Turbojets Vs Turbofans Document

B747skipper
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted Fri Mar 30 2001 14:24:41 your local time (11 years 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2704 times:
Turbojet consists of compressor (with "n" number of stages) + combustion chamber + turbine (with again "n" number o air which enters in the inlet of the compressor is processed through the combustion chamber and the turbine...
Turbofan differs of turbojet in that a portion of the air entering the inlet, is processed by one or a few of the first stages (of which the blades are generally much larger) and bypass the combustion stage to produce thrust much in the manne do...
The proportion of thrust produced by the fan versus the turbojet (or "core" of the turbofan engine) is called bypass ratio
The turboporp, by the way, is just another form of turbofan, but the fan there, is a propeller (often with a gearbox to red shaft of the turbine portion of the engine)...
Last word, the turboprop efficiency is best for lower speeds, lower altitudes, the turbofan at higher subsonic speeds and the straight jet at very high altutu
USER PROFILE SEND INSTANT MSG ADD TO RESP MEMBERS SUGGEST DELETION QUOTE SELEC
VC-10 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 1999, 3655 posts, RR: 43 Reply 2, posted Fri Mar 30 2001 14:47:11 your local time (11 years 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2670 times: A turbo-fan also has a lower specific fuel consumption (sfc)
USER PROFILE SEND INSTANT MSG ADD TO RESP MEMBERS SUGGEST DELETION QUOTE SELECT
Aaskygod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted Sat Mar 31 2001 20:57:08 your local time (11 years 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2619 times: ...as well as a lower noise signature (for a given thrust level).
Just a minor point, but the bypass ratio is actually the ratio of the AIR MASS FLOWS between the fan and the core turb almost the same as thrust, but not quite. The first-generation fans like on the 707 had like a 1:1 bypass ratio... the lates ones have like a 9:1? or was it 13:1? All I know is, they're frickin' huge.
Greeneyes53787 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 844 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted Tue Apr 3 2001 16:26:31 your local time (11 years 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2587 times: Actually the first generation turbofans came in 2-basic types: 1. 3% (plus or minus) front fan type. 2. 38% ( " ) rear fan type. There weren't any 1:1 fan designs in 1961 as I recall. #2 was a military engine gone commercial. They were amazing performers but were a little difficult to maintain. #1 was a commericial engine popular around the world. They were more noisy than #2 but easier to take care of. Greeneyes
Timz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6201 posts, RR: 8 Reply 5, posted Tue Apr 3 2001 18:12:33 your local time (11 years 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2582 times:
I'm on Aaskygod's side-- according to Jane's the JT3D bypass ratio is/was more than 1 (1.4?). The JT8D dropped to ab
Greeneyes53787 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 844 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted Tue Apr 3 2001 18:58:59 your local time (11 years 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2567 times:
Janes isn't always correct. What does your info say about the GE CJ-805-23? I am asking because I do not understand these numbers mean. I think to say that an engine has a 1:1 ratio might mean that it had no bypass at all. A 1.1:1 then refer to a 10% bypass. Therefore a 1.4:1 ratio still would be 40%. But another way to guess at it might be to look at the turbojet inlet diameter and compare that to the full turbofan opening. The bigger the difference the greater the bypass, theoretically (an unscientific method though).
The first DC-8s and 707s with fans had openings much smaller than the 990 at almost 6' across. Further, the 880 intak as the 990 front inner intake) was smaller around than the P&W turbojets. Therefore the 37% (approx) bypass of the G be far greater in bypass ratio than the P&W. Greeneyes
Timz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6201 posts, RR: 8 Reply 7, posted Wed Apr 4 2001 17:18:07 your local time (11 years 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2547 times: Maybe somebody can come up with a definitive textbook quote defining bypass ratio-- until then: From Jane's: "The JT3D is a turbofan version of the J57 turbojet, handling almost 2.5 times more air than the J57..."
