You are on page 1of 16

Geothermics 33 (2004) 599614

Numerical modeling of gland seal erosion


in a geothermal turbine
Zdzislaw Mazur

, Luis M. Palacios, Gustavo Urquiza


Instituto de Investigaciones Elctricas, Av. Reforma 113, Col. Palmira, 62490 Cuernavaca, Morelos, Mexico
Received 16 April 2003; accepted 10 December 2003
Available online 22 April 2004
Abstract
Excessive erosionof the low-pressure rotor endglandseal of a 25MWe geothermal turbine produced
a partial loss of turbine vacuum that degraded cycle efciency. This study used computational uid
dynamics (CFD) to identify the causes of erosion and the optimal steam seal system ow conditions
for reducing the erosion problem. The predictions were based upon a numerical calculation using
a commercial CFD code (Adapco Star-CD) to model the rotor end gland seal with a steam ow
containing hard solid particles. The results conrmed that ow conditions play a major role in rotor
gland seal erosion. By changing steam seal ow pressures to vary ow, it was conrmed that there
is a threshold seal ow condition below which erosion does not occur, or is minimized. Optimizing
the rotor end gland seal supply pressure and intercondenser pressure reduced the turbulent ow
kinetic energy by 49%, with a corresponding decrease in the erosion rate of the rotor gland seal
surface. The erosion rate is related directly to the particle velocity and turbulent ow kinetic energy.
Recommendations are provided for adjusting the rotor end gland seal system to avoid erosion.
2004 CNR. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Erosion; Rotor end seal; Geothermal turbine; Numerical simulation
1. Introduction
Gland steam seal devices are part of an integrated sub-system within the steam turbine
cycle. By sealing the turbine rotor end points, these devices prevent both out leakage of
high-pressure steam that can be converted to energy, and also the in leakage of air, which
has the potential to degrade the efciency of the turbine by raising condensing pressures. The

Corresponding author. Tel.: +52-777-362-3811; fax: +52-777-318-2598.


E-mail address: mazur@iie.org.mx (Z. Mazur).
0375-6505/$30.00 2004 CNR. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.geothermics.2003.12.003
600 Z. Mazur et al. / Geothermics 33 (2004) 599614
Nomenclature
A
p
particle cross-sectional area
C
d
drag coefcient
C
am
virtual mass coefcient
D
p
mean particle diameter
E
MM
erosion ratio
e
N
normal component of restitution coefcient
e
T
tangential component of restitution coefcient
F
am
virtual mass force
F
b
virtual body force
g gravitational acceleration vector
m
p
particle mass
m
p
particle mass ow
p pressure
q
p
particle heat ux
Re
p
particle Reynolds number
r distance vector to the axis of rotation
t time
u instantaneous uid velocity
u
p
instantaneous particle velocity
u
Np
normal component of incoming velocity vector
u
Tp
tangential component of incoming velocity vector
V
p
particle volume
x
p
instantaneous position vector
Greek letters
particle impact angle

