Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 13

Andrew van Paridon1

Osney Thermo-Fluids Laboratory,

Department of Engineering Science,
University of Oxford,
Osney Mead,
Oxford OX2 0ES, UK On the Real-Time Estimation of
e-mail: andrew.vanparidon@eng.ox.ac.uk

Marko Bacic
Disk Temperature Spatial
Osney Thermo-Fluids Laboratory,
Department of Engineering Science, Distributions in Aeroengines
University of Oxford,
Osney Mead, This paper presents a novel approach to real-time modeling of disk temperature distribu-
Oxford OX2 0ES, UK; tion using proper orthogonal decomposition (POD). The method combines singular value
Rolls-Royce PLC, decomposition (SVD) techniques with a series of low-order transfer functions to predict
Moor Lane, the disks thermal response over a typical flight. The model uses only typically available
Derby DE24 8BJ, UK full authority digital electronic control (FADEC) measurements to predict temperature
with accuracy of 630 K over the whole flight cycle. A Kalman filter has also been devel-
Peter T. Ireland oped based on a single temperature measurement, and the location of the measurement
Osney Thermo-Fluids Laboratory, has been assessed in order to select the most appropriate target for instrumentation.
Department of Engineering Science, Points all around the front and back of the disk have been assessed, and the best practice
University of Oxford, result is found to be near the center of the disk neck. This represents a compromise
Osney Mead, between matching the fast dynamic response of the rim, with the slower dynamics of the
Oxford OX2 0ES, UK cob. The new model has been validated against an independent flight simulation.
[DOI: 10.1115/1.4037870]
Ron Daniel
Department of Engineering Science,
University of Oxford,
Parks Road,
Oxford OX1 3PJ, UK

1 Introduction mechanisms can lead to microcrack nucleation and propagation.

A survey of analytical approaches to summing the damage mecha-
Efforts to improve engine efficiency mean that the average tur-
nisms above is provided by Changan et al. [6]. However, thermo-
bine entry temperature continues to increase. As such, there is a
mechanical damage models have no agreed upon standard, so they
growing need to actively monitor thermal fatigue damage on each
are designed and applied on a case-by-case basis. As such, specific
disk in order to fully exploit its maximum safe life. Furthermore,
examples are proprietary, and there is very little in the literature
future developments in adaptable engines open up the opportunity
that directly links disk temperature measurements to fatigue life.
to modulate disk temperatures and further reduce thermal fatigue.
Overall, it has been demonstrated that knowing a disks temper-
This paper develops the methodology for a real-time temperature
ature distribution can drastically improve the confidence with
model that can be used in both health monitoring and control
which this life is predicted [7,8]. Additionally, any potential active
applications of the future.
control concepts that modulate disk temperature would require a
The expected damage accumulation is usually computed and
similar model. Consequently, disk temperature models must be
declared at the design stage and applied across the whole fleet,
able to resolve the nonlinear boundary conditions of the disk sur-
using a probabilistic approach that assumes the worst case scenar-
face in real time, conditional on the processing power of the full
ios and flight profiles [13]. The stress evaluation is typically car-
authority digital electronic control (FADEC) system. The objec-
ried out through finite element (FE) computer simulation [4] in
tives of this paper are therefore to
combination with computational fluid dynamics. For many manu-
facturers and operators, the results are validated against experi- (1) develop a reduced order, accurate, open-loop model for
ments on disks that have been withdrawn early from service [1]. disk temperature estimations and
This means that the majority of the fleets engines are taken off (2) assess the potential benefit and location of a single disk
the wing for overhaul on the basis of a conservative life predic- temperature measurement to filter such a model.
tion. By monitoring service loads on a flight-by-flight basis, some
of the statistical scatter can be reduced [3]. The target of the model is an engine that has been simulated in
Life consumption due to service loads is attributable to low- Rolls-Royce SC03 finite element software. This full engine simu-
cycle fatigue, high-cycle fatigue, thermomechanical fatigue, lation has been preloaded with thermal, fluidic, and structural
creep, creepfatigue interaction, and fatigueoxidation interaction information. It generates engine representative data that have been
[5]. These mechanisms can behave independently or in combina- validated against instrumented engine tests. Similarly, reduced
tion; high temperature environments lead to thermal strain and order models used for online monitoring will also need to be vali-
creep while also generating brittle oxides. Both of these dated directly against similar engine tests to meet civil aircraft
standards. Further details of SC03 data can be found in Armstrong
and Edmunds [9] and Amirante et al. [10].
Corresponding author. A previous paper presented by van Paridon et al. [11] uses a
Contributed by the Heat Transfer Committee of ASME for publication in the
gray-box physics approach to model the temperatures. This model
2017; final manuscript received July 25, 2017; published online October 17, 2017. divides the disk into large lumped elements that have purely
Editor: David Wisler. axial and radial temperature gradients. In this paper, we develop

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power MARCH 2018, Vol. 140 / 031901-1
C 2018 by Rolls-Royce plc
Copyright V

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

the linear parameter-varying systems-proper orthogonal decompo- 2 Preliminaries
sition (LPV-POD) model that is accurate to 630 K anywhere in
the two-dimensional (2D) axisymmetric profile. The addition of a 2.1 LPV-POD Modeling. The temperature of the disk is
Kalman filter allows accurate simulation within a noisy environ- strongly coupled to the heated rotating flows on either side. These
ment, and for the model to follow unseen trajectories. The model cavities have highly nonlinear behavior, which makes it difficult
is named for the two techniques used to create it: LPV and proper to solve the heat equation analytically along the boundary condi-
orthogonal decomposition (POD). In particular, we exploit the use tions. Numerically, it becomes highly complex and computation-
of singular value decompositions (SVDs) to identify the modes of ally exhaustive to recreate accurate physical behavior. Further,
the POD. this does not lead to a low order model suitable for online applica-
The use of SVDs to model thermal systems was set forth by tion. Another approach is to identify energy-based modes of the
Gay and Ray [12]. They exploit the properties of SVD truncation temperature field, and link them with independent variables that
to select only the most significant spatial and temporal modes of fully parameterize that field. To this end, the LPV-POD model
the system, and use this to reduce the model. Such POD models was developed.
do not require knowledge of a materials physical properties or
boundary conditions in order to accurately approximate the gov- 2.2 Singular Value Decomposition of a Temperature Field.
erning equations (subject to a sufficiently rich data set). However, We start from the heat equation in 2D, though the technique can
where complex nonlinear boundary conditions need to be consid- readily be applied in three-dimensional cases as well;
ered, further modeling is required. For instance, Widrich et al.
[13] tested a variety of SVD techniques using multilayer feedfor- @T
ar2 T (1)
ward neural networks to model turbine metal temperatures. A sim- @t
pler method is to consider matching the nonlinear effects to
known conditions using an LPV model. When solving partial differential equations analytically, we
Quasi-LPV models are useful in guidance applications because often resort to a solution with separation of variables, where
the equations of motion governing each axis do not need to be dependence in space and time is separated. We therefore assume
assessed independently. They have been applied for the control that we can represent a solution to the heat equation as
of a generic missile [14], a 747 aircraft [15], turbofan shaft
speed [16], and for a twin rotor model [17]. However, analytically X

