0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Aircraft Engine

Effects of Advanced Engine Technology on Open Rotor Cycle Selection and Performance

[+] Author and Article Information
Christopher A. Perullo

e-mail: chris.perullo@ae.gatech.edu

Jimmy C. M. Tai

e-mail: jimmy.tai@ae.gatech.edu

Dimitri N. Mavris

e-mail: dimitri.mavris@aerospace.gatech.edu
School of Aerospace Engineering,
Georgia Institute of Technology,
270 Ferst Drive,
Atlanta, GA 30332-0150

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Aircraft Engine Committee of ASME for publication in the Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power. Manuscript received February 14, 2013; final manuscript received March 6, 2013; published online June 12, 2013. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 135(7), 071204 (Jun 12, 2013) (9 pages) Paper No: GTP-13-1052; doi: 10.1115/1.4024019 History: Received February 14, 2013; Revised March 06, 2013

Recent increases in fuel prices and increased focus on aviation's environmental impacts have reignited focus on the open rotor engine concept. This type of architecture was extensively investigated in previous decades but was not pursued through to commercialization due to relatively high noise levels and a sudden, sharp decrease in fuel prices. More recent increases in fuel prices and increased government pressure from taxing carbon-dioxide production mean the open rotor is once again being investigated as a viable concept. Advances in aero-acoustic design tools have allowed industry and academia to re-investigate the open rotor with an increased emphasis on noise reduction while retaining the fuel burn benefits due to the increased propulsive efficiency. Recent research with conceptual level multidisciplinary considerations of the open rotor has been performed (Bellocq et al., 2010, “Advanced Open Rotor Performance Modeling For Multidisciplinary Optimization Assessments,” Paper No. GT2010-2963), but there remains a need for a holistic approach that includes the coupled effects of the engine and airframe on fuel burn, emissions, and noise. Years of research at Georgia Institute of Technology have led to the development of the Environmental Design Space (EDS) (Kirby and Mavris, 2008, “The Environmental Design Space,” Proceedings of the 26th International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences). EDS serves to capture interdependencies at the conceptual design level of fuel burn, emissions, and noise for conventional and advanced engine and airframe architectures. Recently, leveraging NASA environmentally responsible aviation (ERA) modeling efforts, EDS has been updated to include an open rotor model to capture, in an integrated fashion, the effects of an open rotor on conventional airframe designs. Due to the object oriented nature of EDS, the focus has been on designing modular elements that can be updated as research progresses. A power management scheme has also been developed with the future capability to trade between fuel efficiency and noise using the variable pitch propeller system. Since the original GE open rotor test was performed using a military core, there is interest in seeing the effect of modern core-engine technology on the integrated open rotor performance. This research applies the modular EDS open rotor model in an engine cycle study to investigate the sensitivity of thermal efficiency improvements on open rotor performance, including the effects on weight and vehicle performance. The results are that advances in the core cycle are necessary to enable future bypass ratio growth and the trades between core operating temperatures and size become more significant as bypass ratio continues to increase. A general benefit of a 30% reduction in block fuel is seen on a 737-800 sized aircraft.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Kirby, M., and Mavris, D., 2008, “The Environmental Design Space,” Proceedings of the 26th International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences, Anchorage, AK, September 14–19.
Hoff, G. E., 1990, “Experimental Performance and Acoustic Investigation of Modern, Counterrotating Blade Concepts,” NASA Report No. CR-185158.
GE Aircraft Engines, 1987, “Full Scale Technology Demonstration of a Modern Counterrotating Unducted Fan Engine Concept: Component Test,” NASA Report No. CR-180868.
Guynn, M. D., Berton, J. J., Hendricks, E. S., Tong, M. T., Haller, W. J., Thurman, D. R., 2011, “Initial Assessment of Open Rotor Propulsion Applied to an Advanced Single-Aisle Aircraft,” Proceedings of the 11th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference, Virginia Beach, VA, September 20–22, AIAA Paper No. 2011-7058. [CrossRef]
