NASA CR-175079 AVSCOM TR-86-C-10 TELEDYNE CAE Report No. 2224 Copy No.

NASA
SMALL ENGINE COMPONENT TECHNOLOGY (SECT) STUDY FINAL REPORT
By B. Singh

.... _TELEDYNE
Turbine Engines

CA E

Date for general release

March 31, 1991

Prepared For: National Aeronautics And Space Administration Lewis Research Center And U.S. Army Aviation Research and Technology Activity Propulsion Directorate Contract NAS 3-24541

1.Report q'ASA CR- 175079 _ AVSCOM TR- 86-C-I0

4. Title end Subtitle

2. Government Accession No.

3. Reciplent's

Catalog No.

5, Report Date

Small Engine Component Study Final Report

Technology

(SECT)

March
6. Performing

1986
Organization Code

7.'Author(s)

'

8. Performing

Organization

Report No,

B. Singh

Teledyne CAE Report No. 2224

10, Work Unit No.

9. Performing

Organization

Name end Aadress 11. Contract or Grant No.

Teledyne CAE 1330 Laskey Road, P. O. Box 6971 Toledo, OH 43612

12. Sponsoring Agency Name llnd Address

NAS 3 - 24541
13. Type of Report end Period Covered

NASA Lewis Research Center and U.S. Army Aviation Research and Technology Activity, Propulsion Directorate, Cleveland, Ohio 44135
15. Supplementary Notes

Contractor
14. Sponsoring

Report

Agency Code

535-05-01 ILI61101AH45

Project Manager, Michael R. Vanco NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH 44135
16. Abstract

A study has been conducted for advanced small (450 - 850 pounds thrust, 2002 3781 N) gas turbine engines for a subsonic strategic cruise missile application, using projected year 2000 technology. An aircraft, mission characteristics and baseline (state-of-the-art) engine were defined to evaluate technology benefits. Engine performance and configuration analyses were performed for two and three spool turbofan and propfan engine concepts. Mission and Life Cycle Cost (LCC) analyses were performed in which the candidate engines were compared to the baseline engine over a prescribed mission. The advanced technology engines reduced system LCC up to 41% relative to the baseline engine. Critical aerodynamic, materials and mechanical systems turbine engine technologies were identified and program plans were defined for each identified critical technology.

i'7'. Key Words (Suggested

by Author(s))

18. Distribution

Statement

Cruise missile Turbofan engines Propfan Component technology

19. Security Clesslf. (of this report) 20. Security Clasalf. (of this page) 21. No. of psges 22. Price"

Unclassified

Unclassified

TABLE SECTION 1 0 SUMMARY INTRODUCTION SELECTION 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 4.0 ENGINE 4.1 4.2 OF EVALUATION Definition and

OF

CONTENTS PAGE 1 2

2.0 3.0

PROCEDURES

AND

ASSUMPTIONS

3 3 3 6 7

Methodology Assumptions Mission Aircraft Baseline

Groundrules

Requirements Definition Engine Definition AND Technology Anaylsis Turbofan Turbofan Propfan Propfan For Component Analysis CYCLE ANALYSIS

8 9 9 9 i0 i0 i0 ii ii Ii

CONFIGURATION Preliminary Engine Cycle 2-Spool 3-Spool 2-Spool 3-Spool Cycles

Projections

4.2.1 4.2.2 4.2.3 4.2.4 Engine Component 4.4.1

Aerodynamics Fan/Compressor 4.4.1.1 4.4.1.2 Technology Projections

12 12 13 13

Technology Configurations Technology Technology Configurations Technology Technology Selected

4.4.2

Turbine 4.4.2.1 4.4.2.2

Projections

13 14 14

4.4.3

Combustor 4.4.3.1 4.4.3.2

Projections Configurations and Flowpaths

14 15

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION

PAGE

4.5

Structures 4.5.1 4.5.2 4.5.3 4.5.4

Technology Fan/Compressor Turbine Propfan Mechanical Technology Analysis Analysis Cycle Analysis Evaluation Structural Technology

16 16 18 19 20 22 24 26 26 27 28 29 29

Structural Gearbox Design

Technology Design Guidelines

Technology

4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 4.10 4.11 5.0 SYST_4 5.1 5.2 6.0

Materials Recuperator Cooled Updated

Projection

Turbine Engine

Engine/Component Candidate PERFORMANCE Mission Life Analysis Cycle Cost Engines

Configuration

EVALUATION

Analysis AND PROGRAM and PLANS

30 31 31 32

TECHNOLOGY 6.1 6.2

INDENTIFICATION Identification Plans TO AND OTHER

Technology SECT Program

Rankings

7.0 8.0 9.0

TECHNOLOGY TECHNOLOGY RECOMMENDATIONS REFERENCE APPENDIX A

TRANSFER PAYOFFS

APPLICATIONS

33 35 36 37

CONCLUSIONS

LIST

OF

SYMBOLS

AND

ABBREVIATIONS

ii

LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

i0
Baseline Baseline Engine Engine Performance Materials For Component Design: 40 Matrix 41 41 _ and Payoffs 42 42 43 For Engines For Cruise 43 44 Cycle: Propfan Cycle 45 46 46 At 47 Detailed Thrust Summary And Rankings Centrifugal Cycle Performance 48 49 49 Subsonic TITLE

PAGE 38

39

Typical Engine Cycles Sea Level, Mach 0.7 Engine Compressor Turbine Turbine Combustor Structural Strategic Structural Missile Advanced Recuperator Recuperator Component Candidate Mission-Match And Component Design Technology Design

Configuration Guidelines Improvements Constraints Projections Contraints Missile

Technology Design Cruise

43

Design Requirements Engine Turbines Engine Materials Engine Parameters Configurations Performance

Ii 12 13 14 15

Design Design Engine

Engines: Thrust

16

Candidate Engines: At Mission-Match System Technology Subsonic Compressor Performance

17 18 19

Identification Strategic Cruise Requirements

Missile

50
Priority Applications Drivers: 51

2O

System, Mission And Technology Transfer

Environmental To Other

iii

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS FIGURE 1 SECT Study Methodology TITLE Flow Chart (Missile Operation
53

PAGE 52

SECT Life Cycle Cost Study And Support) Methodology 3 4 5 6 Basic Subsonic Cruise Missile Strategic Missile Vehicle

Cruise Vehicle

Missile

Mission

54 54 55 56

Baseline Cruise Baseline Preliminary Projections (Corrected

Drag Characteristics Engine Efficiency

(State-Of-The-Art)

Fan/Compressor Polytropic To YR 2000 Flow Up To 0.725 kg/sec) Polytropic kg/sec)

57

Preliminary Fan/Compressor Projections To YR 2000 (Correct Flow Up To 4.536 Preliminary Projections Preliminary Projections Radial Turbine To YR 2000 Axial Turbine to YR 2000

Efficiency
57

9 i0 ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Efficiency
58

Efficiency
59

Two-Spool Turbofan Parametric Sea Level, Mach 0.7 Three-Spool Sea Level, 4 X 4 Counter Turbofan Mach 0.7 Rotating

Performance:
6O

Parametric Propeller

Performance:
6O

Performance

61

Two-Spool Propfan Parametric Sea Level, Mach 0.7 Three-Spool Sea Level, Propfan Parametric Mach 0.7

Performance:
61

Performance:
62

Compressor Polytropic To YR 2000 Compressor

Centrifugal Corrections

Efficiency Ratio

Projections
62

Hub/Tip

Corrections
Speed

For Efficiency

63

Compressor Specific for Efficiency

64

iv

LIST

OF

ILLUSTRATIONS

(CON'T)

FIGURE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

TITLE Compressor Axial Radial Mixed Turbine Turbine Flow Flow Size Efficiency Efficiency Efficiency Trends Effectiveness Trends And Weight Trends Pattern Trends Factor Trends Trends Corrections Projections Projections Projections For Efficiency To To YR YR To 2000 2000 YR 2000 "

PAGE 64 65 66 66 67 68 68 69 70 70 71

Turbine Temperature Cooling Weight Size Exit

Combustor Combustor Combustor Combustor Combustor Combustor Combustor Axial And

Temperature Loss

Pressure

Configurations Mixed Flow Maximum And Mixed Maxiumum Fan/Compressor Allowable Tip Structural Speed Projections

Guidelines: 31 Centrifugal Guidelines: Propfan Gearbox Propfan Shaft

72

Flow Compressor Allowable Tip

Structural Speed Projections

73

32

Gearbox Weight Gearbox Diameter Seals VS

Weight Projections: VS Input Speed Shaft Diameter VS Power Shaft Guidelines: Seal Rubbing Projections: Speed Maximum Velocity Allowable

73

33

34

Contacting Temperature

74 Allowable And 75 Load 76

35

Non-Contacting Seals Guidelines: Maximum Temperature VS Relative Surface Velocity Relative Surface Velocity VS Seal Pressure Differential Bearing Design Guidelines: VS Bearing Bore Diameter Bearing Design Guidelines: Operative Temperature Low Pressure Speed Spool VS Shaft Shaft Maximum

36

Operating

37

Life

Factor

VS

Bearing 76

38

Critical Frequency v

Speed Parameter

Guidelines: (Dm/L2) 77

Maximum

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (CON'T) FIGURE 39 TITLE Two-Spool Propfan Recuperated Engine Parametric Performance: Sea Level, Mach 0.7, 6% Recuperator Pressure Loss Two-Spool Propfan Recuperated Engine Parametric Performance: Sea Level, Mach 0.7, 12% Recuperator Pressure Loss Recuperator Design Sketch With 79 With 79 PAGE

77

40

78 78

41 42

Two-Spool Turbofan Parametric Performance Updated Cycles: Sea Level, Mach 0.7, 1371C (2500F) TRIT Two-Spool Turbofan Parametric Updated Cycles: Sea Level, 1649C (3000F) TRIT Performance Mach 0.7,

43

44

Three-Spool Turbofan Parametric Performance With Updated Cycles: Sea Level, Mach 0.7, 1371C (2500F) TRIT Three-Spool Turbofan Cycles: Sea Level, Parametric Mach 0.7, Performance With Updated 1649C (3000F) TRIT

80 80 81 81 With 82 82

45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54

Three-Spool Turbofan Parametric Performance With Updated Cycles: Sea Level, Mach 0.7 (3500F) TRIT Two-Spool Propfan Parametric Updated Cycles: Sea Level, Performance Mach 0.7 With

Three-Spool Propfan Parametric Performance Updated Cycles: Sea Level, Mach 0.7 Two-Spool Turbofan And Performance Three-Spool Turbofan And Performance Two-Spool Propfan And Performance Mission Cruise Analysis Missile Candidate Candidate Engine

Cross-Section Cross-Section 83

Engine

Candidate Methodology

Engine

Cross-Section
3

Flow Chart Baseline Engine

84 84

Mission

Performance:

Cruise Missile Mission Performance: Two-Spool Advanced Technology Turbofan Engine

vi

85

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (CON'T) FIGURE 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 TITLE Cruise Missile Mission Performance: Advanced Technology Turbofan Engine
Cruise Missile Mission Advanced Technology Cruise Advanced System System Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Technology Life Life Missile Mission Performance: Propfan Engine Performance: Propfan Cost Cost Results Sensitivity Radial Bearings Propfan Dual Slinger High Results Inflow And Gearbox Centrifugal Combustor Speed Shaft CompreSsor Turbine Seals Engine Three-Spool 85 Two-Spool 86 Three-Spool 86 87 87 88 88 89 89 PAGE

Technology Cycle Cycle Program Program Program Program Program Program

Plans: Plans: Plans: Plans: Plans: Plans:

9o
9O

vii

i. 0

SUMMARY

The objectives of this study were to identify high payoff small turbine engine technologies for year 2000 applications and provide technology plans for guiding future research and technology efforts. The study was based on a subsonic strategic cruise missile capable of flying at Mach 0.7 to 0.9 from sea level to 12.2 KM(40,000 ft.) with a 7408 KM (4000 NM) range. A current state-ofthe-art engine (2758N, 620 ibs thrust at sea level, Mach 0.7) was selected as the baseline engine. A_ engine cycle performance analysis was conducted at sea level, Mach 0.7 using the projected year 2000 technology. Four engine concepts were evaluated with a variety of component configurations: two spool turbofan, three spool turbofan, two spool propfan and three spool propfan. Four candidate engine cycles, representing each engine concept, were selected for system analysis. These engines ranged from 1371 to 1649C (2500 to 3000F) turbine rotor inlet temperature and 26:1 to 45:1 overall pressure ratio. The engines were selected primarily on the basis of low SFC and component configuration considerations. The lowest SFC was achieved with the three spool propfan engine cycle: approximately 0.051 Kg/HR/N (0.5 Ib/hr/Ib), a 50% reduction relative to the baseline engine. The three spool turbofan engine provided approximately 35% reduction in SFC. Each candidate engine was subjected to mission analysis and compared to the baseline engine mission performance. Engines and air vehicles were scaled to satisfy the 7408 KM (4000 NM) mission range. All advanced candidate engines satisfied the required 7408 KM (4000 NM) range. The baseline engine, scaled to 4448 Newton (i000 ib) thrust, failed to meet this requirement by 30%. Missile weight ranged from 782 Kg (1725 ibs) for the three spool propfan to 1483 Kg (3271 ib) for the baseline engine. The reduction in missile weight and size increased the launch aircraft missile carrying capability up to 47% based on missile weight and 26% based on the missile diameter relative to the baseline engine. A life cycle cost (LCC) analysis was performed, to compare the advanced technology engines to the baseline engine. The results indicate that the advanced technology engines provide up to 41% reduction in system LCC. A turbine cooling penalty analysis indicated 15% increase in LCC relative to the uncooled turbine. Recuperated configurations were evaluated, and found to be noncompetitive. High payoff engine technologies were identified and ranked. The technologies identified as critical to the success of the year 2000 systems are: ceramic composite radial inflow turbine, light weight missilized propfan gearbox and high speed bearings/seals. Technology plans were prepared for these and other identified important technologies.

2.0

INTRODUCTION

Many research and development programs have resulted in an extensive data base for medium to large gas turbine engines. However, small engines have not attracted the same interest and funding. This has created a wide technology and performance gap between small (.23-1.59 Kg/sec, 0.5-3.5 ibs/sec airflow) and large engines; small engine components exhibit lower efficiency and temperature levels. Technology transfer is limited, because aerodynamic and structural design and manufacturing techniques of large engines can not directly be scaled to small engines. However, technology programs directed to small engines can provide up to 50% fuel consumption improvements for the year 2000 technology engines. The primary objectives of the Small
(SECT) study were to identify high payoff technology plans for year 2000 technology as covering the 890-4448 Newton (200 to This study was funded by the NASA Lewis Aviation Research and Technology Activity Technology Technology payoffs plans are include based on detailed Component Technology technologies and provide turbine engines, defined i000 ibs) thrust range. Research Center and US Army - Propulsion Directorate. cycle cost evaluation.

Engine

system life schedules.

The SECT study was directed cruise missile application. The performance needs of rotorcraft, engines engine. emphasis The are congruent with those

to an advanced strategic size, configuration and tactical crulse missile of the strategic cruise

subsonic general and APU missile

Because many of the required technologies was placed on technology transfer to these SECT study consisted of the following

are common, applications.

tasks: and the study

(i)

Task I - Selection of evaluation assumptions. This effort focused methodology and major assumptions. Task II Engine configuration and

procedures on defining

(ii)

cycle

analysis.

This engine of

task encompassed component cycle analysis, component candidate engines. (iii) Task IIIlife cycle engines.

technology definition

projections, and selection

System performance cost analyses were

evaluation. conducted

for

Mission and the candidate

(iv)

Task IV - Technology plan. identified and ranked during were generated for the high report presents the results

High this payoff of

payoff technologies task. Technology technologies. study.

were plans

This

this

3.0

SELECTION OF EVALUATION PROCEDURES AND ASSUMPTIONS The Small Engine

Component Technology the (SECT) baseline reference study assumptions and is

and and

groundrules definition

included of: mission

definition of requirements,

application, air vehicle mission engine

engine, basic assumptions and methodology. a strategic subsonic cruise missile, with technology 3.1 to be available Definition by the year

The primary the required

2000.

Methodology

A methodology was established to conduct the engine configuration and cycle evaluation, system performance evaluation and to establish a SECT plan; the logic flow is shown on Figure The methodology integrates mission requirements, projected components and materials technology, engine cycleconfiguration analysis and aircraft definition to identify the high payoff technologies. The main elements of the methodology are: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) (viii) (ix) (x) (xi) Assumptions Mission Reference Reference Engine Engine Mission Life and groundrules

i.

requirements vehicle state-of-the-art cycle concepts analysis cycle cost analysis and prioritization analysis and configuration engine

Technology Technology Technology

identification transfer plans

3.2

Assumptions

And

Groundrules established These engine to provide included engine installation and

Assumptions and groundrules were consistent advanced technology results. parameters, engine operating conditions, LCC parameters. cycles, concepts The list main of These assumptions and materials to are summarized abbreviations

were achieve

based on advanced engine large SFC reductions. A

assumptions symbols and

in the following paragraphs. is contained in Appendix A.

Range

of The

Thermodynamic ranges of

Parameters thermodynamic parameters selected only) (2100 were:

Bypass Ratio = 2.0 to 6.0 (Turbofans Turbine Inlet Temperature = i149-1927C Overall Pressure Ratio = 8.0 to 45.0 Propfans: Single and Counterrotation This 2000 (i) technology technology Subsonic between turbine (ii) span was projections flight

to

3500F)

year

based on the mission and Teledyne CAE's dictate that bypass

requirements, past experience: ratios be

speeds

2.0 and 6.0 for inlet temperature

low SFC, depending and installation

upon the restrictions. size, inlet or near

Turbine inlet temperature impacts the core engine hence allowable bypass ratio, therefore, year 2000 engines demand high temperatures. The low turbine temperature limit was selected to reflect current term operational overall technology pressure ratio levels. (OPR) excessive is desireable OPR's can

(iii)

High

for result

SFC in in

considerations.

However,

reduced component size, cost. An OPR limit of the year 2000 technology

increased engine complexity 45:1 provides achieveable engines. propfans provide for the subsonic a

and goals

(iv)

Single and counterrotating significant SFC improvements cruise missile mission. Environment operational = = 0-12.2 0.5 = KD2 KM 0.9 _>> environment (0-40,000 1800 (See

means of strategic

Engine

Operatin_ The engine

conditions ft.)

are:

Altitude Mach No. Distortion The performs descends assumed

Appendix missile 10.7 KM cruise. (due to distortion

for

definition)

subsonic a first to sea to have

strategic cruise cruise segment at level for the final a flush type an inlet engine demanding Losses engine installation 0.96 0.0 7.5 KW (i0.0

is air launched, (35,000 ft.) and The missile was reduced RCS capability. tolerance

requirements), Engine The Inlet Bleed Power

Installation assumed

losses

are:

Recovery: Air Extraction: Extraction:

HP)

Fuel: Current cruise missiles use JP-10 as the primary fuel. Thus, JP-10 was selected to provide relative technology payoffs, and to allow relation of cruise missile technology to the technology
transfer fuels. SECT applications, which most probably will not use slurry

but

Slurry fuels were were not considered

considered for detail

in defining analysis

as

engine they

configurations, are outside the

SECT work scope. Some of the uncertainties and problems with various slurry fuels are: ill defined combustion chemistry, liquid combustion product deposit on the engine components, engine component abrasion due to combustion products, fuel management system (tank, pumping, valving) complexity and interaction of combustion products with composite materials. Technology Drivers system priority area, performance (range) order: SFC specific thrust and

Significant strategic cruise missile improvements will require, in decreasing reduction, and increases of thrust/frontal thrust/weight relative to current engines. The SFC: assumed .051-.082 technology Kg/hr/N drivers (0.5 -

(goals) 0.8

were:

ib/hr/ib) ib/in 2)

Thrust/frontal Cost: S22.5-45/N Thrust/airflow: Thrust/weight: Trade Factors and

area: .035-.07 N/MM 2 (5-10 (_100-200/Ib) thrust 294-981 N/Kg/sec (30-100 44.1-98.1 N/Kg (4.5 - i0 Preliminary Selection Criteria defined

ib/ib/sec) ibs/ib)

The preliminary

following engine TRADE

trade factors were selection criteria: FACTORS

to

be

used

as

VALUES (%/%)
1.5 0.2 0.i launch weight fuel consumption max thrust weight density 3.0 0.5 0.25

0w/0 SFC
0W/0 0 W/0 Where, W SFC FN WE PE = = = = = (FN/WE) P E vehicle specific engine engine engine

studies Since

These representative trade factors were derived from past for a typical subsonic strategic cruise missile mission. the SFC trade factor is overwhelmingly dominent over the engine selection process focused

other two, the preliminary entirely on SFC.

Life

Cycle

Cost

(LCC)

Assumptions LCC analysis

& was

Procedures conducted based on the

The following

SECT system assumptions: Constant

(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v)

1985

dollars

(vi)
(vii)

6000 production units 600 units per year production rate 5 year scheduled maintenance interval 20 year engine life. An engine life starts at of delivery and expires at the end of 20 years, scheduled maintenance every five years. Fuel cost: _i0 per gallon for JP-10. _35 per was Cost also used categories: for sensitivity analysis. Engine development Engine Acquisition Engine maintenance Fuel Vehicle acquisition

the time with gallon

Development and production unit costs were computed through the use of the RCA PRICE H model. Engine maintenance costs were computed through the use of the APSICOST MOSC (Missile Operational and Support Cost) model, developed under USAF/AFWAL sponsorship. The 3.3 computer Mission A (Figure model's Requirements subsonic strategic to evaluate each cruise advanced The missile mission technology primary conceptual flow chart is presented in Figure 2.

representative 3) was selected

candidate engine characteristics (i)

and the baseline engine. of the mission are: Altitude Launch: ft.), Mach 0.7; 0.9 at 10.67 KM

air launch at 11.28 accelerate to cruise (35,000 ft.)