derived LPV models will often miss key dynamics necessary for Tx; y; t Wl x; yUl t (2)
creating accurate models for control. For applications outside
of motion control, identifying quasi-LPV systems from experi-
where Wl are eigenfunctions of the r2 operator. In cases with
mental data is a method that has seen increasing popularity. There
homogeneous boundary conditions and simple geometries, Wl are
are two methods presented in the literature: techniques that iden-
sinusoidal functions in space which have corresponding functions
tify LPV models based on one set of measurements with time-
Uk that are exponential functions in time. For models considered
varying parameters, and techniques based on multiple different
here, with complex boundary conditions, we assume only that
sets of measurements using frozen values of the scheduling
Wl(x, y) can be represented by an orthogonal set of functions such
variable [18].
Designing the Kalman filter (see Fig. 1) is based on the assump-
tion that a sensor could be manufactured such that the temperature 
1; i j
of the disk could be measured to the accuracy proposed by Garg Wi x; yWj x; ydxdy (3)
et al. [19]. There have been a number of reported uses of Kalman D 0; i 6 j
filters used in real-time models to understand the core-flow per-
formance degradation in gas turbines [2023]. where D is the domain of the disk. This assumption allows us to
This paper presents the development and validation of the use SVD and experimental data to identify Wl and Ul. To see this,
LPV-POD model and an associated Kalman filter. Section 2 dem- consider subsampling the transient temperature field of a body at
onstrates the theory behind the LPV-POD model architecture and m discrete locations v1,, vm (where vi v(xi, yi)) and at n dis-
Kalman filter design. Section 3 presents the application of the crete times t1,, tn to get the matrix T(v, t). We postulate that this
model to the simulated disk system and then Sec. 4 discusses the can be represented as
results and analysis of the model methodology. Section 5 contin-
ues with the development of the model to include the Kalman fil- Tv; t Wl vUl t (4)
ter and Sec. 6 presents the validation of the updated model and a l1
discussion on best practice for identifying good filters. Section 7
summarizes the conclusions. In this case, we assume m M because generally m < n for most
time series data.2 Expanding the equation becomes
2 3
Tv1 ; t1 Tv1 ; t2 Tv1 ; tn
6 7
6 Tv2 ; t1 Tv2 ; t2 Tv2 ; tn 7
6 7
T6 .. 7
6 . 7
4 5
Tvm ; 0 Tvm ; t1 Tvm ; tn
2 32 3
W1 v1 Wm v1 U1 t1 U1 tn
6 .. 76 .. 7
64 .
54 .
5 (5)
W1 vm Wm vm Um t1 Um tn

Fig. 1 Block diagram of a plant with a parallel model and filter 2

If n < m then the subscripts change slightly but the overall result is much the
(L) same.

031901-2 / Vol. 140, MARCH 2018 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

This is immediately identifiable as an equivalent to the SVD of When the final model is put together, the p, z, and k values are
the data set recalled as the driving functions of state matrix A and input matrix
m B such that Ui(h, t) is given by
T Ui :ri Vi>
i1 x_ i t Ai hxi t Bi hut
U1    Um  r1 V1    rm Vm  (6) Ui h; t Ci xi t (11)

