Int J Turbo Jet Eng 2016; aop
J. O. Dvalos, J. C. Garca*, G. Urquiza, A. Huicochea and O. De Santiago
Prediction of Film Cooling Effectiveness on a Gas
Turbine Blade Leading Edge Using ANN and CFD
DOI 10.1515/tjj-2016-0034
Received May 18, 2016; accepted May 25, 2016
Abstract: In this work, the area-averaged film cooling
effectiveness (AAFCE) on a gas turbine blade leading
edge was predicted by employing an artificial neural net-
work (ANN) using as input variables: hole diameter,
injection angle, blowing ratio, hole and columns pitch.
The database used to train the network was built using
computational fluid dynamics (CFD) based on a two level
full factorial design of experiments. The CFD numerical
model was validated with an experimental rig, where a
first stage blade of a gas turbine was represented by a
cylindrical specimen. The ANN architecture was com-
posed of three layers with four neurons in hidden layer
and Levenberg-Marquardt was selected as ANN optimiza-
tion algorithm. The AAFCE was successfully predicted by
the ANN with a regression coefficient R2 < 0.99 and a root
mean square error RMSE = 0.0038. The ANN weight
coefficients were used to estimate the relative importance
of the input parameters. Blowing ratio was the most
influential parameter with relative importance of
40.36 % followed by hole diameter. Additionally, by
using the ANN model, the relationship between input
parameters was analyzed.
Keywords: ANN, CFD, gas turbine blade, film cooling,
design of experiments, optimization
PACS (2010). 44.05. + e, 47.27.nf, 47.50.Cd, 47.85.-g
*Corresponding author: J. C. Garca, Centro de Investigacin en
Ingeniera y Ciencias Aplicadas, Universidad Autnoma del Estado
de Morelos, Av. Universidad 1001, Chamilpa, Cuernavaca, Mor.,
Mxico, 62209, E-mail: jcgarcia@uaem.mx
J. O. Dvalos: E-mail: jdavalos@uaem.mx, G. Urquiza:
E-mail: gurquiza@uaem.mx, A. Huicochea:
E-mail: huico_chea@uaem.mx, Centro de Investigacin en
Ingeniera y Ciencias Aplicadas, Universidad Autnoma del Estado
de Morelos, Av. Universidad 1001, Chamilpa, Cuernavaca, Mor.,
Mxico, 62209
O. De Santiago, ETU i + D, Cuauhtmoc 3, Ind. San Pedrito
Peuelas, Quertaro, Mxico, 76148,
E-mail: oscar.desantiago@etu.mx
Authenticated | jcgarcia@uaem.mx author's copy
Download Date | 6/20/16 4:46 AM
Introduction
Reaching high inlet temperatures is a requirement to
increase power in gas turbines. However, those high
temperatures could exceed the melting point of the tur-
bine blade material and they could lead to a blade fail-
ure. To maintain blade temperature in adequate levels,
various cooling techniques have been developed. One of
them is film cooling, which has been widely used. Film
cooling has hole sets placed at blade surface through
which air, extracted from compressor, is ejected to create
a protective barrier between the hot main flow and blade
surface. Blade zones like trailing edge, leading edge,
pressure and suction sides, are protected with cooling
holes. In fact, the leading blade is the most critical
blade zone due to its contact with hot mainstream.
Film cooling at leading edge is mainly influenced by
flow conditions, hole geometry, hole position and blade
geometry [1]. Experimental and numerical studies have
been carried out in order to study film cooling effective-
ness under the influence of aforementioned parameters.
Flow conditions like blowing ratio, density ratio, turbu-
lence and aerodynamic losses have been investigated in
[26]. Geometrical parameters as hole diameter, injection
angle, hole shape and hole locations were investigated
[711].
However, the study of film cooling at different oper-
ating conditions with various geometrical configurations
implies an excessive economical and computational cost.
In order to reduce such costs, surrogate methods like
ANN, Support Vector Machines (SVM) and Radial Basis
Function (RBF) can be used to obtain correlations to
predict AAFCE. Naghashnejad et al. [12] presented a
model to predict the film cooling effectiveness over a
flat plate using a group method of data handling
(GMDH)-type ANN. They used as input variables: hole
injection angle, length of hole to diameter ratio, blowing
and density ratio. The database for training the ANN was
made based on CFD computations. Wang et al. [13] com-
puted the AAFCE for a gas turbine guide vane using
genetic algorithms. They considered only fluid dynamic
parameters like, blowing ratio, density ratio and down-
stream distance. They used genetic algorithms to opti-
mize weights and biases of back-propagation neural
2 J. O. Dvalos et al.: Film Cooling Effectiveness on Blade Leading Edge
network. They reported an average error of 2 % in the
prediction of cooling effectiveness. Wang et al. [14]