KM Mach

(37,000

(ii)

Altitude Mach 0.9 Descent: without Sea 07. Level

Cruise: for 4630 descend range gain Cruise:

cruise at 10.67 KM KM (2500 NM range). to sea level, or fuel used. cruise 2778 KM Mach

(35,000

ft.),

(iii)

0.7

(iv)

(1500

NM)

at

Mach

(v)

Termination: 7408 KM (4000 Payload: mission was 181.4 chosen

Mission terminates NM) total range. Kg based (400 on lbs). the

after

achieving

(vi) This

following

considerations:

(i)

Previous launch

studies aircraft

indicated beyond most attrition of in life cycle Mach number

7408 KM (4000 enemy threat this cost

NM) range boundaries, weapon SECT the

puts system range

decreasing the (not included technology). requirements. (ii) The mission improvement Longer larger size scope (iv) 3.4 A very

expensive impact of with

is

consistent

range over

represents a significant current systems.

(iii)

ranges than 7408 KM (4000 hiM) will require a vehicle, thus resulting in an increased engine (larger than 4448 Newton, i000 ibs - outside the of this program). missile will be difficult to air launch.

large

Aircraft

Definition

The selected air vehicle (Figure 4) and its characteristics were based on a NASA Langley study (Reference I). The vehicle features a relatively high drag-rise Mach number of about 0.95. The basic vehicle characteristics are: Aspect Wing Wing Vehicle The Ratio: Leading Section: 2.446 Edge Sweep: NACA 65A006 58 8.65 parameters are:

Length/Diameter: vehicle

baseline

Vehicle Weight Wing Area Wing Span Fuselage Length Fuselage Diameter

=
= = = =

2495 Kg (55oo lbs.)

4.93 3.47 6.77 .78 M2 M M M (53.1 ft 2) ft.) ft.) ft.) (11.4 (22.2 (2.56

The vehicle planform and side views are depicted in Figure 4. The fuselage features a circular cross-section; Wings are attached at the center line of the fuselage. The vehicle was scaled for each advanced requirement The engine satisfy technology of 7408 vehicle candidate KM (4000 and size two engine NM). fuel to satisfy the mission range

launch

weights

were The

estimated was

based required

on

the to

and air inlet the following TOTAL FUSEAGE

and weight. requirements: =

vehicle

VOLUME

(PAYLOAD+STRUCTURAL+ENGINE+INLET + FUEL) VOLUME WEIGHT of an

LAUNCH The advanced vehicle cruise

WEIGHT drag missile

(PAYLOAD+STRUCTURAL+ENGINE+FUEL)

characteristics are representative vehicle, Figure 5.

The engine is mounted in the aft section of the fuselage. Engine air is supplied through a bottom mounted flush inlet. propfan engines use pusher counter-rotating props mounted aft the engine and located behind the vertical tail. 3.5
Baseline The technology. a bypass Engine Definition engine is based on the current state-of-the-art

The of

reference

The baseline engine is a two spool turbofan featuring ratio of I.I (Figure 6), scaled from 2758 to 4448N (620 consists The HP

to of

i000 ib) thrust to achieve maximum range. The LP spool a two-stage fan driven by a two-stage uncooled turbine. spool features a four stage (3 axial plus one centrigugal)

compressor driven by high load capacity single stag e uncooled turbine. An annular slinger combustor provides a compact engine installation. The exhaust system mixes by-pass and core flows, discharging through a convergent nozzle. Basic engine performance is summarized in Table 1 and engine materials are listed in Table

2.

4.0

ENGINE CONFIGURATION AND CYCLE ANALYSIS

Engine cycle values were studied parametrically to identify and define candidate cycles for the advanced subsonic strategic cruise missile system. _%e study was conducted using the assumptions and ground rules of Section 3.0 nd preliminary component projections at a sea level Mach 0.7 flight condition. This flight condition was identified as the most critical from fuel usage considerations, as more than 50% of the missile fuel is used at sea level cruise. Detailed component aerodynamic, structural and materials technology projections were later made and integrated into the candidate engines after the thermodynamic parameter ranges were reduced to a manageable number and high payoff combinations were identified. They verified the accuracy of the initial, simpler projections. 4.1
Preliminary Technology Projections

Preliminary component efficiency projections were made to conduct broad engine cycle parametric analysis. These efficiency projections were defined in a format to facilitate and simplify engine cycle analysis, and later verified for the final selected engine cycles. The primary objective was to generate realistic and consistent engine parametric cycle data and provide relative cycle performance analysis. Axial assessment without detailed component design and

and

centrifugal

compressor

polytropic

efficiency

projections are presented in Figure 7 as a function of compressor exit corrected airflow. These projections were derived from historical data and projected to the year 2000. Higher corrected airflow data are shown in Figure 8, and show that the axial and centrifugal efficiency curves cross over at approximately 2.5 Kg/sec (5.5 ibs/sec) corrected airflow. The axial curve passes through the Energy Efficient Engine (E 3) compressor efficiency level at 4.5 Kg/sec (i0.0 ibs/sec) corrected airflow (Reference The similar i0 as axial uncooled turbine manner. Adiabatic a function of turbine turbines respectively. levels airflow C[cle

2).

efficiency projections were derived in a efficiency is presented in Figures 9 and inlet corrected airflow for radial and Axial turbines reached E 3 engine 5.0 Kg/sec (Ii.0 ibs/sec)

efficiency corrected 4.2 Engine The

at approximately (Reference 3). Analysis analysis covered

parametric

broad

range

of

cycle

parameters to ensure that best engine cycles are selected for the Task III system analysis. The strategic cruise missile engine size is relatively small, 0.23 to 1.81Kg/sec (0.5 to 4.0 ib/sec)!core corrected airflow. This indicates a desireability of uncooled turbines. However, a cooled turbine analysis was also conducted to provide trade data (Section 4.8). The cycles were sized for a 0

baseline thrust at approximately 3336 Newton (750 ibs) at sea level, Mach 0.7 with 0.96 inlet pressure recovery. Four basic engine concepts were evaluated during this study: 4.2.1
Two-Spool Turbofan the maximum overall pressure ratio turbofan is 30:1. The parametric ii. Fan pressure ratio was optimized ratio, turbine rotor inlet ratio. The data indicate parameter ranges to be: TRIT OPR Bypass 4.2.2 Engine Three-Spool thermodynamic Turbofan cycle data are presented in Figure 12 for 1149-i 649 (OPR) data for

It was assumed that achievable in a two-spool are presented in Figure

each combination of bypass (TRIT) and overall pressure (lowest SFC) thermodynamic

temperature the optimum

oc

Ratio

(2100-2500F) 25-30 4-6

a three-spool turbofan engine. The three-spool turbofan provides the capability of achieving higher OPR and lower SFC than a twospool turbofan. Fan pressure ratio was optimized for each combination of bypass ratio, TRIT and OPR. SFC improvements of up to 7% were realized relative to the two-spool engines. Data did not indicate a significant SFC improvement above OPR of approximately 36:1. The optimum (lowest SFC) thermodynamic parameters are: TRIT OPR Bypass 4.2.3 2-Spool Ratio Propfan in propfan technology efficiency levels at high the NASA missile have proven that subsonic Mach was order to 1371-1649C 36-45 4-6 (2500-3000F)

they

Recent developments can achieve high

numbers evaluated achieve (SRP) and

(0.8-0.9). Therefore, for a strategic cruise significant gains counter-rotation

propfan concept application in

in range. propeller

Single-rotation (CRP) concepts

propeller were evaluated

for the prescribed mission. CRP permits (HP/D2) and achieves higher efficiency Three CRP configurations (4X4, 5X5 and for the Hamilton SECT study. CRP performance Standard performance decks.

higher propeller loadings levels than the SRP. 6X6 bladed) were evaluated the as a 13

was generated using Propfan efficiency is presented at sea level are:

function of power loading and tip speed for the selected (4X4) CRP configuration The selected propeller characteristics No. of Blades Loading (HP/D 2) 4X4

in Figure Mach 0.7.

*Power

73.4-342.5 243.8 0.88

Kw/M M/see.

(30-140

HP/Ft

2)

Tip Speed Efficiency *Depending upon the cruise horsepower

(800

Ft./See.)

requirements.

i0

A fixed pitch counter-rotation propeller configuration was used for simplicity; the variable pitch mechanism is very costly and complex, therefore, undesirable for the unmanned applications. Preliminary fixed pitch CRP evaluation did not indicate any
significant reduction minimum cruise power in propeller required was efficiency at or above down 80% to 80% (Section power; 5.1).

data are

These characteristics for two-spool propfan presented as a function

were used to generate engine parametric engine concepts. SFC and specific thrust of OPR and TRIT in Figure 14. These to 29%) and up SFC) improvements to 50% relative thermodynamic SFC to the parameters in

data indicated very significant (up relative to the two-spool turbofan, baseline engine. The optimum (lowest are : TRI T OPR Specific increase relative 4.2.4 Propfan performance presented (30-45). 1371-1649C 22-30

(2500-3200F)

thrust varies very in specific thrust to 1371C (2500F). Three-Spool engine described in Figure These data Propfan

significantly is observed

at

with TRIT, e.g., 1649C (3000F)

a 45% TRIT

parametric in Section 15 as a indicate from thrust due to Component

data were 4.2.3.

generated Parametric

using data

the are

CRP OPR to

function further

of TRIT reduction

(1371-1649C) and in SFC relative cycle relative

the lowest SFC 14). However, 2-spool propfan 4.3 Engine

achievable specific cycles For

the two-spool propfan is reduced up to 15% the increased OPR. Analysis

(Figure to the

Cycles

Three engine cycles were selected for the component design effort. These cycles based on Section 4.2 data analysis are: two spool turbofan with TRIT = 1371C (2500F) and overall pressure ratio (OPR) = 25; three spool turbofan with TRIT = 1649C (3000F) and OPR = 45; and two spool propfan with TRIT = 1649C (3000F) and OPR = 22. Specific design requirements for these three cycles are shown in Table 3. The three spool propfan cycle was not selected for component design analysis because the three engine concepts encompass the component requirements for this engine.

The conceptual component design and analysis was carried out for the specific design requirements (pressure ratio, corrected flow, and work) established by these cycles. This approach provided realistic component configuration comparisons for the same design requirements. 4.4 Component Aerodynamics configurations based on the The components shown in Table 4 were flow and work defined were mixed and matched 11 designed by the as for

The component each engine concept optimized cycles.

required. technologies 4.4.1

The projected year 2000 component aerodynamic used for these designs are discussed in this
Fan/Compressor Technology

section.

The compressor technology assessment was based on a realistic compressor data base and a generic computer code. Compressor efficiency is a function of parameters such as airflow, pressure ratio, tip speed, inlet radius ratio, specific speed, backward curvature, and diffuser radius ratio, thus is difficult to present in compact form. Performance characteristics were projected for the year 2000 for axial and centrifugal compressor stages. 4.4.1.1 Technology Projections

Teledyne CAE projects an increase of 5-7 points in compressor adiabatic efficiency by year 2000. Figure 16 shows projected performance as a function of temperature coefficient for axials, and as a function of stage pressure ratio for centrifugal stages. These Figure axial 17. efficiency Specific levels are adjusted speed corrections are for also hub/tip applied ratio, to centri-

fugal stage efficiency levels, Figure 18. Figure 19 addresses the engine size penalty on the compressor performance. Multi-stage compressor performance was predicted using these figures for each component stage. The compressor performance projections shown in these figures are consistent with the advanced structural and materials guidelines projected for year 2000 applications (sections 4.5 and 4.6). Compressor performance improvements can be achieved by enhancing both aerodynamic analytical modeling and structures/ manufacturing. Aero modeling will be improved by the use of 3-D aero codes like the Teledyne CAE/Denton code now being integrated into the compressor design system. The use of advanced codes such as this for flow analysis and blading design will improve efficiencies, allow higher stage loadings and minimize the penalties associated with small blade passages. Structural untwist modeling and uncamber needs improved prediction, capability for higher in these pressure for more tip speeds, accurate and

blade

for tighter tip 0roduce reduced stage, In smaller thereby

clearances. Improvements size corrections and higher increasing efficiencies. it higher will tip

areas will ratios per

the area of materials, shaft diameters and

be necessary to handle speeds so that hub/tip stage pressure ratios

radius are

ratio corrections are obtained and efficiency

improved, better increased. will result leading edge and items will also by small

surface blade reduce

Improved manufacturing finish, smaller tolerances. These the penalties

in airfoils with smoother fillet radii, and closer improve efficiencies and

imposed

size.

12

4.4.1.2

Configurations

Specific fan/compressor configuration designs were evaluated for two and three-spool turbofans and two-spool propfan cycles. These configurations provided enough information to satisfy the requirements for the three-spool propfans, therefore, it was not considered necessary to separately evaluate the compressor designs for this cycle. Temperature coefficient and blade height limitations were used to provide practical design concepts, Table 5. The components were designed at sea level, Mach 0.7 flight condition. 4.4.2 Turbine Technology high temperature turbines and structural durability turbine engines. Because of small cooled turbines for the and radial levels strategic turbine projected cruise to

Advancements in the development of are required to achieve the performance goals for the year 2000 technology small of the performance, cost and complexity was decided to baseline missile application. configurations the year 2000. 4.4.2.1 were uncooled turbines Axial, mixed flow and

it

evaluated

efficiency

Technology

Projections an increase efficiency (3500F). of 5 to 6 points in limited at temperature levels of Similar improvements are projected turbine 20 through 22 for axial, projected performance is flow levels as a has to its was

Teledyne life uncooled 1371C (2500F) projected efficiency radial and presented

CAE projects axial turbine to 1927C

for the radial turbines. Generic levels are presented in Figures mixed flow configurations. The for three turbine inlet corrected

function of loading (A H/ @ cr), U/Co and speed (RPM). Speed been used as an independent parameter. However, an optimized turbine speed may not be feasible for a specific design due impact on the compressor design. Therefore, speed selection based on the compressor-turbine performance considerations.

These projections are based on improved computational analytical methods (such as three-dimensional airfoil design techniques and three-dimensional viscous flow analysis), high Mach number blades, vane-blade interaction analysis, active/passive tip clearance control, high tip speeds (material improvements) and manufacturing technology improvements to provide improved surface finishes, Table 6. In addition, the losses due to secondary flows and low-aspect-ratio blade rows (necessitated by high loadings, low solidities and AN 2 limits) will be reduced through the use of fully three-dimensional aerodynamic design tools. The AN 2 limit is_projected2 to be 2.15 X 104 M2-Rev/sec . 2 .1200( inZ-RPM ) for ceramic composite axial turbines; values are 0.72-1.43 X 104 M2-Rev2/Sec 2 (400-800 in2-RPM 2) limitations Additional technology projection are summarized in Table 7. X 108 typical X 108 current and

groundrules

13

4.4.2.2

Configurations two

Specific turbine configuration designs were evaluated for and three-spool turbofans and two-spool propfan cycles (Section 4.3). These configurations also provide enough information to satisfy the requirements for the three-spool propfans. 4.4.3 Combustor Technology

The candidate SECT engines use overall pressure ratios up to 45:1 and high turbine inlet temperatures to optimize overall engine performance. At high temperatures, the durability and life of the turbine components are strongly dependent on combustor exit temperature gradients. The radial temperature profile must meet the structural requirements of the rotating component, while the circumferential temperature gradient (or pattern factor) must be minimized to reduce structure. excellent throughout thermal stresses and cooling requirements of the static Consequently, the combustors will be required to have exit temperature quality, and to retain this quality the life of the engine. Control of combustor exit

temperature gradient will require accurate prediction and control of the aerothermodynamics and stoichiometry of the primary combustion zone through the use of improved design tools. In addition, light weight and high temperature capability materials will be required. Combustor performance characteristics were projected 4.4.3.1 to meet the year 2000 system goals.

Technology

projections with pattern

Small turbine engine combustors currently operate factors in the 0.2 to 0.3 range at temperature-rise-to-inlettemperature ratios (A T/T4) in the order of 1.4. With cycle pressures and temperatures required of the SECT turbine durability and life goals will irequire pattern below 0.15. are compared Combustor in Table Cooled The year 2000 8 performance with the projections current values. for the

the high engines, factors year 2000

Configurations engines will require increased temperature rise

across the combustor cooling complexity. film cooled combustors year 2000 concepts via advanced and advanced

(Figure 23) thus adding to the combustor The cooling effectiveness achieved on current (0.4 to 0.6) is expected to reach 0.9 by the augmented materials. and/or surface convection film cooling

Durability, conflict with ratio and low where overall the high engine

reliability performance SFC. This

life

goals

of

advanced

engines

goals such as is particularly

increased true in the

thrust-to-weight the combustor, needed to attain use of advanced

cycle pressures and temperatures performance goals necessitate

cooling, materials and fabrication techniques and (in some cases) weight. While advanced increase cooling effectiveness, (Figure 24), heat transfer analysis to accurately predict 14

- which add complexity cooling concepts do the ability of current these improvements is

hampered by the limited detailed knowledge of the local boundary conditions. Advanced cooling concepts, augmented by improved analytical models integrating the combustor flowfield analysis and the liner wall heat transfer mechanism, will allow more effective use of cooling air and provide a more detailed, accurate prediction of liner temperatures. These improved combustor flowfield models are expected to alleviate this problem. The added complexity and weight are illustrated in Figure 25, where the weight of the advanced convention-film cooled configuration is three times that of the sheet metal louvered film concept. Part of this weight increase is offset by the trend toward smaller combustors (Figure 26). There has been a general trend toward a lower pattern factor (PF) over the years (Figure 27) and this trend is expected to continue. A push towards reduced pressure loss (Figure 28), with an attendant degradation in mixing, flowfield and gradient control will be balanced against exit temperature gradient requirements.
Uncooled Materials are required combustors. to develop These include high temperature fiber

Significant advances capability materials for

reinforced superalloys, ceramic composites and carbon-carbon. The ceramics and carbon-carbon are very attractive since they offer very light weight structures with material temperature capabilities in the 1760 to 2404C (3200 to 4000F) range, Table ii. These liner wall major advanced materials will eliminate the need of combustor uniform two

cooling requirements temperatures. These benefits (i) to the

thus resulting (uncooled) hot process:

in higher walls will

and more provide

combustion

The wall cooling

quenching films will

associated with be eliminated,

cooled or at

walls and/or least signifi-

cantly reduced. to volume ratio significant (ii) Heat walls loss will in loss from be

In small is high, in

combustors where surface area wall quenching can represent a performance. radiation) to loss reduction and thus the hot will

combustor

the flames (due to reduced. This heat reaction rate

result combustor 4.4.3.2 Selected

increased performance. Configurations

improved

And

Flowpaths for two spool propfan engine data, the following

Specific combustor designs were evaluated turbofan, three spool turbofan and two spool configurations. In order to provide consistent design goals/guidelines were assumed: o o o o Combustor Pattern Fuel Pressure Factor (Heating Value) Loss < < 2% 0.15

JP-10:42,100 KJ/Kg (18, i00 Bt u/Lb) wide range stability.

High

efficiency

and

15

Three basic combustor configurations were considered; annular slinger with centrifugal fuel injection, straight through or axial annular with atomizing fuel nozzles and reverse flow annular, with atomizing nozzles, Figure 29. Combustor geometry and size are
dependent Therefore, selected pressure on the high pressure compressor/turbine configurations. were high specific conceptual to provide compact compressor/turbine combustor design configurations engine flowpaths for the selected combinations.

Based on this configuration analysis, the slinger type combustor design presented in Figure 29 was selected to provide compact engine configurations for two spool turbofan, three spool turbofan, and two Spool propfan. Combustor loadings are light to moderate: residence time 5.2 to 14.8 milliseconds and heat release rate 35.3 to 97.8 X 10 -5 J/Sec M 3 Pa (4.3 - 11.9 MBTU/hour/cubic foot/atmosphere). The resulting combustor loadings and slinger design concepts will provide wide range for high performance and adaptability to the slurry fuels. 4.5 Structural Technology will

Aggressive performance goals for engines in the year 2000 require significant increases in tip speeds and significant decreases in component weights, obtained through the use of increased strength-to-weight materials and increased design efficiencies. Design efficiency will be increased by tailoring design to the selected material capabilities, using advanced structural analysis methods. Increased use of inelastic stress analyses and composite codes are projected. material stress and life analysis computer

the

Engine static component durability requirements generally have no significant interactions with the engine performance requirements, but many static components contribute significantly to engine weight. The design of each static structure component must be tailored to take full advantage of the properties of the selected material. This structural tailoring is particularly important for composite structures. Cost is a governing concern in missile engines, and difficult to estimate for these unproven materials. This section discusses the structural aspects, approaches, assumptions, design limits and the design requirements for the year 2000 technology engines. The structural guidelines focus primarily on the rotating components as they provide the maximum technology payoffs. In addition, technologies for mechanical systems such as bearings, seals, shafts and the propfan gearbox are also addressed. 4.5.1 Fan/Compressor Selection of Structural rotating is these component critical components to Technology mechanical the will study, limit design concepts and

materials technology considerations for parameters Preliminary mixed flow

since durability performance

such as tip speed, aspect structural design studies and centrifugal compressor 16

ratio and hub/tip ratio. were conducted for axial, rotating components to

identify the projected identified the critical Table 9.

