User:Enginerd44
Specific impulse (usually abbreviated Isp) is a way to describe the efficiency of rocket and jet engines. It represents the impulse (change in momentum) per unit amount of propellant used.[1] The unit amount may be given either per unit mass (such as kilograms), or per unit Earth-weight (such as kiloponds, since g is used for the latter definition).[2] The higher the specific impulse, the less propellant is needed to gain a given amount of momentum.
The exhaust velocity is the average speed that the exhaust jet actually leaves the vehicle. The effective exhaust velocity is the speed that the propellant burned per second would have to leave the vehicle to give the same thrust. The two are about the same for a rocket working in a vacuum, but are radically different for an airbreathing jet engine that obtains extra thrust by accelerating air. Specific impulse and effective exhaust velocity are proportional.
Specific impulse is a useful value to compare engines, much like miles per gallon or litres per 100 kilometres is used for cars. A propulsion method with a higher specific impulse is more propellant-efficient.[1] Another number that measures the same thing, usually used for air-breathing jet engines, is specific fuel consumption. Specific fuel consumption is inversely proportional to specific impulse and effective exhaust velocity.
General considerations
Rocket motor propellant is normally measured either in units of mass or weight. If mass is used, specific impulse is an impulse per unit mass, which dimensional analysis shows to be a unit of speed, and so specific impulses are often measured in meters per second, and are often termed effective exhaust velocity. However, if propellant weight is used instead, an impulse divided by a force (weight) turns out to be a unit of time, and so specific impulses are measured in seconds. These two formulations are both widely used, and differ from each other by a factor of g, the dimensioned constant of gravitational acceleration at the surface of the Earth.
Essentially, the higher the specific impulse, the less propellant is needed to gain a given amount of momentum. In this regard a propellant is more efficient if the specific impulse is higher. This should not be confused with energy efficiency, which can even decrease as specific impulse increases, since propulsion systems that give high specific impulse require high energy to do so.[3]
In addition it is important that thrust and specific impulse not be confused with one another. The specific impulse is a measure of the impulse per unit of propellant that is expended, while thrust is a measure of the momentary or peak force supplied by a particular engine. In many cases, propulsion systems with very high specific impulses—some ion thrusters reach 10,000 seconds—produce low thrusts.[4]
When calculating specific impulse, only propellant that is carried with the vehicle before use is counted. For a chemical rocket the propellant mass therefore would include both fuel and oxidizer; for air-breathing engines only the mass of the fuel is counted, not the mass of air passing through the engine.
Examples
Engine | Effective exhaust velocity (m/s) | Specific impulse (s) | Exhaust specific energy (MJ/kg) |
---|---|---|---|
Turbofan jet engine (actual V is ~300 m/s) | 29,000 | 3,000 | Approx. 0.05 |
Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster | 2,500 | 250 | 3 |
Liquid oxygen–liquid hydrogen | 4,400 | 450 | 9.7 |
NSTAR[5] electrostatic xenon ion thruster | 20,000–30,000 | 1,950–3,100 | |
NEXT electrostatic xenon ion thruster | 40,000 | 1,320–4,170 | |
VASIMR predictions[6][7][8] | 30,000–120,000 | 3,000–12,000 | 1,400 |
DS4G electrostatic ion thruster[9] | 210,000 | 21,400 | 22,500 |
Ideal photonic rocket[a] | 299,792,458 | 30,570,000 | 89,875,517,874 |
- For a more complete list see: Spacecraft propulsion#Table of methods
An example of a specific impulse measured in time is 453 seconds, or, equivalently, an effective exhaust velocity of 4,440 m/s, for the Space Shuttle Main Engines when operating in vacuum.[10]
An air-breathing jet engine typically has a much larger specific impulse than a rocket: a turbofan jet engine may have a specific impulse of 6,000 seconds or more at sea level whereas a rocket would be around 200–400 seconds.[11] An air-breathing engine is thus much more propellant efficient; this is because the actual exhaust speed is much lower, because air provides oxidizer, and because air is used as reaction mass. Since the actual, physical exhaust velocity is lower, for at least subsonic speeds the kinetic energy the exhaust carries away is lower and thus the jet engine uses far less energy to generate thrust. This is so even allowing for the fact that more air must be exhausted at lower speeds to get the same thrust as a smaller amount of air at higher speeds.
While the actual exhaust velocity is lower for air-breathing engines, the effective exhaust velocity is very high for jet engines. This is because the effective exhaust velocity calculation essentially assumes that the propellant is providing all the thrust, and hence is not physically meaningful for air-breathing engines; nevertheless it is useful for comparison with other types of engines.
