Propeller efficiency and energy loss

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the efficiency of propellers and the energy losses associated with them, particularly in comparison to ducted fans. Participants explore the mechanisms of energy loss, the potential for efficiency improvements, and the implications of design choices on performance. The scope includes theoretical considerations and practical applications in aerodynamics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the ~15% energy loss in propellers may be converted to heat or result from unusable kinetic energy in airflow.
  • It is noted that propeller inefficiencies do not account for losses inherent in the prime mover when measuring power.
  • Participants identify two primary sources of energy loss in unducted props: flow around blade tips and the whirl component of velocity that does not contribute to thrust.
  • Some argue that ducted fans can reduce tip losses by providing a barrier between different airstreams, allowing for higher tip velocities without significant efficiency loss.
  • There is a question about the potential efficiency gain from adding ducts and stator vanes, with speculation on whether ducted fans could achieve around 95% efficiency compared to the 85% typical for unducted props.
  • One participant expresses that the main advantage of ducted fans may lie in maintaining efficiency at higher blade tip speeds rather than significantly increasing peak efficiency.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the exact efficiency gains from ducted fans versus unducted props, and the discussion includes multiple competing views on the mechanisms of energy loss and the implications for design.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions regarding the specific efficiency improvements that can be achieved with ducted fans and the impact of design choices on overall performance. The discussion also highlights the complexity of measuring and defining efficiency in different contexts.

mheslep
Gold Member
Messages
376
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
11K
Replies
10
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
613