Energy 260 (2022) 125085

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Energy and performance analysis of a turbofan engine with the aid of

dynamic component efficiencies
Serhan Ahmet Cihangir a, Hakan Aygun b, Onder Turan c, d, *
a
Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Firat University, Elazig, Turkey
b
Department of Aircraft Airframe and Powerplant, Firat University, TR-23119, Elazig, Turkey
c
Faculty of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Eskisehir Technical University, TR-26450, Eskisehir, Turkey
d
Istanbul Ticaret University, TR-34445, Istanbul, Turkey

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Assessment of performance of turbofan engine with different design parameters is crucial for meeting the per­
Polytropic efficiency formance requirements by considering each key components of the engine. To comprehend influences of
Turbofan performance component efficiencies to mitigate environmental effect from turbofans has been hot topics in aviation field
Specific fuel consumption
recently. In this study, firstly, impacts of polytropic efficiencies of fan, compressor and turbine as well as pressure
Overall efficiency
ratio of combustor (CPR) on several turbofan performance are dealt with at several flight conditions. Secondly, it
is tried to show difference of performance metrics under ideal and real conditions. The discrepancy between
performance parameters computed at ideal and real cases gets relatively high. Namely, at take-off condition, the
difference between ideal and real specific fuel consumption is computed as 29.12% whereas it is found as 28.37%
at cruise condition, which shows that considering the system as ideal makes the computations inappropriate for
performance analysis. Moreover, performance parameters of turbofan is more sensitive to compressor efficiency
compared with turbine. As the polytropic efficiencies of fan and compressor are close to highest, net thrust of the
engine develops from 109.05 kN (baseline) to 124.71 kN at take-off while it increases from 26.36 kN (baseline) to
29.27 kN at cruise condition. With effect of the elevated pressure ratio of combustor and efficiency of turbine,
thrust of the engine increases to 118.23 kN at take off and to 27.84 kN at cruise condition. Finally, as Mach
number increases, the difference between ideal and real performance values sharply increases. Therefore, when
analyzing on turbofan engines, the assumptions should be minimum as possible as, otherwise the findings make
the engineers to misguide for system optimization. Besides, these outcomes show that if the components with
higher polytropic efficiency can be obtained, overall efficiency of turbofan, thereby environmental sustainability
could be elevated to upper level compared with baseline.

1. Introduction industry could be possible by removing causes leading to increment of

aviation emissions.When considering emission source in aircraft, tur­
Next twenty years, it is expected that the increase of air traffic will bine engines are firstly considered. Since these systems, especially
attain a factor of two compared with the present year, which leads to turbofan engines have higher reliability and provide higher power per
more oil demand day by day if any measures that decrease dependancy weight, these have been selected as power supply for commercial
of fossil fuel are not taken [1]. What is more, the supply of aviation fuel aircraft. Due to rapid expansion of commercial aviation, it is projected
could fall behind the demand to it. To offset aviation emissions, several that freight and passenger air traffics will increase 4.2% and 4.7% at an
agencies have put forward important goals, however alone these at­ annual rate by 2036, respectively and it is thought that effect of
tempts without official frameworks set by authorities may failed to COVID-19 on this sector will be overcome, rapidly at next years [3].
achieve these goals. As a matter of fact, the global aim determined in the Since service quality depends on how much short time passenger or
Paris Agreement is that increment of average temperature is to limit in freight are conveyed between the destinations, air transportation is
1.5–2 ◦ C above pre-industrial levels [2]. To support this aim in aviation promising sector in spite of its relatively high costs [4].

* Corresponding author. Faculty of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Eskisehir Technical University, TR-26450, Eskisehir, Turkey.
E-mail addresses: cihangirserhan@gmail.com (S.A. Cihangir), haygun@firat.edu.tr (H. Aygun), oturan@ticaret.edu.tr, onderturan@eskisehir.edu.tr (O. Turan).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.125085
Received 11 May 2022; Received in revised form 25 June 2022; Accepted 7 August 2022
Available online 16 August 2022
0360-5442/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S.A. Cihangir et al. Energy 260 (2022) 125085

