Sensitivity of Engine Performance To Component Degradation of A Turbofan Aircraft Engine

UNIVERSITY
OF SOUTH WALES
Sensitivity of Engine Performance to Component
Degradation of an Aircraft Turbofan Engine

Adeyemi Emmanuel Adewole
14071312

A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Computing, Engineering and Science in
partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of M.Sc. Aeronautical
Engineering

(2016)
Supervisor: Rukshan Navaratne, Senior lecturer in Aeronautical Engineering,
University of South Wales.

DECLARATION: I declare that this dissertation is the product of my own hard-work and
independent research, except where I owe my indebtedness to other sources

Signed …………………………... 21/09/2016
Date ……………………………

Acknowledgements

I Adeyemi Emmanuel Adewole would like to give appreciation to God for giving me the grace
to pay my fees, get my visa and bring me to this great Institution. I would also want to give
appreciation to my parents Rev.(Dr) and Rev. (Dr.) Mrs Adewole Adeyemi JPs for their support
both financially, materially and spiritually.
I would also want to appreciate Primate Elijah Babatunde Ayodele also for his financial and
spiritual support towards this master’s degree. Then last but not least are Pastor and Mrs
Sesan Oluyadi who have also been a family and also rendered help and advice in my academic
endeavours and finally appreciating the members of Christ Divine Faith Ministry Lagos Nigeria
for their spiritual support towards my education.
I just want to say a big thank you to everyone and God bless you all.

Abstract

The rate at which civil aviation keeps growing in todays world is rapid, with increased travels
all around the world and more variants aeroplanes keep growing and keep getting bigger. To
handle the much volume of travels and bigger aeroplanes, the need for efficient engines is
the key word. An efficient engine is one that can generate so much thrust to reduce travel
time and to reduce fuel burn and in so doing reducing air pollution in the environment to save
the climate. The important issue that must be addressed is the performance degradation of
an aircraft engine. The major objective and focus of this dissertation is to critically evaluate
the effect of engine performance in relation to component degradation of the entire engine
and hence quantify the varied impact on the environment and climate with certain regards
to the fuel burned and NOX emissions.

Furthermore, the simulations encountered in this project are based on the focus of a typical
two-spool high-bypass turbofan engines in two thrust variants, which are the Separate flow
engine which is utilised for short to medium range travels and the mixed flow engine is based
on long range travels. Simulations were carried out on both engines in the cycle parametric
and off-design analyses which were carried out to validate the performance of these engines
with comparisons with the public domain. The results were critically analysed and
recommendations were given due to results obtained from these two engines.

ii
Table of Contents.
Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..i
Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………ii
List of Tables…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….v
List of Figures………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….vii
List of Symbols…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………ix
List of Abbreviations…………………………………………………………………………………………………………x

1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….1
1.1: Background……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..1
1.2: Research Focus………………………………………………………………………………………………………..1
1.3: Research Aims and Objectives………………………………………………………………………………….2
1.4: Outline…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….2

2 Literature Review………………………………………………………………………………………………………….3
2.1: The History behind an Aeroplane…………………………………………………………………………….3
2.2: Turbofan Engine Technology……………………………………………………………………………………5
2.2.0: How a Turbofan works……………………………………………………………………………………….5
2.2.1: Single Spool Turbofan………………………………………………………………………………………..7
2.2.1a: Basic Single Spool Turbofan……………………………………………………………………………7
2.2.1.b: Geared Single Spool Turbofan……………………………………………………………………….8
2.2.1.c: Aft-fan Single Spool Turbofan……………………………………………………………………….9
2.2.2: Twin Spool Turbofan…………………………………………………………………………………………10
2.2.2b: Basic Twin Spool Turbofan (Axial or Centrifugal) Twin Spool Compression......11
2.2.2c: Boosted Twin Spool Turbofan………………………………………………………………………12
2.2.2ci: Boosted Twin Spool Mixed Flow Nozzle Turbofan……………………………………..12
2.2.2cii: Boosted Twin Spool Separate (Unmixed) Flow Nozzle Turbofan………………..13
2.2.2d: Geared Twin Spool Turbofan……………………………………………………………………….16
2.2.3: Triple Spool Turbofan……………………………………………………………………………………….17
2.3: Turbofan Engine Variations…………………………………………………………………………………….18
2.3.1: Low-bypass Turbofan………………………………………..……………………………………………..18
2.3.1a Afterburner………………………………………………………………………………………………….19
2.3.2: High-bypass Turbofan……………………………………………………………………………………….21
2.4: Turbofan Engine Performance………………………………………………………………………………..22
2.4.1: Thermal Efficiency…………………………………………………………………………………………….22
2.4.2: Propulsive Efficiency…………………………………………………………………………………………26
2.4.3: Overall Efficiency………………………………………………………………………………………………30
2.5: General Knowledge on Engine Degradation Mechanisms………………………………………….30
2.5.1: Fouling……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..31
2.5.2: Corrosion………………………………………………………………………………………………………….32
2.5.3: Hot Corrosion……………………………………………………………………………………………………32
2.5.4: Abrasion…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..34
2.5.5: Mechanical Degradation……………………………………………………………………………………34
2.5.6: Oxidation………………………………………………………………………………………………………….35
2.5.7: Erosion……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..36

iii
3 Simulation of Engine Performance and Degradation……………………………………………………..38
3.1: Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..38
3.2: Engine Models……………………………………………………………………………………………………….38
3.2.1: USWLRM Engine model…………………………………………………………………………………….38
3.2.2 USWSMS Engine Model……………………………………………………………………………………..38
3.3 Simulations of Engine Degradation……………………………………………………………………………39
3.3.1: USWLRM Engine Degradation……………………………………………………………………………39
3.3.1a Simulation of When Compressor Is Deteriorated Only…………………………………….50
3.3.1ai Compressor is deteriorated by 1%(0.01) and Turbine is left normal………………50
3.3.1aii Compressor is deteriorated by 2%(0.02) and Turbine is left normal ……………51
3.3.1aiii Compressor is deteriorated by 3%(0.03) and Turbine is left normal……………51
3.3.1aiv Compressor is deteriorated by 24%(0.24) and Turbine is left normal…………52
3.3.1av Compressor is deteriorated by 60%(0.60) and Turbine is left normal………….53
3.3.1b Simulation of when Turbine is deteriorated only…………………………………………….54
3.3.1bi Turbine is deteriorated by 1%(0.01) and Compressor is left normal………………54
3.3.1bii. Turbine is deteriorated by 2%(0.02) and Compressor is left normal……………54
3.3.1biii Turbine is deteriorated by 3%(0.03) and Compressor is left normal……………55
3.3.1biv Turbine is deteriorated by 24%(0.24) and Compressor is left normal……………56
3.3.1bv. When Turbine is deteriorated by 65%(0.65) and Compressor is left……………57
3.3.2 USWSMS Engine Degradation…………………………………………………………………………….58
3.3.2a Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 1%(0.01) …………………………………..68
3.3.2b Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 2%(0.02) ………………………………….69
3.3.2c Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 3%(0.03) ………………………………….70
3.3.2d Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 4%(0.04) ………………………………….71
3.3.2e Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 5%(0.05) ………………………………….72
3.3.2f Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 6%(0.06) ………………………………….73
3.3.2g Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 7%(0.07) ………………………………….74
3.3.2h Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 8%(0.08) ………………………………….75
3.3.2i Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 20%(0.20) …………………………………76

4. General Discussion on the Project ………………………………………………………………………………77
4.1 The General Approach……………………………………………………………………………………………77
4.2 Analyses on the Simulated Engines (USWLRM & USWSMS) …………………………………….78
4.2.2 Critical Analyses on USWLRM Engine…………………………………………………………………78
4.2.2.1 Compressor stall…………………………………..…………………………………..……………….79
4.2.2.2 Compressor surge…………………………………..…………………………………..…………….80
4.2.3 Critical Analyses on USWSMS Engine…………………………………..…………………………….82
4.2.3.1 Bird Strike…………………………………..…………………………………..…………………………84
4.2.3.1a The Effects of Bird Strike…………………………………..…………………………………..85
4.2.3.1b Misconceptions about Bird Strikes ………………………………………………………..85
4.2.3.1c Prevention of Bird Strikes…………………………………..………………………………….86
4.3 Summary of key points …………………………………..……………………………………………………..86

5. Conclusion…………………………………..…………………………………..…………………………………………87
5.1 Research objectives, summary of findings and conclusions…………………………………….87
5.2 Recommendations…………………………………..…………………………………..……………………….88
References…………………………………..…………………………………..…………………………………………….90
iv
List of Tables

Table 3.0: Public Domain Data of the USWLRM Engine…….…….…….…….…….…….…….………..40
Table 3.1a: Cycle Design Point of the USWLRM Engine…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…………41
Table 3.1b: Simulation of USWLRM engine was performed at top of climb …….…….…….……41
Table 3.2a: Parameters used to achieve results…….…….…….…….…….…….…….……………………41
Table 3.2b: Mass flow in simulating USWMLRM Engine…….…….…….…….…….…….…….……….41
Table 3.2c: Proof that Simulations on USWLRM engine are correct…….…….…….…….…….…..41
Table 3.3: Off Design Point of the USWLRM Engine…….…….…….…….…….…….…….……………..42
Table 3.4: Parameters used to achieve results…….…….…….…….…….…….…….……………………..42
Table 3.5: Simulation of USWLM engine performed at take-off…….…….…….…….…….…………42
Table 3.6: Off-Design results of simulated Increased thrust of USWLRM Engine…….…….……45
Table 3.7: Proof that Off-Design results of Increased thrust are correct…….…….…….…….…..45
Table 3.8: Compressor is deteriorated by 1%(0.01) of the USWLRM Engine …….…….…….……50
Table 3.9: Thrust Drop when Compressor alone is deteriorated by 2%(0.02) …….…….…….…51
Table 3.10: Thrust Drop when Compressor alone is deteriorated by 3%(0.03) …….…….……..51
Table 3.11: Thrust Drop when Compressor is deteriorated by 24%(0.24) …….…….…….………52
Table 3.12: Compressor is deteriorated by 24% (0.24) and BET is increased to achieve
Thrust…….…….…….…….…….…….…….………..…….…….…….…….…….…….…….……….52
Table 3.13: Normal Thrust achieved when BET was increased to 2673.35R(1485.19K)………53
Table 3.14: Thrust Drop can be observed on the USWLRM Engine when Compressor is
deteriorated by 60%(0.60) …….…….…….…….…….…….…….………..…….…….…………53
Table 3.15: Normal Thrust attained when BET was increased to 4524.02R(2513.34K)……….53
Table 3.16: Error warning when BET is increased to maintain cruise…….…….…….…….………..53
Table 3.17: Trust drop when Turbine is deteriorated by 1%(0.01) only…….…….…….…….…….54
Table 3.18: Trust drop when Turbine is deteriorated by 2%(0.02) only…….…….…….…….…….54
Table 3.19: Thrust drop when Turbine is deteriorated by 3%(0.03) only…….…….…….…….…..55
Table 3.20: Thrust Drop when Turbine is deteriorated by 24%(0.24) …….…….…….…….……….56
Table 3.21: Turbine is deteriorated by 24% (0.24) and BET is increased to maintain Thrust.56
Table 3.22: Normal Thrust achieved when BET was increased to 2581.14R(1433.96K)……….56
Table 3.23: Thrust Drop Turbine is deteriorated by 65%(0.65) …….…….…….…….…….…….……57
Table 3.24: Turbine is deteriorated by 65% (0.65) and BET is increased to maintain Thrust.57
Table 3.25: Normal Thrust achieved when BET was increased to 4413.14R(2451.74K………..57
Table 3.26: Range violations warning due to extreme deterioration…….…….…….…….…….….57
Table 3.27: Public Domain Data of the USWSMS Engine…….…….…….…….…….…….…….……….59
Table 3.28a: Cycle Design of the USWSMS Engine…….…….…….…….…….…….…….………………..60
Table 3.28b: Simulation of USWSMS Engine was performed at top of climb…….…….…….…..60
Table 3.29a: Parameters used to achieve results…….…….…….…….…….…….…….………………….60
Table 3.29b: Mass flow in simulating USWSMS Engine…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…………60
Table 3.29c: Proof that Simulations of USWSMS Engine are correct…….…….…….…….…………60
Table 3.30: Off-Design Point of the USWSMS Engine…….…….…….…….…….…….…….……………61
Table 3.31: Parameters used to achieve results…….…….…….…….…….…….…….……………………61
Table 3.32: Simulation of USWSMS Engine was performed at Take-off…….…….…….…….…….61
Table 3.33: Off-Design results of Simulated DECREASED Thrust on USWSMS Engine…….……64
Table 3.34: Proof of the Off-Design results of Simulated DECREASED Thrust…….…….…………64
Table 3.35: Thrust Drop when Compressor and Turbine are both deteriorated by 1%(0.0)..68

v
Table 3.36: When Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 1% (0.01) and BET is
increased to maintain Thrust…….…….…….…….…….…….…….………..…….…….………68
Table 3.37: Normal Thrust achieved when BET was increased to 3425.12R (1902.84K)........68
Table 3.38: Thrust Drop when Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 2%(0.02)………69
increased to maintain Thrust…………………………………………………………………………69
Table 3.40: Normal Thrust achieved when BET was increased to 3471.8R (1928.77K)…….…69
Table 3.43: Normal Thrust achieved when BET was increased to 3520.1R(1955.61k)…..……70
Table 3.55: Normal Thrust achieved when BET was increased to 3729.1R(2071.72K)…..……74
Table 3.56: Thrust Drop when Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 8%(0.08)……...75
Table 3.58: Error and warning signs are indicated when BET is raised to achieve cruise….…75
Table 3.59: Normal Thrust achieved when BET was increased to 3785.6R(2103.11K) ……….75
Table 3.60: Thrust Drop when Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 20%(0.20)….…76
Table 3.62: Error and warning signs are indicated when BET is raised to achieve cruise with
more signs of overheating……………………………………………………………………………..76
Table 3.63: Normal Thrust achieved when BET was increased to 4603.1R(2557.27K)…………76
Table 4.1a: Stations numbers of NORMAL parameters of USWLRM Engine……………………….78
Table 4.1b: Stations numbers of NORMAL parameters of Simulated USWLRM Engine……….78
Table 4.2a: Stations numbers of NORMAL parameters of USWSMS Engine……………………….83
Table 4.2b: Stations numbers of NORMAL parameters of Simulated USWSMS Engine……….83

vi
List of Figures.

