Multi Design Point Cycle Design Incorporation into the Environmental Design Space

Schutte, Jeff; Tai, Jimmy C.; Mavris, Dimitri N.

doi:10.2514/6.2012-3812

Cited by 16 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The optimal design of ECS is selected through optimization in the identified design space in terms of specified objectives. This fundamental idea is inspired by the MDP method for engine design [16,17], but the actual methodology and implementation are different.…”

Section: B Multi-design Point Sizing Methodology For Ecsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To fill such a gap that a proper and publicly available ECS sizing approach is very hard to find , this paper proposes a multi-design point (MDP) sizing methodology for the ECS. This proposed method is inspired by the MDP sizing methodology for the gas turbine engine [16,17], which was developed to overcome the deficiencies of SDP sizing method shown in other studies [18,19]. The proposed MDP ECS sizing method is capable of obtaining an optimal ECS while satisfying all the performance and operation constraints.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Multi-Design Point Sizing Methodology for Environmental Control Systems

Shi

Cai

Gladin

et al. 2020

AIAA Scitech 2020 Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The environmental control system, which is to provide cabin air supply, conditioning, and pressurization, is the largest consumer of the secondary power in the aircraft. The impacts of the environmental control system designs have been studied for a long time. However, there is not a clear design guideline for it. Many studies have designed or optimized the environmental control system for a single point which was important in terms of vehicle or mission fuel economy. Some other researchers chose the most critical condition for sizing, such as the hot day and ground condition, or hot day with one engine failed. Some research also pointed out that the cooling efficiency can be greatly influenced when operation point is far from its design point. Therefore, a design guideline of the environmental control system is needed. To fill this gap, this paper proposes a multi-design point sizing methodology which sizes the environmental control system based on performance requirements of multiple points instead of those for a single point. This methodology will guarantee that all the requirements through the mission will be satisfied, and the efficiency will not be influenced much when the operation condition moves.

show abstract

Section: B Multi-design Point Sizing Methodology For Ecsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Multi-Design Point Sizing Methodology for Environmental Control Systems

Shi

Cai

Gladin

et al. 2020

AIAA Scitech 2020 Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…MDP allows the user to consider various flight conditions and power requirements based on customer needs. This capability in MDP sizes the engine to exactly meet all requirements and constraints whereas in SDP the engine satisfies these objectives but may be oversized compared to the MDP solution 12 . For performing this common core analysis, using MDP is particularly advantageous because a core is desired that minimizes performance penalties relative to each engine application while simultaneously meeting the requirements.…”

Section: A Overview Of Multi-design Pointmentioning

confidence: 99%

Common Core Engine Design for Multiple Applications using a Concurrent Multi-Design Point Approach

Hughes¹,

Perullo²,

Mavris³

2014

50th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Common core engine technology has been pursued by industry for decades due to the potential of reducing costs for design, development, and operation when applying the same core over a family of engines for multiple applications. This paper investigates the design space for a next-generation technology level common core (high pressure system) for multiple applications at each engine's flight conditions and power requirements. To evaluate the feasibility of a common core between different applications, or market segments, three engine applications for a similar small engine power class were considered: a turboshaft helicopter, a regional turboprop commercial transport, and a regional turbofan commercial transport. To perform this design space exploration, the Numerical Propulsion System Simulation and Weight Analysis of Turbine Engines (WATE++) were used within a Multi-Design Point (MDP) framework. The MDP approach ensures that all design and offdesign requirements and constraints for a given engine are simultaneously met. Within MDP, this paper demonstrates how candidate cores can be evaluated concurrently for all three engine applications. This ensures the same core is implemented on each application and allows flexibility for exploring the common core design space, while providing an added degree of freedom in evaluating performance trade-offs. In order to determine how well the common core is suited across applications, the "ideal" cycle design is first selected for each engine independently. This paper discusses the trade-offs and decisions that must be made in order to select a "100% fully common" core while aiming to incur minimum performance penalties compared to independently designed engines. The results show significant penalties for a common core operated across multiple applications, which motivates future work to explore trade-offs for different levels of commonality, development cost, and robust design when selecting a common core for multiple engine applications. NomenclatureBPR = Bypass Ratio COTS = Commercial Off-the-Shelf DOE = Design of Experiments EPR = Engine Pressure Ratio ESFC = Effective Specific Fuel Consumption, lbm/hr/eshp FAR = Fuel to Air Ratio FPR = Fan Pressure Ratio FPT = Free Power Turbine HPC = High Pressure Compressor HPCPR = High Pressure Compressor Pressure Ratio HPT = High Pressure Turbine LPT = Low Pressure Turbine MACE = Multiple Application Core Engine MDP = Multi-Design Point NPSS = Numerical Propulsion System Simulation OPR = Overall Pressure Ratio 2 PWc = Corrected Core Power, hp SDP = Single Design Point T41max = Maximum Turbine Inlet Temperature, °R TF = Turbofan TKO = Takeoff TOC = Top of Climb TP = Turboprop TS = Turboshaft TSFC = Thrust Specific Fuel Consumption, lbm/hr/lbf WATE++ = Weight Analysis of Turbine Engines

show abstract

“…Jones provides a comprehensive introduction to thermodynamic cycle modeling in NPSS [7]. Furthermore, in order to design an engine that can meet performance requirements at various flight conditions, an implementation of the multiple design point (MDP) method described by Schutte et al [8][9][10] is utilized.…”

Section: Vce Engine Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a Parametric Variable Cycle Engine Model Using the Multiple Design Point Approach

Clark

Tai

Mavris

2023

AIAA SCITECH 2023 Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development of a parametric variable cycle engine (VCE) model is investigated. The model is developed using the multiple design point (MDP) approach, which allows for the sizing of an engine that meets design criteria across multiple flight conditions. The proposed architecture, a three-stream double-bypass architecture, is modeled in the Numerical Propulsion System Simulation (NPSS) tool. A double bypass architecture is selected due to the need to maintain continuous third-stream flow to be used as a heat sink for cooled-cooling and aircraft cooling heat exchangers. Results show that a VCE utilizing an aft variable area bypass injector (VABI), variable compressor inlet guide vanes (IGVs), and variable nozzle throats can be modulated to provide higher sea-level static (SLS) thrust and lower cruise specific fuel consumption (SFC) than a standard mixed-flow turbofan engine. Furthermore, engine pressure ratio (EPR) is shown to be a convenient thermodynamic parameter, such that variable geometry schedules can be developed as a function of EPR only, without respect to flight altitude or Mach number.

show abstract

Multi Design Point Cycle Design Incorporation into the Environmental Design Space

Cited by 16 publications

References 4 publications

A Multi-Design Point Sizing Methodology for Environmental Control Systems

A Multi-Design Point Sizing Methodology for Environmental Control Systems

Common Core Engine Design for Multiple Applications using a Concurrent Multi-Design Point Approach

Development of a Parametric Variable Cycle Engine Model Using the Multiple Design Point Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About