Jet engines have always fascinated me. So have rocket engines. Great video on how RR does it:
How To Build A Rolls-Royce Jet Engine
- Thread starter sleddriver
- Start date
- Status
Frustrating company to do work for, at least it was about 15 years ago.
Thanks for the post.
Thanks for the post.
Last edited:
Thanks for posting this...very interesting.
Originally Posted By: FowVay
Those crazy British.. their steering wheels are on the wrong side of the car, they drive on the wrong side of the road, their escalators are backwards and even their jet engines spin backwards. Gotta love 'em!
That goes back quite a ways... they considered the Rolls Merlin "backwards", but it turns the same way as American Allison engines did. The Bristol radials and the RR Griffon all turned the "wrong" way.
The cool thing about the big Rolls Royce turbofans (at least to me) is that they use 3 shafts when most others just use two. Allowed them to do some clever stuff to carry the heavy electrical generation load on the 787 without loosing compressor stall margin. The main idea was just moving the alternators from the primary to the intermediate shaft.
Those crazy British.. their steering wheels are on the wrong side of the car, they drive on the wrong side of the road, their escalators are backwards and even their jet engines spin backwards. Gotta love 'em!
That goes back quite a ways... they considered the Rolls Merlin "backwards", but it turns the same way as American Allison engines did. The Bristol radials and the RR Griffon all turned the "wrong" way.
The cool thing about the big Rolls Royce turbofans (at least to me) is that they use 3 shafts when most others just use two. Allowed them to do some clever stuff to carry the heavy electrical generation load on the 787 without loosing compressor stall margin. The main idea was just moving the alternators from the primary to the intermediate shaft.
surprised at the level of non-automation of the creation and assembly.
Great post, I had an old friend who passed away that worked for RR over here as a consultant and field inspector.
I remember being VERY surprised at how they were putting together these engines with a ton of hands on work. Amazing dedication and focus to keep the quality so high.
I remember being VERY surprised at how they were putting together these engines with a ton of hands on work. Amazing dedication and focus to keep the quality so high.
Remember the other day I posted a car engine vs a jet engine, hmm, see if the Brits built a car this way, you would only need one engine forever,imho, but but but, it wont happen.
Originally Posted By: sleddriver
Jet engines have always fascinated me. So have rocket engines. Great video on how RR does it:
It is nice to see quality for safety of our families.
Jet engines have always fascinated me. So have rocket engines. Great video on how RR does it:
It is nice to see quality for safety of our families.
Originally Posted By: stro_cruiser
Im an ex-engineering industry Brit and I have to say this is nostalgic engineering porn for me!! hahaha...loving this, great to hear those accents!
Spent 10 years up to my elbows in GEC Erith/Parsons/RR/Siemens 500MW steam turbines...the Brits have a way about them when it comes to engineering. The gear is individual and has for want of a better word "personality"
They turn "backwards" too.
Im an ex-engineering industry Brit and I have to say this is nostalgic engineering porn for me!! hahaha...loving this, great to hear those accents!
Spent 10 years up to my elbows in GEC Erith/Parsons/RR/Siemens 500MW steam turbines...the Brits have a way about them when it comes to engineering. The gear is individual and has for want of a better word "personality"
They turn "backwards" too.
Thanks for the video.
Here is a website for GEnx engines with some nice animations.
http://www.geaviation.com/education/theatre/genx/
http://www.geaviation.com/education/engines101/
Here is a website for GEnx engines with some nice animations.
http://www.geaviation.com/education/theatre/genx/
http://www.geaviation.com/education/engines101/
Good video, watched it all. Thanks for posting.
Originally Posted By: Brons2
surprised at the level of non-automation of the creation and assembly.
GE does it the same way, I've seen it first hand many times with just about every engine they build. I assume P+W does it the same.
