4.7 Article

Investigation of the comprehensive performance of turbine stator cascades with heating endwall fences

期刊

ENERGY
卷 174, 期 -, 页码 1188-1199

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2019.03.038

关键词

Steam turbine; Two-phase flow; Condensation; Endwall fences; Wet steam

资金

  1. Science and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong Province, China [2015B010101002]
  2. National Research Council of Science and Technology Support Program of China [2014BAA06B01]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of China [2018MS088]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study of wet steam two-phase flow is particularly important for the improvement of steam turbine efficiency and optimization of the design of a cascade channel. For White cascade, an endwall fence was designed and heated in the cascade. Eulerian-Eulerian model based on the finite volume method was imposed to analyze the aerodynamic performance, dehumidification performance, entropy production and enthalpy drop of the cascade for different positions and heating strengths of the endwall fence. The analysis indicated that the dehumidification performance can be improved by installing the endwall fence close to the cascade outlet but that doing so slightly deteriorates the aerodynamic performance. Moreover, higher heating intensity is costlier while providing a decreasing benefit; thus, it is necessary to select reasonable heating intensity. By comparison, an optimum design scheme is obtained that can improve the stage efficiency, operational safety and overall work capacity of the unit while reducing the energy loss. Moreover, compared with the original case, the average outlet wetness, total pressure loss and entropy production of the cascade can be lessened by 43.4%, 2.0% and 2.0%, respectively, while the enthalpy drop is raised by approximately 3.9%. These research results can serve as a reference for turbine passage design. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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