|
New idea in ducted fans |
Post Reply
|
Page <1234 6> |
| Author | |
MarkD
Platinum (US) USERID: 12974 Hobbyking Addict
Joined: 19/Feb/2009 Location: Austin TX USA Online Status: Offline Posts: 498 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 17/Dec/2009 at 1:30pm |
|
I've seen several threads on the idea and the consensus is alwasys that it would be more advantagous to apply more power to a single fan. Noone seemed to want to take into the lab though. |
|
|
***************************
|
|
![]() |
|
Blind Vision
Platinum (DK) USERID: 52464 Forum Admin
ADMIN Joined: 21/Oct/2009 Location: DK/Denmark, AMC Online Status: Offline Posts: 3804 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 21/Dec/2009 at 11:57pm |
|
GREAT JOB ON THE INTAKE VANES
looking forward to getting that on production EDF's INLINE 2 EDF engines I had the same idea, -and tried it out with small GWS 50mm fans running on brush motors. funny things happend, the to running motors did'nt use twice the amount of power as a single moter, far less -as i rember only 20% more power used. The First inline motor increased its rpm, when the to engines where aligned front to back. the second motor was running a even higher rpm than the First motor. Just an od expriment, thinking of jet engines first/second/third stage compressors. -newer continued with it. |
|
|
Doing some guerilla gardening... take a peek; http://www.facebook.com/groups/416558261701047/ lokal bustop infront of my flat
|
|
![]() |
|
Ken jack
Platinum (AU) USERID: 142032 Bargain Addict!
Joined: 26/Feb/2009 Location: BRISBANE AU Online Status: Offline Posts: 92 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 22/Dec/2009 at 6:56am |
|
Hi ,Blind vision,Thanks for your reply as it makes me think of pursueing the idea .As you found second motor uses less power and both fans running at higher rpm,so if rear fan had higher kv rating than front fan there would be a higher increase in verlocity producing higher dynamic thrust in a lot smaller dia. and higher flight speed.Regards,Ken Jack
|
|
![]() |
|
Ken jack
Platinum (AU) USERID: 142032 Bargain Addict!
Joined: 26/Feb/2009 Location: BRISBANE AU Online Status: Offline Posts: 92 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 05/Jan/2010 at 5:42am |
|
Hi again,I have a new idear,i hope forum does not get sick of me.On the weekend i visited a fellow modeller not far from me and he showed me a electric counter rotating propellers for a scale Bugattie (i dont know how to spell that).I then looked up a proposal by Rolls Royce in a reference book (THE JET ENGINE) for a counter rotating by pass ducted fan .The interesting design has no guide vanes or flow straighteners.I think this would be very succesful project as well as being interesting to make and use.I woud like your feedback on this idear .Regards Ken Jack
|
|
![]() |
|
Blind Vision
Platinum (DK) USERID: 52464 Forum Admin
ADMIN Joined: 21/Oct/2009 Location: DK/Denmark, AMC Online Status: Offline Posts: 3804 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 05/Jan/2010 at 11:29pm |
|
This is your design as i see it.
######################### N C ######### N C N C ENG1_ENG2 N C ENG1=ENG2=N-----C ENG1_ENG2 N C N C N C N C ######### ######################### ENG1=motor1 ENG2=moter2 N=FAN Normal clockwise rotating C=FAN counter rotating ---- - -- ---- ---- --- -- --- -- -- - - -- - -- ------- -- - -- ----- -- -------------- - - --------- -- --- -- ----- made me think, trying to improve it MAYBE even better design I DO THINK THERE IS A REASON FOR NOT MAKEING clockvise/counter clockvise. first it think the idea was born on the basis of Heavy propellers producing torque, to illiminate that effect especially on two-engined warbirds Counter rotating was born -at least i think that was how it happened. Not knowing when that design you found, was from i think it was the early jet period. still at lot of experimenting going on, on diameter and so on. -BUT REALLY I HAVENT GOT I CLUE, just loved planes jet engines since i was a child. ----------- - --- --- --- -- --- --------------------------- --- -- -- - --- - ------------------ My idea, as the fuel driven jets, it has more blades, as your idea (more can be added, and outer diameter of the turbine can be decreased. -thus adding more more power, i think and less stress on the moters (at least i think so) here it comes: ################# V1 N1 ##### V1 N1 N2 ##### V1 N1 N2 N3 ########## V1 N1 N2 N3 N4 V1 N1 N2 N3 N4 ##ENG1+ENG2 N1 N2 N3 N4 ###ENG1=ENG2=N1=N2=--N3---N4----- ##ENG1+ENG2 N1 N2 N3 N4 V1 N1 N2 N3 N4 V1 N1 N2 N3 N4 V1 N1 N2 N3 ########## V1 N1 N2 ##### V1 N1 ##### ################ ENG1=motor1 ENG2=moter2 V=intake VANE N1=FAN, pitch 6 - (clockwise rotating) N1=FAN, pitch 7 - (clockwise rotating) N1=FAN, pitch 8 - (clockwise rotating) N1=FAN, pitch 9 - (clockwise rotating) PITCH is not actual numbers, just to present the idea. As Air passes N1 at a given speed, that airflow speed is increased by decreaseing the Duct before it hits N2, this has to be Pitched at a diffrent angle than N1, to run on the same axel, without slowing the airspeed down, but just enough to pass it though to N3. Leaving N2 the duct is narrowed down even more, High airspeed agian BUT this time it is passed to the secound Motor driveing N3 and N4. -hope it makes sense.. to you Edited by Blind Vision - 06/Jan/2010 at 1:56am |
|
|
Doing some guerilla gardening... take a peek; http://www.facebook.com/groups/416558261701047/ lokal bustop infront of my flat
|
|
![]() |
|
Ken jack
Platinum (AU) USERID: 142032 Bargain Addict!
