1、ST.NASA CR-121016R72 AEG 296PROPULSION SYSTEM STUDIES for an ADVANCED HIGH SUBSONIC,LONG RANGE JET COMMERCIAL TRANSPORT AIRCRAFTbyN73-11800 (NASA-CR-121016) PROPULSION SYSTEM STUDIESFOR AN ADVANCED HIGH SUBSONIC, LONG RANGEJET COMMERCIAL TRANSPORT AIRCRAFT (GeneralElectric Co.) Nov. 1972 152 p CSCL
2、21A UnclasG3/28 473U1 jGENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANYprepared forNATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION, NASA-Lewis Research CenterContract NAS 3-15544Robert J. Antl, Project ManagerReproduced by jNATIONAL TECHNICAL jINFORMATION SERVICE iU S Department of Commerce I.Springfield VA 22131 , “.jProvid
3、ed by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-1. Report No.NASA CR-1210164. Title and SubtitlePropulsion System Studies foLong Range Jet Commercial Tr2. Government Accession No.r an Advanced High Subsonic,ansport Aircraft7. Author(s)General Electric Comp
4、any9. Performing Organization Name and AddressGeneral Electric CompanyAircraft Engine GroupCincinnati, Ohio 4521512. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationWashington, D.C. 205463. Recipients Catalog No.5. Report DateNovember, 19726. Performing Organization C
5、ode8. Performing Organization Report No.GE: R72 AEG 29610. Work Unit No.11. Contract or Grant No.NAS3-1554413. Type of Report and Period CoveredContractor Report14. Sponsoring Agency Code15. Supplementary NotesProject Manager, Robert J. Antl, V/STOL and Noise DivisionNASA-Lewis Research CenterClevel
6、and, Ohio 4413516. AbstractPropulsion system characteristics for a long range, high subsonic (Mach0.90 - 0.98), jet commercial transport aircraft are studied to identify themost desirable cycle and engine configuration and to assess the payoff ofadvanced engine technologies applicable to the time fr
7、ame of the late 1970sto the mid 1980s. An engine parametric study phase examines major cycletrends on the basis of aircraft economics. This is followed by the preliminarydesign of two advanced mixed exhaust turbofan engines pointed at two differenttechnology levels (1970 and 1985 commercial certific
8、ation for engines No. 1and No. 2, respectively). The economic penalties of environmental constraints -noise and exhaust emissions - are assessed. The highest specific thrust engine(lowest bypass ratio for a given core technology) achievable with a single-stage fan yields the best economics for a Mac
9、h 0.95 - 0.98 aircraft and canmeet the noise objectives specified, but with significant economic penalties.Advanced technologies which would allow high temperature and cycle pressureratios to be used effectively are shown to provide significant improvement inmission performance which can partially o
10、ffset the economic penalties incurredto meet lower noise goals. Advanced technology needs are identified; and, inparticular, the initiation of an integrated fan and inlet aero/acoustic programis recommended.17. Key Words (Suggested by Author(s)Turbofan enginesSubsonic aircraftAdvanced technologyNois
11、eEmissions19. Security Classif. (of this report)Unclassified18. Distribution StatementiUnclassified - limited20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. oUnclassified 151f Pages 22. Price*$3.00* For sale by the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22151Provided by IHSNot fo
12、r ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-PRECEDING PAGE BLANK NOT FILMEDFOREWORDThis propulsion system study was performed for the National Aeronauticsand Space Administration under Contract NAS3-15544 under the direction of theLewis Research Center - Mr. J.H. Pov