It follows that each function can be approximated from the Keeping the output matrix C constant ensures that gain schedul-
equivalent singular vector as Wi Ui and Ui ri Vi> . Ordering the ing does not unnaturally force the output. For instance, the func-
elements of the SVD such that ri > ri1, the relative contribution tion U2 has the structure
of each successive term is diminished. An approximation for tem-
perature, T^, can be generated by selecting only the first r terms U2 h; s s  zh
kh    (12)
r U s s  p1 h s  p2 h
T^ W i Ui (7)
i1 which can be realized in state-space form as
The selection of r can be chosen to satisfy some predetermined p1 h 0 kh
criteria for accuracy. System identification can be performed on x_ 2 t x2 t ut
p2 h  zh p2 h 0 (13)
each ri Vi> to identify equivalent temporal functions Ui. Thus, it is
possible to create a reduced order model by identifying the first r U2 h; t 1 1 x2 t
modes of the SVD.
The state vector x does not correspond to any direct physical
2.3 Quasi-LPV Identification of the Temporal Vector Ui. variables as the model is crafted through inputoutput identifica-
The SVD model above is excellent for recreating a single tempera- tion. It can be understood broadly as the thermal energy modes of
ture profile, whereby truncation can be easily applied to minimize the disk.
the number of modes given some target accuracy. However, aircraft
will usually fly through trajectories of differing operating condi- 2.4 Incorporating the Spatial Vector Wi. As the temporal
tions that are unknown a priori. The complex changes in the heat functions Ui(h, t) are derived from multiple data sets, it follows
transfer rates at the disks surface create nonlinear boundary condi- that a similar process would help provide a more broadly applica-
tions and lead to complex sets of temperature profiles. The model ble solution for Wi(v). By stacking the full list of training data,
must be able to recreate a diverse set of trajectories within the tem- and taking the SVD, the resulting Ui provides the best approxi-
perature space. This can be achieved by gain scheduling the param- mate to the average Wi solutions. These can be adapted into the
eters of Ui with flight conditions that, in general, are also nonlinear. state space directly. When the final model is built, Wi can be
In the present case, we apply system identification using the experi- incorporated by multiplying the row vector C with the spatial vec-
ment based frozen-value quasi-LPV method [18]. The resulting tor Ui
model is only limited by the operating conditions used in the train-
ing data and the linearity of the behavior far from those points. Wi v Ui vCi (14)
First, a parameter vector h, based on the flight conditions, is
selected such that it adequately parameterizes the trajectories of This way, the number of columns in each Wi will match the
the aerodynamics. Then, a series of experiments are recorded that number of rows in the related xi such that the overall model will
span the temperature space of interest. Each experiment records stay consistent. The final model will directly produce the tempera-
the plants response to a step change in u and h. The SVD is taken, ture output
resulting in a number of vectors ri Vi> of length N. The parameters
of the temporal function Ui are recorded through parametric iden- 2 3 2 32 3
x_ 1 t A1 h 0 x1 t
tification of ri Vi> [24]. This is done by first assuming the number 6 7 6 7
6 x_ 2 t 7 6 A2 h 76 7
of coefficients (ai, bi) in the transfer function
6 76 76 x t 7
6 2 7
6 7 6 6 .. 7
76 7
b0 b1 s b2 s2    bm sm 4 5 4 . 54 5
Uh; s (8) x_ m t 0 Am h xm t
a0 a1 s a2 s2    an1 sn1 sn
2 3
B1 h
and minimizing e subject to 6 7
6 B2 h 7
N 6 6 7ut
7 (15)
e Ui utj  ri Vi> 2 (9) 4 5
j1 Bm h
2 3
x1 t
As each Ui is identified, it can be converted to pole-zero form. 6 7
It is important that the number of poles and zeros for each Ui is 6 x2 t 7
T^h; v; t W1 v W2 v Wm v 6 6 7
consistent across all h responses. This can become a limiting fac- 4 5
tor in the order of the final model if, for example, U3 is identified xm t
with no zeros in one experiment, and two in another. In this case,
the final model will be constructed from U1 and U2. For a set of h,
the transfer function will have the form The model can be easily reduced by selecting the first r func-
tions from the m identified. The basis for this can be determined
by the designer.
s  zi h
Uh; s
kh i1 (10)
U s YN 2.5 Kalman Filter Design. To answer the second objective
s  pi h of this paper, we need to assess the value that a potential disk
j1 measurement might have on improving the accuracy of the model.

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power MARCH 2018, Vol. 140 / 031901-3

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

solid mechanics. As such, a vast array of measurements are
available to be used for inputs to the LPV-SVD model; however,
we limit ourselves to measurements that are typically available to
the FADEC, such as the compressor exit temperature (T30 ). It is
noted that SC03 results have been validated against engine tests,
including the use of rotating instrumentation, and represent
physics that could be expected in an engine.

3.2 Selection of Input and Parameter Vector. There are

several variables that govern a particular turbines temperature,
Fig. 2 The implementation of estimator correction in a state- the most important being the temperature of the gas in the core
space model flow and in the disk wells. These can be consolidated using a mea-
surement of T30 . Normalizing this by the maximum and minimum
temperatures provides the input variable u(t)

Consider how a measurement of the disk could improve the T30  T30;min
model, given some process noise (w) and measurement noise (v). ut (21)
T30;max  T30;min
In this setup, the plants state-space equations can be expressed as
In the case of the turbine disk, the most important parameter
_ Axt But B1 wt
xt that defines the nonlinear boundary conditions is perhaps the
Tt Cxt vt rotational Reynolds number (Re/), which drives the Nusselt
number (Nu) and the local heat transfer coefficients. Working
where B1 allows us to include some weighting factor as required. backward, the most important parameters would be the engine
If u and w are strictly additive, such as is the case here, B1 and B LP spool speed (X), and the initial air thermodynamic properties,
are equal. The LPV-POD model corrections are based on differen- which are directly related to atmospheric pressure, modeled as
ces between a given model output (T^i ) and a single measured pressure altitude alt. Therefore, we chose to model the parameter
value (Ti) from the plant. vector as h h(X, (alt)). Other parameters such as the other shaft
In a Kalman filtered model, there is a discrete update between speeds, fuel flow, and power extraction will vary in a near fixed
time steps based on the new Ti information as shown in Fig. 2. relation to these two as the shaft speed is often used as a proxy
The current state estimate (^ x ) is found from previous, or predic- for thrust.
x ) and the residual of T^i and Ti
tor, state estimate (
3.3 Acquisition of Training Data. The disk profile was sub-
x^ x LTi  T^i (17) sampled at 121 discrete query points for each step cycle. The
points were arbitrarily selected by imposing a square grid pattern
The design of the estimator matrix (L) for the Kalman filter is on the profile and selecting all the points that fell within the
based on a stochastic balance of v and w, and is calculated assum- boundary (see Fig. 3).
ing that the noises have a Gaussian distribution, zero mean, and The SC03 simulations were run with step cycles starting from
are not correlated with time. The mean-square noise levels of each steady sea-level-static (SLS) conditions, rising to one of nine
are defined from their expectation values other conditions (see Table 1) and returning back to SLS. A tenth
point was investigated for conditions at descent approaching
Rw Efwkwk> g (18) 1.5 kft; however, because the temperatures at the start of the step
cycle are so similar to these conditions, the simulation and
Rv Efvkvk> g (19) resulting SVD failed to capture the full responses of the system.
Instead, the parameters at this point have been heuristically
Rv can be understood as a measure of sensor accuracy; thus, it determined based on other nearby points. Good agreement with
is reasonably easy to estimate. However, there is no objective the data in the final validation was easy to achieve using this
means to assess the value of Rw. As such, it is usually selected method.
based on the designers best understanding. The matrix L can be
calculated from the solution to minimizing the variance of the fil- 3.4 SVD Analysis. Figure 4 shows a representation of the
ter error with respect to its state estimate and is the solution to the spatial singular vectors (Ui) produced using a full set of step
Discrete Algebraic Riccati Equation. Details of the derivation can response data. Vectors U1 and U2 appear to correlate with the disk
be found in Franklin et al. [24]. This is a common solution as
employed in MATLABS kalmam.m function and is expressed here
simply as

L LA; B; wi ; Rv ; Rw (20)

The parameter wi is used to isolate different measurement

points. It is defined by zeroing all the rows of [W1 W2] apart from
row i. This means that only the measurement Ti is considered
when filtering the model, but still affects all other points.