Figure 2.1: Schematics on a High-bypass Two Spool Turbofan…………………………………………….5
Figure 2.2: Cross Section of a Basic Single Spool Turbofan………………………………………………….7
Figure 2.3: Cross Section of the Snecma M53-P2………………………………………………………………..7
Figure 2.4: Cross Section of a Geared Single Spool Turbofan ……………………………………………….8
Figure 2.5: Cross Section of the Turbomeca Aubisque………………………………………………………..8
Figure 2.6: Schematics of the Turbomeca Aubisque……………………………………………………………9
Figure 2.6.1: Schematics of an Aft-fan Single Spool Turbofan………………………………………………9
Figure 2.6.2: Cross Section of GE CF700 Aft-fan Single Spool Turbofan………………………………..9
Figure 2.6.3: Schematics of GE CJ805-23 Aft-fan Single Spool Turbofan…………………………….10
Figure 2.6.4: Cross Section of GE CJ805-23 Aft-fan Single Spool Turbofan………………………….10
Figure 2.7: Schematics of a Basic Twin Spool Turbofan……………………………………………………..11
Figure 2.8: Cross Section of the Pratt and Whitney PW600 Basic Twin Spool Turbofan………12
Figure 2.9: Schematics of a Boosted Twin Spool Mixed Flow Nozzle Turbofan…………………..13
Figure 2.10: Cross Section of the Boosted Twin Spool Mixed Flow Nozzle Turbofan…………..13
Figure 2.11: Schematics of a Boosted Twin Spools Separate Flow Nozzle Turbofan……………14
Figure 2.12: Cross Section of Boosted Twin Spool Separate Flow Nozzle Turbofan…………….15
Figure 2.13: Schematics of a Geared Twin Spool Turbofan………………………………………………..16
Figure 2.14 Cross Section of the Pratt and Whitney PW1000 Geared Twin Spool Turbofan..16
Figure 2.15: Schematics of Triple Spool Turbofan……………………………………………………………..17
Figure 2.16: Cross Section of the Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 a Triple Spool Turbofan Engine…..18
Figure 2.17: Schematics of a low-bypass Turbofan Engine…………………………………………………19
Figure 2.17a: Schematics of an Afterburner……………………………………………………………………..20
Figure 2.17b: Cross Section of an Afterburner………………………………………………………………….21
Figure 2.17c: Cross Section of the Pratt and Whitney F100-220 Low-bypass afterburner……21
Figure 2.18: Schematics of a low-bypass turbofan Engine…………………………………………………22
Figure 2.19: Open Brayton Cycle………………………………………………………………………………………23
Figure 2.20: Energy versus Entropy graph indicating Thermal Efficiency in a system………….24
Figure 2.21: T-S Diagram………………………………………………………………………………………………….24
Figure 2.22: P-V Diagram…………………………………………………………………………………………………24
Figure 2.23: Schematics showing the flow of Propulsive energy in a Turbofan Engine……….29
Figure 2.24 Evidence of fouling in a compressor blade……………………………………………………..31
Figure 2.25: Corroded Turbine Blade……………………………………………………………………………….32
Figure 2.26a: Evidence of Hot Corrosion on a Turbine blade …………………………………………….33
Figure 2.26b: Evidence of Hot corrosion on a Turbine Blade due to contaminants…………….33
Figure 2.27: Visible Signs of Abrasion due to Volcanic Ash Particles………………………………….34
Figure 2.28: Signs of Mechanical Degradation on Rolling Bearings and gears…………………….35
Figure 2.29: Evidence of Oxidation on a turbine blade………………………………………………………36
Figure 2.30a: Evidence of Erosion on Turbine blade………………………………………………………….37
Figure 2.30b: More evidence of erosion on turbine blade…………………………………………………37
Figure 3.1: Enthalpy against Entropy Graph of the simulated USWLRM engine…………………43
Figure 3.2: Temperature against Entropy Graph of the simulated USWLRM engine…………..43
Figure 3.3: Pressure against Volume Graph of the simulated USWLRM engine………………….43
Figure 3.4: Graph in progression of SFC against Net thrust on USWLRM engine…………………43
Figure 3.5: Schematics of the USWLRM Engine with stations numbering…………………………..45

vii
Figure 3.6: Graph of Off Design Performance WITHOUT Deterioration of Mass Flow, Fuel Air
Ratio and Gas Constant against Station Number of USWLRM Engine……………….46
Figure 3.7: Graph of Off Design Performance WITHOUT Deterioration of Total and Static
Temperature with Static Pressure against Station Number………………………………47
Figure 3.8: Graph of Off Design Performance WITHOUT Deterioration of Velocity, Mach
Number, Area and Density against Station Number of USWLRM Engine………….47
Figure 3.9: Off-Design of Increased BET of Temperature against Entropy Graph……………….48
Figure 3.10: Off-Design of Increased BET of Pressure against Volume Graph…………………….48
Figure 3.11: Operating Line graph of Pressure-Ratio against Mass flow of the BOOSTER MAP
in the USWLRM Engine……………………………………………………………………………………………………48
Figure 3.12: Off-Design of Increased BET of Enthalpy against Entropy Graph…………………….49
Figure 3.13: Operating Line graph of Pressure-Ratio against Mass flow of the LPC MAP…….49
Figure 3.14: Operating Line graph of Pressure-Ratio against Mass flow of the HPC MAP……49
Figure 3.15: Operating Line graph of Pressure -Ratio against Speed flow of the LPT MAP….49
Figure 3.16: Operating Line graph of Pressure-Ratio against Speed flow of the HPT MAP….49
Figure 3.17: Temperature against Entropy Graph of the Simulated USWSMS Engine…….…..62
Figure 3.18: Enthalpy against Entropy Graph of the Simulated USWSMS Engine…….…….…..62
Figure 3.19: Pressure against Volume Graph of the Simulated USWSMS Engine…….…….……62
Figure 3.20: Graph of Specific Fuel Consumption against Net Thrust of USWSMS Engine…..62
Figure 3.21: Schematics of the USWSMS Engine with Station numbering of each section….63
Figure 3.22: Graph of Off Design Performance WITHOUT Deterioration of Mass Flow, Fuel
Air Ratio and Gas Constant against Station Number of USWSMS Engine………..65
Temperature with Static Pressure against Station Number…….…….…….…………66
Figure 3.24: Graph of Off Design Performance WITHOUT Deterioration of Velocity, Mach
Number, Area and Density against Station Number of USWSMS Engine…….….66
Figure 3.25: Off-Design of decreased BET of Temperature against Entropy Graph of the
USWSMS Engine …….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…67
Figure 3.26: Off-Design of decreased BET of Pressure against Volume Graph of the USWSMS
Engine…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….……67
Figure 3.27: Operating Line graph of Pressure-Ratio against Mass flow of the BOOSTER MAP
in the USWSMS Engine…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….67
Figure 3.28: Off-Design of decreased BET of Enthalpy against Entropy Graph of the USWSMS
Engine…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….……67
Figure 4.1: Direction of airflow on an aerofoil…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…..80
Figure 4.2: Detailed schematics of an aerofoil…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….……......80
Figure 4.3: Identification of parts of an aerofoil…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…81
Figure 4.4: Direction of airflow on an aerofoil identifying how air is separated from the
trailing edge…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….……81
Figure 4.5: Evidence of a very minor case of Bird Strike…….…….…….…….…….…….…….…….….86

viii

List of Symbols

Symbol Definition Unit

c Core Air Flow -
f Fan Flow -
F Force N
ṁ Mass Flow kg/s
!th Thermal Efficiency -
h Enthalpy -
Cp Specific Heat at Constant Pressure Kj/Kgk)
T Temperature K
Va Inlet Velocity of air
Vj Inlet velocity of Jet m/s
LCV Low Calorific Value kj/kg
M Mass (Weight) kg
A Acceleration m/s2
!Pr Propulsive efficiency -
!overall) Overall Efficiency -
Pa Pressure of Air
Pj Pressure of Jet psi
V Flight Speed m/s
Aj Area of Jet Nozzle m2

ix
List of Abbreviations

BPR Bypass Pressure Ratio
BET Burner Exit Temperature
CO2 Carbon dioxide
EGT Exhaust Gas Temperature
FOD Foreign Object Damage
HPC High-pressure Compressor
HPT High-pressure Turbine
LPC Low-pressure Compressor
LPT Low-pressure Turbine
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NDT Non Destructive techniques
NOX Oxides of Nitrogen
OGV Outside Guide Vane
OPR Overall Pressure Ratio
RPM Revolutions Per Minute
SFC Specific Fuel Consumption
TET Turbine Exit Temperature
PPB Parts per Billion
x
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
This first chapter gives an introductory illustration to the basis of this project which initialises
the general degradation mechanisms and also specifies the major context in which this
project was carried out. It also tries to describe the foundation of this project, addresses the
scope and objectives in this project as a brief outline.
1.1 Background:
This dissertation is tilted to focus more on turbofan engines and elaborate on the degradation
mechanisms that could affect the components in these engines. In this 21st century ability to
have reliable engines is the basic watchword by most engine manufacturers, as the rate of
which the preferred mode of travel is more tilted to flight.
Civil aviation keeps growing at an alarming rate and more emphasis are focused on safety,
and to accomplish this goal so many technological tools are being injected into the aviation
industry to improve safety, like NDT. Non-Destructive Techniques (NDT) are applied to
improve maintenance on the fuselage and also on the engines but these techniques are
applied after the engine had completed some hours of flight which could have incurred some
unforeseen damages and more financial expenditure may be carried out on these tests. It is
a well-known fact that various techniques in NDT tend to check for defects in super alloys or
composite materials which are mostly utilized by modern turbofan engines, but this project
is not focused on NDT, instead it is focused on using a software called GasTurb12 to simulate
various circumstantial events that could affect an engine through various levels of engine
degradation which helps engine manufacturers to understand how their engine performs and
with this information create better performing engines.

1.2 Research Focus:
The research focus of this project is based on investigating the degradation of components in
Turbofan engines. This project is more focused on the ability to simulate various instances of
how specific components in an engine can perform when challenged with so many levels of
engine degradation. A turbofan engine cannot be certified to fly if Core (Thermal) efficiency
and Propulsive efficiency do not meet certain requirements even after undergoing the various
test. The compressor, combustor and turbine are all major components in a core engine and
1
this project tends to critically analyse each component by degrading to check how to make
newer engines safer. Another issue that would be analysed is how the engine contributes to
environmental pollutions when degraded and also the ramifications that evolve in more CO2
emissions of the aircraft engine and how related it is to Specific Fuel Consumption (SFC) as
well as NOX emissions.

1.3 Research Aims and Objectives:
The project is centred on engine degradation so the aims and objectives of this project are:
• Having a general understanding of various degradation mechanisms including the
effects of fouling on an aerofoil.
• Understanding various turbofan engine types and how a Mixed and Unmixed turbofan
engine operates.
• Ability to analyse and push an engine to the maximum limit of degradation.

1.4 Outline:
This dissertation is divided into five main chapters with each chapter being subdivided into
further sections and subsections.
Chapter 1 provides the basic introduction to this project topic, the aims and objectives
including the scope of this project.
Chapter 2 focuses on the basis for this project which delivers a wide overview of turbofan
engines which are applied in commercial and military aeroplanes. It also provides a detailed
background of the aeroplane, in-depth knowledge on engine technology, how the turbofan
engine works, the variants in engines and the introduction to engine degradation.
Chapter 3 Introduces the use of GasTurb12 to demonstrate various levels of engine
degradation that a turbofan engine can undergo. This chapter also demonstrates how engine
components perform at various altitudes and different Speeds and how SFC and NOX
emissions are generated as a result of degradation.
Chapter 4 tries to give a general feedback on simulations performed to analyse both engines,
and the critically analyse the results obtained from chapter three and full interpretations of
them.
Chapter 5 this chapter been the last chapter gives a general conclusion and recommendations
to the project.
2
CHAPTER 2
Literature Review

This second chapter tends to form the basis for this project by providing a brief history and
wide overview of turbofan engines which are applied in commercial and military aeroplanes.
In addition, to totally understanding the research approach of this project, it provides a
detailed background of the relevant subjects which are addressed throughout this study. This
includes the history of the aeroplane which birth the turbofan engine, engine technology,
how the turbofan engine works, the variants in engines and the introduction to engine
degradation.

2.1 The History behind an Aeroplane:
According to the National Academy of Engineering (2016), much perseverance has been
undergone to make sure the recurring engineering problems which are associated with flight
are tackled properly and efficiently. Even before the Wright brothers' famous endeavours at
flight on December 17th 1903, in North Carolina United States there have been so many
attempts to flight in general.
According to Ackroyd (2000), Sir George Cayley, who was born on December 27th 1773,
and was also an English baronet launched aeronautical engineering by understanding the
behaviour of solid surfaces moving fast in a fluid stream, created the first winged aircraft. He
spent many years studying flight and died on December 15th 1857, in Brompton.
Aviation History (2006), gave brief history on Samuel Pierpont Langley who was born
August 22nd 1834, in Massachusetts, United States. He was known as the first man to build
the first powered aircraft. Samuel P. Langley manufactured a steam propelled aerodrome in
1896. Theis aerodrome was unmanned, and it actually flew for about a half mile. Samuel
Pierpont Langley in 1901 continued with his research where he built the first propelled
gasoline powered model of his aerodromes. These Aerodromes were propelled by an internal
combustion engine, he later died on February 27th 1906, South Carolina United States.
McCullough (2015) commented on the efforts of the Wright Brothers in 1903 to create
the first successful manned flights in their aircraft in North Carolina. Wilbur Wright born April
16th 1867 and Died May 30th 1912, while his younger brother Orville Wright born on August
3
19, 1871 and died January 30, 1948. The Wright Brothers are known over the world as the
pioneers of aeroplanes today.
Military Factory (2013) gave clear instances on the reasons why better aeroplanes are used
for fighting purposes in 1914 which were created during World War 1. This birth the creation
of aeroplanes which were faster and lighter. These aeroplanes used Piston Propeller Engines.
According to Wisconsin Historical Society (1996), from around early 1925-1930
civilian aeroplanes are gradually being developed to be much bigger and better planes with
improved air-cooled radial piston propeller driven engines.
In 1933 the first ever metal, twin-engine passenger aeroplanes which were powered by
two 550 HP Pratt and Whitney Wasp radial piston engines. They were manufactured by
Boeing and they were called Boeing 247. Boeing manufactured 75 of this planes and they
could seat up to 10 people (Boeing, 1995).
The first jet-powered commercial aeroplane based on the claims of a staff of
findingDulcinea (2011), De Havilland Comet made its first flight on July 27, 1949. Thereafter
in just three years the Comet in May 2nd 1952, officially became first jet-powered commercial
flight which flew between London and South Africa.
More so, Pratt and Whitney (2016) proudly acclaimed the manufacture of the first ever
low-bypass medium to long range commercial turbofan engine which was created in 1957.
The JT3D (TF33) engine made its first ever flight on Boeing 707-120 aircraft on June 22, 1960.
McDonnell Douglas were impressed with the engine and they selected it for versions of the
DC-8 (Boeing, 1995).
General Electric Aviation (2016), in just over a decade that the low-bypass turbofan engine
was created, in 1968 they produced the first ever two-spool high-bypass turbofan engine
which was TF39 turbofan engines for the Lockheed Martin C-5 A/B/C Galaxy military aircraft.
These engines are still in service till date but GE has since stopped the production of these
engines (Kasper, 2012).
Due to the wide acclaimed advantages of the high-bypass turbofan engines especially in
high fuel efficiency in 1969 just a year after GE created the TF39, Boeing launched the first
larger passenger jets called the Boeing 747-100B. This huge aeroplane was powered by four
high-bypass turbofan and it was graced by the very first set of engines which was the Pratt &
Whitney's JT9D (Pratt and Whitney, 2016). Rolls Royce (2016), joined the race in early 1970’s
to produce the RB211-535E4 also known as the record breaker, thereafter in 1971 GE was
4
motivated to join history in the making by creating the CF6 engine for the Boeing 747-100B
(General Electric Aviation, 2016).

2.2 Turbofan Engine Technology:
Turbofan engines are used vastly in the world of today. When it comes to civil transportation
the most relied upon method of transport are aeroplanes that use turbofan engines being the
most widely used engine variant for short-to-medium as well as for long range travels.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) (2012), explained that for an
aeroplane to move through the air, thrust is generated by some kind of propulsion system.
Turbofan engines are the most preferred option for civil travels because of their high
increase in thrust, good fuel efficiency and quiet operation. Woodford (2016) gave his opinion
on the fact that turbofan engines possess large fans which suck a large amount of air at the
front. This air is drawn into the compressor while a huge some are blown around the
surrounding areas of the entire engine including the combustion chamber and then directed
to the back this process is called a bypass.

Figure 2.1: Schematics on a High-bypass Two Spool Turbofan (Loftin, 2004).

2.2.0: How a Turbofan works:
There are many variations of gas turbines but compared to other gas turbines, turbofan has
a fan and a core engine. This core engine controls the effect of power or thrusts a turbofan
can produce. The core engine comprises of a combustion chamber, a compressor section and
a turbine section all these sections make up the core engine in any gas turbine or Turbofan
engine.
5
In the turbofan engine, the fan is in front of the core engine and turbine at the rear. The
fan blades and turbine blades comprise of many blades, also the core compressor and core
turbine, are connected by an additional shaft or spool. The core compressor, core turbine and
fan blades turn with the shaft or spool and some blades remain stationary. These stationary
blades are known as Stator Vanes they do not rotate and they do not change their shape or
position while other the other type of blades that are also stationary but can change their
shape and position they are known as Variable Stator Vanes.
A turbofan engine works by permitting incoming air which is drawn in by the large fan and
then captured by the engine inlet. The air drawn in moves into the core compressor and then
into the combustor, where the mixture of fuel and air combine to create combustion. These
hot gases then flow through the turbine core and then moves out with intense pressure
through the nozzle. This airflow is called the core airflow.
Where: Force= [mass x acceleration]
•
Force= (M)
Where c= core air flow •
(M)c
Airflow =
This airflow that passes through the fan has a velocity, this velocity is slightly increased from
fast moving stream. This airflow is called the fan flow or bypass flow (National Aeronautics
and Space Administration (NASA), 2012).

Where: Force= [mass x acceleration]
•
Force= (M)
Where f= fan flow •
(M)f
Bypass flow =
The ratio of (m dot)f to (m dot)c is called the Bypass Pressure Ratio BPR.
Where
•
Bypass Pressure Ratio (BPR) = (M)f
•

(M)c

Turbofan engines have three major variants which are Single Spool Turbofan, Twin Spool
Turbofan engines and Triple Spool Turbofan engines.

6
2.2.1 Single Spool Turbofan:
The single spool or single shaft turbofan has two major types which are the basic single spool
turbofan and the geared single spool turbofan engines.
2.2.1a Basic Single Spool Turbofan:
The Single spool turbofan engine or single shaft turbofan engine is an engine that has a
single shaft connecting the fan, high-pressure compressor (HPC) and high-pressure turbine
(HPT). As can be observed in Figure 2.2 below the black and blue striped line runs through
from the fan down to the turbine this causes all the three components to have the same
revolutions per minute(RPM). These type of engines are mostly adopted by few military
aircrafts. The first ever single shaft or spool turbofan is the Snecma M53-P2. According to
Mirage Jet (2002), the Snecma M53-P2 has a low-bypass ratio of 0.4.

