Lucian Hanimann1

Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts,

Engineering and Architecture,
Technikumstrasse 21,
Horw 6048, Switzerland
e-mail: lucian.hanimann@hslu.ch
Development of a Novel Mixing
Luca Mangani
Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts,
Engineering and Architecture,
Plane Interface Using a Fully
Technikumstrasse 21,
Implicit Averaging for Stage

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/turbomachinery/article-pdf/136/8/081010/6300178/turbo_136_08_081010.pdf by Seoul National University user on 03 May 2024

Horw 6048, Switzerland

Ernesto Casartelli
Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts,
Analysis
Engineering and Architecture,
This paper describes the development and validation steps of a characteristics-based
Technikumstrasse 21,
Horw 6048, Switzerland
explicit along with a novel fully implicit mixing plane implementation for turbomachi-
nery applications. The framework is an unstructured 3D RANS in-house modified solver,
based on open-source libraries. Particular attention was paid to mass-conservation,
Thomas Mokulys accurate variables interpolation, and algorithm stability in order to improve robustness
MAN Diesel and Turbo Schweiz AG,
and convergence. By introducing a specific interface, allowing the use of algebraic mul-
Hardstrasse 319,
tigrid solvers together with multiprocessor computation, a speed up of the numerical so-
Postfach 2602
lution procedure was achieved. The validation of both mixing plane algorithms is
Zurich 8021, Switzerland
carried out on an industrial radial compressor and a cold air 1.5 stages axial turbine.
[DOI: 10.1115/1.4026323]
Sebastiano Mauri
MAN Diesel and Turbo Schweiz AG,
Hardstrasse 319,
Postfach 2602
Zurich 8021, Switzerland

1 Introduction A simple way to approximate the unsteady flow into a steady

state solution is the frozen rotor technique. This method keeps the
Although significant progress has been achieved in computa-
relative position of the rotor to the stator in a fixed (frozen) posi-
tional fluid dynamics over the past few decades, the design and
tion. The governing equations are solved in their frames of refer-
analysis of turbomachinery applications with numerical simula-
ence and the fields, containing the primitive variables, are simply
tions still remains a challenging task. Multistage configurations,
transformed at the interface. Solutions obtained with this interface
differences in the rotational speeds of the components, and the
are strongly dependent on the relative position of the rotor with
broad range of covered Mach numbers, accompanied with almost
reference to the stator and a thorough investigation needs the cal-
always turbulent flows, require a considerable amount of compu-
culation of several different relative positions. A comparison
tational power and time. The engineering practice for design pur-
between frozen-rotor and transient interfaces can be found in
poses, however, needs short cycle times. This requirement
Ref. [1].
encouraged researchers to develop turbo-specific tools, making
Circumventing this position-dependent solution and still having
use of the characteristics of turbomachines.
the advantage of a steady-state computation can be achieved by
A possibility to speed up the solution procedure is the reduction
mixing planes. The concept of mixing planes was first published
of the simulation domain. Multistage configurations can, e.g., be
by Denton and Singh [2] during their studies on time marching
reduced to single stages. Additionally, by exploiting the rotational
methods where they suggested the use of circumferentially aver-
periodicity of a blade row, the stage can be simulated based on
aged values with radial profiles from the adjacent interface side.
single blade passages. Differences in the pitch, mesh, and rota-
In later studies of the three dimensional flow through turboma-
tional speed between the rotor and stator demand a special treat-
chines, Denton [3,4] already mentioned the most important con-
ment for the exchange of the flow quantities. Interfaces enabling
siderations concerning the influence of the averaging and
this process are known under the term rotor-stator-interfaces.
geometrical restrictions. The superior behavior of the mixing
For turbomachinery applications there are three main types of
planes with respect to frozen rotor simulations in reproducing the
interfaces. Transient interfaces use two separate frames of refer-
mean effect of rotor-stator interactions was shown by Dawes [5].
ence which are moved with respect to each other, while the flow
Due to the importance of the averaging scheme, his implementa-
quantities are conservatively interpolated between the two sides.
tion used three different techniques, including an adaption of a
Even if this procedure seems very intuitive and accurate, it has a
nonreflective boundary condition (NRBC). The NRBCs are based
major drawback. The movement of the mesh and the unsteady
on the idea that waves can travel across the boundary without any
solution makes the whole calculation computationally expensive.
interaction and the basic concepts were published in the late
1970s [6–9]. In 1988, Giles [10] used these basic concepts to
derive an NRBC for 2D calculations which was extended to a
1
Corresponding author. quasi 3D-flow by Saxer and Giles in 1991 [11]. The implemented
Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for
publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received November 27,
algorithm used the approximation that radial variations are small
2013; final manuscript received December 14, 2013; published online January 31, compared to circumferential variations. This did not always lead
2014. Editor: Ronald Bunker. to fully nonreflective behavior. Motivated by these limitations a

Journal of Turbomachinery Copyright V

C 2014 by ASME AUGUST 2014, Vol. 136 / 081010-1
 Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/turbomachinery/article-pdf/136/8/081010/6300178/turbo_136_08_081010.pdf by Seoul National University user on 03 May 2024
Fig. 1 Concept of mixing plane averaging

