hsr system integration studies - nasa · status of nasa in-house comparative propulsion studies...
TRANSCRIPT
't _, I •''
HSR System Integration Studies
NASA Rev{ew of FY92 Progress and FY93 Plans
September 23, 1992
Bill Strack - Lewis
Allen Whitehead - Langley
HIGH-SPEED RESEARCH PROGRAM REVIEW
Propulsion System Studies
Outline
• Phase I Program Milestones
e Propulsion System Study Milestone Plan -- FY92 accomplishments -- FY93 Plans
• Budgets
.'t ..
Major HSCT Propulsion System Issues
1. Which propulsion concept best achieves a balanced compromise of performance, weight, emissions, noise, and complexity ?
2. What price do we pay to achieve various levels of environmental acceptability ?
3. What are the key uncertainties and what are their potential impacts ?
PROPISS.DRW WCS1<'ML 9·10·92
[ HIGH-SPEED RESEARCH PROGRAM . REVIEW )
Propulsion System Studies
Phase I Program Milestones
Propulsion System. ·studies - Lewis Level 2 Summary
Program Milestones
Gross R&D
Net R&D
Research Contracts
Grants
In-House
Program Support
CSWY
SSCWY
FY90
FY90
1580
1t82
1182
0
0
398
7
0
FY91 FY92 FY93
Propulsion System Down-select
Resource Summary (537-01-22)
FY91 FY92 FY93 FY94
2800 3115 1500 1560
2000 2715 1187 1235
1915 2335 1000 1085
85 90 45 0
0 290 142 150
BOO 400 313 325
8 13 12 11
2 2 2 2
FY95
FY95
1620
1282
1122
0
160 .
338
9
2 RESSUMDRW WCS/KML 9-16-92
A Propulsion System Down-Select is Needed to Focus the Phase II Technology Program
Phase I
Environmental Technology Feasibility
~ Concept2
System ~ Studies
• • •
Oct. '93 Down-Select Decision Gate
6 r--I I I I I I I
~oncept])-___ _J __ I
I
Phase II
Propulsion Component
Technologies ~~ Primary ..... Backup
11 System Studies
Monitor Progress - Shortfall impacts - Re-direction options
New concept analyses
6 Technology Readiness
DOWN SEL.DRW WCS/tjf 0801'"'
Level 2 HSR Program Schedule - Propulsion System Studies
HSR Program Milestone
Propulsion Design Studies and Evaluations
Airframer Evaluations
NASA Design Studies and Evaluations
Net R&D, $K
cs +sse wy
FY91 I FY92 I FY93 I FY94 6. Propulsion Down-select
~----------------------------------·~----------~
2000
8+2
~ Life Study Evaluations v Assess. v { II
Ill ~~~~~t:=.:~:~:~:~:~=:II~=:~:I~:~:=:~:~:~:~~I=~~!=~:~;t=~::;=:~\~:[=tl
Common Down-select Engme Engtne Strategies Groundrules Process Data Cost 11
' \. \. ' ' TBE MFTF IFV VCE Flade II
~~~-: Assessment l:f
I I
:----.. I Fallback
2715
13+2
I I
l~il:i:i:!i!!ii!i!i!iiiiii!i~lllliilil!fl.li~~~i~~~~~~~~~~~~~::::::::::::::::::I:l Assessment
I 1500
12+2
Strategies
1560
11 + 2
Note: Funding excludes airframer evaluation element which is funded by airframe system studies SCHEDULDRW WCS1<'ML 9-21-92
HIGH-SPEED RESEARCH PROGRAM REVIEW
Propulsion · System Studies
FY92 Accomplishments
Propulsion System Studies Accomplishments
FY92 Accomplishment
1. Determined benefits of EPM technology
2. Established I implemented down-select process
3. Completed commercial engine life study
4. Performed comparative analyses of alternative concepts
5. Quantified impact of key uncertainties
Significance
Provides quantitative program justification
Foundation of rationale consensus decision
Established design rules and EPM requirements
Critical down-select information
Provides down-select risk insights
PI.ANACCZDRW WCSIKML 9-21-92
HSR Enabling Propulsion Materials Program Benefits 2005 IOC Aircraft meeting Stage 3 noise and EINox = 5 constraints
1991 Engine Materials Technology
Airplane gross weight = 720,000 lb Engine life < 1 000 hours
Metal
Combustor
liner
Max. T3 = 1oso·F
Conventional
Turbomachinery
Materials
Metal
Exhaust
Nozzle
wnh 10% cooling
/ + EPM Program
2000 Engine Materials Technology
+6.5% Cruise Efficiency
-15% Propulsion Weight
-12% Airplane Weight
9,000 - 18,000 hr Engine Life
CMC Combustor
Liner
wnh 14% cooling
Max. T3 = 12so·F
Adv. Nickel
Alloy
lntermetallic Exhaust
Nozzle
with no cooling
/
EMPCL2,.DRW WCS/KML 9-10.92
HSR Propulsion System Selection Process
Cycle Optimization and Preliminary Concept Screening (GE I PW, LeRC}
Candidate ~ Concepts~ 1
TBE VCE MFTF Flade TBE/IFV
I I I I 1 • Performance
Mission Evaluation
1 • Weight I Geometry Common ~ 1 • Acoustics -Groundrules 1 • Cost 1
\..----- --------- fl--------------------.../
Data Decks
-t +Overall Systems Assessment (BAC, DAC, LaRCIARC}
\._J Inlet Matching Airframe Installations (3)
Mission Evaluation } Economic Analysis .. DOC Risk Assessment
I 2 3 4 5
Preferred Concept
APPROAC2.0RW WCS/KML 11-27-91
Monte Carlo Simulation Risk Analysis Inlet, Engine, Nozzle Components Maintenance Cost
Price Weight
Efficiency
Probability
Value
TBE MFTF
VCE FLADE
TBE/IFV
8Qio lito.
