PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Tech Log (https://www.pprune.org/tech-log-15/)
-   -   Propfans? (https://www.pprune.org/tech-log/10119-propfans.html)

The Grinder 7th Oct 2000 21:46

Propfans?
 
This has probably been done before, but can anyone give me any info on them. Advantages, disadvantages, why MD binned them in the end etc etc

Cheers

Checkboard 8th Oct 2000 07:21

If you think it might have been done before, try the search function at the top right of each thread. :)

Look at: propfans

------------------
Tech Log forum moderator

John Farley 8th Oct 2000 20:39

As has been said noise was a big problem - they sounded like demented buzz-saws. The subjective matter of the "nature" of the noise - was grim. It really got to people.

The other big issue was no possibility of blade containment

JF

aerostude 10th Oct 2000 16:38

I did a little bit of research on these for my degree so I hope this helps! The idea for open rotor power plants (propfans) was developed because of the obvious benefit of high bypas ratio engines. High bypass ratios (BPR) mean that the mean jet velocity is reduced and the propulsive efficiency is increased. The Specific Fuel Consumption is also improved in engines with high BPR. But with conventional engines, the BPR is limited by size of the engine nacelle. Typically values of 8-10 are difficult to exceed as the increased weight and drag of the large engine makes the improved SFC useless. Hence the birth of propfans which can have one or two stages of fan not enclosed in the nacelle.
The problems are similar to those of turboprops at the higher mach numbers. The blade tips go supersonic and causes increased noise/vibration and loss of efficiency. However, designers developed sophisticated blades which are very thin, highly cambered and have substantial sweepback near the tips which delays the onset of shockwaves. This meant that efficiency and acceptable noise levels could be maintained up to Mach 0.8. Other problems were caused by gearbox design due the large amounts of power involved. Particularly with the rear mounted unducted fan (UDF) case on the MD80 where they were at the rear of the engine in the hot jet efflux.
Back in the 80's when these things were under trial, the values of sfc were approx 25% lower than those of turbofans and BPR was in the region of 30-40. So they did look pretty desirable but like the turbo-prop it has unavoidable limitations which seem to condemn it to the drawing board.

The Grinder 10th Oct 2000 17:20

Many thanks for the above replies. Demented chainsaws eh - bit like flying in a J41.....


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:50.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.