General Disclaimer

One or more of the Following Statements may affect this Document

This document has been reproduced from the best copy furnished by the 

organizational source. It is being released in the interest of making available as 

much information as possible.

This document may contain data, which exceeds the sheet parameters. It was 

furnished in this condition by the organizational source and is the best copy 

available.

This document may contain tone-on-tone or color graphs, charts and/or pictures, 

which have been reproduced in black and white.

This document is paginated as submitted by the original source.

Portions of this document are not fully legible due to the historical nature of some 

of the material. However, it is the best reproduction available from the original 

submission.

Produced by the NASA Center for Aerospace Information (CASI)
A R- 3 971 

EXPERIMENTAL CLEAN COMBUSTOR PROGRAM 

Phase II Final Report 

b 

G1 son 

Ro s 

Bahr 

GE ERAL ELECTRIC CO A 

(NASA-CF- 34971 ) EXPERIMENTAL CLE 

CO BUSTOR P~OGRAM , PH SE 2 Final Report 

(General Electric Co.) 208 p BC $7 . 75 

CSCL 21E Unclas 

G3/07 02503 

Prepared For 

Matiolal A.rolaltics and Space Ad.llistratlol 

ASA L is R arch C n 

ontract AS3-1 551 
~~""-'1~"-:;~-1------'-

~;;" 1 

~ i' 

.1 

, 

r 

} 

f 

~ 'J 

, "J' i 

r 

t 

I 

! 12 I 

I 

l I ~ 

~. ~~ ;;: 

~ 

~ 'f' l l;t·' 

 

B 

I &f' 

" 

;;:.! 

r ., 

r 

t l l\ ~.- .. "cUi 

'T~' r-'-~-' .. 

r ~--",.-~-

'1 ;\ ~ f j 

'f 1 .... ____ .. T [ t .. .1. ,., '"', 

·C. 1\ \, .. ' 

1. Report No. '1 2. Gove\lnment Acces5ion No. 3. Recipient's Catalog ··No. 

NASA CR-134971 

4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report !;late 

Experimental Clean Combustor Program Phase II August 1976 

Final Report 6. Performing Organization Code 

7. Author(s) II, Performing Organization Report No. 

C.C. Gleason, D.W. Rogers, D.W. Bahl' ,: R76AEG422 

10. Work Unit No. 

9. Performing Organization Name and Address 

General Electric Company 11. Contract or Grant No. '" : Aircraft Engine Group 

Cincinnati, Ohio 45215 NAS3-l855l 

13. Type of Report and Period Covered 

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Contractor Report 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington, D.C. 20546 

15. 'Supplemen,ary Notes 

Project Manager, R. Niedzwiecki, Airbreathing Engines Division 

NASA-Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio 44135 

16. Abstract 

The primary objectives of this three-phase program are to develop technology for the design of 

advanced combustors with significantly lower pollutant emission levels than those of current 

combustors, and to demonstrate these pollutant emission reductions in CF6-5OC engine tests. 

The purpose of the Phase II Program was to further develop the two most promising concepts 

identified in the Phase I Program, the Double Annular Combustor and the Radial/Axial Staged 

Combustor, and to design a combustor and breadboard fuel splitter control for CF6-50 engine 

demonstration testing in the Phase III Program. Noise Measurement am Alternate Fuels Addendums 

to the basic program were conducted to obtain additional experimental data. 

Twenty-one full annular and fifty-two sector combusto~ configurations were evaluated. Both 

combustor types demonstrated the capability for significantly reducing pollutant emission.le:l/f~ls. 

The most promising results were obtained with the Double Annular Combustor. Rig test results 

corrected to CF6-5OC engine conditions produced EPA emission parameters for CO HC, and NO" of 

3.4, 0.4, and 4.5 respectively. These levels represent CO, HC, and NOx reductions of 69, 90, 

and 42 percent respectively from current combustor emiSSion levels. The combustor also met 

smoke emission level requirements ancl de\'elopment engine performance and installation requirements. 

17. Key Words (Suggested by Author(s)) 18. Distribution Statement 

Combustion CTOL Pollution Reduction 

Emissions Unclassified - Unlimited 

CF6-50 Combustor 

19. Security aassil. (01 this report) 

1

20

. 

Security Classil. (01 this page) 21. No. of Pages 122. Price' 

Unclassified Unclassified 208 

* For sale by the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22151 

NASA'I:.168 (Rov. 6-71) 

i 

1 

~ 

, 

" 

, 

j 
i 

It 

.... -

.. ,i 

TABLE OF COt~TENTS 

Chapter 

SUMMARY 

INTRODUCTION 

I DESCRIPTION OF EXPERIMENTAL CLEAN COMBUSTOR PROGRAM 

II 

OVERALL PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 

PROGRAM PLAN 

Phase I Program 

~hase II Program 

Phase III Program 

PROGRAM SCHEDULE 

PROGRAM GOALS 

Pollutant Emission Level Goals 

Combustor Performance Goals 

PHASE II PROGRM1 DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT APPROACHES 

CF6-S0 ENGINE/COMBUSTOR 

TEST FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT 

Full Annular Combustor Rig 

60° Sector Combustor Rig 

12° Sector Rigs 

COMBUSTOR CONCEPTS 

Double Annular Combustor 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor 

TEST CONDITIONS AND PROCEDURES 

Full Annular Performance/Emission Tests 

Full Annular Ground Start Tests 

Full Annular and 60° Sector Altitude Re'light Tests 

12° Sector Carbon/Flashback Tests 

DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURES 

Combustor Performance Data Processing 

Pollution Emission Data Processing 

Pollution Emissions Correlation 

EPA Parameter Calculation 

iii 

Page 

1 

4 

6 

6 

6 

7 

7 

8 

8 

10 

10 

10 

13 

13 

13 

17 

17 

21 

24 

24 

36 

44 

44 ie 

51 

51 

53 

53 

53 

55 

55 

57 , 

! 

j 
l

····, .. 