~ Confidence so·
' 201o
' DOC
1 1 1 1
Many passes through with::;:::> C random Input values
Propulsion System Models
(5 Concepts)
• DOC
Direct Operating
Cost Model
1 2 3 4 5
~ t=V
Propulsion System Forecast Maintenance Cost
Price Weight
Performance
Confidence
Ifill • Aircraft System Model
SFC
MONTE.DRW WCS/lJL 09/01/'fJ.
Mach 2.4 Turbine ·Bypass Engine Life Study
Design Changes from Military-like ST)949 to HSCT ST)989
T3: 1300 ~ 1250°F
• Engine weight increased -11%
• Engine design groundrules established
• Material requirements identified for achieving life goals (EPM impact)
Limited Distribution
HSCT COMMUNITY NOISE TECHNOLOGY Challenge
Turbojet Engines
Engine exhaust velocity = 3,200 ft/sec
Unsuppressed Sideline Noise
/
\ FAR 36- Stage Ill
123 EPNdB
Throttled Engine and Oversized Wing
......,.,.,...,..,.....,..........,."""' High-Lift
I
Mixer-Ejector Nozzle Suppression System
102.5 EPNdB
I I Stage IV i - - - - - - r - ?
I 1/\/\AAAA.
Status with Gen. I mixer-ejector nozzles and without operational procedure credits
HSCT_2DRW WCS/lJL 08/31/92
Effect of Exhaust Velocity on Sideline Noise
120
110 Sideline Noise, EPNdB
100
1000
-
1500
Flade
Stage3
TJ
20+dB problem
-------------------
2000 2500 3000 .
Exhaust Velocity, ft/s
3500
SIDELINEX.DRW WCS/tp 111/31/92
Status of NASA In-House Comparative Propulsion Studies Mach 2.4, 100% supersonic 5000 n.mi. range, 292 passengers
Stage III sideline constraint Assumes material "goals and mixer-ejector nozzle goals are achieved
LeRC results as of September, 1992
1.15
Relative Takeoff 1· 10
Gross Weight
1.05
1.00
0.95L---TBE MFTF TJ/IFV
- Limited Distribution -
I I I TBD I I I
VCE
I I I TBD I I I
Flade INHOUSE WCSIKML 9-21·92
Key Propulsion . System Uncertainties
Technical
1. Adequate mixer - ejector nozzle aero I acoustic performance -- oversize engine and I or wing -- exclude TBE and low-BPR MFTF
2. EPM materials progress -- investigate alternative shortfall strategies
External
· 3. More severe airport noise regulations -- determine economic penalty -- identify tolerant concepts
4. Climb noise -- determine low climb noise concepts
5. Mach number selection -- focus on 2.4 -- design a few 1.6 and 2.0 engines (sonic boom, emissions,
airframe materials) KEYPROPORW WCS/I(ML 9-14-92
Impact of Noise Suppression ·rechnology and Noise Constraint Mach 2.4, all supersonic 5000 n.mi. range, 292 passengers
Cycle, nozzle, wing loading, thrust loading vary along each curve
Ignores aircraft installation differences and possible climb noise constraint NASA Lewis results as of September 1992
1.15
1.1
Relative Takeoff 1 05 Gross Weight . TJ I IFV
2600°F 2900°F
TBE T 41 = 2100°F
1 ---------------
0.2 0.1 0"95 OL..,..__ ____ 5L.....__ ___ ___J1_0 ___ ---~15 ____ 2__.0 Stage 111
5 1 0 15 2 0 2 5 Stage Ill- 5
Noise Suppression, dB
- Limited Distribution -IMPACf.DRW WCS/.KML 9-14-92
ll TOGW, 0/o
Sensitivity to Nozzle Performance and Weight
Mach 2.4 TBE - Powered HSCT Reference TOGW: 701,000 lb
20
15
10
5
0
-5 .92 .93 .94 .95 .96
Nozzle Cv .97 .98
1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 Relative Nozzle Weight
.99
SF.N!li11V .IJRW WCS/t~ 117/30/92
Impact of Turbine Inlet Temperature On EINax and TOGW HSR LPP Combustor Technology
6
5
4
3
2
1
-----------0~--~-~---~~----+-----~----~ 2500 2600 2700 2800 2900
~1 ?F
Flame Tube data
3000
Example Fallback Strategies for CMC Combustor Liner Material
Strategy 1. A. Sacrifice life by as much as one-half and replace CMC combustor liners at the 9, 000 hour scheduled replacement of rotating hot parts. Impact: ADOC = +1-114%.
