Jump to content
  • Welcome to Recreational Flying!
    A compelling community experience for all aviators
    Intuitive, Social, Engaging...Registration is FREE.
    Register Log in
Sign in to follow this  
flyvulcan

120hpTurboprop engine

Recommended Posts

I added this post to another thread but it was suggested I start my own thread about my engine so here it is:

 

Perhaps a realistic alternative to a Rotax will be the engine that I have been developing and am in the process of launching. It is still at least 2 years away for first deliveries but we are making steady headway to that target.

 

 

The engine shown in the above video is our Proof of Concept engine. It uses a gas generator designed by us but for cost reasons, off the shelf components were used for the interstage, power and gearbox sections. These OTS components are by no means optimized. Indeed, our computer analysis determined that the power turbine section would be offering significantly lower efficiency than needed which proved to be true - the good news is that the design optimization program will result in a power turbine that will deliver the required performance to meet the target specifications. The POC engine is shown on its dyno in the video and the video is of an early test run that validated the theoretical analysis that had been completed on the POC engine design. The engine is only being run to around 70% gas generator capability in the video.

 

The entire engine is undergoing a full redesign, based on the results of our testing/analysis and also to incorporate some technical innovations that will significantly enhance fuel efficiency and reliability/TBO to achieve our target specifications.

 

The anticipated specs for the commercial engine are T/O power 120hp, optimum cruise power (best SFC) 100-110hp, installed weight <120lbs/54kgs, fuel burn at 100hp around 8gph. The prop will be a constant speed unit and engine/prop will be controlled by a single lever (very simple). The engine's ECU/FADEC will automatically ensure no engine limits are exceeded and will also offer full data acquisition to facilitate engine health monitoring.

 

Here are some additional details that I provided in answer to some queries on the other thread.

 

Answering in no particular order, unrecuperated, the best SFC that we would likely get for this small scale turbine engine is around .60 lbs/hp/hr. If recuperated, we could be close to .55 lbs/hp/hr (so 100hp optimized cruise power setting = 55 lbs/hr @ an sg of 6.76 lbs/gal for JetA = 8.1 gal/hr). We plan to recuperate to get the SFC down. So its not sipping fuel at 100hp but at the same time, the Rotax 912iS etc. cannot run continuously at 100hp but the 914 at 100hp isn't burning that much less fuel. The Rotaxes only start to sip fuel at their lower power settings.

 

Ultimately, we'd like to get the TBO out to 3000+ hours. Given the simplicity of the design and the lower acquisition/manufacturing costs for exotic and conventional materials these days, we anticipate an overhaul cost of around US$5-6000, so probably less than the cost to overhaul the Rotax at 2000 hours.

 

Routine maintenance is expected to be significantly less than for a piston engine.

 

The actual materials to be used, the cooling requirements and the need for ceramic coatings on the hot section components is being investigated by our engineers as part of the optimization program for the design. Ceramic coatings may not be required but if it is, a number of recently developed cost effective solutions are available. The addition of a recuperator to our base design will result in the usual re-analysis of all components and that exercise is about to be commenced. Material requirements will be identified as part of that process. Current power turbine/NGV assembly cooling on the POC engine is from bleed air tapped from the compressor.

 

We did a low-key introduction of our engine to the experimental/LSA airframe manufacturers at Oshkosh last year. It was an interesting experience observing their attitude change from our initial introduction where we advised them that we were developing a small turboprop engine (skepticism/disbelief) to when we showed them the video and explained where we were at in our development program. The excitement that was evident from the manufacturers was validation to us that there is a strong desire for such a product and the offers of support from those manufacturers in the form of test airframes to flight test the engine in as well as offers to provide airframes as demonstrators for the engine was very pleasing for us. A number of leading manufacturers expressed their desire to work with us through the development program such that when the engine was ready, they would have designed a totally new airframe to take advantage of the distinctive features of the engine, i.e. low weight, small size, low frontal area etc.

 

Dave

 

 

  • Like 13
  • Informative 2
  • Winner 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the million $ question is price vs the rotax engines is up against.

 

I can already get a gas turbine based on the little jet from Eastern Europe that's powering the little kit jet from Sonex but it's poison on the pocket to buy and has fuel guzzling like you claim to not have.

 

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And the million $ question is price vs the rotax engines is up against.

I can already get a gas turbine based on the little jet from Eastern Europe that's powering the little kit jet from Sonex but it's poison on the pocket to buy and has fuel guzzling like you claim to not have.

We anticipate the price tag to be in the vicinity of the Rotax 914 price.

 

The PBS Velka TJ100 jet is a simple single stage compressor/turbine with not a particularly high pressure ratio. It is the core engine for their 240hp turboprop engine which was advertised at last years Oshkosh as a firewall forward package for RV10 aircraft at US$110k. PBS have reportedly spent about $20m on the development and certification of their turboprop engine.

 

Our gas generator if configured as a pure jet would have approximately half the thrust as the TJ100 jet engine. We intend to have higher pressure ratios and also, recuperation that will enhance the fuel efficiency of our engine.

 

Time will tell how it all works out...

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its love.....

We had a long chat with the Tucano rep at Oshkosh. Unfortunately, we couldn't make it to see the owner when he was visiting you just after Oshkosh. Our engines would go nicely in your aircraft!!

 

 

  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Upgraded to LUST.....

 

 

Sent a email to factory with all the notes and the link - we talked about this at the last visit and agreed that one effect is the nose wheel would have to move to the prototype actual location. Right now FAA 51% approval is the next goal.

