NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS) 20070022426: Gas Emissions Acquired during the Aircraft Particle Emission Experiment (APEX) Series

1.6 MB·English

by  NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1
ISABE-2007-1277

Gas Emissions Acquired during the Aircraft Particle Emission Experiment (APEX) Series

by
Changlie Wey
ASRC Aerospace Corporation, Cleveland OH, U.S.A.
and
Chowen C. Wey
Army Research Laboratory at NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland OH, U.S.A.

Abstract
Jet Emissions Testing for Speciation (JETS)-APEX2
NASA, in collaboration with other US federal was conducted at Oakland Airport in August, 2005.
agencies, engine/airframe manufacturers, airlines, and Southwest Airlines provided four aircraft, two B737-
airport authorities, recently sponsored a series of 3 7H4 with CFM56-7B22 engines, one B737-3H4 with
ground-based field investigations to examine the CFM56-3B1 engines, and one B737-3Q8 with CFM56-
particle and gas emissions from a variety of in-use 3B2 engines. Four sampling stands were anchored at 1
commercial aircraft. Emissions parameters were m (both right and left engines), 30 m, and 50 m. Gas
measured at multiple engine power settings, ranging samples were drawn from 1m (both right and left) and
from idle to maximum thrust, in samples collected at 3 30 m probes. Figure 2 shows sample stands used in
different down stream locations of the exhaust. JETS-APEX2.
Sampling rakes at nominally 1 meter down stream
contained multiple probes to facilitate a study of the APEX3 was conducted at Cleveland Hopkins Airport
spatial variation of emissions across the engine exhaust in November, 2005. Continental Airlines provided four
plane. Emission indices measured at 1 m were in good aircraft: two B737-3T0 with CFM56-3B1 engines and
agreement with the engine certification data as well as two B757-324 with RB211-535E4B engines.
predictions provided by the engine company. However ExpressJet Airlines provided two aircraft: one ERJ-
at low power settings, trace species emissions were 145XR with AE3007-A1E engines and one ERJ-
observed to be highly dependent on ambient conditions 145ER with AE3007-A1P engines. FedEx Corporation
and engine temperature. provided one aircraft, A300B4-622R with PW4158
engines. NASA Learjet25 with CJ610-8ATJ was also
Introduction studied. Three sampling stands were anchored at three
down stream locations: 1, 30, and 42 m for large
With concerns over the environmental effects [1 – 4] of engines and 1, 15, and 30 m for small engines. Figure 3
aircraft exhaust, National Aeronautic and Space shows sample stand behind the FedEx A300-B4-622R
Administration (NASA) to sponsor a variety of studies aircraft with PW4168 engines.
in the past decade to gather detailed aircraft emission
data in order to assess the environmental impact of These measurement campaigns brought researchers
aviation and to develop ultra efficient and low from federal laboratories, academic institutions, and
emissions turbine engine technology [5 - 9]. Important private industry together to advance the knowledge of
recent studies include a series of three ground-based aircraft emissions and their initial evolution in ground
field investigations to examine the particle and gas atmosphere.
emissions from a variety of in-use commercial aircraft.
Objective
The first in the series was Aircraft Particle Emissions
eXperiment (APEX) which was conducted at NASA A suite of conventional gas analyzers was used to
Dryden Flight Research Center (DFRC) in April, 2004 measure the major and minor gas-phase species
using the NASA DC-8 aircraft with CFM56-2C1 emissions. The instrument suite and sampling system
engines. Three sampling probe stands were anchored at were tailored to provide emission parameters that are
1, 10, and 30 meters (m) downstream of the engine exit archived in the International Civil Aviation
plane. Gas samples were drawn continuously from the Organization (ICAO) database in order to confirm that
1 and 10 m probes. Figure 1 shows the sample stands the engine was operating within its certified emission
behind the NASA DC-8 aircraft with CFM56-2C1 limits; to map (using multi-port sampling rakes) the
engines. spatial distribution of emissions across the engine
This material is declared a work of the U.S. Government and
is not subject to copyright protection in the United States.
2
exhaust plume; to provide baseline plume information Sample Lines
for interpreting the particle emission observations; and Figure 4 shows a schematic of the gas sample system.
to provide the information necessary for calculating Sample air was drawn through the sample inlet probes,
emission indices (EI). Gas emissions played a critical 12.2 m of 9.5 mm stainless steel (SS) sample lines, the
role in anchoring the engine performance and sample heated valve selection box (with computer-controlled
locations in the exhaust plume. valve operation to determine which probe of which
rake the sample came from), heated boost pumps,
In this paper, the discussion focuses on the gas another 18 m of 9.5 mm SS sample line, to the
emissions acquired at 1 m behind the engine exit plane measurement systems. All sample lines and valve box
from all models of CFM56 engines available during were heated to 150oC with electric heater tape
these three measurement campaigns. according to Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)
Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) 1286B. The
Experimental Setup rake was cooled with water from an outdoor faucet to
protect the o-rings that vacuum-sealed the inlet probes
Fuel inside their mounting brackets. Because a high-
Three different fuels were used during APEX to pressure pump is required to force water through the
investigate the effect of fuel composition upon narrow passages in the gas probes, we suspect that the
emissions: baseline JP8 fuel from Edwards Air Force cooling flow had a minimal effect on sample gas
Base; high-sulfur fuel created from baseline fuel doped temperatures.
with tertiary butyl disulfide (C12H18S2); and high
aromatic Jet-A fuel purchased from a California JETS-APEX2 sample lines were setup similarly to the
refinery. There was no special arrangement for the APEX with 10 m sample line between probe and
fuels used in JETS-APEX2 and APEX3, fuels were heated box and another 15 m to the measurement
what were left in the fuel tank with additional amount system. APEX3 sample lines were again setup
added from the airport fuel storage. Fuel and oil similarly with 10 m sample line between probe and
samples were collected in all three campaigns and heated box and another 15 m to the measurement
detail analysis were done post-test. system.