Axial/Mixed Flow

limits for structural

these parameters. These studies design requirements indicated in

Fan/Compessor

Figure 30 shows projected maximum allowable tip speed as a function of hub/tip ratio (based on average diameters) and aspect ratio for axial and mixed flow fan/compressor rotors. The baseline engine rotor characteristics are also superimposed on this figure. The limits are based on burst margin and/or creep/rupture requirements. in the Obtainable range of 40 tip speed increases for year 2000 to 80 percent. These technology technology improvements are

are based on advanced materials, principally materials with a density of 5.26 X 103 Kg/M3 (0.19 Ibs/in3). Specific material selection will be based on the fan/compressor maximum operating temperature. For example, reinforced aluminum can be used at temperatures to 315C (600F) and composites such as carbon/polymide to approximately 427C (800F). Reinforced titanium is projected to have capability to 704C (1300F). Additional limitations imposed are: (i) (ii) (iii) 965-1138 for the No An X 106 advanced Pa (140-165 materials KSI) yield strength

vibratory assumed

restrictions blade thickness/chord tapering blade. to 2.5%

ratio at the

of tip

9%

at a

root, linearly constant chord

with

Component design is limited by the composite matrix strength, namely the inter-laminate and in-plane shear stresses in the fibers. A second critical limit is the transition region from radial stress to circumferential stress in the fibers. Centrifugal/Mixed Flow Compressor

The centrifugal compressor configuration is often limited by creep/rupture concerns. Since the disk bore temperature parallels that of the compressor exit, the bore is usually the limiting location for this component. These concerns are aggravated by the bore diameter requirements imposed if a low pressure spool shaft must pass through these components. Figure 31 presents projected allowable tip speeds for several materials as a function of disk bore temperature. The utilization of advanced titanium aluminide alloys, nickle based alloys and carbon-carbon are projected to provide 792-914 M/Sec (2600-3000 ft/sec) tip speed capability. Allowable tip speeds are indicated to be as high as 25% greater than the current state-of-the-art. 20%

These projected improvements in tip speed are based upon a improvement in ultimate strength capability of metallic materials through the use of advanced nickel alloys as well as titanium aluminide alloys. These gains can be accomplished through the rapid solidification process which is currently under development. 17

For advanced composite materials, a 2X improvement in shear strength capability of carbon/carbon or similar material is required: interlaminate shear stress capability of 6.89 X 106 Pa (i KSI) versus 3.45 X 106 Pa (0.5 KSI) and 103 X 106 Pa (15 KSI) for the in-plane shear stress capability are suitable goals. These improvements are required in conjunction with a low temperature oxidation/corrosion coating. limited 4.5.2
cant

The centrifugal/mixed by the disk bore

Turbine Structural turbine in

flow component designs are typically utilizing a disk burst margin of 17%.
Technology[ are projected capabilities to over require current signifiturbine

stress

Advanced improvement

components structural

technology. Turbine disks will have to increase in rim turbine blades to increase in average metal temperatures. ments in materials and continued development of structural methodology will ensure the achievement of these advanced capabilities, the projected The addressed while mission maintaining the usage goals. structural turbine required reliability

speed and Improvedesign to meet

fundamental during any

design requirements design and development

which must are outlined

be in

Table i0o The specific design requirements of burst, creep/rupture, some low cycle fatigue, high cycle fatigue, damage tolerance, maneuver loads, and containment are the key considerations that establish a turbine component's structural integrity. Of these, creep/rupture and low cycle fatigue (LCF) are the primary drivers. For disks and blades, the critical structural parameters that in turn drive creep/rupture and low cycle fatigue, are rim speed, AN 2 (annulus area x speed squared) and average metal temperature. Axial/Mixed Flow Turbines

Themixed flow turbine technology is representedby additional design parameters such as the inlet and outlet lean anqles. A technology capability for AN 2 of 2.15-3.5 X 104 M2-REV2/SEC2 (1200-1950 x 108 in 2 RPM2), using advanced ceramic composites and carbon-carbon from 792 tions for M2-Rev2/Sec2 materials, to 914 M/Sec tip speed and (800 x 108 materials are expected. The corresponding (2600 to 3000 ft/sec). Current AN 2 are 617 M/Sec (2200 ft/sec) in 2 RPM 2) respectively. such as ceramic composites and tip speeds vary technology limitaand 1.43 X 104

Advanced

silicon

carbide/silicon carbide are key technologies that are required in achieving these turbine technology goals. A 5 to 10% improvement in basic tensile strength capability with an operating temperature 1649-1927C (3000-3500F) was assumed for the ceramic composite materials. A 200% improvement in carbon/carbon shear stress capability is required to attain these 6.89 X pro_ections. i0 Pa (i The KSI) improvement interlaminate in shear stress capability shear stress and 103 X i0 _ of Along with withstanding this, a high 1649-1927C reflects Pa (15

KSI) in-plane temperature (3000-3500F)

shear stress capability. oxidation coating capable is required 18

The turbine blades are stress limited by the parameter This is basically set by the airfoil twist and by the airfoil for the mixed flow rotors. The disk is also stress limited speed parameter.
Radial Turbines

AN2. lean by tip

The tip speed versus turbine rotor inlet temperature relationship is used to establish the turbine blade's creep/rupture limitation. Advanced technology carbon-carbon tip speed projections range from 792 to 914 M/Sec (2600 to 3000 ft/sec) up to 1927C (3500F) turbine rotor inlet temperature. Advanced ceramic composites are projected to be capable of operating up to 1649C (3000F) turbine rotor inlet temperature at up to 670 M/Sec (2200 ft/sec) tip speed. Current uncooled turbine blade structural technology is limited to operate at less than 610 M/Sec (2000 ft/sec) and below 1204C (2200F) turbine rotor inlet temperature. These materials anistropic 4.5.3 projections are (such as ceramic design Propfan Gear analysis Box based on composites technologies. Design Guidelines the development of and carbon-carbon) advanced and

For the propfan to succeed in achieving its very significant specific fuel consumption reductions (Section 4.2.3), an advanced gearbox capable of handling counter rotating propfan shafts and 12-15 turndown ratio must be developed. In addition, gearbox weight, heat transfer, volume and reliability must be improved to be a viable solution. The gearbox design requires high capacity gearing operating at temperatures beyond the capability of current lubricants and materials. Figures 32 and 33 lines as a function of 50% reduction in weight technology. volume. materials These such present the input speed is projected projected gearbox design guideand horsepower capability. A for the year 2000 gearbox

Similar improvements are also expected in the gearbox improvements would be achieved through advanced as carburized materials for gears. The missilized systems. devices load

design would also incorporate self-contained lubrication The higher operating temperature resulting from eliminating conventional oil tank, heat exchanger and oil conditioning would demand lubricating oil capability to 427C (800F). Development of silicon and fluorosilicone oils to enhance carrying capacity substantially more will be required. favorable viscosity These to materials temperature

have a relationship.

load would loads double three

In addition to capacity tooth be utilized.

the lubricant and material development, higher geometry such as Wilhaber-Novikow profiles These tooth forms, which transmit the gear circular surfaces, loading of surfaces rather have the capacity the conventional than through to handle gears. two to

through conformal, convex involute times the limit

19

The unique ture lubrication achieve a light

counter 4.5.4 rotating

gearing concepts, advanced materials, high temperaoils and missilized features will be required to weight compact and reliable gearbox for year 2000
propfans. Design Technology

Mechanical

Significant enhancements in mechanical design technology will be required to satisfy the conflicting goals of improved durability, advanced thermodynamic cycles (higher temperature and pressure) and increased thrust-to-weight ratios for year 2000 technology engines. Some of the key areas are seals and bearings, shaft design, high performance gearing and lubrication systems, secondary flow system design and vibration control. Seals Seals are one of the primary drivers to achieve high performance and durability goals of the engine. Figure 34 shows current contacting seals technology, as well as projected requirements for the higher rotational speeds and temperatures in the year 2000. Current technology is limited to maximum rubbing velocity of 122 M/Sec (400 ft/sec) at maximum temperature of 232C (450F). These rubbing velocity and operational to 152 M/Sec (500 ft/sec) and year 2000. These improvements materials which offer characteristics. Some high temperature metals (to provide compatibility temperature carbons. Non-contacting 35. Current temperature 343C (650F) limits are respectively projected for the

will be realized through advanced seal better wear resistance/durability of the candidate materials are ceramics, with a low thermal coefficient of expansion with shaft materials) and high

Figure

seals technology technology is

also

projections superimposed

are

presented in for comparison. to 274

The projections show requirements for surface velocities up M/Sec (900 ft/sec) and seal operating temperatures to 649C (1200F). The current technology limits are 213 M/Sec (700 and 537C (1000F). Seal pressure differential requirements 2.07 X 106 Pa (300 psi), the current limit is 1.38 X 106 Pa (200 psi). low thermal composites technology advanced from 2.54 ring oil geometry, capabilities. These advances expansion/high in conjunction required to make in seal modulus materials materials will such be as provided TZM, or

ft/sec) are by ceramic

with graphite facing. these components work

The design along with heights, while hybrid ranging incorporating lift sealing

materials focus is upon the small seal MM to 3.05 MM (0.i00 to 0.120 inches), cooling. Typical seals will incorporate providing hydrostatic as well as

hydrodynamic

2O

Bearings Bearing achieve technology is high performance one of the most through high critical advances required speed rotating turbo-

to

machinery. Figure 36 presents projected bearing technology requirements. Advanced bearing design capabilities will require improved fracture toughness up to 3.5 MDN, higher tensile strength and high hot hardness (RC 56-60). Bearing operating temperatures are projected to 649C (1200F) for metallics and 982C (1800F) for ceramics. In addition, three to five times improvement in rolling contact fatigue capability is required.

The bearing design life guidelines are shown in Figure 37 as a function of bearing operating temperature for ceramics and metallic materials. The operating temperature capabilities are projected to 649C (1200F) for metallic and 982C (1800F) for ceramic bearings compared to a current technology limit for metallic bearings approximately 454C (850F). Ceramic bearings operating at (1800F) will require an improvement in material brittleness, innovative schemes for accommodating differences in thermal expansion between shafts and the inner bearing race. These materials advances such as will dual be achieved through advanced bearing property powder metallurgy technology, iron materials implanted surfaces, (cermets). ceramics and the at 982C and

carburized metallics hybrid ceramic/metallic Shafts Figure 38 presents the first bending for three composite all based for

with

on

projected mode critical

shaft design guidelines, speed. The projections

focusing are

presented Ti/Borsic Beryllium,

shaft materials; INCO 718 (current technology), material with 50% volume fraction ratio, and on 20% critical speed margin. Maximum shaft up to 2.8 times the current technology

speed capability are projected

improvement year 2000.

These improvements are realized through advanced material properties, e.g., high modulus to density ratios (E/ P ). Fiber reinforced metals and Beryllium provide modulus to density ratio improvements of 2.2 and 7.5 times the current technology (INCO 718) respectively. However, Beryllium is a toxic material and would require special care in handling and manufacturing. In addition, a 25% improvement in the shear stress capabilities is required to reduce the shaft diameter. Shaft design limits are set by the low pressure spool shaft critical speeds and the shaft torque capability. Other Technoloqies

Other key design technologies are: lubrication systems, secondary flow systems and vibration control. Higher engine overall pressure ratios and temperatures will impose a very severe operational environment for the lubrication system. Improved cooling and reduced pressure losses will be required for the secondary flow 21

systems in order to reduce cooling air requirements and improve efficiency. As the shaft size diminishes, the vibration control will impose a challenging task to the designer. These technologies will require more attention once a specific engine design and configuration are chosen and detailed design analysis is initiated. 4.6
Materials Technology and satisfy Projection are among the critical system requirements. technologies Materials

Materials required to

manufacturing the future

technology provides higher turbine inlet rotor temperature and higher overall pressure ratio capability, resulting in improved performance and higher thrust-to-weight ratio engines. In addition, high temperature materials eliminate cooling penalties and thus provide further fuel consumption improvements. Materials titanium and currently steel for used axial in production and centrifugal engines are compressor aluminum, rotors.

Cast aluminum (C355) is used for inlet housing and other static structure where temperatures do not exceed approximately 149C (300F). Combustor shells of the nickel base alloy INCO 625 require extensive cooling. INCO 718 is used both for the outer housing investment and the cast compressor INCO 713 shaft. material Current for the engines turbine also inlet use an nozzle.

Integral-bladed turbine satisfies requirements temperature. engines where These higher

rotors are up to about

made from cast 2000F turbine

M_AR-M-247 which rotor inlet need are front section for advanced desired. end and

materials do temperatures

not satisfy the (up to 1927C) in the the hot

Advanced engines composite ceramics

will use composites and carh_3n/carbon in

extensively. Carbon/carbon to compressors and housings Table ii summarizes candidate future Inlet technology Ducts and requirements Stators

and composite ceramics to produce lower cost materials which will for the advanced

have application components. satisfy the engines.

turbine

Table Ii illustrates the materials and manufacturing methods for inlet ducts and stators operating in the temperature range from room temperature to I038C (1900F). Carbon/polymer composites will be used extensively for both static and rotating components in the temperature range of 316-427C (600 - 800F), depending on the polymer development status at that time. High volume production methods of injection or transfer molding will be utilized. Powder metal titanium aluminide has been demonstrated, but needs development for net shape fabrication of components. Higher strengths in the titanium aluminide will be provided hot isostatic pressing methods for low cost production capabilities. by net The filament shapes use of reinforcement. are required carbon/carbon Again, to provide in the but The than for

temperature range of 482-I038C (900 - 1900F) is feasible, manufacturing methods of filament winding should be explored. coating system for carbon/carbon operating in the i038-I093C (1900-20000F) range will be significantly easier to develop the 1649-1927C (3000-3500F) capability material. 22

Fan/Compressor Manufacturing integral technology compressor for filament winding to rotors using polymer a provide composites low is

cost

bladed

being explored and will provide temperature requirements will Table Ii. Reinforced titanium, reinforced components. these high Combustor superalloys, Low cost temperature

low cost approach. Higher be satisfied with a glass ceramic, titanium aluminide or fiber be utilized for techniqueswill rotating be needed for

will also manufacturing materials.

For a combustor design to operate with little or no cooling, the use of carbon/carbon is ideal, Table ii. A coating to satisfy the 1649-1927C (3000-3500F) temperature will be required. Gas operating temperatures up to 1760C (3200F) can be realized with composite ceramics (with reduced cooling compared to a metallic material). Fiber reinforced nickel-base superalloys with a thermal barrier coating can be considered for operating temperatures of 1371-1649C (2500 - 3000F) with cooling. Turbine/Nozzle The application advantages thermal Composite reinforced require The spondingly materials. the fiber same materials for turbine reflected inlet for nozzles; combustors they offer will the have same

as (uncooled) carbon/carbon and limitations of the barrier coating for nickel-base alloys, Table Ii. ceramics (operating temperature up to 1760C) and fiber superalloys (operating temperatures 1371-1649C) will reduced turbine level rotor of cooling relative the greatest to metallic challenge, materials. and higher (2200 moly, corre-

presents

the greatest benefit In the temperature reinforced superalloys

in performance via range of 1204-1649C using fibers from

temperature - 3000F), ceramic, or

carbon offer potential strength improvements. Again, the thermal barrier coating is critical for this type of application in the 1649C (3000F) temperature range. Composites, ceramics and carbon/carbon fall in the same temperature range (1649-2205C) and have the same technical Nozzles requirements and Ducts and manufacturing technology a high nozzles, requirements temperature Table ii. for the exhaUst are as stated previously.

Materials jet nozzles similar to Bearings High composites addition, DN

and ducts the turbine

operating in and turbine

environment

bearing

materials high for provide bearing

such

as

ceramics

and

ceramic In

will provide dry lubricants to for

temperature temperatures

capability, Table ii. up to I093C (2000F) bearings. Refer and limitations.

will be necessary to section 4.5.4

low cost functional design guidelines 23

Shafts

Fiber beryllium (800F). operating reinforced Manufacturing reinforced cation for winding, range, Seals The temperature operating material modulus. Gearbox Fiber

reinforced metallics (such as titanium/borsic) and will be used for operating temperatures up to 427C For shafting in the 982-i093C (1800 - 2000F) range, materials such as reinforced titanium aluminide, ceramic and carbon/carbon are candidates, Table ii. developments will include titanium aluminide with net the composite ceramic. The coating extrusion or hip for the or near net shape densifiutilization of filament for the i093C (2000F)

with an appropriate will be necessary.

system

candidate

materials TZM

for

the

seals

are

ceramics,

high the high

carbon, environmental requirements Graphite

and ceramic temperature, for seals are on the

composites Table ii. low thermal may be

depending upon The advanced expansion and required.

facing

seals

reinforced

metallics

such

as

titanium

aluminide

will

be

used for the gearbox with increased thermal for weight reduction. for filament winding Carburizing materials may be used for gear

casings, Table ii. However, polymer composites conductivity may be used for gearbox casings The manufacturing technology will be needed or compression molding for cost reduction. such as Carpenter EX53, Vasco 2 and CBS 600, teeth, Table ii.

The advanced materials and manufacturing methods will pace the turbine technology for the year 2000. The composites offer the biggest gains; high temperature composites such as ceramic and carbon/carbon offer the biggest payoffs and also the highest risks. Reliable, high temperature thermal barrier coatings will be essential must 4.7 for use on be developed Recuperator The recuperated metals. Last, but to fully utilize Analysis turbine engine provides fuel consumption not least, composite new NDE techniques engine materials.

benefits. However, the penalty for the incremented weight, volume and cost must be analyzed in order to select an optimum engine for a specified mission. The objective of this sub-study was to quantify these benefits/penalties for the recuperated engine cycle for the subsonic strategic cruise missile mission. Cycle Parametric Analysis

A parametric study was conducted for a two-spool propfan cycle to evaluate the effects of recuperator effectiveness, recuperator pressure loss and overall engine pressure ratio. The study was conducted at 1649C (3000F) turbine rotor inlet temperature at the sea level, Mach 0.7 condition. Parametric cycle performance is 24

presented in Figures 39 and 40 for 6 and 12% recuperator losses respectively. Superimposed on each figure is the recuperated cycle data for direct comparison.

pressure non-

The results show 7.5 to 12% SFC improvements for the 0.8 effectiveness recuperator relative to the optimum non-recuperated engine cycle. These improvements in SFC are diminished to 1,5 to 6% for 0.6 recuperator effectiveness. The corresponding thrust losses for recuperator effectiveness of 0.8 and 0.6 are 16-19% and 8-13.5% respectively.
Recuperator Design

Based on the parametric engine cycle analysis, a recuperated engine cycle (Table 12) was selected as a design basis. Recuperator design parameters are summarized in Table 13. An annular type recuperator design was selected as it provides minimum manifold volume requirements, high heat transfer surface density and excellent flow distribution with minimum pressure loss, Figure 41. The recuperator, as depicted in Figure 41, was designed using platefin construction, with construction based on silicon carbide. Recuperator Benefits/Penalties and non-recuperated engine weights a constant thrust engine. For the indicate the following: 4-9% 13-19% up to 200% 37% and volumes were selected mission,

Recuperated estimated for study results i) ii) iii) iv) v)

SFC improvements: Thrust losses: Total Engine Engine engine volume cost

weight increase: increase: up to increase: 20-50%

Cruise missiles engine diameter due serious installation This study

are, by nature, volume to the added recuperator implications. that a recuperated

limited. volume

Any will

increase have

in

indicates

engine

is

not

cost

effective solution for a subsonic strategic cruise missile application. Cost, engine complexity, weight and volume outweigh the SFC benefits. In addition, other factors such as incremental development cost, schedule and propulsion system reliability should also be considered. However, the recuperated engine candidate for a manned application savings in repeated of the system, and the engine diameter. The life recuperated cycle cost) could be a very such as rotorcraft significantly not critically attractive where

fuel life on

missions accumulate the installation is

over the dependent

and

engine was analysis.

not

selected

for

the

system

(mission

25

4.8

Cooled

Turbine

Analysis effect on the engine following two-spool turbine performance: 6.0 1371 26:1 in the study 8.2 6.0 4.5 3.6 1.0 0.5 1.0 blade metal respectively. temperaBulk (2500F)

A cycle engine

sub-study was conducted to evaluate the of cooling the HP turbine blades . The cycle was selected to study the cooled Bypass Turbine Overall Turbine Ratio Rotor Inlet Temperature Pressure Ratio assumptions used

cooling

are:

HP Turbine HP Turbine I_P Turbine LP Turbine LP Turbine LPT Turbine Miscellaneous

Nozzle Cooling Bleed (%) Blade Cooling Bleed (%) Efficiency Degradation (Pts.) Nozzle Cooling Bleed (%) Blade Cooling Bleed (%) Efficiency Degradation (Pts.) Cooling Bleed (%) are based 954C (1900F is 0.54. on vane and and 1750F),

tures cooling

These assumptions of I038C and effectiveness

The study results showed 8.9% degradation in SFC and 18.1% thrust loss at sea level, Mach 0.7. These performance losses would increase for a higher turbine rotor inlet temperature thus resulting in further performance deterioration. In addition to the performance degradation, manufacturability of small turbine blades (0.4 in height) would be a difficult task. Increased cost and complexity and durability/reliability implications are negative factors for an unmanned application. The engine performance loss with the cooled turbine shows a significant impact on the system life cycle cost, Section 5.0.

4.9

Updated Since the

EngineCycle initial

Analysis engine cycle parametric analysis was

conducted projections, detailed 4.6. turbine updated Figures between

using the preliminary engine the selected engine cycles component projections described

component performance were updated using the in Sections 4.4 through

The updated cycles included fanf_ompressor, combustor, and performance projections for the year 2000 technology. The cycle performance is compared with the initial cycles in 42 through 48. The results indicate a good correlation the initial and the updated cycles. Therefore, the engine trends indicated were used to define engines to be used by the preliminary cycle analysis are the thermodynamic parameters for the for the system performance analysis. the and number indivdual engine cycle

performance valid and candidate The component of stages component analysis

component efficiency levels are dependent upon configurations (such as axial and centrifugal) (i.e., loading requirements). Therefore, the configurations were integrated into the final as described in Section 4.10. 26

4.10

EngineComponent From the sixty

Configuration component

Evaluation evaluated to satisfy

configurations

the engine tions which through 48 configurations

performance goals the high payoff component configuracorrespond to the updated cycles shown in Figures 42 are summarized in Table 14. Competitive engine component were evaluated for common performance and loading As an example, three high pressure (two axials plus centrifugal, two plus one centrifugal) were designed and airflow requirements for a two 14. This approach provided a direct among the component configurations. were selected compressor centrifugals for common spool turbofan performance and

requirements. configurations one mixed flow pressure ratio engine, Table size comparison

and

The candidate engine configurations following considerations:

based

on

the

i)

A preliminary mission analysis relative impact of thermodynamic launch weight. The criterion launch weight. trade factors defined performance Therefore, in

Conducted parameters for selection

was

to evaluate the on the vehicle was minimum vehicle

ii)

The most

Section parameter lowest

3.2 was SFC

indicated specific cycles

that fuel were

the given

significant

consumption (SFC). primary consideration. iii)

Simplicity, manufacturability and cost were also considered. For example, centrifugal/radial components were preferred over axial stages, wherever possible, due to the small engine size, and their high aero load capacity. The total number of rotating stages was kept to from I IP Comp. a minimum 14 HP Comp. 2-Centrif for are: HP Turb. l-Radiall I IP I Turb. LP Turb. 2-Axial cost considerations.

