PERM injection system Development. PERM injection system Validation

Transcription

1 PERM injection system Development AVIO, Antonio Peschiulli KIT, Nikos Zarzalis PERM injection system Validation ENGINSOFT, Lorenzo Bucchieri ONERA, Isabel Da Costa DGA, Vincent Plana

2 Index 1. Introduction 2. Injection System Development Injection System Design Injection System Manufacturing Experimental test campaign Tubular combustion system Annular combustion system (PERM combustor) Numerical Validation 3. Comparison of achieved results and target objectives 4. Conclusion & outlook 2

3 Introduction Subtitle - 1 Within NEWAC project, Avio designed in SP6 an Ultra Low NOx Annular Combustor on New Aero Core concept developed into SP4 and SP5, more precisely: Flow controlled core S/R - FCC Active core - AC 3

4 Introduction Subtitle - 1 Within NEWAC project, Avio designed in SP6 an Ultra Low NOx Annular Combustor to be tested at relevant engine condition by DGA Aero-engine Testing according to the New Aero Core concept cycles developed into SP4 and SP5, more precisely: Flow controlled core S/R - FCC Active core - AC 4

5 Introduction - 2 The Partially Evaporated and Rapid Mixing technology has been developed for the Injection System by University of Karlshrue and Avio, who define the Injector System device and performed LAB investigations for selecting the most promising configurations. Two configurations of Injector System has been manufactured and tested up to relevant engine conditions in sub-component experimental test at ONERA plan. Partner ENGINSOFT has performed numerical investigation in order to validate the numerical modeling of reactive CFD computation and produce reliable predicting tools. 5

6 Partner Subtitleinvolved AVIO as responsible for: Injector System Design NEWAC PERM Combustor Design integration of PERM combustion concept in Full Annular combustor. UNI KA as responsible for: Injector System Design LAB investigation ( optical measurement, investigation up to intermediate pressure) ENGINSOFT as responsible for: Numerical investigation of non reactive/reactive flow field ONERA as responsible for: PERM IS experimental investigation DGA as responsible for: PERM Full Annular Combustor validation 6

7 Index 1. Introduction 2. Injection System Development Injection System Design Injection System Manufacturing Experimental test campaign Numerical Validation 3. Comparison of achieved results and target objectives 4. Conclusion & outlook 7

8 European Workshop on New Aero Engine Concepts Injector SubtitleSystem PERM Concept Design Inj System concept Design [mm] CFD verification on tubular combustor case [mm] Mechanical arrangement Manufacturing and testing Validation of reactive CFD modeling Expected results for PERM IS applied on Full Annular Combustor 8

9 Subtitle PERM development time schedule PERM 1: IS design and validation IS design IS experimental validation up to Medium Pressure IS experimental validation up to High Pressure Numerical validation M1 M12 M24 M36 M48 May 2006 May 2007 May 2008 May 2009 May 2010 M60 May 2011 PERM 2: IS design and validation IS design IS experimental validation up to Medium Pressure IS experimental validation up to High Pressure PERM 1: FANN Combustor validation FANN experimental validation Low Pressure FANN experimental validation High Pressure 9

10 Injector SubtitleSystem PERM Concept Design PERM 1 Concept PERM 2 Concept ADVANTAGES first concept of main fuel feeding supply lean Injection System DISADVANTAGES mixing not optimized low value of AFR at Lean Blow Out; circumferential staging required at low regimes AREAS of IMPROVEMENT Review of the main fuel feeding at high load Flow field optimization: recirculation position and size more efficient air staging within the nozzle improvement of stability at low regime 10

11 Injector SubtitleSystem PERM Design PERM 1 Design Worst case Evaluation by means CFD of the Injector System solution robustness in dependency of the fuel system feeding due to fuel flow position inaccuracy Better case PERM 2 Design Worst case Better case 11

12 Injector SubtitleSystem PERM Design PERM 1 Design Worst case Evaluation by means CFD of the Injector System solution robustness in dependency of the fuel system feeding due to fuel flow position inaccuracy Temperature Profile comparison 3 PERM 2 Design Worst case Radius / IS exit radius PERM 1 PERM Temperature / Average Temperature 12

13 Injector SubtitleSystem PERM Injector System Manufacturing Mechanical arrangement studied for applying PERM concept on Injector System installed into tubular and Full Annular combustors PERM concept applied on Tubular case PERM concept applied on Annular case 13