, . 

• 

Chapter 

1-

J 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) 

III PHASE II EXPERIMENTAL TEST RESULTS 

DOUBLE ANNULAR COMBUSTOR 

Phase I Results 

Exhaust Emission Results 

Idle Pollution Results 

Climbout and Takeoff Pollution Results 

Approach Pollution Results 

Cruise Pollution Results 

EPAP Results 

Combustor Performance Results 

Altitude Relight Results 

Ground Start Results 

Carboning Results 

Acoustic Resonance Results 

Combustor Exit Temperature Profile Results 

Main Stage Cross-Fire Results 

Summary of Combined Results 

Pollution-Performance Tradeoff Considerations 

Best Engine-Combustor Compromise Design 

RADIAL/AXIAL STAGED COMBUSTOR 

Phase I Results 

Exhaust Emission Results 

Idle Pollution Results 

Climbout and Takeoff Pollution Results 

f~pproach Pollution Results 

Cruise Pollution Results 

EPAP Results 

·CQ~bustor Performance Results 

Altitude Relight Results 

Ground Start ,Results 

Carboning Results 

Flashback Results 

Combustor Exit Temperature Profile Results 

Other Performance Results 

iv 

I 

58 

58 

58 

59 

59 

64 

67 

69 

69 

71 

71 

71" 

76 

76 

78 

81 

81 

81 

84 

84 

84 

85 

85 

85 

89 

92 

92 

96 

96 

96 

96 

96 

99 

102 

,r 

··-l o . 

, 

1 

I 

~ 

~ 

t § 

I 

~ "~ 

-1 

1 ; 

, 

1 

1 

i 

i 

~ ~ 

I .,j 

J 

, 

, 

j 
" ., 

r .. 

~ . t '-:":: 

.! • 

~-~( 

Chapter 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (concluded) 

Summary of Combined Results 

Pollution-Performance Tradeoff Considerations 

Best Engine-Combustor Compromise Design 

IV ASSESSMENT OF PHASE II TEST RESULTS 

COMMON RESULTS 

DOUBLE ANNULAR COMBUSTOR RESULTS 

Pollution:· Status 

Performan~e Status 

RADIAL/AXIAL STAGED COMBUSTOR RESULTS 

Pollution Status 

Performance Status 

APPLICATION OF RESULTS 

Phase III - Engine-Combustor Selection 

_ Pbas~II--I- Engine-Combustor Testing 

V PHASE II - ENGINE-COMBUSTOR DESIGN ITEMS 

ENGINE COMBUSTOR DESIGNS 

Double Annular Combustor 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor 

Engine Combustor Interfacing 

ENGINE FUEL CONTROL DESIGN 

DESIGN. STATUS OF COMBUSTOR FOR PHASE III PROGRAM 

APPENDIX A - EMISSIONS CORRECTION FACTORS 

Pressure Corrections 

Special Configuration D13 Test 

APPENDIX B - EPA FMISSION PARAMETER CALCULATION PROCEDURE 

APPENDIX C FULL ANNULAR RIG TEST DATA 

APPENDIX D - SECTOR RIG TEST DATA 

NOMENCLATURE 

REFERENCES 

Page 

102 

102 

102 

106 

106 

107 

108 

108 

108 

109 

110 

HI 

111 

III 

114 

114 

114 

120 

124 

125 

127 

129 

129 

132 

138 

143 

178 

206 

208 

.~ 

! 

1 

cl 

j 

1 
r.i

. -.-- '" ' 

Figure 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

14. 

15. 

16. 

17. 

18. 

19. 

20. 

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 

NASA/General Electric Experimental Clean Combustor Program 

Schedule. 

General Electric CF6-50 High Bypass Turbofan Engine. 

Production CF6-50 Engine Combustor. 

Full Annular CF6-50 Combustor Test Rig, Axial Cross 

Section View. 

Gas Sample Location and Manifolding Diagrams. 

CF6-50 60° Sector Combustor Test Rig. 

12° Sector Combustor for Carboning Tests. 

12° Sector Combustor for Flashback Tests. 

Double Annular Combustor General Arrangement. 

Double Annular Combustor Design Parameter Variations, 

Configurations 11-16 - D3. 

Double Annular Combustor Design Parameter Variations, 

Configurations D4 - D7. 

Double Annular Combustor Design Parameter Variations, 

Configurations D8 - Dll. 

Double Annular Combustor Design Parameter Variations, 

Configurations D12 - D14. 

Pilot Stage Air Swirler Configurations, Double Annular 

Combustor. 

Main Stage Air Swirler Configurations, Double Annular 

Combustor. 

Fuel Injector Configurations, Double Annular Combustor. 

Double Annular Sector Combustor Assembly. 

Cross-Fire Slot Configurations, Double Annular Combustor. 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor General Arrangement. 

\\ 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor Design Parameter.'/ariations, 

Configurations IU-2 - R3. 

vi 

9 

14 

16 

18 

19 

20 

22 

23 

25 

27 

28 

29 

30 

33 

34 

35 

41 

43 

46 
r-T~--C-T-- - ~ ,,~ .. T" no ~'.\ •. , n,""'" Tr 

, 

i 

I 

I 

l 

I 

I 

I Ii. 

I 

f , 

I· 

! 

i 

, . 

t r 

I 

, . 

Figure 

21. 

22. 

23. 

24. 

25. 

26. 

27. 

28. 

29. 

30. 

31. 

32. 

33. 

34. 

35. 

