Home

Search

Collections

Journals

About

Contact us

My IOPscience

Turbulent flow computation through a model Francis turbine and its performance prediction

This article has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text article. 2010 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 12 012004 (http://iopscience.iop.org/1755-1315/12/1/012004) View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more

Download details: IP Address: 41.218.179.15 The article was downloaded on 13/09/2011 at 05:23

Please note that terms and conditions apply.

25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012004

IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012004

Turbulent flow computation through a model Francis turbine and its performance prediction
Y Wu1, S Liu1, X Wu1, H Dou2, L Zhang3 and X Tao3
1

State Key Laboratory of Hydroscience and Engineering, Department of Thermal Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China 2 Mechanical Engineering Department, National University of Singapore, Singapore 119260 3 Harbin Institute of Large Electrical Machinery, Harbin, 150001, China E-mail: wyl-dhh@tsinghua.edu.cn
Abstract. In this paper an improved k turbulence model is proposed, which brings the nonlinear term of the mean fluid flow transition to the equation in the original k model of Wilcox. Based on the improved k turbulence model, three dimensional turbulent flow computation is carried out through the whole flow passage including the spiral casing, stay vanes, guide vanes, runner and draft tube of a model Francis turbine. In calculation the direct coupling method is used to solve the RANS turbulent flow governing equations for the Francis model turbine by Ansys CFX software. Since the feasibility of the improved k turbulence model to hydro-turbine performance prediction is the present main concern, its validation is conducted by the steady flow simulation. Comparisons of the computational results on energy characteristics with test data and with different turbulence models at different flow rate cases indicate that the present method has sufficient potential to simulate the turbulent flow in hydraulic turbines and to predict their performances.

1. Introduction
Francis turbine is widely employed in large scale hydro-power stations in the world. Its main characteristics include the efficiency, stability [1] and cavitation characters [2]. In practical establishment, each large power station must develop a new Francis turbine for its special natural conditions and requirements. The great amount of investment requires the Francis turbine to have an efficiency as high as possible for utilization of the natural resources. The key technology in the development of a new Francis turbine is the 3D turbulent flow simulation both for steady flow and unsteady flow [1]. Nowadays, the unsteady flow simulation is the main technology to predict the pressure fluctuation in this machine and further to predict its stability. In this paper, the 3D steady turbulent flow simulation, developed in this paper with the new k- model, is used to predict its performances, including the hydraulic torque (output) and its efficiency. In recent years, computation of turbulent flows based on the solution of Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations have been extensively used to predict the flow field in various flow devices including hydroturbines and pumps. Meanwhile, various turbulence models have been developed and incorporated in the governing equations. This approach has obtained significant success for some cases with both incompressible and compressible flows. However, the prediction of turbulent flows in complex flow passages such as turbomachinery still faces great challenge due to the influence of the complex geometry of the passage. To achieve the objective of prediction, the accuracy of the turbulence model employed is a key issue in the numerical simulation of the flow field [3-4]. The k- model is one of the most common turbulence models, which is a two equation model. The first transported variable is turbulent kinetic energy, k. The second transported variable in this case is the specific dissipation frequency, . It is the variable that determines the scale of the turbulence, whereas the first variable, k, determines the energy in the turbulence. This allows a two equation model to account for history effects like convection and diffusion of turbulent energy. The k- based Shear-Stress-Transport (SST) model was designed to give highly accurate predictions of the onset and the amount of flow separation under adverse pressure gradients by the inclusion of transport effects into the formulation of the eddy-viscosity. This results in a major

c 2010 IOP Publishing Ltd

25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012004

IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012004

improvement in terms of flow separation predictions [6, 7]. In this paper, an improved k turbulence model is proposed, which brings a nonlinear term, which is like the additional nonlinear term in the equation of the RNG k- model, to the equation in the original k model of Wilcox [8, 9]. At first, the new model is used to calculate the turbulent flow in a 90 degree rectangular duct and the result is compared with the experimental data in Kim and Patel (1993) [10] to validating the model, similar to that Yakinthos et al (2008) did [11]. Then, the improved k- model has been used to predict the performance of a Francis turbine. The results indicate that the improved model predicts the transverse velocity component and convective component with less loss than those by other two models.

