Assessment of a regulatory measurement system for the determination of the non-volatile particulate matter emissions from commercial aircraft engines

John S. Kinsey, Robert Giannelli, Robert Howard, Brandon Hoffman, Richard Frazee, Michael Aldridge, Cullen Leggett, Katherine Stevens, David Kittelson, William Silvis, Jeffrey Stevens, Prem Lobo, Steven Achterberg, Jacob Swanson, Kevin Thomson, Timothy McArthur, Donald Hagen, Max Trueblood, Lindsay Wolff, David LiscinskyRussell Arey, Kate Cerully, Richard Miake-Lye, Timothy Onasch, Andrew Freedman, William Bachalo, Gregory Payne, Mikal Durlicki

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The SAE International has published Aerospace Information Report (AIR) 6241 which outlined the design and operation of a standardized measurement system for measuring non-volatile particulate matter (nvPM) mass and number emissions from commercial aircraft engines. Prior to this research, evaluation of this system by various investigators revealed differences in nvPM mass emissions measurement on the order of 15–30% both within a single sampling system and between two systems operating in parallel and measuring nvPM mass emissions from the same source. To investigate this issue, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency in collaboration with the U. S. Air Force's Arnold Engineering Development Complex initiated the VAriable Response In Aircraft nvPM Testing (VARIAnT) research program to compare nvPM measurements within and between AIR-compliant sampling systems used for measuring combustion aerosols generated both by a 5201 Mini-CAST soot generator and a J85-GE-5 turbojet engine burning multiple fuels. The VARIAnT research program has conducted four test campaigns to date. The first campaign (VARIAnT 1) compared two essentially identical commercial versions of the sampling system while the second campaign (VARIAnT 2) compared a commercial system to the custom-designed Missouri University of Science and Technology's North American Reference System (NARS) built to the same specifications. Comparisons of nvPM particle mass (i.e., black carbon), number, and size were conducted in both campaigns. Additionally, the sensitivity to variation in system operational parameters was evaluated in VARIAnT 1. Results from both campaigns revealed agreement of about 12% between the two sampling systems, irrespective of manufacturer, in all aspects except for black carbon determination. The major source of measurement differences (20–70%) was due to low BC mass measurements made by the Artium Technologies LII-300 as compared to the AVL 483 Micro-Soot Sensor, the Aerodyne Cavity Attenuated Phase Shift (CAPS PMSSA) monitor, and the thermal-optical reference method for elemental carbon (EC) determination, which was used as the BC reference.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number105734
JournalJournal of Aerosol Science
Volume154
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2021

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
Funding for this project was provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ) in Ann Arbor, MI, the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration under Grant No. 13-C-AJFE-MST, Amendment 004, and in-kind support from the U.S. Air Force at AEDC. We like to acknowledge the support of Bryan Manning and Glenn Passavant of OTAQ. Additional support came from Edwin Corporan of the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, OH who supplied the Camelina fuels, Scott MacDonald of Pratt and Whitney in East Hartford, CT who supplied the second AVL sampling and measurement system for VARIAnT 1, and the technical support of Steve Garner, Brad Besheres, Roy Carroll, Jason Smith, Gary Storey, Robert Baltz, Todd Vanpelt, Brad Winkleman, Kathleen Jones, Gary Teal, Bryon Weatherford, Mike Ferris, John King, Charles Easley, and Brian Anderson of the Aerospace Testing Alliance at Arnold Air Force Base, TN.

Funding Information:
Funding for this project was provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ) in Ann Arbor, MI, the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration under Grant No. 13-C-AJFE-MST , Amendment 004, and in-kind support from the U.S. Air Force at AEDC. We like to acknowledge the support of Bryan Manning and Glenn Passavant of OTAQ. Additional support came from Edwin Corporan of the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, OH who supplied the Camelina fuels, Scott MacDonald of Pratt and Whitney in East Hartford, CT who supplied the second AVL sampling and measurement system for VARIAnT 1, and the technical support of Steve Garner, Brad Besheres, Roy Carroll, Jason Smith, Gary Storey, Robert Baltz, Todd Vanpelt, Brad Winkleman, Kathleen Jones, Gary Teal, Bryon Weatherford, Mike Ferris, John King, Charles Easley, and Brian Anderson of the Aerospace Testing Alliance at Arnold Air Force Base, TN.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2020

Keywords

  • Aerosol sampling systems
  • Aircraft turbine engines
  • Black carbon
  • Combustion aerosols
  • Elemental carbon
  • Laboratory generated soot

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Assessment of a regulatory measurement system for the determination of the non-volatile particulate matter emissions from commercial aircraft engines'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this