36. 

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Continued) 

Rarlial/Axial Staged Combustor Design Parameter 

Variations, Configurations R4 - R7. 

\\ 

Radial/Axial Staged Sector Cd~bustor Assembly. 

CF6-50 Estimated Windmilling Combustor Conditions. 

Double Annular Combustor Idle Emission Characteristics, 

Configurations Dl-D8. 

Double Annular Combustor Idle Emission Characteristics, 

Configurations D8-DI4. 

Double Annular Combustor NOx Emission Characteristics at 

Takeoff Conditions. 

Effect of Fuel Flow Split on Emission Levels of the 

Double Annular Combustor at Approach Conditions. 

Effect of Design Modifications on Double Annular Combustor 

Altitude Relight Characteristics. 

Altitude Relight Characteristics of Final Double 

Annular Combustor Design Configuration. 

Sea: Level Ignition Performance of Final Double Annular 

Combustor Design Configuration. 

Swirl Cup Carboning Test Results. 

Effect of Fuel Flow Split on Profile Factor for the Double 

Annular Combustor. 

Effect of Fueling Mode on Exit Temperature Profiles of the 

Double Annular Combustor at Approach Conditions. 

Exit Temperature Profile Characteristics of Final Double 

Annular Combustor Design Configuration at Takeoff 

Conditions. 

Double Annular Combustor Main Stage Cross-Fire/Stability 

Characteristics. 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor Idle Emission Characteristics. 

vii 

47 

49 

52 

63 

65 

66 

68 

73 

74 

75 

77 

,. 

79 

80 

82 

83 

87 

1 

1 

i 

j 

1 

'i J 

I 

1 

j 

1 

i 

J 
.. ~ . 

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Continued) 

Figure 

37. Effec~i of Fuel Flow Split on NOx Emission Levels of the 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor at Climbout and Takeoff 

Conditions. 

38. 

39. 

40. 

Tradeoff Between NO and CO Emissions at Climbout and 

Takeoff Conditions lor the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor. 

Effect of Fuel Flow Split on Emission J.Jevels of the 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor at Approach Conditions. 

Tradeoff Between Combustion Efficiency and NOx Emission 

Level at Cruise Conditions for the Radial/Axial Staged 

Combustor. 

41. EPA Parameter Tradeoffs for the Radial/Axial Staged 

Combustor. 

42. Effect of Design Modifications on Radial/Axial Staged 

Combustor Relight Characteristics. 

43. Sea Level Ignition Performance of Final Radial/Axial 

Staged Combustor Configuration. 

44. Damaged Radial/Axial Staged Combustor Flameholder Array. 

45. Effect of Fuel Flow Split on Profile Factor for the 

Radial/Axial i3taged Combustor. 

46. Exit Temperature Profile Characteristics of Final Radial/ 

Axial Staged Combustor Configuration. 

47. Tradeoff Between Combustion Efficiency and NOx Emission 

LevelS at Climbout and Takeoff Operating Conditions for 

the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor. 

48. Double Annular CF6-50 Combustor Design. 

49. Fuel Nozzle Installation Sequence, Doublo Annular 

Combustor. 

50. Radial/Axial Staged CF6-50 Combustor Design. 

51. Add-on Fuel Flow Splitter Design Concept. 

52. Add-on Fuel Flow Splitter. 

, ~; .... ) j 

,.)'''' viii 

88 

90 

91 

93 

94 

97 

98 

100 

101 

103 

104 

117 

119 

122 

126 

128 

J 

I 

I 

I 

J 

'1 

, . 

.... 

I 

i 

j 

I 

l 

I 

J 

I 

~ ! 

>1 

j 

A 

i 

1 

I 

1 
IJII"'-

, 

t 

i 

I· 

I 

~ 

r 

~ 

! 

~ 

t 

r 

I 

~: 

~. 

I 

rl 

" 

-T -.-

~ 

~ .. 

. . 

! . -l,t 

n 

, 

'. ~ 

I. 

I , 

~ I 

1 

.1 

I 

rr . 

! A 

~' '.., 

~ ~ .... 

r~ rI 

'" ~~ 

r- i'!iI.. ........ "r_~ .. J 110, .. \\ ,,', A ,-,!-;, 

\ , . 

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Concluded) 

Figure 

53. Effect of CO Emission Index on Pressure Exponent, (Phase II 

Program Full Annular Combustor Tests). 

54. Effect of Pressure on NO Entissions, Double Annular 

x 

Combustor. 

55. Effect of Pressure on CO Emissions, Double Annular 

Combustor. )1 

56. Effect of Pressure on HC Emissions, Double Annular 

Combustor • 

Ii :/ .,' 

- -- .. ~--~-~~~ .-

ix 

• " .•• h._.~~<,, ___ ~,. 

-' 

133 

134 

135 

136 

, 

l 

1 

l 

~ j 

j 

1 

1 

j 

'! 

,\~ 

j 

I 

, 

, 

.. 
r ...... -~- ----r -~- 0-. ' 

j

.~ 

~ .,~_,.."". y TO,' ""~" l 

I 

j 

I 

........ 

Table 

I. 

II. 

Ill. 

IV. 

V. 

VI. 

VII. 

VIII. 

IX. 

r X. 

r 

i XI. 

I XII. 

. l . 

• XIII • 

( 

~. XIV. 

f 

~. , 

XV. 

i 

i 

i 

IXVI. 

XVII. 

., 

LIST OF TABLES 

Pollutant Emission Level Goals of the NASA/General Experimental Clean Combustor Phase II Progr,am. i, 

Combustor Performancepoals of the NASA/General Electric 

Experim~ntal Clean Combustor Program. 

CF6-50 Engine/Combustor Operating Conditions. 