In some ways, comparing specific impulse seems unfair in the case of jet engines and rockets. However, in rocket- or jet-powered aircraft, specific impulse is approximately proportional to range, and suborbital rockets do indeed perform much worse than jets in that regard.
The highest specific impulse for a chemical propellant ever test-fired in a rocket engine was lithium, fluorine, and hydrogen (a tripropellant): 542 seconds (5,320 m/s). However, this combination is impractical; see rocket fuel.[12]
Nuclear thermal rocket engines differ from conventional rocket engines in that thrust is created strictly through thermodynamic phenomena, with no chemical reaction. The nuclear rocket typically operates by passing hydrogen gas through a superheated nuclear core. Testing in the 1960s yielded specific impulses of about 850 seconds (8,340 m/s), about twice that of the Space Shuttle engines.
A variety of other non-rocket propulsion methods, such as ion thrusters, give much higher specific impulse but with much lower thrust; for example the Hall effect thruster on the SMART-1 satellite has a specific impulse of 1,640 s (16,100 m/s) but a maximum thrust of only 68 millinewtons. The hypothetical Variable specific impulse magnetoplasma rocket (VASIMR) propulsion would theoretically yield a minimum of 10,000−300,000 m/s but would probably require a great deal of heavy machinery to confine even relatively diffuse plasmas, and so would be unusable for high-thrust applications such as launch from planetary surfaces.
The proposed Project Orion nuclear propelled spaceship provided a specific impulse of 10,000—1,000,000 s.[13]
Units
Specific Impulse (by weight) |
Specific Impulse (by mass) |
Effective exhaust velocity |
Specific fuel consumption | |
---|---|---|---|---|
SI | =X seconds | =9.8066 X N•s/kg | =9.8066 X m/s | =(101,972/X) g/kN•s |
English units | =X seconds | =X lbf•s/lb | =32.16 X ft/s | =(3,600/X) lb/lbf•h |
By far the most common units used for specific impulse today is the second, and this is used both in the SI world as well as where English units are used. Its chief advantages are that its units and numerical value is identical everywhere, and essentially everyone understands it. Nearly all manufacturers quote their engine performance in these units and it is also useful for specifying aircraft engine performance.
The effective exhaust velocity of m/s is also in reasonably common usage; for rocket engines it is reasonably intuitive, although for many rocket engines the effective exhaust speed is not precisely the same as the actual exhaust speed due to, for example, fuel and oxidizer that is dumped overboard after powering turbopumps. For airbreathing engines it is not physically meaningful although can be used for comparison purposes nevertheless.
The N•s/kg is not uncommonly seen, and is numerically equal to the effective exhaust velocity in m/s (from Newton's second law and the definition of the newton.)
The units of ft/s were used by NASA during Apollo, but seems to have fallen into disuse, and NASA is moving towards using SI units wherever possible.[citation needed]
The lbf•s/lb unit sees little use but is covered in some textbooks.[citation needed]
Another equivalent unit is specific fuel consumption. This has units of g/kN.s or lbf/lb•h and is inversely proportional to specific impulse. This is used extensively for describing air-breathing jet engines.
Specific impulse in seconds
General definition
For all vehicles specific impulse (impulse per unit weight-on-Earth of propellant) in seconds can be defined by the following equation[14]:
where:
- is the thrust obtained from the engine, in newtons (or poundals).
- is the specific impulse measured in seconds.
- is the mass flow rate in kg/s (lb/s), which is negative the time-rate of change of the vehicle's mass since propellant is being expelled.
- is the acceleration at the Earth's surface, in m/s² (or ft/s²).
(When working with English units, it is conventional to divide both sides of the equation by g0 so that the left hand side of the equation has units of lbs rather than expressing it in poundals.)
This Isp in seconds value is somewhat physically meaningful—if an engine's thrust could be adjusted to equal the initial weight of its propellant (measured at one standard gravity), then Isp is the duration the propellant would last.
The advantage that this formulation has is that it may be used for rockets, where all the reaction mass is carried onboard, as well as aeroplanes, where most of the reaction mass is taken from the atmosphere. In addition, it gives a result that is independent of units used (provided the unit of time used is the second).
Rocketry
In rocketry, where the only reaction mass is the propellant, an equivalent way of calculating the specific impulse in seconds is also frequently used. In this sense, specific impulse is defined as the change in momentum per unit weight-on-Earth of the propellant:
where
Isp is the specific impulse measured in seconds
is the average exhaust speed along the axis of the engine in (ft/s or m/s)
g0 is the acceleration at the Earth's surface (in ft/s2 or m/s2)
In rockets, due to atmospheric effects, the specific impulse varies with altitude, reaching a maximum in a vacuum. It is therefore most common to see the specific impulse quoted for the vehicle in a vacuum; the lower sea level values are usually indicated in some way (e.g. 'sl').
