Supercharging the Allison

A Presentation to the Aircraft Engine Historical Society July 17, 2009 Indianapolis, Indiana By Daniel D. Whitney, P.E.

Background There are several aspects to the topic of Supercharging the Allison that involve more than just the technology of the supercharging methods applied to the Allison V-1710. In particular, the engine was a key player in the technical and political evolution of large aircraft engines during the period between the First World War and through the Second World War. This paper reflects on these developments, and motivations, as well as the technology of the V-1710. Any engine used to power an aircraft is fundamentally a mechanical device interposed into the process of burning a fuel, with the goal of extracting meaningful and useful power for the purpose of sustaining flight. Machines that do this are known to engineers as Heat Power Engines, and for some 200+ years, people have been devising interesting, sometimes unique, and hopefully effective, ways of doing this. With the necessity to burn a fuel, thereby releasing its contained thermal energy, the fundamental requirements are to bring the fuel and oxidizer together at the same time and place, then burn the fuel in a way that the heat doesnt damage the mechanical components of the engine, while deriving mechanical power that can be used to drive an airscrew, or provide a jet of gasses able to produce propulsive thrust. It quickly became apparent to airplane designers that the more power available the more successful their craft was likely to be. Unfortunately, early efforts at providing more power usually meant more weight, which is the antithesis of a flying machine. The first aviation engines were naturally aspirated, that is, they drew in ambient air in which to burn the fuel, by the rapid movement of a piston down a cylinder. Soon engineers began to describe the advantages of their particular machines by their Volumetric Efficiency, that is, how well the cylinders were being filled during the intake stroke. This process could never be 100% efficient, and particularly so in an airplane whose whole purpose was to fly high in the sky, where the air density is significantly reduced as altitude increases. Clearly, there was a point where the available power from the engine would decrease to the point that the airplane could go no higher. This has been named the Critical Altitude. Another type of efficiency (inefficiency) that works on any engine is the fact that it can never fully extract, or convert, all the available fuel energy into power, for there are a number of competing physical processes that conspire to waste the available energy. The most demanding of these is the amount of energy required to heat the air in the cylinder as a consequence of burning the fuel. Peak temperatures during the combustion process exceed 3,000 oF, which is good for thermodynamics because it gives us a lot of thermal energy to work with, but it also can be very hard on the machinery extracting mechanical work. Obviously, with this much heat in a confined space the machine is going to get hot, so a cooling system must be included to keep the parts from being damaged. Next, there is motion, for the oscillating piston in the combustion chamber is connected to a crankshaft, which has supporting bearings, all of which involves metal components rubbing together, creating friction and wear. This can be overcome by incorporating a lubrication system to keep the parts moving smoothly, through the lubricating oil is

heated by this friction and the hot metal parts, so the airplane designer must devise a way of cooling the oil. This again adds weight and drag to a fine flying machine. Figure 1 is a schematic showing how a typical aircraft engine utilizes the energy available from the fuel. Notice that only about 25% of the fuel energy is delivered to the airscrew, another 25% is wasted via the cooling systems (cylinder/head and lubricating oil), and unfortunately, about 50% of the energy leaves via the hot engine exhaust gas. Its temperature having been reduced to about systems, but this is still a

Figure 1 This is an example of how the heat from burning fuel in an engine is distributed. In this case only 29.6% of the fuel energy is delivered to the propeller, and over half exits with the hot exhaust.

1500 oF by the work done on the propeller and by the cooling lot of energy. If only there was some way to recover it.

Early airplane designers quickly found that using larger, and therefore heavier, engines was of dubious value. What was needed was for every pound of engine installed in the airplane to do more work, the question was, how? It is believed that Gottlieb Daimler was the first to propose supercharging, but it was not tried until used on a two-cycle engine in1878. With the start of WWI in 1914 Frenchman Auguste Rateau came up with a way to get more power from an aircraft engine by supercharging. His device forced more air into the engine, that is, to supercharge it, and increasing volumetric efficiency. This not only produces more power, but has the advantage that the power can be produced to a higher altitude, i.e., increasing the critical altitude. Rateau also advanced the concept by attempting to utilize some of the heat being wasted in the exhaust to drive the supercharger (actually an air-compressor) by powering it with a turbine. The device became known as the turbo-supercharger. The Turbosupercharger The late 1800s and early 1900s were a very dynamic time for the development of heat engines. The early gasoline spark ignition 4-stroke, Otto Cycle, engines were being invented and developed around the world. The Diesel engine cycle was also being pursued, while at the same time stationary and marine steam turbines were being used in ever larger scale. In about 1903 Sanford Moss, while working on a PhD in Engineering at Cornell University, was able to obtain a small steam turbine for his research. With modifications to this device he became the first to operate a turbine powered by hot 3

combustion gas. This experience got him a position at General Electric, a company then big in steam turbine driven electric generators and air compressors.

Figure 2 Although shown on an air-cooled engine, the Type B Turbo was used for the V-1710, particularly the P-38. Important features are the intercooler to reduce the temperature of the compressed air going into the carburetor and the control of the wastegate, which determines the speed of the turbine/compressor, and thereby the discharge air pressure.

