Grigore Cican1

Faculty of Aerospace Engineering,

Polytechnic University of Bucharest,
1-7 Polizu Street, 1,
Bucharest 011061, Romania
e-mail: grigore.cican@upb.ro

Valentin Plesu
Performances and Emissions
Faculty of Applied Chemistry and
Materials Science,
Polytechnic University of Bucharest,
Evaluation of a Microturbojet
1-7 Polizu Street, 1,
Bucharest 011061, Romania
Engine Running on Biodiesel
e-mail: v_plesu@chim.upb.ro

Marius Deaconu
Acoustics and Vibrations Laboratory,
National Research and Development Institute for
Gas Turbines—COMOTI,
220D Iuliu Maniu Avenue, 6,
Bucharest, Romania
e-mail: marius.deaconu@comoti.ro
Adina Toma
Gas Turbine Special Equipments,
Physics and Mechanical Testing Laboratory,
National Research and Development Institute for
Gas Turbines—COMOTI,
220D Iuliu Maniu Avenue, 6,
Bucharest, Romania
e-mail: adina.toma@comoti.ro
Mihaiella Cretu
Physical and Chemical Laboratory,
National Research and Development Institute for
Gas Turbines—COMOTI,
220D Iuliu Maniu Avenue, 6,
Bucharest, Romania
e-mail: mihaela.cretu@comoti.ro
Blends
This paper analyzes the performances and the emissions of the JETCAT P80 microen-
gine, when jet A jet A þ 10% biodiesel (BD), jet A þ 20% biodiesel, and jet A þ 30% bio-
diesel are utilized as fuel, and to each of these combinations is added 5% of Aeroshell
Oil 500. The performances will be assessed based on the engine speed, for the generated
thrust force, the temperature in front of the turbine, and on the fuel flow. The paper will
investigate the performances and the emissions generated by the four fuel blends burning
when the engine is idle, at the cruise and at the max regime. This will be realized by
maintaining each of these regimes for approximately a minute and a half. During the
tests, the vibrations were monitored both radially and axially for the observation of the
engine function regimes. From the measurements, the concentrations of SO2, NOx, and
CH4 will be analyzed, highlighting the emissions of SO2. There were performed measure-
ments to determine the fuel blend’s density in order to transform the values of the fuel
flow from liter per hour into kilogram per second. Having these data registered from the
engine, a jet engine cycle analysis at max regime will be performed based on the combus-
tion efficiency, the thermal efficiency of the engine, and the specific fuel consumption.
[DOI: 10.1115/1.4042718]

Introduction states from Ref. [3] that “Aviation is responsible for about 3% of
global fossil fuel consumption and 12% of transportation-related
The continuous development of the air traffic has led to the
CO2 emissions and Emissions from aircraft are estimated to con-
increase of the fuel quantity used. Different studies conducted,
tribute 3.5–4.9% of anthropogenic radiative forcing.”
especially regarding the air passenger market, had outlined the
The main aircraft engine emission pollutants are carbon dioxide
evolution of the aviation industry, despite the recession periods,
(CO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), unburned
the fluctuation of the oil prices, near pandemics, security threats,
hydrocarbons (HC), carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter
and wars. A study by Boeing on the Current Market Outlook
(PM), and soot. The novel character of the work presented in this
2015–2034 [1] has shown that the industry has grown on average
paper is given by sulfur oxides (SOx) analysis, the conducted
by 5% each year. The numbers are backed up by other studies
research seeking to ensure an alternative for the jet A fuel, by
which confirm that the aviation industry will continue to develop
combing it with different proportion of biodiesel (BD) in order
at the same rate. Nygren et al. [2] conducted a study on the civil
that ambient exposure to sulfur dioxide does not exceed the guide-
air traffic in 2009; Lee et al. [3] projected the growth of the avia-
lines recommended by World Health Organization (WHO). SOx
tion traffic by 4.5–6% per year, with the numbers doubling every
emissions are based on the level of sulfur content in the fuel used,
15 years. Following the Boeing study, Airbus had published a
and to achieve a reduction of SOx and particulate matter in the
study concerning the evolution of passenger traffic and aviation
environment, it is mandatory to use low sulfur fuel. Another
traffic in the paper “Global Market Forecast 2017–2036 Growing
aspect is given by the vibration monitoring during the blends test-
Horizons” [4].
ing on the microengine for different regimes.
Since the aviation traffic is interdependent with the fuel con-
sumption, the rates presented in the specialty studies cited above
also apply to the fuel consumption. A study published in 2015 [5] Problem Statement
In the European Aviation Environmental Report 2016 [6], offi-
1
Corresponding author. cials of the European Union underline the effects of the develop-
Contributed by the Advanced Energy Systems Division of ASME for publication
in the JOURNAL OF ENERGY RESOURCES TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received October 2,
ment of the aviation traffic on the climate, stating that the aircrafts
2018; final manuscript received January 24, 2019; published online April 10, 2019. CO2 emissions have increased by 77% starting 1990 until 2005,
Assoc. Editor: Omid Askari. based on the data collected and reported by EU28 and EFTA

