1 / 30

JET A VAPORIZATION IN A SIMULATED AIRCRAFT FUEL TANK (INCLUDING SUB-ATMOSPHERIC PRESSURES AND LOW TEMPERATURES)

JET A VAPORIZATION IN A SIMULATED AIRCRAFT FUEL TANK (INCLUDING SUB-ATMOSPHERIC PRESSURES AND LOW TEMPERATURES) . C. E. Polymeropoulos, and Robert Ochs Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Rutgers University 98 Bowser Rd Piscataway, New Jersey, 08854-8058, USA

osman
Télécharger la présentation

JET A VAPORIZATION IN A SIMULATED AIRCRAFT FUEL TANK (INCLUDING SUB-ATMOSPHERIC PRESSURES AND LOW TEMPERATURES)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. JET A VAPORIZATION IN A SIMULATED AIRCRAFT FUEL TANK(INCLUDING SUB-ATMOSPHERIC PRESSURES AND LOW TEMPERATURES) C. E. Polymeropoulos, and Robert Ochs Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Rutgers University 98 Bowser Rd Piscataway, New Jersey, 08854-8058, USA Tel: 732 445 3650, email: poly@jove.rutgers.edu

  2. Motivation • Combustible mixtures can be generated in the ullage of aircraft fuel tanks • Current effort in minimizing explosion hazard • Present objective of the present work is: • prediction of the influence of different parameters involved in the evolution and composition of combustible vapors • The tank ambient pressure and temperature • The fuel and tank wall temperatures • The composition and the amount of fuel in the tank • assessing the flammability of the resulting air-fuel mixtures

  3. Outline • Brief background discussion • Description of the model • Comparisons with experimental data • Discussion of model results • Conclusions

  4. Mass Transfer Considerations • Natural convection heat and mass transfer • Liquid vaporization • Vapor condensation • Variable Pa and Ta • Vented tank • Multicomponent fuel

  5. Assumptions used for Estimating Ullage Vapor composition • Well mixed gas and liquid phases • Spatially uniform and time varying temperature and species concentrations in the ullage and in the evaporating liquid fuel pool • Quasi-steady transport using heat transfer correlations, and the analogy between heat and mass transfer for estimating film coefficients for heat and mass transfer • Low evaporating species concentrations • The time dependent liquid fuel, and tank wall temperatures, and the tank pressure are assumed known

  6. Additional Assumptions • Gases/vapors follow ideal gas behavior • Tank pressure is equal to the ambient pressure • Condensate layer forms on the tank walls • Condensate at the tank wall temperature • No out-gassing from the liquid fuel, no liquid droplets in the ullage, no liquid pool sloshing • Fuel consumption neglected

  7. Heat and Mass Conservation Relations

  8. Heat and Mass Transfer Correlations

  9. Computational Method • Given: • The tank geometry • The fuel loading • A liquid fuel composition • The tank pressure, and the liquid fuel and the tank wall temperatures as functions of time (experimental data) • The previous relations allow computation of the temporal variation of ullage gas composition and temperature

  10. Jet A Characterization • Jet A is a complex multi-component fuel • Components are mostly paraffin, and to a lesser extend cycloparaffin, aromatic, olefin, and other hydrocarbons • Jet A specifications are expressed in terms of allowable ranges of properties reflecting the physical, chemical and combustion behavior of the fuel • The composition of a Jet A sample therefore depends on its source, on weathering, etc

  11. Data for Jet A Characterizationwas based on Woodrow’s (2002) data • Jet A samples with flash points between 37.5 °C and 59 °C were characterized using chromatographic analysis • The characterization was in terms of equivalent C5 to C20 normal alcanes • Equilibrium vapor pressures computed with the resulting compositions were in good agreement with measured data • For comparisons with test tank results the model used fuel compositions from Woodrow’s data having flash points similar to the fuel samples used with the experimentation

  12. Jet A Compositions used for Comparisons with Experimental Data

  13. Comparisons with Experimental Data • Data on ullage temperature, and total hydrocarbon concentration with test tank at ambient pressure (Summer, 1997) • Samples with: 322.3 K < F.P.< 325.2 K • Data on ullage temperature, and total hydrocarbon concentration with test tank in altitude chamber (Ochs, 2004) • Samples with: 322.3 K < F.P. < 319.5 K • Data data from aircraft fuel tank (Summer, 2004) • Samples with various F.P.

  14. Ullage Vapor Lower Flammability Limit • The lower flammability limit (LFL) of ullage vapor is not well defined. • Empirical definitions (used by Shepherd 2000) • For most saturated hydrocarbons the 0°C F/A mass ratio at the LFL is 0.035±0.05 (Kuchta,1985) • Le Chatelier’s rule: at the LFL LR =1 where, Note: Use of Le Chateliers’s rule with the present equivalent n alcane species Jet A characterization needs further examination

  15. Conclusions • The temporal evolution of Jet A fuel vapor in experimental tanks was estimated using perfectly mixed fluids due to natural convection, and correlations based on the analogy between heat and mass transfer • Principal required inputs to the model were the tank geometry, the fuel loading, a component characterization of the liquid fuel, the tank pressure, and the temperature history of the liquid fuel and the tank walls. • Liquid Jet A was characterized using mixtures of C5-C20 n-alcanes with flash points equivalent to those of the samples used with the experimental test tanks • There was good agreement between measured and computed total Jet A vapor concentrations within a constant pressure test tank, and also within one undergoing pressure and temperature variations similar to those encountered with aircraft flight

  16. Conclusions (continued) • The model was used for detailed examination of evaporation, condensation and venting in the test tanks, and of the observed variations in total hydrocarbon concentration • The model was also used for estimating the effect of different parameters on the ullage F/A mass ratio • The temperature of the liquid fuel had a strong influence on the F/A • The effect of fuel loading was of minor significance, except for small fuel loadings. Of importance, however, is the potential of increased liquid fuel temperatures at low fuel loading • Of major significance was the choice of liquid fuel composition, which was based on previous experimental data with samples differentiated by their flash point

  17. Conclusions (continued) • The flammability of the ullage vapor was assessed • Using as criterion a previously proposed limit range of F/A mass ratios • Le Chatelier’s ratio with ullage species mole fractions computed with C5-C20 liquid fuel compositions • For the cases considered the two approaches yielded comparable LFLs. However, prediction of the LFL of Jet A requires additional consideration, especially with the use of an equivalent fuel composition • The model needs to be applied to different flight conditions using data from aircraft fuel tanks

  18. Acknowledgment Support for this work was under the the FAA/Rutgers Fellows Program, provided by the the Fire Safety Division of the FAA William J. Hughes Technical Center, Atlantic City, New Jersey, USA

More Related