Single Spool

Fan

Figure 2.2: Cross section of a Basic Single Spool Turbofan

FAN
HPC COMBUSTOR
NOZZLE/EXHAUST
SINGLE SPOOL HPT

Figure 2.3: Cross section of the Snecma M53-P2 (Mirage Jet, 2002)

7
2.2.1b Geared Single Spool Turbofan:
The Geared Single spool turbofan engine or Geared single shaft turbofan engine is an
engine that has a single shaft connecting the fan, then the gears followed by the high-pressure
compressor (HPC) and high-pressure turbine (HPT). As can be observed in Figure 2.4 below
the black and blue striped line runs through from the fan then intercepted by the gears then
to the high-pressure compressor and finally the turbine. Due to the presence of the gears,
this permits the fan blades to rotate at a much slower speed compared to the HPC and HPT.
Thereby making the fan rotate at a slower RPM and causing the other two components to
rotate at higher revolutions per minute(RPM). A very good example of an engine that was a
geared single spool turbofan is the Turbomeca Aubisque which as acclaimed by All-Aero
(1962) is a low-bypass turbofan engine which had its first run in 1961 and was adopted by
military aircraft. According to Flying (1962, p.105), the Turbomeca Aubisque was adopted by
the Saab 105 military jet and these engines are still in service till date.

Gears
Single
Spool
Fan

Figure 2.4: Cross section of a Geared Single Spool Turbofan

Single Spool/Shaft
Fan
Nozzle/Exhaust
Gears HPC Combustor
HPT

Figure 2.5: Cross section of the Turbomeca Aubisque (Flight Global, 1962).

8

Figure 2.6: Schematics of the Turbomeca Aubisque (All-Aero, 1962).

2.2.1c Aft-fan Single Spool Turbofan:
The Aft-fan Single spool turbofan engine is an engine that has a single shaft connecting
the high-pressure compressor (HPC), high-pressure turbine (HPT) and fan. As can be observed
in Figure 2.6.1 below. As compared to other typical turbofans that have their fans in front the
aft-fan in located at the rear. Since it’s a single shaft engine all components rotate at the same
revolutions per minute(RPM).

Turbine

Combustor
Figure 2.6.1 Schematics of an Aft-fan Single

Spool Turbofan (BS Aeronautics, 2016).

HPT
FIRST SPOOL
CONNECTING AFT-FAN
FAN, LPC AND LPT

HPC
COMBUSTOR NOZZLE/EXHAUST
Figure 2.6.2 Cross Section of GE CF700 Aft-fan

Single Spool Turbofan (Chips, 2012).
9

NOZZLE/EXHAUST

HPT

AFT-FAN
HPC

Figure 2.6.3: Schematics of GE CJ805-23 Aft-fan Single Spool Turbofan (Flight Global, 1959).

COMBUSTOR
NOZZLE/EXHAUST

HPC HPT AFT-FAN
Figure 2.6.4: Cross Section of GE CJ805-23 Aft-fan Single Spool Turbofan

(General Electric, 2006).
According to Archimedes (2015), the GE CJ805-23 is a typical example of an aft-fan which was
manufactured in 1956. The disappointment in the production of GE CJ805-23 made General
Electric produce the GE CF700 in 1964 according to Aviation Safety Network (2014). This
engine is currently running the Dassault Falcon 20 aircraft (General Electric Aviation, 2015).

2.2.2 Twin Spool Turbofan:
The twin spool turbofan is slightly similar to the single spool turbofan the only major
difference is that the twin spool turbofan engine has an extra spool that introduces the low-
pressure compressor (LPC) and the low-pressure turbine (LPT). Twin spool turbofan is widely
used in the civil aviation industry of which many variations have been produced. Detailed
explanation of the wide variations of twin spool turbofan are explained below.
10
2.2.2.b Basic Twin Spool Turbofan with (Axial or Centrifugal) Twin Spool Compression:
The basic twin spool turbofan engine consists of two pools connecting the fan, low-
pressure compressor (LPC), high-pressure compressor (HPC), the high-pressure turbine (HPT)
and low-pressure turbine (LPT). In Figure 2.7 below the first spool which is indicated by the
blue line runs through from the fan then through the low-pressure compressor and finally to
the low-pressure turbine and then the second spool indicated by a larger yellow coloured line
could be observed moving through the high-pressure compressor to the high-pressure
turbine. Figure 2.8 below gives a clear picture of the Pratt and Whitney PW600 engine, which
shows the fan, the outside guide vane (OGV), which creates space before the axial LPC, the
high-pressure centrifugal compressor then the axial HP Turbine and LP Turbine. The Pratt and
Whitney PW600 according to Pratt and Whitney (2006), developed three more models which
are presently in service which are PW610F, PW615F and PW617F.

HPT
FAN HPC COMBUSTOR

LPC
EXHAUST
SECOND SPOOL
CONNECTING BOTH
LPT
HPC AND HPT
FIRST SPOOL CONNECTING

FAN, LPC AND LPT
Figure 2.7: Schematics of a Basic Twin Spool Turbofan

(The Flying Engineer, 2016).
11

FIRST SPOOL CONNECTING FAN, LPC AND LPT
CENTRIFUGAL HPC
FAN

EXHAUST

LPT

HPT

OGV SECOND SPOOL
LPC COMBUSTOR CONNECTING BOTH
HPC AND HPT
Figure 2.8: Cross section of the Pratt and Whitney PW600 Basic
Twin Spool Turbofan (Pratt and Whitney, 2006).

2.2.2.c Boosted Twin Spool Turbofan:
The boosted twin spool turbofan can be easily mistaken as the basic twin spool turbofan
because they possess similar configurations and similar engine layouts. The only major
difference which helps identifies a boosted twin spool turbofan from a basic twin spool
turbofan is that the Low-pressure Compressor (LPC) in a boosted twin spool turbofan engine
is merged or bolted with the fan which helps to compress air quicker and increase propulsive
efficiency better, compared to the basic twin spool turbofan which has a fan and then the
outside guide vane (OGV) that separates the fan from the low-pressure compressor this is
visible by comparing Figure 2.8 above of the Pratt and Whitney PW600 compared to Figure
2.10 of the CFM56-5c engine.

2.2.2.c.i Boosted Twin Spool Mixed Flow Nozzle Turbofan:
This type of engine like CFM56-5C have similar characteristics like normal twin spool
turbofan engines, the only reason they are called mixed flow turbofan engines is that in a low,
high or ultra-high-bypass engines the cold air absorbed by the fans are merged with the hot
exhaust gases emitted from the compressed air emitted by the low-pressure turbines at the
nozzles as shown in Figure 2.9. El-Sayed (2008, p.242) gave clear reasonable merits on the use
of mixed flow nozzle turbofan compared to the separate or unmixed flow turbofan engines.
Engines that possess mixed flow nozzle exhaust are much quieter in operation, especially the
internal core of the engines and the combustor are effectively cooled, they generate much
12
thrust than their counterparts, the LPT uses less power to drive the fan and also the fan
generates higher specific thrust.

Figure 2.9: Schematics of a Boosted Twin Spool Mixed Flow
Nozzle Turbofan (Aainsqatsi, 2008).

FIRST SPOOL
CONNECTING
FAN, LPC AND
LPT
LPC/Booster
HPT LPT

FAN
EXHAUST
COMBUSTOR

SECOND SPOOL
HPC
CONNECTING BOTH
HPC AND HPT

Figure 2.10: Cross Section of the CFM56-5C Boosted Twin Spool Mixed
Flow Nozzle Turbofan (CFM Aero Engines, 1996).

2.2.2.c.ii Boosted Twin Spool Separate (Unmixed) Flow Nozzle Turbofan:
The CFM56-7B also possess similar characteristics like normal twin spool turbofan engines
and just as explained above with the mixed flow the only visible difference is that the cold air
absorbed by the fans do not mix with the hot exhaust gases emitted from the nozzles. Figure
2.11 shows the schematics of a typical high-bypass unmixed engine. Wittenberg (2009, p.200)
claimed that mixed flow engines are heavier than Unmixed flow engines due to the large
13
nacelles that mixed flow engines possess which permits airflow in the core of the engine.
Unmixed nozzle turbofan engines tend to shed excess weight by making the nacelles smaller.
High-bypass ratio turbofan engines tend to generate a much larger Bypass Ratio(BPR) than
higher thrust and according to El-Sayed (2008, p.242) reverse thrust on an unmixed/separate
flow engine is more efficient.

Figure 2.11: Schematics of a Boosted Twin Spool Separate Flow Nozzle
Turbofan (Aainsqatsi, 2008)
14

FIRST SPOOL
CONNECTING
FAN, LPC AND LPT
AIRRFLOW
HPT LPT
LPC/Booster HPC
NOZZLE/EXHAUST
FAN

COMBUSTOR
OGV
SECOND SPOOL
CONNECTING BOTH
HPC AND HPT
Figure 2.12: Cross Section of a CFM56-7B Boosted Twin Spool Separate Flow Nozzle
Turbofan (CFM Aero Engines, 1996).
15
2.2.2.d Geared Twin Spool Turbofan:
The geared twin spool turbofan engine is also similar to that of the geared single spool
turbofan these engines perform similar functions the only major difference is that this engine
has a two independent spools. The first spool drives the fan, gears, LPC and LPT while the
second spools drive the HPC and HPT. Figure 2.13 below shows the schematics of a geared
twin spool turbofan. The function of the gears as explained earlier on the geared single shaft
engine above is that the gears installed are meant to reduce the centrifugal force the LPT
turbine applies to drive the fan by so doing the fan would rotate at a much slower speed
thereby making the LPC and LPT rotate at a much faster speed. Engines that possess this
technology have long lasting LPT blades. Pratt and Whitney (2016) adopted this technology
by manufacturing the Pratt and Whitney PW1000 as shown in Figure 2.14 below.
FIRST SPOOL CONNECTING FAN, GEARS, LPC AND LPT

FAN
LPC HPT LPT
HPC

GEARS

COMBUSTOR SECOND SPOOL
CONNECTING BOTH
EXHAUST
HPC AND HPT

Figure 2.13: Schematics of a Geared Twin Spool Turbofan
(The Flying Engineer, 2016).

FAN
HPC HPT LPT

GEARS

LPC

SECOND SPOOL
FIRST SPOOL CONNECTING BOTH
CONNECTING HPC AND HPT
FAN, LPC AND LPT
Figure 2.14: Cross section of the Pratt and Whitney PW1000

Geared Twin Spool Turbofan (The Flying Engineer, 2016)
16
2.2.3 Triple Spool Turbofan:
The triple spool turbofan engine is also similar to that of the single and twin spool
turbofan engines has explained before the only major difference is that this engine has three
independent spools. The first spool drives the fan, LPC blades and LPT blades while the second
spools drive the Intermediate Pressure Compressor blades (IPC) and Intermediate Pressure
Turbine blades (IPT). Then finally the third spool connecting the HPC blades and HPT blades.
Rolls-Royce is generally known to use the triple spool turbofan engines in most of the engines
they produce worldwide. Deagel (2003), suggested the Ivchenko-Progress D-18T which is a
similar triple spool engine which is manufactured by Motor Sich. The Ivchenko-Progress D-
18T is a high-bypass triple spool turbofan engine which is utilised by the biggest aircraft in
the world that is the Antonov 225 Mriya. Figure 2.16 below shows the world renowned Rolls-
Royce Trent 1000, an engine according to Rolls-Royce (2015) would power the Boeing 787
Dreamliner family.

Figure 2.15: Schematics of Triple Spool Turbofan Engine (Jeff Scott, 2006).

17

THIRD SPOOL
CONNECTING BOTH
LPC
HPC AND HPT HPT
HPC
FAN
LPT

SECOND SPOOL
CONNECTING BOTH
IPC AND IPT

IPC
IPT
FIRST SPOOL
CONNECTING
FAN, LPC AND LPT

Figure 2.16: Cross Section of the Rolls-Royce Trent 1000
a Triple Spool Turbofan Engine (Rolls-Royce, 2005).

2.3: Turbofan Engine Variations:
In a turbofan engine, there are two major variations which are the low and high-bypass
turbofan engine.

2.3.1 Low-bypass Turbofan:
Low-bypass turbofan engines which are also known as Jet engines usually are
manufactured to mostly have a single spool or sometimes a twin spool operated engine,
which as explained in Figure 2.2 that comprises of the fan, compressor section and turbine
section or if it’s a twin spool engine according to Figure 2.7 might contain the fan which is
driven by the LPT and LPC and then the second spool that drives both the HPC and HPT. Low-
bypass turbofans according to Skybrary (2014), generates most of its thrust from the engine
core. The same mass airflow is utilized in a low-bypass turbofan engine but the fan discharge
of air will be slightly greater than the amount of air passing through the compressor. In a low-
bypass engine, a few stages may be termed as fans that bypass the air. The fan discharge air
may be separate flow which means the air passes directly overboard from a short fan duct,
or it may be mixed flow which means the air passes directly along the entire length of the
18
engine which is a long fan duct. The end of these ducts all converge at the nozzle which
produces high thrust. (BS Aeronautics, 2016).
According to Safran (2016), the bypass pressure ratio of Snecma M53-P2 is 0.36
approximately 0.4 This means that assuming the measurement of air is taking by pressure
(psi) then the assumption can be made that 0 psi of air was bypassed around the engine and
only 4psi of air was permitted into the core of the engine.

Figure 2.17: Schematics of a low-bypass Turbofan Engine (Jeff Scott, 2006)

Low-bypass engines or turbojets are mostly utilised by the military compared to high-bypass
turbofans that are utilised mainly by civil aerospace companies. Low-bypass engines are small
and compact which makes it easy to be embedded in the fuselage of the aeroplane. Low-
bypass engines respond quickly to change in thrust when controlled by the pilot compared to
the delay which occurs in high-bypass turbofan engines. The major drawback of a low-bypass
turbofan engine is the rate at which Specific fuel consumption (SFC) is consumed. Military
aeroplanes utilise the low-bypass turbofan engines and some engines are fitted with an
afterburner.

2.3.1a Afterburner:
Benningfield (2007) gave his opinion on the way an afterburner performs stating that
an afterburner can be considered as a secondary combustion system which relatively burns
more fuel behind the nozzle, this reaction causes more increase in thrust. An afterburner can
also be called Reheat. This term reheat refers to the way an afterburner performs, which is
due to the fact that when the combustor passes on hot exhaust gases to the HPT blades, then
the air passes on to the LPT stages and then the nozzle. The reheat occurs when the little
oxygen present in the hot gases around the nozzle is utilized by spraying more fuel which
causes an increase in heat and thereby expands the exhaust gases further, thus causing an
19
extra increase in thrust. Engines that do not have an afterburner installed are much slower
than engines equipped with afterburners
Afterburners are mainly installed on low-bypass turbofan engines that are designed fir
use by the military. The purpose an afterburner is installed on jet engines including low-
bypass turbofans is to increase thrust and push an aeroplane beyond transonic speeds to
supersonic speeds of up to Mach 1.2, afterburners also help shorten take-off time and helps
in high-speed manoeuvres and aerobatic displays.
Aeroplanes which are fitted with afterburners requires adjustable nozzle as seen in Figure
2.17b which shows a variable nozzle, this nozzle helps turn the afterburners on and off this
feature helps the pilot to maintain good SFC (PilotFriend, 2000). Pratt and Whitney (2015)
claims the Pratt and Whitney F100-220 which is shown in Figure 2.17c powers the U.S. Air
Force’s F-15 Eagles and the F-16 Fighting Falcons. The F100 is presently used in over 20 air
force’s in the world.

Figure 2.17a: Schematics of an Afterburner(NASA Glenn Reseach
Center, 2015).
Thrust is Force (F) and it is derived when the cold stream of air inlet containing the mass flow
rate and velocity are subtracted from exhaust mass flow rate and velocity.
• •
MeVe MoVo
Whereby Thrust (F) = -
20

Figure 2.17b: Cross section of an Afterburner (PilotFriend, 2000)

LPC HPC HPT LPT

FAN

AFTERBURNER

COMBUSTOR EXHAUST

Figure 2.17c: Cross section of the Pratt and Whitney F100-220 Low-
bypass afterburning Turbofan Engine (Karman, 2015).