Specific impulse as a speed (effective exhaust velocity)
Because of the geocentric factor of g0 in the equation for specific impulse, many prefer to define the specific impulse of a rocket (in particular) in terms of thrust per unit mass flow of propellant (instead of per unit weight flow). This is an equally valid (and in some ways somewhat simpler) way of defining the effectiveness of a rocket propellant. For a rocket, the specific impulse defined in this way is simply the effective exhaust velocity relative to the rocket, ve. The two definitions of specific impulse are proportional to one another, and related to each other by:
where
- - is the specific impulse in seconds
- - is the specific impulse measured in m/s, which is the same as the effective exhaust velocity measured in m/s (or ft/s if g is in ft/s2)
- - is the acceleration due to gravity at the Earth's surface, 9.81 m/s² (in English units units 32.2 ft/s²).
This equation is also valid for airbreathing jet engines, but is rarely used in practice.
(Note that different symbols are sometimes used; for example, c is also sometimes seen for exhaust velocity. While the symbol might logically be used for specific impulse in units of N•s/kg, to avoid confusion it is desirable to reserve this for specific impulse measured in seconds.)
It is related to the thrust, or forward force on the rocket by the equation:
where
is the propellant mass flow rate, which is the rate of decrease of the vehicle's mass
A rocket must carry all its fuel with it, so the mass of the unburned fuel must be accelerated along with the rocket itself. Minimizing the mass of fuel required to achieve a given push is crucial to building effective rockets. Using Newton's laws of motion it is not difficult to verify that for a fixed mass of fuel, the total change in velocity (in fact, momentum) it can accomplish can only be increased by increasing the effective exhaust velocity.
A spacecraft without propulsion follows an orbit determined by the gravitational field. Deviations from the corresponding velocity pattern (these are called Δv) are achieved by sending exhaust mass in the direction opposite to that of the desired velocity change.
Actual exhaust speed versus effective exhaust speed
Note that effective exhaust velocity and actual exhaust velocity can be significantly different, for example when a rocket is run within the atmosphere, atmospheric pressure on the outside of the engine causes a retarding force that reduces the specific impulse and the effective exhaust velocity goes down, whereas the actual exhaust velocity is largely unaffected. Also, sometimes rocket engines have a separate nozzle for the turbopump turbine gas, and then calculating the effective exhaust velocity requires averaging the two mass flows as well as accounting for any atmospheric pressure.
For airbreathing jet engines, particularly, turbofans, the actual exhaust velocity and the effective exhaust velocity are different by orders of magnitude. This is because a good deal of additional momentum is obtained by using air as reaction mass. This allows for a better match between the airspeed and the exhaust speed which saves energy/propellant and enormously increases the effective exhaust velocity while reducing the actual exhaust velocity.
Energy efficiency
Rockets
For rockets and rocket-like engines such as ion-drives a higher implies lower energy efficiency: the power needed to run the engine is simply:
where Ve is the actual jet velocity.
whereas from momentum considerations the thrust generated is:
Dividing the power by the thrust to obtain the specific power requirements we get:
Hence the power needed is proportional to the exhaust velocity, with higher velocities needing higher power for the same thrust, and thus are less energy efficient per unit thrust.
However, the total energy for a mission depends on total propellant use, as well as how much energy is needed per unit of propellant. For low exhaust velocity with respect to the mission delta-v, enormous amounts of reaction mass is needed. In fact a very low exhaust velocity is not energy efficient at all for this reason; but it turns out that neither are very high exhaust velocities.
Theoretically, for a given delta-v, in space, among all fixed values for the exhaust speed the value is the most energy efficient with respect to the final mass, see Tsiolkovsky rocket equation.
However, a variable exhaust speed can be more energy efficient still. For example, if a rocket is accelerated from some positive initial speed using an exhaust speed equal to the speed of the rocket no energy is lost as kinetic energy of reaction mass, since it becomes stationary.[15] In this case the rocket keeps the same momentum, so its speed is inversely proportional to its remaining mass. During such a flight the kinetic energy of the rocket is proportional to its speed and, correspondingly, inversely proportional to its remaining mass. The power needed per unit acceleration is constant throughout the flight; the reaction mass to be expelled per unit time to produce a given acceleration is proportional to the square of the rocket's remaining mass.
Also it is advantageous to expel reaction mass at a location where the gravity potential is low, see Oberth effect.
Air breathing
Air-breathing engines such as turbojets increase the momentum generated from their propellant by using it to power the acceleration of inert air rearwards. It turns out that the amount of energy needed to generate a particular amount of thrust is inversely proportional to the amount of air propelled rearwards, thus increasing the mass of air (as with a turbofan) both improves energy efficiency as well as .
Figures for real engines
Rocket engines in vacuum | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model | Type | First run |
Application | TSFC | Isp (by weight) | Isp (by mass) | |
lb/lbf·h | g/kN·s | s | m/s | ||||
Avio P80 | solid fuel | 2006 | Vega stage 1 | 13 | 360 | 280 | 2700 |
Avio Zefiro 23 | solid fuel | 2006 | Vega stage 2 | 12.52 | 354.7 | 287.5 | 2819 |
Avio Zefiro 9A | solid fuel | 2008 | Vega stage 3 | 12.20 | 345.4 | 295.2 | 2895 |
Merlin 1D | liquid fuel | 2013 | Falcon 9 | 12 | 330 | 310 | 3000 |
RD-843 | liquid fuel | Vega upper stage | 11.41 | 323.2 | 315.5 | 3094 | |
Kuznetsov NK-33 | liquid fuel | 1970s | N-1F, Soyuz-2-1v stage 1 | 10.9 | 308 | 331[16] | 3250 |
NPO Energomash RD-171M | liquid fuel | Zenit-2M, -3SL, -3SLB, -3F stage 1 | 10.7 | 303 | 337 | 3300 | |
LE-7A | cryogenic | H-IIA, H-IIB stage 1 | 8.22 | 233 | 438 | 4300 | |
Snecma HM-7B | cryogenic | Ariane 2, 3, 4, 5 ECA upper stage | 8.097 | 229.4 | 444.6 | 4360 | |
LE-5B-2 | cryogenic | H-IIA, H-IIB upper stage | 8.05 | 228 | 447 | 4380 | |
Aerojet Rocketdyne RS-25 | cryogenic | 1981 | Space Shuttle, SLS stage 1 | 7.95 | 225 | 453[17] | 4440 |
Aerojet Rocketdyne RL-10B-2 | cryogenic | Delta III, Delta IV, SLS upper stage | 7.734 | 219.1 | 465.5 | 4565 | |
NERVA NRX A6 | nuclear | 1967 | 869 |
Jet engines with Reheat, static, sea level | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model | Type | First run |
Application | TSFC | Isp (by weight) | Isp (by mass) | |
lb/lbf·h | g/kN·s | s | m/s | ||||
Turbo-Union RB.199 | turbofan | Tornado | 2.5[18] | 70.8 | 1440 | 14120 | |
GE F101-GE-102 | turbofan | 1970s | B-1B | 2.46 | 70 | 1460 | 14400 |
Tumansky R-25-300 | turbojet | MIG-21bis | 2.206[18] | 62.5 | 1632 | 16000 | |
GE J85-GE-21 | turbojet | F-5E/F | 2.13[18] | 60.3 | 1690 | 16570 | |
GE F110-GE-132 | turbofan | F-16E/F | 2.09[18] | 59.2 | 1722 | 16890 | |
Honeywell/ITEC F125 | turbofan | F-CK-1 | 2.06[18] | 58.4 | 1748 | 17140 | |
Snecma M53-P2 | turbofan | Mirage 2000C/D/N | 2.05[18] | 58.1 | 1756 | 17220 | |
Snecma Atar 09C | turbojet | Mirage III | 2.03[18] | 57.5 | 1770 | 17400 | |
Snecma Atar 09K-50 | turbojet | Mirage IV, 50, F1 | 1.991[18] | 56.4 | 1808 | 17730 | |
GE J79-GE-15 | turbojet | F-4E/EJ/F/G, RF-4E | 1.965 | 55.7 | 1832 | 17970 | |
Saturn AL-31F | turbofan | Su-27/P/K | 1.96[19] | 55.5 | 1837 | 18010 | |
GE F110-GE-129 | turbofan | F-16C/D, F-15EX | 1.9[18] | 53.8 | 1895 | 18580 | |
Soloviev D-30F6 | turbofan | MiG-31, S-37/Su-47 | 1.863[18] | 52.8 | 1932 | 18950 | |
Lyulka AL-21F-3 | turbojet | Su-17, Su-22 | 1.86[18] | 52.7 | 1935 | 18980 | |
Klimov RD-33 | turbofan | 1974 | MiG-29 | 1.85 | 52.4 | 1946 | 19080 |
Saturn AL-41F-1S | turbofan | Su-35S/T-10BM | 1.819 | 51.5 | 1979 | 19410 | |
Volvo RM12 | turbofan | 1978 | Gripen A/B/C/D | 1.78[18] | 50.4 | 2022 | 19830 |
GE F404-GE-402 | turbofan | F/A-18C/D | 1.74[18] | 49 | 2070 | 20300 | |
Kuznetsov NK-32 | turbofan | 1980 | Tu-144LL, Tu-160 | 1.7 | 48 | 2100 | 21000 |
Snecma M88-2 | turbofan | 1989 | Rafale | 1.663 | 47.11 | 2165 | 21230 |
Eurojet EJ200 | turbofan | 1991 | Eurofighter | 1.66–1.73 | 47–49[20] | 2080–2170 | 20400–21300 |
Dry jet engines, static, sea level | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model | Type | First run |
Application | TSFC | Isp (by weight) | Isp (by mass) | |
lb/lbf·h | g/kN·s | s | m/s | ||||
GE J85-GE-21 | turbojet | F-5E/F | 1.24[18] | 35.1 | 2900 | 28500 | |
Snecma Atar 09C | turbojet | Mirage III | 1.01[18] | 28.6 | 3560 | 35000 | |
Snecma Atar 09K-50 | turbojet | Mirage IV, 50, F1 | 0.981[18] | 27.8 | 3670 | 36000 | |
Snecma Atar 08K-50 | turbojet | Super Étendard | 0.971[18] | 27.5 | 3710 | 36400 | |
Tumansky R-25-300 | turbojet | MIG-21bis | 0.961[18] | 27.2 | 3750 | 36700 | |
Lyulka AL-21F-3 | turbojet | Su-17, Su-22 | 0.86 | 24.4 | 4190 | 41100 | |
GE J79-GE-15 | turbojet | F-4E/EJ/F/G, RF-4E | 0.85 | 24.1 | 4240 | 41500 | |
Snecma M53-P2 | turbofan | Mirage 2000C/D/N | 0.85[18] | 24.1 | 4240 | 41500 | |
Volvo RM12 | turbofan | 1978 | Gripen A/B/C/D | 0.824[18] | 23.3 | 4370 | 42800 |
RR Turbomeca Adour | turbofan | 1999 | Jaguar retrofit | 0.81 | 23 | 4400 | 44000 |
Honeywell/ITEC F124 | turbofan | 1979 | L-159, X-45 | 0.81[18] | 22.9 | 4440 | 43600 |
Honeywell/ITEC F125 | turbofan | F-CK-1 | 0.8[18] | 22.7 | 4500 | 44100 | |
PW J52-P-408 | turbojet | A-4M/N, TA-4KU, EA-6B | 0.79 | 22.4 | 4560 | 44700 | |
Saturn AL-41F-1S | turbofan | Su-35S/T-10BM | 0.79 | 22.4 | 4560 | 44700 | |
Snecma M88-2 | turbofan | 1989 | Rafale | 0.782 | 22.14 | 4600 | 45100 |
Klimov RD-33 | turbofan | 1974 | MiG-29 | 0.77 | 21.8 | 4680 | 45800 |
RR Pegasus 11-61 | turbofan | AV-8B+ | 0.76 | 21.5 | 4740 | 46500 | |
Eurojet EJ200 | turbofan | 1991 | Eurofighter | 0.74–0.81 | 21–23[20] | 4400–4900 | 44000–48000 |
GE F414-GE-400 | turbofan | 1993 | F/A-18E/F | 0.724[21] | 20.5 | 4970 | 48800 |
Kuznetsov NK-32 | turbofan | 1980 | Tu-144LL, Tu-160 | 0.72-0.73 | 20–21 | 4900–5000 | 48000–49000 |
Soloviev D-30F6 | turbofan | MiG-31, S-37/Su-47 | 0.716[18] | 20.3 | 5030 | 49300 | |
Snecma Larzac | turbofan | 1972 | Alpha Jet | 0.716 | 20.3 | 5030 | 49300 |
IHI F3 | turbofan | 1981 | Kawasaki T-4 | 0.7 | 19.8 | 5140 | 50400 |
Saturn AL-31F | turbofan | Su-27 /P/K | 0.666-0.78[19][21] | 18.9–22.1 | 4620–5410 | 45300–53000 | |
RR Spey RB.168 | turbofan | AMX | 0.66[18] | 18.7 | 5450 | 53500 | |
GE F110-GE-129 | turbofan | F-16C/D, F-15 | 0.64[21] | 18 | 5600 | 55000 | |
GE F110-GE-132 | turbofan | F-16E/F | 0.64[21] | 18 | 5600 | 55000 | |
Turbo-Union RB.199 | turbofan | Tornado ECR | 0.637[18] | 18.0 | 5650 | 55400 | |
PW F119-PW-100 | turbofan | 1992 | F-22 | 0.61[21] | 17.3 | 5900 | 57900 |
Turbo-Union RB.199 | turbofan | Tornado | 0.598[18] | 16.9 | 6020 | 59000 | |
GE F101-GE-102 | turbofan | 1970s | B-1B | 0.562 | 15.9 | 6410 | 62800 |
PW TF33-P-3 | turbofan | B-52H, NB-52H | 0.52[18] | 14.7 | 6920 | 67900 | |
RR AE 3007H | turbofan | RQ-4, MQ-4C | 0.39[18] | 11.0 | 9200 | 91000 | |
GE F118-GE-100 | turbofan | 1980s | B-2 | 0.375[18] | 10.6 | 9600 | 94000 |
GE F118-GE-101 | turbofan | 1980s | U-2S | 0.375[18] | 10.6 | 9600 | 94000 |
General Electric CF6-50C2 | turbofan | A300, DC-10-30 | 0.371[18] | 10.5 | 9700 | 95000 | |
GE TF34-GE-100 | turbofan | A-10 | 0.37[18] | 10.5 | 9700 | 95000 | |
CFM CFM56-2B1 | turbofan | C-135, RC-135 | 0.36[22] | 10 | 10000 | 98000 | |
Progress D-18T | turbofan | 1980 | An-124, An-225 | 0.345 | 9.8 | 10400 | 102000 |
PW F117-PW-100 | turbofan | C-17 | 0.34[23] | 9.6 | 10600 | 104000 | |
PW PW2040 | turbofan | Boeing 757 | 0.33[23] | 9.3 | 10900 | 107000 | |
CFM CFM56-3C1 | turbofan | 737 Classic | 0.33 | 9.3 | 11000 | 110000 | |
GE CF6-80C2 | turbofan | 744, 767, MD-11, A300/310, C-5M | 0.307-0.344 | 8.7–9.7 | 10500–11700 | 103000–115000 | |
EA GP7270 | turbofan | A380-861 | 0.299[21] | 8.5 | 12000 | 118000 | |
GE GE90-85B | turbofan | 777-200/200ER/300 | 0.298[21] | 8.44 | 12080 | 118500 | |
GE GE90-94B | turbofan | 777-200/200ER/300 | 0.2974[21] | 8.42 | 12100 | 118700 | |
RR Trent 970-84 | turbofan | 2003 | A380-841 | 0.295[21] | 8.36 | 12200 | 119700 |
GE GEnx-1B70 | turbofan | 787-8 | 0.2845[21] | 8.06 | 12650 | 124100 | |
RR Trent 1000C | turbofan | 2006 | 787-9 | 0.273[21] | 7.7 | 13200 | 129000 |
Jet engines, cruise | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model | Type | First run |
Application | TSFC | Isp (by weight) | Isp (by mass) | |
lb/lbf·h | g/kN·s | s | m/s | ||||
Ramjet | Mach 1 | 4.5 | 130 | 800 | 7800 | ||
J-58 | turbojet | 1958 | SR-71 at Mach 3.2 (Reheat) | 1.9[18] | 53.8 | 1895 | 18580 |
RR/Snecma Olympus | turbojet | 1966 | Concorde at Mach 2 | 1.195[24] | 33.8 | 3010 | 29500 |
PW JT8D-9 | turbofan | 737 Original | 0.8[25] | 22.7 | 4500 | 44100 | |
Honeywell ALF502R-5 | GTF | BAe 146 | 0.72[23] | 20.4 | 5000 | 49000 | |
Soloviev D-30KP-2 | turbofan | Il-76, Il-78 | 0.715 | 20.3 | 5030 | 49400 | |
Soloviev D-30KU-154 | turbofan | Tu-154M | 0.705 | 20.0 | 5110 | 50100 | |
RR Tay RB.183 | turbofan | 1984 | Fokker 70, Fokker 100 | 0.69 | 19.5 | 5220 | 51200 |
GE CF34-3 | turbofan | 1982 | Challenger, CRJ100/200 | 0.69 | 19.5 | 5220 | 51200 |
GE CF34-8E | turbofan | E170/175 | 0.68 | 19.3 | 5290 | 51900 | |
Honeywell TFE731-60 | GTF | Falcon 900 | 0.679[26] | 19.2 | 5300 | 52000 | |
CFM CFM56-2C1 | turbofan | DC-8 Super 70 | 0.671[23] | 19.0 | 5370 | 52600 | |
GE CF34-8C | turbofan | CRJ700/900/1000 | 0.67-0.68 | 19–19 | 5300–5400 | 52000–53000 | |
CFM CFM56-3C1 | turbofan | 737 Classic | 0.667 | 18.9 | 5400 | 52900 | |
CFM CFM56-2A2 | turbofan | 1974 | E-3, E-6 | 0.66[22] | 18.7 | 5450 | 53500 |