2. The improved k turbulence model

In the improved k turbulence model, the turbulent kinetic energy k equation in the original RNG k turbulence model [12] also is used. But the turbulent dissipation rate equation has been modified from the definition of turbulent dissipation frequency ,

Ck k

(1)

and the turbulent dissipation rate equation in the RNG k turbulence model [13]. Its total differential expression is as follows: D D 1 D Dk (2) = =
Dt Dt Ck k Ck k Dt k Dt

The RNG approach, which is a mathematical technique, could be used to derive a turbulence model similar to the k- and could result in a modified form of the equation which attempted to account for the different scales of motion through changes to the production term. In the RNG k model, if the buoyancy in the incompressible fluid is neglected, the k and the equations are [12, 13]
Dk = + t k Dt x j
k x j + Gk

(3) (4)

D = + t Dt xj

2 + C1 Gk C2 R k k xj

where Gk = t S 2 , and
R=

C 3 (1 0 ) 2 1 + 3 k

(5)

where S k , 0 = 4.38 , = 0.012 . Substituting Eqs. (3) and (4) to eq. (2), one yields k D 1 2 = + t + C1 Gk C2 R + t + Gk k x j x j Dt Ck k x j k k k x j After rearranging it and according to the differential formula, one can get the new the turbulent dissipation rate frequency equation as D = P + D R (6) Dt where 1 P = C1 Gk = (C1 1) Gk (7-1) k k k Ck k

Ck k

C2

2
k

Ck k = (C2 1)Ck 2

(7-2)
2

1 1 k 1 1 2k 1 1 D = t + + t 2 + t 2 k k x j x j k k x j k k

k x j

+ x j

t x j

(7-3)

25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012004

IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012004

3 3 1 C (1 0 ) 2 C Ck (1 0 ) 2 (7-4) = 3 Ck k 1 + k 1 + 3 Equation (6) and Eqs. (7-1) to (7-4) constitute the model transport equations for the turbulent dissipation rate frequency based on the RNG theory. The corresponding turbulent kinetic energy equation is k Dk (8) = + t + Gk Ck k k x j Dt x j The new term in the turbulence dispassion frequency equation C Ck 3 (1 0 ) 2 R = 1 + 3 is an additional term of 2nd order of .Turbulent viscosity is modeled as: k (9) t = C

R =

where C = 0.0845 , C1 = 1.42 , C2 = 1.68 , Ck = 0.8 , C = 0.8 ( Ck and C can be chosen as 0.7194 as

theoretical) 0 = 4.38 , = 0.012 and

S 1 u u j , Gk = t S 2 , S 2 S ij S ij , Sij = i + . 2 x j xi Ck

These equations form a closed system to calculate the turbulent stresses in the improved k two-equation turbulence model.

3. Boundary Conditions and Numerical Treatment

Inlet boundary condition: The velocity profile at the inlet is assumed to be uniform and its magnitude is determined by the mean flow in the experiment. The total pressure is specified at the inlet boundary and thus, the static pressure can be decided. In the computation, the default inlet turbulence intensity, l is selected, and the value is set to: l = 0.037 , which is an approximate value for internal pipe flow. The inlet turbulence energy, the turbulence dissipation (if use the RNG k- model) and its frequency could be calculated. The default inlet eddy viscosity is 1000. Outlet boundary condition: At the outlet, in addition to the global conservation of mass, all variables are assumed to have a zero-gradient. . Boundary conditions near solid walls: For the fully developed turbulent flow, the boundary conditions near solid walls were implemented using wall functions, that is, the following formulae is used to calculate the turbulence dissipation rate frequency l near walls

l =

u* 1 u *2 = 1ky 1k y +

For the low-Re flow near walls, the formulation of is based on the low-Re modelsuch as

s =

( y)

In the k based turbulent models, the treatment near-wall automatically switches from wall-functions to a low-Re near wall formulation as the mesh is refined. However, a strict low-Reynolds number implementation of the model would also require a near wall grid resolution of at least y+ <0.2. This condition cannot be guaranteed in most applications at all walls. In the present computation, the y+ in grid systems is larger than 4. So that the wall logarithmic law is used to determine the flow velocity and other turbulent parameters at stations near walls. Numerical treatment: The software CFX is used to make the numerical simulation. In the simulation, the second order upwind scheme is used for discretization of convective term and the second order central scheme for discretization of diffusion term. The full coupled method is used to solve the incompressible flow in the present simulation. The discrete momentum equations and the continuity equations for the complete flow field are solved together without iteration and corrections. This numerical method will need large computer storage, but it will improve the stability in the numerical procedure [14]. In the improved k turbulence model, the new nonlinear term R can be inserted into the source term of the turbulence dispassion rate frequency equation