When the US was drawn into WWI in 1917 the aviation arm of the US Army Signal Corps was interested in applying the Rateau turbosupercharger to the new Liberty-12 aircraft engine and Mosss earlier work was remembered. The GE Company was then selected as one of several US entities given the charge to produce an indigenous turbosupercharger. Only two machines came out of this work, one by Scherboney, and the other by GE/Moss. Both were comparatively crude devices, with only the GE unit considered for development. Moss and his team at GE had considerable resources available to them, specifically they had people who understood to some extent the dynamics of hot steam and gasses, the elements of turbine design, and significantly, they understood air and had a lot of experience compressing it, albeit, for industrial applications. By the end of WWI the GE/Moss team had built several operating turbosuperchargers suitable for use with the 400 hp Liberty-12, and had successfully operated one at an elevation of some 14,000 feet on Pikes Peak, Colorado. 4

Following the war the turbosupercharger was one of the few programs to receive continued funding and support by the military. The war had clearly shown the need and tactical advantage of operating combat airplanes at high altitudes. Moss went through a number of significant evolutions of his turbosupercharger. The first was to find a viable configuration for all of the machinery, for while a turbo is a fairly simple device, having a single shaft, with a centrifugal supercharger on one end and an axial turbine on the other, relatively large ducting needed to connect it to an intercooler, the engines carburetor, and to the hot exhaust outlets. The Use of Superchargers The need and interest in fitting aircraft engines with superchargers was fairly widespread in the early 1920s, however actually getting a supercharger to work on an engine was not a simple undertaking. While the centrifugal type of supercharger is preferred for aircraft installations, (because of simplicity and light weight, having only one moving part, the impeller), it must spin at very high speeds, inducing both very high mechanical stresses, while generating considerable heat. This heat (temperature rise) is a physical consequence of the compression of the air and the inefficiency of the supercharger as a machine. For these reasons superchargers remained in the experimental laboratory, and in a few instances, applied to early racing airplanes. See Figure 2 for details of a turbosupercharger installation. With the exception of the efforts to develop the turbosupercharger, the earliest production use of what could be considered a supercharger were the rotary induction systems fitted on some early radial engines built by Wright Aeronautical and Pratt & Whitney. Early radials were plagued by uneven distribution of the fuel and air mixture to the radially disposed cylinders. While their carburetors mixed the fuel and air fairly well, the intake tubes from the carburetor to the cylinders resulted in uneven delivery, and often times collected condensed or unevaporated fuel. The result was rough running and poor performance. A solution was to interpose a mixer between the carburetor and cylinders to insure a uniform distribution of the mixture to the various cylinders. This took the form of what would now be called a mechanically driven supercharger in that an impeller, driven at a speed higher than the crankshaft was used to fully mix the fuel with the air and add enough heat to insure the fuel was fully evaporated prior to delivery to the cylinders. This worked quite well on the low-power engines to which it was fitted. With the interest in racing it was only natural that the step-up gear ratio to the impeller be increased, with the result that the pressure of the mixture going to the cylinders was greater than atmospheric, alas Supercharging. However, the resulting improvement in performance was not without consequences. First, the increase in power challenged the fundamental design of the engine components, requiring many to be strengthened. However the real constraint was the quality of fuel being used. In the US the typical aviation grade fuel1 had an octane rating of only about 40 60, while the best, known as Fighting Grade, was only marginally better, in the 65 87 range. The higher pressures
1

Innovation and the Development of Flight, By Roger D. Launius, page 105

developed in the cylinders, the result of the greater density and temperature of the mixture coming from the supercharger, caused these fuels to detonate, with disastrous consequences for the pistons and engines. In racing situations special cocktails of fuel could be prepared which allowed limited but safe operation, however this was not practical for widespread application. Spurred by the development of the supercharger and the need for more powerful engines, the development of improved aviation fuels, specifically the introduction of TEL (Tetra Ethyl Lead) compound, allowed performance ratings of over 100. Engines could now safely develop much more power. With improved fuels, and superchargers, most manufacturers of large aircraft engines worked to fit the device onto their existing engines. However in most instances the marriage was not very successful. An example of such an engine is the Curtiss Conqueror, a water-cooled V-12 having 1560 cubic inches of displacement. At 600 horsepower this was one of the most powerful engines of the era, with various models incorporating the many evolving features coming from the rapid development of technology occurring during the 1920s. These included propeller reduction gears, improved bearings, chemical-cooling (ethylene glycol), mechanical supercharging, and turbo-supercharging. Only the reduction gears and improved bearings enjoyed more than limited production. By 1929 major changes to the engine were required if more power, efficiency, and reliability were to be achieved. The 1930s Developments Wright Aeronautical acquired Curtiss in 1929, and largely abandoned the in-line V-12 in favor of a new line of supercharged, air-cooled, radials to compete with the new Pratt & Whitney air-cooled radials that were preferred by the US Navy. Pratt & Whitney had introduced their air-cooled, R-1340 in 1925. It featured a rotary induction system. Concurrently, Packard had announced that they were no longer interested in providing the US Army Air Corps with its in-line V-12s and ended for more than a decade its involvement with aviation engines. Back in the early 1920s the Curtiss D-12, a water-cooled V-12, was the most advanced engine available. It was imitated around the world with racing versions setting new speed records, particularly in the Schneider Cup competition. With the rapid dominance of the type in racing, and with the objective of having a high-powered, streamlined, V-12 of their own, the US Army Air Corps issued a request for proposals in 1929 for the industry to provide them with such an engine. Unfortunately the stock-market crash in October 1929 changed the ability and interests of the likely firms able to respond, with the result that the Allison Engineering Company was the only firm to provide a responsive offer. The Air Corps did not want to have Allison join the industry as an aircraft engine manufacturer given the number of firms already in the field. Allison had been a key provider of unique, experimental, and limited production and modified aircraft engines, reduction gears, and superchargers to the aviation industry beginning in WWI. Furthermore, they had developed the steel-backed plain bearing, and had fitted them into 6

