Skip to main content

Approach to Modeling Boundary Layer Ingestion Using a Fully Coupled Propulsion-RANS Model

20170005216 · NASA · 2017

Public domain · NASATechnical Reports

Overview

Although boundary layer ingestion (BLI), or wake ingestion, is commonly applied in marine propulsion applications, it has not yet seen wide-spread adoption in aircraft applications. However, recent studies have predicted that BLI offers a potential for a 10 reduction in aircraft fuel burn, even on…

Publisher
NASA
Document
20170005216
Year
2017
Pages
20

Key points

  • Boundary Layer Ingestion (BLI) can provide fuel burn savings between 5% and 12%.
  • The BLI propulsor is powered by a 3500 hp electric motor and utilizes two 1925 hp generators.
  • The performance analysis of the BLI propulsor was conducted using a 1D thermodynamic cycle model and a 2D axisymmetric RANS model.
  • Improved propulsor performance accounts for 50-60% of the total performance gain from BLI, while fuselage drag reduction contributes 40-50%.
  • Capturing the effects of BLI requires a coupled simulation that considers both propulsion and aerodynamic interactions.
Frequently asked questions
What is the main benefit of Boundary Layer Ingestion?

BLI offers fuel burn savings between 5% and 12%.

How is the BLI propulsor powered?

The BLI propulsor is powered by a 3500 hp electric motor and two generators, each rated at 1925 hp.

What types of models were used for the performance analysis?

The performance analysis utilized a 1D thermodynamic cycle model and a 2D axisymmetric RANS model.

What factors contribute to the performance gains from BLI?

The performance gains come from a combination of improved propulsor performance and reduced fuselage drag.

What is necessary to accurately capture BLI effects?

Capturing BLI effects requires a coupled simulation that accounts for both propulsion and aerodynamic interactions.

Document

Approach to Modeling Boundary Layer Ingestion using a

Fully Coupled Propulsion-RANS Model

Justin Gray, Charles A. Mader, Gaetan K.W. Kenway, Joaquim R. R. A. Martins th January 12 , 2017

Boundary Layer Ingestion (BLI) offers

between 5% and 12% fuel burn savings

Aft-mounted BLI propulsor Mail-slot inlet BLI propulsors Aft-mounted BLI engines Motivation Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

NASA’s Starc-ABL configuration applies

BLI to a traditional airframe

Tube-with-wings configuration Under-wing engines and generator Electric BLI propulsor Motivation Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

The BLI propulsor is powered by an

electric motor delivering a constant 3500 hp

3500 hp motor 2x 1925 hp generators (90% transmission efficiency) Turboelectric propulsion system has an electric BLI propulsor powered by generators mounted on the under-wing turbofans Motivation Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

We simplified the configuration to focus on

the coupled performance of the BLI propulsor

Loosely based on 737 fuselage dimensions Removed wing, tail, and under-wing engines to simplify the analysis Modeling Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

BLI propulsor performance was

compared to a podded configuration

Exact same propulsor geometry, including inlet, was used for both BLI and podded configurations Modeling Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

The propulsion analysis was a

1D thermodynamic cycle model

modeled with pyCycle, a modular propulsion cycle tool built in the OpenMDAO framework Modeling Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

The aerodynamic analysis was a

2D axisymmetric RANS model

Mach contours ˜170,000 cell mesh a single solve takes ˜2 minutes Modeling Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

The analyses were coupled via a Gauss-Seidel iteration

pyCycle → ADflow : fan-exit P and T t t and required ˙ m for 3500 hp ADflow → pyCycle : mass-averaged fan-face P and T t t GS and Broyden iterations implemented with OpenMDAO solvers Modeling Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

For any given FPR the propulsor is resized

and the mass-flow across the propulsor is balanced

FPR = 1.2 FPR = 1.35 baseline Modeling Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

Performance is examined via net force coefficient

2 f C = F - x 2 ρ V A ∞ ref ∞ C C F -fuse F -prop C should be negative, a decelerating force (i.e. drag) F -fuse C should be positive, an accelerating force (i.e. thrust) F -prop C can be positive or negative F - x Fan Pressure Ratio Trade Study Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

BLI offers 5 to 6 more force counts

for the same 3500 hp to the propulsor

Fan Pressure Ratio Trade Study Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

Propulsion-aerodynamic interactions cause the

boundary layer height to vary with FPR

FPR = 1.2 FPR = 1.35 baseline Fan Pressure Ratio Trade Study Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

Propulsion-aerodynamic interactions cause the

boundary layer height to vary with FPR

Fan Pressure Ratio Trade Study Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

Improved propulsor performance accounts

for 50-60% of the BLI performance gain

Of the 5 to 6 total counts of improvement C , F - x 3 counts come from increased C F -prop Fan Pressure Ratio Trade Study Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

Fuselage drag reduction contributed

40-50% of the BLI performance gain

Of the 5 to 6 total counts of improvement C , F - x 2 to 3 counts come from smaller C F -fuse Fan Pressure Ratio Trade Study Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

Reduction in C comes from an increased

F -fuse

surface static pressure on the aft-fuselage

the change in surface static pressure profile is a strong function of FPR Fan Pressure Ratio Trade Study Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

The performance gains from BLI come from a

combination of propulsion and aerodynamic effects

Capturing BLI effects requires a coupled simulation Aerodynamic effects are strongly influenced by inlet design and throttle setting Conclusions and Future Work Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

The performance gains from BLI come from a

combination of propulsion and aerodynamic effects

Capturing BLI effects requires a coupled simulation Aerodynamic effects are strongly influenced by inlet design and throttle setting Conclusions and Future Work Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

Next step is to perform optimization of this configuration

with propulsion and shape design variables

Thank you to: Transformational Tools and Technologies Project (TTT) for funding the OpenMDAO framework and pyCycle development Advanced Aviation Transportation Technologies (AATT) for funding my PhD research Jim Felder for his guidance and advice Conclusions and Future Work Fully Coupled Propulsion-Aerodynamic Modeling

Source & rights

Source: ntrs.nasa.gov. Public-domain U.S. Government work (17 USC §105) — freely reproducible.

Permanent URL — we don’t break links.

Report a problem or request removal

Document details

Doc number
20170005216
Publisher
NASA
Year
2017
Pages
20
File size
4.0 MB