One advantage of the adaptive cycle engine (ACE) is its ability of throttling with constant airflow by the combined control of\nvariable geometries, resulting in an improvement of spillage drag. However, the improvement is achieved at risk of a complex\ntechnical solution and control. This article investigates the selection scheme of variable geometries and engine configuration. It\nfocuses on the performance of a three-stream ACE during throttling, whose configuration and control schedule are simpler than\nother types of ACEs. Five variable geometries are selected from seven available options through comparison analysis. The\nuninstalled thrust decreases from 100% to 60.36% during the subsonic throttling and to 59.81% during the supersonic throttling.\nBenefitting from the decreased spillage drag, the installed performance of the three-stream ACE is improved to some degree\nduring throttling. This improvement is less than the result of a three-bypass ACE, whose configuration and control schedule are\nmore complex. Thus, the three-stream ACE is a compromise design considering the technical risk and variable cycle\ncharacteristic, which is a better platform to verify the component technology and control schedule for the further research on a\nmore complex type of ACE.
Loading....