Strategy 2. B. Double the LPP combustor liner cooling flow to retain life. This would double NOx El from 2-1/2 to 5 unless turbine temperature were decreased - 2000F. Impact: A TOGW = +2%.
EPMHSR.DRW WCSIKML 9-15-92
HIGH-SPEED RESEARCH PROGRAM REVIEW
Propulsion System Studies
FY93 Plans
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Propulsion System Studies ·Planned Accomplishments
Planned FY93 Accomplishment
Complete propulsion down-select studies including risk assessments
Determine impact of "Stage IV" constraint
Complete turbomachinery noise characterization
Complete climb noise comparisons
Complete Lockheed propulsion installation study
Significance
Provides information required for down-select
Helps thwart arbitrary rule-making Helps select tolerant propulsion concept
Enables . approach noise assessments
Strengthens down-select and FAR 36. assessment
Helps select axi or 2-D nozzles and ·inlets
PLANACCP.DRW WCSIKML 9-21-92
Douglas Propulsion Risk Assessntent Objectives:
1. Define inlet system uncertainties quantitatively 2. Perform overall propulsion system risk assessment for five concepts
100
Probability % 50
DAC
Inlet parameters (P/p, Wgt., .... )
TBE MFTF
VCE FLADE
TBE/IFV
"
+
' 00/ Confidence 50
' 20
" DOC
100
50
1 1 1 1
GE/PW
Engine & nozzle parameters
Stage III &
Stage III-X
OOUGRJSK.DRW WCS/KML 9-14-92
GE I PW Generation II Mixer-Ejector Nozzle Design-Evaluation
Objectives: Evaluate methods of achieving FAR 36 Stage Ill- 4 dB
Amroach: Axi-20 hybrid nozzles - 60% and 80% MFA versions
BPR MFA
.4 105
TOGW .4 60,80 .68 60,80
for Axi~2D:::::::::U:H:::=::n::. MFTF H ··brid\::::::!,)':::?:
Engines .4 ?
- mechanical design and weight - 30 flowpath design - aero and acoustic performance - boat-tail drag
20 SLP nozzle with increased suppression treatment
Oversize
engine
engine engine
acoustic treatment
Case A. Stage Ill
Case B. Stage Ill - 4
GI:N_II.DRW WCSIKML 9· 14·92
HSCT Climb Noise Prediction Task
Obiective: •
Background:
Approach:
Make first-order estimates of climb noise for 5 propulsion concepts assuming deployed suppression systems.
High specific thrust engines may not be able to achieve adequate climb noise levels. Ability to predict acoustics is minimal.
Analytically predict mixer-ejector nozzle performance and acoustics up to Mach 0.7. Accept error band for acoustics.
