This application is a U.S. National Stage Entry under 35 U.S.C. § 371 of International Patent Application No. PCT/GB2017/052810, filed Sep. 20, 2017, which claims priority to British Application No. 1616030.1, filed Sep. 21, 2016, the disclosures of which are hereby explicitly incorporated by reference herein.
The present disclosure relates to a turbomachine, such as a turbocharger, having a turbine wheel.
Turbomachines are machines that transfer energy between a rotor and a fluid. For example, a turbomachine may transfer energy from a fluid to a rotor or may transfer energy from a rotor to a fluid. Two examples of turbomachines are a power turbine, which uses the rotational energy of a rotor driven by a fluid to do useful work, for example, generating electrical power; and a compressor which uses the rotational energy of the rotor to compress a fluid.
Turbochargers are well known turbomachines for supplying air to an inlet of an internal combustion engine at pressures above atmospheric pressure (boost pressures). A conventional turbocharger essentially comprises an exhaust gas driven turbine wheel mounted on a rotatable shaft within a turbine housing connected downstream of an engine outlet manifold. Rotation of the turbine wheel rotates a compressor wheel mounted on the other end of the shaft within a compressor housing. The compressor wheel delivers compressed air to an engine inlet manifold.
The turbocharger shaft is conventionally supported by journal and thrust bearings, including appropriate lubricating systems, located within a central bearing housing connected between the turbine and compressor wheel housings.
The turbine housing 15 has at least one exhaust gas inlet volute 19 (in
In use, the turbine wheel 14 is rotated by the passage of exhaust gas from the exhaust gas inlet volute 19 to the exhaust gas outlet 10. Exhaust gas is provided to the exhaust gas inlet volute 19 from an exhaust manifold (also referred to as an outlet manifold) of the engine (not shown) to which the turbocharger is attached. The turbine wheel 14 in turn rotates the compressor wheel 16 which thereby draws intake air through the compressor inlet 31 and delivers boost air to an inlet manifold of the engine via the diffuser 39, the volute 32 and then the outlet 33.
Various profiles are known for the turbine wheel 14.
The back face 3 of the turbine wheel extends radially outwardly from a hub 4 (the “weld boss”) where the turbine wheel 14 is attached to the turbocharger shaft 18. The back face 3 has 12-fold rotational symmetry (i.e. its appearance is the same when it is rotated by 30 degrees about the axis 100). The radially outermost portions of the back face 3 are the back ends 7 of the inducer tips 2. To either circumferential side of each blade 1, the radially outer edge of the back face 3 becomes gradually closer to the axis 100, and its radially-innermost position is marked as point 5.
In
As noted above, the inducer tip 2 of the turbine wheels 14 shown in
The disclosure aims to provide a new and useful turbine wheel for a turbomachine.
In general terms, the disclosure proposes omitting material from radially-outer portions of a mixed-flow turbine wheel to reduce the mass of the turbine wheel. Specifically, mass is omitted outside the base line (that is, the circle on the back surface of the wheel which indicates the minimum radius of the back surface). Reducing the mass means that the turbine has an improved transient response. Note that it is more beneficial to omit radially outward material than radially inward material, since the omission of radially outward material reduces the moment of inertia of the turbine wheel more than omission of the same mass of radially inward material.
A first aspect of the disclosure is that, in a mixed-flow turbine wheel, there is scalloping of the back face of the turbine wheel at a radial position outward of the base line. The scalloping extends to proximate the back end of the inducer tip. In numerical simulations, it has been observed that it is possible to do this without causing undue stresses in the blade.
A second aspect of the disclosure is that the webbing provided on a blade of a mixed-flow turbine wheel is asymmetric about a plane including the rotational axis and the circumferential centre of the blade, with less webbing provided on the pressure side of the blade (that is, the side which, in use, is the upstream side) than the other side of the blade (in use, the downstream side). Viewing the turbine wheel in the axial direction, the area of the webbing to one side of a radial line through the inducer tip, and outside the baseline, may be at least 20% less than on the other side, and more preferably at least 25% or even at least 30% or 40% less than on the other side. It has been observed in numerical simulations that reducing the amount of webbing on one side of the blade compared to existing turbine blades does not cause undue stresses in the blade.
