Influence mechanism of advance ratio on the aerodynamic performance of a contra-rotating propfan
-
Cao Zhiyuan
,
Gu Qinpeng
Abstract
Contra-rotating propfan (CRP) emerged in the context of the oil crisis in the 1970s and 1980s. The understanding of the flow mechanism of CRP has been continuously deepened with the research on the three-dimensional (3D) flow and design parameters of CRP. This paper conducts a study on the advance ratio of a CRP and explores its 3D flow characteristics. The results show that increasing the advance ratio can weaken the blade-induced acceleration effect on the flow, the thrust coefficient decrease from 0.9 to 0.31. As the advance ratio increases, the axial induction coefficient decreases, and the acceleration effect and power decrease, the circumferential induction coefficient of the front blade decreases. The circumferential induction coefficient of the rear blade is affected by the incoming flow and fluctuates at different radial positions, affecting the rotational effect of the CRP. The combined effect of these leads to a decrease in the axial vorticity of the tip vortex and the trailing edge vortex.
-
Research ethics: Not applicable.
-
Informed consent: Not applicable.
-
Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.
-
Use of Large Language Models, AI and Machine Learning Tools: None declared.
-
Conflict of interest: All other authors state no conflict of interest.
-
Research funding: This work was supported by National Science and Technology Major Project of China.
-
Data availability: Not applicable.
References
1. Zante, DEV, Collier, F, Orton, A, Khalid, SA, Wojno, JP, Wood, TH. Progress in open rotor propulsors: the FAA/GE/NASA open rotor test campaign. Aeronaut J 2014;118:1181–213. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0001924000009842.Search in Google Scholar
2. Chen, B, He, X. Development of the propfan technology abroad. Gas Turbine Exp Res 2020;33:54–8.Search in Google Scholar
3. Mulac, R, Schneider, J, Adamczyk, J. Average-passage simulation of counter-rotating propfan propulsion systems as applied to cruise missiles [C]. AIAA Paper No: 1989-2943 1989.10.2514/6.1989-2943Search in Google Scholar
4. Janus, J, Whitfield, D, Mansfield, F. Computation of the unsteady flowfield about a counterrotating prop-fan cruise missile [C]. AIAA Paper No: 1990-3093 1990.10.2514/6.1990-3093Search in Google Scholar
5. Schnell, R. Experimental and numerical investigation of blade pressure fluctuations on a cfk-bladed counterrotating propfan [C]. ASME Paper No: 2001-GT-0298 2001.10.1115/2001-GT-0298Search in Google Scholar
6. Stuermer, A. Unsteady cfd simulations of contra-rotating propeller propulsion systems [C]. AIAA Paper No: 2008-5218 2008.10.2514/6.2008-5218Search in Google Scholar
7. Alessandro, C, Fabio, DF, Francisco, AP. On the flow field induced by two counter-rotating propellers at varying load conditions. Ocean Eng 2021:221–108322.10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.108322Search in Google Scholar
8. Stratikis, I, Protopapadakis, GE, Katsapoxaki, P, Gkoutzamanis, V, Ghorbaniasl, G, Kalfas, A. Aerodynamic and aeroacoustic sensitivities of contra-rotating open rotors to operational parameters. Aeronaut J 2024;128:2832–55. https://doi.org/10.1017/aer.2024.71.Search in Google Scholar
9. Jin, JH, Ye, YH, Li, XH, Li, L, Shan, M, Sun, J. A deep learning-based mapping model for three-dimensional propeller RANS and LES flow fields. Appl Sci 2025;15:460. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15010460.Search in Google Scholar
10. Li, QX, Öztürk, K, Sinnige, T, Ragni, D, Eitelberg, G, Veldhuis, L. Design and experimental validation of swirl-recovery vanes for propeller propulsion systems. AIAA J 2018;56:4719–29.10.2514/1.J057113Search in Google Scholar
11. Ricouard, J, Julliard, E, Omais, M, Regnier, V. Installation effects on contra-rotating open rotor noise [C]. AIAA Paper No: 2010-3795 2010.10.2514/6.2010-3795Search in Google Scholar
12. Olausson, M, Avellán, R, Sörman, N, Rudebeck, F, Eriksson, LE. Aeroacoustics and performance modeling of a counter-rotating propfan [C]. ASME Paper No: GT2010-22543 2010.10.1115/GT2010-22543Search in Google Scholar
13. Czech, MJ, Thomas, RH. Open rotor installed aeroacoustic testing with conventional and unconventional airframes [C]. AIAA Paper No: 2013-2185 2013.10.2514/6.2013-2185Search in Google Scholar
14. Zachariadis, A, Hall, C, Parry, AB. Contrarotating open rotor operation for improved aerodynamics and noise at takeoff [J]. J Turbomach 2013;135:031010, https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4006778.Search in Google Scholar
15. Stuermer, A, Akkermans, RA. Validation of aerodynamic and aeroacoustic simulations of contra-rotating open rotors at low-speed flight conditions [C]. AIAA Paper No: 2014-3133 2014.10.2514/6.2014-3133Search in Google Scholar
16. Stuermer, A. Validation of installation effect predictions through simulations of contra-rotating open rotors at low-speed flight conditions [C]. AIAA Paper No: 2015-2886 2015.10.2514/6.2015-2886Search in Google Scholar
17. Stuermer, AW. Validation of URANS-Simulations of contra-rotating open rotor-powered aircraft at take-off conditions [C]. AIAA Paper No: 2018-1265 2018.10.2514/6.2018-1265Search in Google Scholar
18. Zhang, ZZ. Research on aerodynamic interference and matching between contra rotating prop-fan [D]. Nanjing: Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics; 2019.Search in Google Scholar
19. Yuan, PB. Research on aerodynamic interference law and experimental validation of high efficiency contra rotating prop-fan [D]. Nanjing: Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics; 2020.Search in Google Scholar
20. Gao, J, He, X, Cao, J, Wang, YG. Propfan aerodynamic design of aeroengine [M]. Beijing: Science Press; 2024.Search in Google Scholar
© 2025 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
