Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association

ISSN: 0002-2470 (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uawm16

Air Pollution Emissions From Jet Engines

Eloy R. Lozano , Walter W. Melvin Jr. & Seymour ochheiser

To cite this article: Eloy R. Lozano , Walter W. Melvin Jr. & Seymour ochheiser (1968) Air
Pollution Emissions From Jet Engines, Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, 18:6,
392-394, DOI: 10.1080/00022470.1968.10469144

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00022470.1968.10469144

Published online: 16 Mar 2012.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 13525

Citing articles: 16 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uawm20
 Eloy R. Lozano and
Walter W. Melvin, Jr.
Kelly Air Force Base, Texas
Air Pollution Emissions
Seymour Hochheiser
National Center for
Air Pollution Control
From Jet Engines

Pollution emissions from three representative types of jet engines were determined. Pollutants measured
included nitrogen oxides, aldehydes, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and odors. A method is presented
for determining the magnitude of pollution emissions due to commercial jet aircraft operation by using basic
emission factors.

M t the request of the National Table I Engine Specification and Performance Data
Center for Air Pollution Control, Pub- (Average Values)
lic Health Service and at the direction
of the Surgeon's Office the Environ- Ex- In-
mental Health Laboratory, Kelly Air haust take
Force Base, Air Force Logistics Com- Gas Air
Tern- Tern-
mand conducted tests to measure and Fuel Fuel/ pera- Pres- pera-
characterize the exhaust products of Engine Power Flow Air ture sure ture
three representative Air Force jet en- Type Setting lb/hr Ratio" °F in Hg °F
gines which have counterparts in civilian
airlines. These engines were: T-56-A 7 Take-off 1970 0.0184 1780b 70
(Turboprop)
b
1. The T-56 turboprop engine manu- Cruise and 1515 0.0143 1505 70
approach
factured by the Allison Corp. and used Idle 675 0.0080 1050 b
70
to power the AF C-130 (Lockheed) J-57-19W Take-off 75
(conven- 8300 0.0143 1096
and the Lockheed Electra;
2. The J-57 conventional jet engine tional jet)
Cruise 5500 0.0104 885 28.0 75
manufactured by the Pratt and Whitney Idle 890 0.0052 494 2.4 75
Corp. and used on the AF B-52 (Boe- TF-33-P5 Take-off 8550 0.0133 816 20.8 35
ing), the Boeing 707 and other aircraft; (fan-jet)
3. The TF-33 fan-jet engine also Approach 5290 0.0119 680 12.1 35
Idle 1000 0.0065 464 0.8 35
manufactured by Pratt and Whitney
and used on the Boeing 707, 720, and a
Information provided by Allison and Pratt & Whitney
Douglas DC-8. (This engine is not technical
b
representatives.
used on twin-engine aircraft such as 0
Turbine Inlet Temperature.
the Boeing 737 or Douglas DC-9 or on Measurement was not taken.
tri-engine aircraft such as the Boeing
727.) These tests were conducted in
engine test cells operated by the Air Table II Methods of Analysis
Force. The information is intended
for use in preparing estimates of pollu- Sampling Analytical
tion emissions from jet-engine aircraft Pollutant apparatus method
operation.
Oxides of nitrogen 50-cc Glass syringe Patty 1 (Griess-Ilos-
Sampling and Analysis vay reagent) and
Saltzman2
Power settings, fuel flow, and other Nitric oxide 50-cc Glass syringe Saltzman2
performance specifications of the three Carbon dioxide Gas sampling bulb Mass spectrometry
(glass) and Orsat
engines used for this study are sum- Total aldehydes Bubbler Sawicki3 (MBTH
marized in Table I. JP-4 fuel was reagent)
used. Sampling apparatus and analyti- Formaldehyde Bubbler Altshuller4 (chromo-
cal methods used to determine pollu- tropic acid in sul-
tants in the exhaust are summarized furic acid reagent)
Carbon monoxide Stainless steel gas Infrared spectrometry
in Table II. cylinder (10-meter gas cell)
Total hydrocarbons Continuous moni- Flame ionization de-
toring tector
Mr. Lozano, chemist and Colonel Paraffin, olefin, Continuous moni- Flame ionization with
Melvin, Jr. are with the Environ- aromatic charac- toring PdSO4, HgSO4,
mental Health Laboratory, Kelly terization subtractive tech-
Air Force Base, Texas 78241. Mr. niques5
Hochheiser is with the Abatement articulates Glass fiber filter Gravimetric
Program, National Center for Air Odor threshold Continuous moni- Dynamic dilution
Pollution Control, Cincinnati, Ohio. toring with test panel
measurement6

392 Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association

 The T-56 exhaust tests were con-
ducted during routine engine-quality
static testing of 20 engines. The
J-57 and TF-33 exhaust tests were
conducted using one engine of each
type. Although examination of several
engines was analytically and statistically
desirable, sampling in this manner was
found to be inefficient. Differences
in the exhaust products of individual
T-56 engines were noted but discrep-
ancies were not pronounced except when
an engine was in need of repair. Since
faulty engines were immediately re-
turned for maintenance, their exhaust
products were not fully evaluated and
results were not included in the data
presented.
Examination of one representative
engine of each type, which could be
operated for prolonged periods of
time and which could be used exclu-
sively for the study, was deemed suffi-
cient to provide adequately accurate
results. Consequently, permanently
mounted sampling probes were installed
in the tailpipes of J-57 and TF-33
engines and sampling was continued un-
JET ENGINE TAILPIPE
oxides of nitrogen were investigated by
analyzing several samples taken at
SAMPLING PROBE
± = - EEXHAUST
X points "A" and " B . " Figure 1 indi-
ENGINE cates the relative position of these
TEST CELL sampling sites which were at a distance
®—POINT "A" of 10 and 40 feet, respectively, from
SAMPLE RETURN ® (10 FT. FROM
-LINE EXHAUST) the exhaust tailpipe. To keep con-
densation losses at less than 5 per cent,
.\\ the sampling lines were cleaned daily
N
BLAST
WALL and kept to a maximum of 40 feet.
CONTROL
ROOM FLOW
•POINT "B" Results and Discussion
SAMPLING MANIFOLD
(40 FT. FROM EXHAUST) Data on pollution emissions are
summarized in Tables III and IV.
Figure 1. Diagram of jet engine exhaust
Values obtained for all contaminants
sampling system.
represent average emission rates over
til reproducible data could be obtained. 10 to 30 minute intervals. Samples
Basically, the sampling system was were not taken during acceleration
identical for each engine except for or deceleration modes because large
minor modifications for recovery in- variations in exhaust composition were
vestigations in the J-57 and TF-33 observed during these periods. These
engines. Stainless steel tubing i}/\ or variations were noted by continuously
3
/s in. ID) was used throughout as monitoring exhaust hydrocarbons with
sampling lines. Tubing length was the flame ionization detector. (The
FID also served as an indicator of
kept to a minimum wherever possible.
fluctuation in engine characteristics
A diagram of the system is shown in
Fig.l. from day to day.) Reported readings
were taken only when the hydrocarbon
Condensation losses of aldehydes and

Table III Pollution Emissions from Jet Aircraft

Power setting and engine type

Take-off Cruise and approach Idle
Pollutant T-56 J-57 TF-33 T-56 J-57 TF-33 T-56 J-57 TF-33

Oxygen (%)_ 16.7 17.1 17.5 18.0 19.0 19.6

Carbon dioxide (%) 4.1 2.3 2.7 3.2 1.5 2.1 2.4 1.0 0.9
Carbon monoxide 34 32 7 40 55 30 109 130 195
Oxides of nitrogen as
NO2 (ppm) 43 59 27 27 39 15 12 13 11
Nitric oxide (ppm) 37 44 25 30 13 8 9
Total hydrocarbons
(as C atoms) (ppm) 5.5 5 7 2.5 5 42 101 152 700
Olefins as C atoms
(ppm) 25 38 220
Aromatics as C atoms
(ppm) 10 39 60
Total aldehydes as
HCHO (ppm) 4.1 0.8 .06 2.0 0.8 0.3 4.8 2.5 21
Formaldehyde (ppm) 1.1 0.5 1.9 0.5 3.5 2.4