applied SVM to predict the AAFCE on a flat plate with
8 input parameters. The SVM results perform better
predictions than semi-empirical correlations proposed
by other authors. Lee et al. [15] optimized the ejection
angles of double-jet-film-cooling over a flat plate using
RBF and RANS equations with four input variables. They
obtained a relative error about 1.47 % between the RBF
predictions and the RANS results. They concluded that
the application of surrogate methods can be sufficiently
reliable in film cooling predictions. At blade leading
edge there is no scientific model for predicting film cool-
ing effectiveness considering the combination of both
geometrical parameters and fluid parameters with the
use of CFD/ANN computations, such model is absent in
present time.
In this paper, AAFCE was predicted using an ANN,
which was trained with a data set obtained by CFD cal-
culations of a cylindrical gas turbine leading edge model
with showerhead configuration. Results of CFD computa-
tions were validated with experimental measurements in
a low speed wind tunnel. A sensitive study was carried
out to define the relative importance of input variables.
This study showed that blowing ratio was the most
important parameter for the AAFCE.
Methodology
The AAFCE was computed using ANN on a cylindrical gas
turbine blade leading edge model. The data base popula-
tion for training the ANN was created using CFD. The CFD
computations were validated with experimental measure-
ments at a low speed wind tunnel, in which the tempera-
ture over the blade surface was measured. In next
paragraphs details of test rig and computations are given.
Authenticated | jcgarcia@uaem.mx author's copy
Download Date | 6/20/16 4:46 AM
Experimental set-up
Before giving details of experimental setup, it is neces-
sary to define next concepts. The blowing ratio is one of
the main flow factors that influences the cooling effec-
tiveness [16, 17]. Blowing ratio is defined by:
c vc
M= (1)
m vm
Blowing ratio determines the amount of air needed to
create the film cooling. Lowest values of M cannot pro-
vide enough air; nevertheless an excessive amount of air
can cause penetration of cooling flow into the main-
stream flow and its separation of the blade surface [18,
19]. Then, an appropriate magnitude of blowing ratio is
needed to guarantee the blade protection. AAFCE is used
to evaluate the cooling effectiveness. The area-averaged
film cooling effectiveness (AAFCE or Aav ) is averaged
over the area where cooling holes are placed and it is
defined as:
1
Aav = dA (2)
A
where A is the area and is evaluated as follows:
Tm Taw
= (3)
Tm Tc
where Taw is the adiabatic temperature and represents the
coolant temperature at the blade wall, Tm is the main-
stream temperature and Tc is the coolant temperature at
exit of the cooling hole.
To validate the numerical results, flow and tempera-
ture measurement were taken from gas turbine blade
leading edge model (GTB-model). This model was
exposed to an air flow stream in a low speed tunnel,
which has the dimensions 2.5 m 0.5 m 0.25 m. The
experiment was realized in an inverse way with hot
fluid in plenum and cold fluid in mainstream [20, 21].
Figure 1: Schematic view of the
experimental array.
 J. O. Dvalos et al.: Film Cooling Effectiveness on Blade Leading Edge
A diagram of the experiment is shown in Figure 1.
Mainstream was provided by an axial fan placed at the
exit of wind tunnel with a speed of 10 m/s at room
temperature. Air stream supplied by an air compressor
and warmed by an electrical heater was used as hot air
for plenum of gas turbine blade leading edge model. In
order to measure temperature and velocity of the air
supplied to plenum, a hot wire probe was installed with
a deviation of 1 and 2 % respectively. The density ratio
c
m was considered as 1. Air stream temperature at plenum
inlet was 60 C. Fluid temperature at different locations of
the leading edge surface was measured using thermocou-
ples. The thermocouples used were of type T with a
deviation of 1 C.
The GTB-model (Figure 2(a)) was made of aluminum
and has cooling holes distributed in three columns: the
first column at the stagnation line, the second and the
third columns at each side of the stagnation line.
The leading edge surface temperature was measured
for two different blowing ratios M = 1 and M = 1.5.
Temperature was measured in three positions at exit of
(a) (b)
Figure 2: (a) Representative gas turbine blade leading edge model
(GTB-model), (b) locations of thermocouples for the first holes of the
stagnation line column and lateral column.
Authenticated | jcgarcia@uaem.mx author's copy
Download Date | 6/20/16 4:46 AM
3