3 MethodologyModel
3.1 Plant Description. The plant is taken to be the tempera-
ture output from an FE simulation of an IP turbine disk. The soft-
ware used is SC03, which has been discussed by Sun et al. [25].
The SC03 model incorporates the entire engine for both fluid and Fig. 3 Grid of points used for subsampling the SC03 model

031901-4 / Vol. 140, MARCH 2018 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Table 1 The operating points used in the frozen value train-
ing data

Condition X/Xmax palt (kft)

Maximum take-off 1.000 0.0

Climb after take-off 0.985 1.5
Cruise 0.919 36.0
Reacceleration 0.972 36.0
Cruise 0.910 38.0
Reacceleration 0.966 38.0
Cruise 0.914 40.0
Deacceleration 0.647 40.0
Cruise (low hold) 0.862 1.5
Descenta 0.529 1.5
Fig. 5 First six temporal modes (riVi) of a SLS-MTO step cycle
Point derived from other nearby conditions

Fig. 6 A close up of Figure 5 without (r1V1)

contribute a similar weighting to the final model. Further, this

means that the benefit of including them can only be achieved by
incorporating all of them. The problem is that these vectors do not
resemble consistent transfer function structures across other
responses. The first two vectors, r1V1 and r2V2, are identified
consistently as first- and second-order responses, respectively.
This trend does not continue over the subsequent modes, nor is it
consistent across all data sets. If the order of the response is not
consistent, it makes it extremely difficult to model them using the
LPV methodology as described. Thus, to simplify the process, the
final model is based on the approximation that uses only the first
two modes

T^ U1 :r1 V1> U2 :r2 V2> (22)

Fig. 4 Contour representation of the first four spatial vectors

3.5 Identification of Transfer Functions. It is necessary to

temperature profiles at steady-state and midtransience, respec- identify the form of the functions U1 and U2 that best model r1V1
tively (as will be shown in Sec. 4.4). On the other hand, they also and r2V2, respectively. For U1, this is a transfer function with a
represent physical phenomenon that appear in the temperature single-pole (p1) and gain (k1). In state-space form, this is realized
profile, but they are less explicitly defined. It is best to consider as
them all in the context of their respective riVi.
A plot of the first six temporal modes (riVi) as identified by the A1 p1 ; B1 k1 ; C1 1  (23)
SVD of the SLS-maximum take-off (MTO) step cycle is shown in
Fig. 5. These have been normalized to the maximum value of The second function, U2, is best represented by a dual-pole (p2,
r1V1 to show the relative contribution of each vector. A closer p3), single-zero (z) structure, with gain (k2), which, in state-space
view of the plot is shown in Fig. 6 where r1V1 has been removed. form, is
We are mostly concerned with the ascent (step-up) portion of the    
data, as this is used for each of the operating points. The descent p2 0 k
A2 ; B2 2 ; C2 1 1  (24)
step (step-down) is used from the SLS-MTO cycle only as a p3  z p3 0
means to determine the appropriate SLS parameters.
As can be seen in Fig. 6, the first mode (r1V1) is the only one The parameters of each LPV function are identified through the
that does not tend to zero at steady-state, implying that U1 repre- frozen value approach. That is, for each set of data, the gains
sents the steady-state temperature profile. The second mode (k1, k2), poles (p1, p2, p3), and zero (z) are identified in relation to
(r2V2) is almost 20% the value of the first, which is why U2 is the parameter vector (h) and stored in a set for later interpolation.
clearly discernible in the temperature profile. r3V3 ! r6V6 are of To visualize how this interpolation would work, a typical map of
all of similar magnitude in ascent. This implies that they would the results is shown in Fig. 7. This plot shows p1 for both the

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power MARCH 2018, Vol. 140 / 031901-5

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Fig. 8 Overview of the final LPV-POD model for the disk

Fig. 7 Visualization p1 5 p1(h) as a contour plot, with a typical

flight profile overlaid

identified parameters (gray circles) and the interpolated values

(contours). The black line shows a typical flight cycle as it varies
with X and patm.
The corners where no data exists were estimated to ensure
smooth interpolation of the rest of the results. It was found after
validation that similar model accuracy could be achieved with
fewer data points, particularly in the upper-right corner of this
plot. However, the aim of the research is not to minimize the num-
ber of data sets used as these are inexpensive to generate through Fig. 9 Difference between original data (T) and truncated data
SC03 simulations. (T^ r 5 2 )

3.6 General Model Architecture. Matrices A and B can be

concatenated into single state-space matrices to make it more
2 3 2 3
p1 h 0 0 k1 h
A4 0 p2 h 0 5; B 4 k2 h 5 (25)
0 p3 h  zh p3 h 0

Similarly, we incorporate the components Ui via

Wv W1 vC1 W2 vC2  U1 U2 U2  (26)