Berton, J., 2011, “Empennage Noise Shielding Benefits for an Open Rotor Transport,” Proceedings of the 17th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Portland, OR, June 5–8, AIAA Paper No. 2011-2764. [CrossRef]
Bellocq, P., Sethi, V., Cerasi, L., Ahlefelder, S., Singh, R., and Tantot, N., 2010, “Advanced Open Rotor Performance Modeling for Multidisciplinary Optimization Assessments,” ASME Paper No. GT2010-22963. [CrossRef]
Hendricks, E., 2011, “Development of an Open Rotor Cycle Model in NPSS Using a Multi-Design Point Approach,” ASME Paper No. GT2011-46694. [CrossRef]
Drela, M., “MSES/MISES,” Analytical Methods, Inc., Redmond, WA, accessed March 2013, http://www.am-inc.com/PDF/MSES.pdf
Denner, B. W., 1989, “An Approximate Model for the Performance and Acoustic Predictions of Counterrotating Propeller Configurations,” NASA Report No. CR-180667.
Whitfield, C. E., Mani, R., and Gliebe, P. R., 1990, “High Speed Turboprop Aeroacoustic Study,” NASA Report No. CR-185242.
Farassat, F., 2010, “Open Rotor Noise Prediction at NASA Langley—Capabilities, Research and Development,” NASA Report No. TM-2010-216178.
Zorumski, W. E., 1982, “Aircraft Noise Prediction Program Theoretical Manual,” NASA Report No. TM-83199.
NASA, 2006, Numerical Propulsion System Simulation (NPSS) User's Guide, version 1.6.4 rev V, NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, OH.
Tong, M. T., and Naylor, B. A., “An Object-Oriented Computer Code for Aircraft Engine Weight Estimation,” NASA Report No. TM-2009-215656.
McCullers, L. A., 2009, FLOPS User's Guide Ver. 8.11, NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA.
Biermann, D., Gray, W. H., and Maynard, J. D., 1942, “Wind-Tunnel Tests of Single and Dual-Rotating Tractor Propellers of Large Blade Width,” NACA Wartime Report.
Schutte, J., Tai, J., Sands, J., and Mavris, D., 2012, “Cycle Design Exploration Using Multi-Design Approach,” ASME Paper No. GT2012-69334.
General Electric Company, 1987, “Full Scale Technology Demonstration of a Modern Counterrotating Unducted Fan Engine Concept—Design Report,” NASA Report No. CR-180867.
General Electric Company, 1977, “Study of Unconventional Aircraft Engines Designed for Low Energy Consumption Vol II,” NASA Report No. CR-187630.
Fischer, B., and Klug, H., 1989, “Configuration Studies for a Regional Airliner Using Open-Rotor Ultra-High-Bypass Ratio Engines,” Proceedings of the AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE 25th Joint Propulsion Conference, Monterey, CA, July 10–12, AIAA Paper No. 89-2580. [CrossRef]
Henne, P., 1989, “MD-90 Transport Aircraft Design,” Proceedings of the AIAA/AHS/ASEE Aircraft Design, Systems and Operations Conference, Seattle, WA, July 31–August 2, AIAA Paper No. 89-2023. [CrossRef]
Niskode, P., Stickes, R., Allmon, B., and DeJong, R., 2010, “FAA CLEEN Consortium Open Session,” Presentation CLEEN Consortium Open Session, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, October 27.
Myers, R. H., Montgomery, D. C., and Anderson-Cook, C. M., 2009, Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments, Wiley, New York.
Jiminez, H., Pfaender, H., and Mavris, D., 2011, “System-Wide Fleet Assessment of NASA Environmentally Responsible Aviation (ERA) Technologies and Concepts for Fuel Burn and CO2,” Proceedings of the 11th AIAA ATIO Conference, Virginia Beach, VA, September 20–22, AIAA Paper No. 2011-6882. [CrossRef]
Rallabhandi, S., and Mavris, D., 2008, “Simultaneous Airframe and Propulsion Cycle Optimization for Supersonic Aircraft Design,” Proceedings of the 46th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 7–10, AIAA Paper No. 2008-143. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Open rotor modeling methodology

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

EDS counter rotating propeller map

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Tail strike angle constraint

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

GE representative open rotor improvements

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

EDS open rotor high speed cruise performance

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

EDS open rotor takeoff performance

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Projected open rotor fuel burn benefit

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

EDS open rotor design sensitivities

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In