In this investigation, CFD calculations are conducted to evaluate the differences between five-hole pressure probe-determined flow quantities and the unaffected flow quantities without the probe’s intrusive influence. The blockage effect of the probe is described and evaluated. Furthermore, the influence of this effect is used to estimate the error when using measured stator outflows as forcing functions for the following rotor blades.

To compare the flow field, both with and without the probe’s influence, a five-hole pressure probe is traversed numerically at midspan behind each stator row of a 2.5-stage axial compressor. For reproducing the blockage of the probe accurately, the full annulus of the respective stator row has to be modeled. In order to minimize the calculation time, a study to reduce the number of stator passages was successfully performed. To evaluate the flow quantities using the probe, a calibration polynomial is set up numerically. CFD simulations of the probe geometry within a uniform flow field for each pitch and yaw angle, as well as Mach number combination, are performed for this purpose. Moreover, the pressure probe data for the numerical traverses are corrected to account for velocity gradients in the wake region. The comparison of Mach number, with and without the probe’s influence, shows differences both in the width and the depth of the wake. The results of the Fourier-transformed wake profile for both cases are compared and changes in the first harmonic of Mach number of up to −13% identified. Finally, the first harmonic of the flow quantities is used to perform linearized CFD calculations and to evaluate the influence of disturbed forcing functions on the aerodynamic work of the following rotor blade. The average difference in aerodynamic excitation is about −12% with a maximum deviation of more than −30%.

The results presented aim to draw attention to intrusive probe influences and their consequences for validating numerical results against experiments. Special attention is given to the discrepancies of forced response calculations with varying gust boundary conditions.

This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.