The

selected

configurations IFan/LP I Comp.

Table

ENGINES

I
2-Spool (PD2 3-Spool (PD3 2- Spool (PD2 3-Spool (PD3 TurbofanI1-Axial TF2 ) I

I
--

I
Turbofanll-Axial TF9 ) Pr opfan PF5 ) Propfan PFI) 1-Axial 1-Axial l-Centrif + l-Centrif.

I I
l-Radialll-Radial 3-Axial

I I
2-Centrif. l-Rad ial I -2-Axial

I I
1-Axial 1.Axial l-Centrifl +Ii-Centrif. l-RadialIi-Radial 3-Axial

i
turboThe the

Engine cross sections for the two spool turbofan, three spool fan, and two spool propfan are presented in Figures 49 to 51. three spool propfan cross section was not prepared because of similiarity to the three spool turbofan configuration.

27

4.11

Candidate

Engines and main cycle characteristics in Table 15, and compared depicts the thrust size of KM (4000 NM) mission range, of candidate the baseline the engines required with the exception to

The performance engines are summarized engine. This table to satisfy the 7408

of the baseline engine (maximum attainable engine is 5260 KM). Detailed engine cycle Table 16 for each candidate engine. These engine designs were used to compute system

range with the baseline parameters are listed in four selected candidate performance, Section 5.0.

28

5.0 SYSTEMPERFORMANCE h_VALUATION System performance was evaluated via mission and life cycle cost (LCC) analyses of the candidate engines defined in Section 4.11. The system performance payoffs for the advanced engines were quantified and compared with the state-of-the-art baseline engine. Mission analysis provided the definition of vehicle size, engine size and fuel burned for a 7408 KM (4000 NM) range for each candidate engine and the baseline engine. These data were used to conduct system LCC analysis. 5.1
Mission Analysis

Mission analysis was conducted for the baseline and the four advanced technology candidate engines using an in,house mission analysis computer program. As outlined in Figure 52, this is an interactive program integrating the defined mission, vehicle characteristics and engine performance. This program provides the capability to compute system weight and fuel burned for each engine. The air vehicle and engines were scaled prescribed 7408 KM (4000 NM) range requirement, 3.4. The analysis was based on the methodology, ground rules defined in Section 3.0. Table 17 _le baseline requirement. for a 4448 N engine however, NM) dominant o which all presents the summary results of engine did not meet the 7408 KM Therefore, the mission and LCC (i000 ibs) thrust (at sea level, achieved advanced on the only 71% candidate Specific vehicle weight (5260 _) engines fuel size: and engine size decrease as the SFC to satisfy the Sections 3.3 and assumptions and

the mission analysis. (4000 NM) range analyses were conducted Mach 0.7) baseline desired the range, 7408 KM has a (4000 very

of the satisfied consumption

range

requirements. impact

(SFC)

Vehicle launch is reduced. The the

three spool propfan engine, the smallest launch weight vehicle. weight engines reduction relative missiles

lowest

SFC,

provides

Vehicle advanced

of up to 47% is to the baseline can be carried

achieved engine. on a

with

the

This aircraft

implies that as indicated

more below:

launch

Increased Criteria (Based Payload Missile Diameter On) Carrying Relative Baseline 47% 26%

Missile Potential To Engine

launch

These very aircraft

significant payoffs translate and increased firepower.

into

need

for

fewer

29

This study indicates that the engine weight and volume are of secondary importance for the long range subsonic mission with advanced technology engines. Engine volume is important to the engine/air vehicle installation: large engine volume can reduce available fuel volume in some circumstances for a constant volume vehicle. Detailed mission performance characteristics are shown in Figures 53 through 57 for the five engines (baseline and four advanced technology). Altitude cruise requires power ranging from 100% to approximately 75%. Advanced technology turbofans require less than 54% power at sea level cruise condition, Figures 54 and 55. 'Fne excess power is used for high 'g' maneuvers in terrain following or on a hot day. The propfan uses relatively higher power settings at sea level cruise. It should be noted that propfan core flow is less than 5% of the high bypass ratio advanced engines. The low flow provides an added benefit of reduced inlet size that will help reduce observables. Additionally, inlet volume constraints are relieved, allowing an improved inlet recovery and reduced distortion configuration. 5.2
Life Cycle Cost Analysis cost (LCC) analysis advanced technology was conducted for candidate engines. the LCC

System life cycle baseline and the four

methodology and assumptions are described in Section 3.2. System LCC consists of four elements: Operational and Support (O&S), engine development, engine acquisition and vehicle acquisition. Engine development and production costs were computed using the RCA PRICE H model. Vehicle production costs were also estimated with the PRICE model. The RCA PRICE model was calibrated with current production reliable through engine and vehicle cost data to cost estimates. Engine maintenance the use of the Teledyne CAE APSICOST provide costs MOSC consistent and were estimated model.

Figure 58 summarizes relative LCC data for the four advanced technology engines. Combined engine O&S, development and acquisition costs are approximately 10% of the total system LCC for the advanced technology engines: approximately a 50% reduction relative to the baseline engine. However, advanced engines have a very significant leverage on the System LCC resulting primarily from vehicle launch weight reductions for advanced engines (section 5.1). LCC reductions of up to 41% are achieved with the advanced technology Figure 58. engines relative to the baseline state-of-the-art engine,

the

Additionally, launch aircraft

increased (Section

missile 5.1)

carrying capacity (26-47%) would result in further cost been included did not satisfy turbine engine in LCC but also in

of

saving s if the launch aircraft costs had should be noted that the baseline engine I<M (4000 NM) range. Therefore, advanced not only provides significant reduction mission capability. 30

LCC. It the 7408 technology enhances

LCC sensitivity analysis was also conducted for the component efficiency levels, cooled turbine and fuel costs, Figure 59. The study indicates approximately a 1% increase in system LCC for one point degradation in any component efficiency. The cooled turbine
provided a significance very of large (15%) increase in LCC. uncooled turbines and the need This for indicates advanced the 59. materials. System LCC was insensitive It was concluded from the study that projections were off by three points savings would still be 29%. Therefore, the proposed ratio. 6.0 TECHNOLOGY program payoffs would to the fuel costs, Figure even if individual technology in each component, the LCC only partial achievement a very high benefit/cost

of

present

IDENTIFICATION

AND

PROGRAM

PLANS

The SECT study resulted in a matrix of critical turbine engine technologies that were weighed and ranked based on their benefits and risks. Technology plans were generated for each identified critical technology necessary to achieve year 2000 system mission goals. The technology plans include overall schedules and milestones.

6.1

Technology

Identification

And to

Rankin_s identify and year 2000 evaluated is the least

A matrix approach was used summarize technology benefit/risk technology goals. The benefits ranked on a scale from 1 to 5,

systematically in meeting the of the technologies Table 18. Rank 1

were

important and rank 5 is mandatory to the achievement of the year 2000 objectives. A qualitative logic statement is associated with each technology rank. This statement indicates the significance of each ranking. A qualitative risk assessment is also associated with each technology rank. Rank 1 technologies are mixer and composite cold static structure, or readily projectable technologies with them. are rank 2 development Multi-stage technologies. programs low and nozzle, fuel control, propfans Table 18. These are available and have little risk associated

pressure turbines and fan/LP compressors These do not require high technology will result from currently ongoing

Research and programs. Performance and structural goals can be achieved during the component programs. Low observable coatings and materials and instrumentation are important technologies (rank 3). Technology development programs are required, however, these are considered outside the scope of the SECT study. These technologies have moderate risk associated with them. The double centrifugal compressor, axial-centrifugal compressor, slinger combustor and high speed shafts are ranked as very important technologies (rank 4), Table 18. These technologies require % programs to meet the year 2000 mission objectives, and are deemed high risk. A recommended double centrifugal compressor generic technology is presented program encompassing in Table 19. the need of all the configurations

31

A ceramic composite 1649C (3000F) turbine capable of operating at a light weight missilized (rank 5) technologies. mission requirements are with the very high payoff 6.2
SECT Program Plans

radial turbine capable of operating at inlet gas temperature, bearings and seals 649C (1200F) environmental temperature and propfan gearbox are classed as mandatory These technologies are required if year 2000 to be met. Very high risks are associated of these technologies.

Critical

technology

plans

have

been

prepared

for

the

critical

technologies (ranks 4 and 5, section 6.1) necessary to achieve projected year 2000 system objectives. Major elements of the plans are aerodynamic technology, structural/materials technology, test requirements and schedule. The technology plans are generic in nature, as they cover a wide range of component size and operational environment. A more detailed engine concept definition should preceed lines the technology and requirements. phase to provide specific technology guide-

The technology plans present frame from 1986 through 1993. included, as they may be outside tests should be conducted demonstrate the technology can be conducted on any proposed programs and a mission-specific prototype to 2000 time frame. Radial Inflow Turbine

major milestones Engine demonstrator the NASA charter.

covering a tests are However,

time not these

in the 1993-97 time frame to verify and in a real operational environment. They available size engine. Given the type of follow on engine demonstrator program, testing could be scheduled in the 1997

Figure 60 presents the ceramic radial inflow turbine plans. Improved aerodynamics achieved through improved design methodology and high temperature ceramic material development are two key turbine technologies required to satisfy the year 2000 cruise missile mission requirements (Section 4.4.2.1). These technologies are planned as parallel efforts and brought together in integrated high performance and high temperature verification tests. These tests Bearings will be and conducted Seals plans are shown in Figure 61. to meet the high speed and high for seals and bearings (Section bench development will materials and integrated tests will be conducted be in in a in a simulated operational environment.

Bearings and seals program Materials programs are required temperature operating environment 4.5.4). conducted bearing simulated

High temperature lubrication in parallel with the bearing rig verification tests. These engine operational environment.

32

Prop

fan

Gearbox

The gearbox plan is presented in Figure 62. The key technologies for the advanced missilized propfan gearbox are methodology to analyze and design the advanced tooth profiles, materials, heat rejection and high temperature lubrication (Section 4.5.3). These technologies can be evolved in parallel The integration of the technologies will scale simulated verification tests, for rig. Double Centrifugal Compressor
L

and verified separately. be accomplished in full example on a back-to,back

Double centrifugal technology plans are Advanced aerodynamic methodology is required subcomponents (individual centrifugal stages, Section without will be tests. aerodynamic will be Slinger

presented to design diffusers

in Figure 63. compressor and ducts),

4.4.1.1. Aerodynamic performance tests will be conducted, advanced materials, for each centrifugal stage; these tests followed by overall compressor performance verification Materials technology can be developed in parallel to the technology. Materials and aerodynamic technologies integrated in simulated verification tests. Combustor 64 and in shows the slinger combustor technology aerothermodynamic technologies (Section parallel. Aerothermodynamic technology for example, can be developed with the materials. Similarly, materials/structural aerothermodynamic will be brought rig verification plan. 4.4.3.1) can and code current (low technology consiin

Figure Materials be evolved verification, temperature)

can be evolved independent of derations. These technologies integrated full scale combustor High Spee d Shafts

technology together tests.

High modulus

speed shaft technology plans are shown tQ density ratio materials and structural

in

Figure design

65. High methodology

are the key to the success of high speed shaft 2000 (Section 4.5.4). Materials and structural evolved in parallel and integrated into shafting 7.0 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER TO OTHER APPLICATIONS

designs in the year technologies can be verification tests.

Teledyne CAE strategic subsonic dynamic, reviewed craft, scaling

concentrated the cruise missile

SECT study effort engine. However,

on the advanced

advanced aero-

structural and materials technologies were evaluated and to insure applicability of these technologies to rotortactical cruise missile and APU's. Where deemed necessary, can be used to meet the other three application needs from A key element to effect the technology requirements for nature. This is mandatory of small engines and the lack for components and materials. 33

a common projected technology base. technology transfer is identifying propulsion applications of diverse because of peculiarities/uniqueness of broad-range exploratory funding

These applications share problems (flow range from manufacturing tolerances structural integrity and

common small engine size-related design 0.2 to 3.5 ibs/sec), such as maintaining and airfoil shapes while achieving required performance.

Table 20 presents the major system and environmental priorities for each of the four selected application areas, and their impact on engine requirements. The Table shows, for example, both the strategic cruise missile engine and rotorcraft engine cycles are driven by a need for maximum practical pressure ratio and turbine inlet temperature, at high component efficiency, and each probably on 2 (Concentric) or 3 (Excentric) shafts. These factors define common compressor and turbine technology requirements. Differences are expected to exist in the rating of the components, and possibly some material choices. The strategic cruise missile engine will be operated at increased temperature and speed, consistent with its 50-hour life requirement. With suitable derating, similar componentswill provide the multi-thousand hour durability needs of the rotorcraft turboshaft. Reliability requirements are high for each, but are focused on different definitions (e.g., 99+% one-way mission achievement reliability versus high mean time between unscheduled maintenance actions). Table 20 also shows that acquisition cost is a high priority for each application. Each has a major influence on overall vehicle costs by virtue of its leverage on the system performance and overall life cycle cost. Component/engine performance is not the primary technology requirement for the APU's and tactical cruise missile engines. However, performance improvements are desirable, especially for the tactical cruise missile system. With suitable technology derating, cost, structural integrity, distortion tolerance and size (weight and volume) objectives can be met for these applications. Low cost for the tactical cruise missile and APU's, for example, can be achieved with simplified high pressure ratio (per stage) rotating components with advanced materials and manufacturing technologies from the subsonic strategic cruise missile application. The size, configuration and general performance needs of rotorcraft engines and elements of tactical cruise missile engines and APU's are congruent with those of the strategic cruise missile engines. Based on the evaluation of mission requirements, technology drivers and critical parameter requirements, the common technologies have been identified for the four diverse applications, Table 20. Implied in these technologies are aerodynamic and structural tool development technologies such as computational fluid mechanics technology, optimum structural designs and analysis and materials architecture technology. These are generic technologies that can be used to design, analyse and predict any turbine engine component. The subsonic strategic cruise missile engine technologies far exceed the levels required by rotorcraft, APU's and tactical missiles. Once these technologies are verified in strategic cruise missile engine environments, they will be available for other applications via technology transfer. The common technologies have varying benefits on each system, however, the unifying theme is that a combination of these technologies will benefit all candidate systems. 34

8.0 TECHNOLOGY PAYOFFS AND CONCLUSIONS This study has indicated that considerable advances in future small gas turbine engines can be achieved with well planned and concentrated research activities. The system payoffs resulting from these engine technologies are very attractive and must be pursued. The following summarizes the major advanced turbine engine technology payoffs for cruise missile engines and the conclusions of this study:
(i)
Significant SFC improvements (30-50%) turbofan and propfan configurations, state-of-the-art engine. The advanced increases of vehicles. increased below 4448 (iii) Reduction vehicle missile relative System with engines range provide relative a to potential current can are achieved relative to in the

(ii)

of very operational

large

Further missile N (i000

range increases size while keeping ibs)

be realized with the engine thrust

in missile weight and size missile carrying capability weight and 26% based on the to the baseline engine_ life cycle cost savings of up

increases the up to 47% based missile diameter

launch on

(iv)

to

41%

can

be

realized

the

advanced

technology

engines.

(v)

System life cycle cost is found to be relatively insensitive to fuel cost. However, sensitivity analysis indicated that even if individual efficiency levels were estimated high would by three points still be 29%. in each component, the LCC savings

(vi)

High strength, high temperature composite materials technology the desired goals for the year composite operating mandatory

composite and is a major key 2000 systems.

ceramicin achieving Ceramic is

radial inflow turbine technology capable of at 1649C (3000F) turbine inlet temperature for achieving high performance at low cost. technology a suitable is mandatory installation for on achieving the air

(vii)

Propfan gearbox SFC engines with vehicle.

low

(viii)

To fully achieve the desired small turbine engine technology programs are required in all disciplines: aerodynamics, structures, materials. Instrumentation calibrate design systems and evaluate performance also be flowpaths. provided for the reduced size and higher

goals, to must speed

35

9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Significant advances achieved by systematically each technical discipline. (i) (ii) in small gas turbine engines can be identifying and developing technology It is therefore recommended that: in

NASA conduct a detailed system study the prime contractor to substantiate

with an airframer as the system payoffs.

NASA conduct a more focused design concept study on the propfan e.go, to delete the axial stage and the through shaft, and thus minimize bearing development and other structures-related problems.
NASA initiate technologies: Radial the following programs of critical

(iii)

inflow

turbine

Bearings and seals Propfan gearbox Double centrifugal Slinger combustor High speed shafts (iv) If all critical technology

compressor

programs

can

not

be

undertaken

due to budgetary constraints, technologies, high temperature composite should be radial inflow initiated. turbine

the two key capability and propfan

enabling ceramic gearbox,

36

REFERENCE M. L. Cruise Spearman, Missile Note "Aerodynamic Characteristics At Mach Numbers From 0.50 D-7069, November 1972. Component 8", NASA Development CR-169496, Of A 2.86", Swept-Wing NASA

to

Technical CC. and April

.

Ciepluch Integration 1982. Thulin,

"Energy Efficient Engine Semi-Annual Report Number

R.D.

D.C. Pressure January

Howe

and

I.D,

Singer,

"Energy Design

Efficient Report", NASA

Engine High CR-165608,

Turbine 1982.

Detailed

37

TABLE

i:

BASELINE

ENGINE

PERFO_NCE

Aft. KM (ft) Mach No. Inlet Fan Fan Fan Fan Recovery Pressure Ratio (huO/tip) Efficiency (hub/tip) Corrected Airflow, Kg/sec (1D/sec) Corrected Speed, Rev/sec (RPM) Ratio

0 0.7 i .0 2.0/2.0]9 85.5/81.6 6.00 (13.228) 599 (35,978) 1.11 6.31 0.795 1.59 (3.510) 781 (46,849)

0 0 i .0 2.01/2.16 84.3/80.8 6.17 (13.596) 617 (37,023) 1.11 6.68 0.777 1.63 (3.599) 816 (48,947)

10.7 0.5 1.0

(35,000)

Bypass

2.08/2.32 78.9/74.2 6.39 (14.092) 590 (35,438) 1.11 7.17 0.735 1.66 (3.654) 853 (51,160)

HP Compressor Pressure Ratio HP Compressor Efficiency HP Compressor Corrected Airflow, Kg/sec (ib/sec) HP Compressor Corrected Speed Rev/sec (RPM) Combustor Pressure Loss (%) Combustor Efficiency Fuel Lower Heating Value, KJ/Kg (Btu/ib) - JP-lO HP Turbine Work, Ah/Bcr , KJ/Kg (Btu/Ib) HP Turbine Efficiency HP Turbine Rotor Inlet Temperature, oc (OF) HP Turbine Corrected Speed Rev/sec (RPM) HP Turbine Corrected Airflow, Kg/sec (lb/sec) LP Turbine Work, _h/Bcr , KJ/Kg (Btu/ib) LP Turbine Efficiency LP Turbine Inlet Temperature, C (F) LP Turbine Correcte0 Speed, Rev/sec (RPM) LP Turbine Corrected Airflow, Kg/sec (ib/sec)

2.5 0.995 42,100

(18,100)

2.5 0.994 42,100

(18,100)

2.5 0.989 42,100

(18,100)

70.9 0.85 i160 418 0.52

(30.5)

70.9 0.85 1127 423 0.52

(30.5)

70.7 0.85 1016 416 0.52

(30.4)

(2120) (25,062) (1.14)

(2060) (25,355) (1.14)

(1860) (24,930) (1.14)

45.4

(19.5)

45.1

(19.4)

45.8

(19.7)

0.88 883 (1621) 318 (19,085) 1.41 (3.10)

0.88 854 (1570) 316 (i8,970) 1.41 (3.1)

0.88 762 (1403) 315 (18,920) 1.41 (3.10)

Nozzle

Thrust

Coefficient

0.9864 2758 (620) 0.102 (1.005) 7.94 (17.51) (SL/0.7 1 1.31 .85 .856 1.59 1.27 (3.51) (2.8) MACH): 2 1.34 .85 .856 1.27 (2.8) 1.0 (2.2)

0.9814 3100 (697) 0.071 (.697) 6.19 (13.60)

0.981 778 (175) 0.087 (0.855) 200 (4.41)

Thrust, Newtons (ibs) SFC Kg/HR/N (ib/hr/ib) Total Airflow, Kg/sec (ib/sec) HP Compressor Stage PR AO. EFF. POLY EFF. Inlet Correct Airflow, Kg/sec (LB/sec) Exit Correct Airflow, Kg/sec (LB/sec) Stage Performance

3 1.2 .82 .825 1.00 0.86

(2.2) (1.89)

4 2.99 .817 .843 0.86 (1.89) 0.34 (.75)

38

OF POOR QUALITY
TABLE 2: BASELINE ENGINE MATERIALS

I
b_TERIAL C355 Alum J COMPONENT

I
I Front Frame I Gear Box j Fan Stators I Axial Compressor Shroud

I I
17-4 PH I Fan Rotors & Fan Stub I Axial Compr. Rotors & I Radial Diffuser Shaft Stators

I I
TI 6AL-4V j Radial Compressor I Fan qq_rust Bearing Shroud Housing

I I
INCO 71 8 I Radial Compressor Rotor j lip Compressor Shaft I Combustor Hot]sing

I I
INCO 713 I tIP J LP I LP Turbine Turbine Turbine Inlet Inlet Rotors Nozzle Nozzle

I I
INCO 625 I Combustor I Exhaust Duct/Mixer

I I
MAR-M-247 I Turbine Blades

i I
Nitralloy I LP Shaft

I I
6061 Alum I Fan Duct

I I
300 Series ST. ST. I Tubing & Adaptors

3g

TABLE 3 :

TYPICAL ENGINE CYCLES FOR COMPONENT DESIGN SEA LEVEL/0.7 MACH

pA_IMETERS
FAN/LP CO[._RESSOR W_O/5, Ks/see PR EFFICIENCY BYPASS RATIO

2-Spool TURBOFAN

I I

3-Spool TURBOFAN

2-Spool PROPFAN

I
(LB/SEC) 16.71 (35.65) 1.65 0.899 6.0 12.78 (28.17) 2.0 0.896 6.0 1.12 (2.48) 1.7 0.881

INTERMEDIATE W_O/_, PR EFFICIENCY nI_{ PRESSURE W_O/a, PR EFFICIENCY COMBUSTOR PRESSURE EFFICIENCY HIGH REF. PRESSURE WORK

COMPRESSOR Ks/see (LB/SEC) 1.02 (2.255) 6.71 0.835

m_m

COMPRESSOR Ks/see (LB/SEC) 1.52 (3.356) 15.758 0.830 0.21 (0.457) 3.354 0.848 0.73 (1.60) 12.94 .821

LOSS,

2.0 0. 998

2.0 0.998

2.0 0.998

TURBINE (Ah/0cr), KJ/Kg 93.5 (40.2) 0.867 (2500) (0.480) 52.6 (22.6) 0.978 1649 0.ii (3000) (0.242) 1649 0.14 74.2 (31.9) 0.88 (3000) (0.305)

(BTU/LB) EFFICIENCY TRIT, C (F) W_f-Oe/$ , Kg/sec (LB/SEC) TURBINE

1971 0.22

INTEIhMED. REF. WORK KJ/Kg EFFICIENCY TRIT, WV_e/_ LOW REF. C ,

PRESSURE (Ah/0cr), (BTU/LB) (F) Ks/see

59.3

(25.5) 0.867 (2536) (0.481)

1391 (LB/SEC) 0.22

_mm

PRESSURE

TURBINE 89.6 (38.5) 0.913 ( 1762 ) (1.857) 112.1 (48.2) 0.901 1134 0.48 (2073) (1.067) 1287 0.38 125.1 (53.8) 0.894 (2348) (0.831)

WORK (Ah/0cr), KJ/Kg (BTU/LB) EFFICIENCY TRIT, C (F) WV_e/_ , Ks/see (LB/SEC) PERFORMANCE THRUST, Newtons (LB) SFC, Kg/HR/N (LB/HR/LB)

961 0.84

3447 0.074

(775 ) (0.722

3447 0.072

(775) (0.703)

3336 0.054

(750) (0.526)

40

TABLE4 ENGINE COMPONENT CONFIGURATION MATRIX

TURBOFANS COMPONENT FANILP COMP. TWO-SPOOL 1A -2A+IC, MF+C, 3A+IC C+C THREE-SPOOL 1A 1C, 1A + 1C 1C PROPFANS TWO-SPOOL 1A -2A+IC, MF+C, 1A, 1R -3A, MF SLINGER 3A+IC C+C THREE-SPOOL 1A 1-C 1C

INTER. PRESS. COMP. HPCOMP.

