Search Results

In recent years there has been increasing interest in quantifying the emissions from aircraft in order to generate inventories of emissions for climate models, technology and scenario studies, and inventories of emissions for airline fleets typically presented in environmental reports. The preferred method for calculating aircraft engine emissions of NOx, HC, and CO is the proprietary “P3T3” method. This method relies on proprietary airplane and engine performance models along with proprietary engine emissions characterizations. In response and in order to provide a transparent method for calculating aircraft engine emissions non proprietary fuel flow based methods 1,2,3 have been developed. This paper presents derivation, updates, and clarifications of the fuel flow method methodology known as “Fuel Flow Method 2”.

The 98,000 lb. thrust Pratt & Whitney PW4098 high-bypass turbofan engine recently completed a flying test-bed program on the Boeing 777-300 airplane. The purpose of the one-month program was to validate engine operability and to gather data that can be used for upcoming engine certification to the standards of Federal Aviation Regulations part 33. Testing included engine transient operation, steady-state performance, in-flight starting, component cooling, and inlet compatibility. When engine certification is complete, an airplane certification program will be conducted for the 777-300/PW4098, a combination of the world's largest twin engine airplane and the world's largest turbofan engine yet to fly.

As part of NASA’s Aviation Safety and Security Program, a simulation study of a twin-jet transport aircraft crew training simulation was conducted to address fidelity for upset or loss-of-control flight conditions. Piloted simulation studies were conducted to compare the baseline crew training simulation model with an enhanced aerodynamic model that was developed for high-angle-of-attack conditions. These studies were conducted in a flaps-up configuration and covered the approach-to-stall, stall and post-stall flight regimes. Qualitative pilot comments and preliminary comparison with flight test data indicate that the enhanced model is a significant improvement over the baseline. Some of the significant unrepresentative characteristics that are predicted by the baseline crew training simulation for flight in the post-stall regime have been identified.

The desire to operate rotorcraft in icing conditions has renewed the interest in developing high-fidelity analysis methods to predict ice accumulation and the ensuing rotor performance degradation. A subset of providing solutions for rotorcraft icing problems is predicting two-dimensional ice accumulation on rotor airfoils. While much has been done to predict ice for fixed-wing airfoil sections, the rotorcraft problem has two additional challenges: first, rotor airfoils tend to experience flows in higher Mach number regimes, often creating glaze ice which is harder to predict; second, rotor airfoils oscillate in pitch to produce balance across the rotor disk. A methodology and validation test cases are presented to solve the rotor airfoil problem as an important step to solving the larger rotorcraft icing problem. The process couples Navier-Stokes CFD analysis with the ice accretion analysis code, LEWICE3D.

A highly modified F/A-18 aircraft is being used to demonstrate that aeroelastic wing twist can be used to roll a high performance aircraft. A production F/A-18A/B/C/D aircraft uses a combination of aileron deflection, differential horizontal tail deflection and differential leading edge flap deflection to roll the aircraft at various Mach numbers and altitudes. The Active Aeroelastic Wing program is demonstrating that aeroelastic wing twist can be used in lieu of the horizontal tail to provide autonomous roll control at high dynamic pressures. Aerodynamic and loads data have been gathered from the Phase I AAW flight test program. Now control laws have been developed to exploit aeroelastic wing twist and provide autonomous flight control of the AAW aircraft during Phase II. Wing control surfaces are being deflected in non-standard ways to create aeroelastic wing twist and develop the required rolling moments without use of the horizontal tail.