1978-79 Jane's says the JT8D bypass ratio started at 1.10 in the -1 and -7 and dropped to 1.03 in the -15 and 1.00 in t It also says the airflow was 143-148 kg per second; if bypass ratio means what Greeneyes53787 says then almost all o would be going through the core. But JT9D core airflow was only 118 kg/sec, says Jane's. (No typo; it gives JT9D core but not JT8D.)
Jane's also says the F404 has a bypass ratio of 0.34, and as I recall the original Conway had a ratio of 0.3. If those are and if the term "bypass ratio" always means the same thing, then Greeneyes53787's definition is impossible.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm guessing the intake diameter on a JT3D-powered 707 was at least equal to the intake on a 99 have ready access to the old Jane's that might (or might not) say what their airflows were.
Timz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6201 posts, RR: 8 Reply 8, posted Thu Apr 5 2001 15:48:10 your local time (11 years 17 hours ago) and read 2529 times: From Flight Magazine 30 Oct 1959:
"In the design of a double-flow engine there are two major variables. The first is whether to put the fan at the front or at and later in this article General Electric's preference for the latter configuration is explained. The other major variable is choice of C/H ratio. This is also known as by-pass ratio, fan ratio, cold-flow ratio, or augmentation ratio, but the author f (cold/hot) ratio, since this is unambiguous. In case any reader feels otherwise, it means the cold flow through duct C [in accompanying diagram] expressed as a ratio of the hot flow through duct D."
A table in the article says Conway RCo.12 and RCo.15 C/H ratio was 0.3, CJ-805-23 was 1.56, and JT3D-1 was 1.4. It maximum diameter was 53 inches for both the CJ-805-23 and JT3D-1, for what that's worth.
Greeneyes53787 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 844 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted Thu Apr 5 2001 16:25:58 your local time (11 years 17 hours ago) and read 2528 times:
I've been around many 990s and KC137s. And as I recall the GE intake was bigger than the P&W. But this is kind of ju me to post such unimportant remembrances. But I have quite a bit of data on the Convairs (drawings and specs) that c answer these questions fast. But I'd have to look for them. And even though the GE was first with a production fan eng weren't best until later with front fan engines. Thanks for your interest. Greeneyes
PW4084 From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 291 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted Thu Apr 5 2001 17:15:15 your local time (11 years 16 hours ago) and read 2544 times: from "Aircraft Gas Turbine Engines of the World"
Bypass Ratio Ratio of the fan weight of airflow to core engine weight of airflow. For example, an engine with a 5 to 1 Fan Bypass Rat have: for a total mass airflow of 1500 lb./sec., a core flow of 250 lb./sec. and a fan flow of 1250 lb./sec.
Regarding the bypass ratio of 777 engine choices: the PW4000 series for the 777 have bypass ratios between 5.8 and http://www.pratt-whitney.com/3a/html/Products_pw4000112.html
Regarding the JT3D/JT3C topic: I found the JT3D bypass to be 1.43:1 and that the JT3C has no bypass. It is a straight turbojet...civillian version of the J Timz quoted Jane's. A 1:1 bypass means that 100% of the core's mass airflow flows through the fan.
Greeneyes53787 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 844 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted Fri Apr 6 2001 08:55:12 your local time (11 years ago) and read 2523 times:
Well then by this definition the GE couldn't ever have a 1:1 ratio because no cool air passes through the inner diameter fan unless the engine is shut off. But the GE engine can possess a greater bypass ratio than a front fan engine that rec 100% of the flow from the fan. GE
310_engineer From Belgium, joined Dec 2000, 165 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted Fri Apr 6 2001 09:44:49 your local time (10 years 12 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2523 times:
Final result: By-pass ratio = secundary airflow/primary airflow.
PW4084 From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 291 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted Fri Apr 6 2001 13:22:24 your local time (10 years 12 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2517 times:
I looked up the GE CJ-805-23 in my AGTEW book and it states a 2.46:1 Bypass Ratio. For some reason this differs fro table in Flight Magazine. Using 2.46:1, it puts the engine in the 'Medium Bypass Turbofan' classification which is impres considering it was the first turbofan engine in US commercial service. My book also states that the Total Mass Airflow o engine as 422 Lb./Sec. Evaluate my math below: 300 Lb/Sec Fan Airflow 122 Lb/Sec Core Airflow + _________________________ 422 Lb/Sec Total Mass Airflow Does this make sense?
Mr Spaceman From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 2777 posts, RR: 18 Reply 14, posted Fri Apr 6 2001 13:44:15 your local time (10 years 12 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2512 times:
The very first response by B747skipper was the easiest one for me to understand. Now that you gentlemen are really g with reguards to all the ratios etc, I'm kinda lost, but thats OK because it,s very interesting to watch how you guys figure this technical out.
However I would like to ask one simple question about a HI-Bypass Turbofan engine. Is it true that the air passing throu engine cowling that does NOT go through the hot section of the engine, also acts as a sort of "Muffler"? Is that why the Turbofans seem so much "Quieter"? Chris
"Just a minute while I re-invent myself"
310_engineer From Belgium, joined Dec 2000, 165 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted Fri Apr 6 2001 14:36:30 your local time (10 years 12 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2516 times: simple answer:Yes
JETPILOT From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3111 posts, RR: 38 Reply 16, posted Fri Apr 6 2001 14:37:38 your local time (10 years 12 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2521 times: The operating principles behind a tubofan and turbojet differ in the different ways they produce thrust.
A turbojet where a relatively small amount of air entering the engine goes through the compressor, combustor, and turb
sections and is then exhausted out the rear at a very high velocity.
A turbofan uses a turbojet engine as its core but turns a large fan pushing large amounts of air at relatively slow speeds achieve the same effect.
You can achieve thrust by moving small amounts of air at very high speed as in the turbojet, or you can move largre am air at low speed as in the case of the turbofan. The later is much more efficeint.
A turbofan is, simplified, a turbojet with a fan as its first stage. The turbojets energy is used to turn the fan instead of be to push the aircraft foward. It is the fans job to provide thrust. The big turbofans are much quieter do to the low air velocity of the bypass air concealing the core exhaust. The front fan casing concealing the fan is called a bifurcated duct.
The earlier Pratt engines (JT3D, JT8D), although turbofans because they have a bypass, are more towards turbojets on evolutionary ladder.
The Lear 24/25 has straight turbojets. They are the loudest things you will see at the airport nowdays. And they are lou JET
Greeneyes53787 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 844 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted Fri Apr 6 2001 18:07:00 your local time (10 years 12 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2505 times: Just a couple things:
1. A turbofan isn't really a turbojet with a fan as its first stage, as you stated, unless the turbofan is a front fan design. B there it isn't true. Fans don't run the same speed (or at least they didn't) as the turbojet spool. A 2-spool engine incorpo power takeoff somewhere (often in the back) to run the fan in the front. The recently evaluated unducted fan design and small GE turbofans installed in many dassault Falcon 20s have variable pitch inlet guide vanes and stators- but no first fan. Instead the fan resides behind the entire turbojet. And the bypass is farely high. The Caravelle used a larger versio engine for testing, and Convair put this engine on their 990.
2. The exhaust of the turbojet in a turbofan engine can be separated from the fan exhaust. But generally it is mingled. I words there is no high speed turbojet exhaust anymore. The slower fan exhaust with high volume creates quite a drag turbojet enough to slow it's exit speed too. But i've not graduated from jet school so my thinking could be incorrect on th Greeneyes
310_engineer From Belgium, joined Dec 2000, 165 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted Sat Apr 7 2001 08:08:17 your local time (10 years 12 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2501 times:
Greeneyes, Also turbojets can be two spool engines with N1 low pressure compressor/low pressure turbine and N2 high press.com press.turb. N1 is driven by LPT and N2 driven by HPT.(ie JT4A)
Engines where fan exhaust and jet exhaust are mingled (low by-pass engines ie JT3D,Jt8D) produce more noise and h higher specific fuel consumption than non mixed xhaust engines (high by-pass engines ie JT9D,PW4000,CFM56,CF6,e So generally mingled is not correct.