HP TURBINE IP TURBINE LP TURBINE COMBUSTOR

1A, MF,1R -3A, MF SLINGER

1R 1A, 1R 3A, MF ANNULAR SLINGER

1R 1A, 1R 3A, MF ANNULAR

A -- AXIAL C -- CENTRIFUGAL MF -- MIXED FLOW R -- RADIAL

70229 A1-05911

TABLE

5:

COMPRESSOR

DESIGN

GUIDELINES

COMP RESSOR CONFIGURATI

ON

MAXI MUM TEMP ERATURE COEFFICIENT

MINIMUM BLADE HEIGHT, (IN) 7.62 5.08 2.54

MM

BACKWARD CURVATURE

AXIAL MIXED FLOW

0.4 0.55
m_u

(0.3) (0.2) (0.i) 30

CENTRIFUGAL

41

TABLE

6:

TURBINE

TECHNOLOGY

IMPROVEMENTS

AND

PAYOFFS
f

TECHNOLOGY o o o o o o o 3D AIRFOIL MACH DESIGN NUMBER FLOW BLADES ANALYSIS o o o o CLEARANCE CONTROL o o o IMPROVED INCREASED REDUCED IMPROVED REDUCED HIGHER IMPROVED

PAYOFF VANE/BLADE STAGE SECONDARY AERO/REDUCED LEAKAGE WHEEL LOSSES SPEED AND AN 2 OPTIMIZATION REACTION FLOW LOSSES COOLING i

HIGII 3D

VISCOUS

VANE-BLADE ACTIVE/PASSIVE _TERIAL MANUFACTURING

INTERACTION TIP

IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEME_S

AIRFOIL

TOLERANCES

TURBINE

TABLE DESIGN

7 CONSTRAINTS

AXIAL BLADE POSITIVE HEIGHT HUB >10.16 REATION MM (0.4 in) -

MIXED BLADE

FLOW MM (0.3 in) - BLADE

RADIAL HEIGHT > 5.OB MM (0.2 in)

HEIGHT>7.62

FAVORABLE

REACTION

(W 2

= 2,5W

I)

- FAVORABLE DI/D T >

REACTION 1.30

(W 2

: 2W I)

- M2<

1.25 P _> 0.7

- CARBON-CARBON:

- RHUB/RTI

o AN2<9.96X_O (1960 X 10 o TIP SPEED <

8 ['4"12-Rex2/Sec INZ-RPM z) 914 M/Sec

DH/DT

>0.4

A' _/HUB <

130

(3000

ft/sec)

-'_I -

RHUB> '< 80

10.16

MM

(0.4")

- CARBON-CARBON:

RADIAL

BLADE

o AN2<9.96n_08 (1960 X 10

IN

_2-RE_2/SEC2 -RPM z)

- CERAMIC

COWPOSITES

CARBON-CARBON:

0 TIP

SPEED

<

914

M/Sec (Low

(3000 Twist)

ft/sec)

o o

AN 2 < TIP

6.1

X 108 < 640

M2-Rev2/Sec M/Sec (2100

(1200 ft/sec)

lO B IN2-RPM

2)

o TIP

SPEED.<

914

M/Sec

(3000

ft/sec)

o RADIAL CERAMICS

ELEMENTS

SPEED

o CERAMIC o TIP SPEED

CO_OSITES < 670 M/Sec (2200 ft/sec)

COMPOSITES X 108 IN2-RpM '655 M2-Rev2/Sec 2) (2150 ft/sec) 2

5 LEAN

@ EXIT

o AN 2 < (1200 o TIP

6.10 X 108 <

SPEED

M/Sec

ORIGINAL OE. POOR 42

PAGE

IS

QUALITY'

TABLE

8:

COMBUSTOR

TECHNOLOGY

PROJECTIONS

PERFORMANCE PARA/_TERS

CURRENT TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 99.9

TECHNOLOGY PROJECTIONS 2000 99.9

Efficiency Pressure Temperature Pattern Radial Factor Cooling Effectiveness Loss

3-4% .2 .3

<_ 2% < .]_5

Factor As Req'd As Req'd

Profile

.6

.9

TAB LE STRUCTURAL I
i CONPONENT

9 STRATEGIC CRUISE MISSILE ENGINES

I)ESIGN
DESIGN

CONSTRAINTS
REQUIREM6NT VIBRATION /HCF X X X X X X X X * *

FOR

SUt_SON[C

APPLICAB!-E LCF

I I
IFAN ROTOR iAXIAL CONF'. SCENT. CONP. IFAN STATORS iCOMP. STATORS iFAN ICOWP. iFRONT CASE HOUSING FRAW ROTOR ROTOR

CREEP/ FATIGUE

BURST/ FLUTTER X X YIELD X X X * *

INGESTION /FOD SURGE

DAMAGE TOLERANCE

MANEUVER /EXTERNAL LOADS

CONTAINMENT /BLADE OUT

X X X * *

X *

DESIGN

REQUIREMENTS LIMITING

APPLIES FOR PROJECTED 2000 TECHNOLOGY LEVELS

DUPABILITY

TABLE STRUCTURAL DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR

STRUCTURES LOW CREEP BURST X RUPTURE CYCLE FATIGUE X X

i0 CRUISE
DESIGN VIBRATION /HCF X X

MISSILE
REC UIREMENTS

ENGINE

TURBINES

APPLICATION

TURBINE COMPONENT DISK

DAMAGE TOLERANCE X

MANEUVER LOADS CONTAINMENT

LIMITED TURBINE L&S

LIFE BLADE NOZZLE CASE

X *

DESIGN DESIGN IN

REQUIREMENTS REQUIREMENT

IS IS A

APPLICABLE PRIME DRIVER

ADVANCING

TECHNOLOGY

APPLICATIONS

43

ORII_INAL PAGE _.,IS OF. IN)OR qUALITY

ADVANCED

TABLE 11 ENGINE MATERIALS

MAX. TEMP. COMPONENTS

MAT'L C MATERIALS MANUFACTURING

CAPABILITY, (F)

INLET

DUCTS

& STATORS

427 482 1038 1038

(800) (900 (1900) (1900)

C/POLYMER REINFORCED REINFORCED CARBON/CARBON

COMPOSITES CAST P/M TI ALUMINUM ALUMINIDE

INJECTION/TRANSFER INVESTMENT HIP FOR NET

MOLD METALS

CAST/POWDER SHAPE (COATING

FILAMENT

WOUND

FOR

1900F)

FAN/COMPRESSOR

482 1371 760 1093

(900) (2500) (1400) (2OOO)

POLYMER CERAMIC

COMPOSITES COMPOSITES

FILAMENT NET SHAPE

WOUND FORMING WOUND CASTING

OR

COMPRESSION

MOLD

CARBON/CARBON FIBER REINFORCED SUPERALLOYS/TiAI

FILAMENT P/M OR

WITH

COATING

TO

2000F

COMBUSTOR

1649 1760 2204

(3OOO) (32OO) (4000)

FIBER CERAMIC

REINFORCED COMPOSITES

SUPERALLOYS

REINFORCED NET SHAPE

SHEET FABRICATION RELIABILITY

MANUF.IFORMINGIJOININGICOATING'L

CARBON/CARBON

COATING

NET

SHAPE

FABRICATION

TURBINE/NOZZLE

1649+ 1760 2204

(3000

+)

FIBER CERAMIC

REINFORCED COMPOSITES

SUPERALLOY/TBC

NET NET

SHAPE SHAPE

FORMING FORMING RELIABILITY NET SHAPE FORMING i

(3200) (4000)

CARBON/CARBON

COATING

NOZZLES/DUCT

1649+ 1760 2204

(3000

+)

FIBER CERAMIC

REINFORCED COMPOSITES

SUPERALLOY/TBC

NET NET

SHAPE SHAPE

FORMING FORMING RELIABILITY NET SHAPE FORMING

(32O0) (4000)

CARBON/CARBON

COATING

BEARINGS

1093

(2000)

CERAMIC

NET

SHAPE

FORMING

SHAFT

427 427 982 1093 1093

(800) (800) (1800) (2000) (2000)

FIBER

REINFORCED

METALLICS

NEAR NEAR

NET NET

SHAPE SHAPE OR HIP

HIP HIP

BERYLLIUM FIBER REINFORCED CERAMIC SUPERALLOYS

EXTRUSION NET SHAPE

REINFORCED CARBON/CARBON

FORMING WOUND WITH COATING FOR 2000 F

FILAMENT

SEALS:

CONTACTING NON CONTACTING

343 649 982

(850) (1200) (1800)

CERAMIC CERAMIC, CERAMIC,

HIGH TZM,

TEMP. CERAMIC

CARBON COMPOSITES

NET NET NET

SHAPE SHAPE SHAPE

FORMING FORMING FORMING

GASPATH

CERAMIC

COMPOSITES

GEARBOX

482 482 482

(900) (900) (900)

POLYMER HIGH FIBER TEMP

COMPOSITES CARBURIZED MATLS. METALLICS (GEARS) (CASINGS)

FILAMENT NEAR NEAR NET NET

WOUND SHAPE SHAPE

OR + HIP

COMPRESSION POST SURFACE

MOLD HARDENING

REINFORCED

72199

44

OR1G_NALAGE p
OF, POOR

IS

QUALITY

TAB hE RECUPERATOR DESIGN ENGINE

12 CYCLE: PROPFAN CYCLE

SEA LEVEL MACH 0.7 INLET RECOVERY _0.96

LP COMDRESSO R Pressure Ratio CorrecLed AirFlow, (LB/SEC) Efficiency HP COMRESSO_R Pressure Ratio Corrected Airflow, (LB/SEC) Efficiency COMBUSTOR

Kg/sec

1.12

1.7 (2.48) 0.891

Kg/sec

0.73

8.82 (1.60) 0.823

--- ncy
Pressure loss, % Fuel Heating Value, (BTU/LB) HP TURBINE Turbine'Inlet _H/_cr , KJ/K9 Efficiency LP TURBINE Turbine KJ/K9

0.998 2.0 42, i00 (].8,iO0)

Temp,

( F )

1482

(2700) 0.885

(.bTU/LB)

65.4 (28.L)

Inlet

Temp,

( F )

i182 105.4

A Hl_gr, KJ/Kg HEfflciency RECUPERATOR Effectiveness Pressure Loss,

(UTU/LB)

(2160) (45.3) 0.895

0.7 6.0

IPERFORMANCE Thrust, Newtons (LB) SFC, Kg/HR/N (LB/HR/LB)

2535

(570)

(o.5o )

45

TABLE RECUPERATOR DESIGN

13 PARAMETERS I I
1 761 (1402) X 105

Exhaust Temp., Pressure,

Gas C

In (F) Pa (psia)

Ii.33 (19.27)

Flow, Exhaust Temp., Pressure,

Kg/sec Gas C Out (F) Pa

(ib/sec)

1.47

(3.237

562 (psia) 1.25

(1043) X 105

(18.1)
Air In C (F) Pa (psia) 476 20.13 (292) (889) X 105

Temp., Pressure,

Flow,

Kg/sec

(ib/sec)

11.43

(3.157)

Air

Out C (F) Pa (psia)

l I
1675 118.96 I (275) (1247) X 105

Temp., Pressure,

Effectiveness

I I i
Drop sides) _P/P% I cold

.7o
12

Total (hot

Pressure &

I 1 A: AXIAL

TABLE COMPONENT AND ENGINE

14 CONFIGURATIONS

C: CENTRIFUGAL MF: MIXED FLOW R: RADIAL

ENGINES

TRIT oc (OF)

0PR

8PR

FAN/LP COMP.

IP COMP.

HP COMP.

HP TURB.

IP TURB.

LP TURB.

2-SPOOL TURBOFAN PD2TFI PD2 TF2 PD2TF3 PD2 TF4 PD2TF5 PD2 TF6 PD2TF7 3-SPOOL TURBOFAN PD3 TFI PD3TF2 PD3 TF3 PD3TF4 PD3 TF5 PD3TF6 PD3 TF7 PD3TF8 PD3 TF9 PD3TFID 2-SPOOL PROPFAN PD2 PF1 PD2PF2 PD2 PF3 PD2PF4 PD2PF5 3-SPOOL PROPFAN PD3PFI PD3PF2

1371(2500) 1371(2500) 1371(2500) 1371(2500)

1648(3ooo)
1648(3000) 1648(3000)

26 26 26 26 26 3O 30

6 6 6 4 6 6 4

1A IA 1A IA IA IA IA

2A+IC 2C IMF+IC 2A+IC 2A+iCi 2A+ICI 2A+IC

IA IR IA IA IA IA IA

2A 2A 2A 2A 2A 2A 2A

11648(3000)

I1648(3ooo)
I1648(3000)

I1648(3ooo)
11648(3000) 11927(3500) 11927(35D0) 11927(3500) 11371(250O) 11371(2500)

45 45 45 45 37 45 45 37 37 37

IA IA IA IA IA IA IA IA IA IA

IC IA+IC iC IA+IC IA+IC 1A+IC IA+IC IA+IC IA+IC IA+IC

IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC IC

IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR

IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR IR

3A 3A IA+IMF 3A 3A 3A 3A 3A 3A 3A

I I
11648(3000) 11648(30o0) 11648(300o) 11648(3ooo) 1648(300o) 22 22 22 3O 22 IA IA IA IA IA 12A+IC 1 2C 12A+IC 2C 2C MF IA IR IR IR 2A 2A 2A 2A 2A

1648(3000) 1648(3000)

45 37

IA IA

IA+IC IIA+IC

IC iC

IR IR

IR IR

3A 3A

I 46 ORigiNAL OF POOR PAGE IS QUALITY

TABLE CANDIDATE ENGINES: PERFO[_MANCE

15 AT MISSION-MATCH THRUST

SEA LEVEL MACH 0.7 INLET REC. = 0.96 JP-10

ENGINE THRUST, NEWTONS (LB) BASELINE (2-SPOOL 2-SPOOL (LOWEST 3-SPOOL (LOWEST 2-SPOOL TU RBOFAN) TURBOFAN SFC) TURBOFAN SFC) PROPFAN TRADE) 4448 (1000) 3772 (848) 3278 (737) 2153 (484) 1993 (448) SFC, KG/HR/N (LBIHR/LB) 0.015 (1.031) 0.073 (0,.716) 0.069 (0.673) 0.054 (0.533) 0.051 (0.500) ---6.0 1.1 1.1 6.0 BPR TRIT, C (OF) 1160 (2120) 1371 (2500) 1371 (2500) 1649 (3000) 1649 (3000) 45 9 22 6 37 26 12.6 OPR NO. OF STAGES

(COMPLEX/PERF. 3-SPOOL (LOWEST PROPFAN SFC)

70217 A1_050

47

TABLE

16: CANDIDATE ENGINES: DETAILED CYCLE AT MISSION-MATCH THRUST Sea Level 0.96

PERFORMANCE

OF POOR

QUALIRi_

Math 0.7 Inlet Recovery

Parameters

2-Spool Turbofan

3-Spool Turbofan

2-Spool Propfan

3-Spool Propfan

Performanc

e 3772 .073 26 6.0 1371 22.4 (848) (0.716) 3278 .069 37 6.0 1371 (737) (0.673) 2153 22 (2500) 1649 0.91 (3000) (2.01 (484)

Thrust, Newtons (lb) SFC, Kg/HR/N (lb/hr/lb) Overall Pressure Ratio Bypass Ratio TRIT, C (OF) Airflow, Kg/Sec

.o54 (o.533)

1993 (448) .o51 (o.5oo)

45

(lb/sec)

(2500) (49.38)

1649 (3ooo)
0.94 (2.08)

2o.3 (44.67)

Fan/LP Compressor Pressure Ratio Efficiency Corrected (ib/sec) Airflow, Kg/Sec

1.65 0.917 17.61 (38.84) 479 457 (28,735) (27,420)

1.65 0.913 15.93 504 481

(35.12)

1.7 O. 838 0.72 (1.58) 1660 1584 (99,570) (95,025)

2.5 O. 885 0.74 (1.64)

Speed, Rev/Sec (RPM) Corrected Speed, Rev/Sec (RPM)

(30,220) (28,850)

IP Compressor Pressure Ratio Efficiency Corrected Airflow, Kg/sec (1O/sec) Speed, Rev/Sec (RPM) Corrected Speed, Rev/Sec (RPM)

6.7

O. 866 1.50 (3.31) -

6.0 O. 867 0.35 (0.761)

ii01 (66,070) 972 (58,340)

HP Compressor Pressure Ratio Efficiency Corrected (lb/sec) Airflow, Kg/sec

15.78 0.824 1.66 (3.65) 1165 1029 (69,920) (61,755)

3.35 0.861 0.31 (0.676) 2231(133,840) 1466 (87,970)

12.95 0.838 0.46 (i.017) 2138(130,690) 1911(i14,645)

3.0 0.839 0.08 (0.168)

Speed, Rev/sec (_M) Corrected Speed, Rev/sec (RPM)

HP Turbine .A H/_cr, KJ/Kg (Btu/lb) Efficiency Corrected Airflow, Kg/sec (lb/sec) 95.8 (41.2) O. 882 0.24 (0.53) 56.8 (24.4) 0.883 0.15 (0.335) 72.6 (31.2) O. 868 0.09 (0.19) 48.6 0.866 0.05 (20.9) (0.i0)

IP Turbine H/Ocr, KJ/Kg (Btu/lb) Efficzency Corrected Airflow, Kg/sec (ib/sec) LP Turbine A H/Ocr, KJ/Kg (Btu/lb) Efficiency Corrected Airflow, Kg/sec (ib/sec) 64.9 (27.9) 0.898 0.32 (0.71) 56.3 0.876 0.08 (24.2) (0.187)

I I I 1 I I I I

89.3 (38.4) 0.892 0.91 (2.00)

95.8 (41.2) 0.906 0.75 1.65)

124.4 0.898 0.24

(53.5) (0.53)

133.5 0.885 0.18

(57.4) (0.39)

48

SYSTEM

TABLE 17 PERFORMANCE

SUMMARY

INLET
PARAMETERS ENGINE PERFORMANCE: THRUST, NEWTONS (LB) SFC, KGIHR/N (LBIHRILB) AIRFLOW, KG/SEC (LBISEC) ENGINE WEIGHT, KG (LB) MISSILE PERFORMANCE: LAUNCH WEIGHT, KG (LB) FUEL WEIGHT, KG (LB) LENGTH, M (FT) DIAMETER, M (FT) MIXED MISSION RANGE, KM (NM) 4448 (1000) 0.105 (1.031) 12.8 (28.1) 103.0 (227) BASELINE 2-SPOOL TURBOFAN

SLI0.7 REC. = 0.96

2-SPOOL TURBOFAN 3-SPOOL TURBOFAN 2-SPOOL PROPFAN 3-SPOOL PROPFAN

3772 (848) 0.073 (0.716) 22.4 (49.4) 44.4 (97.9)

3278 (737) 0.069 (0.673) 20.3 (44.7) 41.3 (91.0)

2153 (484) 0.054 (0.533) 0.91 (2.0) 25.9 (57.2)

1993 (448) 0.051 (0.500) 0.95 (2,1) 26.2 (57.8)

1484 (3271) 799 (1761) 5.9 (19.3) 0.68 (2.23) 5260 (2840)

1470 (3241) 853 (1880) 5.8 (19.0) 0.67 (2.20) 7408 (4000)

1270 (2800) 709 (1563) 5.4 (17.7) 0.63 (2.05) 7408 (4000)

864 (1904) 426 (940) 4.5 (14.8) 0.52 (1.71) 7408 (4000)

782 (1725) 367 (809) 4.4 (14.3) 0.50 (1.65) 7408 (4000)

TECHNOLOGY

TABLE 18 IDENTIFICATION

AND

RANKINGS RISK

RANK/BENEFITS 1 INCIDENTAL/AVAILABLE 2 NOT VERY IMPORTANT 3 IMPORTANT 4 VERY IMPORTANT

PROGRAM JMIXER NOZZLE, FUEL CONTROL, PROPFANS, COMPOS. COLD STATIC I LP TURBINE FANILP COMPRESSOR L.O. COATINGS/MATERIALS INSTRUMENTATION DOUBLE CENTRIFUGAL COMPRESSOR AXI-CENTRIFUGAL COMPRESSOR SLINGER COMBUSTOR SHAFTS (HIGH SPEED AND HIGH LOAD)

LOW

MODERATE

HIGH

5 MANDATORY

CERAMIC COMPOSITE RADIAL TURBINE (3000F) BEARINGS/SEALS 649C, (1200F) LIGHT WT. MISSILIZED PROPFAN GEARBOX

VERY

HIGH

49

TABLE SUBSONIC STRATEGIC CRUISE MISSILE

19 COMPRESSOR REQUIREMENTS

CENTRIFUGAL

CORR. AIRFLOW, (LB/SEC) PR

Ol O

Kg/sec

2-SP Turbofan I-STG 1 2-STG HPC HPC 1.661 0.254 (3.662) (.561) 9.25 i .70 .867 .857 .30 .50 83.4

3-Spool IPC 0.842 (1.856) 4.47 .889 .866 .515 .60 86.2

Turbofan HPC 0.307 (.676) 3.35 .882 .861 .55 .50 90.1

2-Spool 1-STG 0.456 (1.027) 7.5 .888 .855 .55 .50 92.6

Propfan I I 2-STG 1 O.O9O (0.198) 1.725 .895 .853 .30 .50 93.4

(HPC)

RECOM. 1-STG 0.466 (1.027) 9.25 .888 .849

PROGM. 2 -STG 0.090 (0.198) 1.7 .895 .887

POLY. AD.

EFF. EFF. MACH

.877 .837 .58 .50 85.4

Inlet Hub/Tip Ns

4966H

_m

TABLE SYSTF.M, MISSION TECHNOLOGY

20 P[{IORITY DRIVERS: APPLICATIONS

AND F_NVIRONMENTAL TRANSFER TO OTHER

TECHNOLOGY APPLICATION STRATEGIC CME MISSION REQU'T MACH NO. DRIVERS SFC COST Fn/VOL Fn/Afr OBSERVABLES MISSION REL. START/ACCEL. MACH NO. SFC COST OBSERVABLES MISSION WEIGHT START/ACCEL DURABILITY REL.

CRITICAL PARAM ETERS FLOW:.09-1.59 LB/SEC) (2500"3000F

COMMON TECHNOLOGIES

CORRECTED

SUBSONIC LIFE: MAX HIGH RANGE

UP TO 50 HRS DISTORTION

KG/SEC (0.23-3.5 OPR: 22 TO 45 TRIT POSS. STRUCT. 1371-1649C, EFF'Y MULTI-FUEL COMPON.

CORE HIGH

COMP. TRIT/LOW

P.R.

COOLING MULTI-FUEL

LOSSES EFF'Y COMBUSTOR TDF CONTROL TOLERANCE

SURVIVABILITY LTD. VOLUME SHOCK, EMP ETC ALT. 0-40K FT. STORABILITY (5 YRS. +)

COMPONENT COMBUSTOR DISTORTION FUEL MATERIALS AERO STRUCT SYSTEM

INTEGRITY

-- HCF; S.R. -- SHOCK DISTORTION RAPID OPR TRIT ACCEL > > 16:1 1316C, EFF'Y H/C FUEL INTEGRITY (2400F) TOLERANCE

CONTROL DESIGN GEOM.

ROTORCRAFT TU RBOSHAFT

SUBSONIC

ALT, 0-3.0 KM (0-10K FT) LIFE: MIN. INLET 5000+ HRS; FUEL BURN POWER SEPARATOR/

POSS. VARIABLE COMPONENTS MFG. SHAFT METHODS DYNAMICS

COMPON. ALTERN. STRUCT. --HCF LCF

OEI/EMERG. DISTORTION SURVIVABILITY iCING SERVICE HIGH APU SHORT EXTENDED USAGE STATIC LIFE: HIGH TACTICAL CME

BEARINGS

& SEALS

INSTRUMENTATION

RAPID

ACCEL

ACCESS.

MTBUR FLIGHT 0-10K HRS 5000 CONDITION FT 20 HRS FT) COST HP/VOLUME WEIGHT REL. COST Fn/VOL Fn/Afr Fn/WT. OBSERVABLES MISSION REL. START/ACCEL. POSS. MULTI-FUEL INTEGRITY TOLERANCE STRUCTURAL RAPID ACCEL. INTEGRITY

ALTITUDE

MTBUR

SUB/SUPERSONIC MACH LIFE: HIGH NO. UP TO DISTORTION

STRUCTURAL DISTORTION RAPID ACCEL.

SURVIVABILITY LTD. VOLUME ALT, 0-12.2 STORABILITY KM (0-40K

71051 A1-103

51

_Assu++,o_s, "EFE.ENOE _F'XEOM'SS'ON I 'l I l .EF_.ENOE

GROUNDRULES i,, I |REQUIREMENTS I J

+ +

VEHICLE I

S.O.A.

ENGINE

IENOINEANALYSIS CYCLE I
I & CONFIGURATIONS ENGINE CONCEPTS (STICK DRAWINGS) I I

MISSION ANALYSIS SATISFY MISSION REQUIREMENTS DEFINE ENGINE WT. & SIZE DEFINE TOTAL FUEL

_-

+
I LIFE ANALYSIS COST CYCLE I

TRANSFER TECHNOLOGY ANALYSIS

IDENTIFICATION & TECHNOLOGY PRIORITIZATION

SECT

PLAN TECHNOLOGY

70235 A1-065

Figure

i.

SECT

Study

Methodology

Flow

Chart.

52

I _L_

DATA

EXECUTIVE

ROUTINE

I I STORAGE I

2_.,_o I s_u_ __-

\ _ _ _

I I I LAUNCH I

I _z_.,,_. I RECOVERY _o_ m] I

_{B

1 I T_ST I LAUNCH l_T_'_'

SHEDULED!WARRANTY TESTING MATERIAL + LABOR

MATERIAL

+._Bo_

UNSCHEDULED

TRANSPORTATION

MATERIAL AND LABOR

IACCEPTANCE I [ TESTING FUEL

I
SUPPORT MATERIAL AND LABOR 71077 A1-122

Figure

2.

SECT

Life

Cycle

Cost

Study

(Missile

Operation

and

Support)

Methodology.

53

KM 12-

FT x 103 40MACH = 0.9

30.
_

ALTITUDE

20

PAYLOAD

= 181.4KG

(400 LBS.)

410-

MACH
0--

= 0.7 4,000 NM 1 8000

72195

o
I 0

I
1,000 I 2000

I
2,000 I 4000 RANGE 3,000 I 6000 KM

Figure

3.

Basic

Subsonic

Strategic

Cruise

Hi ssile

Flissiolt.

LAUNCH

WT = 2495 KG (55_

AR SWEEP ANGLE WING SECTION

: 2.45 : 58 : 65A006

0 6.77 M (22.2 FT)-

0.25 CL

0.5

72190

Figure

4.

Baseline

Cruise

Missile

Vehicle.

54

ORIGINAL PAGE IS OF POOR QUALITY

0.18

0.16

0.14

0.12I-Z uJ

U
ii ii uJ

0.10!-

//_

0 0 < r7

/
o.o8i-.i 0.06_ f:::5 MACH NO. //

//
/_'

0,o4 @/
0.02 -0.00 -0.40 I -0.20 l 0.00 1 0.20 I 0.40 I 0.60 I 0.80 I 1.00 1.20 71076 A1-121 LIFT COEFFICIENT Figure 5. Cruise :4issi].e Vehicle Dr-_.L: Characteristics.

55

911.9 MM (35.9 IN.)

586.7MM

(23.1 IN.)

_/- J_403.9M

/ (15.9 IN.)

SLI0.7 PERFORMANCE THRUST, N (LB) SFC, KG/HR/N (LB/HR/LB) TOTAL AIRFLOW, KG/SEC (LB/SEC) 4448(1000) 0.102(1.005) 12.8(28.2)

(INLET

REC. BPR OPR

= 1.0) 1.11 12.6 1127 (2060)

72198

TRIT,C(F)

THRUST/WT.
rt_i Figure 6. Baseline (State-Of-The-Ar_)

(4.4 LB/LB) 43.1 NIKG

Engine.

.95

FINAL UPDATES O AXIAL STAGE A CENTRIFUGAL INITIAL PROJECTION

STAGE O

.90 POLY. EFF. .85'_ _'_

CENTRIFUGAL MP)

.80 0

.2
I

.4
I

.2 I

.4 I

.6
i

KG/SEC 1.6 LBISEC

1.0

1'.2

114

EXIT

70233 A1-063

Figure

7.

Preliminary (Corrected

Fan/Compressor PoIytropic Flow Up To 0.725 kg/_ec).

Efficiency

Projections

To YR

2000

.91

90

CENTRIFUGAL

COMPRESSOR

POLYTROPIC EFFICIENCY .89

.88

1 .8]

KG/SEC

, I
2

,
3 4 COMPRESSOR

,
5 EXIT CORRECTED t_

I
-/ AIRFLOW 8

I
9

,
10 71074 A1-119 LB/SEC

Figure

8.

Preliminary Fan/Compressor (Correct Flow Up To 4.536

Polytropic kg/sec).

Eificiency

Projections

To

YR

2000

57

.90 -

.89 ADIABATIC EFFICIENCY .88 --

/ /
.87 0 /

.1 .2
,I ! .4

.2 I

i .6

.3 I

i .8

.4 I

KG/SEC i 1.0 LB/SEC

INLET CORRECTED AIRFLOW

.92 -

.90 ADIABATIC EFFICIENCY .88

1 .86 0 I 2 1 4

2 I

I 6

3 I

_ 8

4 I

KG/SEC 1 10 LB/SEC 71075 A1-120

INLET CORRECTED AIRFLOW

Figure

9,

Preliminary

Radial

Turbine

Efficiency

Projections

To YR 2000.

58

.92

.88 ADIABATIC EFFICIENCY .84 / f f

/ .1 I .:2 .2 I .3 I .8 .4 I KG/SEC
|

.80 L 0

, .4

_ .6

1.0

LB/SEC

INLET CORRECTED AIRFLOW

.92 -

ADIABATIC EFFICIENCY .84

.80 0

1 , I 2

2 I _* ;

3 I ;

4 I

, 10

5 I 12
71073 A1-118

KG/SEC LB/SEC

INLET CORRECTED AIRFLOW

Figure

i0.

Preliminary

Axial

Turbine

Efficiency

Projections

To

YR

2000.

59

INLET REC. .... D.m KG/HR/N .12. LB/HRILB 1.2 _ ....

= 0.96

(2,100OF) 1149C (2,500F) 1371 C (3,000OF) 1649oC (3'500F) 1927C LB/LB/SEC 60

BPR 2
1.1- SFC '_ _ _ _

[
50-_'...... .....

NIKG/SEC BPR .____2 2 500 F

/
1,00

.10

__

4 _'_'_.---_

1.oi
r'",_ _._._ 2 ^ _ ---.. u 8-1- _"_.--_':-'---. "_ :_ -" .... " "'---

SPECIFIC THRUST

......

...........

.08

20

O0

0.7 1 15

I 20 OPR

I 25

30

10 I 15

I 20 OPR

l 25

"'-'] 30

'-100

72192

Figure

ii.

Two-Spool

Turbofan

Parametric

Performance:

Sea

Level,

Mach

0.7.

KG/HRIN .10 I

LBIHRILB 1.1

----....

INLET REC (2500F) (3000F) (3500OF)

= 0.96 1371C 1649C 1927C BPR 2

LB/LB/SEC 60 N/KG/SEC BPR 2 50 SPECIFIC THRUST -500

1.0

--......

--.._._

.09 SFC

0.9
__ 4

-400

2 0.6 2 -..._......_ _.__ ------._4 _ 6 20 30 6 64 6 -200 -300

.07 -

0.7

0.6 3O

J 35 OPR

I 40

r 45

10 30

I 35 OPR

a 40

i 45

100

70222 A1-055/1

Figure

12.

Three-Spool

Turbofan

Parametric

Performance:

Sea

Level,

Mach

0.7.

60

TIP SPEED, (FT/SEC)

M/SEC

182.9(600)

213.4(700)

243.8(800)

I / 20 40

I 60

I 80

I 100

I 120

I 140

I 160

I 180

I 200 HP/FT 2

I 200

J 400

I 600

I 800 SHP/D2

I 1000

I 1200

I 1400

I 1600 KW/M 2

Figure

13.

4x4

Counter

Rotating

Propeller

Performance.

LB/H RILB 0.60 KGIH R/N - .06 0.58 INLET REC = 0.96 PROP EFF. = 0.88

LBILBISEC 350 -

TRIT, C(F) 1927(3500) 300 _X SPECIFIC _ THRUST

N/KGISEC - 3000

0.56 SFC

\\
-.055 0.54 0.52 _

\
---... 27(35ool
_0) 1649(3000) 200

-2500 1649(3000)

- 2000

0.50 15 --.05

I 20 OPR

I 25

I 30

150 15

I 20 OPR

I 25
70220 A1-053

J 30

-1500

Figure

14.

'l_o-Spool

Propfan

Parametric

Performance:

Sea

Level,

Mach

0.7.

61

SPECIFIC THRUST LBILB/SEC 300 INLET REC = 0.96 PROP. EFF. = 0.88

SPECIFIC THRUST NIKglSEC TRIT C(F) 3000

_5oo)

250 LBIHRILB 0.56 KglHRIN .056 0.54 .054 SFC .052 0.50 30 I 35 OPR I 40 0.52 __,___1_7 (3500) 150 1649 (3000) I 45 100 30 I 35 OPR I 40 I 45 1371 (250O) 200 TRIT C (OF) 1371 (2500)

.2500

1649 (3000) - 2000

- 1500

1000
72196

Figure

15.

Three-Spool

Propfan

Parametric

Performance:

Sea

Level,

Mach

0.7.

STAGE POLYTROPIC EFFICIENCY, 92 9O %

STAG E AXIAL 2000 POLYTROPIC EFFICIENCY,% CENTRIFUGAL

92
88

2000

88 86 84 82 0.10 8C .20 .30 .40 .50 GJ_,H/U T .60 1 3 5 STAGE 7 PRESSURE 9 RATIO
72197

84

1985

11

TEMPERATURE

COEFFICIENT

Figure

16.

Compressor

Polytropic

Efficiency 62

Projections

to YR

2000.

HUB/TIP

RADIUS

RATIO CORRECTION

rr O
I--

1.00 0.99 0.98

1.00 >0.99

O <
IJ_

w I--- 0.98 o'_ 60

-,,, --..._
YEAR198_5 "

S
2C
IJ.I

0.97 0.96 0.95 0.94 0.93 CURVES FOR

_x
2000 REDUCE 1985. FOR BY 1/2 PENALTY _

k",.,
PRESSURE RATIO 8 _-_:,_

_YEAR

E,,
w z 0.97

\
\

oo_

_s 0.96
0.95 OO
13.

\
0.4 0.5 0.6 HUB/TIP RATIO 0.7
0.8

n'nO O >0 z uJ

0.94 0.93 0.3

\
0.9

1.1_ I.IJ

_110 0.92 0.91 0.90 0.3

0 n < m < <

\14

0.4

0.5 HUB/TIP

0.6 RATIO

0.7

0.8

0.9

AXIAL

CENTRIFUGAL

71072 A1-117

Figure

17.

Compressor

Hub/Tip

Ratio

Corrections

For

Efficiency.

CENTRIFUGAL

STAGE

SPECIFIC

SPEED

CORRECTION

nO IO < ii >O z iii O LL LL Iii O

m

1.0

0.8 r/p = r/p, opt X CORRECTION FACTOR

0.6

O 13: O Q.

0.4 20 40 60 80 SPECIFIC SPEED 100 120 71071 A1-116

Figure

18.

Centrifugal

Compressor

Specific

Speed

Corrections

For

Efficiency.

STAGE FLOW SIZE CORRECTIONS

UI-N I HII-UL_AL COMPRESSORS 1.0 _ 0.95 AXIAL COMPRESSORS VARIATION OF POLYTROPIC EFFICIENCY CORRECTION FACTOR WITH FLOW FOR AXIAL AND CENTRIFUGAL COMPRESSORS r/p = _/p, opt. x CORRECTION FACTOR

"< 090
O_ _ . _ OO Q.. 0.85 0.80 0.75 YEAR 1985

/
0.5 1.0

0.70 0.1

I
2.0 10.0 100.0 LB/SEC

I .045

[ .227

I .45

I .907

I 4.5

I 45

KG/SEC

STAGE IN LET CORRECTED FLOW (Wj_O) 71070 A1-115

Figure

19.

Compressor

Flow

Size 64

Corrections

For

Efficiency.

AXIAL W-,_E 95
i _

= 2.268KG/SEC(5.0 LB/SEC)

0.6 o_
I-I"-

1.134(2.5) 0.7 .227(0.5)

9O

___

85
(3b O1

%\
%
80

75 0

I 10

I 20

I 30

I 40

I 50

_ 60

I 70

i 80

I 90

I 100

I 110

SPEED, RPM x 10-3

71088 A1q33

Figure

20.

Axial

Turbine

Efficiency

Projections

To

YR

2000.

RADIAL

100

W-,_"O'E

0.68

KG/SEC

(1.5 LBM/SEC) 0.227(0.5) 0.113(0.25)

901 0.7.,._Ao.sf-_--

_----.,0.8

o4

70
60

.?o
/__

50

40

f 30

' 40

I 50

i 60

i 70

i 80 SPEED,

i 90 RPM x

l 100 10 -3

i 110

i 120

i 130

i 140

i 150

1 160

71090 A1-135

Figure

21.

Radial

Turbine

Efficiency

Projections

To

YR

2000.

MIXED

FLOW

100 W_O'(: _' 06 _ u;_ 0.75 0.65 ___ = 0.907 KG/SEC (2.0 LB/SEC) 0.453 (1.0) 0.227 (0.5)

9O

o4
t F-

8O

7O

60

5O 10

I 20

4 30

I 40

I 50

I 60 SPEED,

I 70 RPM x 10 -3

I 80

I 90

I 100

I 110

I 120

71089 A1-134

Figure

22.

Mixed

Flow

Turbine

Efficiency

ProjectLons

To

YR

2000.

66

TRENDS IN COMBUSTOR COOLING

C 1300

22OO1-

LEGEND O LONG LIFE [:3 UMITED LIFE O aFT ENGINE

LEGEND O LONG LIFE

1100

O Ob

....-..-

_ 1.6

(HIGH

THRUST/WEIGHT)

I,--

--2000 1600

(HIGH

0 THRUSTNVEIGHT) E. F100

___

_ O Oz

1.4 1.8 _,_O

O G _

ODLIMITEDMFELIFT ENGINE O

o
12001_-0 0 100_ JT15D a I ^ J85 0 .... _WHlU 0CF34 0 _ u_ I i _F 1.0 0 _0 _......_.._

r_ LARZAC

0.8

5OO

1960

1970

1980
YEAR

1990

2000

O 1960

1970

1980
YEAR

1990

2000

71112 A1-156

Figure

23.

Combustor

Temperature

Trends.

TRENDS

IN

COMBUSTOR

TEMPERATURES

1.0
_C =

Tg - Tw Tg - Tc

CONVECTION-FILM

TFRSA

_)

.8

w,6 > m

CONVECTION-FILM

CONVENTIONAL

MAT'L

,)

Ob (3o

(.

FELT-META_
LOUVER FILM TFRSA

_4

SHEET

METAL-LOUVER

FILM

.)
i

CAR_ON,CAR_ON )
1990 20

1960

1970

1980 YEARS

1990

2000

1960

1970

1980 YEARS

0'0

,o=
Figure 24. Combustor Cooling Effectiveness Trends. Figure 25. Combustor Weight Trends.

71111 A1-155

TRENDS M3 (Kg/SEC Pa 60.18r _/K) FT 3 (LB/SEC PSI _/R)

IN SIZE AND

WEIGHT

LEGEND

Kg

LB

(Kg/SECK)_"LB/SEC V VR_
PSI

O _

LONG

LIFE

.16150.141o_ _o 40m 4 30 E]"'-_

.J

LIMITED LIFE LIFT ENGINE (HIGH THRUST-TOWEIGHT)

P6o101 "_:_,2 W 3 -81 P3 -6

Comb.

Inlet Inlet Inlet

Air

Flow,

Kg/sec

(Ib/sec)

T 3 --Comb. Comb.

Temp., Pressure,

C (R) Pa (psia)

" .12i .10 .08 k _ _ 20 2 T25 T41A _J100 TS_00_73 1970 1980 YEAR 72193 0 6 -_--.

DX... o

,,,
4 (N155)

O >

20 i -

.06,[

G i 1970 A 1980 YEAR i 1990 I 2000 0-

0 1960

(,NCO

625)

10 _ 1960 .04

1990

2000

Figure

26.

Combustor

Size

and

Weight

Trends.

TRENDS

IN EXIT TEMPERATURES

QUALITY

0.5

LEGEND A O LONG LIFE 13 LIMITED LIFE O LIFT ENGINE (HIGH THRUST/WEIGHT)

uJ n tr o.O w F-

0.4

0.3

o.2
0 izl 0 0 0 1960 I 1970 i 1980 YEAR

013

0.1

i 1990

| 2000 71106 A1.150

Figure

27.