The exhaustion threat of fossil fuels gets the current engines inproper slightly diminishes by 0.68%. Besides, Aygun [19] scrutinized effect of
for aviation industry. To meet performance requirements of aircraft as throttle settings on turbofan engine performance for 19 different points.
well as mitigation of emissions, several additives have been recently The higher RPM results in energy efficiency of PW4000 engine to in­
added to conventional kerosene fuels. These are named as alternative crease from 9.77 to 37.69% whereas it leads to mitigate environmental
fuels that occur from mixing different oils to the kerosene fuel. The effect factor of the engine from 3.26 to 0.807 throughout all RPM set­
combustion of fossil fuels in aircraft is contributing anthropogenic tings. In addition, Yucer [20] studied effects of the engine loads on
emission up to 5% [5]. Since these emissions lead to the formation of turbojet performance for four different loads. As the engine runs higher
contrails in atmosphere layers, global warming is induced on account of loads, overall performance of turbojet engine improves. Namely, the SFC
chemical reaction of several emission compounds [6]. For alleviation of of the engine decreases from 66.5 to 0.29 kg/Nh. Similarly, Coban et al.
aircraft emissions, several main measures have been proposed, which [21] searched the load effects of turboshaft engine used in helicopter
are official binding schemes concerning emission tax, alternative fuels, engine for four points. Especially, when the engine is operated at the
novel aircraft types involving components with higher efficiency and the higher loads, exergy efficiency of the combustor increases from 60.8 to
improved air traffic management [7]. On the other hand, it is well 66.61% whereas the other components, especially compressors do not
known that aircraft engines are source of mechanical and electricity for experience an apparent change in its efficiency. Also, Yildirim et al. [22]
aircraft subsystems, which results in impairing efficiency of the engine. analyzed impacts of shaft power on thermodynamic metrics of
The existing electricity production systems such as APU, RAT and the piston-prop helicopter engine at ten different points. Interestingly, the
engine itself in aircraft have relatively lower efficiency than solid oxide highest exergy efficiency of the engine is measured as 17.62% at 250
fuel cell [8]. The evidence of this case is that the efficiency ranges of SHP which is intermediate point, not maximum. On the other hand,
SOFC-GT hybrid systems are 60–80% whereas conventional engines Akdeniz and Balli [23] investigated effects of different fuels on exergetic
enjoy efficiency of 20–40% [9,10]. performance of small turbojet engine, which expressed that there is the
To achieve fuel efficiency of 2% determined by ICAO could be apparent difference between SFC values of the engine fueled JP-8, H2
possible with both novel aircraft technology involving full or hybrid and biofuel whereas their energy and exergy efficiencies are close the
electric aircraft and sustainable aviation fuels [2]. Especially, as the each other, namely change between 14.36 and 15.34% for exergy effi­
volume of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) application in aviation in­ ciency. In other words, the engine fueled H2 has the lowest SFC as 0.013
creases, CO2 emissions from aircraft engine could be offset. Moreover, it kg/kN while the highest exergy efficiency (15.34%) belongs to the en­
is undoubted that substituting of alternative fuel has several challenges gine fueled JP-8. Finally, Aygun et al. [24] dealt with influences of RPM
in application phase. For instance, although liquefied hydrogen provides on TRS-18 turbojet engine for ten points. The authors express that
about three-fold more energy per unit kg, this fuel is required more four although RPM increases linearly, exergy efficiency of the engine raises
fold volume for obtaining the same energy [7]. To partly achieve decreasingly. Namely, effect of RPM on this metric mitigates in its high
carbon-neutral growth from 2019, the efficiency of the propulsion sys­ values. In this context, exergy efficiency of the engine ascends from 5.8
tem and its components could be elevated by implementing parametric to 18.07% due to the elevated RPM. In this study, combined effects of
cycle equations as well as thermodynamic laws to the existing engine polytropic efficiency of main turbomachinery components on the
being or not applied any modification. When considering literature re­ turbofan engine performance are investigated at both take-off and cruise
view, the researchers who work optimization of gas turbine engine so as conditions. Although effects of fan pressure ratio, by-pass ratio,
to enhance energy efficiency have increased day by day [11,12]. compressor pressure ratio and turbine inlet temperature on thermody­
Zhou et al. [13] investigated effects of biofuels on aircraft engine namic and performance metrics of turbofan engine have been studied, it
performance. Biofuels with low caloric value lead to lowering NO is seen that influence of efficiency of fan, compressor and turbine on
emission, but providing lower thrust and higher specific fuel consump­ performance parameters are lack of this field. This is main novelty of the
tion. Besides, Ji et al. [14] indicated how the engine performance affects present study. Moreover, parametric cycle equations regarding the
from modification of engine involving solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) and S–V2500 engine are solved for both ideal and real cases. Thus, the dif­
ITB. Thanks to integration of these components, thermal efficiency and ference between ideal and real computations is revealed, which could
specific thrust of the engine get increment by 2.94% and 23.87% help the engineers so as to make decision for improvement of the engine
respectively compared with conventional system. In addition, Guo et al. performance. Moreover, the parametric analysis is performed at
[10] explored effects of SOFC on turbofan performance at different different altitude and Mach for ideal and real cases. Thus, effects of flight
electric power fractions (EPF). The SFC of newly design turbofan de­ conditions on performance metrics of S–V2500 engine are observed. To
creases between 10% and 24% with respect to different EPFs. Moreover, sum up, major points of the current study could be expressed as below:
Shavsavari and Ahmadabadi [15] tried to develop axial flow fan of
turbofan engine without changing fan diameter. According to the au­ • To perform parametric cycle analyses regarding turbofan engine
thors, for the same thrust with conventional one, the higher efficiency (S–V2500) under ideal and real cases
and the lower fuel consumption were obtained, however at overspeed • To observe effects of polytropic efficiency of fan, compressor and
conditions, these gains from the newly design fan eliminate. turbine as well as pressure ratio of combustor at take-off and cruise
When considering effect analysis of fuel, compressor pressure ratio conditions
(CPR), turbine inlet temperature (TIT), by-pass ratio (BPR) and fan • To explore impacts of altitude and Mach on performance metrics of
pressure ratio (FPR) on performance behaviour of gas turbine engine the S–V2500 engine for ideal and real cases
used in aviation applications, there are a number of studies in the open • To compare the findings of ideal and real computations of the engine
literature. Turan [16] dealt with effects of TIT and CPR on small turbojet parameters such as net thrust, specific fuel consumption and overall
engine, which expressed that rising CPR as well as the higher Mach leads efficiency
to increase exergy efficiency of the engine, which ranges between 5 and
10%. In addition, Akdeniz and Balli [17] explored effects of by-pass ratio 2. System description
on military aircraft engine producing thrust of 80 kN at take-off. With
the increased BPR from 1.3 to 1.45, exergy efficiency of the engine raises As a common kind of gas turbine engines, turbofan engines have
from about 25.5 to 26.5%. On the other hand, Balli et al. [18] investi­ superiority of performance in thrust production with lower specific fuel
gated the effects of hydrogen fuel on TF33 engine fueled with kerosene consumption. This case makes their suitable for powering commercial
fuel, which stated that usage of hydrogen has both advantages and aircraft. Many engineers have spent attempt to promote performance of
drawbacks. However, thanks to H2 fuel for fuel energy rate, SFC of the these engines since 1940 where age of jet initiated. Moreover, efficiency
engine decreases by 60.61% whereas specific thrust of the TF33 engine of main components of turbofan engine has significant influence on its