Double Annular Combustor Test Configurations, Full Annular 

Rig. 

Double Annular Combustor, Area/Airflow Distributions, Full 

Annular Test Configurations Dl - D7. 

Double Annular Combustor, Area/Airflow Distributions, Full 

Annular Test Configurations D8 - D14. 

Fueling Modes, Full Annular Rig Tests. 

Double Annular Combustor Test Configurations, 60° Sector 

Rig. 

Double Annular Combustor Cross-Fire Test Configurations, 

Main Stage Airflow Investigation, 60° Sector Rig. 

12° Sector Combustor Test Configurations. 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor Test Configurations, Full 

Annular Rig. 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor, Area/Airflow Di~tributions, 

Full Annular Test Conflgurations. 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor Test Configurations, 60° 

Sector Rig. 

Standard Carboning Test Cycle. 

Summary of Measured and Calculated Combustor Parameters for 

Full Annular Tests. 

Double Annular Combustor Emission Results, Configurations 

Dl - D7. 

Double Annular Combustor Emission Results, Configurations 

" DB - D14. 

x 

11 

12 

15 

26 

31 

32 

37 , i 

39 

40 

42 

45 

48 

50 

54 

56 

60 

61 

J ~""::"':'-. .., ~_ . ___ ". -_",. 'y,_.~u...,.".~ ._~l. •• .:.. ........... ~.~. __ ••• ~ __ ."-•• ~ .... r.' __ .~ ..• ;...-"_. ""<, .. _.'"~~ .• !.-"-.,.'"",~"""",-,,~,,,,,.M""'''''''''''''''''''''''''_'''' .. _ ....... ~~" ....... .,.....,,,.-.,~"'·~*~"'_.w.._:\.~~"'-_~~J],,B"':.iIIIIII 
r

---~--r-~' 

I 

Ii' ~/~O 

Ii 

~-

Table 

XVIII. 

XIX. 

xx. 

XXI. 

XXII. 

XXIII. 

XXIV. 

XXV. 

XXVI. 

XXVII. 

XXVIII. 

XXIX. 

XXX. 

XXXI. 

XXXII. 

XXXIII. 

XXXIV. 

XXXV. 

. r---··-"· 

I 

LIST mi

' TAI3LEi:> (Cont.inuod) 

Standard Day Cruise Emission Results. 

Double Annular Combustor EPA Emission Parameters with 

Pilot-Stage-Only Operation at Approach. 

,,, 

Double Annular-- Combustor EPA Emission Parameters with 

Two-Stage Operation at Approach. 

Double Annular Combustor Acoustic Resonance Summary. 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor Emission Results. 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor EPA Emission Parameters. 

Phase II Development Status of the Double Annular 

Combustor. 

Phase II Development Status of .the Radial/Axial Staged 

Combustor. 

DoubleiiAnnular CF6-50 Combustor Design for Phase III 

Engine Tests. 

Radial/Axial Staged CF6-50 Combustor Design for Phase III 

Engine Tests. 

Engine/Combustor Interfacing Requiremcnts. 

Effect of Pressure on EmiSSions, Phase II Full Annular 

Combustor,Tests. 

Sununary of Pressure Exponents, Phase II Full Annular 

Combustor Tests. 

EPAP Coefficients for Phase II Program, CF6-50 Engine. 

Sample EPAP Calculations. 

Full Annular Combustor Test Sequence. 

SUllunary of Tcst Results, Configuration DI. 

Summary of Test Results, Configuration D2. 

xi 

62 

70 

7'2 

78 

86 

95 

107 

109 

116 

121 

1 '2.[ 

130 

131 

1·10 

III 

H5 

1 16",\ !J 

~i 

.

,I 

1 

i 

r. 

I 

~ 

j 
r---~ ---. --.;-1----- 

I 

, 

~ 

Table 

XXXVI. 

XXXVII • 

XXXVIII. 

XXXIX. 

XL. 

XLI. 

XLII. 

XLIII. 

XLIV. 

XLV. 

XLVI. 

XLVII. 

XLVIII. 

XLIX. 

L. 

LI. 

LII. 

LIlI. 

LIV. 

LV. 

\ 

LIST OF TABLES (Continued) 

Summary of Test Results, Configuration D3. 147 

Summary of Test Results, Configuration D4. 148 

Summary of Test Results, Configuration D5. 149 

P;:tttern and Profile Factors for Atmospheric Pressure 

Combustor Test, Configuration D6. " 150 

Summary of Sea Level Ignition Test Results, Configuration D6. 151 

Surmnary of Sea Level Efficiency Test Results, Configuration D6. 152 

Summary of ~est Results, Configuration D6. 153 

Summary of Test Results, Configuration D7. 154 

Summary of Test Results, Configuration D8. 155 

Summary of Cross-Fire Test Results, Configuration DB. 

Summary of Test Results, Configuratj,on D9. 

Summary of Test Results, Configuration DIO. 

Summary of Test Results, Configll.ration Dll. 

Summary of Test Results, Configurations D12A and D12B. {i 

Summary of Sea Level Ignition Test Results, Configuration 

Dl2A. «o,-=-if 

\\ \, Summary of Sea Level Efficiency Test Results, Configuration 

Dl2A. 

Summary of Test Results, Configuration D13. 

Summary of Test Results, Configuration Dl3 (DOT). 

Summary of Test Results, Configuration Dl4A. 

Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration DI4B. 

xii 

156 

157 

158 

159 

160 

161 

162 

163 

164 

165 

166'-

\ 

, 

, 

f 

,~ 

~ 

I 

I I 

K 

I 

1 

1 

.~ 

~ , 

i 

I 

-I ~ 

I 

• 

~ 

I oj 

! 

i 

t ,j 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

, 

1 

1 

, 

1 

1 

J 

I 

~ 
r---- -1 '" -~J. i 

~ 

Table 

LVI. 

