4.6 Article

Aerodynamic simulation of a high-pressure compressor stage using the lattice Boltzmann method

出版社

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/HFF-07-2021-0510

关键词

Lattice Boltzmann method; LBM; Axial compressor; Turbomachinery

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper validates the application of lattice Boltzmann method (LBM) to a high-subsonic high-pressure compressor stage, showing that the finest grid can accurately predict the mean flow across the machine and the influence of rotor tip gap size. The study demonstrates the relevance of using this high-fidelity method in compressor configurations by highlighting vortical structures and their evolution with operating points. Spectral analyses suggest that LBM provides a proper prediction of tonal and broadband contents in the flow.
Purpose The present paper aims at evaluating the lattice Boltzmann method (LBM) on a high-subsonic high-pressure compressor stage at nominal regime. Design/methodology/approach The studied configuration corresponds to the H25 compressor operated in a closed-loop test rig at the von Karman Institute. Several operating points are simulated with LBM for two grids of successive refinements. A detailed analysis is performed on the time-averaged flow predicted by LBM, using a comparison with experimental and existing RANS data. Findings The finest grid is found to correctly predict the mean flow across the machine, as well as the influence of the rotor tip gap size. Going beyond time-averaged data, some flow analysis is performed to show the relevance of such a high-fidelity method applied to a compressor configuration. In particular, vortical structures and their evolution with the operating points are clearly highlighted. Spectral analyses finally hint at a proper prediction of tonal and broadband contents by LBM. Originality/value The application of LBM to high-speed turbomachinery flows is very recent. This paper validates one of the first LBM simulations of a high-subsonic high-pressure compressor stage.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据