Propeller efficiency and energy loss

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on propeller efficiency, highlighting that optimal efficiency peaks at approximately 85% due to energy losses primarily converted to heat and stray kinetic energy. Ducted fans are presented as a solution to improve efficiency by reducing tip losses and managing the whirl component of airflow, allowing for higher tip velocities without significant efficiency drops. The potential efficiency gain from ducted fans with stator vanes is estimated to be around 95%, particularly beneficial for maintaining efficiency at higher RPMs or aircraft speeds.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of propeller aerodynamics
  • Knowledge of ducted fan design principles
  • Familiarity with energy loss mechanisms in fluid dynamics
  • Basic concepts of thrust generation in aviation
NEXT STEPS
  • Research "Ducted fan efficiency improvements" to explore design benefits
  • Study "Propeller blade tip design" for reducing energy losses
  • Examine "Transonic flow effects on turbofan engines" for advanced insights
  • Investigate "Energy loss in fluid dynamics" to understand underlying principles
USEFUL FOR

Aerospace engineers, propeller designers, and aviation enthusiasts interested in optimizing propeller and ducted fan efficiency.

mheslep
Gold Member
Messages
373
Reaction score
714
Googling for information on the topic leads me to graphs such as this, which suggest that if Beta and advance are optimal efficiency tops out at 85% or so. Some questions:

1) Is the ~15% lost energy converted to heat, or is there some stray kinetic energy in airflow that is somehow unusable as thrust? And to verify then, these prop inefficiencies are not including some losses inherent in the prime mover when measuring 'power' in?

2) Do fans or ducted fans improve on prop inefficiencies (assume sub sonic tip speeds for both)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There are (at least) two sources of energy loss in an unducted prop. One is the flow around the blade tips, where in a viscous fluid you can't have a "clean" separation between the air accelerated by the prop and the air "outside" it. The other is the whirl component of the velocity created by the prop, which gives a helical motion to the air but produces no net thrust.

A ducted fan reduces the tip losses by providing a physical barrier between the two airstreams flowing at different speeds. That allows higher tip velocites (up to transonic flow) without a rapid decrease of efficiency. If there are stator vanes behind the prop, they can also partially straighten out the whirl component of the velocity.
 
AlephZero said:
There are (at least) two sources of energy loss in an unducted prop. One is the flow around the blade tips, where in a viscous fluid you can't have a "clean" separation between the air accelerated by the prop and the air "outside" it. The other is the whirl component of the velocity created by the prop, which gives a helical motion to the air but produces no net thrust.
Yes, thanks.

A ducted fan reduces the tip losses by providing a physical barrier between the two airstreams flowing at different speeds. That allows higher tip velocites (up to transonic flow) without a rapid decrease of efficiency. If there are stator vanes behind the prop, they can also partially straighten out the whirl component of the velocity.
Any guess or experience as to the efficiency gain by adding the duct and vanes? That is, if a prop can hit 85%, would (say) a 95% efficient duct-ed and trailing vane fan be typical, without a drag penalty that negates the effort?
 
I'm not a "prop expert" but I think the biggest benefit would be maintaining efficiency at higher blade tip speeds (either from faster RPM or faster aircraft) rather than pushing the peak efficiency much about 85%. For example the blades on turbofan jet engines run with slightly transonic flow without losing efficiency, but that would completely kill an unducted prop. Since power output is proportional to RPM cubed (aside from efficiency considerations), higher power output without larger fan diameters is a big win.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
10K
Replies
10
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
4K