GE Aviation Low Emissions Combustion Technology Evolution

GE Aviation Low Emissions Combustion Technology Evolution

Hukam C. Mongia, Manager Adv. Comb. Eng., GE Aviation, Cincinnati, Ohio, U.S.A.

2 /GE - Aviation

Mongia_AIAA_IITK_2008

Presentation Outline

Introduction

Optimized Rich-Quench Lean (ORQL) Technology

Dual-Annular (Rich or Lean Dome) Combustors (DAC)

Combustion System Tradeoffs

Twin Annular Premixing Swirler (TAPS)

Long-term Goal (for TAPS2 and TAPS3)

Summary

3 /GE - Aviation


Extensive Low-Emissions Tech Development Activities for 30 years

Bahr and Gleason (1975), Roberts, Peduzzi, and Vitti (1975), Anderson, R. D. et al (1976), Bruce, Davis, Kuhn, and Mongia(1977) Google search for low gaseous emissions propulsion engine technology on November 24, 2007 at 7:11 AM gave a total of 3820 entries:

GEnx TAPS combustor Google search gave 762 entries including:Cool BurningsAllen Paxson, GEnx product line and Airbus programs manager, says that on the GEnx powerplant, "The TAPS combustor has changed the game in terms of NOx ...PDF] The GEnx promises clean, lean operationFile Format: PDF/Adobe AcrobatTAPS combustor extends the life of the. GEnx combustion liner and the turbine. components downstream. In addition,. the lower temperatures reduce liner GE - Aviation: GEnxGEnx TAPS Combustor--The Most Advanced Combustor in the Industry. With our innovative single-annular TAPS combustor, the GEnx is designed to be the Aviation Maintenance Magazine :: GE's Simpler, Efficient GEnx

GE's Simpler, More Efficient Genx The GE90 turbofan has spawned a number of ... The TAPS combustorruns cooler, too, Wilking said, "because it's not going

4 /GE - Aviation


Rich Quench Lean Combustors

Optimized to meet ALL Design Requirements:NOx, Smoke, CO & HC

Combustion Eff IdleCombustion Eff CruisePressure DropAltitude Restart Descent Weak ExtinctionTransient OperationHail/Water IngestionPeak Pattern FactorPeak Profile FactorRoot and Tip TemperaturesCombustor DurabilityFuel Injector CokingCombustion System WeightTotal Cost of Ownership

Low-Emissions Comb.Must Meet All Reqmnts

5 /GE - Aviation


20

30

40

50

60

70

80

20 25 30 35 40 45Engine Pressure Ratio

L

T

O

N

O

x

,

g

/

k

N

RQL

Optimized

RQL10%

20%

30%

Target >30% NOx Reduction from ORQL

Rich-Quench-Lean Technology Potential

CAEP6: -1.04+2 EPR (2008)

6 /GE - Aviation


DAC Optimized to meet ALL but 2 Design RequirementsNOx, Smoke, CO & HC

Off-design Turbine Efficiency (2)

Altitude Restart Descent Weak ExtinctionTransient OperationHail/Water Ingestion

Peak Pattern FactorPeak Profile Factor (1)

Fuel Injector CokingLiner Durability Fix in-placeCombustion System WeightTotal Cost of Ownership

~30% NOx Reduction

Fleet experience (2/06):~375 Engines~5M Flight Hrs.~3.3M Cycles

Optimized RQL will catch up with DACIf no new inventions

Future Invention to address Red &Orange Issues

Comparable with SAC:In-flight shutdownAborted takeoffsDelays & Cancellations

Dual- Annular CombustorDAC

Low Power (20/0) Intermediate Power (20/25)

Staged Combustion in DAC Combustor

High Power (20/20)Low Power (20/0) Intermediate Power (20/25)

Staged Combustion in DAC Combustor

High Power (20/20)

7 /GE - Aviation


20253035404550556065

20 40 60 80 100LTO CO, g/kN

L

T

O

N

O

x

,

g

/

k

N

CFM56-5ACFM56-5BCFM56-5B/PCFM56-7B

Same SAC & Fuel Nozzle

NOx versus CO and HC Tradeoffs

20253035404550556065

20 40 60 80 100 120LTO CO, g/kN

L

T

O

N

O

x

,

g

/

k

N

CFM56-5ACFM56-5BCFM56-5B/PCFM56-7BCFM56-5B/PDACCFM56-7BDAC

SAC vs DAC

??

20253035404550556065

0 5 10 15 20LTO HC, g/kN

L

T

O

N

O

x

,

g

/

k

N

CFM56-5ACFM56-5BCFM56-5B/PCFM56-7BCFM56-5B/PDACCFM56-7BDAC

HC

??

Goal: Reduce NOx, CO and HC

Is it fundamentally possible?

8 /GE - Aviation


Pilot and Main (Twin) FlamesMain flame is an Annular flameDegree of Premixing optimized

For TAPS1Swirler-stabilized flames

8 Years and ~$60 MM to reach TRL6

Pilot

Cyclone

Mixing Air Fuel Injection

TAPS Fuel Nozzle & Swirler Arrangement

9 /GE - Aviation


DAC TAPS combustor and fuel nozzle tested in a full-scale full-annular test rig

TAPS Cruise NOx Reduction

Optimized RQLHigh EPR TAPS (Typ)

Cruise NOx Reduction Potential

Low EPR TAPS(Typ)

Cruise NOx Reduction Potential LTO NOx Reduction

No Engine Testing

T3 (F)

E

I

N

O

x

/

P

3

^

.

