Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Jet Engine Thrust Percentage  
User currently offlineVidens From Argentina, joined Mar 2004, 133 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3244 times:

How much thrust is generated by what parts of a jet engine?
Is most of the thrust coming from the "visible" blades?
I keep coming across explanations that say "most" thrust is generated by the (visible) engine blades...
What I'd like to know, is how much thrust each engine stage creates in terms of general engine performance.
Does it change depending on altitude or speed?


Travel? Why would i travel if I can watch it on TV?
16 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLineMechQX From United States of America, joined May 2004, 77 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3202 times:

On a modern turbofan engine most of your thrust is being produced by the fan blades you would see on the outside of an installed engine. Most of the air brought in by these blades "bypasses" the engine compression and combustion cycle completely. Therein lies the name high bypass turbofan. Not much different then a turboprop engine, where an even higher percentage of air that passes through the prop blades doesn't enter the engine. Yet a small amount of "turbo" thrust is still produced known basically as ESHP (equivalent shaft horsepower).

Late PC

User currently offlineSpitfire From France, joined Feb 2001, 800 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3188 times:

Let's say 80% of the thrust by the fan and 20 by the nozzle to have an idea.
Rgds
Spitfire


Sabena ... never to be forgotten (10 years already , what a shame !! )
User currently offlineKalakaua From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1516 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3179 times:

The distribution of thrust forces can be calculated by considering each componet in turn. The thrust produced by the engine is mainly the product and the velocity increase imparted to it (i.e., Newtons 2nd Law of Motion), however, the pressure difference between the inlet to and the outlet from the particular flow section will have an effect on the overall thrust of the engine and must be included in the calculation.

Thrust = (Area of flow section x Pressure) + [Mass flow*Velocity of Flow/gravitational constant]

*units in English

When applying the above method to calculate the individual thrust loads on the various components it is assumemd that the engine is static.


Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion.
User currently offlineKalakaua From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1516 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3166 times:




Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion.
User currently offlineYikes! From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 268 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 3069 times:

I posted an explanation and numbers for this question about 5 years ago and it can be found in a search, FWIW. The short answer is that in a modern high bypass engine, at takeoff thrust, about 75% of overall thrust comes from the fan; in cruise about 60% of the overall thrust comes from the fan. During reverse thrust on landing, the same 75% of the thrust comes from the cascading fan thrust. Core thrust is a factor but only about 1/2 of the fan's thrust.

Yikes!

User currently offlineOkie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2050 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 3041 times:

The CFM56 a common turbine power plant, the 56 refers to 5.6 to 1 ratio of fan in relationship to the core.

I do not know if that refers to thrust ratio in terms of output or mass airflow ratio at the inlet.

1 / 5.6 = .17857 or roughly 18% thrust from the core or airflow going to the core however it is figured.

Okie

User currently offlineMITaero From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 497 posts, RR: 11
Reply 7, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 3028 times:

You guys are talking about two different things here. Some are discussing component-by-component performance, and some are discussing bypass flow vs. core flow.

What Okie gave was a bypass ratio (mass flow ratio of bypass air to core air). It doesn't matter where it's measured, it's the same at the exit and the inlet due to conservation of mass. The momentum change of the core air is much greater, so expect the thrust ratio to favor the bypass air a bit less than the mass flow ratio does. This is consistent with Yikes's remarks.

In regard to the original post (and considering a modern turbofan), all air goes through the "visible" blades, but some of it passes into the core after being compressed by those visible blades. The air that doesn't (most of it) bypasses the combustion process and passes through a low pressure turbine (which drives the fan) before exiting.

The core air undergoes a stronger compression, then is combusted (where fuel is added), then is routed through a high-pressure turbine before being expelled at a much higher velocity than the bypass air.

What do you mean by "stage"?

User currently offlineSplitzer From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2953 times:

Minor correction - bypass air doesn't drive a turbine - wouldn't that be some kind of perpetual motion - with the fan powered by the turbine and the turbine by the fan? Where does the energy come from?  Big grin

It is driven by a low-pressure turbine spun by the core flow.

User currently offlineMITaero From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 497 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2935 times:

Oh yeah, whoops. My bad. Thanks for the catch  Smile

User currently offlineXFSUgimpLB41X From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 3664 posts, RR: 36
Reply 10, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2927 times:

On the CF34's that the CRJ has...its about 80% from the fan, and 20% from the core. I heard that the C-130 has that same ratio on it's prop haha. No wonder we poop out around 22,000.