Test Matrix 1 m Sample Rake
Two different test matrices were employed in APEX : In APEX, the 1 m stand held a sample rake that
(1) “NASA” matrix was designed to parametrically contained six gas probes and six particle probes that
study the effects of engine operation parameters on were alternatively positioned. It also supported six
exhaust emissions and including approximately 4 external, large-diameter gas probes to supply sample
minutes sampling time at thrust levels of ground idle air to measurement systems that had high flow
(approximately 4%), 5.5%, 7%, 15%, 30%, 40%, 60%, demands. A shroud was installed on the rake to protect
65%, 70%, 85%, and 100% (actual maximum the externally connected probes. (Figure 5)
permitted was 93%). This series of engine power level Thermocouples were attached to each external probe
was repeated once by lowering the power to ground and temperatures were recorded.
idle before the next one. (2) “EPA” matrix was
intended to simulate airport operations. It ran four In Jets-APEX2, both of the 1 m stands each held a
repeated ICAO-defined Landing-Take-Off (LTO) sample rake the same as the APEX 1 m sample rake
cycles of 26 minutes at idle (7%), 0.7 minutes at with similar probe orientation, but without external
takeoff (100%), 2.2 minutes at climb (85%), and 4 probes. There were three gas sample probes available
minutes at approach (30%). for our use as indicated in Figure 6.