2
S.A. Cihangir et al. Energy 260 (2022) 125085

overall performance. When considering individual component of sys­ Table 1

tem, specialization is required for each unit for elevating performance Several versions of V2500 engine and their specifications used in commercial
margin to an upper level. In the present study, high by-pass turbofan aircraft [26,28].
engine that is very similar to V-2500 engine is dealt with. Furthermore, Engine By-pass Overall pressure Rated thrust Applications
the earlier version of V2500 engine started to be employed in 1989 for identification ratio ratio (kN)
A320 aircraft. The V2500 engine has been manufactured by Interna­ V2522-A5 4.9 25.27 102.5 A319
tional Aero Engine Company consisting of consortium of Pratt Whitney, V2524-A5 4.8 27 108.9 A320
Japanese Aero Engine Corporation and MTU Aero Engines [25]. Having V2527-A5 4.8 27.1 110.3 A321
V2530-A5 4.6 32 133 MD-90
more than 250 million flight hours, the V2500 engine has high reliability
V2533-A5 4.5 33.7 140.6 KC-390
and efficiency [26]. This engine enjoys typically single stage fan and V2531-E5 4.5 32.3 134.8
four stages low pressure compressor, which are turned by five stages low V2500-AI 5.7 36 111
pressure turbine on N1 shaft. Also, it has ten stages high pressure
compressor that is turned by two stages high pressure turbine on N2
shaft. Moreover, its maximum take-off thrust is measured as 111 kN higher overall pressure ratio and polytropic efficiency of compressor
whereas the engine considered in this study (named after S–V2500 en­ could be aimed. At early turbojets, polytropic efficiency of compressor
gine) produces take-off thrust of 109.05 kN. Fig. 1 shows typical mixed was below 80% whereas it is improved up to 92% [29]. In this study,
flow high by-pass turbofan engine ant its key components. Also, Table 1 parametric cycle equations are applied to for each component of the
presents different types of V2500 engine used in commercial aircraft. engine in turn.
When considering working of turbofan engine, fan unit of the engine
increases pressure of incoming ambient air and the compressed air is
diverted to two different ducts. Small part of the pressurized air passes 3.1. Fan section
through core section whereas the remain air flows through by-pass duct
to exhaust section where core air and fan air are mixed and the mixing For a given fan pressure ratio and polytropic efficiency outlet tem­
flows leave the engine from common exhaust duct. The specifications of perature and pressure of fan are determined by following relations [29].
S–V2500 engine considered in this study are presented in Table 2 in (γ − 1)/(γc ηfan )
detail. τfan = πfanc (1)

3. Mathematical background of parametric cycle equations where τfan denotes ratio of fan outlet temperature to its inlet temperature
whereas π fan represents pressure ratio between fan inlet and outlet. Also,
With the advent of turbojet engines in 1940s, the traditional pro­ ηfan is polytropic efficiency of fan while γc denotes specific heat ratio for
peller/piston engines have started to be removed from most of aero- cold flow.
vehicle due to the fact that turbojet engines have higher power to Isentropic efficiency of fan could be found with knowing tempera­
weight and higher reliability [26]. However, the early turbojets were not ture and pressure ratio at fan section [29].
suitable for transport aircraft where fuel economy is required. In this
π(γfanc − 1)/(γc ) − 1
framework, several targets have been determined for these systems. ηisen,fan = (2)
These are to increase overall efficiency, to develop power output for τfan − 1
same dimensions, to mitigate exhaust emission and noise [26]. To follow
these goals, at several fields, research and development studies have
been initiliazed. For instance, for combustor, it is aimed that combustion 3.2. Compressor section
process, pressure drop and combustion efficiency are improved. More­
over, for turbine, turbine inlet temperature and polytropic efficiency of Similarly, to compute outlet temperature and pressure of compressor
turbine could be enhanced. On the other hand, for compressor, the could be possible by introducing the determined compressor pressure
ratio and its polytropic efficiency [29].

Fig. 1. Illustration of cross section high by-pass turbofan engine and its main components [27].

3
S.A. Cihangir et al. Energy 260 (2022) 125085

Table 2
The S–V2500 engine specifications for ideal and real conditions.
P4 = P3 − ΔPcc (6)

Parameters Ideal Real Ideal Real where ΔPcc is the pressure drop in the combustor chamber or the
condition condition condition condition
combustor.
(take-off) (take-off) (cruise) (cruise)

Altitude (km) 0 0 11 11
Mach 0 0 0.9 0.9 3.5. Pressure ratio of combustor
Ambient 288.15 288.15 216.65 216.65
temperature
It is ratio of outlet pressure to inlet pressure in combustor. Due to
(K)
Ambient 101.325 101.325 22.63 22.63
viscous losses and flow friction in combustor duct, this metric is less than
pressure (kPa) unity for real case [29].
Air mass flow 358 358 143 143
P4
(ṁa ) (kg/s) πcc = (7)
By-pass ratio 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.7 P3
Cp (Specific 1.004 – 1.004 –
heat) (kJ/kgK) where πcc is pressure ratio in the combustor.
Cpc (Specific – 1.004 – 1.004 Moreover, fuel to air ratio is determined by establishing equation of
heat) (kJ/kgK)
energy conservation for the combustor.
Cpt (Specific – 1.108 – 1.108
heat) (kJ/kgK) ṁcore (1 + f )cph T4 = ṁcore cpc T3 + ηcc ṁf QLHV (8)
γ (Specific heat 1.4 – 1.4 –
ratio)
γc (for cold air) – 1.4 – 1.4
where ṁcore is the air mass flow through the core section of the engine
γt (for hot gases) – 1.35 – 1.35 whereas cph represents specific heat for hot air gases and QLHV is
Fan Pressure 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 lowering heat value of the fuel, which is 42,800 kJ/kg. Also, T 4 is tur­
ratio bine inlet temperature.
Fan nozzle 1 0.99 1 0.99
The above equation is rearranged as follows:
pressure ratio
Exhaust nozzle 1 0.99 1 0.99 τλ − τr τcomp.
pressure ratio f= (9)
ηcc QLHV /(cpc T0 ) − τλ
Overall pressure 36 36 36 36
ratio
Turbine inlet 1550 1550 1550 1550
where f is fuel to air ratio whereas ηcc is efficiency of combustion and τ λ
temperature is enthalpy ratio for the combustor.
(K)
Fan polytropic 1 0.85≪ ηfan 1 0.85≪ ηfan
efficiency 0.95 0.95 3.6. Turbine section
Compressor 1 0.89≪ ηcomp 1 0.89≪ ηcomp
polytropic 0.99 0.99 To compute outlet temperature and pressure of turbine should be
efficiency established equation of power balance between fan, compressor and
Turbine 1 0.89≪ ηturb 1 0.89≪ ηturb
turbine units [29].
polytropic 0.99 0.99
efficiency ṁfan cpc (T1.8 − T1 ) + ṁLPC cpc (T2 − T1.3 ) = ηm,LPT ṁLPT (T4.5 − T5 ) (10)
Combustor 1 0.96≪ πcomb 1 0.96≪ πcomb
pressure ratio 0.99 0.99
Shaft 1 0.99 1 0.99 ṁHPC cpc (T3 − T2 ) = ηm,HPT ṁHPT (T4 − T4.5 ) (11)
mechanical
efficiency where T 1.3 is compressor inlet temperature whereas T 1.8 is fan outlet
temperature.
From above relations, temperature ratio at turbine is determined as
(γ − 1)/(γc ηcomp. )
(3) below:
c
τcomp. = πcomp.