holes in the stagnation line column at radial direction
(Figure 2(b)). In every hole, the first thermocouple was
located at the edge of the hole (0D) whereas the second
and the third thermocouples were placed at 1D and 2D of
the edge respectively, where D is hole diameter.
Additional thermocouples were added in holes of the
lateral columns. These thermocouples are placed at
0.5D of edge hole and are angled 125 with respect to
the horizontal axis.
The GTB-model has a total height of 80 mm
(Figure 3). The radius of the leading edge is 40 mm. The
plenum admission has a radius of 6.35 mm and its length
is 75 mm. Cooling holes have a diameter of 2 mm and an
ejection angle of 40 with the horizontal axis of the
leading edge. The hole spacing in span direction is
10 mm.
CFD analysis
CFD computations were carried out to generate the popu-
lation data base for the ANN. The measured data
described in the previous section were compared with
the CFD computations. The numerical domain is formed
by three zones: mainstream flow (section of the low
speed wind tunnel where GTB-model was tested), stream
flow in GTB-model and a solid zone of GTB-model. All
dimensions of the numerical domain and magnitudes of
velocity and temperature were the same that in the
experimental test. At the mainstream inlet and plenum
inlet, the boundary condition was velocity inlet and at
the outlet the boundary condition was pressure outlet. At
wall leading edge model adiabatic wall boundary condi-
tion was considered and no-slip condition was assumed.
Both fluid domains and boundary conditions are repre-
sented in Figure 4.
Structured mesh with hexahedral elements was gen-
erated using a multi-block technique. A detailed view of
Figure 3: Gas turbine leading edge
(GTB-model) dimensions.
4 J. O. Dvalos et al.: Film Cooling Effectiveness on Blade Leading Edge
Figure 4: Domain and boundary conditions of the CFD model.
Figure 5: Detailed view of leading edge mesh 5(a) and a view of a
transversal slice mesh 5(b).
mesh is presented in Figure 5. The size of mesh was
3,532,144 cells, based on a mesh independence study
with a y + value between 0.1 and 1. In this study, tem-
perature was compared with a profile placed at leading
edge between the centers of the third and the fourth hole
of the stagnation line column. Meshes with 3,532,144 and
4,290,868 elements showed a temperature average differ-
ence of 0.835 C between them; due to this, the mesh with
3,532,144 elements was selected, because it represents a
lesser computational cost (Figure 6).
Fluent 15 was the CFD code used during the CFD
analysis. Turbulence model RNG k was used to resolve
the turbulence. This turbulence model was selected,
because it was used by others researchers with good
results [22]. The second order upwind scheme was used
for the spatial discretization, while coupling of the pres-
sure and velocity was made by the SIMPLEC algorithm.
The convergence criterion for continuity, momentum and
Authenticated | jcgarcia@uaem.mx author's copy
Download Date | 6/20/16 4:46 AM
Figure 6: Results of the mesh independence study.
turbulence residuals was set to 1 105, whereas the resi-
dual for the energy equation was set to 1 108.
ANN details
ANN is based on the brain process and consists of neu-
rons or nodes joined by weighted connections to form a
parallel architecture [23]. The neurons are grouped in
layers, considering the following order: an input layer,
one or more hidden layers with sigmoid neurons and an
output layer with linear neurons forming a network
called multi-layer perceptron or feed-forward network.
The multiple layers of neurons associated with a transfer
function allow the network to learn nonlinear and linear
relationships between input and output vectors. A num-
ber of neurons of input layer and output layer corre-
sponds to the number of input variables and outputs of
the process that is analyzed respectively. In hidden layer,
a bias bi (threshold) is assigned to each neuron; this bias
is added to the sum of weighted input to define the input
of the hidden neuron. An example of the input for a
hidden layer neuron n1 is:
n1 = W1, 1 In1 + W1, 2 In2 + ... + W1, k Ink + b1 (4)
In the output layer, the weighted sum of the signals from
the hidden layer is calculated and two new coefficients
are connected, Wo and b2 that corresponds to the con-
nection weight of the hidden layer neuron to output layer
neuron and the bias of output layer neuron respectively.
Then the network output can be calculated:
y = gWo f Wi In + b1 + b2  (5)
where f and g represent the transfer functions for hidden
and the output layer respectively. Hyperbolic tangent
 J. O. Dvalos et al.: Film Cooling Effectiveness on Blade Leading Edge 5