group at the University of Stuttgart [12] extended this theory to a 2 Concept of the Mixing Plane
fully 3D NRBC.
As already mentioned, mixing planes average the flow quanti-
Today, implementations of mixing planes can be found in most
ties in the circumferential direction before passing them to their
commercial CFD software packages and are widely used in the
adjacent side, as illustrated in Fig. 1. The justification of this pro-
industry. In 2008, Holmes [13] made an attempt to create a list
cess is based on the observation that in real turbomachinery appli-
with all of the criteria a mixing plane should ideally fulfill. A sum-
cations the flow is also largely mixed in the gap between the rotor
mary of the advantages and disadvantages of turbomachinery
and the stator. This mixed-out-state makes the simulation inde-
CFD, including the influences on the final solution of mixing
pendent of the relative position of the rotor and stator and results
planes, was then given by Denton [14] in 2010.
in a circumferentially averaged steady state solution reflecting the
The aim of this work is to introduce a novel implicit approach
mean solution of all rotor-stator positions. Despite the similarity
of the mixing plane, integrated in an in-house modified pressure
R between the mixing process and the mixed-out-state, the differ-
based all-Mach solver [15] based on the OpenFOAMV [16,17]
ence in the way the mixing occurs can cause problems. Even if
framework. A standard explicit approach based on the previously
the flow is largely mixed out in reality, the process is more grad-
published concepts was implemented for comparison and will
ual than the instantaneous mixing at the mixing plane. This instan-
briefly be explained. The underlying concept of these earlier
taneous mixing will result in a higher entropy rise and can be seen
interfaces is the mathematical separation of a physically con-
as a loss of total pressure over the interface. Studies by Fritsch
nected domain. Together with the accompanied iterative solution
and Giles [20] showed an increase in the total loss of about 10%
procedure, this leads to considerable stability problems and
when instantaneous mixing was applied.
demands special treatment of flow variables at the interface. The
superior behavior of the novel implicit approach will be shown in
this paper. 3 Convections and General Requirements
A basic formulation of this kind of boundary condition already To make the mixing plane easy to use and applicable to a vari-
R
exists in an extended version of OpenFOAMV and was published ety of different turbomachinery applications with different flow
by Jasak and Beaudoin [18]. The validation of this mixing plane regimes and numerical schemes, several requirements must be sat-
was only shown for an incompressible Francis turbine [19] and isfied. The mixing plane has to be:
further calculations with this basic formulation showed mass con-
• mesh independent
servation problems. This basic formulation was extended to han-
• applicable for compressible and incompressible flow
dle compressible and incompressible flows, thus increasing the
• applicable to multiprocessor and multigrid calculations
applicability domain. Acceleration of the simulation was achieved
by introducing a framework allowing multigrid techniques and Figure 2 shows the convention of labeling used in the explana-
multiprocessor calculations. tions thereafter. In order to ensure mesh independency, the values
Mixing planes are generally used to represent an average solu- are interpolated at the boundary from the unstructured grid at the
tion of a full rotation of the rotor, which demands a uniform total mixing plane to an intermediate virtual interface, covering the
pressure distribution after this interface. The test case validation same bounding box as the original boundary but built up from
presented in the paper shows that the tight coupling between the radial slices, as shown in Fig. 1.
variables due to the implicit formulation increases the quality of
downstream total pressure uniformity.
A thorough validation was carried out by a comparison with the 4 Explicit Algorithm
measurement data and simulation of several turbomachinery The implementation of an explicitly coupled boundary condi-
applications. The presented test cases are a centrifugal compressor tion generates two computational domains which have to be sepa-
with a vaned diffusor and an axial turbine. The centrifugal com- rately solved. The decomposition of a physically connected
pressor was used to test the improvements of the implicit mixing domain results in the generation of an additional outlet and inlet.
plane with respect to the explicit formulation, especially if oper- As ordinary inlet and outlet boundaries, unphysical flow structures
ated in off-design conditions. The axial 1.5 stage test case proves due to reflections can occur. A brief overview of the NRBC was
the stability of the implemented mixing plane in a multi-row already given in the Introduction and is not discussed further in
calculation. this paper, nor is it implemented in the presented mixing plane.

081010-2 / Vol. 136, AUGUST 2014 Transactions of the ASME


Fig. 2 Labeling convention
Table 1 Subsonic boundary conditions
Quantity Upstream Downstream
Pressure Dirichlet Neumann
Velocity Neumann Dirichlet
Temperature Neumann Dirichlet
Remaining quantities Neumann Dirichlet
A number of authors have investigated the influence of specific
averaging methods, agreeing that simple area or mass averaging
cannot guarantee the conservation of mass, momentum, and
energy. The implemented scheme will be based on Dzung’s [21]
consistent averaging and explained in Sec. 4.1. A summary of the
procedure is given in Appendix A. Another advanced method
using all relevant conservation equations and making the distinc-
tion between hypothetically reversible and irreversible quantities
was presented in a publication by Kreitmeier [22].
4.1 Boundary Conditions and Consistent Averaging. The
explicit algorithm exploits the theory of characteristics to impose
the correct boundary conditions on each side of the domain inter-
face. A set of resulting boundary conditions for subsonic flow re-
gime is listed in Table 1. To correctly reproduce the physics of the
characteristic waves, a subroutine was implemented, inverting the
boundary condition for the pressure in the case of supersonic flow.
The mixing plane was then separated into one part for compressi-
ble and one part for incompressible calculations. A separation of
these sub-branches was carried out to allow different treatments
of different primitive variables.
For explicitly coupled boundaries, this is of considerable impor-
tance if conservation equations have to be strictly satisfied over
the mixing plane. As already mentioned, the averaging procedure
is based on Dzung’s consistent averaging. This technique uses all
conservation equations to derive a quadratic equation for a consis-
tently averaged normal component of the velocity. According to
Dzung, one solution represents subsonic, while the other solution
would correspond to supersonic flow conditions. A distinction
between these two solutions can be accomplished by computing a
simple area-averaged normal velocity and using the closest solu-
tion. This averaged velocity is used to compute the remaining
averaged primitive-variables, together with the slice-wise inte-
grated conservation equations. To fully conserve momentum over
the interface, the imposed velocity is calculated based on the aver-
aged actual upstream mass flux and the directional components of
the consistently averaged velocities. A first approach using the
Journal of Turbomachinery
upstream averaged total pressure to calculate the downstream
velocity-components led to conservativity problems on the down-
stream side.
5 Fully Implicit Algorithm
The former explicit coupling of the rotor and stator domain led
to two numerically separated problems. The coupling, introduced
based on the theory of characteristics, is only imposed as addi-
tional inlets and outlets before solving the respective equations.
With the implicit procedure, the fluxes over the interface are dis-
cretized and integrated into the matrix of coefficients, creating a
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/turbomachinery/article-pdf/136/8/081010/6300178/turbo_136_08_081010.pdf by Seoul National University user on 03 May 2024
system of equations for the complete domain independent of any
up- or downstream classification. This reduces the influence of the
coupling condition on the simulation, having a positive numerical
effect, as will be shown later with the examples. An example of a
system of equations for an explicit and implicit treatment of an
interface is given in Appendix B, based on a discretization of a
diffusion operator.
An important part of the explicit mixing plane is its consistent
averaging technique. The values have to be conservatively inter-
polated to the virtual patch, which demands a fine resolution of
this structured interface. In addition, the averaging technique
requires ‘tricky’ handling in case of backflow and different proce-
dures for the calculation of primitive variables. To avoid these dif-
ficulties, the idea of the mixing plane introduced by Beaudoin and
Jasak [18] was adopted. The interpolation object is built up in cy-
lindrical coordinates. Despite the fact that this method drastically
reduces the computational costs of the interpolation, complicated
averaging is no longer needed since the interpolation onto a single
face implicitly carries out an area-weighted average. This for-
mally reduces the conservativity of the interpolation but can be
considered as a negligible drawback since its influence is mini-
mized due to the implicit treatment coupled to mass conservation,
which is explicitly enforced (see Appendices B and C).
5.1 Coupled System of Equations. With the implicit
approach, the interface is integrated into the system of equations
for the complete solution domain. The general form of a system of
linearized equations is shown in Eq. (1)
Ax¼b (1)
where A is the matrix of coefficients, x is the solution vector, and
b is the right hand side. Coupled systems, as in the case of a mix-
ing plane, split this equation into one part for the interface and
one for the remaining domain, leading to Eq. (2)
 