thousands of WWI era Liberty-12 engines, significantly improving the reliability of the Liberty. It was not a question of Allisons ability; rather it was the dilution of support for the available engine manufacturers and the lack of government funding that concerned the Army. The engine proposed by Allison was the liquidcooled V-1710. Its primary designer was Harold Caminez, one of the two or three most experienced and capable engine designers of the day. He designed an engine able to operate with high-temperature ethylene glycol coolant, Figure 3 This is the V-1710-A engine designed by Harold with an integral propeller Caminez, showing many of the features that would identify it reduction gear, able to through its long life, including the four valve cylinders and develop 1000 horsepower, power section, separately removable cylinder banks, reduction have an integral gear and accessory sections. supercharger, and be able to operate with a turbosupercharger. The engine also incorporated advanced features such as a roller cam operating four valves per cylinder, the new Allison steel-backed bearings, and was adaptable to fuel injection. In all, a very advanced engine, see Figure 3, however the Army was unable to fund the project and it was not encouraged. Allison did find a sponsor for the engine, albeit in an unsupercharged, naturally aspirated, form, as the US Navy needed such an engine to power its new airships. The Navy sponsored the newly designed mechanically supercharged V-1710-A as a way to expedite development, of the engine they wanted. Meanwhile, Allison developed the unique V1710-B for airship use,

Figure 4 The naturally aspirated V-1710-B for airships included several very unique features, including the ability to reverse directions from full power in seven seconds. Without a supercharger the carburetors were mounted in the vee between the banks.

Figure 4. Both of these developments were successful, however the airship program was cancelled following the loss the USS Akron and USS Macon airships, just as the V-1710Bs were ready for delivery. In the meantime the Army developed a requirement for a large bomber and desired to power it with streamlined engines fitted into the wings, rather than the high drag, low-powered air-cooled radials installations typical of the day. With this requirement in mind Allison designed the V-1710-C, an engine with a long epicyclic reduction gear for easy streamlining into the airframe, integral mechanical supercharger, and intended to operate with a turbosupercharger in a high altitude bomber. This engine incorporated the many lessons learned in developing the earlier models, yet was to endure a slow development because of the depressed economic times and minimal funding. In 1936 this engine became the first Allison to fly, in the test bed Bell A-11A. Because of the development delays the Boeing XB-15 bomber project had been built with conventional air-cooled radials. As a way to expedite development of both the V-1710 and turbosupercharger the Army then issued a new requirement for an in-line powered, turbosupercharged Pursuit, the Curtiss XP-37. This airplane preceded a contract for 13 YP-37s, intended to introduce the high-speed, high-altitude fighter type aircraft to the US military, along with its integrated engine and turbo installation. As a group these aircraft were successful, although the primary lessons learned were that combining the turbosupercharger with a high performance engine/airframe required a much more sophisticated control system than was available at the time. This work was immediately undertaken and resulted in turbosupercharger installations that were very successful only a few years later, during WWII, in the Lockheed P-38, Republic P-47, Boeing B-17, Consolidated B-24, and Boeing B-29.

Figure 5 Bell XP-39, powered by a V-1710-E2 extension shaft engine. In this original form, with intercooled turbosupercharger, Bell promised to exceed 400 mph at altitude. When flown it was unable to meet this requirement due to excessive drag, much of which was due to the way the turbo was installed.

The gathering of war clouds in the late 1930s stimulated the US military to aggressively seek more capable and modern aircraft. The first of these were to be high-altitude 400+ mph fighters, with the winners being the Lockheed XP-38 and Bell XP39, both of which were powered by turbosupercharged Figure 6 The XP-39 turbo installation appears quite compact and Allison V-1710s. efficient; however the four waste gates and intercooler were largely While the XP-38 in the airplane slipstream and created excessive drag. was able to meet the requirements, the XP-39, see Figure 5, was not. The NACA put the aircraft in its wind tunnel and determined the problem was largely due to the poor configuration and integration of the turbosupercharger with the engine, see Figure 6. From this it was determined that the airplane would never meet it requirements with the turbo, and hence the turbo should be removed, aerodynamic improvements made to the fuselage, and an altitude rated engine fitted. This was quickly done, and by the expediency of using a higher step-up gear ratio to drive the integral supercharger a workable engine configuration was achieved. This provided enough power, an altitude of about 14,000 feet, where without the weight and drag of the turbo, the XP39 could just barely meet Figure 7 the 400 mph contract 9