25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012004

IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012004

numerically by the user defined function (UDS) subroutine in the software. For the rotating Francis turbine, the so-called the MRF (multi reference frame), that is, the frozen rotor approach is used. This method involves the entire geometry of the stator, and rotor to be modeled, but is kept in a fixed relative position (frozen) throughout the simulation. The stator is calculated in the stationary frame and the runner in rotating frame of reference, at the interface the flow variables are transformed into the according frame of reference. As a result the approach accounts partly for interactions across frame boundaries, yet transient effects remain unresolved with this approach as well. The main advantage of the frozen rotor method compared with a true transient simulation is the reduction of computing time. This approach is used in 3D steady turbulent flow simulation through rotating machinery. And in this computation, the runner solid surfaces is not stationary, is running with a rotating speed along tangential direction.

4. Calculated Results in a Curved Rectangular Duct

In order to indicate the reliability of the presented improved k model, the three dimensional air flow in a 90o curved rectangular duct (as shown in Fig. 1) has been conducted and the calculated results have been compared with the test data from Kim and Patel (1993) and the calculated results by using other two turbulence model: the k model (Wilcox, 1998) and RNG k model (Yakhot et al. 1992, Smith and Woodruff, 1998). Figure 1 shows the dimension of the curved rectangular duct, which is similar with the draft tube in hydraulic turbine. It is a 90o bend with the height of 0.609m along z-ordinate direction, the width of 0.203m and the total length 34.5 times of the width, which includes the inlet part of 4.5 times of width along x direction and the outlet part of 30 times of width along y direction. The inlet velocity of the air flow is 16m/s with the Reynolds number Re = 2.24 105 , as same as in the test. In this calculation, the structural grid system with hexahedrons has been adopted with the fine grid number on the solid walls to keep y+ along walls in 4-30. Figure 2-1 to Fig.3-3 show velocity components u, v, w along streamline, width and height directions respectively on the symmetric plane of the bend (Fig.1) and on serif 1 with a distance to bottom of 0.0127m and serif 2 with a distance to bottom of 0.609 m. Actually, the serifs are along the width direction. The abscissa in these figures is the relative distance along the width, the reference frame 0.0 point is located on the outside of the bend with high streamline velocity component near the point, as shown in Fig. 2-1 and Fig. 3-1. The two figures show that all three turbulent models give the good results of the streamline velocity component. But the results by the present model give the data more close to the tested data than those from other two models. Figure 2-2 and Fig. 3-2 show the velocity component v along width (transverse) direction, which is negative (from inner side to out side) on serif 1 near bottom wall (Fig. 2-2) and is positive (from out side to inner side) on serif 2 leaving from bottom wall (Fig. 3-2) to form a circulation. This velocity component has a small value, and the present model gives the data more close to the test data than those from other two models. Figure 2-3 and Fig. 3-3 indicate the velocity component w along height (convective) direction, which is positive (from bottom) on serif 1 and negative (to bottom) on serif 2. Both velocity component w distributions have very small value at the inner side (with large abscissa) of bend with a large curvature. The present model gives the data more close to the test data than those from other two models, especially in Fig. 3-3. The present model adds the additional nonlinear term in the equation and predicts the transverse velocity component and convective component with less loss than those by other two models. So that the present model has the possibility to be adopted in the engineering, for example in rotating hydraulic turbine. In order to justify the influence of the coefficient Ck to the turbulence model, Fig. 4-1 to Fig. 4-3 show the velocity components u, v, w on the symmetric plane of the bend (Fig. 1) and on serif 2 with values of Ck in 0.8, 1.0 and 1.2 respectively. The three results are almost same.

