The evolution of upstream propagating shock waves from the isolated transonic compressor designated NASA Rotor-35 is examined numerically. Results from the numerical simulations are compared with those from a semi-analytical two-dimensional model based on the nonlinear acoustic interaction of shock waves in the axial-tangential plane upstream of the rotor. The evolution determined from a two-dimensional viscous computational solution is found to agree well with the semi-analytical prediction and confirms that shock wave evolution is a primarily inviscid phenomenon. Radial variations are found to increase the rate of decay of the shock wave amplitude in comparison to the prediction from the semi-analytical two-dimensional model. The velocity field from the three-dimensional viscous solution compares well with experimental measurements, indicating that the initial shock strength and shock wave evolution immediately upstream of the rotor blade leading edge are accurately captured. The upstream-propagating shock system is found responsible for nearly 20% of the total loss attributable to the rotor, and is consistent with earlier transonic airfoil cascade studies. The axial decay rate of the upstream induced circumferential static pressure distortion is found to be an order of magnitude slower at spanwise locations with supersonic relative inlet Mach numbers than those at which it is subsonic. As a consequence of this slower decay rate, it is found that the axial gap to the upstream stator would need to be about twice that used for subsonic blade sections.

Issue Section:
Technical Papers
Keywords:
shock waves, flow simulation, Mach number, transonic flow, computational fluid dynamics, compressors
Topics:
Compressors, Mach number, Pressure, Rotors, Shock (Mechanics), Shock waves, Simulation, Flow (Dynamics), Blades, Engineering simulation
1.
Ferri, A., 1964, “Aerodynamic properties of supersonic compressors,” Aerodynamics of Turbines and Compressors, High Speed Aerodynamics and Jet Propulsion, Vol. X, ed., W. R. Hawthorne, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
2.
Probasco
,
D. P.
,
Leger
,
T. J.
,
Wolff
,
J. M.
,
Copenhaver
,
W. W.
, and
Chriss
,
R.
,
2000
, “
Variations in Upstream Vane Loading with Changes in Back Pressure in a Transonic Compressor
,”
ASME J. Turbomach.
,
122
, pp.
433
–
441
.
3.
Giles
,
M. B.
,
1988
, “
Non-Reflecting Boundary Conditions for Euler Equation Calculations
,”
AIAA J.
,
28
, pp.
2050
–
2058
.
4.
Kerrebrock
,
J. L.
, and
Mikolajczak
,
A. A.
,
1970
, “
Intra-stator Transport of Rotor Wakes and its Effect on Compressor Performance
,”
ASME J. Eng. Power
,
92
, pp.
359
–
368
.
5.
Ni
,
R.-H.
,
1982
, “
A Multiple-Grid Scheme for Solving Euler Equations
,”
AIAA J.
,
20
, pp.
1565
–
1571
.
6.
Davis, R. L., Ni, R.-H., and Carter, J. E., 1986, “Cascade Viscous Flow Analysis Using Navier-Stokes Equations,” AIAA Pap., Paper No. 86-0033.
7.
Ni, R.-H., and Bogoian, H., 1989, “Predictions of 3-D Multistage Turbine Flow Fields Using a Multiple-Grid Euler Solver,” AIAA Pap., Paper No. 89-0233.
8.
Ni, R.-H., and Sharma, O. P., 1990, “Using a 3-D Euler Flow Simulation to Assess Effects of Periodic Unsteady Flow Through Turbines,” AIAA Pap., Paper No. 90-2357.
9.
Davis, R. L., Shang, T., Buteau, J., and Ni, R.-H., 1996, “Prediction of 3-D Unsteady Flow in Multi-stage Turbomachinery using an Implicit Dual Time-Step Approach,” AIAA Pap., Paper No. 96-2565.
10.
Wilcox, D. C., 1998, Turbulence Modeling for CFD, DCW Industries, Inc.
11.
Morfey
,
C. L.
, and
Fisher
,
M. J.
,
1970
, “
Shock-wave Radiation from a Supersonic Ducted Rotor
,”
Aeronaut. J., Royal Aeronautical Society
, ,
74
, pp.
579
–
585
.
12.
Rudnick
,
I.
,
1953
, “
On the Attenuation of a Repeated Sawtooth Shock Wave
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
,
25
, pp.
1012
–
1013
.
13.
Dring
,
R. P.
, and
Oates
,
G. C.
,
1990
, “
Throughflow Theory for Nonaxisymmetric Turbomachinery Flow—Part I: Formulation
,”
ASME J. Turbomach.
,
112
, pp.
320
–
327
.
14.
van Zante
,
D. E.
,
Strasizar
,
A. J.
,
Hathaway
,
M. D.
, and
Okiishi
,
T. H.
,
2000
, “
Recommendations for Achieving Accurate Numerical Simulation of Tip Clearance Flows in Transonic Compressor Rotors
,”
ASME J. Turbomach.
,
122
, pp.
733
–
742
.
15.
Chauvin, J., Sieverding, C., and Griepentrog, H., 1970, “Flow in Cascades with a Transonic Regime,” Flow Research on Blading, ed., L. S. Dzung, pp. 151–189, Elsevier.
16.
Sharma, O. P., and Tan, C. S., 1999, “Impact of Unsteadiness Induced by Adjacent Airfoil Rows on the Performance, Structural Integrity and Stalling Characteristics of Axial Flow Compressors,” Blade Interference Effects in Axial Turbomachinery Stages, von Karman Institute.
17.
Smith, L. H., 1970, “Casing Boundary Layers in Multistage Axial-flow Compressors,” Flow Research on Blading, ed., L. S. Dzung, 275–304, Elsevier.
18.
Mikolajczak, A. A., 1976, “The Practical Importance of Unsteady Flow,” AGARD Conf. Proc., on Unsteady Phenomena in Turbomachinery, 177.
19.
Hetherington, R., and Moritz, R. R., 1976, “Influence of Unsteady Flow on the Design and Operation of Aero Engines,” AGARD Conf. Proc., on Unsteady Phenomena in Turbomachinery, 177.
20.
Gorrell, S. E., Okiishi, T. H., and Copenhaver, W. W., 2002. “Stator-Rotor Interactions in a Transonic Compressor: Part 1—Effect of Blade-Row Spacing on Performance,” ASME Paper GT-2002-30494.
21.
Koch
,
P. J.
,
Probasco
,
D. P.
,
Wolff
,
J. M.
,
Copenhaver
,
W. W.
, and
Chriss
,
R.
,
2000
, “
Transonic Compressor Influences on Upstream Surface Pressures with Axial Spacing
,”
J. Propul. Power
,
117
, pp.
474
–
476
.
22.
McAlpine, A., and Fisher, M. J., 2000, “On the Prediction of “Buzz-Saw” Noise Generated by an Aeroengine,” AIAA Pap., Paper No. 2000–2095.
Copyright © 2003
 by ASME
You do not currently have access to this content.