Overall and blade element performance of a 1.20 pressure ratio fan stage with rotor blades reset -7 deg

A 51-cm-diam model of a fan stage for short haul aircraft was tested in a single stage compressor research facility. The rotor blades were set 7 deg toward the axial direction (opened) from the design setting angle. Surveys of the air flow conditions ahead of the rotor, between the rotor and stator, and behind the stator were made over the stable operating range of the stage. At the design speed and a weight flow of 30.9 kg/sec, the stage pressure ratio and efficiency were 1.205 and 0.85, respectively. The design speed rotor peak efficiency of 0.90 occurred at a flow rate of 32.5 kg/sec

Aerodynamic performance of 0.5 meter-diameter, 337 meter-per-second tip speed, 1.5 pressure-ratio, single-stage fan designed for low noise aircraft engines

Overall and blade-element aerodynamic performance of a 0.271-scale model of QF-1 are presented, examined, and then compared and evaluated with that from similar low noise fan stage designs. The tests cover a wide range of speeds and weight flows along with variations in stator setting angle and stator axial spacing from the rotor. At design speed with stator at design setting angle and a fixed distance between stage measuring stations, there were no significant effects of increasing the axial spacing between rotor stator from 1.0 to 3.5 rotor chords on stage overall pressure ratio, efficiency or stall margin

Overall and blade-element performance of a 1.20-pressure-ratio fan stage at design blade setting angle

A 51-cm-diam. model of a short-haul fan stage was tested. Surveys of the air flow conditions ahead of the rotor, between the rotor and stator, and behind the stator were made over the stable operating range of the stage. At the design speed of 213.3 m/sec and weight flow of 26.7 kg/sec, the stage pressure ratio and efficiency are 1.18 and 0.87, respectively. The rotor peak efficiency of 0.92 occurred at flow rate of 30.5 kg/sec. Peak stage efficiency of 0.09 was obtained at 110 percent speed at a pressure ratio of 1.218 and a weight flow of 30.2 kg/sec. Maximum stage pressure ratio is 1.269 at 120 percent speed

Whirling of the single mass rotor

Motion equations for whirling mass rotor on damped elastic shaf

Aerodynamic performance of a 1.20-pressure ratio fan stage designed for low noise

The aerodynamic design and the overall blade element performance of a 51 centimeter diameter fan stage is presented. The stage was designed to minimize the noise generated by rotor stator interactions. The design pressure ratio was 1.20 at a flow of 30.6 kilograms per second and a rotor blade tip speed of 228.6 meters per second. At design speed the rotor peak efficiency was 0.935. The peak efficiency of the stage, however, was 0.824. The radial distribution of rotor performance parameters at peak efficiency and design speed indicated excellent agreement with design values

Flight parameters and vehicle performance for project fire flight 1, launched april 14, 1964

Flight parameters and spacecraft performance for Fire project flight

Performance of a transonic fan stage designed for a low meridional velocity ratio

The aerodynamic performance and design parameters of a transonic fan stage are presented. The fan stage was designed for a meridional velocity ratio of 0.8 across the tip of the stage, a pressure ratio of 1.57, a flow of 29.5 kilograms per second, and a tip speed of 426 meters per second. Radial surveys were obtained over the stable operating range from 50 to 100 percent of design speed. The measured, peak efficiency (0.81) of the stage occurred at a pressure ratio of 1.58 and a flow of 28.7 kilograms per second

Book Review. - Literatur

Book Review. - Literatu

A Tribute to A.L. Philpott

In 1973 I served in my first session of the General Assembly of Virginia. Prior to leaving for Richmond, I was advised to keep my mouth shut and to never, never raise the ire of A.L. Philpott. We had some problem in Mecklenburg County, and I introduced legislation to address it. As the bill was called on second reading, I shuddered as Mr. Philpott rose and asked the Speaker if I would yield for a question. He asked: Does the gentleman realize the bill is in violation of the Constitution of Virginia? Since I am not an attorney, I had no idea that this was the case. He proceeded to expand his questions. At the end of his statement he asked the Speaker if I would allow this measure to go by for the day. I don\u27t know if I have ever been happier. As I sat down, A.L. was standing by my seat offering amendments to correct the flaws in my bill