2.3.2 High-bypass Turbofan:
Skybrary (2014) describes an high-bypass turbofan engine as an engine that derives most of
its thrust from the fan as observed in Figure 2.18 below. The amount of exhaust velocity in
high-bypass is relatively lower than in a turbojet or low-bypass turbofan. A High-bypass
turbofan engine is the most widely used engine because of its fantastic savings in economising
fuel. High-bypass turbofan demonstrates good SFC by increasing inlet mass airflow while
greatly decreasing the velocity and temperature of the exhaust gas through the bypass
thereby reducing the total loss (BS Aeronautics, 2016).
According to Darling (2015), the fan in a high-bypass turbofan engine has a much larger
diameter to force a large volume of air through the ducts. GE Aviation (2016) brags about
their new engine the GEnx which is built for Boeing 787 Dreamliner and Boeing 747-8. GE
claims that this high-bypass turbofan engine can generate a bypass pressure ratio at take-off
21
at 9:0 and at top of climb at 8.3 this means that an assumption can be made by weighing mass
of air in kilograms (Kg). This means if GEnx is at top of climb then approximately 8kg of air is
bypassed around the engine and only 3kg of air moves on in the engine core.
William O. Gaffin (1968) gave affirmations to the fact that the efficiency of propulsion is a
function of airspeed birth from the exhaust to the surrounding air. High-bypass turbofan
engines are more efficient engines when achieving airspeeds of about 500 to 1,000 km/h (310
to 620 mph).

Figure 2.18: Schematics of a low-bypass Turbofan Engine (Jeff Scott, 2006)

2.4 Turbofan Engine Performance:
The Core system of an aircraft engine is determined by the efficiencies of both Thermal and
Propulsive efficiency.

2.4.1 Thermal efficiency (!th):
Ruffles (2012) gave his opinion by explaining that thermal efficiency is the process at which a
gas generator which in a turbofan engine, the combustor converts the chemical energy from
fuel which is mixed with the hot gaseous exchange of gases from the HPC to create thermal
energy which is then passed on to the HPT stages then nozzle to create intense thrust.
Thermal efficiency (!th) is the ratio between input thermal energy which is the Net Work
against the output work this output work is the heat input from the combustor.
22
Thermal efficiency is affected greatly by the mechanical work done in generating heat energy
and extracting that energy as thrust and, Thermal efficiency is also affected by the flight
altitude, the higher an aeroplane flies the thinner air becomes which makes compression
difficult thereby thrust from thermal efficiency would be affected by inadequate combustion.

Where:
Thermal Efficiency (!th)

Thermal Efficiency can not be properly explained without including Open Brayton Cycle. The
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (1902) commented on the efforts of George
Brayton on the manufacture of a piston engine called Brayton's Ready Motor which was
invented in April 2nd 1872. Pure combustion was derived from a mixture of gas with large
proportions of atmospheric air in. According to Butterman (2012), the components of the
Brayton cycle are categorised into two major parts which are the Closed cycle and Open cycle
as observed in the Figure 2.19 below. Due to this historical development by George Brayton,
the Open Brayton cycle was adopted by the aviation industry and thus Thermal efficiency can
be properly examined.

Figure 2.19: Open Brayton Cycle.
23

Section A. (Performance calculations and analysis)

1a. Calculate the net work per kg of air and thermal efficiency of the engine
Figure 1: Open Brayton Cycle

Advanced Propulsion Figure 2.20: Energy versus Entropy graph indicating Thermal Efficiency
Introduction to Propulsion Faculty of Computing, Engineering & Science, University of South Wales
in a system (Navaratne, 2016).

Temperature (T)
3
Pressure (P)
Qin
2 3
Qin

2’ 2

WT
Wc 4
4
1 Qout
4’
1 Qout
Volume (V)
Entropy (S) Figure 2: P-V Diagram
Figure 3: T-S Diagram
Figure 2.21: T-S Diagram. Figure 2.22: P-V Diagram.
(1-2’) = Adiabatic and reversible compression

(2’-3) = Constant pressure heat addition
(3-4’) = Adiabatic and reversible expansion
°
T1=15 C , 15+273= 288k
(1-2’) = Adiabatic and reversible compression
P1= 1bar
P2=38 bars
Isentropic efficiency of Compressor = 90%, Isc,C = 0.90
9
(2’-3) = Constant pressure heat addition
T3= 1800k
P3= 38 bars
Isentropic efficiency of Turbine = 92%, Isc,T = 0.92
(3-4’) = Adiabatic and reversible expansion
Compressor γ = 1.4,
Cp = 1.005KJ/kg
Turbine γ = 1.3,
The diagrams above (Figure 2.21 and Figure 2.22) which tend to illustrate how temperature
Cp=1.244 KJ/kg
Compressor
and pressure affect Thermal Efficiency in a Gas turbine engine.
γ- 1
T2’ = P2 γ
Thermal Efficiency (
T P 1
1.4- 1
1 !th) =
T2’ 1.4
= 38
!thermal
288 1
= Net work
T2’
= 380.2857
288
Heat in
T2’= 288 x 2.827
T2’= 814.2K
Network (NW) = Work done by Turbine (WT) – Work done by Compressor (WC)
10
24

Where: Network (NW) =
WT = h3-h4 – Wc = h2-h1
WT = Cp (T3-T4) – Wc = Cp (T2-T1)

Heat in (Combustor) =
Qin = h3-h2
Qin = Cp (T3-T2)
Note: h= Enthalpy
Cp= Specific heat at Constant Pressure (Kj/Kgk)
T= Temperature (k)

Thermal Efficiency (!th) can also be expressed further as
!thermal = Power to Jet (Mechanical energy)
Power to combustor (thermal energy from fuel)
!thermal = "KE (change in kinetic energy)
mfuel LCV

. . .
!thermal = ½ [(mair + mfuel ) Vj2 - mairVa2]
.
mfuel LCV

Note: • = Mass flow of Air LCV = Low Calorific Value
Mair

•
M fuel
= Mass flow of fuel Vj = Jet Velocity

Va = Inlet Velocity of air

The thermal efficiency of a turbofan engine can be explained further when NetWork (NW) is
fully applied in a turbofan engine these tend to greatly increase the kinetic energy of air flow
in the engine, the low calorific value of fuel is thereby regarded as chemical energy which is
then converted to thermal energy and thus combustion is complete.

25
Thermal efficiency (!th) can be calculated by assuming that air is sucked in the compressor at
1bar at 15˚c (288k) and it’s compressed to a pressure of 9 bar after combustion the gas
temperature is 1000˚c (1273K). If Isentropic efficiency of compressor and turbine are 94% and
the Network (NW) is calculated to be 620.4Kj/Kg and if the Heat in (Qin) is also calculated as
1520.1Kj/Kg then
Thermal efficiency (!th) = NW/QIN
Thermal efficiency (!th) = 0.4081 or 40.81%
2.4.2 Propulsive efficiency (!Pr):
Propulsive efficiency (!Pr) obeys both Newton’s second and third laws of motion. Newton’s
third law of motion states that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. This
means that the rate at which a turbofan generates thrust is caused by a reaction of resulting
forces which are inhaled in the engine. The principles at which thrust is derived is owed to the
large intake of a turbofan engine. The large fan in a turbofan engine sucks in a large amount
of air rapidly and this air is compressed and then the combustor expands that air and produces
a forward reaction by pushing the hot gases mixed with fuel out of the nozzle. Propulsive
efficiency also obeys the Newton’s second law of motion, which has so many definitions and
versions to what the law means.
According to Erik Oberg (2012), Newton’s Second law of Motion states that “Change of
motion is proportional to the force applied and takes place along the straight line in which
the force acts”.
Newton’s second law can be expressed as F=MA.
Where F = Force
M= Mass (Weight)
A = Acceleration (Velocity)
In the aviation industry, the Newton’s second of motion is applied especially in high-
bypass turbofan engines. These principles apply to the generation of thrust, and by breaking
down Newton’s second of motion it means the rate of change of momentum in an engine
26
determines the thrust. Newton’s second law and third law are all intertwined in how
propulsive efficiency is achieved in a gas turbine engine especially in turbofans. The mass
which was developed in Newton’s second of motion is the mass of air (mass flow) that the
fan sucks in the engine which is ingested and then spewed out. The acceleration (velocity) is
the speed of the resultant exhaust gases or air. Merging both mass and acceleration produces
force (thrust). This thrust or force derived is also known as The Rate of Change of Momentum.
Propulsive efficiency (!Pr) begins to approach 100% when the speed of the aeroplane flying
through the air is almost equal to the rate of speed at which hot gases of air are expelled from
the nozzles (The Flying Engineer, 2016).

Note: Newton’s second law can be expressed as F=MA.

According to General Electric Aviation (2004), the GEnx is designed to power the Boeing
Boeing 787-8, 787-9, 787-10 and the Boeing 747-8I Freighter. The GEnx1B70 is designed
specifically for the Boeing 787-8 which generates a thrust of 69,800lbs (310485.87N) and the
Air Mass Flow at take-off is 2559 lbs-mass/sec (1160.743Kg/s). So to calculate a balanced
propulsive efficiency and achieve 100% then speed of the aeroplane must be equal to the
acceleration of hot gases expelled.
Where Thrust (F) = Air mass flow (M) x Acceleration (A)
F = 310485.87N
M = 1160.743Kg/s
A = ?
F = MA
A =F/M
A =310485.87/1160.743
A = 267.48m/s2
Therefore, propulsive efficiency would be 100% if the aeroplane is achieving thrust of
69,800lbs (310485.87N) as a result of the large intake of the fan at the Air Mass Flow of 2559
lbs-mass/sec (1160.743Kg/s) and the core engine produces velocity of 267.48m/s2
(519.94Kn/s2)
27
Propulsive efficiency (!Pr) can be defined as the ratio between the power to aircraft against
power to jet.
Propulsive efficiency (!Pr) = Power to Aircraft = FN X V
Power to Jet ∆KE

Where:
Net Thrust (FN) = Gross Thrust (FG) – Momentum Drag (FD)
• • •
M air Mfuel M air
Gross Thrust (FG)= [ + ]Vj – Momentum Drag (FD) [ Va ]
• • •
FN =
[
M Mair a + Aj (Pj-Pa)]
air Mfuel j – ( )V
( + )V

Note: •
Mair
= Mass of Air Vj = Jet Velocity Aj = Area of Jet Nozzle
•
Mfuel
= Mass of fuel Va = Inlet Velocity of air V= Flight Speed

Pa = Pressure of Air Pj= Pressure of Jet

If Area of nozzle is assumed not to affect the amount of thrust generated and Net thrust
would not be affected then, then assume Aj = 0

• • •
FN=[( M
Mair a]
air Mfuel j – ( )V
+ )V

Propulsive efficiency (!Pr) = Net Thrust X Flight Speed
Change in Kinetic energy
28

•
F Mfuel
Aj

• •
Mout = Mair + Mfuel
Min
F Pj
Va Pa
Va
Vj

Figure 2.23: Schematics showing the flow of propulsive energy in a Turbofan Engine
• • •
!Pr = [( + )V Mair a] V
Mair Mfuel j – ( )V
• • •
2
Mair 2a]
Mair Mfuel j – ( )V
½ ( + )V

!Pr = 2V
V + Vj

According to Baxter (2012) Newton’s third law of motion which states that to every action
there is an equal and opposite reaction. In turbofan engines thrust is generated from the fan,
which is driven by the LPT this is the action involved in sucking air and which the reaction is
exhausted through a jet nozzle.

Propulsive efficiency
!Pr = 2Va
Va + Vj

Jet velocity Vj should be higher than the aircraft velocity Va to generate useful thrust, but to
get a balance propulsive efficiency then jet velocity must be almost equal to aircraft velocity.

29
2.4.3 Overall Efficiency (!overall):
Overall efficiency is generally known and defined as the multiplication of Propulsive efficiency
and Thermal Efficiency.
Where:
Overall Efficiency (!overall) = Propulsive Efficiency (!Pr) X Thermal Efficiency (!th)
J.H. Ellis (1999) made comments on how overall efficiency applies in modern aeroplanes,
which the claim made was that overall efficiency ranges between 20 and 40%. Overall
efficiency can be increased by first lowering the jet velocity (Vj) which would cause an increase
in propulsive efficiency. High-bypass turbofan engines implement this method to increase
overall efficiency especially when thermal efficiency from the core engine is typically
optimised but when an engine is degraded this affects thermal efficiency. When degradation
occurs like for example if losses occur due to the inefficiency of the fan which is driven by the
LPT this would reduce thermal efficiency and thereby affect propulsive efficiency and thus
the overall efficiency of such an engine would be currently about 30 to 37% at cruise.
Note:
!overall = Power to Aircraft (Useful work)
Thermal Energy from fuel
!overall = !Propulsive x (Power to Jet)

1/!Thermal x (Power to Jet)
!overall = !Propulsive x !Thermal

2.5 General Knowledge on Engine Degradation Mechanisms
According to Cyrus B. Meher-Homji (2005), they discussed the effects of gas turbine
performance deterioration which could affect the behaviour of an engine and how the
degradation of an engine can also increase fuel cost. Danai (2011) also claimed that the
performance of turbofan engines deteriorates with age due to corrosion, erosion and also
fouling of blades. Belapurkar (2012, p.23) stated that the deterioration of core engine
components like the compressor or turbine blades cannot be prevented but managed
effectively. Attempts to greatly manage these plague that affects turbofan engines have been
ongoing in frequent years in both commercial and military gas turbine engines by using
30
performance diagnostics tools. Ntantis (2013) also claimed that gas turbine performance
diagnostics is a more accurate method to detect, isolate and assess the changes in engine
module performance. An aircraft engine can be degraded over a long period of time due to
it’s exposure to the following factors which causes engine degradation in engines especially
Turbofan engines are: Fouling, Corrosion, Hot Corrosion, Abrasion, Mechanical Degradation,
Oxidation, Erosion.

2.5.1 Fouling:
According to Ebi A. Ogiriki (2015), fouling occurs in the core of the engine and as a result, it is
caused by the adherence of particles less than 10μm such as salt particles from the ocean. Oil
or water mists, dust and ash from volcanic eruptions are also causes fouling. These particles
stick to the turbine blades in the engine core as observed in Figure 2.24 below. The result of
these causes a build up of materials that inevitably would cause increased surface roughness
which in turn alters the shape of the compressor or turbine blades in the engine.
Rainer Kurz (2014), gave reasonable suggestions on how fouling can be greatly prevented
to an extent by detergent washing of components. Fouling which occurs in colder sections of
the engine can be prevented by cleaning. Components in the core engine operating at intense
temperatures are also subject to fouling, but the dirt’s are baked to the surfaces, this makes
it so difficult to clean.
There are generally four different types of fouling deposits that can be found inside an axial
compressor which are salts, carbon dirt, heavy hydrocarbons like oils and waxes,
Deterioration due to fouling is usually reversible, as the particles can be removed by a process
called On-Crank Washing (Pipeline and Gas Journal, 2011).
Evidence early signs of

Fouling can be observed at
the edge of the HPC air-foil
in a light colouration which
alters profile change and
affects performance of the
compressor
Figure 2.24: Evidence of Fouling
in a Compressor blade (Pipeline
and Gas Journal, 2011).
31
2.5.2 Corrosion:
Rainer Kurz (2009) claims corrosion can be caused both by inlet air contaminants and by fuel,
water, or combustion derived contaminants. Robb (2013), emphasized on the fact that fuel is
a major factor that causes corrosion just like heavy fuel oils and distillates. Rainer Kurz (2014),
claimed that salt-laden air would cause unprotected engine parts to corrode.
According to Fisher (2008), regular maintenance and fuel purification process regularly, and
application of turbine blade coating should be applied on affected blades to help deter
corrosion.

Figure 2.25: Corroded Turbine Blade (Stahlkocher, 2005).

2.5.3 Hot Corrosion:
Rainer Kurz (2009), explained that hot corrosion occurs as a result of the interaction of a metal
surface with a chemical substance at elevated temperatures. Even N. Eliaz (2000), stated that
hot corrosion is a form of accelerated oxidation which occurs mainly in the combustion
chamber and HPT blades as observed in Figure 2.26b below. It is derived from the chemical
reaction between this component in the core engine and molten salts which are deposited
on its surface. Stringer (1977), further explained that the accelerated oxidation of these
super-alloys is caused by the deposit of salts like Na2SO4. According to Rainer Kurz (2014), hot
corrosion occurs at temperatures ranging at 730 to 950°C and they can be managed by
adequately implementing turbine protective coatings.

32

Figure 2.26b: Evidence of Hot corrosion on a Turbine blade due to fuel or
air contaminants (P. Lowden, 2014).

Figure 2.26a: Evidence of Hot corrosion on a Turbine blade due to fuel or
air contaminants (Life Predictions Technologies Incorporated, 2010).
33
2.5.4 Abrasion:
Robb (2013), gave an opinion on the fact that abrasions can be caused as a result of the fan
in a turbofan engine rotating and brushing its tips against the nacelle. James A. Addison
(1988), also gave another opinion that abrasive wear can also be caused by rapid movements
of contaminant particles which cause the gradual chipping away of component materials this
results in friction, wear, and heat generation. Degradation due to abrasion of particles results
to roughening and misalignment of the fan blade tips. The more the friction occurs the wide
the tip gaps increase and thus causes engine surge in flight.

