ENGINEERING MATTERS, INC Electric Machine Throws Aircraft Overboardengineeringmatters.com/EngineeringMatters_Project_Motor2.pdf · 2008-11-26 · 1 ENGINEERING MATTERS, INC. w w w

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

1

ENGINEERING MATTERS, INC.w

ww

.engineeri ngmatt ers .com

Electric Machine Throws Aircraft Overboard

David Cope Christopher CorcoranRichard Fontana

Engineering Matters,Inc.

375 Elliot St.Newton, MA [email protected]

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

2


ww


1. Purpose• 1.1. Aircraft Carriers

– New Design CVNX-1• 1.2. Possible ground-based applications

– Short-field take-off

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

3


ww


2. Navy Goals• 2.1. Manning reduction: 30%• 2.2. Life Cycle Cost reduction: 20%• 2.3. Size and Weight reduction: 50% • 2.4. Operational Avail. increase: 20%• 2.5 Increased Performance: 25%

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

4


ww


Electric Machines for Aircraft Arrestor

• Reduced manning & maintenance– Low maintenance electric motor– Self-diagnostics

• Reduced system mass & volume • Increased performance

– Greater launching aircraft energy, speed and mass

– Reduced peak-to-mean force ratio on aircraft

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

5


ww


Navy Needs:EMALS Attributes - 1

NavyNeeds

EMALS Attributes EMALS Functions/Features

Survivability: Rapid aircraftlaunch time

Intelligent automated control of launchoperation: rapid shuttle return and realtime individual adjustment

“Dark ship” launchoperations

Integral energy storage

Sustainability: Lower manning Automated operationsLower maintenance Self-diagnostic controls, redundant

power electronics, simplified motor.Higher reliability Graceful degradation through

redundancy and simplicityMobility: Reduced WOD

requirementsIncreased energy capability

Reduced systemweight and volume

High power and energy densityelectromagnetic machines

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

6


ww


Navy Needs:EMALS Attributes - 2

NavyNeeds

EMALS Attributes EMALS Functions/Features

Affordability: Restricted launchdistance

Efficient deck usage;Higher energy capability

Reduced airframestresses

Controlled launch profile

Reduced peak-to-meanforce

Closed-loop control

Eliminate hazardousmaterials

Hydraulic oil not used

DesignFlexibility:

Installation flexibility Possible athwartshipinstallation

Performance: Reduced airframe stressRestricted launchdistance

High bandwidth force controlAdvanced high level control

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

7


ww


3. History• 3.1.Circa late 1940’s

– 3.1.1. Westinghouse’s “Electropult”

– 3.1.2. Failed technically & economically

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

8


ww


3. Brief History (cont.) • 3.2. 1984

– 3.2.1. Solicitation– 3.2.2. (Kaman selected: cost & sched.

overrun?)

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

9


ww


3. Brief History (cont.)• 3.3. 1987

– 3.3.1. New solicitation: $700k and MANY CDRLs

– 3.3.2. Kaman, GA, and PSA rec’d initial contracts

– 3.3.3. Kaman downselected and produced over-budget, over-sched. non-compliant ~1/4 scale model

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

10


ww


3. Brief History (cont.)• Kaman EMALS Device

– Linear synchronous motor– Bipolar transistor-controlled– Met static force requirement– Did NOT meet acceleration requirement– Kaman sez the requirements were changed

midstream

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

11


ww


Kaman’s EMALS Device

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

12


ww


3. Brief History (cont.)• 3.4. 1995 Navy paper:

http://www.lakehurst.navy.mil/ieeere%7E1.htm - indicated EMALS success

• 3.5. 1997 (August)– 3.5.1. Industry briefing– 3.5.2. No solicitation

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

13


ww


3. Brief History (cont.)• 3.6. 1999 CVNX-1

– 3.6.1. Industry briefing– 3.6.2. Draft RFP out (sans Sections L & M)– 3.6.3. Solicitation to come (RSN)

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

14


ww


4. EMALS Schedule• 4.1. Three Phases: PDRR, EMD,

ProductionID Task Name1 EMALS Program

2 EMALS PDRR #1

3 EMALS PDRR #2

4 EMALS Downselect

5 EMALS EMD

6 EMALS Production

H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H2 H1 H21999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

15


ww


4.2. EMALS PDRR• 4.2.1. Two PDRR contracts• 4.2.2. FY00-03• 4.2.3. $60M ea.

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

16


ww


EMALS 2nd & 3rd Phases• 4.3 EMALS EMD

– 4.3.1. Single downselect– 4.3.2. FY04-09– 4.3.3. ~$160M

• 4.4 EMALS Production– 4.4.1. FY08-10– 4.4.2. ~$25M x 4

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

17


ww


5. Industrial Base• 5.1.Prime bidders

for the Navy Advanced Linear Motor (Suspected):

• 5.2.Other potential prime bidders

Engineering Matters, Inc.SPD, Electric BoatOak Ridge (multiple)General Atomics, Foster-Miller,

Newport NewsWestinghouseUniversity of TexasPRT SystemsMagnemotionAnalexMcMullen, Premier rides,

Kaman Electromagnetics

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

18


ww


5. Industrial Base (cont.)• 5.3 EMALS Bidders

– Lockheed, Kaman– Northrup-Grumman,

Westinghouse– General Atomics,

Boeing Downey, Boeing St. Louis, Maxwell Labs, Univ. of Texas, BWXT, Foster-Miller

• 5.4 EMALS Bidders– SAIC, Power

Superconductor Applications (?)

