0 Голоса «за»0 Голоса «против»

Просмотров: 3210 стр.May 02, 2017

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd

© All Rights Reserved

Просмотров: 32

© All Rights Reserved

- For Summer COoling
- Dinamica de Fluidos Computacional
- Week 14 - CFD Analysis - Lecture Presentation
- AOFST_6-5b-3
- meeting minutes
- Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Adiabatic Film Cooling Effectiveness Over the Compound Angled
- CFD_QB.docx-new
- HEAT TRANSFER IN FORCED CONVECTION.docx
- Rotational Effects on Lubricant Jet Flow
- mass transfeer
- CHAPTER 6.pdf
- ICEAE Paper
- 106BRE
- Discrete element method
- mathioulakis1998
- 1240-8587-1-PB
- durbin1995 (1)
- *
- Lecture notes on fem
- jntuk-2-1-fm-nov-2017-q.p

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 10

Blades Using Unstructured-Mesh CFD Solver

Department of Aerospace Engineering, Tohoku University, Sendai, Miyagi, 980-8579, JAPAN

CFD solver to predict the thermal loads of cooled turbine vanes, Mark II and C3X. In this

simulation, the fluid domain and solid domain are solved simultaneously satisfying the

continuity of the heat flux and temperature on the boundary of the fluid and solid. In

addition, -Re transition model is applied to predict the boundary layer transition which

often occurs in the flow around turbine blades and affects the material thermal load

seriously. The predicted thermal load results from the two- and three-dimensional

computations are in close agreement with the measurement data capturing the transition on

the suction side of the vanes.

I. Introduction

In order to develop more efficient gas turbine engines, it is especially required to achieve higher turbine inlet

temperature. Highly increased turbine inlet temperature, however, causes the turbine materials to be damaged or

depleted because of the severe thermal loads. Until now, turbine inlet temperature has increased due to the

development of the high temperature materials and cooling systems. For the further requirements in the future, it is

important to predict the thermal loads of the turbine blades accurately to design the enhanced-performance cooling

systems and to estimate the damages, degradation, and lifetime of the materials. As the thermal loads prediction

method, the conjugate heat transfer (CHT)1 simulation, in which the fluid domain and solid domain are solved

simultaneously, is known to be effective. In the conventional calculation method, the flow domain is solved to

calculate the heat transfer coefficient distribution at first using the wall boundary temperature that is assumed before

calculation, and then the resultant heat transfer coefficient and fluid reference temperature are used as the boundary

conditions to calculate the solid heat conduction. The wall temperature is assumed by the empirical correlations,

thus there exists the uncertainty and this makes it quite difficult to predict the thermal loads particularly for the

complicated geometries. On the other hand, in CHT the wall temperature and heat transfer coefficient are not

prescribed as the boundary condition but are the solutions of the whole calculation. Thus the uncertainty can be

removed in CHT and can be applied to the arbitrary geometries and conditions.

The configurations of turbine blades are very complicated because of their cooling systems. For flow simulations,

the unstructured-mesh solvers have the advantage over structured-mesh solvers in terms of the easy mesh generation

for complex geometries. Also, the unstructured-mesh CFD solver, TAS-code (Tohoku university Aerodynamic

Simulation code2) developed at Tohoku University, has been used for the flow analysis and design of a commercial

airplane practically and is known to be a reliable flow simulation code.

It is necessary for the CFD code which is based on the CHT simulation to capture the flow characteristics around

turbine blades accurately. In particular, since the Reynolds number of the flow around turbine blades is about 105

106, there is the laminar boundary layer and the heat transfer coefficient increases sharply when the transition occurs.

Hence, the prediction of transition is important in terms of the thermal load prediction. In this study, -Re

transition model3, 4 proposed by Menter et al. is applied. Since this model can predict the transition using only the

local variables, it is easy to implement in the unstructured-mesh solver.

The objective of the present study is to develop and validate the conjugate heat transfer simulation code based on

the unstructured-mesh CFD solver applying -Re transition model aiming to predict the thermal loads of cooled

1

Graduate Student, Student member, yoshiara@ad.mech.tohoku.ac.jp.