sigmoid transfer function (eq. (5)) and linear transfer
function (eq. (6)) are employed on several investigations
and were used in this work.
2
f=
1 + e 2*Wi *Ink + b1s 1
g = Wo *f + b2l
The first step in the methodology of the ANN model is to
define the algorithm to train the net. Basically, this algorithm
adjusts weights and biases to minimize an error function
between the predicted outputs for the network and the stored
outputs in database (Figure 7). The Levenberg-Marquardt
algorithm was used in this network, because of its reliability
and its faster convergence. The performance of the ANN was
evaluated by means of the root mean square error (RMSE)
and the regression coefficient computed by eqs (8) and (9)
respectively.
hand, CFD is computationally expensive and a large
database is not feasible. An option to select a database
that could maximize the information is to use a statistical
method like the two level full factorial design of experi-
(6) ment. With this method, the variables can assume two
levels, low and high values, which represents the super-
(7) ior and inferior limits of the variables range. The amount
of samples is defined by 2n , where 2 represents two levels
and n is the number of variables. For our research, the
number of samples was 32 plus an additional sample
with all the variables with average values.
An algorithm was implemented to construct the geo-
metries and to run the CFD code in an automatic way
until the 33 samples are evaluated. This algorithm loads
the matrix generated by the factorial design of dimension
33 5, where 33 is the number of samples and 5 is the
number of variables. Values of the matrix are listed in
Table 1. The 75 % of data sample was used for training
and the rest was used for testing the net. All data is
normalized in a range of 0.19 using eq. (10) where ui is
the new normalized value, Ui is the data value without
normalization and umin and umax are the inferior and
superior range of data, respectively.