Thus, the final model is

_ Ahxt Bhut
xt Fig. 10 Comparison of the LPV transfer functions with their
T^h; v; t Wvxt target output (ri Vi> )

which is shown in Fig. 8. The model can also be used to produce

the individual Ui values for validating the identification process reasonably well during take-off, cruise and midcruise reaccelera-
by substituting the original [C1 C2] in place of W. tion, but the descent period (from 0.9) does not match as well.
This is due to the lack of local data to support the interpolation of
4 Validation and Discussion the state-space parameters (k, p, z). It is also likely due to the fact
that cooling is a slower process than heating, which leads to more
4.1 Natural Limit of SVD Model. The final model has an complex interactions. However, a full physical reasoning is best
accuracy limit imposed by the nature of the truncated SVD. As a conducted alongside the realization of the temperature profiles.
reference for the final model, a rank 2 SVD of a full flight profile
across 121 points has been compared with the original data. The 4.3 Validation of LPV-POD Model. A number of validation
difference between the two is shown in Fig. 9. The maximum studies have been carried out to identify the strengths and weak-
error associated with this truncation is about 20 K. This occurs at nesses of the model methodology. As an example, the temperature
the start of take-off, at maximum temperature, and during descent. profile for an arbitrary point selected the center of the disk is
The erms of this model is 2.14 K. shown in Fig. 11. This plot is included to show the closeness of fit
in any one point.
4.2 Reproduction of Orthogonal Time Functions. Each of The temperature profile of all 121 points is shown in Fig. 12(a)
the identified Ui was validated against riVi as produced by an and the error for each point is shown in Fig. 12(b). The initial
SVD of the full flight cycle. This is shown in Fig. 10. For the warmup period (0 < t < 5000 s) has no discernible error. This is
purposes of comparison, each profile has been normalized to the because the models range only starts above SLS conditions, and
maximum value of U1. Both transfer functions appear to match this early period only shows the Tbase, which is the same across all

031901-6 / Vol. 140, MARCH 2018 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

During descent (d), the error balloons out again. This is partially
due to the lack of data used to identify the local parameters. This
will be discussed further using the 2D profiles in Sec. 4.4.
The overall width of the error spread in Fig. 12(b) is similar to
that found in the natural limit shown in Fig. 9. The difference
being that the error in the natural limit error is centralized,
whereas the model error drifts high and low with the simulation.
The erms of these data is 2.18 K, which is not statistically different
from the natural limit. This effect is partly corrected with the addi-
tion of the Kalman filter presented in Sec. 6.

4.4 Reconstruction of Axisymmetric Temperature Profile.

It is possible to take snapshots of the disk temperature in Fig. 12
and remap the thermal distribution on to the disk geometry. An
Fig. 11 Comparison of a single point (T^ 50 ) against the original example of this is shown in Fig. 13 alongside the equivalent snap-
(T50) shot from the SC03 simulation. The data between points in the
simulation have been interpolated assuming a linear gradient
between nearest neighbors. Figure 13 highlights the incredible
tests. The point of maximum error occurs just after MTO at point (a). detail that can be reconstructed from the SVD methodology.
This value is in agreement with the natural limit identified in Figure 14 shows the temperature profile (a)(d) and respective
Sec. 4.1. By the time the simulation reaches maximum temperature error (e)(h) for the series of time stamps shown in Figs. 12(a)
at (b), the error reaches a minimum across the entire model. This is and 12(b). Focusing on the temperature profiles first, there is an
due to the way that Wi is defined from the Ui vectors, in turn based obvious similarity between (b), (c), and the contour plot of U1
on the overall training data. It has optimized the model to simulate (Fig. 4). These are examples of quasi-stable conditions that tend
the temperature at this point. Using a different set of training data, toward the dominant steady-state mode. Similarly, (a) and (d)
with different steady-state maximum temperatures and reside look much more like U2 contours, as they are examples of tran-
times, will shift this optimization (e.g., to the cruise conditions) sient conditions.
but having it optimized to the maximum temperature conditions From a physical perspective, the steady-state plots show the
was expected to be most beneficial for life management. near linear temperature profile that dominates the geometry from
The steady-state error at cruise (c) is very low, as it is during front to back due to the steady heat transfer between the disk
midflight reacceleration, and both are well within the 20 K target. wells. During transients, the cob of the disk lags behind the tem-
perature change of the rest of the disk due to its greater mass and
heat capacity, so the contours have a local minimum/maximum
near to the center of the cob.
Turning attention to the absolute error plots is shown in
Figs. 14(e)14(h). The first thing to notice is that the distribution
of the error in (f) and (g) corresponds very closely with U2. Simi-
larly, (e) corresponds very much with U3 while (h) appears to
have some similarity to both U3 and U4, particularly with the latter
when observing the high gradient on the rear surface of the cob.
Physically, plots (e) and (h) reflect the locations of local con-
vective forces that have been ignored by the truncation of the
higher order modes in the SVD. For plot (e), an impingement
mechanism exists on the front of the cob. This is caused by both
the flow injection from the stator surface and the core region cir-
culating toward the disk surface. On the rear side of the disk in
plot (h), there is a strong convective force across the entire sur-
face. This is due to a heat transfer mechanism that is only partially
dependent on the T30 air, and thus not properly incorporated into
the model. This invalidates the assumption that the thermal field

Fig. 12 Temperature results for all 121 model points and com- Fig. 13 Comparison of disk temperature contours at maximum
parison with the original SC03 data: (a) temperature and (b) conditions. Contour levels are the same for each: (a) SC03 data
temperature error and (b) model data.

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power MARCH 2018, Vol. 140 / 031901-7

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Fig. 14 Normalized temperature profile of the disk (a)(d), and the respective error in K of the model relative to the original data
(e)(h). The scales are the same across the row for each of the four figures: (a) start of take-off, (b) maximum T, (c) cruise at
36,000 ft, (d) descent, (e) start of take-off, (f) maximum T, (g) cruise at 36,000 ft, and (h) descent.