JETS-APEX2 chose similar engine thrust level with a In consideration of wide range of aircraft included in
different way to repeat the thrust levels. The cycle was APEX3, a new sample rake with a scissor-jack base
defined as ground idle (approximately 4%), 7%, 15%, that can adjust height and/or tilt the sample rake was
30%, 40%, 60%, 85%, and take-off (maximum thrust specially designed. Water-cooling feature was decided
level permitted by local ambient conditions), 85%, not necessary for hardware survivability. Figure 7
60%, 40%, 30%, 15%, 7%, ground idle. shows that the rake contained eighteen gas and
eighteen particle probes were installed alternatively,
APEX3 designed an extra step in the series: ground and neighboring 2 gas probes were paired to a common
idle (approximately 4%), take-off (maximum thrust line connecting to the heated valve box, hence there
level permitted by local ambient conditions), 7%, 15%, were total 9 gas inlet positions. Nominally, there were
30%, 40%, 60%, 85%, take-off, ground idle, take-off, three combined gas probes for NASA gas measurement
85%, 60%, 40%, 30%, 15%, 7%, ground idle. system that were in the exhaust. Temperature and
3
pressure were measured at the same location of gas Fuel Air Ratio
probes. Figure 10a shows sample FAR calculated from all
measured data during APEX and from GEAE cycle
Measurement Systems calculations for CFM56-2C1 engine. Values from all
Conventional gas analyzers (CGA) were used as the six probe and three fuel types were within 10% of
primary gas-measurement system, the CGA employed GEAE predictions. Figure 10b shows sample FAR
standard methods recommended by ICAO Annex 16 calculated from measured data of CFM56-3B1 engines
Volume 2 and SAE ARP1256B. It measured a variety during JETS-APEX2 and APEX3. Values at each of
of major and minor gas species including carbon the four LTO thrust levels were within 10% of the
monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO ), oxygen (O ), expected value with the exception of one aircraft (tail
2 2
total unburned hydrocarbon (THC), and nitrogen number N70330). This was caused by probes located at
oxides (NO ), which is the sum of nitric oxide (NO) the outer edge of exhaust flow, i.e. diluted by fan and
X
and nitrogen dioxide (NO ). ambient air. Figure 10c shows similar agreements of
2
10% for the CFM56-3B2 engine from JETS-APEX2
A flow diagram of gas sample flow and the analyzers is with exception of one probe which was diluted by fan
shown in Figure 8. Each analyzer had its own pump to and ambient air. Figure 10d shows agreement within
control and meter the sample flow rate. An auxiliary 5% for the CFM56-7B22 engine from JETS-APEX2.
heated pump could be added to the main sample line if
the total sample flow rate was too low. A quality Nitrogen Oxides NO
x
assurance plan was developed for the CGA system. Nitrogen oxides (NO ) include both nitrogen monoxide
x
Individual components of the CGA system were (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO ). Emission index of
2
individually calibrated before the experiment, and then nitrogen oxide (EINO ) were corrected for humidity to
x
the entire system was calibrated again after installation the standard atmospheric condition (0.00629 kg-
was completed. The pre-campaign calibration water/kg-dry air) then plotted against ICAO LTO data.
procedures for the gas analyzers are stated in 40CFR
86 Subpart D. Different calibration procedures were Figure 11a shows the measured EINO of CFM56-2C1
x
given for the different detection methods used by the engine from APEX in good agreement, i.e. within 10%,
analyzers. The pre-test and post-test calibration with both ICAO data and GEAE prediction. The spread
procedures are stated in 40 CFR 86. They do not of the data are minimized to within 2 - 3 % when
differentiate between analyzers. normalized to combustor inlet temperature. Figures
11b, 11c, and 11d respectively show similar 10%
Results agreement with each engine model’s certification data
recorded in ICAO database. EINO appeared to show
x
For any given thrust level, engine operation and no noticeable dependency on fuel types or probe
gaseous emissions were influenced by ambient locations.
conditions. Although pressure was approximately
constant throughout each campaign, ambient Carbon Monoxide CO
temperature varied by up to 20oC and significantly As shown in Figure 12a, the measured EICO of
effected fuel flow rates to achieve the specific engine CFM56-2C1 engine from APEX were in excellent
power setting. This phenomenon was evident from the agreement, approximately 2 - 3% with ICAO data as
spread of calculated fuel air ratio (FAR) and measured well as with GEAE predictions. Figures 12b, 12c, and
gas emissions at the same thrust level. Hence all data 12d show similar agreement with ICAO data. EICO
were plotted against fuel flow rate instead of thrust increased exponentially at low thrust level. There were
level. significant differences between idle (7% engine thrust)
and ground idle (~4% engine thrust) which could be of
Emissions variation caused by probe positions was more concerns for airport air quality.
studied in APEX. Figure 9 demonstrates clearly that
although all six gas probes on the 1 m rake were within EICO has a negative correlation with EINO , i.e. EICO
x
the core engine exhaust, some of the outer probes increases when EINO decreases, as shown in Figure
x
exhibited greater levels of variability than the others. In 13. Because combustors are typically designed to
particular, samples collected from probes G5 and G6 operate most efficiently at high thrust levels, it is a well
were often observed to be diluted by 5 to 10% with fan established fact that EICO is highest at the lowest
air at low power conditions. However, their emission power conditions. On the other hand, EINO was
x
indices (EI’s) were in reasonable agreement with other typically a maximum at takeoff power because the
probes. combustor flame temperature peaked under these
conditions.
4
Unburned Hydrocarbon HC (UHC or THC) [4] Aviation and the Global Atmosphere – A special
Because CO and the HC are formed by similar reaction Report of IPCC Working Groups I and III, 1999
chemistry within the combustor, EIHC exhibited the
[5] Howard R. P., et al., “Experimental
same trend as EICO. However, concentrations of
Characterization of Gas Turbine Emissions at
unburned hydrocarbon were significantly more
Simulated Flight Altitude Conditions,” AEDC-TR-
sensitive to engine operating temperature than CO as is
96-3, 1996
readily apparent in Figures 14a, 14b, 14c, and 14d.
[6] Wey, C. C., et al., “Engine Gaseous, Aerosol
In addition, HC emission levels were higher when the Precursor and Particulate at Simulated Flight
engine was cold (during the initial run up). This was a Altitude Conditions,” NASA TM 1998-208509
consistent finding throughout the 3 campaigns, but and ARL-TR-1804, 1998
most evident in APEX because NASA DC-8 aircraft
[7] Whitefield, P. D. et. al., “NASA/QinetiQ
was dedicated to the test unlike other aircraft typically
Collaboration Program – Final Report,”
came soon after a commercial flight. Similar effects
NASA/CR-2002-211900, 2002
were noted in GEAE’s early emissions variability
testing of the CF6-50 [10]. It is understood that [8] Anderson, B.E., “An overview of the NASA
certification data were typically acquired on warm Experiment to Characterize Aircraft Volatile
engines. Aerosol and Trace-Species Emissions
(EXCAVATE),” NASA/TM-2005-19019, 2005
Figure 15 demonstrates that EIHC from APEX are at
[9] Wey, C. C., et al., “Aircraft Particle Emissions
the highest values at engine cold-start and decrease
eXperiment (APEX)”, NASA TM 2006-214382
with time for the same power conditions (with warmer
and ARL-TR-3903, 2006
engine). This phenomenon can be observed more
clearly when EIHC data are grouped by cold and warm [10] Dodds, W. J. “APEX Engine Operation”
engine conditions as shown in Figure 16. http://particles.grc.nasa.gov APEX Conference
Presentation, 2004
Conclusion

