Energy efficient engine flight propulsion system: Aircraft/engine integration evaluation

APPENDIX A Appendix A i s a reproduction of r e p o r t D6-48069 s u p p l i e d by Boeing A i r c r a f t Company as t h e i r c o n t r i b u t i o n t o a i r c r a f t i n t e g r a t i o n . The format and p r i n t i n g have been a l t e r e d t o c o o r d i n a t e with t h i s p u b l i c a t i o n .

BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANE COMPANY A DIVISION OF THE BOEING COMPANY SEATTLE, WASHINGTON ENERGY EFFICIENT ENGINE AND AIRPLANE INTEGRATION STUDY PURCHASE 0 RDE R 200-4XX-14N43049 UNDER NASA CONTRACT NAS3-10643 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY AIRCRAFT ENGINE GROUP EVENDALE, OHlO

APPENDIX A TABLE O F CONTENTS 1.0 SUMNARY 2.0 INTRODUCTION 3.0 SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS 4.0 AIRPLANE AND MISSION DEFINITION 4.1 Mission S e l e c t i o n 1 0 1 4.2 Advanced Technology F e a t u r e s 103 4.2.1 Aerodynamics 103 4.2.2 Weight and S t r u c t u r e s 103 4.3 Airplane Geometry Guidelines 103 4.4 Engine I n s t a l l a t i o n 4.4.1 Engine Placement ’ 4.4. ‘ 2 Nacelle Drag 4.4.3 Engine Bleed and Power E x t r a c t i o n 4.5 Preliminary A i r p l a n e Configuration 4.5.1 Airplane D e s c r i p t i o n 4.5.2 Engine D e s c r i p t i o n 4.6 Procedures € o r Determining Direct Operating Cost (DOC) and Return on Investment ( R O I ) 113 4.6.1 Direct Operating Cost 4.6.2 Return on Investment 5.0 AIRPLANE PERFORMANCE AND SENSITIVITY 5 . 1 Airplane S i z i n g 119 5.1.1 Airplane Performance and C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 119 5.1.2 Airplane Weight 5.1.3 Airframe Noise and FAR 36 F l i g h t Conditions 5.1.4 Engine and A i r f r a m e Noise 130 5.1.5 Airplane Drawings of Sized Airplane 123 5.1.6 Airplane Drag P o l a r s

APPENDIX A TABLE OF CONTENTS (Concluded) Section Page 5.2 Airplane Sensitivity Factors 123 5 . 3 Takeoff Gross Weight and Fuel Burned Comparison 12 3 Typical Mission DOC and ROI 5.4 130 6.0 AIRCRAFT ENGINE INTEGRATION 138 6.1 Nacelle Arrangement and Construction 138 6.2 Airframe Accessory Requirements and Location 6 . 3 Maintainability, Accessibility, and Safety Requirements 146 6.4 Fuel Heater System 6.5 Nacelle Mount System 6 . 6 Nacelle Design 6.7 Nacelle Weight Evaluation 157 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 165 REFERENCES

APPENDIX A LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Page Figure Domestic Passenger J e t Fuel Consumption as a Function o f A-1.

Range. 1 0 2 Typical Mission P r o f i l e . 104 A-2

A-3. Energy E f f i c i e n t Engine Configuration (General Arrangement) -

Model 768-865. 105 Airplane Geometry G u i d e l i n e s . 107 A-4.

Nacelle Placement G u i d e l i n e s . 108 A-5.

Engine Placement Ground Rules. 109 A-6.

A-7. I n s t a l l a t i o n Cornparison.

1 1 2 A-8. Airplane Bleed Airflow Requirement.

A-9. Fw F a c t o r f o r C r e w Pay.

A-10. C r e w U t i l i z a t i o n .

A-11. Airplane Performance Trades.

Energy E f f i c i e n t Engine Configuration (General Arrange- A-12.

ment) - Model 768-869. 126

A-13. Energy E f f i c i e n t Engine Configuration (General Arrange-

ment) - Model 768-868. 127

A-14. Block Fuel Comparison.

1 3 1 A-15. November 1978 PDR S t a t u s Fuel Saving.

A-16. P e r c e n t Block Fuel by Mission P r o f i l e Segment.

, A-17. November 1978 PDR S t a t u s Direct Operating Cost Copparison.

A-18. General E l e c t r i c Energy E f f i c i e n t ’ Nacelle.

14 2 A-19. T h r u s t Reverser Concerns.

A-20. Hydraulic Loads.

A-21. E l e c t r i c Loads.

1 4 7 E3 Fuel Heater System ( G E ) .

A-22.

A-23. E3 Fuel Heater System (Boeing Modification).

A-24. Long Duct Nacelle Mount.

A-25. A i r l o a d s - M a x i m u m Takeoff.

A-26. A i r l o a d s - Maximum Dynamic P r e s s u r e .

A-27. A i r l o a d s - 0-deg F l a p , 1 . 3 V s t a l l .

A-28.

A i r l o a d s - 10-deg F l a p , 1.3 V s t a l l .

APPENDIX A LIST OF TABLES Page Table A-I. Airplane C h a r a c t e r i s t i c and Performance.

A-11. Nominal Noise Estimates.

A - I 1 1 Advanced Airframe S t r u c t u r e f o r E3 S t u d i e s .

A-IV. DOC Elements.

A-V. Basic C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f Boeing 1977 C o e f f i c i e n t s .

A-VI. Domestic Direct Operating Cost Formulas.

A - V I I . Return on Investment Method.

A - V I I I . Airplane C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and Performance.

A-IX.

Weight Statement f o r General Electric E3 A i r p l a n e s .

A-X. F l i g h t Conditions f o r FAR 36 Noise C a l c u l a t i o n s - 77" F.

A-XI. Nominal Noise Estimates.

A - X I I . Domestic Airplane S e n s i t i v i t y F a c t o r s - Model 768-868.

A - X I I I . Domestic Airplane S e n s i t i v i t y F a c t o r s - Model 768-868.

A-XIV. I n i t i a l Economic Analysis.

A-XV. November 1978 PDR S t a t u s Economic A n a l y s i s .

A-XVI. November 1978 PDR S t a t u s Economic Analysis (Boeing Engine P r i c e ) .

E3 Engine Gearbox Location. , A-XVII.

A - X V I I I . Nacelle and S t r u t Design Load F a c t o r s .

A-XIX. Engine Nacelle A i r l o a d s .

A-XX. GE Advanced Nacelle E v a l u a t i o n . 158 A-XXI. General Electric Energy E f f i c i e n t Engine Estimated Weights. 159 A - X X I I . Reduction F a c t o r s f o r Advanced Technology A p p l i c a t i o n . 160 A - X X I I I . Boeing Weight Analysis Summary.

1.0 S U M M A R Y N A S A o b j e c t i v e s f o r t h e Energy E f f i c i e n t Engine (E3) program a r e t o develop technology t o a c h i e v e : (1) a 12% r e d u c t i o n i n c r u i s e s p e c i f i c f u e l consumption, (2) 5% r e d u c t i o n i n d i r e c t o p e r a t i n g c o s t (DOC), and (3) re- d u c t i o n o f engine performance d e t e r i o r a t i o n common t o c u r r e n t technology high-bypass-ratio e n g i n e s . Future n o i s e and emission requirements m u s t a l s o be m e t . Boeing's r o l e i n t h e E3 program was f i r s t t o h e l p determine i f t h e GE Advanced Technology Engine (ATE) m e t N A S A performance g o a l s and secondly t o ensure t h a t E 3 n a c e l l e met a i r p l a n e requirements and o b j e c t i v e s , a i r c r a f t manufacturer's d e s i g n p r a c t i c e , and FAA c e r t i f i c a t i o n requirements. In t h i s c a p a c i t y , Boeing d e f i n e d an advanced technology a i r p l a n e and provided mission performance , economics, n o i s e , and n a c e l l e assessment d a t a w i t h E3 and c u r r e n t technology engines i n s t a l l e d .

An advanced technology one-stop t r a n s c o n t i n e n t a l a i r p l a n e w a s s e l e c t e d f o r t h e Boeing s t u d y . S c a l a b l e ATE and CF6-50C engine d a t a s u p p l i e d by GE were cycled w i t h t h e a i r p l a n e t o achieve t h e most f u e l - e f f i c i e n t and economical a i r p l a n e €or each engine i n s t a l l a t i o n . Table A-I shows t h e a i r p l a n e d e s i g n p o i n t performance and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . The d e s i g n - m i s s i o n f u e l burned f o r t h e ATE w a s 18.3% lower than f o r t h e CFG-50C e n g i n e . Based on GE s u p p l i e d maintenance c o s t and engine p r i c e d a t a , t h e ATE a l s o had 6% lower design- mission DOC than t h e CF6-50C-powered a i r p l a n e .

Table A-I1 shows t h a t n o i s e l e v e l s f o r t h e ATE-powered a i r p l a n e m e e t

FAR 36 - Amendment 8 requirements f o r a twin-engine a i r p l a n e . A 3 EPNdB

margin between nominal n o i s e estimates and t h e FAR 36 - Amendment 8 r e q u i r e

ments i s achieved e x c e p t a t approach where t h e margin i s 2 EPNdB. Since no attempt w a s made i n t h i s p r e l i m i n a r y e s t i m a t e t o r e f i n e t h e n a c e l l e t r e a t - ment t o t h e lowest n o i s e l e v e l s , i t was concluded t h a t refinement of n o i s e treatment could a t t a i n t h e 3 EPNdB margin Boeing g e n e r a l l y c o n s i d e r s a c c e p t a b l e t o a s s u r e c e r t i f i a b l e n o i s e l e v e l s .

The f u e l burned, economics, and n o i s e r e s u l t s based on engine d a t a s u p p l i e d by GE f o r t h e ATE show t h a t t h e NASA g o a l s f o r t h e GE E3 c y c l e could be m e t . However, Boeing's assessment of t h e engine d a t a and n a c e l l e d e s i g n i n d i c a t e d a number of unresolved issues. These issues and t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e Boeing e v a l u a t i o n follow.

BOeing p r e l i m i n a r y e v a l u a t i o n of t h e ATE n a c e l l e weights i n d i c a t e d t h e n a c e l l e t o be over 1000 l b h e a v i e r than t h e GE e s t i m a t e d weight.

Boeing's weight e s t i m a t e was based on methods r e f l e c t i n g low t e c h n i c a l r i s k f o r commercial o p e r a t i o n . A 1000 l b weight i n c r e a s e reduces f u e l burned savings from 18.3% t o about 17% and reduces t h e d e s i g n - m i s s i o n DOC advantage from 6 t o 5 . 8 % .

e The ATE engine p r i c e s u p p l i e d b y GE i s too high according t o Boeing p r o j e c t i o n s . Boeing's assessment i n d i c a t e d an engine p r i c e 22% less than t h e GE e s t i m a t e . The Boeing estimated p r i c e increased t h e Design Mission DOC advantage of t h e ATE from 6% t o 7 . 5 % .

0 4 o m N O e \ 5, m co 0 4 o m N O u \ 5, m Nacelle assessment and evaluation requires continual review as the design evolves to ensure that the nacelle design meets airplane requirements and objectives, aircraft manufacturer's design practice, and airline and FAA certification requirements. During the Boeing assessment, several versions of the ATE nacelle design were reviewed.

In GE's nacelle layouts, however, material callouts and construction details were too incomplete to conduct an indepth evaluation.

Concerns based on a critique of the nacelle design were developed and coordinated with GE. Some nacelle design problems were identified.

Much additional effort would be required to ensure a flight-acceptable nacelle installation.

To ensure that the E3 program results in an engine configuration that meets the program goals and that can be installed in a nacelle acceptable to the airframer and airlines, it is important for the airframer to be actively involved in the installation design and evaluation.

Table A-11. Nominal Noise Estimate ATE FAR 36 (1978) Margin EPNdB Re q uiremen t EPNdB EPN d B

90 .o 93.8 -3.8

Takeoff S ide1ine 90.0 98.2 -8.2

1 Approach 100.0 102.0 -2 .o

2.0 INTRODUCTION The NASA A i r c r a f t Energy program (ACEE) has t h e o b j e c t i v e of improving t h e energy e f f i c i e n c y of f u t u r e U.S. a i r c r a f t s o t h a t s u b s t a n t i a l f u e l s a v i n g s and economics can be achieved.

The "Energy E f f i c i e n t Engine (E3> P r e l i m i n a r y Design and I n t e g r a t i o n Study" i s one o f t h e elements o f t h i s program. The recommended advanced technology p r o p u l s i o n system r e s u l t i n g from t h i s s t u d y i s p r o j e c t e d f o r u s e on a i r p l a n e s introduced i n t o s e r v i c e i n t h e l a t e 1980's o r e a r l y 1990's.

NASA g o a l s f o r t h e E3 program are a 12% improvement i n i n s t a l l e d c r u i s e s p e c i f i c f u e l consumption, a 5% improvement i n DOC, and performance r e t e n t i o n of 50% o r more as compared with a c u r r e n t technology high-bypass-ratio t u r b o f a n engine.

The p r e s e n t s t u d y i s a follow-on t o work performed f o r t h e General Electric Company (GE) under s u b c o n t r a c t N o . P.O. 200-4X X 1 4 K 40096 i n s u p p o r t of t h e GE prime c o n t r a c t NAS3-20627. Objective o f t h e GE prime c o n t r a c t was t o e v a l u a t e advanced technology engine c y c l e s and t o select a n advanced c y c l e t h a t b e s t f u l f i l l e d t h e NASA E3 program g o a l s . Objective o f t h e c u r r e n t study w a s t o e v a l u a t e t h e advanced technology t u r b o f a n engine comparing it w i t h a c u r r e n t technology r e f e r e n c e engine t o determine i f N A S A g o a l s w i l l be m e t when t h e s e e n g i n e s are i n s t a l l e d on commercial a i r p l a n e s of t h e l a t e 1980's.

The t a s k s designed t o accomplish t h i s o b j e c t i v e i n c l u d e d : Task 1 - A i r c r a f t and Mission D e f i n i t i o n . Under t h i s t a s k a n advanced technology t r a n s p o r t a i r c r a f t w a s d e f i n e d w i t h a d e s i g n r a n g e , performance passenger c a p a c i t y , and m i s s i o n a p p r o p r i a t e l y f o r domestic use.

A i r c r a f t Performance and S e n s i t i v i t y . This t a s k e v a l u a t e d a Task 2-

c u r r e n t technology r e f e r e n c e engine , t h e CF6-50C (Ref. 3 )

s c a l e d t o t h e a i r p l a n e requirements and a s i m i l a r l y s c a l e d advanced technology e n g i n e , t h e ATE (Ref.3) a s i n s t a l l e d i n t h e advanced technology a i r p l a n e . The a i r c r a f t s i z e was optimized f o r each engine f o r t h e d e f i n e d m i s s i o n . A i r c r a f t performance and mission s e n s i t i v i t i e s were t h e n generated f o r t h e a i r c r a f t power with t h e advanced e n g i n e .

Task 3 - A i r c r a f t and Engine I n t e g r a t i o n . Under t h i s t a s k a GE n a c e l l e Subtask A w a s e v a l u a t e d f o r n a c e l l e c o n s t r u c t i o n , n a c e l l e aerodynamics a i r f r a m e accessory requirements and l o c a t i o n , m a i n t i n a b i l i t y , a c c e s s i b i l i t y and s a f e t y requirements. R e s u l t s o f the aero- dynamic study were reported i n Reference 5 .

T a s k 3 - Long Duct Wind Tunnel Study. It was intended t h a t Boeing

Subtask B a s s e s s and comment o n wind tiinnel tests o f a GE-designed n a c e l l e s i m u l a t o r t e s t model. Because of d e l a y i n model f a b r i c a t i o n t h e t e s t s could n o t be completed i n t h e c o n t r a c t schedule. Boeing t h e r e f o r e e x p e c t s t o complete t h i s t a s k on a c o n t r a c t e x t e n s i o n and r e p o r t on t h i s t a s k i n a l a t e r r e p o r t .

Task 4 - Reports

S e c t i o n 4 . 0 of t h i s r e p o r t reviews and updates t h e mission s e l e c t i o n and a i r p l a n e d e f i n i t i o n s t u d i e s accomplished i n e a r l i e r E3 s t u d i e s r e p o r t e d i n Reference 5. Mission d e f i n i t i o n d i f f e r e d from t h e s e e a r l i e r s t u d i e s p r i m a r i l y i n i t s r e d u c t i o n of t a k e o f f f i e l d l e n g t h (TOFL) requirement from w a s an a f t 7500 f t . t o 6000 f t . The major a i r p l a n e - c o n f i g u r a t i o n change r e l o c a t i o n of t h e engine exhaust p l a n e t o 40% wing chord. The l a t t e r change was made a s a r e s u l t of a f l u t t e r w e i g h t p e n a l t y t r a d e study.

S e c t i o n 5.0 summarizes t h e s i z i n g s t u d i e s of t h e CF6-50C and ATE-powered a i r p l a n e s and compares t h e r e s u l t i n g performance, n o i s e , and economics of t h e two a i r p l a n e s . These s t u d i e s were based on t h e GE-supplied engine performance, .engine weight, engine n o i s e , and engine economic d a t a . DOC and ROI s e n s i t i v i t y t o f u e l p r i c e w a s determined by u s i n g f u e l p r i c e s of 35, 40 and 45C/gal. Also, an a d d i t i o n a l DOC and ROI c a l c u l a t i o n shows t h e impact of a Boeing e s t i m a t e d engine p r i c e t h a t was about 22% lower t h a n G E ' s e s t i m a t e .

S e c t i o n 6 . 0 comments on t h e Boeing assessment and e v a l u a t i o n of t h e GE- , designed n a c e l l e i n s t a l l a t i o n . Design comments, accessory requirements and l o c a t i o n , d e s i g n l o a d s , mount s t r u c t u r e , and a weight assessment a r e included i n t h e c r i t i q u e of t h e GE n a c e l l e d e s i g n .

3.0 ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS A / P a i r p l ane AR a s p e c t r a t i o ATE advanced technology engine BLKF block f u e l , pounds BLKT block t i m e , hours C l o c a l chord

wing l i f t c o e f f i c i e n t , L/qSmF

CL CL r a t i o CLR d r a g c o e f f i c i e n t D/qSREF CD CDNAC n a c e l l e d r a g c o e f f i c i e n t , DNAC/qSNAC CET combustor e x i t temperature, O F D a i r p l a n e d r a g , pounds d B ( A ) weighted sound p r e s s u r e l e v e l , d e c i b e l s n a c e l l e d r a g , pounds DNAC DOC d i r e c t o p e r a t i n g c o s t energy e f f i c i e n t engine E3 EPNL e f f e c t i v e perceived n o i s e l e v e l EPNdB e f f e c t i v e perceived n o i s e , d e c i b e l s n a c e l l e v e r t i c a l bending frequency, Hertz VB n e t t h r u s t , pounds FN FSPP f u l l s t a n d a r d s p r e d i c t i o n procedure GL ground l i n e ICAC i n i t i a l c r u i s e a l t i t u d e c a p a b i l i t y , f e e t LE l e a d i n g edge M f l i g h t machine number MCR maximum c r u i s e MEW m a n u f a c t u r e r ' s empty weight, pounds OEW o p e r a t i o n a l empty weight, pounds dynamic p r e s s u r e , l b [ f t 2 P DR p r e l i m i n a r y d e s i g n review P NL perceived n o i s e l e v e l SFC s p e c i f i c f u e l consumption l b / h r - l b SLST sea l e v e l s t a t i c t h r u s t ( u n i n s t a l l e d ) wing r e f e r e n c e a r e a , ft2 SREF n a c e l l e w e t t e d a r e a , f t 2 SNAC

wing thickness-to-chord r a t i o , measured streamwise

t / c TE t r a i l i n g edge TOGW t a k e o f f g r o s s weight, pounds TOFL t a k e o f f f i e l d l e n g t h , f e e t WCP wing chord plane W E @ wing r e f e r e n c e plane VAPP approach speed, keas d e s i g n d i v e speed VD sweepback a n g l e a t wing q u a r t e r chord, degrees J\, 0.26C 4.0 AIRPLANE AND MISSION DEFINITION S e l e c t i o n of t h e d e s i g n mission and a corresponding d e s i g n payload and range was based on a p r o j e c t i o n o f t h e commercial a i r p l a n e market of t h e 1990's and c o n s i d e r a t i o n s of p o t e n t i a l f u e l s a v i n g . Various design requirements, wing geometry, and advanced technology f e a t u r e s were e s t a b l i s h e d f o r a 1990 domestic s e r v i c e a i r p l a n e .

4.1 MISSION SELECTION Examination o f t h e p o s s i b l e 1990 market suggested t h a t t h e f u t u r e a i r l i n e market would be s i m i l a r t o t h e e x i s t i n g marketplace. This p r e d i c t i o n w a s based on t h e assumption t h a t t h e a i r t r a v e l i n g community i n t h e 1990's w i l l c o n s t i t u t e approximately t h e same percentage of t h e t o t a l population as t o d a y ' s a i r t r a v e l e r s , w i t h a 4 t o 6% annual growth. The a i r cargo market should experience similar growth.

Many o f t h e c u r r e n t narrow body a i r c r a f t w i l l be r e t i r e d from a c t i v e s e r v i c e by t h e major a i r l i n e s i n t h e late 1980's. These i n c l u d e t h e i n t e r - c o n t i n e n t a l range 707-320B .and -320C models, t h e DC-8 S i x t y s e r i e s a i r p l a n e s , and some of t h e e a r l y 727-200 model domestic a i r p l a n e s . Hence, t h e r e should a market i n t h e l a t e 1980's f o r a l a r g e number of replacement a i r c r a f t i n be t h e 180 t o 220 passenger s i z e range.

S t a t i s t i c s of a i r p l a n e f u e l consumption f o r v a r i o u s s t a g e l e n g t h s have shown t h a t over 85% of t o t a l domestic passenger-jet f u e l consumption occurs a t s t a g e l e n g t h s a t or below 2000 s t a t u t e m i l e s . Furthermore as Figure A-1 shows, t h e s h o r t e r ranges account f o r t h e bulk of t h e f u e l used.

Considering t h e p o t e n t i a l market and t h e o p p o r t u n i t y o r f u e l saving a t s h o r t e r ranges t h e d e s i g n mission and s i z i n g c o n s t r a i n t s s e l e c t e d f o r t h e E3 study a r e : Domes t i c A i rp lane Design range, nmi 2000 Nominal payload, passengers (15/85% mix) Cruise Mach number 0 . 8 TOFL, f e e t (max) 6000 VAPP, knots (max) 125 33 000 _ _ _ _ . - - - -

IcAc, f e e t (min)

Reserves ATA Domestic The following off-design missions were a l s o s e l e c t e d for economic assessments : Domes t i c A i r p lane Range, nmi 665 1000 Payload, 108 108 passengers ( 15 /85% mix) C r u i s e Mach number 0 . 8 0.8 J

2 ENGINE STANDARD BODY

ci 3 ENGINE STANDARD BODY

4 ENGINE STANDARD BODY

2 & 3 ENGINE WIDE BODY

4 ENGINE WIDE BODY

2u

1Q

E *

c

zooo. 2000 3ooo 4 o 0 0 5 O O o

RANGE - STATUTE MIUS

F i g u r e A-1. Domestic Passenger Jet F u e l Consumption as a Function o f Range A t y p i c a l mission p r o f i l e i s shown i n Figure A-2.

4.2 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY FEATURES An a v a i l a b l e aerodynamic and s t r u c t u r a l technology d a t a base was used as a b a s e l i n e f o r p r o j e c t i n g advanced a i r p l a n e technology f o r t h e E3 program.

Reviews i n each technology i d e n t i f i e d advanced technology f e a t u r e s assumed t o be a v a i l a b l e f o r a 1986 program s t a r t and f o r i n - s e r v i c e u s e i n t h e e a r l y 1990's. The advanced technology f e a t u r e s are summarized on a i p l a n e c o n f i g u r a t i o n s drawings (Fig. A-3).

A f u r t h e r d i s c u s s i o n of aerodynamics, weight, and s t r u c t u r a l advanced technology follows.

4 . 2 . 1 Aerodynamics A b a s e l i n e d r a g l e v e l was d e r i v e d from r e p r e s e n t a t i v e wind t u n n e l model d a t a . Improvements t o t h i s b a s e l i n e drag d a t a base were a p p l i e d as f o l l o w s : a . Cruise--2% r e d u c t i o n i n c r u i s e d r a g was t o be achieved by improved w i n g - a i r f o i l d e s i g n and improved component i n t e g r a t i o n . I n a d d i t i o n , it was assumed t h a t an advanced a c t i v e c o n t r o l system would produce z e r o t r i m d r a g .

b.

Takeoff and Landing--a 5% improvement i n l i f t - d r a g r a t i o w a s assumed f o r t h e domestic two-engine a i r p l a n e . This r e f l e c t e d t h e following changes: s e a l e d l e a d i n g edge (LE) f l a p s , seals between n a c e l l e s t r u t s and l a t e r a l edges of t h e LE f l a p s , and a i l e r o n droop f o r high l i f t .

4 . 2 . 2 Weight and S t r u c t u r e s P o s s i b l e a p p l i c a t i o n of advanced aluminum a l l o y s and advanced composite s t r u c t u r e s on a i r f r a m e conponents i s shown with p o t e n t i a l weight savings on Table A - 1 1 1 .

4 . 3 AIRPLANE GEOMETRY GUIDELINES The a i r p l a n e geometry g u i d e l i n e s shown i n Figure A-4 were adopted t o ensure adequate ground c l e a r a n c e d u r i n g t a x i , t a k e o f f , and Landing. These a r e t h e same g u i d e l i n e s used i n t h e e a r l i e r study under s u b c o n t r a c t NO. P.O. 200-4XX-14K40096.

4.4 ENGINE INSTALLATION 4 . 4 . 1 Engine, Placement Engine placement g u i d e l i n e s w e r e r e v i s i o n s of those used i n t h e c y c l e s e l e c t i o n s t u d i e s . The r e v i s e d g u i d e l i n e s e s t a b l i s h e d f o r chordwise engine placement ( F i g s . A-5 and A-6) provided balance between i n t e r f e r e n c e d r a g and f l u t t e r weight p e n a l t y . Figure A-7 compares t h e ATE and CF6-50C i n s t a l l a t i o n s using t h e s e g u i d e l i n e s .

(NO SCALE)

* c Y F i g u r e A-2. T y p i c a l Mission P r o f i l e IC f . r :

.. 4

/ / * . ?

. - in A d v a n c e d A i r f r a m e S t r u c t u r e f o r E3 S t u d i e s Table A - 1 1 1 .

N E W TECHNOLOGY STRUCTURAL MATERIAL WEIGHT SAVING MATERIAL COMPONENT % OF COMPONENT WEIGHT WING BOX 6% STANDARD ADVANCED FUSELAGE 4% ALUMINUM A L U M I N U M 6% ALLOYS EMPENNAGE ALLOYS BOX

i (CURRENT 747)

25% CONVENT IONAL ADVANCED CONTROL COMPOSITE SURFACES ALUMINUM LANDING GEAR CONSTRUCTION STRUCTURE ( GRAPHITE 1 DOORS MAIN LANDING 40% CARBON GEAR BRAKES LANDING GEAR 20% T I TAN I UM F I T T I N G S SUPPORT S I D E OF BODY R I B EMPENNAGE BODY ATTACH ENGINE STRUT ATTACH F L A P SUPPORT

u

w t v) w

ZE

w w B

u 0

z z

U m

a .ez

w

k

QL U I4 9)

a a

QL & w w d d M w 0 0 CI

z

ih N S

x

a

c

w w

;z S S

e Z

I Q I rn E H Spanwise engine l o c a t i o n was based on c o n s i d e r a t i o n s of wing f l u t t e r , engine-ouf c o n t r o l , and landing g e a r l e n g t h .

4.4.2 Nacelle Design I n s t a l l e d engine performance included cowl scrubbing d r a g where a p p l i c a b l e .

E x t e r n a l d r a g of t h e n a c e l l e and i n t e r f e r e n c e d r a g e f f e c t s among wing, s t r u t , and n a c e l l e were included i n a i r p l a n e d r a g p o l a r s .

4 . 4 . 3 Engine Bleed and Power E x t r a c t i o n Engine bleed a i r e x t r a c t i o n v a l u e s allowed c a b i n a i r v e n t i l a t i o n a t d e s i g n c r u i s e w i t h s u f f i c i e n t margin f o r c a b i n a l t i t u d e c o n t r o l . Recircu- l a t i o n reduced engine bleed requirements and f u e l consumption due t o a i r - c o n d i t i o n i n g by about 50%. Cabin bleed a i r requirements are shown i n Figure A-8.

Engine s h a f t power e x t r a c t i o n w a s based on load c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s e s t a b l i s h e d by previous e x p e r i e n c e . Power e x t r a c t i o n i s s p l i t between a i r p l a n e opera- t i o n a l f u n c t i o n s and passenger l o a d i n g . Operational f u n c t i o n s include b a s i c h y d r a u l i c and electric l o a d s f o r o p e r a t i n g t h e a i r p l a n e s y s t e m s . Passenger loading d i r e c t l y a f f e c t s g a l l e y l o a d s and passenger l i g h t i n g . . This s t u d y used a base load of 180 h p / a i r p l a n e , which i s adequate f o r 200 passengers.

Engine power e x t r a c t i o n f o r a i r p l a n e o f f - d e s i g n o p e r a t i o n ( e . g . , o p e r a t i o n i n i c i n g c o n d i t i o n s ) w a s not r e q u i r e d f o r t h e a i r p l a n e parametric s t u d i e s .

System d e s i g n s , however, considered o f f - d e s i g n requirements.

4.5 PRELIMINARY AIRPLANE CONFIGURATION 4.5.1 Airplane D e s c r i p t i o n For t h e p r e l i m i n a r y a i r p l a n e , t h i s study s e l e c t e d a twin-engine wide- body c o n f i g u r a t i o n w i t h d o u b l e - a i s l e seven-abreast s e a t i n g . Wing geometry (AR = l O , A 0 . 2 5 c = 30 deg) was c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e c r u i s e speed and t a k e o f f and landing c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . The lower lobe cargo space w a s configured t o accommodate 1 7 LD-3 c o n t a i n e r s s i d e by s i d e .

A prelimnary drawing o f t h e b a s e l i n e a i r p l a n e i s shown i n Figure A-3.

4.5.2 Engine D e s c r i p t i o n S c a l a b l e CF6-50C and ATE t u r b o f a n engines (Ref. 3 ) were used f o r s i z i n g t h e advanced technology a i r p l a n e s . Both t h e c u r r e n t technology engine and advanced engine were i n s t a l l e d t o e n s u r e only t h e d i f f e r e n c e s i n engines were r e f l e c t e d i n t h e performance improvements r e s u l t i n g from t h i s s t u d y .

The CF6-50C engine w a s i n s t a l l e d i n a s h o r t - f a n - d u c t n a c e l l e similar t o t h e Boeing model 747 engine i n s t a l l a t i o n ; t h e ATE was i n s t a l l e d i n a long-duct n a c e l l e t h a t included a forced mixer.

Main c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e two engines a t maximum climb t h r u s t , 0.8 Mach, and an a l t i t u d e of 35 000 f t a r e : 2 5 ' 2oa

AIR CONDITIONING +WING 8, ENGINE INLET TAI*

L

1 5

AIR CONDlTlONlNG + WlNG TAl*

r

AIR CONOlTlONlNG WlTH RECfRCUfATION

(ALL AMBIENT TEMPERATURES 1

AIRPLANE ALTITUDE, 1000 FEET

* IClNG CONDITlONS DEFINED BY FAR 25.1419

Figure A-8. Airplane Bleed A i r f l o w Requirement ATE CF6-50C Bypass r a t i o 6.8 4 . 2 I n s t a l l e d SFC 0.546 0.629 Fan p r e s s u r e r a t i o 1.65 1.76 Overall p r e s s u r e r a t i o 38 32

Maximum t u r b i n e r o t o r i n l e t temp. 23400F --

(SLS hot-day t a k e o f f ) 4.6 PROCEDURES FOR DETERMINING DIRECT OPERATING COST (DOC) AND RETURN O F INVESTMENT ( R O I ) The following method was used f o r determining t h e DOC and R O I of t h e a i r p l a n e powered by t h e CF6-50C and t h e ATE advanced engine. The a i r p l a n e s were s i z e d t o minimize f u e l burned and a i r p l a n e g r o s s weight f o r t h e given engine.