Table 1: Matrix of input parameters range.

Hole Columns Diameter Angle M

pitch pitch (mm) D (mm) A ()
(m)

Low . . .
High . . .

Figure 7: Levenberg-Marquardt optimization algorithm.

Table 2 shows data set to train the ANN. This table con-
tains details of the CFD input parameters and the main
CFD results -area-averaged film cooling effectiveness
v
u" # (AAFCE)- for this work.
u P Q
u ANN CFD 2
 
u
t q=1 Ui Umin
RMSE = (8) ui = 0.8 + 0.1 (10)
Q Umax Umin

Q 
P 2 With the completed database, the number of neurons
q, ANN q, CFD in hidden layer was selected based on the RMSE for each
q=1
R2 = 1 (9) neuron. It is observed that the lowest RMSE was obtained
Q 
P 2
q, CFD m with 4 neurons (Figure 8).
q=1
The recurrent network architecture had an input
Database population is an important parameter that layer with five neurons, one hidden layer with three
influences the ANN prediction. It is desirable that data- neurons and an output layer with one neuron and it is
base includes relevant information avoiding repeated shown in Figure 9 where Wi and W0 are the weights at
data. In this work the database population to train the the input and output respectively. All calculations were
ANN was gotten using CFD computations. On the other realized with the Matlab ANN Toolbox.

Authenticated | jcgarcia@uaem.mx author's copy

Download Date | 6/20/16 4:46 AM
6 J. O. Dvalos et al.: Film Cooling Effectiveness on Blade Leading Edge

Table 2: Input parameters data set to train the ANN.

Hole pitch Column D (mm) A () M AAFCE Hole Column D A M AAFCE

(mm) pitch (mm) computed pitch pitch (mm) computed

. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . .

Figure 8: RMSE at different neuron numbers.

Figure 9: Recurrent neural network architecture.

Results
Because population database of the ANN was computed
by CFD, validation was necessary to assess the reliability
of ANNs predictions. In Figure 10, comparisons of tem-
perature measured and computed by CFD are presented
at two different blowing ratios, M = 1 and M = 1.5. In case
of the cooling holes at stagnation line, the average errors
were 2.72 % and 2.56 % for M = 1 and M = 1.5 respectively.
At same blowing ratios, comparison is presented for lat-
eral column of cooling holes in Figure 11, where the
average error was 5.57 % for M = 1 and 3.39 % for
M = 1.5. Comparison between experimental and CFD
methods shows a satisfactory agreement. The percentage
of error demonstrates the capability of proposed CFD
model to approach experimental results.
The results of linear regression during training and
validation are shown in Figure 12. The linear regression
coefficient was R2 = 0.99811 and the RMSE = 0.0038,
which means that the proposed network model was able
to predict AAFCE with a minimum deviation of the one
predicted by CFD. The ANN coefficients, weight and
biases, are presented in Table 3.

Authenticated | jcgarcia@uaem.mx author's copy

Download Date | 6/20/16 4:46 AM
 J. O. Dvalos et al.: Film Cooling Effectiveness on Blade Leading Edge 7

Figure 10: Comparison of

temperature cooling holes at
stagnation line for M = 1 (a) and
M = 1.5 (b).

Figure 11: Comparison of

temperature cooling holes at
lateral column of holes for
M = 1 (a) and M = 1.5 (b).

Table 3: Weights and biases coefficients generated with ANN.

Wi(,) Wi(,) Wi(,) Wi(,) Wi(,)

. . . . .
Wi(,) Wi(,) Wi(,) Wi(,) Wi(,)
. . . . .
Wi(,) Wi(,) Wi(,) Wi(,) Wi(,)
. . . . .
Wi(,) Wi(,) Wi(,) Wi(,) Wi(,)
. . . . .

Wo(,) Wo(,) Wo(,) Wo(,)

. . . .
b() b() b() b()
. . . .
Figure 12: Comparison of the AAFCE predicted by ANN and CFD. b()
.

