Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Limits To Current High-bypass Engine Designs?  
User currently offlinecornutt From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 338 posts, RR: 1
Posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1893 times:

How much farther do you think manufacturers can go with the current big-fan high bypass engine designs? Will someone be able to build an engine of this design pattern that will reach 150,000 lbs thrust? I wonder how much bigger fans can get... at some point, fan blade tip speed has to become a problem, not to mention fitting a giant-fan engine under the wings without the nacelle dragging on the ground.

I've wondered about the possibility of building an engine that has two or three fans side by side. The idea is that one fan is driven by the engine core in the conventional fashion, and then there are one or two additional fans in parallel that are either driven by mechanical linkage off of the low-pressure spool, or via a low-pressure turbine on the additional fan's shaft that is driven via an exhaust bleed from the core. Is this at all practical, or a crazy idea? Has anyone done any work on such an engine?

1 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinerwessel From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2422 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1738 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting cornutt (Thread starter):
How much farther do you think manufacturers can go with the current big-fan high bypass engine designs? Will someone be able to build an engine of this design pattern that will reach 150,000 lbs thrust?

Sure. If they can figure out how to make money from such a beast. FWIW, the GE-90-115B has been run at 127,900lbs.

Quoting cornutt (Thread starter):
I wonder how much bigger fans can get... at some point, fan blade tip speed has to become a problem,

No, the bigger the fan, the slower it rotates. Tip speed is approximately constant somewhere around Mach 1.2. One problem with slower fan rotation is the increasing mismatch between the speed at which LP turbines are efficient and the fan speed. So a GTF design might be particularly attractive at such power levels.

Quoting cornutt (Thread starter):
not to mention fitting a giant-fan engine under the wings without the nacelle dragging on the ground.

Given what Boeing has accomplished to stuff large diameter engines under the 737 wing, I'd say there was a lot of slack. But on you'd not be putting that big an engine on any current aircraft, and a new aircraft you would design with enough ground clearance.

Quoting cornutt (Thread starter):
I've wondered about the possibility of building an engine that has two or three fans side by side. The idea is that one fan is driven by the engine core in the conventional fashion, and then there are one or two additional fans in parallel that are either driven by mechanical linkage off of the low-pressure spool, or via a low-pressure turbine on the additional fan's shaft that is driven via an exhaust bleed from the core. Is this at all practical, or a crazy idea? Has anyone done any work on such an engine?

Technically there is no conceptual problem driving several fans. Just consider your engine a turboshaft, hang the appropriate transmission in front of the thing, and away you go. Consider the lift fan on the STOVL F-35B. The lift fan is mounted just behind the cockpit, and is driven off a long shaft back to the engine - it's exactly a second fan hung off the engine, although it's mounted at right angles to the application you're proposing. Similarly the rotors on helicopters (or V-22) usually are interconnected in such a way that you could consider them as two "fans" driven of one engine (of cluster of engines).

OTOH, if you had *any* choice, you'd avoid such a mechanical nightmare. Just look how hard Pratt has been working to get the (rather simpler) GTF ready. Just make the fan a bit bigger if you can. A pair of fans would be less efficient aerodynamically too - even if only in wetted area.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Limits To Current High-bypass Engine Designs?
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...
High Bypass Turbofan Buzzsaw posted Thu Nov 1 2012 01:07:08 by rolypolyman
Hi Bypass Engine - What's The Limit In Diameter? posted Sun Jan 9 2011 09:41:39 by A380900
Cause Of High Bypass "growl" Sound posted Sun Mar 25 2007 21:31:39 by PC12Fan
When Is CFM Going To Work On A New Engine? posted Wed Jan 3 2007 23:53:33 by 747400sp
High Bypass Oil Systems posted Mon Nov 27 2006 17:33:06 by Tlfd29
What Was Going To Power The Twin Engine 727? posted Fri May 26 2006 18:29:04 by 747400sp
High Bypass Engines In Low Atmos Pressure? posted Thu Jan 27 2005 20:14:18 by Kaitak
DC-10 And L-1011 Tail Engine Designs And Mounts posted Wed Jan 5 2005 13:21:24 by Thrust
High Bypass Turbofan posted Sun Jun 6 2004 10:17:39 by Modesto2
How To De-rate An Engine posted Sat Nov 8 2003 09:51:27 by Liamksa

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format