Figure 2.27: Visible Signs of Abrasion due to volcanic ash particles (Moody, 1982).

2.5.5 Mechanical Degradation:
Rainer Kurz, (2014) discussed on mechanical degradation which occurs mainly in bearings and
seals that cause excessive vibration, noise and thereby causing more problems in the lube oil
system. Component creep or thermal ratcheting are effects of mechanical degradation gas
turbine engines. The creep deformation of an exhaust nozzle can cause aerodynamic
problems and performance changes including thrust loss.
34
More so, mechanical engines are prone to mechanical degradation due to wear and tear
so periodical monitoring and maintenance could help manage such events in a gas turbine
engine.

Visible Signs of Mechanical
Degradation
Figure 2.28: Signs of Mechanical Degradation on Rolling Bearings and Gears
(Kuhnell, 2004).

2.5.6 Oxidation:
Robb (2013), explained that oxidation of a metal is the loss of some electrons which could
cause the metal to move from a neutral state to become a positively charged ion thereby
creating metal oxide on the surface of the metal. Rusting is a typical oxidation process which
occurs due to the chemical reaction between a metal and the exposure of oxygen in its
environment.

The B-52 Stratofortress according to Krum (2015), was a smoking aeroplane and this occurred
as a result of the water injection technology utilised to increase thrust and cool the engine.
The water injection technology sprays de-mineralized water into the incoming air which are
sucked in by the compressor and this had the effect of cooling the engine core and increasing
thrust by the addition of mass applied to the exhaust. Rainer Kurz (2009), claims to believe
that oxide layer on the metal surfaces in the engine core can either be beneficial, as a
35
protective layer over the metal, or even detrimental if corrosion continues to occur on the
metal.

The Figure 2.29 on the next page shows a visible example of a turbine blade that is undergoing
oxidation process.

Figure 2.29: Evidence of Oxidation on a turbine blade (Armando
Gallegos-Muñoz, 2012).

2.5.7 Erosion:
R.G Wellman (2008), explains erosion as the gradual chipping away of the thermal barrier
coating as shown in Figure 2.30b below with the damage which is confined to the upper layer
of 30µm of the coating. Rainer Kurz (2014), added that erosion as is the abrasive eradication
of material particles impinging on flow surfaces. These particles are larger than 10μm in
diameter to cause erosion by impact. Erosion greatly effects engines using water droplets for
inlet cooling like the B-52 Stratofortress.
Adler (1977), claims erosion could limit engine performance greatly and so suggest
methods to handle erosion by the use of Air filtration to extend the life of a turbine blade.
Thermal barrier coatings are applied on gas turbine blades to protect the engines hot-section
components in the harsh combustion environments and extend engine components
(Dongming Zhu, 2007).
36

Figure 2.30a: Evidence of Erosion on a turbine
blade due to Volcanic Ash (SKYbrary, 2016).

Figure 2.30b: More evidence of Erosion on a turbine blade. (Combined Cycle
Jounal, 2013).
37
CHAPTER 3
Simulation of Engine Performance and Degradation
3.1 Introduction:
This chapter tries to demonstrate and introduce various levels of engine degradation that a
turbofan engine can undergo and to critically check and observe the limit at which an engine
can try to maintain cruising speed even above all odds, thereby pushing the engine to the
limit. This chapter also demonstrates how engine components perform at various altitudes
and different Speeds.

3.2 Engine models:
The engine models used in this chapter were carved out from real turbofan engines. So
thereby for the purpose of this project the CFM56-5C is known as The University of South
Wales Long Range Mixed Flow Turbofan Engine (USWLRM) Engine and the CFM56-7B is also
known as the The University of South Wales Short to Medium Range Separate Flow
Turbofan Engine (USWSMS).

3.2.1 USWLRM Engine model: This engine is a mixed flow long range turbofan engine which
prides itself the ability to have longer flights and still have excellent Specific Fuel
Consumption(SFC). This engine comprises of a fan, four booster compressor stages, nine high-
pressure compressor stages with just a high-pressure turbine blade and five low-pressure
stages which produce a cruising net thrust of 6915 pounds of thrust. This engine is applied on
A340-200 and A340-300.

3.2.2 USWSMS Engine Model:
This engine is a separate flow short to medium-range turbofan engine which on the other
hand is designed for short to medium flights. This engine also compensates for its SFC due to
the fact that it’s separate flow engine this means the air coming from the large fans do not
get mixed with the hot air coming from the engine core by so doing the engine nacelles are
smaller and thereby shedding weight. This engine comprises of a fan, three booster
compressor stages, nine HPC, one HPT and four LPT which produces a cruising net thrust of
5420 pounds of thrust. This engine is applied on 737-600 and 737-700.
38
3.3 Simulations of Engine Degradation:
To simulate these engines some relevant data were obtained from various sources over
the public domain. The aim of gathering this information is to replicate these parameters
obtained from the public domain and input those data in the software which would be used
for the simulation, the software is called Gasturb12. The purpose of this simulation is to try
to understand how the components in a turbofan engine can affect the performance of flight
and thrust when degraded. These simulations would be carried out on the two major twin
spool turbofan engine variances which are used in the 21st century in aviation today.

3.3.1 USWLRM Engine Degradation:
In simulating the USWLRM engine the first hurdle to overcome is to accurately get the overall
pressure ratio(OPR). OPR means the ratio of the stagnated pressurised air which are trapped
are measured at the front and rear of the compressor stages. The OPR of this engine is 37.40
and to get this Figure on Gastub12 some parameters needed to be altered like the inner and
outer fan pressure ratio, the core inlet duct pressure ratio, Intermediate pressure (IP)
compressor pressure ratio, compressed inter-duct pressure ratio and the high-pressure (HP)
compressor pressure ratio. To get FN which is net thrust then various parameters needed to
be further adjusted including the insertions of Revolution Per Minutes (RPM), Bypass Duct
Pressure Ratio, Compressor and Turbine stages which are all obtained from the public
domain. Furthermore, not every information can be found on the public domain as Burner
Exit Temperature(BET) which is located at station 4 from Figure 3.5 below had to be created
and set up to 1278.83k. Simulating SFC was tricky as some parameters needed adjustments
these parameters are burner design efficiency, burner part-load constant, fuel heating value
which is also known as Low Calorific Value (LCV), HP spool mechanical efficiency, gear ratio,
LP spool mechanical efficiency, design mixer Mach number, burner pressure ratio, mixed
stream pressure ratio, then cold and hot stream mixer pressure ratio. The most important
parameters to recognise in Gasturb12 are when fuel heating value is increased then SFC
reduces and vice versa also Increase in air mass flow increases thrust massively and vice versa.
Simulations of various degradations were carried out by utilising the off-design tool in
Gasturb12 to simulate scenarios like increasing TET this happens when the pilot pushes the
throttle forward to increase the speed of the Engines.
39
The compressor would also be deteriorated and turbine would be left normal and then
turbine is deteriorated and compressor left normal.

Engine Design Parameters of USWLRM Engine

Fan Pressure Ratio Inner 1.58
Fan Pressure Ratio Outer 1.5
Mass flow (lbs/sec) 1,065
Inner LPC (Fan) Efficiency 0.88
Outer LPC(Fan) Efficiency 0.88
Burner (Combustor) Efficiency 1
Compressor Efficiency 0.88
Turbine Efficiency 0.90
Burner Exit Temperature (BET) (K,R) 1278.83,2301.9
Gear Ratio 0.8
Fan Pressure Ratio Range 1.58
Cycle Design Point Simulations
Design Point Conditions
Altitude (ft) 35000
Mach number 0.8
Delta T from ISA (R) -105.1
Relative Humidity (%) 0
Public
Parameters Domains Simulations Variations References
Bypass Pressure Ratio 6.5 6.5 0% (CFM, 1993)
SFC(Lb/hr) (Cruise) 0.545 0.545 0% (Meier, 2005)
NL (rpm) 4,800 4800 0% (Bislin, 2015)
NH (rpm) 15,183 15183 0% (Bislin, 2015)
Compressor stages 1+4B+9 1+4B+9 0% (Meier, 2005)
Turbine stages 1+5 1+5 0% (Meier, 2005)
Overall Pressure Ratio 37.4 37.4 0% (CFM, 1993)
Maximum cruise Thrust (lbs) 6,915 6915.04 0.04% (CFM, 1993)
Off Design Point Simulations
Altitude (ft) 0
Total Temperature T1 (R) 518.673
Total Temperature P1 15.1189
Ambient Pressure Pamb. 14.7609
Public
Parameters Domains Simulations Variations References
Bypass Pressure Ratio 6.5 9.89 3% (CFM, 1993)
Maximum Climb Thrust (lbs) 7,365 7365.03 0.03% (CFM, 1993)

Table 3.0: Public Domain Data of the USWLRM Engine.
40
Table 3.1a: Cycle Design Point of the USWLRM Engine.
Table 3.1b: Simulation of USWLRM Engine

was performed at top of climb.
Table 3.2b: Mass flow in simulating

USWLRM Engine.
Table 3.2c: Proof that Simulations of USWLRM

Engine are correct.
Table 3.2a: Parameters used to
achieve results.

41
Table 3.3: Off-Design Point of the USWLRM Engine.

Table 3.4: Parameters used to achieve results.

Table 3.5: Simulation of USWLRM Engine was performed at Take-off

42
Figure 3.1: Enthalpy against Entropy Graph Figure 3.2: Temperature against Entropy
of the Simulated USWLRM Engine. Graph of the Simulated USWLRM Engine.
Figure 3.3: Pressure against Volume Graph Figure 3.4: Graph in progression of Specific Fuel
of the Simulated USWLRM Engine. Consumption against Net Thrust of USWLRM Engine.
43
In Off design to manipulate the Burner Exit Temperature or the Turbine Exit Temperature
(TET), the number 2 in ZT4 is selected whereas number 1 is the Relative Spool Speed ZXN.
Initial Burner Exit Temperature at station 4 is 1278.83k (2301.90R) and at Station 5 which is
temperature gotten at the final stage of the LPT is 668.82 (1203.88R) with Net thrust FN =
30.76KN (6915.04 lb). According to Table 3.0 from the public domain, the Exhaust Gas
temperature at the second stage of the LPT turbine is 1198K.

With off design increasing TET would simulate what happens when the pilot pushes the
throttle forward to increase speed of the Engines. To simulate this TET would be increased to
1400k (2520 R) to 25.25KN (8265.11lb). Thus station 5 is increased as seen Figure 3.5
Note: Burner Exit Temperature from GasTurb12 software means temperature directly leaving
the combustor which is at station 4.
More so, Figure 3.11 to 3.16 and Figure 3.27 to Figure 3.32 this shows compressor and
turbine maps with operating lines. These operating lines commence with the single point
which was previously calculated therefore series of points with a continuous decrease in gas
generator spool speed will be calculated. The default step size of relative spool speed is 0.025.
Increase the number of points to 20.

The white circle marks the cycle design point and because the cycle design point had been
calculated in the off-design mode the yellow square also marks the off-design operating point.
There are six different versions of a turbine map. The y-axis is Pressure Ratio or Corrected
Work. Here Turbine Pressure Ratio is shown over the product of Corrected Flow and Corrected
Speed which is also known as SPEED FLOW.

44
Figure 3.5: Schematics of the USWLRM Engine with Station numbering of each
section.

Table 3.7: Proof that Off-Design results of

INCREASED Thrust are correct

Table 3.6: Off-Design results of Simulated INCREASED
Thrust of USWLRM Engine.
45
Ratio and Gas Constant against Station Number of USWLRM Engine.

46
Figure 3.7: Graph of Off Design Performance WITHOUT Deterioration of Total and
Static Temperature with Static Pressure against Station Number of USWLRM Engine.

Figure 3.8: Graph of Off Design Performance WITHOUT Deterioration of Velocity,

Mach Number, Area and Density against Station Number of USWLRM Engine.

47
Figure 3.9: Off-Design of Increased BET of Figure 3.10: Off-Design of Increased BET of
Temperature against Entropy Graph of the Pressure against Volume Graph of the
USWLRM Engine. USWLRM Engine.
Figure 3.11: Operating Line graph of Pressure-Ratio Figure 3.12: Off-Design of Increased BET of
against Mass flow of the BOOSTER MAP in the Enthalpy against Entropy Graph of the
USWLRM Engine. USWLRM Engine.
The white cycle in the MAPS indicate the Cycle Design Point.
48

Figure 3.14: Operating Line graph of

Figure 3.13: Operating Line graph of Pressure-Ratio against Mass flow of the HPC
Pressure-Ratio against Mass flow of the LPC MAP in the USWLRM Engine.
MAP in the USWLRM Engine.
Figure 3.15: Operating Line graph of Pressure - Figure 3.16: Operating Line graph of Pressure-
Ratio against Speed flow of the LPT MAP in the Ratio against Speed flow of the HPT MAP in
USWLRM Engine. the USWLRM Engine.
49
The yellow cycle is the Operating Point for T4=1400k (2520 R).
The University of South Wales Long Range Mixed Flow Turbofan Engine (USWLRM) would
undergo degradation by understanding how the deterioration can affect the compressor and
turbine. The Compressor of the Long Range Mixed Flow Turbofan Engine has a normal
efficiency of 88% (0.88), Turbine also has an efficiency of 90% (0.90) and they shall be
deteriorated in ten different stages. This simulation is to observe what happens when engine
components are degraded and Turbine Entry Temperature (TET) or Burner Exit
Temperature(BET) is left normal which is at station 4 in Gasturb12. The compressor would be
deteriorated and turbine would be left normal and then turbine is deteriorated and
compressor left normal.

3.3.1a Simulation of When Compressor Is Deteriorated Only:
3.3.1ai Simulate when Compressor is deteriorated by 1%(0.01) and Turbine is left normal
0.88-0.88x0.01=0.8712
Table 3.8: Compressor is deteriorated by 1%(0.01) of the USWLRM Engine.

50
3.3.1aii. When Compressor is deteriorated by 2%(0.02) and Turbine is left normal
0.88-0.88x0.02=0.8624

Table 3.9: Thrust Drop when Compressor alone is deteriorated by 2%(0.02)
3.3.1aiii. When Compressor is deteriorated by 3%(0.03) and Turbine is left normal
0.88-0.88x0.03=0.7736
Table 3.10: Thrust Drop when Compressor alone is deteriorated by 3%(0.03)

51
3.3.1aiv. When Compressor is deteriorated by 24%(0.24) and Turbine is left normal. 0.88-
0.88x0.24=0.6688
Creating a scenario to simulate how the USWLRM Engine performs if ONLY the Compressor
is deteriorated due to fouling as a result of flying through volcanic ash and to also push the
USWLRM Engine to the maximum limit it can be deteriorated even when the pilot tries to
maintain thrust.
Table 3.11: Thrust Drop when Compressor is

deteriorated by 24%(0.24) with errors visibly shown. Table 3.12: When Compressor is
deteriorated by 24% (0.24) and BET
is increased to achieve Thrust.
Table 3.13: Normal Thrust achieved when BET was increased to 2673.35R(1485.19K).
52
3.3.1av. When Compressor is deteriorated by 60%(0.60) and Turbine is left normal
0.88-0.88x0.60=0.352
When the compressor is deteriorated it causes pressure loss, also flameout usually
occurs when combustors stops burning fuel due to accidents that occur like Foreign Object
Damage (FOD) like bird strike this causes EGT to be lower than normal idle working
temperatures at 998K by simulating when the combustor stops burning fuel as observed in
station 4 below in Table 3.14

Table 3.14: Maximum Deterioration achieved as irreversible Thrust Drop can be

observed on the USWLRM Engine when Compressor is deteriorated by 60%(0.60)

Table 3.16: Error warning when BET

is increased to maintain cruise.

Table 3.15: Normal Thrust attained when BET was increased

to 4524.02R(2513.34K) but risk of overheating occurs.
53
3.3.1b. Simulation of when Turbine is deteriorated only
3.3.1bi. When Turbine is deteriorated by 1%(0.01) and Compressor is left normal
0.90-0.90x0.01=0.891.
Table 3.17: Trust drop when Turbine is deteriorated by 1%(0.01)

only.
3.3.1bii. When Turbine is deteriorated by 2%(0.02) and Compressor is left normal
0.90-0.90x0.02=0.882
Table 3.18: Trust drop when Turbine is deteriorated by 2%(0.02) only.

54
3.3.1biii. When Turbine is deteriorated by 3%(0.03) and Compressor is left
normal. 0.90-0.90x0.03=0.873

Table 3.19: Thrust drop when Turbine is deteriorated by 3%(0.03) only.

55
3.3.1biv. When Turbine is deteriorated by 24%(0.24) and Compressor is left normal.
0.90-0.90x0.24=0.684
The scenario on how the USWLRM Engine performs if ONLY Turbine is deteriorated due to
Hot Corrosion which can further deteriorate to creep causing mechanical degradation and to
also push the USWLRM Engine to the maximum point of deterioration as the pilot tries to
maintain thrust.
Table 3.20: Thrust Drop when Turbine is deteriorated

by 24%(0.24). Table 3.21: When Turbine is
deteriorated by 24% (0.24)
and BET is increased to
maintain Thrust.
56
3.3.1bv. When Turbine is deteriorated by 65%(0.65) and Compressor is left normal.
0.90-0.90x0.65=0.315
Table 3.23: Maximum Deterioration achieved as Table 3.24: When Turbine is

Thrust Drop can be observed on the USWLRM deteriorated by 65% (0.65) and BET
Engine when Turbine is deteriorated by 65%(0.65). is increased to maintain Thrust.
Table 3.26: Range violations warning

due to extreme deterioration.

Polytropic efficiency is the process of breaking down isentropic efficiencies into smaller steps
and processes. Isentropic efficiency is uniformity in all directions or equal entropy the
moment the temperature and pressure coming in an engine is not uniform then surge occurs
57
and then combustion is affected. Thus causing engine failures. The Table 3.25 above shows
that to attain Net thrust of 6915lb then more heat needs to be applied to BET.

3.3.2 USWSMS Engine Degradation:
Simulating the USWSMS engine was quite easy to perform as it had fewer parameters to
adjust to get things working. As usual, the first thing to do is to accurately get the overall
pressure ratio (OPR). The OPR of this engine is 32.70 and this is obviously a smaller ratio
compared o the Mixed turbofan engine earlier simulated. This is so because it is a separate
flow engine that has a smaller fan diameter encased by a smaller and lighter nacelle. To
simulate OPR on Gastub12 parameters like the inner and outer fan pressure ratio, the core
inlet duct pressure ratio, Intermediate pressure (IP) compressor pressure ratio, bypass duct
pressure ratio, compressed inter-duct pressure ratio, turbine inter-duct pressure ratio and
the high-pressure (HP) compressor pressure ratio were adjusted.
To simulate net thrust which is at cruising speed then fewer parameters needed to be
adjusted which are RPM, Compressor and Turbine stages, bypass ratio these are all obtained
from the public domain also SFC also plays a vital role to achieve cruising speed and to achieve
this mass airflow was adjusted to 1750lb/s also fuel heating value and burner design efficiency
were properly adjusted and finally Burner Exit Temperature was raised to
1877.59k(3379.67R).
Furthermore, more off-designs were carried out which involved simulating how the engine
would perform if the pilot decides to decrease thrust this was done without any form of
degradation. Then the compressor and turbine were both degraded to observe the limit at
which this engine can be degraded.

58

Engine Design Parameters of USWSMS Engine

Fan Pressure Ratio Inner 1.4
Fan Pressure Ratio Outer 1.2
Mass flow (lbs/sec) 1,750
Inner LPC (Fan) Efficiency 0.89
Outer LPC(Fan) Efficiency 0.89
Burner (Combustor) Efficiency 1
Compressor Efficiency 0.89
Turbine Efficiency 1
Burner Exit Temperature (BET) (K,R) 1877.59,3379.67
Gear Ratio 1
Cycle Design Point Simulations
Altitude (ft) 35000
Mach number 0.8
Delta T from ISA (R) 366.66
Parameters Public Domains Simulations Variations References
Bypass Pressure Ratio 5.4 5.4 0% (Safran, 1998)
SFC(Lb/hr) (Cruise) 0.6333 0.6333 0% (Meier, 2005)
NL (rpm) 5,380 4800 0% (Bislin, 2015)
NH (rpm) 15,183 15183 0% (Bislin, 2015)
Compressor stages 1+3B+9 1+3B+9 0% (Meier, 2005)
Turbine stages 1+4 1+4 0% (Meier, 2005)
Overall Pressure Ratio 32.7 32.7 0% (Safran, 1998)
Maximum cruise Thrust (lbs) 5,420 5420.03 0.03% (Bislin, 2015)
Off Design Point Simulations
Altitude (ft) 0
Total Temperature T1 (R) 763.69
Total Temperature P1 5.6809
Ambient Pressure Pamb 2
Parameters Public Domains Simulations Variations References
Bypass Pressure Ratio 5.4 5.1493 0.2507% (Safran, 1998)
Maximum Climb Thrust (lbs) 5,960 5960.25 0.25% (Safran, 1998)

Table 3.27: Public Domain Data of the USWSMS Engine.

59
Table 3.28a: Cycle Design of the USWSMS Engine.
Table 3.28b: Simulation of USWSMS

Engine was performed at top of climb.
Table 3.29b: Mass flow in simulating

USWSMS Engine.
Table 3.29a: Parameters used to

achieve results. Table 3.29c: Proof that Simulations of USWSMS
Engine are correct.
60

Table 3.30: Off-Design Point of the USWSMS Engine.

Table 3.31: Parameters used to achieve results.
Table 3.32: Simulation of USWSMS Engine was performed at Take-off.
61

Figure 3.17: Temperature against Entropy Figure 3.18: Enthalpy against Entropy
Graph of the Simulated USWSMS Engine. Graph of the Simulated USWSMS Engine.
Figure 3.20: Graph in progression of Specific

Figure 3.19: Pressure against Volume Graph Fuel Consumption against Net Thrust of
of the Simulated USWSMS Engine. USWSMS Engine.
62
Initial Burner Exit Temperature at station 4 is 1877.59k (3379.67R) and at Station 5 which is
temperature gotten at the final stage of the LPT is 935.53K (1683.95R) with Net thrust FN =
24.11KN (5420lb). According to Figure 3.27 from the public domain, the Exhaust Gas
temperature at the second stage of the LPT turbine is 1198K.

With off design decreasing TET would simulate what happens when the pilot pulls the throttle
backward to decrease speed of the Engines. To simulate this TET would be decreased to 1660k
(2988R) to 10.73KN (2412.45lb)

The operating line was calculated with the default step size of relative spool speed is 0.025.
Decreasing the Number of Points to 20, then run the case by clicking the Operating Line
button.

Figure 3.21: Schematics of the USWSMS Engine with Station numbering of each section.
63

Table 3.33: Off-Design results of Simulated DECREASED Thrust on USWSMS Engine.

Table 3.34: Proof that Off-Design results of Simulated DECREASED Thrust
was accurately calculated.

64

Ratio and Gas Constant against Station Number of USWSMS Engine.

65

Temperature with Static Pressure against Station Number of USWSMS Engine.

Figure 3.24: Graph of Off Design Performance WITHOUT Deterioration of Velocity,

Mach Number, Area and Density against Station Number of USWSMS Engine.

66
The yellow cycle from Figure 3.27 to Figure 3.32 is the Operating Point for T4=1660k
(2988R). The white cycle in the MAPS indicates the Cycle Design Point.
Figure 3.25: Off-Design of decreased BET of Figure 3.26: Off-Design of decreased BET of
Temperature against Entropy Graph of the Pressure against Volume Graph of the
USWSMS Engine. USWSMS Engine.
Figure 3.27: Operating Line graph of Pressure- Figure 3.28: Off-Design of decreased BET of
Ratio against Mass flow of the BOOSTER MAP in Enthalpy against Entropy Graph of the USWSMS
the USWSMS Engine. Engine.

The Short to Medium Range Separate Flow Turbofan (USWSMS) Engine has a compressor
which has a normal efficiency of 0.89 and turbine which has an efficiency of 0.94.
Turbine Exit Temperature (TET) is left normal which is at station 4 in Gasturb12. Then when
both compressor and turbine are degraded this causes reduced thrust. So to bring back the
67
thrust TET must be increased and then components in the engine would be observed to
identify and understand the ripple effects that can occur when efficiency is reduced.
3.3.2a Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 1%(0.01)
Compressor 0.89-0.89x0.01=0.8811 and Turbine 0.94-0.94x0.01=0.9306
Table 3.35: Thrust Drop when Compressor and

Turbine are both deteriorated by 1%(0.01) only. Table 3.36: When Compressor and
Turbine are deteriorated by 1% (0.01)
and BET is increased to maintain Thrust.

Table 3.37: Normal Thrust achieved when BET was increased to 3425.12R (1902.84K).
68
3.3.2b Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 2%(0.02)
Compressor: 0.89-0.89x0.02=0.8722 and Turbine 0.94-0.94x0.02=0.9212

Table 3.38: Thrust Drop when Compressor and Table 3.39: When Compressor and
Turbine are both deteriorated by 2%(0.02) only. Turbine are deteriorated by 2% (0.02)

Table 3.40: Normal Thrust achieved when BET was increased to 3471.8R (1928.77K).
69
3.3.2c Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 3%(0.03)
Compressor: 0.89-0.89x0.03=0.8633 and Turbine: 0.94-0.94x0.03=0.9118

Table 3.42: When Compressor and

Table 3.41: Thrust Drop when Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 3% (0.03)
Turbine are both deteriorated by 3%(0.03) only. and BET is increased to maintain Thrust.
Table 3.43: Normal Thrust achieved when BET was increased to 3520.1R(1955.61k).
70

3.3.2d Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 4%(0.04)
Compressor: 0.89-0.89x0.04=0.8544 and Turbine: 0.94-0.94x0.04=0.9024


71

3.3.2e Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 5%(0.05)
Compressor:0.89-0.89x0.05=0.8455 and Turbine: 0.90-0.90x0.05=0.893

72

3.3.2f Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 6%(0.06)


73
3.3.2g Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 7%(0.07)

Table 3.53: Thrust Drop when Compressor and
Turbine are deteriorated by 7% (0.07)
Turbine are both deteriorated by 7%(0.07) only.
74
3.3.2h Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 8%(0.08)
Creating another scenario to simulate how the USWSMS Engine performs if BOTH the
Compressor and Turbine is deteriorated due to Bird strike which could cause mechanical
degradation and to push the USWSMS Engine to the maximum point of deterioration even
when the pilot tries to maintain thrust.

Table 3.58: Error and warning signs are

indicated when BET is raised to achieve
cruise.
75
3.3.2i Compressor and Turbine are deteriorated by 20%(0.20)


Table 3.62: Error and warning signs are

indicated when BET is raised to achieve
cruise with more signs of overheating

76
Chapter 4
General Discussion on the Project

4.1: The General Approach:
The aim of performing this project is to understand how specific and certain components
perform and how each component affects the performance of the engine. This project
focused on the simulation performed on two different engines which served two different
roles. The USWLRM is a mixed flow turbine fan engine which was used for longer flights due
to its ability to maintain good SFC. This engine has just one additional HP compressor and LP
turbine blade than the USWSMS engine which is just a short to medium range separate flow
engine used on short flights. As observed from Table 3.1a the the USWLRM engine has much
larger thrust with reduced SFC compared to the USWSMS engine in Table 3.28a which has a
less thrust power but more SFC at cruise, this is why the USWLRM engine is the much
preferred choice for travelling on long flights, but every engine has a life span. The life of a
basic aeroplane is proposed to have different variants of years before they are written off.
In the aviation industry, most aeroplanes have various life spans. According to Landsberg
(2000), commercial aeroplanes like Douglass DC-3 are still in service nearly over 60 years,
while other aeroplanes are retired after only a decade of use. Few modern aeroplanes such
as a Boeing 737 which utilises the USWSMS simulated engine parameters may spend close to
fifteen to twenty years in airline service before been written. Due to the fact that the
USWSMS engine is designed for short to medium flights, this causes repetitive events of
fatigue and stress due to the pressurisation and depressurization cycles involved in landing
and taking off on the overall aeroplane. Repetitive events like that make the aeroplane grow
old very fast and this takes a lot of maintenance to keep them in safe operating condition.
Whereas aeroplanes like the A340 series have longer life spans of about 30 years that is
a whole decade above the Boeing 737 series and this is because the have longer flights thus
this causes less repetitive events of pressurisation and depressurization cycles, thereby the
need for maintenance take longer time. During the lifetime of a commercial aircraft, the
maintenance process involves complete disassembly, thorough inspection with Non-
Destructive Techniques (NDT). Maintenance especially D checks are complete when fresh
brand new or refurbished engines are installed this occurs mostly every two to three years.
77
This project tends to break down every component in bits and permits research to be done
and observations performed when the engine efficiency is degraded in successive levels.

4.2 Analyses on the Simulated Engines (USWLRM & USWSMS): Critical analyses was
performed on both engines to get some varied results on the engines.

4.2.2 Critical Analyses on USWLRM Engine: The USWLRM engine was simulated to get 99%
benchmarks like the way is it is demonstrated in the public domain and thereby all results
derived from the cycle design and comparing to the public domain had 0% variations as
observed in Table 3.0 except from the cruise trust that had a slight deviation of 0.04%.

Table 4.1a: Stations numbers of NORMAL parameters of USWLRM Engine

Table 4.1b: Stations numbers of NORMAL parameters of Simulated USWLRM Engine
78
Off-design simulations were performed on this engine by first trying to increase burner exit
temperature to create the scenario of how the pilot would increase trust and in so doing
understanding how each component responds. When BET was increased some parameters
automatically increased to adjust themselves to the increase in thrust. These parameters
where RPM, all efficiencies, increase in net thrust, SFC, Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX), core and
propulsive efficiencies, increased overall efficiency but a reduction in bypass pressure ratio.
Furthermore, incremental simulations of degradations were performed first by simulating
the deterioration of only compressor and leaving turbine to perform efficiently. Usually,
foreign object damage or fouling are likely culprits for damaging the compressor the more
deteriorated a compressor gets the less pressure of air can be drawn to the combustor to gain
thrust. Degradation of the compressor ran from degrading the compressor from 1%(0.01) to
23%(0.23) it could be observed that there was a steady decline in net thrust, SFC, NOX, Core
and propulsive efficiency. When the compressor was further deteriorated to 24%(0.24) it
could be observed that in Table 3.11 there was an error encountered in the simulation
performed on Gasturb12, this could be related in real life scenario as the engine encountering
Compressor Stall. Compressor surge occurred when the compressor was further degraded to
60%(0.60).

4.2.2.1 Compressor stall:
Omar (2012), spoke about the series of events that would cause a compressor to stall as he
explained that an aerofoil stalls when the air flow is separated from the suction side. Due to
the fact that on the suction side air travels rapidly on the leading edge as seen in Figure 4.2,
to cause a reduction in pressure of air. As the airflow reaches the middle section which is the
maximum thickness of the aerofoil, the air begins to slow down, thus causing pressure to
increase and be accumulated at the pressure side. This unstable conditions of airflow forces
a flow separation towards the trailing edge this causes a more pronounced reverse flow over
the aerofoil as seen in Figure4.4.
Stalls in axial compressors could occur due to various reasons. Channel flow occurs when
a stall happens on just a single blade or few blades and other blades are rotating normally,
this could also be known as a stable rotating stall. Stalls can cause detrimental events to an
engine and the worse event of a stall is called a compressor surge which causes a flameout.

79
4.2.2.2 Compressor surge:
As observed in Table 3.14 a compressor can graduate from a stall to a surge. A surge is a
phenomenon that occurs when all the blades in an axial compressor stall. This occurrence
occurs as a result of when the flow through aerofoils in the LP axial compressor becomes
choked. This phenomenon causes a complete breakdown in compression which results in the
reversal of flow and the violent expulsion of previously compressed air out through the engine
intake, which on various occasions causes a very loud bang.
Compressor surge occurs mainly as a result of repeated stall in all aerofoils that is because
the compressor might either experience a condition of large amounts of airflow which
exceeds the limits of its pressure rise capabilities or is highly overwhelmed such that it could
no longer have the ability to absorb a momentary amount of air to compress. As observed in
Table 3.15 the compressor was able to recover to normal flow once the engine pressure ratio
reduces to a level at which the compressor is capable of sustaining stable airflow but as it can
be seen in Table 3.16 the engine was able to recover but at the expense of risking overheating.

Figure 4.1: Direction of airflow on an
aerofoil (Qvist, 2011). Figure 4.2: Detailed schematics of an aerofoil
(Qvist, 2011).

80

Figure 4.3: Identification of parts of an aerofoil.

Figure 4.4: Direction of airflow on an aerofoil
identifying how air is separated from the trailing
edge (staff, 2016).
81

More so, more degradation simulations were carried on the USWLRM engine by keeping the
compressor normal and degrading the Turbine ONLY. Degradation of the turbine ran its
course from 1%(0.01) to 65%(0.65). Steady decline in net thrust, SFC, NOX, Core and
propulsive efficiency occurred as expected but when the turbine was degraded to 24%(0.24)
then the effects of the deterioration of the turbine began to get pronounced as the simulation
ran into errors until corrected by increasing BET to generate more thrust back to normal
cruising speed. Further deterioration of turbine was carried out to 65%(0.65) in which some
warnings about polytropic efficiency been low was observed as seen in Table 3.26. This can
happen in a real life scenario if engine degradation is caused by Hot Corrosion which can
further deteriorate to creep causing and thereby mechanical degradation.