All the best Mike
Can anyone explain the difference between these two kind of engines? are current engines either a turbofan/turbojet or types were only used to designate 1st generation jets? Thanks for the input!
Viasa we miss you!. Good times will return after Chavez is gone!
15 replies: All unread, jump to last
TWAMD-80 From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 1006 posts, RR: 5 Reply 1, posted Tue Dec 14 2004 19:42:13 your local time (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3808 times:
I'll give this a shot. A pure turbojet engine is one that doesn't have any bypass air. An example would be the engines on DC-9. A Turbofan is a turbojet engine that has a fan strapped to the front of it. Some of the air from the fan is ducted ar center turbojet section.
In addition to that you have low-bypass turbofan engines and high-bypass turbofan engines. An example of a low-bypa engine is an MD-80's JT8D. There is not a lot of air that bypasses the actual turbojet section. A good visible example o bypass fan engine is the GE fan on the 747-400. If you look in pictures you can see a gap between the jet section and engine cowling - this is where the bypass air flows through. Hope this helps.
View Large View Medium
View Large View Medium
Photo Jonathan Simmons
Photo Craig Boyes
TW
Two A-4's, left ten o'clock level continue left turn!
EMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9150 posts, RR: 15 Reply 2, posted Tue Dec 14 2004 19:43:28 your local time (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3803 times:
I guess the short answer would be with a Turbojet..100% of the air passes through the engine giving you the thrust. Wi Turbofan only 20% of the air actually passes through the core engine. The other 80% passes through the Bypass Secti the thrust being generated by the Fan, driven by the 20% core air.
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
Luisde8cd From Venezuela, joined Aug 2004, 2504 posts, RR: 39 Reply 3, posted Tue Dec 14 2004 21:08:36 your local time (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3778 times: Now I get it. Thanks for the quick replies!
Viasa we miss you!. Good times will return after Chavez is gone!
Starlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 15047 posts, RR: 69 Reply 4, posted Tue Dec 14 2004 21:45:47 your local time (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 3770 times: A pure turbojet engine is one that doesn't have any bypass air. An example would be the engines on an old DC-9. All DC-9s have had Turbofans. For pure turbojets, early marks of the 707 and DC-8 are an example.
I guess the short answer would be with a Turbojet..100% of the air passes through the engine giving you the thrust. Wi Turbofan only 20% of the air actually passes through the core engine. The other 80% passes through the Bypass Secti the thrust being generated by the Fan, driven by the 20% core air.
The proportions don't have to be 80/20. Many early turbofans had less than half of the air as bypass air. Only later mod had proportions of 80/20 or so. The important thing, as you say, is that in turbofans there is a bypass air component.
Tact Is For People Who Aren't Witty Enough To Be Sarcastic
Newark777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 9348 posts, RR: 40 Reply 5, posted Wed Dec 15 2004 18:07:25 your local time (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3663 times:
On the FAA's N-code look-up site (http://162.58.35.241/acdatabase/nnum_inquiry.asp), they list airliners' engine type a jet, even though the planes are obviously turbo-fan. Do they simply say all jet aircraft are equipped with turbo-jet as a m saying it is a jet powered aircraft, or is this a mistake by the site?
Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
QantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 42 Reply 6, posted Wed Dec 15 2004 18:19:27 your local time (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3656 times:
Good catch, Newark777. Turbojets and turbofans should indeed be differentiated on there, though I guess it's not of tha importance for a rego database... Cheers, QantasA332
411A
From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted Wed Dec 15 2004 20:00:57 your local time (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3638 times:
Early turboJET engines such as the Pratt & Whitney JT4A-17 used on the B707-320 had lots of thrust, with very good h altitude performance, but suffered from poor runway performance, as all the air went thru the core. Early turboFAN engines (JT3D-3B for example) used on the 707-320B had much better runway performance, but abov suffered from rather large altitude thrust loss, as the fan was optimused for lower altitude performance. Later designs of course improved on this and in addition, turboFAN engines have better specific fuel economy.
HAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 29992 posts, RR: 62 Reply 8, posted Thu Dec 16 2004 03:12:06 your local time (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3585 times: Examples would be:JT3Ds of the B707s were Turbojets. JT8Ds of the B732s were Low Bypass Turbofans CFM56s of the B737NG were High Bypass Turbofans
Turbjets:- 100% of the Air sucked in thru the inlet is used for combustion Turbofans:- Part of the Air sucked in thru the inlet is used for combustion the rest is used as bypass air,mainly generate thrust. In Low Bypass the ratio of core Air to Bypass air would be 1:1,in High bypass it can be 5:1.Speaking of the Examples a What is the Bypass ratio for the GE90s. regds MEL
Think of the brighter side!
Aloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 7241 posts, RR: 51 Reply 9, posted Thu Dec 16 2004 06:53:00 your local time (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3551 times: "What is the Bypass ratio for the GE90s."
According to a not-so-convincing source, a GE90-115B has a bypass ratio of an impressing 9:1. Still very much possib site didn't look that professional.
Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
Air2gxs From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted Thu Dec 16 2004 07:33:43 your local time (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3542 times: Hawk,
One correction: on a pure turbojet (JT3) 100% of the air is not used for combustion. 100% goes down the core. I'm not the ratio, but a substantial component of core air is called secondary air. This is the air that is used to cool the liner and buffer between the flame front and the liner. And let's not forget bleed demands from the aircraft and the internal coolin of the engine.
As an instructor of mine once said: (to paraphrase), you can't breathe the exhaust from a 4 cycle engine, but if you can
heat and taste, you can breathe the exhaust of a pure jet.
Tarantine From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 210 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted Thu Dec 16 2004 09:59:24 your local time (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3513 times:
Also, a fanjet makes much less noise than a turbojet; this was a BIG deal in the early 1960s, probably more so than fue efficiency.
Timz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6201 posts, RR: 8 Reply 12, posted Thu Dec 16 2004 10:53:52 your local time (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3498 times: "JT3Ds of the B707s were Turbojets." JT3Cs, you mean. And JT4As. JT3Ds and JT8Ds (pre -200 series JT8Ds that is) had bypass ratios around 1:1.
HAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 29992 posts, RR: 62 Reply 13, posted Sat Dec 18 2004 01:24:31 your local time (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3382 times: Air2gxs....You are correct.It would be less than 100%. Timz....What was the Differences between the JT3C & 3D. regds MEL
Think of the brighter side!
Timz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6201 posts, RR: 8 Reply 14, posted Sat Dec 18 2004 10:29:14 your local time (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3357 times:
The original 707-121, -123, -124, -131, -138 and -139 had JT3C turbojets, rated 13000 to 13500 lb thrust with water inj Pan Am's -121s and AA's -123s were all converted to JT3D turbofans, rated 17000 (?) lb with no need for water injectio 707s built after... 1962? had turbofans.
Philhyde From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 667 posts, RR: 2 Reply 15, posted Sat Dec 18 2004 12:31:26 your local time (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3358 times: I stumbled across this site a while back. It's a little funky, but the information is good. http://www.thaitechnics.com/engine/engine_intro.html

Turbojets Vs Turbofans Document

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Turbojets Vs Turbofans Document

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

B747skipper

Final result: By-pass ratio = secundary airflow/primary airflow.

"Just a minute while I re-invent myself"

All the best Mike

15 replies: All unread, jump to last

View Large View Medium

View Large View Medium

Photo Jonathan Simmons

Photo Craig Boyes

Two A-4's, left ten o'clock level continue left turn!

Tact Is For People Who Aren't Witty Enough To Be Sarcastic

Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?

Think of the brighter side!

Think of the brighter side!

You might also like