Colin S. Bidwell

Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

Ice Particle Transport Analysis With Phase Change 

for the E3 Turbofan Engine Using LEWICE3D

Version 3.2

NASA/TM—2012-217700

September 2012
NASA STI Program . . . in Profi le

Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the 

advancement of aeronautics and space science. The 

NASA Scientifi c and Technical Information (STI) 

program plays a key part in helping NASA maintain 

this important role.

The NASA STI Program operates under the auspices 

of the Agency Chief Information Offi cer. It collects, 

organizes, provides for archiving, and disseminates 

NASA’s STI. The NASA STI program provides access 

to the NASA Aeronautics and Space Database and 

its public interface, the NASA Technical Reports 

Server, thus providing one of the largest collections 

of aeronautical and space science STI in the world. 

Results are published in both non-NASA channels 

and by NASA in the NASA STI Report Series, which 

includes the following report types:

• TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of 

completed research or a major signifi cant phase 

of research that present the results of NASA 

programs and include extensive data or theoretical 

analysis. Includes compilations of signifi cant 

scientifi c and technical data and information 

deemed to be of continuing reference value. 

NASA counterpart of peer-reviewed formal 

professional papers but has less stringent 

limitations on manuscript length and extent of 

graphic presentations.

• TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientifi c 

and technical fi ndings that are preliminary or 

of specialized interest, e.g., quick release 

reports, working papers, and bibliographies that 

contain minimal annotation. Does not contain 

extensive analysis.

• CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientifi c and 

technical fi ndings by NASA-sponsored 

contractors and grantees.

• CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected 

papers from scientifi c and technical 

conferences, symposia, seminars, or other 

meetings sponsored or cosponsored by NASA.

• SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientifi c, 

technical, or historical information from 

NASA programs, projects, and missions, often 

concerned with subjects having substantial 

public interest.

• TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. Englishlanguage translations of foreign scientifi c and 

technical material pertinent to NASA’s mission.

Specialized services also include creating custom 

thesauri, building customized databases, organizing 

and publishing research results.

For more information about the NASA STI 

program, see the following:

• Access the NASA STI program home page at 

http://www.sti.nasa.gov

• E-mail your question to help@sti.nasa.gov

• Fax your question to the NASA STI 

Information Desk at 443–757–5803

• Phone the NASA STI Information Desk at

 443–757–5802

• Write to:

 STI Information Desk

 NASA Center for AeroSpace Information

 7115 Standard Drive

 Hanover, MD 21076–1320
Colin S. Bidwell

Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

Ice Particle Transport Analysis With Phase Change 

for the E3 Turbofan Engine Using LEWICE3D

Version 3.2

NASA/TM—2012-217700

September 2012

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Glenn Research Center

Cleveland, Ohio 44135

Prepared for the

Atmospheric Space Environments Conference

sponsored by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

New Orleans, Louisiana, June 25–28, 2012
Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Joseph Veres, Philip Jorgenson and Russell Claus of the NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, 

Ohio for contributing the fl ow solution for the E3 compressor and for aid in interpreting turbomachinery fl ow and particle transport 

physics. The NASA Aviation Safety Program, Atmospheric Environment Safety Technologies Project supported this work.

Available from

NASA Center for Aerospace Information

7115 Standard Drive

Hanover, MD 21076–1320

National Technical Information Service

5301 Shawnee Road

Alexandria, VA 22312

Available electronically at http://www.sti.nasa.gov

Trade names and trademarks are used in this report for identifi cation 

only. Their usage does not constitute an offi cial endorsement, 

either expressed or implied, by the National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration.

This work was sponsored by the Fundamental Aeronautics Program 

at the NASA Glenn Research Center.

Level of Review: This material has been technically reviewed by technical management. 
NASA/TM—2012-217700 1 

Ice Particle Transport Analysis With Phase Change for the E3

Turbofan Engine Using LEWICE3D Version 3.2 

Colin S. Bidwell 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

Glenn Research Center 

Cleveland, Ohio 44135 

Abstract 

Ice Particle trajectory calculations with phase change were made for the Energy Efficient Engine (E3) 

using the LEWICE3D Version 3.2 software. The particle trajectory computations were performed using 

the new Glenn Ice Particle Phase Change Model which has been incorporated into the LEWICE3D 

Version 3.2 software. The E3

 was developed by NASA and GE in the early 1980’s as a technology 

demonstrator and is representative of a modern high bypass turbofan engine. The E3

 flow field was 

calculated using the NASA Glenn ADPAC turbomachinery flow solver. Computations were performed 

for the low pressure compressor of the E3

 for a Mach 0.8 cruise condition at 11,887 m assuming a 

standard warm day for ice particle sizes of 5, 20, and 100 m and a free stream particle concentration of 

0.3 g/m3

. The impingement efficiency results showed that as particle size increased average impingement 

efficiencies and scoop factors increased for the various components. The particle analysis also showed 

that the amount of mass entering the inner core decreased with increased particle size because the larger 

particles were less able to negotiate the turn into the inner core due to particle inertia. The particle phase 

change analysis results showed that the larger particles warmed less as they were transported through the 

low pressure compressor. Only the smallest 5 m particles were warmed enough to produce melting and 

the amount of melting was relatively small with a maximum average melting fraction of 0.836. The 

results also showed an appreciable amount of particle sublimation and evaporation for the 5 m particles 

entering the engine core (22 percent). 

Introduction 

Over the last several years work has been ongoing to develop tools to analyze aircraft configurations 

subjected to High Ice Water Content (HIWC) conditions (Refs. 1 to 2). The HIWC environment contains 

conditions outside of the FAA Appendix C (Ref. 3) Certification Envelope. The HIWC environment 

contains large ice or mixed phase particles (50 m) in very high concentrations (~10 g/m3

) up to very 

high altitudes (~40000 ft). This HIWC environment has been responsible for many engine anomalies 

including engine roll backs and shutdowns (Ref. 1). Work is underway to quantify the HIWC 

environment and to develop ground test facilities and computational tools to assess the sensitivity of 

various engines to the HIWC environment. New certification rules, which will require aircraft to fly 

safely through these conditions, are on the horizon. It is anticipated that these new rules will generate new 

requirements for aircraft ice protection system design and certification and for the tools which aid in these 

processes. Icing computational tools, which have been successfully used in the design and certification of 

aircraft subject to the current FAA Appendix C icing environments, show great promise in their ability to 

analyze aircraft systems subject to the HIWC environment. 

The development of icing computational analysis tools which produce sufficiently accurate results in 

a reasonable amount of computational time for turbomachinery flows has been a major challenge 

(Refs. 4 to 6). The use of unsteady tools to simulate the flow and particle transport in the highly time 

dependent turbomachinery flows was seen as impractical and as possibly unnecessary. For this reason a 

methodology was developed at NASA Glenn which uses the steady flow assumption commonly used in 

turbomachinery design tools. These methods typically model blade rows as a single blade with 
NASA/TM—2012-217700 2 

circumferential symmetry and circumferentially averaged inflow and outflow boundary conditions which 

are generated from neighboring blade rows. These methods typically march through the turbomachinery 

calculating steady flow for each blade using the upstream blade outflow boundary data and the 

downstream inflow boundary data for the inflow and outflow boundary conditions respectively. Several 

passes through the engine to achieve convergence are typically employed by these methods 

The newly developed NASA Glenn “block-to-block” icing analysis method follows the same logic 

used in these steady flow turbomachinery design tools. Ice particle or water droplet transport properties 

and ice shape calculations are generated for each blade row using steady, single blade flow solutions and 

the outflow particle size, state, concentration, and velocity data from the upstream blade row as inflow 

data. The upstream blade outflow particle concentration, velocities, and state are circumferentially 

averaged before being passed to the downstream blade row as an inflow boundary condition. This “blockto-block” method was incorporated into the LEWICE3D Version 3.2 software. (Refs. 6 and 7). 

The E3

 engine (Refs. 8 to 10) was selected as a test case for the newly developed “block-to-block” 

method incorporated into LEWICE3D Version 3.2. The E3 was developed by NASA and GE in the early 

1980’s as a technology demonstrator. The engine was chosen because it is representative of a modern 

high bypass turbofan engine, the geometry and experimental data were publicly available and flow 

solutions were readily available. 

Nomenclature 

A Area, m2

D Ice particle diameter, m 

E3 Energy Efficient Engine 

IGV Inlet Guide Vane 

LWC Liquid Water Content, g/m3

IR Impingement Rate, g/s 

T Ice particle temperature, K 

SF Scoop Factor 

V Velocity, m/s 

 Impingement efficiency 

Analytical Method 

Grid and Flow Calculations 

GRIDGEN was used to develop the three-dimensional grids for the geometry (Ref. 11). The ADPAC 

flow solver (Refs. 12 to 14) was used to generate the flow solution for the analysis. The ADPAC code is a 

three-dimensional, finite volume based, Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes flow solver. The code 

computes flows on complex propulsion system configurations using multi-block body fitted grids. The 

method employs a “mixing-plane” procedure to pass boundary condition data between grid blocks for the 

steady state flows. The code supports parallel computing and uses a Baldwin-Lomax based turbulence 

model. 

LEWICE3D 

The LEWICE3D ice accretion code was used for the ice particle trajectory calculations. This grid 

based code incorporates particle trajectory, heat transfer and ice shape calculation into a single computer 

program. The code can handle generic multi-block structured grid based flow solutions, unstructured grid 

based flow solutions, simple Cartesian grids with surface patches, and adaptive grids with surface 
NASA/TM—2012-217700 3 

patches. The latter two methods allow the use of generic panel code input which, when combined with 

LEWICE3D, is a computationally efficient method for generating ice shapes. The code can handle 

overlapping and internal grids and can handle multiple planes of symmetry. Calculations of arbitrary 

streamlines and trajectories are possible. The code has the capability to calculate tangent trajectories and 

impingement efficiencies for single drops or drop distributions using area based collection efficiency 

methods. Ice accretions can be calculated at arbitrary regions of interest in either a surface normal or 

tangent droplet trajectory direction. The program can run on a variety of single processor and parallel 

computers, including Unix, Linux, and Windows (Microsoft Corporation) based systems. 

Version 3.2 of the LEWICE3D software which incorporates several new features was used for the 

analysis. These features include a new particle splash and bounce algorithm, the Glenn Ice Particle Phase 

Change Model (Ref. 5) which tracks ice particle or water drop state, a geometry handling scheme which 

allows complex mirroring, transformation and relative motion of input grid blocks and a new algorithm 

which calculates block-to-block collection efficiencies and particle properties. These new additions 

enable users to analyze HIWC conditions and to calculate collection efficiency with water or ice particle 

phase change, splash and bounce effects through turbo-machinery. 

Analysis 

The E3 analysis included the calculation of flow and ice particle transport properties. The results for 

the flow are presented along with particle analysis for 5, 20, and 100 m ice particle sizes. 

The grid structure used for the flow and particle analysis is shown in Figure 1. The grid contained 12 

structured, abutted grid blocks with a total of 327,583 nodes. The steady, viscous flow solution was 

generated for a Mach 0.8 cruise condition at 11998 m assuming a standard warm day. Flow vectors along 

the centerline of the axi-symmetric solution are shown in Figure 2. 

The LEWICE3D ice particle analysis required several cloud input conditions and modeling 

parameters. The ice particle analysis assumed a free stream relative humidity of 0 percent and a free 

stream particle concentration of 0.3 g/m3

. The ice particles were assumed to be completely frozen and at 

the ambient temperature of the surrounding air (229.3 K). A simple particle impact and bounce model was 

used for this analysis because no model exists for the bounce and breakup of ice crystals typical of the 

HIWC environment. The simple particle bounce model assumed no breakup and no deposition. This was 

considered to be a reasonable assumption for a completely frozen ice particle. A coefficient of restitution 

of 1.0 and a coefficient of dynamic friction of 0.0 were used for the impact particle reflection model 

which yielded a lossless impact. This model was employed for all particle impacts in the engine and 

hence there was no buildup of ice. The ice particles were transported from the free stream through the 

compressor and out the compressor exit boundaries. Impingement efficiencies are reported for various 

surfaces. These were the net values that impinged upon the surface and do not represent the amount of ice 

that accreted on the surface. The actual values of accretion for all surfaces were zero because of the 

impact model employed (no deposition). Due to the bouncing model employed (multiple reflection and no 

deposition) the net amount of impingement on the engine solid surfaces (i.e., walls, blades, spinners, 

splitter lips, etc.) will be higher than that entering the engine. The amount of mass exiting the engine 

through the exit boundaries will however equal the amount entering the engine. The values are merely 

reported to give the reader information as to the amount and location of ice particle impingement. 

It is worthwhile to report the definitions and equations used for the particle analysis. These include 

collection efficiency or impingement efficiency (), average collection efficiency (ave), impingement rate 

(IR), and scoop factor (SF). Impingement efficiency is a non-dimensional measure of the mass flux for a 

surface and is dependent upon the amount of convergence or dispersion of particles in a flow and the 

orientation of the surface relative to the particle paths. An impingement efficiency of one means the 

surface particle flux rate is equal to the free stream particle flux rate. A value less than one means the 

surface particle flux rate is less than the free stream particle flux rate and a value greater than one means 

that the surface particle flux rate is greater than the free stream level. The average collection efficiency is 

defined as: 
NASA/TM—2012-217700 4 

wetted

1

avg A

A n N

n  n n



  

  (1) 

Where N is the number of surface elements with nonzero impingement and n, An are the collection 

efficiency and area of surface element n, respectively. The wetted area of the element is the sum of the 

area of the elements which have non-zero impingement for which we have the equation: 









n N

n

A An

1

wetted (2)

The impingement rate for a surface is defined as: 

avg LWC wetted IR     V  A (3)

Where LWC is the free stream liquid water content and V is the free stream speed. The free stream 

catch fraction or scoop factor (SF) is defined as the ratio of the mass impinging on a component divided 

by the mass available in the free stream for an area equal to the area bounded by the highlight of the inlet 

lip. The scoop factor is then: 



 IR

IR SF (4)

The free stream impingement rate (IR) is defined as the rate at which the particles pass through an area 

traced out by the highlight of the inlet lip (A) traveling at the free stream speed (V) with an average 

collection efficiency of 1 and an LWC matching that of the free stream (LWC). The average collection 

efficiency for a surface is then: 

wetted wetted

avg SF

IR

IR

A

A

A

A 



  



   (5)

Figure 3 shows the particle impact locations, impingement efficiency, and particle impact 

temperatures for the 5 m particle case. From the ice particle trajectory impact points and impingement 

efficiency shown in Figures 3(a) to (c) we can see that impingement occurs throughout the low pressure 

compressor. The ice particle trajectory impact point plot (Fig. 3(a)) displays the impact locations for the 

particles calculated in each of the blocks for the “block-to-block” method. This plot illustrates the density 

and location of the impacting particles used in the “block-to-block” method (each impact is represented 

by a red triangle). The engine schematic shown in Figure 1(c) is useful in clarifying the various elements 

which receive impingement. The peak value of average impingement efficiency for the various surface 

elements listed in Table 1 was for the inlet lip #1 (0.17). The scoop factors were relatively small for the 

5 m particle for the various surface components shown in Table 1 (6 percent). The amount of mass 

entering the inner core was 16.126 g/m3

 which yielded a scoop factor of 0.0679. Figure 3(d) shows the 

temperature distribution of the impacting particles. As can be seen from the plot the impact temperatures 

of the particles increase as they pass through the compressor. The lowest impact temperatures from 

Figure 3(d) are observed on the spinner while the highest were observed on splitter lip #2 and the aft 

support strut. As the ice particles transport through the warming environment of the engine they increase 

in temperature and in some cases sublimate or melt and evaporate. The maximum average particle 

temperature for the 5 m ice particle was 273.29 K (slightly above the freezing temperature of water) and 
NASA/TM—2012-217700 5 

occurred on splitter lip #2 (Table 1). From the table we can also so that there was a small amount of 

melting at the splitter lip #2 because the average melting fraction for splitter lip #2 was less than one 

(0.836). The melting fraction is defined as the percentage of ice mass to total mass. A melting fraction of 

one means the particle is totally frozen. A melting fraction of zero means that the particle is totally water. 

We can also see from Table 1 that there was an appreciable amount of particle sublimation and 

evaporation for the 5 m ice particles entering the engine core (~22 percent). 

The particle impact, impingement efficiency, and temperature results for the 20 m particle case are 

show in Figure 4. As for the 5 m ice particle the 20 m ice particle revealed impingement throughout the 

low pressure compressor although the impingement area was larger for the 20 m particle (Figs. 3(c) and 

4(c)). For most of the components the impingement rates were higher for the 20 m particle than for the 

5 m particle due to particle inertia (Tables 1 and 2). Larger particles, which have larger inertia, are more 

resistive to changes in direction due to flow gradients than smaller particles which results in the larger 

particles being less apt to avoid obstacles. The amount of mass entering the inner core was 10.509 g/m3

which yielded a scoop factor of 0.0443. The mass entering the core for the 20 m particle was smaller 

than for the 5 m particle because the larger particles were less able to negotiate the turn into the inner 

core due to their larger inertia. The peak value of average impingement efficiency for the various surface 

elements listed in Table 2 was for splitter lip #2 (0.3865). The scoop factors were larger for the 20 m 

particle than for the 5 m particle due to particle inertia. The maximum value of scoop factor for the 

20 m particle was for the fan blade (0.3870). From the temperature distributions in Figure 4(d) and 

Table 2 we see that the maximum average temperature for the 20 m particle was 270.38 K which 

occurred on splitter lip #2. This was less than that for the 5 m particle and is due to the thermal mass of 

the 20 m particle being larger and hence more resistive to temperature change. We also see from Table 2 

that there was no melting of the 20 m particle and that there was a very small amount of sublimation for 

some of the elements. 

The particle impact, impingement efficiency, and temperature results for the 100 m particle case are 

show in Figure 5. For most of the components the impingement rates were higher for the 100 m particle 

than for the 20 and 5 m particles due to particle inertia (Tables 1 to 3). The amount of mass entering the 

inner core was 0.181 g/m3

 which yielded a scoop factor of 0.0008. The mass entering the core for the 

100 m particle was smaller than for both the 5 and 20 m particles because the larger particles were less 

able to negotiate the turn into the inner core due to their larger inertia. The peak value of average 

impingement efficiency for the various surface elements listed in Table 3 was for IGV #1 (0.9368). The 

scoop factors were larger for the 100 m particle than for the 20 and 5 m particles due to particle inertia. 

The maximum value of scoop factor for the 100 m particle was for the fan blade (0.8248). From the 

temperature distributions in Figure 5(d) and Table 3 we see that the maximum average temperature for the 

100 m particle was 253.09 K which occurred at the exit of the inner core. This was less than that for the 

20 and 5 m particles and is due to the larger thermal mass of the 100 m particles. We also see from 

Table 3 that there was no melting and sublimation of the 100 m particle for any of the elements. 

Conclusion 

Predictions for ice particle impingement efficiency, temperature, and melting fraction were generated 

for the E3

 low pressure compressor using the Glenn Ice Particle Phase Change Model newly incorporated 

into LEWICE3D Version 3.2 and a flow solution from the ADPAC flow solver. The impingement 

efficiency results showed that as particle size increased average impingement efficiencies and scoop 

factors increased for the various components. The particle analysis also showed that the amount of mass 

entering the core decreased with increased particle size because the larger particles were less able to 

negotiate the turn into the inner core due to particle inertia. The particle phase change analysis results 

showed that the larger particles warmed less as they were transported through the low pressure 

compressor. Only the smallest 5 m particles were warmed enough to produce melting and the amount of 
NASA/TM—2012-217700 6 

melting was relatively small with a maximum average melting fraction of 0.836. The results also showed 

an appreciable amount of particle sublimation and evaporation for the 5 m particles entering the engine 

core (22 percent). These results suggest that the newly developed NASA Glenn “block-to-block” icing 

analysis method can be a useful tool for the analysis of turbomachinery subject to the HIWC 

environment. 

References 

1. Mason, J; Strapp, W and Chow, P; “The Ice Particle Threat to Engines in Flight,” 44th AIAA 

Aerospace Sciences Meeting, v4, 2006, pp. 2445-2465. 

2. Mazzawy R.S., Strapp J.W.; “Appendix D – An Interim Icing Envelope; SAE 2007-01-3311; SAE 

2007 Aircraft and Engine Icing International Conference; Seville, Spain, November 2007. 

3. Federal Aviation Regulation, Part 25, “Airworthiness Standard: Transport Category Airplanes, 

Appendix C,” DOT, FAA, 1974, rev. 1982. 

4. Hamed, A., Das, K., Basu, D., “Numerical Simulations of Ice Droplet Trajectories and Collection 

Efficiency on Aero-engine Rotating Machinery,” AIAA-2005-1248, 2005. 

5. Wright, W., Jorgenson, P., Veres, J., “Mixed Phase Modeling in GlennICE with Application to

Engine Icing,” AIAA-2010-7674, 2010. 

6. Bidwell, C., “Particle Trajectory and Icing Analysis of the E3

 Turbofan Engine Using LEWICE3D 

Version 3,” AIAA-2011-38-0048, 2011. 

7. Bidwell, C.S., Potapczuk, M.G., “Users Manual for the NASA Lewis Three-Dimensional Ice 

Accretion Code (LEWICE3D),” NASA TM-105974, December 1993. 

8. Cline, S.J., Halter, P.H., Kutney, J.T., and Sullivan, T.J., “Energy Efficient Engine: Fan and QuarterStage Component Performance Report,” NASA CR 168070, Jan. 1983. 

9. Bridgeman, M.J., Cherry, D.G., and Pedersen, J., “NASA/GE Energy Efficient Engine Low Pressure 

Turbine Scaled Test Vehicle Performance Report,” NASA CR 168290, Jul. 1983. 

10. Rowe, R.K. and Kuchar, A.P., “Energy Efficient Engine (E 3) Scaled Mixer Performance Report - 

Final Report,” NASA CR 167947, Nov. 1982. 

11. Steinbrenner, J.P., Chawner, J.R., Fouts, C.L., “The Gridgen 3D Multiple Block Grid Generation 

System,” Final Report WRDC-TR-90-3022, June 1990. 

12. Adamczyk, J.J., Celestina, M.L., and Beach, T.A., “Simulation of Three-Dimensional Viscous Flow 

Within a Multistage Turbine,” ASME Paper 89-GT-152, 1989. 

13. Hall, E., Heidegger, N., Delaney, R., “ADPAC v1.0 – Users’s Manual,” NASA CR 1999-206600. 

14. Hall, E., Delaney, R., Lynn, S., Veres, J., “Energy Efficient Low Pressure Subsystem Aerodynamic 

Analysis,” NASA TM 1988-208402. 

 
NASA/TM—2012-217700 7 

TABLE 1.—E3 TRANSPORT STATISTICS FOR AN ICE PARTICLE SIZE OF 5 m 

Element avg Impingement rate, 

g/s 

Scoop factor Davg, 

m 

Tavg, 

K 

Melt Fractionavg

Free stream capture tubea 1.0000 237.397 1.0000 5.00 229.30 1.00 

Inlet lip 0.1746 2.353 0.0099 4.94 255.75 1.00 

Inlet capture 0.8640 183.956 0.7749 4.94 239.40 1.00 

Spinner 0.0927 1.020 0.0043 4.89 255.90 1.00 

Fan blade 0.0432 12.702 0.0535 4.85 262.95 0.986 

Splitter lip #1 0.0856 1.150 0.0048 4.87 267.10 0.987 

IGV #1 0.0913 3.523 0.0148 4.69 269.55 0.931 

Rotor #1 0.0744 1.955 0.0082 4.80 270.92 0.864 

Splitter lip #2 0.1427 0.825 0.0035 4.64 273.29 0.836 

Inner core 0.6965 16.126 0.0679 4.61 271.99 0.952 a

Based on capture area of 3.26 m2

TABLE 2.—E3 TRANSPORT STATISTICS FOR AN ICE PARTICLE SIZE OF 20 m 

Element avg Impingement rate, 

g/s 

Scoop factor Davg, 

m 

Tavg, 

K 

Melt Fractionavg

Free stream capture tubea 1.0000 237.397 1.0000 20.00 229.30 1.00 

Inlet lip 0.2249 24.402 0.1028 19.99 245.44 1.00 

Inlet capture 0.9572 200.823 0.8459 19.98 238.64 1.00 

Spinner 0.0803 4.606 0.0194 19.97 250.05 1.00 

Fan blade 0.2613 91.862 0.3870 19.97 250.76 1.00 

Splitter lip #1 0.1623 5.318 0.0224 19.97 257.26 1.00 

IGV #1 0.2768 13.619 0.0574 19.97 253.04 1.00 

Rotor #1 0.2639 8.590 0.0362 19.97 260.16 1.00 

Splitter lip #2 0.3865 16.317 0.0687 19.92 270.38 1.00 

Inner core 1.1958 10.509 0.0443 19.87 270.25 1.00 a

Based on capture area of 3.26 m2

TABLE 3.—E3 TRANSPORT STATISTICS FOR AN ICE PARTICLE SIZE OF 100 m 

Element avg Impingement rate, 

g/s 

Scoop factor Davg, 

m 

Tavg,

K 

Melt Fractionavg

Free stream capture tubea 1.0000 237.397 1.0000 100.00 229.30 1.00 

Inlet lip 0.1820 83.816 0.3531 100.00 231.80 1.00 

Inlet capture 1.0905 228.779 0.9637 100.00 232.92 1.00 

Spinner 0.4085 28.000 0.1179 100.00 236.40 1.00 

Fan blade 0.5460 195.799 0.8248 100.00 237.07 1.00 

Splitter lip #1 2.1945 76.510 0.3223 100.01 239.88 1.00 

IGV #1 0.9368 98.418 0.4146 100.01 239.44 1.00 

Rotor #1 0.9171 41.943 0.1767 100.01 241.50 1.00 

Splitter lip #2 0.0341 1.395 0.0059 100.03 250.87 1.00 

Inner core 0.0078 0.181 0.0008 100.03 253.09 1.00 a

Based on capture area of 3.26 m2

 
NASA/TM—2012-217700 8 

 

(a) Surface model. (b) Grid block structure.

(c) Element designation. 

Figure 1.—Surface model and grid structure for E3 flow model. 

 
NASA/TM—2012-217700 9 

(a) Side view. 

(b) Orthogonal view. 

Figure 2.—Centerline velocity vectors for the E3

 low pressure compressor. 
NASA/TM—2012-217700 10 

(a) Particle impact locations (axial view). 

(b) Impingement efficiency. 

Figure 3.—E3 particle transport results for a 5 m ice particle. 
NASA/TM—2012-217700 11 

(c) Impingement efficiency (axial view). 

(d) Particle impact temperature. 

Figure 3.—Concluded. 
NASA/TM—2012-217700 12 

 

(a) Particle impact locations (axial view). 

(b) Impingement efficiency. 

Figure 4.—E3 particle transport results for a 20 m ice particle. 
NASA/TM—2012-217700 13 

 

(c) Impingement efficiency (axial view). 

(d) Particle impact temperature. 

Figure 4.—Concluded. 
NASA/TM—2012-217700 14 

(a) Particle impact locations (axial view). 

(b) Impingement efficiency. 

Figure 5.—E3 particle transport results for a 100 m ice particle. 
NASA/TM—2012-217700 15 

(c) Impingement efficiency (axial view). 

(d) Particle impact temperature. 

Figure 5.—Concluded. 
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved 

OMB No. 0704-0188 

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the 

data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this 

burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. 

Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB 

control number. 

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. 

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)

01-09-2012 

2. REPORT TYPE

Technical Memorandum 

3. DATES COVERED (From - To)

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Ice Particle Transport Analysis With Phase Change for the E3 Turbofan Engine Using 

LEWICE3D Version 3.2 

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S)

Bidwell, Colin, S. 

5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

WBS 648987.02.02.03.20 

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field 

Cleveland, Ohio 44135-3191 

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

 REPORT NUMBER

E-18387 

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

Washington, DC 20546-0001 

10. SPONSORING/MONITOR'S

 ACRONYM(S)

NASA 

11. SPONSORING/MONITORING

 REPORT NUMBER

NASA/TM-2012-217700 

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Unclassified-Unlimited 

Subject Category: 03 

Available electronically at http://www.sti.nasa.gov 

This publication is available from the NASA Center for AeroSpace Information, 443-757-5802

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

14. ABSTRACT

Ice Particle trajectory calculations with phase change were made for the Energy Efficient Engine (E3) using the LEWICE3D Version 3.2 

software. The particle trajectory computations were performed using the new Glenn Ice Particle Phase Change Model which has been 

incorporated into the LEWICE3D Version 3.2 software. The E3 was developed by NASA and GE in the early 1980’s as a technology 

demonstrator and is representative of a modern high bypass turbofan engine. The E3 flow field was calculated using the NASA Glenn 

ADPAC turbomachinery flow solver. Computations were performed for the low pressure compressor of the E3 for a Mach 0.8 cruise 

condition at 11,887 m assuming a standard warm day for ice particle sizes of 5, 20, and 100 μm and a free stream particle concentration of 

0.3 g/m3. The impingement efficiency results showed that as particle size increased average impingement efficiencies and scoop factors 

increased for the various components. The particle analysis also showed that the amount of mass entering the inner core decreased with 

increased particle size because the larger particles were less able to negotiate the turn into the inner core due to particle inertia. The particle 

phase change analysis results showed that the larger particles warmed less as they were transported through the low pressure compressor. 

Only the smallest 5 μm particles were warmed enough to produce melting and the amount of melting was relatively small with a maximum 

average melting fraction of 0.836. The results also showed an appreciable amount of particle sublimation and evaporation for the 5 μm 

particles entering the engine core (22 percent). 

15. SUBJECT TERMS

Aircraft icing; Ice crystal particle trajectories; Engine icing 

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF

 ABSTRACT

UU 

18. NUMBER

 OF 

 PAGES

22 

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

STI Help Desk (email:help@sti.nasa.gov) 

a. REPORT

U 

b. ABSTRACT

U 

c. THIS 

PAGE

U 

19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (include area code)

443-757-5802 

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18