requirement, as shown in Figure 7. Concurrently, the followon Pursuit competition was also faltering when Curtiss decided to try the V-1710-C Allison, Figure 8, in their air-cooled P-36 which had a radial engine. This was a very successful installation, although still not able to reach altitudes over 20,000 feet. At the last moment in the competition Allison substituted a higher speed supercharger drive gear Figure 8 Often referred to as the Long-Nose Allison, the V-1710-C and a larger carburetor on was intended to maximize the ability of airplane designers to the engine resulting in streamline the engine installation. It resulted in some very attractive the V-1710-19, see airplanes, such as the early P-40, XP-38, and P-37s. Figure 9, which in May 1939 won the competition and was designated the P-40 Tomahawk. The seriousness of the situation and times can be appreciated when it is realized that when Germany invaded Poland on September 1, 1939, beginning WWII, the only modern pursuit in the US military was the single XP-40, AAF S/N 38-10, as the small batches of YP-38 Lightnings and YP-39 Airacobras were not yet flying. With the start of WWII Britain and France came to the US and purchased large numbers of aircraft, and the engines to power them. These purchases funded construction of the needed factories and the rapid developments that followed. Allison had hand built a total of fewer than 40 V1710 engines during the preceding ten years, but now had contracts for many thousands. These engines were to be

Figure 9 Accessory and supercharger drive configuration on the V-1710-C15 engine showing the long quill shaft used to dampen torsional vibrations via the stabilizing inertia of the high speed supercharger impeller.

10

progressively increased in power and reliability, and to be built in a number of very different configurations. The engineering and manufacturing challenges were immense. A key to meeting the required performance growth was to improve the supercharging of the engine. The Allison Integral Engine-Stage Supercharger The basic centrifugal supercharger contains only two parts, one rotating, and the other stationary. These are the high speed impeller, which comprises a number of vanes radiating from a hub, and a stationary diffuser. The diffuser takes the very high speed air coming from the tips of the rotating vanes, and converts the airs kinetic energy into pressure energy. This process heats the air because of the work done compressing it, while the pressure Figure 10 The accessory drives in the V-1710-E/F/G are much increases its density. revised compared to those in the V-1710-C. Item 31 is a hydraulic This density increase is damper that removes torsional vibration from the drive system, the supercharging stabilized by the supercharger inertia. The starter shaft is rigidly effect, which is what geared to the crankshaft. When it is used to drive the Auxiliary Stage Supercharger the Aux Stage hydraulic clutch and Impeller allows more air to be inertia provide the stabilizing inertia. forced into the cylinder than is possible in a naturally aspirated engine. In the V-1710-A Allison used a very simple 8.25 inch diameter impeller design without a backing plate, straight vanes and a vane-less diffuser. While it worked, it functioned more like a rotary induction system and was not very efficient. Fortunately very little supercharging, or boost, was required in this engine so supercharger efficiency was not an issue. When the V-1710-C was designed not only was the rated boost pressure higher, it was also necessary to minimize the amount of heat in the mixture since the installation was intended to be turbosupercharged, a process that adds heat as well. This meant that the efficiency needed to be improved and the new supercharger shows that considerable work had been done to improve its efficiency and performance. Still the technology was in its infancy. See Figure 8 for the early engine supercharger drive train. 11

In addition to the thousands of V-1710-Cs built for the P-40 Tomahawk, early production was also focused on the V-1710-E and V-1710-F engines for the P-39 and P-38 respectively. These engines shared many parts and were a complete redesign of the V1710-C. They were intended to be easier to manufacture and have the capability for increased power ratings. The supercharger in these engines featured an entirely new drive design that offered a number of different drive ratios, allowing the designer to tailor the engine/supercharger combination to the requirements of the aircraft type and model. These two aircraft being excellent examples of this flexibility, with the altitude rated P39 having 8.8:1 gears while the turbosupercharged sea-level rated engines in the first P38s needed only 6.44:1. See Figure 10 for the late type supercharger drive train. Both engines were rated for 1150 horsepower. The supercharger impeller in the V-1710-C/E/F engines was essentially the same, being 9.5 inches in diameter and having 15 vanes, made of forged and machined aluminum, with an integral backing plate to give the vanes stability and eliminate harmful high frequency harmonic vibrations that would otherwise cause them to fatigue and break. The efficiency of the supercharger, while good for the day, was in the 55 - 60 percent range. With the initial models in production and military service, it was necessary to provide more power for the ever changing combat conditions the aircraft and engines were engaged in. This resulted in a new supercharger inlet that featured steel guide vanes, aligned with the aluminum vanes on the impeller. This simple addition improved the airflow into the impeller, improved the efficiency of the supercharger, and allowed more air to be delivered to the engine. This resulted in an increase in the engine rated or critical altitude because of the improved supercharger, and a slightly higher horsepower delivered to the propeller. Concurrent with this improvement Allison received approval from the Army to eliminate the backfire screens that had been fitted in the intake manifolds. A part of this change was a new gas pipe between the supercharger and streamlined intake manifolds that incorporated a venturi that would pickup and Figure 11 The venturi type intake manifolds solved reatomize any fuel that condensed the Allison Time Bomb fears that had become in the gas pipe, a condition that was epidemic for the P-38J by late-1943. occurring during extended low12

power cruise of the new P-38J with improved intercoolers, Figure 11. manifolds allowed a further 2 3,000 foot increase in critical altitude.