r
rebound (cut-off) angle

C
cutting wear coefcient

D
deformation wear coefcient
molecular viscosity

M
momentum relaxation time scale
p pressure gradient in the carrier uid
coordinate angular velocity vector
steamused as the sealing source for the gland seals is extracted fromthe main steamsupply,
and upon leaving the sealing devices is discharged to the intercondenser to be condensed.
During turbine operation, the most likely factor to inuence the sealing efciency is the rub
between the labyrinth seals and the rotor. This rub wears the seal, producing two detrimental
effects. First it opens the clearance, causing an increase in the leakage area. Second, the
rub will modify the form or shape of the seal strip, changing its coefcient of discharge.
Both effects tend to increase leakage ow and therefore cause a deterioration of turbine
Z. Mazur et al. / Geothermics 33 (2004) 599614 601
efciency. In the case of geothermal steam turbines, the steam can be contaminated with
particles composed of silica, sulfur, salts and other constituents. These contaminants can
directly impact turbine components (Mazur and Kubiak, 1996) and can cause solid particle
erosion damage. This effect is independent of damage related to the presence of a rub. To
remove solids from the steam, the steam is passed through a cyclonic separator before it
enters the turbine steam path. This separation is not totally effective and some solids may
remain in the main steam ow. The degradation of the rotor seal system by solid particle
erosion commonly results in a considerable reduction of the power plants performance
because seal damage impacts condenser performance.
In this paper, the ow pattern within the rotor end gland seal of a 25 MWe turbine was
investigated under a variety of conditions and modeled using a computational uid dynamics
(CFD) code. This modeling was used to identify causes of the erosion of a rotor low-pressure
end gland seal, as well as possible means of reducing erosion through operational guidelines.
2. Background
Twenty-ve MWe turbines have been in continuous operation at the geothermal eld
for 1 year. Each turbine has one ow rotor arranged in seven stages, as shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1. General view of the rotor of a 25 MWe geothermal turbine.
602 Z. Mazur et al. / Geothermics 33 (2004) 599614
Fig. 2. Photograph and schematic diagramshowing where erosion of the rotor end low-pressure gland seal occurred.
Small solid particles and water droplets entrained in the high velocity geothermal steam are
thought to have produced erosion of the low-pressure end gland seal. The arrow on Fig. 1
shows the location of the rotor end gland seal. As the gland seal surface gradually eroded,
steam usage and air ow leakage increased. Details of the rotor end low-pressure gland seal
design and the location of the eroded (denoted by arrow) rotor seal surface are shown in
Fig. 2.
A schematic diagram of the steam and air ow paths to the high and low-pressure
glands of the 25 MWe geothermal turbine is shown in Fig. 3. The low-pressure end of
the unit (steam exhaust) is under vacuum. In this case, there is a positive pressure (atmo-
spheric to vacuum) that can cause ow of air into the turbine casing. Non-condensable
gases in the air will reduce the vacuum, and in doing so, increase the condensing pressure
Fig. 3. Schematic diagram of steam and air ows to the high and low-pressure glands of the 25 MWe geothermal
turbine.
Z. Mazur et al. / Geothermics 33 (2004) 599614 603
and degrade the efciency of the cycle. In addition, any free oxygen in the air will re-
act with other water-wet surfaces and accelerate corrosion. The sealing system at both
the low and high-pressure points must be able to minimize both steam leakage outward
from sections above atmospheric pressure and air leakage inward to sections below atmo-
spheric pressure under all operating conditions. This sealing system requires a regulating
device that controls and limits the steam and air ow to an acceptable level. At reduced
load, a partial vacuum can exist throughout the entire turbine, extending upstream into the
high-pressure section of the turbine. At startup, the entire turbine will be under vacuum.
Under these conditions, steam for sealing must be provided at all sealing locations. The
steam seal leak-off is maintained at a pressure above the main condenser and is vented
to the intercondenser. The lowest pressure leak-off in the system is at the gland steam
condensers, which are maintained at pressures marginally above the condenser pressure.
In these condensers, the steam is condensed and any air that is present is removed and
expelled from the system by steam-jet air ejectors to prevent its contaminating the working
uid.
To maintain a high efciency steam seal system, the seal ows and pressures must be
controlled within precise limits. This study sought to determine both the optimal rotor end
steam seal system ow conditions and the relationships between steam ow conditions and
rotor erosion rates to ensure both high efciency and high reliability of the seal (reduction
of erosion).
3. Modeling methodology
Numerical two-dimensional predictions have been carried out with the nite-volume
code STAR-CD using a RNG k/High Reynolds Number model for turbulence (Launder
and Spalding, 1972; Mack et al., 1999; Adapco STAR-CD, 2001). STAR-CD provides a
dispersed multi-phase ow framework. The framework is of the Lagrangian/Eulerian type
(Bracco, 1985), in which the conservation equations of mass, momentumand energy for the
dispersed phase are written for each individual particle. For ows having a comparatively
small number of dispersed particles, it is possible to solve a set of the afore-mentioned
Lagrangian equations for every element. However, if the number of particles is large, a
statistical approach is more practical. In this statistical approach, the total population is
represented by a nite number of computational parcels (samples), each of which repre-
sents a group (cluster) of particles having the same properties. The number of samples is
not arbitrary; it must be large enough that the properties of the full population are well
represented. In turbulent ows, the random walk technique (Gosman and Ioannides, 1983)
is employed to introduce the uctuating nature of the turbulent velocity eld, which results
in turbulent dispersion of the dispersed elements.
3.1. Governing equations
The motion of the dispersed phase is inuenced by that of the continuous phase (and
vice versa) via displacement and interphase momentum. The strength of the interactions
depends on the size, density and number of the dispersed particle. The momentum equation
604 Z. Mazur et al. / Geothermics 33 (2004) 599614
Fig. 4. Lagrangian particle motion parameters in the carrier uid.
for a particle of mass m
p
is (Adapco STAR-CD, 2001):
m
p
d u
p
d
t
=

