0 Voturi pozitive0 Voturi negative

33 (de) vizualizări13 paginiPropeller Blade Shape Optimization for Efficiency Improvement

Feb 23, 2017

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd

Propeller Blade Shape Optimization for Efficiency Improvement

© All Rights Reserved

33 (de) vizualizări

Propeller Blade Shape Optimization for Efficiency Improvement

© All Rights Reserved

- LAB-KTKQ-Hydrodynamics of screw propeller
- Aerodinamička Analiza Lakog Aviona u Različitim Razvojnim Fazama Projekta
- ABO Paper01 Entrainment
- Free and Force Vortex
- The ϵ-capacity of a gain matrix and tolerable disturbances: Discrete-time perturbed linear systems
- steam turbine
- J.fluids.engineering.2009.Vol.131.N8
- 15_1
- r5311501-optimization techniques
- Internal Flow Concepts and Applications
- Effects of Blade Tip Modifications on Wind Turbine Performance Using Vortex Model
- Resistance and Propulsion Durarich.pdf
- 1-s2.0-S2092678216303077-main
- 559
- 14b - Comparing Optimizers
- Assignment 1 S1-2016-17-2
- prescriptive treatment optimization using a genetic
- Paper Contest Sharing
- Lunk h Nay Ki Machine
- Design Optimition.pdf

Sunteți pe pagina 1din 13

407419, 1998

# 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved

Printed in Great Britain

PII: S0045-7930(97)00035-2 0045-7930/98 $19.00 + 0.00

EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT

1

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Hanyang University, Haengdang-dong, Seongdong-ku, Seoul

131-791, Republic of Korea

AbstractA numerical optimization technique has been developed to determine the optimum propeller

blade shape for eciency improvement. The method satises the constraints of the constant power coef-

cient and the activity factor. A lifting line theory (vortex lattice method) and a lifting surface theory

(3-D panel method) are used to calculate aerodynamic performance parameters of propellers. Both lift-

ing theories use rigid helical wake models. The design variables are twist angle and chord length at mid

points of vortex lattices for vortex lattice method and nodes of panels for the 3-D panel method. The

optimization code is validated by comparing the results with other numerical schemes. Twist angle and

chord length distributions are optimized for various propellers. SR-3 and SR-7 propfan blade shapes

are also optimized using the 3-D panel method for aerodynamic load calculation. # 1998 Elsevier

Science Ltd. All rights reserved

NOMENCLATURE

(Xs, Ts, Zs) (XE, YE, ZE) Coordinate of starting and ending points of vortex lattice element

(XCj, YCj, ZCj) Coordinate of collocation point

V Velocity

CP Total power coecient

CT Total thrust coecient

CR Total radial power coecient

cP Sectional power coecient

cT Sectional thrust coecient

C Mean chord length

AF Activity factor

J Advance ratio

gj Inequality constraint

hk Equality constraint

rp A multiplier which denes the magnitude of penalty

H Hessian matrix

I Symmetric positive matrix (unit matrix)

S Search direction

n Normal vector

Vi,j Velocity induced by a vortex line segment located between points i and j

V Induced velocity

R Blade tip radius

r Radius at station r

x Design variable vector

u Velocity of ow in the inertial frame

L Normal vector to helical surface

Vn Normal velocity of blade surface

P Pressure

DP Pressure dierence across upper and lower surfaces

yL y on leading edge

yT on trailing edge

f Pseudo-objective function

F Velocity potential

G Vortex strength, circulation

o, O Rotation velocity

Z Eciency

b Twist angle distribution

a* Search distance

r Radius of helical vortex line

j Spanwise index number

1 Free stream condition

0 Initial value

407

408 Jinsoo Cho and Seung-chi Lee

1. INTRODUCTION

After Rankine developed the momentum theory for marine propellers, a number of methods

were developed for the aerodynamic analysis of rotary wings. Froude used an element theory

and Goldstein developed the vortex theory, which was further extended by Theoderson to a

highly loaded propeller. These methods formed the basis of lifting line and lifting surface the-

ories as explained by Johnson [1]. Rosen and Graber [2] applied the lifting surface theory to

analyze helicopter rotors and Rand and Rosen [3], Chang and Sullivan [4] and Chiu and Peters

[5] used the lifting line theory. Mikkelson et al. [6] showed the reliability of lifting line theory by

comparing the calculated results with measured data and the calculated result using a lifting sur-

face theory. Chang and Sullivan [4], McVeigh and McHugh [7] and Walsh et al. [8] showed that

twist angle, chord distribution and wing tip shape are the main factors which control the per-

formance of straightened blade propellers. Cho and Williams [9] used a lifting surface theory for

their wingpropeller interaction analysis with good results.

