Forum Home
www.keypublishing.com

Go Back   Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums > Modern Military Aviation > Naval Aviation

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10th September 2005, 05:12
WisePanda's Avatar
WisePanda WisePanda is offline
Rank 5 Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 921
Pumpjet propulsor

can anyone explain how a pumpjet propulsor works and is it too big to install on SSK ?

the newest lines of US and british SSNs have replaced the propeller with this.

is the water sucked in, the turbine is internal and the water jet pushed out of the back?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10th September 2005, 10:53
Phil Foster Phil Foster is offline
Ogri!
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The middle west of 12 Group.
Posts: 1,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by WisePanda
can anyone explain how a pumpjet propulsor works and is it too big to install on SSK ?

the newest lines of US and british SSNs have replaced the propeller with this.

is the water sucked in, the turbine is internal and the water jet pushed out of the back?
Royal Navy subs have been using this tech since the mid 80s mate though I don't claim to know how it works.

Phil
__________________
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=3243&dateline=1166113  560
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10th September 2005, 13:21
wd1 wd1 is offline
Rank 5 Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 390
my personal feel is that pumpjets are less efficient than conventional propellers. SSNs can afford to have the extra power output to maintain 30+kt speed despite the loss of efficiency (go have a look at the reactor output difference between a 688 and Seawolf to get roughly the same max speed).

but for an SSK every watt of battery power is precious, and cannot afford to be wasted with a pumpjet. in any case, SSKs are quieter than nuc boats, and do not (cannot) reach speeds greater than 20kts where cavitation and noise become a problem. they are quiet and not fast enough to require a pumpjet.

the pumpjet seems to make a lot of difference though. the Seawolf is claimed "to be quieter at 20kts than a 688I tied at the pier" and the pumpjet probably contributes a lot to this.


i'm not 100% sure about anything though. my only evidence is Tom Clancy crap (recently re-read Red October and Red Storm Rising), 688I and Seawolf spec sheets and my own grey matter. better informed contributions would be nice.

cheers!
__________________
for i came down from heaven not to do my will, but to do the will of Him who sent me
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10th September 2005, 13:38
Wanshan's Avatar
Wanshan Wanshan is offline
De Oppresso Liber
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: At home
Posts: 2,903
Basically, the pumpjet works by the propeller sucking in water and spitting it out the back. Due to the spinning of the propeller, it makes the water twist and creates lots of bubbles, which are propelled out in the wake of the spinning blades. This creates lots of noise, so anti-swirl vanes are used to stop the swirling of the water and "kill" the bubbles. The pumpjet does not remove the wake. It works like a jet engine, water in becomes water out.

See here and here and here


Last edited by Wanshan; 10th September 2005 at 13:43.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10th September 2005, 16:14
wd1 wd1 is offline
Rank 5 Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 390
i think i'll take back what i said about efficiency ...


wanshan, the third link that you posted had some very interesting and enlightening illustrations, even though i don't know french any idea then, if the pumpjets in the Trafalgars and Seawolfs use a rotor/stator combination, or just an "advanced design propeller" within the shroud?
__________________
for i came down from heaven not to do my will, but to do the will of Him who sent me

Last edited by wd1; 10th September 2005 at 16:17.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11th September 2005, 03:25
GarryB GarryB is offline
Rank 5 Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 8,711
Try searching google for "Hamilton jet".

The jet boat propulsion method was invented by a Kiwi.

ie
http://www.hamjet.co.nz/
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11th September 2005, 06:00
WisePanda's Avatar
WisePanda WisePanda is offline
Rank 5 Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 921
even the conventional props on SSKs seem to be closely guarded secrets. U-212 photos on dock always have the prop covered with a cloth.

http://www.naval-technology.com/proj...ype_21217.html

so I'd think anyone who knows the internal layout of real in-service SSN kit will be keeping very quiet.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11th September 2005, 09:06
SOC's Avatar
SOC SOC is offline
Modimus Maximus
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Burpelson AFB
Posts: 13,200
Send a message via Yahoo to SOC
Isn't this just basically a shrouded prop?
__________________
Sean O'Connor

Sean's Blog, now with forum
ACIG.org Team
Airliners.net
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11th September 2005, 12:15
WisePanda's Avatar
WisePanda WisePanda is offline
Rank 5 Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 921
the drawing seems to suggest that, with the caveat of maybe multiple rotor & stator stages just like a turbine compressor. maybe the shroud helps to reduce the noise dispersion to a narrow cone behind the sub...rather than omnidirectional with a exposed single prop.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12th September 2005, 02:18
sealion sealion is offline
Rank 5 Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 43
Quote:
the Seawolf is claimed "to be quieter at 20kts than a 688I tied at the pier" and the pumpjet probably contributes a lot to this.
Pumpjet or not, the 688I has to be running at full power without lubrication oil, while being tied at the pier, to surpass the noise level of Seawolf at 20 kts

By the way, the Seawolf class is the first full-size submarines to be equipped with bow thrustors (2 on each side), which give it unprecedented low speed manueverability and docking capability. Bow thrustors have been used on tugboats and small submersibles, and now are widely used on large surface vessels also. Is anyone aware of other large submarines with bow thrustors ?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12th September 2005, 11:45
Trident Trident is offline
Rank 5 Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by sealion
By the way, the Seawolf class is the first full-size submarines to be equipped with bow thrustors (2 on each side), which give it unprecedented low speed manueverability and docking capability. Bow thrustors have been used on tugboats and small submersibles, and now are widely used on large surface vessels also. Is anyone aware of other large submarines with bow thrustors ?
Interesting... nope, I wasn't even aware the Seawolf had one!
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12th September 2005, 13:18
WisePanda's Avatar
WisePanda WisePanda is offline
Rank 5 Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 921
a 9000t sub is a lil obese though to be going into shallow waters for spyin and keepin an eye on the unfaithful. they should have just purchased a couple of trafalgar boats off UK and used that logically.
but I guess once built they had to find a use for the Cold war relic.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12th September 2005, 13:54
snake65 snake65 is offline
Rank 5 Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 578
This is experimental pumpjet on 877EKM (Kilo) class. As this boat was the sole one, You can make an educated guess, that pumpjet for SSK was not a success