where ηcomp. denotes polytropic efficiency of compressor. 1 τr [ ( )]

τturb. = 1 − τcomp. − 1 + α τfan − 1 (12)
Isentropic efficiency of compressor regarding the engine is presented ηm (1 + f ) τλ
as below [29]:
where α is by-pass ratio and ηm is mechanical efficiency of shaft.
π(γc − 1)/(γc ) − 1 Once calculated temperature ratio of turbine, pressure ratio at find
ηisen,comp. = comp. (4) outlet pressure of turbine could be determined as follows:
τcomp. − 1
(13)
1)ηturb. ]
πturb. = τγturb.
t /[(γ t −

3.3. Polytropic efficiency for fan and compressor

where γt denotes specific heat ratio for hot gases and ηturb is polytropic
Under a given pressure change, it is ratio of the ideal work required efficiency of turbine.
for compression to the real work imparted to compressor or fan [29].
dwideal dhideal dTideal γ − 1 dP/P 3.7. Polytropic efficiency for turbine
ηcomp. or fan = = = = (5)
dw dh dT γ dT/T
Under a given pressure change, it is ratio of thereal work obtained
from turbine to the ideal work gained from turbine. Namely, it is reverse
3.4. Combustor section of polytropic efficiency of compressor or fan [29].
dw dh dT dT/T
As a design parameter, combustor exit or turbine inlet temperature is ηturb. = = = = (14)
dwideal dhideal dTideal [γ − 1/γ]dP/P
given at parametric cycle analyses. The outlet pressure of combustor
depends how much pressure drop through combustor occurs [29].

4
S.A. Cihangir et al. Energy 260 (2022) 125085

3.8. Fan thrust computation thereby fuel economy, it is of high importance for commercial aircraft.
This metric is rate of the fuel use by turbofan engine per unit thrust
generated [30,31].
τfan = ṁfan (V1.8 − Vi ) + A1.8 (P1.8 − Pa ) (15)
ṁfuel
( ) SFC = (20)
τfan V1.8 T1.8 /T0 1 − P0 /P1.8 Fnet
= a0 − M0 + (16)
ṁfan a0 V1.8 /a0 γc
where SFC is specific fuel consumption while ṁfuel is fuel flow (kg/s).
where V1.8 is fan outlet velocity.
To compute fan thrust, Va1.80 , TT1.80 and P0
are firstly determined. These 3.10.3. Thermal efficiency
P1.8
Thermal efficiency is ratio of power imparted to the engine airflow
are given in the literature.
(as named total power) to the power enabled from fuel injected to the
engine (as named fuel power). For turbofan engines, it is expressed as
3.9. Core thrust computation
below [30,31]:
( ) τnet V1 + 12ṁcore (1 + f )(V9 − V1 )2 + 12ṁfan (1 + f )(V1.8 − V1 )2
τcore = ṁcore + ṁfuel (V9 − Vi ) + A9 (P9 − Pa ) (17) ηthermal = (21)
ṁfuel QLHV
( )
τcore V9 T9 /T0 1 − P0 /P9
= a0 (1 + f ) M0 + (1 + f ) (18) 3.10.4. Overall efficiency
ṁcore a0 V9 /a0 γc
The verbal definition of overall efficiency is ratio of thrust power to
where V9 is outlet velocity of gases from the core engine while A9 is fuel power. It is computed from the product of propulsive and thermal
outlet area of exhaust nozzle. efficiencies [30,31].
τnet V1
3.10. Performance parameters ηoverall = (22)
ṁfuel Q̇LHV

3.10.1. Net thrust To carry out parametric cycle analyses regarding the S–V2500 en­
Thrust force of turbofan engines are mostly obtained by means of fan gine, specific code is improved at MATLAB environment, whose
unit that accelerates high air mass flow with relatively lower velocity, computation methodology is presented at flowchart in Fig. 2. When
which is named cold thrust. The remain is obtained from core section, considering flowchart, prior to calculations, one should introduce data
which is named hot thrust. For typical turbofan engine, net thrust re­ regarding the S–V2500 engine as well as flight conditions. After that, to
lations of the engine is presented as follows [30]: perform the effect analysis, one should determine ranges of input vari­
ables such as polytropic efficiency of fan, compressor and turbine. When
τnet = ṁcore [(1 + f )V9 − V1 ] + ṁfan [(1 + f )V1.8 − V1 ] + A9 (P9 − P1 ) fulfilled these steps, thermodynamic values that belong to each
+ A1.8 (P1.8 − P1 ) (19) component are computed. Based on these information, performance
parameters of the S–V2500 engine are easily determined for each flight
whereas τnet is net thrust of the engine. condition introduced.

3.10.2. Specific fuel consumption

Since specific fuel consumption directly affects fuel consumption,

Fig. 2. Flowchart of computation of turbofan performance parameters.

