0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Aircraft Engine

Computational Fluid Dynamics Investigation of a Core-Mounted Target-Type Thrust Reverser—Part 1: Reverser Stowed Configuration

[+] Author and Article Information
Tashfeen Mahmood

Defence Equipment and Services,
Ministry of Defence,
Bristol BS34 8JH, UK
e-mail: dr.tashfeenmahmood@gmail.com

Anthony Jackson

Centre for Propulsion Engineering,
Cranfield University,
Bedfordshire MK43 0AL, UK
e-mail: a.j.b.jackson@cranfield.ac.uk

Vishal Sethi

Centre for Propulsion Engineering,
Cranfield University,
Bedfordshire MK43 0AL, UK
e-mail: v.sethi@cranfield.ac.uk

Bidur Khanal

Centre for Defence Engineering,
Cranfield University,
Shrivenham SN6 8 LA, UK
e-mail: b.khanal@cranfield.ac.uk

Fakhre Ali

Applied Mechanics Department,
Chalmers University of Technology,
Hörsalsvägen 7A,
Göteborg 412-96, Sweden
e-mail: aeroali@yahoo.com

Contributed by the Aircraft Engine Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received August 17, 2017; final manuscript received November 8, 2017; published online June 15, 2018. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 140(9), 091204 (Jun 15, 2018) (8 pages) Paper No: GTP-17-1464; doi: 10.1115/1.4038816 History: Received August 17, 2017; Revised November 08, 2017

During the second half of the 90 s, NASA performed experimental investigations on six novel thrust reverser (TR) designs; core-mounted target-type thrust reverser (CMTTTR) design is one of them. To assess the CMTTTR efficiency and performance, NASA conducted several wind tunnel tests at sea level static (SLS) conditions. The results from these experiments are used in this paper series to validate the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) results. This paper is part one of the three-part series. Parts 1 and 2 discuss the CMTTTR in stowed and deployed configurations; all analyses in the first two papers are performed at SLS conditions. Part 3 discusses the CMTTTR in the forward flight condition. The key objectives of this paper are: first, to perform the three-dimensional (3D) CFD analysis of the reverser in stowed configuration; all analyses are performed at SLS condition. The second objective is to validate the acquired CFD results against the experimental data provided by NASA (Scott, C. A., 1995, “Static Performance of Six Innovative Thrust Reverser Concepts for Subsonic Transport Applications: Summary of the NASA Langley Innovative Thrust Reverser Test Program,” NASA—Langley Research Centre, Hampton, VA, Report No. TM-2000-210300). The third objective is to verify the fan and overall engine net thrust values acquired from the aforementioned CFD analyses against those derived based on one-dimensional (1D) engine performance simulations. The fourth and final objective is to examine and discuss the overall flow physics associated with the CMTTTR under stowed configuration. To support the successful implementation of the overall investigation, full-scale 3D computer aided design (CAD) models are created, representing a fully integrated GE-90 engine, B777 wing, and pylon configuration. Overall, a good agreement is found between the CFD and test results; the difference between the two was less than 5%.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Yetter, J. A. , 1995, “Why Do Airlines Want and Use Thrust Reversers?—(A Compilation of Airline Industry Responses to a Survey Regarding the Use of Thrust Reversers on Commercial Transport Airplanes),” NASA Langley Research Centre, Hampton, VA, Report No. TM-109158. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19950014289
Morris, K. M., 2005, “Results From Two Surveys of the Use of Reverse Thrust of Aircraft Landing at Heathrow Airport,” British Airways/BAA Heathrow, Environmental Affairs/Airside Environment, Harmondsworth, UK, Report No. ENV/KMM/1128/14.18.
Scott, C. A. , 1995, “Static Performance of Six Innovative Thrust Reverser Concepts for Subsonic Transport Applications: Summary of the NASA Langley Innovative Thrust Reverser Test Program,” NASA Langley Research Centre, Hampton, VA, Report No. TM-2000-210300. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20000112934
Royal Air Force, 2017, “Jet Propulsion—Part 6: Thrust Augmentation and Reverses,” Royal Air Force, London, accessed Feb. 5, 2018, http://slideplayer.com/slide/1462344/
Chuck, C. , 2001, “Computational Procedures for Complex Three-Dimensional Geometries Including Thrust Reverser Effluxes and APUs,” AIAA Paper No. 2001-3747.
Andrade, F. O. , Ferreira, S. B. , Silva, L. F. F. , Jesus, A. A. B. , and Oilveira, G. L. , 2006, “Study of the Influence of Aircraft Geometry on the Computed Flowfield During Thrust Reverser Operation,” AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2006-3673.
Trapp, L. G. , and Oliveira, G. L. , 2003, “Aircraft Thrust Reverser Cascade Configuration Evaluation Through CFD,” AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2003-723.
ANSYS, 2011, “ANSYS FLUENT User's Guide,” Release 14.0., ANSYS Inc., Canonsburg, PA.
Kurzke, J., 2004, “GasTurb 10, User's Manual,” GasTurb GmbH, Aachen, Germany.
Daly, M., and Gunston, B., 2013, “IHS Jane's Aero-Engines,” Jane's Publication, Surrey, UK.
Mahmood, T. , Jackson, A. , Sethi, V. , and Pilidis, P. , 2011, “Thrust Reverser for a Separate Exhaust High Bypass Ratio Turbofan Engine and its Effect on Aircraft and Engine Performance,” ASME Paper No. GT2011-46397.
Mahmood, T. , Jackson, A. , Rizvi, S. H. , Pilidis, P. , Savill, M. , and Sethi, V. , 2012, “Thrust Reverser for a Mixed Exhaust High Bypass Ratio Turbofan Engine and its Effect on Aircraft and Engine Performance,” ASME Paper No. GT2012-68934.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Existing TR designs on civil aircraft engines [4]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Wind tunnel model of the TR in stowed configuration, adopted from Ref. [3]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Sketch of the Geometry schematic of NASA's experimental engine model [3]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Developed integrated 3D CAD model with TR in stowed configuration

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

An isometric view of the developed computational model employed for the CFD analyses

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

(a) Surface mesh distribution around the nacelle and (b) shows the magnified view

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

(a) Surface mesh distribution around wing/engine assembly and (b) shows the magnified view

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Typical prism mesh for a reverser in stowed configuration

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Static pressure measurement points for a reverser stowed configuration [3]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Static pressure measurements were recorded at 14 deg, clockwise from the engine horizontal centerline [3]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Comparison of CFD and test data for the core external surface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparison of CFD and test results for the fan nacelle internal surface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparison of static pressure values on the fan nozzle internal surface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Comparing CFD and theoretical values for SLS, fan gross thrust

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Comparing CFD and theoretical values for SLS, engine total net thrust

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

CFD analyses showing the engine inlet and exhaust flows, FNPR = 1.55, M = 0.0

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

CFD analyses showing the engine inlet, exhaust and free stream flows, FNPR = 1.55, M = 0.0

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Streamlines plot in the horizontal plane, FNPR = 1.55, Mach = 0.0

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Streamlines plot in the vertical plane, FNPR = 1.55, Mach = 0.0

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