RR BR725 | turbofan | 2008 | G650/ER | 0.657 | 18.6 | 5480 | 53700 |
CFM CFM56-2B1 | turbofan | C-135, RC-135 | 0.65[22] | 18.4 | 5540 | 54300 | |
GE CF34-10A | turbofan | ARJ21 | 0.65 | 18.4 | 5540 | 54300 | |
CFE CFE738-1-1B | turbofan | 1990 | Falcon 2000 | 0.645[23] | 18.3 | 5580 | 54700 |
RR BR710 | turbofan | 1995 | G. V/G550, Global Express | 0.64 | 18 | 5600 | 55000 |
GE CF34-10E | turbofan | E190/195 | 0.64 | 18 | 5600 | 55000 | |
General Electric CF6-50C2 | turbofan | A300B2/B4/C4/F4, DC-10-30 | 0.63[23] | 17.8 | 5710 | 56000 | |
PowerJet SaM146 | turbofan | Superjet LR | 0.629 | 17.8 | 5720 | 56100 | |
CFM CFM56-7B24 | turbofan | 737 NG | 0.627[23] | 17.8 | 5740 | 56300 | |
RR BR715 | turbofan | 1997 | 717 | 0.62 | 17.6 | 5810 | 56900 |
GE CF6-80C2-B1F | turbofan | 747-400 | 0.605[24] | 17.1 | 5950 | 58400 | |
CFM CFM56-5A1 | turbofan | A320 | 0.596 | 16.9 | 6040 | 59200 | |
Aviadvigatel PS-90A1 | turbofan | Il-96-400 | 0.595 | 16.9 | 6050 | 59300 | |
PW PW2040 | turbofan | 757-200 | 0.582[23] | 16.5 | 6190 | 60700 | |
PW PW4098 | turbofan | 777-300 | 0.581[23] | 16.5 | 6200 | 60800 | |
GE CF6-80C2-B2 | turbofan | 767 | 0.576[23] | 16.3 | 6250 | 61300 | |
IAE V2525-D5 | turbofan | MD-90 | 0.574[27] | 16.3 | 6270 | 61500 | |
IAE V2533-A5 | turbofan | A321-231 | 0.574[27] | 16.3 | 6270 | 61500 | |
RR Trent 700 | turbofan | 1992 | A330 | 0.562[28] | 15.9 | 6410 | 62800 |
RR Trent 800 | turbofan | 1993 | 777-200/200ER/300 | 0.560[28] | 15.9 | 6430 | 63000 |
Progress D-18T | turbofan | 1980 | An-124, An-225 | 0.546 | 15.5 | 6590 | 64700 |
CFM CFM56-5B4 | turbofan | A320-214 | 0.545 | 15.4 | 6610 | 64800 | |
CFM CFM56-5C2 | turbofan | A340-211 | 0.545 | 15.4 | 6610 | 64800 | |
RR Trent 500 | turbofan | 1999 | A340-500/600 | 0.542[28] | 15.4 | 6640 | 65100 |
CFM LEAP-1B | turbofan | 2014 | 737 MAX | 0.53-0.56 | 15–16 | 6400–6800 | 63000–67000 |
Aviadvigatel PD-14 | turbofan | 2014 | MC-21-310 | 0.526 | 14.9 | 6840 | 67100 |
RR Trent 900 | turbofan | 2003 | A380 | 0.522[28] | 14.8 | 6900 | 67600 |
GE GE90-85B | turbofan | 777-200/200ER | 0.52[23][29] | 14.7 | 6920 | 67900 | |
GE GEnx-1B76 | turbofan | 2006 | 787-10 | 0.512[25] | 14.5 | 7030 | 69000 |
PW PW1400G | GTF | MC-21 | 0.51[30] | 14.4 | 7100 | 69000 | |
CFM LEAP-1C | turbofan | 2013 | C919 | 0.51 | 14.4 | 7100 | 69000 |
CFM LEAP-1A | turbofan | 2013 | A320neo family | 0.51[30] | 14.4 | 7100 | 69000 |
RR Trent 7000 | turbofan | 2015 | A330neo | 0.506[b] | 14.3 | 7110 | 69800 |
RR Trent 1000 | turbofan | 2006 | 787 | 0.506[c] | 14.3 | 7110 | 69800 |
RR Trent XWB-97 | turbofan | 2014 | A350-1000 | 0.478[d] | 13.5 | 7530 | 73900 |
PW 1127G | GTF | 2012 | A320neo | 0.463[25] | 13.1 | 7780 | 76300 |
References
- ^ a b "What is specific impulse?". Qualitative Reasoning Group. Retrieved 22 December 2009.
- ^ Benson, Tom (11 July 2008). "Specific impulse". NASA. Retrieved 22 December 2009.
- ^ http://www.geoffreylandis.com/laser_ion_pres.htp
- ^ "Mission Overview". exploreMarsnow. Retrieved 23 December 2009.
- ^ In-flight performance of the NSTAR ion propulsion system on the Deep Space One mission. Aerospace Conference Proceedings. IEEExplore. 2000. doi:10.1109/AERO.2000.878373.
- ^ Glover, Tim W.; Chang Diaz, Franklin R.; Squire, Jared P.; Jacobsen, Verlin; Chavers, D. Gregory; Carter, Mark D. "Principal VASIMR Results and Present Objectives" (PDF).
- ^ Cassady, Leonard D.; Longmier, Benjamin W.; Olsen, Chris S.; Ballenger, Maxwell G.; McCaskill, Greg E.; Ilin, Andrew V.; Carter, Mark D.; Gloverk, Tim W.; Squire, Jared P.; Chang, Franklin R.; Bering, III, Edgar A. (28 July 2010). "VASIMR R Performance Results" (PDF). www.adastra.com.
- ^ "Vasimr VX 200 meets full power efficiency milestone". spacefellowship.com. Retrieved 2021-05-13.
- ^ "ESA and Australian team develop breakthrough in space propulsion". cordis.europa.eu. 18 January 2006.
- ^ http://www.astronautix.com/engines/ssme.htm
- ^ http://web.mit.edu/16.unified/www/SPRING/propulsion/notes/node85.html
- ^ ARBIT, H. A., CLAPP, S. D., DICKERSON, R. A., NAGAI, C. K., Combustion characteristics of the fluorine-lithium/hydrogen tripropellant combination. AMERICAN INST OF AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS, PROPULSION JOINT SPECIALIST CONFERENCE, 4TH, CLEVELAND, OHIO, Jun 10-14, 1968.
- ^ Project Orion entry in the Internet Encyclopedia of Science:
- ^ Rocket Propulsion Elements, 7th Edition by George P. Sutton, Oscar Biblarz
- ^ Note that this limits the speed of the rocket to the maximum exhaust speed.
- ^ "NK33". Encyclopedia Astronautica.
- ^ "SSME". Encyclopedia Astronautica.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z aa ab ac ad ae af ag Nathan Meier (21 Mar 2005). "Military Turbojet/Turbofan Specifications". Archived from the original on 11 February 2021.
- ^ a b "Flanker". AIR International Magazine. 23 March 2017.
- ^ a b "EJ200 turbofan engine" (PDF). MTU Aero Engines. April 2016.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k Kottas, Angelos T.; Bozoudis, Michail N.; Madas, Michael A. "Turbofan Aero-Engine Efficiency Evaluation: An Integrated Approach Using VSBM Two-Stage Network DEA" (PDF). doi:10.1016/j.omega.2019.102167.
- ^ a b c Élodie Roux (2007). "Turbofan and Turbojet Engines: Database Handbook" (PDF). p. 126. ISBN 9782952938013.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k Nathan Meier (3 Apr 2005). "Civil Turbojet/Turbofan Specifications". Archived from the original on 17 August 2021.
- ^ a b Ilan Kroo. "Data on Large Turbofan Engines". Aircraft Design: Synthesis and Analysis. Stanford University. Archived from the original on 11 January 2017.
- ^ a b c David Kalwar (2015). "Integration of turbofan engines into the preliminary design of a high-capacity short-and medium-haul passenger aircraft and fuel efficiency analysis with a further developed parametric aircraft design software" (PDF).
- ^ "Purdue School of Aeronautics and Astronautics Propulsion Web Page - TFE731".
- ^ a b Lloyd R. Jenkinson & al. (30 Jul 1999). "Civil Jet Aircraft Design: Engine Data File". Elsevier/Butterworth-Heinemann.
- ^ a b c d "Gas Turbine Engines" (PDF). Aviation Week. 28 January 2008. pp. 137–138.
- ^ Élodie Roux (2007). "Turbofan and Turbojet Engines: Database Handbook". ISBN 9782952938013.
- ^ a b Vladimir Karnozov (August 19, 2019). "Aviadvigatel Mulls Higher-thrust PD-14s To Replace PS-90A". AIN Online.
External links
- RPA - Design Tool for Liquid Rocket Engine Analysis
- List of Specific Impulses of various rocket fuels
See also
- Jet engine
- Impulse - the change in momentum
- Tsiolkovsky rocket equation
- System-specific impulse
- Specific energy
- Thrust specific fuel consumption - fuel consumption per unit thrust
- Specific thrust thrust per unit of air for a duct engine
- Heating value
- Energy density
- Delta-v (physics)
z
Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha>
tags or {{efn}}
templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}}
template or {{notelist}}
template (see the help page).