, . LVII. 

LVIII. 

LIX. 

LX. 

LXI. 

LXII. 

LXIII. 

LXIV. 

LXV. 

LXVI. 

LXVII. 

LXVIII. 

LXIX. 

LXX. 

LXXI. 

LXXII. 

LXXIII. 

LXXIV. 

LXXV. 

- -r----'-~ 

,.'," ,.,..-, Tr \ 

LIST OF TABLES (Continued) 

Summary of TEi'st Results, Configuration Dl4B. 

Sununary of Test Results, Configuration Rl. 

Summary of Test Resul'ts, Configuration R2. 

Summary of Test Results, Configuration R3. 

Summary of Test Rest/.lts, Configuration· R4. 

\\, 

Summary of Test Resuits, Configuration R5. 

Summary of ',rest Results, Configuration R6. 

Summary of Pattern and Profile Factors for Atmospheric 

Pressure Combustor Test, Configuration R7. 

Summary of Sea Level Ignition Test Results, Cqnfiguration R7. ~ ,~-

Summary of Sea Level Efficiency Test Results, Configuration R7. 

Summary of Test Results, Configuration R7. 

Sector Combustor Test Sequence. 

Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration S1. 

Altitude Relight Test Results, Configurations DS1A and 

DS1B. -'I 

Altitude Relight Test Results, Configurations DS2A, DS?B, 

DS2C, and DS2D. 

Alt1tude Relight Test Results, Configuration DS3. 

Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration DS4. 

Altitude Relight Test Results, Configurations DS5A, DS5B, 

and DS5C. 

" 

Alti.tude Relight Test Results, Configuration DS19. D 

Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration DS20. 

,) 

r .. 

! 

Page 

167 

168 

169 

170 

171 

172 

173 

174 

175 

176 

177 

179 

182 

183 

184 
F·''''':f~''··· ~.~ ~ 

1 ,., , . .,! 

I 

~ 

, 

/ 

/. 

I , 

I, 

. t 

~, 

, 

, 

f 

I i>-' 

r'~ 

Pc'" 

l 

i 

I 

LIST OF TABLES (Concluded) 

Table 

LXXVI. Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration DS2l. 

LXXVII. Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration DS22. 

LXXVIII. Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration DS23. 

LXXIX. Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration DS24. 

LXXX. Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration:;DS28. 

LXXXI. Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration DS29. 

LXXXII. Alti tude Relight Test Results, Configuration DS30. 

LXXXIII. Idle Emissions Test Results, Swirl Cup Investigation. 

LXXXIV. Idle Emissions Test Results, Fuel Nozzle Investigation. 

LXXXV. Idle EmissiOns Test Results, Airflow Investigation. 

LXXXVI. Subidle Temperature Rise Test Results. 

LXXXVII. Cross-Fire Test Results, Airflow Investigation. 

LXXXVIII. Cross-Fire Test Results, Slot Geometry Investigation. 

LXXJGX, 

XC • 

XCI. 

XCII. 

XCIII. 

XCIV. 

XCV. 

Altitude Relight Test Results, Configurations RSIA and 

RSIB. 

Altitude Relight Test Results, Configurations RS2A and 

RS2B. 

Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration RS3. 

Carboning Test Results. 

Flashback Test Results, Configuration FSI. 

Flashback Test Results, Configuration FS2. 

Flashback Test Results, Configuration FS3. 

xiv 

188 

188 

" 

189 

189 

190 

191 

192 

193 

194 

195 

196 

197 

198 

199 

200 

201 

202 

203 

204 

205 
, 

, 

~ , 

r~'····-···""·-··-r ., , I 

i 

~ ... 

r~ 

l 

SUMMARY 

The primary objectives of this three-phase progr~m are to develop technology for the design of advanced combustors with signiJicantly lower pollutant exhaust emission levels than those of current combustors, and to demonstrate the pollution reductions in tests of a CF6-S0 engine in 1976. The 

purpose of this Phase II Program was to further develop the performance and 

emission characteristics of the two most promising concepts identified in the 

Phase I Program - the Double Annular Combustor and the Radial/Axial Staged 

Combustor - and to define and provide a combustor design for CF6-·S0 engine 

demonstration testing in the Phase III Program. The Phase II efforts were 

successfully completed with the development of a Double Annular Combustor 

design which produced substantial reductions of all gaseous pollutants, 

provided low smoke emissions and met development engine performance requirements. 

The Phase II Program efforts involved experimental evaluations in full 

annular and sector combustor rigs and preparation of detailed aeromechanical 

combustor designs suitable for engine installation and demonstration testing. 

A total of 21 test configurations were evaluated .in the full annular CF6-50 

combustor rig utilized in the Phase I Program. Detailed emission level data 

and other performance characteristics were obtained in these evaluations. In 

addition, 52 test configurations were evaluated in newly-constructed sector 

combus tor rigs. These lat ter tes ts were directed tm.lard screening and developing design modifications to provide reduced emission levels and improved 

performance characteristics for incorporation into the full annular test 

configurations and the engine combustor designs. 

Both Phase II combustors, the Double Annular Combustor and the Radial/ 

Axial Staged Combustor, incorporate two-stage burning, wherein the pilot 

stage operates alone at low power conditions, and both the pilot and main 

stages operate together at high power conditions. Both combustors demonstrated the capability of significantly reducing exhaust pollutants. The 

best Phase II results were obtained with the Double Annu]ar Combustor, which 

produced CO, HC and NOx EPAP values extrapolated to CF6-S0C engines conditions of 3.4, 0.4 and 4.5, respectively. These represent respective CO, HC 

and NOx reductions of 69, 90 and 42 percent, compared to current CF6-50C 

engine values. The combustor also met development engine performance requirements. 

Because of the lower CO and HC emission levels of the Double Annular 

Combustor at idle and at high power operating conditions, and the generally 

satisfactory performance obtained with this design concept during Phase II, 

it was selected for the demonstrator engine evaluations to be performed in 

Phase III. The reduced combustion efficiency levels of the Radial/Axial 

Staged Combustor at high power operating conditions which were required to 

obtain significant NOx reductions, and the occurrence of flame flashback into 

its main stage premlxlng passage were primarv factors in the selection of the 

Double Annular Combustor design concept. 

Ty ···•· 

, 

\ 

,I 
""'_-~'"7''' . "'. 1"----

( 

, 

I 

I 

~ T . 

_.

\ 

--1 

J~. ...... t ,..., ."'''' .r \ 

Pilot stage design modifications, applicable to either combustor type 

were identified during Phase II which provided significant reductions in idle 

emission levels and which also resulted in meeting key engine performance 

requirements, at ignition, altitude relight and low power operating conditions. 

The use of pressure-atomizing fuel nozzles, swirl cup mixing barrels and 

small dilution air jets in the pilot stage provided idle HC emission levels 

well below the program goal and CO emission levels slightly below the program 

goal with the Double Annular Combustor. The incorporation of similar design 

features in the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor also produced HC levels well 

below the program goal, and CO levels approaching the program goal. Although 

the lowest idle CO emission index obtained with the Radial/Axial Staged 

Combustor was significantly lower than that obtained with the production 

CF6-50 combustor, it was still somewhat higher than the levels ac.hieved with 

the Double Annular Combustor. These low idle emission levels were obtained 

with no sacrifice in sea level or altitude ignition perfcrmance. 

Main stage modifications aimed at further reductions in NOx emission 

levels at high engine power operating conditions met with limited success. 

With the Double AnnuIar Combustor, significant main stage perforinance improvements were obtained, but the NOx emission levels at takeoff remained about 

the same as those of the final Phas.:~ I Program configuration, which were 

about 45 percent lower than the levels of .,the production CF6-50 combustor. 

The resulting NOx EPA parameter for the Double Annular Combustor was about 50 

percent higher than the applicable 1979 EPA NOx standard. This degree of NOx 

reduction was obtained with nf) penalty in high power combustion efficiency. 

Takeoff ~Ox emission levels below the program goal were obtained with the 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor, but at t:he expense of combustion efficiency. 

A direct tradeoff between NOx and efficiency was found to exist at high power 

operating conditions, as the fuel split between the pilot and main stages 

were varied. At a combustion efficiency level of 99.8%, which is approximately the takeoff level required if 1979 EPA standards for CO and HC are to 

be met, the NOx levels of the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor were about equivalent to those of the Double Annular Combustor. 

The determination of the best fuel flow split between stages at intermediate power operating conditions, from an emission and/or a performance 

standpoint, was an important part of the Phase II investigations. Specifically, the fuel flow split between combustor stages at the EPA-defined 

approach operating condition was found to have a large impact on the calculated CO and HC EPA parameters for 'both combustors. Because of the low 

combustor fuel-air ratio, inlet temperat~re and inlet pressure levels at 

approach, high CO and HC levels resulted when the fuel was supplied to both 

stages with either combustor type. By fueling only the pilot stage at idle 

and approach, and both stages at climbout and takeoff, CO and HC EPA parameters below the applicable 1979 standards were consistently obtained with the 

Double Annular Combustor, and levels approaching the standards were obtained 

with the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor. No configuration tested met either 

the CO or HC standard with both stages uniformly fueled at approach, but some 

Double Annular Combust9r configurations met both standards with all of the 

pilot stage and a portion of the main stage nozzles fueled. Because of these 

2 

T 

I 

\ 

:: '..' ~, 

I 

j 

1 

~ 
, , 

,:~""""-'-'-'~j~"'~""- 

- .. "'""'l'~-' ,. . .' ~ _ n"?' ...... ~" .... ·--

1 "~,~"",..,,, y n, ""-. ~r I . ',~ 

,{ 

I ~ 

l~ 

~ 

~ t\ 

... . 

factors, NOx emission index reductions at the approach mode could not be 

obtained. 

Both stages of the Double Annular Combustor and the Radial/Axial Staged 

Combustor were fueled at simulated CTOL cruise operating conditions during 

the Phase II tests. Best results were achieved with the Double Annular Combustor. All configurations of this combustor produced NOx levels lower than 

those of the production CF6-S0 combustor, with very high combustion efficierlcies. The lowest level obtained was an emission index of 6.6 with a 

combustion efficiency above 99.8%. This represents a 60% reduction from the 

production combustor. 

In sector tests, pilot stage swirl cup designs for both combustors were 

developed which met the altitude relight requirements of the CF6-S0 engine 

and operated carbon-free at all conditions. Acceptable average exit temperature profiles for both combustors were obtained during the Phase II annular 

tests. Some further adjustments to the peak temperature profile will be 

required to satisfy engine requirements in Phase III. 

Based on, the Phase II results, the Phase III Double Annular Combustor is 

expected to meet development engine performance requirements and meet 1979 

EPA Class T2 standards for CO, HC and smoke emission levels. The design is 

also expected to provide significant reductions in NOx emission levels 

relative to the production CF6-S0 combustor, but is not expected to meet the 

presently defined NOx standard for Class T2 engines. 

3 

r 

I 

\ 

i 

j 

'j 

1 

d 

/ 
IV"'-~~''" 

1 . .. 

