Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 9

THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS

82-GT-236
345 E. 47 St., New York, N.Y. 10017

The Society shall not be responsible for statements or opinions advanced in papers or In
E S discussion at meetings of the Society or of its Divisions or Sections, or printed in its
publications. Discussion is printed only if the paper is published In an ASME Journal.
(y^
^L Released for general publication upon presentation. Full credit should be given to ASME,
the Technical Division, and the author(s). Papers are available from ASME for nine months
after the meeting.
Printed in USA.
Copyright 1982 by ASME

Next Generation Turboprop


W. L. McIntire
Gearboxes
ChiefAdvanced Development A new generation of fuel-efficient turboprop propulsion systems is under con-
sideration now that fuel is a significant portion of the direct operating cost of
D. A. Wagner aircraft. Systems in the 5000- to 15,000-hp (3730- to 11,185-k W) range that use
conventional propellers or the new propfan are being studied. Reduction gearing
Development EngineerAdvanced Design
for this next generation of turboprops is of significant interest due to new
Gas Turbine Research and Engineering, requirements for cruise speed life, and reliability. Detroit Diesel Allison's past
Detroit Diesel Allison experience with the T56 family of turboprop reduction gearboxes is recounted.
Division of General Motors, Probable requirements of the next generation of reduction gearboxes are discussed
Indianapolis, IN since new requirements for gearboxes combined with past experience should
determine the profile of the next generation of gearboxes. A discussion of gearbox
general arrangement and its impact on airframe installation is included, along with
comments on reduction ratio, gear arrangement, accessory drives, reliability goals,
and probable technology needs.

INTRODUCTION Commercial use of turboprops has been limited


in the recent past because of the high available
There will be a new generation of large turbo- cruise speeds and passenger comfort in turbofans and
props flying in the future. The increasing cost of the relative low cost of fuel. Recent work by Hami-
aviation fuel and the portion of operating costs lton Standard and NASA (2) has been directed toward
this represents to the airlines and military are a propfan propulsor that will allow high speed -

forcing this to happen. A modern turboprop propul - cruising with good fuel efficiencies.
sion system featuring today's gas turbine technolo- The propfan development has suggested that
gy, reduction gearbox technology, and advanced pro - aircraft may cruise at 0.8 Mach No. with signifi -

pellers will be available. Turbofans will continue cantly higher efficiency than the most modern turbo-
to play a major role in the long range aircraft -
fan can provide. This technology has not yet demon -

transport area. However, the fuel efficiency asso -


strated full scale performance or noise levels ac-
-

ciated with propeller or propfan propulsion (1) can -


ceptable to the probable commercial customers. How-
not continue to be ignored (see Figure 1), espe -
ever, current efforts at NASA are expected to ini-
cially for "short haul" applications. tiate a large-scale flight research program to
Military users are well aware of the fuel ef- confirm high speed performance and potential pas
- -
ficiency associated with turboprops. The T56 engine senger comfort.
is used for a significant portion of the flight
hours flown by the Navy and Air Force, yet it con -

sumes a small portion of their fuel. Table 1 por- Another major component of the turboprop en-
trays these data for 1977. gine is the reduction gearbox. Experience with
production 5000-shp (3,730-kW) class turboprops cur-
rently flying leads DDA to believe strongly that the

100 Law-speed ced


Table 1. props L speed
Military T56 Engines . prop
90
Turboprop

Navy AF 80 r `

Installed 70 m cip
Re \` \`,
Flight hours 42% 15% efficiency

Fuel consumed 22.5% 6%
60
Turbofan
FY 1977 DOD data
50

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9


Cruise Mach No.
TE81-7006

Figure 1. Fuel efficiencies for various aircraft


Contributed by the Gas Turbine Division of the ASME. propulsion systems.
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/83931/ on 04/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
next generation of reduction gearing up to 15,000 Navy contract. Reliability improvements have
shp (11,185 kW) can be developed with current com- continued under T56 CIP programs.
ponent technology.
This paper will expand on experience gained Reduction Gear Design
with the T56 family of gearboxes and project what
this means for the next generation of turboprop pro- The T56 reduction gear design evolved from the
pulsion systems. early 1950s to the late 1960s. Table 2 presents
some of the many development changes that occurred.
BACKGROUND

The T56 5000-shp (3,730-kW) family of reduc- Table 2.


