7th Global Conference on Global Warming (GCGW-2018)

June 24-28, 2018

Izmir, Turkey

ENERGETIC AND EXERGETIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF GE90-115B HIGH BYPASS

TURBOFAN ENGINE FOR DIFFERENT FUEL USAGE

Ozgur BALLI1*, Yasin SOHRET2, Hikmet T. KARAKOC3

1
1st Air Maintenance Factory Directorship, General Directorate of Military Factories, Ministry of National Defence,
Eskisehir, Turkey.
2
Suleyman Demirel University, School of Civil Aviation, Department of Airframe and Powerplant Maintenance, TR-
32260, Isparta, Turkey.
3
Anadolu University, Facultyof Aeronautic and Astronautics, Department of Airframe and Powerplant Maintenance,
TR26470, Eskisehir, Turkey.
*
Corresponding author e-mail: : balli07balli@yahoo.com; balli.o@hvkk.tsk.tr

ABSTRACT
The energetic and exergetic performance assessment of a GE90-115 model high bypass turbofan engine used
on Boing 777 commercial aircraft are investigated for nine different fuels such as Jet-A, JP-4, JP-5, JP-8, JP-
10, AVGAS, No.2 Diesel, Camelina Bio and H2. The energy efficiency of turbofan engine is calculated to be
between 50.796% (JP-10 fuel) and 50.890% (H 2 fuel) while the exergy efficiency of the engine is estimated to
be between 45.102% (H2 fuel) and 48.051% (JP-10 fuel). The engine has the maximum sustainability index
value by 1.925 for JP-10 fuel usage when it has the minimum value by 1.822 for H 2 fuel usage. Although H2
fuel usage in aviation gas turbine is best option in order to reduce environmental pollutant and global warming
effects of fuel, the exergetic results indicate that the H 2 fuel usage affects badly exergetic efficiency of the
engine hence the H2 fuel has higher fuel exergy value than other fuels.

Keywords: Turbofan engine, different aviation fuels, hydrogen fuel, exergy efficiency, sustainability index.

1. INTRODUCTION
Aviation is responsible for approximately 2% of total global greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions. This
contribution is a result of 2-3% of total fossil fuel consumption worldwide. If the current growth rate of air
travel continues, this trend is forecast to grow toaround 3% by 2050 (Parker, 2009).
Two ways are available to reduce environmental impacts of aircrafts. One of the ways is to minimize the
exhaust emissions with alternative, clean, and renewable energy consumption ( Kousoulidou and Lonza,
2016). Recently, emerging biofuels and transportation fuels have been considered alternatives to traditional
hydrocarbon fuels. Among them, hydrogen and ammonia have zero or very little emissions when produced
from water by renewable energy sources. Possibly, hydrogen, ammonia, methanol and ethanol can eliminate
aviation industry's reliance on the limited fossil fuel sources with fluctuating prices and drastic GHG
emissions (Bicer and Dincer, 2017).
The other way is to maximize the energy and exergy efficiency of aircraft propulsion systems hence
increased efficiency reduces fuel energy consumption in aircraft propolsion system for constat thrust or
power production. The most important criterion in enhancing the performance of an energy conversion
system is the thermodynamic efficiency. Thermodynamic defects of processes are identified and measured
by exergy analyses. Exergy analyses indicate the location, size and resource use of thermodynamic
inefficiencies in a system (Balku, 2017). Exergy analysis is beneficial for identifying the locations and
calculating the magnitudes of the irreversibilities within a thermodynamic system. Using the result of this
analysis, the potential for the improvement in the performance of the system can be identified (Coban et al.,
2017).
Companies and owners have been developing technologies that reduce environmental impacts, increase
efficiencies, and reduce fuel consumptions and emission (Akbulut et al., 2016).Climate change policies; such
as carbon taxes or emissions permits; have been impacting the air transport industry in the recent years. In
this regard, this study aims to evaluate the energetic and exergetic performances of a GE90-115B high
bypass turbofan engine used on Boing 777 commercial aircraft for different fuels in order to determine which
fuel is effective for this engine.

2. MATERIAL AND METHODS

During certification testing in 2002, the GE90-115B engine set a world-record 568.93 kN of thrust to evaluate
the engine at its operational limits and demonstrate its capability beyond the most extreme operating
conditions.
 7th Global Conference on Global Warming (GCGW-2018)
June 24-28, 2018
Izmir, Turkey

At standard operating conditions, the engine produces 513 kN of thrust power (GE, 2018). The engine
technical data are given in Table 1 while the cutaway of the GE90-115B engine is illustrated in Fig 1.

Figure 1. GE90-115B engine cutaway

Table 1. Technical data of GE90-115B

Maximum takeoff thrust  ET  513 kN Air flow at the engine inlet 1461 kg/s
Bypass air flow m bypass 
1296.84 kg/s Core engine air flow 165.16 kg/s
 m core 
Jet-A1 fuel consumption  m F  4.104 kg/s Exhaust gases flow m
 eg   168.26 kg/s

The energy and exergy balance of the engine can be written as (Balli, 2017):
E F  E Pr  E WE (1)
E x  E x  E x
F Pr WEx (2)
Where;
E F  m
 F LHV (3)
Ex F  m
  F F  m
 F LHV (4)
2
V
E Pr  E x Pr   m eg  m bp 
eg
(5)
2000
ET
V 
 m eg  m bp  (6)

The  is fuel exergy grade function. For the chemical formula given as C aHb, it is calculated by (Balli,
b 0.042
2017):   1.04224  0.011925  (7)
a a
Energy and exergy efficiency are calculated by (Balli 2017):
E Pr E
 en   1  WE (8)
E F E F
E x Pr E xWEx
 ex   1 (9)
E x F E x F
Fuel exergy waste ratio is obtained from (Balli 2017):
E WE
FExWR   1   ex (10)
E F
Sustainability index is accounted by (Balli 2017):
1
SI  (11)
1   ex
 7th Global Conference on Global Warming (GCGW-2018)
June 24-28, 2018
Izmir, Turkey

The assumptions made given as follows;

 Fuel heat energy rate into combustor is same for all fuel types.
 Engine produces same thrust power for all fuel types.
 Fuel mass rates of all fuels are computed based on Jet-A/A1.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The chemical formula, lower heating value  LHV  , calculated exergy grade function    and estimated fuel
exergy  
F of the aviation engine fuels and hydrogen are given in Table 2.

Table 2. Technical and thermodynamic properties of fuels (SAE, 2004; Azami and Savill,2017; Song and
Jiaxuan, 1985; Wu et al., 2011)
Ca H b
Fuel types a b LHV  F
Jet-A 11.6 22 43080 1.06124 45718.03
JP-4 8.5 16.9 43606 1.06101 46266.34
JP-5 7.16 13.87 42566 1.05947 45097.60
JP-8 10.9 20.9 43371 1.06125 46027.57
JP-10 10 16 42187 1.05712 44596.72
AVGAS 7.68 16.8 43496 1.06286 46230.04
No:2 Diesel 7.24 12.9 42608 1.05769 45065.91
Camelina Bio 12 25.4 44000 1.06398 46815.18
H2 - - 119450 1.12832 134778.00

The product energy and exergy rate of GE90-115 engine is calculated to be 89812,40 kW when it produces
513 kN of thrust. While it consumes 4.104 kg/s-Jet-A fuel flow, the energy and exergy rate of Jet-A fuel
consumption is estimated to be 176800.32 kW and 187626.81 kW. In this regard, the energy and exergy
efficiency values of engine is obtained to be 50.799% and 47.868%. Hence fuel heat energy rate into
combustor is same for all fuel types, the fuel energy rates of other fuels equal to 176800.32 kW. According
to this assumption, the fuel mass rates and fuel exergy rates of other fuels are determined. Hence fuel mass
rates of other fuel is different from Jet-A fuel, exhaust gases mass rate and product energy and exergy rate
of engine differ from the engine fueled by Jet-A. The fuel flow, outlet air and exhaust flow, fuel energy rate,
fuel exergy rate, engine product energy/exergy rate, energy efficiency, exergy efficiency, fuel exergy waste
ratio and sustainability index of the engine are calculated for all fuel types and listed in Table 3.

Table 3. The energetic and exergetic performance parameters of the engine

mF  eg  m
m  bp Ex
F Ex
F Ex
Pr
 en  ex FExWR SI
Fuel type  kg / s   kg / s   kW   kW   kW   %  %  %  %
Jet-A 4.104 1465.104 176800.32 187626.81 89812.40 50.799 47.868 52.132 1.918
JP-4 4.054 1465.054 176800.32 187586.65 89815.43 50.800 47.879 52.121 1.919
JP-5 4.154 1465.154 176800.32 187315.45 89809.36 50.797 47.946 52.054 1.921
JP-8 4.076 1465.076 176800.32 187629.72 89814.08 50.800 47.868 52.132 1.918
JP-10 4.191 1465.191 176800.32 186899.15 89807.07 50.796 48.051 51.949 1.925
AVGAS 4.065 1465.065 176800.32 187913.49 89814.80 50.800 47.796 52.204 1.916
Diesel No:2 4.149 1465.149 176800.32 186999.31 89809.61 50.797 48.027 51.973 1.924
Camelina Bio 4.018 1465.018 176800.32 188112.23 89817.66 50.802 47.747 52.253 1.914
H2 1.480 1462.480 176800.32 199487.60 89973.53 50.890 45.102 54.898 1.822

The energy efficiency of turbofan engine is calculated to be between 50.796% (JP-10 fuel) and 50.890% (H 2
fuel) while the exergy efficiency of the engine is estimated to be between 45.102% (H 2 fuel) and 48.051% (JP-
10 fuel). However, the fuel exergy waste ratio of turbofan engine is accounted to be between 51.949% (JP-10
 7th Global Conference on Global Warming (GCGW-2018)
June 24-28, 2018
Izmir, Turkey

fuel) and 540.898% (H2 fuel).On the other hand, the engine has the maximum sustainability index value by
1.925 for JP-10 fuel usage when it has the minimum value by 1.822 for H2 fuel usage.

4. CONCLUSIONS
The energetic and exergetic performance assessment of a GE90-115 model high bypass turbofan engine used
on Boing 777 commercial aircraft are analyzed for nine different fuels such as Jet-A, JP-4, JP-5, JP-8, JP-10,
AVGAS, No.2 Diesel, Camelina Bio and H 2. The main remarkable results of this study can be summarized as
follows;
 The turbofan engine fueled by H2 fuel has the maximum energy efficiency with 50.890%.
 The turbofan engine fueled by JP-10 fuel has the maximum exergy efficiency with 48.051%.
 The engine has the maximum sustainability index value by 1.925 for JP-10 fuel usage when it has the
minimum value by 1.822 for H2 fuel usage
Although H2 fuel usage in aviation gas turbine is best option in order to reduce environmental pollutant and
global warming effects of fuel, the exergetic analyzing results indicate that the H2 fuel usage affects badly
exergetic efficiency of the engine hence the H2 fuel has higher fuel exergy value than other fuels.

NOMENCLATURE

E energy rate, kW Subscripts
bp bypass
ET engine thrust, kN
x
E exergy rate, kW
eg exhaust gases
FExWR fuel exergy waste ratio, % en energy
LHV lower heating value, kJ/kg ex exergy
m
 mass flow, kg/s F fuel
SI sustainability index, %, Pr product
V velocity, m/s WE waste energy
Greek Letters WEx waste exergy
 fuel exergy, kJ/kg
 efficiency, %
 exergy grade function

REFERENCES
Akbulut,U., Utlu, Z. & Kincay, O. (2016). Exergy, exergoenvironmental and exergoeconomic evaluation of a heat pump-
integrated wall heating system. Energy,107,502-522.
Azami, M.H.& Savill, M. (2017). Comporative study of alternative biofuels on aircraft engine performance. Proceeding
of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 232 (8), 1509-1521. DOI:
10.1177/0954410016654506.
Balli, O. (2017). Exergy modeling for evaluating sustainability level of a high by-pass turbofan engine used on
commercial aircrafts. Applied Thermal Engineering, 123, 138–155.
Balku, S. (2017).Analysis of combined cycle efficiency by simulation and optimization. Energy Conversion and
Management, 148, 174–183.
Bicer, Y.& Dincer, I. (2017).Life cycle evaluation of hydrogen and other potential fuels for aircrafts. Int Journal of
Hydrogen Energy, 42, 10722-10738.
Coban, K., Sohret, Y., Colpan, C.O. & Karakoc, T.H. (2017).Exergetic and exergoeconomic assessment of a small-
scale turbojet fuelled with biodiesel. Energy, 140, 1358-1367.
GE. (2018). www.geaviation.com/commercial/engines/ge90-engine , Accessed date: 25 March 2018.
Kousoulidou, M. & Lonza, L.(2016). Biofuels in aviation: Fuel demand and CO2 emissions evolution in Europe toward
2030. Transportation Research Part D 2016; 46: 166–18.
Parker, R. (2009). From blue skies to green skies: engine technology to reduce the climate-change impacts of aviation.
Technol Anal Strateg Manage, 21, 61-78.
SAE.(2004).Aerospace Recommended Practice, “Procedure for the analysis and evaluation Gaseous Emissions from
Aircraft Engines”. SAE ARP1533 Rev A
Song, Z. & Jiaxuan W. (1985). The principle of energy-saving. Electric Press. Beijing. China.
Wu. Z., Zou, S., An, L. (2011).The second law (exergy) analysis of hydrogen.Journal of Sustainable Development,
4(1), 260-263.