Journal of Energy Resources Technology Copyright V

C 2019 by ASME JULY 2019, Vol. 141 / 072003-1
member states of the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC). Furthermore, the IMPACT emis-
sions model shows that between 2005 and 2014 the CO2 emis-
sions have increased by 5%. However, the kilometers flown per
passenger in the same period of time exceed the increase of the
emissions. This difference is due to the effectiveness of fuel use,
owing it mainly to the novelty of aircraft and improvements in
operational practice. The studies show a decrease of up to 19% of
the average fuel burnt per kilometer flown for passenger aircraft,
excluding business aviation. Nevertheless, expert projections cannot
indicate a possible balance between the technologic improvements
and the future traffic growth. Based on the traffic forecast and tech-
nology improvements’ rate, the CO2 emissions are expected to
increase up to 207 Mt by 2035, 44% more than 144 Mt in 2005.
The Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution
(CLRTAP) states, based on the data from the UN Economic Com-
mission for Europe, that not only the CO2 emissions have
increased and will continue to grow but also the NOx emissions
have shown a significant growth in statistics between 1990 and
2005, with 85% and 13% between 2005 and 2014, according to
IMPACT data. Based on the current statistics, the NOx emissions
would reach 920 ton in 2035 (42% more than in 2005).
In comparison with CO2 and NOx emissions, the emissions of
HC, CO, and nonvolatile PM have shown a decrease between
2005 and 2014, while full flight emissions of volatile PM have
increased by 7%.
The high-level group on Aviation Research has tried to combat
the environmental issues generated by the emissions and in
“Flightpath 2050” it had envisioned the decrease by up to 75% the
CO2 emissions per passenger kilometer and the NOx emissions by
90%, based on the technologies and procedures that will be avail-
able by 2050 [7].
The main raw material for producing fuel for the aviation
industry is petroleum. According to Statistical Review of World
Energy June 2017 [8] and Annual Statistical Bulletin of Organiza-
tion of the Petroleum Exporting Countries 2017 [9], in the United
States according to the study [10] approximately 12% of the entire
petroleum quantity that is used across all American industries is
used in the production of jet fuel. Given this fact, it is clear the
need to find a replacement for this main raw material, as it is
expected that petroleum will no longer be sufficient to fulfill the
increasing demand of fuel. The replacement is expected to come
from existent sustainable alternatives in order to provide industrial
continuity and avoid economic crisis, and also taking into consid-
eration the environmental issues that are raised by the present
matter.
Statistically, the requirement for fuel in the transportation is
expected to increase by 1.3% per year until 2030 [11] and the
emission of carbon from the transport sector will increase by 80%
[12]. Among the alternative solutions is the development of cer-
tain areas of industry such as vehicle design, public transportation,
and replacement of conventional fuels [13]. The production of
alternative fuels is subject to a number of programs of the greatest
nations worldwide [14].
In the aviation sector, the increased petroleum costs and the
environmental concern are, along with the work security of the
aircraft engine and consistency, the main reasons for the produc-
tion of alternative fuel [15,16].
The main requirements of the alternative fuels [17] that ought
to be met are: (1) high heat content for maximum range or pay-
load: this can mean a high-specific energy or high energy density;
(2) good atomization; (3) rapid evaporation; (4) good burning
characteristics, including relight capability at altitude; (5) low
explosion risk; (6) high-specific heat capacity; (7) free from con-
taminants; (8) minimum carbon formation; (9) low viscosity and
high lubricity—good storage and pumping characteristics, includ-
ing low freezing point to facilitate altitude operation; (10) good
thermal stability/chemical stability; (11) wide availability and
acceptable cost; (12) products of combustion acceptable environ-
mentally; (13) good ground storage and handling characteristics.
072003-2 / Vol. 141, JULY 2019
The most attractive alternative sources for jet fuel are biofuels
[14,18,19].
Biodiesel is an alkyl ester of fat acid, mostly vegetable oils and
animal fats, and it is produced through the process of transesterifi-
cation [16]. This kind of fuel has the advantages of being biode-
gradable and the possession of excellent lubricity, besides the
renewability, the high flash point, the good energy balance, and
the good miscibility with petroleum fuels [20]. There is no sulfur
in the composition and it has shown reduced greenhouse gas emis-
sions [21]. It has also been proven that the biodiesel fuel has zero
aromatic compounds, is nontoxic [22], and does not produce any
kind of pollution. More information about this subject is presented
in Ref. [23].
Despite the numerous advantages, the biodiesel fuel has a very
low energy density compared to the conventional jet fuels, thus
making it insufficient for the use in the aviation industry [24].
Although it does not need any further engine modification and
infrastructure to be implemented as a jet fuel, the biodiesel fuel
does not show much efficiency [25]. The efficiency of this alterna-
tive fuel is also affected by its biodegradability, which can cause
biological growth during storage, an aspect that can affect the sta-
bility [16]. Another matter to consider is the freezing point—by
being higher than the petroleum-based aviation fuel, it is not suffi-
cient for high altitude flights. Another disadvantage of using of
biodiesel as an aviation fuel is the presence of polyunsaturated
and unsaturated fatty acids, which can decrease stability of the
fuel due to the oxidation of the unsaturated sites [26]. Finally, the
presence of ester groups determines the polarity of the diesel fuel,
which determines the formation of emulsion and, thus, the diffi-
culty of water separation [16].
Agarwal et al. present a critical review of the effect of biodie-
sel’s fuel on the engine performance, emissions, and combustion
characteristics in existing diesel engines vis-a-vis conventional
diesel [27], but the paper does not take into account mixt fuels.
There have been many turboengine tests which have used bio-
fuel/biodiesel: So French [28] tested the performance of a turbine
technologies SR-30 turbojet gas turbine engine using canola oil
biodiesel. It was found that the maximum thrust achieved by the
biodiesel was less than jet A by 8% at maximum rpm. Using a gas
turbine engine of the same model as French [28], Habib et al. [29]
tested a variety of biodiesels and biofuels in 50% and 100% (B50
and B100) volumetric blends with jet A-1. In terms of thrust-
specific fuel consumption, at higher rpm, the thrust-specific fuel
consumption of all test fuels was not significantly different from
that of jet A-1. The turbine inlet temperature for biofuels was
higher than that of jet A-1 overall. The exhaust gas temperature
was similar for all test fuels. Chiang et al. [29] tested a 150 kW
Teledyne RGT-3600 micro gas turbine running on an unspecified
biodiesel in volumetric blends of 10%, 20%, and 30% with diesel.
All the biodiesel blends had similar thermal efficiencies across all
power loads. It was reported that carbon deposits were found after
operating for 6 h on biodiesel blends on the fuel nozzle [30].
Krishna [31] tested soy biodiesel (soybean methyl ester) in volu-
metric blends of 20%, 50%, and 100% (B20, B50, and B100) with
ASTM number 2 heating oil in a 30 kW capstone CR30 gas-fired
microturbine. It was found that the heating efficiencies of number
2 heating oil, B20, and B100 were similar, at approximately 20%.
B50 heating efficiency was higher by 7%.
Another study conducted in 2010 is Ref. [32], for which it was
used biodiesel aimed at study of the emissions as a result of the
combustion of biodiesel blends and pure biodiesel in an auxiliary
power unit. More studies regarding the utility of biodiesel can be
found in Refs. [33–36].
In this paper, the performances and the emissions of the JET-
CAT P80 microengine are to be analyzed, by using as fuel jet A,
jet A þ 10% biodiesel, jet A þ 20% biodiesel, and jet A þ 30%
biodiesel and maintaining the engine in three different regimes for
approximately one minute and a half for each regime. After this,
the performances will be analyzed through a jet engine cycle anal-
ysis at the maximum regime.
Transactions of the ASME