tion gearboxes evolved from machines such as the T40 Development in T56 gearbox design.
that were designed in the early 1950s. The T40
(Figure 2) was a counterrotation 5500-shp (4,100-kW) Early gearbox Mature gearbox
turboprop system that powered aircraft such as the Gearbox feature T56 A-7 T56 A-18
R3Y (a multiengine Navy aircraft) and the Lockheed
XFV vertical takeoff fighter, shown in Figure 3. First-stage gearing Spur gear Double helical

The T56 first flew in the mid-1950s on the Second-stage gearing Planetary spur Planetary
C130 (Figure 4) and went into commercial production gear helical gear
as the 501-D13. The most recent major gearbox de -

velopments associated with the T56 were in the late Bearings All separable Many races
1960s when the T56 A-18 gearbox was developed under components integral with
shafting

Accessory gearing Separable Electron beam


clamped welded--fewer
components parts

Planet bearings Spherical-- Inverted


self aligning spherical to
react moment
loads
Figure 2. T40 propulsion system.
Prop shaft Bolted through Single shaft
carrier through center of
gearbox

Several details were developed during this


period and remain as basic features of the T56.
They include:
o Safety coupling
o Torquemeter
o Gear damper rings
o Out of round main power train bearings
- -

o Propeller brake
o Negative Torque Signal from ring gear
position
o Elimination of lock tabs on nut locks
o Gear cooling/lubrication by high pressure -

jets directed to the out of mesh side


- -

o Premium, clean steel


o Gear design for flexibility--ie., splined
ring gear
o Practical gear tooth involute modifications
and tolerances for production manufacture

y
r"

Figure 3. Lockheed XFV vertical takeoff fighter. Figure 4. Early C130 aircraft.

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/83931/ on 04/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo


The use of damper rings to reduce the vibra - development process. The ability to control manu -
tory web stress in the main drive bull gear is an facturing to limits recognized in development as
interesting design feature. Figure 5 shows how the "important limits" was quite valuable; where design,
damper rings were located in the gear rim, and development, and manufacturing occurred in the same
Figure 6 shows the effect of these rings on the facility, it was even possible to let manufacturing
vibratory stress level. know y the limits needed to be controlled. This
One prime goal for DDA's turboprop gearing has was a real asset during the development phase.
been to avoid catastropic failures resulting from Gear manufacturing involves definite control
tooth breakage. All reduction gearing for the T56 of all the manufacturing steps. An example of good
family has been designed for infinite life. DDA ex- control of the steps relating to tooth forming and
perience suggests that the bending stress - strain case hardening is shown in Figure 8. Here it can be
relationship for 9310 gear steel has a knee in the seen that effective procedures have resulted in a
curve near 10 7 cycles (Figure 7). Many T56 gear - uniform case thickness all around the tooth profile.
boxes have operated for more than 10,000 hours, The very critical root area has this uniform case
which would mean an accumulation of more than 10 11 thickness also and indicates the attention to heat
cycles on the pinion gear teeth. treatment and grinding fixturing.

Manufacturing Development Philosophy

As the T56 family of gearboxes matured, it Development of the early T56s was conducted to
became apparent that manufacturing of the critical meet the military requirements then prevalent. The
components was really an extension of the design and final judge in the case of the T56 was a 150 - hr
qualification test wherein the gearbox was consid -
ered an integral part of the engine. It is to be
noted that this is a different philosophy from that
of helicopter transmission development. When a
turboprop gearbox could pass this test, it was ready
for flight.
In addition, prior to running the qualifica -
tion tests, many hours were spent in gearbox devel -
opment on back - to - back rigs (see Figure 9). These
rigs proved to be very valuable for reasons men -
tioned later.
Total test time required for these tests was
significant. In the case of the T56 A-18 (the
Damp result of a long evolution), more than 4000 hr were
spent in back-to-back testing. Thus, the gearbox
rings

TE81-9050 im
Figure 5. T56 main drive gear.

15
Cycles to rupture TE81-7017

Co
^^^Undamped Figure 7. S-N curve for 9310 gear material.

= 10 (69) ^^_.--,+

a) Damper ring

T
05
Co (34)
a

2 3 4 5
Gear speed, rpm/1000 TE81-7016

Figure 6. Effect of damping measures on main drive


TE81
gear stress. Figure 8. Uniform case thickness.