Fig. 1 Dimension of the curved rectangular duct

25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012004
1.10 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 u U0

IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012004

0.25

0.00

0.20

0.05
0.15 tested RNG k _ k _ improved k _ )

v U0

0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.0 0.2

tested RNG k _ k _ improved k _ )

w U0

0.80

0.10

0.10

0.05

0.15

0.20 0.0 0.2 0.4 h h0 0.6

tested RNG k _ k _ improved k _ )

_

0.10

0.05 0.0 0.2 0.4 h h0 0.6 0.8 1.0

0.4 h h0

0.6

0.8

1.0

0.8

1.0

Fig. 2-1 Component u along streamline Fig. 2-2 Component v along width Fig. 2-3 Component w along height Fig. 2 Comparison of velocity components distribution on serif 1
0.02
1.2 1.1 1.0 0.9
0.000 _ _ 0.005 0.010

0.01

0.00
tested RNG k _ k _ improved k _ )

tested RNG k _ _ k improved k _ )

u U0

v U0

0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.2 0.4

_ 0.01 tested RNG k _ _ k improved k _ ) 0.0 0.2 0.4 h h0 0.6 0.8 1.0

w U0

_ 0.015 _ 0.020

_ 0.02

_ 0.025 _ 0.030 0.0 0.2 0.4 h h0 0.6 0.8 1.0

0.6 h h0

0.8

1.0

_ 0.03

Fig. 3-1Component u along the streamline Fig. 3-2 Component v along width Fig. 3-3 Component w along height Fig. 3 Comparison of velocity components distribution on serif 2
1.2 1.1 1.0 0.9

0.006
_ _ _

0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 Ck= 0.8 Ck= 1.0 Ck= 1.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 h /H 0 0.6 0.8 1.0

_ 0.008 _ 0.010 _ 0.012

v/U0

u /U0

0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.2 0.4 h /H0 0.6 0.8 1.0 Ck= 0.8 Ck= 1.0 Ck= 1.2

_ 0.014 _ 0.016 _ 0.018 _ 0.020 _ 0.022 0.0 0.2 0.4 h /H 0 0.6 0.8 1.0 Ck= 0.8 Ck= 1.0 Ck= 1.2
v/U0

_ 0.025 _ 0.030

Fig. 4-1 Velocity component u Fig. 4-2 Velocity component v Fig. 4-3 Velocity component w Fig. 4 Velocity components along width direction on serif 2 with different Ck

5. Computational Results of a Francis Turbine

A commercial N-S equation solver (CFX 10.0) has been employed with inserting the present improved k- turbulence model for 3D steady turbulent flow simulation through a model Francis turbine, and 4 different operating cases are chosen for comparison, which are part load, optimum, rated load (for power station), and over load cases. The results from simulation have been compared with model experiments to validate their preciseness and reliability and with other three turbulence models: original k- model, SST k- model and RNG k- model.
5.1 Simulation domain and parameters The simulation domain is a whole passage of a Francis hydro turbine, which including spiral casing, guide vane, runner, and draft tube (see Fig. 5-1). The runner diameter is 420mm, which is a model hydro turbine. The software gambit is used to create geometry object and mesh the domain. In this paper, the whole passage of the model turbine is mesh with tetrahedron type, which is more adaptive to complex geometry. Figure 5-2 shows the computational grid on runner blade where most grid are in low skewness.

25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012004

IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012004

spiral casing

Y Z X guide vane draft tube

runner

Fig. 5-1 Simulation domain of a model Francis turbine

Fig. 5-2 Grid on runner blade

5.2 Simulation conditions To solve the equations, boundary conditions must be given. For inlet of computational domain, which is at the inlet of spiral casing, the total pressure condition and the inlet flow rate (that is, the averaged inlet velocity normal component) are given because they can reflect the actual flow state in the turbine. Then the inlet static pressure should be known. Other boundary conditions are the same as indicated in section 3. The experiment water head is 20 meters. The calculated water head is obtained as the final convergent results to compared withexperiment data. The unit rotating speed and flow rate are same with experiment, which equals to 650 r/min. Three kinds of guide vane openings are chosen for comparison, which are 10mm, 18mm,20mm and 22mm respectively. To validate thepreciseness and reliability of this simulation, calculating results should be compared with the data from model experiment. The performance experiment of this Francis turbine was carried out at Harbin Institute of Large Electrical Machinery. Its test rig has satisfied IEC standard with the system error of less than 3. The hydro parameters of the model have been measured at different operating conditions, including mass flow rate, hydro moment of runner, hydro efficiency, and so on. The results have been shown in Fig. 6, and the main data shown in Table 1. Table 1 Characteristics of Francis turbine

Optimum case guide vane opening (mm) 18

85

Restricted case

n11o (rpm) 65.0

Q11o (m3/ s) 0.420

mo
(%) 93.6

guide vane opening (mm) 26

n11 (rpm) 65.0

Q11 (m3/s) 0.560

m
(%) 90

characteristic curve

80

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0 18.0 89

20.0 22.0 24.0 26.0 28.0 30.0 33.0 36.0 88 90

75

6.0 70

74 91

nll (r/min)