The ANN model was tested with five new samples, not
included in database, with different variables randomly
selected. For these new samples AAFCE at the leading edge
zone is compared in Figure 13. It is observed that these new
ANN predictions are in agreement with CFD predictions with
a RMSE = 0.0048.
CFD results
Results of film cooling effectiveness at leading edge surface,
computed by CFD, show that the best film cooling zone is
near the cooling holes (at both sides of stagnation line

Authenticated | jcgarcia@uaem.mx author's copy

Download Date | 6/20/16 4:46 AM
8 J. O. Dvalos et al.: Film Cooling Effectiveness on Blade Leading Edge
Figure 13: Comparison of AAFCE with five new samples.
Figure 14: Film cooling effectiveness computed by CFD, (a) stagna-
tion line column, (b) lateral column.
Authenticated | jcgarcia@uaem.mx author's copy
Download Date | 6/20/16 4:46 AM
column Figure 14(a) and at lateral column Figure 14(b)). At
leading edge center the coolant was more uniformly dis-
charged between holes, whereas at lateral side, there were
remarkable changes of the jet path, causing a poor coverage
of cooling flow downstream holes.
To analyze the flow field, planes in spanwise direc-
tion were outlined at center of cooling holes at stagnation
lines column (Figure 15) and at lateral columns (Figure
16). Tangential and axial distances were normalized with
respect to leading edge radius. In both cases it was
observed a reduction of velocity, around the leading
edge, as the spanwise increases. This reduction of velo-
city is due to the model has only one cooling inlet located
at the bottom side. At the first two holes of the stagnation
line column (Figure 15(a) and 15(b) respectively) a high
velocity region exists, which produces the penetration of
the cooling flow in the mainstream and the detachment
of coolant. This effect also occurs at the first hole of
the lateral column (Figure 16(a)). In both columns, the
rest of holes presents a more attached flow around the
leading edge.
Relative importance of film cooling
variables
The relative importance of the input variables was deter-
mined using the equation proposed by Garson [24] and
that relative importance is related with the ANN connec-
tion weights at ANN layers. In Figure 17, the results show
that the blowing ratio is the most important input para-
meter with a 40.36 % of relative importance, followed by
hole diameter, hole pitch, columns pitch and finally
angle of ejection.
Figure 15: Velocity contours at
holes of stagnation column
(sorted in ascending spanwise
direction order): (a) 1st hole,
(b) 2nd hole, (c) 3rd hole,
(d) 4th hole, (e) 5th hole.
 J. O. Dvalos et al.: Film Cooling Effectiveness on Blade Leading Edge
Figure 17: Relative importance of the input variables.
Analysis of the interaction of input
variables
The ANN mathematical model obtained was applied to
analyze the relationship between the input parameters
and AAFCE. In Figure 18, three contours of AAFCE are
shown as function of hole diameter and blowing ratio,
which were the most influencing parameters, are pre-
sented. Hole pitch (HP), columns pitch (CP) and injec-
tion angle (AI) take values of lower, mid and upper
Authenticated | jcgarcia@uaem.mx author's copy
Download Date | 6/20/16 4:46 AM
9
Figure 16: Velocity contours at holes of
lateral column (sorted in ascending
spanwise direction order): (a) 1st hole,
(b) 2nd hole, (c) 3rd hole, (d) 4th hole.
input parameter range respectively. In these three
cases, it was found that large diameters require large
blowing ratio to increase their AAFCE. For D < 1, it was
observed that exceeding some M values, AAFCE
decreases. This is due to coolant liftoff from blade sur-
face caused by raising blowing ratio which in turn
increases mass flow. In all contours, the best perfor-
mance occurs at D = 1.2 with M = 1.5. In the case with
values at lower range input parameters, it has occurred
the highest AAFCE with a magnitude of 0.461. For
values at mid-range, AAFCE decreases to 0.313 and for
the third case, with values at upper range, it drops to
0.235. These changes in AAFCE are influenced mainly
by the reduction of the hole pitch and column pitch,
which are the most influential parameters after blowing
ratio and diameter. The reduction of both pitches also
reduces the area between holes allowing the coolant to
cover it more efficiently; instead, enlarging the area,
where there is not enough coolant to fully cover the
blade surface requiring to increase blowing ratio. Then
it is needed to identify an optimal operational condition
to assure the correct cooling of blade without consum-
ing large amounts of coolant, which could reduce the
turbine thermodynamic efficiency and increase opera-
tional cost. In these studied cases, it is assumed that
injection angle has a minimal influence for AAFCE,
being in agreement with the sensitivity analysis.
10 J. O. Dvalos et al.: Film Cooling Effectiveness on Blade Leading Edge