The process is broken down into operations, which when complete, is signed of by each operator. Specific work instructions are provided for each operation, from which you are not allowed to deviate. After each operation, there is some type of inspection or verification that the operation is done correctly, which also must be signed off. Only the specified tooling and fasteners required for a specific operation are allowed to be in use, and must be accounted for prior to the next operation, FOD is not good. Tooling for example, torque wrenches are of course calibrated, traceable to each engine and operation. All traceable to NIST (National Institute for Standards and technology) among others. All records are kept for at least 20 years, with your name on it and the date you did it. Suppliers of each nut, hose, bearing, sensor, raw materials, everything must operate under this same quality system. Deviations from qualified hardware are under strict quality, and configuration management. This is one contributor to the high cost of aviation hardware, but the stakes are high. I've worked under this system for nearly 30 years and have participated in some crash hardware investigations that had my name all over the paperwork. In these cases the problem was elsewhere, but it still puts a big lump in your throat, but you then appreciate the quality system. In spite of this system, we have problems like those on the 787. I'll be intersted to read where things broke down.
Sorry about being long winded.
surprised at the level of non-automation of the creation and assembly.
GE does it the same way, I've seen it first hand many times with just about every engine they build. I assume P+W does it the same.
The process is broken down into operations, which when complete, is signed of by each operator. Specific work instructions are provided for each operation, from which you are not allowed to deviate. After each operation, there is some type of inspection or verification that the operation is done correctly, which also must be signed off. Only the specified tooling and fasteners required for a specific operation are allowed to be in use, and must be accounted for prior to the next operation, FOD is not good. Tooling for example, torque wrenches are of course calibrated, traceable to each engine and operation. All traceable to NIST (National Institute for Standards and technology) among others. All records are kept for at least 20 years, with your name on it and the date you did it. Suppliers of each nut, hose, bearing, sensor, raw materials, everything must operate under this same quality system. Deviations from qualified hardware are under strict quality, and configuration management. This is one contributor to the high cost of aviation hardware, but the stakes are high. I've worked under this system for nearly 30 years and have participated in some crash hardware investigations that had my name all over the paperwork. In these cases the problem was elsewhere, but it still puts a big lump in your throat, but you then appreciate the quality system. In spite of this system, we have problems like those on the 787. I'll be intersted to read where things broke down.
Sorry about being long winded.
JetStar: not long winded, your post was informative, thanks.
It got me to thinking about the challenges presented by design, qualification & production of electronics and software. It would seem quality control on mechanical operations would be tedious but relatively straightforward. I imagine quality control on electronics, firmware and software would be a whole 'nuther level of complexity.
It got me to thinking about the challenges presented by design, qualification & production of electronics and software. It would seem quality control on mechanical operations would be tedious but relatively straightforward. I imagine quality control on electronics, firmware and software would be a whole 'nuther level of complexity.
If the Brits had paid proper attention to a guy named Whittle they would have had turbine powered fighters ready for the Battle of Britain, and if WE had paid the same attention we would have had P80s ready for the Me 262.
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
If the Brits had paid proper attention to a guy named Whittle they would have had turbine powered fighters ready for the Battle of Britain, and if WE had paid the same attention we would have had P80s ready for the Me 262.
It was tragic that Rolls Royce and Rover put their IP ahead of the war effort. Whittle was cut out of every development at every turn, but had to help them with their screw-ups.
If the Brits had paid proper attention to a guy named Whittle they would have had turbine powered fighters ready for the Battle of Britain, and if WE had paid the same attention we would have had P80s ready for the Me 262.
It was tragic that Rolls Royce and Rover put their IP ahead of the war effort. Whittle was cut out of every development at every turn, but had to help them with their screw-ups.
It's a lesson the US has to learn OVER and OVER ... DON'T fall behind in military hardware because a lot of good people die while you try to catch up. "We shouldn't rely on untested hardware" the establishment says, and a LOT of Allied bomber crews died at the hands of Me 262 pilots. If Shicklegruber had NOT redeployed his 262s as "terror bombers" he would have made a REAL mess of Allied airpower.
Originally Posted By: FowVay
Those crazy British.. their steering wheels are on the wrong side of the car, they drive on the wrong side of the road, their escalators are backwards and even their jet engines spin backwards. Gotta love 'em!
And their motorcycles were Positive ground.
Those crazy British.. their steering wheels are on the wrong side of the car, they drive on the wrong side of the road, their escalators are backwards and even their jet engines spin backwards. Gotta love 'em!
And their motorcycles were Positive ground.
- Status