F
dr
+

F
p
+

F
am
+

F
b
(1)
where

F
dr
is the drag force (Fig. 4), given by (2):

F
dr
=
1
2
C
d
A
p
| u u
p
|( u u
p
) (2)
where C
d
is the drag coefcient (dened below) and A
p
is the particle cross-sectional area.
The instantaneous uid velocity and particle velocity are denoted by uand u
p
, respectively.
The subscript p denotes the particle/dispersed phase, non-subscripted quantities refer to the
continuous phase.

F
p
, the pressure force, is given by:

F
p
= V
p
p (3)
where V
p
is the particle volume and p the pressure gradient in the carrier uid; p includes
any hydrostatic components.

F
am
is the so-called virtual mass force, i.e. the force required
to accelerate the carrier uid displaced by the particle. The expression for this is:

F
am
= C
am
V
p
d( u
d
u)
d
t
(4)
where C
am
is the virtual mass coefcient, usually set to 0.5 (Milne-Thompson, 1968).

F
b
is a general body force term, which represents the effects of gravity and acceleration
present in a non-inertial coordinate frame. In the case of a rotating frame, F
b
becomes:

F
b
= m
p
[ g + ( r) +2( u
p
)] (5)
Z. Mazur et al. / Geothermics 33 (2004) 599614 605
where g is the gravitational acceleration vector, is the coordinate angular velocity vector
and r is the distance vector to the axis of rotation.
Knowledge of the particle velocity allows its instantaneous position vector x
p
to be
determined by integrating:
d x
p
d
t
= u
p
(6)
From Eq. (2), the momentum relaxation time scale
M
can be expressed as:

M
=
m
p
| u u
p
|
|

F
dr
|
=
2m
p
C
d
A
p
| u u
p
|
=
4
p
D
p
3C
d
| u u
p
|
(7)
where D
p
is mean diameter of the particles in m.
A drag coefcient, C
d
(Basset, 1888; Boussinesq, 1897; Oseen, 1910) is introduced to
account for experimental results on the viscous drag of a solid sphere. It depends on the
particle Reynolds number. The usual practice is, therefore, to obtain a drag coefcient
from correlations, derived from experiment or separate theoretical studies. The standard
correlation in the code is as follows:
C
d
=
24(1 +0.15 Re
0.687
p
)
Re
p
, Re
p
10
3
(8)
C
d
= 0.44, Re
p
> 10
3
(9)
where Re
p
is the particle Reynolds number, dened as (Adapco STAR-CD, 2001):
Re
p

