Would a smaller fan blade be more efficient?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter kolleamm
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fan
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the efficiency of fan blades, specifically whether a fan with half the blade length would be more efficient. Participants concluded that smaller fan blades are generally less efficient in terms of air movement and power consumption, as larger fans typically provide better airflow per watt. The conversation highlighted that efficiency is often measured in CFM/Watt or CMM/Watt, with larger diameter fans being more effective for air circulation. Additionally, factors such as rotational speed and blade design significantly influence overall performance.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of fan efficiency metrics such as CFM/Watt and CMM/Watt.
  • Knowledge of aerodynamics, particularly the principles of lift and drag as they apply to fan blades.
  • Familiarity with the concepts of torque and power in mechanical systems.
  • Awareness of HVAC applications and airflow requirements.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the impact of blade design on fan efficiency, focusing on different shapes and sizes.
  • Explore the relationship between rotational speed and airflow in various fan types.
  • Investigate the efficiency of ceiling fans versus desk fans in terms of air circulation and power consumption.
  • Examine case studies on fan performance in confined spaces and their acoustic noise levels.
USEFUL FOR

Engineers, HVAC professionals, and anyone involved in the design or optimization of fan systems will benefit from this discussion, particularly those focused on improving energy efficiency and airflow performance.

kolleamm
Messages
476
Reaction score
44
Would a fan with half the blade length be more efficient? My reasoning is that there would be less mass to spin, also a shorter blade length would make the lever arm smaller thus reducing more of the torque the air would create on the blade.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How much energy does it take to keep a mass spinning once you have started it spinning?

If you spin a blade that is twice as long at half the rotation rate, how does the required power change? What change in the rate of air flow would you expect?
 
I think there probably would be no efficiency due to the rotational inertia, but I'm not sure since the lever arm is shorter in this case. Any fan of any size can be considered for this question.
 
Consider a fan blade that consists of a small vane at the end of a long arm. Ignore the mass and wind resistance of the arm.

If you double the length of the arm and spin it at half the rotation rate, what happens to the speed of the vane?
 
Fan blades are essentially wings. The tip of a wing is usually less efficient than a bit in the middle of the wing. If you reduce the length of the wing does the tip represent more or less of the wing as a percentage?
 
CWatters said:
Fan blades are essentially wings. The tip of a wing is usually less efficient than a bit in the middle of the wing. If you reduce the length of the wing does the tip represent more or less of the wing as a percentage?
That question is unclear. The obvious answer is no. If you scale down the wing in all dimensions, the "tip" retains the same percentage of the total area.
 
jbriggs444 said:
That question is unclear. The obvious answer is no. If you scale down the wing in all dimensions, the "tip" retains the same percentage of the total area.
That's only if you ignore the hub / bearing / shaft.
I believe that the high airspeed of a large diameter blade can lead to inefficiency(?)
Perhaps the conditions implied in the OP not are not precise enough for a proper answer.
 
sophiecentaur said:
Perhaps the conditions implied in the OP not are not precise enough for a proper answer.
Agreed. The vision I had was that with a larger diameter blade, one would scale down the rotation rate, thus having the same tip speed, flow speed and the same angle of attack, but it seems clear that other folks are making different assumptions.
 
kolleamm said:
Would a fan with half the blade length be more efficient? My reasoning is that there would be less mass to spin, also a shorter blade length would make the lever arm smaller thus reducing more of the torque the air would create on the blade.
Unfortunately, this (Original Post) is that it contains a misapprehension. "Torque" is not particularly relevant because the fan could be driven with a suitable motor to produce that torque. What counts is Power, which is torque X rotational speed. Both the speed of the fan and the torque are relevant and a small fan would (optimally) have different shaped blades and rotate at a different speed.
In most cases, there is a certain maximum allowable area for a fan to occupy, to provide a given volume flow of air. It's normal to use as wide a fan as possible, rather than using multiple small fans. That sort of implies that a big fan would usually beat a small one (loosely based on perceived practical evidence)

As an example where size is not too much of a criterion, the 'best' fans for circulating air around a room tend to be large radius ceiling fans, rather than fast revving desk top fans. Also, the Chinook seems to be the only helicopter design which uses two separate rotors. All the others - even the heavy lifting jobs- seem to have just one (large) rotor. Again, this is only anecdotal evidence.
 
  • #10
  • #11
jbriggs444 said:
That question is unclear. The obvious answer is no. If you scale down the wing in all dimensions, the "tip" retains the same percentage of the total area.

Agreed but the OP asked about the length of the blades and my answer addressed that.
 
