Show simple item record

contributor authorJohn Harinck
contributor authorA. Guardone
contributor authorS. Rebay
contributor authorP. Colonna
date accessioned2017-05-09T00:41:40Z
date available2017-05-09T00:41:40Z
date copyrightJanuary, 2010
date issued2010
identifier issn0889-504X
identifier otherJOTUEI-28760#011001_1.pdf
identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/145029
description abstractThis paper presents a quantitative comparison of the effect of using thermodynamic models of various degrees of complexity if applied to fluid-dynamic simulations of turboexpanders operated at conditions affected by strong real-gas effects. The 2D flow field of a standard transonic turbine stator is simulated using the state-of-the-art inviscid ZFLOW computational fluid-dynamic solver coupled with a fluid property library containing the thermodynamic models. The considered thermodynamic models are, in order of increasing complexity, the polytropic ideal-gas (PIG) law, the Peng–Robinson–Stryjek–Vera (PRSV) cubic equation of state, and the highly accurate multiparameter equations of state (MPEoSs), which are adopted as benchmark reference. The fluids are steam, toluene, and R245fa. The two processes under scrutiny are a moderately nonideal subcritical expansion and a highly nonideal supercritical expansion characterized by the same pressure ratio. Using the PIG model for moderately nonideal subcritical expansions leads to large deviations with magnitudes of up to 18–25% in density, sound speed, velocity, and total pressure loss, and up to 4–10% in Mach number, pressure, temperature, and mass flow rate. The PIG model applied to highly nonideal supercritical expansions leads to a doubling of the deviations’ magnitudes. The advantage of the PIG model is that its computational cost is roughly 1/11 (or 1/3 if saturation-checks in the MPEoS are omitted) of the cost of the MPEoSs. For the subcritical expansion, adopting the physically more correct cubic PRSV model leads to comparatively smaller deviations, namely, <2% (toluene and R245fa) and <4% (steam) in all flow parameters, except for the total pressure loss error, which is comparable to that of the PIG model. The PRSV model is reasonably accurate even for the highly nonideal supercritical expansion, for which the errors are at most 4%. The computational cost of the PRSV model is roughly nine times higher than the cost of the PIG model (or twice as high if saturation-checks in the PRSV are omitted). Contrary to low-complexity fluids like water, for complex fluids like toluene and R245fa the deviations in density, speed of sound, and velocity ensuing from the use of the PIG model vary strongly along the isentropic expansions. This invalidates the approach commonly used in practice of correcting the PIG model with a properly chosen constant compressibility factor.
publisherThe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
titleInfluence of Thermodynamic Models in Two-Dimensional Flow Simulations of Turboexpanders
typeJournal Paper
journal volume132
journal issue1
journal titleJournal of Turbomachinery
identifier doi10.1115/1.3192146
journal fristpage11001
identifier eissn1528-8900
keywordsPressure
keywordsFlow (Dynamics)
keywordsMach number
keywordsTemperature
keywordsFluids
keywordsEngineering simulation
keywordsErrors
keywordsSteam
keywordsSound
keywordsBlades AND Density
treeJournal of Turbomachinery:;2010:;volume( 132 ):;issue: 001
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record