| u u
p
|D
p

(10)
In turbulent ows, particle trajectories are not deterministic and two particles injected from
a single point at different times may follow separate trajectories due to the random nature
of instantaneous uid velocity. As a consequence, the particles disperse because of the
uctuating component of the uid velocity. To account for the inuence of turbulent uid
uctuations on particle motion, the method originally developed by Dukowicz (1980),
Gosman and Ioannides (1983), and Faeth (1987) has been applied in the code.
3.2. Erosion modeling
It is assumed that when a particle strikes the wall, the mass loss is distributed uniformly
over the computational cell in which the particle impinged. Approximation errors introduced
by this assumption should be reduced if the number of parcels is high enough and the grid
spacing next to the wall is kept reasonably small.
The following inlets conditions should be specied:
The total number of computational parcels (samples) introduced per unit time.
The particle size and velocity (vector) or the distributions of these quantities, if they are
not constant.
606 Z. Mazur et al. / Geothermics 33 (2004) 599614
Fig. 5. Nomenclature used for restitution coefcients.
When a particle strikes a solid wall, there will be an exchange of momentum that will
affect the particles subsequent passage through the uid. Restitution coefcients are used to
estimate this momentumexchange. The nomenclature for correlations that predict restitution
coefcient is illustrated in Fig. 5. u
Np
and u
Tp
are normal and tangential components of the
incoming velocity vector, respectively. and
r
are the particle impact and rebound angles.
Correlations are provided for both tangential and normal components of the impact and
are given by Eqs. (11) and (12) (Vittal and Tabakoff, 1987):
e
T
= 1.0 2.12 +3.0775
2
1.1
3
(11)
e
N
= 1.0 0.4159 +0.4994
2
0.293
3
(12)
The erosion model (Neilson and Gilchrist, 1968) was developed on the premise that two
different mechanisms are present in the erosion process: cutting and deformation. In effect,
the model is a simplied version of the models of Bitter (1963, Part 1 and Part 2), and is
intended to be used for the quick correlation of experimental data. The equations, as they
are implemented, are:
E
MM
= 0.001

(1/2)| u
p
|
2
cos
2
sin 2

C
+
(1/2)| u
p
|
2
sin
2

for
r
,
(13)
E
MM
= 0.001

(1/2)| u
p
|
2
cos
2

C
+
(1/2)| u
p
|
2
sin
2

for >
r
(14)
where E
MM
is the erosion rate (kg-material/kg-particles), u
p
is the particle impact velocity
(m/s), is the particle impact angle (radians),
r
is the rebound (cut-off) angle, and
C
and
D
are the cutting and deformation wear coefcients, respectively. The latter three parameters
are material-dependent and must be supplied by the user. The available parameters for AISI
4130 steel under liquid-sand erosion conditions (Wallace et al., 2000) were used because
this material has properties similar (chemical composition and hardness) to a rotor made of
low alloy CrMoV steel. It is known (Tabakoff and Eroglu, 1988) that the erosion rate is
related to the material hardness. The erosion rate is dened as the amount of mass lost due
to erosion divided by the mass of impacting particles.
Z. Mazur et al. / Geothermics 33 (2004) 599614 607
Fig. 6. Computational mesh of the low-pressure gland seal of the 25 MWe geothermal turbine.
The computational domain that contains the details of the geometry of the rotor low-
pressure end seal channel is represented by a grid, which was used for conducting the
investigation. This is shown in Fig. 6.
3.3. Boundary conditions
For the simulated conditions, particle diameter was set to 50 m, based on a microscopic
analysis of particles in geothermal steam (Mazur and Kubiak, 1996). Boundary conditions
(Fig. 7) were xed from ow conditions calculated using the thermal balance of the power
Fig. 7. Boundary conditions for the ow simulation.
608 Z. Mazur et al. / Geothermics 33 (2004) 599614
plant. A ow inlet boundary was used for the incoming seal steam ow, with temperatures
and pressures varying from 107.2 to 165