Then a i r p l a n e block f u e l and block t i m e f o r a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e mission were used t o determine t h e DOC and R O I based on 1977 d o l l a r s .

4.6.1 D i r e c t Operating Cost The Boeing DOC method has evolved over s e v e r a l y e a r s from t h e formulas published by t h e A i r Transport Association of America i n 1967.

The DOC c a l c u l a t i o n i n c l u d e s c o s t o f crew, f u e l , a i r f r a m e maintenance, engine main- tenance, d e p r e c i a t i o n , and insurance. U t i l i z a t i o n of t h e a i r p l a n e i s d e t e r - mined from t h e block t i m e d e r i v e d by mission a n a l y s i s . The DOC c a l c u l a t i o n method i s d e t a i l e d i n Tables A - I V , A-V, and A-VI and i n Figures A-9 and A - 1 0 .

4.6.2 Return on Investment The Boeing economic a n a l y s i s of t h e E3 program used t h e discounted c a s h flow R O I method t o e v a l u a t e each engine. R O I i s t h e d i s c o u n t r a t e t h a t makes t h e sum of t h e p r o j e c t e d annual c o s t savings equal t o t h e i n i t i a l investments. It i s t h e b e s t comparator of a l t e r n a t i v e investment o p p o r t u n i t i e s i n a g e n e r a l b u s i n e s s c o n t e x t . R O I recognizes t h e value of money over t i m e , and i t can be d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d t o any a i r l i n e ' s c o s t of c a p i t a l t o show how much a m o d i f i c a t i o n is above o r below t h e h u r d l e r a t e , I n t h i s s t u d y ' s c o n t e x t , t h e h u r d l e rate i s t h e R O I r e q u i r e d b e f o r e an a i r l i n e would c o n s i d e r undertaking an investment o p p o r t u n i t y . Cash flows were c a l c u l a t e d u s i n g c o n s t a n t (1977) d o l l a r s t o ensure c o n s i s t e n t comparison of each concept.

It should be noted t h a t t h e r e i s an i n h e r e n t u n c e r t a i n t y i n any g e n e r a l - ized f i g u r e of m e r i t a p p l i e d t o a s p e c i f i c a i r l i n e due t o c o n s i d e r a b l e v n r i a - t i o n i n i n d i v i d u a l a i r l i n e o p e r a t i o n s , r u l e s , and e v a l u a t i o n c r i t e r i a . S p e c i f i c R O I a n a l y s i s should be made using an a i r l i n e ' s i n d i v i d u a l r u l e s and h u r d l e c r i t e r i a . A h u r d l e r a t e of 15% a f t e r t a x e s i s considered an a c c e p t a b l e c r i t e r i o n .

In t h e E3 study, t h e average range flown by domestic medium-range a i r p l a n e s was determined, and a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e average range of 665 nmi was s e l e c t e d as a base f o r economic c a l c u l a t i o n s . With a mission p r o f i l e d e f i n e d f o r t h e s e l e c t e d range, t h e i n i t i a l investment, o p e r a t i o n a l c o s t s , and cash inflows w e r e c a l c u l a t e d f o r th'is p r o f i l e and a i r p l a n e u t i l i z a t i o n . The R O I was c a l c u l a t e d with t h e method defined by Table A - V I I .

Table A-IV. DOC Elements

-

Crew Cost -

f(TOGW, cruise speed, mission type)

-

+ Fuel -

fuel burn and fuel price specified + Airframe maintenance = specified (Boeing) specified (engine manufacturer) + Engine maintenance =

-

+ Depreciation -

f(usefu1 life, residual value, utilization, initial price, spares price)

-

+ Insurance -

f(initia1 flyaway'price)

- -

DOC per trip Utilization f(block time) Table A-V. Basic Characteristics of Boeing 1977 Coefficients Applicability New airplanes, domestic trunk Mission profile 1967 ATA with revised taxi, air maneuver, and airway distance factors Utilization Function of average block time, maximum of 15 trips/day Minimum cost constant mach, step climb Cruise procedure Crew expenses Function of gross weight, speed and airplane utilization Fuel price 35 C/gal. U.S. domestic and local service Mature-level maintenance based on current level with Maintenance material escalation of 8% over 1976.

Labor rate = $9.70/man-hour Burden = 200% of direct labor New-15 yr. to 10% residual on airplane and spares Depreciation 0.5% of new airpLnne price Insurance rate Assumed spares 6% of airframe price 30% of total engine price 2% added to fuel and maintenance for nonrevenue flying Nonrevenue factor n U v) k 0 v) a , u U n P a d + I

E 3

9 C v) a

E 3 5

a k

v) 5

E a , v> k u v) I .d .d 0) U al U 0 m k W . d U (0 v) 0 k k a a 3 I4 v) 9) 0 v) al a , al k .F: a 3 -4 v) U

: z 0

U I4 k c

.rl W M f

E k (0 5 .rl

. d .rl al . d I4 s

v) W 4 v3 X c4 5: a

4 8

X X c4 E z m 0 0 I.r?

E c o h W . .

z 0 : u) m m 4 A N z ‘9 x w

+ +

+ l n f

E

- 3 .

0 4 C A + - - 0 V

12 0 0 a n

a m h 4 0 0 0 * .

i3; m 0 0 &

* +

a

4 u r a L l n C J I 1 m o . .

0 4 n X E \ v) W w d m W u z -4 z w E z w < 5 :

-

n

3 : 9

'38

w

-* e

CL

z

Table A - V I I . Return on Investment Method k f i n i t i o n : ROI is t h e d i s c o u n t r a t e a t which t h e n e t p r e s e n t value of f u t u r e cash inflows ( c o s t s a v i n g s ) is equal to t h e i n i t i a l cash o u t l a y (investment) u s e f u l l i k e

c CIN/(l+r)n N e t p r e s e n t v a l u e (NPV) = -COUT +

n - 1 When N P V = 0, 1 : = ROI = d i s c o u n t rate 1. Before t a x c a s h outflows (COUT) ?,a l c u l a t ions.,: Incremental a i r p l a n e p r i c e o r m o d i f i c a t i o n c o s t Additional spares inventory 2 . Before t a x cash inflows (annual) (GIN) Cash o p e r a t i n g c o s t savings 0 Fuel Maintenance 3 . A f t e r t a x equivalence 0 Depreciation t a x e f f e c t s 0 Investment t a x c r e d i t ( i f a p p l i c a b l e ) 5 . 0 AIRPLANE PERFORMANCE AND SECURITY 5.1 AIRPLANE SIZING Both t h e CF6-50C and t h e ATE powered a i r p l a n e s were s i z e d t o meet t h e The e f f e c t of engine technology on a i r p l a n e s i z e and same d e s i g n mission.

performance is shown i n Figure A-11. The wing l o a d i n g f o r t h e s e a i r w a s chosen f o r minimum block f u e l (BLKF) and t a k e o f f g r o s s weight ( but w i t h ah 84OF day s e a - l e v e l t a k e o f f f i e l d l e n g t h (TOFL) c o n s t r a i n t of 6000 f t determining t h e t h r u s t loading. S e l e c t e d wing loadings (w/s) were 100 l b / s q . f t . €or t h e ATE-powered a i r p l a n e and 105 l b / s q . f t . f o r t h e CF6- 50C-powered a i r p l a n e . Engine t h r u s t t o weight (T/W) d i f f e r e n c e a t given wing loading shown i n Figure A-11 were due t o d i f f e r e n c e i n BPR between t h e two e n g i n e s .

5.1.1 Airplane Performance and C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and performance of t h e CF6-50C and t h e ATE-powered a i r p l a n e s are compared i n Table A - V I I I . Each a i r p l a n e w a s designed t o m e e t a i r p l a n e and mission requirements (Sec. 4 . 1 ) . The BLKF and TOGW shown i n Table A - V I 1 1 a r e based on an a i r p l a n e s i z i n g program.

5.1.2 Airp 1 ane Weight Table A-IX shows r e s u l t s of a weight a n a l y s i s on domestic E3 a i r p l a n e s These weights r e f l e c t t h e advanced tech- with t h e ATE and CF6-50C engines.

nology f e a t u r e s d i s c u s s e d i n S e c t i o n 4.2. The n a c e l l e weights were s u p p l i e d by GE and s c a l e d t o t h e a p p r o p r i a t e t h r u s t l e v e l . A p r e l i m i n a r y balance a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e d a c c e p t a b l e l o a d a b i l i t y f o r b o t h a i r p l a n e s .

5.1.3 Airframe Noise and FAR 36 F l i g h t Conditions The airframe n o i s e p r e d i c t i o n method a p p l i e d i s p a r t of t h e Boeing standard aircraft-community n o i s e p r e d i c t i o n procedure. This method w a s based on a i r f r a m e n o i s e being predominantly generated by t u r b u l e n t flow a t t h e edges of a i r f o i l s , c a v i t i e s , and landing g e a r members. Q u a n t i t a t i v e values contained i n t h e method were determined from f l i g h t tests of i n - s e r v i c e Boeing a i r c r a f t . A l l methods a r e under c o n t i n u a l review t o m a i n t a i n a technology l e v e l c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e i r s t a t u s a s v a l i d a t e d Boeing s t a n d a r d s .

Noise was p r e d i c t e d as 1/3 o c t a v e band sound p r e s s u r e l e v e l s having d i r e c t i v e l y defined by a 150-ft p o l a r a r c from 10 t o 170 deg a t 10 deg i n t e r v a l s .

The s p e c t r a were e x t r a p o l a t e d f o r t h e r e q u i r e d f l i g h t c o n d i t i o n i n o r d e r t o g e n e r a t e a i r p l a n e f l y o v e r t i m e h i s t o r i e s of sound p r e s s u r e l e v e l and weighted n o i s e v a l u e s (SPL, dB(A)). The perceived n o i s e l e v e l (PNL) t i m e h i s t o r y was c a l c u l a t e d and converted t o e f f e c t i v e perceived n o i s e l e v e l (EPNL).

In normal u s e , t h e p r e d i c t e d a i r f r a m e n o i s e component i s added t o o t h e r n o i s e components a t t h e s p e c t r a l l e v e l f o r e x t r a p o l a t i o n and d e r i v a t i o n o f t o t a l a i r p l a n e EPNL. In a d d i t i o n , a s used h e r e , a i r f r a m e n o i s e can be p r e - d i c t e d and e x t r a p o l a t e d s e p a r a t e l y . 119

PAYLOAD * 196 PASS (40180 LB 1

SAR 8 2900 N.M1.

ALT -

. CRUISE MACH = 0.80

1oOoFr 35

T O R = 6ooo FI ( S I . 8@F)

DESIGN POINT

v M o m 768-869 (CFbW=)

265 -

A MODEL 7688-868 (ATE)

1Mx) L8

l 5 5

lrn &.3

F i g u r e A-11. Airplane Performance Trades v) co 0 4 0 0 co n 0 n . N N O 0 4.

\ E

H Q\ w co 04 0 n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 w p c m 4 . 4 . m n n 9 h m c o 0 co k v) Q \ m m m u J P I A N . . .

0 n - m N O 0 4.

9- Q\ a il ..

W W z Table A-IX. Weight Statement for GE E3 Airplanes Weight (LB) Model 768-868 Model 768-869 (ATE 1 ( CF6 -5 OC Wing 30,280 31,820 Empennage 4,440 4,470 Body 33,430 33,710 Nacelle;'!

6,870 9,060 12,630 Gear 12,700 Total structure (87,630 (91,690) Propulsion system ( 15,600) (15,280) Fixed equipment and opt ions (42,300) (42,570 1 Standard and operational items (1 1,400) (11.400) OEW 156,930 160,940 JrGE provided nacelle weight plus Boeing estimated pylon and mount weight.

Table A-X g i v e s f l i g h t c o n d i t i o n s a t FAR 36 measuring p o i n t s f o r t h e CF6-50C and ATE-powered a i r p l a n e s . This t a b l e a l s o shows nominal a i r f r a m e n o i s e component EPNL v a l u e s . For a study engine, i t i s s t a n d a r d Boeing p r a c t i c e t o add an u n c e r t a i n t y margin o f 3 EPNdB t o t h e t o t a l p r e d i c t e d n o i s e l e v e l . This e n s u r e s t h a t a i r p l a n e n o i s e w i l l f a l l w i t h i n c e r t i f i a b l e l i m i t s .

5.1.4 Engine and Airframe Noise I n t h e Boeing a n a l y s i s , t h e a c o u s t i c a l d e s i g n p o i n t was an 80% l e v e l o f confidence of c e r t i f i c a t i o n . T h i s goal could be achieved w i t h c u r r e n t and near-future l i n i n g technology. The e s t i m a t e d n o i s e l e v e l s f o r t h e ATE (Table A-XI) were based on a nominal a c o u s t i c treatment t o t h e engine and n a c e l l e , n o t on a f u l l y i t e r a t e d l i n i n g d e s i g n s t u d y . It w a s concluded t h a t with f u r t h e r refinement t h e approach n o i s e could a t t a i n t h e 3 EPNdB margin g e n e r a l l y considered a c c e p t a b l e f o r a s s u r i n g c e r t i f i c a b l e n o i s e l e v e l s .

Because q u i e t o p e r a t i o n was n o t t h e prime o b j e c t i v e i n c o n f i g u r i n g t h i s a i r p l a n e , no adjustments were made t o t h e performance o r f l i g h t c o n f i g u r a t i o n f o r t h e purpose of lowering n o i s e l e v e l s . Optimization o f l i n i n g s , f l a p s e t t i n g s , and. t h r u s t l e v e l s could improve t h e margin f o r t h e approach c a s e .

5.1.5 Airplane Drawings of Sized Airplanes Figures A-12 and A-13 show drawings of t h e CF6-50C and ATE-powered a i r p l a n e s .

5 . 1 . 6 Airplane Drag P o l a r s The a i r p l a n e d r a g p o l a r s were derived from wind tunnel test d a t a o b t a i n e d from a model c l o s e l y resembling t h e study c o n f i g u r a t i o n s . Beyond t h a t , d r a g optimism a s s o c i a t e d w i t h advanced technology w a s i n c o r p o r a t e d as d i s c u s s e d i n S e c t i o n 4.2. Estimated d r a g o f i s o l a t e d n a c e l l e s and d r a g caused by i n t e r f e r e n c e between t h e n a c e l l e s and t h e a i r f r a m e were included i n t h e a i r p l a n e p o l a r s .

5.2 AIRPLANE SENSITIVITY FACTORS S e n s i t i v i t i e s f o r a i r p l a n e s a r e shown i n Table A - X I 1 and A - X I I I . The a i r p l a n e s a r e s i z e d by TOFL and t h e s e n s i t i v i t y r e s u l t s a r e n o n l i n e a r f o r some parameters. I n some c a s e s , b e t t e r a i r p l a n e s o l u t i o n s t i . e . , lower TOGW o r BLKF) can be o b t a i n e d by s i z i n g t o more s t r i n g e n t performance c o n s t r a i n t s T h i s , however, r e q u i r e s a d d i t i o n a l d i a g n o s t i c p o i n t d e s i g n s t h a t a r e time- consuming and c o s t l y . It i s recommended t h a t t h e s e n s i t i v i t i e s b e used w i t h c a u t i o n and not o u t s i d e t h e amount of change shown.

5 . 3 TAKEOFF GROSS WEIGHT AND FUEL BURN COMPARISON Figure A-14 shows BLKF and BLKT versus range f o r both CF6-50C and ATE- powered a i r p l a n e s . For t h e domestic a i r p l a n e on t h e average mission, t h e a i r p l a n e with ATE engines u s e s 15.5% less f u e l than t h e CF6-50C a i r p l a n e .

For t h e d e s i g n mission without performance r e t e n t i o n , t h e saving f o r t h e ATE-powered a i r p l a n e i s 17.6%. These savings r e p r e s e n t about 3% improvement Table A-X. Flight Conditions for FAR-36 Noise Calculations--770F Domestic Airplane Takeoff Sideline Approach Model 768-868 (1) (2 1 ( 3 ) (ATE Engine) % of takeoff thrust at flight condition 100 100 100 Speed, knots 153 153 134 Altitude, feet 2 y 200 900 394 Bleed (lb/sec)/HPX (per engifle 1 (0.0/1601 (O.O/160) (0.0/160) ' Engine angle relative 7.7 7.7 5.5 to flight path, degrees 7.3 Climb angle, degrees 7.3 -3 72.5 72.6 93 .O Airframe noise EPNdBJE 6500111 from brake release at maximum takeoff weight (1) 200Om from touchdown at design mission landing weight ( 2 ) (3) 450m sideline distance JE

Nominal noise estimate shown -- appropriate design/demonstration

tolerances are required for certifiable/guarantee levels.

I

Table A-XI. Nominal Noise Estimates FAR 36-8 ATE Jc Requirement Notes

Takeoff 90 .o 93.8 d B No cutback

650Om point 98.2 dB Sideline distance

S i de 1 ine 90 .o

450m point 200Om from

Approach 100 .o 102.0 dB

threshold (two extended flap segments, 3 deg glide slope)

*Note: Nominal noise estimates are shown -- appropriate design/demonstration

tolerances are required for certifiable/guarantee levels.

. - 0 L C : : ? ' S .

I a I I I i I I I M t Irr i I . t t

\

, p Table A - X I I . D o m e s t i c A i r p l a n e S e n s i t i v i t y Factors - Model 768-869 MODEL 769-869 (CF6-5OC E N G I N E S ) 5% CHANGE ~~ ~ 5% OEW 5% FFNTO +/- +6. w 5 . 7 -0.5/+0.8 +8.5 1-7.9 -1 .0/+1.3 -1.0/+1.4 +8.7/-8.1 +3.9 /-3.5 -0.3/+1.1 +5.6/-5.2 -5.2/+6.2 196 PASSENGERS 2000 N . M I . RANGE TOFL 60GO FT WING LOADING = 105 LB/SQ FT T a b l e A - X I I I . D o m e s t i c A i r p l a n e S e n s i t i v i t y Factors - M o d e l 768-868 MODEL 768-868 ( G . E . ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY E N G I N E S ) 5% CHANGE BASED 5% FNCR 5% S F C

CYCLE I +/- I +/-

243600 -0.1 /+0 . 3 +1/4/-1.4 156930 -0.1/+0.1 + O . 7/-0.7

145530 -0. :/+o. 2 +0.8/-0.7

B LKF 34400 -0.6/+1.3 +4.6 /-4.5 SLST . 37710 t l .3/-1.2 -0.1/+0.2 196 PASSENGERS 2000 N . M I . RANGE T O F L = 6000 FT

L. WING LOADING = 100 LS/SQ FT

5.0 4.0

s

8tKT FOR G.L MiMS

, ’ = 3.0

AT 55% AND 100% P I L m

LO

6.E. CFb-%, S5% P I 1 G.E. ADV. TECH., lm P I L 6.E. ADV. TECH.,

5% PIL

AT SAR = 4 4 5 ADV. ENG A I ? USES U.7k

LESS NELTHAN CFEMC AIP, 100% P I L ’ (15.5% E 5 5 AT 55% P I L I

str, ldoo m m

SAR - NMI

Figure A-14. Block Fuel Comparison over t h e earlier study. This improvement is explained by a more a c c u r a t e accounting of s p e c i f i c f u e l consumption (SFC) r e d u c t i o n f o r t h e ATE engine during climb and d e s c e n t mission segments. Allowing a 1% TSFC improvement over t h e l i f e t i m e of t h e engine f o r performance r e t e n t i o n improves t h e s e savings by about 0.9% as shown i n Figure A-15.

A breakdown i n f u e l used d u r i n g v a r i o u s mission segments i s shown i n Figure A-16. The l a r g e percentage of f u e l burned d u r i n g climb f o r t y p i c a l s t a g e l e n g t h s shows t h e importance of maintaining t h e advance-engine SFC improvement a t climb power s e t t i n g .

Overall f u e l burned improvement f o r t h e ATE-powered a i r p l a n e was about 15% t o 18% f o r a l l payload-range combinations. Reduced engine-out windmilling drag could improve t a k e o f f performance o r reduce t h e engine s i z e a t a given TOFL c o n s t r a i n t .

5.4 TYPICAL MISSION DOC AND R O I R e s u l t s of t h e economic a n a l y s i s f o r t h e GE E3 program are presented i n Tables A-XIV, A-XV, and A-XVI. The i n i t i a l economic a n a l y s i s (Table A-XIV) was based on t h e May 8, 1978 engine d a t a of Reference 3. T h i s a n a l y s i s con- s i d e r e d ' t h r e e f u e l prices of 35, 40 and 45 / g a l and used a t y p i c a l range of 665 nmi. GE updated t h e engine d a t a p r i o r t o t h e November 20-21, 1978 pre- liminary d e s i g n review (PDR). This l a t e r d a t a w a s used t o update t h e economic a n a l y s i s summarized i n Table A-XV. This updated a n a l y s i s w a s f o r 40 / g a l f u e l and mission s t a g e l e n g t h s of 665, 1000, and 2000 nmi. Also considered i n t h i s a n a l y s i s was t h e e f f e c t of a 1% TSFC improvement allowance f o r performance r e t e n t i o n over t h e engine l i f e .

In comparison w i t h c u r r e n t h i g h bypass r a t i o engine p r i c e s G E ' s ATE engine p r i c e appeared h i g h e r than could be supported by a competitve market.

Based on t h i s c o n s i d e r a t i o n Boeing p r o j e c t e d an engine p r i c e approximately 22% lower than t h e GE-estimated p r i c e . The e f f e c t of t h i s lower p r i c e on DOC and R O I i s shown i n Table A-XV.

A summary of DOC improvement f o r t h e November 20-21, 1978 PDR s t a t u s i s shown i n Figure A-17. A t t h e d e s i g n mission t h e NASA 5% DOC improvement goal i s exceeded f o r a l l ranges when t h e lower Boeing e s t i m a t e d engine p r i c e i s used; however, when t h e GE p r i c e i s used o n l y t h e design-mission DOC exceeds t h e g o a l .

The DOC and R O I c a l c u l a t i o n s were based on methods d i s c u s s e d i n s e c t i o n 4 . 6 . In a d d i t i o n t h e following assumptions were used i n t h e a i r p l a n e R O I c a l c u l a t i o n s : a . Airplane ROI i s t h e r a t e t h a t makes t h e p r e s e n t v a l u e of f u t u r e n e t annual cash inflows e q u a l t o t h e outflow a t t h e t i m e of equipment purchase.

b. Cash flows and t h e i r timing a r e considered a s f o l l o w s : Time p r i o r t o d e l i v e r y Percent ( % ) of p r i c e paid 15 mo.

1 2 mo. 5 9 m o . 5 130 6 mo. 5 65 + s p a r e s 0 m o . ( d e l i v e r y ) w

+

w W d

a

>

-

E

C Y 0

pi w l -

U

L n 0

N I RANGE, N.M1.

,DESCENT + APPROACH + TAX[

P e r c e n t Block Fuel by Mission F i g u r e A-16.

P r o f i l e Segment him 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~ ~ l 1 1 1 1 I l l f- 00 l n 4 a m o a m 1 I I I I I I I O h l l l l l l l l l 4 m 4 VI z

s

cn zt v)

!2

r;l

4 &

H m l n l n l n l I 1 1 1 1 1 1 W 4 - I I I I I I I I

E 0

L o 4 H 4 c i ln \n ln VI ffi P a

s

h w N W

E i

H c3 z 0 W d 0 cJ a . m 4 4

z”

H W m I- m m al W I W

G

m hl 4 PI 0 a 2 a m 4 4 b VI U VI I a m Fu u

x3

a , P 4 I ;ri W H

5 w

c3 z V w W p: F4 W c l V n \o 0- \o 3 N S-I m W

5 -

c3 z W m 0 W 0 I W

-

e i m \o \o

-

b m V m I \o yzc m V W u W p: F4 W

E

c3 z W

-

m w t3

E

W in c-7

$

H W p: e

E w

a , 4 t3 z P W

s

W z H u z W

-

t

m d 1 , a a u U m u M E d U a &I aJ a U U aJ 1 , .rl n v1 L) a L) VI

1N33t13d ‘.I.N3\/”\lAOddW I 3Oa

c . Investment t a x c r e d i t of 10% spread o v e r t h e f i r s t t h r e e years of o p e r a t i o n .

d. Annual o p e r a t i n g c o s t s and revenue a t s t a t e d missions and load f a c t o r s .

0 A c c e r l e r a t e d d e p r e c i a t i o n f o r t a x purposes (sum of y e a r s d i g i t s method) Income t a x e s a t 48% e. Airplane l i f e i s 15 y e a r s and r e s i d u a l v a l u e i s 10% o f p r i c e p l u s s p a r e s (new a i r p l a n e ) .

Since a i r p l a n e R O I i s based on a i r p l a n e p r o f i t a b i l t i y compared t o t o t a l a i r p l a n e c o s t s , i t measures t h e v a l u e of i n v e s t i n g i n t h e t o t a l a i r p l a n e system. On t h e o t h e r hand, incremental R O I , as shown i n Tables A-XIV, A-XV, and A-XVI, was based on savings r e a l i z e d by using t h e ATE compared t o i t s increased p r i c e .

Incremental R O I t h u s shows r e t u r n on only t h e money i n v e s t e d i n t h e e n g i n e . Because t h e a i r p l a n e performance and c o s t d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e CF6-50C and ATE-powered a i r p l a n e s are minimal, t h e improved economics are generated p r i m a r i l y by engine improvements. It i s t h e r e f o r e more r e a l i s t i c t o use incremental R O I f o r d e c i d i n g t h e economic v a l u e of t h e new engine.

6 . 0 ENGINE/AIRPLANE INTEGRATION This s e c t i o n d e s c r i b e s t h e Boeing assessment and e v a l u a t i o n of t h e GE designed ATE e n g i n e h a c e l l e i n s t a l l a t i o n d e f i n e d by GE drawings, References 6, 7, 8 and 9 . Comparison of n a c e l l e f e a t u r e s w i t h Boeing s t a n d a r d s and a i r l i n e requirements i s covered where a p p r o p r i a t e .

6 . 1 NACELLE ARRANGEMENT AND CONSTRUCTION The i n l e t and major n a c e l l e dimensions were g e n e r a l l y c o n s i s t e n t w i t h Boeing p r a c t i c e . Aerodynamic l i n e s f o r a n a c e l l e s i m u l a t o r model w e r e e v a l u a t e d , and r e s u l t s i n Reference 5.

Being p r e l i m i n a r y , t h e GE drawings lacked numerous c o n s t r u c t i o n d e t a i l s , and in-depth c r i t i q u e of d e t a i l c o n s t r u c t i o n w a s n o t p o s s i b l e . Comments were provide on areas where some d e t a i l w a s shown. Figure A-18 r e p r e s e n t s t h e GE designed n a c e l l e .

a . I n l e t Apparently t h e attachment between i n l e t and cowl/engine s t r u c t u r e i s provided by means of b o l t s i n s t a l l e d i n a c l e v i s w i t h t h e b o l t i n s t a l l e d i n a r a d i a l d i r e c t i o n . To maintain i n t e r n a l and e x t e r n a l contour c o n t r o l , t h e c l e v i s s u r f a c e s must be machined very a c c u r a t e l y , otherwise t h e contours w i l l be s u b j e c t t o s t e p s and gaps which are n o t aerodynamically a c c e p t a b l e . The p o t e n t i a l for b o l t t o h o l e misalignment is a l s o v e r y h i g h . Access t o t h e b o l t heads i s n o t a p p a r e n t . The load path between t h e i n l e t and t o engine/cowl s t r u c t u r e appeare t o be very s o f t and s u b j e c t d e f l e c t i o n , which w i l l also i n c r e a s e t h e gaps on both i n n e r and o u t e r flow s u r f a c e s . The i n l e t bulkhead form is n o t conducive t o attachment o f bulkhead connectors f o r e l e c t r i c a l , pneumatic, or h y d r a u l i c l i n e s , so passing s e r v i c e s through t h e bulkhead w i l l be d i f f i c u l t .

b. Fan Case and Cow?.

Due t o t h e i n t e g r a t e d n a t u r e of t h e fan c a s e and f a n cowl i t i s important t o examine t h e i n t e r f a c e d e t a i l s t o e n s u r e c o m p a t i b i l i t y .

Comments have a l r e a d y been made r e l a t i v e to t h e i n l e t attachment.

The i n t e r f a c e a t t h e forward tongue and groove j o i n t m u s t pass r a d i a l l y upward t o g a i n a c c e s s t o t h e c o r e mounted accessor.ies, i t is n o t c l e a r where t h e break i n t h e o u t e r s h e l l is l o c a t e d .

b u t The s e c t i o n of honeycomb forward of t h e r e v e r s e r s e a l appears t o be an e x t e n s i o n of t h e o u t e r fan case/cowl, y e t t h e i n n e r w a l l of t h e r e v e r s e r i l l u s t r a t e s s e a l s and means f o r opening t h e d u c t s .

More c l a r i f i c a t i o n i n t h i s a r e a i s needed.

I n t h e absence of a primary r e v e r s e r t h e d i f f u s i n g primary gas w i l l tend t o flow forward when t h e fan flow i s being reversed.

For t h i s reason t h e m a t e r i a l s in t h e f a n duct/cowl must be chosen c a r e f u l l y t o prevent i n a d v e r t e n t s t r u c t u r a l damage from hot g a s e s or provide some c o n t r o l l e d leakage through t h e blocker do0.r a r r a y .

13 9 I The c o n t r o l l e d leakage concept must be e v a l u a t e d very c a r e f u l l y because f o r each pound of forward t h r u s t generated t h e system i s penalized 3 pounds of r e v e r s e t h r u s t .

The seal and V groove between t h e fan duct/cowl and t h e t a i l p i p e i s n o t continuous a t t h e t o p and t h u s hoop loads must be c a r r i e d around t h e s l o t made by t h e s t r u t p e n e t r a t i o n . This can cause s e r i o u s stress c o n c e n t r a t i o n s a t t h e a f t end of t h e s l o t , as w e l l as problems w i t h s u p p o r t i n g t h e p r e s s u r e load on t h e f l a t s i d e s o f t h e s t r u t and n o z z l e .

The d u c t i n n e r w a l l contour shown does n o t provide room f o r a longeron o r l a t c h e s a t t h e bottom c e n t e r l i n e . Minimum a c c e p t a b l e c l e a r a n c e between a c c e s s o r y items and cowl s t r u c t u r e is 0.375 i n c h e s . This contour a l s o i s t o o t i g h t f o r i n s t a l l a t i o n of an a c c e s s o r y d r a i n system, o r cowl v e n t i n g p r o v i s i o n s .

The a i r seal (garlock t y p e ) a t t h e forward end of t h e f a n d u c t i n n e r w a l l appears t o be backwards, u n l e s s t h e 'accessory compaFt- ment i s p r e s s u r i z e d t o a l e v e l g r e a t e r t h a n f a n d u c t p r e s s u r e .

I f t h e compartment p r e s s u r e i s h i g h e r t h a n f a n duct p r e s s u r e , d r a i n a g e and v e n t i n g of t h e compartment w i l l be d i f f i c u l t i f e x t e r i o r aerodynamic l o s s e s are t o be avoided. Since no lower b i f u r c a t i o n i s shown c l a r i f i c a t i o n of t h e v e n t and d r a i n system i s needed.

A t t h e a f t end of t h e f a n d u c t o u t e r w a l l o f t h e V groove j o i n t should be i n v e r t e d t o f a c i l i t a t e opening t h e main cowl f o r a c c e s s t o t h e a c c e s s o r i e s . The c o n f i g u r a t i o n as shown has no lower b i f u r c a t i o n , and thus t h e system r e q u i r e s t h e following sequence o f o p e r a t i o n t o g a i n a c c e s s t o the a c c e s s o r i e s .

1. Unlatch and remove t h e t a i l p i p e .

2 . Unlatch and remove o r hinge o u t e r f a n duct w a l l and r e v e r s e r up and o u t of t h e way.

3 . Remove t h e i n n e r f a n d u c t w a l l by u n l a t c h i n g and removing.

This i s necessary t o g a i n a c c e s s each t i m e a mechanic wishes t o check t h e o i l o r any o t h e r r o u t i n e maintenance t a s k . This would not be a c c e p t a b l e t o most a i r l i n e s .

c . Fan Thrust Reverser Location of t h e a c t u a t i o n mechanism f o r t h e r e v e r s e r i s not a p p a r e n t . The space between i n n e r and o u t e r f a n c a s e w a l l s appears marginal f o r i n s t a l l a t i o n o f an a c t u a t i o n system f o r t h e r e v e r s e r . The l o g i c a l p l a c e f o r a c t u a t i o n i s occupied by t h e cascades and t h e s t r u c t u r a l t h i c k n e s s o f t h e f a n cowl l i m i t s p u t t i n g t h e a c t u a t o r i n t h e l i n e with t h e s l e e v e . The a x i a l l e n g t h provided i n the o u t e r fan duct ahead of t h e cascades and a f t of t h e sweep plane f o r d u c t opening is not adequate f o r i n s t a l l a t i o n of an a c t u a t o r with 29-inch s t r o k e .

F u r t h e r concerns r e l a t i v e t o t h e t h r u s t r e v e r s e r i n c l u d e t h e method of providing p o s i t i v e l o n g i t u d i n a l s e a l i n g i n t h e stowed p o s i t i o n , t h e i n t e r f e r e n c e of t h e door l e a d i n g edge w i t h duct s t r u c t u r e d u r i n g t r a n s l a t i o n , and t h e blockage door a n g l e i n t h e deployed p o s i t i o n .

These concerns are i l l u s t r a t e d by Figure A-19. With regard Boeing d a t a show a 90 degree door a n g l e ( i . e . , t o t h e door a n g l e , p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o t h e d u c t w a l l ) t o g i v e t h e most e f f e c t i v e t h r u s t r e v e r s i n g and h i g h e s t e f f e c t i v e area.

d . Mixer Details o f t h e mixer attachment are l a c k i n g . It appears t h a t t h e engine plug i s a t t a c h e d and supported from t h e o u t e r engine exhaust c a s e .

The purpose of t h e l i n k between t h e plug and lobe v a l l e y is n o t clear. It appears t o be f o r support of t h e lobe of t h e mixer, b u t as drawn it could impose loads on t h e mixer and change t h e prihary/secondary area r e l a t i o n s h i p . Since t h e plug is always bathed i n primary flow up t o t h e l i n k and t h e lobe is bathed by both f a n and primary flow, t h e plug w i l l grow thermally more than t h e mixer. When t h i s happens t h e l i n k w i l l move a f t a t t h e p l u g a t t a c h e d end and thus p u l l t h e lobe inward. To be n e u t r a l i n i t s motiori t h e l i n k should be more n e a r l y p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o t h e plug contour. The l i n k must a l s o be p o s i t i o n e d such t h a t i t does not change t h e a r e a ratio.

c . T a i l p i p e The j o i n t between t h e t a i l p i p e and t h e f a n duct should be i n v e r t e d t o allow f o r t h e s i m p l e s t and l i g h t e s t c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e t a i l p i p e .

6 . 2 AIRFRAME ACCESSSORY REQUIREMENTS AND LOCATION Hydraulic and e l e c t r i c loads a r e shown i n Figures A-20 and A-21. These loads can be handled by one h y d r a u l i c pump and one a l t e r n a t o r on each engine g e a r box.

Gearbox and accessory l o c a t i o n s t u d i e s g e n e r a l l y have shown t h e c o r e mounting t o have t h e least weight and b e s t performance; however, access- i b i l i t y , e s p e c i a l l y i n a long d u c t n a c e l l e , i s n o t as good a s f o r t h e c h i n - mounted a c c e s s o r i e s .

Table A-XVII p r e s e n t s a g e n e r a l study of accessory l o c a t i o n . A numerical r a t i n g system, where 0 i s unacceptable and 5 i s t h e b e s t o r m o s t a c c e p t a b l e , was used t o o b t a i n an o v e r a l l f i g u r e of m e r i t . Recent surveys of Boeing customers showed t h a t c h i n mounting and c o r e mounting had widest acceptance.

There a l s o appeared t o be a s t r o n g f e e l i n g a g a i n s t s p l i t gearboxes. Gear- boxes a p p a r e n t l y a r e h i g h m a i n t e n a n c e i t e m s and a i r l i n e s b e l i e v e t h a t s p l i t t i n g a gearbox i n c r e a s e s i t s maintenance problems s i g n i f i c a n t l y . Another important c o n s i d e r a t i o n was t h e f u e l s p i l l requirement (DOT/FAA o r d e r S l l 0 . 1 9 > t h a t

T

a

E

s

s"

i Y

I ' 0 v)

I

I - i

r

i

I Table A-XVII. E3 Engine Gear Box Location Study Split Fuel Pump Fan Core Mount Fuel Pump Bottom Frame at Fan Chin Top Only TOP 60Oand 2 7 Oo Fuel Spill per 5 5 0 5 0 5 DOT/FAA order 8110.19 Acce ss ibi 1 i t y 4 3 3 5 5 1 to accessories Heat rejection 2 5 5 5 5 5 Accessibility 2 5 5 5 5 5 to variable IGV Compatibility 5 5 5 5 5 5 with load reduction Compatibility 2 5 5 5 5 5 with zero moment mount Customer 4 0 0 0 5 0 Acceptance 24 2810 2310 35 /O 30/0 2610 Note: Rating 0 to 5, with 5 most acceptable and 0 not acceptable s p e c i f i e d t h a t no f u e l may be s p i l l e d d u r i n g a wheels-up landing.

The chin- mounted gearbox and engine f u e l pump would be d i f f i c u l t t o c e r t i f y t h i s r eq u i reme n t .

A-XVII r e f l e c t s t h e s e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s and shows t h e core-mounted Table gearbox t o be t h e most a c c e p t a b l e l o c a t i o n .

6 . 3 MAINTAINABILITY, ACCESSIBILITY, AND SAFETY M a i n t a i n a b i l i t y , a c c e s s i b i l i t y , and s a f e t y p r o v i s i o n s were reviewed and found t o be g e n e r a l l y a c c e p t a b l e . The r e f e r e n c e l a y o u t s d i d n o t c o n t a i n s u f f i c i e n t d e t a i l , nor w a s it s u f f i c i e n t l y complete, t o warrant d e t a i l e d study of t h e s e f e a t u r e s .

6 . 4 FUEL HEATER SYSTEM GE has proposed t h a t engine f u e l be used a s a h e a t s i n k f o r c o o l i n g t h e ECS bleed a i r . This s y s t e m w i l l improve engine TSFC by r e t a i n i n g thermal energy i n t h e engine c y c l e r a t h e r t h a n dumping h e a t overboard by t h e conven- t i o n a l use of f a n a i r f o r ECS a i r c o o l i n g . GE e s t i m a t e s a n e t TSFC improve- ment a s h i g h . a s 0.8% when both r e t a i n e d h e a t and e l i m i n a t i o n of f a n - a i r bleed are considered. In t h e proposed system h e a t i s t r a n s f e r r e d from t h e ECS a i r - t o - w a t e r p r e c o o l e r t o a water-to-fuel h e a t exchanger l o c a t e d i n t h e f u e l system between t h e boost-and high-pressure fuel-pump elements. The GE f u e l - h e a t e r s y s t e m i s shown i n Figure A-22.

A s proposed t h e f u e l - h e a t e r system becomes inadequate a s a h e a t s i n k For such a c o n d i t i o n one engine i s during maximum a n t i - i c i n g o p e r a t i o n .

considered i n o p e r a t i v e , and using t h e h e a t s i n k from the- remaining e n g i n e , t h e precooler i s r e q u i r e d t o have s u f f i c i e n t c a p a c i t y t o provide cooled a i r f o r one a i r c o n d i t i o n i n g pack and thermal a n t i - i c i n g a i r f o r one i n l e t cowl and both wings. The r e q u i r e d c a p a c i t y w a s provided by modifying t h e GE fuel-heater s y s t e m a s shown i n Figure A-23 t o include an a i r - t o - a i r h e a t exchanger t o supplement t h e f u e l h e a t s i n k . In t h e Boeing m o d i f i c a t i o n , a c o n t r o l valve opens t o permit fan a i r f l o w through t h e cool s i d e of t h e supplemental h e a t exchanger a s t h e f u e l temperature approaches i t s upper l i m i t of 275OF. During t h e maximum a n t i - i c i n g c o n d i t i o n t h e h e a t r e j e c t i o n r a t e of t h e bleed a i r i c r e a s e s t o 26000 BTU/min compared t o 3900 BTU/min For s a f e t y t h e maximum temperature of d u r i n g maximum c r u i s e a t 35000 f t .

t h e bleed a i r c i r c u l a t e d through t h e a i r p l a n e i s 450°F and f o r o p e r a t i o n a l reasons t h e minimum i s 300OF.

The f u e l - h e a t e r system has p o t e n t i a l f o r f u e l saving and should be f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t e d . Wtih a d d i t i o n a l study c o n s i d e r a t i o n could be given t o e l i m i n a t i o n of t h e i n t e r m e d i a t e f l u i d between t h e f u e l and a i r and t o r e - c i r c u l a t i o n of f u e l t o t h e f u e l tanks during a n t i - i c i n g o p e r a t i o n when a l a r g e r h e a t s i n k is r e q u i r e d .

6.5 NACELLE MOUNT SYSTEM The GE n a c e l l e d e s i g n and mount systems were continuously reviewed during t h e course of t h e c u r r e n t E3 study t o ensure t h a t t h e GE design

Excess Vdume Digitd ECS Bled Air

c m d 2 . 4 ~ ~

552OF .

Fifth %age 52 p i a

Air 52 p i a (1) Values shown for 35,000 maximum cruise with 2.4 pps ECS Bleed.

(2) Lube oil/fuel HX would be downstream of main pump when ECS heat provides all fuel anti-ice heating.

Figure A-22. E3 - F u e l Heater System ( G E )

FUEL

TEMP- I L, -TO DIGITAL

i

CONTROL ACCUMULATOR

EXCESS VOWME ECS BLEED AIR

1.16 PPS

5 5 P F

FIFTH STAGE 52 PSIA

AIR

52 PSlA

(1 1 Values shown for 35,000 maximum cruise with 1.16 PPS ECS Bleed.

(21 Lube oib'fuel HX would be downstream of main pump when ECS heat provides all fuel anti-ice heating.

F i g u r e A-23. E3 - Fuel Heater System (Boefng M o d i f i c a t i o n )

would meet Boeing c r i t e r i a and d e s i g n p r a c t i c e s . The mount system i l l u s t r a t e d t h a t were r a i s e d i n Figure A-18 r e f l e c t s GE's a t t e m p t a t r e s o l v i n g t h e i s s u e s during Boeing's review. Figure A-24 shows t h e GE mount s y s t e m adapted t o a Boeing-designed pylon s t r u c t u r e .

The GE mount system d e p a r t s from Boeing p r a c t i c e by u s i n g a four-point r a t h e r than a three-point s u p p o r t . . T h i s t y p e o f support must be designed t o accommodate t o l e r a n c e buildup and t o avoid preloading and indeterminant load p a t h s . Because of t h e p r e l i m i n a r y n a t u r e of t h e mount d e s i g n Boeing d i d n o t attempt a d e t a i l s t r u c t u r a l assessment.

Boeing would p r e f e r a three-point support system; however, t h e four- p o i n t system with proper design c o n s i d e r a t i o n s w i l l m e e t Boeing c r i t e r i a . A d e f i n i t e advantage of t h e four p o i n t support system is t h a t i t has a p o t e n t i a l f o r reducing engine bending, one of t h e causes of performance d e t e r i o r a t i o n i n c u r r e n t engines. The GE mount system may t h u s a i d i n meeting performance r e t e n t i o n g o a l s of t h e E3 program.

The loads shown on Table A-XVIII g i v e Boeing engine mount design c r i t e r i a .

Figures Table A-XIX summarizes r e s u l t a n t a i r l o a d s t h a t occur once p e r f l i g h t .

A-25, A-26, A-27, and A-28 i l l u s t r a t e t h e a i r l o a d s on t h e n a c e l l e from which t h e r e s u l t a n t s of Table X I X were d e r i v e d . These l o a d s were e s t i m a t e d u s i n g d a t a from f l i g h t t e s t , wind t u n n e l t e s t , and a n a l y s i s . They were based on a 45,500 l b SLST engine and must b e s c a l e d t o t h e E3 t h r u s t levels f o r u s e i n designing E3 n a c e l l e components.

6 . 6 NACELLE MATERIAL Boeing w a s i n g e n e r a l agreement with t h e t y p e of n a c e l l e materials Boeing had good r e s u l t s with Kevlarlaluminum containment s e l e c t e d by GE.

s t r u c t u r e s i n l a b o r a t o r y experiments, and based on t h i s experience t h e f a n containment concept shown appears f e a s i b l e . Boeing used Dyna Rohr i n t h e i n l e t cowling of t h e 737 f o r about two y e a r s and experience was a c c e p t a b l e .

Graphite/Kevlar f a b r i c s k i n s , with a m e t a l c o r e on t h e e x t e r i o r of t h e i n l e t cowl, would be p a r t i c u l a r l y v u l n e r a b l e t o l i g h t n i n g s t r i k e s ; however t h e GE materials list shows c o n s i d e r a t i o n of a l i g h t n i n g p r o t e c t i o n system.

Use of aluminum brazed t i t a n i u m honeycomb f o r t h e c o r e cowl s$ructure would be s a t i s f a c t o r y provided cowl s k i n temperatures do n o t exceed' 800°F. Because t h e t a i l p i p e could be s u b j e c t e d t o temperatures above 10000F, aluminum brazed t i t a n i u m honeycomb i s n o t recommended. Inconel would be a l o g i c a l m a t e r i a l s e l e c t i o n f o r t h e t a i l p i p e .

In Boeing p r a c t i c e , new materials s e l e c t e d f o r a p p l i c a t i o n t o f l i g h t s t r u c t u r e s a r e s u b j e c t e d t o a r i g o r o u s t i m e consuming test and e v a l u a t i o n program. This e v a l u a t i o n c o n s i s t s of l a b o r a t o r y tests of c a n d i d a t e m a t e r i a l s , d e s t r u c t i v e t e s t s t o determine a l l o w a b l e s , n o n c r i t i c a l s e r v i c e t e s t i n g of l i g h t l y loaded s t r u c t u r e , and n o n c r i t i c a l s e r v i c e t e s t s of loaded s t r u c t u r e .

This e v a l u a t i o n process may t a k e s e v e r a l y e a r s , t h e a c t u a l t i m e depending on the s e v e r i t y of t h e intended a p p l i c a t i o n . Candidate materials .may be dropped a t any time d u r i n g t h e e v a l u a t i o n p r o c e s s .

Table A-XVIII. Nacelle and Strut Design Load Factors The nacelle, nacelle strut and primary engine mounts shall be designed for the following inektia load conditions which are assumed to occur only once in the lifetime of the airplane : Condition Ultimate load factors Vertical 6.5 6.5 + 1.5 T ( c ) -3.5 -3.5 + T(c) Thrust 3.0 T(max) + 3.0 verti’cal 3.0 T(max) + 1.5 vertical 3.0 T ( R )

3.0 T ( R ) + 3.0 vertical

Side + 3.0

-

Gyroscope + 2 . 2 5 radfsec yaw + l.ST(c) + 1.5 vertical

-

+ 2.25 rad/sec. pitch + 1.5T(c) + 3.75 vertical

-

Engine seizure Torque equivalent to stopping rotating mass in approximately 0.60 sec T (max = maximum takeoff thrust at sea level Where: T ( C ) = cruise thrust (maximum or minimum, whichever is critical) T(R) 3 reverse thrust Note: For design purposes, these ultimate factors shall be applied at the nacelle and content weight and C.G. exclusive of thrust and contents.

c

I

M al If I I I m a (d l-l $4 L UCZZ I m a m d L.r .rl c 9) I d I4 9) m 0 0 0 0 z 0 0 0 0 o \ D r r 7 a 9) \ o m m a C m - l - 4 *rl M t w

t - -

0 0 0 0 0 0

h -

- 4

C Y ~ V 6.7 NACELLE WEIGHT EVALUATION Table A-XX compares Boeing and GE weight estimates o f s e l e c t e d components of t h e E3 long-duct mixed-flow n a c e l l e . Due t o d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e method by which t h e v a r i o u s n a c e l l e components were f u n c t i o n a l l y accounted f o r by Boeing and GE, it was not p o s s i b l e t o provide a weight comparison f o r a l l i t e m s . Consequently, comparisons were made f o r o n l y those components on which GE provided weight d a t a . Table A-XXI p r e s e n t s t h e weight d a t a r e - ceived from GE.

D i f f e r e n c e s i n Boeing and GE e s t i m a t e d weight l e v e l s were p r i m a r i l y due t o d i f f e r e n c e s i n assumptions.

An i n - d e p t h weight e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e GE composite n a c e l l e r e q u i r e d more d e t a i l e d d e s i g n and s t r u c t u r a l s i z i n g t h a n could be accomplished w i t h i n t h e a i r f r a m e r ' s funded a c t i v i t y ; t h e r e f o r e , Boeing used e x i s t i n g n a c e l l e s and advanced d e s i g n s as a b a s i s f o r e s t i m a t i n g n a c e l l e weight and p o t e n t i a l b e n e f i t s due t o use o f composites. The weight d i f f e r e n c e s between Boeing and GE r e p r e s e n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n nacelle design and l e v e l s of t e c h n i c a l r i s k . Table A-XXII summarizes t h e advanced.tech- nology weight r e d u c t i o n f a c t o r s used i n t h e Boeing a n a l y s i s . These f a c t o r s were based on advanced technology a p p l i c a t i o n . Weight a n a l y s i s d e t a i l s can be found i n Table A - X X I I I .

For t h e November 1978 PDR GE r e v i s e d t h e n a c e l l e weight downward and The n e t r e s u l t was a weight d e c r e a s e of increased t h e ATE engine weight.

over about 495 l b . / n a c e l l e compared t o Reference 3 d a t a f o r a s i z e d n a c e l l e and e n g i n e .

Table A-XX. GE Advanced Nacelle Evaluation Nace 1 le Nacelle Weight Weight Difference Component (Ib/pod 1 i(GE minus Boeing) SLST = 46900 Lb Boe i n g GE l b % E s t i m a t e E s t h a t e I n l e t 770* 5 10 -260 -33.8 Fan Cowl 180 Included i n Fan Module Fan Duct, Reverser 2188 1469 -7 19 -32.9 And Core Cowl Mixer 118 Inc 1 ude d In Plug 96 LPT Module T a i l P i p e 549 19 1 -358 -65.2

(3901 ** 9,* **

* Includes 90 l b b u r s t containment allowance.

*$< Total not computed due t o weight d i s t r i b u t i o n d i f f e r e n c e s between Boeing and GE.

T a b l e A-XXI.

G e n e r a l E l e c t r i c Energy E f f i c i e n t E n g i n e Weights E s t i m a t e d E3 ENGINE ESTIMATED WEIGHTS ESTIMATED 46,900 LBS. 36,500 LBS.

ENGINE WEIGHT T.O. THRUST T.O. THRUST FAN MODULE 2316 LBS.

1950 LBS 1360 LBS.

LPT MODULE* E n g i n e CORE 1745 LBS.

C&A, SUMPS & DRIVES ( 9 7 5 LBS 680 LBS.

510 LBS INLET 385 LBS.

1265 LBS FAN REVERSER & DUCT+;* 958 LBS.

204 LBS CORE C O W L 154 LBS.

2825 l b 191 LBS TAILPIPE 145 LBS.

i 655 LBS ENGINE BUILD-UP 495 LBS.

*INCLUDES REAR FRAME, MIXER AND EXHAUST CENTERBODY.

**INCLUDES PYLON WALLS INTERNAL TO THE BYPASS DUCT.

Tab le A-XXI I.

Weight Reduction Factor(%) Nacelle Component Xnle t Fan Cowl 4 . 6 Fan duct, r e v e r s e r , core cowl Mixer Plug Tai Ip i p e C .d M c . d ai ..

m al L u b C H U C al C r ) a d

E u

u '3 U al cu C -4 d rl C E4 P ' al u k w E W H w x e a , r( A m b U E al C

f

W a d d a J u m z cn 2d bl

I

Ga ..

W 9) M C c Y 'rl 0 bl -4 Jz v 4J C I m a J r( m U M C 1 .rl VI U C a al C C m a u al d a , u a z 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1.

NASA's s t a t e d f u e l consumption g o a l i s a 12% r e d u c t i o n o f c r u i s e TSFC.

For t h e Boeing s t u d y , t h i s w a s i n t e r p r e t e d t o mean a 12% r e d u c t i o n o f a i r p l a n e BLKF. Under t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , t h e ATE as i n s t a l l e d i n t h e Boeing Model 768-868 would s u r p a s s t h e d e s i g n mission f u e l consumption g o a l by over 6% i f i t could be developed as assumed.

2. Boeing's e v a l u a t i o n being more c o n s e r v a t i v e than GE's i n d i c a t e d t h e ATE n a c e l l e t o be over 1000 l b . h e a v i e r than t h e GE weight estimate. A weight i n c r e a s e of 1000 l b / n a c e l l e ( i . e . , 2000 l b . t o t a l ) i n c r e a s e s f u e l burned by about 1%; however, DOC i n c r e a s e s only 0 . 3 % .

3. The NASA g o a l of 5 % DOC r e d u c t i o n i s b e t t e r e d by 1% u s i n g GE s u p p l i e d engine performance, weight, and economic d a t a . However, Boeing c o n s i d e r s t h e engine p r i c e quoted by GE u n r e a l i s t i c a l l y high f o r E3 technology l e v e l s . When t h e 20% lower Boeing p r i c e estimate i s a p p l i e d , t h e DOC improvement i n c r e a s e s from 6 . 4 t o 7.5%. The DOC improvement with t h e h i g h e r Boeing weight and lower p r i c e is about 7.2%.

4. Engine n o i s e estimates based on a p r e l i m i n a r y engine n o i s e treatment show t h a t FAR 36 amendment 8 could m e t . Since no attempt was made t o r e f i n e t h e n a c e l l e treatment f o r lowest n o i s e l e v e l s , it was concluded t h a t c u r r e n t and n e a r - f u t u r e n o i s e treatment technology could a t t a i n t h e 3 EPNdB margin Boeing g e n e r a l l l y c o n s i d e r s a c c e p t a b l e f o r a s s u r i n g c e r t i f i c a b l e n o i s e l e v e l s .

To e n s u r e t h a t t h e E3 program r e s u l t s i n an engine c o n f i g u r a t i o n t h a t 5 .

meets program g o a l s a n d ' t h a t can be i n s t a l l e d i n a n a c e l l e a c c e p t a b l e t o t h e a i r f r a m e r and a i r l i n e s , t h e a i r f r a m e r should be a c t i v e l y involved i n t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n design and e v a l u a t i o n . It i s t h e r e f o r e recommended t h a t t h e balance of t h e E 3 program i n c l u d e c o n t i n u i n g a c t i v e p a r t i c i - p a t i o n b y t h e a i r f r a m e c o n t r a c t o r s .

164.

REFERENCES 1.

EEE Component Development and I n t e g r a t i o n Program, General E l e c t r i c Purchase Order N o . 200-4XX-14N43049.

2. EEE Component Development and I n t e g r a t i o n Program, General E l e c t r i c Purchase Order No. 200-4XX-14K40096.

3. Study d a t a f o r Advanced Technology and Reference engines.

N A S A Energy E f f i c i e n t Engine Program, General E l e c t r i c Co . A i r c r a f t Engine Group, May 5, 1978.

4. Energy E f f i c i e n t Engine and I n t e g r a t i o n S t u d i e s f o r General E l e c t r i c Company, D6-44690, December 6 , 1977.

5 . Aerodynamic Analysis o f GE E3 Model Scale Nacelle Simulator (Unnum- bered r e p o r t submitted t o GE by l e t t e r August 9 , 1978).

6 . General' E l e c t r i c Drawing No. 4013237-857.

7 . General E l e c t r i c Drawing No. 4013267-002.

8. General E l e c t r i c Drawing No. 4013267-810.

9.

General E l e c t r i c P r e s e n t a t i o n "E3 Mount Configuration".

APPENDIX B Appendix B is a reproduction of report LR 28933 supplied by Lockhead- California Company as their contribution to aircraft integration.

The format and printing have been altered to coordinate with this publication.

FINAL REPORT

GY EFFICIENT E

T DEVELOP

AND

I ~ T E G ~ A ~ I O ~ STUDY

Purchase Order 200-4XX-14N43062 Prepared for: GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY AIRCRAFT ENGINE GROUP Cincinnatti, Ohio LOCKHEED-CALIFORNIA COMPANY * BURBANK A D I V I S I O N O F L O C K H E E D C O R P O R A T I O N

APPENDIX B TABLE OF CONTENTS S e c t i o n Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 2 . 0 STUDY EFFORT 183 2 . 1 A i r c r a f t and Mission D e f i n i t i o n A i r c r a f t Performance and Mission S e n s i t i v i t y 183 2 . 2 2 . 2 . 1 S e n s i t i v i t y Analysis 183 2 . 2 . 2 Performance Retention 190 2 . 3 A i r c r a f t / E n g i n e I n t e g r a t i o n 190 2 . 3 . 1 Nacelle Configuration

2 . 3 . 2 Nacelle - Wing I n t e r f e r e n c e

2 . 3 . 3 Accessory Location 193 2 . 3 . 4 Access P r o v i s i o n s 193 2 . 3 . 5 Thrust Reverser 2 . 3 . 6 Center Engine I n s t a l l a t i o n 2 . 3 . 7 Engine Bleed Requirements and Power E x t r a c t i o n 2 . 3 . 8 Engine F i r e P r o t e c t i o n 2 . 4 Performance and Economic Comparisons 2 02 2 06 3 . 0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

SUPPLEMENT A '

SUPPLEMENT B 224

APPENDIX B LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page B-1 . Three-View Drawing of Domestic A i r c r a f t With E3 Engine.

Three-View Drawing of I n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l A i r c r a f t With E3 B-2.

Engine. 178 3-3. Wing Engine I n s t a l l a t i o n Layout With E 3 Engine. 179 B-4. Center Engine I n s t a l l a t i o n Layout With E3 Engine. 180

B-5. Wing Engine Location - E 3 Engine. 181

B-6. Three-View Drawing of Domestic A i r c r a f t With CF6-50C Engine. 185 B-7. Three-View Drawing of I n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l Aircraft With CF6-50C Engine. 186 B-8.

ASSET S y n t h e s i s Cycle. 187 B-9. F a i l - s a f e Design Concepts E3 Engine Mount System. 195

B-10. Pylon-Mounted A i r c r a f t Accessories - E3 Wing Engine

I n s t a1 l a t ion. 196 B-11 . E3 Engine With Fan Case-Mounted Accessories.

B-12. Thrust Reverser Flow D i r e c t i v i t y . 200 B-13. Layout of F i r e Zones f o r E 3 Engine. 201 B-14. Block Fuel Savings With E3 Engine. 203 B-15. DOC Savings With E 3 Engine. 2 04 2 05 B-16. A i r c r a f t S i z e Advantage With E3 Engine.

APPENDIX B LIST OF TABLES Table Page

-

B-I .

Reference A i r c r a f t Design and Performance C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .

B-11. E3 A i r c r a f t Design and Performance C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .

B-I 11. Design and Technology F e a t u r e s - 1990's Transport A i r c r a f t .

B-IV . 188

A i r c r a f t Block Fuel and DOC.

B-V . Airframe Noise Estimates (E3 Engine).

B-VI . S e n s i t i v i t y F a c t o r s - Domestic A i r c r a f t - E3 Engine.

B-VI I. S e n s i t i v i t y F a c t o r s - I n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l A i r c r a f t - E3 Engine.

E-VI 11. I n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l A i r c r a f t Performance C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .

B-IX. . Domestic A i r c r a f t Performance C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . 192

B-X. E3 Accessory Location. 194

1 .o INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

This s t u d y was accomplished by t h e Commercial Advanced Design Division of t h e Lockheed-California Company f o r t h e General E l e c t r i c Company i n support of t h e i r "Energy E f f i c i e n t Engine component Development and I n t e g r a t i o n " Program w i t h NASA-Lewis Research Center.

The e f f o r t r e q u i r e d w a s i n accordance with General E l e c t r i c Company Purchase Order 200-4XX-14N43062 and c o n s i s t e d of t h e following Tasks :

e TASK 1 - A i r c r a f t and Mission D e f i n i t i o n

TASK 2 - A i r c r a f t Performance and Mission S e n s i t i v i t y

e TASK 3 - A i r c r a f t / E n g i n e I n t e g r a t i o n

e TASK 4 - Reporting

This e v a l u a t i o n is an update o r follow-on t o t h e previous Lockheed study e f f o r t i n support of t h e "Energy E f f i c i e n t Engine Preliminary Design and I n t e g r a t i o n Study", General E l e c t r i c Purchase Order number 200-4XX-14K43170, which included : D e f i n i t i o n of a i r p l a n e d e s i g n and technology f e a t u r e s e A i r c r a f t and mission d e f i n i t i o n A i r c r a f t performance and mission s e n s i t i v i t i e s

e A i r c r a f t - engine i n t e g r a t i o n e v a l u a t i o n

During t h e previous study e f f o r t , Lockheed Report LR 28377, two a i r c r a f t c o n f i g u r a t i o n s were developed; one f o r a domestic mission and one f o r an i n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l m i s s i o n . These domestic and i n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l a i r c r a f t , using t h e CF6-5OC t u r b o f a n engine, were c h a r a c t e r i z e d f o r t h e following technology f e a t u r e s and mission c r i t e r i a : e Technology F e a t u r e s S u p e r c r i t i c a l wing e Active c o n t r o l s Advanced Composite s t r u c t u r e Mission C r i t e r i a Domes t i c In te r c o n t i n e n t a 1 Besign Range (n . m i . 3,000 6,500 No. Passengers . 400 400 Cruise Speed M 0.8 M 0.8

Typical Range (n.mi. 1,400 3,000 -

Configuration 3 Engine 4 Engine Wide Body Wide Body A t t h e s t a r t of t h i s study e f f o r t , a re-evaluation of a i r c r a f t tech- nology f e a t u r e s and mission c r i t e r i a was accomplished. T h i s r e s u l t e d i n previously s e l e c t e d c r i t e r i a , except t h a t t h e payload c a p a c i t y r e t e n t i o n of t h e of 100,000 pounds (500 passengers) was incorporated i n liew of 80,000 pounds (400 passengers) p r e v i o u s l y u s e d . This change r e s u l t e d f r o m review by Lockheed's Marketing Development Division r e l a t i v e t o p o t e n t i a l market demand i n t h e 1990's t i m e frame. Reference a i r c r a f t d e s i g n and performance charac- t e r i s t i c s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e increased payload c a p a c i t y a r e included i n Table B-I. These c o n f i g u r a t i o n s were e s t a b l i s h e d a s b a s e l i n e a i r c r a f t t o be used f o r comparison w i t h a i r c r a f t i n c o r p o r a t i n g t h e Energy E f f i c i e n t Engine.

The Energy E f f i c i e n t Engine c y c l e s e l e c t e d by General E l e c t r i c f o r i n s t a l l a t i o n on t h e domestic and i n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l a i r c r a f t i s a mixed flow, d i r e c t d r i v e high-bypass turbofan w i t h t h e following'characteristics, a s compared t o t h e c u r r e n t CF6-50C engine:

CF6 -5 OC E3

Current 1990's Technology Level Fan Drive Direct Direct Exhaust S e p a r a t e Mixed

Bypass Ratio 4.2 6.8

Overall Ratio 32 38 2450OF Turbine I n l e t Temp. 2445OF Table B - I 1 i s a t a b u l a t i o n of t h e a i r c r a f t d e s i g n and performance c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e domestic and i n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l a i r c r a f t w i t h t h e E3 engine. Comparison of t h i s d a t a with t h e r e f e r e n c e a i r c r a f t (CF6-50C e n g i n e ) i n d i c a t e s mission f u e l and d i r e c t o p e r a t i n g c o s t (DOC) s a v i n g s w i t h t h e E3 engine as follows : Fuel Savings DOC Savings

Design Typical Design Ty p i c a 1

Domes t i c 18.3% 17.3% 8% 6.8%

In t e r c on t i n e n t a 1 22.9% 2 1 . 2 % 12% 10.5%

General arrangement drawings, d e p i c t i n g t h e domestic and i n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l a i r c r a f t

w i t h t h e E3 e n g i n e , a r e included as Figures B-I and B-2. The s i z e

of t h e E 3 engine, as supplied by General E l e c t r i c , is w e l l matched ( t h r u s t - both t a k e o f f and c r u i s e , r e v e r s e t h r u s t l e v e l , and power e x t r a c t i o n ) w i t h t h e Lockheed s p e c i f i e d mission/payload c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s f o r t h e 1990's a i r c r a f t .

I n s t a l l a t i o n l a y o u t drawings o f t h e E3 engine on t h e domestic a i r c r a f t (wing and c e n t e r mounted engine) a r e included as Figures B-3 through B-5, and d e p i c t l o c a t i o n of t h e l a i r c r a f t a c c e s s o r i e s i n t h e engine c o r e a s w e l l as placement of t h e n a c e l l e with r e s p e c t t o t h e w i n g . c o n s i s t e n t w i t h minimization of i n t e r f e r e n c e d r a g p e n a l t i e s .

The r e s u l t s of t h i s s t u d y a r e as follows: e The N A S A d e f i n e d g o a l s f o r minimum f u e l and DOC s a v i n g s of 12%

and 5%, r e s p e c t i v e l y , a r e a t t a i n e d w i t h t h e E3 engine

e Nacelle aerodynamic and mechanical c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ( i n l e t , n a c e l l e contour, and mount systems) a r e a c c e p t a b l e f o r a i r c r a f t i n s t a l l a t i o n

Table B-I. Reference Aircraft Design and Performance Characteristics

Domestic

Intercontinental

Mission Characteristics

I

Design Range (n.mi.1 3000

Typical Range (n.mi. ) 1400 3000

Cruise Speed M 0 . 8 MO. 8

No. Passengers 500 500

Init. Cruise Altitude (ft) 37 , 000 32,000

Field Length (ft) 6837 9369

Approach Speed (kt) 135 133

Design Characteristics

I

Configuration 3 Engine-Trijet - 4 Engine-Quadjet

Power Plant CF6-50C CF6-50C

30°

Sweep (..25C) 30°

W/S (lb/ft2) 118 145

0.274 0.248

T/W

10 10

AR

13 13

t/c ( X I

TOGW (lb) 478,622 709,664

303 , 963

OEW (lb) 261,795

Wing Span (ft) 201.4 221.2

Body Length (ft) 228.3 229.5

. 19.6

Body Diameter (ft) 19.6

Performance Characteristics

Thrust/Eng. (SLS,lb) 43,714 43,999

Block Fuel - Design (lb) 98,116 266 , 136

42 , 629 103,425

Block Fuel - Typ. (lb)

1.262 1.449

DOC - Design (C/ASM)

1.360 1.435

DOC - Typ. (C/ASM)

E3 AIRCRAFT AND PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS

Table B-11.

Domestic Intercontinental

Mission Characteristics

Design Range (n.mi.1 3000 6500

1 4 0 0 3000

Typical Range (n .mi.

NO. a- MO. 8

Cruise Speed

No. Passengers 500 500

37,000 32,000

Init. Cruise Altitude (ft)

6837 9369

Field Length (ft)

.Approach Speed (kt 135 133

Design Characteristics

3 Engine-Trijet 4 Engine-Quadjet

Configuration

Power Plant E3 E3

3 Oo 30°

Sweep (.25~)

113 135

W/S (lb/ft2)

0.270 0.241

T/W

1 0 1 0

AR

t/c (%) 13

624,577

453,652

T O W (lb)

256,767 283 , 672

OEW (lb)

215.6

Wing Span (ft) 200.2

Body Length (ft) 228.3 229.5

19.6 19.6

Body Diameter (ft)

Performance Characteristics

37,631

40, a32

Thrust/Eng. (SLS,lb)

Block Fuel - Design (lb) 80,158 205,221

81 , 504

Block Fuel - Typ. (lb) 35,254

1.290

1 . 1 6 1

DOC - Design (GIASM)

1.269 1.299

DOC - Typ. (C/ASM)

p'

'-d P

Y U & 4 c (i 4 Y

I

I t

Y -

a m h rl

P

1 '

I n s t a l l a t i o n of t h e E3 engine with mixed exhaust appears f e a s i b l e without a p e n a l t y f o r i n t e r f e r e n c e d r a g o The t h r u s t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e E3 e n g i n e , s u p p l i e d by General E l e c t r i c , are compatible w i t h 1990's commercial a i r c r a f t .

I n c o r p o r a t i o n of t h e E3 engine r e s u l t s i n a i r c r a f t c o n f i g u r a t i o n , s i z e d f o r long range and l a r g e payload c a p a c i t y , which are compatible w i t h e x i s t i n g a i r p o r t f a c i l i t i e s ( f i e l d l e n g t h , wing span, body l e n g t h , and g r o s s weight).

2.0 STUDY EFFORT The s t u d y e f f o r t accomplished by Lockheed i n support of General E l e c t r i c companys Energy E f f i c i e n t Engine Component Development and I n t e g r a t i o n pro- gram c o n s i s t e d of t h e following major t a s k s :

o Task 1 - A i r c r a f t and Mission D e f i n i t i o n

e Task 2 - A i r c r a f t Performance and Mission S e n s i t i v i t y

o Task 3 - A i r c r a f t / E n g i n e I n t e g r a t i o n

2.1 AIRCRAFT AND MISSION D E F I N I T I O N

Mission and d e s i g n d e f i n i t i o n s , along with a p p l i c a b l e advanced technology were e s t a b l i s h e d f o r both t h e domestic and i n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l a i r c r a f t f e a t u r e s , during t h e previous s t u d y e f f o r t (Lockheed Report LR 28377). On i n i t i a t i o n of t h i s e f f o r t , those d e f i n i t i o n s were reviewed, and updated where a p p l i c a b l e , f o r t h e purpose o f e s t a b l i s h i n g r e f e r e n c e ( b a s e l i n e ) c o n f i g u r a t i o n s and p e r - formance c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s f o r comparison o f t h o s e a i r c r a f t w i t h t h e E3 e n g i n e .

D e f i n i t i o n of. t h e domestic and i n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l a i r c r a f t mission c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and technology l e v e l s i s included as Table B - 1 1 1 . General arrangement drawings are included a s Figures B-6 and B - 7 , and t h e procedures f o r c a l c u l a t i n g DOC a r e included as Supplement B.

2 . 2 AIRCRAFT PERFORMANCE AND MISSION SENSITIVITY Performance, weight, and p e r t i n e n t i n s t a l l a t i o n d a t a f o r both t h e c u r r e n t

CF6-50C engine and t h e advanced technology E3 engine w a s s u p p l i e d by General

E l e c t r i c f o r i n c o r p o r a t i o n i n t o t h e r e f e r e n c e a i r c r a f t . w a s Each a i r c r a f t s i z e d f o r minimum mission f u e l and DOC using t h e Lockheed Parametric A n a l y s i s

(ASSET) program, d e p i c t e d i n Figure B-8. The ASSET Analysis Program i s a

Lockheed P r o p r i e t a r y s y n t h e s i s model t o s i z e p a r a m e t r i c a l l y and determine t h e weight, performance, and c o s t of a i r c r a f t s i z e d t o m e e t given mission p r o f i l e s , payload c a p a c i t y , and s t r u c t u r a l c r i t e r i a using a p r e - s e l e c t e d o p t i m i z a t i o n c r i t e r i a . A i r c r a f t f u e l usage, and DOC f o r both t h e d e s i g n and average m i s s i o n s , along with e s t i m a t e s of t h e a i r f r a m e n o i s e f o r t h e FAR 36 measuring p o i n t s i s included i n Tables B-IV and B-V. Supplement A i n c l u d e s t h e computer p r i n t o u t s f o r t h e domestic and i n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l a i r c r a f t w i t h t h e E3 e n g i n e .

2 . 2 . 1 S e n s i t i v i t y Analysis S e n s i t i v i t y f a c t o r s were c a l c u l a t e d f o r each a i r c r a f t (domestic and i n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l ) w i t h t h e E3 engine t o a s s e s s t h e e f f e c t s of changes i n SFC, engine weight, engine i n t i a l p r i c e , and engine maintenance c o s t on a i r c r a f t performance (TOGW, f u e l usage, and DOC). The following s e n s i t i v i t y f a c t o r s w e r e c a l c u l a t e d :

+20% + 9 ~ 2 5 0 K +lo00 l b +5% SFC

- - - -

T O W X X Fuel W t X X

DOC X X X x

Table B - I L L . DESIGN AND TECHNOLOGY FEATURES-1990's TRANSPORT AIRCRAFT

mrne s t ic I n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l

Wide body t r i j e t

A i r c r a f t Type Wide body q u a d j e t 235 i n . f u s e . dia. 235 i n . f u s e . d i a .

9 a b r e a s t s e a t i n g

9 a b r e a s t s e a t i n g

Z-wing mounted 4-wing mounted

No. Engines and Location

I - c e n t e r mounted

100,000 (500 pax) 100,000 (500 pax)

Payload Capacity ( l b )

TOW Class ( l b ) 500,000 750,000

45,000 46,000

Engine Thrust (lb)

Mission Characteristics

Design Range (n.rni.1 3,000 6 , 5 0 0

1,400 3,000

Typical h n g e (n.mi.1

0 . 5 5 0.55

Typ. Range L.F.

Cruise Speed MO. 8 M0.8

35,000 35,000

Cruise A l t . ( f t )

7,000 20,000

TOFL ( f t )

135 135

App. Speed ( k t ) Advanced Technology

Q 3 % r e d u c t i o n o f 5 3 % r e d u c t i o n of

S u p e r c r i t . Wing

wing w t - i n c r e a s e d wing wt - i n c r e a s e d

t h i c k n e s s of a i r f o i l t h i c k n e s s of a i r f o i l a AR 2 10 0 AR = 10 t / c = 13% K / C 13%

Sweep = 3 0 ° Sweep = 30°

-5.5% wing w t .

Active Controls -5.5% wing w t .

-I% body wt. -1% body w t .

Load Relief

-28% t a i l s i z e -28% t a i l s i z e Relaxed S t a b i l i t y - 8 . 7 % M.E.W. - 9 . 2 % M.E.W.

Advanced Composites 0 P r i m a r y S t r u c t .

Secondary S t r u c t .

n n w

!

'$'

I PROPULSION 0 RDTBE BODY 0 SIOELINE 0 GROSS 0 FLIGHT HISTORY 0 INVESTMENT WING 0 FLYOVER 0 EMPTY e BLOCK FUEL PRODUCTION 0 TAIL 0 FOOTPRINTS 0 STRUCTURAL 0 6 L X U TIME TOOLING 0 ENGINES 0 TAKEOFF 0 MATERtALS 0 RESERVES SPARES 6 SSE 0 GEOMETRY U N O t N G OISTRIBUTION 0 C U M 8 L TRANSONIC PERFORMANCE 0 FUEL CAPACITY 0 PROPULSION 0 FAA BAL. TAKEOFF 0 SUBSYSTEMS A N 0 LANOING

Figure B-8. ASSET Synthesis Cycle

T a b l e B-IV. A i r c r a f t Block Fuel and DOC

F u e l - Design Range (100% L . F . )

Domes t i c I n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l Segment CF6-50C E? CF6-50 C E3 T a k e o f f 1089 776 1462 959 14520 11417 C 1 imb 19185 15514 C r u i s e 81228 66610 243746 186963 Decent 67 5 845 9 1 7 1055 Land 600 5 10 8 25 730 98112 80158 266 135 204221 T o t a l Domes t i c I n t e r c on t i n e n t a 1 CF6-50C E3 Segrne n t CF6-50C E3 T a k e o f f 1089 776 1462 959 10818 8350 11709 95 29 C 1 imb C r u i s e 29529 24886 88584 69315 65 1 80 1 879 1001 Decent

540 44 1

Land 791 700

I T o t a l 1 42627 35254 103425 8 1504

A i r c r a f t D . O . C . ( /ASMI Domes t i c I n te r c on t i n e n t a 1 CF6-506 E3 CF6-50C E3 1.449 1.290

DOC - Design 1 . 2 6 2 1.161

1 . 3 6 0 1 . 2 6 9 1 . 4 3 5 1.299

DOC - T y p i c a l

Table B-V. AIRFRAME NOISE ESTIMATES ( E 3 ENGINE)

s tic Intercontinental,

Condition lome

Approach (42O Flap, Geardown, 3O Glide)

Landing Weight (lb) 371,635 418,209

135 133

Approach Speed (knots)

Altitude (ft) 394 394

Airframe Noise (EPNdB) 95.9 96

Takeoff (25O Flap, Gear up)

Climb Angle 5.96O 4.66O

452 , 857 626,841

TOW (lb)

1668 1128

Altitude (ft)

3.5

Distance (n.mi.1 3.5

150.55 160.6

Speed (knots

( EPNdB 84.1 89.6

Airframe .. No i se

Sideline Point

Airframe Noise (EPNdB) 80.0 83.2

Table B-VI and B - V I 1 d e p i c t t h e s e n s i t i v i t y f a c t o r s f o r t h e E3 a i r c r a f t (with advanced technology e n g i n e ) .

2.2.2 Performance R e t e n t i o n A s s p e c i f i e d by NASA, one of t h e major g o a l s f o r t h e E3 program i s t o i n c o r p o r a t e those d e s i g n f e a t u r e s i n t o t h e advanced technology engine which w i l l e n s u r e t h a t d e t e r i o r a t i o n of SFC c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w i t h t i m e (engine c y c l e s ) w i l l be less than 50 p e r c e n t of t h a t c u r r e n t l y experienced on t h e CF6-50C e n g i n e . This improvement w a s a s s e s s e d t o provide a n a d d i t i o n a l 1% i n SFC r e d u c t i o n , e f f e c t i v e l y o v e r t h e s e r v i c e l i f e o f t h e e n g i n e .

An assessment of t h e impact on a i r c r a f t performance c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e E3 e n g i n e , with and without c r e d i t f o r improved performance r e t e n t i o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , w a s accomplished u s i n g t h e e n g i n e SFC and weight c h a r a c t e r - i s t i c s s u p p l i e d by General E l e c t r i c . Table B - V I 1 1 and B-IX d e p i c t t h e r e s u l t s of t h i s assessment. These r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e a n a d d i t i o n a l i n c r e a s e i n a i r c r a f t f u e l s a v i n g s of approximately 1% i s a t t a i n e d w i t h performance r e t e n t i o n i n c o r p o r a t e d . The f u e l s a v i n g s included i n t h i s r e p o r t are t h o s e v a l u e s o b t a i n e d w i t h performance r e t e n t i o n i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o t h e E3 e n g i n e .

2 . 3 AIRCRAFT/ENGINE INTEGRATION 2 . 3 . 1 Nacelle Configuration The nacelle dimensions and weight f o r t h e E3 engine were s u p p l i e d by General E l e c t r i c . The E3 engine u s e s a mixed flow exhaust which r e q u i r e s a f u l l l e n g t h n a c e l l e .

Use of t h e f u l l l e n g t h n a c e l l e r e q u i r e s c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e following i n s t a l l a t i o n items: 0 P o t e n t i a l o f i n t e r f e r e n c e d r a g p e n a l t y p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r wing mounted e n g i n e .

Increased i n wetted a r e a of t h e n a c e l l e and subsequent i n c r e a s e i n d r a g .

P o t e n t i a l o f i n c r e a s e d n a c e l l e weight due t o f u l l l e n g t h cowl.

Access t o engine h o t s e c t i o n and t o e n g i n e and a i r c r a f t a c c e s s o r i e s .

A s p a r t of t h i s s t u d y e f f o r t , an assessment w a s made of t h e n a c e l l e d e s i g n , s u p p l i e d by General E l e c t r i c , f o r a c c e p t a b i l i t y of aerodynamic and mechanical c h a r a c t e i s t i c s . This assessment included n a c e l l e contour and envelope dimensions (both i n t e r i o r and e x t e r i o r ) , i n l e t geometry, engine mount system, n a c e l l e s t r u c t u r a l arrangement and m a t e r i a l s , and n a c e l l e weight. The r e s u l t s of t h i s e v a l u a t i o n w e r e s u p p l i e d t o General E l e c t r i c f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n d u r i n g t h e i r p r e l i m i n a r y d e s i g n phase o f t h e E3 f l i g h t propulsion system. Assessment o f t h e f l i g h t p r o p u l s i o n s y s t e m d e s i g n used a s the b a s e l i n e f o r the NASA/CE Preliminary Design Review ( P D R ) , November 1978, r e s u l t s i n the following conclusions: Nacelle c o n t o u r s provide a c c e p t a b l e aerodynamic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s f o r i n c o r p o r a t ion i n t o t h e E3 a i r c r a f t .

S e n s i t i v i t y Factors - Domestic Aircraft - E 3 Engine.

Table B-VI.

Base 1.161/1.269 453,652 80,158/35,254

-

ADOC ATOGW AFuel

( C/ASM) ( l b ) ( l b )

ASFC

+5% +0.021/+0.01~1~ + 8526 + 5114 6.38%

---

0 0 0 0

-5% -0.021/-0.0181% - 8337 - 4994 6.23%

AEngine Weight a t 40,000 lb/FN

+0.006/+0.052% + 5677 + 876 ---

+lo00 l b

---

0 0 0 0

-1000 l b -0.006/-0.052% - 5514 - 851 ---

AEngine Cost

+ $250K +0.021/+0.0181% NA NA

0 0

- $250K -0.021/-0.0181%

AEngine Maint .

+20% +0.023/+0.0190%

0 0

-20% -0.024/-0.0207%

Table B - V I I . S e n s i t i v i t y Factors - Intercontinental Aircraft - E3 Engine.

Base 1.290/1.299 624,577 205,221/81,504

-

ADOC ATOGW AFuel

( l b ) ( l b )

W A S M I

ASFC

+5% +0.042/+0.033% +254i9 +i6505 8.04%

---

0 0

0 0

-5 % -0.042/-0.033% -24321 -15732 7.67%

AEngine Weight a t 37,600 Ib/FN

+ 8952 + 2643 ---

+lo00 l b +0.009/+0.007%

0 0

0 0

- 8395 - 2476 ---

-1000 l b -0.009/-0.007%

AEngine Cost NA NA

+ $250K +O. 024

- $250K -0.025

AEngine Maint .

+20%

+O. 027

-20% -0.028

N h a , C .d M C

w

0 - - m - - I I

c 0 C 0 LT m

I 5 I

I 9 \c Er a Er c V a , P m E-c n n n n I n l e t geometry i s a c c e p t a b l e and is c o n s i s t e n t with o u r previous experience w i t h t h i s s i z e o f engine on t h e L-1011 commercial a i r c r a f t The engine mount system i s s t r u c t u r a l l y adequate and compatible w i t h pylon mounting t o t h e a i r c r a f t .

Evaluation of t h e mount system, w i t h r e s p e c t t o f a i l - s a f e c a p a b i l i t i e s , and t h e d e s i g n approach

n e c e s s a r y , are included i n Figure B-9

e Nacelle s t r u c t u r a l arrangement, s t r u c t u r a l m a t e r i a l s , and weight estimates made by General E l e c t r i c appear t o be r e a s o n a b l e and a c c e p t a b l e .

Use o f composite materials i n t h e n a c e l l e r e s u l t s i n a weight s a v i n g s o f aproximately 15 p e r c e n t as compared t o an a l l metal n a c e l l e . This estimate, s u p p l i e d by General Electric, is c o n s i s t e n t w i t h Lockheed's e f f o r t s f o r Advanced Acoustic Composite N a c e l l e s , N A S A Report CR 132649.

2.3.2 Nacelle - Wing I n t e r f e r e n c e

Figure B-5 d e p i c t s i n s t a l l a t i o n of t h e E3 engine t o t h e wing of t h e domestic a i r c r a f t . Pla'cement of t h e engine w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e wing i s con- s i s t e n t w i t h Lockheed experience on t h e L-1011 f o r e l i m i n a t i o n o r minimization of i n t e r f e r e n c e d r a g p e n a l t i e s . Aerodynamic assessments of t h i s i n s t a l l a t i o n i n d i c a t e no d r a g p e n a l t y imposed by wing/nacelle i n t e r f e r e n c e . Development t e s t i n g (wind t u n n e l t e s t s ) and t a i l o r i n g w i l l be r e q u i r e d p r i o r t o a c t u a l i n s t a l l a t i o n of t h e E3 mixed flow engine on t h e a i r c r a f t . For t h e a i r c r a f t performance a n a l y s i s , z e r o i n t e r f e r e n c e d r a g was used, which is compatible w i t h experience on t h e L-1011 commercial a i r c r a f t .

2.3.3 Accessory Location During t h i s s t u d y , v a r i o u s a i r c r a f t accessory l o c a t i o n s were c o n s i d e r e d .

Table B-X p r e s e n t s a q u a l i t a t i v e asessment of t h e advantages and disadvantages of each l o c a t i o n . Figure €3-10 d e p i c t s l o c a t i o n of a i r c r a f t a c c e s s o r i e s f o r t h e wing mounted engines i n t h e pylon. Locating t h e a i r c r a f t a c c e s s o r i e s i n t h e engine pylon is d e s i r a b l e f o r minimization of n a c e l l e d r a g and improved maintainability/reliability due t o t h e improved environment (lower temperature).

A t t e m p t s t o pylon mount a l l a c c e s s o r i e s (both engine and a i r c r a f t ) , f o r b e s t n a c e l l e aerodynamic shape, r e q u i r e s an i n c r e a s e i n pylon s i z e and probable Figure B - 1 1 d e p i c t s t h e o t h e r accessory adverse e f f e c t on i n t e r f e r e n c e d r a g .

l o c a t i o n s s u b j e c t e d t o d e s i g n l a y o u t s d u r i n g t h i s s t u d y . These d e s i g n l a y o u t s show t h a t a c c e s s o r i e s l o c a t e d i n t h e engine c o r e o r e x t e r n a l t o t h e f a n c a s e a r e p r a c t i c a l f o r t h e E3 engine. Since l o c a t i o n of engine and a i r c r a f t a c c e s s o r i e s w i l l u l t i m a t e l y depend on t h e d e s i r e s of t h e E3 engine u s e r , it i s important t o provide an e n g i n e h a c e l l e c o n f i g u r a t i o n which i s a d a p t a b l e t o t h e u s e r requirements. The E3 e n g i n e s , as configured, accomplishes t h i s g o a l . Accessories can be c o r e mounted, fan c a s e mounted, o r pylon mounted without r e q u i r i n g changes t o t h e b a s i c engine d e s i g n .

2.3.4 Access P r o v i s i o n s The E3 e n g i n e / n a c e l l e c o n f i g u r a t i o n s e l e c t e d a s t h e b a s e l i n e f o r t h e f l i g h t propulsion s y s t e m PDR uses c o r e mounted a c c e s s o r i e s (both engine and w i l l a i r c r a f t ) . This c o n f i g u r a t i o n r e q u i r e s a c c e s s t o t h e engine core which be provided by h i n g i n g t h e t h r u s t r e v e r s e r and i n t e r i o r ( c o r e ) cowl. I n t h e event t h a t pylon mounted a i r c r a f t a c c e s s o r i e s a r e incorporated i n f u t u r e Y k x o

P 0 3

n l-l

g

.4 U a , M m U

cm

a m m .4 . e . . .

e . . . e . e . . .

I m I m 1 m X 0 .rl P

k $

m a , a , M l-l a , m M k m U M aJ C U m C ?

.H a . e . . .

e . .

m a , 3;: .4 m U U & U C C U a , m c 3 t 4

m 3 2

n a ,

u 2 2

A

l-l a , k 2 C 3 a , 0 0 0 k l-l 0 a , 0 c?

W C h -4 al M G W m a , -4 k m U U m U U U C C a l C C C 3 3 0 1 3 3 0 0

8 2 : 2

;4" c

I4 U P) C C C k ICC 0 0 0 3 I4 r( 0 0 a 4 V V k h h h 0 c4 n i c4 k -4

-

Y

a

-\

i t

engines, access would be provided by removing t h e t o p of t h e pylon t o provide i s s u b j e c t e d t o aerodynamic ready a c c e s s t o components. Since t h e pylon s k i n loads o n l y , with t h e pylon s t r u c t u r a l arrangement shown i n Figure B-10, removal o f panels f o r a c c e s s can be accomplished with n o n - s t r u c t u r a l , quick t u r n type of f a s t e n e r s . A n a d d i t i o n a l work s t a n d s i m i l a r t o t h a t c u r r e n t l y r e q u i r e d f o r t h e c e n t e r engine on t h e L-1011 w i l l a l s o be r e q u i r e d f o r pylon mounted a c c e s s o r i e s .

2.3.5 Thrust Reverser Reverse t h r u s t i s provided by a set of cascades, l o c a t e d i n t h e engine f a n stream, which are uncovered by a t r a n s l a t i n g cowl d u r i n g t h e r e v e r s e t h r u s t o p e r a t i n g mode. Required l e v e l s of r e v e r s e t h r u s t f o r t h e E3 a i r c r a f t a r e a proximately 35 p e r c e n t of engine forward t h r u s t . As c u r r e n t l y s i z e d , t h e E 5 engine w i l l provide r e v e r s e t h r u s t s t a t i c e f f e c t i v e n e s s of 34 p e r c e n t of forward t h r u s t , which is s l i g h t l y l e s s than t h e CF6-50C w i t h both t h e f a n and t u r b i n e r e v e r s e r . The l e v e l of r e v e r s e t h r u s t estimated f o r t h e E3 engine i s considered a c c e p t a b l e f o r both t h e domestic and i n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l

Flow d i r e c t i v i t y of t h e t h r u s t r e v e r s e r is required' t o

a i r c r a f t d e s i g n s .

minimize impingement on t h e a i r c r a f t c o n t r o l s u r f a c e s and t o minimize, r e i n g e s t i o n i n t o t h e e n g i n e . A schematic of t h e expected flow d i r e c d i v i t y requirements i s shown i n Figure B-12.

2.3.6 Center Engine I n s t a l l a t i o n Primary concern f o r i n s t a l l a t i o n of t h e mixed flow n a c e l l e i n t h e c e n t e r engine l o c a t i o n i s t h e n a c e l l e o v e r a l l l e n g t h and t h e p o t e n t i a l e f f e c t on i n t e r f e r e n c e and p o s s i b l e scrape of t h e n a c e l l e d u r i n g t a k e o f f r o t a t i o n . For t h e domestic a i r c r a f t d e s i g n t h e E3 c e n t e r engine w a s l o c a t e d such t h a t ground c l e a r a n c e of t h e a f t end d u r i n g t a k e o f f r o t a t i o n w a s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e c u r r e n t L-1011 i n s t a l l a t i o n . Also, t h e "S" d u c t i n l e t c o n f i g u r a t i o n of t h e L-1011 was r e t a i n e d . As is t h e c a s e w i t h t h e wing engine i n s t a l l a t i o n , w i l l be r e q u i r e d f u t u r e aerodynamic development t e s t i n g and p o s s i b l e t a i l o r i n g t o minimize i n t e r f e r e n c e e f f e c t s . For t h i s study e f f o r t , z e r o i n t e r f e r e n c e d r a g p e n a l t y , which i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h L-1011 e x p e r i e n c e , w a s used for t h e c e n t e r engine i n s t a l l a t i o n .

2.3.7 Engine Bleed Requirements and Power E x t r a c t i o n For t h i s s t u d y e f f o r t , engine bleed and power e x t r a c t i o n requirements were included i n t h e engine performance d a t a s u p p l i e d by General E l e c t r i c , -

Estimates of t h e bleed and power e x t r a c t i o n requirements f o r a 500 passenger

a i r c r a f t f o r t h e e a r l y 1990's a r e : Bleed a i r - 9 l b l s e c f o r ECS and a n t i - i c i n g ( T o t a l f o r a l l e n g i n e s ) Power e x t r a c t i o n - 370 hp f o r h y d r a u l i c pumps and g e n e r a t o r ( T o t a l f o r a l l e n g i n e s ) 2.3.8 Engine F i r e P r o t e c t i o n Figure B-13 d e p i c t s t h e a p p l i c a b l e f i r e zones e s t a b l i s h e d by Lockheed f o r t h e E3 engine. The following c r i t e r i a was used t o e s t a b l i s h the E 3 engine f i r e p r o t e c t i o n c r i t e r i a : i : n

I \II I

F i r e P r e v e n t i o n : Compartmentation used for containment and t o

p r o v i d e maximum s e p a r a t i o n between combustibles and i g n i t i o n s o u r c e s .

F i r e p r o o f bulkheads should be provided i n t h e more c r i t i c a l areas.

Flameproof bulkheads should be provided i n t h e more c r i t i c a l areas

Flameproof b a r r i e r s are r e q u i r e d t o p r o t e c t primary s t r u c t u r e and e n g i n e s u p p o r t s t r u c t u r e . F i r e zones w i l l r e q u i r e v e n t i l a t i o n and overboard d r a i n s l o c a t e d a t low p o i n t s . V e n t i l a t i o n of t h e com-

p a r t m e n t s s h o u l d be a minimum o f t h r e e volume changes p e r minute

and c a n be provided by f a n a i r or ram a i r d u r i n g i n - f l i g h t con-

d i t i o n s .

F i r e d e t e c t i o n i s provided by a u d i o and v i s u a l F i r e D e t e c t i o n : i n d i c a t i o n a t t h e f l i g h t s t a t i o n f o r e n g i n e compartments as w e l l as t h e APU and main wheel w e l l s . T h e r m i s t o r t y p e , c o n t i n u o u s s e n s i n g e l e m e n t s are used as t h e s e n s o r s t o a c t i v a t e a p p r o p r i a t e warning i n d i c a t o r s on f l i g h t s t a t i o n c o n t r o l p a n e l s .

Each f i r e zone con- t a i n s i t s own s e n s o r s and c o n t r o l l o o p s .

F i r e E x t i n g u i s h i n g System: High r a t e o f d i s c h a r g e (HRD) system

is normally provided f o r e n g i n e a c c e s s o r y compartment and APU

compartment. On t h e L-1011 a i r c r a f t , t h e f i r e e x t i n g u i s h i n g material

is Bromo-trifluoromethane and two

f i r e e x t i n g u i s h e r b o t t l e s are

provided f o r each e n g i n e f i r e zone. B o t t l e s are o p e r a t e d ( d i s -

c h a r g e d ) from c o n t r o l s l o c a t e d i n t h e f l i g h t s t a t i o n .

2.4 PXRFORMANCE AND ECONOMIC COMPARISONS

The p r e v i o u s l y s t a t e d o b j e c t i v e s for t h e Energy E f f i c i e n t Engine Program w i t h r e g a r d s t o f u e l and o p e r a t i n g c o s t s a v i n g s are: Reduction i n s p e c i f i c f u e l consumption o f 12 p e r c e n t minimum.

0 Reduction i n d i r e c t o p e r a t i n g c o s t s o f 5 p e r c e n t minimum.

F i g u r e s B-14 and B-15 show t h e s a v i n g s i n block f u e l and DOC, of t h e

domestic and i n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l a i r c r a f t w i t h t h e E3 e n g i n e when compared t o t h e r e f e r e n c e a i r c r a f t ( C F 6 - 5 0 C e n g i n e ) . The r e s u l t s show s i g n i f i c a n t s a v i n g s f o r t h e E 3 e n g i n e as f o l l o w s : Figure B-16 d e p i c t s t h e advantages i n a i r c r a f t s i z e when t h e E3 engine is used. I n c o r p o r a t i o n of t h e energy e f f i c i e n t e n g i n e p r o v i d e s an a i r c r a f t d e s i g n , f o r l a r g e payload c a p a c i t y and long range c a p a b i l i t y , which i s well f a c i l i t i e s and a l s o p r o v i d e s s i g - w i t h i n t h e c a p a b i l i t i e s o f c u r r e n t a i r p o r t n i f i c a n t f u t u r e growth c a p a b i l i t y .

2 02 Y

c

d M

c

w i-l w d a M c rl

z

e n rl aJ r a rl m rl I

m

aJ k M 1-I k 4 w

a

309-9d3

I

305943 1 t I t 305-943

I

u, 2 04 309933 533 309-9d3

ON

N

I r

G

z

a W t 309-943 E3

I I

I 305-933

2 05 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The r e s u l t s of t h i s study, accomplished with t h e advanced technology, d i r e c t d r i v e , mixed flow E3 e n g i n e , with t h e d e s i g n and performance charac- t e r i s t i c s s u p p l i e d by General E l e c t r i c , show t h a t :

The NASA s p e c i f i e d oals f o r minimum f u e l and DOC s a v i n g s are

exceeded w i t h t h e E 5 engine

Nacelle aerodynamic and mechanical c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s are a c c e p t a b l e f o r a i r c r a f t i n s t a l l a t i o n I n s t a l l a t i o n of t h e mixed exhaust E 3 engine on both t h e domestic , e and i n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l a i r c r a f t appears f e a s i b l e without a p e n a l t y f o r i n t e r f e r e n c e drag Thrust c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e E3 engine are compatible with t h e 0

1990's commercial a i r c r a f t s e l e c t e d by Lockheed

I n c o r p o r a t i o n of t h e E3 engine r e s u l t s i n a i r c r a f t c o n f i g u r a t i o n s , s i z e d f o r long range and l a r g e payload c a p a c i t y , which a r e com- p a t i b l e w i t h e x i s t i n g a i r p o r t f a c i l i t i e s .

2 06 SUPPLEMENT A

Asset Computer P r i n t o u t - Domestic A i r c r a f t with E3 Engine

Asset Computer P r i n t o u t - I n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l A i r c r a f t w i t h E3 Engine 2 07

0 0 oi+% - 0 0 0 0

b

y1 0 0 * ~ 0 * * 0 o O c I * * O ? 0 I r o e * ? g ? ? ? g 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 2: O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r - 6

0 . a 0 0 0 0

* o o o o o o q o F O 0 0 0 . * . . * q o o o G & o ? ? . ~ ~ ~ c J ~ r) * 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 5 0 0 s o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ;9??oo3

0 0

4 o o o o o o q o

0 0 0 . * . . * ? O O O * * O ? 4a;Tyqo' * o o o o o 0

9 9

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 O O G O 0 0 0 0 0 * G O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 .O .

0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 o o o o o o q o 0 O O . . . . .

o o o ; ; 0 9 q;:??; - 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

d 3 9 3 0 0 4 0 0 0 O O O O O O q O

0 0 . . . * 0 3 o o o . * o o 0 . 0 0 0 .

. o o o o o 0 0 0 ; d 0 ; ; ; o

3 9

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a . O 0 0 0 0 0 * G O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 . e . 0 0 . 0 G 0 9 ? 3 ? ? 0 5 0 0 0 o o o . * c o q g o o o ?

0 . . O ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 9

0 0 O 0 c; 0 0 0 0 vl

0 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * G G O 0 0 0 o q o o * * O

9 O O O ~ O O O O 0 0 0 . e 0 0 Y)

O O . . . 0 0 9 0 0 0 * . 0 0 O * O O O . 0

. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . o * . . o > 3 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 o q u o < . O 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . . * O O 4 o o o o o o q o a ! O O . . . . . 0 . 0 0 0 . . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0

0 0 ; o ' 0 ; ; ; o

1 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 S ?

< 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 o q c o 0 b O 0 0 0 0 0 * G O O 0 00.

0 0 0 * 0 0 O Q U 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

g u m o o * * * * r ' . O O O O O 0

e .

c r * w 0 uz 0 0 (L 0 0 0 0 0 0 o q o o 0 0

c ' 3 5 9 o o c o o o q o

.CUI C o b . . . . c o o o . * o o O * O C O . 0 0 0 * O * b a O m a . 0 0 C 0 0 0

c . ?

. w U . 0 c 0 0 O G O I r + Q 0 0 .

0 0 0 0 0 0 e 5 0 0 4 YIUlY 0 4 . O 0 0 0 0 0 &qC;qO09 0 0 7 - u . Q O C O O O O O c (L LI b) O O . . . . .

9 o o o . * o q ?;yc.?d 0 0 0 0 o v x ; o o c o o d c, 0 0 0 0 0 .

0 e 7 d 3 UI Y i 2 0 0 a O O O C 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 . . C o c o o o . O O C 0

0 0 0 . . 0 0 . . o o c o o o o o

G O . . . . .

0 O O O . . O O O e O C O r 0

0 0 . . O . 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 0

. ? c 0 0 o d 6 O

I- 0 0 O O G O 0 0 O ? O O

. .c 0 0 0 0 0 . o c o 0 0

0 0 0 . * . 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4 o C C * * O ~ C33?\9; O O . . . . . . 0

. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c . .

0 0 o c o 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c o o 0 . O 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0

0 * . . O O 0 0 . 9 o o o o o o q o

eo.....

c 0 0 0 . * o q 0 . O t O . G

0 0 . O . . .o 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 c 0 0 O C C e .

0 0

0 . . C o c c , o c . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 . . .

c. 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .... * . 3 0 0 0 . s o 0 0 . 0 0 0 .

OC. o c . 0 .o 0

o c o c c c 0 C 0 0 O C O r c r - Y'

. . C

o o o o o m r - a , * ~i m N m 0 0 N e w m u r v i u u?

e l (r w - a U 4 - - w .

X - I e-

*.-

h 4 %

-

P u y1 Y) VI 0 I

8 4 8 0

* e

2" si u l

Y) L L L L c c u . Y

Y Y)

Ui 0 0 2 0

M . 0 . 5 0 0 -I

4 0 . a 0 0 - 0

e?

w o o - 0

0. -t '; a m

U N a- N Y) Y) c (.. t - r .a > I c Q n a ui t-0 W O W 6 0

L?

r 0 1 0 V I . 0

0 0 *

u

ui e* 0

u Q d u I u hr- h 0 \ O c !

z ?

tf;? + ? ?

d 0

"3 A N

c

U. 8

P m c UJ a a rr

* e

c

-

CL a u .

U * C I E O c 0

c K 3 0 . u u 9

. . o

mr- & e u O h , \ 0 13 - 0 u o 0 cr- u v)O V t - )I vi- rl LI c Y U,

Y 2

X U u l YI I v) c c .

C (L 4 t - a .c u a I L .

U a 0 0 c v ) . ?

4 - u

*

u1 F .

4b a

*

I U I 1 I I I I c .

hl

N I I f I I

I I I I v1 0 0 v) a I J .I z z Y c UJ I UA 4 C I L 7 7 4 4 c V.

W 3 I c a .r a .

3 lu J J U 8- LI c .I UA u a -1 VI v) c c 7 ar Q C u1 U d I

3 * UJ c, CI 3 O

> a P I- a U I 3 U 2 09

-

4 0 ?

a VI L ur 0 c U L c VI VI V U < P t l b 0 a a

!i a -I

-I

*

0, I 3 : c

UJ 0 2 3

P 3 t c Y \ , ..I IC 0 c 0 m Y \ t r- VI N VI W a a c Y , c F VI c.

\ ” . ..

r- I-0

9 m

8- n o D.

u- Y,

c i

I 0, m o . .d . . n o . . . .”, . ..

0 0 :-; - m * o 9 F - 0 C O O N m 0 0

WON^ 0 0 Q N X L .

9 1cu- n O r P. W v ) N m c

W c . - - N L I r

S Y, J J Y, U 4 P t 2 I .

..

r UI c v1 a- VI -1 LLI U y5

s. ? 4 %, 4

0 0 f

0 0 0 0 e e m n c c Q ' 0 0 n 0 9 0 0 N n H i n m .

0 0' d 0 0'

p ' 0 '

m 0,

2 F! g

* .

? 9 2

0 0 0 0, 0 2 m m CI P,

. * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * . . e

0 0 0 O O O O O O O d d O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 . . .

. . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

r ( m c. I .I m L .I .I I I " .. c .

- CI 0 0

0 0 0 0' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a I

i n n 0, : 0 m 2 .I N B N K 0 m L

N a 0 0 0 0 m m a 0 a 0 N a N 0 N

ii E 8 8 (Y N

N N 0 0 R N R 0 0

N

* * J N N N * * * N N

*

7 f 1 f 0

. 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p. (Y N

4 7 F, ?

. .

0 .I o * Q 0 0

c a N m Q G m m m 2 0 n

4 3 ? N, 3

. *

X 0 a N I LI 0

* v)

I n c1 m a s n . .

.

9 -.

0 0 c ul 0 .r I F c Q z N c . N f F c E. N - 4 C a L . .

\ .

0 0 ul ul 9 e E. Lh n- LI n Q h t ul w N " . . .

I 0 .

G IC .L 0 ul m 0 0 Q

4 r

e c F. LI c Q 0 0 \ 0 N c 9 d L )r c e VI Y) .

4 .

P c. rl 0 G c 0 9 c e - 4 CI -4 0 p. c 0 k m

0 N s

ul 5 c \ .

CI F I- e t 0 .c ul U c c s Lc, Q 1u f 9 0 ul ul cu r . 4 4 m 0 Lc, Lc, J U U e c .? U U .c U m r .

-. 0 0 0 c C.

0 8 m u 0 9 m a 3 (I: 0 0 0 0 0 0 C c . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

U * 0 0 0 C 0 0 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 8 0 C O C C O c I O G C O . I \ C ?

U C 0 c. G 0 c o c c o - 0 0 0 0 0 c- 0 0 0 n 0 r 5 ~ c , , c o - , 9 - o r, b 9 ID (c r P r U I N rn

-

F- F. 4

e c -

& a a c Ly Llu Ly W y1 W v) In 2 7 2 z C!X 1 -I VI W c -I W -1 w m u1 -I

m -. yl c Y) -

Y I VI -.

n o c) P Y lu U Ly U V U U u- a I U Y) U 3 Y) U v) 3 3 3 U r a a 3 U U d v. In Y y . U 0. Y v. U U (z a c rl U U p. n r a U a a n U U U ,.

8 & 8 'a

B 9 9 i 3 r5 $ t ? 4 ? ?

s

0 0 0 0 0 e 0 0 a' d 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 c Q (r 0 (P

(r 0 el n n (r p. * (L

0 e 0 N 9 P R Q t - 0 Q 9 .) 0

1E 3 m r-

w 0 - * n I n n n (L n

? c,

0 1

I

E d 2 6 d cf H 8 2

0 2 d 2 d 0

p '

i i ? 1 I

c) m

N 0 n c 0 * n 9

9 9 0 I

m LI & on

O 3 a N n 3 N N

R 0 0 .

0 9 3 . 8 . f * . 0 0 0 * Q,

0 0 0 9 m 0 0 m 0 6 p. 0 (D a a 0 r: OD

2 c) I I 5 - I m m ..I I m CI CI m c1

0 1 a . 0 0 0 0 0 * 4 b 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 .

a 0 . . 0 0 4 b 0 b . 0 . * 0 0 b *

CI c1 r U r. U I I CI L a

e; CI c1 0 e I a CI c

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c n n m 0, m 0, C c) .I M

0 n N Q , R iu N

m n rn m 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 N m 0

It

iu N 0 0 0 0 0 R hl R J R IC N N

4 N N N U N N * * N

4 *

? 'I ? 1 'I j .

. 0 . . * 0 . . * . . 0

0 0 . .

0 0 r; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d

L .

m n m Q L # m I W m m N

. 3 c; * ? . ? ? . : Q. P 2

.

I

0 0 - Q 0 9 9 0 a N - J n OD (I> 0 I- 9 0 m

1 LI n N -4 O N N m 0.

rr) N (c -4 n c .

0, 0, L

2 m r; P, hr N * 2 N N 2

N a c1

n 0 * n n 9 m

4 '? . . 5 3 9 * y: 5 9 9 4 c. 0 0 0 3 0

0 0 L m 0 N m 0 N m n n e 0 n 0 n n I Q N 2 8 P c .

..

d . . . . 0 . . . . b .

* 0 0 * .

0 0 n CI (1 0 0 0 r, f- m 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 n $ 0 0 OD c n CI 0 F 0 n 0 0 v\ Q f- 0 & c N 9 c1 0 rt -.

a c c nI nI c . N 4 c c r c r r . .

* . . 0 . . . .

n c.

C 0 0 n 9 0 m 0 n a r u- 0 0 C 0 Q OD 0 0 9 N

N r e m R a# f- n

0 t - 4 c J 0 L .

I 0 e . .

. . .

cy 0 9 c e 0 cy m F (F a, 0 0- Q 1c N 0 c m n n e m 0

0 I- U 0 0 n g 0. 0 0 n C d N m 0 9

f- 0 r rt N n 0. c F In a .I 0 w 0 Q 0 ul 0 v\ 0, d

2 c Q 0 0 0 IT, 0 c ? 0 0 - -4

n n n m in *I U U F c e. U m (r.

.I .r .t .f . . . .

. . c

c L.

0 0 9 N 0 0 0 n * N 0 - n 0 Q n N m *

(c w 0 f- L1 N N I- 0 r- I - 0 U 0 N r, U b c) OD c PI Q I- 5 n 9 Q -4 I % 0 N

2 r

c) N n f- N

. . . L

.

r- a a f- P .c r a - c c c r In 0

0 0. 0 9 n PI v\ c n n N N In 0 A YI ul v\ v\ a 6 4 n U m rt c, m PI F N

n OD c s E

c e. J r1 r- (9 rt a- r- 0 .r Y I 9 YI m F 0 c F A m m 0 0 0. m 0 I? 0 0 N 0 N 0 N h 9.

R N - 4 N c - c v\ - 4 N 2 ul 14 N

c w Q #l$ In c \ m F n Pl F L, r rn A c-l F P- el m pi rl c, m c n a N w c) Q 0 0 n ? * U. 0, c "> c v\ C 0.

0 0 8 I - I n 0 0 0 0 0 c 0 0 m 0 b (D 0 c 0 m e r- F f- m .f U m f- N PI U -3 2 9 f .

0 0 C G 0 G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C O 0 c 0 C 0 0 0 W 0 0 n 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 c 0 c G 0 C 0 0 I - 3 - 0 0 G C c 0 c 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 - * I - 0 C C C ) C c c 0 c y\ 0 0 C c 0 i l 'P 7 - u C

- c c

0 E 0 c t c 0 0 0 0 - * - 0 F.

4 In P I c r , ... 0, \I

P m 4 P I -1 d e e' t r u a U c t - u u . UI W (L u1 u l d W 2 z 2 W 2 I - V. W c 3 W -1 W e v) y1 -I VI c ir Y) e ul c W + v1 c .

-1 y.

E!P " - "

Ui c u . U: U n r U Ip r U v) u I n

a 4 , ? L M v) - I "

Ll. x a U 3 v U 3 9 3 U I3 3 YI " l W W (I 0 U W a -1 I y. U -1 (I Y. U 4 4 0

c n U .. -I U

e C c C a u U 0 V U U 0 u U V c + a m 9 s 2 c; N - 4 N m a tr a t N 4 a " n a + c H n c u -1 U 2 Y H I -1 Y o ! <

W S 2

u - 0 h U C

$

P I J .r I -1 . e W . e n c *

H " t *

1 0 I c n N 0 N O c - .

s ? 2

nn 4 n o U N 0 . ..

c Q . O 0 c N Q e 4

z

e CIN a Y U c .

h 4 00 c n n e m Q 0 -1 . o o o n n e 0 - 0 e.... .....

" ~ 0 0 0 m r n ~ 0 r 0 a Ly m e c a r a c u m u " 8 0 P

- V I

z

- 42

I * s c F BF z .I u c c r P Y .

P > a Y.

U w U 0 0 m I a * e ut t I m CI

CI f

g y - w CI

.r $ d

X 5

m

; r r

t; e

$ 5

I P t C l

*

...

< u t 1 c a VI a CI # 0 L

E

% I a e A I z u VI VI E c a

E t

'T: U I Y c) u

I *

8 % I I Q: t-z

* UJ * w

* I a s w x I V I * a w I I I I O I c 0 b 0 m I + + U (v e m 0 m u 0 z 0 c . l w 4 9 a) 9 0 c 9 1 r m V c m U m 2

E c -

0 1 a 0 m m ut . 5 . * . . . . .

0 w u W N m w m m - - I a 0 0 a N O * W N U L

w I

I a 1

w CI

0 0 m 0 * 9 O 0

> I

E m -

m m R

(F a ut OL

Z P i : c. U 6

0 ; * n 4 !i

m 0 N m N O a N r h r 0 I- ut n C I O 0 0 N c VI VI 0 0 0 V I 0 I z 0 a . * . . e .

\ e 0

d d 0 0 0 I 0 0 f G I 0

u o I U 0

ut 0 n t

U I > W P a

I E r

* W 0, K I CL V I ' UJ

z

$ I I a a a 0 u m x YI c3 I a UI a 2 7 w * t; 0 W I -I I t s a .

X I K c w 0 c U W w

E

c 2 U .

I z 0 OL UI 0 I r, I 0 m W a u1 OL c-

E 3 4 .( 8 c

I L.

a m a V K I L 4 K -1 U J a a UI 2 OL c) I .( t e > UJ n u I- m u (D I 0 d c.

I C t t c 0 VI e L1 t u 0 d U I 0 k Y I r u I C C I I I 0 e

9 5 5 Y 5 c: = . 0,: 5

P o o c r r o c c c o o - c (?

c'!

r I c I c u w 7 u Z a F ~ C . O O G ~ O q C . . . . . . . .

I a I- o v a IY 9 9 O O O C C O O C I > a 3 >

- rv ~ r h , (v - cu N c

r - C U I * C n I -I < I n c 9 c I U c > I W I c $

*

W I H I a u) t P I

E

I W u I I I .) I I I I I

0 I c m * )L N m 0

c ( c z t- N 0 U n c

00 I w 01 e N (E 0 Q

m 0 U U 0 0 N N N w 0 I a 0 N 'p.

a 9 b . ? .

UI

2 .*

I 0 0 9 0 a 0 I- L L (rr I e

z

0 2 0 Y) b m

a

I Yr Y)

s

2 *

W YI d (1

* c

a P

c * Y) ln ur

w z 0 > olno I L L z . . I w a c m w m a m U I U c m a - W 0 0 c c

* * * I C

LI * ..

z Y 4 4 I S a d

E

a 0 u I a a (0 c c . . 4 0 I

c LL * U

I I I c z I VI V : a u I a I c u e I .I C ' Z a

?????c.?4c.?

a&-( c I uoo$lu u o o ~ o c o a o o LIC a a 3 > I - * c Y VI

-

\ I U I c I C U . 0 w V I 0 0 0 c 0 0 c. 0 7 4 z a

I . . . . . . . . . . 0 - 4

9 u ? o o o c 0 0 0 0 O U

1 > a 5 ? cy N cy "r (u C A N

* e 0 0 0 0 0 e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o q o o u

'? o e o o e o q o 0 r o o * Q 0 Y

L)

0 0 . e a . . 2 000*.oq S $ q q i d 0

* o o o o o 0

0 0 4 3

a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o q o o a

? 4

O Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0

9 4

* I 0 0

e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o q o o .!22

0 e e 0 0 0 e 3 0 u c 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 q 9

e 0 0 . . . e *

9 0 0 0 . * O O O * 0 0 0 * 0

. 0 0 0 0 0 0 S ?

0 0 d ;o$go'O s a 0 0

0 0 r p .O 0 0 0 0 0 .eo0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c o o 5

3 o o o o o o q o 0 rn e e o 0 * . a 0

S O . . . . . 0 OJe..oO 0 * a 0 0 ?O'Y39S . 3 0 0 0 0 0 G O a .

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e o o o o u o S O G O 0 O O O U 0 0 O ? O "

4 o a o o o o o o 0 e s o 0 e

9 O O O . . 0 0

O?;;da'd d

0 0

c . ?

0 0 0 3 1 Q O ' 2 C c 0 - 1 3 0 0 * e n o o o o 0 0 3 0 o

. 0 * . 0 0 0 0 0

4 0 0 0 . 0 0 j 0 * o o o

a 0 a a 0 J C * a O Q O O 0 ? ?

0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 e 0 0 3 0 0 00.30 v o 5 0 0 . J O C ) 0 u 9 . J B 8 3 >

0 4 300..oq 30 0 . o o o . .a 0 .a

2 4 .

G J o r - o u a 3 4 0 0 0 0 .O e O o o O o o q o 0 3 * 8 0 a e . 1 0 a o v 0 v r , u 3 0 0 0 c Y 0 5 3 3 .a Y) ? 6 0 0 0 '-23.. 0 0.

.* * 0 \7 .3 0

G 3 3 0 I, 3 5 3 d I

-

X 2 c n A c n c Y

-

( 0

'?

C .

C O O N u1 et- a m m n o u G .

e 2 0 c -

E a

Y) L ' . J

50'

*

a r U 0 1 0 n .

t m > . - 4 1 d 0 .L.

Y ti- e..

i r m ma3 3.mB- x .v N Y I I .

.I 0 N 4. 4.

d

m - 0

* I L P 4 ...

n -4 n h . x - c 1 a * -

* - -

? ? ? 3 5 3 ? ? 4 4 ?

3%

O L O O O O O O O O O O O e m * . . . . . . . . .

o o o ~ ~ O ~ O O O O O O O . .

. .

c r . . 9 r * i Y r . J * -f .

c m -3 n P J

r. ? .-. m

z a a 'j . ? -. c

*

c CI 4 4

n c c. -

c a d . Y a .

- -9 .-.

'3 Y -J Y -J ** P ) .

c . -4 t n l h .Y .Y L c . .

.

. L

; a

+

3 f . % I- -.

-4 '4 T - 3 *. ?

a a 4 .

J r' a

m 9 * t r t * L.

I + I C UJ 2 .

7 d a a n 4 u x 0 J m r

Ivl -. -

0 U c) 'U

3 UA -I a A

Y 1 U c) 0 * .

m ?

? ? a: 3 ? 3 9 9 9

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 s o 0

m * r) CI

0 8

m m (I I f

8 3 3 R

0 a, e 3

G 0 I 0 i LI 0

9 3 I

n J a n

P 0 m c; 3

? 4 ?

0 0

0 d (L .. 9 r)

r. ! 2 f 2 I e a e e *

2 a

0 0 0 d 0 0 0

e . * .

e 0

d L) a r ) I a c -

a 0 0 0 e .

0 N Y I

z m m n 0 r

0 n 0, 0 J 0 N *) 0 N 0 0 N e N

* N N N * N *

. . * e *

0 Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 U I 9 Ml 4 ff 0 e . * ? .

n t 9 a s n n n a c r Q m a n 0 n 0 ff

n s *

IC c

n. ? . 4 . ? 2 9

a 0 m 0 0 Q 1 d ff 3 m .

.

a

3 J * -4 J a

?

n n

* *

f c * - 4 N . % v . . . . .

0 4 > > r ) a ' 3 0 3 G

Y z

a n ( 0 & .

? r . 4 c C - ?

3 v l . 4 .v N P e J

4 . -

c -

F a P d . n .-

. .

r- c a n Q 5

r- .- 0 a

r .i P i c 3 a (" d m n

-

" 8 Y i c

" -

n - .-

.

3 P a n . I . - c .n C Y 7

n Fi 4 a *

r.

7 * ? 4 v 0 4 L) c n Y Q a P a ?

0 7 3 U J 3 .

3 3 0 3 3 7 ?

%

; - ?

r: * L r

-

4 2 r Y ry c

A 'Y m -

A Y U y1 a U u 3 :: U 4 *> Jc U

x a

a n 4 2

2 ;t t

? ? ? 2 4

V 4 % a 0 0 n a m 0 0 rl

5 n n * 0 L1 rl

a CI " II 0 4 1 m 0 a

*

f

c

3 x

s

c J .( lnc H Y)

Y

* a sc H

8 UC 0 s

z

t 2 I I

a 3

* Y 4 Y) 4 L, H .z m c L n c n n .

N (Y I -a h) n r Y D r .) r C . . .

o m * I a " 4-4 ~ o ~ ~ a m o o a a I . . . . . . . . .

a 0 - 4 C 6 c) 0 a I ) 0

0 . a c 0 *

r P N rn

0"

I -.

r r a n c * I f J n J -1 0 4 n c c iJ

-

4 * E C f * 2 I * c c a

M Y

a

a * u P L I I a l m 1 n 0 m a 9 Q 0 c k 0

I- n 9

I n 3 5

: 4

c . ru I 0, 0 n I r) I 3 N n m 0 OI 9 6 w ui

-

I r u QI N . n a G P. X 0 I 0

'1 s

I 0 ¶ . Y I I V I I I

-

I - 4 I < I I I I u, t Ir Y)

P

a

f

a c U oc I I n 9 y1

m B a

Q ul

t r a

a c Y a u

5 e

.z W Y) J L y1

z X t

.

Y, m * YI 0 u Q c I u

-

n

* a

c s n U rl % i u U 0 I u

s 4 z

m m t *

I I

f

o t e 0 PD N ? I 0 1 N 0 .

- 1 rn I

P I f d. ..I a

m c n r . Y

I n 8 2 e + A a

0 0 (u c *.

- I T , O N

e . 4

r l v r 0 0 3 Y) I > 7: I - ' a 4

'3

x JJ > ' A L a a ..

f

I t ..

n e n P . Y I P

T c 3

LI

* v * 3

-. .

t ?

. j . 3

Ir I I a a r( r.

Y b I t t I I t c) I ¶ I Y

z

I a I SUPPLEMENT B

DIRECT OPERATING COST (COD) CALCULATIONS - E3 AIRCRAFT

were used i n c a l c u l a t i n g D i r e c t The following f a c t o r s and formulas Operating Cost (DOC) f o r t h e E3 a i r c r a f t .

A l l c o s t s a r e i n January 1976 d o l l a r s : 3-Engine Domestic 4-Engine I n t e r c o n t .

C r e w Cost $397 /blk-hr $476/blk-hr Fuel Cost Cost of Fuel $0.308/gal $0.387 /gal Cost of O i l $1.00/lb $l.QO/lb

Non Revenue F l y i n g Factor 1.0123 1 .a123

4%

Salvage Value (SV) 4%

L i f e 16 YRS 16 YRS

Insurance Rate ( I R ) 0.304% 0.304% Labor Rate (LR) $9.OO/hr $9.00/hr Maint. Burden F a c t o r (MBF) 2.23 2.23 Airframe Labor/Cycle (AFLC) 0.52 0.52 Airframe Labor/Flt-Hr (AFLH) 0.52 0.52

0.68

Airframe Matl/Cycle (AFMC) 0.68 Airframe Matl/Flt-Hr (AFMH) 0.68 0.68 Engine Labor/Cycle (ELC) 0.62 0.62 0.62 Engine Labor/Flt-Hr fELH) 0.62

Engine Matl/Cycle (ELC) 1.31 1.31

Engine Matl/Flt-Hr CEMH) 1.31 1.31

n rl .rl W X U cl e

0 3

u

X ln m PI d I3 U

c

0 W aJ X a Q

k u w

X k L) e k ‘rl

x 4

.rl W bo E 0 W W

+

n II II II 1 1 II I1 II I1 II I1 II I1 I 1 II II I1 II I1 n U tr U U e rl aJ k

APPENDIX C Appendix C i s a reproduction o f r e p o r t ACEE-15-FR-9735 A supplied by Douglas A i r c r a f t Company as t h e i r c o n t r i b u t i o n t o a i r c r a f t i n t e g r a t i o n .

The format and p r i n t i n g have been a l t e r e d t o c o o r d i n a t e with t h i s p u b l i c a t i o n .

A p r e l i m i n a r y r e p o r t w a s t h e instrument used by General E l e t r i c Company f o r a i r c r a f t i n t e g r a t i o n a n a l y s i s . The p r e l i m i n a r y r e p o r t extended through S e c t i o n 4 . 3 , t h e f i n a l complete report is presented h e r e .

SEPTEMBER 1979 FINAL REPORT ON STUDY TRANSPORTS POWERED BY G.E. ENERGY EFFICIENT ENGINES GENERAL E t ECTR i C PURCHASE 0 R D E R 200-4XX- 14N44386 DOUGLAS AIRCRAFT COMPANY M C U O N N E L L DOUGLAS CORPORATION FINAL REPORT ON STUDY TRANSPORTS POWERED BY G.E. ENERGY EFFICIENT ENGINES This f i n a l r e p o r t summarizes work done under General E l e c t r i c Purchase Order 200-4XX-14N44386 as p a r t of General E l e c t r i c ' s prime c o n t r a c t Energy E f f i c i e n t Engine (E3) Component Development and I n t e g r a t i o n Program with the NASA L e w i s Research Center.

This r e p o r t completes s u b m i t t a l o f f i n a l r e p o r t i n p u t s f o r Task 1, 2 and 3 i n compliance with t h e Task 4 Reporting requirements.

PREFACE This r e p o r t p r e s e n t s r e s u l t s o f a study conducted by t h e Douglas A i r c r a f t Company a s a s u b c o n t r a c t o r t o General E l e c t r i c t o i n v e s t i g a t e a p p l i c a t i o n s of engines based on u s e of NASA supported Energy E f f i c i e n t Engine (E3> Technology.

This work w a s done under Purchase Order 200-4XX-14N44386 as a p a r t of t h e General E l e c t r i c prime c o n t r a c t from t h e NASA L e w i s Research Center on Energy E f f i c i e n t Engine Component Development and I n t e g r a t i o n program.

The s t u d i e s r e p o r t e d h e r e i n were conducted t o i d e n t i f y commercial t r a n s p o r t a i r c r a f t which could p o s s i b l y u s e engines based on technology from t h e NASA sponsored E 3 program, provide d e s c r i p t i o n s and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of such a i r c r a f t and i n v e s t i g a t e a i r f r a m e / p r o p u l s i o n i n t e g r a t i o n .

The study r e s u l t s presented h e r e i n were conducted from May 1978 through August 1979.

APPENDIX C TABLE OF CONTENTS S e c t i o n

1 .o INTRODUCTION

2 . 0 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY FEATURES 238 2 . 1 Aerodynamics 238 2.1.1 Advanced Wing Design 238 2 . 1 . 2 Advanced High-Lift System 2 . 2 Materials 240 2 . 2 . 1 Advanced Composites 2 . 2 . 2 Metals 242 2 . 3 Systems 2 . 3 . 1 Longitudinal S t a b i l i t y Augmentation System (aLSAS) 242 2 . 3 . 2 Wing Load A l l e v i a t i o n 2 . 3 . 3 Other 243 3 . 0 AIRCRAFT DESCRIPTIONS 3.1 A i r c r a f t C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 3 . 2 D i r e c t Operating Costs 3 . 3 Drag 24 9 3 . 4 Weight 3 . 5 S e n s i t i v i t y F a c t o r s 3 . 6 Noise 3 . 7 Secondary Power 4 . 0 AIRFRAME/PROPULSION SYSTEM INTEGRATION 4 . 1 Nacelle Placement 4 . 2 Preliminary 1990 P r o p u l s i o n System Requirements 266 4 . 2 . 1 Maintenance 4 . 2 . 2 Thrust Reversers 266 4 . 2 . 3 Ozone 2 69 4 . 2 . 4 Bleed A i r C l e a n l i n e s s 269 4 . 2 . 5 Bleed P o r t Locations 4 . 2 . 6 Containment 270 4 . 3 I n s t a l l a t i o n S t u d i e s 270 4 . 3 . 1 F i n a l Study Configurations 281 4 . 3 . 1 . 1 Core Mounted Accessory Configuration 282 4 . 3 . 1 . 2 Fan Case Mounted Accessory Configuration 283 4 . 3 . 2 Maintenance Cost Comparison 283

APPENDIX C TABLE OF CONTENTS (Concluded) Sect ion \ 4.4 Regenerative Fuel Heat System Study 292 4.4.1 Design Philosophy 2 92 4.4.2 Aircraft Configuration Studied 295 4.4.3 Fuel Temperature Characteristics 2 95 4.4.3.1 Descent and Start o f Cruise 2 9 5 4.4.3.2 Regenerative System Operation a t C r u i se 295 4.4.3.3 Engine Throttliag E f f e c t s 2 95 4.4.4 Cruise SFC Savings Calculations 300 4.4.5 Regenerative Fuel Heat Study Conclusions 3 01

APPENDIX C LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS F i g u r e Page e-1.

Energy E f f i c i e n t T r a n s p o r t . 236 C-2. A i r c r a f t Design Concept.

c-3.

Advanced F e a t u r e s - Aerodynamics 239

C-4. Advanced F e a t u r e s - Materials.

c-5. Domestic A i r c r a f t .

C-6. C o m p r e s s i b i l i t y Drag Rise C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .

c-7 S g h - L i f t P o l a r s Gear-Up.

C-8.

A i r c r a f t Compressor Bleed Air Required.

c-9. NacelleIWing R e l a t i o n s h i p .

C-10.

DAC Layouts f o r GE E 3 Study. 271

e-11. Study Layout f o r GE E3 Engine Wing I n s t a l l a t i o n . 273

6-12. Study Layout f o r GE E3 Engine Wing I n s t a l l a t i o n Aft of Wing.

C-13. Study Layout f o r GE E3 Engine I n s t a l l a t i o n , Fan Case- b u n t e d A c c e s s o r i e s . 275 C-14. Study Layout f o r GE E3 Engine I n s t a l l a t i o n , Core-Uounted A c c e s s o r i e s , 0% Chord Exhaust P o s i t i o n . 276.

C-15. Study Layout f o r GE E3 Engine I n s t a l l a t i o n , Fan Case- h u n t e d A c c e s s o r i e s , 0% Chord Exhaust P o s i t i o n .

C-16.

Study Layout f o r GE E3 Engine I n s t a l l a t i o n , Core-Mounted Accessories, 15% Chord Exhaust P o s i t i o n .

C-17. Study Layout f o r GE E3 Engine I n s t a l l a t i o n , Core-Mounted Accessories, 105-Inch-Diameter Nacelle.

C-18.

Study Layout f o r GE E3 Engine I n s t a l l a t i o n , Fan Case- b u n t e d A c c e s s o r i e s , 102-Inch-Diameter Nacelle.

c-19. O v e r a l l F u e l Heating System Schematic. 293 c-20. P r e l i m i n a r y Fuel Heating System Schematic. 294 c-21. 296 FuelIEngine O i l Temperature P r o f i l e .

c-22. E f f e c t o f T h r o t t l i n g Back on Fuel Flow.

C-23. E f f e c t o f T h r o t t l i n g Back on Fuel Temperature. 299

APPENDIX C LIST OF TABLES Table Page

c-I . A i r c r a f t Design Requirements. 245

c-I I. A i r c r a f t C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . 2 46

c-I 11. D i r e c t Operating Costs T r a n s c o n t i n e n t a l Range Domestic

T r i j e t s .

c-IV * DAC DOC Method f o r GE E3 Study.

c-v A i r c r a f t Drag.

c-VI . A i r c r a f t Weight Breakdowns.

c-VI I. S e n s i t i v i t y F a c t o r s .

c-VIII. Airframe Generated Noise.

c-IX. Nonpropulsive Noise Study.

c-x. Accessory Gearbox Power Requirements . 263

c-XI . I n s t a l l a t i o n Elapsed T i m e Goals. 268

c-XII. Replacement Labor Study f o r Core-Mounted Engine Accessories. 284 c-XIII. Replacement Labor Study f o r Fan Core-Mounted Engine Accessories.

c-XIV Unscheduled Removals f o r Fan Case-Mounted Accessories Versus Core Mounted A c c e s s o r i e s .

c-xv *

Performance Summar f o r Regenerative Fuel Heating System on DAC Candidate E 4 Engine Transport.

1 . 0 INTRODUCTION This s t u d y is based on an a i r p l a n e which i s an advanced technology d e r i v a t i v e of t h e DC-10 as i l l u s t r a t e d i n Figure C-1. This s e l e c t i o n w a s a r r i v e d a t from a s o l i c i t a t i o n of t h e views of Douglas marketing and engi- n e e r i n g personnel on a l o g i c a l and l i k e l y new a i r f r a m e .

Taking i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n t r a f f i c growth f o r e c a s t s , a i r l i n e f l e e t compositions and technology develo ment a c t i v i t i e s , t h e l o g i c a l t r a n s t o u t i l i z e engines based on NASA Eg technology i n t h e e a r l y 1990 t i m e appeared t o be a i r c r a f t w i t h i n c r e a s e d s e a t i n g c a p a c i t y r e l a t i v e t o t h e DC-10 and d e s i g n emphasis on reduced f u d l consumption. The need t o minimize new development c o s t s r e s u l t e d i n t h e s e l e c t i o n o f s t r e t c h e d DC-lo's employ- ing advanced t e c h n o l o g i e s . A domestic v e r s i o n i n c o r p o r a t i n g a 65-foot f u s e - l a g e s t r e t c h with a wing area compatible with an i n t e r n a t i o n a l v e r s i o n w a s configured. This a i r c r a f t growth would follow an i n i t i a l s t r e t c h i n t h e e a r l y 1980's as i n d i c a t e d i n Figure 6-2.

. I 4 .r4 w w w h bo 23 6

I -

LL

a

a

U .I

a

m

* w

U a Q) U c V a l k M .i Eu Z a i n o z w u e m 2.0 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY FEATURES The s e l e c t i o n of advanced technology f e a t u r e s was based on r e s u l t s from r e c e n t s t u d i e s and on-going technology development programs i n c l u d i n g t h e N A S A A i r c r a f t Energy E f f i c i e n c y program a c t i v i t i e s on Composites and t h e Energy E f f i c i e n t T r a n s p o r t .

2.1 AERODYNAMICS Advancements i n aerodynamics provide a major improvement i n a i r c r a f t e f f i c i e n c y . Figure C-3 l i s t s t h e major elements.

2.1.1 Advanced Wing Design One of t h e prominent f e a t u r e s o f t h e advanced a i r p l a n e i s t h e new high a s p e c t r a t i o wing u s i n g s u p e r c r i t i c a l a i r f o i l s e c t i o n s and w i n g l e t s . Funda- m e n t a l l y , t h e s u p e r c r i t i c a l a i r f o i l g e n e r a t e s g r e a t e r amounts o f l i f t f o r a given t h i c k n e s s and d r a g than a conventional a i r f o i l . The d i s t i n g u i s h i n g geometric c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s are a s l i g h t l y b l u n t e r nose, a f l a t t e r upper s u r - f a c e a n d ' a hi$ghly cambered t h i n t r a i l i n g edge r e l a t i v e t o a conventional a i r f o i l .

The b e n e f i t s provided by t h e s u p e r c r i t i c a l a i r f o i l f o r wing d e s i g n can be u t i l i z e d i n s e v e r a l ways. From p u r e l y aerodynamic c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , t h e c r u i s e speed and l i f t i n g c a p a b i l i t y ( b u f f e t boundary) could be i n c r e a s e d f o r t h e same wing sweep and t h i c k n e s s . Because o f t h e emphasis on f u e l e f f i c i e n c y , t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f s u p e r c r i t i c a l a i r f o i l technology t o t h e E3 a i r c r a f t h a s been t o i n c r e a s e wing t h i c k n e s s w h i l e s t i l l a c h i e v i n g some b e n e f i t s i n b u f f e t boundary. The i n c r e a s e d wing t h i c k n e s s provides a s t r u c t u r a l weight advantage as w e l l as an i n c r e a s e i n t a k e o f f and landing C b a x . The i n c r e a s e d C h a x , improved b u f f e t boundary and weight r e d u c t i o n due t o t h e t h i c k n e s s i n c r e a s e , r e s u l t i n a r e d u c t i o n i n wing area (and t h u s f u r t h e r weight r e d u c t i o n ) . ' P a r t of t h i s weight r e d u c t i o n h a s been u t i l i z e d t o i n c r e a s e t h e wing a s p e c t r a t i o t o reduce induced d r a g . Winglets i n c o n j u n c t i o n with t h e moderately high wing a s p e c t r a t i o w i l l provide a l a r g e induced drag r e d u c t i o n without t h e e x c e s s i v e wing span and t h e consequent large a i r p o r t g a t e space r e q u i r e - ments t h a t r e s u l t from t h e use of v e r y high a s p e c t r a t i o s .

The wing d e s i g n i n c o r p o r a t e s a i r f o i l shape and t h i c k n e s s v a r i a t i o n s c r o s s t h e span t o c o u n t e r a c t wing-fuselage i n t e r f e r e n c e and o t h e r t h r e e - dimensional planform e f f e c t s and t o maintain as much of t h e two-dimensional drag-divergence Mach number c a p a b i l i t y of t h e advanced a i r f o i l s a s p o s s i b l e .

The wing t w i s t and t a p e r r a t i o are s e l e c t e d t o produce minimum induced d r a g , c o n s i d e r i n g the t r a d e o f f s i n wing weight and s t a l l i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .

NASA has done e x p l o r a t o r y development of t h e s e advanced a i r f o i l s i n c l u d i n g f l i g h t t e s t i n g on a n F-8 r e s e a r c h a i r p l a n e . Douglas has d e s i g n e d , developed and f l i g h t t e s t e d s u p e r c r i t i c a l a i r f o i l s on two d i f f e r e n t wings on t h e YC-15 A M S T prototype a i r c r a f t . R e s u l t s from r e c e n t Douglas/EET wind tunnel programs have s u b s t a n t i a t e d t h a t these advanced a i r f o i l s w i l l provide t h e d e s i r e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s f o r a high a s p e c t r a t i o wing a p p l i c a t i o n .

X

z

n z pe: W u w cr) cd I I

5 %

u F4 2 pe: Q)

W s

&.I cl Frr M

: u w

.A H I z Er, w

E

rn

pe: w 8

w -4 W

2 v3

c-7 u I W PI z 0 H

m E

u * * z, The w i n g l e t concept as w e l l a s t h e s u p e r c r i t i c a l wing were wind tunnel t e s t e d by D r . Whitcomb of N A S A Langley, and have been under s t u d y f o r a number of a i r c r a f t a p p l i c a t i o n s . A r e c e n t l y completed Douglas/EET t a s k generated a n optimized high a s p e c t r a t i o s u p e r c r i t i c a l wing which Considered t h e w i n g l e t as p a r t of t h e o r i g i n a l d e s i g n .

A j o i n t USAF/NASA program is c u r r e n t l y pursuing w i n g l e t i n s t a l l a t i o n on a KC-135A a i r c r a f t . I n prepar- a t i o n f o r t h i s a c t i v i t y , e x t e n s i v e wind tunnel t e s t i n g a t c r u i s e speed and low-speed h i g h - l i f t c o n d i t i o n s has been conducted.

A w i n g l e t development program f o r p o t e n t i a l a p p l i c a t i o n t o t h e Douglas DC-10 i s c u r r e n t l y a c t i v e . The w i n g l e t d e s i g n has taken i n t o account t h e experimental r e s u l t s of D r . Whitcomb. This d e s i g n , i n v a r i o u s forms accord- ing t o t h e s p e c i f i c model o f DC-10, w a s s u c c e s s f u l l y wind t u n n e l t e s t e d a t c r u i s e speed i n t h e N A S A Langley e i g h t - f o o t wind t u n n e l i n 1978 as p a r t of t h e N A S A ACEE program, and demonstrated t h e performance p o t e n t i a l compared t o wing t i p e x t e n s i o n s . The program w i l l c o n t i n u e development through 1979 i n t h e low-speed h i g h - l i f t regime and w i l l e v a l u a t e t h e s t a b i l i t y and con- t r o l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Other concurrent work a t Douglas i s i n v e s t i g a t i n g t h e s t r u c t u r a l and o t h e r f a c e t s of t h e w i n g l e t i n s t a l l a t i o n . Continuation of on-going e f f o r t s forms t h e b a s i s f o r t h e advanced wing design i n t h e E3 a i r p l a n e s .

2 . 1 . 2 Advanced High-Lift System The high l i f t system f e a c u r e s two-segment t r a i l i n g edge f l a p s i n con- j u n c t i o n with a v a r i a b l e camber Keueger l e a d i n g edge. The two-segment f l a p provides high e x t e n s i o n c a p a b i l i t y and t h e l a r g e chord forward segment and smaller chord a u x i l i a r y f l a p provide an optimum camber d i s t r i b u t i o n . The f l a p i s continuous from t h e s i d e of t h e f u s e l a g e t o 80 p e r c e n t of t h e wing span, avoiding t h e high-speed ( i n b o a r d ) a i l e r o n c u t o u t and t h e a s s o c i a t e d l o s s of l i f t and i n c r e a s e i n d r a g . The f u l l - s p a n l e a d i n g edge Krueger f l a p w i l l a l l o w f o r t a i l o r i n g t o provide good s t a l l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and c o n t r o l s t a l l p r o g r e s s i n a c r o s s t h e span.

This h i g h - l i f t system design w i l l provide e x c e l l e n t C L ~ ~ ~ c a p a b i l i t y and very high l i f t - t o - d r a g r a t i o s allowing t h e u s e of small wing a r e a and engine t h r u s t s i z e . Maximum f l a p d e f l e c t i o n i s l i m i t e d t o 30 degrees t o reduce approach n o i s e by minimizing both approach t h r u s t and a i r f r a m e gener- a t e d n o i s e . An a d d i t i o n a l b e n e f i t i s reduced f u e l consumption.

Development work on t h i s h i g h - l i f t s y s t e m design i s proceeding, l e a d i n g t o a p p l i c a t i o n i n t h e next g e n e r a t i o n Douglas t r a n s p o r t a i r c r a f t . Extensive two dimensional wind tunnel t e s t i n g and a n a l y t i c a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n s t u d i e s have been conducted - i n t h e l a s t few y e a r s . An e x t e n s i v e wind tunnel program which a s p a r t of t h e Douglas/EET e f f o r t was r e c e n t l y completed using a f u l l span high a s p e c t r a t i o s u p e r c r i t i c a l wing with s e v e r a l combinations of high 1 i f t s y s t em.

2 . 2 MATE RIALS Material improvements expected a r e shown i n Figure C - 4 . Improvements i n metal a l l o y s and s t r u c t u r e f a b r i c a t i o n techniques a s well a s t h e major use o f advanced composites a r e v i s u a l i z e d . The a p p l i c a t i o n of advanced composites t o primary s t r u c t u r e i s dependent on major technology development sponsored by NASA.

m rn w cl a a , C m

w s

a

3 3

m rr: Cll tr, 2.2.1 Advanced Composites Major advanced composite technology development a c t i v i t i e s have been underway f o r s e v e r a l y e a r s . Douglas composite programs, w i t h major funding support from NASA, are l e a d i n g t o widespread a p p l i c a t i o n o f composites i n f u t u r e t r a n s p o r t a i r c r a f t . Current NASA sponsored advanced composite programs a t Douglas i n c l u d e development of t h e DC-10 r u d d e r , v e r t i c a l t a i l and a wing s t u d y .

Expected a p p l i c a t i o n areas f o r composite materials i n t h e n e x t g e n e r a t i o n o f t r a n s p o r t a i r c r a f t i n c l u d e c o n t r o l s u r f a c e s , f l o o r beams, f a i r i n g s , l a n d i n g g e a r doors and carbon b r a k e s . I f emphasis i s placed on continued composite technology development, by t h e e a r l y 1 9 9 0 ' ~ ~ d e s i g n , f a b r i c a t i o n and r e p a i r techniques should have advanced t o t h e p o i n t t h a t a p p l i c a t i o n areas may be expanded t o i n c l u d e wing and empennage primary s t r u c t u r e . Use o f composites i n primary s t r u c t u e s f o r t h e E3 s t u d y a i r c r a f t i s assumed. The f u s e l a g e p r e s s u r e s h e l l w i l l s t i l l be o f metal c o n s t r u c t i o n and w i l l n o t have changed n o t i c e a b l y from c u r r e n t DC-10 d e s i g n s e x c e p t f o r t h e i n c r e a s e d use o f bonded metal s t r u c t u r e and improved a l l o y s . Composite advantages i n c l u d e s i g n i f i - c a n t s t r u c t u r a l weight r e d u c t i o n , and w i t h t h e f a l l i n g p r i c e o f composite materials r e l a t i v e t o metals, minimum p r i c e e s c a l a t i o n due t o i n f l a t i o n .

2 . 2 . 2 Metals Improved a l l o y s are expected as w e l l as t h e use o f bonded s t r u c t u r e s r e s u l t i n g from t h e PABST program p r e s e n t l y being conducted under A i r Force sponsorship.

The forward f u s e l a g e s e c t i o n o f a C-15 a i r f r a m e has been f a b r i c a t e d u s i n g bonded s t r u c t u r e and t e s t i n g h a s been underway.

2.3 SYSTEMS 2 . 3 . 1 Longitudinal S t a b i l i t y Augmentation System (CLLSAS) The proposed E3 a i r c r a f t c o n f i g u r a t i o n s i n c l u d e a s t a t i c s t a b i l i t y augmentation system t h a t allows o p e r a t i o n a t a center-of-gravity range a f t of t h a t o f an unaugmented a i r c r a f t . The CLLSAS system p r o v i d e s angle-of-attack s t a b i l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s similar t o those o f t h e DC-10. The more a f t c e n t e r - of-gravity l o c a t i o n reduces t h e aerodnamic balancing down load c a r r i e d by t h e h o r i z o n t a l t a i l . T h i s r e s u l t s i n lower t r i m d r a g and a weight s a v i n g s due t o t h e smaller h o r i z o n t a l t a i l and wing r e q u i r e d . The aLSAS system provides p o s i t i v e s t a b i l i t y f o r a l l f l i g h t c o n d i t i o n s , ensuring t h e proper f e e l f o r c o n t r o l column motions and f o r c e s r e q u i r e d f o r manuevering t h e a i r c r a f t . The system employs p i t c h r a t e , p i t c h a t t i t u d e and normal a c c e l - e r a t i o n as feedback parameters t o independent augmentation computers which provide c o n t r o l i n p u t s i n s e r i e s w i t h p i l o t commands t o t h e f o u r e l e v a t o r segments and t h e h o r i z o n t a l s t a b i l i z e r .

I n o r d e r t o e x p l o r e thoroughly t h e requirements and i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s of a i r c r a f t c o n f i g u r a t i o n , f l y i n g q u a l i t i e s , s a f e t y and r e l i a b i l i t y , c o n t r o l s y s t e m d e s i g n and economics, Douglas has embarked on a study u t i l i z i n g an advanced d e r i v a t i v e of t h e DC-10 t r a n s p o r t . A s u b s t a n t i a l p o r t i o n of t h i s t a s k i s proceeding under t h e ACEE program. During 1977 an e x t e n s i v e p i l o t e d s i m u l a t i o n , t o e x p l o r e a i r c r a f t f l y i n g q u a l i t i e s on the Douglas s i x - d e g r e e of motion s i m u l a t o r , w a s conducted. This s t u d y w a s expanded i n 1978 t o include t h e e f f e c t of c o n t r o l system c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n c l u d i n g f a i l u r e c a s e s and t r a n s i e n t phenomena.

2 . 3 . 2 Wing Load A 1 l e v i a t i o n The use of c o n t r o l s u r f a c e movement t o r e g u l a t e t h e n e t load and i t s d i s t r i b u t i o n on t h e wing s t r u c t u r e can be used t o reduce bending moments and t h e r e f o r e reduce weight.

A n a d d i t i o n a l advantage i s t h a t r i d e q u a l i t y w i l l be improved. P r i n c i - p a l l y , t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e s e f u n c t i o n s w i l l be a p p l i e d t o t h e c o n t r o l of manuever loads and g u s t l o a d s .

The u s e of a c t i v e systems f o r f l u t t e r s u p p r e s s i o n , which a l t e r s t h e apparent mass o r s t i f f n e s s , o r aerodynamic damping, i s expected t o be employed t o provide a p p r o p r i a t e f l u t t e r speed margins. Even i n t h e extremely u n l i k e l y event of complete system f a i l u r e , t h e a i r c r a f t w i l l not be f l u t t e r c r i t i c a l w i t h i n t h e normal o p e r a t i n g envelope.

The use of c o n t r o l d e v i c e s t o l i m i t load i s n o t uncommon. However, t h e f u l l a p p l i c a t i o n of wing load a l l e v i a t i o n i n a t r a n s p o r t a i r c r a f t i n v o l v e s c a r e f u l c o n s i d e r a t i o n n o t only of t h e t e c h n i c a l f a c t o r s , but a l s o t h e regu- l a t o r y requirements and o p e r a t i n g f a c t o r s such as d i s p a t c h r e l i a b i l i t y .

Advanced techniques t o improve t h e d e s i g n p r o c e s s e s are under development, f o r example, by NASA i n t h e ACEE program. In t h i s program, l a r g e - s c a l e drones, u s i n g a h i g h a s p e c t r a t i o s u p e r c r i t i c a l wing with a c t i v e c o n t r o l s , w i l l be t e s t e d t o c o r r e l a t e d e s i g n techniques. A number of o t h e r a p p l i c a - t i o n s a r e a l s o under s t u d y o r development. I n t h e t r a n s p o r t f i e l d , a s i g - n i f i c a n t i n t e r e s t h a s developed i n t o a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r c u r r e n t t r a n s p o r J s o r t h e i r d e r i v a t i v e s . The Lockhead L-1011 experimental development, conducted p a r t l y under t h e ACEE program, i s now f l y i n g . A t Douglas, d e s i g n i s pro- ceeding f o r a s y s t e m r e l a t e d t o t h e DC-10. i s a l s o A c t i v i t y i n t h i s f i e l d t o be pursured i n combination w i t h t h e ACEE program.

2.3..3 Other Improvements i n o t h e r a i r c r a f t systems a r e expected. Some of t h e s e a r e :

e D i g i t a l a v i o n i c s - reduced weight and improved r e l i a b i l i t y and

capab i 1 i t y .

F l i g h t performance management - reduced a i r c r a f t o p e r a t i o n a l f u e l

consumption.

e A i r c o n d i t i o n i n g - reduced engine bleed requirements.

0 APU - reduced weight and f u e l consumption.

e Advanced c o c k p i t d i s p l a y s - reduced weight and improved performance.

I These improvements, r e l a t i v e t o c u r r e n t a i r c r a f t systems, can be i n c o r - porated i n t o f u t u r e a i r c r a f t d e s i g n s and a r e assumed t o be u t i l i z e d i n t h e E3 a i r c r a f t .

3 . 0 AIRCRAFT DESCRIPTIONS Using t h e advanced t e c h n o l o g i e s d e s c r i b e d with r e s u l t s from on-going s t u d i e s and technology development programs, a i r c r a f t s i z i n g s t u d i e s were conducted u s i n g Douglas computer programs. The d e s i g n requirements f o r t h e a i r c r a f t i n c l u d e t h e s e l e c t i o n of a common wing s i z e t o s a t i s f y t h e needs o f both a domestic t r a n s c o n t i n e n t a l and i n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l range v e r s i o n . The requirements shown on Table C-I are based t o a g r e a t e x t e n t on t h e DC-10-10 t r a n s c o n t i n e n t a l and t h e DC-10-30 i n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l range a i r c r a f t . Design c r u i s e Mach number w a s reduced from t h e DC-10 l e v e l s t o reduce f u e l consump- t i o n . The domestic a i r c r a f t i s shown i n Figure C-5. An i n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l range v e r s i o n would r e q u i r e a d d i t i o n a l t h r u s t and a four-wheel c e n t e r l i n e main l a n d i n g g e a r assembly t o accommodate t h e h i g h e r g r o s s weight.

3 . 1 AIRCRAFT CHARACTERISTICS The a i r c r a f t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s are shown i n Table C - I 1 compared t o t h o s e which would r e s u l t from t h e use of s c a l e d CF6 e n g i n e s . The a i r c r a f t i n c o r - p o r a t e s a DC-10 f u s e l a g e s t r e t c h e d 65 f e e t , a new h i g h a s p e c t r a t i o wing w i t h s u p e r c r i t i c a l a i r f o i l s and w i n g l e t s , a new empennage and advanced a i r c r a f t systems. The b a s i c mixed c l a s s s e a t i n g c a p a c i t y i s 458 passengers i n t h e domestic v e r s i o n with lower deck g a l l e y . Oversize c a r g o doors permit t h e accommodation o f p a l l e t s i n b o t h t h e forward and c e n t e r cargo compart- ments. The a f t bulk cargo compartment i s t h e same s i z e a s i n t h e DC-10-30.

The f l i g h t crew c o n s i s t s of a t h r e e man c o c k p i t crew and 15 c a b i n a t t e n d a n t s .

The wing area w a s set by t h e requirement f o r a 31,000 f o o t i n i t i a l c r u i s e a l t i t u d e c a p a b i l i t y f o r an i n t e r c o n t i n e n t a l range v e r s i o n . The wing d e s i g n i n c o r p o r a t e s t h e r e s u l t s of t h e l a t e s t wind t u n n e l tests and a n a l y t i c a l s t u d i e s . L a t e r a l c o n t r o l i s provided by s p o i l e r s and t h e a l l - s p e e d outboard a i l e g o n . This allows t h e f l a p t o extend from t h e s i d e of t h e body t o 80 p e r c e n t span without i n t e r r u p t i o n , and with t h e l i m i t e d f l a p d e f l e c t i o n o f 30 d e g r e e s , r e s u l t s i n lower r e q u i r e d t h r u s t l e v e l s and less n o i s e . Wing load a l l e v i a t i o n c o n s i s t i n g of maneuver and g u s t load a l l e v i a t i o n i s used t o reduce wing weight.

Horizontal t a i l a s p e c t r a t i o h a s been i n c r e a s e d compared t o t h e c u r r e n t DC-10 t o reduce t r i m d r a g .

The wing, h o r i z o n t a l t a i l and v e r t i c a l t a i l u t i l i z e composites i n p r i - mary and secondary s t r u c t u r e s t o minimize weight.

study engine was set by t h e t h r u s t The s c a l e d t h r u s t s i z e of t h e G . E .

l i m i t e d i n i t i a l c r u i s e a l t i t u d e requirement of 33,000 f t . The r e s u l t i n g t a k e o f f f i e l d l e n g t h i s 7400 f t . compared t o t h e requirement of not t o ex- ceed 8000 f t . , i n d i c a t i n g a r e a s o n a b l e match between a i r f r a m e and engine c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .

3 . 2 DIRECT OPERATING COST The d i r e c t o p e r a t i n g c o s t f o r tho advanced a i r p l a n e was determined using engine c o s t s supplied by G . E . For comparative purposes, t h e d i r e c t o p e r a t i n g c o s t was a l s o determined f o r t h e same a i r f r a m e technology b u t 0 0 0 0 m m m o c o o d e m - 0 I

- 0 -

vr 4 d m m m m W I U 0) cr w rl 0 n C 3 P a 4 W

d 2 2

a z

H W S - m

c;la

2 0

W a z m n H W m a

z

c I4 z W U

4z

c a H c r W

z -

x, z W

I '

Table C - 1 1 .

GE E3 A i r c r a f t C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s Domestic T r a n s c o n t i n e n t a l Range Engine Scaled CF6-50C Advanced Mixed Class S e a t s 458 45 8

, 000

Design Range (Nautical M i l e s ) 3 3 , 000

Engine Thrust Size (LB/Engine) 44 630 41 , 360

Adjusted Wing Area (SQ FT) 5,190 4,680 Weights:

Maximum Takeoff (LB) 539,000 499 , 000

Maximum Landing (LB) 475,000 459,000 O p e r a t o r ' s Empty (LB) 303 240 289,950 Performance : Cruise Mach Number 0.80 0.80

Takeoff F i e l d Length, MTOGW, SL 6 , 900 7 , 400

8 4 O ~(FT) Approach Speeds, 120 124

Passengers, Bags , Reserves

(KEAS Thrust Limited I n i t i a l Cruise 33 000

33 , 000

A l t i t u d e (FT)

Buffet Limited I n i t i a l Cruise 3 7 , l C O 36 , 500

A l t i t u d e (FT) Fuel Burned A t Design Range (LB) 123,060 98,650 (100% Passenger Load F a c t o r )

Typical Stage Length ( N a u t i c a l 2 , 000 1 , 000

Miles) Fuel Burned A t Typical Range (LB) 39,940 32,630 (60% Passenger

} Load F a c t o r s )

(30% Cargo e ' * e s c a l e d CF6 e n g i n e s . The comparison i s shown i n Table C - I 1 1 and t h e DOC c a l c u l a t i o n method i n Table C-IV.

The a i r p l a n e parasite and induced drag a r e shown i n Table C-V. Nacelle d r a g i s included i n t h e engine d a t a . The c o m p r e s s i b i l i t y d r a g increment i s shown i n Figure C-6. The t a k e o f f and landing d r a g p o l a r s a r e presented i n Figure C-7.

3.4 WEIGHT Airframe weight breakdowns are shown i n Table C-VI. The weights are based on technology advancements i n c l u d i n g t h e widespread use of advanced composites.

3.5 SENSITIVITY FACTORS S e n s i t i v i t y f a c t o r s were generated and are shown i n Table C - V I I . These f a c t o r s provide a means t o assess t h e impact of p e r t u r b a t i o n s i n s p e c i f i c f u e l consumption, engine weight and n a c e l l e d r a g on a i r c r a f t weights, e n g i n e s i z e , and f u e l burned f o r t h e s t u d y missions.

3.6 NOISE The a i r f r a m e o r non-propulsive n o i s e with f l i g h t c o n d i t i o n s and engine power s e t t i n g s a t t h e FAR n o i s e measuring p o i n t s a r e shown i n Table C - V I I I .

Sound p r e s s u r e l e v e l s by frequency band and d i r e c t i o n a t t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s are shown i n Table C-IX.

3 . 7 SECONDARY POWER The secondary power requirements have been e s t i m a t e d and t h e mechanical power requirements are shown i n Table C-X. For h y d r a u l i c power, t h e t i m e average c r u i s e requirement i n s t i l l a i r (without t u r b u l e n c e ) i s 31 horse- power p e r engine. This i s based on h y d r a u l i c pumps i n average c o n d i t i o n with nominal a i r c r a f t h y d r a u l i c system leakage. The maximum o r s i z i n g requirement f o r h y d r a u l i c power i s f o r two pumps p e r engine o p e r a t i n g a t f i v e horsepower per engine i s r e q u i r e d f u l l c a p a c i t y . One hundred seventy f o r pumps t h a t have had c o n s i d e r a b l e usage.

The t i m e average accessory gearbox power r e q u i r e d by t h e g e n e r a t o r s is 75 horsepower p e r e n g i n e . This i s based on a survey made on power usage i n t h e DC-IO. The DC-10 average power usage was s c a l e d up t o provide f o r t h e i n c r e a s e i n number of passengers i n t h i s s t u d y . The maximum o r s i z i n g requirement i s 257 horsepower p e r engine.

The average pneumatic power r e q u i r e d i n t h e form of compressor bleed i s shown i n Figure C-8.

The maximum bleed case i s f o r one pneumatic s y s t e m o u t and an engine o u t , under i c i n g c o n d i t i o n s . For t h i s c a s e , a t a 15,000 f o o t hold c o n d i t i o n , i t i s estimated t h a t one engine must provide 0 . 7 pounds/second i n l e t cowl a n t i - i c e bleed with a temperature g r e a t e r than 500°F p l u s 5 pounds/second 0 0 PI OI vz C 0 00 . I 4 9 bo 0 co 9 m c w

*

*

I-

*

0 m m vz e N N m a , bo Q U C .rl U u C 0 0 4 0 0 9 C o VI 0 0 - I m - m m a

a m N a p 0

k * 4 rd k u .

E-c a * m a , rl U 0 0 4 m o o v z m 0 o m 0 m 4 c o N u bo C .A U m k a , a U u n aJ k z .I4 €0 n m

-

m W 4 W W W I u a , rl n rd h E-c a U VI u w rd Table C-IV. DAC DOC Method For GE E3 Study Direct o p e r a t i n g c o s t s f o r t h e GE domestic E3 a i r c r a f t a r e i n 1978 d o l l a r s and c o n s i s t of t h e following components: Cockpit Crew ( 3 man crew) TOW $ / f l i g h t = t b x (280 + 3 0 . 3 X

1ooooo )

t b = block t i m e ( h o u r s ) where: TOW = maximum t a k e o f f weight ( l b ) Airframe D e Drec ia t i o n (1-R) x CA x ( 1 + SA) x D/DA/P $ / f l i g h t where: R = r e s i d u a l v a l u e r a t i o = 0.10 CA = a i r c r a f t p r i c e less bare engine p r i c e (1978 $1 SA = a i r f r a m e s p a r e s r a t i o = 0.08 D = t r i p d i s t a n c e ( n a u t i c a l m i l e s ) DA = d e p r e c i a t i o n p e r i o d = 16 years P = annual p r o d u c t i v i t y = 1200000 n a u t i c a l m i l e s / y e a r Engine D e prec i a t i o n $ / f l i g h t = (1-R) x C e x N e x ( 1 + SEI x D/DA/P Ce = p r i c e of one b a r e engine (1978 $1 where: Ne = number of engines = 3 Se = engine s p a r e s r a t i o n = 0.25 Insurance $ / f l i g h t = I x (CA + Ne x Ce) x D/P where : I = annual insurance rate = 0.0075 Landing Fees $ / f l i g h t = L x TOW/1000 L = l a n d i n g f e e r a t e p e r 1000 l b of maximum t a k e o f f where: weight = 0.75 $/lo00 lb Fue 1

-

$ / f l i g h t = Cf x FB / 6.7 where : Cf = f u e l p r i c e = 0.50 $ / g a l l o n FB block f u e l Airframe Maintenance

X (WA - 240000.)]

$ / f l i g h t = t F X [162 X 334 X + 400 + 40 x x (WA - 240000.

t F = f l i g h t t i m e ( h r ) = t g - 0.167

where : WA = a i r f r a m e weight ( l b )

= manufacturer's empty weight - bare engine weight

Engine Maintenance

$ / f l i g h t = 223 x t~ XG f o r advanced engine

= 260 X t F X @ & for CF6-50C where: E , = engine t h r u s t s c a l e f a c t o r n m U N n U m 4 W 4 W 4 W 4 d a, m 4 hl 0 U ..

d

.j 2

M II m E *rl VI 3 co rA 0 a , 4 a II rl d c .rl P l a w .rl 0 m hl in 4 o \ a nf 0 h II

PGU

a 4 4 4: a . d LI W nf k k .rl ..

..

cd ..

M a , cd M

7 cd

E k

Gl a , U a .rl 9) u)

u

cd k a nf c H Q4 VI d U VI d k a , U c d k (d a , VI .I4 pc: M (d k n d m

8 8

2 54

t t

n =: k a

J

r n k (d pc U w rl G l I c M rl X h I u Q) k M .rl F 4 Table C-VI. Aircraft Weight Breakdowns Domestic Transcontinental Range Trijets Scaled CF6-50 Advanced Weights (lb) Engines Engines 6 1 , 2 6 0 55,250 Wing Horizontal Tail 4 , 9 8 0 4,250

2 , 320 1,990

Vertical Tail 6 2 , 7 2 0 61,950 Fuse1age

22,120 20 , 360

Landing Gear Propuision* 38,640 36,480 1,435 1 , 4 3 5 APU 2,240 2 , 1 3 0 Fuel System

10 , 540

Flight Controls and Hydraulic 1 1 , 8 8 0 System 1 , 7 5 0 Instruments 1 , 7 5 0

4,965 4 , 965

Air Conditioning and Pneumatics 6,460 6 , 4 6 0 Electrica 1 2,700 2,700 Avionics 53,290 53,290 Furnishings 730 6 5 0 Ice Protection 6Q Handling Gear 6 0 277,550 264,260 Manufacturer's Empty Weight 25,690 25,690 Operator's Items 303 , 240 289,950 Operator's Empty Weight *Includes lower vertical tail \ o m 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

+ +

9 - 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

+ +

w o w m m m 0 0 0 C l # - I d O O

+ + + .rl 0 + + + + +

M O O N O W O N u w In rr) 0 Eu In

v3 + cv \o 07

+ +

+

. d U E U c C M & C -4 M M .rl *d 0 Q) 0 80 0 C h

2 U *d

E U m

z C

W c M .A a 0 111 111 Q)

-

c 0 k p1 k 3 0 u U

m 5 w L)

a m m E

.d s" k

u X 4 0) m V 0

x 0 " n

IJ a a d a a a a a H Eu 3 4 O d m N o m + o m tn f- I l n h d O I- QI -4 U I- 0 I- 0 N OI

4 2 5

c?

n .rl M cn c Qt w a , n k M (A k h a , U

8 PI w

W w

0 ; u

v (A Q) a , 3 1 *I4 (A a k u .A ?i a ,

0 Q) i5

a , w a 4 n 0 (A c a w U U k 0 a , a M .A r-4 .rl w w Cll v

8 rl W U a a

-4 ..

.rl a k k D a I 0 u I -a V w a J E .4 a (A C k k h 3 r-l -4 * r l rl C 0 0 k Err H V 4 z H V UI n C C N H 0 ooc 0 ...

000 yr 1; d 0

k

e n .

a C L VI U .+ d m d

-

e 8 c N cl LL' d V e 0 . 0 z c) U m.?m -4 l r m r c , C 0 Q U! * L 0 K C z 0.4 U z c -J 0 n u 1 U 0 C U -I 0 v : 0 ' CL C o\ C e h d o - , E . ( c C .c .

t r o c 0 f i u .

C t c 3 oeo . . a CCCJ F' c eo0 ...

rccc d n i c c * N II 0 coo .

...

v) c ' coo 0 U J 0 0 4 =r c W c v: 0 Ni 0 .

< ...

i d C @ Q 6 C n L c \ d t a a .

I l n c S Z VI C L U O u1 .

a C 0 a . rn t - 4 u o n P

t r e u r d

a, w (v N 29.4 E: . U .

*rl N r n c - 0 c, M m z . E: N u d o N u b- .-I 1 .

v V I c d C

II -

h C l L O It P cr,cclA?

...

a . ......

IL' UI t - c) .

cr- 4-c

Z $

c (cr-;rc-d r z I W I p z a, *A L m .

4 .

k L a C' 8 2 .

C . - 3

L 2

r . c . 1 F a, rt 1..

P Z e .

C cn rF z c c .

U c

L

ir

-

c (r s .

V >

U' 2 I

c W C .

N 0 II 000 0 ...

oco lr C ri: c = a a & 0?4C 0 . . ...

r t c z o=o cv m u uuu I 2 uurp ...

U! .

UOQ b . c o U e m 3 m c V d u a .

n w o P N z r r

s

c : .rl c, . . a -NO .

u-lncn v C If II U cc- . a . '3 c CJT!

L u G F- P. a 2 h -' c c c c c .

8 . 0 c5c- c c 90b e . .

c - l mC?m c 3 c LL a n J L L C .

c z u a c 4L . ?

m

1 8

u , C z 0 n c* 3 .

a (r!

t w o a, m N a N z . 4 'f

. U

v - c u bin E: d y r 2 .

N N U A O u

. I- 4

w V C t . 4 C c II C L L C II .

a U' c 0 . L z , z s t d

. + 0, . +

...

.c 4- . ?

r-fir- a, * * F- O k - 0 C .

U L L O Ec . - I C , + c ?* zc?

.

...

ur u B-c 4JIJ.G r y ' E C .

k C P r i = .c LI H c P

-

d I?

3 e .

C .

C CII =!

a) C .rl '4 M M C

E

W \ \ X

E !

ln 14 m 4 N aJ a) C c .rl .rl M M c t : W W \ \

E2 E2

m CI) 14 W 0, 2 63 2 64 wing a n t i - i c e flow a t a temperature g r e a t e r t h a n 400°F p l u s 2 . 7 pounds/ second t o provide a i r t o d r i v e one a i r c o n d i t i o n i n g pack. The s i z i n g c a s e t h e r e f o r e r e q u i r e s a t o t a l of 8.4 pounds/second w i t h t h e engine a t 40 t o 60% of climb t h r u s t .

The above v a l u e s r e f l e c t p r e l i m i n a r y a n a l y s e s of a c u r r e n t test program t o reduce bleed flow requirements f o r wing a n t i - i c i n g .

F u r t h e r e v a l u a t i o n s may r e s u l t i n requirements t o r e v i s e t h e wing a n t i - i c i n g flow requirements. In- a d d i t i o n , p o t e n t i a l means t o reduce bleed flow requirements have been i d e n t i f i e d b u t s u f f i c i e n t work h a s n o t been done t o r e f l e c t t h e s e r e d u c t i o n s i n t h i s study.

4 . 0 AIRFRAME/PRO,PULSION SYSTEM INTEGRATION Preliminary propulsion system i n t e g r a t i o n requirements have been i n v e s t i - g a t e d . Study engine i n s t a l l a t i o n s provided by General E l e c t r i c have been reviewed; Douglas conducted n a c e l l e l a i r c r a f t i n t e g r a t i o n s t u d i e s and r e q u i r e - ments f o r engine i n s t a l l a t i o n i n t h e E3 s t u d y a i r c r a f t have been determined.

Results o f t h e s e s t u d i e s a r e r e p o r t e d below.

.

4.1 NACELLE PLACEMENT The nacelle/pylon/wing r e l a t i o n s h i p must be e s t a b l i s h e d t o minimize i n t e r f e r e n c e d r a g . Wind tunnel tests are r e q u i r e d t o e s t a b l i s h t h i s rela- t i o n s h i p . Such tests have been underway a s a p a r t of Douglas a c t i v i t i e s on t h e NASA Langley Energy E f f i c i e n t Transport Program. F u r t h e r development i s r e q u r i e b . Figure C-9 shows t h e c u r r e n t r e l a t i o n between n a c e l l e / pylon/wing r e f l e c t i n g t h e b e s t e s t i m a t e t o d a t e . T e s t r e s u l t s t o d a t e i n d i c a t e a more a f t l o c a t i o n would have e x c e s s i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e d r a g . F u r t h e r , s t u d i e s of shows a more a f t l o c a t i o n t h e flow e f f l u x p a t t e r n d u r i n g r e v e r s e t h r u s t would hsve a problem from impingement on t h e inboard s e c t i o n of t h e v a r i a b l e camber Kreuger l e a d i n g edge d e v i c e on a s w e p t wing.

4.2 - PR.ELIMINARY 1990 PROPULSION SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS

Hew engines are introduced because they r e s u l t i n a major improvement i n economics, provide t h e t h r u s t requirement f o r a new a i r p l a n e s i z e , o r In t h e 199O's, a new engine based on E3 technology w i l l be expected both.

t o improve economics because t h e t h r u s t f i z e s of i n t e r e s t are expected t o be a v a i l a b l e from c u r r e n t and d e r i v a t i v e v e r s i o n s of CF6, CFM56, JT8D r e f a n , JTgD, JTlOD, and €33211 e n g i n e s . Since t h e E3 g o a l i s t o reduce s p e c i f i c f u e l consumption by 12% and DOC by 5%, o t h e r c o s t components cannot i n c r e a s e , and may have t o d e c r e a s e t o provide s u f f i c i e n t i n c e n t i v e f o r development of a new engine. It i s t h e r e f o r e expected t h a t o t h e r c o s t s should improve, o r a t worse, remain t h e same. This needs t o be accomplished while meeting more s t r i n g e n t r e g u l a t i o n s and requirements.

4 . 2 . 1 Maintenance The i n s t a l l a t i o n m a i n t a i n a b i l i t y g o a l s should be comparable t o t o d a y ' s -~ p o r t s without removal of s t a n d a r d s . This r e q u i r e s a c c e s s t o a l l borescope any component. Elapsed time g o a l s are shown i n T b l e C-XI.

4.2.2 T h r u s t Reversers Thrust r e v e r s e r s should be improved. compared t o c u r r e n t d e s i g n s . S p e c i f i c needs a r e l i s t e d below.

1. Fan t h r u s t r e v e r s e r s with e f f l u x d i r e c t i v t y t h a t minimizes d e b r i s kickup while enabling r o u t i n e use down t o z e r o speed a r e d e s i r e d .

- D i r e c t i v i t y t a i l o r i n g c a p a b i l i t y must e x i s t t o match airframe re- quirements t o maintain a i r p l a n e c o n t r o l and drag.

2 . The o v e r a l l r e v e r s e r e f f e c t i v e n e s s goal i s 40% f o r t h e primary p l u s fan on wing e n g i n e s . T a i l engine r e v e r s i n g e f f e c t i v e n e s s can be lower to prevent a i r c r a f t p i t c h u p .

t

2 67 Table C - X I . I n s t a l l a t i o n Elapsed Time Goals DESCRIPTION ELAPSED TIME (Minutes 1 Engine Build Up Neutral QEC from Basic Engine Build Up Neutral QEC t o Wing QEC 45 Build Up Neutral QEC t o T a i l QEC 30 Convert Wing QEC t o T a i l QEC 45 Convert T a i l QEC t o Wing QEC 45 Change Wing Engine 60 ( I n c l u d i n g Access T i m e and GSE) Change T a i l Engine 90 Components/Accessories Remove and Replace I n t e g r a t e d Drive Generator Hydraulic Pump 15 F i r e Detector 15 Main Fuel Control 25 Fuel Pump Fuel Heater 30 Primary Nozzle 90 Exhaust Plug with Primary Nozzle Removed Exhaust Plug with Primary Nozzle I n s t a l l e d 15 Fuel Heater A i r Shutoff Solenoid Valve 10 Anti-Icing A i r Shutoff Actuator Valve 20 D i f f e r e n t i a l P r e s s u r e Switch 6 and 7 Nose Cowl Anti-Icing P r e s s u r e Regulator Shutoff Valve S t a r t e r 20 S t a r t e r Shutoff Valve 5 Hydraulic F i l t e r s 5 Fuel Flow Transmitter 11 I g n i t i o n E x c i t e r I g n i t i o n Plugs P r e s s u r e Ratio Bleed Control Compressor S t a t o r Control Fan+Air Case Cooling Shutoff Valves Bleed ( A i r /Fuel 1 Converter Valve Bleed Control Valves 7 Pneumatic P r e s s u r e Regulating Valves Bleed Check Valves 3 . Current f a i l - s a f e d e s i g n p r a c t i c e f o r ground only r e v e r s i n g w i l l be maintained. The r e v e r s e r s w i l l m a i n t a i n t h e i r p o s i t i o n i n t h e e v e n t of an a c t u a t i o n s y s t e m f a i l u r e .

4. A h y d r a u l i c a c t u a t i o n system i s p r e f e r r e d w i t h r e v e r s e r h y d r a u l i c f l u i d i s o l a t e d from o t h e r a i r f r a m e h y d r a u l i c f l u i d .

4.2.3 Ozone Consideration should be given t o providing bleed a i r f o r c a b i n a i r c o n d i t i o n i n g t h a t has an ozone c o n c e n t r a t i o n of less than 0.1 ppm. Since e l e v a t i n g t h e temperature of air c o n d i t i o n i n g ozone w i l l d e s t r o y t h e ozone, h e a t i n g and c o o l i n g t h e bleed a i r may be a v i a b l e way t o reduce t h e ozone c o n c e n t r a t i o n i n t h e c a b i n . Cabin a i r r e c i r c u l a t i o n w i l l reduce ozone contamination.

4.2.4 Bleed A i r C l e a n l i n e s s Bleed p o r t s must be designed t o prevent t h e i n g e s t i o n of s o l i d p a r t i c l e s t h a t e n t e r t h e engine i n l e t , o r l i q u i d s (such a s might be generated w i t h i n t h e engine by f l u i d l e a k a g e ) , without u n n e c e s s a r i l y s a c r i f i c i n g t o t a l p r e s - s u r e recovery.

Because’an engine compressor a c t s as a c e n t r i f u g a l s e p a r a t o r , c l e a n a i r may be e x t r a c t e d a t t h e compressor i n s i d e diameter without s i g n i f i c a n t l o s s of ram p r e s s u r e . The a s s o c i a t e d disadvantages are t h e c o s t of making hollow s t a t o r vanes s u i t a b l e f o r conducting t h i s a i r t o t h e o u t s i d e diameter of t h e engine, and t h e p r e s s u r e drop of t h e flow t r a v e r s i n g t h e s e r e l a t i v e l y small pas sages .

Outside diameter p o r t s t h a t are p r o t e c t e d by l o c a t i n g them i n a shadow zone s a c r i f i c e r a m p r e s s u r e but may be designed t o provide c l e a n a i r as long as t h e engine i s running. When t h e engine i s stopped, f l u i d s can draw i n t o such openings i f they occur a t a l o w p o i n t .

4.2.5 Bleed P o r t Locations Bleed a i r must be a v a i l a b l e from t h e engine a t f l i g h t i d l e power t o supply t h e a i r c r a f t pnematic system.

For economy reasons, bleed must be a v a i l a b l e a t t h e lowest s t a g e t h a t w i l l s a t i s f y a i r c o n d i t i o n i n g system p r e s s u r e requirements a t maximum a l t i - tude with t h e lowest engine power u s e f u l f o r c r u i s e . I f t h e maximum a l t i - tude f o r t h e b a s e l i n e a i r p l a n e i s 39,000 f e e t , a bleed p r e s s u r e of 20 p s i g would permit using DC-10 type components. P r e s s u r e s a s low as 15 p s i g could be considered i f t h e a s s o c i a t e d economy improvement would j u s t i f y t h e develop- ment of new and p o s s i b l y more complicated a i r c o n d i t i o n i n g components.

An a d d i t i o n a l , lower s t a g e p o r t l o c a t e d so t h a t t h e d i s c h a r g e tempera- t u r e c l o s e l y approached but d i d n o t exceed 4500F on a h o t day a t s e a l e v e l f o r precooling. Complete e l i m - with t a k e o f f t h r u s t would e l i m i n a t e t h e need i n a t i o n of precooling could only be j u s t i f i e d by a thorough i n v e s t i g a t i o n .

Changing from DC-10 t o DC-9 pneumatic system concepts f o r providing s u i t a b l e i c e p r o t e c t i o n bleed temperatures would probably be r e q u i r e d . The i n v e s t i - would have t o i n c l u d e a study of t h e p r e s s u r e s u i t a b i l i t y of t h e next lower s t a g e p r e s s u r e whenever high s t a g e bleed exceeds 450°F a t i d l e power on a h o t day. Any p r e s s u r e above 25 p s i g a t t h i s lower s t a g e would be s a t i s f a c t o r y .

A completely independent p o r t f o r engine i n l e t i c e p r o t e c t i o n a i r supply i s d e s i r e d , l o c a t e d a t compressor d i s c h a r g e , o r p r e f e r a b l y a lower s t a g e i f i t would provide 400°F a t engine i d l e power w i t h ambient temperatures a t t h e low l i m i t of t h e FAA i c i n g envelope.

4 . 2 .6 Con t a i nme n t I n a d d i t i o n t o r o t o r blade containment requirements of FAR P a r t 3 3 , any blade fragment e x i t i n g from t h e engine s h a l l n o t have s u f f i c i e n t energy t o p e n e t r a t e n a c e l l e s t r u c t u r e o r systems.

4 . 3 INSTALLATION STUDIES I n s t a l l a t i o n s t u d i e s were made reviewing t h e G . E . i n s t a l l a t i o n f o r airframe c o m p a t a b i l i t y . A l i s t i n g of t h e l a y o u t s made i s shown i n Figure C-10 with a b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n . The e i g h t l a y o u t s l i s t e d i n Figure C-10 are shown as Figures C-11 through (2-18.

Various f o r e and a f t placement of t h e n a c e l l e r e l a t i v e t o t h e wing were s t u d i e d i n c l u d i n g l o c a t i o n on t h e t r a i l i n g edge o f t h e wing. The c u r r e n t study l o c a t i o n with t h e nozzle t r a i l i n g edge a t 15% o f t h e wing chord i s judged t o o f f e r t h e b e s t promise of a t t a i n i n g a d e s i g n which h a s no f a n r e v e r s e r impingement on wing high l i f t device s u r f a c e s without i n c u r r i n g t h e high r i s k s of n a c e l l e t o wing i n t e r f e r e n c e drag p e n a l t i e s f o r a f t mounted n a c e l l e s o r wing f l u t t e r p e n a l t i e s which a r e expected f o r more forward n a c e l l e p o s i t i o n s .

The r e f e r e n c e base G . E . i n s t a l l a t i o n d e s i g n u t i l i z e s a c o r e mounted accessory arrangement i n o r d e r t o r e t a i n a c i r c u l a r n a c e l l e c r o s s s e c t i o n which would produce a minimum f r o n t a l and wetted s k i n a r e a with consequent minimum performance loss due t o n a c e l l e e x t e r n a l d r a g . This approach, however, r e s u l t s i n reduced a c c e s a b i l i t y t o engine mounted components and a more compact and d i f f i c u l t t o m a i n t a i n accessory arrangement. Performance versus maintenance c o s t t r a d e s , i n c l u d i n g t h e e f f e c t s on d i s p a t c h d e l a y and c a n c e l l a t i o n r a t e s are needed. A s a p a r t of e v a l u a t i o n / a c c e s s o r y arrangement, t h r e e d i f f e r e n t l a y o u t s t u d i e s were made from which t h e drag p e n a l t i e s asso- c i a t e d with fan c a s e mounted a c c e s s o r i e s could be a s s e s s e d r e l a t i v e t o equiv- a l e n t n a c e l l e s designed f o r c o r e mounted a c c e s s o r i e s . The f i r s t t w o of t h e s e s t u d i e s were made using v e r y preliminary e s t i m a t e s of accessory package c o n f i g u r a t i o n s and were l a t e r found t o be very o p t i m i s t i c i n regard t o acces- sory package volume requirements. A s g r e a t e r d e s i g n d e t a i l concerning t h e core mounted accessory package w a s received from G . E . , i t was observed t h a t e a r l i e r s t u d i e s p e r t a i n i n g t o engine f a n case and o v e r a l l diameters d i d n o t t o house core mounted a c c e s s o r i e s provide r e a l i s t i c c o r e compartment volumes without imposing unacceptable f l o w r e s t r i c t i o n s i n t h e fan exhaust d u c t s (DAC layout PP-SK-GEE3-006) shown a s Figure C-16. Since t h i s problem d i d not impact t h e fan case mounted accessory d e s i g n , d i f f e r e n t engine case and n a c e l l e b a s i c diameters a r e shown i n t h e f i n a l s t u d y l a y o u t s f o r t h e core mounted and fan case mounted accessory arrangements ( R e f . PP-SK-GEE-007 and PP-SR-GEE3-008 shown a s Figures C-17 and C-18 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) .

m . e * * a . . . - H In In W Q h h h W a h mco N I m m N h N h 0 1 0 1 n * - 4 m - m - I N 0 1 0 1 0 1 urn uco y ne: Y yi Y o n W 0 0 0 x a Q m * m \o h a? -4 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 l e 0 l a I O \ I W 8, I W t m O h 0 - n h O h m h 0 n h O h W I W W I W I W I W I W I W I W w m r y m W r - W - l w n w - l 8 2 W U N W N W N W N W N urn I 1 1 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 I f Y m x Y I W S O X N x - X - l m m m m-4 g 2 mn.-r m VI 1 I I I I I & & & & a a & & LL & a & a & & a I I m I? N ‘I I b’ . /\ .

bo E m Y Y W a U - . ...

I

I

I

i

\

!

I

i

E

l . .

i ?

I

! r f

-1-

I

I - t . N !

I I !

i I

!

I !

I I !

i

I

5: b i ! i /;A, I I !

OD I- n ! \ I I . .

!

Po i rl U M L 4 . 3 . 1 F i n a l Study Configurations The t w o f i n a l engine i n s t a l l a t i o n study l a y o u t s (Ref. PP-SK-GEE-007 and PP-SK-GEE-008) were prepared with t h e primary purpose of comparing t h e c o r e mounted accessory d e s i g n with a f a n c a s e mounted accessory arrangement. Both l a y o u t s were s u f f i c i e n t l y d e t a i l e d i n regard t o engine a c c e s s o r i e s and a s s o c i - a t e d plumbing systems so t h a t assessments could be made w i t h r e s p e c t t o n a c e l l e space a l l o c a t i o n s and m a i n t a i n a b i l i t y . To s e r v e t h i s purpose, s u f f i c i e n t d e t a i l of engine and accessory plumbing and w i r i n g runs has been shown t o p e r m i t an assessment of t h e removal-replacement times f o r t h o s e engine i n s t a l - l a t i o n components which h i s t o r i c a l l y have r e q u i r e d t h e most f r e q u e n t replacements.

Since it would be impossible, w i t h i n t h e p r e s e n t budget and schedule, t o show a l l such plumbing and w i r i n g , d i s c r e t i o n has t o be used i n d e c i d i n g which r u n s were t o be shown. The r a t i o n a l e used, has been t o show a l l t h o s e l a r g e diameter plumbing o r c a b l e runs which, because of t h e i r s i z e and l i m i t e d choice of l o c a t i o n , could f o r c e t h e use o f d e s i g n s with s e v e r e p e n a l t i e s i n a c c e s s i b i l i t y t o a d j a c e n t engine and accessory components. Small diameter piping and w i r e bundles of approximately one-half inch diameter o r less can be designed with a wide l a t i t u d e concerning t h e i r l o c a t i o n and so have n o t been shown on t h e s u b j e c t drawings s i n c e they should have a r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l impact on n a c e l l e component m a i n t a i n a b i l i t y .

The i n l e t duct flow l i n e s , primary exhaust d u c t flow l i n e s and engine c o r e c o n f i g u r a t i o n s on both engine l a y o u t s a r e i d e n t i c a l and are based on t h e c o n f i g u r a t i o n s shown on G.E. drawing 84013267-011, d t d 8-24-78, s c a l e d t o 40,000 l b . t h r u s t . For t h e c o r e mounted a c c e s s o r y d e s i g n t h e f a n c a s e e x i t diameter, t h e f a n exhaust d u c t diameters and n a c e l l e maximum o u t e r s u r f a c e diameters are g r e a t e r t h a n t h e corresponding values used f o r t h e f a n case mounted accessory c o n f i g u r a t i o n . As o u t l i n e d i n t h e DAC i n t e r i m E3 r e p o r t (ACEE-15-TR-9735 d t d March 1979) t h i s d i a m e t r a l d i f f e r e n c e was r e q u i r e d t o accommodate r e a l i s t i c c o r e compartment volumes t o house t h e accessory package without imposing unaceptable flow r e s t r i c t i o n s i n t h e f a n exhaust d u c t s . This d i f f e r e n c e h a s t h e n e t r e s u l t of both s t u d y n a c e l l e s having approximately i d e n t i c a l wetted s u r f a c e a r e a values even though t h e fan c a s e mounted accessory c o n f i g u r a t i o n r e q u i r e s an accommodating bulge t o t h e n a c e l l e along t h e bottom c e n t e r - l i n e .

The plumbing systems t h a t d i r e c t l y s e r v i c e t h e engine core ( i . e .

combustion chamber f u e l supply, v a r i a b l e s t a t o r s e r v o power and a c t i v e t i p c l e a r a n c e c o n t r o l a i r supply) a r e a l s o e s s e n t i a l l y i d e n t i c a l f o r both s t u d y GE/NASA PDR of Nov.

layouts and are d e r i v e d from information supplied i n t h e 1978 and i n G.E. drawing #4013270-191 d t d 2-16-79 which d e p c i t s t h e ICLS s e r v i c e bleed a i r p i p i n g .

c o n f i g u r a t i o n f o r customer and engine One 120 KVA e l e c t r i c a l g e n e r a t o r and two 35 G P M h y d r a u l i c pumps a r e I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e s e r e q u i r e d on each engine on the DAC E3 t r a n s p o r t .

airframe a c c e s s o r i e s , t h e accessory gearbox must provide s h a f t power i n t e r f a c e s f o r engine o i l pumping, engine f u e l c o n t r o l s and engine s t a r t i n g f u n c t i o n s . I n t h e c a s e of t h e core mounted accessory d e s i g n , reasonable n a c e l l e diameters could be maintained only by combining t h e a i r f r a m e e l e c t r i c power g e n e r a t i g n and engine s t a r t i n g f u c t i o n s i n t o one component i n t h e form of 8 VSCF/electric s t a r t e r u n i t . This i s p r i m a r i l y due t o t h e increased bleed a i r plumbing f o r t h e a c t i v e t i p c l e a r a n c e c o n t r o l systems and s t a r t e r bleed v a l v e s which l i m i t t h e accessory envelope t o t h e core l e n g t h between 2 81 t h e f a n case support frame and t h e 5 t h s t a g e of t h e h i g h p r e s s u r e compressor.

With t h i s l e n g t h r e s t r i c t i o n t h e e l i m i n a t i o n of t h e a i r d u c t i n g t o a pneumatic s t a r t e r becomes one o f t h e major advantages of t h e VSCF/electric starter d e s i g n approach.

4 . 3 . 1 . 1 Core Mounted Accessory Configuration The a c c e s s o r y gearbox f o r t h e c o r e mounted a c c e s s o r y arrangement is shown (on drawing #PP-SK-GEE-007) s m i l e shaped and l o c a t e d j u s t a f t o f t h e f a n case support bulkhead w i t h a l l a c c e s s o r i e s mounted on t h e a f t f a c e o f t h e gearbox. From l e f t t o r i g h t (looking a f t ) t h e a c c e s s o r i e s are mounted i n t h e following o r d e r : f u e l c o n t r o l module ( i n c l u d i n g f u e l pump and f u e l / o i l h e a t exchanger), engine o i l pump, VSCF/electric s t a r t e r (on engine bottom c e n t e r l i n e i n l i n e with t h e gearbox i n p u t d r i v e s h a f t ) , f i r s t h y d r a u l i c pump and second h y d r a u l i c pump, A s e p a r a t e N3 t a c h g e n e r a t o r i s n o t l i s t e d above s i n c e a r e a d i n g o f t h i s engine performance parameter i s a v a i l a b l e from t h e A.C. o u t p u t from t h e VSCF. I f a n independent i n d i c a t i o n o f "wild" frequency Nz speed is d e s i r e d a s e p a r a t e Tach g e n e r a t o r c a n be i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o t h e above arrangement w i t h o u t any n o t a b l e impact on t h e r e s u l t s o f t h i s n a c e l l e d e s i g n s t u d y .