A non-limiting embodiment of the disclosure will now be described, for the sake of example only, with reference to the following figures, in which:
The turbine wheel 114 also has eleven blades 101 which are radially-equally spaced about the axis 100 (again, the number of blades may be different, and is it generally denoted as n, which is typically about eleven or twelve; the turbine wheel 114 has n-fold symmetry about the axis 100). Each blade 101 has an inducer tip 102 which extends between a front end 106 and a back end 107. In the turbine wheel 114, the inducer tip 102 is not only inclined to the axis 100 but the front end 106 is further from the axis 100 than the back end 107. That is, turbine wheel 114 is a mixed flow turbine wheel. Like other mixed flow turbines, the turbine wheel 114, uses bucketing in order to generate high efficiency at low speed ratios. That is, the component of the length direction of the inducer tip 102 length which is perpendicular to the radial direction, is inclined to the axial direction.
The gas flow direction is illustrated by the arrow A. An indicative hub line 141 is included in
Furthermore, the back face 103 displaced relative to the back face 3 of one of the known turbine wheel 14, in the axial direction towards the turbine outlet. The increased degree of scalloping of the back face 103 is possible because of the radial component of the length direction of the inducer tip 2; in other words, because the mixed flow angle α is less than 90°. We define the cutback angle β as the angle between (i) the component of the length direction of an inducer tip 102 which is perpendicular to the circumferential direction, and (ii) the tangent to the back surface 103 in a plane including the axis 100 and which passes through the back end 107 of the inducer tip 102. Typically, this will be equivalent to the angle, in the plane including the axis 100 and the back end 107, between the radial direction and the tangent to the back surface which is most inclined to the radial direction. We have found in numerical simulations that the value of the cutback angle β should preferably be in the range 80° to 100°. A smaller value of the cutback angle β than 80° creates too much stress in the blade; a larger value of the cutback angle β than 100° greatly reduces the mass saving produced by the scalloping.
A cutback depth value d is defined as the maximum distance of the back surface 103 from an axial plane (i.e. one perpendicular to the axis 100) which passes through the back end 107 of an inducer tip 102. This is measured at the circumferential position at which d is greatest.
To quantify suitable values for d we use an average radius, which may be defined as a parameter referred to here as the mean radius. This is defined by the expression
where R1 is the distance of the back end point 107 from the axis 100, and R2 is the distance of the front end point 106 from the axis 100. In numerical simulations we have found that the blade is not subject to unacceptable stresses provided that the cutback ratio, defined as
is no higher than 0.08. Within this constraint, it is preferred that d should be as high as possible, to produce the maximum saving in the mass of the turbine wheel. A significant reduction in the moment of inertia of the turbine wheel is produced if the cutback ratio is greater than 0.01. For example, d may be at least 0.05 times the mean radius, or at least 0.06 times the mean radius, or at least 0.07 times the mean radius. In some circumstances it may be preferable to define the average radius in terms of a root-mean square (RMS) of the values R1 and R2.
Referring to
The turbine wheel 214 is suitable for use in a turbocharger as shown in
The radially-outer edge of the back face 203 is a line of which the radially-outermost points are the back ends 207 of the inducer tips 202. The radially-innermost points on the radially-outer edge of the back face 203 are marked as 205, and are approximately equidistant between the circumferential centres of the respective back ends 207 of the inducer tips 202 of the neighbouring pair of blades 201.
Considering a reference line which is parallel to the rotational axis 100, and which intercepts the circumferential centre of the front end 206 of one of the inducer tips 102, we define the “bucketing angle” as the angle between the reference line and the component of the length direction of the inducer tip 2 which is perpendicular to the radial direction Thus, if the inducer tip 202 is slightly curved, the bucketing angle would be defined as the angle between (i) the reference line and (ii) a straight line connecting the circumferential centres of the ends 206, 207 of the inducer tip 202. Thus, if the bucketing angle were zero, this would indicate that the inducer tips 2 have no component in a circumferential direction.
