Our Design
We came up with a design based on a turbo jet and then we tweaked some of its properties. Eventually we got it to produce the results shown above. We achieved a thrust to weight ratio of .386, which we thought was acceptable though we were not able to use our better models for practical reasons.
While tweaking parts of the engine, the only times we broke a temperature limit was when we tried to increase the airspeed and rate of compression, showing us that in a real engine, there is a point for both aspects where an engine cannot handle such high values.
Some specific characteristics of our engine are Engine Net Thrust, Fuel Flow Rate, Engine Weight, Thrust To Weight Ratio, and Overall Engine Efficiency. Engine net thrust is the total thrust output of an engine with the weight of the engine factored in, and ours was 2393Lbs. Fuel flow rate is the measurment of fuel consumed by the engine in Lbs/hr, ours was 925Lbs/hr. Engine weight, our weight of the engine, was 739.8Lbs. Our thrust to weight ratio, as stated before, was .386. Lastly, our overall engine efficiency was .769.
Our engine was not the best because it was not a turbofan engine, which is the most efficient type. We also had more efficient engines before this one which were turbofans, but they weren't exactly viable in reality.
While tweaking parts of the engine, the only times we broke a temperature limit was when we tried to increase the airspeed and rate of compression, showing us that in a real engine, there is a point for both aspects where an engine cannot handle such high values.
Some specific characteristics of our engine are Engine Net Thrust, Fuel Flow Rate, Engine Weight, Thrust To Weight Ratio, and Overall Engine Efficiency. Engine net thrust is the total thrust output of an engine with the weight of the engine factored in, and ours was 2393Lbs. Fuel flow rate is the measurment of fuel consumed by the engine in Lbs/hr, ours was 925Lbs/hr. Engine weight, our weight of the engine, was 739.8Lbs. Our thrust to weight ratio, as stated before, was .386. Lastly, our overall engine efficiency was .769.
Our engine was not the best because it was not a turbofan engine, which is the most efficient type. We also had more efficient engines before this one which were turbofans, but they weren't exactly viable in reality.