C, and from 1.310


5
to 710
5
Pa, respectively.
The seal steam ow is extracted from the high-pressure glands as shown in Fig. 3. The air
inlet ow (leakage air ow) through the seal was set to an atmospheric pressure of 1.01
10
5
Pa. The turbulence intensity was xed at 5% (Adapco STAR-CD, 2001) for the seal
steam ow conditions. The pressure outlet boundary, determined from the thermal balance
of the unit, was allowed to vary from5.010
4
to 7.510
4
Pa for the intercondenser pressure
and 1.1210
4
to 1.1510
4
Pa for the turbine exhaust vacuum. The particles/steamowvol-
ume ratio was xed at 0.025 (2.5%) based on studies by Mazur and Kubiak (1996). The ma-
terial of the rotor was a lowalloy CrMoVsteel and the particulate material was composed
of silica, sulfur, salts and other constituents. A no-slip condition was used on all the walls,
and the velocity in the laminar sub-layer was calculated using the logarithmic lawof the wall.
4. Results
4.1. Modeling results
Results of simulations at both the current seal ow values (original values) and at opti-
mized ow values determined from calculations at various ow conditions are presented.
Fig. 8. Relationships between steamseal owparameters and kinetic turbulent energy at the end of the seal leak-off
chamber, air in-ow leakage and steam leakage to the turbine vacuum side.
Z. Mazur et al. / Geothermics 33 (2004) 599614 609
Table 1
The original and optimized seal ow conditions
Original conditions Optimized conditions
Intercondenser pressure (Pa) 6.23 10
4
7.45 10
4
Gland steam supply pressure (Pa) 3.79 10
5
2.37 10
5
Turbulent kinetic energy (m
2
/s
2
) 2597 1328
Air leakage inward (mass ux) (kg/h) 50.97 42.48
Steam leakage to turbine vacuum side (mass ux) (kg/h) 121.20 95.02
All calculations were carried out with the turbine operating at steady-state conditions with
a nominal output of 25 MWe. The original and optimized steam seal ow conditions are
presented in Table 1 and Fig. 8. Fig. 9 shows the numerical solution for the end seal congu-
ration in the formof a eld of velocity vectors in the rotor low-pressure end seal channel for
the original and optimized seal ow conditions. These velocity contours (Fig. 9) indicate
that the maximum ow velocity is localized on the rotor surface at the gland seal leakage
chamber, e.g. in the area of rotor erosion damage for both original and optimized conditions.
The maximum ow velocity in the seal leak-off chamber is reduced from 353.5 m/s (Mach
number 1.1) for the original conditions to 252.5 m/s for the optimized conditions (approxi-
mately 28.6% lower). The size and density of the vectors in Fig. 9 are indicative of the ow
Fig. 9. Field of velocity vectors in the rotor low-pressure end seal channel.
610 Z. Mazur et al. / Geothermics 33 (2004) 599614
Fig. 10. Particle track plot in the seal leak-off chamber and labyrinth cells.
velocity, with the largest vectors corresponding to the highest ow. Signicant recirculating
ow can be observed at the seal leak-off chamber (region of erosion), which contributes
to erosion damage. The particle track plot in the seal leak-off chamber and labyrinth cells
is presented in Fig. 10. It shows particles recirculating in both the seal leak-off chamber
and labyrinth cells. The numerical solution, in the form of elds of static pressure in the
seal channel, for the original and optimized conditions, is shown in Fig. 11. The pressure
decreases gradually fromthe steaminlet to the seal (inlet chamber) towards the seal leak-off
chamber and to the turbine exhaust. The pressure at the seal inlet chamber is about 40%less
for the optimized conditions compared to the original conditions. In addition, the pressure
distribution inside the seal channel is different. For the seal system at optimized conditions,
the pressure gradient between the seal inlet chamber and turbine exhaust and between the
seal inlet chamber and condenser is lower, whereas the gradient between the condenser and
atmospheric air is higher.
To obtain relationships between inlet seal steam ow parameters, kinetic turbulent en-