Gas emissions measured in samples drawn from
multiple probe tips on 1 m sample rake provided

information on the engine operation and exhaust plume
characteristics that was essential for interpreting
simultaneous particle emission measurements. Overall,
engine operation seemed to be normal.

Gas emissions, EINO , EICO, and EIHC, agreed very
X
well with the ICAO database and the expected values
for each engine type. EIs for the major and minor
species (CO, CO , NO, NO ) were not dependent upon
2 X
fuel type, but THC and CO emissions were highly
sensitive to variations in ambient temperature.
Reference

[1] Stolarski, R. S. and Wesoky, H. L. (eds.) “The
Atmospheric Effects of Stratospheric Aircraft: A

Fourth Program Report,” NASA Reference
Publication 1359, 1995 Figure 1: Photos of APEX sample stands - 1 m and 10
m stands each with a multi-probe rake, 30 m stand with
[2] Stolarski, R. S. et. al., ”1995 Scientific Assessment
a single probe
of the Atmospheric Effects pf Stratospheric
Aircraft,” NASA Reference Publication 1381,
1995
[3] R. Friedl (ed.) “Atmospheric Effects of Subsonic
Aircraft” Interim Assessment Report of the
Advanced Subsonic Technology Program,” NASA
Reference Publication 1400, 1997
5