Last edited by snake65; 1st January 2007 at 23:32.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12th September 2005, 15:06
Jonesy's Avatar
Jonesy Jonesy is offline
Neo-conversative
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 3,230
Just a quick point to introduce into this is that pumpjets do have some quite significant drawbacks that come with the quieting advantage. Chief amongst these is the adverse impact that increasing depth has on the efficiency of a pumpjet system. Not sure how public this is but the prototype Spearfish HWT's suffered significant performance degradation when fired at depth.
__________________
'the ships hung in the sky menacingly - in exactly the same way bricks dont' - Douglas Adams
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12th September 2005, 18:22
Wanshan's Avatar
Wanshan Wanshan is offline
De Oppresso Liber
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: At home
Posts: 2,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonesy
Just a quick point to introduce into this is that pumpjets do have some quite significant drawbacks that come with the quieting advantage. Chief amongst these is the adverse impact that increasing depth has on the efficiency of a pumpjet system. Not sure how public this is but the prototype Spearfish HWT's suffered significant performance degradation when fired at depth.
What would be the above water analogy for this ? Better jetengine performance at high altitude and worse at low altitude?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 13th September 2005, 00:57
Jonesy's Avatar
Jonesy Jonesy is offline
Neo-conversative
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 3,230
Its sort of an inverse relationship but the closest I can think of would be a Tornado engine being optimised for the lower altitude flight regime - suffering performance loss at higher altitudes. Pumpjets simply dont perform as well at higher ambient water pressures.
__________________
'the ships hung in the sky menacingly - in exactly the same way bricks dont' - Douglas Adams
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 13th September 2005, 03:21
sealion sealion is offline
Rank 5 Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 43
I have the impression that one of the major problems of pumpjet is the clogging up by sand and mud while operating in shallow water or near shores. Pumpjets are also difficult to clean up and rust easily.

Even conventional propellors may have clogging problems while operating in dirty water. In fact, the Chinese Navy are kind of proud of themselves that they pretty much solved this problem. Remeber all those pictures in which the Chinese submarines are sailing in the extremely muddy inland river ? You better know what you are doing in that kind of environment !
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 13th September 2005, 08:10
Distiller's Avatar
Distiller Distiller is offline
Talent on Loan from God
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: MOCKBA
Posts: 4,009
A pumpjet propulsor isn't so much a ducted impeller, similar to that used on a lot of sports boats http://www.berkeleyjet.com/default.htm

The lower noise seems to be the result of the shrouding, not so much of higher efficiency.
__________________
"Distiller ... arrogant, ruthless, and by all reports (including his own) utterly charming"
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 13th September 2005, 09:38
Skipper's Avatar
Skipper Skipper is offline
Rank 5 Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Stavanger, Norway
Posts: 87
Just before I left Rolls-Royce Marine last year I remember that the new Astute SSN propulsor is being manufactured from a Nickel Aluminium Bronze alloy with a composite shroud to reduce the corrosion problems previously seen on such applications.

Have a look at Page 11 here:

http://www.rolls-royce.com/marine/ov.../indepth06.pdf

Regards

Skipper
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 20th October 2005, 18:04
Neptune's Avatar
Neptune Neptune is offline
Rank 5 Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: inside the gyro
Posts: 627
Cool topic, must have been here before I entered this forum as I hadn't seen it before.

One thing they all don't mention. These "ducts" are basically constructed like an aircraft wing, take and aircraft wing, bend it downwards until you have a cilinder and there you have your duct. What is so special about this? Well, as you can see with aircraft, the air is bent down, pushing the wing up with a high pressure field below the wing, above the wing you have a low pressure field. As you can now see, the inside of the duct will have a much higher pressure inside, which allows the propellor to be much much much more efficient and turn on a much lower rate. So, instead of 87rpm, you will only need 60rpm (just an example) to have the same speed. This, together with the propellor diameter determin your water acceleration. Cavitation is created by the acceleration of water, this acceleration means a reduced pressure, and if you lower the pressure enough (below vapor pressure), water evaporates. When the water leaves the propellor, it slows down, and eventually the pressure rises again and the bubble collapses, creating noise.
There you have the other advantage of these propellors, you can go at much higher speeds without creating a huge amount of cavitation and at low speeds even prevent cavitation. Add to this that you have an engine running much slower and hence lower noiselevels and you have quite an idea why everyone is designing pumpjets.
The disadvantage is of course that it it's not as easy as designing propellors because the parts have to fit quite well mechanically (otherwise it's really screwed up).

On the other hand, what a scewed propellor does, is just stressing the blade tips of a propellor, making it more efficient once again, to lower the rpm. The bending "inward" of the wingtips is to reduce the diameter hence acceleration again. The blades can't be built too "fat" though as the stresses would become too large then. But now everyone can build these as once you have seen one, you can give that image to some scientists and they will come up with the answer to what it does, just a matter of invention as is mostly the case. But sometimes the problem is deeper, like with a pumpjet, you can't design one because you've seen it...

Last edited by Neptune; 20th October 2005 at 18:13.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 21:23.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Key Publishing Ltd