F-119 thrust

Anything goes, as long as it is about the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1938
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post15 Jan 2016, 12:51

Becuase this is thread about F-22 engine I ask hear.

Was YF120 smaller then YF119 (dimensions not weight)?

I looked this cutaway:
http://yf-23.net/Pics/Plans/YF-23%20cutaway.jpg

YF120 looks shorter and narrower, then I check wiki info and YF120 dimensions are very similar to RD-33 dimension :shock: Is that right?
Offline

f119doctor

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 219
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2019, 00:07

Unread post06 Oct 2022, 21:49

Digital Twin Helps Pratt Expand F119 Performance For F-22​

Steve Trimble October 03, 2022

Thanks to a newly created “digital twin” of the Pratt & Whitney F119 turbofan, a future software update for the Lockheed Martin F-22 will expand the kinematic performance in certain regions of the twin-engine stealth fighter’s flight envelope.

As digital engineering tools proliferate through the aerospace supply chain, operators and OEMs have touted benefits such as streamlining maintenance activity and refining the data used to inform new engines and aircraft as they are being designed.
But the pending F-22 upgrade may show that creating and analyzing digital copies of physical parts can yield unexpected performance improvements at the midlife stage in the operational career of a combat aircraft.

Specifically, Pratt executives started collecting data on the usage history of individual F119s in 2018. As terabytes of data from real flights were analyzed, Pratt found that operators used the engine differently than the F119’s designers had assumed when calculating how long the parts could last until they needed to be replaced. In some areas of the engine, such as the core and low-pressure module, real flight hour data showed that the parts could last up to 20% longer than the company had predicted. The front fan also was more robust than expected, but not by the same margin.

Knowing that the engine’s parts could last longer than expected, Pratt gave the U.S. Air Force options. They could continue running the engines as they have been doing, and capture more than $800 million in cost savings over the aircraft’s lifetime by deferring the replacement of certain parts. Alternatively, the Air Force could use some of that additional strength in the part and extract more engine performance.

“You realize you have margin that you could potentially spend without a negative detriment, then that opens up the ability to expand the capability of the engine,” Scott Ackroyd, the F119 chief engineer from Pratt & Whitney, tells Aviation Week in an interview.

As an engine produces additional thrust or acceleration, the parts are sometimes exposed to higher temperatures. Since the data from Pratt’s digital twin of the F119 shows that the parts are more robust than intended, operators can expose those components to hotter temperatures without paying more for maintenance later. In this sense, the operator trades more performance in some areas of the flight envelope for long-term cost savings from operating normally and deferring maintenance.

Pratt’s software engineers revised the software code for the F119’s digital electronic engine control (DEEC), a computer that schedules and maintains the operating point of an engine by regulating conditions such as rotor speed and nozzle throat area.

“We changed the order of how we control the parameters inside the envelope to provide more capability and kinematics and certain regions,” Ackroyd says.

Using agile software development methods, Pratt delivered the DEEC software update in nine months, including regression testing and 100 hr. of engine testing in a wind tunnel. Pratt has now turned the new software over to Lockheed, which plans to include the engine performance upgrade in a future update of the F-22’s operational flight program.

Pratt cannot disclose the details of the performance improvement, citing Air Force security restrictions. The maximum continuous thrust rating of about 35,000 lb. for the F119 will not change after the software update, but kinematic performance—meaning, velocity and acceleration—will be improved in certain areas. The Air Force wants to improve performance in a specific area of the existing flight envelope for the F-22, and the tweaks made to the F119 control software enabled Pratt to make that change.

“We were lucky that they lined up exactly where they wanted,” Ackroyd says.

The use of digital twins may spread beyond the F119, but there are limits. For example, Pratt introduced a DEEC in a fighter engine with the F100-PW-229, but the decades-old processor would have to be upgraded to run the algorithms that deliver the improved performance in the F119. Pratt also is working to perform the same usage life analysis on the F135 engine that powers the Lockheed Martin F-35, which would be based on creating a digital twin of existing engines now in service.
https://aviationweek.com/defense-sp...t ... mance-f-22
P&W FSR (retired) - TF30 / F100 /F119 /F135
Offline

f119doctor

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 219
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2019, 00:07

Unread post06 Oct 2022, 22:11

Digital Twin Helps Pratt Expand F119 Performance For F-22​

If I were to hazard a guess, the performance upgrade for the F119 will be in the higher altitude, subsonic to low supersonic portion of the flight envelope. The F119 fan has a small airflow margin over its normal scheduled max airflow, which we exercise on the test cell during an engine module post maintenance run-in where we are trying to get to the maximum possible rotor speeds for the conditions to rub in the necessary clearances in the fan, compressor, and turbines.