The new

Late in the war Allison introduced improved steel inlet guide vanes on the impellors of some limited production engines. These improved the efficiency of the engine stage supercharger to nearly 80 percent, which is very good, particularly for a centrifugal compressor of this date. After the war a number of pending engine and supercharger improvements, which had been delayed because they would require reconfiguration of production lines, were incorporated on the two-stage V-1710-G6 engines used on the North American P-82E/F Twin Mustang. This included an enlarged supercharger impeller of 10.25 inches diameter capable of efficiently passing more air. At the same time the carburetor was eliminated, significantly reducing restrictions to airflow in the intake system. It was replaced by a speed density fuel metering control, essentially an analog computer that calculates the mass of air going into the cylinders and meters the appropriate quantity of fuel.

Figure 12 Hundreds of thousands Type B Turbosuperchargers were built during WWII. Each P-38 had two, one for each V-1710. The turbo was powered by hot exhaust gasses collected from each cylinder bank and directed to the turbine section. Maximum exhaust gas temperature was 1750 oF, though 1450 oF was more typical. Back pressure on the engine was typically near sea-level, about 32 inHgA. Compressor discharge was controlled to meet engine requirements, up to about 32 inHgA into the carburetor. An intercooler was used to keep this temperature below 100 oF

13

Two-Stage Supercharging The necessity of two-stage supercharging was well appreciated in the early days of powered flight. During the 1920s the US Army strategic thinking was that in future wars high-altitude, precision bombing, would be the deciding tactic. This was so widespread that development of fighters (Pursuits) was not considered important to winning the strategic battle. This strategy can be excused when it is understood that bombers of the day were usually faster and higher flying than contemporary Pursuits. To reach these high altitudes the GE/Moss turbosupercharger, Figure 12, was to be employed. Its design philosophy was that it would deliver air at sea-level conditions to the engine, at up to the critical altitude of the supercharger, while imposing only sea-level back pressure on the engine. In this way the engine would always operate as if at sealevel, so the strains and power losses of operating at high altitude would not be an issue. Of course, the turbosupercharger created significant temperature rise while compressing the very cold air in the stratosphere, so an intercooler was fitted between the turbo and the carburetor to cool the air to a temperature similar to that at sea-level. Since the turbo was powered by the hot exhaust gasses coming from the engine the power required to drive it could be obtained with little, if any, reduction in the amount of power delivered to the propeller. Alternatively, a mechanically driven second-stage of supercharging could also be done, but this introduced additional mechanical complexity in the engine, as well as robbing from the engine a considerable amount of power that would otherwise be available to the

Figure 13 This is the mechanically supercharger two-stage V-1710-93(E11) for the P-63A. A three-barrel carburetor was used to maximize altitude capability and is mounted on the inlet to the Auxiliary Stage Supercharger. This view shows the step-up drive for the Aux Stage mounted on the starter shaft. Note that the starter is not mounted in this image.

14

propeller. In the 1930s Allison had proposed to the Army that they develop a mechanically driven two-stage supercharger for the V-1710. The motivation had been in response to requests for such an engine from some of the airplane designers, and to overcome the then apparent shortcomings of the turbosupercharger as then being implemented. With the very tight budgets of the Depression era 1930s, and the considerable long-term investment they had made in the turbosupercharger, the Army would not support such a development, and did not want Allison to dilute their limited engineering capacity by undertaking such a project. With the onset of WWII, and the considerable allocation of new money and manpower to the Allison engine program, development was begun on a mechanically supercharged two-stage V-1710, Figure 13. This effort followed the same modular design philosophy that had been applied to the earlier Allison V-3420 and V-1710-E/F engines; a philosophy taught by the General Motors Technical Institute, to maximize interchangeability and adaptability. As a Division of General Motors, all of their top engineers were products of this post-graduate school, so a standard of excellence and communication existed throughout the corporation. An example of this philosophy is that the V-1710-F3R had 7,161 parts by actual count, but only about 700 "piece" or different parts. The competing Rolls-Royce/Packard Merlin V-1650 had about 11,000 parts, with some 4,500 "piece" parts.

Figure 14 Two-Stage V-1710-119(F32R), with Merlin style Aftercooler. This configuration allows sustained operation at high manifold pressure because it cools the mixture, preventing detonation, without the necessity of carrying ADI fluid on the aircraft. Performance of this engine was comparable to the Merlin in every regard. It flew in a number of experimental aircraft and would have been incorporated in the post-war V-1710G10 had the jet engine not displaced that program.

15

The Allison designed Auxiliary Stage Supercharger is a compact device that mounts on the rear of the engine accessory section, connected by several struts, a air duct, and driven by a step-up gear case that mounts onto the robust starter drive shaft. As a way to improve the efficiency of the installation the Aux Stage operates at the optimum speed for the conditions using a variable speed control of an integral hydraulic clutch. When attached to the basic V-1710 the engine length is extended about 18 inches longer, requiring adaption of the airframe, see Figure 14. The primary wartime user of the twostage V-1710 was the Bell P-63 King Cobra, an enlarged version of the P-39 fitted with a laminar flow wing. In its two-stage form the V-1710 is about nine inches longer than the two-stage Rolls-Royce Merlin. This was the primary reason that the engine was not fitted into the P-51 Mustang during the war. To do so would have required moving the firewall back, a major change that would have interrupted Mustang production. Both the two-stage V-1710 and two-stage Merlin were developed and available at the same time, mid-1943, and delivered similar power at comparable altitudes. When the later light weight Mustangs were designed the P-51J and P-82E/F were fitted with the latest twostage Allisons to give them outstanding performance, see Figure 15.

