Are more propeller blades better?

Real aviation things here. News, items of interest, information, questions, etc!

Are more propeller blades better?

Postby OldAirmail » Wed Jul 15, 2015 8:46 pm

Just an interesting article that I found.


Are more propeller blades better?

Image
.. .
Get the most out of your controls - SPAD.neXt

Image
. . . . . .Any time, any plane, any weather.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . Prepar3d V4
User avatar
OldAirmail
Major
Major
 
Posts: 4814
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2013 3:06 pm
Location: Concrete, WA ICAO - 3W5

Re: Are more propeller blades better?

Postby C » Thu Jul 16, 2015 2:56 am

Interesting article, although the part about WWII propellers is a little off the mark. It was very little to do with ground clearance and more to do with power absorption. An interesting way to look at it would be to compare two of the fighter aircraft that served throughout the war from September 1939 to 1945, the Spitfire and the Bf109.

At the start of the war the Spitfire had just changed from having a broad chord (distance for leading edge of prop blade to trailing edge), fairly coarse fixed pitch prop, to a three bladed DH or Rotol prop, which had a narrower chord on each blade. It's worth noting that the Merlin engine was producing about 1000hp at this point. Move on to say the Mk IX Spitfire in 1942. By this time the Merlin is producing around 1500-1700hp. You need the propeller to adsorb the extra power and there are two ways to do this, and on the Spitfire the answer was to increase the number of blades on the propeller, whilst the individual blade size was about the same. Move onto the Griffon Spitfires, developing 2000hp+, and although initially using 4 blades, they moved onto 5 blades or 6 blades in a contra-rotating prop (with a slightly broader blade too).

Look at the BF109... In the early examples (D,E) it had a narrow chord 3 blade prop. As it progressed through the F, G & K and the power output increased a shade over 1000hp to about 1600hp the prop remained a 3-blade prop, but the size of the blade increases, being similar to what we'd call a "paddle" blade today. The FW190 had similar blades.

Two answers to a similar design conundrum. So rather than having more blades to be able to use a smaller prop, as the article states, it was more having more blades so you didn't have to fit a bigger prop!
User avatar
C
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 11977
Joined: Mon May 19, 2003 1:04 pm
Location: Earth

Re: Are more propeller blades better?

Postby C » Thu Jul 16, 2015 5:22 am

Visual aids...

Spitfire Mk 1, 2 bladed prop - 1030hp Merlin...
Image

Spitfire Mk 1, 3 bladed prop - 1030 - 1300hp Merlin...
Image

Spitfire Mk V, 3 bladed prop (thicker roots) - 1500hp Merlin...
Image

Spitfire Mk IX, 4 bladed prop - 1600-1720hp Merlin...
Image

Spitfire Mk XII, 4 bladed prop - 1700 -1850hp Griffon (hence broader blade)...
Image

Spitfire PR XIX/Mk XIV, 5 bladed prop - 2000hp Griffon...
Image

Seafire FR47 - two 3 blade contra props - 2300hp Griffon...
Image


BF109s:

BF109D - 2 blade - 700hp ish Junker Jumo
Image

BF109E - 3 blade - 1000hp DB601

Image

Bf109F - 3 blade, thicker blades - ~1150 - 1300hp DB601
Image

Bf109G - 3 blade, even thicker - ~1450-1800hp DB605
Image

<<s
User avatar
C
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 11977
Joined: Mon May 19, 2003 1:04 pm
Location: Earth

Re: Are more propeller blades better?

Postby Fozzer » Thu Jul 16, 2015 5:57 am

Very useful stuff; "Air", when it comes to propulsion! ....:dance: ...!

Good for flying...bad for falling out of bed...

Difficult flying on Mars.....keep close to the ground!

Paul.... :D ...!
Win 8.1 64-bit. DX11. Advent Tower. Intel i7-3770 3.9 GHz 8-core. 8 GB System RAM. AMD Radeon HD 7700 1GB RAM. DVD ROM. 2 Terra Byte SATA Hard Drive. Philips 17" LCD Monitor. Saitek Cyborg X Fly-5 Joystick. ...and a Briggs and Stratton Petrol Lawn Mower.
User avatar
Fozzer
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 27361
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2002 3:11 pm
Location: Hereford. England. EGBS.


Return to Real Aviation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 635 guests