ergy at the end seal leakage chamber, air inward ow leakage to the seal and steam leakage
to the turbine vacuum side, a series of calculations with various seal ow conditions was
performed. The simulation results are presented in Fig. 8. It can be seen that increasing the
gland steam supply pressure (pressure of inlet chamber) results in a rapid increase in the
steam leakage of the seal system to the turbine vacuum side while gradually decreasing
the inward air leakage from the atmosphere. Also, the initial intercondenser pressure value
signicantly inuences air leakage into the seal system. Increasing intercondenser pressure
Z. Mazur et al. / Geothermics 33 (2004) 599614 611
Fig. 11. Field of absolute static pressure in the low-pressure end seal channel of the rotor.
decreases the air leakage whereas reducing this pressure increases air leakage. The turbu-
lent kinetic energy plot (Fig. 8), representing kinetic energy at the seal leak-off chamber,
indicates that the kinetic energy developed inside the seal system is proportionally related
to the seal steam supply pressure.
5. Solid particle erosion reduction
The numerical results presented in the previous section have been used to estimate the
erosion rate at the turbine rotor end gland seal. It is known that the erosion rate is related
directly to the turbulent kinetic energy. As the turbulent kinetic energy increases, induced
erosion increases at the same rate (Adapco STAR-CD, 2001; Barman, 2001). At the seal
steam ow design conditions presented in Table 1 and Fig. 8, the related turbulent kinetic
energy at the seal leak-off chamber (e.g. region of highest rotor erosion problems) was
determined to be 2597 m
2
/s
2
. Table 1 and Fig. 8 show optimized seal ow conditions that
will lead to reduced rotor erosion at the seal leak-off chamber zone while maintaining end
seal efciency. For these conditions, the ow turbulent kinetic energy at the seal leak-off
chamber was determined to be 1328 m
2
/s
2
. The eld of turbulent kinetic energy at the rotor
low-pressure end seal channel for both original and optimized conditions is presented in
Fig. 12. The location of the highest turbulent kinetic energy (Fig. 12) is in good agreement
612 Z. Mazur et al. / Geothermics 33 (2004) 599614
Fig. 12. Field of turbulent kinetic energy in the low-pressure end seal channel of the rotor.
with the rotor erosion damage documented in the turbine and shown in Fig. 2. The turbulent
energy in the seal leak-off chamber was reduced by 49%, by changing seal ows from the
original conditions to the optimized conditions. Contours of erosion on the rotor end gland
seal surface, calculated from Eqs. (13) and (14) for both original and optimized end gland
seal conditions, are presented in Fig. 13. As can be seen fromEqs. (13) and (14), the erosion
rate is related directly to the particle velocity. Reducing the particle velocity decreases the
erosion rate proportionally. Other parameters in Eqs. (13) and (14) are not affected by the
change in seal conditions. Erosion of the rotor gland seal under the original conditions was
determined to be 0.015 kg-material/kg-particles. The erosion rate under optimized condi-
tions was determined to be 0.008 kg-material/kg-particles. This means that the predicted
seal erosion damage was reduced by 49%, e.g. by the same amount as the reduction in
turbulent kinetic energy. Seal efciency was also improved, reducing air leakage inwards
to the seal channel from 50.97 to 42.48 kg/h, a change of 17%. Steam leakage to the turbine
vacuum side was decreased from 121.2 to 95.02 kg/h due to the increased intercondenser
pressure, a change of 22%. During the turbine overhaul, the rotor end gland seal supply
pressure and intercondenser pressure were adjusted to the optimized conditions to verify
the predicted erosion rate results. After 1 year of turbine operation, the rotor low-pressure
end gland seal system was inspected and no more evidence of erosion was found at the end
