平面叶栅风洞流场品质主被动调控技术对比

蔡明; 王利敏; 景丽娜; 高丽敏

doi:10.7638/kqdlxxb-2024.0122

欢迎来到能源电力期刊网！

English Version 期刊登录

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

平面叶栅风洞流场品质主被动调控技术对比

研究论文 | 更新时间：2026-05-28

- 平面叶栅风洞流场品质主被动调控技术对比
- Comparison of active and passive control techniques for flow field quality in a linear cascade wind tunnel
- 空气动力学学报 2025年43卷第10期页码：12-22
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 航空工业第一飞机设计研究院,西安,710089
  2. 西北工业大学动力与能源学院,西安,710129
- 作者简介：
  
  蔡明（1992—），男，陕西延安人，高级工程师，研究方向：飞机内流空气动力学及风洞试验技术. E-mail：mingcai@mail.nwpu.edu.cn
  高丽敏*，教授，研究方向：叶轮机械气动热力学. E-mail：gaolm@nwpu.edu.cn
- 基金信息：
  
  国家科技重大专项（2017-Ⅱ-0001-0013）
- DOI：10.7638/kqdlxxb-2024.0122
  中图分类号： V211.3
- 纸质出版：2025
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
蔡明, 王利敏, 景丽娜, 等. 平面叶栅风洞流场品质主被动调控技术对比[J]. 空气动力学学报, 2025, 43(10): 12−22.

CAI Ming, WANG Limin, JING Lina, et al. Comparison of active and passive control techniques for flow field quality in a linear cascade wind tunnel[J]. 2025, 43(10): 12-22.
蔡明, 王利敏, 景丽娜, 等. 平面叶栅风洞流场品质主被动调控技术对比[J]. 空气动力学学报, 2025, 43(10): 12−22. DOI： 10.7638/kqdlxxb-2024.0122

CAI Ming, WANG Limin, JING Lina, et al. Comparison of active and passive control techniques for flow field quality in a linear cascade wind tunnel[J]. 2025, 43(10): 12-22. DOI： 10.7638/kqdlxxb-2024.0122.

摘要

高负荷状态下压气机平面叶栅试验流场品质通常不佳，需借助调控手段提升流场品质以确保试验数据可用。基于亚声速平面叶栅风洞设计了可调尾板的被动方案，研究了尾板安装角对大攻角状态下叶栅流场品质及性能的影响，并与之前研究的上端壁抽吸主动方案的结果进行对比。结果表明：可调尾板通过改变叶栅出口静压分布来调节叶栅进口流场品质。随着尾板安装角减小，靠近上尾板的叶栅出口静压减小，靠近下尾板的叶栅出口静压增大，叶栅流场品质得到提升，然而，若减小尾板安装角超过一定限度，栅前流场均匀性和出口流场周期性将会下降，因此，为达到最佳流场品质，需控制尾板安装角在特定临界值；由于尾板对出口气流的隔离作用，叶栅出气角周期性最好，周期性指数在1以内。上端壁抽吸对叶栅进口流场均匀性的改善比可调尾板更好。由于两种手段的调控机理和流场品质差异，可调尾板调控后叶栅出气角比上端壁抽吸偏小2°左右，损失偏大约0.02；两者的静压比和叶片表面等熵马赫数差异较小。

Abstract

The flow quality of the linear cascade tests for compressor airfoils is always poor under high-load conditions

it is necessary to improve flow quality of linear cascade by adjusting methods to ensure the availability of test data. A passive control scheme of adjustable tailboard was designed based on a subsonic linear cascade wind tunnel. The effect of tailboard angle on flow quality and performance of cascade was investigated

and compared with the results of active control scheme of upper end-wall suction previously studied. The results indicate that the tailboards adjust the flow quality by changing the exit static pressure distribution. As the tailboard angle decreases

the exit static pressure near the upper tailboard decreases while it increases near the lower tailboard

leading to an improvement in the cascade flow quality. However

if the tailboard angle is decreased beyond a certain limit

the uniformity of the inflow and the periodicity of the outflow will decline. Therefore

to achieve the best overall flow quality

the tailboard angle needs to be controlled within a specific critical range. And the outlet flow angle shows the best periodicity due to the isolating effect of tailboard

with a periodicity index less than one. The flow quality of cascade declines when the tailboard angle is over the critical value. The improvement of inflow quality of cascade by upper end wall suction is better than that of tailboard. Due to the difference of control mechanism and flow quality between these two methods

the outlet flow angle of cascade adjusted by tailboard is about 2° smaller than that of upper end wall suction

and the loss is about 0.02 larger than that of upper end wall suction. The difference of static pressure ratio and distribution of isentropic Mach number between the two methods is small.

关键词

Keywords

references

CHU W L, LIU Q Z, HU C B. Principle of aviation blade machine[M]. Xi’an: Northwestern Polytechnical University Press, 2009 (in Chinese).

WU J Q, CUI X C, WEI Z, et al. Research status and development tendency of large aircraft wind tunnel technologies in China[J]. Acta Aerodynamica Sinica, 2023, 41(12): 83−94. doi: 10.7638/kqdlxxb-2023.0147

YUN Q L, SUN S P, Xu M F, et al. High-speed wind tunnel and low-speed wind tunnel flow field quality specifications: GJB 1179−1991[S]. Beijing: Commission for Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense, 1991 (in Chinese).

