Turbine failure.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: The Wood
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turbine failure.
Is it correct that jet engines are not required to contain a turbine failure? The casing is apparently only required to contain a compressor failure. The difference being that turbines weigh a great deal more, are solid not hollow and have a higher RPM therefore making it impossible fom a practical point of view to contain them should they fail. Despite some of the detail I'm attaching to ths question it's not something I know! Is this correct? If so then in fact the RR casing did its job on the QF32 failure case.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IRS NAV ONLY
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by WhyByFlier
The difference being that turbines weigh a great deal more, are solid not hollow and have a higher RPM therefore making it impossible fom a practical point of view to contain them should they fail.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blade off testing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia mentions the requirement for both compressor and turbine containment
Rolls-Royce Trent - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia mentions hollow blades
Rolls-Royce Trent - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia mentions hollow blades
WhyByFlier
You could always do a search in this forum for some prior nswers and better understanding. I think you will find many answers in a post I made a couple of weeks ago.
If you still have questions remaining after reading that than post them as a follow up in this thread.
As always in this forum the greater challenge to the reader is to understand the question(s) as posted before wasting a lot of time with answers that bore most folks.
For starters I would suggest that you not make a distinction between compressor and turbine or hollow vs solid
You could always do a search in this forum for some prior nswers and better understanding. I think you will find many answers in a post I made a couple of weeks ago.
If you still have questions remaining after reading that than post them as a follow up in this thread.
As always in this forum the greater challenge to the reader is to understand the question(s) as posted before wasting a lot of time with answers that bore most folks.
For starters I would suggest that you not make a distinction between compressor and turbine or hollow vs solid
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Disc failure has been discussed many times on Pprune. Learn to use the search engine - it works very well.
What makes you think a turbine, on the same shaft as a compressor, turns faster than the compressor?
What makes you think a turbine, on the same shaft as a compressor, turns faster than the compressor?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: The Wood
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
God knows what I thought - I think I was thinking about free turbines or Multi spool engines. I'm a pilot not an engineer! I'll check those links when I have a chance. Thanks again.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's an equal mix, probably, of pilots, engineers, and bi-partisans on Pprune - welcome to the mob.
The one thing that pervades the forum, though, is a total disregard for political correctness - so it helps to have a thick skin. We use each other as punching bags, and every encounter makes you a bit smarter.
Again, welcome aboard!
The one thing that pervades the forum, though, is a total disregard for political correctness - so it helps to have a thick skin. We use each other as punching bags, and every encounter makes you a bit smarter.
Again, welcome aboard!
