Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267501811
READS
206
4 AUTHORS, INCLUDING:
Leon hu
Ford Motor Company
16 PUBLICATIONS 5 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Leon hu
letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 09 February 2016
Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2010: Power for Land, Sea and Air
GT2010
June
Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2010: Power 14-18,Sea
for Land, 2010,
andGlasgow,
Air UK
GT2010
June 14-18, 2010, Glasgow, UK
GT2010-22320
GT2010-
Pressure Ratio
s peed(P redic tion) 9
2.5
8 Failure
EXPERIMENT AND FAILURE OBSERVATION area
80% R ating R otation
The new design basing on a Honeywell production GT35 2
s peed (Tes t)
Valve Valve
Bearing c d
C System T
Compressor inlet Oil outlet Turbine Exit Fig. 4. Failed turbocharger parts
Total PC00, TC00 RPM Tout Static P T 6, Total TT06
The turbocharger failed during transition to 88% of the
Fig. 2. The schematic diagram of cold test facility
rated speed line right after the #10 test point. Diagnosis of the
The cold flow bench test was chosen, in order that the test failure mechanism relied primarily on the inspection during
data available in support of turbine development. The precise the turbocharger was overhauled. All the turbine blades were
control can be obtained over the operating conditions, because twisted due to the rubbing with the turbine housing, as Figure
of reducing the influence of heat transfer in hot testing. 4b shows. The nut of the compressor wheel broke off because
Turbocharger test facilities shown in Figure 2 are open the shaft on the compressor was ruptured. The back face of
loops i.e., there are completely separate circuits for the compressor wheel with an arc-groove rubbed by the nut on
compressor air and turbine gas. A source of turbine gas supply, the compressor back-plate is shown in Figure 4a. Figure 4c
where the air is provided by auxiliary compressors and heated and Figure 4d indicate clearly that the thrust bearing was
by an electrical heater, must be required. Since TT00 is well overheated due to the excessive friction and the thrust face on
below the normal turbine operation temperature, this flow
550
80% Rating Rotation speed
Thrust force (N)
500
52% Rating Rotation speed
Fig. 5. The scheme of axial thrusts for a turbocharger
450
F = F + F − F
C C1 C2 C3 (1)
2 400
F = π ⋅ r C 1t ⋅ p + m ⋅c
C1 C1 C C _ a1
(2) 0.00 Surge 0.10 0.20 0.30 C hoke 0.40
Compressor Mass Flow Rate
F C2
=
r
∫r p
C2
C _ shroud
( r ) ⋅ 2 π ⋅ r ⋅ dr =
π
2
⋅
p
2
C2
⋅ (r 2
C2
2
− r C 1t ) Fig. 6. CFD result comparison with empirical
C 1t
r C2 (3)
correlation
rC2
F C3
= ∫r C 8 p C _ backface ( r ) ⋅ 2 π ⋅ r ⋅ dr (4) The axial force on compressor wheel back face at two
different speed lines calculated from equation (6) (as shown in
shown in Figure 8b). With the comparison of the curve P_2 flow range rate=0.0% flow range rate=53%
150 160
and curve P_A in the Figure 8a and Figure 8b, the pressure 140 150
Pressure (kPa)
Pressure (kPa)
approaching the rotor trailing edge drops rapidly at the 130 140
compressor wheel back face. 120 Test data 130 Test data
Calculated pressure by Equation 6 Calculated pressure by Equation 6
Calculated pressure by Equation 7 Calculated pressure by Equation 7
P_2 (73mm) ,3 110 120
70.0 67.0 57.0 53.0 27.0 23.0 70.0 67.0 57.0 53.0 27.0 23.0
Radius at im peller backface(m m ) Radius at im peller backface(m m )
P_A (67mm)
R2=70mm
Calculation result at tip speed=366 m/s and Mass Calculation result at tip speed=476 m/s and Mass
flow range rate=77% flow range rate=100%
160 210
Pressure (kPa)
Pressure (kPa)
180
170
P_D (27mm) 140 160
150
Test data 140 Test data
130
Calculated pressure by Equation 6 130 Calculated pressure by Equation 6
P_E (23mm) Calculated pressure by Equation 7 120 Calculated pressure by Equation 7
120 110
70.0 67.0 57.0 53.0 27.0 23.0 70.0 67.0 57.0 53.0 27.0 23.0
Radius at im peller backface(m m ) Radius at im peller backface(m m )
The pressure modification including the leakage flow at Fig. 8. The calculation comparison with test data at a
compressor wheel back face, as shown in equation (7), is compressor wheel back face
proposed. The calculation results are shown in Figure 8c. By
0 .5
comparing pressure distribution in Figure 8b with those in pc _ backface = (1 − K s ⋅ K m ) pc 2
ω c2
Figure 8c, the results calculated by equation (7), which − ρc2 ( rc22 − rc2_ backface ) ⋅ (1 .1 − K m ) 2
8 (7)
considers the effects of rotation speed and mass flow rate,
Where:
have better agreement with the test data.