gland seal surface of the rotor. These results demonstrate that there are threshold seal ow
conditions below which erosion does not occur (or is minimal). This allows seal erosion
problems to be mitigated by adjusting the rotor end gland seal system pressures.
Z. Mazur et al. / Geothermics 33 (2004) 599614 613
Fig. 13. Erosion ratio on the rotor end seal surface in kg-material/kg-particles.
6. Concluding remarks
An axial axisymmetric uid-ow simulation and the prediction of erosion based on La-
grangian particle tracking have been presented for a 25 MWe turbine rotor low-pressure end
gland seal. The erosion process is strongly dependent on particle velocity/turbulent kinetic
energy. Steam seal system pressures have been analyzed to determine the relationships
between steam seal ow conditions and rotor end seal surface erosion rates. The results
show that it is possible to reduce the erosion by up to 49% by adjusting the rotor end seal
system pressures. Seal efciency can also be improved by increasing the intercondenser
pressures, which reduces air leakage inward to the seal channel and steam leak-off to the
turbine vacuum side. The results show also that numerical simulations can be used in a
predictive manner. The simulation results can serve as input during an early stage of the
design process to optimize system parameters and to increase component life-time.
614 Z. Mazur et al. / Geothermics 33 (2004) 599614
References
Adapco STAR-CD, 2001. Version 3.15 Methodology and Users Guide. CD Adapco Group, Computational
Dynamics Limited, Melville, New York.
Barman, P., 2001. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Analysis to Study the Effect of Spool Slot Conguration
on Spool and Valve Body Erosion of Hydraulic Valve. Hydraulic Engineering Analysis Group, Caterpillar Inc.
Basset, A.B., 1888. Hydrodynamics. Cambridge University Press.
Bitter, J.G.A., 1963a. A study of erosion phenomena, part 1. Wear 6, 521.
Bitter, J.G.A., 1963b. A study of erosion phenomena, part 2. Wear 6, 169190.
Boussinesq, J., 1897. Thorie de Lcoulement Tourbillonnant et Tumultueux des Liquides Dans les Lits
Rectilignes Grandes Sections. Comptes Rendus de lAcadmie des Sciences, T.72.
Bracco, F.V., 1985. Modeling of Engine Sprays, SAE Technical Paper Series 850394.
Dukowicz, J.K., 1980. A particle-uid numerical model for liquid sprays. J. Comput. Phys. 35 (5), 229253.
Faeth, G.M., 1987. Mixing, transport and combustion in sprays. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 13 (12), 293345.
Gosman, A.D., Ioannides, E., 1983. Aspects of computer simulation of liquid-fueled combustors. J. Energy 7 (32),
482490.
Launder, B.E., Spalding, D.B., 1972. Mathematical Models of Turbulence. Academic Press, London.
Mack, R., Drtina, P., Lang, E., 1999. Numerical prediction of erosion on guide vanes and in labyrinth seals in
hydraulic turbines. Wear 2 (233235), 685691.
Mazur, Z., Kubiak, J., 1996. The method of in-situ repair of L-0 blades tenons damaged by erosion. Proceedings
of the International Joint Power Generation Conference. Houston, USA, ASME PWR 30(14), pp. 503509.
Milne-Thompson, L.M., 1968. Theoretical Hydrodynamics, 5th edition. McMillan & Co., New York.
Neilson, J.H., Gilchrist, A., 1968. Erosion by a stream of solid particles. Wear 11, 111122.
Oseen, C.W., 1910. ber die Stokessche Formel und ber Eine Verwandte Aufgabe in der Hydrodynamic (in
German). Arkiv for Matematik, Astronomi och Fysik. Stockholm, Sweden. Almquist & Wiksells Boktr.
Tabakoff, W., Eroglu, H., 1988. LDV measurements of solid particle rebound parameters and effect of surface
shape on erosion. ASME, Fluids Eng. Div. (Publ.) FED 64, 174177.
Vittal, B.V.R., Tabakoff, W., 1987. Two-phase ow around a two-dimensional cylinder. AIAA J. 25 (5), 648654.
Wallace, M.S., Peters, J.S., Scanlon, T.J., Dempster, W.M., McCulloch, S., Ogilvie, J.B., 2000. CFD-Based erosion
modeling of multi-orice choke valves. ASME 2000 Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting, Boston,
MA, Paper FEDSM 2000-11244.

You might also like