2

Assistant Professor, Senior member AIAA.

3

Professor, Associate Fellow AIAA.

1

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright 2011 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. All rights reserved.

turbine blades. The code validation is conducted using two and three-dimensional turbine vanes, NASA Mark II and

C3X which have relatively simple geometries and internal convection cooling systems.

A. Fluid calculation

The fluid domain is solved using three-dimensional unstructured-mesh CFD solver, TAS-code. The governing

equations are the compressible Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes equations. The calculation domain is discretized

by means of the cell-vertex finite volume method. Inviscid flux evaluation method is HLLEW5 and LU-SGS6

implicit method is used for time integration. Spalart-Allmaras turbulence model7, SST turbulence model8, and-Re

3, 4

transition model coupled with SST turbulence model are used for the comparisons.

B. Solid calculation

The governing equation for the solid domain is the heat conduction equation. The solid domain is discretized by

the same method as the fluid domain using unstructured mesh. Thus, this conjugate code is homogeneous method.

The heat conduction equation is obtained from degenerating the Navier-Stokes equations setting velocity zero and

inviscid flux zero in the solid domain.

On the boundary between the fluid domain and solid domain, it is necessary to satisfy the continuity of the heat

flux and temperature. Figure 1 shows the cells on the boundary of the fluid and solid. Fluid static temperature TF,

solid temperature TS, and wall boundary temperature TW (unknown) are defined as shown in Fig. 1. Vertical

distances LF and LS are measured from the wall boundary to the definition points of TF and TS respectively. The heat

flux qF between the fluid node and wall surface coincides with the heat flux qS between the solid node and wall

surface. This condition is represented as the following equation;

TF TW T TS

q k F k S W (1)

LF LS

where kF and kS are the thermal conductivities of the fluid and solid respectively. The unknown wall temperature is

obtained from solving Eq. (1) and this wall temperature is used for the boundary condition of the fluid domain and

solid domain, thus the continuity of the temperature on the wall is satisfied,

TW

k S / k F LF / LS TS TF (2)

1 k S / k F LF / LS

where kF is the thermal conductivity of the fluid and is represented as

the following relation;

(3)

kF Cp

Pr

where is viscosity coefficient and Cp is specific heat at constant

pressure. Pr is Prandtl number for air. Laminar viscosity coefficient l

is given by the following Sutherland formula:

3/ 2

l T T0 S

(4)

0 T0 T S Figure 1. The cells on the boundary of

where 0 = 1.7910-5 [kg/ms], T0 = 288.15 [K], S = 110.4 [K]. the fluid and solid.

D. -ReTransition model

-Re transition model proposed by Menter et al. uses the empirical correlations of the momentum-thickness

Reynolds number Re to decide the transition onset position. This model uses the relation (5) between the

momentum-thickness Reynolds number Re and the vorticity Reynolds number Re so that it is not necessary to

calculate the momentum thickness that is an integral parameter. This makes it easy to implement in unstructured-

mesh solvers and to handle a parallelization.

max Re (5)

Re

2.193

2

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

At first, the distribution of transition onset momentum-thickness Reynolds number Re t is obtained from the

empirical correlation based on the local turbulent intensity Tu. Ret is the function of Tu and pressure gradient

~

parameter. Then, the transport equation for local transition onset momentum-thickness Reynolds number Ret is

solved using resultant Ret to calculate the distribution of Ret in the boundary layer. Re is computed from the

relation (5) using Re that can be obtained from the local fluid variables and then the transition onset is evaluated by

~

comparing Re with Ret. The transition region is simulated by solving the transport equation of the intermittency

. In-Re transition model, the following two transport equations are solved in addition to the two equations of k

and of SST turbulence model.

~

Re t U ~

Re t

~

Re t

t t

j

P t (6)

t x j x j x j

U j

t P E

x

(7)

t x j x j f j

~

The effect of Tu is taken into account by the source term Pt in Eq. (6) to calculate the distribution of Ret in the

boundary layer. The term P is to accelerate the transition and D is to relaminarize the flow. Once the transition

onset position is determined, the intermittency rises and increases along the downstream.