Figure 6: Photos of 1 m left rake with 6 gas and 6
Figure 2: Photos of JETS-APEX2 sample stands - 1 m particle probes used in JETS-APEX2; 3 of gas probes
stands each with a multi-probe rake, 30 m and 50 m are for NASA gas measurement system
each with a single probe

Figure 3: Photos of APEX3 sample stands - 1 m stand
with a multi-probe rake and 30 m and 43 m stands each
a single probe

Figure 7: Photo of 1 m rake with 9 combined gas
probes, 9 combined particle probes, and 18 thermal
couples and pressure transducers used in APEX3

VVeenntt
PPuurrggee ggaass
GGaass eemmiissssiioonnss
ssaammppllee ffllooww HHeeaatteedd lliinnee HHeeaatteedd FFDDIIRR
HHCC AAnnaallyyzzeerr
FFiilltteerr SSiiggnnaall 33000000HHMM
Figure 4: Schematic of sample system showing 6 gas
SSppaann ggaass 11 SSppaann ggaass 22
probes connected to a heated switch box that allows PPuurrggee ggaass ZZeerroo ggaass FFuueell
sampling from any chosen
22--CChhaannnneell HHeeaatteedd
NNOOxx//NNOO AAnnaallyyzzeerr
FFiilltteerr CCEELLccDDoo 77PP00hh00yy EEssiiLLcc sshhtt
SSppaann ggaass 11 SSppaann ggaass 22
BByy--ppaassss ZZeerroo ggaass
PPuurrggee ggaass ZZeerroo AAiirr
UUAAnnnniiaavvlleeyyrrzzsseeaarrll SCSCSCiiiOOOeeemmm222///CCCeeennnOOOsss/// OOOUUU222llltttAAArrraaannnmmmaaalllaaayyytttzzz222eee333rrr
CCoooolleerr FFiilltteerr
CCCaaallliiifffooorrrnnniiiaaa AAAnnnaaalllyyytttiiicccaaalll 666000333PPP
CCCOOO222///CCCOOO///OOO222AAAnnnaaalllyyyzzzeeerrr
DDrraaiinn SSppaann ggaass 11 SSppaann ggaass 22
ZZeerroo ggaass
Figure 8: Schematic of gas measurement system with
NO/NO , CO/CO /O , and THC analyzers with sample
X 2 2
and calibration gas line

Figure 5: Photos of 1 m rake with 6 gas, 6 particles,
and 6 external probes used in APEX
6
8855%% ppoowweerr
11 6655%% ppoowweerr 11
4400%% ppoowweerr
3300%% ppoowweerr
22 77%% ppoowweerr 22
nn nn
oo oo
ositiositi 33 ositiositi 33
PP PP
obe obe 44 obe obe 44
PrPr PrPr
55 55 8855%% ppoowweerr
6655%% ppoowweerr
4400%% ppoowweerr
66 66 3300%% ppoowweerr
77%% ppoowweerr
00..000000 00..000022 00..000044 00..000066 00..000088 00..001100 00..001122 00..001144 00..001166 00..001188 00..002200 00 55 1100 1155 2200
FFAARR,, ssaammppllee EEIINNOOxx
Figure 9: (a) EINO (b) FAR vs. APEX 1m rake probe positions at several engine thrust levels
X

