Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
3-Stage Engine Spool-Ups  
User currently offlineC5LOAD From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 917 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2959 times:

I wasn't sure which forum this belonged to, but I was watching a few take-off vids and noticed that most airplanes didn't just spool up to takeoff power right away. They went to about 50%, then 75%, then takeoff power. Why the increments to spool-up?


"But this airplane has 4 engines, it's an entirely different kind of flying! Altogether"
19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3308 posts, RR: 13
Reply 1, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2937 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

As far as I know, it's one spool to around 70% N1, check EPR and some other engine parameters, and if everything checks out, release brakes and continue to around N1 for takeoff. Then, once rolling, switch to pre-set TO/GA power.

TIS



www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 2, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2936 times:



Quoting C5LOAD (Thread starter):
They went to about 50%, then 75%, then takeoff power. Why the increments to spool-up?

I'm not sure about having two intermediate steps, but you'll see at least one really often because jet engines have a really non-linear spool up curve. They accelerate much faster at higher power settings than at low. As a result, if you go straight from idle to takeoff thrust, you can get big thrust asymmetries since the spool up times can be quite different at the low speed ranges (this is less of an issue with FADEC, but it can still happen). Once they're up to a fairly high power setting, the response is much faster and that's usually when you kick in the autothrottle to take it up to takeoff power (if you have an autothrottle).

You also want to make sure the engines are coming up and behaving well before you commit to the takeoff roll and go to full power.

The second pause (around 75% that you saw) may be for a rolling takeoff...the first would be to do the spool up check, the second would be to get rolling before going to full throttle. With aft CG, you may not be able to go to full throttle until you've got some airspeed to provide pitch authority.

Tom.


User currently offlineFLY2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2884 times:

In my ex-airline it was 3 steps for the 737 fleet.

Power up to 40%, look for normal,stable engine indications, then up to 75% and then finally push the TOGA buttons and let the auto throttles do the rest.

Way back in the day before the advent of FADEC just jamming the power on full could create all sorts of problems for the engine. But with FADEC you *could* whip the throttles back and forth all you want and the computer will *hopefully* make sure nothing breaks.

[Edited 2010-01-01 20:33:31]

User currently onlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8639 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2884 times:

Starting more gently also prevents a giant fuel slosh from happening. Just a thought.

User currently offlineMender From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 240 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2810 times:

Although it really depends on aircraft type, you usually cannot safely achieve take off power without causing a surge if the wind direction is not virtually head on. The down wind engine is shielded by the fuselage, thus is kind of starved of air.

I guess it would be standard practice to use an incremental increase in thrust with the brakes released so that the ram air effect of moving forward will reduce the chance of an engine surge. Basically the pilot has one less thing to worry about.


User currently offlineFLY2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2718 times:



Quoting Flighty (Reply 4):
Starting more gently also prevents a giant fuel slosh from happening. Just a thought.

I fail to see how that's an issue. It's certainly not an issue under severe turbulence or during an RTO, and your average takeoff has much less acceleration forces than either of those events.


User currently offlineJetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2565 posts, RR: 25
Reply 7, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2713 times:



Quoting Flighty (Reply 4):
Starting more gently also prevents a giant fuel slosh from happening. Just a thought.

Sooner or later you reach takeoff thrust at which point the slosh effect is the same whether you got there rapidly or not. Also if the tanks are full (or nearly full) there is no fuel slosh. Finally, fuel tanks have baffles to limit fuel slosh effects.



The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
User currently offlineJetlife2 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 221 posts, RR: 25
Reply 8, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2617 times:



Quoting Mender (Reply 5):
Although it really depends on aircraft type, you usually cannot safely achieve take off power without causing a surge if the wind direction is not virtually head on. The down wind engine is shielded by the fuselage, thus is kind of starved of air.

Sorry but that is not accurate. Modern turbofans have to demonstrate stall-free operation in significant crosswinds. It is a certification requirement and part of FAR33. Imagine the operational consequences if that were true.


