Hyppää sisältöön
    • Suomeksi
    • In English
Trepo
  • Suomeksi
  • In English
  • Kirjaudu
Näytä viite 
  •   Etusivu
  • Trepo
  • TUNICRIS-julkaisut
  • Näytä viite
  •   Etusivu
  • Trepo
  • TUNICRIS-julkaisut
  • Näytä viite
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Cavitation erosion resistance assessment and comparison of three francis turbine runner materials

Ylönen, Markku; Saarenrinne, Pentti; Miettinen, Juha; Franc, Jean-Pierre; Fivel, Marc; Nyyssönen, Tuomo (2018-10-26)

 
Avaa tiedosto
Cavitation_erosion_resistance_assessment_and_comparison_of_three_francis_turbine_runner_materials.pdf (102.1Kt)
Lataukset: 



Ylönen, Markku
Saarenrinne, Pentti
Miettinen, Juha
Franc, Jean-Pierre
Fivel, Marc
Nyyssönen, Tuomo
26.10.2018

Materials Performance and Characterization
This publication is copyrighted. You may download, display and print it for Your own personal use. Commercial use is prohibited.
doi:10.1520/MPC20180015
Näytä kaikki kuvailutiedot
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:tuni-201910023649

Kuvaus

Peer reviewed
Tiivistelmä
Cavitation erosion is the most important erosion mechanism in Francis turbine runner blades. For this reason, knowledge of a material’s ability to resist cavitation is important in defining how suitable it is for use in a Francis turbine. In this study, three Francis turbine materials were subjected to cavitation erosion in a high-speed cavitation tunnel. One of the materials was a low-alloy steel, and the other two were stainless steels. The cavitation tunnel produced an annular cavitation field on one face of a cylindrical specimen. The test specimens underwent cavitation erosion until the erosion had reached a maximum penetration depth of about 0.5 mm. The material surface profiles were measured at regular intervals to calculate volume and mass loss. These losses were compared to those of several other materials that had undergone the same tests with the same setup and operational parameters. The materials were compared according to their steady-state erosion rates. The steady-state erosion rate represents a material’s ability to resist cavitation erosion once cavitation damage has already started to develop. The low-alloy steel eroded four times faster than the two stainless steels. One of the stainless steels tested here (Stainless steel 1) had the lowest erosion rate, along with another previously tested stainless steel. The other stainless steel (Stainless steel 2) had a slightly greater erosion rate than the first, falling into the same class as other lower-grade stainless steels and a nickel aluminum bronze alloy. The results show that in choosing a turbine blade material, stainless steels outperform nonstainless ones. The choice of which type of stainless steel to use is significant in turbines with cavitation problems. The eroded surfaces were analyzed with scanning electron microscopy in order to study the erosion mechanisms, and these studies showed that most of the damage is probably due to low-cycle fatigue.
Kokoelmat
  • TUNICRIS-julkaisut [23470]
Kalevantie 5
PL 617
33014 Tampereen yliopisto
oa[@]tuni.fi | Tietosuoja | Saavutettavuusseloste
 

 

Selaa kokoelmaa

TekijätNimekkeetTiedekunta (2019 -)Tiedekunta (- 2018)Tutkinto-ohjelmat ja opintosuunnatAvainsanatJulkaisuajatKokoelmat

Omat tiedot

Kirjaudu sisäänRekisteröidy
Kalevantie 5
PL 617
33014 Tampereen yliopisto
oa[@]tuni.fi | Tietosuoja | Saavutettavuusseloste