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/83931/ on 04/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo


0.15
(68.0)

s
m
a)
U

U 0.1
0
f)
(60.8)

Figure 9. Back-to-back gearbox test rig.

development closely resembled development normally lU 2U 30


associated with gas turbines.
(7,457) (14,914) (22,371)
Maintenance Costs and Reliabilit Horsepower 1,000- (kW)

The T56 family of reduction gears has per -


TE81-7018
formed well for a variety of commercial and military
users; for example, the Navy repairs these gearboxes Figure 10. Projected trend for gearbox
"on condition" -no time between overhauls (TBO)--and
-
specific weight.
the Air Force operates with a 6000 hr TBO. A NASA
-

study (3) conducted in 1978 explored in great detail


the reliability and costs that are associated with NEXT-GENERATION REQUIREMENTS
operation of the T56 reduction gear.
These data were then compared with modern Just as the military requirements of the
turbofan experience and were also projected for early 1950s had a significant impact on the design
comparison with the possible advanced turbofans. of the T56 family of reduction gears, the next-
The significant conclusion of the NASA study generation gearbox will be defined by current re-
was that a modern propeller driven system would com
- -
quirements. It is highly likely that a commercial
pete in the area of reliability and maintenance turboprop will make use of the emerging propfan
costs with a modern turbofan system when the design designs advancing with NASA and Hamilton Standard
concepts employed common technology. support. This type of propulsion will cruise at
speeds common in current turbofans; noise will be a
For reduction gearing: significant design consideration.
o The design should be for on condition re- -
We cannot rule out the modern propeller sys-
pair, not for fixed overhaul periods. tem (4). It will cruise at lower speeds (0.65 Mach
o Modularity should be reflected in the No.) and offer fuel efficiency equivalent to that
design.
of the propfan. In a military application noise
o Reduction in total parts count should be may not be of the importance that it is for commer-
pursued. cial transports. Cruise speed and noise will both
affect the next generation of turboprop reduction
gearboxes. Other parameters that are expected to
Projection of Experience have a significant impact on gearbox design are
power, desired life, maintainability requirements,
A wealth of development and service exper -
reliability requirements, and airframe requirements.
ience has been gained with the T56 family of gear -

boxes in the 5000 shp (3,730 kW) class. This ex


- - -

perience will permit us to move into an advanced Power


turboprop gearbox design with confidence and as -

surance of success. The predominant experience level for propel-


The T56 reduction gearbox weighs approximate - ler-type reduction gearing in the free world is up
ly 500 lb (225 kg), or approximately 0.1 lb/hp to 6,000 hp (4,475 kW). A 12,000-shp (8,950-kW)
(60.8 g/kW). Unpublished studies at DDA suggest gearbox was tested at DDA as shown in Figure 11.
that as the design power is increased, the specific Unpublished studies by DDA have shown that this
weight will increase. (See Figure 10.) This is experience could probably be extrapolated to 30,000
predominantly due to the reduction in propeller hp (22,370 kW). However, it is unlikely that the
speed as power goes up thus the output torque in
-- - next generation of turboprops will operate at that
creases faster than power. The effect of this pro - high a power level. Instead, modest advances in
jected trend for specific weight will be to encour - power, from 5,000 hp (3,730 kW) to 15,000 hp
age the design of multiple torque-path gearboxes.
- (11,185 kW), will probably be accepted. Of course

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/83931/ on 04/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo


these advances will be dictated by specific air - a far reaching effect on the reduction gear; quite
-

plane and mission requirements. Nonetheless, it is simply, it will define the gearbox reduction ratio
not expected that we will stray too far from our (see Table 3). (The design points shown in Table 3
experience base. are just two of a whole spectrum of possibilities.)

Life and Reliabilit


Table 3.
The probable goals for life and reliability
Propfan/propeller characteristics.
will have a strong influence on next-generation
gearbox design. Suppliers and users are specu -

lating that design goals will be in the 25,000-hr


to 40,000-hr life range. We can fully expect that Cruise Takeoff
Reduction speed Tip speed disk loading
these requirements will be greatly in excess of
ratio Mach No. ft/sec (m/s) hp/diam ( amt)
those for the last production generation designed
in the 1950s for military turboprops. The goal
then was to pass a 150-hr qualification test with- Propfan 8.5:1 0.8 800 (245) 70 (560)
out failure. Propeller 15:1 0.6 720 (220) 25 (200)
A requirement for "on condition" maintenance
-

