Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-m9pkr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-14T07:53:28.885Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A study of various energy- and exergy-based optimisation metrics for the design of high performance aircraft systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2016

V. Periannan ,
M. R. von Spakovsky  and
D. J. Moorhouse
V. Periannan
Affiliation:
Center for Energy Systems Research, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, USA
M. R. von Spakovsky
Affiliation:
Center for Energy Systems Research, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, USA
D. J. Moorhouse
Affiliation:
U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson, OH, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper shows the advantages of applying exergy-based analysis and optimisation methods to the synthesis/design and operation of aircraft systems. In particular, an Advanced Aircraft Fighter (AAF) with three subsystems: a Propulsion Subsystem (PS), an Environmental Control Subsystem (ECS), and an Airframe Subsystem – Aerodynamics (AFS-A) is used to illustrate these advantages. Thermodynamic (both energy and exergy based), aerodynamic, geometric, and physical models of the components comprising the subsystems are developed and their interactions defined. Off-design performance is considered as well and is used in the analysis and optimisation of system synthesis/design and operation as the aircraft is flown over an entire mission.

An exergy-based parametric study of the PS and its components is first presented in order to show the type of detailed information on internal system losses which an exergy analysis can provide and an energy analysis by its very nature is unable to provide. This is followed by a series of constrained, system synthesis/design optimisations based on five different objective functions, which define energy-based and exergy-based measures of performance. The former involve minimising the gross takeoff weight or maximising the thrust efficiency while the latter involve minimising the rates of exergy destruction plus the rate of exergy fuel loss (with and without AFS-A losses) or maximising the thermodynamic effectiveness.

A first set of optimisations involving four of the objectives (two energy-based and two exergy-based) are performed with only PS and ECS degrees of freedom. Losses for the AFS-A are not incorporated into the two exergy-based objectives. The results show that as expected all four objectives globally produce the same optimum vehicle. A second set of optimisations is then performed with AFS-A degrees of freedom and again with two energy- and exergy-based objectives. However, this time one of the exergy-based objectives incorporates AFS-A losses directly into the objective. The results are that with this latter objective, a significantly better optimum vehicle is produced. Thus, an exergy-based approach is not only able to pinpoint where the greatest inefficiencies in the system occur but appears at least in this case to produce a superior optimum vehicle as well by accounting for irreversibility losses in subsystems (e.g., the AFS-A) only indirectly tied to fuel usage.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 112 , Issue 1134 , August 2008 , pp. 449 - 458
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2008 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Rancruel, D.F. and Von Spakovsky, M.R., Use of a unique decomposition strategy for the optimal synthesis/design and operation of an advanced fighter aircraft system, 10th AIAA/ISSMO Multi-disciplinary Analysis and optimisation Conf., Albany, NY, USA, 2004, 30 August – 1 September.Google Scholar
2. Rancruel, D.F. and Von Spakovsky, M.R., Decomposition with thermoeconomic isolation applied to the optimal synthesis/design of an advanced fighter aircraft system, Int J Thermodynamics, 6, (3), ICAT, Istanbul, Turkey, September 2003.Google Scholar
3. Muñoz, J.R. and Von Spakovsky, M.R., Decomposition in energy system synthesis/design optimisation for stationary and aerospace applications, AIAA J Aircr, 39, (6), special issue, January – February 2003.Google Scholar
4. Rancruel, D.F. and Von Spakovsky, M.R., A decomposition strategy applied to the optimal synthesis/design and operation of an advanced fighter aircraft system: a comparison with and without airframe degrees of freedom, ASME–IMECE’2003, November 2003, ASME Paper No. 44402, NY, USA, 2003.Google Scholar
5. Rancruel, D.F., A decomposition strategy based on thermoeconomic isolation applied to the optimal synthesis/design and operation of an advanced fighter aircraft system, M.S.thesis, Advisor: von Spakovsky, M.R, Mechanical Engineering Dept., Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Univ., Blacksburg, VA, USA, May 2002.Google Scholar
6. Markell, K.C., Exergy methods for the generic analysis and optimisation of hypersonic vehicle concepts, M.S. thesis, Advisor: von Spakovsky, M. R, Mechanical Engineering Dept., Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Univ., Blacksburg, VA, USA, February 2005.Google Scholar
7. Brewer, K.M., Exergy methods for mission-level analysis and optimisation of generic hypersonic vehicle concepts, M.S. thesis, Advisor: von Spakovsky, M. R, Mechanical Engineering Dept., Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Univ., Blacksburg, VA, USA, May 2006.Google Scholar
8. Butt, J., A study of morphing wing effectiveness in fighter aircraft using exergy analysis and global optimisation techniques, M.S. thesis, Advisor: von Spakovsky, M. R, Mech. Eng. Dept., Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Univ., Blacksburg, VA, USA, December 2005.Google Scholar
9. Periannan, V., Investigation of the effects of different objective functions/figures of merit on the analysis and optimisation of high performance aircraft system synthesis/design, M.S. thesis, Advisor: von Spakovsky, M. R, Mech. Eng. Dept., Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Univ., Blacksburg, VA, USA, August 2005.Google Scholar
10. Roth, B., A work potential perspective of engine component performance, AIAA Paper 2001-3300, July 2001.Google Scholar
11. Riggins, D., The thermodynamic continuum of jet engine performance: the principle of lost work due to irreversibility in aerospace systems, Int J Thermodynamics, ICAT, Istanbul Turkey, 2003, 6, (3).Google Scholar
12. Moorhouse, D.J., Proposed system-level multidisciplinary analysis technique based on exergy methods, AIAA J Aircr, 40, 2003.Google Scholar
13. Figliola, R.S. and Tipton, R., An exergy-based methodology for decision-based design of integrated aircraft thermal systems, Paper No. 00WAC-92, 2000, SAE.Google Scholar
14. Paulus, D.M. and Gagglioli, R.A., Rational Objective Functions for Vehicles, AIAA-2000-4852, September 2000.Google Scholar
15. Mattingly, J.D., Heiser, W.H. and Daley, D.H., Aircraft Engine Design, AIAA Education Series, New York, NY, USA, 1987.Google Scholar
16. gPROMS®, Process Systems Enterprise, London, UK, 2004.Google Scholar