User currently offlineTristarSteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 4024 posts, RR: 33
Reply 9, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2595 times:



Quoting Jetlife2 (Reply 8):
Quoting Mender (Reply 5):
Although it really depends on aircraft type, you usually cannot safely achieve take off power without causing a surge if the wind direction is not virtually head on. The down wind engine is shielded by the fuselage, thus is kind of starved of air.

Sorry but that is not accurate. Modern turbofans have to demonstrate stall-free operation in significant crosswinds. It is a certification requirement and part of FAR33. Imagine the operational consequences if that were t

Ever tried running a large engine at take off when static. It is very very susceptible to surge. You must point the aircraft into wind for a high power run.
I surged at PW4000 on a B744 recently with a 4 kt tail wind.

Now on the TriStar with the RB211-524 engine, it was impossible to reach take off power on nbr 2 engine when standing still. You needed about 50kts headwind before you could get take off. When we did installation ground runs we never went to take off. Max Continuos was the max allowed. The S duct would not funnel enough air into the engine without some ram effect!


User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 10, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2576 times:



Quoting Jetlife2 (Reply 8):
Sorry but that is not accurate. Modern turbofans have to demonstrate stall-free operation in significant crosswinds. It is a certification requirement and part of FAR33. Imagine the operational consequences if that were true.

I believe all the requirements are in flight...which means, minimum, about 100+ knot headwind. Aircraft inlets aren't particularly good at static performance...that's why you see bell-mouth inlets on static test stands.

Tom.


User currently offlineJetlife2 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 221 posts, RR: 25
Reply 11, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2435 times:



Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 9):
Ever tried running a large engine at take off when static. It is very very susceptible to surge. You must point the aircraft into wind for a high power run.

If this were true you could not take off in a cross wind. Large engines are tested with inlet distortion specifically to demonstrate that they operate successfully. Aircraft are certified for certain crosswind limits, for example 40kt. Those requirements in turn are placed on the engines. I quote from GE public domain material:

"The tests now going on at Peebles subject them to 90-degree crosswinds of up to about 70 miles per hour. That compares to a certification requirement of about 40 miles per hour and well beyond anything they’re likely to encounter in flight. The crosswinds are generated by a bank of 19 fans, each eight feet in diameter. The fans are arranged in a 50-foot-high, hexagon-shaped wind tunnel that’s mounted on tracks. It can be rotated 180 degrees, from directly in front of the engine – mounted on a stand 25 feet above the ground – to directly behind."

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 10):

Quoting Jetlife2 (Reply 8):
Sorry but that is not accurate. Modern turbofans have to demonstrate stall-free operation in significant crosswinds. It is a certification requirement and part of FAR33. Imagine the operational consequences if that were true.

I believe all the requirements are in flight...which means, minimum, about 100+ knot headwind.

Here are the requirements. The specific phrase "limiting inlet air distortion" can be approximately translated as "the certified crosswind limit'

§ 33.65 Surge and stall characteristics.

When the engine is operated in accordance with operating instructions required by §33.5(b), starting, a change of power or thrust, power or thrust augmentation, limiting inlet air distortion, or inlet air temperature may not cause surge or stall to the extent that flameout, structural failure, overtemperature, or failure of the engine to recover power or thrust will occur at any point in the operating envelope.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19953 posts, RR: 59
Reply 12, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2304 times:



Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 9):

Now on the TriStar with the RB211-524 engine, it was impossible to reach take off power on nbr 2 engine when standing still. You needed about 50kts headwind before you could get take off. When we did installation ground runs we never went to take off. Max Continuos was the max allowed. The S duct would not funnel enough air into the engine without some ram effect!

Did the 727 have the same problem?


User currently onlineTristarsteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 4024 posts, RR: 33
Reply 13, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2265 times:



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 12):
Did the 727 have the same problem?

The problem with the Tristar was that the original engine was the RB211-22B with 42000lbs. Four years later they fitted the RB211-524B with 52000lbs. The engines were the same size, and the new engine was fitted into the old airframes with the same S duct. The S duct could not funnel in the 25pc greater mass flow of air without some fwd aircraft speed.