Combustor

Exit

Temperature

Pattern

Factor

Trends.

TRENDS

IN COMBUSTOR

PRESSURE

LOSS

12Iz uJ O 10n" ILl 13.. 09 O ,--I u.I n" 8

,o

\
_..._--_ LIFE O WR19 I_ FIO0

09 09 6 LLI cC Q.. r'r O I.-- 4 00 E) rn O O 2-

0 1961

I 1970

I 1980 YEAR

I 1990

I 2000 7! 107 A1-151

Figure

28.

Combustor 70

Pressure

[.oss

Trends.

STRAIG SLINGER i

HT-TH ROUG H
i I

REVERSE-FLOW ANNULAR
I i i i i

ANNULAR

,_i

i ;1i

L ,

'i-r_i:....;_!i

.
I I

",4 ._L

,!L!
7- -I, J/SEC 4.29 MILLISEC 106 FT 3 -ATe) M" 100.1 (9.8) r -4.32 MILLISEC 99.2 (9.71) "r -5.67 MILLISEC 75.7 (7.41)

M 3 Pax --

(MBTU/HR SPEC. VOL,

(ko,s$_ 219 ,/oK)

FT 3

22.1

29.0

LB/SEC #_0.683) PSI

(.0689)

(.0904) 72191

Figure

29.

Combustor

Configurations.

FT/SEC MISEC 800 -

2500

700 YIELD STRENGTH Pa (KSI)

3 UJ UJ D_ 00 D_ FUJ m

11.4 x 2000 _165) 9.7 x 108 (140)

600 -

< O 11.!x 108

_J J <

(165)

I
9.7 x 108
X <

500 -

(140) 11.4 x 165) 9.7 x 108 (140) 1500

_\ @_

400 / BASELINE ENGINE STAGES I .3 I .4 I .5 I .6 O O

O
I .7 I 8 711O0 A1-145

1100

AVG. HUB/TIP RATIO 300 Figure 30. Axial And Mixed Tip Flow Speed Fan/Compressor Projections. Structural Guidelines: Maximum

Allowable

72

M/SEC

FTISE( 30O0

CARBON-CARBON 2800 ,_ 900 ULTIMATE 800 2600 1 ADV. NICKEL ALLOYS STRENGTH 250 (KSI) _'_ "_

2400.-

210 AF2-1DAL6

700225 2200. . 170

CO00

--

500

16(3 600 I 800 I 10O0 I 1200 I 1400 1600 oF

I 300

I 500 MATERIAL

I 70O TEMPERATURE

I 900

C 71O99 A1-144

Figure

31.

Centrifugal And Mixed Flow Compressor Allowable Tip Speed Projections.

Structural

Guidelines:

Maximum

Kg 28-

LBS 60 1000 HP

24-

50

GEAR RATIO: 12-15

20--

4O
WEIGHT 16-

30
12-

20
8-

4-

10 20

40

60 80 100 INPUT SPEED (RPM)

120

140

70241 A-072

Figure

32.

Propfan

Gearbox

Weight

Projections:

Gearbox

Weight

VS

Input

Speed.

73

MM 70

INCH 2.81-

2.4460 -

7%TT% TOo

5O

2.04-

nw kw 40 < rr < w z O z 30 -

1.64-

1.24-

20

.8 4-

_-. -'" _ _ _

746(1000) 373 (500)

10

.4 !

I
20

I
40 POWER

I
60 SHAFT SPEED

I
80 x 1000 RPM

I
100

I
120

I
140 71136 A1-157

Figure

33.

Propfan Gearbox Shaft Speed.

Shaft

Diameter

Projections:

Shaft

Diameter

VS

Power

C 400 -

oF 800 -

n"
UJ

YEAR 2000 TECHNOLOGY 600 CURRENT 200400 TECHNOLOGY

_- 300z
F-

<

r uJ o_

O <
LM 09

100 -

200 -

0 -

0 0 I 0

I 200

1 400 I 100

I 600

FT/SEC I 200 M/SEC 71091 A1-136

SEAL

RUBBING

VELOCITY

Figure

34.

Contacting Seals Rubbing Velocity.

Guidelines: 74

Maximum

Allowable

Temperature

VS

Seal

F_SEC M/SEC 1200 350 >IO

._1

10001-.. YR 2000 TECHNOLOGy

300

I.U > w O < I.L CC 111 l-_J

250

800

200

600 --

150

400 -

uJ n"

100

50-

0-

2Fo
0 I

I 100 I 1000 PRESSURE 200 I 1500 DIFFERENTIAL 300 I 2000 I 2500

! 400

LB/IN 2

KPa

500 SEALED

C
700 1200 600 CURRENT TECHNOLOGY 1000 500 800 400 oF YR 2000 TECHNOLOGY

n
l.iJ I-(..9 Z I'< cr uJ a. 0
._.I

I
600 i 400

300 -

< uJ

200 -

100 --

200 0

t I 100 I 200 I 300 I 400 I 500 I 600 I 800 I 900 I 1000 FT/SEC

700

I 0

I 50 RELATIVE

I 100 SURFACE

I 150 VELOCITY

I 200

I 250

I 300

M/SEC

72187 Allowable Surface Temperature VS Seal VS

Figure

35.

Non-Contacting Relative Pressure

Seals

Guidelines: and

Maximum Relative

Surface Velocity Differential.

Velocity

75

N 20,000

LB 4000 3.5 MDN

3500 15,000 Q O
=.J

3000

3 Z I-,,
ILl

2500 10,000 2000 ACCEPTABLE 1500 5,000 1000 ACCEPTABLE

500

0 _

0 0 10 20

I
30 BOARE BEARING DIA.

I
40 (MM)

I
50
70238 A1-069

Figure

36.

Bearing Design Diame t er.

Guidelines:

Maximum

Operating

Load

VS

Bearing

Bore

1.0 CERAMic
,8 nO

N____.._._._.. BEA RI G S

1".6 o
I,M

CURRENT TECHNOLOGY
B

"_ ---_ \

_YR.

2000 METAL BEARINGS

"

.4

,,,,,,,I

--

METRALN S G I 200 I 400

I

\ I 600 I 800
I

\_ I 1000
I

0
I

I 1200

1 1400
I

I 1600

i 1800
I

OF

200

400

600

800

1000C
70240 A1-071

BEARING OPERATING

TEMPERATURE

Figure

37.

Bearing

Design

_uldelines: _ "

Life

Factor

VS

Bearing

Operative

Temperature.

76

ORIGINAL

PAGE

IS

''NI
-_m

TURBINE

OF

POOR

QUALITY

Nma x-

RPM 70

x 10 -_ BERYLLIUM

(45.0

x 10610.067) (50150)(26.3

310.3

10911.85

x x

10 -6

Pa/KglMM x 10 -6

/TIBORSIC 60 / 50 /

x 10610.134)181.3

10913.7

718_2:;7RIALI0:I:'297)

(184"1

x 109/8"2

x 10 - 6 PalKglMM3

4O

20

10

0 0 I 0

I 2 I 1

I 4 L 2 Dm/L 2 x

I 6 a 3 10 -1

I 8

_ 10 = 4

I/IN

I/MM

72133

t4'i. GItFQ

C3_i.

LOW Shaft

l_F<_ssure Frequency

_-Jj_o,:)l

Shaft

Critical (DIn/L2).

Speed

Gu[delines:

>l.._x:[.m_nn

Speed

VS

Pacameter

SU0.7M INLET REC. = 0.96 TRIT = (3000F) 16490 Kg/HR/N LBIHRILB.7 .07 -(z_) REO=60/

LBS -3400NEWTONS

N ON-RECU PERATE.,_D--_

750 -

T
J,/

/
8.0%

T "
I
I
6.5%

\
,,//_ .6 .06 SFC -_ 700 THRUST N O N-RECUPERATED

-32/1
|

REC

EFFI

*%

I_

-.:i

.05 --

.5

_ _---_ .__ _ "--" MIN.

Ir _.6
_.8
SFC RECUPERATOR EFFECTIVENESS

_--000 3

- 2800

.04 L-

I 10

I 14 OPR

! 18

I 22

600

I 10

I 14 OPR

I 18

I 22

71047 A1-099

F:igure

39.

Two-Spool Math 0.7,

Propfan 6% Recuperator

Recuperat:ed Pressure

Engine Loss.

Parametric

Performallce:

Sea

Level,

77

NEWTOI_S LBS -- 3400

f

SL/0,7 INLET TRIT =

M RECOVERY 3000F = 12% = 0.96

750 NONRE

""-

(APIP)REC. KglHRIN .07 (LBIHRILB)

7 --

700

-3200/ _
-- 3000

[ ,,O,o

3.5O, ,o o1
R EC EFF.

_ .6 .06 -

_._t-_

NON-RECUPERATED

THRUST 6 50

.6

--RECUPERATOR EFFECTIVENESS .6 _ .7_

--2800

.7

SFC

_ _ t 7.5% _ 4%_ _ . r

o 15% " ----600

.05

.5

.8 _f

1_._._ __ .-1'---MIN SFC

Loo/
1
22

.4 .04 -

I
10

I
14 OPR

I
18

55o

I
10

I
14 OPR

I
18

I
22 70218 A1-051/1

Figure

40.

Two--Spool Mach 0.7,

Propfan 12%

Recuperated

Engine Prt.,ssure

Parametric Loss.

Performance:

Sea

L,evel,

Recuperator

MATERIAL:

CERAMIC 70%

EFFECTIVENESS:

CORE VOL: (800 IN 3) 13.1 x 106 MM 3 WEIGHT:

_---" 274.3 MM (10.8 IN) ,,..-= 561 C (1043F) T = 476C (889F) x 106 Pa (292 LB/IN CORE 2) P = 124.8 (18.1 x 103 Pa LB/IN 2) P = 2.01

(35 LBS) 15.88 Kg

TOTAL PRESS DROP (%): 12

T
228.6
I

COLD

AIR

HOT

GAS'-I_

MM

(9.0 IN) T P = = 675C (1247

1.9Pa

x 106(275

HOT GAS

T =

761

C (1402F) x 103 Pa (19.27 LBIIN 2)

P = (4.5 IN) 114.3 MM

132.86

1
._

70223 A1-056

Figure

4].

Recuperat:or

Design

Sketch

78

OF POOR QUALITY

LB/HR/LB INLET Kg/HR/N .09 .90 RECOVERY = 0.96 TRIT = 1371 C (2500 F) UPDATED CYCLES

LB/LB/SEC 30 BPR 4.0 SFC 6.0 .70 .07 20 SPECIFIC THRUST (LB/LB/SEC) .--------....__ PD2TF4 ._ BPR

N/K(/SEC - 300

4.0

2OO

p D 2TF_22F3,_ I 15 20 OPR I 25

_ I 30

6.0 ,100

.6O .06 15

I 20 OPR

I 30

10

71054 AI-10G

Figure

42.

Two-Spool Level, blach

]'u[-hof:an 0.7,

Parametric (2500

Performance F) TkI'['.

With

Updated

Cycles:

Sea

137ic

INLET TRIT Kg/H R/N LB/HR/LB .90 -.09 _ BPR =

RECOVERY

0.96

1649 C (3,000 F) CYCLES (LB/LB/SEC) 40SPECIFIC THRUST BPR PD2TF7 L 4.0 --300 N/Kg/SEC --400

UPDATED

08 80
_60 .70 -.07 15 I 20

PD2TF7

---40
PD2TF6 I 25 OPR I 30

30

PD2TF5 A 2O 15

PD2TF6 a I 30 6.0 -200

I
2O OPR

I
25

71048 A1-100

Figure

43.

Two-Spool Level, Mach

Turbofan 0.7,

arametric 1649C (3000F)

PerL:ormance TRIT.

With

Updated

Cycles:

Sea

79

INLET Kg/HR/N .08 LB/H PJLB .80 TRIT =

RECOVERY

0.96 LB/LB/SEC 30 SPECIFIC THRUST BPR PD3TF10 A 20

1371 C (2500 F) CYCLES

N/Kg/SEC - 300

UPDATED

BPR - 200 4.0

SFC .70 .07 -

4.0 6.0 PD3TF9

PD3TF9

6.0

.60 .06 30

I 35 OPR

I 40

I 45

1C 30

I 35 OPR

I 40

| 45

-100

71055 AI-I07

Figure

4/_.

Three-Spo.l Level, Math

Turbofan 0.7,

Parametric (2500F)

Perforaan_'! ]'RIT.

W_th

[Ipdatcd

Cyc1,_s:

Sea

[371(;

INLET

RECOVERY

= 0.96

TRIT = 1649C (3000F) A UPDATED CYCLES LB/LB/SEC 40 SPECIFIC THRUST BPR Kg/HR/N .08 LB/HR/LB 30 0.8_....._.__ BPR PD3TF4'_'_4.O PD3TF5 PD3TF4 .L4.0 300 N/Kg/SEC

20 .07 0.7_ 6'0

,2O0 PD3TF1,2_ PD3TF3 _ j6.

o.61
.06 30

I
35 OPR

I
40

I
45

lO
30

I
35 OPR

I
40

I
45

-100

71050 A1-102

Figure

45.

Three-Spool Level, Mach

Turbofan 0o7,

Parametric (3000F) 80

Performance TRIT.

With

Updated

Cycles:

Sea

1649C

INLET RECOVERY = 0.96 TRIT = 1927C (3500F) Kg/HR/N LB/HR/LB 0.9- UPDATED CYCLES

"09iPD3TF7

BPR

-
.08 0.8 _ PD3TF8 A

4.0

LB/LB/SEC 40BPR PD3TF7 SPECIFIC THRUST PD3TF8

N/Kg/SEC - 400

A 4.0
- 300 A. 6,0 PD3TF6

69 .07 0.7 --

30--

o.6
.06 30

I
35 OPR

I
40

I
45

20 30

I
35 OPR

I
40

I
45

- 2OO

71053

Figure

46.

Three-Spool Level, Mach

Turbofan 0.7, 1927oc

Parametric (3500OF)

Performance TRIT.

With

Updated

Cycles:

Sea

LB/LB/SEC Kg/HR/N .058 -0.58

INLET REC = 0.96 PROP EFF. = 0.88 TRIT = (3000 F) 1649 C UPDATED CYCLES

SPECIFIC THRUST (LB/LB/SEC)

SPECIFIC THRUST (N/Kg/SEC) - 3000

300 [ 0.56 _ PD2PF2 250 I-PD2PF1 SFC .054 -0.52 PD2PF5 200 t PD2PF 1 PD2PF2 0.54 , PD2PF3 -2000 PD2PF5 PD2PF4 -2500

PD2PF4 0.5 15 .050 -70220 A1-053/1

I 20 OPR

I 25

150 _ 30 15

I 20 OPR

I 25

j 30

-1500

Figure

47.

Two-Spool Level, Mach

Propfan 0.7.

Parametric

Performance

With

Updated

Cycles:

Sea

81

ORIGINAL OF POOR

PAGE

IS

QUALtTY

INLET

RECOVERY EFF. =

= 0.96 0.88

SPECIFIC THRUST (LB/LB/SEC) 25O

SPECIFIC THRUST N/Kg/SEC - 2400

PROPFAN

LB/HR/LB KglHR/N -.06 .Tr

TRIT = (3000 F) 1649 C UPDATED CYCLES

225 Ow - .05 if)

- 2200

.5L
PD3PF2 PD3PF1

.4L 30 .04

I 35 OPR I 40 J 45 2OO 30 1 35 OPR 71078 A1-123 I 40 J 45

-2000

Figure

48,

Three-Spool Level, Math

Propfan 0.7.

Parametric

Performance

With

Updated

Cycles:

Sea

SEA INLET

LEVEL 0.7 0.96 REC.

MACH

',

871.2 MM (34.3 IN.)

,"

w_/OI(_ PR .r/

KglSEC (LBISEC)

17.62 (38.84) 1.65 0.917 27,420 28,735

1.66 (3.65) 15.78 0.824 61,755 69,920

0.24 (0.53) 4.4 0.882 29,760 69,920

0.91 (2.00) 3.95 0.892 14,110 28,735

NI_/O(R P M) N(RPM)

THRUST, N (LB): 3772 (848) SFC, Kg/HR/N (LBIHR/LB): .073 (0.716)

TRIT, C (F): 1371 (2500) OPR: 26

72189

Figure

49.

Two-Spool

Turbofan

Candidate 82

Engine

Cross-Section

And

Performance.

PAGE IS OF ;_'OOR QUAUTY

SEA LEVELIMACH 0.7 INLET REC. 0.96

673.1 MM (26.5 IN.)

Wx/OI6 PR

0.31

(0.676) 3.35

w_O/_,

KglSEC

(LB/SEC)

0.15

(0.335)

_1,/0
N

87,967 133,840

o.6ol

0.883 _11 -,/0 N 57,250 134,410

PR

2.28

-_

(7.97 IN.) RAD. 202.4 MM

Wx/Ol$ PR

KglSEC (LBISEC)

15.93 (35.12) 1.65 0.913 28,848 30,222

1.50 (3.31) 0.32 (0.71) 6.70 2.56 0.866 58,336 66,070 0.898 30,472 66,070 TRIT,

0.75 (1.65) 4.38 0.906 15,322 30,222 C (F): 1371 (2500) OPR: 37

17 NI x/O(RPM) N(RPM)

70232 A1-062/2

THRUST, N (LB): 3274 (736) SFC, KglHRIN (LBIHRILB): .0686 (0.673)

Figure

50.

Three-Spool

Turbofan

Candidate

Engine

Cross-Section

And

Performance.

MACH 0.7 SEA LEVEL INLET REC.: 0.96

_--_ //

/
/

/ /

,,

408.9 MM (16.1 IN.)

I I
W_O/_, PR KglSEC (LBISEC) 0.72 (1.58) 1.7 0.891 95,024 99,570

Jc .

-......
!
f

....

"-

r/ NI_O (RPM) N (RPM)

0.46 (1.02) 0.09 (0.19) 0.24 (0.53) 12.95 2.98 7.48 TRIT, C (F): 1649 (3000) THRUST, N (LBS): 2153 (484) OPR: 22 0.838 0.868 0.898 SFC, Kg/HR/N (LBIHRILB): 0.054 (0.534) 114,646 51,636 43,470 130,690 130,690 99,570

72194

Figure

51.

Two-Spool

Propfan

Candidate

Engine

Cross-Section

And

Performance.

83

VEHICLE/ MISSION DEFINITION FLIGHT PROFILE

DRAG POLARS TOGW PAYLOAD FUEL LOAD

; t
"NNEP" UNINSTALLED ENG. PERF. THRUST SFC AIRFLOW "PIPSI" MISSION =_ I v I o ANALYSIS "CAPER" (AVAIL = REQ'D) WGT. VS. TIME ACCOUNTING THRUST MATCHING I t INLET/EXHAUST EFFECTS INLET REC/DRAG EXHAUST CF /A'BODY DRAG

,1
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE INCREMENTAL/ CUMULATIVE -- TIME -- RANGE -- FUEL SUBSYS. BURNED SUMMARY 66564 A1-074

Figure

52,

Missiotl

Analysis

Hethodology

Flow

Chart.

Krv 12

FT 40,000 LAUNCH ___MISSION M = 0.9 30,000 _ 10 1484 (3271)[ 100

I 877 (1934) 67.5 ] 8.9 O_

VEHICLE WT., Kg (LB) LID % POWER

IJJ

(FT) 20,000 _'_ 4 10,000 -4.82 HRS 3.24 HRS_ MAX RANGE ACHIEVED 877(1934) _681 (2840 NM) 5260 KM (1510)

i-k,,.,J

,,

L14;.8
_

145.5 DES,RED
M = 0.7 i,_1_ .4000 RANGE NM
71056 A1-108 I

0 0

I
1000

I
2000

_1 3000

2000

4000 RANGE

6000

8000

KM

Figure

53,

Cruise

Hissi]e

Mission

Pecforlaance:

Baseline

Engine,

84

KM 12-

FT 40,000

MISSION LAUNCH M =0.9

1062 (2342) 9.6 74.7

VEHICLE WT. Kg (LB) L/D % POWER

30,000 8-

101470100 I (3241)

ALTITUDE

20,000
,=t

4.82 HRS

3.24 HRS .--_

4 10,000 5.1 626 (1379) I M = 0.7 00 0 I 0 I 1000 I 2000 I 2000 1 4000 RANGE 72208 Figure 54. Cruise Missile Mission Turbofan F ngine. Performance: Two-Spool Advanced Technology _ 3000 I 6000 ,,_r''_MISSION _ ENDS 4000 NM I KM 8000

KM 12

FT 40,000

MISSION f-LAUNCH M =0.9

937 (2066) 9.7 75.8

VEHICLE WT. Kg (LB) LID % POWER

10 30,000 -- 1270 (2800) 100 8

LU

20,000
I-.,J

_'_

4.82 HRS

3.24 H RS--_._

4 10,000 -937 (2066) ! 567 (1249) 5i .8 MISSION

0 0

I
1000

I
2000

I 3000

M = 0.7

ENOS
NM

4000

71059 A1-111

2000

4000 RANGE Performance:

6000

8000

KM

Figure

55.

Cruise Turbofan

Missile

Hission

Three-Spool

Advanced

Technology

Engi_le.

85

KM 12-

FT 40,000 M =0.9 10.1 671 (1479) 80.0 LID VEHICLE WT. Kg (LB) % POWER

o_
30,000 _
LU 3 :::) I-i I,_1
m

10 864 (1904 ) I 100

20,000

< 410,000

4.82 H RS

3 24 H RS--_

I I 14'''''
671 (1479) 5.4 88.1 I 3000
I j

3.6 85.1

_ MISSION ENDS

__

o
0
I

I
1000
I

I
2OO0

M = 0.7

i,_t_ 4000

NM
I

2000

4000 RANGE
Two-Spool

6000

8000
71058

KM

Figure

56.

Cruise Propfan

H_ssile Engine.