5
S.A. Cihangir et al. Energy 260 (2022) 125085

4. Results and discussion presents behaviour of net thrust under four different engine parameters
at take-off condition. Net thrust of S–V2500 improves from 109.05 to
This section could be separated into four subsections. Firstly, the 124.71 kN on account of the maximized ηfan and ηcompressor . Thanks to the
comparison of net thrust, SFC and thermal efficiency of the engine is increased ηfan , net thrust of the engine enhances from 109.05 to 113.73
performed for ideal and real cases as well as take-off and cruise condi­ kN whereas it increases to 121.66 kN due to the elevated ηcompressor . It
tion through Fig. 3. Secondly, influences of polytropic efficiencies of could be inferred that polytropic efficiency of compressor affects the
turbomachinery components along with pressure ratio of combustor on thrust of S–V2500 more stringent. Furthermore, with the combined
thermal efficiency, specific fuel consumption, net thrust and overall impacts of ηturbine and πcombustor , net thrust of the engine changes from
efficiency are dealt with through Figs. 4–7 at take-off condition. Thirdly, 109.11 to 116.78 kN. To set highest value of ηturbine leads thrust of
these assessments are presented for cruise condition between Figs. 8–11. S–V2500 to ascend from 109.11 to 116.08 kN whereas it decreases to
Lastly, effects of altitude and Mach number for ideal and real cases are 108.99 kN due to the increased πcombustor . This adverse effect results from
given through Figs. 12–14. low polytropic efficiency of turbine. To observe favourable effect of
Fig. 3 shows how performance indicators of the S–V2500 engine πcombustor , ηturbine should be set as 0.9018 or more.
change according to different cases and flight conditions. As expected, at Fig. 5 illustrates how specific fuel consumption of the S–V2500 varies
ideal case where it is assumed that the components work without under different design parameters at take-off condition. Thanks to the
experiencing efficiency losses or without being the pressure drop at highest polytropic efficiencies of compressor and fan, SFC of the engine
combustor, net thrust and thermal efficiency of turbofan engine is diminishes from 9.82 to 9.52 g/kN. However, the lower SFC is observed
calculated higher, but SFC is lower compared with real case. Namely, net in SFC contours, which means that obtaining minimum SFC is possible
thrust of the engine is measured as 134.61 kN at ideal case and 109.05 with optimum polytropic efficiencies of components. Namely, the lowest
kN at real case whereas ideal and real SFCs are found as 6.96 and 9.82 g/ SFC is found as 9.4144 g/kN with ηfan of 0.95 and ηcompressor of 0.9147.
kNs, respectively. Moreover, ideal and real thermal efficiencies are in With only changing of ηfan , SFC of S–V2500 decreases from 9.82 to 9.42
turn observed as 64.08% and 26.59% at take-off condition. On the other g/kN whereas variation of ηcompressor leads SFC to decrease from 9.82 to
hand, at cruise condition where altitude and Mach is 11 km and 0.9, net
9.76 g/kN. On the other hand, with combined effects of ηturbine and
thrust of ideal and real cases are gauged as 31.47 and 26.36 kN,
πcombustor , SFC of the S–V2500 varies from 9.68 to 9.04 g/kN. The
respectively. In addition, SFC value is observed as 13.9 g/kNs for ideal
maximized ηturbine make the SFC to decrease from 9.68 to 9.10 g/kN
case and 19.03 g/kNs for real case whereas ideal and real overall effi­
while the highest πcombustor leads to raise from 9.68 to 9.69 g/kN at ηturbine
ciencies are determined as 44.61 and 29.15%, respectively. The reason
of 0.85. However, it is seen that as the ηturbine increases, the negative
why overall efficiency is not calculated at take-off condition is that this
effect of πcombustor on SFC vanishes.
efficiency becomes zero due to assuming flight velocity zero. It could be
According to Fig. 6, thermal efficiency (TE) of the S–V2500 engine is
deduced that to perform analysis at ideal case is seen very insufficient to
favourably affected from the increased polytropic efficiency of turbo­
determine whether the engine could meet performance requirements for
machinery components. Namely, TE of the engine changes from 26.59%
the aimed mission.
to 38.58% when polytropic efficiency of fan and compressor are
ascended to 0.95 and 0.99, respectively. Furthermore, with effects of the
maximized ηturbine and πcombustor , thermal efficiency of S–V2500 engine
4.1. The effect analyses at take-off condition
raises from 25.51% to 34.13%. When considering effects of each vari­
able, separately, increasing of ηturbine leads TE to increase from 25.51% to
In this section, effects of polytropic efficiency of fan, compressor and
33.44% whereas the elevated πcombustor results in TE ascending from
turbine as well as pressure ratio of combustion chamber are explored by
25.51% to 26.13%. As can be understood from these findings, effect of
performing parametric cycle analyses under real conditions. Fig. 4

Fig. 3. Performance comparisons of the S–V2500 engine under take-off and cruise conditions.

6
S.A. Cihangir et al. Energy 260 (2022) 125085

Fig. 4. Net thrust variation of the S–V2500 engine versus ηfan , ηcompressor , ηturbine and πcombustor at take-off.

Fig. 5. SFC variation of the S–V2500 engine versus ηfan , ηcompressor , ηturbine and πcombustor at take-off.

ηturbine is observed more dominant than that of πcombustor . 4.2. The effect analyses at cruise condition
Finally, variation of total power imparted to the engine versus
component variables is presented in Fig. 7. It changes from 0.7065 MW In this section, thermodynamic analyses are performed to find out
to 1.1366 MW when ηfan and ηcompressor are set their the highest value. effects of the engine variables at cruise condition where altitude of 11
With impact of the maximized ηfan , total power of the S–V2500 attains km and Mach number of 0.9. While calculating performance parameters,
from 0.7065 MW to 0.8223 MW whereas it raised to 1.0224 MW owing the constant engine parameters used at take-off condition are not
to setting ηcompressor up to highest value. Furthermore, as can be seen in changed. Fig. 8 depicts how much the component variables affect net
Fig. 7, total power also affects from of ηturbine and πcombustor . Thanks to thrust of S–V2500 at cruise condition. The combined influences of ηfan
setting maximum of both variables, total power attains from 0.689 to and ηcompressor make the thrust to promote from 26.36 to 29.27 kN. When
0.8939 MW. When regarding effect of ηturbine , the elevated ηturbine causes setting value of ηfan up to 0.95, thrust slightly varies from 26.36 to 26.93
total power to raise from 0.689 MW to 0.876 MW while it changes to kN whereas it raises to 28.83 kN as ηcompressor is set to 0.99. In addition,
0.7084 MW due to the maximized πcombustor . under favour of the increased ηturbine and πcombustor to maximum, thrust of
S–V2500 engine attains from 26.17 to 27.54 kN. With effect of only
ηturbine raised to 0.99, thrust of the engine changes from 26.17 to 27.4 kN
whereas it ascends to 26.33 kN on account of πcombustor maximized to

7
S.A. Cihangir et al. Energy 260 (2022) 125085

Fig. 6. Thermal efficiency variation of the engine versus ηfan , ηcompressor , ηturbine and πcombustor at take-off.

Fig. 7. Total power variation of the S–V2500 engine versus ηfan , ηcompressor , ηturbine and πcombustor at take-off.

0.99. under different component variables at cruise condition. As the ηfan and
Fig. 9 demonstrates how much the component variables are effective ηcompressor enhance to 0.95 and 0.99, respectively, TE of the engine im­
on specific fuel consumption of S–V2500 engine at cruise condition. proves from 42.34% to 49.89%. Also, the maximized ηfan by keeping
Firstly, SFC varies from 19.03 to 18.57 g/kN due to both impacts of the ηcompressor constant leads TE of the S–V2500 to increase from 42.34% to
maximized ηfan and ηcompressor , which is calculated as the difference of 45.17% whereas it raises to 47.3% due to setting ηcompressor to the highest.
2.41%. It is thought that this variation rate is not low as not omittable.
In addition, thermal efficiency of the engine changes from 42.19 to
Besides, the escalated ηfan results in SFC to decrease from 19.03 to 18.63
47.13% with effects of ηturbine and πcombustor . At constant πcombustor , TE of
g/kN while it dimishes to 18.85 g/kN due to raised ηcompressor . On the the engine raises from 42.19 to 46.61% on account of the maximized
other hand, with combined effect of ηturbine and πcombustor , SFC descends ηturbine . However, at constant ηturbine , thermal efficiency of the S–V2500
from 18.96 to 18.02 g/kN, which is determined as the difference of raises to 42.75%. As can be noticed from the findings, polytropic effi­
4.95%. It could be deduced that mitigation of pressure drop in ciency of turbine has more effect on thermal efficiency compared with
combustor makes SFC low at significant manner. Moreover, with effect effect of. πcombustor .
of ηturbine increased to maximum, SFC decreases from 18.96 to 18.11 g/ Finally, overall efficiency of the engine is plotted versus different
kN whereas it diminishes to 18.85 g/kN as the πcombustor increases to its efficiency values of main components at cruise condition in Fig. 11. It
maximum value. could be noteworthy that the reason why overall efficiency is not pre­
Fig. 10 indicates behaviour of thermal efficiency of S–V2500 engine sented at take-off condition is that this metric could not computed due to

8
S.A. Cihangir et al. Energy 260 (2022) 125085

Fig. 8. Net thrust variation of the S–V2500 engine versus ηfan , ηcompressor , ηturbine and πcombustor at cruise.

Fig. 9. SFC variation of the S–V2500 engine versus ηfan , ηcompressor , ηturbine and πcombustor at cruise.

Mach of zero value. Overall efficiency of the engine attains from 29.15 to versus different altitude and Mach are computed for ideal and real cases.
30.38% with the maximized ηfan and ηcompressor . By setting ηfan maximum, The main aim of this analysis is to show how much the difference be­
ηoverall of the engine increases from 29.15 to 29.94% whereas it raises to tween ideal and real cases occurs. Fig. 12 illustrates variation of thrust
29.83% due to the ηcompressor raised to the highest. On the other hand, under different flight conditions. As expected, the higher the altitude,
ηoverall of the engine raises from 29.24 to 31.06% with effects of both of the thrust the lower, however the higher the Mach, the higher the thrust.
ηturbine and πcombustor . Moreover, the elevated ηturbine results in overall ef­ Namely, net thrust of the engine increases from 35.5 to 40.33 kN with
ficiency to increase 29.24%–30.87% whereas it raises to 29.45% owing effect of raised Mach whereas it decreases to 27.45 kN due to the altitude
to escalated πcombustor . It could be specified that overall efficiency of the that is elevated to 11 km. However, for the same flight ranges, real net
engine experiences between 1.23% and 1.82% if the efficiency of com­ thrust of the S–V2500 engine is measured between 29.04 and 32.27 kN
ponents can be increased. due to the raised Mach from 0.7 to 0.9. Also, with influence of the
escalated altitude, net thrust of the engine decreases from 29.04 to
23.01 kN. At the highest altitude and Mach, net thrust is determined as
4.3. Comparative analysis of ideal and real performance metrics
31.47 kN for ideal case and 26.1 kN for real case. The difference is
computed as 17.06%, which means that the analyses performed under
In this section, performance parameters of the S–V2500 engine

9
S.A. Cihangir et al. Energy 260 (2022) 125085

Fig. 10. Thermal efficiency variation of the engine versus ηfan , ηcompressor , ηturbine and πcombustor at cruise.

Fig. 11. Overall efficiency variation of the engine versus ηfan , ηcompressor , ηturbine and πcombustor at cruise.

ideal case could not guide the engineers to make a decision for the en­ conditions should be required to lowering specific fuel consumption,
gine improvement. Therefore, at performance assessments of turbofan thereby higher flight endurance. When considering only effect of the
engines, the all effects that impair the performance should be considered increased Mach, the SFC increases from 17.51 to 19.24 g/kNs whereas it
as possible as. raises to 17.57 g/kNs owing to the raised altitude. It could be deduced
Fig. 13 demonstrates behaviour of SFC of the engine under different that the influence of the flight altitude on SFC is not generally observed
flight conditions for ideal and real cases. According to ideal analyses, as significant as the influence of Mach.
SFC varies between 12.63 and 13.9 g/kNs under given flight conditions. Lastly, overall efficiency of the engine for ideal and real cases are
As can be seen in Fig. 13, the higher altitude and the higher the Mach, presented under effect of flight conditions in Fig. 14. As can be realized,
the higher the SFC for ideal case. With the effect of Mach ranging from the difference between ideal and real efficiency calculations is high,
0.7 to 0.9, the SFC increases from 12.63 to 13.6 g/kNs whereas it raises which is not negligible. According to ideal case, ηoverall of the S–V2500
to 12.95 g/kNs due to the elevated altitude from 9 km to 11 km. engine varies between 37.21 and 46.91% under the considered flight
Furthermore, when the effect analysis is performed for real case, the SFC ranges. When set Mach from 0.7 to 0.9, ηoverall of the engine raises from
of the S–V2500 engine changes between 17.51 and 19.08 g/kNs. The 39.31 to 46.91%. However, this parameter diminishes from 39.31 to
difference is calculated as 8.22%, which means that optimum flight 37.21% on account of ascending altitude from 9 to 11 km. On the other

10
S.A. Cihangir et al. Energy 260 (2022) 125085

Fig. 12. Effects of flight conditions on the net thrust for ideal and real cases.