Figure 18: Contours of AAFCE for lower

(a), mid (b) and upper (c) values of input
parameters (Hole pitch (HP), columns
pitch (CP) and injection angle (AI)).

Conclusions operating conditions increasing the cooling effectiveness

on film cooled blades.
ANN was employed to develop a mathematical model
which predicts area averaged film cooling effectiveness Nomenclature
of a gas turbine blade leading edge model. Hole pitch,
column pitch, hole diameter, injection angle and blowing A Area (m2)
b bias
ratio were selected as input parameters. The comparison
f Hyperbolic tangent sigmoid transfer function
between CFD computations and ANN results shows a g Lineal function
good agreement having a correlation coefficient of I relative importance
R2 > 0.99 and a RMSE = 0.0038. The predicted reliability In input variable
of the model was proved with samples not included in int intercept
M blowing ratio
data base, and its performance was successful with a
N neurons
RMSE = 0.0048. It is therefore concluded that the devel-
Out ANN output
oped ANN model can be used to estimate AAFCE effec- Q number of data points
tively without resorting to expensive computational q index of data
simulations. The sensitivity analysis revealed that the s slope
blowing ratio is the most important parameter that influ- T temperature (C)
u normalized value
ences the AAFCE, followed by diameter, hole pitch, col-
U input data
umn pitch and injection angle. Finally, the ANN model v velocity (m/s)
was used to analyze the relationship between input para- W weight
meters. It was observed that a higher AAFCE is reached to x tangential distance
combining larger cooling hole diameters with larger y Axial distance
blowing ratios, however the mass flow consumption is
Subscripts
also higher, and therefore a reduction in hole pitch and
ANN artificial neural network
column pitch is recommended. The obtained model can aw adiabatic wall
be used in an optimization process to obtain suitable c cooling