AI þ AC  x ¼ b (2)
The residuals, which have to be minimized by an iterative solution
procedure, can be formed as shown in Eq. (3)
r ¼ b  AI  x  AC  x (3)
The calculation of the coefficients of the coupling matrix AC is
part of the mixing plane interface. In order to use multigrid solv-
ers, this operation had to be split up into two algorithms; one for
the finest level and one for the coarsened equations. On the finest
level the implementation is quite straightforward. If the class is
used by one side of the boundary, the values of the adjacent side
are interpolated on the interface, averaged, and afterwards interpo-
lated on the actual boundary. The coefficients for the matrix AC
are calculated based on the distance of the actual cell center to the
averaged interpolated cell centers of the adjacent side.
The calculation of the coefficients and values for the agglomer-
ated levels needs further analysis. Due to the fact that the virtual
interface is based on the geometry of the finest mesh, the
AUGUST 2014, Vol. 136 / 081010-3

Fig. 3 Data path for agglomerated levels
Fig. 4 Agglomeration of the faces
algorithms for the interpolations between the original and the
structured virtual grid are only available on this level. Exchanging
the flow quantities at the interface for the agglomerated levels
would require a massive amount of operations to bring the varia-
bles from the actual coarsening level to the finest level and back,
as visualized in Fig. 3. In order to avoid these operations and
allow a direct exchange of flow quantities, an algorithm, using the
information from the agglomeration scheme to calculate the inter-
polation values for each coarsening level, was implemented.
Figure 4 shows an example of an agglomerated interface. The
dashed lines present the faces of the boundaries, which are
agglomerated during the restriction. As can be seen from the con-
tinuous line, the faces of the structured interface stay constant dur-
ing agglomeration. The methods used for the agglomeration itself
are based on the additive correction method from Hutchinson and
Raithby [23].
5.2 Multiprocessor Calculations. If multiprocessor calcula-
tions are carried out, the domain is split up into a predefined num-
ber of subdomains. This decomposition may also result in a
decomposition of the mixing plane interface. Due to the fact that a
circumferential average needs the values of all of the faces on the
boundary, the object for the interpolation on the structured inter-
face has to be available in its full size for each processor. The cre-
ation of this object, in turn, needs the geometry of the complete
boundary, which can be done by previously defining and address-
ing, allowing us to collect the data from the different processors.
To exchange values over the boundary, the considered field has to
be expanded to the size of the complete boundary-field and after-
wards restricted to the size of the decomposed boundary on the
actual processor. The method performing the necessary operations
081010-4 / Vol. 136, AUGUST 2014
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/turbomachinery/article-pdf/136/8/081010/6300178/turbo_136_08_081010.pdf by Seoul National University user on 03 May 2024
is based on the Open MPI library [24] and widely used within
R
OpenFOAMV. Special attention was paid to the addressing during
the agglomeration. The size of the agglomerated boundary is no
longer the size of the original boundary-mesh and the initially cal-
culated addressing can no longer be used. An algorithm which
constantly calculates the new addressing for each coarsening level
and processor was, therefore, implemented. Figure 5 shows the
faces and the labels of their addressing for the finest and a coars-
ened level, together with the subdomains where they will be allo-
cated for further calculations.
5.3 Backflow. An important feature of a mixing plane is its
independence to a predefined up- and downstream position. A for-
mulation of the explicit algorithm, inverting the boundary condi-
tions given in Table 1 locally in the case of partial backflow,
showed considerable convergence problems. No reasonable stabi-
lization was found and, therefore, a routine preventing opposite
directed flow was implemented. This reduced the applicability of
the algorithm and was another reason for the implementation of
the more advanced implicit formulation. Including the coefficients
of the coupled interface into the system of equations brings the
stability needed to calculate the backflow. Figure 6 shows a con-
verged solution for an axial fan, operating in conditions leading to
considerable backflow at the mixing plane. Further information
regarding the geometry of the presented test case and problems,
accompanied by the explicitly formulated mixing plane, can be
found in Ref. [25].
6 Solver
The solver used is an in-house 3D unstructured object-oriented
finite volume code. It is implemented into the framework of Open-
R
FOAMV and designed to solve steady-state compressible
Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) equations [15]. The
solver uses a SIMPLE-like algorithm with special treatment of the
pressure correction [26], becoming a so-called all-Mach solver,
and is capable of handling multiple references of frames.
7 Results
The validation of the explicit and the implicit algorithm is dem-
onstrated based on two turbomachinery applications for both the
radial and axial outflow, investigating the flow behavior in a cen-
trifugal compressor and an axial turbine. The centrifugal compres-
sor with a vaned diffusor has 16 rotor and 24 stator blades. The
axial machine is the Aachen 1.5 stage cold air turbine of the Insti-
tute of Jet Propulsion and Turbomachinery (RWTH Aachen). The
simulations with the in-house solver, along with the simulations
carried out with the commercial software both use the same com-
putational grid and boundary conditions along with the discretiza-
tion schemes and turbulence models.
Transactions of the ASME
 Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/turbomachinery/article-pdf/136/8/081010/6300178/turbo_136_08_081010.pdf by Seoul National University user on 03 May 2024
Fig. 5 Multiprocessor distribution

lp ¼ gttc  w (7)

The plotted values are reference values with respect to the inlet
volume-flow coefficient at the maximum gttc of all simulations.

7.2 Centrifugal Compressor Stage Test Case. The simula-

tion domain after the impeller is limited to the bladed diffuser and
the bend. The following bladed return channel, typical for multi-
stage machines, is not modeled. Secondary flow paths are also
neglected. The applied boundary conditions are a total pressure
boundary condition at the inlet with the velocity restricted to the
normal of the boundary. At the outlet, a prescribed static pressure
Fig. 6 Axial fan with backflow was imposed. The outlet pressure was then adjusted in order to
compute a constant rotational speed line for the validation with
the measurement data.
The assessment procedure will begin with a global comparison
7.1 Definitions
of the development of entropy and total pressure compared to the
" c1=c # commercial code (CC1). A local comparison of the conservativity
p02 behavior will be carried out by comparing the representative flow
T01 1
h02s  h01 p01 quantities before and right after the mixing plane. At the end, the
gttc ¼ ¼ (4) results are compared with the measurement data and the uniform-
h02  h01 T02  T01
ity level in the total pressure right behind the mixing plane will be
m_ presented.
/¼ 2 u
(5)
q0;1  dtip tip Figure 7 shows the computed section together with the cutting
planes CP1 and CP2, which will be used during the validation.
P Cutting plane CP1 is a plane at midheight of the mixing plane,
w¼ (6)
m_  u2tip while CP2 is a midspan cut of the computational domain.

Fig. 7 Computational domains with cutting planes

Journal of Turbomachinery AUGUST 2014, Vol. 136 / 081010-5

 Table 2 Relative differences over the mixing plane for both
algorithms

Quantity Difference, implicit (%) Difference, explicit (%)

h0 0.00156 0.02634
p0 0.00381 0.22129
s 0.00018 0.04542
m_ 0.00671 0.13542

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/turbomachinery/article-pdf/136/8/081010/6300178/turbo_136_08_081010.pdf by Seoul National University user on 03 May 2024

Fig. 8 Entropy rise in streamwise direction

Fig. 10 Comparison of the speed lines against the

measurement

Fig. 9 Total pressure rise in streamwise direction

7.3 Comparison and Validation. The mixing, occurring at
the interface, results in a rise in entropy, which is accompanied by
a loss in total pressure. Therefore, the first comparison deals with
the evolution of the entropy and total pressure over the mixing
plane. Figure 8 shows the averaged rise in entropy through the
control surfaces perpendicular to CP2. The continuous line repre-
sents the solution of the implicit mixing plane, while the dashed
curve is the solution achieved with the explicit formulation. To
arrive at the mixed-out-state, the flow quantities have to adapt to
this distribution before the interface. This is clearly visible in
Fig. 8 since the rise in entropy is located upstream of the mixing
plane, representing the additional losses accompanied with the
mixing process. The implicit formulation leads to results similar
to the explicit formulation but shows fewer oscillations. The com-
parison with a commercial code shows good agreement for the
rotor section but has higher entropy rise over the stator blade. The
reason for this behavior will be explained later. Since a rise in en-
tropy is a loss, which is accompanied by a total-pressure drop,
Fig. 9 shows the streamwise evolution of the total pressure for the
two algorithms. It can be seen that there is no difference in the
Fig. 11 Pressure rise in the rotor and stator
total pressure from the inlet to the outlet between the two
algorithms and the development along streamwise direction is
nearly identical. The comparison with the commercial code results
shows a comparable total pressure rise, especially in the rotor, de-
spite the higher entropy rise in the stator. The results shown in
Figs. 8 and 9 deal with the overall solution of the simulation. Fur-
ther validation of the mixing plane was then carried out by a com-
parison of the up- and downstream flow quantities close to the
interface. Representative quantities for the mass, momentum, and
energy are listed in Table 2 and the conservative behavior is
expressed in terms of the percentage of the difference. The calcu-
lated values clearly show the superiority of the implicit formula-
tion for all of the listed quantities. The stage polytropic total-to-
total efficiency, work coefficient, and polytropic head coefficient
against the inlet volume-flow coefficient are shown in Fig. 10 and
compared to the measurement data. The work coefficient shows

081010-6 / Vol. 136, AUGUST 2014 Transactions of the ASME

 good agreement with the measurement results for both mixing
plane formulations. However, the stage polytropic total-to-total
efficiencies result in higher values compared to the measurement
results. The reason for the higher efficiency is due to the fact that
part of the secondary paths, leading to leakage flow, and the return
channel were neglected, while they were included in the measure-
ment. From simulations not presented here, these components
introduce losses on the order of the difference observed here. As
can be seen, the speed line for the explicit algorithm stops at a cer-
tain volume flow toward the stability limit. For higher outlet pres-
sures, instabilities occurred using the explicitly formulated mixing
plane, leading to divergence.

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/turbomachinery/article-pdf/136/8/081010/6300178/turbo_136_08_081010.pdf by Seoul National University user on 03 May 2024

Fig. 12 Velocity profiles at CP1: (a) CC1; (b) implicit mixing
plane
As previously mentioned, solutions obtained with the commer-
cial code did not entirely match the results from the implemented
algorithms. Based on Figs. 8 and 9 it has to be concluded that the
differences must result from phenomena in the stator section
since, up to the mixing plane, the solutions are nearly identical.
To prove this thesis, the referenced total pressure ratio characteris-
tic is separated into rotor and stator sections in Fig. 11. As can be

Fig. 13 Contours of entropy at CP1: (a) CC1 frozen rotor; (b) CC1 mixing plane; (c) implicit mix-
ing plane; (d) explicit mixing plane