Joined: 26/Feb/2009 Location: BRISBANE AU Online Status: Offline Posts: 92 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 06/Jan/2010 at 4:32am |
|
Hi BV,I may be wrong but i think idear of counter rotating bypass fan in RR proposed design in late 1980 was to eliminate flow staighteners from the fan unit as it was after all a large ducted fan driven by a jet engine in front of the fan in the core similar to our brushless motor mount in our edfs .Hope this makes some sense,I will try to post a drawing on this forum ,do not hold your breath as i am not very good at as i am old and have very little computer skills.Regards Ken Jack
|
|
![]() |
|
Buzzkill
Gold (US) USERID: 318206 Bargain Addict!
Joined: 04/Dec/2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 33 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 14/Jan/2010 at 8:45pm |
|
Very interesting things going on in here!
|
|
![]() |
|
Ken jack
Platinum (AU) USERID: 142032 Bargain Addict!
Joined: 26/Feb/2009 Location: BRISBANE AU Online Status: Offline Posts: 92 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 23/Jan/2010 at 2:02pm |
|
Hi,I am back again,i have just ordered parts to start building a counter rotating ducted fan unit using fly fly rotor for front rotor and homemade rotor same size to rotate in opposite direction. This will eliminate flow straiteners,Thus eliminateing some reverse thrust caused by them .This unit will be a 90mm dia. fan and i will be using a motor for each rotor so i should be able higher thrust and efflux , i intend to control each motor with seperate ECU-s so i can run front rotor at full power and reverse rotor put through power range until cotten in efplux shows straight eflux with no swirl.I am very sure this may be a giant leap forward in ducted fan performance.So whatch this thread and give me your feedback,Regards Ken Jack
|
|
![]() |
|
tommo85
Platinum (AU) USERID: 279562 HobbyKing aficionado
Joined: 17/Jan/2010 Location: Brisbane Online Status: Offline Posts: 320 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 23/Jan/2010 at 2:19pm |
|
Where do you fly Ken jack, I would very much like to see these EDF's and learn some of your methods for making such items. I think you would have a fair bit of knowledge that would be quite valuable to learn.
|
|
![]() |
|
tommo85
Platinum (AU) USERID: 279562 HobbyKing aficionado
Joined: 17/Jan/2010 Location: Brisbane Online Status: Offline Posts: 320 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 23/Jan/2010 at 2:43pm |
|
@ blind vision. I am unsure as to how efficient your idea would be. Simply because as you add more stages you will have to reduce your diameter to keep pressure up. As far as i understand it the two stage DF design is to make it easier for the second stage to compress the air and push it out the back. Like a pre compressor on large air compressors.
The reason modern turbines (axial Flow since this is what a DF most accurately is) have several stages, i have head that some have 14 stages on the front and back, is the low ability for each stage to compress the air at each compressor something like 1.2x pressure, so they need many stages to get the pressure way up so they can have a sustainable flame. Conversely on the rear of the turbine at the impeller it is the same in reverse, however its job is to take some of the energy out of the air so it can keep powering the compressors up the front. Centrifugal compressors like the ones in the Mig 15 don't have this problem and only have one compressor and impeller stage. Axial flow turbines are much more efficient that centrifugal, and now you may be asking me why if this is so do i think yours will not. Its got to do with a bypass ratio. Essentially another compressor at teh front of the turbine that is larger than the casing of the main turbine that blows extra air around the outside of the inner casing giving much more air out teh back, which is powered by the really fast moving air inside.. It is far more beneficial to have a LOT of air moving more slowly, than little air moving more fast. From memory I think commercial Airliners have a bypass ratio around 15:1. Meaning for every 1Litre of Air taht goes through the inside of the turbine. 15 goes around. and as such 16 exits the rear. A good analogy. Whats a better prop. An 11x5 or a 8x8.
|
|
![]() |
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1234 6> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions ![]() You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |