Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T15:29:28.121Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ice accretion and release in fuel systems

Large-scale rig investigations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 May 2018

J. K.-W. Lam  and
R. D. Woods
J. K.-W. Lam
Affiliation:
Airbus Operations Ltd, Filton, Bristol, UK
R. D. Woods*
Affiliation:
Woodford Engineering Consultancy (UK) Ltd, Cheadle Hulme, Cheshire, UK
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Following the B777 accident at Heathrow in 2008, the certification authorities required Boeing, Airbus, and Rolls-Royce to conduct icing analysis and tests of their Rolls-Royce Trent engined aircraft fuel systems. The experience and the test data gained from these activities were distilled and released by Airbus to the EASA ICAR project for research and analysis. This paper provided an overview of the Airbus ice accretion and release tests. Brief narratives on the test rigs, the test procedure and methodology were given and key findings from the ice release investigations were presented. The accreted ice thickness was non-uniform; however, it is found typically c. $\mathrm{2\;\mathrm{m}\mathrm{m}}$ thick. Analysis of the accreted ice collected from the rig tests showed the ice was very porous. The porosity is very much dependant on how the water was introduced and mixed in the icing test rigs. The standard Airbus method produced accreted ice of higher porosity compared to that produced by the injection method. The porosity of the accreted ice from Airbus icing investigations was found to be c. 0.90. The relationship of permeability with porosity was inferred from published data and models for freshly fallen snow in the atmosphere. Derived permeability $\mathrm{7.0\times 10^{-9}\;\mathrm{\mathrm{\mathrm{m}}^{\mathrm{2}}}}$ was then applied in the CFD analysis of pipe flow with a porous wall lining to determine the shear stress on the accreted ice. It showed that 25%, 50% and 75% of the accreted ice has interface shear strength of less than $\mathrm{15.3\;\mathrm{Pa}}$, $\mathrm{20.7\;\mathrm{Pa}}$ and $\mathrm{26.1\;\mathrm{Pa}}$, respectively.

Keywords

fuel systemice accretionice releasefuel icingfuel contamination
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 122 , Issue 1253 , July 2018 , pp. 1051 - 1082
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

now with Defence Strategic Fuels Authority, Ministry of Defence, Abbey Wood, Bristol, UK