  • #12
kolleamm said:
Would a fan with half the blade length be more efficient?
No, it would be less efficient in terms of transferring momentum to the air for a given power. That's why glider planes have long wings, and human powered airplanes have long propeller blades. See also most wind turbine blades.

kolleamm said:
My reasoning is that there would be less mass to spin,
That would be only relevant if you are switching the fan on and off all the time.

kolleamm said:
also a shorter blade length would make the lever arm smaller thus reducing more of the torque the air would create on the blade.
But you also move less air with the shorter blade.

You have to define the efficiency you are interested in quantitatively, instead of considering isolated quantities.
 
Last edited:
  • #13
A.T. said:
But you also move less air with the shorter blade.
And short blades need to move faster, creating more noise. The best fans for shifting air in a room are the large overhead ceiling fans. Their only disadvantage is that they are obtrusive and can injure your head if you stand on a chair.
 
Last edited:
  • #14
Another approach is to look at the air moving capacity and power of different size fans. Aerovent has a nice catalog of panel fans: http://aerovent.com/docs/product-bulletins/panel-ring-fans-(model-br-brrc-brrf-brrv-ddr-ddrrc-ddrrf-ddrrv-bp-bprc-bprf-bprv-ddp-ddprc-ddprf-ddprv)---catalog-168.pdf?Status=Master. Look up two different size fans to move the same amount of air at the same static pressure, then compare the power required.

Spoiler: In general, larger fans are more efficient.
 
  • #15
Old thread.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
  • #16
CWatters said:
Old thread.
That could be said of a vast number of PF threads.
 
  • #17
Maaaaan!

Nuthin'
like poring over 14 posts with interest, forming ideas and responses in one's head - only to find out at the last moment that it's years old...Who knows what's changed... CWatters and sophiecentaur might be so old and decrepit by now that they have to type using a stick in their mouths...
 
  • #18
The thread was brought back by a person who clearly does not understand that efficiency and power required are two different things. It seems to me that since PF threads are available for a long time, and we do not want to spread false information, then the post should either get response(s) or be deleted.
 
  • #19
DaveC426913 said:
Maaaaan!

Nuthin'
like poring over 14 posts with interest, forming ideas and responses in one's head - only to find out at the last moment that it's years old...Who knows what's changed... CWatters and sophiecentaur might be so old and decrepit by now that they have to type using a stick in their mouths...
Shame. I used to be one of your greatest fans, Dave.

Edit: Necroposting is not, in itself a bad thing but it's true that OP's have a habit of dropping out. I can't see that being a serious problem unless the thread has been left with a nonsense line to follow. Perhaps a stronger notification about the age of a thread could be given - there could be an age rating / warning, writ large and in red. Alternatively, the text in ageing threads could gradually fade (as in Back to the Future) to a pale sepia until they become impossible to read.
 
  • #20
Without a specific definition of "efficiency" the discussion is bound to be fraught with ambiguities and misunderstandings. I note that the OP is still with us (logged in today in fact) but hasn't yet decided to weigh in. Perhaps they will grace us with the definition they had in mind at some point.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
  • #21
Pinkyverma said:
Yes, a smaller fan blade would be more efficient.

No, by the usual measures of efficiency (air flow per power or thrust per power), a smaller fan blade is less efficient. High efficiency fans usually have as large a diameter as possible.
 
  • #22
"usual measures of efficiency" does not tell us what the OP had in mind in regards to efficiency.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
  • #23
That's true, but I'm struggling to think of an efficiency measure where a smaller fan would be better. Maybe if all you care about is static pressure per watt? That would be a strange focus though, since as soon as you have any airflow at all, a large fan will win again.
 
  • #24
cjl said:
No, by the usual measures of efficiency (air flow per power or thrust per power), a smaller fan blade is less efficient. High efficiency fans usually have as large a diameter as possible.
@gneill has a good point; it is highly dependent on the application. In HVAC, you tend to have an airflow and pressure requirement and efficiency is efficiency: power/power. Small fans are better at generating high pressure at low airflow.
 
  • #25
russ_watters said:
it is highly dependent on the application.
Absolutely. It's only when a fan is operating in free space that the efficiency can be worked out in a straightforward way. Fans are often used in confined spaces where cooling requires an optimum volume of air to flow through an equipment cabinet. Same applies to automotive cooling fans. As @russ_watters says, the relevant figure is Power / Power and a fan may have to be fitted into a non optimal place. There's also the issue of acoustic noise which is often a factor.
I believe there are 'Consultants' that will deliver a good design and charge you lots of money.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
20K
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
6K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
10K
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
3K