Aircraft are thirsty and burn lots of fuel, right?
Wrong.
The average fuel efficiency of air travel today is about 67 mpg per passenger. That makes it more fuel efficient than your drive to work. The best hit 100mpg/passenger.
How did aviation manage it?
A thread.
It wasn't always so. The venerable 707, doyenne of the 60s jet set, was more than twice as wasteful: Its fuel consumption per hour was 50% greater than a modern 787-8, even though the 787 is 50% heavier, flies 50% further and carries a hundred more passengers.
How?
Bypass ratio.
It's easier to accelerate a large volume of air gently than a small volume of air fast…
The bypass ratio is the ratio between the air mass flow through the fan and the flow through the engine core. This number has been going up & up…
Lightweight materials.
Aluminium is light, but Titanium has a higher strength:weight ratio, and composite fibre reinforced plastics (CFRP) higher still. The proportion of aircraft weight given to super lightweight materials has only grown.
That has run hand-in-glove with massive advances in composite manufacturing, rendering it cheaper and more accessible than ever.
Air must be compressed before it's combusted. A high compression ratio aids combustion and energy extraction in the turbine, so higher is better… to a point.
Air resists compression so improving this is a battle of balancing the gains against the losses.
Turbine entry temperature.
All being equal, higher turbine inlet temperatures are better for thermal efficiency. These are limited primarily by structural factors and cooling, as well as toxic Nitrogen Oxide formation.
One early development was improving turbine blade high temperature creep resistance by moving from an equiaxed grain structure through columnar grains and finally to single crystal turbine blades.
A thousand subtle improvements, from computer modelled optimization of fan geometry, through flexible high aspect ratio wings (aided by materials advances), low drag trim, wingtip fences for induced drag reduction.
It all adds up.
Here's a deeper focus on wingtip sails/ winglets, which were absent in the early jet age but almost ubiquitous now as we optimize for efficiency with tightly bound span limits, and evolving into ever more organic forms.
The demise of the flight engineer signalled a fundamental change: Digital flight control systems and their propulsive equivalents (FADEC) can micromanage spoilers, fuel mixing, stator vane position, bleed air etc to achieve efficiencies unattainable manually.
The all electric aircraft.
Most notable in the 787 with it's oversized electrical generation capacity, many sub-systems previously powered by hydraulics or compressed air bleeds are going full electric for reasons of efficiency and minimising weight.
It's better structurally, aerodynamically and propulsively to have two big engines instead of four little ones. The certification of efficient twin engine designs for extended range operation over water was a major step.
Geared fans.
In a modern turbofan engine the fans do most of the work, turned by a shaft connecting the low pressure turbine… but the turbine’s most efficient RPM is a lot higher than that of the fan.
This is an incomplete list, and you can add hub airports, variable ticket pricing, seating design and a bundle of other stuff too… but it's all a tribute to the power of incremental change: Over time it moves mountains… and mountain-sized aircraft.
Let's never stop!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It's the defining question of the energy market. Nuclear power is clean, consistent, controllable and low-carbon, but in the West it's become bloody expensive.
Are there construction techniques available to Make Atomics Great Again?
The problem.
Hinkley Point C, the world's most expensive nuclear plant, could hit a cost of £46 billion for 3.2 gigawatts of capacity, which is monstrous. Clearly nuclear needs to be cheaper, and in many places it already is. What are our options?
Steel bricks/ steel-concrete composites.
Construction can be chaos, and it's expensive chaos: Many bodies,many tasks, serious equipment. The more complexity, the greater the chance of delay, and delays during construction are the most expensive sort.
You can't depend on the wind, and you can't sunbathe in the shade, but the sea never stops moving… can we power our civilization with the ocean wave?
The wave power thread!
If not wind, why not waves?
It's a fair question. Wave power is much more predictable than the wind, it's available 90% of the time and has a higher power concentration per square metre of any renewable energy source.
But it's almost unheard of. Why is it so difficult?
Several things are important in wave power: How we collect the energy, how we use that energy to generate power, and how we store, control and deliver it.
We'll start with collection, which is divided into attenuators, point absorbers and terminators…
Industrial chemistry & materials science: What has been and what is coming up…
A quick thread-of-threads for your Saturday!
Firstly…
Jet engine efficiency is linked to the temperature of combustion, and to survive the physical extremes of burning kerosene, the high pressure turbine blades must survive in a furnace beyond imagining, while pulling 20,000 g.
To do this, we must trick metallurgy…
Cheating metallurgy and staying alive in the furnace: The single crystal turbine blade!
This is the last in my series of Generation IV nuclear reactor threads, and for the finale we’ll look at the one everyone leaves out: The weirdo, the maverick…
The Gas-cooled Fast Reactor!
Why is this one ignored?
We’ve covered fast reactors several times and the premise is simple, though hard to explain quickly: A fast neutron spectrum allows fuel breeding from plentiful Uranium 238, plus burn-up of heavy isotopes.
Fast reactors are typically cooled by molten sodium.
What about gas?
A gas coolant has advantages: Compatibility with water gives simple cooling cycles. It doesn't activate radiologically and doesn’t phase change in the core, reducing reactivity swings. It's also optically transparent, improving refuelling & maintenance.
The Yerkes Observatory in Wisconsin holds the world's biggest refracting telescope. Weighing almost 6 tons, with a 40” main lens, it's so well balanced that it can be moved by hand.
Finished in 1897, no bigger one was ever made. What did we do instead?
The telescope thread…
A refracting telescope uses convex lenses to focus light. Shown are the objective lens & eyepiece, with their respective focal distances: The ratio between these focal lens gives the magnification.
This also shows why the image in a simple refraction telescope is upside-down!
A basic (but incomplete) description of refraction is that changes to the local speed of light affects the direction of light waves as they enter & exit a medium like glass or water. A convex lens exploits this.
Different wavelength’s diffraction angles differ slightly though…
This is the NASA Ames low speed wind tunnel, the biggest in the world. It can fit full sized planes and takes up to 104MW of power to run!
But why use a wind tunnel, and what problems do you run into when trying to make it smaller? Let's go deep.
The wind tunnel thread…
Why use one? For one thing, wind tunnels let you measure and visualize the flow field, using smoke, particle image velocimetry or a host of other techniques.
You can also directly measure the forces on your model with a force measuring ‘sting’ as shown.
Strange tunnels:
This is a rolling road tunnel for Formula 1 cars. The road belt needs to have a velocity that matches the airflow, and the force in the wheels needs measuring: This can be with stings on each wheel, or in pressure sensors under the ‘road’.