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

19


ww


6. Present System• 6.1. Prime Power supplied by ship’s

propulsion power• 6.2. Steam, Open-loop• 6.3. Two parallel slotted cylinders

– 6.3.1. 21” diameter– 6.3.2. 101 m long

• 6.4. Immediately below flight deck

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

20


ww


6. Present System (cont.)• 6.5 Volume: 1133 m3

• 6.6. Weight: 486 metric tons• 6.7. Maintenance intensive• 6.8. Inefficient 4-6%• 6.9. Low availability• 6.10. Maximum energy: 95 MJ = 70

Million ft-lbs.

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

21


ww


6. Present System (cont.)

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

22


ww


7. EMALS Physics• 7.1. Masses: 1000 lb – 50,000 lb (500

kg – 23,000 kg)• 7.2. Velocity: 55 kts -200 kts (28-103

m/sec)• 7.3. Energy: up to 90 Million ft-lbs

(120 MJ)• 7.4. Power: up to 120 MW (assuming 2

sec launch)

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

23


ww


8. EMALS Engineering• 8.1. Ship Interface (Prime Power, etc.)• 8.2. Energy Storage Subsystem• 8.3. Power Conditioning Subsystem• 8.4. Launcher Subsystem• 8.5. Control Subsystem

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

24


ww


9. Energy Storage Subsystem• 9.1. Energy stored ~ 200 MJ (60%

extraction)• 9.2. Discharge time ~ 2 seconds• 9.3. Re-charge time ~ 42 seconds (~5

MW)

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

25


ww


9. Energy Storage Subsystem (cont.)

• 9.4.Technologies– 9.4.1. Flywheel– 9.4.2. SMES– 9.4.3. Battery– 9.4.4. Capacitor– 9.4.5. Fuel Cell

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

26


ww


10. Power Conditioning Subsystem

• 10.1. Switching Device– 10.1.1. SCR– 10.1.2. GTO– 10.1.3. IGBT– 10.1.4. MCT– 10.1.5. PEBB-

friendly

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

27


ww


10. Power Conditioning Subsystem (cont.)

• 10.2. Power Architecture– 10.2.1. Converter/Chopper/Inverter– 10.2.2. VSI or CSI

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

28


ww


11. Launcher Subsystem

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

29


ww


11. Launcher Subsystem• 11.1. Launchbar: Aircraft Connection

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

30


ww


11. Launcher Subsystem (cont.)• 11.2. Launcher

Functions– 11.2.1. Motoring– 11.2.2. Braking– 11.2.3. Retraction

(return to breach)

-50

0

50

100

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Time, sec

Pow

er, M

W

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

31


ww


11. Launcher Subsystem (cont.)• 11.3. Machine

Configuration– 11.3.1. Single

Shuttle, Rigid Rail– 11.3.2. Dual Shuttle,

Rigid Rail– 11.3.3. Staggered Dual

Shuttle, Rigid Rail– 11.3.4. Articulated

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

32


ww


11. Launcher Subsystem (end)• 11.4. Machine

Type– 11.4.1. Induction– 11.4.2. Permanent

Magnet– 11.4.3. Synchronous– 11.4.4. (DC Brush)

N

N

S S

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

33


ww


12. Control Subsystem• 12.1. Peak-to-Mean acceleration: 1.05

– Could feedback on distance, velocity, or acceleration

• 12.2. Sensing A/C mass/type• 12.3. Interface w/ ships control

subsystem

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

34


ww


Electromagnetic Aircraft Launcher System Summary

• EMALS provides many advantages (reduced manning, maintenance, mass; increase reliability, performance, etc.).

• The Navy is actively and reluctantly pursuing this option.

• System design can be improved by innovative and intelligent applications of well-known technologies.

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

35


ww


Electric Machine Types Advantages and Disadvantages

Machine Type Advantages DisadvantagesInductionMachine

• Rugged• Low maintenance

• High reactive power (with traditionalelectronics)

Reluctance • Rugged• Low maintenance

• High reactive power• Complicated power electronics• High acoustic noise

SynchronousPermanentMagnet

• No field excitationnecessary

• Low reactive power

• Permanent field (field always ON)• Lower shear force capability• Environmental sensitivity of pm

materialsSynchronousXfrmr-coupled

• Low reactive powerControllable BEMF

• Very heavy rotor• Fragile electronics on rotor

SynchronousSuperconducting

• Low reactive power• High field

• Unproven availability• High maintenance

Eddy CurrentBrake

• Simple• Rugged

• Unable to retract shuttle• No energy generation• Cannot bring aircraft to complete stop

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

36


ww


Two Fundamental Launcher Configurations

• Slot-in-deck:– FOD, reliability are concerns – Slot length = runout plus shuttle length

• Hole-in-deck:– Covered pass-throughs– Sheaves can provide Purchase Ratio

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

37


ww


Electric Aircraft Launcher• Revolutionary aircraft launcher system• Electric motors below the flight deck• Total machine rating: 120 MJ (90 million

foot-pounds)

ww

w.e

ngin

eerin

gmat

ters

.com

38


ww


Linear Induction Machine Components

Documents

ENGINEERING MATTERS, INC Electric Machine Throws Aircraft Overboardengineeringmatters.com/EngineeringMatters_Project_Motor2.pdf · 2008-11-26 · 1 ENGINEERING MATTERS, INC. w w w