will probably accompany the high life requirement,


and, thus, a method of determining "condition" will The propfan gearbox will have a significantly
be necessary. Fault detection and health monitor - lower reduction ratio than the gearbox for a pro -

ing will be part of the gearbox design require- peller. It is interesting to note that these re -

ments. duction ratios are a function of propulsion and


power turbine technology and not of power level. We
Airframe and Maintainability would expect that a propfan gearbox design with 1980
technology would have the same reduction ratio at
It is difficult to speculate on mission- 5,000 hp (3,730 kW) as at 15,000 hp (11,185 kW).
oriented airframe requirements since the next -
(The diameter of turbine and prop vary with the
generation user has not really identified himself. square root of power. Tip speed is constant.)
It is possible to predict that accessibility Knowing the desired reduction ratio does not
for maintenance functions will be a strong in -
in itself tell us much about the gearbox general ar -

fluence on the propulsion system design and that a rangement. Airframe requirements as well as the ex-
requirement for line replaceable units will force perience of the propulsion system designer will lead
the design to modularity. to a choice of a propeller aligned with the engine
The T56 system, shown in Figure 12, has a center line or offset from the engine center line.
unique flexibility associated with the offset of The T56 experience has been with offset gearing.
the first stage gearing. This offset of the gear
- -
However, the propellers for the Russian Bear power
ing allows use of the same basic propulsion system plant are aligned with the engine center line.
in different airframes, including airframes in The requirement for low noise will manifest
which the propeller must be offset above the engine itself in helical gearing. Maintainability require -
center line and those in which the propeller must ments will be reflected in a high degree of modular -
be below the engine center line. ity, and life requirements will show up in critical
component material and size selection as well as in
IMPACT ON NEXT GENERATION
multiple torque paths even in low power gearboxes.
-- -

Reliability will lead to an emphasis on low parts


The next generation of reduction gearboxes count.
will be forged out of the collective industry ex-
perience and new requirements. It is not always
possible to associate one requirement with a speci -

fic aspect of a reduction gear design, but for the


sake of simplification, that will be attemped here.
Cruise speed selection may affect the selec-
tion of prop or propfan. That selection will have

TE81-7019

Figure 11. 12,000-shp gearbox tested at DDA. Figure 12. T56 propulsion system.

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/83931/ on 04/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo


General Arrangement In addition to the choice of in-line versus
offset gearing, the choice of a remote versus an in -

Table 4 presents some considerations ex - tegral gearbox must be made. The T56 family of en-
pected to affect the next generation of gear gen - gines uses a remotely mounted gearbox that is rigid-
eral arrangement. This table shows four different ly attached to the power section with struts. Inlet
possibilities for gearbox general arrangement with -
ducting is sheet metal that passes between the
out including the choice of reduction ratio. struts and around the drive shaft. Other manu -

facturers have elected to incorporate the rear gear


case and the power section inlet housing into one
Table 4. component. Usually this component is a cast struc -

General arrangement selection. ture. The choice of incorporating the gearbox into
the main front power section structure or leaving it
Choice Affected by to be a remotely mounted component is an interesting
trade-off. The selection of an integral gearbox or
Offset or in line gearbox
- Inlet requirement a remotely mounted gearbox would be expected to af-
accessory drives fect weight and cost. Modularity for maintainabili -

prop control requirements ty will be more difficult with a gear case integral
with the power section front structure.
Remote or integral gearbox Maintainability
Weight/cost Accessory Drives
Accessory drive
requirements The T56 family of gearboxes employed an acces -

sory drive system that was popular at the time of


its conception; the drives were integrated into the
gearbox. Commercial and military experience with
The selection of offset or in line gearing
- this system has been satisfactory. However, modern
will be influenced by the engine inlet flow field emphasis on maintenance time and cost will probably
requirements, the propulsor slip stream character - drive the next generation to an arrangement in which
istics, and the probable desire to have propfan con- at least the airframe accessories (hydraulic pumps,
trols located directly aft of and in line with the electric generator, and starter) are mounted on an
propulsor. AMADS box (5).
These two considerations have led to offset The desire for system fuel efficiency would
gearing in the past and will probably lead to it in suggest that the AMADS box would be power turbine -