Quoting Jetlife2 (Reply 11):
If this were true you could not take off in a cross wind.

Sorry, must have been imagining all those surges and rumbles. When I had my last surge, the MH station manager was on the flight deck with us, and he thought we had destroyed the engine! I managed to get the airport authority to change the ground run rules after that as they heard the surge in the terminal. (We turned the aircraft round and it worked well)


User currently offlineMusang From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2001, 865 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2224 times:

On our 737 classics its effectively a three stage deal.

Stage one - manually set 40% N1,
Stage two - engage autothrust, which winds them up to within a few % of T/O thrust,
Stage three - the A/T fine tunes to T/O N1.

In icing conditions stage one is to set 70% manually in case there is ice on the fan blades etc, but many of the crews feel the need to set 40% first and when that's stable, set 70%, although its not required according to the SOPs.

Regards - musang


User currently offlineJETPILOT From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3130 posts, RR: 29
Reply 15, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2189 times:

Jet engines when idling usually ingest more air through the low pressure compressor than the high pressure compressor can use. So they put in what is called interstage bleed valves. When the engine is spooled up the first time you are looking for indication on the EPER gauge that the IBV's have closed. If they have not closed and you go to full power the HP compressor will surge and scare the sh*t out of you. The second spool up, as already mentioned, is after manually pushing the throttle foward you press the TOGA switches on the auto throttle and the autothrottle spools them up to TO power.

User currently offlineJetlife2 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 221 posts, RR: 25
Reply 16, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2091 times:



Quoting JETPILOT (Reply 15):
So they put in what is called interstage bleed valves.

RR engines only (unless there is a PW case I am not aware of). Not GE (we use VSVs not IBVs)


User currently offlineTristarSteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 4024 posts, RR: 33
Reply 17, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2088 times:



Quoting Jetlife2 (Reply 16):
Not GE (we use VSVs not IBVs)

So what do the VBV do on the Cf6 and CFM56?


User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 18, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2084 times:



Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 17):
So what do the VBV do on the Cf6 and CFM56?

VBV's change how much air is moving through one of the compressors.

The basic problem is that you need to make sure the flow through the low and intermediate/high compressor are matched. You can either dump excess air overboard (IBV's) or control flow in one compressor to match the other one (VSV's).

Tom.


User currently offlineJETPILOT From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3130 posts, RR: 29
Reply 19, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2064 times:

I was told in ground school that both the JT3D-3B o nthe DC8 and the JT8D engines o nthe 727 had interstage bleed valves. On the 727 we do a 1.4 EPR check as we push the throttles up to make sure the bleed valve has closed and the needles jumps. On the DC8 we also had a 4 spooled and stable check to make sure the bleeds closed as well. And when it didn't and you went to TO power the engine compressor stalled.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic 3-Stage Engine Spool-Ups
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Embraer 135-145 Engine Spool-Up Procedure posted Sat Dec 30 2006 07:28:49 by N243NW
Engine Spool Up Time posted Sat Sep 18 2004 03:59:00 by Ba97
Multi Engine A/c Start Ups posted Wed Jul 10 2002 10:20:28 by RobinJH
Engine Spool Up Before Take Off Power posted Mon Apr 16 2001 04:16:06 by Sxmarbury33
What Engine Model On UPS A300-600's? posted Sun Feb 16 2003 15:00:42 by VC-10
UPS B727 Engine Question posted Thu May 2 2002 03:05:53 by UAL Bagsmasher
Freezing Rain: What's Protecting The Engine Face? posted Wed Dec 30 2009 09:53:57 by Faro
2-spool Or 3-spool? posted Sun Dec 27 2009 12:54:06 by Kimon
B752 Engine Replacement/upgrade posted Sat Dec 19 2009 02:18:07 by HAWK21M
Tri-Star No. 2 Engine Reverser Question posted Fri Dec 11 2009 22:23:16 by Propilot83

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format