Region of Concern ,,. _ __,,.._"' _____ , 100
Noise level, 80 dBAMAX
60
40 .__ _ ___,a __ ....;
0 20 40
Unsuppressed TBE-powered HSCT
Suppressed HSCT
60 80
Distance from brake release, n.mi. PREDICT.DRW WCSIKML 9·21·92
Lockheed Propulsion I Airframe Installation Study • Detailed performance determination • Configuration optimization • Axi vs. 2-D nozzle comparison • Axi vs. 2-D inlet comparison
GE VCE Engines and Nozzles Lockheed Airframe and Inlets
Axi
+ 2-D
Status: 65% complete (100% by 12-31-92)
Early result: Wing notch required for inboard diverters WCKHEED.DRW
WCSIKML 9-10-92
HIGH-SPEED RESEARCH PROGRAM REVIEW
Propulsion System Studies
Budgets
FY92 HSR Propulsion Systems Studies Elements Propulsion Portion
FY92 FY93 I I I I I I
Baseline (2365K)
GE I PW Mach 2.4 engines I nozzles
GE I PW Mach 1.6 I 2.0 engines I nozzles
NASA Mach 2.4 engines and support
Augmentation (350K)
GE I PW Gen II M-E nozzle design I Stage Ill - 4 assessment -! DAC inlet risk and system risk assessments
Flade fan aero I mechanical design
Notes: 1. GE I PW and DAC will perform Monte Carlo risk assessments 2. BAC will use traditional risk assessment 3. Stage Ill- x assessments will be performed by DAC, GE I PW, and NASA
Net $K
1200
BOO
365
175
120
55
2715
STDYELEM.DRW WCSf<MI. 9-14·92
HSR Propulsion Systems Studies
Airframe Portion (LaRC administered, LeRC technically monitored)
Mach 2.4
Boeing - TBE, BAC 2D
MFTF (.4, .7, 1.13 BPR)
TBE /IFV
VCE (.4, .26 BPR)
Flade
Detailed evaluations
Douglas and NASA
Boeing - Mach 2.0
Douglas - Mach 1.6
1992 1993 JIFIMIAIMIJI JIAISIOINID JIFIMIAIMIJlJ)AISIOlNlD
.r••~m~~Win1EI b. .A Performance, weight, geometry
b. Cost data mi!f.~nw..l!ru!!ln!:!mlilliM!I~\'lf:!l!lmi!IHn~!!nnmi!IJ1i.ll~ij~~'!llliii!il!li!~
A& D.
~mil
~~,~-~-i.t.l!!!iliiiiiliii1~~H:!.~:~li!ltaU.1dll .A ~
li~fH!l!..llrrli!lll!lll!li!l\llll!!!!iill!l~ .A D.
Similar
~~~\~~'ffi!l!ii!!!il!!!!!ffi[~~~~plli. 1!i1!i !In! !1!1i.'l,llllliill~ll
rtE Fl:e ~FTF 'liilllii!il.illl!lllillliilllll!ilmm~mnl
A A MF1F Flade
.(},Tentative Down-Select
Choices ..(), fi1~l!~ll:l:~~~~~~~~mlll~ll~~~~~~~!llllllml!~llm:~illlllllllllllllllll~ll~l!i~~m~l
I
CONTRACT.DRW WCS'KML 9-15-92
Decision Rationale for FY93 Task Prioritization •
Prioritized Tasks
1. Down-select support for airframers
2. Turbomachinery noise characterization
3. Annual meeting support
4. Cycle and P AI support (LeRC)
5. Flade fan aero I mech. design
6. Climb noise comparisons
7. Mixer-ejector nozzle life study
8. In-depth MFTF core life study
9. EPM fallback strategy analysis
10. Incorporate life models in cost code
Rationale ( ~ = influences down-select)
v Increases fidelity. Insures correct decision.
v Could reveal concept discriminators.
v Conveys key information and forces interpretation.
v Only way for NASA to integrate inlets, engines, nozzles.
v Reduces Flade component uncertainties.
v Deployed suppression systems (M-E) may be show-stopper
Companion to engine life study. Could alter weights.
Reduces risk of wrong material development and IOC delay.
EPM is high-risk and enabling ..
Increases fidelity of DOC calculations.
PRIORITY.DRW WCS/KML 9-15-92
Proposed FY93 HSR Propulsion System Studies Resource Allocation
Baseline Down-Select
Specific 1. Down-select support for airframers V GE!PW
-- cycle I flowpath analyses - risk assessments -- inlet distortion tolerance - inlet flow matching
2. Turbomachinery noise characterization GE/PW during approach
3. Annual meeting support GE!PW
4. Cycle and PAl support " LeRC
5. Flade fan aero I mechanical design " GE
OverguideUne
6. Climb noise comparisons GE/PW
7. Mixer - ejector nozzle life study GE
8. In-depth MFTF core life study P&W
9. EPM fallback strategy analysis GE
RESAUC1.DRW 10. Incorporate life models into engine cost code GE
WCSMML 11-10-92
.,
Net $K 660
220
40
187
80
1187
OGL
85
360
220
440
200
135
FY92
MILESTONE STATUS HIGH-SPEED RESEARCH PROGRAM
RTOP 537-01-22 PROPULSION SYSTEMS STUDIES
Activities
22.1 Propulsion Concepts Assessment
- Refined Mach 2.4 -Mach 1.6 & 2.0 -NASAIH
22.2 Unique Component Modeling - Civil Engine Life &
Material Technology Requirements
- 2D vs. Axllnlat Evaluation and Flada Inlet Evaluation
- 2D vs. Axl Mixer-EJector Nozzle Evaluation and Flada Nozzle Evaluation
1991 1992
Oct I Nov I Dec Jan I Feb I Mar I Apr I May I Jun I Jul I Aug I Sep1
Initial Mach 2.4 · engine evaluaUon
\7 completed
Engine welga. determined & technology
8hortfalla ldenUfled ..... :::::::::: ~::::::::::: ~: ~ =~: ~:: :: =~: ~::: ~: ~ ::::: ~::: ~=:::: ~::: ~ =~::::: ~::::: ~: ~::: ~::::: ~: ::: =~: ~::::: ~: ~=~ .....