the future. The scheme shown in Figure 13 (a) driven. If this is the case, then the starter would
reflects prop controls that have access to the prop become an accessory mounted on the power section
shaft bore without use of hydraulic or electrical along with the fuel pumps, oil pumps, and ignition
slip rings. The engine inlet design for this scheme generator.
is conservative if the axial space for the "S" turn The gearbox accessories would be individually
is not restricted. mounted, but in a modular, easily maintained manner.
The scheme shown in Figure 13 (b) has the These accessories would include oil pumps, propeller
virtue of symmetry. However, the propeller controls brake (if required), and propeller controls.
may require a hydraulic slip ring. The inlet is
also limited by boundary layer flow and may be more
difficult to design than the offset arrangement.
Nonetheless, this approach might be desirable when
the effects of weight and airframe interfaces are
considered.
The selection of arrangement (a) or (b) in
Figure 13 must also consider the effects of reduc -

tion ratio and the driving and location of accesso-


ries. Configuration (a) is a logical choice when a
propfan is the propulsor and the desired reduction
ratio is low--for instance, 8.5:1. In this case,
the work of many would point to a dual lay shaft ar-
rangement (3).
This choice now provides a logical place in a
the propulsion system arrangement for an aircraft
mounted accessory drive system (AMADS). If it were
driven by power turbine, then the drive would come
off the reduction gear without crossing the flow
path.
When the propulsor is a propeller with a re-
quired reduction ratio in the range of 15:1, the
choice might very well be configuration (b) of
Figure 13. At this ratio, a split-torque two-stage
planetary gearbox could be a logical choice. Here,
with the lower cruise speeds involved, inlet distor-
tion is less of a problem. Prop controls would be a
severe test of the designer's skill because of the
need to achieve modularity and reliability while the b
controls are buried inside the flow path. Accessory
drives, whether gas driven by generator or power Figure 13. Propulsion system general arrangement
turbine driven, would have to cross the flow path. with (a) offset gearbox and (b) in-line gearbox.

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/83931/ on 04/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo


Gearing Arrangement The low reduction ratio leads to a straight-
forward arrangement for a dual lay shaft system.
It is expected that requirements for low noise This is now, by definition, an offset gearbox. If
and high reliability will lead to use of helical this reduction ratio is needed for an in-line gear-
gearing and multiple torque paths. In the T56 box, compound planetary gearing would also be quite
family of gearboxes, helical gearing was used in the possible.
T56 A - 18. This system showed a remarkable reduction An in-line gearbox for a propeller with a 15:1
in vibration levels from earlier T56s (see Figure ratio (general range) would be possible in a split
14). torque planetary system. This same ratio in an off-
Multiple torque paths are a logical approach set gearbox would lead to a T56-type general ar-
to creating a system with good life at high torque rangement. As the power requirement increases from
levels. In the T56 family of gearboxes, the high- the range of 5,000 hp (3,730 kW) to 10,000 hp (7,455
torque second-stage gearing has multiple torque kW), the first-stage reduction becomes more of a
paths in the form of planetary gearing. The dual challenge because as the power goes up, the speed
layshaft arrangements for propfan gearboxes current- will be coming down (pinion input speed). Thus, the
ly emphasized can also be used to obtain multiple torque is going up at a significant rate with power.
torque paths for both first and second stages of the A desire for multiple torque paths in this system
gearing. For any overall power (torque) level, leads to solutions other than pinion to bull gear.
multiple torque paths allow achievement of desired
long gear and bearing life without resorting to un- Fault Detection and Health Monitori
familiar design solutions.
Helical gearing in a planetary set introduces Systems for fault detection and health moni-
overturning moments in the planetary gears. This toring are not new to gearboxes. Modern helicopter
results in structural deflections that are not eas- reduction gears make use of vibration as well as
ily defined. An extensive analysis of structural lube system health monitoring techniques. The
deflections will be required to guarantee uniform extent to which they are applied to the next genera-
load sharing in the planets. tion of reduction gears for turboprops will he new.
Load sharing in other approaches to obtaining It is fully expected that sensors and evaluation
multiple torque paths will inspire gearbox design techniques will he an integral part of design and
creativity. Hydraulic as well as mechanical systems development and that they will provide real-time
will compete here. health information. It is believed that the extent
The impact on gearbox specific volume (ft 3 / of data monitored in the gearbox will be so great
shp) of multiple torque path and load sharing sys- that it will be difficult and undesirable to save
tems is not clear at this time. The T56 volume of data for reduction on the ground. Rather, it will
5.4 ft 3 (0.153 m 3 ) or 0.001 ft 3 (0.00004 be reduced in real time by on board computers, and
m 3 /kW) represents a fairly compact gearbox. Ad- only abnormal information will be saved.
vanced gearboxes may very well show increases in
specific volume.
Development Requirements
Reduction Ratio
The next generation of gearboxes will he de-
It has already been stated that the reduction signed to achieve a life in regular operation of
ratio will probably be low (8.5:1) for a propfan and 25,000 hr or more. It is not expected that compo-
high (15:1) for a propeller. nent tests would be run to demonstrate this actual
life. At the same time, the customer--militiary or
commercial--will want a clear-cut demonstration of
E
1.0
(25.4) T56 Series II Spar
life, or the cost of ownership, before a commitment
is made for production. The probable solution to
T56-A-18 Hellcat ar this real dilemma is that the material properties
her ring hone
will be clearly defined in material test, and the
lifelimiting parameters (stress, temperature, and
fatigue cycles) will be thoroughly evaluated. The
gearbox design work will include a large amount of
analytical work for prediction of the life-limiting
0.6
E (15.2
parameters, and then the gearboxes run in develop -
ment tests will be extensively instrumented to
demonstrate that the actual operating stresses, tem-
peratures, and fatigue cycles are well within the
0.4 range predicted analytically. This approach, when
0(10.2
coupled with references to the reliability of
existing gearboxes, will permit factual prediction
of life, even though development programs cannot
0.:
possibly afford to test a large (statistically
(5.1 large) sample of gearboxes to their predicted life.
The design and development of the next genera-
tion of gearboxes will require effort far beyond

_
Pinion gear
rotation,
Coin drive
_r__ia-i
gear rotation,
Plover gear
tooth mesh,
Yonion
gear mesh,
what has been accomplished in large gearbox develop-
ment in the past. The T56 A-18 gearbox was devel-
oped at DDA in the late 1960s. It was a logical im-
1992 cps 6450 cps
230 cps 56 cps
provement over the then current T56 gearboxes, and
TE81-7013
Vibration frequency
yet it took about 4000 hr of back-to-back gearbox
Figure 14. Vibration effectsd of helical gearing testing (see Figure 9 for back-to-back rig) to have
compared with spur gearing. this gearbox ready for military flight test. A

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/83931/ on 04/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo


thorough job for the next generation must take more in gearing are excellent tools. This tool must be
than 4000 hr in the back to-back rig.
- fully calibrated for the gear designer. Subscale
Detroit Diesel Allison has found the back to - - testing of gears designed with these techniques
back rig invaluable in the development of a new needs to be expanded to obtain a benchmark for
gearbox design. When the back to back rig is de-
- - correlation of analysis and real fatigue life.
signed to simulate propshaft thrust, propshaft mom -

ent, and mount reactions, as well as speeds and Materials


torque, it permits a thorough evaluation of gears,
bearings, structure, and shaft couplings. Detroit Materials for gears, bearings, and shafting
Diesel Allison's approach for the T56 family of have undergone remarkable advances since the T56
gearboxes was to design rigs that use large, conser - family of gearboxes was conceived. What remains to
vatively loaded slave boxes to load up the test be fully developed is a single material that is su-
gearbox. For some configurations of turboprop gear - perior for gears, bearings, and shafting. Recent
boxes, it is possible to use a second set of flight developments with case-hardened steels suggest we
gearing (perhaps case, too) to load up the test are not too far from this goal. CBS-600 and Vasco
gearbox. Figure 15 shows two back to back rig sche-
- - X-2 are two materials that have been successfully
matics. used for gears and bearings. Further definition of
Much of the knowledge gained during back to - - the production characteristics of these materials
back testing of gearboxes can be viewed as additions seems to be just a short time away. When this is
to the art of gearbox design. Even though designs accomplished, the gearbox designer will be able to
will be subjected to analytical review unheard of in eliminate many of the rotating joints that have
gearing a few years ago, much in reduction gear plagued the industry.
design is still an art. A small but very important
example of this art is the location of baffles with - Tapered Bearings
in the gearbox to reduce undesired churning and the
resultant power loss. Experience gained with the The effort conducted by the Army, Boeing, and
T56 family of gearboxes has shown that repeated Timken to develop tapered bearings for the heavy
tests in the back to back rig are necessary, along
- - lift helicopter (HLH) transmission system (6) is the
with intuitive designs for all baffles, before the beginning of what will be a fruitful technology de-
churning loss (parasitic drag) can be reduced to a velopment. Further work is necessary to allow the
minimum. This approach was successful in the T56 turboprop gearbox designer to be comfortable with
family to the extent that only 1% of maximum trans - this marvelous device that allows substitution of
mitted power is lost in the gearbox. This is re - two bearings for three.
markable considering the complexity and tight pack-
aging in the 156 family.
This type of effort during development pays
dividends beyond an improvement in overall fuel ef-
ficiency. It also affects lubricant (coolant),
system size, and system weight.