-Re transition model is coupled with SST turbulence model through the intermittency as follows.

k U j k k ~ ~

k t Pk Dk (8)

t x j x j x j

Pk eff Pk ; Dk min max eff , 0.1,1.0 Dk

~ ~

(9)

The modified intermittency eff is to take into account the predictions of separated flow transition. The details of

the transition model including the correlations or the treatment of separated flow transition can be found in Ref. 3, 4.

The internally cooled turbine vanes, NASA Mark II and C3X9, are chosen because the detailed measurement

data are available and these models were often used to validate CHT calculations in the past1, 10, 11 . The

computational meshes are shown in Fig. 2. DotEditor12 was used to generate two-dimensional unstructured meshes.

On the boundary, the coordinates of nodes in the fluid domain correspond with those in the solid domain. The fluid

domain uses a hybrid mesh in order to capture the boundary layer and the solid domain uses only triangular elements.

The near-wall spacing of the fluid is below y+ of 1.0. The total pressure, total temperature and flow angle are given

at the inlet boundary and the static pressure at the exit boundary. The exit static pressure is calculated by the exit

Mach number using isentropic relation. For the circumferential direction, periodic boundary condition is imposed.

The flow conditions are shown in Table 1. Both the cases have ten cooling holes and the flows in all the cooling

holes are assumed to be fully developed turbulence. The Nusselt number for turbulent flow in a smooth pipe is

represented as the following empirical formula:

0.8

Nu D 0.022Cr Pr 0.5 Re D (10)

where Cr is the corrective coefficient and ReD is Reynolds number based on the diameter of each cooling hole. Pr is

Prandtl number of 0.9 for turbulent air flow. The heat transfer coefficient is obtained from Nusselt number Eq. (10)

and it is used as the boundary condition for the solid domain. The coolant condition for each hole including hole

diameter D, Cr, coolant temperature TC and ReD are shown in Table 2. The turbine material is Stainless steel ASTM

Type 310 and the thermal conductivity kS is specified as follows:

k S 0.0182 T 6.13 [W/m/K] (11)

3

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

1

3 1

2 2

4 3

4

5

5

6

6

7

7

8

8

9

9

10

10

Mark II C3X

Test Code 5411 4311

Inlet Total Pressure [MPa] 0.337 0.245

Inlet Total Temperature [K] 788 802

Outlet Static Pressure [MPa] 0.70 0.143

Outlet Mach number 1.04 0.91

6

Reynolds number 3.3010 3.07106

Inlet Turbulence Intensity [%] 6.5 6.5

Inlet Flow Angle [deg] 0 0

Solidity 1.05 1.24

Number of Nodes (Fluid) 46000 51000

(Solid) 12000 14000

4

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Table 2. Coolant conditions

Hole No. D Cr TC ReD

[cm] [K] [10-4]

Mark II C3X Mark II C3X

1 0.630 1.118 336.390 360.630 24.686 15.494

2 0.630 1.118 326.270 360.630 24.408 16.162

3 0.630 1.118 332.680 346.230 24.097 15.974

4 0.630 1.118 338.860 352.500 24.735 15.877

5 0.630 1.118 318.950 341.410 24.335 17.071

6 0.630 1.118 315.580 380.080 24.048 16.158

7 0.630 1.118 326.260 352.470 24.453 16.234

8 0.310 1.056 359.830 387.160 14.967 10.434

9 0.310 1.056 360.890 421.810 9.285 6.396

10 0.198 1.025 414.850 466.790 9.205 4.685

Figure 3 shows Mach number contours by -Re transition model for Mark II and C3X. The pressure

distributions on the vane surfaces from the three turbulence models are shown in Fig. 4. The horizontal axis is the

axial distance from the leading edge normalized by the axial chord of each vane. The two shock waves are observed

at the fore of the vane and near the trailing edge on the suction side in the case of Mark II. The one near the axial

distance of 0.4-0.5 is relatively strong and this indicates the great increase of the surface pressure. In contrast, the

surface pressure of C3X vane shows the mild distribution since C3X has the different flow path from that of Mark II

and the smaller exit Mach number. The results of the pressure distributions from the three turbulence models are

almost identical and are in good agreement with the experimental data. Thus, the fluid calculation part in the CHT

simulation is validated in the two-dimensional simulation. Also, these results are almost the same as those of the

flow only simulation assuming the adiabatic wall boundary condition as shown in Fig. 4. The difference of the wall

thermal condition little affects the main flow field and the surface pressure distribution.

