0
Research Papers

Experimental and Analytical Characterization of Alternative Aviation Fuel Sprays Under Realistic Operating Conditions

[+] Author and Article Information
Andrew Corber

National Research Council of Canada,
Ottawa K1A 0R6, ON, Canada
e-mail: Andrew.Corber@nrc.ca

Nader Rizk

Rolls Royce Corporation,
Indianapolis, IN 46032
e-mail: nkrizk@yahoo.com

Wajid Ali Chishty

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

Manuscript received August 14, 2018; final manuscript received September 5, 2018; published online April 26, 2019. Editor: Jerzy T. Sawicki.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 141(6), 061022 (Apr 26, 2019) (11 pages) Paper No: GTP-18-1568; doi: 10.1115/1.4041649 History: Received August 14, 2018; Revised September 05, 2018

The National Jet Fuel Combustion Program (NJFCP) is an initiative being led by the Office of Environment & Energy at the FAA, to streamline the ASTM jet fuels certification process for alternative aviation fuels. To accomplish this, the program has identified specific applied research tasks in several areas. The National Research Council of Canada (NRC) is contributing to the NJFCP in the areas of sprays and atomization and high altitude engine performance. This paper describes work pertaining to atomization tests using a reference injection system. The work involves characterization of the injection nozzle, comparison of sprays and atomization quality of various conventional and alternative fuels, and uses the experimental data to validate spray correlations. The paper also briefly explores the application viability of a new diagnostic system that has the potential to reduce test time in characterizing sprays. Measurements were made from ambient up to 10 bar pressures in NRC's High Pressure Spray Facility using optical diagnostics including laser diffraction, phase Doppler anemometry (PDA), LIF/Mie imaging and laser sheet imaging to assess differences in the atomization characteristics of the test fuels. A total of nine test fluids including six NJFCP fuels and three calibration fluids were used. The experimental data were then used to validate semi-empirical models, developed through years of experience by engine original equipment manufacturers, and modified under the NJFCP, for predicting droplet size and distribution. The work offers effective tools for developing advanced fuel injectors, and generating data that can be used to significantly enhance multidimensional combustor simulation capabilities.

Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

IATA, 2013, “ IATA Technology Roadmap,” 4th ed., International Air Transport Association, Montreal, QC, Canada.
ICAO, 2017, “ Proposed ICAO Vision on Aviation Alternative Fuels,” International Civil Aviation Organization, Mexico City, Mexico, Paper No. CAAF/2-WP/13.
Colket, M. B. , Heyne, J. , Rumizen, M. , Edwards, J. T. , Gupta, M. , Roquemore, W. M. , Moder, J. P. , Tishkoff, J. M. , and Li, C. , “ An Overview of the National Jet Fuels Combustion Program,” AIAA Paper No. 2016-0177.
Jasuja, A. K. , 1982, “ Plain-Jet Airblast Atomization of Alternative Liquid Petroleum Fuels Under High Ambient Air Pressure Conditions,” ASME Paper No. 82-GT-32.
Lefebvre, A. H. , 1989, Atomization and Sprays, Hemisphere, New York, p. 169.
Mansour, A. , Benjamin, M. , and Steinthorsson, E. , 2000, “ A New Hybrid Air Blast Nozzle for Advanced Gas Turbine Combustors,” ASME Paper No. 2000-GT-0117.
Buschhagen, T. , Zhang, R. Z. , Bokhart, A. J. , Gejji, R. M. , Naikz, S. V. , Lucht, R. P. , Gore, J. P. , Sojka, P. E. , Slabaugh, C. D. , and Meyer, S. E. , 2016, “ Effect of Aviation Fuel Type on Fuel Injection Conditions on Non-Reacting Spray Characteristics of a Hybrid Airblast Fuel Injector,” AIAA Paper No. 2016-1154.
Corber, A. , 2007, “ A Preliminary Investigation of Flow Scaling for Injector Characterization,” ILASS Americas 20th Annual Conference on Liquid Atomization and Spray Systems, Chicago, IL, Paper No. 65.
Mishra, Y. N. , Kristensson, E. , and Berrocal, E. , “ Reliable LIF/Mie Droplet Sizing in Sprays Using Structured Laser Illumination Planar Imaging,” Opt. Express, 22(4), pp. 4480–4492. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Rizk, N. K. , and Mongia, H. C. , 1988, “ Spray Characteristics of Air-Assist Atomizers,” Second Conference of the Institute for Liquid Atomization and Spray Systems—ILASS Americas, Pittsburg, PA, pp. 6–10.
Rizk, N. K. , and Mongia, H. C. , 1992, “ Performance of Hybrid Airblast Atomizers Under Low Power Conditions,” AIAA Paper No. 9210463.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Reference fuel nozzle (adapted from Ref. [6] and modified)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Air-box and nozzle assembly in the high pressure spray facility

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Test section top view. Configuration of laser diffraction and PDPA systems.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Test section top view. Configuration of LIF/Mie imaging system.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Piping and instrumentation diagram of atmospheric experimental setup

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Sample conventional laser sheet images showing differences in cone angle using different fuels. Reference injector without swirler. Fuel flow 2 g/s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Sample cone angle image results. Refereed injector without swirler. Fuel A-1, fuel flow 2.5 g/s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Laser sheet image of fuel spray at three fuel flow rates. Reference injector with swirler. Fuel A-2, P3 = 3.4 atm, ΔP/P = 4%.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Laser sheet image of fuel spray at three P3 conditions. Reference injector with swirler. Fuel A-2, ΔP/P = 2%, fuel flow 3.5 g/s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Laser sheet image of fuel spray at three ΔP/P conditions. Reference injector with swirler. Fuel A-2, P3 = 3.4 atm, fuel flow 3.5 g/s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Laser sheet image of fuel spray. Reference injector with swirler. P3 = 3.4 atm, ΔP/P = 2%, fuel flow 3.5 g/s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Laser sheet image of fuel spray. Reference injector with swirler. P3 = 6.8 atm, ΔP/P = 4%, fuel flow 3.5 g/s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Laser sheet image of fuel spray. Reference injector with swirler. P3 = 13.4 atm, ΔP/P = 6%, fuel flow 3.5 g/s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Sauter-mean diameter as measured by laser diffraction. P3 = 3.4 atm, fuel flow 3.5 g/s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Sauter-mean diameter measured by laser diffraction at three P3 conditions. Fuel flow 3.5 g/s, ΔP/P = 2%.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Sauter-mean diameter measured by laser diffraction. P3 = 3.4 atm, ΔP/P = 4%.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Phase Doppler anemometry results. Axial velocity profiles at three ΔP/P conditions at 25.4 mm downstream of injector face. Fuel MIL-C, P3 = 3.4 atm, fuel flow 3.5 g/s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Phase Doppler anemometry results. Axial velocity profiles for three test fluids at 25.4 mm downstream of injector face. P3 = 3.4 atm, ΔP/P = 6%, fuel flow 3.5 g/s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Phase Doppler anemometry results. SMD profiles for three test fuels measured 25.4 mm downstream of injector face at three P3 and ΔP/P flow conditions, fuel flow 3.5 g/s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Uncalibrated LIF/Mie Ratio-metric SLIPI image with PDA data at 25.4 mm and 50.8 mm locations. Fuel A-2, P3 = 3.4 atm, ΔP/P = 2%, and fuel flow 3.5 g/s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Comparison between LIF/Mie ratio counts and PDA droplet data at 50.8 mm plane. Fuel A-2, P3 = 3.4 atm, ΔP/P = 2%, and fuel flow 3.5 g/s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Calibrated SMD map of the spray. Fuel A-2, P3 = 3.4 atm, ΔP/P = 2%, and fuel flow 3.5 g/s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Performance of an air-assist injector

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

Measured versus estimated SMD's. Comparison between correlations and NRC data at 25.4 mm from injector exit plane.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 25

Measured versus estimated SMD's. Comparison between correlations and NRC data at 63.5 mm from injector exit.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 26

Measured versus estimated drop size distribution. Comparison between correlations and NRC data.

Tables

Errata

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