Fig. 1 Jet CAT P80 test bench
Test Bench
R
The experiments were performed on Jet CAT P80V test bench
(Fig. 1) in the turboengine laboratory of the Aerospace Engineer-
ing Faculty, University of Polytechnics from Bucharest, in collab-
oration with the INCDT Turboengines COMOTI.
The emission measurements were made with a portable device
R
MRUV provided by COMOTI.
Journal of Energy Resources Technology
Description of the Equipments
R
Description of the Jet CAT P80V Test Bench. The Jet CAT
P80 [37] microengine and the test bench are presented in Fig. 1.
It consists of an axial turbine with a direct-coupled radial com-
pressor and an annular combustion chamber. The turbine and
compressor, together with the bearing housing in-between, form a
compact unit. This unit was originally used as the propulsion unit
for model airplanes. The intake air is slung by the fast-rotating
compressor wheel (1) (35,000–115,000 rpm) into the aluminum
diffuser housing (2). Here the speed of the air is converted into
pressure. At the combustion chamber (3) inlet part of the air is
branched off and fed to the front face of the flame tube (4). The
liquid fuel is passed from the rear into so-called evaporator tubes
(5). The fuel is gasified there, and in the front part of the combus-
tion chamber it is mixed with the primary air and combusted. The
flame tube is cooled from the outside by the secondary air. It is
routed to the flame tube by way of bores (6) in order to cool the
very hot combustion gases (approximately 2000  C) down to the
permissible turbine inlet temperature of 600–800  C. A glow plug
(7) ignites the air/fuel mixture during starting.
From the combustion chamber, the combustion gases flow into
the diffuser (8) of the turbine and are accelerated before entering
the axial wheel (9). In the turbine, the gases discharge their energy
to the wheel to drive the compressor. In the process, they are par-
tially relaxed and cooled. They are emitted into the thrust nozzle
(10) at approximately 600  C. The turbine and compressor wheels
are fitted to a common shaft (11) such that they are overhanging.
The shaft is guided on ball bearings (12) in the bearing housing.
The bearings are cooled by the compressor air and the electronics
(13) for the starter motor (15), temperature monitoring, and speed
measurement (14) are located under the front hood.
R
Description of the MRUV Analyzer. The emission measure-
ments were made by using the MRU analyzer, which is presented
in Fig. 2.
The MRU Vario plus industrial analyzer is suitable for indus-
trial applications using combined infrared (nondispersive infrared
sensor) technology and electrochemical sensors for maximum
versatility.
Simultaneously, measurements of gas components (e.g., O2,
CO, NO, NO2, NOx, SO2, and CH4) are carried out.
Emission calculations include: mg/m3, NOx as mg/m3 NO2,
true measurement of NOx ¼ NO þ NO2, including O2 referencing
(normalization) to user definable values. The analyzer has the fol-
lowing parts:
Gas temperature measurement up to 2012  F (use stainless steel
up to 1200  F and use Inconel tubes up to 2012  F), integrated gas
cooler and automatic condensate draining pump/polytetrafluoro-
ethylene filter, air purging pump for CO-sensor protection, built-
in speed printer with easy paper loading, and SD card support for
recorded values at 1 s.
In Table 1, the measured components, measuring ranges, and
accuracies for MRU analyzer are presented.
Experimental Procedure
R
The performances and the emissions of the JETCAT P80V
microengine must be analyzed when jet A, jet A þ 10% biodiesel,
jet A þ 20% biodiesel, and jet A þ 30% biodiesel are used as
fuels. To each of these combinations, a 5% of Aeroshell 500 oil
will be added. The testing plan is presented in Fig. 3.
As far as the performances are concerned, the instrumentation
of the microengine records the temperature in the combustion
chamber, the temperature in front of the turbine, the pressure in
the combustion chamber, the thrust force, the fuel flow, and the
air flow.
The control law of the microengine is based on keeping a con-
stant speed of the turboengine shaft. This control law is not modi-
fied by the used fuel, and to keep the set speed of the turboengine
JULY 2019, Vol. 141 / 072003-3
 engine cycle analysis would be conducted in order to calculate the
combustion efficiency, the thermal efficiency of the engine, and
the specific consumption at the max regime.
In Fig. 2(a), the microengine stand and in Fig. 2(b) the probe
and the gas analyzer can be observed.
The exhaust probe was positioned in the gas jet of the microen-
gine, immediately after the exit from the nozzle. It is well known
that the emission measurements at source must be made in such
manner to avoid the sampling of gases with air from the environ-
ment, so only the burnt gases must be acquired. In the case of the
microengine, due to the high gas flow speed and small distance
between nozzle and the plug nozzle, the gas probe could not be
placed near the turbine. Therefore, the probe was placed near the
nozzle plug, this region represents the jet core where there is no
mixing of burnt gases with the environmental air. It must be speci-
fied that the testing bench does not present any vibrations trans-
ducer. During the engine functioning, the radial and axial
vibrations of the engine were measured (in Fig. 4, it can be
observed the transducers for axial (b) and radial vibrations (a)).
The main scope of the vibrations measurement was to monitor in
real time the vibration level, to avoid exceeding those during the
operation with kerosene jet A, taken as reference and to observe if
the engine’s behavior differs depending on the fuel blends.
Taking into consideration the fact that the exhaust emissions
analyzer takes a certain amount of time to determine and identify
the chemical composition, then for each functioning regime of the
microengine the engine was left on for approximately 90 s. Also
taking into account the handling of the engine and the reading of
the parameters each second, it was calculated as an average
parameter over the 90 s in order to obtain a set of data as correct
as possible.