References

REFERENCES

1.Air Accidents Investigation Branch. Report on the accident to Boeing 777-236ER, G-YMMM, at London Heathrow Airport on 17 January 2008, AAIB Interim Report, September 2008, Department for Transport, Hampshire GU11 2HH, UK. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/54883b6e40f0b602410002a3/Boeing_777-236ER__G_YMMM_10-08.pdf.Google Scholar
2.Air Accidents Investigation Branch. Report on the accident to Boeing 777-236ER, G-YMMM, at London Heathrow Airport on 17 January 2008, AAIB Interim Report 2, March 2009, Department for Transport, Hampshire GU11 2HH, UK. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5422f9a2ed915d1371000755/Interim_Report_2_-__G-YMMM.pdf.Google Scholar
3.European Aviation Safety Agency. Certification specifications & acceptable means of compliance for large aeroplanes, CS, 2015, 25, (Amdt 17). https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/dfu/CS-25%20Amendment%2017_0.pdfGoogle Scholar
4.Federal Aviation Administration. Part 25, airworthiness standards, transport category airplanes, FAR, 1974, 25. https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=042278db328e3f1b8a0f071474d34da7&mc=true&node=pt14.1.25&rgn=div5Google Scholar
5.SAE International. Aircraft fuel system and component icing test, SAE ARP, 2012 1401B. https://www.sae.org/standards/content/arp1401b/Google Scholar
6.SAE International. Considerations on ice formation in aircraft fuel systems, SAE AIR, 2006, 790C. https://www.sae.org/standards/content/air790c/Google Scholar
7.SAE International. Engine fuel system and component icing test, SAE ARP, work in progress, 6340. https://www.sae.org/standards/content/arp6340/Google Scholar
8.Air Accidents Investigation Branch. Report on the accident to Boeing 777-236ER, G-YMMM, at London Heathrow Airport on 17 January 2008, Aircraft Accident Report, February 2010, 1/2010, Department for Transport, Hampshire GU11 2HH, UK. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5422f3dbe5274a1314000495/1-2010_G-YMMM.pdfGoogle Scholar
9.European Aviation Safety Agency. Water in aviation fuel under cold temperature conditions (WAFCOLT), specifications attached to the invitation to tender, EASA.2010.OP.07, 2010, D-50452 Köln, Germany. https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/dfu/2010-op07-TS%20WAFCOLT_EASA.2010.OP.07.pdfGoogle Scholar
10.Lam, J.K.-W., Carpenter, M.D., Williams, C.A. and Hetherington, J.I. Water solubility characteristics of current aviation jet fuels, Fuel, October 2014, 133, pp 26–33. doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2014.04.091.Google Scholar
11.Lam, J.K.-W., Lao, L., Hammond, D.W. and Power, J. Character and interface shear strength of accreted ice on subcooled surfaces submerged in fuel, The Aeronautical Journal, November 2015, 119, (1221), pp 1377–1396. doi:10.1017/S0001924000011301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.European Aviation Safety Agency. Ice accretion and release in fuel systems (ICAR), specifications attached to the invitation to tender, EASA.2012.OP.14, 2012, D-50452 Köln, Germany. https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/dfu/2012-op14-TS_EASA.2012.OP.14_ICAR.pdfGoogle Scholar
13.Roebber, P.J., Bruening, S.L., Schultz, D.M. and Cortinas, J.V. Jr. Improving snowfall forecasting by diagnosing snow density, Weather & Forecasting, April 2003, 18, (2), pp 264–287. doi:10.1175/1520-0434(2003)018<0264:ISFBDS>2.0.CO;2.Google Scholar
14.Alcott, T.I. and Steenburgh, W.J. Snow-to-liquid ratio variability and prediction at a high-elevation site in Utah’s Wasatch Mountains, Weather & Forecasting, February 2010, 25, (1), pp 323–337. doi:10.1175/2009WAF2222311.1.Google Scholar
15.Baxter, M.A., Graves, C.E. and Moore, J.T. A climatology of snow-to-liquid ratio for the contiguous United States, Weather & Forecasting, October 2005, 20, (5), pp 729–744. doi:10.1175/WAF856.1.Google Scholar
16.Ware, E.C., Schultz, D.M., Brooks, H.E., Roebber, P.J. and Bruening, S.L. Improving snowfall forecasting by accounting for the climatological variability of snow density, Weather & Forecasting, February 2006, 21, (1), pp 94–103. doi:10.1175/WAF903.1.Google Scholar
17.Lam, J.K.-W., Hetherington, J.I. and Carpenter, M.D. Ice growth in aviation jet fuel, Fuel, November 2013, 113, pp 402–406. doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2013.05.048.Google Scholar
18.Lao, L., Ramshaw, C., Yeung, H., Carpenter, M.D., Hetherington, J.I., Lam, J.K.-W. and Barley, S. Behaviour of water in jet fuel in a simulated fuel tank, SAE Technical Paper, October 2011, 2011-01-2794. doi:10.4271/2011-01-2794.Google Scholar