Something less known, in cascading type thrust reversers, the only air going backwards is the bypass air. The air going through the core does not get deflected at all.


Chicks dig winglets.
User currently offlinePhollingsworth From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 825 posts, RR: 7
Reply 11, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2875 times:

Thrust = (Area of flow section x Pressure) + [Mass flow*Velocity of Flow/gravitational constant]

*units in English

When applying the above method to calculate the individual thrust loads on the various components it is assumemd that the engine is static.


Though for most commercial aircraft, which operate with subsonic exhausts (the exhaust would be sonic at most), the pressure terms is eliminated. It is actually (Pressure-exit - Pressure-ambient)*Exit Area; however, for subsonic flow the pressures will equal each other. Therefore, all thrust comes directly from momentum change.

Something less known, in cascading type thrust reversers, the only air going backwards is the bypass air. The air going through the core does not get deflected at all.

Not strictly complete. For separate flow turbo-fans this is the case. However, there have been aircraft with mixed flow turbo-fans that used cascade style reversers, e.g. the 727. These reversed both core and bypass flow. I don't know how the MD-90s thrust reversers work.

[Edited 2004-08-12 15:44:16]

User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 14992 posts, RR: 69
Reply 12, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2853 times:

mixed flow turbo-fans

Huh? Ok, now someone has to explain to explain to me what this is  Big grin


Tact Is For People Who Aren't Witty Enough To Be Sarcastic
User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6197 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 2844 times:

The coolest one is the Pratt & Whitney JT11D. It generates 80% of the thrust at the nacelle!

[Edited 2004-08-12 17:24:30]


When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlinePhollingsworth From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 825 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (7 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 2840 times:

mixed flow turbo-fans

Huh? Ok, now someone has to explain to explain to me what this is.


If you are being serious and not making fun of my absurd separation of words (which I will admit has happened here). A mixed-flow turbofan is one where the bypass flow and the core flow are mixed prior to being exhausted through a nozzle. Most Low bypass TFs are mixed flow (JT8D, F404, F100, F101, F110, etc.), also the CFM56s on the A340's, The MD-90 motors, and the RB211s on the 757 are mixed-flow installations. This is compared to the typical high-bypass TF which is separate flow, different nozzles for the fan and the core flow, e.g. GE90, CF34, etc.

Mixed-flow TFs are generally more efficient but have a higher installed weight, greater duct losses, and require are more refined design as fan-duct and turbine exit pressures will have to match.

User currently offlineGrandTheftAero From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 254 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2768 times:

"The CFM56 a common turbine power plant, the 56 refers to 5.6 to 1 ratio of fan in relationship to the core."

Actually CFM56 is a meaningless acronym. As you might know CFMI, the company that produces the CFM56, is a 50/50 joint venture between GE and SNECMA. CFM56 is a combination of the names of engines that GE and SNECMA make, specifically the CF6 and the M56. True story!

--Shane

User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6197 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2777 times:

Yes, the PowerJet SaM146 name is pretty much the same thing.


When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Jet Engine Thrust Percentage
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...
757 Engine Thrust Comparison. posted Thu Oct 19 2006 05:09:36 by BOE773
Engine Thrust: Rating Vs. Real Differences posted Sun Sep 24 2006 20:49:42 by A342
Please Help Identify This Jet Engine posted Fri Jul 14 2006 23:34:50 by EDDM
Ideal Jet Engine Question? posted Wed Apr 12 2006 03:56:39 by Lehpron
Jet Engine Start Attempt On Running Engine posted Tue Apr 11 2006 01:06:55 by Taguilo
Can It Be Too Cold For A Jet Engine To Operate? posted Mon Jan 23 2006 20:22:26 by Julesmusician
Source Of Noise From A Jet Engine? posted Fri Nov 18 2005 20:58:50 by Lehpron
Jet-engine, Flame Out? posted Thu Sep 1 2005 22:52:38 by D5DBY
Jet Engine Windmill On Descent posted Tue Aug 9 2005 21:05:53 by Taguilo
Ionic Jet Engine? posted Sat Jul 9 2005 03:54:08 by Lehpron

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format