The variables for optimization of rotary wings include noise control, interaction control,

improving eciency, etc. In this study, propeller blade shapes are optimized to improve their

eciencies. The numerical optimization method used in this study needs more calculation than

the inverse design method. But, if the objective function and constraints are dened rst, design

variables which maximize or minimize objective function can be found easily. Chang and

Sullivan [4] used the numerical optimization method for their propeller blade shape optimiz-

ation. The optimization techniques require fast calculation of objective functions and Mikkelson

et al. [6] showed that using the lifting line theory shows reasonable accuracy and fast computing

time. In this study both a lifting line theory and a lifting surface theory are used for the calcu-

lation of objective functions to optimize the blade shapes of propellers and propfans respect-

ively, for eciency improvement.

2. OPTIMIZATION TECHNIQUE

The Extended linear Interior Penalty function Method (EIPM), one of the Sequential

Unconstrained Minimization Techniques (SUMT), is employed as an optimization technique.

SUMT transforms a constrained optimization problem into a series of unconstrained optimiz-

ation problems and constructs pseudo-objective function using penalty functions. Therefore the

technique leads to a series of unconstrained optimization solutions by updating the initial pen-

alty.

Constrained optimization problem

Objective function Fx 1

Constraints gj x 0; j 1; m

hk x 0; k 1; l

Pseudo-objective function fx; rp Fx rp Px 2

where, P(x) is a penalty function and rp is a multiplier which denes the magnitude of penalty.

The EIPM has continuous penalty function in every region and can nd a search direction in

any infeasible region [10].

X

m X

l

fx; r_ p ; rp Fx rp Bx rp hk x2 3

j1 k1

A penalty function B(x) is used as an inequality constraint and hk(x) is an equality constraint. A

Hessian matrix [10] can be constructed to determine a search direction as follows.

S q H q rFxq 4

Propeller blade shape optimization 409

H q1 H q Dq 5

where, q is an iteration step and the details of Dq can be found in [10].

The algorithm is,

Step 1: Guess the initial design variables x0 and initial Hessian matrix H0.

(generally, H0=I)

Step 2: Dene search direction.

Sq= HqHF(xq)

Step 3: Dene a*, a multiplier which determines the amount of change in the search direction.

Step 4: Update design variables and calculate HF(xq + 1), Hq + 1.

xq + 1=xq+a*qSq

Step 5: Decide convergence criterion and return to Step 2.

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS

3.1. Vortex Lattice Method (VLM)

3.1.1. Basic formulation. Laplace equation, the governing equation for incompressible, inviscid

and irrotational ow, is solved with the ow tangency condition which implies that there are no

normal velocity components to the blade surface as follows.

Governing equation r2 Fx; y; z 0 6

Boundary condition rF F1 n 0 7

where F is the velocity potential induced by vortex lines and F1 is the velocity potential of free

stream. n is normal vector of blade surface. Velocity induced by a bound vortex on a blade sur-

face and helical vortex line can be calculated by Biot-Savart's law [11].

G r0 r1 r1 r2

V1;2 r0 8

4p j r0 r1 j2 j r1 j j r2 j

where V1,2 is the velocity induced by a vortex line between 1 and 2 with strength G.

The boundary conditions to be satised at collocation points are V n = 0 and the following

algebraic equation can be formed.

vj XM

Gj

Aij 9

V1 i1

4pRV 1

where Vj is the summation of free stream velocity V1, induced velocity components, (u, v, w),

and rotational velocity or and Aij is an aerodynamic inuence coecient. The circulation

strength Gj of each vortex lattice element can be determined by solving the above Equations (6)

and (7).

3.1.2. Geometrics of blade and wake. The propeller is discretized by bound vortices on 1/4

chord line and collocation points on 3/4 chord line of each blade as Fig. 1. (Xs, Ys, Zs),

(XE, YE, ZE) are the starting and ending points of a bound vortex of each vortex lattice

element.

3.1.3. Aerodynamic force calculation. The circulation strength Gj of Equation (9) can be used

for the aerodynamic force calculation by the Kutta-Joukowski law.

Fj rV dG

Gj 2d 10

where 2d is a vortex lattice element length.

Propeller performance coecients, such as power coecient CP, thrust coecient CT, radial

force coecient CR and eciency Z, are dened as follows.

410 Jinsoo Cho and Seung-chi Lee

CT FT J 2 =rV1

2

D2

2

D2

CR FR J 2 =rV1

2

D2

Z JCT =CP

J V1 =nD 11

where J is an advance ratio, n is rotation number and FR, Fy, FT are radial, tangential and axial

force components, respectively.

The 3-D panel method used in this study is a lifting surface theory developed by Cho and

Williams [9,12] and it is based on unsteady, linear aerodynamics. The method is briey

explained in the following subsections and more details on the method can be found in [12].

3.2.1. Boundary condition. The normal velocity of ow at the blade surface must equal the

normal velocity of the blade surface at every point.

n u Vn 12

where u = velocity of ow in the inertial frame, n = the unit normal vector to the blade sur-

face, Vn=normal velocity of the blade surface.

The boundary condition is to be transferred to the helical surface.

L u j L j Vn 13

where L = normal vector to helical surface.

Equation (13) means that the normal velocity induced on the helical surface by the load distri-

bution must equal Vn. Vn is given as Equation (14) for the case of steady operation.

Vn Unz O

ynx x

ny 14

where nx, ny, nz are the components of n in the blade coordinate system.

3.2.2. Lifting surface integral equation. The load distribution determines the distribution of

normal velocity over the reference blade. This relationship between load and normal velocity

can be expressed as an integral equation.

Propeller blade shape optimization 411

Z 1Z yTE

@

Wr;

y pr0 ; y0 Ky y0 ; r; r0 r0 d y0 dr0 15

rh yLE @ y0

where

L u ioy

W 4p e ; P A2 DP eioy0

U r0 U 2

where W = a variable proportional to the normal velocity, P = a variable proportional to the

pressure jump across the blade, K = a kernel function.

3.2.3. Discretization of the integral equation.. The lifting surface integral Equation (15) is

solved approximately by splitting the blade into a nite number of elements within each of

which P is assumed constant. The normal velocity W is then specied at one point per element,

thereby reducing the integral equation to a set of simultaneous algebraic equations for the loads

on each element. The blade is split into NRP radial strips of arbitrary width. Each strip is then

divided into NXP chordwise pieces by a sequence of constant partial chord lines. The algebraic

system resulting from this discretization is

Wi SCij Pj 16

where Wi=W at ith control point, Pj=P on jth panel

Z Z

@Kyi y0 ; ri ; r0

Cij d y0r0 dr0

@y0

The mathematical programming uses the same propeller performance analyses discussed pre-

viously and couples the present optimization program. Once the design variables are dened,

the optimization program takes over the role of manipulating the design variables to arrive at

the best blade shape design as shown in Fig. 2.

4.1.1. Blade twist angle distribution optimization.. To improve the eciency of propellers using

the Vortex Lattice Method, CP is kept as an equality constraint and CT became an objective

function. Using the VLM, the twist angle distribution can be optimized.

Objective function to be maximized

CT bi 17

Constraints

CP bi constant

0 bi p=2; i 1; . . . m

bi b1 ; b2 ; . . . bm T

where bi are the span twist angle distributions dene as design variables.

4.1.2. Chord length distribution optimization. As before, CT is an objective function to be maxi-

mized and CP and AF, an activity factor, are equality constraints. The activity factor is dened

in Equation (18) and it represents the power absorbed by a propeller. Here, an activity factor is

added as another equality constraint, since the chord length distribution can be optimized under

the same activity factor and advance ratio according to [13].

Z

105 Tip c r 3 r

AF d 18

16 Hub D R R

412 Jinsoo Cho and Seung-chi Lee

CT Ci 19

Constraints

CP Ci constant

AFCi constant

0 Ci span; i 1; . . . m

Ci C1 ; C2 ; . . . Cm T

where, Ci are the spanwise chord length distributions dened as design variables.

Using the 3-D panel method described earlier, the coordinates of panel edges (node points)

can be optimized using the same optimization technique.

Objective function to be maximized

CT nodei 20

Constraints

CP nodei constant

Propeller blade shape optimization 413

Fig. 3. Comparison of optimized and unoptimized twist angle of Purdue model propeller J = 2.2.

5. RESULTS

5.1. The blade shape optimization using a lifting line theory

To validate the present method, the optimized and unoptimized twist angle distribution of the

Purdue model propeller using the present method are compared with the result of Chang and

Sullivan [14] in Fig. 3 showing good agreement. The Purdue model blade has an aspect ratio of

3, constant chord, essentially helical twist distribution and a constant prole of NACA0010 sec-

tion. Comparing the cases, the present method showed an eciency improvement of 0.98%

whereas that in [4] showed 0.4%. In the present calculation, the inuence of wakes in the range

of 35 times the blade tip radius after the blade trailing edge are included.

Figure 4 compares the optimized and unoptimized twist angle distribution of the SR-2 prop-

fan blade by the present method along with the result by Chang [14]. The discrepancy between

the two methods is thought to be resulting from the slightly dierent discretization of the SR-2

blade, although the two methods are based on the same optimization theory.

In the absence of comparable results, Figs 5 and 6(ac) show the chord length distribution,

the sectional power coecient distribution, the sectional thrust coecient distribution and the

circulation distribution of optimized and unoptimized SR-2 propfan blade respectively.

Especially in Fig. 5, it is easily shown that the SR-2 blade shape can be optimized to some

extent for eciency improvement. Table 1 shows the numerical results of the SR-2 blade shape

optimization, where the results violate no constraint.

Figures 7, 8 and 9(ac) show the optimized and unoptimized distributions of twist angle,

chord length, sectional power coecient, sectional thrust coecient and circulation for the

Fig. 4. Comparison of optimized and unoptimized twist angle of SR-2 propfan blade.

414 Jinsoo Cho and Seung-chi Lee

Fig. 5. Comparison of optimized and unoptimized chord length of SR-2 propfan blade.

Fig. 6. (a) Comparison of sectional power coecients of optimized and unoptimized SR-2 propfan

blade. (b) Comparison of sectional thrust coecients of optimized and unoptimized SR-2 propfan

blade. (c) Comparison of circulation distributions of optimized and unoptimized SR-2 propfan blade.

SR-2 Propeller b3/4=408 (J = 1.7)

5

CP CT AF 10

16 D

1

Eciency

Optimized model 0.299379E 01 0.167566E 01 0.968817 0.951509

Percentage eciency

improvement 2.3457%

Propeller blade shape optimization 415

Fig. 7. Comparison of optimized and unoptimized twist angle of NACA 4-(4)(06)-04 propeller blade.

NACA 4-(4)(06)-04 propeller blade respectively. The numerical results for the same propeller

blade are listed in Table 2.

All of the three blades optimized above are discretized with 10 uniform lattices, which is the

minimum number to achieve a reasonable degree of accuracy. The eect of number and choice

of panels are discussed in the Appendix.

Figure 10 shows the propfan coordinate system used in the present analysis. Figures 11 and

12 show the planform shapes and circumferential positions of leading and trailing edges for the

optimized and unoptimized SR-3 propfan blade, respectively. As mentioned earlier, a 3-D

method is used for the aerodynamic forces calculation for the case considered, since the vortex

lattice method used does not model the camber distribution, which is an important design par-

ameter of the modern propfans. The negligible change in the SR-3 optimization eort implies

that the SR-3 propfan has been already optimally designed for best eciency.

Figures 13 and 14 are the results for the SR-7 propfan showing the little changed blade

shapethe same as in the SR-3 case. Tables 3 and 4 show the numerical optimization results of

SR-3 and SR-7, respectively. The tables show almost the identical performance coecients for

the optimized and unoptimized shapes, as can be easily expected.

Both SR-3 and SR-7 blades are discretized with 70 (7 chordwise 10 spanwise) uniformly par-

titioned panels.

Fig. 8. Comparison of optimized and unoptimized chord length of NACA 4-(4)(06)-04 propeller blade.

416 Jinsoo Cho and Seung-chi Lee

Fig. 9. (a) Comparison of sectional power coecients of optimized and unoptimized NACA 4-(4)(06)-

04 propeller blade. (b) Comparison of sectional thrust coecients of optimized and unoptimized

NACA 4-(4)(06)-04 propeller blade. (c) Comparison of circulation distributions of optimized and unop-

timized NACA 4-(4)(06)-04 propeller blade.

NACA 4-(4)(06)-04 Propeller b3/4=408 (J = 2.7)

5

CP CT AF 10

16 D

1

Eciency

Optimized model 0.637080E 01 0.227813E 01 0.157281 0.965489

Percentage eciency

improvement 0.02%

Propeller blade shape optimization 417

Fig. 11. Comparison of optimized and unoptimized planform of SR-3 propfan blade.

Fig. 12. Comparison of optimized and unoptimized yL, yT of SR-3 propfan blade.

6. CONCLUSIONS

The optimization method introduced here has been shown to perform good propeller blade

shape optimization for eciency improvement when a lifting line method and a lifting surface

method are used for the aerodynamic performance calculations. The present method showed

good agreement with other numerical schemes for the straight bladed propellers, where the

Vortex Lattice Method is used for the aerodynamic analysis. The results also show that when

eciency improvements are set for the objective function, the propeller blade shape varies to

some extent after optimization.

Fig. 13. Comparison of optimized and unoptimized planform of SR-7 propfan blade.

418 Jinsoo Cho and Seung-chi Lee

Fig. 14. Comparison of optimized and unoptimized yL, yT of SR-7 propfan blade.

SR-3 Propfan (J = 2.416)

CP CT Eciency

Optimized model 0.1570E + 01 0.5313E + 00 0.8177

Percentage eciency improvement 0.17%

SR-7 Propfan (J = 3.056)

CP CT Eciency

Optimized model 0.163217E + 01 0.459453E+)) 0.8603

Percentage eciency improvement 0.2871%

It was also found that the present optimization method can be used for validating well-

designed propellers (propfans) and can be a good design tool for high eciency propellers

(propfans). The higher order numerical aerodynamic analysis schemes, such as full potential

codes and Euler codes, etc., need to be incorporated into the present optimization method.

In the absence of comparable results, the present analysis showed that a lifting surface panel

method can be a useful aerodynamic analysis tool for modern propfans whose heavily twisted 3-

D shape depends on camber distributions and blade sweep back.

REFERENCES

1. Johnson, W., Recent developments in rotary-wing aerodynamics theory.. AIAA Journal, 1986, 24(8), 1219.

2. A. Rosen and A. Graber, Free wake model of hovering rotors having straight or curved blades., International

Conference on Rotorcraft Basic Research, North Carolina, 1985.

3. O. Rand and A. Rosen, A lifting line theory for curved helicopter blades in hovering and axial ight, The 8th

European Rotorcraft Forum, Aix-en-Provence, France, 1982.

4. Chang, L. K. and Sullivan, J. P., Optimization of propeller blade twist by an analytical method. AIAA Journal,

1982, 22(2), 22.

5. Chiu, Y. D. and Peters, D. A., Numerical solutions of induced velocities by semi-innite tip vortex lines. Journal of

Aircraft, 1987, 25(8), 684.

6. D. C. Mikkelson, G. A. Mitchell and L. J. Bober, Summary of recent NASA propeller research, The AGARD Fluid

Dynamics Panel Meeting on Aerodynamics and Acoustics of Propellers, Toronto, Canada, 1984.

7. M. A. McVeigh and F. J. McHugh, Inuence of tip shape chord, blade number and airfoil on advanced rotor per-

formance, The 38th Annual Forum of the American Helicopter Society, Anaheim, CA, 1982.

8. J. L. Walsh, G. J. Bingham and M. F. Riley, Optimization methods applied to the aerodynamic design of helicopter

rotor blades, The 26th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference,

Orlando, Florida, 1985.

9. Cho, J. and Williams, M. H., Propellerwing interaction using a frequency domain panel method. Journal of

Aircraft, 1990, 27(3), 196.

Propeller blade shape optimization 419

10. G. N. Vanderplaats, Numerical Optimization Techniques for Engineering Design, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York,

1984.

11. J. Katz and A. Plotkin, Low-Speed Aerodynamics from Wing Theory to Panel Methods, 1st edn. McGraw-Hill, New

York, 1991.

12. M. H. Williams, An unsteady lifting surface theory for single rotation propellers, Purdue University Report, W.

Lafayette, IN, 1985.

13. C. Tau, E. Lan and J. Roskam, Airplane Aerodynamics and Performance, 1st edn. The University of Kansas

Lawrence Press, Kansas, 1980.

14. L. K. Chang, The theoretical performance of high eciency propellers. Ph.D. thesis. Purdue University, W.

Lafayette, IN, 1980.

15. A. K. H. Lee. A computational investigation of propeller/wing interaction. M.S. thesis. Purdue University, West

Lafayette, IN, 1988.

7. APPENDIX

The minimum number of lattices or panels used for the present blade shape optimization method should be chosen care-

fully for the best optimized results with the least errors involved. As an example, eects of a number of lattices on sol-

utions for Purdue model propeller using a vortex lattice method are given and the choice of lattices are discussed.

According to [15], the present error of aerodynamic coecients decreases with increasing number of lattices in the vortex

lattice method. However, when the method is used as an aerodynamic tool for the optimization, the design variables and

constraints will increase in proportion to the number of lattices. Using an excessive number of design variables and con-

straints may cause diculty in nding the search direction. Since it was found that using nonuniform lattices showed

negligible eect on solutions, the uniform lattices are used for the cases considered here.

Figure A1 shows the eect of number of lattices on eciency improvement for the Purdue model propeller. It can be

easily shown in the gure that eciency improvement amount reaches to a constant value asymptotically as the number

of lattices increases over 10. Figure A2 shows the optimized twist angle distributions of the Purdue model propeller

blade for dierent numbers of lattices. It can be seen in the gure that the solution improves with increasing number of

lattices until 10, whereas the solution for 19 lattices shows a wiggly curve which cannot be considered as an optimized

result.

Although it cannot be shown in the gure, the present optimization scheme fails to work with more than 21 lattices,

which attributes to the excessive number of design variables for the case, as explained already. Therefore, using 10 uni-

form lattices will give good optimized results within the acceptable degree of accuracy although only 7 0 8 lattices are

enough to resolve aerodynamic performance parameters for the vortex lattice method used.

Fig. A1. Eect of number of lattices on eciency improvement for the Purdue model propeller.

Fig. A2. Optimized twist angle distributions of the Purdue model propeller for dierent numbers of lat-

tices.

- LAB-KTKQ-Hydrodynamics of screw propellerÎncărcat dePanda On Fire
- Aerodinamička Analiza Lakog Aviona u Različitim Razvojnim Fazama ProjektaÎncărcat dehrabrivuk
- ABO Paper01 EntrainmentÎncărcat deabolcay
- Free and Force VortexÎncărcat deNur Amira Jasmin
- The ϵ-capacity of a gain matrix and tolerable disturbances: Discrete-time perturbed linear systemsÎncărcat deIOSRjournal
- steam turbineÎncărcat deAditya Eka
- J.fluids.engineering.2009.Vol.131.N8Încărcat deНильва Александр
- 15_1Încărcat deDanieleKokoriFortunati
- r5311501-optimization techniquesÎncărcat desivabharathamurthy
- Internal Flow Concepts and ApplicationsÎncărcat deintelligentlove
- Effects of Blade Tip Modifications on Wind Turbine Performance Using Vortex ModelÎncărcat deGeorgeKKonsolas
- Resistance and Propulsion Durarich.pdfÎncărcat deRadityo Nugra Erlangga
- 1-s2.0-S2092678216303077-mainÎncărcat deAbu Hadiyd Al-Ikhwan
- 559Încărcat dePervez Ahmad
- 14b - Comparing OptimizersÎncărcat devasdevharish
- Assignment 1 S1-2016-17-2Încărcat deShawn
- prescriptive treatment optimization using a geneticÎncărcat deapi-346237712
- Paper Contest SharingÎncărcat deica
- Lunk h Nay Ki MachineÎncărcat deAliRaza
- Design Optimition.pdfÎncărcat deHüseyin Kalkan
- Goal ProgramingÎncărcat deAmritesh jha
- 1-s2.0-S0098135499800404-mainÎncărcat deCalcetin
- Numerical and Experimental Characterization of a CP PropellerÎncărcat desatonsaton
- Asian Hydrogen Plant Case StoryÎncărcat deFaizan Ahmed
- Dry dock llistÎncărcat decapone55
- Stern TubesÎncărcat deweesweekwee8652
- ur-z3rev7Încărcat deproject_work
- Math for MLÎncărcat deAriyanto
- 2253 Optimal Design of Tall Residential Building With Rc Shear Wall and With Rectangular LayoutÎncărcat dedskumar49
- Murawski Forces 2005 4Încărcat deAnonymous K3FaYFl