19.Schab, H.W. Problems associated with water contaminated jet fuels, J the American Soc for Naval Engineers, February 1960, 72, (1), pp 41–60. doi:10.1111/j.1559-3584.1960.tb02358.x.Google Scholar
20.Libbrecht, K.G. The physics of snow crystals, Reports on Progress in Physics, March 2005, 68, (4), pp 855–895. doi:10.1088/0034-4885/68/4/R03.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Costa, A. Permeability-porosity relationship: A reexamination of the Kozeny-Carman equation based on a fractal pore-space geometry assumption, Geophysical Research Letters, January 2006, 33, (2), L02318. doi:10.1029/2005GL025134.Google Scholar
22.Barr, D.W. Coefficient of permeability determined by measurable parameters, Groundwater, May 2001, 39, (3), pp 356–361. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6584.2001.tb02318.x.Google Scholar
23.Barr, D.W. Turbulent flow through porous media, Groundwater, September 2001, 39, (5), pp 646–650. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6584.2001.tb02353.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24.Shimizu, H. Air permeability of deposited snow, Contributions from the Institute of Low Temperature Science, March 1970, A22, pp 1–32, Hokkaido University, Japan. https://eprints.lib.hokudai.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2115/20234/1/A22_p1-32.pdfGoogle Scholar
25.Zermatten, E., Haussener, S., Schneebeli, M. and Steinfeld, A. Tomography-based determination of permeability and Dupuit-Forchheimer coefficient of characteristic snow samples, Journal of Glaciology, January 2011, 57, (205), pp 811–816. doi:10.3189/002214311798043799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.Zermatten, E., Schneebeli, M., Arakawa, H. and Steinfeld, A. Tomography-based determination of porosity, specific area and permeability of snow and comparison with measurements, Cold Regions Science & Technology, January 2014, 97, pp 33–40. doi:10.1016/j.coldregions.2013.09.013.Google Scholar
27.Calonne, N., Geindreau, C., Flin, F., Morin, S., Lesaffre, B., Rolland du Roscoat, S. and Charrier, P. 3-D image-based numerical computations of snow permeability: Links to specific surface area, density, and microstructural anisotropy, The Cryosphere, September 2012, 6, (5), pp 939–951. doi:10.5194/tc-6-939-2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28.Geotechdata.info. Soil void ratio, http://geotechdata.info/parameter/permeability.html, (as of October 7, 2013). Accessed February 2018.Google Scholar
29.Suga, K. and Nishio, Y. Lattice Boltzmann flow simulation of porous medium-clear fluid interface regions, Proceedings of the 19th International Symposium on Transport Phenomena, August 2008, Reykjavik, Iceland. http://www.me.osakafu-u.ac.jp/htlab/html-e/pdf/suga-nishio.pdfGoogle Scholar
30.Suga, K. and Nishio, Y. Three dimensional microscopic flow simulation across the interface of a porous wall and clear fluid by the lattice Boltzmann method, Open Transport Phenomena J, 2009, 1, pp 35–44. url:https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5d96/75e06810ff4cb38a85897d26f52be183d1f5.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31.Tilton, N. and Cortelezzi, L. Linear stability analysis of pressure-driven flows in channels with porous walls, J Fluid Mech, June 2008, 604, pp 411–445. doi:10.1017/S0022112008001341.Google Scholar
32.Beavers, G.S. and Joseph, D.D. Boundary conditions at a naturally permeable wall, J Fluid Mech, October 1967, 30, (1), pp 197–207. doi:10.1017/S0022112067001375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33.Prinos, P., Sofialidis, D. and Keramaris, E. Turbulent flow over and within a porous bed, J Hydraulic Engineering, September 2003, 129, (9), pp 720–733. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2003)129:9(720).Google Scholar
34.Vafai, K. and Kim, S.J. Fluid mechanics of the interface region between a porous medium and a fluid layer – an exact solution, Int J Heat & Fluid Flow, September 1990, 11, (3), pp 254–256. doi:10.1016/0142-727X(90)90045-D.Google Scholar
35.Alkam, M.K., Al-Nimr, M.A. and Hamdan, M.O. On forced convection in channels partially filled with porous substrates, Heat & Mass Transfer, April 2002, 38, (4-5), pp 337–342. doi:10.1007/s002310000177.Google Scholar
36.Breugem, W.P. and Boersma, B.J. The turbulent flow over a permeable wall, Center for Turbulence Research – Proceedings of the Summer Program 2002, 2002, pp 215–228. https://web.stanford.edu/group/ctr/ctrsp02/breugemboersma.pdfGoogle Scholar
