7 Bladed Propeller
7 Bladed Propeller
7 Bladed Propeller
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, Technical University of Denmark (DTU), Kongens Lyngby, Denmark
2
J.J. Kappel A/S, Hilleroed, Denmark
3
ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (HDW), Kiel, Germany
ABSTRACT
1 INTRODUCTION
and
in
3 DESIGN PROCEDURE
1.&2.
order
nat.
freq.
TE
noise
antising.
high
efficiency
XXX
XX
XXX
XX
XX
XX
XXX
XXX
XX
XX
pitch distribution
XXX
XXX
XX
camber distribution
cavit.
margin,
general
cavit.
margin
tip
excita-
XX
section profile
XX
circulation distribution
PARAMETERS
stress
limit
XXX
XXX
XX
XX
skew
XX
XX
XX
XX
area ratio
XX
XX
XX
XXX
XX
area distribution
XX
XX
XX
XX
XX
diameter
XX
XX
XX
XXX
XX
XX
RPM
XX
XX
XX
XX
XX
XX
blade number
XXX
XXX
XXX
XX
thickness ratio
XX
XX
XX
XXX
XXX
XX
XX
XX
XXX
material
XXX
XX
suction-side cavitation
pressure-side cavitation
hub-vortex cavitation
blade
length
and
circulation
The most important parameter with respect to propellerinduced forces is the wake field itself which for many
reasons should as fair as possible, be it surface ships or
submarines. However, with a given wake field the
number of propeller blades can probably be considered
the most important issue. Increasing the number of
propeller blades will reduce the unsteady force on each
propeller blade, but not necessarily the total unsteady
force. An example of unsteady force calculations with a
panel method for propellers with various geometries and
blade numbers are discussed in section 6.3.
Increase of the propeller diameter may increase or
decrease the unsteady forces depending on the radial
distribution of the unsteadiness in the wake field. An
example of variation of unsteady forces with propeller
diameter calculated by a panel method is shown in section
6.3.
4.3 Skew, pitch and camber distribution
The application of skew can reduce in particular the firstorder thrust and torque fluctuations and improve the
cavitation behaviour as commonly seen in surface ships.
However, a fairly large skew angle is needed to reduce
torque and thrust fluctuations significantly. Large skew
angles lead to fairly complicated higher-order flexural
modes of the propeller blades not to mention the blade
stresses when the propeller is going astern - for which
For further developments of understanding of the flowinduced noise, as introduced in this paper, a viable and
promising alternative would be systematic acoustic measurements, for example using "piezo-technique" on the
surface of the blade (trailing-edge region), last but not
least to verify theoretical calculations. The approach by
Lighthill equations (Lighthill (1952)) can be designated
as a first estimation. If enhanced predictions are to be
made the efforts will increase strongly. More comprehensive software packages (hybrid procedure) exist on
the market and use more or less the principles of Lighthill
analogies as well. The applicability of this software is demonstrated for some examples, but the applications for
the propeller design process are most doubtful. What are
needed first are accurate experiments in model and full
scale which are essential to scaling the theoretical
calculations.
6 EXAMPLE
Propeller
1
Propeller
2
Propeller
3
Propeller
4*
Propeller
5
Propeller
6*
Propeller
7
Propeller
8*
Diameter (relative)
1.06
0.96
0.96
1.0
0.94
1.0
0.94
1.0125
Pitch ratio
0.83
1.02
1.05
1.03
1.04
1.09
1.21
1.09
Skew, degree
13.75
-15.03
22.99
30.8
31.6
29.7
31.4
29.6
0.52
0.50
0.76
0.59
0.61
0.59
0.59
0.59
No. of blades
Propeller
4
Propeller
6
Propeller
8.1
Propeller
8.2
Propeller
8.3
Propeller
8.4
D, (relative)
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.025
1.05
1.1
No. of blades
Kx
0.25942
0.25081
0.25296
0.23448
0.21288
0.16736
kx
0.0517
0.0481
0.0089
0.01006
0.00918
0.00918
ky
0.0093
0.00767
0.00963
00.0086
0.00756
0.00557
kz
0.0071
0.00685
0.01724
0.01541
0.01364
0.01074
Mx
0.04326
0.04221
0.04296
0.03880
0.03440
0.02608
kmx
0.0076
0.00771
0.00171
0.00183
0.00170
0.00149
kmy
0.0032
0.00324
0.00519
0.00470
0.00416
0.00313
kmz
0.0051
0.0052
0.00964
0.00895
0.00817
0.00682
kx/Kx
0.1993
0.1918
0.0352
0.0429
0.0458
0.0549
ky/Kx
0.0358
0.0306
0.0381
0.0366
0.0355
0.0333
kz/Kx
0.0274
0.0273
0.0682
0.0657
0.0641
0.0642
kmx/Mx
0.1757
0.1827
0.0398
0.0472
0.0494
0.0571
kmy/Mx
0.0740
0.0768
0.1208
0.1211
0.1209
0.120
kmz/Mx
0.1179
0.1232
0.2244
0.2307
0.2375
0.2615
Kx*=kx/Kx+kmx/Mx
Kx*
0.3750
0.3745
0.0750
0.0901
0.0952
0.1120
Kyz*=ky/Kx+kz/Kx
Kyz*
0.2551
0.2579
0.4515
0.4541
0.4580
0.4790
+kmy/Mx+kmz/Mx
7 CONCLUSION
REFERENCES