P[issiol

Pe_formatlce:

Advanced

Technology

AI-110

KM 12

FT MISSION 40,000 -,_LAUNCH I 782 (1725) 30,000 _ 10 100

M =0.9

VEHICLE WT. Kg (LB) L/D % POWER

LIJ a I-I",,--I

20,000

_._

4.82 HRS

_- _'

3.24 H RS-_

4 10,000 612 (1349) 420 (925)I ,_i_ MISSION ENDS

o
0

I
1000

I
2000

S_

I 3000

M=0.7

4000 NM

2000

4000 RANGE

i 6000

i KM 8000
71057 A1-109

Figure

57.

Cruise Propfan

Hissile Engine.

Mission

Performance:

Three-Spool

Advanced

Technology

86

0_: PO0!i,_ QUALW. Y

1.0 FUEL COST: $10 1 GAL. TOTAL ENGINES: 6000 41%

!
0.8 RELATIVE LCC 0.6VEH ACQ VEH ACQ VEH ACQ I

1
DEV

VEH ACQ 0.4-

VEH ACQ

0.2ENG ACQ DEV 0 _ O&S BASELINE ENGINE ENG ACQ. DEV "_ 2-SPOOL PROPFAN ENG ACQ DEV O&S
-7

ENG ACQ 2-SPOOL TURBOFAN

DEV O&S

ENG ACQ 3-SPOOL TURBOFAN

'-"

,_-_.->-_.I O&S 3-SPOOL PROPFAN

72207

*DOES

NOT MEET MISSION

Figure 58. System Life Cycle Cost Results.

1.15

1.1 RELATIVE LCC

1.05

r----I

1.o
COMPONENT Z_EFF (PTS) FAN -5

I
HP TURB -5 LP TURB - 5 COOLED TURBINE FUEL PRICE
71664

HP COMP -5

Figure

59.

System

Life

Cycle

Cost

Sensitivity

Results.

87

1.

2.

AERODYNAMIC TECHNOLOGY ON-GOING R&D INVERSE DESIGN METHODOLOGY* PERF. VERIFICATION (COLD) TESTS -- BENCH, SUBCOMPONENT & COMPONENT TESTS (3 SPOOL DUCT, T.I.N.) COMPOSITE MAT'L/MANUF.ISTRUC. TECHNOLOGY MAT'L DEVEL. & PROPERTY ARCHITECTURE MAT'L SAMPLE/COMPONENT TESTS MAT'L MANUF. DEVELOPMENT** STRUCT. DESIGN METHODOLOGYIOPTIM. DES. TOOLS* VERIFICATION TESTS (SAMPLE/COMPONENTS) FULL SCALE SIMULATION/ENGINE TESTS UPDATED/HIGH TEMP. SIMULATION TESTS DEMO ENGINE TESTS

85

90

95

00

I t
I

I I I
I

_-I ]

* CONSIDERED TO BE GENERIC ** OUTSIDE THE SECT PROGRAM,

PROVIDED

FOR PLANNING

ONLY

72181

Figure

60.

Technology

Program

Plans:

Radial

Inflow

Turbine,

85
I,

90

95

00

HIGH TEMP. MAT'L/MANUF./STRUCT. TECHNOLOGY MAT'L DEVEL. & PROPERTY ARCHITECTURE MAT'L SAMPLE/COMPONENT TESTS MAT'L MANUF. DEVELOPMENT* BEARING COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT HIGH TEMP LUBRICATION (LIQUID, DRY) DEVEL. HIGH TEMP. SEAL DEVELOPMENT BEARING/LUBRICATION VERIF. TESTS (BENCH, RIG) SEALS STRUC. TESTS (BENCH, RIG) TESTS

I I I I I

I I I I I I I

2. FULL SCALE SIMULATION/ENGINE DEMO ENGINE TESTS*

* OUTSIDE THE SECT PROGRAM,

PROVIDED

FOR PLANNING

ONLY
72182

Figure

61.

Technology

Program

Plans: 88

Bearings

And Seals.

4:1
"

4/"

......

85
=

90

95

00

ADV. GEOMETERY TOOTH PROFILE ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY/COMPUTER CODES* COMPOSITE MAT'L/MANUF./STRUCT. TECHNOLOGY I I I I I I

CONCEPT EVALUATION & DESIGN GEAR DEVELOPMENT 800F LUBRICATION DEVELOPMENT COMPONENT TEST (BEARINGS, LUBE, GEARS)

FULL SCALE SIMULATION/ENGINE TESTS FULL SCALE SIMULATION TESTS DEMO ENGINE TESTS (WITH PROPFANS)**

* CONSIDERED ** OUTSIDE

TO BE GENERIC
72183

THE SECT PROGRAM

Figure

62.

Technology

Program

P1aHs:

Propfan

Gearbox.

85
I,

90

95

00

AERODYNAMIC TECHNOLOGY ON-GOING R&D 3-D DESIGN METHODOLOGY* PERFORMANCE VERIFICATION TESTS -- ELEMENT TESTS (BENCH & SUBCOMPONENT) -- COMPONENT TESTS INCL. IN/OUT DUCTS
.

L I

J J

MATERIALIMAN UF.ISTRUCT. TECHNOLOGY MAT'L DEVEL. & PROPERTY/ARCHITECTURE MAT'L SAMPLE/COMPONENT TESTS MAT'L MANUF. DEVELOPMENT** STRUCT. DES. METHODOLOGYIOPTIM. DES. TOOLS* VERIFICATION TESTS (SAMPLE/COMPONENTS) FULL SCALE SIMULATION/ENGINE TESTS FULL SCALE SIMULATION TESTS DEMO ENGINE TESTS**

I
L _J

I.

* CONSIDERED TO BE GENERIC ** OUTSIDE THE SECT PROGRAM,

PROVIDED

FOR PLANNING

ONLY

721 84

Figure

63.

Technology

i?rogram

Plans: 89

Dual

Centrifugal

Compressor.

85

90

95

00

AEROTHERMODYNAMIC TECHNOLOGY 3-D REACTION FLOW METHODOLOGY* PERF. VERIFICATION & CHARACTERIZATION

TESTS

COMPOSITE MAT'LIMANUF./STRUCT. TECHNOLOGY MAT'L DEVEL. & PROPERTY/ARCHITECTURE MAT'L SAMPLE/COMPONENT TESTS MAT'L MANUF. DEVELOPMENT** STRUCT. METHODOLOGY & OPTIMIZ. DES. TOOLS* STRUCT. VERIFICATION TESTS (SAMPLE/COMPONENTS) FULL SCALE SIMULATION/ENGINE TESTS FULL SCALE SIMULATION TEST DEMO ENGINE TESTS**

I I I

I-----1 [ I

* CONSIDERED TO BE GENERIC ** OUTSIDE THE SECT PROGRAM,

72185

PROVIDED

FOR PLANNING

ONLY

Figure

64.

Technology

Program

Plans:

Slinger

Combustor.

85 1. FIBER REINF. SUPERALLOYS TECHNOLOGY PRIOR R & D MAT'L DEVEL & PROPERTY ARCHITECTURE MAT'L SAMPLE/COMPONENT TESTS MAT'L MANUF. DEVELOPMENT* STRUCT DESIGN/METHODOLOGY (STABILITY, HIGH TEMP. VISCOUS DAMPER) COMPONENT TESTS (BENCH, RIG) TESTS MAT'LIMANUF.ISTRUT --]

90

95

00

t I I 1-----1

2. FULL SCALE SIMULATION/ENGINE DEMO ENGINE TESTS*

* OUTSIDE THE SECT PROGRAM,

PROVIDED

FOR PLANNING

ONLY
72186

Figure

65.

Technology

Program

PlaHs: 90

High

Speed

Shaft.

APPENDIX LIST OF SYMBOLS AND

A ABBREVIATIONS

SYMBOLS AN2 BPR CO D DM FN G Had HCF HP I IP J

DEFINITION ANNULUS AREA-SPEED STRESS PARAMETER BYPASS RATIO ISENTROPIC VELOCITY CORRESPONDING TO TOTAL HEAD PROPELLER TIP DIAMETER SHAFT MEAN DIAMETER NET THRUST ACCELERATION DUE TO GRAVITY TOTAL TO STATIC ADIABATIC HEAD HIGH CYCLE FATIGUE HIGH PRESSURE COMBUSTOR HEAT RELEASE RATE INTERMEDIATE PRESSURE ENERGY CONVERSION FACTOR X CRING] M

UNITS M2-REV2/Sec 2 M/SEC M MM Newton MM/Sec 2 M (IN-RPM) 2 (Ft/Sec.) (FT) (IN.) (LB.) (FT/Sec2) (FT.)

J/SEC. M3 Pa OOULE

(MBTU/HR-FT3-ATM) (FT-LB/BTU)

KD2 L LCC LCF M M2 N n Ns OPR P3 PR RH RT SFC SHP SPECIFIC THRUST SPECIFIC VOLUME T3 T4 Tc Tg TW

INLET DISTORTION

INDEX =

_D [(_IRINGX (e-)RING
ID OD

.IL

CRING SHAFT LENGTH LIFE CYCLE COST LOW CYCLE FATIGUE MACH NUMBER EXHAUST RELATIVE MACH NUMBER SPEED SPEED SPECIFIC SPEED In _ ] [Had 3/4] OVERALL PRESSURE RATIO COMBUSTOR INLET PRESSURE PRESSURE RATIO VOLUME FLOW EXIT OF TURBINE HUB RADIUS TIP RADIUS SPECIFIC FUEL CONSUMPTION SHAFT HORSEPOWER THRUST/AIRFLOW COMBUSTOR SPECIFIC VOLUME [Volume/ W3x/_/] P3 COMBUSTOR INLET TEMPERATURE COMBUSTOR EXIT TEMPERATURE COOLING BLEED TENPERATURE GAS TENPERATURE METAL TEMPERATURE
ID

(IN.)

RPM Rev/Sec

(RPM)
(Rev/Sec)
I----

Pa M3/Sec MM MM Kg/HR/N KW N/Kg/Sec M3 _ SEC/MM2x/_ OK OK OK OK OK

(LB/IN 2) (FT3/Sec.) (IN.) (IN.) (LB/HR/LB) (HP) (LB/LB/Sec.) (FT3-Sec./In 2(OR)

R)

(R) (R) (R)

(OR)

LIST

OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS

(CON'T)

SYMBOLS TENPERATURE COEFFICIENT TRIT U UT W W3 WE WA

DEFINITION GJ A H/U_ TURBINE ROTOR INLET TENPERATURE MEAN WHEEL SPEED TIP SPEED VEHICLE WEIGHT COMBUSTOR INLET AIRFLOW ENGINE WEIGHT AIHFLUW SPECIFIC HEAT RATIO ENT_ALPY CHANGE GAS TURNING ANGLE RATIO OF PRESSURE TO SEA LEVEL FUNCTION OF 3/ = 7s

UNITS

oc

M/SEC M/SEC Kg Kg/SEC Kg Kg/SEC

(OF) (FT/Sec.) (Fm/Sec.) (LBS) (LB/Sec.) (LBS) (LB/Sec.)

7
AH A _ HUB

J/g Degrees STANDARD "Y 2 /

(BTU/LB) (Degrees)

(.o r_o

EC COOLING EFFECTIVENESS ADIABATIC EFFICIENCY (T 9 Tg Tw) Tc

_s/Ts

11
I--I

_p (_
(-)cr

POLYTROPIC EFFICIENCY RATIO OF TENPERATURE TO SEA LEVEL

STANDARD

RATIO OF CRITICAL VELOCITY AT TURBINE INLET TENPERATURE TO CRITICAL VELOCITY AT SEA LEVEL STANDARD ENGINE DENSITY RESIUENCE TIME Kg/M 3 Millisecond (LB/FT 3 ) (Millisecond)

PE
T

(Fn/W E)

RATIO UF CHANGE OF VEHICLE WEIGHT WITH HE3PECT TO ENGINE THHUST TO WEIGHT RATIO RATIU OF CHANGE OF VEHICLE RESPECT TO SFC RATIO UF CHANGE OF VEHICLE RESPECT TO ENGINE OENSITY WEIGHT WITH

w SFC W
_ RE

WEIGHT

WITH

DISTRIBUTION

LIST
d

SECT

STUDY

REPORTS

NASA 21000 Attn:

Lewis

Research Road

Center

U.S.

Army

Aviation Activity Directorate Research OH 44135

Research

and

Brookpark Ohio

Technology Propulsion Mail Stop 60-3 60-1 5-9 NASA Lewis

Cleveland,

44135

Center

Library Report R. W.

(2 Graham D. G. Beheim

copies) Office

Cleveland, Attn: J--_---Acurio G. P. G. G. W. G. R. J. L. A. L. A. J. G. Weden

Control

Mail St__ 77-12 (5 copies) 77-12 77-12 77-12 6-8 77-6 77-6 77-6

Major M. A. N. D. D. W. J. J. A. G. J. B. L. J. J. R. P. T. P. T. G. C. E. W. M. R. R. F. R. J. H. R. S. T. D. D. L. R. T. J. C. C. W.

Kulchak

501-3 3-9 3-8 3-8 6-12 6-12 6-12 6-12 6-12 6-12 6-8 5-3 5-7 5-7 86-I 77-6 77-6 77-6 86-4 86-4 86-7 77-6 77-6 77-6

Meitner Bobula Klann Acosta Skoch DeAnna

Saunders Poferl Mikkelson Strack Gauntner

Eisenberg J. Glassman Knip E. Haas A. A. R. A. C. T. N. G. J. A. L. A. T. R. W. J. A. J. S. R. L. R. T. E. J. J. E. Miller Povinelli Wood Ziemianski Evans Kerwin Strom Batterton Biesiandy Kraft Ball Willis Wintucky Vanco Roelke Newman Rollbuhler Fordyce Gray Dreshfield Levine Serafini Sokolowski Gauntner Kiraly Kielb (5 copies) Niedzwiecki

NASA Attn:

Headquarters D.C. 20546 Rosen Rosen Facey Banerian RJ/Cecil RP/Robert RP/John RP/Gordon

Washington,

NASA Moffett Attn:

Ames

Research Field, CA

Center 94035 Mail Stop Mail 237-11 Stop 237-11

John T. L.

Zuk,

Galloway,

NASA

Langley VA Robert J.

Research 23665 W. Koenig, Mail

Center

Hampton, Attn:

Mail Stop

Stop 246A

249

Stickle,

77-6 77-6 77-6 77-6 77-6 3-5 49-1 49-3 49-3 49-3 49-7 23-3 23-3 23-3 Headquarters U.S. NASA Moffett Attn: Army Ames Aviation Activity Research Field, Dr. Mr. J. W. CA R. Research (AVSCOM) Center 94035-1099 Carlson SAVDL-AS and Technology Commander Systems 4300 St. Attn: U.S. Command Boulevard 63120-1798 Crawford Edwards, DRSAV-EP Army Aviation

Goodfellow Louis, Mr. Mr. MO C. V.

Andre,

93

Aviation Applied Technology Directorate U.S. Army Aviation Research and Technology Activity (AVSCOM) Fort Eustis, VA 23604-5577 Attn: H. Morrow, SAVDL-ATL-ATP Mr. G. A. Elliott Mr. E. Johnson Mr. S. Morgan U.S. Army Tank Automotive Command 28251Van Dyke Warren, MI 48397-5000 Attn: Mr. G. Cheklich Mr. C. Mason, AMSTA-RGRT Mr. E. Danielson Commander Army Research Office P.O. Box 12211 Research Park Triangle, NC 27709 Attn: Dr. R. Singleton Naval Air Propulsion Center P.O. Box 7176 Trenton, NJ 08628-0176 Attn: Mr. W. W. Wagner Mr. R. Valori, PE 34 Naval WeaponsCenter Code 3246 China Lake, CA 93555 Attn: Mr. G. W. Thielman Naval Air Systems Command Washington, D.C. 20361 Attn: Commander L. Murphy III J. Mr. R. A. Grosselfinger, AIR-310 F David Taylor Naval Ship R&DCenter Bethesda, MD 20084 Attn: Mr. M. Gallager, Code 1240 U.S. Marine Corps Developmentand Education Command LVT(X) Directorate, DI6 Quantico, VA 22134 Attn: CarmenDiGiandomenico Deputy Under Secretary of Defense Research and Engineering Research and AdvancedTechnology The Pentagon Washington, D.C. 20301 Attn: Dr. D. Dix, OUSDRE (MST) Mr. D. Gissendanner

Department of Army, SCSRDA Room3E429 The Pentagon Washington, D.C. 20301 Attn: Mr. D. R. Artis Mr. R. Ballard Defense AdvancedResearch Project Agency 1400 Wilson Blvd. Arlington, VA 22209 Attn: S. Sigman, Jr. R. Williams Wright Patterson Air Force Base Dayton, OH 45433 Attn: Mr. Erik W. Linder, AFWAL/POTA Mr. T. Gingrich Lt. J. Gagliardi Mr. E. A. Lake Mr. W. Troha, AFWAL/POTC U.S. Department of Energy Office of Transportation Systems i000 IndependenceAvenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20585 Attn: Richard T. Alpaugh, MS 5G-046 Naval Ship Systems Engineering Station Philadelphia, PA 19112 Attn: Mr. L. Haryslak, Code 033D Mr. T. Bodman U.S. ArmyMaterial Command 5001Eisenhower Avenue Alexandria, VA 22333 Attn: Mr. R. A. Mercure, AMCDE-SA Allison Gas Turbine Division General Motors Corporation P.O. Box 420 Indianapolis, IN 46206-0420 Attn: P. C. Tramm H. C. Mongia, TI4 T. R. Larkin AVCO Lycoming 550 South Main Street Stratford, CT 06497 Attn: H. Moellmann L. Beatty H. Kaehler

94

General Electric Aircraft Engine Business Group P.O. Box 6301 Evandale, OH 45215-6301 Attn: L. H. Smith, K-70 General Electric Aircraft Engine Business Group i000 Western Avenue Lynn, MA 01910 Attn: L. H. King R. Hirschkron Garrett Turbine Engine Company Iii South 34th Street P.O. Box 5217 Phoenix, AZ 85010 Attn: _ Howell J. R. Switzer M. L. Early United Technologies Corporation Pratt & Whitney Engineering Division 400 Main Street East Hartford, CT 06108 Attn: T. J. Gillespie, 162-23 United Technologies Corporation Pratt & Whitney Engineering Division P.O. Box 269.1 West Palm Beach, FL 33402 Attn: R. E. Davis J. Alcorta Sundstrand Turbomach P.O. Box 85757 4400 Ruffin Road San Diego, CA 92138-5757 Attn: C. Rodgers Teledyne CAE Turbine Engines 1330 Laskey Road P.O. Box 6971 Toledo, OH 43612 Attn: E. H. Benstein E. Razinsky B. Singh

Williams International 2280 West Maple Road P.O. Box 200 Walled Lake, MI 48088 Attn: R. C. Pampreen D. A. Gries R. A. Horn, Jr. Norton - TRW Gottard Road Northboro, MA 01532-1545 Attn: Dr, C. L. Quackenbush Caterpillar Tractor Company Defense Products Department, JB7 Peoria, IL 61629 Attn: Mr. G. G. Valbert Beech Aircraft Corporation 9709 E. Central Wichita, KS 67201 Attn: Mr. O. Scott Mr. C. McClure CessnaAircraft Corporation P.O. Box 7704 Wichita, KS 67201 Attn: Mr. E. Kraus Gulfstream Aerospace P.O. Box 2206 Savannah, GA 31402 Attn: Mr. R. J. Stewart Fairchild Aviation Company International Airport P.O. Box 32486 San Antonio, TX 78284 Attn: Mr. R. E. McKelvey Bell Helicopter Textron P.O. Box 482 Fort Worth, TX 76101 Attn: Mr. D. Karanian Gates Learjet Corporation P.O. Box 7707 Wichita, KS 67277 Attn: Mr. R. D. Neal

95

Boeing Vertol Company Boeing Center P.O. Box 16858 Philadelphia, PA 19142 Attn: D. R. Woodley McDonaldDouglas Helicopter Co. Centinela Avenue and Teale Street Building T 465 Culver City, CA 90230 Attn: D. Borgman Piper Aircraft Corp. P._O. Box 1328 Vero Beach, FL 32960 Attn: Max Bleck Sikorsky Aircraft Division United Technologies Corporation N. Main Street Stratford, CT 06602 Attn: H. Shohet Boeing Military Airplane Co. Research & Engineering Wichita, KS 67210 Attn: Mr. Bert Welliver Boeing Aerospace Company Kent Space Center P. O. Box 3999 Seattle, WA 98124-2499 Attn: Mr. L. Harding Brunswick Corporation Defense Division 3333 Harbor Blvd. Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Attn: Mr. Richard L. Benton General Dynamics Corporation Convair Division P O. Box 85357 San Diego, CA 92138 Attn: Mr. Mark F. Dorian Hughes Aircraft Co. Missile Development 8433 Falbrook Avenue CanogaPark, CA 91304 Attn: Mr. Larry Wong

Lockheed Missiles & Space Co. Austin Division 2100 East St. Elmo Road Austin, TX 78744 Attn: Mr. Michael Levin Lockheed Georgia Co. 86 S. Cobb Drive D72-16, Z399 Marietta, GA 30063 Attn: Mr. Rick Mattels Martin Marietta Aerospace P. O. Box 5837 Orlando, FL 32855 Attn: Mr. Victor Schilling,

MP 275

McDonnelDouglas Astronautics Co. Box 516 Bldg. 106, Level 2, Room287 St. Louis, MO 63166 Attn: Mr. ThomasF. Schweickert Northrop Corporation Ventura Division 1515 Rancho Conejo Blvd. P. O. Box 2500 NewburyPark, CA 91320 Attn: Mr. Marion Bottorff Northrop Corporation Hawthorne Division One Northrop Avenue Dept. 3810, Zone 82 Hawthorne, CA 90250 Attn: Mr. David McNally Rockwell International Corp. Missile SystemsDivision Department 362 4405-A International Blvd. Norcross, GA 30093 Attn: Mr. F. L. Goebel Teledyne Ryan Aeronautical 2701 Harbor Drive Box 80311 San Diego, CA 92138-9012 Attn: Mr. Vernon A. Corea Hamilton Standard Mail Stop 1-2-11 Windsor Locks, CT 06096 Attn: Mr. Fred Perkins