When the inlet air temps are cold at altitude, the engine runs at its scheduled Mil/Max rated airflow. As the inlet temperature goes lower, the rotor speeds and turbine temperatures also get lower, with the turbine blades and vanes having a longer life at these conditions than warm inlet conditions when the engine is running at maximum speeds and turbine temperatures. The life of the hot section parts is determined on how long on average they spend at both limit temps and cooler conditions. Based on the AvWeek article, I’m guessing the they are turning up the wick to use the full airflow capability of the engine under these colder inlet conditions, within the airflow limits of the airframe intake.

To my knowledge, this is the first performance increase modification to the F119 software or hardware. There have been changes to the engine OFP to reduce engine to engine performance variability, improve operability, and to improve fault reporting and diagnostics
P&W FSR (retired) - TF30 / F100 /F119 /F135
Offline

disconnectedradical

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1237
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
  • Location: San Antonio, TX

Unread post06 Oct 2022, 23:00

I'm surprised there aren't more engine upgrade programs for F119. There are about 500 engines in the fleet, not as many as F100s or F110s but still a sizable amount. The F135 EEP gives 5-10% increase in thrust and fuel efficiency and I wonder why these advances are being applied to F119, especially since they want more range out of the F-22.

Then there's a slide which shows that application of AETP technology, not necessarily the 3-stream design but the advances in materials, aerodynamics, etc can improve F-22 range by 18%, which is a pretty big increase because that gives about 700 nmi subsonic combat radius. It's not the kind of range USAF is looking for NGAD, but it's still a very good improvement and frankly I doubt the F-22 will be retired as early as they're saying with how much it's being upgraded and most of the fleet still having over 2/3 of its life hours left even without SLEP, and maybe even longer because F-22s aren't being flown as hard as they were designed for.
Offline

disconnectedradical

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1237
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
  • Location: San Antonio, TX

Unread post06 Oct 2022, 23:12

milosh wrote:Becuase this is thread about F-22 engine I ask hear.

Was YF120 smaller then YF119 (dimensions not weight)?

I looked this cutaway:
http://yf-23.net/Pics/Plans/YF-23%20cutaway.jpg

YF120 looks shorter and narrower, then I check wiki info and YF120 dimensions are very similar to RD-33 dimension :shock: Is that right?


The YF120 is bigger than YF119 because when ATF weight was increased, thrust also increased so both P&W and GE increased the size of the fan but P&W didn't include the bigger fan on the YF119 but GE included it in the YF120. So both F119 and YF120 are bigger than YF119.

The YF120 dimensions are strange, it might be without the nozzle.
Offline

f119doctor

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 219
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2019, 00:07

Unread post06 Oct 2022, 23:46

disconnectedradical wrote:I'm surprised there aren't more engine upgrade programs for F119. There are about 500 engines in the fleet, not as many as F100s or F110s but still a sizable amount. The F135 EEP gives 5-10% increase in thrust and fuel efficiency and I wonder why these advances are being applied to F119, especially since they want more range out of the F-22.

Then there's a slide which shows that application of AETP technology, not necessarily the 3-stream design but the advances in materials, aerodynamics, etc can improve F-22 range by 18%, which is a pretty big increase because that gives about 700 nmi subsonic combat radius. It's not the kind of range USAF is looking for NGAD, but it's still a very good improvement and frankly I doubt the F-22 will be retired as early as they're saying with how much it's being upgraded and most of the fleet still having over 2/3 of its life hours left even without SLEP, and maybe even longer because F-22s aren't being flown as hard as they were designed for.


The F135 core is a essentially the same as the F119, with a different intermediate case to match up with large F135 fan, plus 10+ years of developmental improvements to the combustor and high turbine for higher temperature capability along with some producibility cost improvements. There was a study on adapting the F135 core to the F119 during a depot overhaul, although the USAF had not decided to make that investment last I heard.

Surprisingly, even if many of the life limited parts in the EEP would be common between the F119 and F135 core, they would probably be given different part numbers to prevent complete interchangeability. Usage in each engine is different and tracking the life usage will require the parts be segregated between the fleets, unless these digital twins is successful enough to fully account for these usage differences

With that said, incorporating the F135 EEP core into the F119 should be possible, utilizing the same changes needed for the F135 /F119 common core study, if the USAF decides to chose the EEP option for the F-35 and the F-22 is going to stay in the inventory long enough for the return on investment. The EEP core might need some turbine vane area rematching to optimize the F119 performance across the flight envelope, but it should result in a ~10% improvement in SFC.
P&W FSR (retired) - TF30 / F100 /F119 /F135
Offline

disconnectedradical

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1237
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
  • Location: San Antonio, TX

Unread post07 Oct 2022, 01:47

USAF is already deciding to keep flying and upgrading the F-16 instead of developing a new 4.5 gen MR-X, and with how expensive NGAD is it’s unlikely the F-22 will retire even when NGAD becomes operational, since the F-22 fleet hasn’t even reached halfway through its service life. And no the F-35 is not a replacement for the F-22, it’s not as overall capable in air to air. I think F119 upgrades with application of technology from F135 EEP or XA101 is a good return on investment.