70 8082 8486 65 93.5 92 93 86 84 82 80

60

55 95.0% power limiting line 50 100 200 300 400 Q11(L/s) 500 600 700 800

Fig. 6 Characteristic curve of hydro efficiency

25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012004

IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012004

The characteristic curve of hydro efficiency from model test is shown in Fig. 6, where the total water head (from inlet of spiral casing to outlet of draft tube) is 20m, n11 refers to unit rotating speed, and Q11 refers to unit volume flow rate respectively. The highest efficiency point is at n11=65r/min and Q11=420L/s, with the value is 93.6%. The hydro efficiency can be calculated as: M 100% (10) = Qv gH where M is the hydro moment of runner, is the rotating speed, is the water density, and H is the water head, which is a constant value during the test.
5.3 Mesh independent verification Before analyzing the calculated results, grid-independent verification should be carried out first. In this paper, 5 numerical models with different mesh sizes have been applied to do the numerical simulation with same boundary conditions. The calculation has been carried out at the operation case with at the highest efficiency, n11=65r/min and Q11=420L/s. The torque of runner and hydro efficiency of model turbine with different mesh system are shown in Figs. 71 and 7-2. It can be seen that the torque and efficiency value increase as the mesh number increases, meanwhile, it also can be seen that the hydro parameters value of model 4 and model 5 are nearly the same, which shows that the two models are mesh independent, and can be used to analyzed. In the mesh system, the grid near the solid walls has adopted the fine one with y+ is less than 40 especially near the runner blade surfaces as shown in Fig. 8.
498 497

87.5

87.0
496
moment(Nm)

494 493

eff (%)

495

86.5

86.0

85.5
492 491 500000

1000000

1500000 cell

2000000

2500000

85.0 500000

1000000

1500000 cell

2000000

2500000

(7-1) torque of runner

(7-2) hydro efficiency of model turbine Fig.8 y+ distribution on runner blade surface

Fig. 7 Performance of model turbine with different mesh system

5.4 Results verification To verify the accuracy of calculation results, they are compared with experiment results and with calculated results of other three turbulent models. In this calculation, the inlet velocity distribution is given as the boundary condition, after the calculation, one can get the total pressure difference between the inlet of spiral casing and the out let of draft tube, which is the working head upon the turbine. The work head results are around 20m with a little error. That is to say that all models could predict the working head accurately. Another energy performances are the water moment acting on runner and the hydraulic efficiency. The calculations with different turbulence models could predict the efficiency with good agreement to the test data, which are amiable to be used in engineering. Among them, the improved model and the SST model have better data than other two models results. Besides, the predicted efficiency by the improved model is little higher than the test data. But other model results are lower than the test data. Because in the experiment, besides the hydraulic loss there must have a volumetric loss and mechanical, which have been decreased to vary small amount by nowadays high technology. But they still exist. So that the present improved model can get the reasonable results. That is for the additional nonlinear term in the dissipation rate frequency equation to predict the dissipation rate with small value.

25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012004

IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012004

Table 2 Parameters comparison of test data and calculated results

guide vane opening

turbulence model

flow rate(kg/s)

head calculated

torque on runner(Nm) calculated 645.7 640.5 615.3 672.7 820.3 810.7 780.5 852.5 922.2 920.8 890.5 950.6 1035 1032 995 1080 test

hydro efficiency(%) calculated 92.3 92.2 91 93 93.0 92.8 91.5 93.7 92.8 92.7 91.6 93.5 91.2 91.0 89.5 91.7 test

14mm

18mm

20mm

23mm

SST k RNG k k improved SST k RNG k k improved SST k RNG k k improved SST k RNG k k improved

264.7

329.6

370.3

430.9

20.1m 19.9m 19.9m 20.2m 20.1m 20.0 19.9m 20.1m 20.1m 19.8m 19.9m 20.0m 20.0m 19.9m 20.0m 20.1m

667

92.6

845.7

93.4

940

93

1070

91.5

6. Conclusions
In this paper, an improved k turbulence model is proposed, which brings the nonlinear term of the mean fluid flow transition to the equation in the original k model of Wilcox. The new model is used to calculate the turbulent flow in a 90 rectangular duct and to compare with test data. Calculated results by the present model agree the test data better than those from other two models, the RNG k model and the original k model. And the improved model predicts the transverse velocity component and convective component with less loss than those by other two models. The 3D steady turbulent flow simulation, developed in this paper with the new k- model, is used to predict its energy performances of one type of rotating machinery-Francis turbine, including, the turbine hydraulic torque (output) and its efficiency. The predicted results are more reasonable and closer to test data than the results from the RNG k model, the original k model and even the SST k model.