Table IV Pollution Emissions from Jet Aircraft

Take-off Cruise and approach Idle

Pollutant T-56 J-57 TF-33 T-56 J-57 TF-33 T-56 J-57 TF-33
Carbon dioxide (lb/hr) 6800 20000 27900 5300 12000 14000 3100 2500 2100
Carbon monoxide (lb/hr) 3.6 17.5 3.0 4.7 27.6 12.7 6.2 20.9 28.1
Oxides of nitrogen, as NO2
(lb/hr) 7.5 53.8 28.4 4.6 32.1 10.4 1.1 3.4 2.6
Nitric oxide (lb/hr) 6.4 44.2 26.3 24.6 9.0 2.1 1.4
Total hydrocarbons, as C
atoms (lb/hr) 0.3 1.2 2.4 0.1 1.1 9.3 3.0 10.5 43.2
Olefins as C atoms (lb/hr) 0.7 2.6 13.6
Aromatics, as C atoms
(lb/hr) 0.3 2.7 3.7
Total aldehydes, as HCHO
(lb/hr) 0.5 0.5 0.04 0.2 0.4 0.14 0.3 0.4 3.2
Formaldehyde (lb/hr) 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.4
Particulates (lb/hr) 16.2 10.8 2.4
Odor dilution threshold 100 600 75 600 15. 500 1000

June 1968 Volume 18, No. 6 393

level was observed to stabilize at the
indicated power setting. Samples were
taken repeatedly until a stable repro-
ducible emission value was obtained.
Oxide of nitrogen emissions mainly
take the form of nitric oxide. In
TF-33 exhaust the volume-per cent of
nitric oxide in the total nitrogen oxides
varied from 82 to 93 per cent; and in
J-57 exhaust the per cent composition
varied from 62 to 76 per cent depending
upon engine power setting. Per cent
composition of nitric oxide was greatest
at the "take-off" power setting and
lowest at the "idle" power setting.
Olefin and aromatic characteriza-
tion of the exhaust hydrocarbons was
performed at the "idle" setting only;
analysis at other power settings in-
volved making analytical measurements
beyond the lower limits of the FID.
Photochemically reactive hydrocarbon
content (olefins and aromatics) of
T-56, J-57, and TF-33 exhaust repre-
sented 35, 51, and 40 per cent, respec-
tively, of the total hydrocarbons
emitted. Olefin content was signifi-
cantly greater than aromatic content
in TF-33 exhaust. Emissions of reactive
hydrocarbons are particularly impor-
tant to emission studies related to the
photochemical-type smog problems.
The principal aldehyde present in
jet engine exhaust is formaldehyde.
The formaldehyde content of the alde-
hydes measured was greater than 60
per cent in J-57 and T-56, except at
the "idle" power setting in T-56 exhaust
when the formaldehyde content was
38 per cent. Carbon monoxide and
hydrocarbon concentrations in exhaust
products generally increased with de-
creasing engine power setting and ni-
trogen oxide concentration generally
increased with increasing engine power
setting. Odor dilution threshold for
jet engine exhaust varied from 15 to
1000, depending upon engine type and
power setting (Table IV). Odor di-
lution threshold is greatest for the fan-
jet engine at the "idle" power setting.
Data obtained on particulate emis-
sions from jet engines during this study
are limited, especially those obtained
for the T-56 and J-57 engines. Suffi-
cient data to provide a representative
value were obtained only for the TF-33
Table V Estimated Time of Departure
and Landing
Time,
min
Taxiing from terminal to runway
and awaiting clearance for take-
off 4.0
Take-off and climb-out to 2500 ft 2.5
Approach from 2500 ft to touch-
down 4.5
Landing run and taxiing to ter-
minal 5.0
394
Table VI Estimated Pollution Emissions from Jet
Aircraft Operations
Nitrogen Hydro- hydes Par-
oxides carbons
CO (as NO2) (as CH4) HCHO) lates
Departure
Turboprop, T-56 2.4
Conventional jet,
J-57b 8.4
Fan-jet, TF-33 8.0
Arrival
Turboprop, T-56 3.5
Conventional jet,
J-57 15.2
Fan-jet, TF-33 12.6
a
For four-engine aircraft; for three-engine aircraft, multiply
these data by 0.75; and for two-engine aircraft multiply these
data by 0.5.
b
No water injection during take-off.
engine. The irregular nature of par-
ticulate emissions resulting from deposi-
tion of soot on burner cans and subse-
quent sporadic discharge complicated
the collection of representative samples.
Further tests on emissions of particu-
lates from TF-33 engines would be
desirable, and further tests on emissions
from T-56 and J-57 engines are necessary
to obtain particulate emission factors.
Air Pollution Emission Inventory
The conduct of an emissions inventory
is an essential element of an air pollu-
tion control program. Data on emis-
sions from jet aircraft operation pre-
sented herein should provide improved
information on air pollution emissions
from commercial aircraft operations.
Air pollution emissions during landing
or departure were calculated from emis-
sion data reported herein in pounds per
hour for a given engine power setting
and from the estimated time of arrival
and departure of jet aircraft. The
average time of departure and arrival
of a four-engine jet aircraft in a large
metropolitan airport and the engine
power settings utilized were estimated
by reference to previously reported
data and by consultation with knowl-
edgeable people.7'8 These data are
presented in Table V. Estimated emis-
sions from four-engine jet aircraft
operations are given in Table VI.
Pollution emissions during a landing
operation are greater than those during
a departure operation mainly because
the time for landing is greater than the
time for take-off. Hydrocarbon emis-
sions from fan-jet engines are signifi-
cantly greater than similar emissions
from jet engines.
Summary
Air pollution emissions from three
types of turbine engines have been char-
acterized and a method for estimating
the magnitude of air pollution emissions
Pollutant (lb)
Aide-
(as ticu-
1.9 1.0 0.14
9.9 3.0 0.19
5.2 12.0 1.00 3.4
2.2 1.2 0.13
10.7 3.8 0.25
4.0 17.0 1.20 4.0
due to commercial jet aircraft opera-
tions has been presented. Further
information on particulate emissions
would be desirable. Information on
emissions from other types of fan-jet
engines in use today or in the develop-
mental stage are needed. Until such
time as data on emissions from fan-jet
engines other than the type studied be-
come available, these data reported
herein will have to suffice in preparing
estimates of pollution emissions from
fan-jet engine aircraft operation.
The views expressed herein are those
of the authors and do not necessarily
reflect the views of the United States
Air Force, the Department of Defense,
or of the Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare.
References
1. Patty, F. A., and Petty, G. M., "Ni-
trite field method for the determination
of oxides of nitrogen," </. Ind. Hyg.
& Tox., 25:361(1943).
2. Interbranch Chemical Advisory Com-
mittee, "Selected Methods for Measure-
ment of Air Pollutants," PHS Pub.
No. 999-AP-ll, U. S. DHEW (1965).
3. Sawicki, E., Hauser, T. R., Stanley,
T. W., and Elbert, W., "The 3-methyl-
2-benzo thiazolone hydrazone test,"
Anal. Chem., 33: 93, (1961).
4. Altshuller, A. P., Miller, D. L., and
Sleva, S., "Determination of formalde-
hyde in gas mixtures by the chromo-
tropic acid methods," Anal. Chem., 33:
621(1961).
5. Klosterman, D. L., and Sigsby, Jr.,
J. E., "Application of subtractive
techniques to the analysis of automo-
tive exhaust, J. Environ. Sci. and
Tech., 1:309(1967).
6. ASTM D 1391-57, "Standard Method
for Measurement of Odor in Atmo-
spheres (Dilution Method)," 1957.
7. George, R. E., and Buiiin, R. M.,
"Air Pollution from Commercial Jet
Aircraft in Los Angeles County,"
L. A. Co. Air Poll. Cont, Dist., (I960).
8. Nolan, M., "A Survey of Air Pollution
in Communities around the John F.
Kennedy International Airport," Natl.
Ctr. Air Poll. Cont., Cincinnati, Ohio
(1966).
Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association