I think the F-22 and F119 are due for an upgrade. It’s likely that the XA101, being P&W’s analogue to GE XA100, offers potentially greater enhancement and incorporate materials such as CMC, and given that it’s about the size of an F135, I do wonder if that core is scalable to F119 size. If not, even F135 EEP core sounds like a pretty good upgrade.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8966
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post07 Oct 2022, 08:51

disconnectedradical wrote:USAF is already deciding to keep flying and upgrading the F-16 instead of developing a new 4.5 gen MR-X, and with how expensive NGAD is it’s unlikely the F-22 will retire even when NGAD becomes operational, since the F-22 fleet hasn’t even reached halfway through its service life. And no the F-35 is not a replacement for the F-22, it’s not as overall capable in air to air. I think F119 upgrades with application of technology from F135 EEP or XA101 is a good return on investment.

I think the F-22 and F119 are due for an upgrade. It’s likely that the XA101, being P&W’s analogue to GE XA100, offers potentially greater enhancement and incorporate materials such as CMC, and given that it’s about the size of an F135, I do wonder if that core is scalable to F119 size. If not, even F135 EEP core sounds like a pretty good upgrade.


The MR-X was never a serious proposal just a vague concept. Also, I doubt "very much" the F-22 will be around. When the NGAD arrives let alone beyond it!
Offline

disconnectedradical

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1237
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
  • Location: San Antonio, TX

Unread post07 Oct 2022, 09:23

Corsair1963 wrote:
disconnectedradical wrote:USAF is already deciding to keep flying and upgrading the F-16 instead of developing a new 4.5 gen MR-X, and with how expensive NGAD is it’s unlikely the F-22 will retire even when NGAD becomes operational, since the F-22 fleet hasn’t even reached halfway through its service life. And no the F-35 is not a replacement for the F-22, it’s not as overall capable in air to air. I think F119 upgrades with application of technology from F135 EEP or XA101 is a good return on investment.

I think the F-22 and F119 are due for an upgrade. It’s likely that the XA101, being P&W’s analogue to GE XA100, offers potentially greater enhancement and incorporate materials such as CMC, and given that it’s about the size of an F135, I do wonder if that core is scalable to F119 size. If not, even F135 EEP core sounds like a pretty good upgrade.


The MR-X was never a serious proposal just a vague concept. Also, I doubt "very much" the F-22 will be around. When the NGAD arrives let alone beyond it!


There’s no way they’re investing this many upgrades, $11 billion to 2031, in the F-22 and then retiring it right after. Especially when there’s a lot of fleet life left and there’s the RAMMP program meant to make it more maintainable. The F-22 is the dominant air to air platform, even with NGAD operational the F-22 is still the second best air to air fighter, and may be very useful in areas where range isn’t as much of concern, like Europe.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4095
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post07 Oct 2022, 19:52

Corsair1963 wrote:


The MR-X was never a serious proposal just a vague concept. Also, I doubt "very much" the F-22 will be around. When the NGAD arrives let alone beyond it!

I doubt very much that the F-22 will be retired before the 2040s. There is zero evidence to support such a ridiculous notion, that the F-22 will retire before NGAD enters service. It has been stated on numerous occasions that the F-22 won't retire before NGAD is available in sufficient numbers and program maturity. I'm not sure how much clearer things need to be stated. The current upgrades will be lasting till 2031, so unless we see the USAF change their mind before then, all available evidence suggests that F-22s will be flying for quite some time past 2031.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4095
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post07 Oct 2022, 19:55

disconnectedradical wrote:



There’s no way they’re investing this many upgrades, $11 billion to 2031, in the F-22 and then retiring it right after. Especially when there’s a lot of fleet life left and there’s the RAMMP program meant to make it more maintainable. The F-22 is the dominant air to air platform, even with NGAD operational the F-22 is still the second best air to air fighter, and may be very useful in areas where range isn’t as much of concern, like Europe.

The USAF is even addressing the range issue with engine upgrades, and stealthy external fuel tanks, in addition to greatly reducing the maintenance requirements.
Previous

Return to General F-22A Raptor forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests