[mm.abdollahzadeh]

Originally Posted by rafiee18

I couldn't succeed with this grid ... I generated my own mesh ... I created the geometry by ansys bladegen, then I used turbo grid to create structured mesh and creating shroud gap

Hi Rafee

Was you successful to validate the near peak efficiency case with your grid??

I was using the previous CGNS file. I didn't have any problem with defining periodic boundaries. but for my case the position of M=1 is incorrect.

Could you please send me your grid to check my solution process?

my email is : mm.abdollahzadeh@yahoo.com

Best
Mahdi

[rafiee18]

Originally Posted by mm.abdollahzadeh

Hi Rafee

Was you successful to validate the near peak efficiency case with your grid??

I was using the previous CGNS file. I didn't have any problem with defining periodic boundaries. but for my case the position of M=1 is incorrect.

Could you please send me your grid to check my solution process?

my email is : mm.abdollahzadeh@yahoo.com

Best
Mahdi

Dear friend
The incorrect position of m=1 is due to two reasons
first of all the incorrect outlet static pressure ... secondly to coarse mesh
Anyway I will send you my mesh file :

https://rapidshare.com/files/344103514/nasa67.rar

[mm.abdollahzadeh]

Originally Posted by rafiee18

Dear friend
The incorrect position of m=1 is due to two reasons
first of all the incorrect outlet static pressure ... secondly to coarse mesh
Anyway I will send you my mesh file :

https://rapidshare.com/files/344103514/nasa67.rar

many thanks for your kind reply and the mesh file.

In my previous case , I was just defining a guess value for static pressure at outlet and then by targetting massflow rate I was trying to solve the problem. for the inlet also i was usuing fixed total pressure and temperature. at the outlet also i am using radial equliburim. I am not using the experimental profile for velocity angle and pressure and temperature distribuation. I am also runnning my case in Fluent.
the case is resulting to correct pressure ratio.
could you please tell me that this boundary condition is correct?
if I need to use experimental datas , I dont know how to get the profiles and input them .
I am not familer enough with turbomachinary modelling. could you please tell me that if I extend the geomtry at inlet and outlet. the part that is adding to hub should be stainary or moving.

many thanks for your help.

Kind Regards.
Mahdi

[rafiee18]

Originally Posted by mm.abdollahzadeh

many thanks for your kind reply and the mesh file.

In my previous case , I was just defining a guess value for static pressure at outlet and then by targetting massflow rate I was trying to solve the problem. for the inlet also i was usuing fixed total pressure and temperature. at the outlet also i am using radial equliburim. I am not using the experimental profile for velocity angle and pressure and temperature distribuation. I am also runnning my case in Fluent.
the case is resulting to correct pressure ratio.
could you please tell me that this boundary condition is correct?
if I need to use experimental datas , I dont know how to get the profiles and input them .
I am not familer enough with turbomachinary modelling. could you please tell me that if I extend the geomtry at inlet and outlet. the part that is adding to hub should be stainary or moving.

many thanks for your help.

Kind Regards.
Mahdi

Dear abdollahzadeh
Actually , you must extend the outlet.... I modeled a stage so i couldn't extend the space between rotor and stator .... but in your case you should extend , otherwise you will have convergence problem
the need for extension of inlet if you didn't find any considerable eddy at inlet is not important in this case
considering this fact that hub is attached to blades so they should be moving... but about shroud, if you consider the gap between blade tip and casing it is better you set the casing fixed otherwise you can set it moving too without major difference between results
I didn't have the profile .... so there is some error ...
anyway by try and error I found the best boundary condition for fan is inlet total pressure and outlet average static pressure....
then I increased outlet pressure from 0 to 40 kpa to find characteristic curve
Near stall convergence is much more difficult if you simulate nasa67 for steady state condition.
here is some part of my results :

https://rapidshare.com/files/3209642269/NASA67.pdf

[mm.abdollahzadeh]

Originally Posted by rafiee18

Dear abdollahzadeh
Actually , you must extend the outlet.... I modeled a stage so i couldn't extend the space between rotor and stator .... but in your case you should extend , otherwise you will have convergence problem
the need for extension of inlet if you didn't find any considerable eddy at inlet is not important in this case
considering this fact that hub is attached to blades so they should be moving... but about shroud, if you consider the gap between blade tip and casing it is better you set the casing fixed otherwise you can set it moving too without major difference between results
I didn't have the profile .... so there is some error ...
anyway by try and error I found the best boundary condition for fan is inlet total pressure and outlet average static pressure....
then I increased outlet pressure from 0 to 40 kpa to find characteristic curve
Near stall convergence is much more difficult if you simulate nasa67 for steady state condition.
here is some part of my results :

https://rapidshare.com/files/3209642269/NASA67.pdf

Dear Rafee

Thanks for your help.
am i righit? you use the simple nonreflecting boundary condition which gives you the ability to define avarge pressure at outlet. and do the trail and error procedure by your own expect of using that targrting mass flow. and in this case you are changing the pressure between 0 to 40kpa. so did you used a reffrence pressure 1atm? and define 0 for total pressure at inlet? ( I know that my questions looks stupid).

