Measurement Testing Plan and nvpm LTO Mass and Number Metric Development

Transcription

1 WP3 on Environmental Regulations Measurement Testing Plan and nvpm LTO Mass and Number Metric Development Paul Madden (RR) workshop Amsterdam 15 April 2016 WP3 Environmental Workshop (15 th April Amsterdam)

2 Content Reminder of Why we are Taking the Measurements Measurement Testing Plan - Remaining open items being addressed and how. - Data Protocols within CAEP - Some Measurements nvpm LTO Metric Development - Some example of potential Metrics Summary and Conclusions Workshop Amsterdam, 15 April 2016

3 New measurement equipment to measure black carbon (nvpm) mass and number emissions agreed by regulators rather than smoke. SAMPLE Programme Trent Results Regulations Being Agreed are to Test All Production Engines for nvpm. Workshop Amsterdam, 15 April 2016

4 nvpm Transition Standard and Stringency Timeline AE3007 and Trent The data is wanted by regulators by February There is no necessity to test engines that will not be in-production after 2020 whereas we will have to by regulation test engines that are in-production. Workshop Amsterdam, 15 April 2016

5 Workshop Amsterdam, 15 April

6 Workshop Amsterdam, 15 April 2016

7 At least 7 engine Types will have testing on more than one engine helping work on engine to engine variability. Workshop Amsterdam, 15 April 2016

8 Measurement Tasks Maintain Engine Measurement Campaign Schedules Maintain and Add to Test plans for: - Fuel Composition Effects - Ambient Conditions Effects - Engine to Engine Variability Assess quality and sufficiency of datasets Maintain a list of ongoing issues with regards to data reporting and measurements Feedback to SAE E31 on measurement system and issues Workshop Amsterdam, 15 April 2016

9 CAEP11 nvpm Corrections Ambient Conditions Currently blank placeholder need data Workshop Amsterdam, 15 April 2016

10 CAEP11 nvpm Corrections Engine to Engine Variability nvpm statistical compliance data needed Workshop Amsterdam, 15 April 2016

11 Data Reporting Protocol Engine Manufacturer reports for each of their engine test to their NAA. NAA gets the engine certification report with required data as specified in Ch 4 and Appendix 7. NAA confirms that the data complies with CAEP/10 Approved Ch 4 and Appendix 7 (CAEP10 WP and WP026.4) The NAA sends the approved nvpmvdb format sheet to the collection point: Mr. Werner Hoermann EASA The collection point checks that engine type designations have been removed and replaced by a PMTG engine code and uploads a package of nvpmvdb sheets to the CAEP PM secure site, and informs the METRICS ahg about the upload. Nominated WG3 members will have to sign the data use agreement for getting access to the data. Access to the nvpmvdb will be via a CAEP nvpm secure site with a click to agree for appropriate data use box. The METRICS ahg use nvpmvdb for LTO metrics development, evaluation and verification of a max mass concentration based visibility standard. Workshop Amsterdam, 15 April 2016

12 Small RR Engine Emissions Results 12 This engine has low smoke and is a mixed flow engine so was good for checking on limit of detection. Please note the curve shapes. nvpm emissions are not well behaved like CO and HC that increase exponentially at low conditions or NOx that increases exponentially at high conditions. Where LTO cycle points lie relative to nvpm levels may be important for some engine Types (peak on a cycle point or not). Workshop Amsterdam, 15 April 2016

13 EImass [g/kg] EInumber [#/kg] One Curve Two Sets of Instruments Results for Testing on a Trent Rich Burn Combustor 3 Curves Power Good repeatability but note different curve shapes for number and mass emissions. Power

14 Measurements on Lean Burn Engine Demonstrator Lean Burn Research Combustor Gives Normal Looking nvpm on Pilot Only and then no nvpm at Higher Conditions on Lean Burn mode at Take-Off, Climb and Cruise. Workshop Amsterdam, 15 April 2016

15 METRIC Development The CAEP 10 standard uses a nvpm mass concentration metric that is akin to smoke number such that the nvpm mass concentration has a maximum limit value to maintain invisibility. We will have emissions indices for mass (EIm) and number (Ein) at 4 LTO points reported as part of CAEP10 commitments. We can sum these over the existing gaseous LTO cycle using fuel flow * EI * time to give total nvpm in the LTO cycle. - The proposal to use the default LTO cycle times in modes. Key things are whether to divide the total nvpm by say thrust (the goodness of the engine), and whether to correlate say this parameter against a further parameter or not. - It is clear that bigger engines with higher fuel flow will produce more nvpm so this needs accounting for in some way. Potential favourite parameters might be as for NOx so total nvpm/thrust might be the metric. - Will this need a correlating parameter (like NOx) or not (like CO/HC)? Workshop Amsterdam, 15 April 2016

16 Total LTO Mass/Rated Thrust (mg/kn) METRIC Development If the data shows that nvpm increases uniformly with thrust then it might be that another correlating parameter such as OPR might not be required. We could then end up with a constant limit in terms of Total nvpm Mass (mg) /Thrust (KN) Clearly the y axes could be number or mass, but will both metrics behave in a similar manner? OPR Workshop Amsterdam, 15 April 2016

17 Total LTO Mass/Rated Thrust (g/kn) METRIC Development If the data shows that nvpm increases even faster with thrust then it might be necessary to have a correlating parameter such as OPR in a similar way to NOx. We could then end up with a limit line in terms of Total nvpm Mass (mg) /Thrust (KN) v OPR. It is quite likely number emissions will vary more than nvpm mass emissions and for both mass and number measurement uncertainty will have to be taken into account in some way when setting the LTO standard. OPR Workshop Amsterdam, 15 April 2016

18 Well-Designed LTO nvpm Metrics and Standards CAEP standard setting pillars:- Environmental benefit: improvement in nvpm emissions due to improvements in engine and combustor design. This needs to be put in context of how big the overall problem is so atmospheric science understanding of PM is required. Technical feasibility: improvements we can physically implement in a timely fashion. For example do we have a robust methodology to reduce nvpm number emissions. Does reducing nvpm mass also result in a reduction in nvpm number? Economically reasonable: can the desired improvements be made without disrupting the marketplace or putting too high a burden on a stakeholder? Do the benefits match the costs of technology implementation? Interdependencies: can the desired improvements be made without compromising safety or other environmental standards? For example NOx trades with smoke so if improvements in nvpm is required then this might put the NOx up, and needs to be taken into account by the regulators. Workshop Amsterdam, 15 April 2016

19 Conclusions The manufacturers are now measuring nvpm on 24 representative inproduction engines. Measurements to date have shown that nvpm is not as well behaved as gaseous emissions within the LTO cycle. This might result in difficulties developing robust LTO nvpm mass and number standards. Development of LTO nvpm number and mass based standards will continue into CAEP11 and will involve metric development as well as fuel composition corrections, ambient condition corrections, and engine to engine variability. There is a lot of work to do which might be difficult to complete the LTO standard by CAEP11. Workshop Amsterdam, 15 April 2016