Blade containment - simplified analytical approach

AI Thread Summary
Blade containment tests for rotating machinery, particularly gas turbines, are crucial to prevent catastrophic failures if a blade detaches. While physical experiments and finite element analysis (FEA) are common, there is interest in simplified analytical methods to predict blade behavior post-detachment. A proposed approach involves calculating the kinetic energy of the blade using the formula E_K=1/2 m (ω·r)², but questions arise about its applicability when transitioning from rotational to translational motion. Real-world examples highlight the complexity of containment, with past incidents demonstrating that even robust designs can fail to contain high-speed blades. Overall, there is no straightforward solution for ensuring blade containment in high-speed applications.
FEAnalyst
Messages
348
Reaction score
149
TL;DR Summary
What is the simplified analytical approach to blade containment problem?
Hi,
one of the most interesting experimental tests performed for rotating machinery (such as gas turbines) is blade containment test - if the blade detaches from the hub, it can't break through the cover of the turbine because it could result in catastrophic damage (especially in case of airplanes). Apart from physical experiments, such tests are very often performed with FEA. However, I wonder if there's a way to perform some simplified analytical calculations (and determine whether the blade will be able to break through the cover or not) before proceeding to FEA or in order to confirm the correctness of numerical analysis. What I've found so far is approach based on the kinetic energy of the blade after detachment. The formula I've found in some scientific paper is: $$E_{K}=\frac{1}{2}m (\omega \cdot r)^{2}$$ where: ##m## - blade mass, ##\omega## - angular velocity, ##r## - radius. Is this formula correct for a situation when body suddenly switches from rotational to translation motion? What to do next? And is it possible to account for the deformation of the blade (which is significant in this case)?

Thanks in advance for your help
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
I found some good sources using search term jet engine blade containment. From one of the hits:
Blade containment.jpg

I had looked into a similar problem some years ago. That problem in involved orbital log saws coming apart. A chunk of steel weighing over 100 lbs coming off a 24 inch radius orbit arm running 300 RPM makes a serious dent in the steel guardhouse. In our case, I calculated that it would not penetrate a 12 gauge steel inner wall, provided that the inner wall was properly supported around the edges. The analysis involved calculating force vs dent distance, and integrating until the total work was greater than the worst case kinetic energy of the flying parts.

Brochure of the log saw mentioned above: https://catalog.bretting.com/item/saws/24-inch-orbital-log-saw/1058. I headed the team that developed that saw, the conveyor system, and the guard house.

Bottom line: No simple solution for high speed turbine blades.
 
  • Like
Likes Lnewqban and berkeman
Thanks for reply. Can you say more about the approach you used for log saws (some equations, sources)?
 
Building 273 at GE's Schenectady works had a turbine overspeed test stand. It had a steel inner liner, then 6 feet of railroad ties, and a steel outer liner. It did not always succeed in containing broken blades. Legend said that one engineer was killed while sitting at his desk as a blade fell from the sky and hit him.
 
Then, we had accident of flight 1380 of SW Airlines.

Please, see:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southwest_Airlines_Flight_1380

“On November 19, 2019, following the aforementioned hearing, the NTSB released the final report on the accident.[2] the probable cause reads:

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) determines that the probable cause of this accident was a low-cycle fatigue crack in the dovetail of fan blade No. 13, which resulted in the fan blade separating in flight and impacting the engine fan case at a location that was critical to the structural integrity and performance of the fan cowl structure. This impact led to the in-flight separation of fan cowl components, including the inboard fan cowl aft latch keeper, which struck the fuselage near a cabin window and caused the window to depart from the airplane, the cabin to rapidly depressurize, and the passenger fatality.”
 
How did you find PF?: Via Google search Hi, I have a vessel I 3D printed to investigate single bubble rise. The vessel has a 4 mm gap separated by acrylic panels. This is essentially my viewing chamber where I can record the bubble motion. The vessel is open to atmosphere. The bubble generation mechanism is composed of a syringe pump and glass capillary tube (Internal Diameter of 0.45 mm). I connect a 1/4” air line hose from the syringe to the capillary The bubble is formed at the tip...
Thread 'What type of toilet do I have?'
I was enrolled in an online plumbing course at Stratford University. My plumbing textbook lists four types of residential toilets: 1# upflush toilets 2# pressure assisted toilets 3# gravity-fed, rim jet toilets and 4# gravity-fed, siphon-jet toilets. I know my toilet is not an upflush toilet because my toilet is not below the sewage line, and my toilet does not have a grinder and a pump next to it to propel waste upwards. I am about 99% sure that my toilet is not a pressure assisted...
After over 25 years of engineering, designing and analyzing bolted joints, I just learned this little fact. According to ASME B1.2, Gages and Gaging for Unified Inch Screw Threads: "The no-go gage should not pass over more than three complete turns when inserted into the internal thread of the product. " 3 turns seems like way to much. I have some really critical nuts that are of standard geometry (5/8"-11 UNC 3B) and have about 4.5 threads when you account for the chamfers on either...
Back
Top