How to improve the efficiency of a propeller?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the efficiency of propellers in aircraft design, specifically addressing whether it is possible to exceed an efficiency of 80% for a two-bladed propeller. Participants explore various factors that influence propeller efficiency, including diameter, blade count, rotational speed, and design considerations.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asserts that the efficiency of a propeller cannot be improved beyond the physical limits, suggesting that a larger diameter propeller, more blades, higher rotational speed, or larger chord blades are potential options, but questions their effectiveness when starting from 80% efficiency.
  • Another participant notes that while a larger diameter may move more air with less drag, it may not lead to efficiency gains when considering the advance coefficient.
  • It is mentioned that increasing diameter would decrease the advance coefficient (J), raising questions about the relationship between J and efficiency (η).
  • One participant emphasizes that while modifications might increase power or thrust, they would not necessarily improve efficiency, and highlights that no propeller can achieve 100% efficiency due to energy losses in the wake.
  • A later reply suggests that if diameter is increased while maintaining the same velocity, the rotational speed would need to decrease, potentially keeping J constant and possibly shifting the efficiency curve upwards slightly, but warns of diminishing returns at high efficiency levels.
  • Another participant introduces the concept of aspect ratio, explaining that higher aspect ratios reduce the impact of less efficient wing tips on overall performance, relating this to propeller design.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the potential for improving propeller efficiency beyond 80%. While some acknowledge physical limitations, others propose various design modifications and their implications, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific technical terms and relationships, such as the advance coefficient (J) and efficiency (η), without reaching a consensus on how these factors interact in the context of propeller design.

PhyIsOhSoHard
Messages
157
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


One of your friends is building his own airplane. He has received a quotation for a two-bladed propeller with an efficiency of ##\eta = 80\%## . He asks for your advice on whether it is possible to get a higher efficiency - what is your answer?

  • no, the efficiency based on physics not be improved
  • use a large diameter propeller
  • use a propeller with more blades
  • use a higher rotational speed
  • use propeller blades with a larger chord
The correct answer according to my book is "use a large diameter propeller" however his propeller already has an efficiency of 80%, is it physically possible to make it higher than this?

Here is a graph that shows the efficiency of an aircraft but it doesn't go higher than 80% efficiency:
XDX2E2L.png


So how is it possible to increase this efficiency by making the diameter larger?

For the record, the speed of advance coefficient (J) is:
##J=\frac{V}{nD}##
Where V is the velocity of the aircraft, D is the diameter and n is the revolutions.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The graph shows how the efficiency depends on speed, (for a fixed diameter).
A larger diameter may move more air with a smaller increase in drag compared with the other approaches.
But it may not translate into gains against the advance coefficient.

If you increase D, you decrease J ... what happens to ##\eta (J)##?

iirc - 80% is pretty close to the top efficiency of a prop.
 
The ideas in your OP might give you more power or thrust, but not higher efficiency. You will need a more powerful motor to drive the bigger/faster prop.

You can't make a prop that is 100% efficient, because it can only generate thrust by moving air about, and some energy must be "wasted" in the propellor wake left behind the plane.
 
Simon Bridge said:
If you increase D, you decrease J ... what happens to ##\eta (J)##?
Assuming V is to be the same, then n would need to be decreased if D is increased, and J could end up being the same, and the curve for ##\eta (J)## might shift upwards by a small amount. If the propeller is already at 80% efficiency, then it's probably at a point of diminishing returns for increasing D.
 
@rcldr: thanks but - that question was pedagogical - I know what I'd answer ... I want to see what OP answers.

Comes down to how you interpret the question though doesn't it?
Take each choice in turn - all of them have something objectionable about them.
 
One simple explanation for the book answer is that the tips of any wing are less efficient than the mid span. So the higher the aspect ratio the less effect the inefficient tip part has on overall performance. It's one reason why gliders have high aspect ratio wings.
 

Similar threads

Replies
13
Views
8K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
17K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
9K