Best
Mahdi

[rafiee18]

Originally Posted by mm.abdollahzadeh

Dear Rafee

Thanks for your help.
am i righit? you use the simple nonreflecting boundary condition which gives you the ability to define avarge pressure at outlet. and do the trail and error procedure by your own expect of using that targrting mass flow. and in this case you are changing the pressure between 0 to 40kpa. so did you used a reffrence pressure 1atm? and define 0 for total pressure at inlet? ( I know that my questions looks stupid).

Best
Mahdi

You are on the right track Mehdi
Break a leg

[priAero]

Hi Rafiee,

I am also trying to simulate the NASA 67 Stage, I was wondering whether you have a .cgns model of the downstream stator. I would great appreciate it!
Thanks,
Priyanka

[shaliyela]

Hi dear all. i,m searching for surface static pressure of Nasa rotor 67 at mid span for validation of my code. Is there any experimental results or any other result for validating my code?
If you have it or you know any paper which has it, please tell me.
thanks

[Jwala.R]

Originally Posted by sam
;157800

dear all I need the geomtry of nasa rotor 67 or 37 test case for validation of code. i would be thankful to you

Hi,
I have the geometry for both.
Get me your email id so that I could send you.
Regards,
Jwala.

[shaliyela]

Hi everybody.
I had a problem for validating of my case.
In fact, I simulate nasa rotor67 profile at mid-span in 2D. I find out that my simulation, grid and boundary condition is true but my result is different from experimental results.
1. Is it because of my 2D simulation? or I must calculate it in 3D for comparing to experimental results?
2. If you have any result of mid-span surface pressure ratio, please send me.
3. Also, If you have any other results of 2D calculation, or you know papers which could give these information, please send it to me.
Note: I run my case for near peak efficiency condition.
Thanks very much.

[battersai]

Could someone please upload the analysis files again, I am not using them, but it might be of great help to go through.
Thanks

[eslamnagy]

Originally Posted by rafiee18

I couldn't succeed with this grid ... I generated my own mesh ... I created the geometry by ansys bladegen, then I used turbo grid to create structured mesh and creating shroud gap

how u do this??plz

[Far]

eslam

You have contacted me but I forgot to send you required info.

I have huge data base (almost all turbulence models, three Y+, three meshes) and meshes for rotor 37

[eslamnagy]

Originally Posted by Jwala.R

Hi,
I have the geometry for both.
Get me your email id so that I could send you.
Regards,
Jwala.

please Jwala send me both in my email
maj_eslam@yahoo.com

thanks

[eslamnagy]

[QUOTE=Far;427039]eslam

You have contacted me but I forgot to send you required info.

I have huge data base (almost all turbulence models, three Y+, three meshes) and meshes for rotor 37[/QUOTE

dear far

just please send me the geometry of rotor 67 and rotor 37 in igs file
on my email id
maj_eslam@yahoo.com
thanks

[astrorajesh]

dear far

just please send me the geometry of rotor 67 and rotor 37 in igs file
on my email id

bondamani123@gmail.com

[astrorajesh]

hi rafiee

i just started my project related to transonic blade parametrization and optimization of compressor stage i need co ordinates of rotor 67,what r the difficulties u faced during geometry creation ,mesh generation in turbo grid,please share with me

thank you
mail id : flyrajesh4@gmail.com

[rvl565]

Have you used this mesh?
When i import it in pointwise or ICEM and then into fluent it gives me an error.
if you look at the leading/trailing edge of the mesh you can see weird overlapping regions.

[nickal609]

Hi all,

I need geometry rotor 37 to complete my project as a student..can you share with me a softcopy of the geometry to my email black16_geng@yahoo.com..


TQ

[Heranykka]

Hi all,
does anybody have the geometry data of rotor 37 and 67? I need rotor blades, stator blades, hub, shroud, inlet and outlet coordinates. Please, send me any information you have. My teacher gave me a task and didn't give any information. My email: marina4erk@gmail.com

Regards,
Marina.