- FactoryÎncărcat deChristian Mudimisi
- Cat 300ekw c9Încărcat deDede Santoso
- 141.1Încărcat deahmsal
- courant number.pdfÎncărcat deUday Joshi
- Hovercraft.pdfÎncărcat dedrthuhan
- 3dmax Amoozesh PDF 1Încărcat deahmsal
- FBIR.pdfÎncărcat deahmsal
- Sources and Types of CavitationÎncărcat deahmsal
- -Topics in Hydro-AcousticsÎncărcat deahmsal
- Hanshin Seol_Numerical Analysis of Underwater Propeller NoiseÎncărcat deahmsal
- Acoustic Excitation of Hull Surfaces by Propeller SourcesÎncărcat deahmsal
- further_computer_analyzed_data_of_the_wageningen_b-screw_seriesÎncărcat denando_aparicio
- MRTS301Încărcat deahmsal
- des_specsÎncărcat deahmsal
- Cathodic Protection DesignÎncărcat demtuanlatoi9704
- SKLNS.pdfÎncărcat deahmsal
- Specification for Cathodic ProtectionÎncărcat deahmsal

- Narrido, I - PS312B FINAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS.docxÎncărcat deGroup 5 PolSci 3B Thesis
- Speak Out Upper intermediateÎncărcat deFelipeGonzález
- Asrock X58 Extreme6Încărcat detoto36
- Autosys EEM implementation guideÎncărcat deManigandan Nagarajan
- CMG_AppC_WCCPÎncărcat dervmkd2
- Mufon Ufo JournalÎncărcat deSAB78
- Profiling of the Resin GlycosideÎncărcat deSonia Sahnoun
- PeopleSoft Campus Solution 9.2 InstallationÎncărcat deWandhee
- iit madras detailed syllabusÎncărcat deSuperdudeGaurav
- Bangladesh ReportÎncărcat dejakariauzzal
- Viveiros de Castro, Zeno's Wake.Încărcat degermanocorrea
- ESA BAT Packing Friction on Valve Performance 2012 AprilÎncărcat deSebastien Paul
- 03-EASY-ROB-Introduction-01Încărcat deapi-3714448
- 36 Neducin_DejanaÎncărcat deAleksandar Milojkovic
- Softex DocumentationÎncărcat deManasa Ramanan
- Jealous Gave Speeches to Universities While They Were Raising TuitionÎncărcat deDavid Lublin
- 3Încărcat deiranbod
- (784445670) Chapter 19 Empires in Collision Outline (1)Încărcat deasdjiofa
- lcruizÎncărcat deRicardo Ferreira
- KPC Info 06 CB ProtectionÎncărcat dePuneet Shah Jaiwansh
- CadburyÎncărcat deDhruv Nayyar
- Flojoe CPE ExamsÎncărcat deJan
- Heat Transfer PDF - Google SearchÎncărcat dezoksi
- Common Clock(SRAN8.0 01)Încărcat deMikhail Berezovskiy
- SHT_37_350_004_00 Compact PLC Install and Update ManualÎncărcat dekris
- 126 Breathing Apparatus Information BookletÎncărcat deJeduardo Ch-meza
- wartsila-o-water-st-c-small.pdfÎncărcat demavericksilver
- Wg Email Encryption TbÎncărcat desatenderrose
- SMO-F551-SDÎncărcat deDavid Teszt
- Tt3020 Installation ManualÎncărcat deluckystrike9008

## Mult mai mult decât documente.

Descoperiți tot ce are Scribd de oferit, inclusiv cărți și cărți audio de la editori majori.

Anulați oricând.