5

TAPS_Typ2

TAPS_Typ1

Typ2 Typ1 cruise range

SL Engine OP-Line

10 /GE - Aviation


15

25

35

45

55

65

75

20 25 30 35Engine Pressure Ratio

L

T

O

N

O

x

,

g

/

k

N

CFM56-5B/PCFM56-7BCFM56-5B/PDACCFM56-7BDACCFM TAPSGE/NASA E^3 24% 39%

31% 46%

27%49%

TAPS NOx compared w/ RQL and Lean DAC

39-49% LTO NOx Reduction from RQL

11 /GE - Aviation


15

25

35

45

55

65

75


L

T

O

N

O

x

,

g

/

k

N

CFM56-5B/PCFM56-7BCFM56-5B/PDACCFM56-7BDACCFM TAPSGE/NASA E^3

02468

1012141618


L

T

O

H

C

,

g

/

k

N

CFM56-5B/PCFM56-7BCFM56-5B/PDACCFM56-7BDACCFM TAPS

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140


L

T

O

C

O

,

g

/

k

N


02468

1012141618


M

a

x

S

m

o

k

e

N

o

.


HC as good as SAC

CO midwaySmoke # 1/10th

Lowest PF and reduced Twall levels and gradients Improved life

~45% NOx reduction

12 /GE - Aviation


20

30

40

50

60

70

80


L

T

O

N

O

x

,

g

/

k

N

GE90DACIGE90DACIIGE90-115BGE90TAPS FAR

44-58% Reduction

0

1

2

3

4

5

6


L

T

O

H

C

,

g

/

k

N


HC ~1

10

20

30

40

50

60

70


L

T

O

C

O

,

g

/

k

N


CO comparable

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


M

a

x

S

m

o

k

e

N

o

.


Particulate mass ~1/4th

Lowest PF and reduced Twall levels and gradients Improved life

13 /GE - Aviation


20253035404550556065

20 40 60 80 100LTO CO, g/kN

L

T

O

N

O

x

,

g

/

k

N

CFM56-5B/PCFM56-7BCFMTAPS

01020304050607080

0 10 20 30 40 50 60LTO CO, g/kN

L

T

O

N

O

x

,

g

/

k

N

GE90DACIIGE90-115BGE90TAPS

15

25

35

45

55

65

0 2 4 6 8 10 12LTO HC, g/kN

L

T

O

N

O

x

,

g

/

k

N

CFM56-5B/PCFM56-7BCFMTAPS

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 1 2 3 4 5 6LTO HC, g/kN

L

T

O

N

O

x

,

g

/

k

N

GE90DACIIGE90-115BGE90TAPS

Summary of Emissions Technology Trend line

14 /GE - Aviation


Long-Term Vision: How much low NOx w/ 0.6 ?

0

20

40

60

80

Comb Inlet Temperature

E

I

N

O

x

Diffusion FlamePPM_chi=3PPM_chi=4PPM_chi=5PPM_ chi=6PM_Phi=0.60PM_Phi=0.65PM_Phi=0.70PM_fi=0.75PM_Phi=0.80PM_Phi=0.85Comb 1Comb 2Comb 3Comb 4Comb 5Comb 6

Reducing from 50 Take-off EINOx to 5 EI w/ TAPSX?What is Customers Expectation?

15 /GE - Aviation


NASAs UEET and Propulsion 21 Programs Goals:

30% CAEP2 at EPR>50 (TAPS2 Tech!) 50% CAEP6

15% CAEP2 at EPR>50 (TAPS3 Tech!) 25% CAEP6

Level of Effort: 2xTAPS1 Technology $, 10 years

Level of Effort: 2xTAPS2 Technology $, 15-20 years

Government Funded Effort Required to get to TRL6

16 /GE - Aviation


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

NOx CO HC

%

I

C

A

O

UEET FAR 6%UEET 5-cup B2, 10%UEET 5-cup B3 , 6%

(high power pilot fuelsplit listed in legend)

17% Reduction from FAR

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

NOx CO HC

%

I

C

A

O




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

NOx CO HC

%

I

C

A

O




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

NOx CO HC

%

I

C

A

O




UEET demonstrated limitation of TAPS1 Technology

More work needed for conducting combustion system tradeoffs and TAPS2 mixer development

UEET Program Terminated Prematurely

17 /GE - Aviation


Fuel/Air Ratio

E

I

N

O

x

Typical Cruise Conditions

~70% ReductionTA

PS1 Tech

nology

TAPS 2 and 3Fuel/Air Ratio

E

I

N

O

x

Typical Cruise Conditions

~70% ReductionTA

PS1 Tech

nology

TAPS 2 and 3

Preliminary Mixer Development Effort for Cruise EINOx

Propulsion 21 Program Terminated Prematurely

Documents

GE Aviation Low Emissions Combustion Technology Evolution