 

 

 

Keep going

 

 

 

Gary

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be able to produce more power or be scaled up to compete with the IO320/360 ranges? 160hp TP RV7 firewall forward kit for a reasonable price should sell like hot cakes.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ben,

 

The TA200TP model is being developed in parallel but 6 months behind the TA120TP. The -200 will produce a minimum 200hp for take-off and be optimized for 160-180hp cruise. The -200 may be offered in a 250ish hp version as well.

 

The -200 will use a larger gas generator/power section but the gearbox and accessory drive will be common to all power plants.

 

We are anticipating that the -200 will sell for around US$45k, so on a par with a new IO360. The Tucanos, Blackshape Primes, CubCrafters, Sling 4, Arion Lightning etc manufacturers were extremely interested in our -200 engine.

 

While at Oshkosh, we had an offer from a group of enthusiasts who personally owned Vans RV model aircraft and also aviation related companies to develop and offer firewall forward kits for the RV range of aircraft. We anticipate that such packages will be developed for most of the more popular kit aircraft, both for the -120 and the -200 engines. Weight and balance considerations are very important due to the significant weight differential between the turboprop and the legacy piston engines.

 

 

  • Helpful 1
  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds brilliant. If you can achieve those figures for cost and fuel burn I'm sure it will be a winner.

 

I've just calculated the Lb/Hp/Hr burn for our SOP cruise with the PT6 and its 0.68 at low level (5k'). Being reverse flow I wouldn't have expected it to be very efficient (as I'm sure you're aware).

 

Do you have any idea how this stacks up against other conventional TP's? A Garrett for example?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, we aren't interested in comparing our range to the larger turboprops. They are not in our market. We need to be able to have added value over our competition which is the Rotaxes, Jabs, D-Motors, UL Powers etc in the 100hp region and the legacy engines in the 200hp region. The only other turboprop development at the moment is the PBS Velka offering and ultimately, as long as we can provide reliability and outstanding product support, we believe that our larger engine will be competitive against the PBS product.

 

Yes, definitely adaptable for small helicopters and we see this area as one that will have a lot of interest in our product. Our gearbox designer already has a 90 degree gearbox for a similar application for small helo's so we do anticipate selling some into that market.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To be honest, we aren't interested in comparing our range to the larger turboprops. They are not in our market. We need to be able to have added value over our competition which is the Rotaxes, Jabs, D-Motors, UL Powers etc in the 100hp region and the legacy engines in the 200hp region. The only other turboprop development at the moment is the PBS Velka offering and ultimately, as long as we can provide reliability and outstanding product support, we believe that our larger engine will be competitive against the PBS product.

Yes, definitely adaptable for small helicopters and we see this area as one that will have a lot of interest in our product. Our gearbox designer already has a 90 degree gearbox for a similar application for small helo's so we do anticipate selling some into that market.

Oh you win on the PBS turboprop on price alone ... they are looking at near twice your target price and their fuel guzzle is prodigious.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flyvulcan I have a deposit and a 19 registered 230d that wants that....put me down for one please....WOW!

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flyvulcan I have a deposit and a 19 registered 230d that wants that....put me down for one please....WOW!

Within the next few weeks, our overhauled website will be up and running. It will coincide with the launch of a book build for reserving a delivery slot. That will be for both the 120hp and the 200hp engines. I will be providing details shortly, but it will be a no-risk, fully refundable at any time delivery slot reservation system.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is really awesome!

 

I don't really understand the air induction. You say it has a low profile, so in flight, is the dynamic pressure of air at the intake utilized?

 

What are the possibilities for alternative fuels i.e. Diesel?

 

PS When will we ever break free of the US engineering system of archaic units? I mean, does anyone care how much power 120 horses generate? Where as 1 Watt = 1 Joules/s = 1 kg m^2 / s^3 and hence no mysterious conversion factors in equations. Also could have saved NASA $125m in a mars probe.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is really awesome!

I don't really understand the air induction. You say it has a low profile, so in flight, is the dynamic pressure of air at the intake utilized?

 

What are the possibilities for alternative fuels i.e. Diesel?

 

PS When will we ever break free of the US engineering system of archaic units? I mean, does anyone care how much power 120 horses generate? Where as 1 Watt = 1 Joules/s = 1 kg m^2 / s^3 and hence no mysterious conversion factors in equations. Also could have saved NASA $125m in a mars probe.

Hi Aplund,

 

Dynamic air pressure is not a requirement for our engine. The way it is configured, with prop at one end and intake at the other end, where most aircraft are tractor rather than pusher, the intake will be buried near the firewall. As long as it can get adequate air supply, that is all that is needed. Of course, dynamic air would help but only marginally.

 

We intend for the engine to run on the heavy fuels, JetA, diesel etc. so yes, diesel will be a preferred fuel. It will not be designed to run on Avgas/Mogas.

 

For your peace of mind, perhaps you could think of our launch engine as the TA90TP, referring to 90kW 001_smile.gif.2cb759f06c4678ed4757932a99c02fa0.gif

 

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PS When will we ever break free of the US engineering system of archaic units? I mean, does anyone care how much power 120 horses generate? Where as 1 Watt = 1 Joules/s = 1 kg m^2 / s^3 and hence no mysterious conversion factors in equations. Also could have saved NASA $125m in a mars probe.

You have made 2 incorrect assumptions there.

 

First that I know what a Watt is,

 

Second that I know what a joules is.

 

The only correct assumption is that I know what a Horse is!

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...