Figure 5 shows the static temperature contours by-Re transition model for Mark II and C3X. Figure 6 is the

external heat transfer coefficient distributions and Fig. 7 is the surface temperature distributions compared with the

experimental measurement data. The large fluctuations of the heat transfer coefficient and surface temperature near

the trailing edges are due to the effect of the cooling holes in the vanes and simulated the test results well. These

results show the differences among the three turbulence models unlike the results of the pressure distributions.

Especially the results from SA and SST turbulence models assuming the fully turbulent flow show the different

characteristics of heat transfer coefficient and temperature on the suction side from the measured data since these

models cannot capture the transition from laminar to turbulent flow near the axial distance of 0.4. On the other hand,

the result from-Re transition model shows the close characteristic to the data capturing the increase of heat

transfer coefficient due to the boundary layer transition. In the case of Mark II, the boundary layer transition occurs

at the position of the fore shock wave and this causes the sharp increase of the heat transfer coefficient. However,

the amount of the increase is evaluated excessively compared with the measurements. In C3X geometry, where no

shock waves exist in the flow field, the calculation using -Re transition model also captured the qualitative trend

well and this denotes that the transition model is important for the prediction of the heat transfer and wall

temperature. With the slight different predicted values from the test data, the positions of the local minimum of the

heat transfer coefficient and wall temperature coincide with the test data and this means that the position of the

transition was captured accurately. The results from these turbulence models show the close values to the data

except for the transition region on the suction side, so the validity of the CHT simulation was confirmed.

5

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(a) Mark II (b) C3X

Figure 3. Mach number contours.

1 1

0.9 0.9

0.8 0.8

0.7 0.7

p/pt

p/p t

0.6 0.6

Adiabatic SA Adiabatic SA

0.5 0.5

CHTMark II SA CHTC3X SA

0.4 CHTMark II SST 0.4 CHTC3X SST

CHTMark II SST+-Re CHTC3X SST+-Re

0.3 EXPMark II 0.3 EXPC3X

0.2 0.2

-1 Pressure Side 00 Suction Side 1 -1 Pressure Side 00 Suction Side 1

(a) Mark II (b) C3X

Figure 4. Surface pressure distributions.

6

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(a) Mark II (b) C3X

Figure 5. Static temperature contours.

1 1

CHTMark II SA CHTC3XSA

0.9 CHTMark II SST 0.9 CHTC3XSST

CHTMark II SST+-Re CHTC3XSST+-Re

0.8 EXPMark II 0.8

EXPC3X

h/ (1135 W/m2/K)

0.7 0.7

h/ (1135 W/m 2 /K)

0.6 0.6

0.5 0.5

0.4 0.4

0.3 0.3

0.2 0.2

0.1 0.1

0 0

-1 Pressure Side 00 Suction Side 1 -1 Pressure Side 00 Suction Side 1

(a) Mark II (b) C3X

Figure 6. External heat transfer coefficient distributions.

0.85 0.85

CHTMark II SA CHTC3X SA

CHTMark II SST CHTC3X SST

0.8 0.8 CHTC3X SST+-Re

CHTMark II SST+-Re

EXPMark II EXPC3X

0.75 0.75

T/ (811 K)

T/ (811 K)

0.7 0.7

0.65 0.65

0.6 0.6

0.55 0.55

-1 Pressure Side 0

0 Suction Side 1 -1 Pressure Side 0

0 Suction Side 1

(a) Mark II (b) C3X

Figure 7. Surface temperature distributions.