37.Bruneau, C.H. and Mortazavi, I. Numerical modelling and passive flow control using porous media, Computers & Fluids, June 2008, 37, (5), pp 488–498. doi:10.1016/j.compfluid.2007.07.001.Google Scholar
38.Chan, H.C., Huang, W., Leu, J.M. and Lai, C.J. Macroscopic modeling of turbulent flow over a porous medium, Int J Heat & Fluid Flow, October 2007, 28, (5), pp 1157–1166. doi:10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2006.10.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
39.Liu, Q. and Prosperetti, A. Pressure-driven flow in a channel with porous walls, J Fluid Mech, July 2011, 679, pp 77–100. doi:10.1017/jfm.2011.124.Google Scholar
40.Breugem, W.P., Boersma, B.J. and Uittenbogaard, R.E. The influence of wall permeability on turbulent channel flow, J Fluid Mech, September 2006, 562, pp 35–72. doi:10.1017/S0022112006000887.Google Scholar
41.Breugem, W.P. and Boersma, B.J. Direct numerical simulations of turbulent flow over a permeable wall using a direct and a continuum approach, Physics of Fluids, February 2005, 17, (2), pp 025103. doi:10.1063/1.1835771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
42.Çengel, Y.A. and Cimbala, J.M. Fluid Mechanics: Fundamentals and Applications, McGraw-Hill Series in Mechanical Engineering, 1st ed., 2006, McGraw-Hill Higher Education.Google Scholar
43.Giles, R.V. Theory and Problems of Fluid Mechanics and Hydraulics, Schaum’s Outline Series, 2nd ed., 1962, McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
44.Massey, B.S. and Ward-Smith, J. Mechanics of Fluids, 7th ed., 1998, Stanley Thornes.Google Scholar
45.Schetz, J.A. and Fuhs, A.E. Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics, 1999, John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
46.Spurk, J. and Aksel, N. Fluid Mechanics, 2nd ed., 2008, Springer.Google Scholar
47.Young, D.F., Munson, B.R., Okiishi, T.H. and Huebsch, W.W. A Brief Introduction to Fluid Mechanics, 2010, John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
48.White, F.M. Fluid Mechanics, 3rd ed., 1994, Mc-Graw Hill.Google Scholar
49.Brown, G.O. The history of the Darcy-Weisbach equation for pipe flow resistance, Environmental & Water Resources History, 2002, 38, (7), pp 34–43. doi:10.1061/40650(2003)4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
50.Moody, L.F. Friction factors for pipe flow, Transactions ASME, 1944, 66, (8), pp 671–684. https://www.scribd.com/document/269398353/Friction-Factors-for-Pipe-Flow-MoodyLFpaper1944Google Scholar
51.Brkić, D. Review of explicit approximations to the Colebrook relation for flow friction, J Petroleum Science & Engineering, April 2011, 77, (1), pp 34–48. doi:10.1016/j.petrol.2011. 02.006.Google Scholar
52.Lindeburg, M.R. Environmental Engineering Reference Manual for the PE Exam, 2nd ed., 2009, Professional Publications.Google Scholar
53.Baena, S., Lawson, C. and Lam, J.K.-W. Effects of ice accretion in an aircraft protective mesh strainer of a fuel pump, SAE Technical Paper, 2015, 2015-01-2449. doi:10.4271/2015- 01-2449.Google Scholar
54.Allen, J.J., Shockling, M.A., Kunkel, G.J. and Smits, A.J. Turbulent flow in smooth and rough pipes, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Soc A: Mathematical, Physical & Engineering Sciences, March 2007, 365, (1852), pp 699–714. doi:10.1098/rsta.2006.1939.Google Scholar
55.McKeon, B.J., Zagarola, M.V. and Smits, A.J. A new friction factor relationship for fully developed pipe flow, J Fluid Mech, September 2005, 538, pp 429–443. doi:10.1017/S0022112005005501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
56.Shockling, M.A., Allen, J.J. and Smits, A.J. Roughness effects in turbulent pipe flow, J Fluid Mech, October 2006, 564, pp 267–285. doi:10.1017/S0022112006001467.Google Scholar
57.Colebrook, C.F. Turbulent flow in pipes, with particular reference to the transition region between the smooth and rough pipe laws, J ICE, 1939, 11, (4), pp 133–156. doi:10.1680/ijoti.1939. 13150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
58.Papaevangelou, G., Evangelides, C. and Tzimopoulos, C. A new explicit relation for the friction coefficient in the Darcy-Weisbach equation, PRE10: 10th International Conference on Protection and Restoration of the Environment, 2010, University of Ioannina and Stevens Institute of Technology. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283993267_A_new_explicit_equation_for_the_friction_coefficient_in_the_Darcy-Weisbach_equation_Proceedings_of_the_Tenth_Conference_on_Protection_and_Restoration_of_the_Environment_PRE10_July_6-9_2010Google Scholar
59.Coordinating Research Council. Handbook of Aviation Fuel Properties, 3rd ed., 2004, CRC Report, 635, SAE.Google Scholar