turbine supercharger.
04-12-2007, 11:14 AM
#1
turbine supercharger. Does anyone know what the name is for a supercharger thats basically the cold side of a turbine engine??? i saw a development one on a vette i think.
i think its axis or axel or something. i cant remeber and it killing me!
lol
thanks Chris.
i think its axis or axel or something. i cant remeber and it killing me!
lolthanks Chris.
04-12-2007, 11:20 AM
#3
Originally Posted by dsmawd350
centrifical?
its like a multistage compressor out of a jet engine. and doesn't use a centrifugal design but the more moderan design we are all used to seeing on jet engines.
its really p!ssing me off now! lol
Chris.
Trending Topics
04-12-2007, 11:54 AM
#8
On The Tree
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Axial Flow are good for higher flows and lower head pressures, it would be hard to build "boost" with an axial. Also it would have to be multi-staged, packaging may become a real issue.
04-12-2007, 12:29 PM
#9
TECH Fanatic
04-12-2007, 01:04 PM
#10
"Axial compressors and turbines would tend to have higher efficiencies than radial-flow machines, except in small sizes, where the boundary layers would dominate the area available to the flow. In that case, radial components would be more efficient." Taken from my advanced turbomachinery book...
Not exactly a great answer, but for the sizes we are talking about here, the centrifugal superchargers are the way to go. You'd have a really hard time packaging an axial flow compressor that was anywhere near as good as a radial (centrifugal) compressor. We deal with very tight space requirements in this world.
Not exactly a great answer, but for the sizes we are talking about here, the centrifugal superchargers are the way to go. You'd have a really hard time packaging an axial flow compressor that was anywhere near as good as a radial (centrifugal) compressor. We deal with very tight space requirements in this world.
04-12-2007, 07:58 PM
#13
I guess they could be smaller dia. if they would use counter-rotating stators. Using a reaction/impulse blade design would help too. Although reaction style blades do require higher speed to be efficient. You could probably make a more efficient turbo using more of the engines expanding hot exhaust gasses, axial flow turbines would alow this. A diesel would have an advantage because they "pump" more air at more constant engine speeds.
04-13-2007, 01:52 AM
#15
Launching!
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: College Station, TX
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm curious about the temperature rises in the higher pressure air... cold air is good.
I'm guessing that this thing is driven by the serpentine system. I wonder how much torque is required to turn that axial supercharger. If it is a small torque like a turbo, then it could be engineered as an axial turbo and run off the exhaust for free energy.
I'm guessing that this thing is driven by the serpentine system. I wonder how much torque is required to turn that axial supercharger. If it is a small torque like a turbo, then it could be engineered as an axial turbo and run off the exhaust for free energy.
04-14-2007, 10:46 AM
#18
Staging Lane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The old Lathem axial flow compressor was a multistage design 8 or more I believe. The blades were pressed in or clamped sheet metal lacking correct airfoil shape thus limiting efficiency and pressure ratio capabilities per stage.
Even today’s modern axial compressor stages have a hard time achieving pressure ratios of ~ 1.6:1 (that’s about 8.8 PSI). As you reduce size to accommodate mass flows that better match our engines, the blades get very small at about 0.5’ tall assuming 5” diameter. With such small blades tip clearance ratios become impractical by comparison to say jet engine counterpart. Then blade thickness becomes another issue because axial blades are more prone to vibration when approaching or in surge margins. To counter this stage loading must be kept low at say a pressure ratio of 1.2:1 or even lower. Also tip speeds (shaft RPMs) are quit high.
Axial flow superchargers’ appeal would be in high mass flow low boost applications. Another advantage would be more linear boost curve in comparison to centrifugals. Adiabatic efficiency could potential be a bit better as well.
Mike
Even today’s modern axial compressor stages have a hard time achieving pressure ratios of ~ 1.6:1 (that’s about 8.8 PSI). As you reduce size to accommodate mass flows that better match our engines, the blades get very small at about 0.5’ tall assuming 5” diameter. With such small blades tip clearance ratios become impractical by comparison to say jet engine counterpart. Then blade thickness becomes another issue because axial blades are more prone to vibration when approaching or in surge margins. To counter this stage loading must be kept low at say a pressure ratio of 1.2:1 or even lower. Also tip speeds (shaft RPMs) are quit high.
Axial flow superchargers’ appeal would be in high mass flow low boost applications. Another advantage would be more linear boost curve in comparison to centrifugals. Adiabatic efficiency could potential be a bit better as well.
Mike
04-16-2007, 01:49 AM
#19
thanks again Skunk! 
do you think they could be used in tandum withsya a turbo or SC to almost compound boost??? the axial flow you "get the air in" and the turbo/SC to do the actual real compresing work.
thanks Chris.
do you think they could be used in tandum withsya a turbo or SC to almost compound boost??? the axial flow you "get the air in" and the turbo/SC to do the actual real compresing work.
thanks Chris.
04-17-2007, 11:56 AM
#20
Staging Lane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can but you would create a boost curve from hell as both axial and centrifugal is exponential. A PD blower and turbo would work much better and is what some OEMs use.
An axial feeding a centrifugal was fairly common on jet APUs (auxiliary power unit), but over time as efficiency and pressure ratio increased out of centrifugal the axial stage was dropped. Examples of this can be on smaller jet engines such as Williams.
What are you trying to achieve? Perhaps IGV (inlet guide vanes) on centrifugal may be a better fit.
Mike
An axial feeding a centrifugal was fairly common on jet APUs (auxiliary power unit), but over time as efficiency and pressure ratio increased out of centrifugal the axial stage was dropped. Examples of this can be on smaller jet engines such as Williams.
What are you trying to achieve? Perhaps IGV (inlet guide vanes) on centrifugal may be a better fit.
Mike