Inside the PDE Lab

imgHi Everyone…

The past few weeks have been a blast… literally!! I am smack in the middle of some exciting, ground-shaking experiments testing a new kind of airplane engine called a Pulsed Detonation Engine (PDE). These aren’t just any experiments, they happen to be the first of their kind in the world. I’ll tell you more about them, but first… let me tell you some more about PDEs.

As the name implies, a PDE uses “detonations” to burn the fuel in a more explosive and more efficient manner compared to your usual steady deflagration flame. A deflagration is the normal way to burn fuel… you see it everywhere… a fireplace, a candle burning, inside an internal combustion engine, and inside today’s aircraft engines. It’s also what powers the world in today’s large megawatt scale gas turbine based powerplants. A detonation, on the other hand, looks nothing like a deflagration. A detonation is a shock wave travelling at Mach 5 (5 times the speed of sound!!) that ignites the fuel-air mixture as it passes. The combustion products are at higher pressure (this is a key difference from a deflagration) and that translates into a more efficient conversion of the chemical energy stored in the fuel into useful work.

The reason why I am so excited about PDE’s is that we can potentially reduce the amount of fuel burned by a whopping 5%!! That might not sound like much, but in the aircraft propulsion world a 1% improvement translates into hundreds of millions of dollars of savings per year!! Considering that present day deflagration-based gas turbine engines have already been highly optimized over the past 50 years (a 0.2% improvement is considered a major breakthrough)… PDE’s represent a possible game-changing technology that could revolutionize aerospace propulsion. Equally important, by reducing the amount of fuel burned, PDE’s also reduce the amount of emissions and greenhouse gases that get put up in the atmosphere… it’s good for the environment too!

So… back to my experiments… what exactly am I doing? Well, we’ve designed and built an eight-combustor version of a PDE and integrated it with a turbine… the first steps to understanding how to integrate a PDE in a real gas turbine engine. I’ve been leading this collaborative effort with NASA for the past two years and we’re in our final phases of the program. Now, this particular laboratory experimental engine will not be flying anytime soon, but we’ve gathered some unique data that has increased our understanding and has moved us one step closer.

Well… I’d better go… time to get back to my experiments… there’s nothing like the sound of the turbine spooling up as the PDE’s fire. I’ll see if I can find some video of an experiment, then you’ll see why this is so much fun!

Comments

Don’t get so carried away having fun that you lose sight of an important detail. Increasing efficiency in this case implies higher peak combustion temperature, which inevitably means formation of more NOx. Aircraft burn a lot of fuel. Do you have any concerns about developing an engine which adds to acid rain?

One problem at a time dude. NOx can be handled on it’s own. More efficient use of fuel would be a great asset. Besides, this is a research project. It’s like saying “don’t study the benifits of fire, you might burn your fingers”. Ludite.
Kudos on your PDE research. Keep it up!

The NOx discussion raises a very good point. When developing an engine system, we have to remember that there are multiple (often competing) requirements. Efficiency is just one requirement. Emissions (ie: NOx) is another, but so are noise (for communities adjacent to airports), operability, maintainability, simplicity and, of course, safety and reliability.

We at GE are committed to making environmentally sound products. We simply have to be… it is a necessity if we plan on continuing to live on Earth. Luckily, this happens to be a rare win-win situation. Reducing fuel burn, by definition, directly reduces CO2 production (~3 kg of CO2 for every 1 kg of fuel). As for NOx – it’s still early yet in our research and we have just started looking at it. Our preliminary numerical predictions suggest that NOx levels from a PDE seem to be consistent with current technology engines. NASA has also done some recent work in this area. We haven’t yet done an experimental validation, but we will certainly devote some more of our effort in the near future.

Having said all of the above… this is research… so of course… one step at a time…

ADAM

P.S. By the way, detonations are a lot easier in hydrogen…

this is some good information thanks

How different is this process from the old Ramjet engines, like those that were used in the V-1?

You fellows need to read PROJECT ORION by Geo Dyson. There is very little new under the sun. And look at this info:

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/O/OrionProj.html

It is heartening to note that path breaking innovations are made in GE. Kudos to the team. It would be a good idea to understand the effect of variations in the fuel mix has any effect on the output/performance… Thanks Shankar

This seems to be the same multiple charge burn principle used in 4 stroke internal combustion engines – (multiple individual metered fuel charge burns in each cylinder). You say it’s not the same principle. What is the difference?

To Vince: The V1 engines were not quite “Ramjets”, they were “Pulsejets”. which used relatively low pressure “explosions”, which slammed the inlet “flappers” closed, and exhausted out the rear. It required air motion to reopen the flappers, and ignition, for the next pulse.

I am “guessing” that PDE’s may require a more robust design to contain the explosions compared to a steady state combustion system. This may add weight to the engine and the structures supporting the engine in an aircraft application. Is my “guess” correct? If yes, what is your estimate of the extra weight required to support this new design as applied to a Boeing 777?

S…

Finally some good, no nonsense info about airports energy efficiency. You can be positive I will bookmark Mamufův webík – Å kolní nášup a rybi�ky to use your page as a reference and this, no later than Wednesday….

info…

Thanks for sharing this information as I have been searching for info about Tuesday since last Tuesday. I found you when I Googled: airports energy efficiency….

Seb…

Thanks for sharing your knowledge on the topic of airports energy efficiency and for creating aviationwatch.eu ” UK airport expansion should be halted to meet …: I have been on your site 7 times since last Wednesday….

At the time of these publications other Pulse Det engines were being experimented with by other companies…How are you so sure that these particular experiments were the first of their kind?

I am with SoundBlast Technologies a small venture group that has made considerable progress in developing coherent detonation wave technology for various applications. We think we have very valuable knowledge that would help further development of a detonation wave propulsion engine.

In creating a detonation wave, our technology allows us to bypass the deflagration stage by creating and amplifying a tiny detonation wave. By employing our technology our wave never degenerates into deflagration which would ruin our timing accuracy. This system has allowed us to create the detonation wave in a very short tube. Since detonation waves all travel at the speed of sound, and since the speed of sound is a local constant, all the tubes in our arrays have the same trigger-to-impulse timing and can therefore be coherent. We have generated coherent detonation waves in 3′ tubes and amplified them to 6′, 8′ and 12′tubes.

As far as we know no one else has been able to accomplish what we have accomplished.

Our tubes have the capability of detonating at up to 30 times per second if supplied with enough air and fuel mixture flow.

Jim Teel

SoundBlast Technologies

Leave a comment
We appreciate your interest in our company, and thank you for taking the time to communicate with us. However, you should be aware that we do not wish to receive information in confidence. Accordingly you agree that this submission is not provided to us in confidence, and that it is made gratuitously and without expectation of compensation. In other words GE will be free to consider and use it without any obligation to you. By this agreement you are not, however, granting GE any rights under existing or future patents.

To proceed with your submission you must first accept the foregoing agreement by checking the I ACCEPT box below.

If you are unclear about these conditions we urge you to consult with an attorney before submitting your information to us. Alternatively, if you would like to know more about GE's Submitted Ideas program, you should consult our website at: http://www.ge.com/contact/submit_an_idea/
Name*
Email* (We will never share your email address)
Comment

read more

RELATED POSTS

see details

join the conversation


editors

our picks

Follow along as the Barbarian Group visits GE
GE Adventure
How science and technology can help address some of the world's issues
Collective Imagination
Complex stuff, simple explanations
HowStuffWorks