Fig. 2 The stand tests for emissions (a) and MRU (b)
shaft, a higher/lower fuel flow will be injected in combustion
chamber. Considering the same speed of the compressor for all
the types of fuel blends results, the same pressure and air flow will
be obtained.
The parameters that depend on the shaft speed will be: thrust F,
temperature in front of the turbine T3, and the fuel flow Qc. These
will be analyzed when the engine is idling at 18.7% of the throttle
gas, when the engine is at cruise regime at 30%, and when it is at
max regime at 94% (for safety functioning condition), by main-
taining each regime for approximately one minute and a half. Dur-
ing the whole period of functioning, the vibrations both axially
and radially were monitored. The content of SO2, NOx, and CH4
will be analyzed, emphasizing the SOx emissions.
Measurements have been made for the determination of the fuel
blends’ density in the COMOTI laboratory to make possible the
transformation of the fuel flow values from liters per hour to kilo-
gram per second. Having this data recorded from the engine, a jet
Table 1 Measurement components, measuring range, and accuracy for MRU analyzer
Experimental Results
Following the experiments, Table 2 presents the main quantities
of interest recorded by the microengine, performing the average
for the 90 s for each regime: thrust, fuel flow, and gas temperature
in front of the turbine. Furthermore, the vibrations and the concen-
trations of NOx, SO2, and CH4 present in the combustion gas are
also listed. In the same table, the percentage of variations for the
gas temperature in front of the turbine, the fuel flow, and the force
is presented, for each blend and each regime, respect to the case
in which the microengine functioned with jet A.
By analyzing Table 2, it can be concluded that, first of all, the
integrity and functionality of the microengine are not endangered.
In the idling regime, the temperature in front of the turbine has
the greatest variations.
Regarding the fuel consumption, expressed in liters per hour,
this has small variations in all three regimes for all four fuel
blends.
The thrust presents positive variations of a few percentage in
idle and cruise.
Regarding the vibrations, the use of the blends did not modify
significantly the vibration levels on radial direction. On the other

Measurement components Measuring range Accuracy

Oxygen (O2) 0–21.0 vol % 6 0.2 vol 60.2 vol % abs

Carbon monoxide (CO) 0–4000 ppm 610 ppm or 5% reading < 4000 ppm/10% reading > 4000 ppm
Overload 10,000 ppma
Nitric oxide (NO) 0–1000 ppm 65 ppm or 5% reading < 1000 ppm/10% reading > 1000 ppm
Overload 5000 ppm
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) 0–200 ppm 65 ppm or 5% reading < 200 ppm/10% reading > 200 ppm
Overload 1000 ppma
Sulfur dioxide (SO2) 0–2000 ppm 610 ppm or 5% reading < 2000 ppm/10% reading > 2000 ppm
Overload 5000 ppma
Carbon dioxide (CO2) 0–3% up to 30% 60.5% or 63% of reading
Hydrocarbons/methane (CH4) 0–10,000 ppm up to 3% 60.03% or 63% of reading
a
Overload range recommended only for short time measurements.

072003-4 / Vol. 141, JULY 2019 Transactions of the ASME


Fig. 3 Measurement plan
hand, on axial direction there can be observed some particular-
ities. In idle regime, the increase of the biodiesel concentration
leads to the decrease of the level of vibrations with up to 0.21 m/s2
root mean square value, while in cruise mode the increase of the
concentration presents an increase of the vibrations’ level. How-
ever, all these variations do not endanger the stability and the
integrity of the microengine. It is a notable fact that the T3 temper-
ature in the idle regime is increasing once with the increasing con-
centration of the biodiesel, while the vibrations decrease. These
Journal of Energy Resources Technology
Fig. 4 Radial accelerometer (a) and axial accelerometer (b)
variations of the vibration levels can be influenced by the proc-
esses from the combustion chamber, where in some regimes the
combustion can present some instability that can have as effect
the variations of the vibrations on axial direction.
Regarding the emissions, these are decreasing once with the
biodiesel concentration increases for each regime.
In Figs. 5–12, the values from Table 2 are presented in detail,
in order to have a more detailed image of the parameters
variation.
Figure 5 presents charts for the temperature in front of the tur-
bine for the three regimes and for the four different types of fuel.
It can be noted in Fig. 5 that the temperature in the combustion
chamber in the idle mode for the three combinations of blends is
greater than for the jet A but does not exceed the superior limit of
engine’s functioning 800  C.
In the cruise regime, the combustion temperature decreases
once the biodiesel concentration increases, below the reference
value of jet A. In the max regime, the temperature in the combus-
tion chamber is a little lower than the value of the reference case
jet A, observing a small decrease at the 20% concentration biodie-
sel. This small variation can be caused by the reading error of the
thermocouple sensor.
In Fig. 6, it is presented the variation of the fuel flow for the
three regimes and the four fuel blends.
At the same time, it can be observed that the fuel flow remains
approximately the same, not presenting notable variations as seen
in Table 2, under 2% compared to the case in which jet A was
used.
Figure 7 presents the force variation for the three regimes and
the four fuel blends.
In all cases, the force of the microengine has a positive increase
once the biodiesel concentration increases for all three studied
regimes.
JULY 2019, Vol. 141 / 072003-5
 Table 2 The main measured variables

T3 Variation Qc Variation F Variation Acc-radial Acc-axial SO2 NOx CH4

Regime Fuel ( C) (%) (l/h) (%) (N) (%) (m/s2) (m/s2) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm)

Idle Jet A 612.9 6.66 5.49 1.07 1.45 139 21 700

Jet A þ 10%BD 678.1 10.64 6.64 0.31 5.65 2.93 0.99 1.43 50 17 610
Jet A þ 20% BD 684.5 11.68 6.56 1.54 5.77 5.10 1.08 1.29 12 17 600
Jet A þ 30% BD 686.9 12.08 6.56 1.61 5.77 5.12 0.99 1.24 0 16 600
Cruise Jet A 625.9 9.91 14.14 3.63 0.95 159 22 800
Jet A þ 10% BD 617.0 1.42 10.07 1.56 14.38 1.70 3.55 0.96 60 17 620
Jet A þ 20% BD 615.5 1.66 9.91 0.01 14.78 4.54 5.01 1.02 8 16 580
Jet A þ30% BD 612.7 2.11 9.99 0.84 14.74 4.26 3.23 1.21 0 15 560
Max Jet A 654.9 22.96 85.69 3.24 2.90 57 19 530
Jet A þ 10% BD 651.8 0.48 23.06 0.44 86.07 0.45 3.15 2.82 11 17 440
Jet A þ 20% BD 648.1 1.04 22.96 0.02 86.10 0.48 3.42 2.77 0 16 430
Jet A þ 30% BD 650.9 0.62 22.94 0.08 86.17 0.56 3.45 2.97 0 15 410

Fig. 5 Variation of T3 ( C)

In the idle regime, it can be noticed that the thrust force has a
tendency to increase once the biodiesel concentration increases.
In the cruise regime, it can be observed that the thrust force has
a small percentage increase.
In the max regime, the thrust force is bigger than the jet A case,
in all three cases when biodiesel is being used, but the increase is
very small.
In Fig. 8, the measured values of vibrations for both the direc-
tions are shown.
The burning stability can be altered by using other fuel than jet
A causing vibration in turbine and in the shaft that can lead to
engine destruction. So the main parameter which gave us an
image of the burning stability was the vibration monitoring. It can
be noticed that for all the studied cases, another than jet A fuel,
the vibrations fit in the limits of functionality by not exceeding the
recorded value for the jet A case; therefore, the engine was not
endangered during the functioning.
The second important part of the experiment consists of record-
ing the emissions of SO2, NOx, and CH4.
In Fig. 9, the SO2 variation is presented for the three function-
ing regimes and for the four fuel types.
It is notable that the SO2 concentration decreases once the bio-
diesel concentration increases in the case of all regimes, but at a
concentration of 30% biodiesel the analyzer no longer records
SO2.
From this point of view, a maximum concentration of biodiesel
of 30% is sufficient for the sulfur concentration to be eliminated
from the combustion gas in all three functioning regimes of the
microengine. Increasing the biodiesel concentration in fuel leads
to lower quantity of sulfur in the blend composition knowing that
the biofuels does not contain sulfur.
In Fig. 10, the NOx variation is presented.
Regarding the NOx content in the combustion gas, it can be noted
that for all the functioning regimes, the NOx content decreases once
the biodiesel concentration in the blend fuel increases.
Next, the variation of CH4 in the combustion gas is presented in
Fig. 11.
As far as the CH4 content is concerned, it can be observed that in
all three functioning regimes, this is the lowest opposed to the jet
A, presenting a decrease with the biodiesel concentration increase.
Jet Engine Cycle Analysis
This section presents the variation of the performances for the
max regime and the fuel blends.
The basis of the calculation of performance parameters is the
cycle analysis of gas turbines as demonstrated by [38]

072003-6 / Vol. 141, JULY 2019 Transactions of the ASME

 Fig. 6 Variation of Qc (m3/s)

Fig. 7 Variation of force F (N)

 
F m where f is the fuel–air ratio, FHV is fuel heating value, cp is the
Fst ¼ (1) specific heat capacity, and T is the temperature
_ _
Mc þ Ma s
 
f kg
where Fst is the specific thrust, F is the thrust force, M_ c is the fuel S ¼ 3600  ¼ (3)
flow, and M_ a is the air flow Fst Nh

where S is the specific fuel consumption

M_ c 1
f ¼ ¼ ðcp3  T3  cp2  T2 Þ (2) To determine some performances for the maximum regime of
M_ a FHV the microengine, the following calculations were made.

Journal of Energy Resources Technology JULY 2019, Vol. 141 / 072003-7

 Fig. 8 Vibration levels: (a) radial and (b) axial

In the combustion chamber, there are concerns with incomplete defined as the net rate of organized out of the engine
combustion of the fuel, combustion efficiency gb which is divided by the rate of thermal energy available from the fuel in
expressed as the engine.

The thermal efficiency of the engine can be written as
M_ c þ M_ a  cp3  T3  M_ a  cp2  T2
gb ¼
M_ c  FHV ð1 þ f Þ  v2e ð1 þ f Þ  F2st
gT ¼ ¼ (5)
ð1 þ f Þ  ðcp3  T3  cp2  T2 Þ 2  f  FHV 2  f  FHV
¼ (4)
f  FHV
where ve is the gas flow velocity from the nozzle.
The thermal efficiency of an engine is another very The fuel heating value of each four fuel blends was determined
useful engine performance parameter. Thermal efficiency is using the below equation:

072003-8 / Vol. 141, JULY 2019 Transactions of the ASME

 Fig. 9
Fig. 10 NOx levels
FHV ¼ gAeroshell500  FHVAeroshell500 þ gjetA  FHVjetA þ gbiodiesel
 FHVbiodiesel (6)
where g is the massic participation of each blends. It must be men-
tioned that in each mixture 5% of Aeroshell 500 oil was used.
For the calculation of the heating value, the values for jet
A (42,800 kJ/kg) [39], biodiesel (37,270 kJ/kg) [40], and for
Aeroshell 500 (2000 kJ/kg)2 were taken into consideration.
2
www.xlrotor.com
Journal of Energy Resources Technology
SO2 levels
Based on the measured density, the fuel flow was transformed
from liters per hour to kilogram per second and we can calculate
the specific consumption using Eq. (3). Table 3 presents perform-
ance calculations for the maximum regime.
The heating value of the blends decreases as the biodiesel con-
centration increases. This is explained because the biodiesel heat-
ing value is lower than the jet A. On increasing the biodiesel
concentration, the heating value of the blend will get smaller.
On analyzing Table 3, it can be observed that the value of the ther-
mal efficiency is reduced extremely compared with the values from
the literature [38] because the functioning processes of a microengine
are not similar with the turboengine from the airplanes.
JULY 2019, Vol. 141 / 072003-9
 Fig. 11 CH4 levels

Table 3 Calculated performances for the maximum regime

The burning efficiency presents small variation between the
FHV Density gb gT S four blends.
Fuel (kJ/kgcomb) (kg/m3) (%) (%) (kg/N h) Thermal efficiency has small increases as the biodiesel concen-
tration increases.
Jet A 40,661 817 88.53 6.55 0.223
Jet A þ 10% BD 40,135.65 822 88.16 6.64 0.225
From Fig. 12, the specific consumption increases due to a big-
Jet A þ 20% BD 39,610.3 829 88.39 6.71 0.226 ger concentration of biodiesel, this was expected due to the lower
Jet A þ 30% BD 39,084.95 836 89.34 6.76 0.227 calorific power of the biodiesel.
It can be noted that the specific consumption of the microengine
has a minimally increase, which is a normal consequence