Authenticated | jcgarcia@uaem.mx author's copy

Download Date | 6/20/16 4:46 AM
 J. O. Dvalos et al.: Film Cooling Effectiveness on Blade Leading Edge
o output
i input
m Mainstream or number of neurons in hidden layer
min minimum
max maximum
s number of neurons in hidden layer
h number of neurons in input layer
l number of neurons in output layer
Greek letters
cooling effectiveness
density (kg/m3)
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to acknowl-
edge to the CONACYT 206393 project for the financial
support.
Funding: Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologa,
(Grant / Award Number: 206393).
References
1. Bogard DG, Thole KA. Gas turbine film cooling. J Propul Power
2006;22(2):24970.
2. Bernsdorf S, Rose Martin G, Abhari R. Modeling of film cooling-
part 1: experimental study of flow structure. J Turbomach
2006;128(1):1419.
3. Narzary D, Liu K, Rallabandi A, Han JC. Influence of coolant
density on turbine blade film cooling using pressure sensitive
paint technique. J Turbomach 2011;134(3):03100610.
4. Moritz N, Kusterer K, Bohn D, Sugimoto T, Tanaka R, Taniguchi
T. Conjugate calculation of a film cooled blade for improve-
ment of the leading edge cooling calculation. Propul Power Res
2013;2(1):19.
5. Zhu HR, Liu ZG. Investigation on the influence of various
mainstream pressure gradients on the film cooling perfor-
mances of cylindrical hole and expansion shaped holes. Int J
Turbo Jet Engines 2014;31(1):112.
6. Xingdan Z, Jingzhou Z, Xiaoming T. An experimental investi-
gation of showerhead film cooling performance on a turbine
blade. Procedia Eng 2014;99:63445.
7. Colban W, Thole KA, Haendler MA. Comparison of cylindrical and
fan-shaped film-cooling holes on a vane endwall at low and
high freestream turbulence levels. J Turbomach
2008;130(3):0310079.
8. Kim Y, Kim SM. Influence of shaped injection holes on a
turbine blade leading edge film cooling. Int J Heat Mass
Transfer 2012;47(2):24556.
9. Abdullah K, Funazaki O, Takeomi I. Experimental investigations
on aero-thermal interaction of film cooling airs ejected from
Authenticated | jcgarcia@uaem.mx author's copy
Download Date | 6/20/16 4:46 AM
11
multiple holes: shallow hole angle. In: Proceedings of ASME
Turbo Expo 2013: Turbine Technical Conference and
Exposition, GT2013-95346, 2013.
10. Liu C, Zhu H, Zhang X, Xu D, Zhang Z. Experimental investiga-
tion on the leading edge film cooling of cylindrical and laid-
back holes with different radial holes. Int J Heat Mass Transfer
2014;71:61525.
11. Yu Z, Xu T, Li J, Ma L, Xu T. Comparison of a series of
double chamber model with various hole angles for
enhancing cooling effectiveness. Int Commun Heat Mass
Transfer 2013;44:3844.
12. Naghashnejad N, Amanifard N, Deylami HM. A predictive
model based on a 3D computational approach for film cooling
effectiveness over a flat plate using GMDH-Type neural net-
works. Heat Mass Transfer 2014;50(1):13949.
13. Wang W, Gao J, Xu L, Shi X. Experimental study and prediction
of film cooling effectiveness for a guide vane in heavy gas
turbines, In: Proceedings of the 15th International heat Transfer
Conference, Paper No. IHTC-9965, 2014.
14. Wang C, Zhang J, Zhou J, Alting SA. Prediction of film cooling
effectiveness based on support vector machines. Appl Therm
Eng 2015;84:8293.
15. Lee K, Choi D, Kim K. Optimization of ejection angles of
doubled-jet-film-cooling holes using RBNN model. Int J Therm
Sci 2013;73:6978.
16. Dyson TE, Bogard DG, Piggush JD, Kohli A. Overall effective-
ness for a film cooled turbine blade leading edge with varying
hole pitch. J Turbomach 2013;135(3):031011.
17. Lim CH, Pullan G, Ireland P. Influence of film cooling hole
angles and geometries on aerodynamic loss and net heat flux
reduction, In: Asme 2011 Turbo Expo: Turbine technical con-
ference and exposition GT2011-45721, 2011.
18. Han JC, Rallabandi AP. Turbine blade film cooling using PSP
technique. Front Heat Mass Transfer 2010;1(1):121.
19. Gomes RA, Niehius R. Film cooling on highly loaded blades
with main flow separation-part II: overall film cooling effec-
tiveness. J Turbomach 2012;135(1):0110449.
20. Teng S, Sohn DK, Han JC. Unsteady wake effects on film
temperature and effectiveness distributions for a gas turbine
blade. J Turbomach 2000;122(2):3407.
21. Gao Z, Narzary D, Han JC. Upstream vortex effect on turbine
platform film cooling with typical purge flow. J Thermophys
Heat Transfer 2012;26(1):7584.
22. Li X, Wang T. Effects of various modeling schemes
on mist film cooling simulation. J Heat Transfer
2007;129(4):47282.
23. Van den Braembussche RA. Numerical optimization for
advanced turbomachinery design. In: Dominique Thvenin and
Gbor Janiga Optimization and computational fluid dynamics.
Berlin: Springer, 2008:14790.
24. Garson GD. Interpreting neural-network connection weights. AI
Expert 1991;6(4):4751.