Fig. 13. Effects of flight conditions on the SFC for ideal and real cases.

hand, ηoverall of the engine varies between 25.08 and 29.02% throughout the in this field. This is also major novelty of the current study. Another
altitude and Mach considered in this analysis. The difference is gauged goal of this study is to reveal the difference between ideal and real
as 3.94%, which is important for the environmental sustainability. Also, performance findings obtained from parametric cycle analyses. Futher­
increasing Mach leads ηoverall to ascend from 25.08 to 29.2% whereas it more, effects of flight conditions on the engine indicators are searched
decreases to 24.56% due to the elevated altitude. for ideal and real cases. For these analyses, the specific code is improved
so that the S–V2500 engine is subjected to thermodynamic and perfor­
5. Conclusions mance analyses at MATLAB environment. Main highlights could be
drawn as follows:
In this paper, energy and performance analyses of the turbofan en­
gine which is very similar to V-2500 engine used in commercial aircraft • At take-off conditions, net thrust of the engine is measured as 109.05
are carried out by implementing parametric cycle equations. Main kN for real cases and 134.61 kN for ideal case, which has the dif­
motivation of this study is to observe effects of polytropic efficiency of ference 18.6% whereas at cruise condition, it is computed 26.36 kN
fan, compressor and turbine as well as pressure ratio of combustor of and 31.47 kN, respectively, which has the difference 16.23%.
S–V2500 engine on performance parameters such as net thrust, specific • Specific fuel consumption of the S–V2500 engine is computed 6.96
fuel consumption, thermal efficiency and overall efficiency. When g/kNs for ideal case and 9.82 g/kNs for real case at take-off whereas
considering the studies regarding turbofan engine in open literature, it is in turn calculated as 13.9 and 19.03 g/kNs at cruise condition.
there are many works on effects of fan pressure ratio, turbine inlet The disparity of SFC occurs 29.12% for take-off condition and
temperature, compressor pressure ratio and by-pass ratio. However, the 26.95% for cruise condition. It means that the analyses carried out
influences of component efficiencies on performance metrics are lack of under ideal case could misguide the engineers at preliminary design

11
S.A. Cihangir et al. Energy 260 (2022) 125085

Fig. 14. Effects of flight conditions on overall efficiency for ideal and real cases.

processes. To match the analysis findings with practical outcomes, conceptual engine could reveal opportunities for the related engine.
polytropic efficiencies of components, pressure ratio of combustor Polytropic efficiency of component could be affected from process
and other effects leading performance deterioration should be taken applied in design phase. Especially, if isolation of components from
consideration. environment could be achieved or compression without the temperature
• With the effects of ηfan and ηcompressor maximized up to 0.95 and 0.99, increase in the component could be achieved by intercooling to
SFC of the engine experiences the decrement from 9.82 to 9.52 g/ component stages is succeeded, polytropic efficiency could be enhanced.
kNs, which means 3.05% improvement under take-off whereas it In this study, effects of these possible improvements were researched.
diminishes from 19.03 to 18.57 g/kNs, which means 2.41% Therefore, it could be proposed that these analyses could be applied to
improvement under cuise condition. gas turbine engine where effects of component efficiencies are
• SFC of the S–V2500 engine has enhancement from 9.68 to 9.04 g/ researched. As a next study, by setting polytropic efficiency of main
kNs at take-off and from 18.96 to 18.02 g/kNs at cruise condition due components regarding turbofan engine as control variables, optimiza­
to effect of ηturbine and πcombustor maximized up to 0.99 for both. The tion of turbofan engine could be performed using different metaheuristic
enhancement rate is calculated as 6.61% at take-off and 4.95% at approaches. Moreover, influences of component efficiency could be
cruise condition. explored for other kinds of gas turbine engine used in aviation industry.
• Overall efficiency of the S–V2500 engine favourably affects from
polytropic efficiency of components. Namely, it increases from 29.15 Credit author statement
to 30.38% on account of the elevated ηfan and ηcompressor , which has
the 1.23% difference whereas it attains from 29.24 to 31.06% due to Serhan Ahmet Cihangir: Software, Methodology, Writing-
the raised ηturbine and πcombustor , which is computed the difference of Reviewing and Editing, Validation. Hakan Aygun: Software, Method­
1.82%. It could be inferred that improvement between 1% and 2% ology, Writing- Reviewing and Editing, Validation. Onder Turan: Su­
for overall efficiency could requires important attempts by the pervision, Conceptualization, Reviewing and Editing, The
engineers. corresponding author, Onder Turan, is responsible for ensuring that the
• Lastly, as Mach number increases, the difference between ideal and descriptions are accurate and agreed by all authors.
real performance computations diverges to higher value. Namely, at
lowest Mach, ideal and real SFC of the engine are gauged as 12.63 Declaration of competing interest
and 13.6 g/kNs, which has the difference of 7.13% whereas the
highest Mach, this metric is in turn calculated as 17.51 and 19.24 g/ The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
kNs, which is difference of 8.99%. Therefore, very assumptions interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
regarding turbofan impair performance analysis more under real the work reported in this paper.
flight conditions.
Data availability
According to the findings in the present study, performance assess­
ments including the effect analyses for specific engine rather than The authors do not have permission to share data.

Nomenclature

A Area (m2)
APU Auxiliary power unit
BPR By-pass ratio
Cp Specific heat (kJ/(kg.K))
CC Combustion chamber

12
S.A. Cihangir et al. Energy 260 (2022) 125085

CPR Compressor pressure ratio

FPR Fan pressure ratio
h Altitude (m)
HPT High Pressure Turbine
ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization
LPC Low Pressure Compressor
LPT Low Pressure Turbine
LHV Lower heat value (kJ/kg)
M Mach number
ṁ mass flow rate (kg/s)
P Pressure(kPa)
RAT Ram air turbine
R Specific gas constant (kJ/kg.K)
RPM Revolutions per minute
SAF Sustainable aviation fuel
SFC Specific fuel consumption (g/kN.s)
S − V2500 Similar to V2500
SOFC Solid oxide fuel cell
T Temperature (K)
TE Thermal efficiency
τnet Net thrust (kN)
TIT Turbine inlet temperature
Q̇ Heat transfer rate (MW)
V Velocity (m/s)
Ẇ Work rate (MW)