Figure 15 The family of Light-weight Mustangs developed by North American near the end of WWII included the XP-51J, which was powered by the two-stage, aftercooled, V-1710119(F32R). This engine was the equal of the two-stage Merlin used in the other light-weight Mustangs.

Horsepower Demands of Two-Stage Supercharging The power needed to compress air has two components, first the power to increase the density and temperature in an adiabatic (reversible) process, and second the losses (which show up as even more temperature rise) due to inefficiency in the shapes of the impeller and diffuser. In the first process the power required is simply a function of the pressure rise and the quantity of air being pumped through the supercharger, Figure 16. When using two stages of compression the power required is the same as if a single stage was 16

doing all of the work, however there really is a difference because the second stage impeller is working with air already heated by the first stage compression and inefficiency. The result is a calculation that is somewhat empirical based upon two stages with different efficiencies and pressure rise capability. In the case of the V-1710 the engine-stage supercharger, which operates at a speed which is a fixed multiple of the crankshaft rpm, usually consumes more horsepower than the Auxiliary Stage. This is because of the laws of supercharging, that for a V-1710 with 8.1:1 engine-stage step-up

Figure 16 For the V-1710 Takeoff power at 3000 rpm is developed in the range of 9 10,000 pounds of air per hour. War Emergency at about 12,500 #/hr. It is clear that at high power the amount of power taken from the crankshaft is considerable. The associated temperature rise increases in a similar manner, and unless an intercooler, or ADI/Water injection is used to cool the mixture, damaging detonation will occur at about 100 oC.

gearing develops a pressure rise ratio of about 2.0 at maximum rated engine speed of 3000 rpm. In a two-stage setup this will deliver up to about 56 inHgA2 without any boost provided by the Auxiliary Stage, or Turbosupercharger. The Auxiliary Stage, or Turbosupercharger, is used to maintain sea-level manifold pressure when operating at altitude, or alternatively, develop greater power at altitudes less than that where the first stage is developing its maximum pressure ratio, Figure 17. The pressure ratios of the two stages, in series, multiply. This is how War Emergency Ratings of up to 100 inHgA, at 3200 rpm, can be achieved. At these very high ratings the total amount of power required by the two superchargers can exceed 1200 horsepower.
2

At sea-level, with ambient pressure of 30 inHgA the expected boost from the supercharger at take-off should be 60 inHgA, however the losses through the carburetor and butterflys are about 2 inHgA, so the net observed manifold pressure is 56 inHgA.

17

Figure 17 The horsepower consumed by the Auxiliary Stage, when running with minimum hydraulic clutch skip can become very large. This only occurs when at maximum altitude, or War Emergency Ratings.

Evolution of the Allison Two-Stage Supercharger In its initial form the Allison two-stage fitted the Aux Stage directly behind the engine accessory section, with the carburetor sitting on the inlet to the Auxiliary Stage. In this form thousands were built for the P-63, the engine models being the V-1710-93(E11) and V-1710-117(E21), Figure 19. A consequence of having two-stages of compression is heating of the air. Allison considered with their V-1710-119(F32R), Figure 14 and then deferred as a near term production item, the Rolls-Royce approach of incorporating an aftercooler, and instead developed the first water injection system. This approach required that the aircraft carry a small tank of water-alcohol and, when needed, that it be metered, along with the fuel, and injected into the eye of the engine-stage supercharger. This approach worked quite well, and is now a feature of almost all high-powered piston aircraft engines. There is a drawback to having the carburetor on the inlet to the supercharger, particularly when the primary goal is to increase the operating altitude of the engine/aircraft. This is the considerable reduction in air pressure ahead of the supercharger, and when combined with the already low air density available at altitude, severely reduces critical altitude.

18

Allison addressed this issue with the V-1710-109(E22) engine, Figure 20; here the outlet of the Aux Stage was re-directed so that the compressed air would enter the standard engine-stage carburetor, now operating as an inter-stage carburetor. Modern engine nomenclature would call such a configuration as a blow-through carburetor. While even this arrangement resulted in pressure losses in the ducting and carburetor, these losses were after the Aux Stage, and could be easily overcome by slightly increasing its operating speed. This arrangement is the same as that used when the engine was fed by a turbosupercharger.

Figure 18 Auxiliary Stage Supercharger is driven off the starter shaft and through the infinitely variable speed hydraulic coupling.

19

Figure 19 The V-1710-117(E21) was an improvement in details of the E11 twostage engine. Here the airflow through the superchargers is shown schematically.

Figure 20 The V-1710-109(E22) uses the interstage carburetor location, on the inlet to the engine-stage supercharger as done on turbosupercharged two-stage engines. While the airflow makes more turns, eliminating the restriction of the carburetor at the inlet to the Aux Stage gave a sizeable improvement in altitude performance.