PROBABLE TECHNOLOGY NEEDS

One conclusion that should be drawn from the


foregoing discussion is that the next generation of
gearboxes can be designed with current technology.
A gearbox can be designed to meet these next genera - -

tion requirements without advances in material or


machining precision. What will be new in this gear-
box designed with current technology will be the
general arrangement. Our experience and the new re -

quirements will require a completely new general ar -


Large slave gearboxes
rangement. If one looked on arrangement as a tech -
with torque applier TE81-7014
nology, this would be the new technology.
The modern aircraft gearbox designer has an a
arsenal of tools and techniques available that were Tn...,.n ^nnl^n.

not even dreamed of at the time the T56 family of


gearboxes was conceived and developed. These in -

clude clean materials with excellent fatigue lives;


advanced joining techniques to eliminate nuts and
splines; analytical techniques that permit calcula -

tion of real stress and deflection levels; and test


methods and aids that reveal the real operating con -

ditions. All these are available for the turboprop


gearbox design, and they have never been fully used
in a turboprop gearbox destined for production.
This is not to say that the next generation of gear -

boxes will not benefit from specific technology ad-


with flight gearing
vancements. It will.
TE81-7015
Analytical b
Figure 15. Schematics of hack-to-back rigs,
Modern finite-element analysis techniques that using (a) a large slave gearbox and
allow detail analysis of real stress and deflection (b) flight gearing for slave box.

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/83931/ on 04/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo


NASA work has shown that this type of bearing The requirements for the next generation gear
- -

can be successfully run at aircraft system speeds box will not stand in the way of an advanced turbo-
(7). It is not just in simplification that tapered prop propulsion system.
bearings can be expected to be a benefit for the
gearbox. Their capacity and resultant life while
thrust loaded will make them a logical propshaft REFERENCES
thrust bearing to achieve the life requirements of
1 Nored, D. L., Conference on Propeller Pro -
the next-generation gearbox.
pulsion, CS 79 3974, presented 22-24 April 1980,
- -

s' ,l r n re ; -,,
Dayton, Ohio.
2 Dugan, J. F., and Miller, B. A., "The NASA
High Speed Turboprop Program," NASA Technical Memor
- -
Fault detection techniques for turboprop gear-
andum 81561 prepared for Aerospace Congress spon -
ing could benefit from some detail development ef-
sored by the SAE, October 1980, Los Angeles, Calif.
fort. The reduction in cost of ownership for a
3 "Study of Turboprop Systems Reliability and
gearbox equipped with a good fault detection system
Maintainability Costs," NASA CR-135192, prepared by
is expected to be significant. This technology,
Detroit Diesel Allison under contract NAS 3-20057,
when properly developed, will yield the most useful
June 1978.
life for each gearbox.
4 Kruse, D. L., "Propulsion Needs as Seen by
the Airlines," presented at AIAA meeting, 13-14
April 1980, Washington, D.C.
5 Holbrook, G. E., and Rosen, G., "Evolution
CONCLUSION of the Turboprop for High-Speed Air Transportation,"
ASME paper 78-GT-201, presented April 1978, London.
The principal conclusion to be drawn is that 6 Lenski, J. W., Jr., "Advanced Transmission
an advanced reduction gear can be designed for the Components Investigation Program -Bearing and Seal
-

next generation of turboprop powered aircraft using


- Development Report," USAAVRADCOM TR 80 D 19, August
- - - -

existing component technology. Testing alone will 1980.


not allow prediction of life (cost of ownership); 7 Parker, R. J., Pinel, S. I., and Signer, H.
instead, testing supported by a thorough analysis R., "Performance of Computer Optimized Tapered Rol -

will be required. New technology developments are ler Bearing to 2.4 Million DN," NASA Technical Mem -

not required but can enhance the next generation - orandum 81414 for ASLE meeting, August 1980, San
gearbox. Francisco, Calif.

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/83931/ on 04/06/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi