Effect of reduced aft diameter and increased blade number on high-speed counterrotation propeller performance

Performance data of 0.17-scale model counterrotation pusher propeller configurations were taken in the NASA Lewis 8- by 6-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel at Mach numbers of 0.66, 0.71, 0.75, and 0.79. These tests investigated the aerodynamic performance of the unducted fan (UDF) demonstrator propeller e...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Rose, Gayle E., Jeracki, Robert J.
Format: Tagungsbericht
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Performance data of 0.17-scale model counterrotation pusher propeller configurations were taken in the NASA Lewis 8- by 6-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel at Mach numbers of 0.66, 0.71, 0.75, and 0.79. These tests investigated the aerodynamic performance of the unducted fan (UDF) demonstrator propeller engine developed in a joint program by General Electric and NASA. Data were recorded to show the effect on counterrotation propeller cruise efficiency of two takeoff noise-reduction concepts. These two concepts are reduced aft blade diameter and increased forward blade number. The four configurations tested were a baseline (F1/A1 8/8) configuration, a reduced aft diameter (F1/A3 8/8) configuration, an increase forward blade number (F1/A1 9/8) configuration, and a combination of the latter two (F1/A3 9/8) configurations. Data were collected with a complex counterrotation propeller test rig via rotating thrust and torque balances and pressure instrumentation. Data comparisons documented the power differences between the baseline and the reduced aft diameter concepts. Performance comparisons to the baseline configuration showed that reducing the aft blade diameter reduced the net efficiency, and adding a blade to the front rotor increased the net efficiency. The combination of the two concepts showed only slightly lower net efficiency than the baseline configuration. It was also found that the counterrotation demonstrator propeller model (F7/A7 8/8) configuration outperformed the baseline (F1/A1 8/8) configuration.