TURBOMACHINERY BOUNDARY LAYERS 333

catastrophic flow breakdown (stall) somewhere in the machine. It turns out

that the operating limits of highly loaded stages are very difficult to predict
and the stage performance appears to be only loosely related to the
two-dimensional airfoil boundary-layer characteristics. These facts have led
compressor designers to place comparatively little reliance on boundary-layer
calculations and to develop a correlation approach based on rig tests. On
the other hand, turbines accelerate the flow and consequently the problem
of operating close to stage stall is mitigated. However, as is pointed out in
Chap. 4 of this volume, separation can still be a problem--even in turbines.
Further, the local heat transfer on the vanes or blades is of considerable
design interest and dominated by the boundary layer. In view of the relative
success of two-dimensional boundary-layer analyses in predicting the heat-
transfer rates in the turbine, turbine designers have come to place a greater
reliance on boundary-layer analyses. More recent developments in turbine
technology (such as even higher turbine inlet temperatures, film cooling, and
higher work extraction levels per stage) have led to a commensurate interest
by designers in developing and using appropriate analyses. In particular, the
higher work extraction levels and the accompanying high levels of flow
acceleration cause extended regions of transition from laminar to turbulent
flow (and vice versa). The various practical film cooling schemes introduce
three-dimensional effects and the higher turbine inlet temperatures make it
necessary to know with some precision the intrablade hub and casing
heat-transfer distributions. ~
The foregoing problems are in many ways much more difficult to treat
than the boundary-layer problems encountered in external aircraft
aerodynamics. The wide variety of possible configurations open to the
turbomachinery designer, and the probable impact of the boundary layer on
any selected configuration, leads one to suspect that the correlation (i.e., the
extrapolation approach) would be both uncertain and expensive. Further
development of boundary-layer analyses seems entirely justified, even if it
results in an improvement in only the correlation approach to the design of
turbomachinery.
In the subsequent sections, attention is first devoted to both integral and
finite difference procedures for predicting the two-dimensional blade or
vane boundary layers. Here the aim is to provide the means of estimating
the airfoil section loss coefficient and the detailed distribution of heat-trans-
fer coefficient around the airfoil. This is followed by a discussion of the
axisymmetric pitch-averaged equations and the procedures available for
solving this set of equations and their role in predicting the pitch-averaged,
i.e., circumferentially-averaged hub and casing boundary-layer behavior.
Next, the rather limited role played by conventional three-dimensional
boundary layers in turbomachinery will be introduced and the available
schemes, both integral and finite difference, discussed. The much enlarged
capability of what is here termed the extended three-dimensional boundary-
layer procedures, sometimes termed (rather euphemistically) the parabolized
Navier-Stokes equations, will then be described and the problems of this
concept discussed. The difficulties arising from boundary-layer separation
334 AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENTS

are then introduced and the status of the very limited number of schemes
for treating this problem as rigorously as possible reviewed. Finally, the
problems of turbulence modeling and the current approaches to this most
difficult of topics will be reviewed. Each topic is discussed from the point of
view of the special problems of turbomachinery applications and the aim is
to give the reader guidance in selecting an approach, concept, or procedure
suitable for his particular problem.

6.2 Two-Dimensional or Axisymmetric Boundary Layers

The turbomachinery designer has a very profound interest in vane and
blade boundary layers from the heat-transfer and loss point of view.
Further, the flow in the various ducts and the resulting total pressure losses
are of a similar considerable interest. In spite of the often very noticeable
three-dimensional variations present in both of the foregoing instances and
largely as a result of the absence up until now of better simulations,
two-dimensional and axially symmetric boundary-layer analyses have been
applied to these problems. In the present section, both integral and finite
difference techniques for predicting the two-dimensional vane
boundary-layer behavior will be discussed. Finally, the additions required to
describe axisymmetric flow, both swirling and nonswirling, will be intro-
duced.

Integral Methods for Predicting the Blade Boundary Layers

In view of the highly satisfactory status of methods which directly and
numerically integrate the boundary-layer partial differential equations of
motion, it seems at first sight incongruous at this point in time to dwell
upon the so-called integral procedures for predicting boundary-layer devel-
opment. The arguments against the further development or application of
integral methods seem very persuasive. Direct numerical treatment of the
governing partial differential equations of motion can now be performed
routinely, and in view of the general availability and comparatively low cost
of modern computers, quite cheaply compared to, say, the cost of engineer-
ing man-hours. The potential cost savings of integral procedures are depen-
dent upon utilization and code construction and, in some applications, an
order-of-magnitude reduction in an already small computing cost is not a
significant factor. Ease of use is not usually a deciding factor either, since a
number of the direct numerical procedures have been made to operate, upon
user request, with the same identical input usually demanded by integral
procedures, together with such features as optional automatic grid selection.
The direct procedures, by virtue of their not requiring the a priori adoption
of velocity, temperature, and turbulence profile families, certainly contain
less empiricism than the integral methods and, thereby, focus attention
upon the essential problem of the turbulent boundary layer, that is, ade-
quate specification of the turbulent transport mechanism. Finally, it is
claimed by their protagonists that the direct procedures are much more
 TURBOMACHINERY BOUNDARY LAYERS 335

general and flexible with regard to such items as boundary conditions and
inlet profiles, so that features such as heat transfer, wall transpiration, rough
walls, and film cooling, for instance, may be readily incorporated into the
procedure, subject solely to the accuracy of the boundary-layer approxima-
tions and the turbulent transport model.
In spite of the foregoing, however, a case for the continued development
and application of integral methods for predicting boundary-layer behavior
in some instances does exist. It is becoming apparent, for example, that a
whole category of flow problems arise where a rapid and often iterative
estimate of the boundary-layer growth is required as a subtask in a
procedure for predicting, say, the pressure field in or around a body. In such
instances, provided the required degree of accuracy is attainable, the poten-
tial cost savings of the integral procedure might be very considerable and
hence desirable. Although the cost savings attributed to the integral proce-
dures are usually thought of as arising from the reduced use of the
computer, the engineering labor required to code and debug an integral
procedure can be one or more orders of magnitude smaller than that
required by the better direct numerical procedures. However, since detailed
listings of a number of satisfactory direct procedures are available in the
open literature, the code construction cost savings may not be realized.
Also, it does not follow that the use of empirical information, such as
velocity profile families, necessarily degrades a prediction; this is the case
only when the empirical input is inaccurate or inappropriate and the
parameters of interest depend upon the empirical input. It is true, however,
that the necessity of supplying this additional empirical information does
limit integral techniques to those problems where such empirical informa-
tion exists and has been suitably correlated. Here, the degree of collapse to
which the empirical correlations must adhere is dictated solely by the user's
overall required predictive accuracy and this, of course, is the user's peroga-
tive to decide. However, it does seem clear that, for instance, the displace-
ment thickness over a smooth shock-free two-dimensional unseparated
airfoil without heat transfer at high Reynolds numbers may be predicted
quite satisfactorily by a number of simple integral procedures. On the other
hand, if the problem is changed to estimate the heat transfer to the same
airfoil with a rapidly varying wall temperature distribution typical of those
encountered in gas turbine operations, few, if any, of the currently available
integral procedures could be relied upon to provide an acceptable prediction
of the heat-transfer rate. The reason for the failure in the presence of heat
transfer is the inadequacy of the presently available temperature profile
families when the wall temperature varies rapidly.
In the subsequent discussion, an attempt will be made to delineate those
areas where present integral methods might be expected to be inaccurate as
a result of the inadequate additional empirical information required, relative
to direct procedures. At the same time, some integral procedures possess
characteristic features that are of considerable importance in the convenient
application of the procedure. These desirable features will also be em-
phasized. Also, certain integral procedures can be fashioned to permit
336 AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENTS

incorporation of turbulence models of the same type as are currently being

developed for the direct numerical procedures. Such features are obviously
attractive and they, too, will be emphasized in the subsequent development.

