A Theoretical Treatment of Technical Risk in Modern Propulsion System Design

In summary, the PhD dissertation by Bryce Alexander Roth focuses on the development of a methodology for analyzing risk in the design of aerospace vehicles. This method utilizes work potential figures of merit, including exergy, available energy, and thrust work potential, to analyze thermodynamic losses in propulsion systems. Using the Northrop F-5E with GE J85-GE-21 engines as a case study, the method is applied to analyze aerodynamic drag losses and fuel usage throughout the design mission. Additionally, the impact of engine cycle technologies on the F-5E airframe is quantified using this methodology. The dissertation also incorporates probabilistic analysis methods to assess the impact of risk on the aerothermodynamic performance of the F-5E.
  • #1
Astronuc
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
2023 Award
21,905
6,322
http://www.asdl.gatech.edu/teams/prop/roth_pub/roth_thesis.pdf
(use save target as if speed limited)

PhD Dissertation

Bryce Alexander Roth

A prevalent trend in modern aerospace systems is increasing complexity and cost, which in turn drives increased risk. Consequently, there is a clear and present need for the development of formalized methods to analyze the impact of risk on the design of aerospace vehicles. The objective of this work is to develop such a method that enables analysis of risk via a consistent, comprehensive treatment of aerothermodynamic and mass properties aspects of vehicle design.

The key elements enabling the creation of this methodology are recent developments in the analytical estimation of work potential based on the second law of thermodynamics. This dissertation develops the theoretical foundation of a vehicle analysis method based on work potential and validates it using the Northrop F-5E with GE J85-GE-21 engines as a case study. Although the method is broadly applicable, emphasis is given to aircraft propulsion applications.

Three work potential figures of merit are applied using this method: exergy, available energy, and thrust work potential. It is shown that each possesses unique properties making them useful for specific vehicle analysis tasks, though the latter two are actually special cases of exergy. All three are demonstrated on the analysis of the J85-GE-21 propulsion system, resulting in a comprehensive description of propulsion system thermodynamic loss. This “loss management” method is used to analyze aerodynamic drag loss of the F-5E and is then used in conjunction with the propulsive loss model to analyze the usage of fuel work potential throughout the F-5E design mission. The results clearly show how and where work potential is used during flight and yield considerable insight as to where the greatest opportunity for design improvement is. Next, usage of work potential is translated into fuel weight so that the aerothermodynamic performance of the F-5E can be expressed entirely in terms of vehicle gross weight. This technique is then applied as a means to quantify the impact of engine cycle technologies on the F-5E airframe. Finally, loss management methods are used in conjunction with probabilistic analysis methods to quantify the impact of risk on F-5E aerothermodynamic performance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
Thanks Astro. I downloaded that. I hope to get a chance to read it this weekend.
 
  • #3


This dissertation presents a comprehensive methodology for analyzing technical risk in modern propulsion system design. By utilizing work potential figures of merit and loss management techniques, this method provides a consistent and comprehensive approach to analyzing the impact of risk on aerothermodynamic and mass properties aspects of vehicle design. The case study of the F-5E with GE J85-GE-21 engines demonstrates the effectiveness of this methodology in identifying areas for design improvement and quantifying the impact of risk. This work has significant implications for the future design of aerospace vehicles, as it provides a framework for incorporating risk analysis into the design process, ultimately leading to more efficient and cost-effective designs.
 

What is the purpose of a theoretical treatment of technical risk in modern propulsion system design?

The purpose of a theoretical treatment of technical risk in modern propulsion system design is to identify potential risks and uncertainties in the design process and to develop strategies to mitigate or manage these risks. This helps to ensure the safety and reliability of the propulsion system, as well as reduce costs and improve overall performance.

What are some common technical risks in modern propulsion system design?

Some common technical risks in modern propulsion system design include material and component failure, integration errors, system complexity, and unexpected environmental conditions. These risks can lead to malfunctions, delays, or even catastrophic failure, making it important to address them during the design process.

How can a theoretical treatment of technical risk be incorporated into the design process?

A theoretical treatment of technical risk can be incorporated into the design process through various methods such as risk assessment tools, simulation and modeling, and prototyping. These methods can help identify potential risks and evaluate their impact on the design, allowing for adjustments to be made before the system is implemented.

What are the benefits of incorporating a theoretical treatment of technical risk in modern propulsion system design?

Incorporating a theoretical treatment of technical risk in modern propulsion system design can have several benefits. It can improve the safety and reliability of the system, reduce costs by avoiding failures and delays, and improve overall performance. It can also help to identify areas for improvement and innovation in the design process.

How does a theoretical treatment of technical risk differ from a practical approach to risk management?

A theoretical treatment of technical risk focuses on identifying and analyzing potential risks in the design process, while a practical approach to risk management deals with implementing strategies to mitigate or manage those risks. Theoretical treatment is more proactive, while practical risk management is more reactive, addressing risks as they arise in the implementation stage.

Similar threads

  • Mechanical Engineering
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
966
Replies
19
Views
14K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
30
Views
7K
  • General Engineering
Replies
27
Views
8K
Back
Top