13、olny, Program Manager and Mr. R.J. Antl,Project Engineer. The report was prepared by M.A. Compagnon, with contributionsfrom A.J. Albright, R. Lee, and other General Electric personnel. W.R. Collier,the General Electric Program Manager, directed the overall study activity andR.E. Neitzel served as Te
14、chnical Study Manager.General Electric wishes to acknowledge the cooperation and support of theAdvanced Transport Technology aircraft system contractors performing airplanestudies (under contract to the Langley Research Center) in parallel with thispropulsion system study, namely:The Boeing Company
15、- Seattle, WashingtonGeneral Dynamics Corporation - Fort Worth, TexasLockheed - Georgia Company - Marietta, Georgia111 Preceding page blankProvided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-PRECEDlNu i;AGi. jjTABLE OF CONTENTSPageSUMMARY 1INTRODUCTION 8
16、TASK I - TURBOFAN ENGINE PARAMETRIC STUDY 9GENERAL APPROACH 9Scope of Specific Study 9CYCLE STUDIES 14Cruise Design Point and Cycle Match 14Engine Ratings 4Engine Study Size 15Component and Cycle Assumptions 15DEFINITION OF PARAMETRIC ENGINES 5Air Design and Component Sizing 5Installation 9Weight an
17、d Cost Estimates 26NOISE 27Noise Prediction Procedures 7Noise Suppression Treatment 28EXHAUST EMISSIONS 32Carbon Monoxide and Unburned Hydrocarbons 32Oxides of Nitrogen (NO ) 32BASIS OF ENGINE EVALUATION X 8RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 43Major Parametric Study Trends 3Effect of Cruise Mach Numb
18、er on Optimum Specific Thrust 52Effect of Energy Extraction - Separate Exhaust 59Noise Estimates 59Noise Suppression Penalties 69Economics Versus Noise 70Penalty Estimates for NO Control 74CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS - TASK I 6Conclusions 76Recommendations 7TASK II - ENGINE PRELIMINARY DESIGNS 7
19、8INTRODUCTION 78ENGINE DESCRIPTION 81Cycle and Performance 81Component Aerodynamic Design Summary 81Turbine Cooling Design Considerations 5Controls 6Mechanical Design Features and Weight 88Installation 91Preceding page blankProvided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without
20、 license from IHS-,-,-TABLE OF CONTENTS (Concluded)?ageNOISE 99Airplane Flight Trajectory and Thrust Requirements 105Acoustic Treatment Design 105Noise Estimates 107Noise Contour Study 112Noise Comparisons 6Uncertainties in the Noise Estimates 121EMISSIONS ESTIMATES 121EVALUATION OF RESULTS 1Basis 1
21、21Comparison of ATT No. 1 and ATT No. 2 121Noise Benefits Due to Nacelle Suppression 124Economic Penalties of Noise Suppression 5Water Injection Penalties 125Payoff of Advanced Technology Engines Vs. CurrentTechnology 130TASK III - IDENTIFICATION OF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY FEATURES 132FAN 132COMPRESSOR
22、132COMBUSTOR 2TURBINES 3CONTROLS AND ACCESSORIES 133EXHAUST SYSTEM 134INSTALLATION 4RECOMMENDED ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY PROGRAMS 134Integrated Fan and Inlet Aero/Acoustic Program 134Installation Aerodynamics Investigation 136Aerodynamic Investigation of Fan/Core Mixers 139Additional Cycle Studies 139Con
23、trol System Studies 140Other Related Programs 0CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 141Conclusions 141Recommendations 3APPENDIX - SYMBOLS 144VIProvided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-LIST OF TABLESTable PageI. Parametric Engine Screening Study Flo
24、wchart. 10II. Initial Cycle Design Point Parametric Study Grid. 11III. Engine Parametric Study Grid. 12IV. Nacelle Aerodynamic Guidelines, Mixed Flow Cycle. 20V. Nacelle Aerodynamic Guidelines, Separate Flow Cycle. 21VI. Nacelle Structural Guidelines, Mixed and Separate Exhaust. 22VII. Components Co