Journal of Turbomachinery AUGUST 2014, Vol. 136 / 081010-7


Fig. 14 Contours of enthalpy at CP1: (a) CC1 frozen rotor; (b) CC1 mixing plane; (c) implicit
mixing plane; (d) explicit mixing plane
seen from the dashed lines, in the rotor section there is very good
agreement between the implemented implicit algorithm and the
solution achieved with the commercial code. In the stator section,
however, the solution achieved by the commercial software has
less of a pressure drop for a higher volume flow, leading to better
efficiency. A further investigation of the stator section has shown
that the solution obtained with the commercial software has sig-
nificantly less separation. Figure 12 illustrates the backflow region
at mid span. The dark gray parts are regions of streamwise nega-
tive flow. While the incidence and mass flow are approximately
the same, the part of the blade which has recirculation is
considerably larger for the simulation with the implicit mixing
plane. The secondary flow structures accompanied by the separa-
tion on the stator blade are an additional loss, leading to a higher
drop in total pressure and, thus, lower efficiency. By comparing
the different simulation results with the measurement in Fig. 10, it
seems that the commercial software underestimates the separation
in the stator. Compared to frozen-rotor simulations, a mixing
plane should yield a solution which is independent of the relative
081010-8 / Vol. 136, AUGUST 2014
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/turbomachinery/article-pdf/136/8/081010/6300178/turbo_136_08_081010.pdf by Seoul National University user on 03 May 2024
position of the rotor and stator, resulting in uniform pitchwise
enthalpy and entropy for a fixed spanwise height on the down-
stream side of the domain, as stated by Denton [14]. Figures 13
and 14 show the contours of the entropy and enthalpy distribution
along CP1. All of the figures have the same range and fifty uni-
formly distributed isolines in order to assess the quality of the for-
mulation. For a better comparison, the position dependent solution
achieved with a frozen-rotor approximation is plotted in
Figs. 13(a) and 14(a). Since a dense distribution of isolines indi-
cates high gradients, the nonuniformity in entropy and enthalpy
on the downstream side of the interface is clearly visible in the
case of the frozen-rotor simulation. Compared to this result, all
other implementations of mixing planes provide much more uni-
form fields. With respect to the uniformity criteria, the implicit
algorithm performs the best. From an engineering point of view,
the rotor and the stator can be considered as two separate domains
with their inlet and outlet conditions coupled to the adjacent do-
main. Applying the total conditions at the inlet, the downstream
side of the mixing plane interface would also require imposed
Transactions of the ASME
 Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/turbomachinery/article-pdf/136/8/081010/6300178/turbo_136_08_081010.pdf by Seoul National University user on 03 May 2024
Fig. 15 Contours of total pressure at CP1: (a) CC1 frozen rotor; (b) CC1 mixing plane; (c)
implicit mixing plane; (d) explicit mixing plane

Fig. 16 Computational domain with cutting planes

total conditions. With respect to the idea behind the mixing plane,
this would demand pitchwise uniform total pressure. Figure 15
shows the isolines of the total pressure on CP1. It is important to
point out that despite the small reflections in entropy and enthalpy
due to the strong coupling of the boundary condition, a uniform
total pressure distribution has been achieved with the novel
formulation.
7.4 Axial Turbine Test Case. The axial turbine presented in
this paper is a 1.5 stage cold air turbine built at the Institute of Jet
Propulsion and Turbomachinery at Aachen Technical University
(IST RWTH Aachen, Germany). This turbine is a well-known test
case investigated by many authors. See, for example, Refs.
[27–29] for further information. At the inlet, total conditions are
imposed while at the outlet a prescribed static pressure was used.

Journal of Turbomachinery AUGUST 2014, Vol. 136 / 081010-9


Fig. 17 Absolute flow angle at CP1
Validation of the code is carried out by a comparison of the abso-
lute flow angles and the total pressure distribution. Figure 16
shows the axial turbine, including the cutting planes used for the
comparison. At cutting planes one to three, the absolute flow
angles were computed and compared with the measurement data.
7.5 Comparison and Validation. Figures 17, 18, and 19
show the flow angles computed with the implemented implicit
mixing plane and those obtained with a commercial code (CC1) at
the three cutting planes. Several different turbulence models have
been used together with the in-house solver wherein the solutions
of a Spalart–Allmaras [30] and a modified k-x shear stress trans-
port (SST) [31] model with automatic wall treatment are
presented. The turbulence model of the commercial code is, again,
a k-x SST model with automatic wall treatment. Figure 17
presents the solutions after the first stator row. The flow angles
around midspan are well-predicted by all simulations. Differences
appear in the prediction at the upper and lower end wall. Com-
pared to measurement results the k-x SST model with automatic
wall treatment of the in-house solver performs best in predicting
Fig. 18 Absolute flow angle at CP2
081010-10 / Vol. 136, AUGUST 2014
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/turbomachinery/article-pdf/136/8/081010/6300178/turbo_136_08_081010.pdf by Seoul National University user on 03 May 2024
Fig. 19 Absolute flow angle at CP3
the spanwise positions of the extrema. The solutions from the
commercial code and the in-house code with the Spalart–Allmaras
turbulence model are not able to reproduce the correct spanwise
position of the extrema of the turning angles. For the first blade,
however, it has to be noted that the position of the extrema is
strongly dependent on the inlet boundary condition, which is
always accompanied with uncertainties about the real flow
distribution. The prediction of the absolute flow angle behind the
rotor shows even higher discrepancies between the different simu-
lations; see Fig. 18. Again, the in-house solver, together with the
k-x SST model, shows superior behavior. The small wave close
to the shroud is, however, smeared out. A reason for this could be
a too low mesh resolution at the end-walls. Calculation of the flow
angles using the Spalart–Allmaras model showed discrepancies in
predicting secondary flow effects close to the hub. The absolute
flow angles after the stator in the outlet domain are shown in
Fig. 19. As can be seen, the flow angles are well predicted by the
k-x model of the in-house code, while the k-x model of the com-
mercial software was unable to correctly predict the secondary
flow effects. The one-equation Spalart–Allmaras model gives rea-
sonable results in most parts of the computed section but shows
discrepancies close to the hub. A global validation is carried out
by comparing the total pressure distribution. Since the most prom-
ising turbulence model is the k-x SST model with automatic wall
treatment, these results will be used for the comparison and are
presented in Figs. 20 and 21.
The implemented mixing plane shows the expected uniform
total pressure distribution after the interface. This uniformity
respects the underlying concept of a mixed-out-state, reproducing
a solution for a complete revolution.
8 Conclusions
Two mixing plane approaches have been implemented. One
uses a characteristics-based explicit approach and one uses a novel
implicit formulation. Validation of both implemented mixing
planes showed good agreement with the measurement data. The
implicit mixing plane proved the expected superior behavior com-
pared to the explicit characteristics-based approach. The coupled
treatment of the interface greatly improved stability during start-
up, in the case of backflow or close to choking conditions,
extending the applicability of this approach for turbomachinery
applications. The formerly stated possible inaccuracy due to an
inaccurate averaging technique could be solved with an explicit
correction. This allowed the use of a better implementation of the
Transactions of the ASME
 Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/turbomachinery/article-pdf/136/8/081010/6300178/turbo_136_08_081010.pdf by Seoul National University user on 03 May 2024
Fig. 20 Contours of total pressure at CP4 for the first interface: (a) mixing plane 1, CC1; (b)
mixing plane 1, implicit