T h e m o m e n t u m integral equation. As is well known, the basic tech-

nique of deriving an infinite family of integral momentum equations from
the partial differential equations of motion consists of multiplying the
partial differential equations by a factor y"u m and integrating the equations
in the coordinate direction normal to the wall. When n = m = 0, the van
Khrm~m momentum integral equation is obtained and, if the external flow is
varying slowing in time compared to the typical turbulent velocity fluctua-
tions, 1 this equation can be written for compressible flow, neglecting the
Reynolds normal stresses, as

aO 0 On e Jr 0 aOe 1 08* 8" abl e

ax + -~e --~-X(2 + H ) 0 e ~ -x- + u e at Ue2 at

8* Ope 1 ap e 1 aop c/ ~-cQ (6.1)

+ peu~ at Peble at O° Ue at 2

where

OU e 3U e Op
Pe o - ~ Jr PeU e 3X OX

r' u(1
O=ao ~eUe __ U

PeU e

Op=foB(1 - ~ ) d y (6.2)

and H is the shape factor given by 6*/0 and

• w w
cf= 1 2 CQ = - (6.3)
~PeU e PeU e

Given the external velocity distribution Ue(X , t) and external density field
Oe(x, t) from an inviscid calculation of the flow around the body displace-
ment surface, the momentum integral equation relates the three thickness
parameters and the skin friction. Obviously, additional relationships must
be supplied to form a determinate system. Before proceeding to develop the
required additional equations, some observations seem appropriate. First,
 TURBOMACHINERY BOUNDARY LAYERS 337

the axial momentum integral equation is not particularly controversial and

most investigators have made it a point to base their analysis upon this
foundation. Some authors include the Reynolds normal stress terms, but
this seems to be quite optional and to date has not proved to be a
particularly crucial item (except possibly near separation where, in any
event, the conventional boundary-layer analysis is in difficulties). Evans and
Horlock 2 have pointed out that unless the integration is carried out far
enough into the freestream, the fact must be taken into account that the
skin-friction term on the right-hand side of the momentum integral equation
(6.1) is actually the net result of the wall stress minus the apparent Reynolds
shear stress - u'v' at the y = 8 point where the integration is terminated. In
principle, this does not cause any difficulty with the momentum integral
equation, since it is evident from Eq. (6.2) that the upper limit on the
integration can be arbitrarily large for the defect thicknesses defined there.
Problems can arise, however, with the auxiliary relationships if they
involve integral thickness parameters depending on the location of the
boundary-layer edge. The problem manifests itself principally in flows
where the velocity profile tails off very gradually into the freestream, such
that there might be a factor in excess of 1.25 between the point at which the
local velocity equaled 0.99 of the external stream (y = ~0.99) and the point at
which the local velocity equaled 0.995 of the freestream (y = ~0.995)- This
long tail seems to be a characteristic of flows with a significant amount of
- - 1

freestream turbulence present, i.e., T, = (U'2)~/Ue > 0.03. The implication

here is that boundary layers with this characteristic long tail should be
integrated out to where the Reynolds apparent shear stress is negligible
compared to the wall stress. This was the approach adopted by McDonald
and Kreskovsky. 3 As an alternative, an estimate of the Reynolds stress at
some convenient thickness can be made and this approach was adopted by
Evans and Horlock. 2
Finally, it is observed that the momentum integral equation is indepen-
dent of any assumption about the form of the mean velocity or temperature
profile and is equally valid for laminar, transitional, or fully turbulent flow.
This fact is convenient in applying the momentum integral equation and
leads one to seek, where possible, auxiliary equations with this same formal
detail profile independence property. Detail profile independence permits
the overall technique to be constructed so as to be valid for any type
boundary-layer flow and places the flow distinction mechanism in the more
easily isolated region of turbulence model and profile specification.

Skin-friction laws and the mean velocity profiles. Turning to the

auxiliary relationships to be supplied, the great majority of methods specify,
often explicitly, a skin-friction law relating the integral thickness parameters
O, 8", etc., to the skin-friction coefficient cf. Typical forms of these explicit
relationships are discussed by Nash 4 for incompressible turbulent flow and
an apparently quite satisfactory relationship is derived by Nash and
MacDonald 5 for turbulent compressible adiabatic flow. Several other simi-
lar quite satisfactory explicit relationships are available in the literature for