JIANG Z L, LIN D J, YU H J, et al. The method of supersonic/transonic linear cascade experiments: HB 20145−2014[S]. Beijing: State Administration of Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense, 2015: 1−14 (in Chinese).

CAI M, GAO L M, LIU Z, et al. Experimental study on flow field quality of linear cascade wind tunnel under different conditions[J]. Journal of Propulsion Technology, 2021, 42(5): 1162−1170 (in Chinese). doi: 10.13675/j.cnki.tjjs.190815

GAO L M, YANG G, WANG H H, et al. Influence of leading edge over tolerance under random machining deviation on aerodynamic performance consistency of compressor cascade[J]. Acta Aerodynamica Sinica, 2024, 42(10): 109−118. doi: 10.7638/kqdlxxb-2024.0083

ERWIN J R, EMERY J C. Effect of tunnel configuration and testing technique on cascade performance: NACA-TN-2028[R]. Washington, USA: National advisory committee for aeronautics, 1950.

HERRIG L J, EMERY J C, ERWIN J R. Systematic two-dimensional cascade tests of NACA 65-series compressor blades at low speed: NACA-RM-L51G31[R]. Washington, USA: National advisory committee for aeronautics, 1951.

DUNAVANT J C, EMERY J C, WALCH H C, et al. High-speed cascade tests of the NACA 65-(12A10)10 and NACA 65-(12A2I8b)10 compressor blade sections: NACA-RM-L55I08[R]. Washington, USA: National advisory committee for aeronautics, 1955.

HERGT A, MEYER R, ENGEL K. Experimental investigation of flow control in compressor cascades[C]//Proc of the Volume 6: Turbomachinery, Parts A and B, Barcelona, Spain. ASMEDC, 2006. doi: 10.1115/gt2006-90415

KIESNER M, KING R. Multivariable closed-loop active flow control of a compressor stator cascade[J]. AIAA Journal, 2017, 55(10): 3371−3380. doi: 10.2514/1.j055728

PIANKO M. Modern methods of testing rotating components of turbomachines: AGARD-AG-207[R]. Neuilly sur Seine, France: Advisory group for aerospace research development, 1973.

SONG B, NG W. Influence of axial velocity density ratio in cascade testing of supercritical compressor blades[C]//Proc of the 40th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, Fort Lauderdale, Florida. AIAA, 2004: AIAA2004-3414. doi: 10.2514/6.2004-3414

LEPICOVSKY J, MCFARLAND E R, CHIMA R V, et al. On flowfield periodicity in the NASA transonic flutter cascade, Part I: experimental study[C]//Proc of the 45th International Gas Turbine and Aeroengine Technical Congress sponsored by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Munich, Germany, May 8–11, 2000. doi: 10.1115/2000-gt-0572

TIAN S M, PETRIE-REPAR P, GLODIC N, et al. CFD-aided design of a transonic aeroelastic compressor rig[J]. Journal of Turbomachinery, 2019, 141(10): 101003. doi: 10.1115/1.4043884

CAI M, GAO L M, LIU Z, et al. Flow field quality control of subsonic linear cascade wind tunnel based on suction[J]. Journal of Propulsion Technology, 2021, 42(9): 1985−1992 (in Chinese). doi: 10.13675/j.cnki.tjjs.190873

CAI M, WANG L M, GAO L M, et al. Analysis and improvement of flow field quality in high-load planar cascade wind tunnel[J]. Acta Aerodynamica Sinica, 2025, 43(1): 44−52 (in Chinese).

CAI M, GAO L M, LIU Z, et al. Analysis and modification on inflow uniformity of highly-loaded compressor linear cascade[J]. Journal of Engineering Thermophysics, 2021, 42(12): 3164−3169 (in Chinese).

CAI M, GAO L M, JIN W H, et al. Passive control strategy for flow quality of linear cascade wind tunnel[J]. Journal of Aerospace Power, 2024, 39(7): 222−233 (in Chinese). doi: 10.13224/j.cnki.jasp.20220482

CAI M, GAO L M, LI R Y, et al. Establishment of standard model of linear cascade wind tunnel for subsonic compressor[J]. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 2025, 46(2): 119−136 (in Chinese). doi: 10.7527/S1000-6893.2024.30547

SUN P, ZHANG Y Z, FU W G, et al. Flow field quality improvement of transonic linear cascade test device[J]. Journal of Propulsion Technology, 2022, 43(12): 105−115 (in Chinese). doi: 10.13675/j.cnki.tjjs.210731

FU W G, YANG Z, ZHANG Y Z, et al. Numerical study on flow field quality improvement in a highly loaded linear cascade wind tunnel[J]. Journal of Propulsion Technology, 2023, 44(7): 173−184 (in Chinese). doi: 10.13675/j.cnki.tjjs.2203021

浏览量

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

基于非线性耦合本构关系的高速磁流体控制数值模拟

开槽轨道对高速磁浮列车气动特性的影响

临近空间长航时无人机飞发一体气动设计研究进展

“无人机飞发气动综合设计”专栏序言

斜爆轰发动机：斜爆轰波在受限空间中的起爆与稳定