20

All of the Allison Aux Stage Superchargers use a 12-3/16 inch diameter impeller. With the various models the step-up drive gear ratio did change, with the trend being to increase it for greater power and higher altitude capability. In all cases the hydraulic driving clutch was able to provide the exactly optimum speed once the carburetor throttle butterflys were fully open. Speed was controlled by the simple expediency of a dip stick that determined the quantity of oil in the clutch, thereby controlling the degree of slip between the input and output shafts. As with any hydraulic clutch there is some horsepower lost due to heating of the oil in the clutch, although this is relatively minor, being less than five percent of the power being transmitted. See Figure 18. In the later production Aux Stage units the impeller inlet guide vanes were reshaped to an elliptical curved section which improved the efficiency and quantity of air that could be delivered to the engine.

Figure 21 The V-1710-143(G6R) was the last production model of the Allison V-12. The major improvements were adaptation of the Speed Density Fuel Control, eliminating the restrictions caused by a carburetor, an increased diameter engine-stage supercharger, and other detail changes that allowed rating the engine at 3200 rpm and 100 inHgA, resulting in a War Emergency Rating of 2250 bhp.

When the V-1710 was to be used in a two-stage installation, turbosupercharged or with the Aux Stage, Allison standardized on 8.1:1 step-up gears for the 9.5 inch diameter engine-stage supercharger. Early models of the V-1710 for the P-38 had used 6.44 and 7.48:1 ratios, primarily because those models of the engine were not rated for the higher power of the later models, which benefited from improved structure and internal system details. These included use of silver plated bearings, larger oil pumps, improved air intake manifolds, and sodium-cooled intake valves. When the post-war V-1710-G6 engines, Figure 21, with 10.25 inch diameter engine-stage impellers were developed, the 21

drive used the 7.48:1 gears, which in combination with the larger impeller gave approximately the same impeller tip speed as the smaller impeller and higher gears in the earlier engines. A feature of the V-1710 is that it can be assembled to turn the propeller either right or left handed. This is accomplished by swapping the crankshaft end for end, fitting an idler gear in the accessories drive (needed because the cams, distributors, magneto, and supercharger always rotate the same direction), fitting ignition harnesses with the revised firing order, and installing an opposite handed starter. For the Auxiliary Stage Supercharger, which must also rotate in the original direction, a reversing idler gear is also required. The result is that a left-handed Auxiliary Stage will have a slightly lower overall step-up drive ratio, for example in the V-1710-G6L it is 1:8.03 versus 1:8.087 for the G6R. This difference is so small that it is negligible in service.

Figure 22 The TurboCompound V-1710-127(E27) was based on the V-1710-109, with a new Aux Stage air inlet cover, and an extension shaft to connect the GE Type C power turbine, which was geared directly to the crankshaft. The Aux Stage hydraulic clutch controlled the Aux Stage as on other two-stage engines. These features resulted in 3000 bhp to the propeller at altitude when running at 3200 rpm and 100 inHgA; not bad for an engine originally designed to produce 1000 bhp!

V-1710 Turbo-Compound Driving a supercharger takes horsepower from the propeller, and the discharged hot exhaust gasses waste energy. Both of these problems could be reduced, or eliminated, if the wasted exhaust heat energy could be made to provide the power to the supercharger. This is exactly what the turbosupercharger does, but the amount of power it can provide is limited to the amount of power needed to drive what is essentially an auxiliary stage supercharger. Its power requirements are high at high altitudes, but otherwise the Aux 22

Stage does not need that much power to boost manifold pressure and make more engine power. The concept of the turbo-compound is that the turbine wheel be mechanically connected to the engine crankshaft so that it can have a place to use the considerable power available in the hot exhaust. In this way it provides the power needed for supercharging, and any excess is available through the crankshaft to the propeller.
Table 1: Turbocompound V-1710-127(E27) Ratings
Rating War Emergency Military Normal Maximum Cruise BHP/RPM/Altitude, ft/MAP 3090/3200/28,000/100 inHgA 2320/3200/28,000/ 85 inHgA 1740/3000/33,000/ 52.5inHgA 1340/2700/26,000/ Comments Wet Dry Dry Dry, BSFC 0.365 #/hp-hr

Allison was the first to develop such an engine, with development beginning in 1943. As the V-1710-127(E27) program, Figure 22, it was intended to power the Bell P-63H airplane, Figure 25. Both the engine and airplane were built, but never flown due to the ending of hostilities and the introduction of jets.

Figure 23 Schematic of how the hardware was arranged to connect the turbine so that its power was delivered to the crankshaft. While the turbine drives through the Aux Stage, it does not directly drive it. Power for the superchargers was obtained in the normal way. The Aftercooler was not included in the V-1710-127(E27).