Km : Mass _ Flow _ Ratio
Calculated result by Equation (6) at tip Calculated result by Equation (6) at tip
150 speed=293 m/s 250 speed=476 m/s Ks : Rotation _ Speed _ Ratio
140
An additional comparison, which is calculated and test
200
Pressure (kPa)
Pressure (kPa)
130
pressure vs. the radius on the compressor wheel back face for
120
150
four given flow conditions, are shown in Figure 8d. The curve
110
P_2 P_A Cal P_2 P_A Cal
calculated by Equation (7) is close to test data curve more
P_B Cal P_C Cal P_B Cal P_C Cal
than the curve calculated by Equation (6) obviously.
P_D Cal P_E Cal P_D Cal P_E Cal
100 100
0.0 0.2
Surge<- 0.4 Flow Range
Mass 0.6 0.8
->Choke 1.0 0.0 0.2
Surge<- 0.4 Flow Range
Mass 0.6 0.8
->Choke 1.0
Pressure (kPa)
130
the following equations, is similar to the calculations of the
120
150
compressor side. So the pressure distribution on the turbine
110
P_2 P_A Test P_2 P_A Test
looks like the compressor side.
P_B Test P_C Test P_B Test P_C Test
P_D Test P_E Test P_D Test P_E Test
F =F − ( FT1 + FT 2)
100 100
0.0 0.2
Surge<- 0.4 Flow Range
Mass 0.6 0.8
->Choke 1.0 0.0 0.2
Surge<- 0.4 Flow Range
Mass 0.6 0.8
->Choke 1.0 T T3 (8)
b
r
Calculated result by Equation (7) at tip Calculated result by Equation (7) at tip F T1
= ∫ T4 p ( r ) ⋅ 2π ⋅ r ⋅ dr
T _ shroud
150 speed=293 m/s 250 speed=476 m/s
rT 6 t (9)
140 2
F = π ⋅ r T 6t ⋅ p + mT ⋅ cT _ a 6
200 T2 T6 (10)
Pressure (kPa)
Pressure (kPa)
130
r
= ∫ T 4 _ scollop p
120
F ( ) ⋅ 2π ⋅ r ⋅ dr
T _ backface r
150
T3
110
P_2 P_A Cal P_2 P_A Cal
rT 8 (11)
P_B Cal P_C Cal P_B Cal P_C Cal
P_D Cal P_E Cal P_D Cal P_E Cal
100 100
0.0 0.2
Surge<- 0.4 Flow Range
Mass 0.6 0.8
->Choke 1.0 0.0 0.2
Surge<- 0.4 Flow Range
Mass 0.6 0.8
->Choke 1.0
0
700
Thrust (N)
-200 88% RPM With 1D 600
52% RPM with test 80% RPM with test
calculation
Rital (Concepts NREC Agile Software) and were correlated to -400
data data 500
8
08
09
12
15
17
22
22
26
30
34
26
28
30
33
34
Compressor Mass Flow Rate
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
100% RPM (Prediction)
Stall
Pressure Ratio (TS)
52% RPM (Test) Fig. 10. Axial thrust load calculation at compressor
80% RPM (Test)
side
500
Mass Flow Rate
test data
-500
The axial thrust load result on the compressor side is 268kPa 283kPa
213kPa 223kPa 259kPa 275kPa 283kPa
-1000
shown in the Figure 10. The blue line shows the resultant 134kPa 136kPa
134kPa
139kPa
137kPa 140kPa
208kPa 224kPa
1
6
9
0
3
3
44
40
41
42
44
44
23
24
39
40
19
19
21
22
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
176(N)
200
150 85(N) 96(N) the equation (13). At the same mass flow rate condition,
100
24(N)
higher pressure ratio means more power is required by the
50 -10(N) -11(N)-9(N) -4(N) 6(N)
0 compressor. So the power delivered by turbine increases
-50
-100
accordingly, more expansion ratio at the same turbine inlet
Surge
0.089 0.094 -----------> Choke
0.125 0.156 0.177 0.220 Surge
0.229 --->
0.266 0.300Choke
0.340 Surge ----->
0.263 0.284 Choke
0.305 0.335 0.348
Compressor Mass Flow Rate temperature condition. Finally, the increase in compressor
Fig. 12. Axial thrust load calculation of turbocharger pressure ratio will lead to the increase in the thrust load of
the turbocharger. Figure 3 shows that the pressure ratio of
Another thrust load calculation, with elevated turbine inlet
the new design compressor is higher than the original one.
