Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

Why does putting Eng Anti-Icing on (increase air bleed use) help control engine rpm

Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

Why does putting Eng Anti-Icing on (increase air bleed use) help control engine rpm

Old 22nd May 2019, 13:07
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: at the behest of the Queen of Canada.
Posts: 797
Why does putting Eng Anti-Icing on (increase air bleed use) help control engine rpm

So, how does increasing air bleed demand (put eng anti ice on) for take off at high density altitudes help control engine rpm in a high-bypass turbofan engine?
The pilotís notes (-1) for my aircraft suggests that using engine anti ice may prevent rpm over speeds at high density altitudes. I think I know why, but am not quite sure.
Hueymeister is offline  
Old 22nd May 2019, 23:52
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 97
Unloads the compressor stage, depending on engine type it stabilizes bleed demand and avoids rapid swaps between HP and LP bleed sources on the engine at the high altitudes.
plhought is online now  
Old 23rd May 2019, 01:02
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 64
Posts: 2,348
It would help if we knew the engine/aircraft you're talking about.
BTW, is it safe to assume by "high density altitudes" you mean high altitudes/low density? Because "high density" usually means low altitudes.
tdracer is online now  
Old 23rd May 2019, 04:03
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 433
Originally Posted by tdracer View Post
It would help if we knew the engine/aircraft you're talking about.
BTW, is it safe to assume by "high density altitudes" you mean high altitudes/low density? Because "high density" usually means low altitudes.
Regional technical language barrier.. at least in North America, there's the term "density altitude" meaning what the altitude would be, on a standard day, that corresponds to the current density of wherever we're talking about.

So his situation (a "high density altitude") is a density altitude that is high, i.e., low density.
Vessbot is offline  
Old 23rd May 2019, 06:14
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Surrey UK
Age: 70
Posts: 60
Sure On and not Off.

Originally Posted by Hueymeister View Post
So, how does increasing air bleed demand (put eng anti ice on) for take off at high density altitudes help control engine rpm in a high-bypass turbofan engine?
The pilot’s notes (-1) for my aircraft suggests that using engine anti ice may prevent rpm over speeds at high density altitudes. I think I know why, but am not quite sure.
I am puzzle by the instruction you read from pilot's notes for prevention of over speeds, my understanding:-
In a multi spool compressor using air off take would unload the forward spools causing them to speed up!
Same config at T/O would decrease thrust if an increase in fuel/EGT were not made!
Same config. a low air density (high altitude) would also cause front spools to run faster and perhaps over speed!
The only good reason for using air off takes,as far as the engine is concerned, is to improve the compressor stall margin for engine!
Welcome corrections.
aeromech3 is offline  
Old 23rd May 2019, 06:28
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oztrailia
Posts: 2,695
As said above, unloads the compressor section.
ACMS is offline  
Old 29th May 2019, 13:43
  #7 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: at the behest of the Queen of Canada.
Posts: 797
C-17
Pratt Whitney F117-PW-100
Hueymeister is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2019, 00:20
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: KPMD
Posts: 15
The C-17 engine is derivative of the PW 2000 used on the B757. In the C-17 they are flat rated to 40,400 lbsf to 30 C. I am sure there are other differences, but the biggest obvious difference is the C-17 has a core thrust reserver in addition to the fan reserver that the B757 version has.

The thrust reversers are used on the ground to back the aircraft, a useful feature in an unimproved landing zone. The C-17 can back up a 2% grade at up to maximum gross weight (585,000 lbs). This capability was demonstrated during development on McChord AFB taxiway H. C-17 flight crews routinely back the aircraft into parking using reverse thrust.

The flight manual (T.O. 1C-17A-1) states that while backing the aircraft, further protection from engine surge may be achieved by selecting engine cowl anti-ice on for the period of time reverse thrust must be used above idle. I have seen similar procedures (turning on engine anti-ice) to clear compressor stalls in other aircraft.

I've always thought that applying a bleed load like the engine anti-ice reduced the compressor load (meaning that the compressor wasn't producing the same compression ratio). However, it would seem that the engine control would compensate to keep the engine operating at the same RPM.

Would be nice to hear from a propulsion engineer. Thank you
Le Flaneur is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2019, 01:17
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 64
Posts: 2,348
Originally Posted by Le Flaneur View Post
The C-17 engine is derivative of the PW 2000 used on the B757. In the C-17 they are flat rated to 40,400 lbsf to 30 C. I am sure there are other differences, but the biggest obvious difference is the C-17 has a core thrust reserver in addition to the fan reserver that the B757 version has.

I've always thought that applying a bleed load like the engine anti-ice reduced the compressor load (meaning that the compressor wasn't producing the same compression ratio). However, it would seem that the engine control would compensate to keep the engine operating at the same RPM.

Would be nice to hear from a propulsion engineer. Thank you
Sorry, I'd missed when [COLOR=center=#222222]Hueymeister posted the engine in question (I've been traveling a lot lately).
Never worked the C-17, but I was responsible for the PW2000 on the 757 for several years - the differences the F117 and the PW2000 are fairly minor.
As noted, bleeding air from the engine unloads the compressor and generally improves the stall margin. While the FADEC will work to keep the rotor speed constant, there are response times involved - the lag between when the FADEC senses a speed change, the fuel flow responds, and the resultant change in rotor torque can not only allow the rotor speed to change significantly, it can actually result in an oscillatory speed response.
Educated guess here, but I'm thinking that, under the circumstances in question, the HP compressor is on the edge of stall - and the variations in flow separation in the compressor can cause the rotor speed to fluctuate more rapidly than the FADEC can compensate for - possibly even resulting in an oscillatory response as noted above. Turning on anti-ice bleed unloads the compressor sufficiently, moving the compressor away from stall and helping the FADEC keep the rotor speed constant.[/COLOR]
tdracer is online now  
Old 26th Jun 2019, 11:55
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Bath
Age: 53
Posts: 41
I doubt if bleed extraction changes the performance of the speed control loop in any significant way. If the engine is rated on LP spool speed (I'm assuming here...), maybe there is a debit applied when bleed is requested (to reduce turbine temp) which decreases rated LP speed - thus giving greater margin to NL:max limit..

Also worth noting that at an LP speed, extraction of bleed (from the HPC) would increase HP speed, so unless the debit idea above is true, it would seem that putting AI on reduces margin to NHmax....

jh5speed is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2019, 13:53
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,099
Originally Posted by jh5speed View Post
I doubt if bleed extraction changes the performance of the speed control loop in any significant way. If the engine is rated on LP spool speed (I'm assuming here...), maybe there is a debit applied when bleed is requested (to reduce turbine temp) which decreases rated LP speed - thus giving greater margin to NL:max limit..

Also worth noting that at an LP speed, extraction of bleed (from the HPC) would increase HP speed, so unless the debit idea above is true, it would seem that putting AI on reduces margin to NHmax....
I don't understand the use of the term "rated on" How does this relate to a term describing a controlling function burried in the FADEC? like pressure output or temperature generated?
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2019, 14:52
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Bath
Age: 53
Posts: 41
Originally Posted by lomapaseo View Post
I don't understand the use of the term "rated on" How does this relate to a term describing a controlling function burried in the FADEC? like pressure output or temperature generated?
For a given pilot demand (throttle lever position) engines are controlled to ('rated to', or 'rated on') a looked-up value of a particular measured engine parameter. That looked-up value is the result of much modelling and discussion between Engine and Airframe people, and relates to delivered power or thrust at a particular flight case.

Some engines are controlled to LP speed as their prime rating parameter; some are rated to EPR; some are rated on turbine exit temperature.
jh5speed is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2019, 16:50
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,099
Originally Posted by jh5speed View Post
For a given pilot demand (throttle lever position) engines are controlled to ('rated to', or 'rated on') a looked-up value of a particular measured engine parameter. That looked-up value is the result of much modelling and discussion between Engine and Airframe people, and relates to delivered power or thrust at a particular flight case.

Some engines are controlled to LP speed as their prime rating parameter; some are rated to EPR; some are rated on turbine exit temperature.
OK

but it seems to me the issue from the OP is not related to a pilot controlling action directed at LP speeds, so I assumed the question was about what the engine control did or did not do. and the how and whys.
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2019, 18:16
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 64
Posts: 2,348
The PW2000 and F117 engines are controlled to EPR at power, not N1 (assuming normal operation - there are failure modes where control reverts to N1).
N2 speed control is used at/near idle, as is minimum burner pressure (PS3) (i.e. at idle, the control will control to N2 or PS3, doing a 'select high').
Turning on bleed doesn't change the control loop response, but if the N2 rotor is flirting with separation or stall (not an uncommon problem with this engine type, mainly the earlier builds), the rotor speed changes can simply be more rapid than the control can respond to - there are significant lags in the time between the control senses N2, the fuel flow changes, and the resultant torque change results in an N2 speed change. We're talking fractions of a second here, but that's all it takes to set up an oscillatory rotor speed response. When controlling to EPR, the time lags get worse, because of the inherent lags in sensing EPR compared to rotor speed, making an oscillatory response even more likely.
tdracer is online now  
Old 26th Jun 2019, 22:52
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Bath
Age: 53
Posts: 41
Originally Posted by tdracer View Post
The PW2000 and F117 engines are controlled to EPR at power, not N1 (assuming normal operation - there are failure modes where control reverts to N1).
N2 speed control is used at/near idle, as is minimum burner pressure (PS3) (i.e. at idle, the control will control to N2 or PS3, doing a 'select high').
Turning on bleed doesn't change the control loop response, but if the N2 rotor is flirting with separation or stall (not an uncommon problem with this engine type, mainly the earlier builds), the rotor speed changes can simply be more rapid than the control can respond to - there are significant lags in the time between the control senses N2, the fuel flow changes, and the resultant torque change results in an N2 speed change. We're talking fractions of a second here, but that's all it takes to set up an oscillatory rotor speed response. When controlling to EPR, the time lags get worse, because of the inherent lags in sensing EPR compared to rotor speed, making an oscillatory response even more likely.
I was talking about what a controller might do at high power in response to AI being selected. No pilot action was involved - sorry if I gave that impression.

OK - so we are taking about an engine rated on EPR rather than N1, but the principle is similar. The OP mentions AI is claimed to be advantageous in mitigating overspeed. We are asked why. One way that this could be true is if AI selection dials in a rating debit (an EPR debit in this case) which would reduce rated power and hence increase speed margin (margin which may be partially consumed during the transient response onto the EPRrating from idle).

It was an idea - not necessarily the right answer .... Are rating debits applied for AI for this engine at takeoff?
jh5speed is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2019, 23:18
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 64
Posts: 2,348
Originally Posted by jh5speed View Post
It was an idea - not necessarily the right answer .... Are rating debits applied for AI for this engine at takeoff?
Yes for the PW2000, I'm not sure about the F117, but since it's rated a little higher (43k vs. 40k for the PW2000) I would expect it does.
tdracer is online now  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.