Talk:General Electric LM6000

Sprint and other options
I'm pretty sure Sprint is a GE trademark as is LM6000. What's the Wikipedia policy on that? Has SMEC really become that popular of an option that it warrants mentioning? Why do these particular options matter more than other options like VIGV, steam injection, DLE, etc.? Also, I was under the impression that water injection was not for efficiency, but for NOx reduction. In fact, in the four years that I worked engineering LM6000 packages, we always called it "NOx water." --W0lfie 16:59, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

— Sprint is probably trademarked. I don't know what the policy is on that.

Water injection as I understood it had several names, including water injection, NOx water, etc. It serves two purposes, the main being to reduce the temperatures thereby reducing NOx, with the side effect of more mass flow through the turbine and a slight efficiency boost.

Some of these other options are part of auxillary packages and not the turbine proper. Some of them are mounted on or in the turbine. Perhaps they should all be described and explained on this page or another. I did not comment on steam injection, VIGV, VBV, etc because my understanding of some of that equipment is not so good.--Dj245 18:18, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Not sure which options are the most important, but I think your additions are a good start. I might take a crack at fleshing it out a bit after I make some additions to the pipe organ articles I'm working on.  :-)  --W0lfie 19:23, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

noxwater is injected into the primary and secondary fuel nozzle inputs on natural gas fired engines with the effect of reducing nox emissions. SPRINT is used for boosting efficiency and power by cooling the airflow so the (T3) air is cooler while maintaining the same (P3). This allows a higher fuel flow before reaching max (T4.8) of 1600F. SPRINT water is a manifold around the aft end of the low pressure compressor with feed tubes going into the air collector duct. the nozzles are mounted on the compressor front frame just forward of the vbv doors. also, a 50hz engine would be the exact same as a 60hz engine. the different idle stages of the engine are: core idle and sync idle. core idle is the minimum sustained HP rotor operating speed. if the hp rotor falls below core idle speed the starter would have to give it a boost to ramp up the engine again. sync idle is when the lp rotor speed matches the exact hz of the grid. (60hz = 3600rpm, 50hz = 3000rpm). this is when the operator throws the breaker and now the generator is hooked up with the power grid. when the operator feeds the engine more fuel, (increases hp rotor speed) the lp rotor speed will NEVER increase while it is linked to the grid. the grids electrical force keeps the lp rotor at the exact same rpm it was as sync idle, even though the hp rotor speed continues to increase. when the engine puts more power into the generator it starts to twist the shaft and this change in phase from the engine to the generator, or how hard the engine is trying to break the generator from the grid, determines how much power is generated. so in short, the lp rotor would just turn slower on a lower hz system. the lp rotor has a max speed of 3700rpm but is not designed to be constantly operated at this setting so 60hz is the highest recommended speed of the lp rotor. not sure if it would operate less efficiently under 50hz.... 68.145.55.195 22:43, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

on vigv, vbv and vsv: vigv is a customer option. it is used to restrict airflow into the lpc during low speeds such as start up and idle. this is to prevent compressor stall of only the lpc and make the engine able to increase speed faster. compressor stall happens when there is too little airflow over the vane at high speed... (such as suddenly closing the inlet off, this situation is not going to happen on a ground based engine as the inlet cannot get blanked off by tails and wings like on aircraft) or from too much airflow at too low speed causing a choking condition. when this happens the air backs up in the aft end of the compressor and bends the blades forward causing the compressor to not function correctly due to bad airflow. stalling can also cause a failure from rotor blades touching the stator. the reason vigv is not needed is because there are vbv's. vbv's release pressure at low speeds through the air collector duct. the other solution is to ramp the engine up at a slower rate.

as well as the mentioned features of the vbv above, they also limit air into hpc for the same reasons as with the vigv. you dont want too much air in the lpc at low speeds. at high speeds the vbvs fully close and the vigvs fully open.

same deal for the vsv's except they are always required unlike their wannabe vigv counterparts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.145.55.195 (talk) 23:14, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

This is all consistent with what I remember from my stint at a peaking plant. Anyway, I can imagine scenarios where a ground based unit could stall- they just aren't very likely. Most of the scenarios I can think of involve various objects becoming sucked onto the filter house and blocking the intake. One thing I was always fuzzy on was the connection between the high and low speed rotors. Am I correct that there is no hard connection between them such as a gearbox? --Dj245 23:26, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not intimately familiar with the LM6000 in particular, but for most aircraft and aeroderived engines, the two spools rotate on separate bearings and are only linked aerodynamically... Georgewilliamherbert 00:20, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * That is correct. --W0lfie (talk) 03:28, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

a ground based engine will stall when there is a vsv or vbv failure on startup or low engine speeds. it can be cause by an hcu failure, or a controls failure. this is the bad stalling that bends the blades. the inlet blocking stall does not really hurt the engine, just causes it to flame out. as for the 2 rotors: the lpt and lpc are coupled together with the midshaft assembly which has the #1 ball (thrust) bearing #2 roller, #6 roller and #7 roller. the hpc and hpt are coupled together with the compressor aft shaft splining into the fwd shaft on the stage 1 hpt disk. the hp rotor has the #3 roller bearing, #4 roller, #4 ball (thrust) and #5 roller. each rotor has a thrust bearing to counteract the effect that their respective compressors put on the whole rotor assembly which is to screw (or pull) itself forward as it grabs onto the intake air (it keeps axial alignment). when the core module is installed (hp rotor) it is put on overtop of the midshaft (for the lp rotor) and bolts onto the front frame. there is about 1 inch of clearance between the hp rotor and the midshaft. just imagine the hp rotor is a shaft with a large axial hole that allows for another shaft to run through it at an entirely different speed. aerodynamically linked as said above. power from the hp rotor is transferred into the accessory gearbox through a set of gearboxes and radial drive shafts. the agb will have the lube/scavenge pumps, hcu and hydraulic starter attached. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.145.55.195 (talk) 02:20, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Thats about what I thought/remembered. Would one of those nice multicolored LM6000 diagrams that GE puts out be allowable on the article page? The ones I have seen are printed on glossy paper and usually are tacked on someones wall. It looked like promotional material to me but it could be trade secret reference material only sold with an engine for all I know. That diagram would be very helpful in explaining this type of engine.--Dj245 00:40, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

trade secrets hundreds and hundreds of people have access to. if a competitor wanted that diagram, they already have it. there are 2 diagrams. one for airflow and a frame strut diagram which shows what oil and vent lines go to which struts and which sumps. i have access to those but not a scanner. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.145.55.195 (talk) 00:18, 29 September 2007 (UTC)


 * ooh I love the oil one. it's so complicated looking.  ;-)  But I'm glad we have the air one up. --W0lfie (talk) 03:30, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Lm6000-2.png
Image:Lm6000-2.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Lm6000-2.png
Image:Lm6000-2.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:40, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I have inserted an appropriate fair use rationale on the image and deleted the notice there. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 20:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Man, I haven't seen that in ages. Would it be worth adding a paragraph to the article explaining the whole PC/PD (Dry low emissions) thing?  It would help explain the odd asymmetry of the image. --W0lfie (talk) 03:26, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Balanced?
I only know about the GTG side of LM6000s. So I'm afraid most of my contributions are centered on that use, rather than aviation. Is that misleading that the article focuses more on land units? Should we add more about its us on airplanes? --W0lfie (talk) 03:33, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on General Electric LM6000. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150905141815/http://www.geaviation.com/engines/docs/marine/datasheet-lm6000.pdf to http://www.geaviation.com/engines/docs/marine/datasheet-lm6000.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:47, 12 October 2017 (UTC)