Energy 93 (2015) 716e729

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Exergy analysis of a turbofan engine for an unmanned aerial vehicle

during a surveillance mission
€ hret a, *, Ali Dinç b, T. Hikmet Karakoç c
Yasin Şo
a
Graduate School of Sciences, Anadolu University, TR-26470, Eskişehir, Turkey
b
Tusas Engine Industries Inc., TR-26003, Eskişehir, Turkey
c
Faculty of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Anadolu University, TR-26470, Eskişehir, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this study, an exergy analysis of a turbofan engine, being the main power unit of an UAV (unmanned
Received 8 June 2015 aerial vehicle) over the course of a surveillance mission flight, is presented. In this framework, an engine
Received in revised form model is firstly developed, based upon engine design parameters and conditions using a genuine code.
8 September 2015
Next, the exergy analysis is performed according to thermodynamic laws. At the end of the study, the
Accepted 17 September 2015
Available online xxx
combustion chamber is identified as the most irreversible component of the engine, while the high
pressure turbine and compressor are identified as the most efficient components throughout the flight.
The minimum exergy efficiency is 58.24% for the combustion chamber at the end of the ingress flight
Keywords:
Aircraft engine
phase, while the maximum exergy efficiency is found to be 99.09% for the high pressure turbine at the
Cycle analysis start of the ingress flight phase and landing loiter. The highest exergy destruction within the engine
Gas turbine occurs at landing loiter, take-off and start of climb, with rates of 16998.768 kW, 16820.317 kW and
Exergy analysis 16564.378 kW respectively.
Turbofan © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
UAV

1. Introduction second laws of thermodynamics, pays attention to the quality of

As a result of technological development and rapid advances in
engineering sciences and industry, world energy demand in the
21st century is ever increasing. Recent reports by well-regarded
institutions [1,2] reveal that fossil fuels are still the most common
energy resources, rather than renewable energy resources. There-
fore, there is pressure to develop more efficient energy system
designs, and to utilize and sustain energy more efficiently. At this
point, thermal engineering, commonly referred to energy engi-
neering, plays a vital role. Exergy in particular, is a prominent tool in
this field of engineering providing benefits, such as the evaluation
and optimization of energy systems. Exergy analysis comprises the
first and second laws of thermodynamics. The first law deals with
energy conservation and forms changes of energy within the sys-
tem. Thus, it enables us to understand the conversion rate of energy
into another form, while the second law of thermodynamics ex-
plains the theoretical limitations of a system under actual operating
conditions. Exergy analysis, which benefits from both the first and
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ90 5347661416.
€ hret).
E-mail address: ysohret@gmail.com (Y. Şo
energy consumption and conversion within a system in addition to
the quantity. Therefore, it leads us to understand the irreversibility
and loss within the examined system [3e5]. For this purpose, many
studies have been presented in the literature for the evaluation of
various energy systems e.g. power plants, engines, heating and
cooling systems and suchlike [6e15].
The transportation sector accounts for approximately 25% of
energy consumption worldwide [1]. Air transportation has grown
in importance thanks to the time it saves us in daily life. Corre-
spondingly, the number of aircraft in service has increased and the
contribution of air transportation to energy utilization has
increased more than expected. Thus, aircraft propulsion systems,
especially gas turbine engines, have caught the attention of re-
searchers dealing with thermal engineering. However, a number of
early research papers emphasize the need to use exergy in the
course of aircraft propulsion systems development processes as an
optimizing and design tool to achieve more efficient and environ-
mentally friendly systems [16,17]. With respect to this, numerous
aircraft gas turbine engines have been investigated using exergy.
Turgut et al. [18] contributed to the literature by examining a
turbofan engine at sea level condition with the aid of exergy. The
fan and hot section nozzle were found to be the most irreversible

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.09.081
0360-5442/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 €hret et al. / Energy 93 (2015) 716e729
Y. Şo 717

Nomenclature F exergetic fuel

f fuel
E_ exergy rate (kW) flight flight
_
IP improvement potential rate (kW) gas exhaust gas
i engine station number
Q_ heat transfer rate (kW)
in inlet section
R universal gas constant k kth ingredient of the mixture
W _ work rate or power (kW) L loss
cp specific heat capacity under constant pressure mix mixture
(kJ kg1 K1) out outlet section
e_ specific exergy rate (kW kg1) P exergetic product
m_ mass flow rate (kg s1)
F thrust (kN) Superscripts
FAR fuel-air ratio CH chemical
h enthalpy (kJ kg1) KN kinetic
LHV lower heating value (kJ kg1) PH physical
M molar weight (kg kmol1) PT potential
N mole number (mole)
NGV nozzle guide vanes Abbreviations
P pressure (kPa) AC air compressor
T temperature (K) CC combustion chamber
TSFC thrust specific fuel consumption (kg kN1 h1) HPT high pressure turbine
V speed (m s1) LPT low pressure turbine
g gravity (m s2) TFE turbofan engine
x mole fraction UAV unmanned aerial vehicle
y variable
w uncertainty Greek letters
z altitude from reference (m) d fuel depletion rate
ε exergy efficiency (%)
Subscripts x productivity lack
0 dead state conditions c relative irreversibility (%)
air specification of air
D destruction

