The complexity of modern gas turbine engines has led to the adoption of a modular design approach, in which a conceptual design phase fixes the values for a number of parameters and dimensions in order to facilitate the subdivision of the overall task into a number of simpler design problems. While making the overall problem more tractable, the introduction of these process-intrinsic constraints (such as flow areas and radii between adjacent stages) at a very early phase of the design process can limit the level of performance achievable, neglecting important regions of the design space and concealing important trade-offs between different modules or disciplines. While this approach has worked satisfactorily in the past, the continuous increase in components’ efficiencies and performance makes further advances more difficult to achieve. Part I of this paper described the development of a system for the integrated design optimization of gas turbine engines: postponing the setting of the interface constraints to a point where more information is available facilitates better exploration of the available design space and better exploitation of the trade-offs between different disciplines and modules. In this second part of the paper, the proposed approach is applied to several test cases from the design of a three-spool gas turbine engine core compression system, demonstrating the risks associated with a modular design approach and the consistent gains achievable through the proposed integrated optimization approach.

1.
Keane
,
A. J.
, and
Nair
,
P. B.
, 2005,
Computational Approaches for Aerospace Design
,
Wiley
,
New York
.
2.
Jones
,
S. M.
, 2007, “
An Introduction to Thermodynamic Performance Analysis of Aircraft Gas Turbine Engine Cycles Using the Numerical Propulsion System Simulation Code
,”
NASA
Technical Report No. TM-2007-214690.
3.
Braun
,
R.
,
Gage
,
P.
,
Kroo
,
I.
, and
Sobieski
,
I.
, 1996, “
Implementation and Performance Issues in Collaborative Optimization
,”
Sixth AIAA/NASA/ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization
, Bellevue, WA.
4.
Panchenko
,
Y.
,
Moustapha
,
H.
,
Mah
,
S.
,
Patel
,
K.
,
Dowhan
,
M. J.
, and
Hall
,
D.
, 2002, “
Preliminary Multi-Disciplinary Optimisation in Turbomachinery Design
,”
Symposium on “Reduction of Military Vehicle Acquisition Time and Cost Through Advanced Modeling and Visual Simulation,”
Paris, France.
5.
Dornberger
,
R.
,
Buche
,
D.
, and
Stoll
,
P.
, 2000, “
Multidisciplinary Optimization in Turbomachinery Design
,”
European Congress on Computational Methods in Applied Sciences and Engineering
, Barcelona, Spain.
6.
Jeschke
,
P.
,
Kurzke
,
J.
,
Shaber
,
R.
, and
Riegler
,
C.
, 2002, “
Preliminary Gas Turbine Design Using the Multidisciplinary Design System MOPEDS
,”
Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo—Land, Sea and Air
, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
7.
Reddy
,
E. S.
,
Curtis
,
D. R.
,
Reddy
,
D. R.
, and
Malak
,
M. F.
, 1996, “
A Performance Enhancement Tool for a Multi-Stage Compressor
,”
ASME, SAE and ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit
, Lake Buena Vista, FL.
8.
Oyama
,
A.
and
Liou
,
M. S.
, 2002, “
Multiobjective Optimization of a Multi-Stage Compressor Using Evolutionary Algorithm
,” AIAA Paper No. 2002-3535.
9.
Chen
,
W.
,
Allen
,
J. K.
,
Tsui
,
K. L.
, and
Mistree
,
F.
, 1996, “
A Procedure for Robust Design: Minimizing Variations Caused by Noise Factors and Control Factors
,”
ASME J. Mech. Des.
0161-8458,
118
, pp.
478
484
.
10.
Dorca-Luque
,
J. M.
, and
Perrot
,
V.
, 2005, “
Multi-Disciplinary System Design Optimisation of a 2-Stage Axial Compressor for Aerodynamic Performance, Production Cost and Dynamic Stability
,” Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Technical Report No. 16.888 MSDO.
11.
De Sousa
,
F.
,
da Silva
,
R. J.
, and
Barbosa
,
J. R.
, 2005, “
Single Objective Optimization of a Multi-Stage Compressor Using a Gradient-Based Method Applied to a Specially Developed Design Computer Code
,”
Sixth World Congress on Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization
, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
12.
Keskin
,
A.
, and
Bestle
,
D.
, 2006, “
Application of Multi-Objective Optimization to Axial Compressor Preliminary Design
,”
Aerosp. Sci. Technol.
1270-9638,
10
, pp.
581
589
.
13.
Jarrett
,
J. P.
,
Dawes
,
W. N.
, and
Clarkson
,
P. J.
, 2007, “
An Approach to Integrated Multi-Disciplinary Turbomachinery Design
,”
ASME J. Turbomach.
0889-504X,
129
(
3
), pp.
488
494
.
14.
Bell
,
T. A.
,
Jarrett
,
J. P.
, and
Clarkson
,
P. J.
, 2008, “
Exploring the Effects of Removing Process-Intrinsic Constraints on Gas Turbine Design
,”
J. Propul. Power
0748-4658,
24
(
4
), pp.
751
762
.
15.
Jarrett
,
J. P.
,
Ghisu
,
T.
, and
Parks
,
G. T.
, 2009, “
On the Coupling of Designer Experience and Modularity in the Aerothermal Design of Turbomachinery
,”
ASME J. Turbomach.
0889-504X,
131
(
3
), p.
031018
.
16.
Ghisu
,
T.
, 2009, “
Robust Aerodynamic Design of Compression Systems
,” Ph.D. thesis, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
17.
Jaeggi
,
D. M.
,
Parks
,
G. T.
,
Kipouros
,
T.
, and
Clarkson
,
P. J.
, 2008, “
The Development of a Multi-Objective Tabu Search Algorithm for Continuous Optimisation Problems
,”
Eur. J. Oper. Res.
0377-2217,
185
, pp.
1192
1212
.
18.
Cumpsty
,
N. A.
, 1989,
Compressor Aerodynamics
,
Longman Scientific & Technical
,
UK
.
19.
Ghisu
,
T.
,
Parks
,
G. T.
,
Jarrett
,
J. P.
, and
Clarkson
,
P. J.
, 2006, “
Multi-Objective Optimisation of Aero-Engine Compressors
,”
Third International Conference on the Future of Gas Turbine Technology
, Brussels, Belgium.
20.
Rolls-Royce plc
, 2005,
The Jet Engine
,
Rolls-Royce plc
,
UK
.
21.
Cumpsty
,
N. A.
, 1997,
Jet Propulsion
,
Cambridge University Press
,
Cambridge, UK
.
You do not currently have access to this content.