00..002255 00..002255
AAPPEEXX ((CCFFMM5566--22CC11)) JJEETTSS--AAPPEEXX22,, NN669955SSWW ((--33BB22)),, PPrroobbee RR11
JJEETTSS--AAPPEEXX22,, NN669955SSWW ((--33BB22)),, PPrroobbee LL11
00..002200 00..002200
pleple pleple
mm mm
R, saR, sa00..001155 R, saR, sa00..001155
AA AA
FF FF
00..001100 00..001100
00..000055 00..000055
00..00 00..22 00..44 00..66 00..88 11..00 00..00 00..22 00..44 00..66 00..88 11..00
FFuueell FFllooww,, kkgg//ss FFuueell FFllooww,, kkgg//ss
00..002255 00..002255
JJEETTSS--AAPPEEXX22,, NN335533SSWW ((--33BB11)) JJEETTSS--AAPPEEXX22,, NN442299WWNN ((--77BB2222))
AAPPEEXX33,, NN7700333300 ((--33BB11)),, GG66 JJEETTSS--AAPPEEXX22,, NN443355WWNN ((--77BB2222))
AAPPEEXX33,, NN7700333300 ((--33BB11)),, GG44
00..002200 AAPPEEXX33,, NN1144332244 ((--33BB11))
00..002200
pleple00..001155 pleple
mm mm
R, saR, sa R, saR, sa00..001155
FAFA00..001100 FAFA
00..001100
00..000055
00..000000 00..000055
00..00 00..22 00..44 00..66 00..88 11..00 11..22 00..00 00..22 00..44 00..66 00..88 11..00
FFuueell FFllooww,, kkgg//ss FFuueell FFllooww,, kkgg//ss
Figure 10: FAR vs. engine fuel flow rate (a) CFM56-2C1 (b) CFM56-3B1 (c) CFM56-3B2 (d) CFM56-7B22
7
2255 2255
AAPPEEXX ((CCFFMM5566--22CC11)) JJEETTSS--AAPPEEXX22,, NN669955SSWW ((--33BB22)),, PPrroobbee RR11
55 IICCAAOO,, --22CC55 JJEETTSS--AAPPEEXX22,, NN669955SSWW ((--33BB22)),, PPrroobbee LL11
22 IICCAAOO,, --33BB22
2200 2200
22
55
22
55
1155 1155
OOxx OOxx
NN NN
EIEI EIEI
1100 1100
55 22
55 55
55 22
00 00
00..00 00..22 00..44 00..66 00..88 11..00 11..22 00..00 00..22 00..44 00..66 00..88 11..00 11..22
FFuueell FFllooww,, kkgg//ss FFuueell FFllooww,, kkgg//ss
2255 2255
AJAJEEPPTTEESSXX--33AA,,PP NNEE77XX002233,,33 NN00 33((--553333BBSS11WW)),, GG((--3366BB11)) JJJJEEEETTTTSSSS----AAAAPPPPEEEEXXXX2222,,,, NNNN444423239595WWWWNNNN ((((----7777BBBB22222222)))) 77
AAPPEEXX33,, NN7700333300 ((--33BB11)),, GG44 77 IICCAAOO,, --77BB2222
2200 AAPPEEXX33,, NN1144332244 ((--33BB11)) 2200
11 IICCAAOO,, --33BB11 77
11
1155 11 1155
OOxx OOxx
NN NN
EIEI EIEI
1100 1100 77
11
55 55
11 77
00 00
00..00 00..22 00..44 00..66 00..88 11..00 11..22 00..00 00..22 00..44 00..66 00..88 11..00 11..22
FFuueell FFllooww,, kkgg//ss FFuueell FFllooww,, kkgg//ss
Figure 11: EINO vs. engine fuel flow rate (a) CFM56-2C1 (b) CFM56-3B1 (c) CFM56-3B2 (d) CFM56-7B22
X
110000 110000
AAPPEEXX ((CCFFMM5566--22CC11)) JJEETTSS--AAPPEEXX22,, NN669955SSWW ((--33BB22)),, PPrroobbee RR11
55 IICCAAOO,, --22CC55 JJEETTSS--AAPPEEXX22,, NN669955SSWW ((--33BB22)),, PPrroobbee LL11
22 IICCAAOO,, --33BB22
8800 8800
6600 6600
OO OO
CC CC
EIEI EIEI
4400 4400
22
55
2200 2200
00 55 55 55 00 22 22 22