7

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

IV. Three-dimensional Calculations

The C3X turbine vane which models the experimental circumstance was used for the three-dimensional

calculation. The three-dimensional computational mesh was obtained by extruding the two-dimensional mesh

toward the spanwise direction. MEGG3D13 was used for the three-dimensional unstructured mesh generation. The

computational mesh is shown in Fig. 8 and consists of hexahedral elements near wall and prismatic elements for the

rest of the domain. Although the mesh near the side wall in the spanwise direction in the main flow domain is very

fine in order to capture the boundary layer, such high resolution in this direction is not required in the solid domain

and the mesh is coarsened as shown in Fig. 8. In this near-wall area where the nodes of the main flow domain and

those of the solid domain do not coincide, the wall temperature is interpolated from the solid domain to the main

flow domain. The number of nodes is 2,200,000 for the main flow domain, 300,000 for the solid domain.

The coolant conditions are the same as that of the two-dimensional calculation, in which the Nusselt number

based on the empirical correlation is imposed on the internal wall surfaces. The calculation conditions of the main

flow domain are the same as that of the two-dimensional calculations and the side wall is assumed to be an adiabatic

non-slip wall.

Figures 9 and 10 show Mach number contours and static temperature contours results respectively from -Re

transition model at midspan. The pressure distributions at midspan are shown in Fig. 11 and are in close agreement

with the measurement data. The difference from the two-dimensional result is seen near the trailing edge on suction

side predicted by SA turbulence model.

Figure 12 shows the external heat transfer distribution at midspan and Fig. 13 is the surface temperature

distribution at midspan. Although the wall temperature result from SA turbulence model is lower than the data near

the stagnation point and on the suction side, these results show the similar characteristics to those of the two-

dimensional calculations about each turbulence model. The boundary layer transition on the suction side is captured

also in the three-dimensional simulation using the -Re transition model. The overall view of the surface

temperature contours is shown in Fig. 14 and the distribution is symmetric because the identical coolant condition

along the spanwise direction is set using the empirical correlation of Nusselt number. The slightly higher

temperature shown near the side wall is due to the secondary flow generated by the side wall and vane surface.

8

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Figure 9. Mach number contours at midspan. Figure 10. Static temperature contours at midspan.

1 1

CHTC3XSA

0.9 0.9 CHTC3XSST

CHTC3XSST+-Re

0.8

0.8 EXPC3X

h/ (1135 W/m2/K)

0.7

0.7 0.6

p/pt

0.6 0.5

0.5 CHTC3X SA 0.4

CHTC3X SST 0.3

0.4 CHTC3X SST+-Re 0.2

0.3 EXPC3X

0.1

0.2 0

-1 Pressure Side 00 Suction Side 1 -1 Pressure Side 0

0 Suction Side 1

Figure 11. Surface pressure distributions at Figure 12. External heat transfer coefficient

midspan. distributions at midspan.

0.85

CHTC3X SA

CHTC3X SST

0.8 CHTC3X SST+-Re

EXPC3X

0.75

T/ (811 K)

0.7

0.65

0.6

0.55

-1 Pressure Side 0

0 Suction Side 1

Figure 13. Surface temperature distributions at midspan. Figure 14. Surface temperature contours.

9

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

V. Conclusion

The conjugate heat transfer method was implemented in the unstructured-mesh CFD solver TAS-code and the

prediction of thermal load of the internally cooled turbine vanes was conducted using three turbulence models. One

of them is the -Re transition model coupled with SST turbulence model. In two-dimensional calculations, it was

shown that the difference of the turbulence models had little effect on the pressure distributions. However, the

results from the transition model captured the thermal properties of the test data well for the two different turbine

geometries and flow conditions. In three-dimensional calculation, the results show the similar characteristics to the

two-dimensional calculation capturing the transition onset position accurately on the suction side. Thus, the method

in the present paper revealed the importance of the boundary layer transition prediction for accurate prediction of the

thermal properties of turbine blades using the conjugate heat transfer method.