can be parameterized by T30 and h alone. This will be the subject The ability for the model to resolve surface points appears to be
of future work. relatively sound in this instance. The next step is to test and evalu-
ate different Kalman filter designs.
4.5 Extrapolation of Surface Points. An important consider-
ation in the practical application of this method is how well tem- 5 MethodologyFilter
peratures on the surface of the disk can be extrapolated from the
available data. This analysis considers five points spaced around 5.1 Filter Description. In designing the Kalman filter, we
the disks surface as identified in Fig. 15. The extrapolation assume that the measurement is taken directly at one of the plant
technique for the simulated points involves minimizing differen- outputs (T^i ). The measurement noise (v) occurs at the theoretical
ces in the local temperature gradient, effectively smoothing the sensor that measures the temperature of the disks surface. In
temperature toward a local linear profile. This is consistent with place of the sensor, raw data from the SC03 simulations are used
temperature distributions in an isotropic material under quasi- as the measurement, with v applied artificially. The process noise
steady conditions. The SC03 data at these points can be extracted (w) must account for the random fluctuations in the temperature of
directly. the air leaving the compressor, the fluctuation of the heat transfer
The temperature data for these five points are shown in effects as the air passes from the compressor to the disk well, and
Fig. 16(a) and the relative error plot is shown in Fig. 16(b). All the noise of the measurement of T30 in the first place.
points perform worse than their nearest neighbors that have been Figure 17 shows the setup for the Kalman filter. The original
directly simulated, but not all to the same extent. Point 1 (inner LPV-POD model is at the bottom-left with input T30 and output
cob surface) and Point 2 (front cob surface) still perform within Ti. This value is compared with the artificial Plant measurement
the natural limitation. Point 3 (center radius front) and Point 4 T^i , before passing to the Kalman filter L at the bottom-right. In
(front of rim) appear to be the worst affected at the start of take- this case, B1 B, and both A and B are functions of h. A steady-
off. Both are very close to impingement areas from secondary state Kalman filter can be found using the formula
flows so they face large nonlinearities. Point 5 (back of disc) is
most affected by the variation in the flow entering the disc well
that was identified in Fig. 14(h). L LA; B; wi ; Rv ; Rw (28)

031901-8 / Vol. 140, MARCH 2018 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Fig. 17 Setup of LPV-POD model using raw SC03 data and arti-
ficial measurement noise v to create a Plant for filtering

optimal filter can be selected, and then be validated against an

independent trajectory to confirm its effectiveness.
Two methods for calculating L are presented. The first is calcu-
lated using constant values of A, B, wi based on a single parameter
vector h, thus producing a constant L. The second considers a fil-
ter based on LPV systems, where L L(h). Each method is eval-
uated across multiple measurement points.
Fig. 15 Five points on the disks surface where temperature For Rw, we assume that the error associated with the T30 sensor
data have been extrapolated. Labels match Figs. 16(a) and 16(b). is roughly equivalent to the fluctuations between T30 and the disk
wells. If the standard deviation of the measurement is r 3.3 K,
and we use assume a covariance of 3r, then Rw 10 K. On the
other hand, Rv is based on the predicted accuracy required for life
as outlined in Sec. 2.5. As we only use a single measurement of
monitoring as suggested by Garg et al. [19], which is 5 K.
the plant (at location vi), and the model is a function of h, there is
no clear method to optimize the solution based on either vi and/or
h. The approach taken here is to evaluate filters at a selection of 5.2 Filter Design
different vi and h, and then compare each filters ability to correct 5.2.1 Constant Filter. The complete h map is based on 12
the model over a known trajectory. From this comparison, an engine spool speeds (X) and five pressure altitudes (alt), giving a
total of 60 operating points. However, these were interpolated and
extrapolated from the ten original operating points used in the
training data. As such, in choosing h for evaluating the constant
filter, only the original ten are considered. Furthermore, we start
by prioritizing accuracy at the extremes of operation, so only
MTO and 38k cruise conditions are considered initially. These
represent two very different flight conditionspeak temperature
and long hold time at low atmospheric pressureand should high-
light any differences that the choice of h might have on the overall
effectiveness of the filter. The resulting constant filters are called
LMTO,i and L38c,i respectively, and calculated using

LMTO;i LMTO AhMTO ; BhMTO ; wi ; Rv ; Rw (29)

L38k;i L38k Ah38k ; Bh38k ; wi ; Rv ; Rw (30)

Each constant value filter has been evaluated at nine different

vi. Not all points in the simulation make sense for the location of a
virtual measurement, as any location not near the surface of the
disk does not make practical sense and generally produces an
unstable filter. The selected points for evaluation are presented in
Fig. 18. It will be shown that the choice of measurement point is
far more important than the basis of h, which is why only two con-
stant flight conditions for the LPV model are presented.
5.2.2 LPV-Based Filter. The LPV-based filter has been inves-
tigated using the same nine vi as defined above. The filter is con-
structed by evaluating L at all 60 h where A(h) and B(h) have
been identified in the original model

Lh;i h Lh Ah; Bh; wi ; Rv ; Rw (31)

Fig. 16 Temperatures for the five extrapolated points: (a)
temperature and (b) relative error compared with the FE/CFD Lh can then be utilized in the model with a look-up table similar
solution to A(h) and B(h). The motivation for this method was that the

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power MARCH 2018, Vol. 140 / 031901-9

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

throughout the entirety of the simulation. The second analysis
considers the erms at each point in order to identify where there is
significant sustained drift in the accuracy.
A selection of the emax and erms contour plots for a LMTO,i filter
based on each of the nine measurement points is shown in
Figs. 1921. Blue indicates regions where the output is nearly an
exact match to the training data, and red indicates either signifi-
cant over- or under-estimation. The contour levels have been cho-
sen to highlight the difference between results. It is important to
acknowledge that the contours are included for esthetics, and that
the interpolated data away from the sample points are less signifi-
cant than the values at the points themselves (yellow points). This
is particularly apparent when considering the significance of the
error at the top left corner of Fig. 19(a), compared with the error
Fig. 18 Points on the disk that were investigated to find the at the top right of Fig. 19(b).
best possible Kalman filter virtual sensor location It was found that the greatest factor affecting the results is the
large difference in the dynamic response between the rim and the
cob. Using a filter measurement at the cob will lead to gross inac-
curacies at the rim because the cob responds much slower to ther-
mal mechanisms than the neck and rim do. This can be seen in
Fig. 20. The exception to this observation is shown in Fig. 19(a),
where a point at the front edge of the cob does a reasonable job of
controlling the temperature error distribution across all points.
This is because the front of the cob has dynamics similar to the
rim due to a local impingement of air from the disk well.
On the other hand, a measurement near the rim of the disk will
tend to over correct the cob for extended periods, as indicated by
Figs. 21(c) and 21(d). The closer the measurement is to the rim,
the more yellow and red areas appear in the cob. Another feature
that can be seen from both Figs. 20 and 21 is that there is a slight
benefit to choosing a measurement at the front side of the disk.
This is because the rear of the disk is known to be affected by
flows that have not been modeled properly (see above discussion).
If this issue was resolved, a sensor that measures the back of the
Fig. 19 Contour plot of the emax at every point in the disk pro-
disk would be favorable because it would be easier to install.
file using a LMTO with measurements at the highlighted dot: (a) Based on the above observations, the location of vi should be a
point 42 and (b) point 102 point that reflects the dynamics of the disk on average. However,
it is not yet clear how to derive this location analytically. The best
compromise between the extremes has been found heuristically.
filter could be optimized at different operating points throughout a As such, the best choice is a measurement at the mid span of the
flight. neckv102 (see results shown in Figs. 19(b) and 21(a)). This is
mildly inaccurate, as measurements are more likely to be at the
surface of the disk, whereas all the vi locations are internal. This
can be mitigated in practice by assuming larger measurement
5.3 Selection by Measurement Point. First, consider how
noise, or creating a disk model based on surface measurements
the choice of vi affects the filter by comparing the results of
LMTO,i alone. The profile used for evaluating and comparing the
filters is the same as used for validation above. The desire is that
the filter will mitigate both large singular spikes in the error, and 5.4 Filter Selection by Operating Condition. It could be
significant extended offsets. To that end, two basic analyses were assumed that the choice of vi primarily affects the spatial resolu-
generated. The first considers the emax experienced at each point tion of the error, whereas the choice of h would affect the error