Fig. 21 Contours of total pressure at CP4 for the second interface: (a) mixing plane 2, CC1; (b)
mixing plane 2, implicit

interpolation and resulted in a massive reduction of computational
costs. Numerical experiments also showed that the explicit correc-
tion does not influence the convergence behavior. As already
mentioned in the paper, the NRBC treatment is not implemented
in the code. It is, therefore, evident to point out that the small
reflections, due to the use of a strong imposition of the mixing av-
erage, are not directly responsible for the phenomena of the non-
uniform profile in the downstream domain. This is a problem that
affects all mixing planes. In fact, the so-called nonreflective
mixing plane used in the past to solve this problem is damping the
effect of the mixing process without so much efficacy, in terms of
downstream profile uniformity. This paper points out that the
reflection is not the direct cause of the nonuniformity in the down-
stream profile. Instead, the tight coupling between the variables
has a major effect in achieving the target of downstream uniform-
ity. Despite the small reflections in entropy and enthalpy due to

Journal of Turbomachinery AUGUST 2014, Vol. 136 / 081010-11


Fig. 22 Example domains
this strong coupling, a uniform total pressure distribution has been
achieved with the novel formulation. This shows that the nonre-
flective approach is not the solution of the nonuniformity problem.
One solution would respect subsonic flow regimes, while the other
belongs to supersonic flow regimes. To distinguish which solution is
correct, a simple area weighted average of the normal velocity can
be computed. The solution closest to this result is then taken as the
consistent average of the normal velocity component. The remaining
primitive variables can be computed by re-using the equations com-
puted according to example (A3). An averaged density can, for
example, be computed based on the mass conservation equation
which was formed similarly to Eq. (A3), resulting in Eq. (A7)
m_ i
qbi ¼ (A7)
ubn;i

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/turbomachinery/article-pdf/136/8/081010/6300178/turbo_136_08_081010.pdf by Seoul National University user on 03 May 2024

According to our experience and the theory about mixing planes,
this is one of the most important criteria and is lacking in most
commercial codes. A mixing plane is used to represent an average Appendix B: Coupled System of Equations
solution of a full rotation of the rotor. The nonuniform total pres- Figure 22 represents a simplified domain, consisting of four
sure distribution, as found in the commercial code, denies this ba- cells and separated by a mixing plane. The differences in the cou-
sic criteria, influencing the energy of the flow field without any pling of the interface will be pointed out by a numerical discreti-
physical justification. The improved behavior leads to the better zation of a diffusion operator, given in Eq. (B1)
prediction of flow structures such as, e.g., the point of separation ð
on a downstream located blade, as presented in Fig. 12. The B ¼ rCcell UdV (B1)
implicit formulation of the mixing plane provides an easy, usable,
and accurate tool for the design and analysis of turbomachinery
applications. ð
¼ Ccell UdS (B2)
Appendix A: Dzung’s Consistent Averaging
The idea behind Dzung’s consistent averaging is to compute X
averaged primitive variables leading to the same fluxes as the inte- ffi Cf Uf Sf (B3)
grated local values.
The procedure is described with the equation for normal mo-
mentum (10). Equations for the different components of the mo- This equation can be rewritten in the general form shown in Eq.
mentum equations and mass and energy conservation can be (1). For further explanation, the fluxes across the faces will be dis-
similarly formed. cretized with a central difference scheme and the areas of the
Conservation of normal momentum faces are of a uniform size Sf . Furthermore, C ¼ Cf  Sf .

I_n;i ¼ qbi ubn;i ubn;i þ pbi (A1) B.1 Explicit Algorithm. As mentioned earlier, an explicit
X coupling leads to additional inlets and outlets, as visualized in
ðqi;j ui;j  ni;j ui;j  ni;j þ pi;j ÞSi;j Fig. 23. The subdomains are represented by two systems of linear-
j ized equations and are given in Eqs. (B4) and (B5):
¼ (A2)
Si "CC# ! !
ð U1 b1
1 22
¼ ðqðu  nÞðu  nÞ þ pÞdS (A3)  ¼ (B4)
S CC
22 U2 b2
|fflffl{zfflffl} |fflfflffl{zfflfflffl} |fflfflffl{zfflfflffl}
A1 x1 b1
To create a more general solution, Dzung proposed the introduction
of dimension-free quantities. Therefore a Laval speed is defined, "CC# ! !
dependent only on the stagnation enthalpy and the mass flux 22 U3 b3
CC
 ¼ (B5)
U4 b4
j  1 E_ 22
|fflffl{zfflffl} |fflfflffl{zfflfflffl} |fflfflffl{zfflfflffl}
a2 ¼ 2 (A4) A2 x2 b2
j þ 1 m_

The normal velocity component can be computed with Eq. (A5)
ubn ¼ la
where l is the solution of the quadratic Eq. (A6), which was cre-
ated with a complete set of conservation equations similar to
Eq. (A3)
l2  b  l þ c ¼ 0
The values from the adjacent side of the interface are used as inlet
and outlet conditions, according to the theory of characteristics.
(A5) The influence of the adjacent domain fully acts as an explicit con-
tribution to the source. Therefore, the coupling is only carried out
before the outer iterations.
B.2 Implicit Algorithm. An implicit treatment of a coupled
interface can be understood as using two separate matrix of coeffi-
cients to build up a system of linearized equations for the com-
(A6) plete solution domain, as shown in Eq. (B7) (see Fig. 24).