Since i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e r e q u i r e d o p e r a t i n g temperatures and h e a t r e j e c t i o n rates f o r t h e s t i l l to be designed f u e l c o n t r o l and VSCF/ e l e c t r i c starter u n i t s were n o t a v a i l a b l e , no p r o v i s i o n s f o r a c c e s s o r y temp- e r a t u r e c o n t r o l s have been shown on t h e s u b j e c t l a y o u t s . Compartmentization o f t h e engine a c c e s s o r y zone s e p a r a t e from t h e rest o f t h e engine c o r e com- a choice of partment f o r v e n t i l a t i o n purposes would f o r c e t h e d e s i g n t o e i t h e r a l a r g e r n a c e l l e diameter (with a complete rearrangement o f t h e g e a r - box and component l o c a t i o n s ) o r a major r e d u c t i o n i n a c c e s s i b i l i t y t o b o t h t h e a c c e s s o r i e s and engine c o r e plumbing components. A more a t t r a c t i v e approach, from t h e viewpoint of maximum a c c e s s i b i l i t y a t minimum system weight, would be t o u s e l o c a l h e a t s h i e l d i n g t o p r o t e c t i n d i v i d u a l a c c e s s o r i e s from r a d i a n t h e a t from t h e engine c o r e o r bleed a i r d u c t s w h i l e d i r e c t i n g c o o l i n g a i r flow onto t h e s e components from a i r supply d u c t s mounted t o t h e i n n e r s u r f a c e o f t h e hinged f a n d u c t assembly. a q u a n t i t a t i v e Although assessment can n o t be made f o r t h i s type of system without s p e c i f i c v a l u e s f o r component c o o l i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , t h e impact o f i t s employment upon t h e n a c e l l e l i n e s shown on t h e s u b j e c t layout should be minor.

A major a c c e s s problem d i s c l o s e d by t h e s u b j e c t layout is a t t h e e n g i n e core-to-pylon i n t e r f a c e where a l l t h e engine t o a i r f r a m e system connections are made. Due t o t h e G . E . n a c e l l e concept wherein t h e a f t edge o f t h e hinged p o r t i o n of t h e f a n d u c t i n n e r w a l l is 38 inches forward of t h e rear f l a n g e of t h e c o r e case, o n l y a 23 inch long p o r t i o n o f t h e pylon lower bulkhead i s common t o t h e engine c o r e compartment. A s shown on t h e l a y o u t (drawing #PP- SK-GEE3-007) c o n s i d e r a b l e c o n g e s t i o n r e s u l t s i n t h i s area due t o t h e presence o f t h e airframe-to-accessory package connections ( i . e . f u e l f e e d l i n e , h y d r a u l i c supply l i n e s and a i r f r a m e e l e c t r i c a l power l i n e s ) a s w e l l as t h e engine bleed a i r supply d u c t s t o t h e a i r f r a m e . With t h i s arrangement, i t is a n t i c i - pated t h a t a s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e i n engine removal and replacement t i m e w i l l r e s u l t r e l a t i v e t o t h e p r e s e n t DC-10.

2 82 4 . 3 . 1 . 2 Fan Case Mounted Accessory Configuration The accessory gearbox f o r t h e f a n case mounted accessory arrangement i s shown (drawing #jPP-SK-GEE3-008) c e n t e r e d below and supported by t h e bottom of t h e engine f a n c a s e . A two inch deep d e p r e s s i o n above t h e accessory compartment h a s been s c a l l o p e d o u t of t h e 7 inch t h i c k composite fan c a s e s h e l l t o minimize t h e e x t e r n a l bulge i n t h e n a c e l l e l o f t l i n e s r e q u i r e d t o house t h e accessory package. Two d o o r s , hinged t o t h e composite f a n c a s e a t t h e 3:30 and t h e 7:30 o-clock p o s i t i o n s , and l a t c h e d t o g e t h e r along t h e bottom c e n t e r l i n e form t h e bulged e x t e r n a l n a c e l l e l i n e around t h e accessory compartment. The a c c e s s o r y gearbox i s smile shaped i n a manner similar t o t h e d e s i g n used f o r t h e c o r e mounted accessory arrangment b u t i n t h i s c a s e both t h e forward as w e l l as t h e a f t f a c e s of t h e gearbox are employed t o provide d r i v e pads f o r t h e a c c e s s o r i e s . The engine o i l pump, t h e VSCF/ e l e c t r i c starter and t h e No. 1 h y d r a u l i c pump are mounted t o t h e forward f a c e of t h e gearbox w h i l e t h e No. 2 h y d r a u l i c pump and t h e engine f u e l c o n t r o l module are mounted t o t h e a f t s i d e of t h e gearbox a l o n g s i d e of t h e gearbox i n p u t d r i v e s h a f t . This arangement i s s i m i l a r t o t h o s e i n use on c u r r e n t commercial t r a n s p o r t s and provides t h e minimum bulge t o t h e b a s i c c i r c u l a r n a c e l l e c r o s s s e c t i o n formed by t h e engine composite f a n c a s e . A second scalloped-out w e l l i n t h e composite f a n c a s e s t r u c t u r e i s provided on t h e h o r i z o n t a l c e n t e r l i n e on t h e r i g h t hand s i d e o f t h e engine i n which is housed t h e engine o i l t a n k . A metal l i n e d trough between t h i s w e l l and t h e accessory compartment on t h e bottom must be provided i n o r d e r t o provide f o r t h e o i l plumbing between t h e pump. The metal l i n i n g tank and t h e engine o i l would be f o r t h e purposes of f i r e zoning. S i m i l a r metal l i n e d troughs must be provided between t h e engine a c c e s s o r y compartment and t h e t o p of t h e f a n case i n o r d e r to provide f i r e p r o t e c t e d r o u t e s from accessory compartment and t h e pylon f o r t h e engine f u e l feed l i n e and f o r a i r f r a m e h y d r a u l i c and e l e c t r i c power supply connections. A s shown on t h e study drawing, t h e f u e l feed l i n e would be routed on t h e o p p o s i t e s i d e of t h e f a n c a s e from t h e o t h e r a i r f r a m e c o n n e c t i o n s .

Except f o r t h e absence of t h e accessory package, t h e engine core s e c t i o n f o r t h i s c o n f i g u r a t i o n h a s been kept i d e n t i c a l t o t h a t f o r t h e c o r e mounted a c c e s s o r y c o n f i g u r a t i o n . Thus, d i f f e r e n c e s i n m a i n t a i n a b i l i t y c o s t s should be s t r i c t l y due t o t h e d i f f e r e n c e s i n accessory package l o c a t i o n .

4 . 3 . 2 Maintenance Cost Comparison To compare t h e two engine c o n f i g u r a t i o n s f o r t h e i r r e l a t i v e maintenance c o s t s a review of each c o n f i g u r a t i o n w a s conducted t o i d e n t i f y t h o s e engine i n s t a l l a t i o n components which w e r e uncommon i n t h e i r method o f i n s t a l l a t i o n o r a c c e s s i b i l i t y . The major components s o i d e n t i f i e d were: t h e VSCF/electric starter, t h e two engine d r i v e n h y d r a u l i c pumps, t h e engine f u e l c o n t r o l module ( i n c l u d e s engine f u e l pump), t h e engine o i l t a n k , t h e engine combustor f u e l flow d i v i d e r and t h e v a r i a b l e s t a t o r a c t u a t o r . Each of t h e s e components was e v a l u a t e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e manpower and e l a p s e d t i m e required f o r a removal/replacement c y c l e f o r each of t h e two engine c o n f i g u r a t i o n s a s shown i n Tables C - X I 1 and C - X I I I . The l a b o r requirements d e t a i l e d i n Table C - X I 1 and C - X I 1 1 a r e broken down f o r each component i n t o t h r e e c a t e g o r i e s : t h e l a b o r involved i n g a i n i n g a c c e s s t o t h e n a c e l l e / e n g i n e compartment a r e a i n which t h e component i s l o c a t e d ( s e e column 21, t h e l a b o r involved i n any b VI 0 2 9 rl 0 0 N N N N N N N CD N m N 9 p1 0, '4 l . 4 VI VI W ..i M c w U n h n a J rl r( N m Y c X aJ V Id l S . 8 >r .u U VI l . 4 D c7 U VI c a a J - x z t

c

4 2 2 - n E: d rl a VI

.. 9

a 0 - m z n n u - -4 N c7z n

- N

N a - x Z I w z E : - E: N h .. .

c4 s i 5 2 K [r, 0 z v1 0 u > 2 84 Q) m Q1 N N N m U m U m

-

rr) m E E c . l z W X N .. d d X 0 1 h h h h 1 2 N 4 N d N 3: h n h - N m

I

N P - x Z I w z 2 - z N h .I .

Ez

:s

S I :

t

r- yc N P W 0 rn In E i 0 0 N N N m Q, m In a -r

3 k z

W

.. 9

d 0 ' m z 2; z I I 2 87 N m N N N N N QI VI m N N m N n W U C U v u) 0) .-I I . 1 :: 9) U

C . . I - h

-.I N M w W 9) U C I w e :

s

z U bd 0 h x -a U m I . .

n U c E + a n U el w c .

i 5

"3 X a 4 w Y z uc) d o z w 1 4 4 s w u =I 3 x I r w 0 P w h h ri 0 ..

w i - 4 z system p r e p a r a t i o n f o r comonent removal o r p o s t replacement system checkouts ( s e e column 31, and t h e l a b o r involved i n p h y s i c a l l y dismounting/remounting each component t o t h e engine ( s e e column 5 ) . A summary of t h e column 2, 3 and 5 l a b o r f a c t o r s f o r each component i s t a b u l a t e d i n column 6 on each t a b l e . These t o t a l s r e p r e s e n t t h e non-routine maintenance l a b o r performed in r e p l a c i n g a l i s t e d component i f it i s suspected of being f a i l e d .

An e s t i m a t e of t h e maintenance c o s t impact o f t h e c o r e l o c a t e d acces- s o r i e s v e r s u s t h e f a n c a s e l o c a t i o n f o r unscheduled removals can be obtained by using t h e l a b o r v a l u e s i n Tables C - X I 1 and C - X I 1 1 t o c a l c u l a t e e s t i m a t e d c o s t s due t o unscheduled component removals a s summarized i n Table C-XIV.

The l a b o r (man h o u r s ) and e l a p s e d t i m e v a l u e s shown i n Table 6-XIV are taken from Tables C - I and C-11. The l a b o r c o s t s were c a l c u l a t e d by using a l a b o r c o s t rate of $11.00 p e r man hour t o which i s added a maintenance burden c o s t e q u a l t o 1.8 t i m e s t h e l a b o r c o s t . The c o s t due t o d i s p a t c h d e l a y i s taken from t h e c o s t s shown i n NASA Report CR-12113, Vol. 11, d t d March 1973 ("An A i r l i n e Study of Advanced Technology Requirements For Advanced High P h i l l i p S a l l e e ) f o r t h e DC-10 and Speed Commercial Transport Engines," by G .

f a c t o r e d by 1.4429 t o a d j u s t t h e amounts f o r i n f l a t i o n a r y e f f e c t s f o r t h e 1973 t o 1979 . t i m e p e r i o d . This f a c t o r is based on t h e U.S. Department of Commerce Index f o r government and i n d u s t r y c o s t s . The component unscheduled replacement r a t e s are based on d a t a accumulated by t h e Douglas A i r c r a f t Company R e l i a b i l i t y Engineeering Group f o r similar engine i n s t a l l e d compon- e n t s of t h e DC 10-30 a i r c r a f t f o r t h e y e a r s of 1976 and 1977. In t h e c a s e s of t h e VSCFlelectric s t a r t e r and t h e engine combustor f u e l flow d i v i d e r i n which t h e r e were no previous experience t o go by, e s t i m a t e s were made on experience with engine components of s i m i l a r mechanical complexity. For t h e c o r e mounted a c c e s s o r i e s t h a t are n o t uncommon t o both engine c o n f i g u r a t i o n s , two sets of replacement rates a r e shown; one set which is i d e n t i c a l t o t h e set s u p p l i e d t o c o s t c a l c u l a t i o n s f o r t h e f a n mounted accessory c o n f i g u r a t i o n and a second s e t which i s 10% g r e a t e r than comparable v a l u e s i n t h e f i r s t set. This second set of unscheduled replacement r a t e s was used along w i t h t h e f i r s t set i n o r d e r t o e v a l u a t e s e n s i t i v i t y i n c o s t s t o t h e s h o r t e r l i f e t h a t could occur due t o l o c a t i n g a c c e s s o r i e s i n t h e more severe temperature environment found i n t h e engine compartment. A s shown i n Table X - 1 1 1 , a comparison of c o s t s f o r t h e fan mounted accessory c o n f i g u r a t i o n w i t h t h e c o s t s ( a t t h e a c c e l e r a t e d replacement r a t e ) f o r t h e c o r e mounted accessory c o n f i g u r a t i o n show t h e l a t e r t o be $.045 g r e a t e r p e r engine f l i g h t hour.

l i s t e d components and a s such i s probably This v a l u e i s only f o r e i g h t i n d i c a t i v e of only h a l f of t h e r e s u l t i n g c o s t d i f f e r e n c e i f a l l t h e a f f e c t e d components were t o be a s s e s s e d i n t h e choice between accessory package l o c a t i o n s .

A n examination of t h e Table C-XIV c o s t breakdown shows t h a t t h e "cost due t o d i s p a t c h delay" i s t h e major c o n t r i b u t o r t o t h e replacement c o s t t o t a l f o r each component. This c o s t i s an account of i n c r e a s e d crew wages and passenger rescheduling expenses, e t c . r e s u l t i n g from equipment d e l a y s and i s not t y p i c a l l y counted-in a s l i n e maintenance c o s t i n standard DOC c a l c u l a t i o n s . A s a r e s u l t of t h i s s t u d y , a $0.90 per engine f l i g h t hour c o s t d i f f e r e n c e f o r t h e core mounted accessory l o c a t i o n r e l a t i v e t o t h e fan c a s e l o c a t i o n i s i n d i c a t e d a s an o r d e r of magnitude c o s t d i f f e r e n c e e s t i m a t e f o r t h e shop and l i n e maintenance c o s t due t o unscheduled removals o n l y .

(7 (7 m P-

-

In N m m h m \o \o * m (7 0 01 .rl .rl M M W W In Q) I , I , N m a a m ln 0 N m .j m L I , X 2 U U N e In PI M rl m m r4 rx.

Q1 N h \o 0 I , I ,

-

m In co m D4 a h ln m . .

?

M 0 0 C * c + W \ It It & AJ n m Ir( - 9 - m U 0) .rl lir m m o - d o O O I - m m c m m 9 o o m 009 I , Inlnr. 0 h r - 0 m m m I n m a .-I-.- 0 N N O m

. . . 9 9 9

. . . . .

m d m u I , Q)

E

Y D4 4 P) Ir( m r ; m m m m o o f i L) v N u l 0- W 0 - 0 Y E ? ? ? m .

m - l AJ m e m L m N m O N m .rl N N In-! 0 N U I , m 0 > U n C m I aJ Q) -46 m o - m m m E aJ 9‘9 9 9 ? ? 9 9 Y N N lno m Nln l n m O h 4 0 0 m 0 0 l n m In0 2% N m rl N o .

i

d P V C d r4 a AJ V m a m m c v \om a m I , -00 -PI coo3 N-l s . . . . . . . .

m d u e o m \ O N a m m o In m m l n N 0 N m U E: 0 .I4 m .rl 5 O E k I , Y m l u Y m *rl cu 0 m I m 0) .rl I , Y m m P) m N O m - 4 $ 2 g g . . . . . .

U 0 - 0 0 0 0 Y I , m 0 VII AJ I ,

B

m N

u4 G

a N H U

Y

B u

Q a, w rl z a P a o m k d u o E ! z :: W ; I z s a E 3 U x a 2 91 In a d d i t i o n t o scheduled maintenance c o s t d i f f e r e n c e s , some o t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n s r e l a t e d t o accessory l o c a t i o n t h a t have n o t been q u a l i f i e d are: 1: E f f e c t on a c c e s s o r y component l i f e .

2: Higher i n i t i a l c o s t s when a new n a c e l l e / e n g i n e is introduced s i n c e t h e above are based on a mature i n s t a l l a t i o n .

3 : E f f e c t on engine maintenance cost because of i n c r e a s e d teardown and b u i l d up c o s t s 4 : I n s t a l l a t i o n c o s t 5: I n s t a l l a t i o n development c o s t .

It i s concluded t h a t an a c c e s s o r y l o c a t i o n o p t i o n should be maintained pending more i n depth s t u d i e s .

4.4 REGENERATIVE FUEL HEAT SYSTEM STUDY The p r i n c i p l e i n c e n t i v e f o r a r e g e n e r a t i v e f u e l h e a t i n g system i s t o t r a n s f e r unwanted h e a t from t h e b l e e d a i r supply f o r t h e a i r f r a m e environ- mental c o n t r o l system t o t h e f u e l being s u p p l i e d t o t h e engine with t h e prospect of improving ( d e c r e a s i n g ) t h e engine SFC v a l u e s a t c r u i s e .

I n a d d i t i o n , - e l i m i n a t i o n of t h e f a n a i r bleed t h a t would o t h e r w i s e be needed a t c r u i s e , should a l s o r e s u l t i n an SFC r e d u c t i o n .

A study of t h e s e p o t e n t i a l SFC improvements on t h e E3 c a n d i d a t e a i r p l a n e was conducted u s i n g t h e follow- i n g . d e s i g n c o n s t r a i n t s : 1. The h e a t t r a n s f e r loop between t h e b l e e d a i r and t h e f u e l system should be through an i n t e r m e d i a t e , non t o x i c f l u i d such as water t o minimize t h e chance o f a i r c o n d i t i o n i n g contamination w i t h f u e l vapor.

2. Fuel temperature should n o t exceed 275OF. 7 3 . A i r p r e s s u r e loss i n waterlair h e a t exchanger < 0 . 5 p s i .

4 . Engine b l e e d a t e n t r y t o t h e environmental c o n t r o l system (ECS) is not t o be less than 300OF. This t e m p e r a t u r e is c a l l e d t h e ECS S e t P o i n t (ECSSP).

A schematic of t h e G . E . c a n d i d a t e system i s shown i n F i g u r e C-19.

4 . 4 . 1 Design Philosophy Figure C-19 shows an o v e r a l l system schematic while a p r e l i m i n a r y con- t r o l system l o g i c schematic i s shown i n Figure C-20. The system i s designed t o be o p t i o n a l . It has been found t h a t t h e r e g e n e r a t i v e system can not be operated a t i d l e d e s c e n t as f u e l temperatures a r e a l r e a d y c l o s e t o 275OF with a conventional system dce t o t h e h e a t r e j e c t i o n from t h e engine o i l c o o l e r . The ECS S e t P o i n t (ECSSP! t e m p e r a t u r e is tisually 440°F t o f a c i l i t a t e hot a i r wing a n t i - i c i n g . Without wing a n t i - i c i n g , the ECSSP temperature has been chosen a t 300OF. The lower t h e ECSSP, the g r e a t e r t h e h e a t a v a i l a b l e t o the r e g e n e r a t i v e system f o r h e a t t r a n s f e r i n t o the f u e l s u p p l i e d t o t h e engine. The conventional s y s t e m of switching from the IP bleed t o engine H P compressor d e l i v e r y bleed a t low t h r o t t l e s e t t i n g s i s r e t a i n e d s i n c e t h e problem o f ECS o p e r a t i o n a t low bleed p r e s s u r e s and temperatures s t i l l e x i s t .

The l o w t h r o t t l e s e t t i n g s .-rs z o i n c i d e n t with h i g h f u e l temperatures, t h e r e - f o r e , t h e r e g e n e r a t i v e system o n l y o p e r a t e s with 1 . P . bleed a i r . Bypasses around t h e b l e e d l a i r l w a t e r and t h e f u e l l w a t e r h e a t exchangers a r e included f o r those o p e r a t i o n a l m z d e s when t h e r e g e n e r a t i v e system i s not i n o p e r a t i o n .

h

I V K w -I W z a .

w et a .

v) v) P

zi

CJ I 2 94 4 . 4 . 2 A i r c r a f t Configuration Studied The study w a s concentrated on t h e E3 c a n d i d a t e a i r c r a f t s i z e d t o a ' minimum t a k e o f f weight of 499,000 l b . which has 3 engines i n a DC10-30 arrangement. E3 bleed q u a n t i t i e s were e s t i m a t e d i n p r o p o r t i o n t o t h e number of passengers with a r e c i r c u l a t i n g ECS system designed f o r 55% r e c i r c u l a t i o n . It was assumed t h a t c a b i n bleed flows remained c o n s t a n t throughout a f l i g h t , and t h a t t h e a i r c r a f t had one a i r c o n d i t i o n i n g pack p e r engine i n o p e r a t i o n .

4 . 4 . 3 Fuel Temperature C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s Estimates f o r t h e E3 a i r p l a n e o i l c o o l e r f u e l o u t l e t temperatures were made from D C l O test d a t a . These temperatures v a r i e d according t o f l i g h t c o n d i t i o n , engine power s e t t i n g , f u e l tank temperature and ambient temper- a t u r e . With t h e r e g e n e r a t i v e system o p e r a t i n g , t h e p e r m i s s i b l e f u e l t e m - p e r a t u r e rise would be 275OF minus FOCO, where FOCO is t h e o i l c o o l e r f u e l o u t l e t temperature.

4.4.3.1 Descent and S t a r t of Cruise Engine o i l c o o l e r temperature d a t a f o r a t y i c a l DClO f l i g h t p r o f i l e f o r a s t a n d a r d p l u s 18OF day with an i n i t i a l f u e l tank temperature of 120°F is shown on Figure C-21. According t o t h i s d a t a , t h e o i l c o o l e r f u e l o u t l e t temperature a t c r u i s e i n i t i a t i o n would be 2180F, while an I d l e Descent con- d i t i o n would produce an o i l o u t l e t f u e l temperature of 275OF. With t h i s I d l e Descent temperature, t h e r e g e n e r a t i v e system would have t o be shut o f f t o avoid exceeding t h e maximum f u e l t e m p e r a t u r e l i m i t (275OF). Test d a t a f o r Standard Day c o n d i t i o n s i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e FOCO temperature a t s t a r t of c r u i s e would be 153OF which would a l l o w a 122OF f u e l temperature rise due t o r e g e n e r a t i v e system h e a t i n g .

4.4.3.2 Regenerative System Operation A t C r u i s e Table C-XV shows , t h e f u e l temperature r i s e f o r t h e v a r i o u s o p t i o n s , a t Mz0.8, 35,000 f t ; ISA w i t h a preheat FOCO of 153OF. Where t h e c r u i s e r e s u l t a n t f u e l temperature i s less than 275OF, t h e , r e g e n e r a t i v e system would be o p e r a t i n g c o n t i n u o u s l y ; t o o b t a i n optimum b e n e f i t from r e g e n e r a t i v e h e a t - ing, t h e design aim should be t o achieve 275OF f u e l temperature i n t h e c r u i s e mode s i n c e c r u i s e c o n s t i t u t e s t h e g r e a t e s t p r o p o r t i o n of t h e f l i g h t p r o f i l e .

D C l O f l i g h t test d a t a i n d i c a t e t h a t 6OF d e c r e a s e i$ FOCO temperature can be expected over t h e d u r a t i o n of c r u i s e due t o c o o l i n g i o f t h e wing tank f u e l temperatures. For t h e E3 c a n d i d a t e a i r c r a f t with 55% ECS r e c i r c u l a t i o n , t h e r e g e n e r a t i v e system could be operated without i n t e r r u p t i o n throughout c r u i s e with a maximum experienced f u e l temperature of 2710F.

4.4.3.3 Engine T h r o t t l i n g E f f e c t s A s t h e a i r c r a f t g e t s l i g h t e r d u r i n g prolonged c r u i s e , t h e engines are t h r o t t l e d back. The e f f e c t of p a r t i a l c r u i s e t h r u s t s e t t i n g s on engine f u e l flow and r e g e n e r a t i v e system h e a t i n p u t i s shown i n Figure C-22 while Figure C-23 shows t h e r e s u l t a n t f u e l temperature a s a f u n c t i o n of % max c r u i s e t h r u s t . A r e d u c t i o n of 5% f u e l flow corresponds t o a 5% r e d u c t i o n of c r u i s e t h r u s t and a 40F i n c r e a s e i n r e g e n e r a t i v e h e a t i n g f u e l temperature rise W i l l i n t u r n be o f f s e t by t h e lower FOCO temperature due t o wing tank c o o l i n g STD + 18OF DAY +12OoF INITIAL FUEL TANK TEMP REF: DAC/GE ENGG COORD MEMO NO. 7340-1 DTD 3/19/70 A -- .-.

U UJ 0:

2 200

K w n L FUEL OUTLET

5 188

i-

L FUEL INLET

v

HEAT EXCHANGER TEMPERATURES

1 FUEL TANK TEMPERATURE

- e c)

a. Ground Idle - Takeoff

Ir b. Max. Climb (MN = .61-.85) x 3 0 c. Max. Cruise (MN = .85) t : d. Flight Idle (MN = .85-.69) 1 'LFLIGHT PROFILE

w 20 \

e. Loiter (MN = .35)

n

\

I /

a 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 TIME -MINUTES F i g u r e C-21. Fuel/Engine O i l Temperature P r o f i l e T a b l e C-XV. P e r f o r m a n c e Summary For Regerative F u e l Heating System On DAC Candidate E3 Engine T r a n s p o r t RATED TAKEOFF THRUST LB 41360 (PER ENGINE) MAX. TAKEOFF WEIGHT LB 499000 MAX. CRUISE FUEL FLOW PER ENG. 4814 FOR Mn = 0.8, 35K ALT. LB/HR I . P . BLEED TEMP. OF 5 34 H.P. BLEED TEMP. OF 860 H.P. DELIVERY PRESS. PSIA 15 1 TYPE OF A I R CONDITIONING 55% RE-CIRCULATE 1.41 BLEED AIR FLOW PPS ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL SET POINT (ECSSP TEMP) OF FUEL TEMP. RISE DUE TO REGENERATIVE HEATING OF ESTIMATED FUEL TEMP. AFTER PRE-HEATING OF 2 97 MTOGW = 499,000 LB TAKE OFF THRUSTIENGINE = 41,360 LB TB = BLEED AIR TEMPERATURE Tsp = ECSSP TEMP = AIR CONDiTlONiNG SET WINT TEMPERATURE a t o t l I-

-

u .

CIRCULATION/1.41 PPS/INTERMEDlATE/4M0F ECCSP 0

a J \ m

-

w . t 4000 .I 1 I I 80 90 I 100 50 i 60 70 PERCENT OF MAX. CRUISE THRUST 2 98 Figure C-22. Effect of T h r o t t l i n g Back on F u e l Flow MTOGW = 499,000 LB TAKE OFF THRUST/ENGINE = 41,360 LE T8 = BLEED AIR TEMPERATURE Tsp = ECSSP TEMP = AIR CONDlTIONlRIG SET POINT TEMPERATURE = ENGINE BLEED NOT INCLUDING ANTI-ICE WB ENGINE AIR BLEED CONDITIONING A x?

x U 2 200 W v)

-

a w i- -I w 3 100 L L 1 I I I 60 70 ao 90 100 PERCENT OF MAX. CRUlSE THRUST

HEAT INPUT (BTWMIN) ~ 6 0

FUEL TEMP RSSE (OF) = FUEL FLOW (LE/HR) 0.5 F i g u r e C-23. Xffect of Throttling Back on Fuel Temperature 2 99 ( d e s c r i b e d i n Para. 4.4.3.2) so t h a t t h e a b s o l u t e v a l u e o f t h e f u e l temper- a t u r e at t h e r e g e n e r a t i v e h e a t e r o u t l e t w i l l s u b s t a n t i a l l y remain c o n s t a n t over t h e e n t i r e range o f c r u i s e t h r u s t s e t t i n g s w i t h no change i n p o t e n t i a l SFC s a v i n g s as c r u i s e p r o g r e s s e s .

4.4.4 Cruise SFC Savings C a l c u l a t i o n s % SFC Saving p u r e l y due t o f u e l pre-heating

WB X (TB - TECSSP) X Cpb - ( 1 )

WF X ATF X Cpf = WF X EHV WF X EHV WB Bleed Flow LB/MIN Fuel Flow LB/MIN WF ATF Pre Heat Fuel Temp Rise Degree F S p e c i f i c Heat o f Fuel BTU/LB/ C P f Degree F S p e c i f i c Heat of Bleed Air BTU /LB / Degree F

-

E f f e c t i v e Heating Value of Fuel BTU/LB EHV

-

Bleed Temperature Degree F TB

-

Environmental Control System *ECSSP S e t P o i n t Degree F FROM ( 1 )

= % X (TB - TECSSP) X C& ( 2 )

-

WF CPf Examining Table 1 It must be remembered t h a t f o r t h e E3 e n g i n e , SFC s a v i n g s are p o s s i b l e due t o t h r e e r e a s o n s : DIRECTLY DUE TO IMPROVED TECHNOLOGY A b a s i c i n i t i a l SFC improvement due t o a more economical e n g i n e .

2) DIRECTLY DUE TO RECIRCULATION R e c i r c u l a t i o n reduces c a b i n bleed by 55% which ( a ) reduces SFC due t o reduced c a b i n bleed ( b ) reduces SFC due t o t h e a s s o c i a t e d r e d u c t i o n i n f a n p r e c o o l e r b l e e d as a consequence o f t h e r e d u c t i o n i n i n t e r m e d i a t e b l e e d flow.

3 ) DIRECTLY DUE TO REGENERATOR a ) t h e p r e h e a t i n g f u e l temp rise i s g r e a t e r s i n c e the f u e l flow t o r e c e i v e r each BTU o f bleed h e a t i s reduced.

b ) t h e SFC r e d u c t i o n due t o t h e e l i m i n a t i o n of f a n p r e c o o l e r bleed when t h e r e g e n e r a t o r o p e r a t e s .

This r e p o r t i s concerned only with t h e s a v i n g s due t o reason 3 ) .

4 . 4 . 4 CRUISE SFC SAVINGS CALCULATIONS (Continued) CALCULATION OF SFC SAVINGS Savings d i r e c t l y due t o f u e l pre-heating have been e s t i m a t e d by r a t i o i n g the pre-heat of t h e f u e l t o a f u e l e f f e c t i v e h e a t i n g v a l u e , t h r u s t i s assumed c o n s t a n t and a s p e c i f i c h e a t o f 0.5 f o r t h e f u e l w a s assumed, i . e . from ( 1 )

% SFC s a v i n g = ATF x Cpf

EW QUOTED B E L O W ARE SFC SAVINGS FOR REASON ( 3 ) : (A) WITH CABIN RECIRCULATION ECSSP TEMP = 300 DEGREE F MAX CRUISE RATING 118 X 0 . 5 * 0.32% SFC SAVING DIRECTLY DUE 18525 T O FUEL PREHEATING SFC SAVING DUE TO REDUCTION I N PRECOOLER FAN BLEED WITH 0.06% RE GE NE RAT OR I N OPERATION TOTAL SFC 0.38% REDUCTION DIRECTLY DUE TO REGENERATOR THE MAXIMUM SFC SAVING DIRECTLY DUE TO THE REGENERAOR (B) Assuming a FOCO o f 153 degree F and a f u e l temperature a f t e r t h e r e g e n e r a t o r o f 275 degree F, the maximum SFC s a v i n g d i r e c t l y due t o t h e r e g e n e r a t o r i s : 122 X 0.5 = 0 . 3 3 % 18525 and 1 degree F i n f u e l temperture rise reduces t h e SFC by: 0 . 3 3 = 0.0027%

-