The turbine selected for the project was from the General Electric Type C Turbosupercharger, designated the CT-1. This turbine is similar to the Type B turbos for the P-38, only larger, as it was being used on the Republic P-47 with 2,000 bhp P&W R2800 engines. To take full advantage of the power available the developed engine was a two-stage V-1710 with the turbine driving through the Aux Stage to a gear connected directly to the crankshaft. Both supercharging stages being powered in their usual ways, though the hydraulic coupling and off of the starter shaft. See Figure 23. The turbine 23

extended the length of the engine, but resulted in a very efficient overall configuration, although the exhaust pipes were exposed on the P-63H due to limited internal space in the airframe.
Table 2 V-1710-G10 Turbo-Compound Performance
Horsepower Takeoff: 2000 Military: 2250 2400 2550 1400 1700 rpm Altitude, ft 3200 Sea Level 3200 28,500 War Emergency 3200 Sea Level 3200 20,000 Normal Cruise 2700 Sea Level 2700 30,000 Comments Grade 115/145, Dry Critical Altitude, Dry Wet Critical Altitude, Wet

One challenge for the project was that the Type C turbine wheel rotated the wrong direction relative to the Aux Stage Supercharger, requiring that a special wheel and nozzle assembly be provided by GE. In this way the wheel could be directly connected to the Aux Stage. As can be seen in the photo of the engine this was done. The ratings for the engine are impressive and listed in Table 1, with a War Emergency rating of 3090 bhp being available at 3200 rpm and 28,000 feet, with a manifold pressure of 100 inHgA. See Figure 24. The difference in take-off power, with and without the feedback turbine, was 500 bhp. This increased to over 800 bhp additional at altitude. By comparison, and under similar operating conditions, late model P-38s with turbosupercharged V-1710s developed 1600 bhp, though at 3000 rpm,V-1710-G6 twostage engines in the P-82E/F delivered 2250 bhp at 3200

Figure 24 V-1710-127(E27) performance curves show the results of the development program. Quite an engine!

24

rpm, and at the same 100 inHgA manifold pressure. But the real advantage of the turbocompound is the significant improvement in cruise specific fuel consumption, achieved by recovering some of the otherwise wasted exhaust heat energy. With this power now available to the propeller the efficiency of the engine is very much improved, to 0.365 pounds per brake horsepower-hour. This even improves on the efficiency of the nonsupercharged engines in the 1986 record setting Voyager un-refueled around the world airplane, which operated at 0.393 #/bhp-hr. Some of this benefit is realized when the engine is turbosupercharged, and both approaches are dramatically better than when a two-stage engine is mechanically supercharged. The V-1650-7 Merlin, used in the major production P-51D Mustang, in cruise at 16,500 feet delivered 520 bhp at 2000 rpm, while burning 48 gallons of fuel per hour, for a BSFC of 0.60 pounds per horsepower per hour. By comparison, the contemporary (two-stage via turbosupercharging) Allison V-1710-111/113 used in the P38L, cruising at 15,000 feet with 525 bhp from 1600 rpm, consumed 0.45 pounds of fuel per horsepower per hour. Because of the perceived improvement in performance of the two-stage Merlin over the single-stage V-1710 in the P-51 Mustang, it has often been suggested that a similar engine swap should have been done to the P-38. This was extensively studied by Lockheed during the war with the conclusion that in fact, the two engines provided very similar performance in the airplane; however the range of the airplane would have been significantly curtailed with the Merlin. As shown above, the Merlin is not an efficient engine. The real ride for the turbo-compound V-1710 was to be in a follow-on model of the P82 Twin Mustang. This was to have been an evolutionary development; in fact the USAF actually had contracted for engines to replace the V-1710-143/145(G6R/L) that was in the P-82E/F with similar engines having port fuel injection. These would have been the V-1710-147/149(G9R/L), rated for 2450 bhp at 3200 rpm and 110 inHgA-wet, however Allison preferred to make an even bigger step and go directly to their port fuel injected, aftercooled, and the turbo-compounded V-1710-G10. In a long-range escort fighter, with two pilots and two engines, the improved specific fuel consumption would have allowed the airplane to fly unbelievably long missions. Table 2 provides key performance values for the proposed V-1710-G10 engine. Allison also proposed a new V-1710-H version of the engine that would have eliminated the engine-stage supercharger entirely, been fitted with an aftercooler, and used a twostage turbine to provide all of the supercharging, a way to further improve performance and specific fuel consumption. Conclusion The key to making power in an engine is maximizing the quantity of air passing through the engine, while efficiently using the air for combustion in the cylinders. As can be seen, the Allison V-1710 air induction system covered a wide range of methods, ranging from naturally aspirated, in the V-1710-B, with rotary induction in the V-1710-A, fully supercharged in the V-1710-C, it operated with two-stages of supercharging in the 25

V-1710-E/F, with both turbosupercharging and mechanical/Auxilary Stage supercharging, and then being the first piston engine to be turbo-Compounded. Over the 15 years of development of the basic engine, horsepower ratings rose from 700 bhp to 3000 bhp. When ratings reached 1350 bhp in 1942 the V-1710 became the first engine to exceed one horsepower per pound of weight. The mechanical strength of the engine, along with its building block design, allowed the many very different engine configurations to evolve and serve the diverse needs of aircraft designers. Over 70,000 V-1710s were built, mostly during the WWII war years. Normal time between overhaul, by the end of the war was 500 hours, which for a high powered piston engine is very good, a testament to the engines robust nature and reliability. The Allison V-1710 was the product of the ingenuity, dedication, and hard work of many people. It is indeed fortunate that a few individuals with vision persevered with its design and development during the Depression of the 1930s, with the result that when it was needed it was available.

Figure 25 Bell P-63H was built, complete with the Allison TurboCompound V-1710-127(E27) engine, but not flown due the end of WWII. Note the large ventral exhaust pipe to discharge the hot gasses leaving the turbine, which at War Emergency power added about 150 pounds of thrust.

26