Fig. 12 Variation of specific consumption

072003-10 / Vol. 141, JULY 2019 Transactions of the ASME

considering the fact that the calorific power inferior of the biodie-
sel is smaller than the one of the Jet A.
Due to the lower FHV and higher specific consumption of the
fuel blends comparing with the Jet A, these will lead to necessity
of bigger amounts of fuel taken in flight.
Conclusions
Following the conducted experiments, it can be stated that the
microengine Jet CAT P80 is functioning, without suffering any
further technological modification, safely for all four cases of fuel
blends studied in the three main functioning regimes.
An advantage of the biodiesel utilization results from the reduc-
tion of the concentration of NOx and CH4. An explanation for the
reduction of the NOx concentration in the burnt gases is given
also by a lower temperature for the biodiesel blends.
In conclusion, the functioning of the microengine with different
biodiesel concentrations demonstrated stability in functioning in
all three studied regimes and for all four fuel blends analyzed,
without overcoming the limit of the temperature in front of the
turbine which is 800  C and without high level vibrations that
would affect the engine functioning.
The tests from this study highlighted that the SO2 emissions
were totally reduced, the NOx compounds were reduced with
25%, the force increased up to 5%, and all these phenomena and
others leading at a higher specific consumption.
The use of biodiesel in the aviation engines could be a good
alternative to reduce the emissions without implementing major
modifications to the engines and without altering significantly the
engines performance.
Future research directions are intended to test the biodiesel
blends in different engine regimes at different environmental tem-
peratures and study the transitory regimes. Another future
research direction will be to investigate the biodiesel made from
recycled oils from food industry.
Nomenclature
cp ¼ specific heat capacity
f¼ fuel–air ratio
F¼ thrust force
Fst ¼ specific thrust
g¼ massic participation
M_ a ¼ air flow (kg/s)
M_ c ¼ fuel flow (kg/s)
Qc ¼ fuel flow (l/h)
S¼ specific fuel consumption
T2 ¼ temperature in front of combustor chamber
T3 ¼ temperature in front of turbine
gb ¼ combustion efficiency
gT ¼ thermal efficiency
References
[1] Boeing, 2015, “Current Market Outlook,” Boeing Commercial Airplanes Mar-
ket Analysis, Seattle, WA, accessed Mar. 26, 2019, http://www.boeing.com/
resources/boeingdotcom/commercial/about-our-market/assets/downloads/Boeing_
Current_Market_Outlook_2015.pdf
[2] Nygren, E., Aleklett, K., and H€ o€
ok, M., 2009, “Aviation Fuel and Future Oil
Production Scenarios,” Energy Policy, 37(10), pp. 4003–4010.
[3] Lee, D. S., Fahey, D. W., Forster, P. M., Newton, P. J., Wit, R. C. N., Lim, L.
L., Owen, B., and Sausen, R., 2009, “Aviation and Global Climate Change in
the 21st Century,” Atmos. Environ., 43(22–23), pp. 3520–3537.
[4] Thomas, M., 2018, “Airbus Global Market Forecast 2017–2036: Growing Hori-
zons,” Avi8ion, accessed Mar. 26, 2019, http://www.avi8ion.aero/2018/03/16/
airbus-global-market-forecast-2017-2036/
[5] Winchester, N., Malina, R., Staples, M. D., and Barrett, S., 2015, “The Impact
of Advanced Biofuels on Aviation Emissions and Operations in the U.S.,”
Energy Econ., 49, pp. 482–491.
[6] EASA, 2016, “European Aviation Environmental Report,” European Aviation
Safety Agency and and EUROCONTROL, Cologne, Germany, accessed Mar. 26,
2019, https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/transport/files/european-aviation-environ-
mental-report-2016-72dpi.pdf
[7] EC, 2011, “Flight Path 2050, Europe’s Vision for Aviation,” Report of the High
Level Group on Aviation Research, Publications Office of the European Union,
Luxembourg, Europe, accessed Mar. 26, 2019, https://ec.europa.eu/transport/
sites/transport/files/modes/air/doc/flightpath2050.pdf
[8] BP, 2017, “Statistical Review of World Energy,” Pureprint, London, accessed
Mar. 26, 2019, https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp-country/de_ch/PDF/bp-sta-
tistical-review-of-world-energy-2017-full-report.pdf
[9] OPEC, 2017, “Annual Statistical Bulletin of Organization of the Petroleum
Exporting Countries,” Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries,
Vienna, Austria, accessed Mar. 26, 2019, https://www.opec.org/opec_web/
static_files_project/media/downloads/publications/ASB2017_13062017.pdf
[10] U.S. EIA, 2018, “Use of Energy in the United States Explained,” U.S. Energy
Information Administration, Washington, DC, accessed Mar. 26, 2019, https://
www.eia.gov/energyexplained/?page¼us_energy_transportation
[11] Bello, B. Z., 2012, “Captured CO2 to Grow Microalgae for Bio-Jet Fuel
Production,” UKCCSC Winter School, University of Cambridge, Cambridge,
UK.
[12] Metz, B., Davidson, O. R., Bosch, P. R., Dave, R., and Meyer, L. A., 2007,
“Climate Change 2007: Mitigation,” Contribution of Working Group 3 to the
Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
[13] IEA, 2006, “IEA World Energy Outlook,” International Energy Agency, Paris,
France, accessed Mar. 26, 2019, Chaps. 2, 3, and 14, https://www.iea.org/
publications/freepublications/publication/weo2006.pdf
[14] Blakey, S., Rye, L., and Wilson, C. W., 2011, “Aviation Gas
Turbine Alternative Fuels: A Review,” Proc. Combust. Inst., 33(2), pp.
2863–2885.
[15] Faaij, A., and van Dijk, M., 2012, “White Paper on Sustainable Jet Fuel,”
SkyNRG, Utrecht, The Netherlands, accessed Mar. 26, 2019, http://skynrg.com/
wp-content/uploads/2013/11/White-paper-on-sustainable-jet-fuel-June-2012-Faaij-
van-Dijk-copy.pdf
[16] Hemighaus, G., Boval, T., Bosley, C., Organ, R., Lind, J., Brouette, R., Thomp-
son, T., Lynch, J., and Jones, J., 2006, “Alternative Jet Fuels: A Supplement to
Chevron’s Aviation Fuels Technical Review,” Chevron Corporation, San
Ramon, CA.
[17] Armstrong, F. E., Allen, J. E., and Denning, R. M., 1997, “Fuel-
Related Issues Concerning the Future of Aviation,” Proc. IMechE G, 211(1),
pp. 1–11.
[18] Kandaramath Hari, T., Yaakob, Z., and Binitha, N. N., 2015, “Aviation Biofuel
From Renewable Resources: Routes, Opportunities and Challenges,” Renew-
able Sustainable Energy Rev., 42, pp. 1234–1244.
[19] Abu Talib, A. R., Gires, E., and Ahmad, M. T., 2014, “Performance Evaluation
of a Small-Scale Turbojet Engine Running on Palm Oil Biodiesel Blends,” J.
Fuels, 2014, p. 946485
[20] Kubickova, I., and Kubicka, D., 2010, “Utilization of Triglycerides and Related
Feedstocks for Production of Clean Hydrocarbon Fuels and Petrochemicals: A
Review,” Waste Biomass Valorization, 1, pp. 293–308.
[21] Moser, B. R., 2010, “Camelina (Camelina sativa L.) Oil as a Biofuels Feed-
stock: Golden Opportunity or False Hope,” Lipid Technol., 22(12), pp.
270–273.
[22] Arkoudeas, P., Kalligeros, S., Zannikos, F., Anastopoulos, G., Karonis, D.,
Korres, D., and Lois, E., 2003, “Study of Using JP-8 Aviation Fuel and Biodie-
sel in CI Engines,” Energy Convers. Manage., 44(7), pp. 1013–1025.
[23] Saxenaa, P., Jawaleb, S., and Joshipurac, M. H., 2013, “A Review on Prediction
of Properties of Biodiesel and Blends of Biodiesel,” Procedia Eng., 51, pp.
395–402.
[24] Roberts, W. L., 2008, “Bio Jet Fuels,” The Fifth International Biofuels Confer-
ence, Raleigh, NC.
[25] Wardle, D. A., 2003, “Global Sale of Green Air Travel Supported Using Bio-
diesel,” Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev., 7(1), pp. 1–64.
[26] Saynor, B., Bauen, A., and Leach, M., 2003, “The Potential for Renewable
Energy Sources in Aviation,” PRESAV Final Report.
[27] Agarwal, A. K., Park, S., Dhar, A., Lee, C. S., Park, S., Gupta, T., and Gupta,
N. K., 2018, “Review of Experimental and Computational Studies on Spray,
Combustion, Performance, and Emission Characteristics of Biodiesel Fueled
Engines,” ASME J. Energy Resour. Technol., 140(12), p. 120801.
[28] French, K., 2003, “Recycled Fuel Performance in the SR-30 Gas Turbine,”
ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition: Staying in Tune With Engineering
Education, Nashville, TN, June 22–25, pp. 3651–3656.
[29] Habib, Z. B., Parthasarathy, R. N., and Gollahalli, S. R., 2009, “Effects of Bio-
fuel on the Performance and Emissions Characteristics of a Small Scale Gas
Turbine,” AIAA Paper No. 2009–827.
[30] Chiang, H. W. D., Chiang, I., and Li, H. L., 2007, “Performance Testing of
Microturbine Generator System Fueled by Biodiesel,” ASME Paper No.
GT2007-28075.
[31] Krishna, C. R., 2007, “Performance of the Capstone C30 Microturbine on Bio-
diesel Blends,” Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY, Technical Report
No. BNL-77927-2007-IR.
[32] Blakey, S., Rye, L., and Wilson, C. W., 2010, “Emissions From an APU Oper-
ating on a Range of Alternative Fuels,” SWAFEA Members Meeting, Paris,
France.
[33] Prussi, M., Chiaramonti, D., Riccio, G., Martelli, F., and Pari, L., 2012,
“Straight Vegetable Oil Use in Micro-Gas Turbines: System Adaptation and
Testing,” J. Appl. Energy, 89(1), pp. 287–295.
[34] Nascimento, M. A. R., Sierra, G. A., Lora, E. E. S., and Rendon, M. A., 2011,
“Performance and Emission Experimental Evaluation and Comparison of a

Journal of Energy Resources Technology JULY 2019, Vol. 141 / 072003-11

 Regenerative Gas Microturbine Using Biodiesel From Various Sources as
Fuel,” ASME J. Energy Resour. Technol., 133(2), p. 022204.
[35] Zabihian, F., Fung, A. S., and Chiang, H. W. D., 2011, “Modeling of Biodiesel
Fueled Micro Gas Turbine,” ASME Paper No. GT2011-46655.
[36] Ibrahim, M. N., Ali, A. H., and Ookawara, S., 2013, “Performance Assessment
of Turbojet Engine Operated With Alternative Biodiesel,” ASME Paper No.
POWER2013-98183.
072003-12 / Vol. 141, JULY 2019
[37] JetCat USA, 2008, “Jet Cat Instruction Manual,” U.S. Patent No. 6216440.
[38] Mattingly, J., 2006, Elements of Propulsion: Gas Turbines and Rockets, 2nd
ed., American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VA.
[39] Air BP, 2000, “Handbook of Products,” Air BP Ltd., Johannesburg, South
Africa.
[40] Elsayed, M. A., Matthews, R., and Mortimer, N. D., 2003, “Carbon and Energy
Balances for a Range of Biofuels Options,” Project No. B/B6/00784/REP.
Transactions of the ASME