tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post3393243479315269253..comments2024-01-17T13:23:35.896-05:00Comments on aeroturbopower: Definitive LEAP1-B fan diameter!(?)Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-57728006261304807442012-03-28T17:29:51.207-04:002012-03-28T17:29:51.207-04:00Well, yes, people forget that the engine on the A3...Well, yes, people forget that the engine on the A320 classic is bigger today than the one on the B737NG, still they are about equal in efficiency as a whole. So, I do not see why it would not be the same for the NEO and the MAX planes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-87763198671500481642012-03-26T03:52:39.813-04:002012-03-26T03:52:39.813-04:00Please remember that the B737 has a lower thrust s...Please remember that the B737 has a lower thrust setting than the A320, so the sweet spot for the B737 should be somewhat lower than the sweetspot for the A320. And the exact sweetspot might be different for different engines. It might be higher for a GTF than for a conventional trubofan like LEAP-1B.aeroturbopowerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17686461923667604678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-36393962882026775532012-03-26T03:49:54.016-04:002012-03-26T03:49:54.016-04:00If you compare two fan area's (more exactly co...If you compare two fan area's (more exactly cou would have to compare the fan nozzle areas), you get that v2/v1=(A1^2/A^2). Per Bernoulli you get then that p2-p1= (density/2)* (v2^2-v1^2).aeroturbopowerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17686461923667604678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-49759349745544060312012-03-25T09:02:32.633-04:002012-03-25T09:02:32.633-04:00I think that if 68-69 inch would be the optimum fa...I think that if 68-69 inch would be the optimum fan size for the LEAP engine (taking into consideration weight, drag, fan pressure ratio), Airbus would put that one on the A320 series. <br /><br />If 78 inch would be better, Boeing would do the business case and conclude 68.4 is the maximum they can get on the 737 at reasonable costs. <br /><br />Saying it's the sweetspot & we are the best anyway is just PR. What else can they say? Sorry, but this is the max we can do?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-74646916332689954052012-03-23T14:48:23.233-04:002012-03-23T14:48:23.233-04:00Ok, thanks for the response. So the difference is...Ok, thanks for the response. So the difference is bigger than one might think at first. I did not think that the area for either fans was increasing that much.<br />Is it possible to figure out how much a pressure differential would it be between the two fans? Thanks again and keep up the great work you'd been doing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-18090954741609863222012-03-23T04:56:45.710-04:002012-03-23T04:56:45.710-04:00NEO fan area increases by roughly 31%, MAX fan are...NEO fan area increases by roughly 31%, MAX fan area by 24%, meaninig that the fan pressure ratio can be set lower for the NEO engine, resulting in higher propulsive efficiency.aeroturbopowerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17686461923667604678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-9616049771535266082012-03-22T12:53:04.424-04:002012-03-22T12:53:04.424-04:00Well, doing a rough estimation of fan are increase...Well, doing a rough estimation of fan are increase on both NEW and Max. The NEO fan goes from 68 inches to 78 inches, so is that about an increase of about .1471 (78/68)?<br />Now, if we do the same for the Max we have an increase of about .1213 (68.4/61). Although, the increase is smaller than that of the NEO, is it as big a difference for the perceive increase in efficiency for the NEO over the Max? What is the difference in fan area increase for each?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-47586344940414097342012-03-21T03:45:56.762-04:002012-03-21T03:45:56.762-04:00Bigger is not always better, that's right: the...Bigger is not always better, that's right: there is a sweet spot for aircraft/engine combination. The question is: is the sweet spot for the MAX where Boeing and CFM tell us it is, coincidentally being the maximum diameter the LEAP can have under the wing under the MAX?aeroturbopowerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17686461923667604678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8118460937928958757.post-46528648568901727452012-03-20T16:06:33.248-04:002012-03-20T16:06:33.248-04:00Although an not an engineer and I don't know m...Although an not an engineer and I don't know much about the sweet spot, common sense would tell me that there must be an engine size for any airplane where it must not be bigger, or it will start impacting the fuel efficiency down. Weight is probably the first one to come to mind, as well as the force of the engine on the wing (trust). So, is bigger always better for any airplane?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com