Fig. 20 Contour plot of the emax at every point in the disk profile using a LMTO with measure-
ments at the highlighted dot: (a) point 66, (b) point 76, (c) point 87, and (d) point 92

031901-10 / Vol. 140, MARCH 2018 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Fig. 21 Contour plot of the erms at every point in the disk profile using a LMTO with measure-
ments at the highlighted dot: (a) point 102, (b) point 103, (c) point 116, and (d) point 117

distribution over time. This is true and further analysis showed shows the process on a neighboring point (y88) that has not been
that the choice of h did affect the results. However, the effect is directly measured. The filter allows a large influence on the mea-
almost negligible in the cases studied here. Overall, there is no surement point, so T^102 follows the measured value precisely,
clear difference in the results that would suggest one technique albeit with a lower variance. This appears to work against the
over another. As such, LMTO,102 has been chosen for validating accuracy of point 88 at take-off, but the absolute accuracy of all
the final model. points has improved (as shown between Figs. 23 and 24) so this is
understandable. The filtering process has shown the greatest
6 Validation and Discussion
An independent flight profile has been introduced to validate
the final filter selection, LMTO,102. This is shown in Fig. 22 and
represents a flight that was aborted after take-off. For reference,
the error simulating this profile without the Kalman filter is shown
in Fig. 23. The errors are much greater than previously observed
for the LPV-POD model due to the trajectory operating far outside
the original training data. Even the initial temperature of the disk
does not align with a typical take-off.
The data from the original SC03 simulation are used as a mea-
surement signal for the Kalman filter. The signal has an artificial
measurement noise vt to emulate the sensor error that might
exist in a real engine. A similar process noise wt is applied to
the models input signal to replicate the sensor error associated
with the upstream measurement.
The error associated with the complete, filtered results is shown
in Fig. 24. The improvement in accuracy compared to the unfil-
tered results is stark. The error is now bounded to 630 K, and
most points perform far better. The signal is noisy, but this can be
improved in downstream processing.
Figure 25 shows the results of the filtered model as applied to
singular points. Specifically, Fig. 25(a) shows how the filter works
on T^102 where the virtual measurement is taken, and Fig. 25(b)
Fig. 23 Error in simulating the new flight profile with the LPV-
POD model only

Fig. 22 Flight profile used for validating the Kalman filter LPV-
POD model. Each color represents one of the 121 points where Fig. 24 Error in simulating the new profile with the Kalman fil-
the disk was sampled. ter in place

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power MARCH 2018, Vol. 140 / 031901-11

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

The authors would like to thank Rolls-Royce PLC for their con-
tinued support on this project.

alt pressure altitude
A state (or system) matrix
B input matrix
C output matrix
emax maximum absolute error
erms root-mean-square error
k transfer function gain
L filter matrix
p transfer function pole
t time
T temperature
u input vector (or forcing function)
Ui left-singular vector
v measurement noise
Vi right-singular vector
w process noise
x state vector
z transfer function zero

Greek Symbols
h parameter vector
ri singular value
Ui temporal function
v position vector
wi point targeted spatial function matrix
Fig. 25 Unfiltered model, measured signal, and filtered output Wi spatial function
for a single point: (a) measurement point (102) and (b) compari- X engine spool speed
son point (88)

improvement through the descent period where the model would
[1] Boyd-Lee, A. D., Harrison, G. F., and Henderson, M. B., 2001, Evaluation of
otherwise overpredict the temperature. Standard Life Assessment Procedures and Life Extension Methodologies for
Fracture-Critical Components, Int. J. Fatigue, 23(Suppl. 1), pp. 1119.
[2] Boyd-Lee, A., Painter, D., and Harrison, G. F., 2001, Life Extension Method-
7 Conclusions ologies and Risk-Based Inspection in the Management of Fracture Critical
The aim of this paper was to apply the LPV-POD model to a Aeroengine Components, RTO A VT Specialists Meeting on Life Manage-
ment Techniques for Ageing Air Vehicles, Manchester, UK, Oct. 811.
turbine disk based on SC03 simulations, and develop a Kalman [3] Lykins, C., Thomson, D., and Pomfret, C., 1994, The Air Forces Application
filter for the LPV-POD model to improve online monitoring of the of Probabilistics to Gas Turbine Engines, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-94-1440.
temperature. The final model is based on a rank 2 truncation of [4] Claudio, R. A., Branco, C. M., Gomes, E. C., Byrne, J., Harrison, G. F., and
the SVD analysis. Higher order modes proved to be too difficult Winstone, M. R., 2004, Fatigue Life Prediction and Failure Analysis of a Gas
Turbine Disc Using the Finite-Element Method, Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater.
to work with as the spatial and temporal modes were less consist- Struct., 27(9), pp. 849860.
ent across different training sets. The choice to use an arbitrary [5] Wu, X., 2010, Life Prediction of Gas Turbine Materials, Gas Turbines, G.
selection of points was adequate as a proof of concept. Due to the Injeti, ed., InTech, Rijeka, Croatia, pp. 215282.
natural limit in the accuracy of the SVD, it is unlikely that a more [6] Changan, C., Liaw, P. K., Ye, M., and Yu, J., 1999, Recent Developments in
the Thermomechanical Fatigue Life Prediction of Superalloys, J. Met., 51(4),
sophisticated selection of the points would lead to a superior epub.
model. The LPV-POD model produces a temperature field with an [7] Lu, Z. Z., Liu, C. L., Yue, Z. F., and Xu, Y. L., 2005, Probabilistic Safe Analy-
accuracy of 630 K at any point bounded by the locations vi, and sis of the Working Life of a Powder Metallurgical Turbine Disc, Mater. Sci.
no more than 636 K at points outside. These maximum errors Eng. A, 395(12), pp. 153159.
[8] Hou, N., Yu, Q., Wen, Z., and Yue, Z., 2010, Low Cycle Fatigue Behavior
occur during MTO transience and where there is less training data of Single Crystal Superalloy With Temperature Gradient, Eur. J. Mech.A/
available. In other places throughout the cycle, the field is much Solids, 29(4), pp. 611618.
better resolved, and overall the erms 2.2 K. [9] Armstrong, I., and Edmunds, T. M., 1989, Fully Automatic Analysis in an
This paper presented several methods for constructing a Industrial Environment, Second International Conference on Quality Assur-
ance and Standards, Stratford-upon-Avon, UK, May 2225, pp. 7484.
Kalman filter to support an LPV-POD model of the disk. The filter [10] Amirante, D., Hills, N. J., and Barnes, C. J., 2012, Thermo-Mechanical Finite
selection procedure has shown that the measurement point for a Element Analysis/Computational Fluid Dynamics Coupling of an Interstage
filter is far more important than the operating conditions at which Seal Cavity Using Torsional Spring Analogy, ASME J. Turbomach., 134(5),
the filter is trained. Further, the measurement point should be cho- p. 051015.
[11] van Paridon, A., Bacic, M., Ireland, P. T., Barnes, C., and Lewis, L. V., 2014,
sen at a location that reflects the thermal dynamics of the disk on Reduced Order Transient Disc Temperature Models For Online Health Mon-
average. In this case, the point is chosen approximately halfway itoring, ASME Paper No. GT2014-26296.
between the rim and cob. The filter allows the model to track an [12] Gay, D. H., and Ray, W., 1995, Identification and Control of Distributed
unknown flight trajectory that lies outside the original training Parameter Systems by Means of the Singular Value Decomposition, Chem.
Eng. Sci., 50(10), pp. 15191539.
data space to an accuracy of 630 K. Further work is needed to [13] Widrich, M., Sinha, A., Suarez, E., and Cassenti, B., 2006, Applications of
create a model and filter based on experiments to ensure that the Neural Networks to the Real-Time Prediction of Metal Temperatures in Gas
best-practice methodology found here would hold. Turbine Engine Components, ASME Paper No. GT2006-90317.

031901-12 / Vol. 140, MARCH 2018 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

[14] Tan, W. T. W., Packard, A., and Balas, G., 2000, Quasi-LPV Modeling and [20] Luppold, R. H., Roman, J. R., Gallops, G. W., and Kerr, L. J., 1989,
LPV Control of a Generic Missile, American Control Conference (ACC), Chi- Estimating In-Flight Engine Performance Variations Using Kalman Filter
cago, IL, June 2830, pp. 36923696. Concepts, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-89-2584.
[15] Marcos, A., and Balas, G. J., 2004, Development of Linear-Parameter-Varying [21] Simon, D. L., and Garg, S., 2010, Optimal Tuner Selection for Kalman Filter
Models for Aircraft, J. Guid. Control Dyn., 27(2), pp. 218228. Based Aircraft Engine Performance Estimation, ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines
[16] Li, S. Q., and Zhang, S. X., 2010, A Modified LPV Modeling Technique for Power, 132(3), p. 031601.
Turbofan Engine Control System, International Conference on Computer [22] Simon, D. L., and Armstrong, J. B., 2013, An Integrated Approach For Air-
Application and System Modeling (ICCASM), Taiyuan, China, Oct. 2224, craft Engine Performance Estimation and Fault Diagnoses, ASME J. Eng. Gas
pp. 99102. Turbines Power, 135(7), p. 071203.
[17] Rotondo, D., Nejjari, F., and Puig, V., 2013, Quasi-LPV Modeling, Identifica- [23] Volponi, A., 2008, Enhanced Self Tuning On-Board Real-Time Model
tion and Control of a Twin Rotor MIMO System, Control Eng. Pract., 21(6), (eSTORM) for Aircraft Engine Performance Health Tracking, NASA
pp. 829846. Glenn Research Centre, Cleveland, OH, Technical Report No. CR-2008-
[18] Paijmans, B., Symens, W., Van Brussel, H., and Swevers, J., 2008, 215272.
Identification of Interpolating Affine LPV Models for Mechatronic Systems [24] Franklin, G. F., Powell, J. D., and Workman, M., 1997, Digital Control of
With One Varying Parameter, Eur. J. Control, 14(1), pp. 1629. Dynamic Systems, 3rd ed., Addison-Wesley Longman, Reading, MA.
[19] Garg, S., Schadow, K., Horn, W., Pfoertner, H., and Stiharu, I., 2010, Sensor [25] Sun, Z., Chew, J. W., Hills, N. J., Volkov, K. N., and Barnes, C. J., 2010, Efficient
and Actuator Needs for More Intelligent Gas Turbine Engines, ASME Paper Finite Element Analysis/Computational Fluid Dynamics Thermal Coupling for
No. GT2010-22685. Engineering Applications, ASME J. Turbomach., 132(3), p. 031016.

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power MARCH 2018, Vol. 140 / 031901-13

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use