Acknowledgments
The research work was funded by Chinese National Foundation of Natural Science (No. 10532010) and by the National Key Technology R&D Program in China.

Nomenclature
Ck C
C

turbulence model coefficient [-] turbulence model coefficient [-] turbulence model coefficient [-] turbulence model coefficient [-] term in turbulence model [ML-3T-2]

S ( Ck )
0

coefficient in wall function [-] turbulence model coefficient, coefficient of wall function [-] turbulent dissipation [L2T-3] turbulence model variable [-] turbulence model coefficient [-]

C1 C 2

25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012004

IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012004

Gk
h ho k k

turbulent production in turbulence model [ML-1T-3] ordinate along duct width [L] duct width [L] turbulent kinetic energy [L T ] Kammen constant [-] pressure [ML-1T-2] turbulent production in turbulence model [ML-3T-2] nonlinear term in turbulence model [M L T ] nonlinear term in turbulence model [ML-3T-2] Reynolds number(=UbDh/) [-] strain rate [T-1] trace-less viscous strain rate(i=1, 2, 3)[T-1] velocity [LT-1] dimensionless wall stress velocity( = w )[LT-1] velocity at inlet [LT-1] normal distance to the nearest wall [L]
-1 -4 2 -2

molecular dynamic viscosity [ML-1T-1] eddy viscosity [ML-1T-1] molecular kinematic viscosity [L2T-1] density [ML-3] wall stress [ML-1T-2] term in turbulence model [ML-3T-2] turbulent dissipation frequency [T-1] Superscript wall function [-] low-Re model [-]

p
P

R
R

Re

S S ij
u

u*
Uo

References
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] Zhang R K, Cai Q D, Wu J Z, Wu Y L, Zhang L, Liu S H 2005 The physical origin of severe lowfrequency pressure fluctuations in giant Francis turbines Modern Physics Letters B 19(28-29) 15271530 Li S C, Liu S H, Wu Y L 2007 A new type of cavitation damage Triggered by boundary-layer turbulent Production Modern Physics Letters B 21(20) 1285 1296 Zhang L X, Guo Y 2009 Simulation of turbulent flow in a complex passage with a vibrating structure by finite element formulations Modern Physics Letters B 23(2) 257-260 Yao J, Yao Y, Mason P J, Zhang T, Heyes F, Roach P 2009 CFD modeling of water injection flow for turbine cleaning Modern Physics Letter B 23(3) 341-344 Yakhot V and Orszag S A 1986 Renormalized group analysis of turbulence: I. basic theory J. Sci. Comput. 1 3-5 Menter F R 1993 Zonal Two Equation k- Turbulence Models for Aerodynamic Flows AIAA 93-2906 Menter F R 1994 Two-Equation Eddy-Viscosity Turbulence Models for Engineering Applications AIAA Journal 32 269-289 Wilcox D C 1988 Re-assessment of the scale-determining equation for advanced turbulence models AIAA Journal 26 1414-1421 Wilcox D C 2004 Turbulence Modeling for CFD 2nd Ed (DCW Industries Inc) Kim W J and Patel V C 1993 An experimental study of boundary-layer flow in a curved rectangular duct Symposium on Data for Validation of CFD codes ASME Fluids Eng. Div. Meeting (Washington DC, USA) 16 1328 Yakinthos K, Vlahostergios Z and Goulas A 2008 Modeling the flow in a 90o rectangular duct using one Reynolds-stress and two eddy viscosity models International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 29 35 47 Yakhot V, Orszag S A, Thangam S, Gatski T B and Speziale C G 1992 Development of turbulence models for shear flows by a double expansion technique Physics of Fluids A 4(7) 1510-1520 Smith L M and Woodruff S L 1998 Renormalization-group analysis of turbulence Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 30 275-310 Liu S H, Zhang L, Nishi M and Wu Y L 2009 Cavitating turbulent flow simulation in a Francis turbine based on mixture model J. of Fluids Engineering 131 1-13