Bestul& 2Dconcept aelectlona
::: ~::: ~ =~::::::::::::::::: ~: ~::::::::::: ~::::::::::: ~::::::::::::::::::: ~: ~: ~::::::::: :: ~:::::::: :~:::: :::::: ::::::::::::::::::: =.....
Ad.va.2D ln8lella8on
_.,... complela
~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~::: ~::: ~::::::::::: ~: ~: ~: ~::: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~::: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~::: ~: ~::::: ~: ~::: ~: ~::: ~: ~::::: ~::: ~::::: ~::::: ~::::::::: ~: ~: ~::: ~::: ~: ~: ~: ~::: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~::::: ~::: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~:::::: ~ \ ): ~::: ~: ~: ~:: ~1.
KEY \J PLANNED ACTIVITY 0 PLANNED OR INCOMPLETE MILESTONE
+ COMPLETED MILESTONE b. SCHEDULED COMPLETION FOR DELAYED ACTIVITY
• ACTIVITY ACTUAL COMPLETION
.. 1
FY93
MILESTONE STATUS HIGH-SPEED RESEARCH PROGRAM
ATOP 537-01-22 PROPULSION SYSTEMS STUDIES
Activities
22.1 Propulsion Concepts Assessment
22.2 Unique Component Modeling
- Flade fan aero/ mech. design
- Gen. 2 axl and 2D mixerejector nozzles (Performance, size, weight & noise)
1992 1993
Oct I Nov I Dec Jan I Feb I Mar I Apr I May I Jun I Jul I Aug I Sep1
Engine decks AlternaUve conet pta available evaluation
\] completed
Fladefan model&rlsk determined
~}!=nn=n==H=!n=u,=u:=!n=~H=!=!=H=nn=H=!==!n==!=i~n°H=:(=y=n==u=nn=ini=nn=wt=:nt=n!=n:!=:n!=:u=nn=n::=nn=nn~n(>
Gen 2 mixer eJector Axl vs. 2 ~ nozzle characlerlsUcs
lnslallaUil ~ determined analysis cotr plete \]
"""=!"":!:!""":!:""!n:"'"'!:i"":in""":i:""in:=:n=:!:!""":!:""!:!:"'"'::!"":i:i"""::::d:~:. "...2."":i:"":n:=in.=,in.,;:!::=n:=:n:.,.,.in:""in=:!n""":!:"":n:=!:::""!n""':HI 1*
Rrstorder lurbomachlnery noise
model completed
- Turbomachlnery noise !:!:i:!:i:::::::::::::::::::::::!:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::!::::n:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::!l(
Flrslorder climb noise estimates
- Climb noise model ::::;::::::::i:::::::::::=:i:::::::::::::i:::::::::::::::i:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::i:::::::::::::::!:::::::::::::::i:i:::::::::::i:=:::::::::::V
*Actlvlly delayed from FY92
KEY '\J PLANNED ACTIVITY 0 PLANNED OR INCOMPLETE MILESTONE
• COMPLETED MILESTONE b. SCHEDULED COMPLEilON FOR DELAYED ACTIVITY
... ACTIVITY ACTUAL COMPLETION 04KLA047 LAN9/22/92
..
Summary
1. Adequate progress towards Oct. '93 down-select
-- process defined and established -- TBE, MFTF's, TJ I IFV data decks generated -- VCE and Flade data decks by Oct. 30th -- pace is manpower limited
2. MFTF more forgiving than TBE to M-E nozzle shortfalls I Stage IV
3. Stage 111-5 causes 3-7% TOGW penalty
4. Moderate hot-section materials shortfalls appear tolerable
5. FY93 plans limited to down-select issues only SUMMARt.DRW WCSIKML 9-15-92