components of the engine as a result of the study. In Ref. [19],
fundamental exergy relationships were introduced to evaluate the
performance of an aerial vehicle for each phase point of a flight.
Exergy balance equations and entropy functions were developed
regarding the impact of drag and lift forces on the energy con-
sumption of the propulsion system. Tona et al. [20] present the
exergy parameters of a turbofan engine in addition to an economic
evaluation. Within this scope, the variation in exergy efficiency for
each component was obtained at the take-off, climb, cruise,
descent, holding and landing phases of a flight. Depending on the
exergy analysis, researchers also performed a cost analysis of the
evaluated engine. Turan [21] discusses the effect of certain engine
design parameters, for example pressure ratio, turbine inlet tem-
perature and flight Mach number, on the exergetic performance of
a turbojet engine. This study may be considered a milestone as the
first exergy analysis of an UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle) applicable
jet engine. As a result of this study, it was concluded that the exergy
efficiency of components and the engine improve, in relation to an
increase in Mach number. Another paper [22] reveals the exergetic
performance and economic aspects of a CT7-9C turboprop engine.
The compressor, combustion chamber, gas turbine and power tur-
bine components are evaluated within this framework. Balli and
Hepbasli [23] conducted an exergy analysis of another turboprop
engine, mostly used for military applications. The engine was
investigated under different operating modes, such as 75% and
100% loads, military and take-off. The dependence of exergetic
characteristics of the engine on operating mode was presented.
Unlike in previous studies, uncertainty analyses were also
performed in this study. In Ref. [24] the performance of a J85-GE-21
turbojet engine with afterburner was evaluated at sea level con-
ditions and 11000 m altitudes based on the exergy analysis method.
A decrease of exergy efficiency, based on reducing inlet air speed,
was noted by the authors. In addition, the study concluded that the
loss of exergy efficiency was 0.45% with a 1  C temperature
decrease. Balli [25] presented the impact of an afterburner on the
exergetic performance of an experimental turbojet engine. The
exergy efficiency of the investigated engine was calculated to be
29.81% and 22.77% for military and afterburner modes, respectively.
A genetic algorithm was developed for the exergy-based optimi-
zation of a turbofan engine by Tai et al. [26]. Engine cycle analysis
equations were combined with an exergy approach in this context.
A 3.3%e11.0% increase in specific thrust generation was confirmed
at the expense of 1.5%e2.3% of extra fuel consumption with the aid
of thermodynamic optimization.
Exergy analyses of gas turbine engines operated on UAVs (un-
manned aerial vehicles) are scarce in the literature. Related to
progress in this field gas turbine engines used for UAVs should be
investigated from the view point of exergy. For this purpose, the
current study aims to contribute to the literature by examining a
turbofan engine which is the main power unit of an UAV. Within
this scope, exergy parameters (exergy efficiency, exergy destruction
rate, improvement potential rate, productivity lack, and fuel
depletion rate) for each component of the engine are presented
based on obtained results from an engine model for a mission flight.
The exergy analysis of the engine is conducted for a typical sur-
veillance mission flight of the UAV.
718 €hret et al. / Energy 93 (2015) 716e729
Y. Şo
2. Modeling
2.1. UAV and mission flight description
UAVs are defined as aerial vehicles that do not carry a pilot and
which are operated remotely or autonomously during a mission
flight. Thus, they have numerous military and civil applications,
such as: aerial photography; agricultural purposes like crop moni-
toring and spraying; herd monitoring and driving; coastguard
search and rescue; coast line and sea-lane monitoring; pollution and
land monitoring; surveillance for illegal imports; fire services and
forestry; fire detection; shadowing enemy vessels; decoying mis-
siles by the emission of artificial signatures; reconnaissance; sur-
veillance of enemy activity; target designation and monitoring; and
the location and destruction of land mines and suchlike [28e32].
The evaluated engine in this study is the main power unit of an
UAV, similar to the Global Hawk. The Global Hawk is a HALE (high
altitude long endurance) type UAV developed within the frame-
work of a project by the US Air Force, primarily for reconnaissance
and surveillance missions [32e36]. An assumed surveillance
mission flight scenario is given in Fig. 1 for the evaluated UAV in the
current study. The phases of the mission flight are start (0), take-off
(0e1), climb (2e3), cruise climb ingress (4e5), loiter (6e7), egress
(8e9), descent (9e11) and landing (11). According to the assumed
mission profile (flight scenario), at first the engine starts at point 0,
the UAV goes along the runway reaching a speed of approximately
185 km/h at point 1. At this time, the UAV takes off and climbs to an
altitude of 15,240 m (50,000 ft). At point 3, the climb phase ends
and the cruise climb ingress phase begins at point 4. From point 4 to
point 5, the UAV ascends from an altitude of 15,240 m up to
19,812 m (65,000 ft) altitude, while cruising towards the field to be
observed. In the period between points 6 and 7 the UAV conducts
surveillance (loiter) for around 24 h. After this, the UAV egresses the
mission field at point 8 and descends to an altitude of 15,240 m. At
point 9, the UAV continues to descend and awaits (loiters) landing
at point 10, depending on conditions. Finally, the UAV lands at point
11 and the mission flight ends.
2.2. Modeling the AE3007H turbofan engine
Engine modeling was performed in a previous study conducted
by Dinc [32] according to the parametric cycle analysis equations
explained in many texts [37e40]. Parametric cycle analysis aims to
obtain estimates of performance parameters (thrust and specific
fuel consumption) in terms of design limitations (e.g. maximum
allowable turbine temperature and attainable component effi-
ciencies), flight conditions (ambient pressure and temperature and
Mach number) and design choices (e.g. compressor pressure ratio
and combustion efficiency). The AE3007H turbofan engine, the
main power of the Global Hawk, is modeled on a genuine code
Fig. 1. An Assumed surveillance mission flight scenario of the evaluated UAV.
developed for modeling the UAV and its engine with regard to
mission flight conditions. In Fig. 2, a flowchart of the UAV and
turbofan engine modeling code is given. The main code comprises
three embedded algorithms for UAV sizing, engine modeling and
performance calculation. Firstly, the main code reads more than
100 input parameters from a file. These input parameters can be
summarized as follows:
 A UAV flight profile and capability requirements of the aircraft
(Mach number, flight altitude, payload to be carried, operation
radius, and so on.)
 Aerodynamic data estimations for drag, lift coefficients, wing
loading and suchlike.
 UAV sizing parameters and ratios, such as thrust to weight ratio,
fuel weight ratio of the UAV, aspect ratio, tip to hub chord length
ratio, thickness to chord ratio of wing, fuselage length to
diameter ratio and so on.
 Engine design parameters (selection/limits), such as fan and
compressor pressure ratios, turbine inlet temperature, fan-
compressor-combustor-turbine-exhaust and mechanical effi-
ciencies, inlet-bypass duct-combustor-jet pipe total pressure
losses, cooling and bleed air ratio and so on.
 Empirical data and correlations for weight and volume estima-
tion of the UAV components, systems and engine.
After reading the input data, the UAV sizing algorithm calculates
the size and weight of the UAV and the required engine power and
weight through iterations for each flight point based on the above
mentioned inputs. Next, the engine modeling algorithms charac-
terize the engine according to the engine design parameters for
meeting the thrust demand of the UAV at each phase of mission
flight. At the next step, performance calculations are made for the
engine and UAV at each flight point. The ISA (International Standard
Atmosphere) model is embedded into the code and is used for
engine modeling and performance calculation algorithms. The code
checks whether or not the results are satisfactory. Warning mes-
sages are generated if any of the following cases occur. Inputs
should then be reviewed:
 Too low a thrust to balance drag, for the input altitudes
(decrease altitude or increase aircraft thrust to weight ratio)
 Too low an input velocity to produce required lift (increase
cruise or loiter Mach number)
 Complex numbers in results (check engine and aircraft
parameters)
 Negative numbers in flight time segments, climb rate and so on
(check engine and aircraft parameters).
Finally, all detailed results are written to a file for user evalua-
tion. For other design options, a user may change the input file and
 €hret et al. / Energy 93 (2015) 716e729
Y. Şo 719

Fig. 2. A Flowchart of the genuine code developed for modeling the UAV and its engine.

run the code again. In the present study, a genuine code is used for X X
modeling the AE3007H turbofan engine at each phase point of the m_ in ¼ m_ out (1)
surveillance mission flight scenario of the UAV according to the
engine station numbering that is shown in Fig. 3. X h  .  i
The AE3007H turbofan engine is comprised of a single fan (2-13- Q_  W_ þ m_ in hin þ Vin
2
2 þ gzin
X h  .  i (2)
24), a 14-stage high pressure compressor (26-3), an annular com-
 m_ out hout þ Vout2
2 þ gzout ¼ 0
bustion chamber (31-4), a 2-stage high pressure turbine (415e416)
and a 3-stage low pressure turbine (46e48). A nozzle (5e7) is also Here, m_ notates mass flow rate, while Q_ , W,
_ h, V2/2, and gz are
installed after the low pressure turbine for thrust generation. In heat transfer rate, work rate, enthalpy, kinetic and potential en-
addition, a by-pass canal (13e17) and a by-pass nozzle (17e18) are ergies of the flow. An exergy balance equation as the third funda-
included in the engine [41]. mental equation for a steady-state system is stated as [15,43]:

3. Exergy analysis E_ F  E_ P  E_ D  E_ L ¼ 0 (3)

3.1. Fundamental considerations
As mentioned earlier, exergy analysis is an approach which is a
combination of the first and second laws of thermodynamics. In
this framework, fundamental equations should be written to
perform exergy analysis of any system. Therefore, for any steady-
state system, mass and energy conservation equations are written
respectively as follows [21e23,42e44]:
where E_ F and E_ P represent exergy rates of fuel and product
respectively, while E_ D and E_ L mean exergy destruction and exergy
loss rates within the system. In addition, exergetic fuel should not
be confused with actual fuels, such as natural gas, coal or kerosene.
The term fuel in exergy analysis is used to define all of the resources
consumed to gain an exergetic product from the system. Exergy is
considered to consist of physical, chemical, kinetic and potential
components, neglecting nuclear, magnetic, electrical and surface
tension effects. Therefore, the components of exergy are physical,
chemical, kinetic and potential [15,23,42e44]:
 
E_ ¼ m_ ePH þ eCH þ eKN þ ePT (4)

Physical exergy or flow exergy is found by Refs. [23,42e44]:

 
ePH ¼ cp ðT  T0 Þ  T0 cp lnðT=T0 Þ  R lnðP=P0 Þ (5)

The chemical exergy of a gas mixture and a liquid fuel can be

expressed respectively as follows [41e43]:
X X
eCH
mix ¼ xk eCH
k þ RT0 xk ln xk (6)

eCH
f ¼ gLHV (7.a)
Fig. 3. A Schematic view of the AE3007H turbofan engine [32].
720 €hret et al. / Energy 93 (2015) 716e729
Y. Şo

   The bleed and cooling system were assumed to be shut off

h o s h during the course of the analyses.
g ¼ 1:0401 þ 0:1728 þ 0:0432 þ 0:2169 1  2:0628
c c c c  The air was assumed to be composed of 75.67% nitrogen, 20.35%
(7.b) oxygen, 0.0345% carbon dioxide, 3.03% water vapor and 0.8255%
other ingredients [47,48].
Here, xk and R are the mole fraction of each mixture ingredient
and universal gas constant. Additionally, LHV and g represent the
lower heating value and chemical exergy of the fuel in Eqs. 7.a and
7.b. Kinetic and potential exergy as two other components of exergy
3.3. Exergy analysis of the turbofan engine components
are formulated as follows [42e44]:
. In this section of the paper, the application of governing equa-
eKN ¼ V 2 2 (8)
tions to each component of the turbofan engine is explained
depending on the assumptions made.
ePT ¼ gz (9) Mass balance, energy balance and exergy balance equations for
the fan (F) may be stated as follows:
In exergy analysis, exergy efficiency, improvement potential,
fuel depletion rate and productivity lack are beneficial indicators in m_ 2 ¼ m_ 13 þ m_ 24 (15)
the evaluation of the exergetic performance of the considered
W_ þ m_ h  m_ h  m_ h ¼ 0 (16)
system. Exergy efficiency is defined as the ratio between exergy F 2 2 13 13 24 24
rates of product and fuel [15,18,43,45]:  
_  E_ þ E_  E_  E_
W F 24 13 2 D;F ¼ 0 (17)
E_
ε¼ P (10)
E_ F
For the AC (air compressor) the following equations may be used
for exergy analysis:
Improvement potential is defined as the rate of exergy
destruction minimization within the system by van Gool [15,18,46]: m_ 26 ¼ m_ 3 (18)

_ ¼ E_ D ð1  εÞ
IP (11)
W_ _ 26 h26  m_ 3 h3 ¼ 0
AC þ m (19)
Relative exergy destruction rate or relative irreversibility in-  
_ _ _ _
AC  E3  E26  ED;AC ¼ 0
dicates the percentage of exergy destruction within the system W (20)
component:
In the analyses of the fan and air compressor, the specific heat
E_ capacity of the working fluid air under constant pressure is
c ¼ PD (12)
E_ D dependent on temperature and is calculated using Eq. (21) [21]:

Fuel depletion ratio is another evaluation parameter which en- 383:719 9:45378 2 5:49031 3
cp;air ¼ 1:04841  Tþ T  T
ables us to comprehend the destruction rate of exergetic fuel within 106 107 1010
the system [18,23,27,45]: 7:92981 4
þ T
1014
E_ (21)
d ¼ PD (13)
E_ F The following equations are used for exergy analysis of the CC
(combustion chamber):
Productivity lack is the ratio of exergy destruction rate to total
exergetic product rate within the system [18,23,27,45]: m_ 31 þ m_ f ¼ m_ 4 (22)
E_
x ¼ PD (14)
E_ P m_ 31 h31 þ m_ f LHVhc ¼ m_ 4 h4 (23)
 
E_ 4  E_ 31 þ E_ f  E_ D;CC ¼ 0 (24)
3.2. Assumptions
At this stage of the analysis, the chemical exergy of the fuel and
Assumptions made in the current study are as follows: flue gas are found by Eqs. 6, 7.a and 7.b. The specific heat capacity of
flue gas under constant pressure, dependent on temperature, is
 The engine was considered under steady-state conditions dur- determined by following [49]:
ing the mission flight.
 The air and combustion gases were assumed to be perfect gas. P
c N M
 The fuel was kerosene. The chemical formula of the kerosene cp;gas ¼ Pp;k k k (25)
was considered as C11H21, while the lower heating value of the Nk Mk
kerosene was 43370.596 kJ/kg. After analyzing the combustion chamber, calculations of HPT
 The combustion reaction was considered to be complete. (high pressure turbine) exergy analysis are performed according to
 All the components of the engine were assumed to be adiabatic following equations:
and heat losses were disregarded.
 Kinetic energy, potential energy, kinetic exergy and potential m_ 415 ¼ m_ 416 (26)
exergy changes within the engine were ignored.
 Chemical exergy of the air was disregarded being so close to _ HPT þ m_ _ 416 h416 ¼ 0
W 415 h415  m (27)
0.00 value.
 €hret et al. / Energy 93 (2015) 716e729
Y. Şo 721

  Therefore, the exergy balance statement for the overall engine is

E_ 415  E_ 416  W_ HPT  E_ D;HPT ¼ 0 (28) re-arranged as follows:
 
Similar formulations can be derived for a LPT (low pressure E_ f  F Vflight  E_ D  E_ 7 þ E_ 18 ¼ 0 (38)
turbine) as follows:
Thus, for the overall engine Eq. (10) is derived as:
m_ 46 ¼ m_ 48 (29)

W_ LPT þ m_ h  m_ h ¼ 0 (30)

46 46 48 48 F Vflight
εTFE ¼ (39)
  E_f
E_ 46  E_ 48  W_ _
LPT  E D;LPT ¼ 0 (31)

Depending on disregarded kinetic and potential energy 4. Results and discussion

changes within the engine, hot section and by-pass nozzles are
beyond the scope of this paper. However; mass, energy and exergy
balance equations may be expressed for the BPC (by-pass canal) as
follows:
m_ 13 ¼ m_ 17
In this study, a turbofan engine of a UAV was investigated with
the aid of exergy, based upon data obtained from an engine
modeling study for a surveillance mission flight. In this section of
the paper, the modeling results and the results of the exergy
(32)
analysis are presented below.

m_ 13 h13  m_ 17 h17 ¼ 0 (33)

4.1. Engine modeling results

E_ 13  E_ 17  E_ D;BPC ¼ 0
3.4. Exergy analysis of the overall engine
The exergy analysis of the overall engine is conducted in
accordance with the scheme demonstrated in Fig. 4. Thus, the
exergetic fuel of the engine is considered as the total exergetic
value of fuel provided to the engine while the exergetic product is
the exergy rate of thrust generated by the engine. The exergy bal-
ance for the overall engine is thereby expressed as follows [43]:
E_ f  E_ T  E_ D  E_ L ¼ 0
Here, E_ T is the exergy rate of thrust and is found by Ref. [18]:
E_ T ¼ F Vflight
E_ L in Eq. (32) represents the exergy loss rate and it equals the
exergy rate of the exhaust gas:
E_ L ¼ E_ 7 þ E_ 18
Fig. 4. A System definition for the overall engine analysis [50].
(34) An engine model is developed for a mission flight profile. More
than 100 input parameters (related to mission profile, UAV and
engine design characteristics) are inputted into the model. An en-
gine model is developed for each phase point of the surveillance
mission flight scenario. In Table 1, the obtained engine character-
istics are summarized for each flight phase point during the sur-
veillance mission. The assumed parameters for the engine by
genuine engine model code are thrust, flight speed, inlet air mass
flow rate, fuel flow rate, temperature and pressure values at each
engine station as illustrated in Fig. 3. In addition, as a result of
comparing the genuine code with commercial GasTurb 11 software
[51], deviations (namely errors) of pressures, temperatures, air
(35) mass flow rates, fuel mass flow rates at engine stations and
generated thrust are found to be 0.20%, 0.09%, 0.58%, 1.66% and
0.57% respectively.
Figs. 5 and 6 are plotted to clearly see variations of pressure and
(36)
temperature within the engine. According to Fig. 5, an increase in
temperature variation at the high pressure inlet and NGV (nozzle
guide vanes) outlet are similar. On the other hand, the temperature
at the fan outlet, compressor inlet and outlet, combustion chamber
inlet and outlet vary in a similar manner depending on the flight
(37)
phase point. Depending on other temperature variations within the
engine, an increase in temperature at the high pressure turbine
outlet, low pressure turbine outlet and hot section nozzle outlet are
approximately the same.
Fig. 6 demonstrates the pressure variation of the engine sta-
tions with flight phase points. Until the end of the take-off (or
start of climb) phase, pressure variation at every station of the
engine is approximately constant. However, in the period be-
tween the start and the commencement of the climb and egress
phases, pressure at each engine station decreases with approxi-
mately the same slope angle. However, from the egress phase to
the start of landing, pressure at each engine station increases
significantly.
The variation of TSFC (thrust specific fuel consumption) and FAR
(fuel-air ratio), as performance evaluation parameters of the
aircraft gas turbine engines, is plotted depending on the flight
mission profile in Fig. 7. TSFC indicates the amount of fuel provided
to the combustion chamber for the purpose of 1 kN thrust gener-
ation by the engine. From this viewpoint, the TSFC of the engine
increases remarkably during the take-off, climb and egress phases
of the mission flight and peeks at the end of the egress phase. The
722 €hret et al. / Energy 93 (2015) 716e729
Y. Şo

Table 1
Engine performance parameters during the surveillance mission flight scenario.

Engine parameter Flight phase point

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

T (kN) 29.429 28.472 3.624 3.63 3.376 3.369 1.91 1.913 3.63 29.907
Vflight (km h1) 185.2 238.0 610.0 635.0 635.0 597.2 597.5 635.0 635.0 161.0
m_ f (kg s1) 0.5217 0.5251 0.0961 0.0968 0.1049 0.088 0.050 0.0510 0.0968 0.5205
m_ 2 (kg s1) 115.2 116.2 18.2 18.4 17.2 16.8 9.5 9.7 18.4 114.8
P0 (kPa) 103 104 14 15 14 13 8 8 15 103
P2 (kPa) 102 103 14 15 14 13 8 8 15 102
P24 (kPa) 164 166 23 23 22 21 12 12 23 163
P13 (kPa) 164 166 23 23 22 21 12 12 23 163
P17 (kPa) 159 161 22 22 21 20 11 11 22 158
P26 (kPa) 161 162 23 23 21 21 12 12 23 160
P3 (kPa) 2313 2337 325 331 308 300 170 175 331 2304
P31 (kPa) 2313 2337 325 331 308 300 170 175 331 2304
P41 (kPa) 2243 2267 316 321 299 291 165 169 321 2235
P4 (kPa) 2243 2267 316 321 299 291 165 169 321 2235
P415 (kPa) 2243 2267 316 321 299 291 165 169 321 2235
P416 (kPa) 573 577 105 107 99 97 55 56 107 572
P44 (kPa) 573 577 105 107 99 97 55 56 107 572
P46 (kPa) 568 571 104 106 98 96 55 56 106 566
P48 (kPa) 206 207 48 49 45 45 25 26 49 206
P7 (kPa) 204 205 48 48 45 44 25 25 48 204
T0 (K) 289 290 231 232 232 230 230 232 232 289
T2 (K) 289 290 231 232 232 230 230 232 232 289
T24 (K) 336 337 268 269 269 267 267 269 269 336
T13 (K) 336 337 268 269 269 267 267 269 269 336
T17 (K) 336 337 268 269 269 267 267 269 269 336
T26 (K) 336 337 268 269 269 267 267 269 269 336
T3 (K) 782 785 628 631 631 627 627 631 631 782
T31 (K) 782 785 628 631 631 627 627 631 631 782
T41 (K) 1571 1572 1559 1560 1560 1559 1559 1560 1560 1571
T415 (K) 1529 1529 1510 1511 1511 1510 1510 1511 1511 1529
T416 (K) 1156 1155 1210 1209 1209 1211 1211 1209 1209 1156
T44 (K) 1156 1155 1210 1209 1209 1211 1211 1209 1209 1156
T46 (K) 1156 1155 1210 1209 1209 1211 1211 1209 1209 1156
T48 (K) 928 927 1028 1026 1026 1029 1029 1026 1026 928
T5 (K) 916 915 1006 1004 1004 1007 1007 1004 1004 917
T7 (K) 916 915 1006 1004 1004 1007 1007 1004 1004 917

FAR is the burnt fuel mass within the combustion chamber per
combustion air mass. As seen in Fig. 7, variations of the TSFC and
FAR are approximately the same over the course of the surveillance
mission flight.
4.2. Results obtained from exergy analysis of the engine
components
An overview of major exergy parameters of each component is
plotted logarithmically scaled in Fig. 8 for better understanding and
Fig. 5. Temperature variation within the engine during the mission flight.
easy comparison. According to Fig. 8, the highest exergy destruction
occurs within combustion chamber at every flight phase point,
while the high pressure turbine has minimum irreversibility. For a
detailed assessment of the component based exergy analysis re-
sults, exergy parameters of each engine component are given for
each flight phase point separately in following tables.
According to Table 2, which is given for flight phase point 1, the
most irreversible component of the engine is the combustion
chamber with a relative exergy destruction rate of 88.29%, whereas
the relative exergy destruction rate of the high pressure turbine is
lowest with a value of 0.88%. The exergy destruction rates of the fan,
compressor, combustion chamber, high pressure turbine, low
pressure turbine and by-pass canal are 501.088 kW, 440.760 kW,
14381.012 kW, 143.650 kW, 575.459 kW and 244.837 kW respec-
tively. Depending on the highest exergy destruction rate, the
combustion chamber has the minimum exergy efficiency of all the
components. Exergy efficiencies of the fan, compressor, combustion
chamber, high pressure turbine, low pressure turbine and by-pass
canal are 90.78%, 95.22%, 64.60%, 98.55%, 90.97% and 93.89%
respectively.
The exergy parameters of the engine components at flight phase
point 2 are summarized in Table 3. The most efficient component of
the engine is shown to be the high pressure turbine, with the
combustion chamber having the lowest exergy efficiency. This is
easily understood from the exergy destruction rates of 468.262 kW,
445.130 kW, 14492.396 kW, 146.473 kW, 578.281 kW and
244.785 kW for the fan, compressor, combustion chamber, high
pressure turbine, low pressure turbine and by-pass canal, respec-
tively. High exergy destruction within the component is an
 €hret et al. / Energy 93 (2015) 716e729
Y. Şo
Fig. 6. Pressure variation within the engine during the mission flight.
Fig. 7. TSFC and FAR variation of the engine during the mission flight.
indicator of irreversibility and inefficiency. Similarly, improvement
potential rates of the fan, compressor, combustion chamber, high
pressure turbine, low pressure turbine and by-pass canal are found
to be 39.966 kW, 21.201 kW, 5129.251 kW, 2.140 kW, 52.048 kW
and 14.702 kW, respectively, at flight phase point 2.
Table 4 is a summary of results obtained from an exergy analysis
of the engine components at the end of the climb flight phase. From
the table, the combustion chamber is noted as the most irreversible
component with a relative exergy destruction rate of 92.049%,
while the high pressure turbine takes the minimum exergy
destruction portion with a relative exergy destruction rate of
0.523% among all the components. Improvement potential rates are
found to be 1.118 kW, 3.056 kW, 854.654 kW, 0.150 kW, 5.210 kW
and 3.674 kW for the fan, compressor, combustion chamber, high
pressure turbine, low pressure turbine and by-pass canal, respec-
tively. Depending on exergy destruction rates, the exergy effi-
ciencies of the fan, compressor, combustion chamber, high pressure
turbine, low pressure turbine and by-pass canal are 95.93%, 94.85%,
64.86%, 98.91%, 91.99% and 91.72%, respectively.
In Table 5, the exergy analysis results of the engine components
at flight phase point 4 are given. According to Table 5, the com-
bustion chamber is identified as the most inefficient component
among all the components, similar to flight phase points 1, 2, 3 and
4. The exergy efficiencies of the components are 83.90%, 95.12%,
64.83%, 99.09%, 92.15% and 90.49% relating to the fan, compressor,
723
combustion chamber, high pressure turbine, low pressure turbine
and by-pass canal, respectively. Depending on inefficiencies within
the components, the exergy destruction rates of the fan,
compressor, combustion chamber, high pressure turbine, low
pressure turbine and by-pass canal are revealed as 109.873 kW,
57.142 kW, 2453.382 kW, 11.701 kW, 64.718 kW and 45.070 kW,
respectively.
The results of the exergy analysis are summarized in Table 6 for
the engine components at flight phase 5. Here, the highest exergy
destruction occurs within the combustion chamber with a rate of
3080.99 kW. The combustion chamber is followed by the fan, low
pressure turbine, compressor, by-pass canal and high pressure
turbine with exergy destruction rates of 74.602 kW, 62.587 kW,
49.673 kW, 44.091 kW and 13.281 kW, respectively. Due to this, the
exergy efficiencies of the fan, compressor, combustion chamber,
high pressure turbine, low pressure turbine and by-pass canal are
88.31%, 95.46%, 58.24%, 98.91%, 91.99% and 90.549%, respectively.
As indicated in Table 7, the high pressure turbine is found to be
the most efficient component of the engine at flight phase point 6.
The exergy efficiencies of the other components are 94.94%, 92.57%,
92.35%, 90.62% and 64.88% for the compressor, fan, low pressure
turbine, by-pass canal and combustion chamber, respectively.
Additionally, the improvement potential rates of the high pressure
turbine, compressor, fan, low pressure turbine, by-pass canal and
combustion chamber are found to be 0.511 kW, 2.715 kW, 3.437 kW,
4.368 kW, 4.198 and 788.318 kW, respectively.
For the flight phase point 7, the results of exergy analysis are
designated in Table 8. At the end of the loiter phase of the flight, the
high pressure turbine and compressor are shown to be the most
efficient components of the engine. The relative exergy destruction
rates of the fan, compressor, combustion chamber, high pressure
turbine, low pressure turbine and by-pass canal are found to be
4.970%, 2.140%, 86.868%, 0.487%, 2.446% and 3.089%, respectively, as
an indicator of irreversibility. Fuel depletion ratios and productivity
lacks of the components are directly proportionate to exergy
destruction rates and inversely proportional with exergy
efficiencies.
According to the exergy analysis conducted for the engine
components under operating conditions at start of egress, the
highest exergy destruction rate is 1293.872 kW for the combustion
chamber. The exergy destruction rates of the other components are
found to be 72.118 kW, 28.648 kW, 6.849 kW, 33.617 kW and
46.508 kW for the fan, compressor, high pressure turbine, low
pressure turbine and by-pass canal, respectively. Earlier mentioned
724 €hret et al. / Energy 93 (2015) 716e729
Y. Şo

Fig. 8. Fuel, product, exergy destruction and improvement potential rate variations of the engine components with the flight phase points (plots are logarithmically scaled).

Table 2
Exergy parameters of engine components at flight phase point 1.

Component E_ F (kW) E_ P (kW) E_ D (kW) ε (%) _ (kW)

IP c (%) d x
F 5438.825 4937.736 501.088 90.787 46.166 3.077 0.007 0.008
AC 9220.385 8779.625 440.760 95.220 21.070 2.706 0.006 0.007
CC 40624.694 26243.682 14381.012 64.600 5090.832 88.299 0.190 0.243
HPT 9915.040 9771.390 143.650 98.551 2.081 0.882 0.002 0.002
LPT 6373.753 5798.294 575.459 90.971 51.956 3.533 0.008 0.010
BPC 4009.254 3764.417 244.837 93.893 14.952 1.503 0.003 0.004

Table 3
Exergy parameters of engine components at flight phase point 2.

Component E_ F (kW) E_ P (kW) E_ D (kW) ε (%) _ (kW)

IP c (%) d x
F 5486.345 5018.082 468.262 91.465 39.966 2.860 0.006 0.008
AC 9345.975 8900.846 445.130 95.237 21.201 2.718 0.006 0.007
CC 40947.408 26455.012 14492.396 64.607 5129.251 88.501 0.190 0.242
HPT 10027.496 9881.023 146.473 98.539 2.140 0.894 0.002 0.002
LPT 6425.034 5846.753 578.281 91.000 52.048 3.531 0.008 0.010
BPC 4075.563 3830.778 244.785 93.994 14.702 1.495 0.003 0.004

considerations for engine components at flight phase points 1, 2, 3,
4, 5, 6 and 7 can also be asserted for engine components operated
under flight phase point 8 conditions (Table 9).
Tables 10 and 11 show the exergy analysis results for the start
and end of the landing flight phase, respectively. The highest exergy
destruction occurs within the combustion chamber with rates of
2453.382 kW and 14363.42 kW at flight phase points 9 and 10,
respectively. Depending on this irreversibility within the combus-
tion chamber, the exergy efficiency of the combustion chamber is
found to be 64.83% and 64.54% at the start and end of the landing
flight phase, respectively. The exergy efficiencies of the fan,
compressor, high pressure turbine, low pressure turbine and by-
 €hret et al. / Energy 93 (2015) 716e729
Y. Şo 725

Table 4
Exergy parameters of engine components at flight phase point 3.

Component E_ F (kW) E_ P (kW) E_ D (kW) ε (%) _ (kW)

IP c (%) d x
F 675.415 647.935 27.480 95.931 1.118 1.040 0.002 0.003
AC 1151.981 1092.650 59.331 94.850 3.056 2.245 0.005 0.007
CC 6922.185 4489.888 2432.297 64.862 854.654 92.049 0.214 0.279
HPT 1269.816 1256.001 13.814 98.912 0.150 0.523 0.001 0.002
LPT 813.215 748.127 65.088 91.996 5.210 2.463 0.006 0.007
BPC 536.222 491.834 44.388 91.722 3.674 1.680 0.004 0.005

Table 5
Exergy parameters of engine components at flight phase point 4.

Component E_ F (kW) E_ P (kW) E_ D (kW) ε (%) _ (kW)

IP c (%) d x
F 682.831 572.958 109.873 83.909 17.679 4.007 0.010 0.013
AC 1171.482 1114.339 57.142 95.122 2.787 2.084 0.005 0.007
CC 6976.796 4523.414 2453.382 64.835 862.729 89.478 0.215 0.283
HPT 1289.670 1277.969 11.701 99.093 0.106 0.427 0.001 0.001
LPT 824.891 760.174 64.718 92.154 5.077 2.360 0.006 0.007
BPC 474.172 429.102 45.070 90.495 4.284 1.644 0.004 0.005

Table 6
Exergy parameters of engine components at flight phase point 5.

Component E_ F (kW) E_ P (kW) E_ D (kW) ε (%) _ (kW)

IP c (%) d x
F 638.298 563.697 74.602 88.312 8.719 2.244 0.006 0.009
AC 1095.081 1045.408 49.673 95.464 2.253 1.494 0.004 0.006
CC 7378.577 4297.587 3080.990 58.244 1286.495 92.655 0.266 0.373
HPT 1223.031 1209.749 13.281 98.914 0.144 0.399 0.001 0.002
LPT 781.623 719.037 62.587 91.993 5.011 1.882 0.005 0.008
BPC 466.508 422.416 44.091 90.549 4.167 1.326 0.004 0.005

Table 7
Exergy parameters of engine components at flight phase point 6.

Component E_ F (kW) E_ P (kW) E_ D (kW) ε (%) _ (kW)

IP c (%) d x
F 623.466 577.176 46.290 92.575 3.437 1.882 0.004 0.006
AC 1063.199 1009.474 53.725 94.947 2.715 2.184 0.005 0.007
CC 6393.869 4148.786 2245.084 64.887 788.318 91.278 0.214 0.280
HPT 1168.222 1155.643 12.579 98.923 0.135 0.511 0.001 0.002
LPT 747.897 690.744 57.153 92.358 4.368 2.324 0.005 0.007
BPC 477.663 432.885 44.778 90.626 4.198 1.821 0.004 0.006

Table 8
Exergy parameters of engine components at flight phase point 7.

Component E_ F (kW) E_ P (kW) E_ D (kW) ε (%) _ (kW)

IP c (%) d x
F 352.555 279.907 72.649 79.394 14.970 4.970 0.012 0.016
AC 601.214 569.929 31.285 94.796 1.628 2.140 0.005 0.007
CC 3606.664 2336.916 1269.747 64.794 447.022 86.868 0.216 0.287
HPT 660.602 653.489 7.113 98.923 0.077 0.487 0.001 0.002
LPT 426.347 390.599 35.748 91.615 2.997 2.446 0.006 0.008
BPC 231.647 186.490 45.157 80.506 8.803 3.089 0.008 0.010

pass canal are 83.90%, 95.12%, 99.09%, 92.15%, 90.49% for flight
phase point 9, and 89.71%, 95.26%, 98.58%, 91.05%, 93.78% at flight
phase point 10, respectively.
In Fig. 9, the exergy efficiency variations of the engine compo-
nents are plotted during the flight. It is clear from the graph, the
exergy efficiencies of high pressure turbine and compressor are
approximately constant at 99% and 95%, respectively. However, the
exergy efficiencies of the fan and by-pass canal dramatically
decrease at the end of the loiter and the start of the ingress flight
phases. The exergy efficiency of the combustion chamber is
approximately 65% throughout the entire flight excluding the end
of the ingress flight phase. At flight phase point 5, the exergy effi-
ciency of the combustion chamber decreases to 58.24%.
4.3. Results obtained from exergy analysis of the overall engine
In this study, in addition to a component based exergy analysis,
the overall engine is also examined according to the methodology
previously explained for each flight phase point. As a result of the
analysis, the main exergy parameters of the engine are obtained
and compiled in Table 12. The lowest exergy destruction within the
engine occurs at the start of the ingress and descent flight phases.
726 €hret et al. / Energy 93 (2015) 716e729
Y. Şo

Table 9
Exergy parameters of engine components at flight phase point 8.

Component E_ F (kW) E_ P (kW) E_ D (kW) ε (%) _ (kW)

IP c (%) d x
F 359.971 287.853 72.118 79.966 14.448 4.868 0.012 0.016
AC 617.575 588.927 28.648 95.361 1.329 1.934 0.005 0.006
CC 3677.013 2383.141 1293.872 64.812 455.289 87.329 0.215 0.286
HPT 680.561 673.712 6.849 98.994 0.069 0.462 0.001 0.002
LPT 434.360 400.744 33.617 92.261 2.602 2.269 0.006 0.007
BPC 238.223 191.715 46.508 80.477 9.080 3.139 0.008 0.010

Table 10
Exergy parameters of engine components at flight phase point 9.

Component E_ F (kW) E_ P (kW) E_ D (kW) ε (%) _ (kW)

IP c (%) d x
F 682.831 572.958 109.873 83.909 17.679 4.007 0.010 0.013
AC 1171.482 1114.339 57.142 95.122 2.787 2.084 0.005 0.007
CC 6976.796 4523.414 2453.382 64.835 862.729 89.478 0.215 0.283
HPT 1289.670 1277.969 11.701 99.093 0.106 0.427 0.001 0.001
LPT 824.891 760.174 64.718 92.154 5.077 2.360 0.006 0.007
BPC 474.172 429.102 45.070 90.495 4.284 1.644 0.004 0.005

Table 11
Exergy parameters of engine components at flight phase point 10.

Component E_ F (kW) E_ P (kW) E_ D (kW) ε (%) _ (kW)

IP c (%) d x
F 5419.940 4862.353 557.586 89.712 57.363 3.419 0.007 0.009
AC 9188.370 8752.968 435.401 95.261 20.632 2.670 0.006 0.007
CC 40512.560 26149.140 14363.420 64.546 5092.441 88.068 0.191 0.244
HPT 9878.312 9738.228 140.084 98.582 1.987 0.859 0.002 0.002
LPT 6346.099 5778.581 567.518 91.057 50.752 3.480 0.008 0.010
BPC 3947.136 3701.629 245.508 93.780 15.270 1.505 0.003 0.004

the graph. As mentioned earlier, the difference between the exer-

getic fuel and product rates of the engine is reasoned by exergy
destruction within the engine and a loss of unavailable exhaust gas
exergy rate. In addition, a decrease of exergetic fuel rate leads to a
decrease in exergetic product, exergy loss, exergy destruction and
improvement potential rates as expected. The behavior of the
exergy efficiency is inversely proportional to exergetic fuel rate,
depending on an approximately constant exergetic product rate
relative to exergetic fuel rate.

4.4. Uncertainty analysis

Uncertainty and error analyses are commonly carried out for

experimental studies. However, certain former exergy analysis
studies based upon experimental data, present uncertainties and
errors arising from selection, condition and calibration of the in-
strument, environmental conditions, data monitoring and staff
Fig. 9. Exergy efficiency variation of the engine components with the flight phase capabilities [23,52e55]. Similarly, uncertainty and error analyses
points. are necessary for theoretical and model-based studies [56,57]. The
uncertainty of a calculated quantity is related to the total un-
certainties of all measured and calculated quantities used in its
The exergy destruction rate of the engine is 16820.317 kW,
calculation. Therefore, the absolute uncertainty of y, dependent on
16564.379 kW, 2433.206 kW, 2520.04 kW, 3152.758 kW,
y1, y2,y3, …, yn, is expressed by Eq. (41) [57e59]:
2275.855 kW, 1353.157 kW, 1365.83 kW, 2520.04 kW and
16998.769 kW at flight phase points 1e10, respectively. Depending y ¼ f ðy1 ; y2 ; y3 ; …; yn Þ (40)
on a low exergy destruction rate, the highest exergy efficiency is
found to be 11.109% at flight phase points 4 and 9. On the other sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 2  2  2
hand, the engine operates inefficiently at the start of the landing vy vy vy
wy ¼ wy1 þ wy2 þ…þ wyn (41)
loiter (flight phase point 10), depending on the highest exergy vy1 vy2 vyn
destruction rate of 16998.769 kW.
Uncertainty is also expressed as a percentage as follows [58]:
The variation of the engine exergy parameters over the course of
the mission flight is plotted in Fig. 10. The difference between the wy
exergetic fuel and product rates of the engine are clearly shown in wy ¼ (42)
y
 €hret et al. / Energy 93 (2015) 716e729
Y. Şo 727

Table 12
Exergy parameters of the turbofan engine during the surveillance mission flight.

Flight phase point E_ F (kW) E_ P (kW) E_ D (kW) E_ L (kW) ε (%) _ (kW)

IP

1 31040.222 1513.959 16820.317 12705.947 4.877 15999.922

2 31238.158 1882.316 16564.379 12791.464 6.026 15566.260
3 5717.822 614.067 2433.206 2670.549 10.740 2171.892
4 5763.670 640.292 2520.040 2603.339 11.109 2240.086
5 6245.166 595.489 3152.758 2496.919 9.535 2852.136
6 5284.882 558.880 2275.855 2450.148 10.575 2035.182
7 2988.475 317.007 1353.157 1318.311 10.608 1209.619
8 3038.457 337.432 1365.830 1335.194 11.105 1214.150
9 5763.670 640.292 2520.040 2603.339 11.109 2240.086
10 30967.768 1337.508 16998.769 12631.492 4.319 16264.587

5. Conclusions

In this study, an exergy analysis of a turbofan engine, which is

the power unit of a UAV, is presented for the first time. Additionally,
an exergetic performance evaluation of the engine is conducted for
a complete surveillance mission flight. The conclusions drawn from
the present study are as follows:

 The highest exergy destruction occurs within the combustion

chamber of the engine. Improving the combustion chamber
design can reduce exergy destruction, but the irreversibility
of combustion reaction is unavoidable related to state of the
art.
 This study proves the significance of environmental conditions
for exergetic performance. At high altitudes, the exergy effi-
ciency of the engine and components increases, dependent on
temperature and pressure decreases. However, at take-off,
commencement of climb, and the end of descent flight phases,
Fig. 10. Variation of the turbofan engine exergy parameters during the surveillance the exergy efficiency of the engine is lowered considerably.
mission flight.  Exergy destruction within the fan, compressor and turbines is
low compared to the combustion chamber. However, improve-
ment of these components, as mentioned in Refs. [60e65], is
According to Eq. (10), the exergy efficiency of a component may
feasible, depending on advances in science and technology.
be expressed as dependent on modeling results as follows:
Higher exergy efficiency of the low pressure turbine in partic-
ular, reduces the exergy loss rate of the engine and affects the
ε ¼ f ðm_ i ; Ti ; T0 ; Pi ; P0 Þ (43) exergy efficiency of the overall engine positively.
 Advances in combustion technology (most likely unconven-
If we adapt Eq. (41) to an exergy efficiency statement, Eq. (44) is
tional combustion techniques), generating more thrust by
obtained:

sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 2  2  2  2  
vε vε vε vε vε
wε ¼ wm_ i þ wTi þ wT0 þ wP0 þ wP0 (44)
vm_ i vTi vT0 v Pi v P0

Similarly, the uncertainty of the overall engine exergy efficiency consuming less fuel, can increase overall engine exergy effi-
calculation may be written as follows: ciency. However, optimizing design parameters (pressure ratio,
turbine inlet temperature, and so on) with respect to the results
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi of the exergy analysis, may be useful from the point of view of
u !2  2 !2
u vε vεTFE vεTFE designers.
wεTFE ¼ t TFE
w þ wF þ wE_
vVflight Vflight vF vE_ f f

The authors intend to reveal economic aspects of the evaluated

(45) engine during the surveillance mission flight with the aid of exergy
According to the uncertainty analysis, the obtained results for in a future study, in addition to presenting a risk analysis from the
the exergy efficiency calculations of each component, and the view point of health and the environment by referring to earlier
overall engine at each flight phase point, are summarized in papers [15,66,67].
Table 13.
728 €hret et al. / Energy 93 (2015) 716e729
Y. Şo

Table 13 [24] Ehyaei MA, Anjiridezfuli A, Rosen MA. Exergetic analysis of an aircraft turbojet
Exergy efficiency calculation uncertainties of the turbofan engine and its compo- engine with an afterburner. Therm Sci 2013;17:1181e94.
nents at the flight phase points (values are indicated as percentages). [25] Balli O. Afterburning effect on the energetic and exergetic performance of an
experimental turbojet engine (TJE). Int J Exergy 2014;14:212e43.
Flight phase point TFE AF AC CC HPT LPT BPC [26] Tai VC, See PC, Mares C. Optimisation of energy and exergy of turbofan en-
gines using genetic algorithms. Int J Sustain Aviat 2014;1:25e42.
1 1.27 0.89 1.35 1.84 1.01 0.98 1.71
[27] Turan O, Aydin H, Karakoc TH, Midilli A. Some exergetic measures of a JT8D
2 1.18 0.92 1.42 1.81 0.94 1.16 1.66 turbofan engine. J Autom Control Eng 2014;2:110e4.
3 1.16 1.12 1.31 1.94 0.97 1.09 1.42 [28] Korchenko AG, Illyash OS. The generalized classification of unmanned air
4 1.03 1.11 1.38 1.97 1.02 1.13 1.83 vehicles. In: Actual Problems of Unmanned Air Vehicles Developments Pro-
5 1.12 1.12 1.40 1.96 0.91 1.18 1.53 ceedings (APUAVD), IEEE 2nd International Conference; 2013. p. 28e34.
6 1.15 0.97 1.33 2.14 0.93 1.12 1.61 [29] Maddalon JM, Hayhurst KJ, Koppen DM, Upchurch JM, Morris AT,
7 1.09 1.11 1.37 2.19 1.05 0.99 1.69 Verstynen HA. Perspectives on unmanned aircraft classification for civil
8 1.12 1.12 1.34 2.06 1.01 1.15 1.52 airworthiness standards. NASA/TMe2013e217969, NASA. 2013.
9 1.18 0.95 1.41 1.98 1.03 1.19 1.78 [30] UK Ministry of Defence. Unmanned aircraft systems: terminology, definitions
10 1.24 0.91 1.49 1.96 1.02 1.07 1.82 and classification. Joint Doctrine Note 3/10. 2010.
[31] Akgul AS, Hacioglu A. To design and build of a surveillance/attack mini unmanned
aerial vehicle (UAV). J Aeronaut Space Technol 2010;4:1e6 [in Turkish].
[32] Dinc A. Optimization with elitist genetic algorithm method in preliminary
Acknowledgments design of unmanned air vehicle & its propulsion system simultaneously [PhD
Thesis]. Graduate School of Sciences, Anadolu University. [in Turkish].
[33] Stacy NJS, Craig DW, Staromlynska J, Smith RB. The Global Hawk UAV
The authors wish to thank Anadolu University for the support. Australian deployment: imaging radar sensor modifications and employment
The contribution of reviewers in improving the quality of the paper for maritime surveillance. In: Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium,
2002. desigIGARSS'02. 2002 IEEE International, vol. 2; 2002. p. 699e701.
is also gratefully acknowledged. [34] Leonard RS, Drezner JA. Innovative development: Global Hawk and Darkstar.
RAND; 2002.
[35] Naftel JC. NASA Global Hawk: a new tool for earth science research. NASA/TM-
2009e214647. 2009.
References [36] Foster JD. Swarming unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs): extending marine
aviation ground task force communications using UAVs [Master Thesis]. Naval
[1] US Energy Information Administration. Annual energy outlook 2015 with Postgraduate School; 2014.
projections to 2040. International Energy Agency; 2015. [37] Mattingly JD, Heiser WH, Pratt DT. Aircraft engine design. AIAA Education
[2] World Energy Council. World energy perspective energy efficiency technol- Series. 2nd ed.. 2002.
ogies. World Energy Council; 2015. [38] El-Sayed AF. Aircraft propulsion and gas turbine engines. CRC Press; 2008.
[3] Dincer I, Cengel YA. Energy, entropy and exergy concepts and their roles in [39] Roberts Rory A, Eastbourn Scott M. Modeling techniques for a computational
thermal engineering. Entropy 2001;3:116e49. efficient dynamic turbofan engine model. Int J Aerosp Eng 2014:11, Article ID
[4] Rocco MV, Colombo E, Sciubba E. Advances in exergy analysis: a novel 283479. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/283479.
assessment of the extended exergy accounting method. Appl Energy [40] Liew KH, Urip E, Yang SL. Parametric cycle analysis of a turbofan engine with
2014;113:1405e20. an interstage turbine burner. J Propuls Power 2005;21:546e51.
[5] Pavelka M, Klika V, Va gner P, Marsík F. Generalization of exergy analysis. Appl [41] European Aviation Safety Agency. EASA type-certificate data sheet: Rolls-
Energy 2015;137:158e72. Royce corporation AE 3007 series engines. IM.E.044. 2013.
[6] Chen L, Zhu X, Sun F, Wu C. Exergy-based ecological optimization of linear [42] Dincer I, Rosen MA. Exergy: energy, environment and sustainable develop-
phenomenological heat-transfer law irreversible Carnot-engines. Appl Energy ment. Elsevier; 2012.
2006;83:573e82. [43] Bejan A, Tsatsaronis G, Moran M. Thermal design and optimization. John
[7] Satapathy AK. Thermodynamic optimization of a coiled tube heat exchanger Wiley & Sons Inc; 1995.
under constant wall heat flux condition. Energy 2009;34:1122e6. [44] Kotas TJ. The exergy method of thermal plant analysis. Anchor Brendon Ltd;
[8] Hepbasli A. A comparative investigation of various greenhouse heating op- 1985.
tions using exergy analysis method. Appl Energy 2011;88:4411e23. [45] Xiang JY, Cali M, Santarelli M. Calculation for physical and chemical exergy of
[9] Li H, Svendsen S. Energy and exergy analysis of low temperature district flows in systems elaborating mixed-phase flows and a case study in an IRSOFC
heating network. Energy 2012;45:237e46. plant. Int J Energy Res 2004;28:101e15.
[10] Bi Y, Liu X, Jiang M. Exergy analysis of a gas-hydrate cool storage system. [46] Van Gool W. Exergy analysis of industrial processes. Energy 1992;17:
Energy 2014;73:908e15. 791e803.
[11] Acikkalp E, Yamik H, Icingur Y. Performance of a compression ignition engine [47] Altuntas O, Karakoc TH, Hepbasli A. Exergetic, exergoeconomic and sustain-
operated with sunflower ethyl ester under different engine loads. J Energy ability assessment of piston-prop aircraft engine. Int J Therm Sci Technol
South Afr 2014;25:81e90. 2012;32:133e43.
[12] Haragovics M, Mizsey P. A novel application of exergy analysis: lean [48] Moran MJ, Shapiro HN, Boettner DD, Bailey MB. Fundamentals of engineering
manufacturing tool to improve energy efficiency and flexibility of hydrocar- thermodynamics. John Wiley & Sons; 2010.
bon processing. Energy 2014;77:382e90. [49] Heywood JB. Internal combustion engine fundamentals. McGraw-Hill; 1988.
[13] Strusnik D, Avsec J. Artificial neural networking and fuzzy logic exergy con- [50] http://myjetreview.com/html/10-rr-ae3007.html.
trolling model of combined heat and power system in thermal power plant. [51] http://www.gasturb.de/.
Energy 2015;80:318e30. [52] Pandey SD, Nema VK. An experimental investigation of exergy loss reduction
[14] Sarker MSH, Ibrahim MN, Aziz NA, Punan MS. Energy and exergy analysis of in corrugated plate heat exchanger. Energy 2011;36(5):2997e3001.
industrial fluidized bed drying of paddy. Energy 2015;84:131e8. [53] Sharqawy MH, Mokheimer EM, Habib MA, Badr HM, Said SA, Al-Shayea NA.
[15] Caliskan H. Novel approaches to exergy and economy based enhanced envi- Energy, exergy and uncertainty analyses of the thermal response test for a
ronmental analyses for energy systems. Energy Convers Manag 2015;89: ground heat exchanger. Int J Energy Res 2009;33(6):582e92.
156e61. [54] Li G, Eisele M, Lee H, Hwang Y, Radermacher R. Experimental investigation of
[16] Bejan A, Siems DL. The need for exergy analysis and thermodynamic opti- energy and exergy performance of secondary loop automotive air-
mization in aircraft development. Exergy Int J 2001;1:14e24. conditioning systems using low-GWP (global warming potential) re-
[17] Roth B, Mavris D. Method for propulsion technology impact evaluation via frigerants. Energy 2014;68:819e31.
thermodynamic work potential. J Aircr 2003;40:56e61. [55] Zhu J, Wang K, Wu H, Wang D, Du J, Olabi AG. Experimental investigation on
[18] Turgut ET, Karakoc TH, Hepbasli A, Rosen MA. Exergy analysis of a turbofan the energy and exergy performance of a coiled tube solar receiver. Appl En-
aircraft engine. Int J Exergy 2009;6(2):181e99. ergy 2015;156:519e27.
[19] Riggins DW, Moorehouse DJ, Camberos JA. Characterization of aerospace [56] Macdonald I, Strachan P. Practical application of uncertainty analysis. Energy
vehicle performance and mission analysis using thermodynamic availability. Build 2001;33(3):219e27.
J Aircr 2010;47:904e16. [57] Ege A, Şahin HM. Determination of uncertainties in energy and exergy anal-
[20] Tona C, Raviolo PA, Pellegrini LF, de Oliveira Jr S. Exergy and thermoeconomic ysis of a power plant. Energy Convers Manag 2014;85:399e406.
analysis of a turbofan engine during a typical commercial flight. Energy [58] Holman JP. Experimental methods for engineers. 8th ed. McGraw-Hill; 2012.
2010;35:952e9. [59] Dogru M, Midilli A, Howarth CR. Gasification of sewage sludge using a
[21] Turan O. Exergetic effects of some design parameters on the small turbojet throated downdraft gasifier and uncertainty analysis. Fuel Process Technol
engine for unmanned air vehicle applications. Energy 2012;46:51e61. 2002;75(1):55e82.
[22] Aydin H, Turan O, Midilli A, Karakoc TH. Exergetic and exergo-economic anal- [60] Ballal DR, Zelina J. Progress in aeroengine technology (1939e2003). J Aircr
ysis of a turboprop engine: a case study for CT7-9C. Int J Exergy 2012;11:69e88. 2004;41(1):43e50.
[23] Balli O, Hepbasli A. Energetic and exergetic analyses of T56 turboprop engine. [61] Zou ZP, Li Y, Liu HX, Zhang ZQ, Ye J, Li W, et al. Key turbomachinery tech-
Energy Convers Manag 2013;73:106e20. nology of civil high-bypass-ratio turbofan engine. J Aerosp Power 2008;8.
 €hret et al. / Energy 93 (2015) 716e729
Y. Şo
[62] Marta AC, Shankaran S. Assessing turbomachinery performance sensitivity to
boundary conditions using control theory. J Propuls Power 2014;30(5):
1281e94.
[63] Tang H, Liu S, Luo H. Design optimization of profiled endwall in a high work
turbine. In: ASME Turbo Expo 2014: Turbine Technical Conference and
Exposition. American Society of Mechanical Engineers; 2014, June.
V02CT38A029eV02CT38A029.
[64] Yoon S, Denton J, Curtis E, Longley J, Pullan G. Improving intermediate pres-
sure turbine performance by using a nonorthogonal stator. J Turbomach
2014;136(2):021012.
729
[65] Xiang J, Schlüter JU, Duan F. Miniature gas turbines: numerical study of the
effects of heat transfer and Reynolds number on the performance of an axial
compressor. Int J Comput Mater Sci Eng 2014;3(02):1450008.
[66] Cassetti G, Rocco MV, Colombo E. Exergy based methods for economic and
risk design optimization of energy systems: application to a gas turbine. En-
ergy 2014;74:269e79.
[67] Mamaghani AH, Najafi B, Shirazi A, Rinaldi F. Exergetic, economic, and envi-
ronmental evaluations and multi-objective optimization of a combined
molten carbonate fuel cell-gas turbine system. Appl Therm Eng 2015;77:
1e11.