Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T10:05:43.724Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Performance prediction and progress towards multi-disciplinary design of contra-rotating open rotors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2016

S. Guérin ,
R. Schnell  and
R. G. Becker
S. Guérin*
Affiliation:
DLR, Institute of Propulsion Technology, Engine Acoustics Department, Berlin, Germany
R. Schnell
Affiliation:
DLR, Institute of Propulsion Technology, Fan and Compressor Department, Cologne, Germany
R. G. Becker
Affiliation:
DLR, Institute of Propulsion Technology, Engine Department, Cologne, Germany
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

At DLR’s Institute of Propulsion Technology, the prediction tools and multi-disciplinary optimisation strategies developed for turbofan engines have been extended to contra-rotating open rotors (CROR). Thereby the objective has been to appraise and improve the performance of CROR engines and thus to reduce their environmental impact. The present paper reviews the intermediate progress achieved in this scope. The prediction is based on analytical and CFD methods and covers the fields of engine performance analysis, aerodynamics and acoustics. The aerodynamic and acoustic results could be partly validated through the comparison to experimental data obtained from wind-tunnel tests. In a multi-disciplinary approach the aforementioned aspects are optimised together. First results of an aero-acoustic optimisation are presented. Furthermore this paper undertakes some comparison between high-bypass ratio turbofan engines and open-rotor concepts.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 118 , Issue 1208 , October 2014 , pp. 1159 - 1179
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Rohrbach, C. and Metzger, F.B. The prop-fan: a new look in propulsors, Anaheim, California, USA, 29 September – 1 October 1975. AIAA/SAE 11th Propulsion Conference. AIAA-75-1208.Google Scholar
2. Grieb, H. and Eckardt, D. Turbofan and propfan as basis for future economic propulsion concepts. Huntsville, Alabama, USA, 16-18 June 1986. AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE 22nd Joint Propulsion, Conference. AIAA-86-1474.Google Scholar
3. Reynolds, C.N., Riffel, R.E. and Ludemann, S. Propfan propulsion systems for the 1990s, San Diego, California, USA, 29 June-2 July 1987. AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE 23rd Joint Propulsion Conference. AIAA-87-1729.Google Scholar
4. Reid, C. Overview of fight testing of GE aircraft engines UDF engine, Boston, Massachusetts USA, 11-13 July 1988, AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE 24th Joint Propulsion Conference. AIAA-88-3082.Google Scholar
5. Interview of Chief Technology Offcer Ric Parker from Rolls-Royce: Das wird auch für die Flugzeugh-ersteller eine schwierige Entscheidung, VDI Nachrichten, 37, (2), 16 September 2011.Google Scholar
6. http://www.boeing.com/boeing/commercial/cmo/.Google Scholar
7. http://www.cleansky.eu/.Google Scholar
8. Becker, R.-G., Wolters, F., Nauroz, M. and Otten, T. Development of a gas turbine performance code and its application to preliminary engine design. Bremen, Germany, 27-29 September 2011, Deutscher Luft-und Raumfahrtkongress 2011.Google Scholar
9. Laban, M., Kok, J.C. and Prananta, B.B. Numerical tools for contra-rotating open-rotor performance, noise and vibration assessment. Nice, France, 19-24 September 2010, 27th International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences.Google Scholar
10. Schnell, R., Yin, J., Voss, C. and Nicke, E. Assessment and optimization of the aerodynamic and acoustic characteristics of a counter rotating open rotor, ASME J Turbomachinery, 134/061016-15.Google Scholar
11. Otten, T., Becker, R.-G., Plohr, M. and Doepelheuer, A. Energy effcient engine concepts. Lisbon, Portugal, 22-24 October 2012. NATO AVT-Workshop on Energy Effcient Technologies and Concepts of Operation.Google Scholar
12. Nürnberger, D., Eulitz, F., Schmitt, S. and Zachcial, A. Recent Progress in the Numerical Simulation of Unsteady Viscous Multistage Turbomachinery Flows. Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium on Air Breathing Engines, 2001. ISABE-2001-1081.Google Scholar
13. Schnell, R. Investigation of the Acoustic Nearfield of a Transonic-Fanstage by Time-Domain CFD-Calculations with Arbitrary Blade Counts. Wien, Austria, 7-14 June 2004. ASME Turbo-Expo 2004. 2004-GT-54216.Google Scholar
14. He, L. Fourier methods for turbomachinery applications, Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 2010, 46, (8), pp 329–341.Google Scholar
15. http://www.dream-project.eu/.Google Scholar
16. Denton, J.D. and Singh, U.K. Time marching methods for turbomachinery flow calculation. VKI Lecture Series 1979-7. 1979.Google Scholar
17. Delattre, G. and Schnell, R. Cross-comparison of Aerodynamic prediction for Open Rotors with ONERA-elsA and DLR-TRACE codes. Toulouse France, February 2011. 11th ONERA–DLR Aerospace Symposium.Google Scholar
18. Lepot, I., Leborgne, M., Schnell, R., Yin, J., Falissard, F. and Talbotec, J. Aero-mechanical optimization of a contra-rotating open rotor and assessment of its aerodynamic and acoustic characteristics. Proceedings of the Institute of Mechnical Engineers, Part A: J Power and Energy, 2011, 225, 7, pp 850–863.Google Scholar
19. Funke, S., Kim, L. and Siller, H. Acoustic measurements of a contra-rotating open rotor in an open jet wind-tunnel, Int J Aeroacoustics, 2012, 11, (2), pp 239–254.Google Scholar
