Rotating Detonation Engine, the future of aviation propulsion?

In summary, RDEs are not likely to replace turbofans for subsonic propulsion in the near future, as the gains in specific impulse would have to be significant and the complexity of RDEs makes it unlikely. They are being investigated for hypersonics and rocketry, but their use in commercial aviation is not feasible.
  • #1
Abheer Parashar
4
1
TL;DR Summary
Is the use of RDEs for aviation propulsion happening anytime sooner or the use of low/high bypass turbofan engines will continue ?
Hello everyone, I am Abheer and I am a high school student. Few days back I saw an article about RDEs (Rotating Detonation Engines). The article said it is the future of aviation propulsion. I want to ask, is it really so that RDEs are future or the low/high bypass turbofan engines will continue to rule the skies till the end of 21st century ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hi Abheer- turbofans will not be replaced by RDEs for subsonic propulsion. RDEs are being researched for hypersonics and alternatives to conventional deflagration rocket engines. The gains in specific impulse would have to be a factor of ten or more to make the RDE compete with a commercial turbofan. This is not feasible, and because RDEs are very complex, I would say that will never happen.

RDEs are being investigated at universities, but they are also being investigated in the military. Currently, the most powerful publicly-acknowledged RDE I am aware of is sitting at 22kN of thrust. This is still not quite cutting it for some necessities in hypersonics, such as packaging limitations, or simply thrust required to maintain a glide at high Mach numbers.

Basically, the "normal, lame" commercial turbofans you know on airplanes are actually extremely well-engineered engines with the highest specific impulses known to mankind for chemical propulsion. RDEs offer something to rocketry, but not to the plane you fly to LA.
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker and Lnewqban
  • #3
Benjies said:
Hi Abheer- turbofans will not be replaced by RDEs for subsonic propulsion. RDEs are being researched for hypersonics and alternatives to conventional deflagration rocket engines. The gains in specific impulse would have to be a factor of ten or more to make the RDE compete with a commercial turbofan. This is not feasible, and because RDEs are very complex, I would say that will never happen.

RDEs are being investigated at universities, but they are also being investigated in the military. Currently, the most powerful publicly-acknowledged RDE I am aware of is sitting at 22kN of thrust. This is still not quite cutting it for some necessities in hypersonics, such as packaging limitations, or simply thrust required to maintain a glide at high Mach numbers.

Basically, the "normal, lame" commercial turbofans you know on airplanes are actually extremely well-engineered engines with the highest specific impulses known to mankind for chemical propulsion. RDEs offer something to rocketry, but not to the plane you fly to LA.
What do you think about their use in fighter jet and UAVs
 
  • #4
Abheer Parashar said:
TL;DR Summary: Is the use of RDEs for aviation propulsion happening anytime sooner or the use of low/high bypass turbofan engines will continue ?

I want to ask, is it really so that RDEs are future or the low/high bypass turbofan engines will continue to rule the skies till the end of 21st century ?
Whenever you read that something is being developed, or investigated, or researched, it means that the future is uncertain. It may be used in the future if tests are successful, or it may be dropped if tests fail or if major disadvantages are found. There are many more failures than successes.
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker and Lnewqban
  • #5
Well that's not really accurate. Diesel engines are still "being researched" and yet have been in practice use for over a century.
 
  • #6
boneh3ad said:
Well that's not really accurate. Diesel engines are still "being researched" and yet have been in practice use for over a century.
We're drifting off topic here, but there is a distinction between "being researched" for economic viability and "being researched" for incremental improvements to something already known to be economically viable.
 
  • Like
Likes dlgoff, russ_watters and FactChecker

1. What is a Rotating Detonation Engine (RDE)?

A Rotating Detonation Engine is a type of propulsion system that uses detonation waves to compress and ignite the fuel-air mixture, creating a continuous cycle of detonation and exhaust. This results in more efficient and powerful combustion compared to traditional engines.

2. How does an RDE differ from traditional jet engines?

RDEs differ from traditional jet engines in that they use a continuous cycle of detonation rather than a series of combustion events. This allows for a more efficient use of fuel and a higher thrust-to-weight ratio, making them ideal for aviation propulsion.

3. What are the potential benefits of using RDEs in aviation?

The use of RDEs in aviation has the potential to significantly reduce fuel consumption and emissions, as well as increase the speed and range of aircraft. They also have a simpler design and require fewer moving parts, leading to lower maintenance costs.

4. What are the current challenges in developing RDE technology?

One of the main challenges in developing RDE technology is controlling and stabilizing the detonation waves to ensure a continuous and predictable cycle. Additionally, there are still technical hurdles to overcome in terms of materials and design to make RDEs viable for commercial use.

5. When can we expect to see RDEs being used in commercial aircraft?

While RDEs have shown promising results in laboratory settings, it will likely take several more years of research and development before they can be implemented in commercial aircraft. Some experts predict that we may see RDEs being used in military aircraft within the next decade, but widespread commercial use may still be further in the future.

Similar threads

  • Aerospace Engineering
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • General Engineering
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • Aerospace Engineering
Replies
9
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
51
Replies
4
Views
130
Replies
1
Views
293
Replies
1
Views
213
Replies
3
Views
731
Back
Top