00..00 00..22 00..44 00..66 00..88 11..00 11..22 00..00 00..22 00..44 00..66 00..88 11..00 11..22
FFuueell FFllooww,, kkgg//ss FFuueell FFllooww,, kkgg//ss
110000 110000
JJEETTSS--AAPPEEXX22,, NN335533SSWW ((--33BB11)) JJEETTSS--AAPPEEXX22,, NN442299WWNN ((--77BB2222))
AAPPEEXX33,, NN7700333300 ((--33BB11)),, GG66 JJEETTSS--AAPPEEXX22,, NN443355WWNN ((--77BB2222))
AAPPEEXX33,, NN7700333300 ((--33BB11)),, GG44 77 IICCAAOO,, --77BB2222
8800 AAPPEEXX33,, NN1144332244 ((--33BB11)) 8800
11 IICCAAOO,, --33BB11
6600 6600
OO OO
CC CC
EIEI EIEI
4400 4400
11
2200 2200 77
00 11 11 11 00 77 77 77
00..00 00..22 00..44 00..66 00..88 11..00 11..22 00..00 00..22 00..44 00..66 00..88 11..00 11..22
FFuueell FFllooww,, kkgg//ss FFuueell FFllooww,, kkgg//ss
Figure 12: EICO vs. engine fuel flow rate (a) CFM56-2C1 (b) CFM56-3B1 (c) CFM56-3B2 (d) CFM56-7B22
8
100
JETS-APEX2, N353SW (-3B1)
APEX3, N70330 (-3B1)
APEX3, N14324 (-3B1)
80 JETS-APEX2, N695SW (-3B2)
APEX (-2C1)
JETS-APEX2 (-7B22)
60
O
C
EI
40
20
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
EINO
x
Figure 13: EICO vs. EINO
x
2255 2255
AAPPEEXX ((CCFFMM5566--22CC11)) JJEETTSS--AAPPEEXX22,, NN669955SSWW ((--33BB22)),, PPrroobbee RR11
55 IICCAAOO,, --22CC55 JJEETTSS--AAPPEEXX22,, NN669955SSWW ((--33BB22)),, PPrroobbee LL11
22 IICCAAOO,, --33BB22
2200 2200
1155 1155
CC CC
HH HH
EIEI EIEI
1100 1100
55 55
55 22
00 55 55 55 00 22 22 22
00..00 00..22 00..44 00..66 00..88 11..00 11..22 00..00 00..22 00..44 00..66 00..88 11..00 11..22
FFuueell FFllooww,, kkgg//ss FFuueell FFllooww,, kkgg//ss
2255 2255
JJEETTSS--AAPPEEXX22,, NN335533SSWW ((--33BB11)) JJEETTSS--AAPPEEXX22,, NN442299WWNN ((--77BB2222))
AAPPEEXX33,, NN7700333300 ((--33BB11)),, GG66 JJEETTSS--AAPPEEXX22,, NN443355WWNN ((--77BB2222))
AAPPEEXX33,, NN7700333300 ((--33BB11)),, GG44 77 IICCAAOO,, --77BB2222
2200 AAPPEEXX33,, NN1144332244 ((--33BB11)) 2200
11 IICCAAOO,, --33BB11
1155 1155
CC CC
HH HH
EIEI EIEI
1100 1100
55 55
11 77
00 11 11 11 00 77 77 77
00..00 00..22 00..44 00..66 00..88 11..00 11..22 00..00 00..22 00..44 00..66 00..88 11..00 11..22
FFuueell FFllooww,, kkgg//ss FFuueell FFllooww,, kkgg//ss
Figure 14: EIHC vs. engine fuel flow rate (a) CFM56-2C1 (b) CFM56-3B1 (c) CFM56-3B2 (d) CFM56-7B22

5 1.0 25
GGG213 Ewnagrmine Econldgine
4 GG54 0.8 20 HBaigshel isnuel ffuure l
G6 High aromatic
EI HC 23 00..46 Fuel Flow, kg/s EI HC1105 ICAO CFM56-2-C5
1 0.2 5
0 0.0 0
08:10:00 08:30:00 08:50:00 09:10:00 09:30:00 09:50:00 10:10:00 10:30:00 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

Time on 4/26/2004 (PDT), Baseline Fuel Fuel Flow, kg/s
Figure 15: EIHC from individual probes during APEX Figure 16: Effect of engine temperature on EIHC
with baseline fuel