References

1

Bohn, D, Krger, U, and Kusterer, K, Conjugate Heat Transfer: An Advanced Computational Method for the cooling

design of modern gas turbine blades and vanes, Heat Transfer in Gas Turbines, eds. B. Sundn and M. Faghri, pp. 57-108, WIT

Press, Southampton, UK, 2001.

2

Nakahashi, K., et al. Some Challenges of Realistic Flow Simulations by Unstructured Grid CFD, International Journal for

Numerical Method in Fluids, Vol. 43, 2003, pp. 769-783.

3

Menter, F. R., Langtry, R. B., Likki, S. R., Suzen, Y. B., Huang, P. G., and Vlker, S., A Correlation Based Transition

Model Using Local Variables Part 1: Model Formulation, Journal of Turbomachinery, Vol. 128, No. 3, 2006, pp. 413422.

4

Langtry, R. B., Menter, F. R., Correlation-Based Transition Modeling for Unstructured Parallelized Computational Fluid

Dynamics Codes, AIAA Journal, Vo. 47, No. 12, 2009, pp. 2894-2906.

5

Obayashi, S. and Guruswamy, G. P., Convergence Acceleration of an Aeroelastic Navier-Stokes Solver, AIAA Paper 94-

2268, 1994.

6

Sharov, D., and Nakahashi, K., Reordering of Hybrid Unstructured Grids for Lower-Upper Symmetric Gauss-Seidel

Computations, AIAA Journal, Vol.36, No.3, 1998, pp. 484-486.

7

Spalart, P. R. and Allmaras, S. R., A One-Equation Turbulence Model for Aerodynamic Flows, AIAA Paper 92-0439,

January 1992.

8

Menter, F. R., Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications, AIAA Journal, Vo. 32, No. 8,

1994, pp. 1598-1605.

9

Hylton, L. D., Mihelc, M. S., Turner, E. R., Nealy, D. A., and York, R. E., Analytical and Experimental Evaluation of the

Heat Transfer Distribution Over the Surface of Turbine Vanes, NASA Paper No. CR-168015, 1983.

10

Bamba, T., Yamane, T., Fukuyama, Y., Turbulence Model Dependencies on Conjugate Simulation of Flow and Heat

Conduction, ASME Turbo Expo 2007, GT2007-27824.

11

Luo, J., and Razinsky, E. H., 2007, Conjugate Heat Transfer Analysis of a Cooled Turbine Vane With the V2F Turbulence

Model, ASME Journal of Turbomachinery, Vol. 129, Paper No. GT2006-91109, pp. 773781.

12

Ishida, T., Study of Grid Generation around Complex Geometry, Masters Thesis, Tohoku University, 2008. (in

Japanese)

13

Ito, Y. and Nakahashi, K., Improvements in the Reliability and Quality of Unstructured Hybrid Mesh Generation,

International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, Vol. 45, Issue 1, May 2004, pp. 79-108.

10

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

- For Summer COolingЗагружено:Boris Joshua Q. Teodoro
- Dinamica de Fluidos ComputacionalЗагружено:abraham
- Week 14 - CFD Analysis - Lecture PresentationЗагружено:r4c1ng
- AOFST_6-5b-3Загружено:Suranto S Suranto
- meeting minutesЗагружено:api-272118377
- Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Adiabatic Film Cooling Effectiveness Over the Compound AngledЗагружено:IAEME Publication
- CFD_QB.docx-newЗагружено:Jagan Raj
- HEAT TRANSFER IN FORCED CONVECTION.docxЗагружено:PREMESH REDDY PYINTI
- Rotational Effects on Lubricant Jet FlowЗагружено:Ian Rorke Sheeley
- mass transfeerЗагружено:Aiena Azlan
- CHAPTER 6.pdfЗагружено:Aiena Azlan
- ICEAE PaperЗагружено:raashid83
- 106BREЗагружено:thanhndb
- Discrete element methodЗагружено:Relining Minerals
- mathioulakis1998Загружено:11751175
- 1240-8587-1-PBЗагружено:Antonio Martín Alcántara
- durbin1995 (1)Загружено:fatemedarlik
- *Загружено:Mina Youssef Halim
- Lecture notes on femЗагружено:Gaddam Ranga
- jntuk-2-1-fm-nov-2017-q.pЗагружено:Sai Krishna
- 000143587Загружено:Patrick Silva Oliveira
- Gate SyllabusЗагружено:PARTH PATEL
- Bangalore 05Загружено:minhtrieudoddt
- Maji 2007Загружено:satyam
- CC15 Laminar FlowЗагружено:999impact
- Tutorial on Scale Up.docxЗагружено:hafizi naim Ismail
- [SolarPACES2019] Design and Construction of an experimental Parabolic Trough Collector Using Low Cost Alternative MaterialsЗагружено:Hugo Machado Torres
- Biomech SylЗагружено:Stephanie Yang
- Chapter Wise TestsЗагружено:Karthik Chockkalingam
- Design_01.2 - P01 - 12pol - 1,5polЗагружено:dfiorillo