Turning to
Like the turbine wheel 114 shown in
As for the turbine wheel 114, the back face 203 of the turbine wheel 214 is not flat, but rather concave: it is “scalloped”. We define the cutback angle β as the angle between (i) the component of the length direction of an inducer tip 202 which is perpendicular to the circumferential direction, and (ii) the tangent to the back surface 203 in a plane including the axis 100 and which passes through the circumferential centre of the back end 207 of that inducer tip 202. Typically, this will be equivalent to the angle, in the plane including the axis 100 and the back end 207, between the radial direction and the tangent to the back surface which is most inclined to the radial direction. As for the turbine wheel 114, the cutback angle β of the turbine wheel 214 should preferably be in the range 80° to 100°.
For the turbine wheel 214, the cutback depth value d is defined as the maximum distance of the back surface 203 from an axial plane (i.e. one perpendicular to the axis 100) which passes through the back end 207 of an inducer tip 202. This is measured at the circumferential position at which d is greatest.
Again, the mean radius is defined by the expression (1), where R1 is the distance of the back end point 207 from the axis 100, and R2 is the distance of the front end point 206 from the axis 100. A cutback ratio is again defined by expression (2). In numerical simulations we have found that the blade is not subject to unacceptable stresses provided that the cutback ratio is no higher than 0.08. Within this constraint, it is preferred that d should be as high as possible, to produce the maximum saving in the mass of the turbine wheel. A significant reduction in the moment of inertia of the turbine wheel is produced if the cutback ratio is greater than 0.01. For example, d may be at least 0.05 times the mean radius, or at least 0.06 times the mean radius, or at least 0.07 times the mean radius.
Turning to
If the number of blades is denoted by n (n=11 in
Consider a circle 240 which passes through the points 205 at which the radially-outer edge of the back face 203 of the turbine wheel 214 has minimum radial extent. For a single segment, consider the part of the back face 203 of this segment which is radially outside the circle 240. This portion of the back face 203 is partitioned into two by a respective radial line 209 through the circumferential centre of the corresponding back end 7 of the corresponding inducer tip 2. That is, the radial line 209 divides the part of the back face 203 of this segment which is radially outside the circle 140, into an upstream portion 208a (to the left of the line 209 in
Numerical simulations have shown that, for high values of γ (such as over 0.25) it is preferable for the bucketing angle to be between 15° and 60°, and more preferably between 20° and 50°, or even between 20° and 40°.
Although only a few embodiments of the diffuser have been described, many variations are possible within the scope of the disclosure as will be clear to a skilled reader.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1616030 | Sep 2016 | GB | national |
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/GB2017/052810 | 9/20/2017 | WO | 00 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2018/055375 | 3/29/2018 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3069072 | Birmann | Dec 1962 | A |
4006997 | Friberg | Feb 1977 | A |
9810225 | Yokoyama | Nov 2017 | B2 |
9810238 | Annati | Nov 2017 | B2 |
20080229742 | Renaud | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20140369823 | Yamashita | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150086396 | Nasir | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20160341072 | Chandramohanan | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20180347571 | Yamashita | Dec 2018 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
102080575 | Jun 2011 | CN |
2022988 | Feb 2009 | EP |
2055893 | May 2009 | EP |
3379028 | Sep 2018 | EP |
2011252431 | Dec 2011 | JP |
2015119828 | Aug 2015 | WO |
Entry |
---|
CN102080575—Translation and original (Year: 2010). |
Leonard, T., et al., “A numerical study of automotive turbocharger mixed flow turbine inlet geometry for off design performance”, IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 52, Topic 4, (2013), Available on the Internet at https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1757-899X/52/4/042012 on Mar. 21, 2019. |
Rajoo, Srithar, et al., “Mixed Flow Turbine Research: A Review”, Journal of Turbomachinery, vol. 130, No. 4, Oct. 2008; 12 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued by the European Patent Office dated Dec. 7, 2017, for International Application PCT/GB2017/052810; 12 pages. |
Search Report issued by the United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office dated Mar. 9, 2017, for British Application No. 1616030.1; 4 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20190345825 A1 | Nov 2019 | US |