,1 r 

INTRODUCTION 

Various studies to define the extent of contributions of turbine enginepowered aircraft to worJd wide pollution have been conducted. In general, . 

these studies have shown that the overall contributions of aircraft turbine 

engine emissions to tl~e air pollution problems of metropolitan areas are 

quite small, as eori1pared to those of other contributors (Reference 1). The 

foremost conr..ern a.ssociated with these engine exhaust emissions appears to be 

their possible impacts on the immediate areas surrounding major metropolitan 

airports. Because of the operating characteristics of most current turbojet 

and turbofan engines, the highest levels of the various objectionable exhaust 

constituents are typically generated at engine operating modes that occur in 

and around airports. Further, because large numbers of daily aircraft operations can occur in and around a given airport, the cumulative exhaust emissions 

resulting from these localized aircraft operations tend to be concentrated to 

some extent in the airport vicinity. 

For these reasons, the U.s. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concluded that standards to regulate and minimize the quantities of carbon 

monoxide (CO), unburned or partially oxidized hydrocarbons (HC), oxides of 

nitrogen (NOx ) and smoke emissions discharged by aircraft, when operating 

within or near airports are needed. Based on this finding, such standards 

were defined for several different categories and types of fixed-wing, commercial aircraft engines and were issued in July 1973. For the most part, 

these standards become effective in 1979 (Reference 2). 

The introduction of aircraft engine emissions into the stratosphere is 

another area of concern. It is thought that the continuous introduction of 

some engine exhaust products into the stratosphere by large aircraft fleets 

might, after extended time periods, result in adverse environment impacts. 

The introduction of NOx emissions into the stratosphere has, in particular, 

been identified as an area of concern. The possible impacts of the introduction of these and other engine exhaust products into the stratosphere have 

been conducted by the U.S. Department of Transportation (Reference 3). The 

preliminary findings of this extensive program indicate that very low NOx 

emission levels at high altitude cruise operating conditions may become an 

important need in future transport aircraft engines (Reference 4). 

To minimize these possible adverse environmental effects, significant 

development efforts to provide technology for the control and reduction of 

the levels of the pollutant exhaust emissions of aircraft turbine engines 

have already been conducted by both government and industry organizations and 

major additional development efforts are currently underway. Significant 

advances have already been made in the development of engines with greatly 

reduced smoke emission levels. As a result, advanced transport aircraft 

engines, such as the General Electric CF6 engines, with virtually invisible 

smoke emission levels, have been developed and placed into service. These 

engines are, thus, already in compliance with the smoke emission standards 

which have been issued by the EPA. 

4 j~~IGINAL PAGE IS 

'OF; POOR QUALITY 

I 

ITs····· 

., 

i 

j 

., 

1 

, 

1 

i 

d 
j. 

At the present time, therefore, the primary pollutant reduction technology needs of nonafterburning engines involve the reduction of CO and HC 

emission levels at idle operating conditions and the reduction of NOx emission 

levels during takeoff, climbout and cruise operations. The attainment of 

reduced exhaust emission levels in future engines primarily involves providing 

improved and modified main combustors for use in these engines. Major combustor design technology advances are needed to obtain these significant 

reductions in gaseous pollutant emissions. 

To provide these needed combustor design technology advances, the Experimental Clean Combustor Program '(ECCP) was initiated by the U. S. National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in 1972 (Reference 5). The overall objective of this major program is to define, develop and demonstrate 

technology for the design of low pollutant emission combustors for use in 

advanced commercial aircraft engines with high cycle pressure ratios, in the 

range of 20 to 35. However, it is also intended that this technology be 

applicable to advanced military aircraft engines. Because the smoke emission 

levels of advanced commercial and military aircraft engines have already been 

reduced to low values, the primary ECCP program focus is on reducing the CO, 

HC and NOx emission levels of these engines. 

The NASA/General Electric Experimental Clean Combustor Program is one of 

two programs that comprise the overall program. The work effort was initiated 

in January 1973, and is being conducted in three phases. Phase II, initiated 

ir'.' August 1974 and completed in November 1975, is the subject of this report. 

'.L'ne purpose of this phase was to further develop the performance and emission 

Jharacteristics of the two most promising combustor designs identified in 

Phase I, and to define a low emissions combustion system design suitable for 

CF6-50 engine demonstration in Phase III. 

This report describes the two low pollution combustor concepts investigated - the Double Annular Combustor and the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor -

and the test results obtained. Full annular and partial sectors of each low 

emission combustor design, sized to fit within the CF6-50 engine aero(:lynamic 

flowpath are described, and detailed performance and pollution data i)e 

reported. Data were obtained at test conditions simulating all important 

CF6-50 operating modes from ignition to takeoff, including altitude windmilling and cruise conditions, at test pressures up to 9.5 atmospheres. Also 

described are the program objectives and schedule,the aerodynamic and mechanical design features of the Phase III engine demonstrator combustor design, 

and current and future program efforts. 

Detailed test results obtained as part of two Phase II Program Addendums - the Noise Measurement Addendum and the Alternate Fuels Addendum - are 

presented in References 8 and 9. 

5 

~\ 

I 

\ 

1 

" •• v , ... " •• ,'" ............ ,." .. =,=~=~~" .• ",= ....,= ... =~~~ ......... ___ J 
CHAPTER I 

DESCRIPTION OF EXPERIMENTAL CLEAN COMBUSTOR PROGRAM 

OVERALL PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 

The Experimental Clean Combustor Program is a multi-year effort which is 

being conducted by the NASA-Lewis Research Center. The primary program 

objectives are: 

• To generate and demonstrate the technology required to develop 

advanced commercial CTOL aircraft engines with significantly lower 

pollutant exhaust emission levels than those of current technology 

engines. 