Fig. 23 Explicit separation

081010-12 / Vol. 136, AUGUST 2014 Transactions of the ASME

 Fig. 24 Implicit separation

Fig. 26 Detail of transformed interface

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/turbomachinery/article-pdf/136/8/081010/6300178/turbo_136_08_081010.pdf by Seoul National University user on 03 May 2024

2C C 3 0 1 0 1
2 2 0 0 U1 b1
6C C 7 B C B C
62 C 0 7 B U2 C B b 2 C
6 2 7B C ¼ B C (B10)
60 C
C C2 7 B C B C
4 2 5 @ U3 A @ b 3 A
0 0 C2 C2 U4 b4
ffl} |fflfflfflffl{zfflfflfflffl}
|fflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflffl{zfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflffl |fflfflffl{zfflfflffl}
A x b

The coefficients of the linearized equations for the owner cells to

their faces are always local while the coefficients from the faces
to the coupled cells are averaged coefficients from the adjacent
side. With this implicit treatment, the iterative solution procedure
constantly considers the complete domain, even during the inner
iterations.

Appendix C: Interface Transformation

Figure 25 shows one side of a coupled interface of an axial fan
Fig. 25 Unstructured mixing plane boundary built up from an unstructured grid. Carrying out a circumferential
average on an unstructured grid at a given radial section would
require a weighting of the face values dependent on their overlap-
b¼Ax (B6) ping section. To simplify the procedure of the averaging a struc-
tured patch is created, as explained in this paper. Building up a
  structured interface would require a vast amount of faces to appro-
¼ AI þ AC x (B7) priately match the curved boundary. The interface is, therefore,
transformed in cylindrical space, allowing a single face per radial
The interface is no longer built up from an additional inlet and slice. A detail of the transformed patch, including the structured
outlet; instead, the fluxes over the interface are integrated into the interface, is shown in Fig. 26. The interpolation from the unstruc-
system of linearized equations. The system of linearized equations tured grid to a structured grid with one face implicitly carries out
for the inner coefficients is built up as follows: an area average. Carrying out a consistent averaging would
require interpolation on a very fine structured grid with many
2C C 3 0 1 0 1 faces in the cylindrical direction, followed by a procedure to carry
2 2 0 0 U1 b1
6C C 7 B C B C out the consistent average in the circumferential direction on the
6 7 B C B C
6 2 2 0 0 7 B U2 C B b2 C structured interface. This is the procedure used for the explicit
6 7 B C ¼ B C (B8) coupling of the interface. An implicit treatment, as shown in Ap-
6 0 0 C C 7 B U3 C B b3 C
4 2 25 @ A @ A pendix B, negates the need for a special treatment of different
0 0 C2 C2 U4 b4 flow variables since the coefficients already contain the numerical
|fflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflffl{zfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflffl} |fflfflfflffl{zfflfflfflffl} |fflfflffl{zfflfflffl} discretization of the convection and diffusion operator.
AI x b

It can be seen that the system shown in Eq. (B8) can be built up
from the equation systems of the explicit approach. However, Nomenclature
instead of considering the influence of the coupling in the source A¼ matrix of coefficients
term, these fluxes are implicitly discretized. A system of linear- a ¼ Dzung’s Laval speed
ized equations for the interface fluxes, with respect to the preced- b¼ right hand side
ing example is shown in Eq. (B9): CP ¼ cutting plane
2 3 0 1 0 1 d¼ diameter, m
0 0 0 0 U1 b1 DS ¼ downstream side
6 C C 7 B C B C E_ ¼ total energy flux, kg s3
60 0 7 B U2 C B b2 C
6 2 2 7B C ¼ B C (B9) GGI ¼ general grid interface
60 07 B C B C
4 C
2
C
2 5 @ U3 A @ b3 A h¼ enthalpy, kJ kg1
I_ ¼ impulse, kg m1 s2
0 0 0 0 U4 b4
|fflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflffl{zfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflffl} |fflfflfflffl{zfflfflffl
ffl} |fflfflffl{zfflfflffl} LE ¼ leading edge
AC x b m¼ mass, kg
MRF ¼ multi-reference frame
Adding AI þ AC will lead to a system of linearized equations for NRBC ¼ nonreflecting boundary condition
the complete domain p¼ pressure, Pa

Journal of Turbomachinery AUGUST 2014, Vol. 136 / 081010-13

 P¼ power, W [6] Kreiss, H., 1970, “Initial Boundary Value Problems for Hyperbolic Systems,”
Commun. Pure Appl. Math., 23(3), pp. 277–298.
RB ¼ rotor blade [7] Engquist, B., and Majda, A., 1977, “Absorbing Boundary Conditions for Nu-
s¼ entropy, J kg1 K1 merical Simulation of Waves,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 74(5), pp.
S¼ area, m2 1765–1766.
SB ¼ stator blade [8] Engquist, B., and Majda, A., 1979, “Radiation Boundary Conditions for Acous-
tic and Elastic Wave Calculations,” Commun. Pure Appl. Math., 32(3), pp.
SST ¼ shear stress transport 313–357.
T¼ temperature, K [9] Hedstrom, G., 1979, “Nonreflecting Boundary Conditions for Nonlinear Hyper-
TE ¼ trailing edge bolic Systems,” J. Comput. Phys., 30(2), pp. 222–237.
u¼ velocity, ls1 [10] Giles, M., 1988, “Non-Reflecting Boundary Conditions for the Euler Equa-
tions,” Computational Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, Report No. CFDL-TR-88-1.
US ¼ upstream side [11] Saxer, A., and Giles, M., 1991, “Quasi-3-D Non-Reflecting Boundary Condi-
x¼ solution vector tions for Euler Equations Calculations,” 10th AIAA Computational Fluid Dy-
namics Conference, Honolulu, HI, June 24–26, AIAA Paper No. 91-1603-CP,

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/turbomachinery/article-pdf/136/8/081010/6300178/turbo_136_08_081010.pdf by Seoul National University user on 03 May 2024