25、nsidered in Weight and Cost Analysis. 27VIII. Task I Noise Ground Rules and Assumptions. 30IX. Task I Noise Suppression Summary. 31X. Host Airplane Characteristics. 42XI. Mission Trade Factors for Mach 0.98 A/C, Task I. 44XII. Mission Trade Factors for Mach 0.90 A/C, Task I. 44XIII. Engine Operating
26、 Conditions at FAR 36 Reference Stations -Task I. 62XIV. Penalty Estimates for NO Control, Task I. 75XV. Noise and Exhaust Emissions Objectives for Task II. 79XVI. Basic Engine Summary, Task II. 80XVII. Cycle, Task II. 82XVIII. Engine Ratings, Task II. 82XIX. Performance, Task II. 3XX. Component Aer
27、odynamic Design Summary - Task II. 84XXI. Control System Design Objectives. 87XXII. Control System Functions. 87viiProvided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-LIST OF TABLES (Concluded)Table PageXXIII. Control Mode Comparison. 89XXIV. ATT No. 1 D
28、esign Features, Basic Engine. 89XXV. ATT No. 1 Basic Engine Weight Breakdown. 90XXVI. ATT No. 1 Installation Weight. 92XXVII. ATT No. 2 Advanced Features, Basic Engine. 93XXVIII. ATT No. 2 Basic Engine Weight. 93XXIX. ATT No. 1 Installation Features. 102XXX. ATT No. 1, Estimated Noise Levels. 110XXX
29、I. ATT No. 2, Estimated Noise Levels. IllXXXII. Comparison of ATT Noise Contour Areas with Those ofCurrent Aircraft. 120XXXIII. Predicted Emissions Levels, ATT No. 1 and No. 2. 122XXXIV. Mission Sensitivity Factors for M = 0.98 Aircraft, Task II. 123XXXV. Merit Factor Evaluation, ATT No. 1 Versus AT
30、T No. 2. 123XXXVI. Estimated Water Injection Penalties. 129XXXVII. ATT Engine Payoff Versus Current Technology Engine. 131VlllProvided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONSFigure Page1. ATT No. 1 Bare Engine Cross Section Schem
31、atic. 32. ATT No. 2 Bare Engine Cross Section Schematic. 43. ATT No. 2/CF6-50 Engine Comparison. 54. Single-Stage Fan Design Point Performance Characteristics. 165. Two-Stage Fan Design Point Performance Characteristics. 176. Variation of System Pressure Losses. 187. Influence of Specific Thrust on
32、Nacelle Size. 238. Mach 0.98 Cruise Installation Drag Breakdown. 249. Influence of Specific Thrust on Mach 0.98 Cruise Drag. 2510. Task I - Noise Calculation Flowchart. 2911. Comparison of Peak Engine Smoke Emission Characteristics. 3312. Typical Relationships Between Combustion Efficiency andLevels
33、 of CO and H/C Emissions. 3413. Typical Combustion Efficiency Characteristics for aCurrent Engine. 3514. Predicted Emission Levels at Idle Conditions. 3615. Advanced Combustor Full Annular Test, Effect ofCompressor Exit Bleed Flow Extraction on Idle Emissions. 3716. NO Emission Trends at Sea Level S
34、tatic Full Power Operation. 39x17. Effect of Water Injection on NO Emissions Characteristicsof Carbureting Combustor. 4018. Predicted Effects of Water Injection on NO Emissions atSea Level Static Takeoff. X 4119. Engine Parametric Study Cycle Trends Versus SpecificThrust. 4620. Engine Parametric Stu
35、dy Performance Trends VersusSpecific Thrust. 47IXProvided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Continued)Figures Page21. Engine Parametric Study Weight Trends Versus SpecificThrust. 4822. Engine Parametric Study Price Trends
36、Versus SpecificThrust. 923. Engine Parametric Study Aircraft Gross Weight TrendsVersus Specific Thrust (M = 0.98). 5124. Engine Parametric Study Cycle Temperature and PressureRatio Effects on SFC, Weight, and Price at ConstantSpecific Thrust (M = 0.98). 5325. Engine Parametric Study Cycle Temperatur
