0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Combustion, Fuels, and Emissions

Characterization of Emissions From the Use of Alternative Aviation Fuels

[+] Author and Article Information
Tak W. Chan

Environment Canada,
Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3, Canada
e-mail: tak.chan@ec.gc.ca

Wajid A. Chishty

National Research Council Canada,
Ottawa, ON K1A 0R6, Canada
e-mail: Wajid.Chishty@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca

Pervez Canteenwalla

National Research Council Canada,
Ottawa, ON K1A 0R6, Canada
e-mail: Pervez.Canteenwalla@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca

David Buote

Environment Canada,
Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3, Canada
e-mail: David.buote@ec.gc.ca

Craig R. Davison

National Research Council Canada,
Ottawa, ON K1A 0R6, Canada
e-mail: Craig.Davison@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca

Contributed by the Combustion and Fuels Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received July 13, 2015; final manuscript received July 29, 2015; published online September 2, 2015. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 138(1), 011506 (Sep 02, 2015) (9 pages) Paper No: GTP-15-1262; doi: 10.1115/1.4031226 History: Received July 13, 2015; Revised July 29, 2015

Alternative fuels for aviation are now a reality. These fuels not only reduce reliance on conventional petroleum-based fuels as the primary propulsion source, but also offer promise for environmental sustainability. While these alternative fuels meet the aviation fuels standards and their overall properties resemble those of the conventional fuel, they are expected to demonstrate different exhaust emissions characteristics because of the inherent variations in their chemical composition resulting from the variations involved in the processing of these fuels. This paper presents the results of back-to-back comparison of emissions characterization tests that were performed using three alternative aviation fuels in a GE CF-700-2D-2 engine core. The fuels used were an unblended synthetic kerosene fuel with aromatics (SKA), an unblended Fischer–Tropsch (FT) synthetic paraffinic kerosene (SPK) and a semisynthetic 50–50 blend of Jet A-1 and hydroprocessed SPK. Results indicate that while there is little dissimilarity in the gaseous emissions profiles from these alternative fuels, there is however a significant difference in the particulate matter emissions from these fuels. These differences are primarily attributed to the variations in the aromatic and hydrogen contents in the fuels with some contributions from the hydrogen-to-carbon ratio of the fuels.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

CF700-2D-2 turbofan engine set up at NRC gas turbine testing facility

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Throttle cycle definition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Schematic of emissions measurement setup

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

(a) CO2 and (b) CO2 equivalent emissions from the four fuels at the three steady engine load conditions with theoretical equivalent CO2 for each fuel (shown as solid horizontal lines)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

(a) NO and (b) NOx emissions from the four fuels at the three steady engine load conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Particle number size distributions from Jet A-1 at the three steady engine load conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Comparison of the particle number size distributions at: (a) idle and (b) 95% engine load conditions for the four fuels

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

(a) Particle number emissions from the four fuels at the three steady engine load conditions and (b) the relative changes in particle emissions from different alternative fuels with respect to Jet A-1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

BC mass emissions determined from the HS-LII instrument at various engine modes on different fuels

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Relative changes in BC mass emissions from different fuels with respect to Jet A-1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

HS-LII BC mass emissions at various engine settings compared to fuel parameters: (a) hydrogen content, (b) aromatic content, and (c) H/C ratio

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Calculated combustor primary zone (flame) temperature at the three engine load conditions for the four fuels. Also shown is the measured primary zone temperature during engine operation on Jet A-1 fuel.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Measured NOx emissions versus calculated combustor primary zone (flame) temperature at the three engine load conditions for the four fuels

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

NO2 as a fraction of NOx measured at the three engine load conditions for the four fuels; and the dependence of the NO2:NOx ratio on air–fuel ratio

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In