14 Index 1. Introduction 2. Injection System Development Injection System Design Injection System Manufacturing Experimental test campaign Numerical Validation 3. Comparison of achieved results and target objectives 4. Conclusion & outlook 14

15 Experimental test campaign 3 versions of PERM injection systems tested at ONERA (M1 test rig) on a tubular combustion chamber: PERM 1 (June to December 2008) PERM 1.05 (December 2009 January 2010) PERM 2 (January 2010) Data acquired during test campaign: Aerodynamic performances Emission measurement Dynamic pressure M1 test rig at ONERA Palaiseau Rig capability: Air mass flow: up to 4 kg/s Air temperature: up to 870 K Chamber pressure : from 0.5 up to 30 bar RIG Drawing

16 Testing Aerodynamic tests and combustion tests were performed for each system : P=5.4 bar T from 518 K up to 655 K P=13.5 bar T from 600 K up to 720 K P=22 bar or 24 bar T from 808 K up to 840 K For each conditions various Pilot/Total ratios were performed LBO limits were determined at P=5.4 bar T=518 K with injection on pilot line only.

17 European Workshop on New Aero Engine Concepts Experimental test campaign Main results for the tubular test campaign: 10% reduction of PERM 2 in Fuel Air Ratio at LBO condition vs. PERM 1 50% reduction of PERM 2 in EI NOx at the higher pressure condition tested (22bar) vs PERM 1 Lean Blow Out comparison EI NOx Measurement at ONERA test Fuel Air Ratio PERM 1 PERM 2 EI NOx [g/kg] PERM 1 PERM Pressure Drop 0 Adiabatic Flame Temperature

18 Index 1. Introduction 2. Injection System Development Injection System Design Injection System Manufacturing Experimental test campaign Numerical Validation 3. Comparison of achieved results and target objectives 4. Conclusion & outlook 18

19 Numerical results compared with experimental measurement (PERM01) The system has a rotational periodicity the CFD domain is simply 1/16th of the actual rig (~800k elements) Heat Shield Dome Injection System primary swirler vane secondary swirler vane Rotational Periodic Conditions Fuel pilot A I R A I R lip droplets evaporation

20 Numerical results compared with experimental measurement (PERM01) Test condition summary and numerical results Operating Conditions Inlet Total Pressure [bar] 5.38 Inlet Temperature [K] 623 Fuel/Air Ratio 4% Pilot/Total Fuel Ratio 20% Non-dimensional temperature profiles Averaged Quantity CFD Temperature NO emissions NO X emissions FAR

21 Index 1. Introduction 2. Injection System Development Injection System Design Injection System Manufacturing Experimental test campaign Numerical Validation 3. Comparison of achieved results and target objectives 4. Conclusion & outlook 21

22 Comparison of achieved results and target objectives The experimental campaign on tubular RIG has confirm the capability of the PERM combustion concept in achieving the NOx emission reduction target of the NEWAC program. Full Annular Test are currently on going at DGA (Paris) and will verify the PERM 1 Injection System performance for the application to the AVIO designed combustor. NEWAC Cycles NOx Emission Prediction based on Injection System Tubolar Combustor Test Results EI NOx at LTCO cycle DPNOx/Foo, g/kn 100 NOx CAEP2 90 PERM (35% CAEP2) AC S/R, PERM 1 60 FCC S/R, PERM 1 50 AC S/R, PERM 2 40 FCC S/R, PERM OPR - Overall Pressure Ratio EI NOx NEWAC con PERM 1 NEWAC con PERM 02 TO climb App Idle

23 Index 1. Introduction 2. Injection System Development Injection System Design Injection System Manufacturing Experimental test campaign Numerical Validation 3. Comparison of achieved results and target objectives 4. Conclusion & outlook 23

24 Conclusion & outlook The single sector combustor test campaigns have confirmed the capability of the PERM Injection System concept to achieve the NOx emission reduction target of the program (-65% CAEP2). PERM combustion system technology has been tested in Full Annular Combustor (FANN) configuration and demonstrated ignition ambient conditions. FANN medium and high pressure tests are currently on-going to validate the combustor performances for the LTCO. Future design improvements and lab investigations (NEWAC-extension, LEMCOTEC) will allow the PERM Injection System technology to approach 2020 ACARE target (-80%).