- Nozzle designЗагружено:mehdi10000
- (Developments in Heat Transfer) R. S. Amano, R. S. Amano, B. Sunden-Computational Fluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer_ Emerging Topics-WIT Press (2010) (1)Загружено:cris
- MRS Bulletin TBCsЗагружено:Leandro Augusto Souza
- Versteeg H K , Malalasekera W , Introduction to Computational Fluid Dynamics-The Finite Volume Method (Longman, 1995)Загружено:waleedyehia

- Chapter 9 Mass TransferЗагружено:saadiis
- ADA359226.pdfЗагружено:Eray Koç
- section on Hypersonic FlowЗагружено:P K
- cicedocЗагружено:shivaprazad19
- B.E.MECH-SYLLABUSЗагружено:Kamal Kumar
- Alnahhal Mohammed_PhD thesis.pdfЗагружено:Kaffel
- • Boundary Layer Equations • Non-Dimensional EquationsЗагружено:msnaghavi
- Pr-sof-1262-Design and Fabrication of Wood Gasification Plant That Runs a 15 Kva Static Load GeneratorЗагружено:Ayaz Zafar
- Falco UAV Low Reynolds Airfoil DesignЗагружено:redxus
- 64241Загружено:amdeva
- 3D Simulation(5MW) of Wind Turbine Rotors at Full Scale. Part I- GeometryЗагружено:Abdel Salam Alsabagh
- ReportЗагружено:vaibhav471995
- r7312301-Transport Phenomena in Bio ProcessesЗагружено:sivabharathamurthy
- Scale Effect in Modelling 10.1007_BF01426877Загружено:mivos4
- Heat Transfer CalculationsЗагружено:Manuel Corona Cárdenas
- Bronkhorst 2017 WindЗагружено:முகமது உசேன்
- 08. ThermalЗагружено:kiruthishka
- Numerical Study of Passive and Active Flow Separation Control Over a NACA0012 AirfoilЗагружено:Kavi Perera
- A ally Simple Turbulence Closure Model for Attached and Separated Turbulence Boundary LayersЗагружено:Shapiro Alex
- Strong Conservative Form of the Incompressible Navier–StokesЗагружено:劉平本
- Models.cfd.Water Purification ReactorЗагружено:sjrjanakiraman6870
- Fluidised Heat TransferЗагружено:tanzil10
- 1939 Thornthwaite - The Determination of Evaporation From Land and Water SurfacesЗагружено:Rodrigo Rivero
- Dynamics of FluidЗагружено:Meron Moges
- Evaluation and Optimization of Aerodynamic Performance of the TARF-LCV ArchitectureЗагружено:BrenoVentorimdeTassis
- EngineeringЗагружено:Prashant Kumar Tripathi
- eRep-Calculation of Blade-To-Blade Flow in a Turbomachine by Streamline CurvatureЗагружено:Moly69x
- MCQ UNIT 3Загружено:ismaeel247
- Solving Differential Equations in JavaЗагружено:malekan2005
- Baldwin-Lomax Model -- CFD-Wiki, The Free CFD ReferenceЗагружено:picams_picams

## Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.

Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.

Отменить можно в любой момент.