Greek Symbols pp. 845–857.
[12] Anker, J. E., Schrader, B., Seybold, U., Mayer, J. F., and Casey, M. V., “A
c¼ specific heat ratio Three-Dimensional Non-Reflecting Boundary Condition Treatment for Steady-
C¼ transport constant State Flow Simulations,” 44th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit,
Reno, NV, January 9-12, AIAA Paper No. 2006-1275.
g¼ efficiency [13] Holmes, D., 2008, “Mixing Planes Revisited: A Steady Mixing Plane Approach
j¼ adiabatic index Designed to Combine High Levels of Conservation and Robustness,” ASME
l¼ head coefficient Paper No. GT2008-51296.
q¼ density, kg m3 [14] Denton, J., 2010, “Some Limitations of Turbomachinery CFD,” ASME Paper
No. GT2010-22540.
/¼ volume flow coefficient [15] Mangani, L., Bianchini, C., Andreini, A., and Facchini, B., 2007, “Development
U¼ transported quantity and Validation of a Cþþ Object Oriented CFD Code for Heat Transfer Analy-
w¼ work coefficient sis,” ASME-JSME Thermal Engineering and Summer Heat Transfer Confer-
ence, Vancouver, Canada, July 8–12, Paper No. AJ-1266.
Subscripts [16] OpenCFD, 2012, “OpenFOAM User Guide,” OpenCFD Limited, Berkshire,
UK.
c¼ compressor [17] OpenCFD, 2012, “OpenFOAM Programmers Guide,” OpenCFD Limited,
i¼ radial position on virtual interface Berkshire, UK.
[18] Jasak, H., and Beaudoin, M., 2011, “Openfoam Turbo Tools: From General
j¼ tangential position on virtual interface Purpose CFD to Turbomachinery Simulations,” ASME-JSME-KSME Joint Flu-
n¼ normal direction ids Engineering Conference (AJK2011-FED), Hamamatsu, Japan, July 24-29,
p¼ polytropic Paper No. AJK2011-05015.
s¼ isentropic [19] Page, M., Beaudoin, M., and Giroux, A., 2010, “Steady-State Capabilities for
Hydroturbines With OpenFOAM,” IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth and Environ. Sci., 12,
tip ¼ rotor blade tip p. 012076.
tt ¼ total-to-total [20] Fritsch, G., and Giles, M., 1993, “An Asymptotic Analysis of Mixing Loss,”
0¼ total conditions ASME Paper No. 93-GT-345.
1¼ inlet [21] Dzung, L., 1971, “Konsistente mittelwerte in der theorie der turbomaschinen fuer
kompressible medien,” Brown-Boveri Mitt., 10(71), p. 485–492.
2¼ outlet [22] Kreitmeier, F., 1992, “Space-Averaging 3D Flows Using Strictly Formulated
Balance Equations in Turbomachinery,” ASME Cogen-Turbo, 6th International
Superscripts Conference on Gas Turbines in Cogeneration and Utility Industrial and Inde-
pendent Power Generation, Houston, TX, September 1–3, Vol. 7, D. H. Cooke,
C ¼ coupled S. H. Borglin, H. W. Holland, and L. S. Langston, eds., ASME, New York, pp.
I ¼ internal 397–408.
[23] Hutchinson, B. R. and Raithby, G. D., 1986, “A Multigrid Method Based on the
Additive Correction Strategy,” Numer. Heat Transfer, Part A, 9(5), pp. 511–537.
Diacritic Marks [24] Graham, R. L., Woodall, T. S., and Squyres, J. M., 2006, “Open MPI: A Flexi-
ble High Performance MPI,” Parallel Processing and Applied Mathematics
b ¼ Dzung’s average (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3911), R. Wyrzykowski, J. Dongarra,
 ¼ time derivative N. Meyer, and J. Wasniewski, eds., Springer, Berlin, pp 228–239.
[25] Hanimann, L., 2011, “Mixing-Plane Interface for OpenFOAM,” Master’s the-
sis, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
[26] Mangani, L., 2008, “Development and Validation of an Object Oriented CFD
References Solver for Heat Transfer and Combustion Modeling in Turbomachinery
[1] Brost, V., Ruprecht, A., and Maih€ ofer, M., 2003, “Rotor-Stator Interactions in Application,” Ph.D. thesis, Dipartimento di Energetica, Universita degli Studi
an Axial Turbine, a Comparison of Transient and Steady State Frozen Rotor di Firenze, Florence, Italy.
Simulations,” International Conference on Case Studies in Hydraulic Systems [27] Karczewski, M., and Błaszczak, J., 2008, “Performance of Three Turbulence Mod-
(CSHS’03), Belgrade, Serbia, September 29–30. els in 3D Flow Investigation for a 1.5-Stage Turbine,” Task Q., 12(3), pp.
[2] Denton, J., and Singh, U., 1979, “Time Marching Methods for Turbomachinery 185–195.
Flow Calculation,” Applications of Numerical Methods to Flow Calculations in [28] Poehler, T., Gier, J., and Jeschke, P., 2010, “Numerical and Experimental Anal-
Turbomachines, Vol. 1, von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics, Rhode-St- ysis of the Effects of Non-Axisymmetric Contoured Stator Endwalls in an Axial
Genese, Belgium, p 47. Turbine,” ASME Paper No. GT2010-23350.
[3] Denton, J., 1985, “The Calculation of Fully Three-Dimensional Flow Through [29] Reinm€ oller, U., Stephan, B., Schmidt, S., and Niehuis, R., 2002, “Clocking
Any Type of Turbomachine Blade Row,” AGARD, Lecture Series 140. Effects in a 1.5 Stage Axial Turbine: Steady and Unsteady Experimental Inves-
[4] Denton, J., 1992, “The Calculation of Three-Dimensional Viscous Flow Through tigations Supported by Numerical Simulations,” ASME J. Turbomach., 124(1),
Multistage Turbomachines,” ASME J. Turbomach., 114(19), pp. 18–26. pp. 52–60.
[5] Dawes, W., 1990, “Towards Improved Throughflow Capability—The Use of [30] Spalart, P. R., and Allmaras, S. R., 1992, “A One-Equation Turbulence Model
3D Viscous Flow Solvers in a Multistage Environment,” ASME 35th Interna- for Aerodynamic Flows,” AIAA Paper No. 92-0439.
tional Gas Turbine and Aeroengine Congress and Exposition, Vol. 1 Brussels, [31] Menter, F. R., 1993, “Zonal Two Equation kx Turbulence Models for Aero-
Belgium, June 11-14, ASME Paper No. 90-GT-18. dynamic Flows,” AIAA Paper No. 93-2906.

081010-14 / Vol. 136, AUGUST 2014 Transactions of the ASME