4.2.3 Critical Analyses on USWSMS Engine:
The USWSMS Engine was simulated in cycle point design mode as a separate or unmixed
flow turbofan engine, with each parameter represented on Gasturb12 having 0% variation
from the information’s derived from the public domain. This engine has lower cruising speed,
lower SFC, lower core efficiency but slightly higher propulsive efficiency compared to the
USWLRM engine. The RPM on the LP Spool of this USWSMS engine are slightly higher but the
HP Spools have similar RPM speeds with even the USWLRM engine design. The Table 4.2a and
4.2b indicate station numbers of the USWSMS engine without any form DETERIORATION.
Off-design simulations were performed on this engine by first trying to increase burner exit
temperature to create the scenario of how the pilot would decrease trust and in so doing
understanding how each component responds. This simulation was performed in Table 3.33
and significance decrease in net thrust, an increase in SFC, NOX remains the same, a reduction
in Core efficiency and a massive increase in propulsive efficiencies. Bypass pressure ratio and
overall pressure ratio remain unfazed. The reason why SFC increased when BET was reduced
was because more fuel was added to keep the flame in the combustor burning enough to
generate thrust.
However, to simulate degradation of the USWSMS engine both compressor and turbine
efficiencies shall be degraded in succession. The USWSMS engine was degraded from
82
Table 4.2a: Stations numbers of NORMAL parameters of USWSMS Engine
Table 4.2b: Stations numbers of NORMAL parameters of Simulated USWSMS Engine
1%(0.01) to 20%(0.20). When the USWSMS efficiencies of the engine were degraded from
1%(0.01) to 7%(0.07) it could be observed that as the deterioration grew there was a steady
decline in net thrust, increase in SFC, and reduction in core and propulsive efficiency even as
at just 1% of deterioration as observed in Table3.35 but as BET was increased as seen in Table
3.36 the effect of that causes SFC to increase as more fuel is added to the combustor to
generate more power since the turbine is not working efficiently, also core efficiency was
reduced but propulsive efficiency was back to normal. Furthermore, this trends continues
until the efficiency of the compressor and turbine in the engine was degraded to 8%(0.08)
and then errors can be observed at Table 3.58 even when cruising speed was attained.
83
Furthermore, a scenario was carried out to simulate how BOTH the Compressor and
Turbine are deteriorated due to Bird strike which could cause mechanical degradation and to
push the USWSMS Engine to the maximum point of deterioration even when the pilot tries
to maintain thrust. Further degradations were performed to simulate this scenario and thus
the engine is deteriorated to 20% (0.20) and in so doing lots of errors were encountered. BET
was increased to compensate the massive loss of net thrust and core efficiency but by so
doing if the pilot was to increase thrust to compensate for the degraded USWSMS engines
then risk of overheating occurs as it can be seen in Table 3.62.

4.2.3.1 Bird Strike:
According to Skybrary (2016), this term is not only specifically limited to only birds but it a
blanket word to other wildlife strikes like bats or even ground animals. Bird Strikes are caused
due to severe collision between a bird and an aircraft which is either on a take off roll in flight
or landing roll. Bird Strike is a common threat to aircraft safety. Smaller aeroplanes suffer
severe damage to engines and fuselage while bigger aeroplanes suffer more damage in their
engine which causes loss of thrust which can follow the ingestion of birds into the core engine
thus resulting in a number of fatal accidents.
Lloyd (2009), tried to explain how birds could bring down an aeroplane of which he stated
based on real reports which claimed that bird strikes caused an aircraft to crash in the Hudson
River near Manhattan. More catastrophic instances have occurred that claimed more than
200 lives due to wildlife strikes with aircraft since 1988 this was reported by Bird Strike
Committee USA. According to U.S. Air Force in 2007 they reported more than 5,000 bird
strikes. Bird strikes occur often especially when an aeroplane is close to the ground, either is
taking off or landing. Bird strikes are very serious and deadly due to the fact that when an
aeroplane wants to take off or land the engines are mostly set on full throttle so when
attacked by birds the ramification of this effect causes mechanical failure in the compressor
and turbine. Birds like geese, gulls and raptors are common birds that are sucked into the
engine and the effect of this impact usually causes a chain of uncontrolled disastrous events
in the engine whereby a blade might be displaced the blade such that it strikes another blade
and a cascade may occur, resulting in massive engine failure.
This project is focused on the simulating degradation of engines to simulate real life scenarios,
from Table 3.62 it could be observed that in the USWSMS engine both the compressor and
84
turbine are degraded to just 20% but in the case of a severe bird strike, engine degradation
can rise to even 30%.

4.2.3.1a The Effects of Bird Strike:
Bird Strike causes various effects on the engine depending on various circumstances which
could be:
• The speed of the aeroplane at the point of impact
• The size of the bird.
• The size and type of the aeroplane struck
• The specific part of the aeroplane that was affected.
Total engine failure or severe power loss in all engines, or even if it is on only one engine, may
be critical and dangerous even amid take-off phase. If the case of bird strike occurs to multiple
engines, then the entire aeroplane is doomed to crash. Modern turbofan engines have been
designed to withstand such effects of bird strike that is why even when the USWSMS engine
was degraded to almost its peak, thrust could still be delivered but at the risk of overheating.
Such hazardous ingestion of birds is rare but real disaster might occur if it’s a penetration of
a large flock of small to medium sized birds or even an encounter with very large ones like the
goose (SKYbrary, 2016).

4.2.3.1b Misconceptions about Bird Strikes:
Boeing Industries (2011), gave their insights on various misconceptions of bird strikes which
are:
• Birds do not fly in areas that have poor visibility, such as thick clouds, fog, snow, rain
or even at night.
• Airplane colours this are the pulsating lights located at the wing tips mostly in red
colours which are fitted in modern aeroplanes and the fan engine spinner markings all
help to repel birds.
• Birds can also detect the rays emitted from the weather radar and avoid the airplane.
• It is a known fact that birds dive to avoid an aeroplane on approach and also due to
its aerodynamic and engine noise.

85
4.2.3.1c Prevention of Bird Strikes:
According to Boeing Industries (2011), airports are solely responsible for various bird control
measures and they also the provision of adequate wildlife control measures must be utilised.
The following preventive measures which the crew or airport authorities should consider are:
• Delay the take-off or landing if there is sufficient fuel.
• Availability of multiple runways helps for an aeroplane to land in an alternate route in
the case of emergency landing if struck by birds.

Figure 4.5: Evidence of a very minor case of Bird Strike (Boeing Industires, 2011).

4.3 Summary of key points:
The simulations performed on both USWSMS engine and USWLRM engine confirms that
proper maintenance on engines is very important as this helps to improve the life of the
engine. Natural occurrences like even volcanic ash also tend to alter the shape of the
compressor or turbine blades which can impair the ability of an engine to generate thrust.
This project has been able to prove that various levels of engine degradation mechanisms can
be a major plague to both engines but stronger and tougher alloys or stronger composite
materials can help preserve and reduce the rate of engine degradation.

86
CHAPTER 5
Conclusion.

5.1 Research objectives, summary of findings and conclusions:
The University of South Wales Long Range Mixed Flow Turbofan Engine (USWLRM)
which shares similar parameters with the CFM56-5C2 engine, is a mixed flow engine which is
utilized for long range flights. This engine without degradation as observed in Table 3.1a can
give out a cruising net thrust of FN= 6915 lb while maintaining SFC=0.5450 lb/lbh and due to
this emission of NOX = 0.22ppb. This engine is known to be efficient for long travels while
maintaining good fuel consumption. Degradation of this engine was centred on degrading the
efficiencies of compressor and leaving turbine to perform optimally. This simulation was
performed as seen in Table 3.14 which saw the compressor been degraded to 60% a scenario
played out to assume a compressor was damaged due to FOD (Foreign Object Damage). The
results of this simulation a huge impact on net thrust FN= 3827.52 lb, while a massive increase
in SFC=2.0318 lb/lbh and due to this a massive environmental pollution of NOX =11.8ppb.
These parameters indicate ramifications of uncontrolled events that could occur when a
simple component is degraded. When BET was set to 4524.02R (2513.3K) cruising speed was
achieved but at the expense of environmental pollution and high SFC=1.3187 lb/lbh and
severe overheating errors.
Furthermore, the similar simulations were performed by degrading the Turbine and keeping
compressor normal. This time around turbine was set to 65% level of degradation and
Gasturb12 software was not able to output reasonable values for the results of that
simulation as observed in Table 3.23 and Table 3.26 of which polytropic errors were observed
when BET (Burner Exit Temperature) was increased to achieve cruising speed.
However, The University of South Wales Short to Medium Range Separate Flow
Turbofan Engine (USWSMS) which shares similar parameters with the CFM56-57B20 engine,
is an unmixed flow engine which is utilized for mainly short to medium range flights. This
engine without degradation as observed in Table 3.28a can give out a cruising net thrust of
FN= 5420.03 lb, while maintaining a slightly higher SFC=0.6333 lb/lbh and due to this
emission of NOX = 9.087(908.7). This engine is known to be efficient for mostly short to
medium long range travels while maintaining an acceptable level of fuel consumption but a
87
disappointing rate of pollution to the environment. This engine was degraded to its peak by
simulating efficiency drop of both compressor and turbine to 20% by so doing it could be
observed that in Table 3.60 the software delivered arbitrary results. When BET was increased
to maintain thrust at 4603.18R(2557.3K) error warnings indicated risk of overheating. Thus
the components of the USWSMS engine at Table 3.63 indicated high levels of air pollution of
NOX=29.33ppb this is due to high levels of SFC to maintain cruising speed.

5.2 Recommendations:
This project was generally centred on engine degradation using Gasturb12 software, of which
the results derived are generally acceptable with a certain degree of accuracy.
In this project, two variances in turbofan engines were simulated and each had different
characteristics which made simulation a little tasking. Most turbofan engines usually come in
two variances which are either a mixed flow turbofan engine or an unmixed (separate) flow
turbofan engine. Simulating an engine with limited information supplied by the
manufacturers can be difficult but for future references towards a similar project like this, it
is important to note some few things.
• Using Gasturb12 software if the public domain hints that the LPC is a booster stage
then to get a reasonable accurate result there are options at the propulsion tab to
select an engine with a booster
• A separate or unmixed flow turbofan engine data from Gasturb12 is easy to locate as
browsing through the Jet Engines tab and selecting Geared Turbofan A or selecting
the Propulsion tab and selecting the Separate flow with Booster section produces the
exact data sample from Gasturb12. This also goes for the mixed flow turbofan engine
sample data, selecting from the Jet Engines tab and clicking on Geared Mixed Flow
Turbofan A or from the propulsion tab, by clicking on the Mixed flow with Booster
produces the same exact sample data on Gasturb12. This Information is useful to
anyone who is new to this software Gasturb12 and would quickly want to simulate
any engine.
• It is important to know that Inner and outer fan pressure ratio range from 1.2 to 1.7
and this information is not always readily supplied on the public domain, more so
overall pressure ratio and bypass pressure ratio should be calculated before
readjusting BET and mass flow to achieve results.
88
Gasturb12 is a good software, but if Gasturb13 should be released then it should be advised
that sometimes some results do not change when some few parameters in the software are
adjusted and this occurs when Gasturb12 can not solve the parameters supplied. Also this
software should be updated to point out errors in a simple and easy to understand manner,
as it could be observed that when BET was increased to the point of overheating the error
which was reported from gasturb12 as observed in table 3.58 was
ideal jet velocity rati0 v18/v8, the only time this software tends to pinpoint errors are when
they are excessive. If Gasturb12 can accurately pinpoint what areas needs to be adjusted at
the slightest change in alteration, then simulation would come easy.
Furthermore, based on this project my last recommendation is focused on mixed flow
engines, more engines which have mixed flow nozzle design should be encouraged to be
installed on more aeroplanes as these engines have very good SFC and they can travel on
longer journeys than unmixed turbofan engines. Mixed turbofan engines have a drawback of
having heavy nacelles that increase weight and drag because they are made from aluminium
materials. Newer Nacelles can be made from strong composite materials to reduce weight.

89
REFERENCES.
1. Aainsqatsi, 2008. Turbofan operation. [Online] Available at:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Turbofan_operation.svg [Accessed 21 6 2016].

2. Ackroyd, J., 200. Sir George Cayley: The Invention of the Aeroplane near Scarborough at
the Time of Trafalgar. Journal of Aeronautical History, 1(46), p. 182.

3. Adler, W. F., 1977. Erosion Control in Energy Systems, Washington DC: National Academy
of Sciences.

4. All-Aero, 1962. Turbomeca Aubisque / RM9. [Online] Available at: http://all-
aero.com/index.php/contactus/64-engines-power/13700-turbomeca-aubisque-turbomeca-
rm9 [Accessed 21 6 2016].

5. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1902. Transactions of the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers. Journal of Applied Mechanics, 23(1), pp. 62-68.

6. Archimedes, 2015. The Turbofan Emerges: Ge’s Cj805-23 Aft Fan Engine. [Online]
Available at: http://ourairports.biz/?p=2192 [Accessed 23 6 2016].

7. Armando Gallegos-Muñoz, N. C. U.-R. a. F. E.-B., 2012. Conjugate Heat Transfer in Ribbed
Cylindrical Channels. In: S. N. Kazi, ed. An Overview of Heat Transfer Phenomena. p. 240.

8. Aviation History, 2006. Samuel Langley: Aviation Pioneer. [Online] Available at:
http://www.historynet.com/samuel-langley-aviation-pioneer.htm [Accessed 2015 6 2016].

9. Aviation Safety Network, 2014. [Online] Available at: https://aviation-
safety.net/database/engine/GE-CF700 [Accessed 23 6 2016].

90
10. Baxter, A. D., 2012. Jet Engine Principle of Operation. [Online] Available at:
https://www.britannica.com/technology/jet-engine [Accessed 2 7 2016].

11. Belapurkar, R. K., 2012. Stability and performance of propulsion control systems with
distributed control architectures and failures, Ohio: Ohio State University.

12.Benningfield, D., 2007. How does an afterburner work? [Online] Available at:
http://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/how-things-work-afterburners-18481403/?no-
ist [Accessed 28 6 2016].

13. Bislin, W., 2015. In the wings with the CFM56 engines. [Online] Available at:
http://walter.bislins.ch/aviatik/media/cfm-technical-data.pdf [Accessed 1 6 2016].

14. Boeing Industries, 2011. Strategies for Prevention of Bird-Strike Events. [Online]
Available at: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/2011_q3/4/
[Accessed 30 8 2016].

15. Boeing, 1995. 707/720 Commercial Transport. [Online] Available at:
http://www.boeing.com/history/products/707.page [Accessed 19 6 2016].

16.Boeing, 1995. Model 247 Commercial Transport. [Online] Available at:
http://www.boeing.com/history/products/model-247-c-73.page [Accessed 19 6 2016].

17. BS Aeronautics, 2016. Turbofan Engine. [Online] Available at:
http://www.bsaeronautics.com/2015/05/02/turbofan-engines/ [Accessed 22 6 2016].

18. Butterman, E., 2012. George Brayton. [Online]
Available at: https://www.asme.org/engineering-topics/articles/automotive/george-brayton
[Accessed 30 6 2016].

19. CFM Aero Engines, 1996. CFM56-5C Turbo Engine. [Online] Available at:
http://www.cfmaeroengines.com/engines/cfm56-5c [Accessed 21 6 2016].
91
20. CFM, 1993. CFM56-5C Turbofan Engine. [Online] Available at:
http://www.cfmaeroengines.com/engines/cfm56-5c [Accessed 27 5 2016].

21. Chips, 2012. Aviation Thread. [Online] Available at: https://forums.finalgear.com/off-
topic/the-aviation-thread-contains-lots-of-awesome-pictures-38005/page-347/ [Accessed
22 6 2016].

22. Combined Cycle Journal, 2013. Inspection findings take centre stage at aero-based
roundTables. [Online] Available at: http://www.ccj-online.com/onsite/page/73/ [Accessed 9
7 2016].

23. Cyrus B. Meher-Homji, M. A. C. a. H. M. M., 2005. Gas Turbine Performance Deterioration,
California.

24. Danai, J. C. S. a. K., 2011. In-flight isolation of degraded engine components by shape
comparison of transient outputs.

25. Darling, D., 2015. Encyclopaedia of Science. [Online] Available at:
http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/T/turbofan_engine.html [Accessed 28 6 2016].

26. Deagel, 2003. Progress D-18. [Online] Available at: http://www.deagel.com/Turbofan-
Engines/D-18T_a000901001.aspx [Accessed 24 6 2016].

