Abstract

A fluid with a large swirl (circumferential) velocity entering an annular pressure seal influences the seal cross-coupled dynamic stiffness coefficients, and hence it affects system stability. Typically comprising a large number of angled vanes around the seal circumference, a swirl brake (SB) is a mechanical element installed to reduce (even reverse) the swirl velocity entering an annular seal. SB design guidelines are not readily available, and existing configurations appear to reproduce a single source. By using a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model, the paper details a process to engineer a SB upstream of a 16-tooth labyrinth seal (LS) with tip clearance Cr = 0.203 mm. The process begins with a known nominal SB* geometry and considers variations in vane length (LV* = 3.25 mm) and width (WV* = 1.02 mm), and stagger angle (θ* = 0 deg). The vane number NV* = 72 and vane height HV* = 2.01 mm remain unchanged. The SB–LS operates with air supplied at pressure PS = 70 bar, a pressure ratio PR = exit pressure Pa/PS = 0.5, and rotor speed Ω = 10.2 krpm (surface speed ΩR = 61 m/s). Just before the SB, the preswirl velocity ratio = average circumferential velocity U/shaft surface speed (ΩR) equals α = 0.5. For the given conditions, an increase in LV allows more space for the development of vortexes between two adjacent vanes. These are significant to the dissipation of fluid kinetic energy and thus control the reduction of α. A 42% increase in vane length (LV = 4.6 mm) produces a ∼43% drop in swirl ratio at the entrance of the LS (exit of the SB), from αE = 0.23 to 0.13. Based on the SB with LV = 4.6 mm, the stagger angle θ varies from 0 deg to 50 deg. The growth in angle amplifies a vortex at ∼70% of the vane height, while it weakens a vortex at 30% of HV. For θ = 40 deg, the influence of the two vortexes on the flow produces the smallest swirl ratio at the LS entrance, αE = −0.03. For a SB with LV = 4.6 mm and θ = 40 deg, the vane width WV varies from 0.51 mm to 1.52 mm (±50% of WV*). A reduction in WV provides more space for the strengthening of the vortex between adjacent vanes. Therefore, a SB with greater spacing of vanes also reduces the inlet circumferential velocity. For WV = 0.51 mm, αE further decreases to −0.07. Besides the design condition (α = 0.5), the engineered SB having LV = 4.6 mm, θ = 40 deg, and WV = 0.51 mm effectively reduces the circumferential velocity at the LS entrance for other inlet preswirl ratios equaling α = 0 and 1.3. Rather than relying on extensive experiments, the CFD analysis proves effective to quickly engineer a best SB configuration from the quantification of performance while varying the SB geometry and inlet swirl condition.

References

1.
Childs
,
D. W.
,
2013
,
Turbomachinery Rotordynamics With Case Studies
,
Minter Spring Publishing
,
Wellborn, TX
, pp.
319
450
.
2.
Benckert
,
H.
, and
Wachter
,
J.
,
1980
, “
Flow Induced Spring Coefficients of Labyrinth Seals for Application in Rotor Dynamics
,”
Proceedings of the Workshop on Rotordynamic Instability Problems in High-Performance Turbomachinery
, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, May 12–14, pp.
189
212
.
3.
Childs
,
D. W.
, and
Ramsey
,
C.
,
1991
, “
Seal-Rotordynamic-Coefficient Test Results for a Model SSME ATD-HPFTP Turbine Interstage Seal With and Without a Swirl Brake
,”
ASME J. Tribol.
,
113
(
1
), pp.
198
203
.10.1115/1.2920587
4.
Childs
,
D. W.
,
Baskharone
,
E.
, and
Ramsey
,
C.
,
1991
, “
Test Results for Rotordynamic Coefficients of the SSME HPOTP Turbine Interstage Seal With Two Swirl Brakes
,”
ASME J. Tribol.
,
113
(
3
), pp.
577
583
.10.1115/1.2920662
5.
Kwanka
,
K.
,
2001
, “
Improving the Stability ofLabyrinth Gas Seals
,”
ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power
,
123
(
4
), pp.
382
387
.10.1115/1.1359772
6.
Childs
,
D. W.
,
Mclean
,
J. E.
,
Zhang
,
M.
, and
Arthur
,
S. P.
,
2016
, “
Rotordynamic Performance of a Negative-Swirl Brake for a Tooth-on-Stator Labyrinth Seal
,”
ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power
,
138
(
6
), p.
062505
.10.1115/1.4031877
7.
Nielsen
,
K. K.
,
Myllerup
,
C. M.
, and
Van den Braembussche
,
R. A.
,
1998
, “
Optimization of Swirl Brakes by Means of a 3D Navier-Stokes Solver
,”
ASME Paper No. 98-GT-328.
10.1115/98-GT-328
8.
Nielsen
,
K. K.
,
Childs
,
D. W.
, and
Myllerup
,
C. M.
,
2001
, “
Experimental and Theoretical Comparison of Two Swirl Brakes Designs
,”
ASME J. Turbomach.
,
123
(
2
), pp.
353
358
.10.1115/1.1354140
9.
Baldassarre
,
L.
,
Bernocchi
,
A.
,
Fontana
,
M.
,
Guglielmo
,
A.
, and
Masi
,
G.
,
2014
, “
Optimization of Swirl Brake Design and Assessment of Its Stabilizing Effect on Compressor Rotordynamic Performance
,”
Proceedings of the 43rd Turbomachinery and Pump Symposium
, Turbomachinery Laboratory, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, Sept. 23–25, pp.
1
12
.https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/87264093.pdf
10.
Matula
,
N. R.
, and
Cizmas
,
P. G.
,
2017
, “
Numerical Investigation of the Effect of Geometric Design Parameters on Swirl Brake Performance
,”
AIAA
Paper No. 2017-0034.10.2514/6.2017-0034
11.
Untaroiu
,
A.
,
Jin
,
H.
,
Fu
,
G.
,
Hayrapetiau
,
V.
, and
Elebiary
,
K.
,
2018
, “
The Effects of Fluid Preswirl and Swirl Brakes Design on the Performance of Labyrinth Seals
,”
ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power
,
140
(
8
), p.
082503
.10.1115/1.4038914
12.
Venkataraman
,
B.
,
Moulton
,
D.
,
Cave
,
M.
,
Clarke
,
C.
,
Moore
,
J.
,
Wilkes
,
J.
, and
Eldridge
,
T.
,
2018
, “
Design and Implementation of Swirl Brakes for Enhanced Rotordynamic Stability in an Off-Shore Centrifugal Compressor
,”
Proceedings of the Asia Turbomachinery and Pump Symposium
, Turbomachinery Laboratory, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, Singapore, Mar. 12–15, pp.
1
20
.https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/187125918.pdf
13.
ANSYS,
2019
, “ANSYS CFX User's Guide 19.1,”
ANSYS
,
Canonsburg, PA
.
14.
Thorat
,
M.
, and
Childs
,
D.
,
2010
, “
Predicted Rotordynamic Behavior of a Labyrinth Seal as Rotor Surface Speed Approaches Mach 1
,”
ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power
,
132
(
11
), p.
112504
.10.1115/1.4000895
You do not currently have access to this content.