temperature and high rotation speed, has been carried out. The
Therefore, it is not hard to understand why during the cold
comparison of thrust load between cold and hot flow
flow bench testing the new design turbocharger had
conditions is presented in Figure 13. The axial thrust load of
catastrophic failure, while the original turbocharger survived
turbocharger, as predicted by the 1D model, decreases about
without any damage on the thrust bearing.
20% with 200K increase of the turbine inlet temperature at the
hot flow.
CONCLUSIONS
Turbocharger thrust load comparison of a cold and hot condition The calculation method, which evaluates rapidly the
400
350
80% RPM
Hot prediction condition
88% RPM
variation of thrust loading at the operation condition of
300 Cold test condition turbocharger, was presented. Combining with mean line or
250
CFD, the thrust loading of turbocharger can be predicted by
Thrust (N)
200
50
the turbocharger operation range, the turbocharger failures due
0 to an insufficient thrust load capacity will be avoid.
-50
This study shows that in the flow bench testing of a
-100
Surge
0.229 ----------->
0.266 0.300 Choke
0.340 Surge 0.284
0.263 ---------------->
0.305 0.335 Choke
0.348
Compressor Mass Flow Rate turbocharger, the combination of three things will for sure
lead to the catastrophic failure of a turbocharger: the cold
Fig. 13. Calculation Comparison at hot test and cold turbine inlet, the deep choke on compressor side when
test condition running at high rotation speed and the high compressor
pressure ratio.
)η
pT 6 ( k −1) k
W = mT ⋅ c pe ⋅T T 00 ⋅ (1 − ( ) First, when the compressor performance is just focused on,
T pT 00 T ,ts
(12)
the hot flow bench testing, which is well matched to actual
W C
= mC ⋅ c pa ⋅ T C 00 ⋅ ((
p Coll ( k −1) k
p C 00
) − 1) η C ,ts engine operation condition, should be chosen. When the cold
(13)
flow bench testing for turbine development is processed, the
In general, the turbine power is calculated by the equation
thrust bearing of the higher load capacity should be used as
(12). In order to gain the same compressor aero performance
possible.
at the different turbine inlet condition in the turbocharger,
Secondly, the deep choke should be avoided in the flow
whatever the cold test condition or the hot test condition on
bench testing, because the measurement which the
turbine side is, the compressor consumes the same power.
compressor efficiency is below 60% at the choke condition is
85(N)
80% R ating R otation 96(N) 344(N)
2.5
s peed (Tes t)
176(N)
24(N)
1
0.00 0.05Low --------------------------------->
0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 High0.35 0.40
Compressor Mass Flow Rate
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The financial support from Ford Motor Company and
DOE (under grant DE-FC26-07-NT43280) and computing
facilities provided by Ford Motor Company are greatly
appreciated. The authors also want to extend the gratitude to
Dave Hanna for his valuable suggestions on this project.
REFERENCES
[1] Nicholas C. Baines, 2005, Fundamentals of
turbocharging, Concepts NREC Inc., Vermont.
[2] Lobanoff, V. S., and Ross, R. R., 1985, Centrifugal
Pumps Design & Application, Gulf Publishing Company,
Houston.
[3] Loewenstein, L. C., and Crissey, C. P., 1911, Centrifugal
Pumps. Their Design and Construction, D. van Nostrand
Company, New York.
[4] Stepanoff, A. J., 1948, Centrifugal and Axial Flow
Pumps, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
[5] Hong Hanchi and Ma Chaochen, 2006, Numerical
Solution of Axial Thrust of Turbocahrger, VEHICLE
AND POWER, 2006-2.
[6] Zhen-Xue Han and Paul G. A. Cizmas, 2001, A CFD
Method For Axial Thrust Load Prediction of Centrifugal
Compressors, ASME Paper No. 2001-GT-0568.
[7] Wang Yansheng, Huang Yousheng, 1984, Turbocharging
for the vehicle engine, National Defense Industry
Publishing Co. China.