20. Schnell, R., Yin, J., Funke, S. and Siller, H. Aerodynamic and basic acoustic optimization of a counter rotating open rotor with experimental verifcation. Colorado Springs, CO USA., 4-6 June 2012, 18th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. AIAA-2012-2127.Google Scholar
21. Peake, , and N. Parry, A.B. Modern challenges facing turbomachinery aeroacoustics, Annual Rev Fluid Mech, 2012, 44, pp 227–248.Google Scholar
22. Moreau, A. and Guérin, S. Development and application of a new procedure for fan noise prediction. Stockholm, Sweden, 7-9 June 2010. 16th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. AIAA-2010-4034.Google Scholar
23. Moreau, A. and Guérin, S. Similarities of the in-duct and free-field formulations in rotor noise problems. Portland, USA, June 2011, 17th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. AIAA-2011-2759.Google Scholar
24. Guérin, S., Moreau, A., Menzel, C. and Weckmüller, C. Open-rotor noise prediction with a RANS-informed analytical methods. Colorado Springs, CO, USA, 4-6 June 2012. 18th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. AIAA-2012-2303.Google Scholar
25. Moreau, A. and Oertwig, S. Mesurements compared to analytical prediction of the sound emitted by a high-speed fan stage, Berlin, Germany, June 2013. 19th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. AIAA-2013-2047.Google Scholar
26. Hanson, D.B. Noise of counter-rotation propellers, J Aircr, 1985, 22, (7), pp 609–617.Google Scholar
27. Weckmüller, C. and Guérin, S. Highly-Effcient Hybrid CFD/FW-H Approach for Open-Rotor Tonal Computation. Warsaw, Poland, 7-8 October 2010. 14th CEAS-ASC Workshop & 5th Scientifc Workshop of X3-Noise, Aeroacoustics of high-speed aircraft propellers and open rotors.Google Scholar
28. Weckmüller, C. and S. Guérin, S. On the infuence of trailing-edge serrations on open rotor tonal noise. Colorado Springs, CO, USA, 4-6 June 2012. 18th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, AIAA-2012-2124.Google Scholar
29. Weckmüller, C. Hybride Verfahren zur Berechnung der tonalen Schallerzeugung von Turbomaschinen. Technical University of Berlin, 2013. PhD Thesis.Google Scholar
30. Weckmüller, C., Guérin, S., Wellner, J. and Michel, U. Ffowcs-Williams and Hawkings Formulation for the Convective Wave Equation and Permeable Data Surface. Stockholm, Sweden, 7-9 June 2010. 16th AIAA/CEAS-Aeroacoustics Conference. AIAA-2010-3710.Google Scholar
31. Majjigi, R.K., Uenishi, K. and Gliebe, P.R. An investigation of counterrotating tip vortex interaction. Technical report, NASA, 1989. CR-185135.Google Scholar
32. Ganz, U., Glegg, S. and Joppa, P. Measurement and prediction of broadband fan noise, Toulouse, France, 2-4 June 1998, 4th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. AIAA-98-2316.Google Scholar
33. Moreau, A., Guérin, S. and Busse, S. A method based on the ray structure of acoustic modes for predicting the liner performance in annular ducts with flow, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 23-26 March 2009, NAG/DAGA 2009 Conference.Google Scholar
34. Kingan, M., Powles, C. and Self, R. Effect of centerbody scattering on adavnced open-rotor noise, AIAA J, 2010, 48, (5), pp 975–980.Google Scholar
35. Stürmer, A. and Yin, J. Installation impact on pusher CROR engine low speed performance and noise emission characteristics, Int J Engineering Systems Modelling and Simulation, 2012, 4, (1,2), pp 9–68.Google Scholar
36. Holewa, A., Weckmüller, C. and Guérin, S. Impact of by-pass bifurcations on fan noise, J Propulsion and Power, 2014, 30, (1), pp 143–152.Google Scholar
37. Guérin, S. and Moreau, A. Accounting for sweep and lean in the design-to-noise of rotor–stator stages. Berlin, Germany, 15-18 March 2010. DAGA 2010 Conference.Google Scholar
38. Hanson, D.B. Infuence of propeller design parametres on far-field harmonic noise in forward fight, AIAA J, 1980, 18, (11), pp 1313–1319.Google Scholar
39. Carazo, A., Roger, M. and Omais, M. Analytical prediction of wake-interaction noise in counter-rotating open rotors. Portland, USA, June 2011. 17th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. AIAA-2011-2758.Google Scholar
40. Weckmüller, C., Guérin, S. and Ashcroft, G. CFD/CAA Coupling Applied to DLR UHBR-Fan: Comparison to Experimental Data. Miami, Florida, USA, 11-13 May 2009, 15th AIAA/CEAS-Aeroacoustics Conference. AIAA-2009-3342.Google Scholar
41. Pagano, A., Barbarino, M., Casalino, D. and Federico, L. Tonal and broadband noise calculations for aeroacoustic optimization of propeller blades in a pusher confguration. Miami, Florida, USA, May 2009. 15th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. AIAA-2009-3138.Google Scholar
42. Marinus, B.G. Roger, M. Van den Braembussche, R.A. and Bosschaerts, W. Multidisciplinary optimization of propeller blades: focus on the aeroacoustic results. Portland Oregon, USA, 17th June 2011, AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. AIAA-2011-2801.Google Scholar
43. Yin, J. and Delfs, J. Improvement of DLR rotor aeroacoutics code (APSIM. and its validation with analytic solution. Friedrichshafen Germany, 16-18 September 2003. 29th European Rotorcraft Forum.Google Scholar
44. Stürmer, A. and Yin, J. Low-speed aerodynamics and aeroacoustics of CROR propulsion system. Miami, Florida, USA, 11-13 May 2009. 15th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. AIAA-2009-3134.Google Scholar
45. Farvacque, B. Specifcation of acoustic criteria for open rotor evaluation. Technical report, 2009. DREAM project internal documentation.Google Scholar