Greek letters
η Polytropic efficiency
π Pressure ratio
γ Specific heat constant
Δ Difference
τ Temperature ratio

References [13] Zhou L, Liu Z-w, Wang Z-x. Numerical study of influence of biofuels on the
combustion characteristics and performance of aircraft engine system. Appl Therm
Eng 2015;91:399–407.
[1] Pandey V, Badruddin IA, Terfasa TT, Tesfamariam BB, Ahmed GMS, Saleel CA,
[14] Ji Z, Qin J, Cheng K, Liu H, Zhang S, Dong P. Performance evaluation of a turbojet
Alrobei H. Experimental investigation of the impact of CeO2 nanoparticles in Jet-A
engine integrated with interstage turbine burner and solid oxide fuel cell. Energy
and Jatropha-SPK blended fuel in an aircraft can-combustor at flight conditions.
2019;168:702–11.
Fuel 2022;317:123393.
[15] Shahsavari A, Nili-Ahmadabadi M. A novel approach for the design of axial flow
[2] Zaporozhets O, Volodymyr V, Synylo K. Trends on current and forecasted aircraft
fan by increasing by-pass ratio in a constant-diameter turbofan. Propulsion and
hybrid electric architectures and their impact on environment. Energy; 2020,
Power Research 2020;9(2):142–58.
118814.
[16] Turan O. Exergetic effects of some design parameters on the small turbojet engine
[3] Liu X, Zhao D, Guan D, Becker S, Sun D, Sun X. Development and progress in
for unmanned air vehicle applications. Energy 2012;46(1):51–61.
aeroacoustic noise reduction on turbofan aeroengines. Prog Aero Sci 2022;130:
[17] Akdeniz HY, Balli O. Effects of bypass ratio change trend on performance in a
100796.
military aircraft turbofan engine with comparative assessment. J Energy Resour
[4] Şöhret Y, Ekici S, Dinc A. Investigating the green performance limits of a cargo
Technol 2021;143(12):120905.
aircraft engine during flight: a thermo-environmental evaluation.Energy Sources,
[18] Balli O, Ozbek E, Ekici S, Midilli A, Karakoc TH. Thermodynamic comparison of
Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects. 2021. p. 1–16.
TF33 turbofan engine fueled by hydrogen in benchmark with kerosene. Fuel 2021;
[5] Manigandan S, Atabani A, Ponnusamy VK, Gunasekar P. Impact of additives in Jet-
306:121686.
A fuel blends on combustion, emission and exergetic analysis using a micro-gas
[19] Aygun H. Investigation of exergetic and exergo-sustainability metrics for high by-
turbine engine. Fuel 2020;276:118104.
pass turbofan engine at different power settings.Environmental Progress &
[6] Lai YY, Christley E, Kulanovic A, Teng C-C, Björklund A, Nordensvärd J,
Sustainable Energy. pp. e13700.
Karakaya E, Urban F. Analysing the opportunities and challenges for mitigating the
[20] Yucer CT. Thermodynamic analysis of the part load performance for a small scale
climate impact of aviation: a narrative review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2022;
gas turbine jet engine by using exergy analysis method. Energy 2016;111:251–9.
156:111972.
[21] Coban K, Colpan CO, Karakoc TH. Application of thermodynamic laws on a
[7] Dahal K, Brynolf S, Xisto C, Hansson J, Grahn M, Grönstedt T, Lehtveer M. Techno-
military helicopter engine. Energy 2017;140:1427–36.
economic review of alternative fuels and propulsion systems for the aviation sector.
[22] Yildirim E, Altuntas O, Mahir N, Karakoc TH. Energy, exergy analysis, and
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2021;151:111564.
sustainability assessment of different engine powers for helicopter engines. Int J
[8] Cheng K, Qin J, Sun H, Dang C, Zhang S, Bao W. Performance comparison on wall
Green Energy 2017;14(13):1093–9.
cooling and heat supply for power generation between fuel-and liquid metal-cooled
[23] Akdeniz HY, Balli O. Energetic and exergetic assessment of operating biofuel,
scramjet. Aero Sci Technol 2019;93:105294.
hydrogen and conventional JP-8 in a J69 type of aircraft turbojet engine. J Therm
[9] Chan S, Ho H, Tian Y. Modelling of simple hybrid solid oxide fuel cell and gas
Anal Calorim 2021;146(4):1709–21.
turbine power plant. J Power Sources 2002;109(1):111–20.
[24] Aygun H, Cilgin ME, Turan O. Exergo-sustainability indicators of a target drone
[10] Guo F, Qin J, Ji Z, Liu H, Cheng K, Zhang S. Performance analysis of a turbofan
engine at dynamic loads. Energy 2021;221:119803.
engine integrated with solid oxide fuel cells based on Al-H2O hydrogen production
[25] https://prattwhitney.com/products-and-services/products/commercial-engine
for more electric long-endurance UAVs. Energy Convers Manag 2021;235:113999.
s/v2500. [Accessed 7 April 2022].
[11] Dinc A. Optimization of a turboprop UAV for maximum loiter and specific power
[26] https://www.mtu.de/engines/commercial-aircraft-engines/narrowbody-and-regi
using genetic algorithm. Int J Turbo Jet Engines 2016;33(3):265–73.
onal-jets/v2500/. [Accessed 1 February 2022].
[12] Dinc A, Elbadawy I. Global warming potential optimization of a turbofan powered
[27] Kurzke J. Design and off-design performance of gas turbines. Gasturb 11 Manual
unmanned aerial vehicle during surveillance mission. Transport Res Transport
2007.
Environ 2020;85:102472.
[28] https://www.easa.europa.eu/domains/environment/icao-aircraft-engine-emiss
ions-databank. [Accessed 14 January 2022].

13
S.A. Cihangir et al. Energy 260 (2022) 125085

[29] Mattingly JD. Elements of propulsion: gas turbines and rockets. American Institute [31] Mattingly JD. Elements of gas turbine propulsion, vol. 1. New York: McGraw-Hill;
of Aeronautics and Astronautics; 2006. 1996.
[30] El-Sayed AF. Aircraft propulsion and gas turbine engines. CRC press; 2008.

14