27. Dongming Zhu, R. A. M., 2007. The Development of Erosion and Impact Resistant

28. Turbine Aerofoil Thermal Barrier Coatings, Cleveland: NASA Glenn Research Centre.

29 Ebi A. Ogiriki, Yiguang G. Li, Theoklis Nikolaidis, ThankGod E. Isaiah, Gowon Sulea, 2015.
Effect of fouling, thermal barrier coating degradation and film cooling holes Blockage on gas
turbine engine creep life. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Through-life
Engineering Services, 17 7, 38(4), p. 228.

92
30. El-Sayed, Ahmed. F., 2008. Forward flow mixed flow engines. In: Aircraft Propulsion and
Gas Turbines Engines. Boca Ratcon: CRC Press Taylour & Francis Group, p. 242.

31. Erik Oberg, Franklin D. Jones, Holybrook L Horton and Henry H. Ryffel, 2012. Machinery
Handbook. In: C. J. McCauley, ed. 29 ed. New York: Industrial Press, p. 179.

32 European aviation safety agency EASA, 2012. CFM International S.A. - CFM56-5B and 5C
series engines. EASA TYPE CERTIFICATE DATA SHEET, 15 12, Issue 3, p. 14.

33. European Aviation Safety Agency EASA, 2012. CFM International SA CFM56-7B series
engines. EASA TYPE CERTIFICATE DATA SHEET, 17 12, Issue 4, p. 12.

34 findingDulcinea , 2011. On This Day: First Commercial Jet Flight Takes Off. [Online]
Available at: http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/on-this-day/May-June-08/On-this-Day--
First-Commercial-Jet-Flight-Takes-Off-From-London.html [Accessed 16 6 2016].

35. Flight Global, 1959. The G.E. CJ-805-23 aft-fan engine. [Online] Available at:
https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1959/1959%20-%202802.PDF
[Accessed 22 6 2016].

36. Flight Global, 1962. A History of Aviation from 1962. [Online] Available at:
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/1962.html [Accessed 22 6 2016].

37. Flying, 1962. Floatplane landing techniques. Aviation magazine, 12 6, 74(6), p. 105.

38. GE Aviation, 2016. The GEnx Commercial Aircraft Engine. [Online] Available at:
http://www.geaviation.com/commercial/engines/genx/ [Accessed 29 6 2016].

39. General Electric Aviation., 2015. The CF700 Engine. [Online] Available at:
http://www.geaviation.com/bga/engines/cf700/ [Accessed 23 6 2016].

93
40 General Electric Aviation, 2004. GENX High-bypass Turbofan Engines. [Online]
Available at: http://www.geaviation.com/engines/docs/commercial/datasheet-genx.pdf
[Accessed 5 6 2016].

41 General Electric Aviation, 2016. TF39 Turbofan engines. [Online] Available at:
http://www.geaviation.com/engines/docs/military/datasheet-TF39.pdf
[Accessed 19 6 2016].

42. General Electric Aviation, 2016. The CF6 Engine. [Online] Available at:
http://www.geaviation.com/commercial/engines/cf6/ [Accessed 19 6 2016].

43. General Electric, 2006. General Electric CJ805. [Online] Available at:
http://www.ovguide.com/general-electric-cj805-9202a8c04000641f800000000ad5a313
[Accessed 22 6 2016].

44. J.H. Ellis, N.R.P. Harris, D.H. Lister, J.E. Penner, 1999. Aviation and the Global Atmosphere,
Costa Rica: B.S. Nyenzi.

45. James A. Addison, W. M., 1988. Diesel Engine Lubricant Contamination and wear, New
York: Pall Corporation.

46. Jeff Scott, 2006. Pentagon & Boeing 757 Engine Investigation. [Online] Available at:
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0265.shtml [Accessed 22 6 2016].

47. Karman, Theodore von, 2015. Aircraft Engine Design. [Online] Available at:
http://www.aircraftenginedesign.com/F100pics.html [Accessed 28 6 2016].

48. Kasper, J., 2012. [Online] Available at: http://www.bga-aeroweb.com/Engines/General-
Electric-TF39.html [Accessed 19 6 2016].

94
49. Krum, C., 2015. Why Were Old Jet Engines So Much Smokier Than Newer Ones. [Online]
Available at: http://flightclub.jalopnik.com/why-were-old-jet-engines-so-much-more-
smokey-than-newer-1720531271 [Accessed 9 7 2016].

50. Kuhnell, Bruce T., 2004. How Age and Contamination Affect Rolling Bearings and Gears.
[Online] Available at: http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/732/rolling-bearings-
contamination [Accessed 26 4 2016].

51. Landsberg, B., 2000. When is an Aircraft too old? [Online] Available at:
https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2000/july/pilot/when-is-an-aircraft-too-
old [Accessed 25 8 2016].

52.Life Predictions Technologies Incorporated, 2010. Aerospace. [Online] Available at:
http://lifepredictiontech.com/?p=aerospace [Accessed 8 7 2015].

53. Lloyd, R., 2009. How Birds Can Down a Jet Airplane. [Online] Available at:
http://www.livescience.com/3239-birds-jet-airplane.html [Accessed 30 8 2016].

54. Loftin, L. K., 2004. Quest for Performance: The Evolution of Modern Aircraft. [Online]
Available at: http://history.nasa.gov/SP-468/ch10-3.htm [Accessed 19 6 2016].

55.McCullough, D., 2015. The Wright Brothers. Maine: Thorndike Press. Meier, N., 2005.

56.Civil Turbojet/Turbofan Specifications. [Online] Available at: http://www.jet-
engine.net/civtfspec.html [Accessed 5 6 2016].

57. Military Factory, 2013. World War 1 Aircraft (1914-1918). [Online] Available at:
http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/ww1-aircraft.asp [Accessed 18 6 2016].

58.Mirage Jet, 2002. M53-P2. [Online] Available at: http://www.mirage-
jet.com/Propulsion/M53/m53.HTM [Accessed 21 6 2016].

95
59.Mirage Jet, 2002. Potential Upgrades of M53-P2. [Online] Available at:
http://www.mirage-jet.com/Propulsion/Upgrades/upgrades.htm [Accessed 21 6 2016].

60. Moody, E., 1982. Jet Engine Meets Volcanic Ash. [Online] Available at:
http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2010-04/why-cant-planes-fly-through-volcanic-ash-
because-nasa-tried-once [Accessed 26 4 2016].

61. N. Eliaz, G. Shemesh, R.M. Latanision, 2000. Hot corrosion in gas turbine components,
Cambridge: Elsevier.

62 NASA Glenn Reseach Center, 2015. Afterburning Jet Thrust. [Online] Available at:
https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/turbab.html [Accessed 28 6 2016].

63.National Academy of Engineering., 2016. Airplane Timeline. [Online] Available at:
http://www.greatachievements.org/?id=3728 [Accessed 18 6 2016].

64. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), 2012. Turbofan Engine. [Online]
Available at: https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/aturbf.html
[Accessed 20 6 2016].

65. Navaratne, Rukshan 2016. Introduction to Aircraft Propulsion. Wales: University of South
Wales.

66. Ntantis, E., 2013. The Impact of Measurement Noise in GPA Diagnostic Analysis of a Gas
Turbine Engine. Aeronautics & Aerospace Engineering, 2(2), p. 5.

67 Omar, W. Z. W., 2012. Research Gate. [Online] Available at:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Stalling_and_surging_in_a_compressor [Accessed 28 8
2016].

68 P. Lowden, S Turcott, and S Hastie, 2014. Turbine Blades. [Online] Available at:
http://www.ccj-online.com/archives/2q-2011/turbine-blades/ [Accessed 8 7 2016].
96
69.PilotFriend, 2000. Principles of Jet Operation. [Online] Available at:
http://www.pilotfriend.com/outside_link/principles_of_jet_engine_operati.htm
[Accessed 28 6 2016].

70. Pipeline and Gas Journal, 2011. Gas turbine compressor blade fouling mechanisms.
Pipeline and Gas Journal, 9, 238(9), p. 16.

71. Pratt and Whitney, 2006. Aero News Network. [Online] Available at: http://www.aero-
news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=d997650c-4716-40f6-8cf5-d128a49a58ca
[Accessed 22 6 2016].

72. Pratt and Whitney, 2015. F100 Engine. [Online] Available at:
http://www.pw.utc.com/F100_Engine [Accessed 28 6 2016].

73. Pratt and Whitney, 2016. JT3D (TF33) Engine. [Online] Available at:
http://www.pw.utc.com/JT3D_TF33_Engine [Accessed 19 6 2016].

74. Pratt and Whitney, 2016. JT9D Engine. [Online] Available at:
http://www.pw.utc.com/JT9D_Engine [Accessed 19 6 2016].

75. Pratt and Whitney, 2016. PurePower PW1000G ENGINE. [Online] Available at:
http://www.pw.utc.com/PurePowerPW1000G_Engine [Accessed 24 6 2016].

76. R.G Wellman, J.R Nicholls, 2008. Erosion, Corrosion and Erosion-Corrosion of EB PVD
Thermal Barrier Coatings. Tribology International, 7, 41(7), pp. 657-662.

77. Rainer Kurz, Cyrus Meher-Homji, Klaus Brun, 2014. Gas Turbine Degradation. 43rd
Turbomachinery & 30th Pump Users Symposia (Pump & Turbo 2014), 24 9.p. 36.

78. Rainer Kurz, Klaus Brun, Meron Wollie, 2009. Degradation Effects on Industrial Gas
Turbines. Trans. ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 15 7, Volume 131, p. 7.

97
79. Robb, D., 2013. Compression Degredation. [Online] Available at:
https://www.turbomachinerymag.com/compressor-degradation/ [Accessed 24 4 2016].

80. Rolls Royce, 2016. Civil aerospace. [Online] Available at: http://www.rolls-
royce.com/products-and-services/civil-aerospace/products/civil-large-engines/rb211-
535e4.aspx#engine-details [Accessed 19 6 2016].

81. Rolls-Royce, 2005. Civil Aerospace. [Online] Available at: http://www.rolls-
royce.com/products-and-services/civil-aerospace/products/civil-large-engines/trent-
1000.aspx [Accessed 22 6 2016].

82. Rolls-Royce, 2015. Civil Aerospace Rolls-Royce Trent 1000. [Online] Available at:
http://www.rolls-royce.com/products-and-services/civil-aerospace/products/civil-large-
engines/trent-1000/programme-update.aspx [Accessed 26 6 2016].

83. Ruffles Philip, 2012. Perfecting the jet engine. Ingenia, 12, 1(53), p. 12.

84. Safran, 1998. The CFM56 success story. [Online] Available at: http://www.safran-aircraft-
engines.com/commercial-engines/single-aisle-commercial-jets/cfm56/cfm56-7b [Accessed
16 6 2016].

85. Safran, 2016. Combat and training aircraft engines. [Online] Available at:
http://www.safran-aircraft-engines.com/military-engines/training-and-combat-aircraft/m53
[Accessed 28 6 2016].

86. Skybrary, 2014. Turbofan Engine. [Online] Available at:
http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Turbofan_Engine [Accessed 28 6 2016].

87. SKYbrary, 2016. Bird Strike. [Online] Available at:
http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Bird_Strike [Accessed 30 8 2016].

98
88. SKYbrary, 2016. Volcanic Ash. [Online] Available at:
http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Volcanic_Ash [Accessed 9 7 2016].

89. Stahlkocher, 2005. [Online] Available at:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Turbinenschaufel_RB199.jpg
[Accessed 24 4 2016].

90. Stringer, J., 1977. Hot corrosion of high-temperature alloys. Annual Review of Materials
Science, 21 8, Volume 7, pp. 477-509.

91. The Flying Engineer, 2016. Pratt and Whitney PW1100G Geared Turbofan Engine. [Online]
Available at: http://theflyingengineer.com/flightdeck/pw1100g-gtf/
[Accessed 21 6 2016].

92. William O. Gaffin, J. H. L., 1968. DEVELOPMENT OF THE HIGH-BYPASS TURBOFAN. Annals
of the New York Academy of Sciences, 11, 154(1), p. 576–589.

93. Wisconsin Historical Society, 1996. The Early History of Civilian Aircraft: 1925-1930.
[Online] Available at:
http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/Content.aspx?dsNav=Ny:True,Ro:0,N:4294963828-
4294963805&dsNavOnly=Ntk:All%7CEarly+American+Civilian+Aircrafts%3A+Image+Gallery+
Essay%7C3%7C,Ny:True,Ro:0&dsRecordDetails=R:CS14867&dsDimensionSearch=D:Early+A
merican+Civilian+Aircrafts%3A+Image+Gallery+Essay,Dxm:All,Dxp:3&dsCompoundDimensio
nSearch=D:Early+American+Civilian+Aircrafts%3A+Image+Gallery+Essay,Dxm:All,Dxp:3
[Accessed 2016 6 2016].

94.Wittenberg, E. a. H., 2009. Essentials of Aeronautical Disciplines and Technology, Historical
Notes. In: Flight Physics. New York: Springer, p. 200.

95. Woodford, C., 2016. Jet engines. [Online] Available at:
http://www.explainthatstuff.com/jetengine.html [Accessed 20 6 2016].

99

Sensitivity of Engine Performance To Component Degradation of A Turbofan Aircraft Engine

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sensitivity of Engine Performance To Component Degradation of A Turbofan Aircraft Engine

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNIVERSITY

Symbol Definition Unit

Figure 2.6.1 Schematics of an Aft-fan Single

Figure 2.6.2 Cross Section of GE CF700 Aft-fan

Figure 2.6.4: Cross Section of GE CJ805-23 Aft-fan Single Spool Turbofan

FIRST SPOOL CONNECTING

Figure 2.7: Schematics of a Basic Twin Spool Turbofan

Figure 2.14: Cross section of the Pratt and Whitney PW1000

2.4.1 Thermal efficiency (!th):

Thermal Efficiency (!th)

Figure 1: Open Brayton Cycle

Thermal Efficiency (!th) can also be expressed further as

!thermal = Power to Jet (Mechanical energy)

Power to combustor (thermal energy from fuel)

!thermal = "KE (change in kinetic energy)

Thermal efficiency (!th) = NW/QIN

Thermal efficiency (!th) = 0.4081 or 40.81%

2.4.2 Propulsive efficiency (!Pr):

Propulsive efficiency (!Pr) = Power to Aircraft = FN X V

Power to Jet ∆KE

Propulsive efficiency (!Pr) = Net Thrust X Flight Speed

Change in Kinetic energy

Overall Efficiency (!overall) = Propulsive Efficiency (!Pr) X Thermal Efficiency (!th)

!overall = Power to Aircraft (Useful work)

Thermal Energy from fuel

!overall = !Propulsive x (Power to Jet)

Evidence early signs of

Engine Design Parameters of USWLRM Engine

Table 3.1b: Simulation of USWLRM Engine

Table 3.2b: Mass flow in simulating

Table 3.2c: Proof that Simulations of USWLRM

Table 3.7: Proof that Off-Design results of

Figure 3.8: Graph of Off Design Performance WITHOUT Deterioration of Velocity,

Figure 3.14: Operating Line graph of

Table 3.8: Compressor is deteriorated by 1%(0.01) of the USWLRM Engine.

Table 3.10: Thrust Drop when Compressor alone is deteriorated by 3%(0.03)

Table 3.11: Thrust Drop when Compressor is

Table 3.14: Maximum Deterioration achieved as irreversible Thrust Drop can be

Table 3.16: Error warning when BET

Table 3.15: Normal Thrust attained when BET was increased

Table 3.17: Trust drop when Turbine is deteriorated by 1%(0.01)

Table 3.18: Trust drop when Turbine is deteriorated by 2%(0.02) only.

Table 3.19: Thrust drop when Turbine is deteriorated by 3%(0.03) only.

Table 3.20: Thrust Drop when Turbine is deteriorated

Table 3.23: Maximum Deterioration achieved as Table 3.24: When Turbine is

Table 3.26: Range violations warning

Engine Design Parameters of USWSMS Engine

Table 3.28b: Simulation of USWSMS

Table 3.29b: Mass flow in simulating

Table 3.29a: Parameters used to

Table 3.30: Off-Design Point of the USWSMS Engine.

Table 3.32: Simulation of USWSMS Engine was performed at Take-off.

Figure 3.20: Graph in progression of Specific

Table 3.33: Off-Design results of Simulated DECREASED Thrust on USWSMS Engine.

Figure 3.24: Graph of Off Design Performance WITHOUT Deterioration of Velocity,

Table 3.35: Thrust Drop when Compressor and

Table 3.42: When Compressor and

Table 3.45: When Compressor and

Table 3.48: When Compressor and

Table 3.51: When Compressor and

Table 3.54: When Compressor and

Table 3.57: When Compressor and