ripcrow
Veteran Member
Joined: December 2015
Posts: 114 
|
Post by ripcrow on Dec 24, 2016 23:14:50 GMT -5
I've been kicking this around for a while. Like many others I've had dramas with the delivery air positioning to the flame tube and agree that a bottom delivery tangential to the tube is the best. So I'm thinking a straight path from the comp compressor to a side delivery the full length of the flame tube outer can. This eliminates any bends that restricts air flow as well as providing a natural diffusing effect. Also I can't see why the flametube itself is built the way it is. Normally a tube with a funnel to direct sir flip to the turbine. Why can't it be coned the whole length. My uneducated thinking says it gives a smoother flow to the turbine resulting in better Flow
|
|
ripcrow
Veteran Member
Joined: December 2015
Posts: 114
|
Post by ripcrow on Dec 24, 2016 23:16:51 GMT -5
Couldn't get image to load originally  |
|
|
|
Post by racket on Dec 25, 2016 1:26:18 GMT -5
Yep , you can have delivery up along the side , but it makes constructing a "pressure vessel" somewhat hader
|
|
ripcrow
Veteran Member
Joined: December 2015
Posts: 114
|
Post by ripcrow on Dec 25, 2016 6:55:48 GMT -5
Will it provide better flow rates.
|
|
|
|
Post by racket on Dec 25, 2016 15:37:49 GMT -5
Nope
|
|
ripcrow
Veteran Member
Joined: December 2015
Posts: 114
|
Post by ripcrow on Dec 26, 2016 0:04:30 GMT -5
Ok. I always thought a path with no bends would give less restriction and our sim was to create pressure right at the flametube walls. Will the fully coned flametube give any benefits in regards fuel economy or performance as it doesn't force the sir to undertake any change in direction until it reaches the turbine scroll.
|
|
|
|
Post by racket on Dec 26, 2016 5:38:47 GMT -5
As long as the air speeds are down below 300 ft/sec- 100 m/s the losses in bends are going to be so small as not to be worth taking into account .
A straight in approach to the scroll is prefered as the hot gases are travelling pretty fast by the time they are contained to the scroll inlet cross sectional area , again there'll be very little to no gains in fuel efficiency or performance from the coned flametube compared to a conventional tubular one , the one good point about the coned flametube is the increased primary zone area , but whether theres any measurable differences , maybe a tad , maybe not , it probably comes down to how well each is made .
|
|