37、e and PressureRatio Effects on Aircraft Gross Weight, DOC, and ROI atConstant Specific Thrust (M = 0.98). 5426. Engine Parametric Study Direct Operating Cost TrendsVersus Specific Thrust (M = 0.98). 5527. Engine Parametric Study Return on Investment TrendsVersus Specific Thrust (M = 0.98). 5628. Eng
38、ine Parametric Study Trends of SFC, Weight, and Priceas a Function of Specific Thrust. 5729. Engine Parametric Study Trends of Aircraft Gross Weight,DOC, and ROI as a Function of Specific Thrust (M = 0.90). 5830. Engine Parametric Study Trends of SFC, Weight, and Priceas a Function of Energy Extract
39、ion - Separate Exhaust(M = 0.98). 6031. Engine Parametric Study Trends of Aircraft Gross Weight,DOC, and ROI as a Function of Energy Extraction -Separate Exhaust (M = 0.98). 6132. Engine Parametric Study Sideline Noise Estimates as aFunction of Specific Thrust (M = 0.98). 6433. Engine Parametric Stu
40、dy Community Noise Estimates as aFunction of Specific Thrust (M = 0.98). 6534. Engine Parametric Study Approach Noise Estimates as aFunction of Specific Thrust (M = 0.98). 66Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Conti
41、nued)Figure35. Engine Parametric Study, Traded Noise Estimates as aFunction of Specific Thrust (M = 0.98). 6736. Engine Parametric Study Penalties of Noise SuppressionTreatment as a Function of Specific Thrust (M = 0.98). 7137. Engine Parametric Study Economic Penalties Versus TradedNoise, without F
42、an Source Noise Reduction (M = 0.98). 7238. Engine Parametric Study, Economic Penalties Versus TradedNoise, with Fan Source Noise Reduction (M = 0.98). 7339. ATT Engine Installation Dimensions. 9440. Accessory Gearbox Location. 9641. Exhaust Nozzle Candidates. 742. External Drag Comparison, M = 0.98
43、 and M = 0.90. 9843. Thrust Reverser System, Mixed Exhaust. 10044. Thrust Reverser Performance, Mixed Exhaust. 10145. Typical Engine Installation, Mixed Exhaust, M = 0.98. 10346. Task II, Noise Calculation Flowchart. 10447. Standard Take-off and Approach Airplane Trajectories(M = 0.98 A/C). 10648. A
44、TT No. 1 Acoustic Treatment Design. 10849. ATT No. 2 Acoustic Treatment Design. 10950. Effect of Exhaust Nozzle Area Increase on Noise Levels. 11351. Aircraft Trajectories with Operational Procedures, Approach.11452. Aircraft Trajectories with Operational Procedures, Takeoff. 11553. ATT No. 1 Noise
45、Contours. 11754. ATT No. 2 Noise Contours. 8XIProvided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Concluded)Figure Page55. ATT No. 1 Penalty of Noise Suppression. 12656. ATT No. 2 Penalty of Noise Suppression. 12757. ROI Penalty of
46、 Noise Suppression. 12858. Aero/Acoustic Test Vehicle Schematic. 13759. Aero/Acoustic Test Vehicle Schematic with Noise SuppressionTreatment. 138xnProvided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-SUMMARYThe overall objective of this study was to ident
47、ify propulsion systemsapplicable to long range, high subsonic, jet commercial transport aircraft.Emphasis was placed upon advanced technology for engines designed for Mach0.95 to 0.98 aircraft.In the Task I parametric phase, the effects of variations in cycle andengine configuration on performance,
48、weight, cost, installation, noise,emissions, and aircraft economics were examined. The significant resultsand conclusions reached in Task I are summarized below: For a Mach 0.98 aircraft, the highest specific thrust engine(lowest bypass ratio for given core technology) obtainable with asingle-stage fan (assumed to be limited to 1.9 pressure ratio)yields the best mission performance. The above result applies for noise levels down to 15 EPNdB belowFAR 36. Sideline jet noise becomes limiting for any lower levelof engine noise. For a Mach 0.90 aircraft