• To demonstrate the low pollutant emission levels in tests of 

advanced commercial aircraft turbofan engines. 

The intent of this major program is to reduce pollutant emission levels 

by the development of advanced combustor designs, rather than by the use of 

special engine operational techniques and/or water injection methods. The 

program is aimed at generating technology which is primarily applicable to 

advanced commercial CTOL aircraft engines with high cycle pressure ratios, in 

the range of 20 to 3S. However, it is also intended that this technology be 

applicable to advanced military aircraft engines. Because the smoke emission 

levels of advanced commercial and military aircraft engines have already been 

reduced to low values, the primary focus of the program is on reducing the 

levels of the gaseous pollutant emissions. 

The NASA/General Electric Experimental Clean Combustor Program is one of 

two programs that comprise the overall effort. It is being conducted by the 

General Electric Aircraft Engine Group under contract to the NASA-Lewis 

Research Center. The design and development efforts are directed toward 

providing advanced combustors for use in the General Electric CF6-S0 engine. 

This engine is an advanced, high bypass turbofan engine in the 218 kN (SO,OOO 

lb) rated thrust class, and is in commercial service in the ~tcDonnell Douglas 

DC-IO Series 30 aircraft and in the Airbus Industrie A300B aircraft. While 

the CF6-S0 engine is the specific intended application of the advanced 

combustor technology development efforts of this program, this technology 

should also be applicable to all advanced engines in the large thrust size 

category. 

6 

PROGRAM PLAN 

The Experimental Clean Combustor Program is being conducted in three 

sequential, individually funded phases: 

j 

I 

• ,_ -. ",,,OJU_,.';';"" ",~_,~-,~-"-,.,*"", .•.. ~ .. ".,~'..;,~.,,.... .. ><.,,,,_,.-...,,-" ..:.,.. ..... -'"""","""". ,_~~ ' •• _i&.""'fO~1-""":'h"":"""_""<'''''''''''-~-,,"_~''')~t";'';''''';.'''~'~~A.~~~!I''~W 
"""'"'~-'~'~",""'-1-""''''' . f~, 

~ \ 

Phase I: Combustor Screening 

Phase II: Combustor Refinement and Optimization 

Phase III: Combustor-Engine Testing 

Phase I Program 

The Phase I Program, which has been completed, was an 18-month effort 

specifically directed toward screening a variety of combustor design approaches. 

The objective was to identify and develop promising combustor design approaches 

for obtaining the pollutant exhaust emission level reductions. Phase I 

Program efforts involved the definition of four advanced combustor design 

approaches, the detailed aeromechanical design of CF6-S0 engine-size versions 

of these approaches, the fabrication of full annular versions and pollution 

and performance evaluation tests. Configurations were evaluated in a test 

rig which exactly duplicates the aerodynamic flowpath and envelope dimensions 

of the combustor housing of the CF6-S0 engine, at operating conditions identical to those of the CF6-S0 engine except for pressure level, which was 

restricted to 9.5 atmospheres or less due to test facility limitations. In 

these tests detailed measurements of the emission and performance characteristics of each combustor configuration were obtained. 

In conjunction with Phase I, additional efforts were also carried out in 

two program addendums; the Advanced Supersonic Transport (AST) Addendum and 

the Combustion Noise Measurement Addendum. The purpose of the AST Addendum 

was to develop combustor design technology for reducing the NOx emission 

levels of AST engines at supersonic cruise operating conditions by applying 

and extending the results of the basic program investigations. The purpose 

of the Combustion Noise Measurement Addendum was to obtain experimental data 

on the acoustic characteristics of these advanced low emission combustors 

and, thereby, to enable comparisons of their noise characteristics with those 

of current technology combustors. 

Detailed descriptions and results of the Phase I Program and AST Addendum are presented in Reference 6. Combustor Noise Measurement Addendum 

results are presented in Reference 7. 

Phase II Program 

i The Phase II Program, which has also been completed, was a IS-month 

effort to further develop the most promising advanced combustor designs 

evolved in the Phase I Program. The Double Annular Combustor and the Radial/ 

Axial Staged Combustor design approaches produced the most promising Phase I 

results and were selected for Phase II development. Phase II efforts included 

both full annular and sector combustor component tests, detailed aeromechanical design of versions of these combustors for possible use in Phase III 

CF6-50 engine tests, and the design of a breadboard engine fuel control 

system. The primary objective of these design and development efforts was 

7 

i 

1 

j 

d 
to provide advanced combustor designs which meet the performance and installation requirements of the CF6-50 engine and approach the objective low pollut:l.on emission level goals of the program. 

In conjunction with the Phase II Program, additional efforts were also 

carried out in two program addendums; the Noise Measurement Addendum and the 

Alternate Fuels Addendum. The purpose of the Noise Measurement Addendum was 

to obtain additional experimental data on the acoustic characteristics of 

these low emissions combustors and make direct comparisons of their noise 

characteristics with those of the current production CF6-50 combustor. The 

purpose of the Alternate Fuels Addendum was to obtain experimental data on 

the effect of relaxed fuel specificatons, such as final boiling point and 

hydrogen content, on the pollutant emission levels and performance characteristics of these low emissions combus.tors and the current production CF6-

50 combustor. 

Detailed descriptions and results of the Phase II Program are presented 

in Chapter II through V of this report. Descriptions and results of the two 

addendums are presented in References 8 and 9. 

Phase III Program 

The Phase III Program, which is currently underway, is a l6-month 

effort and consists of detailed evaluations of the most promising Phase II 

Program combustor design in a demonstrator CF6-50 engine. The objective is 

to demonstrate significant pollutant reductions with an advanced combustor 

which meets the performance, operational and installation requirements of the 

engine. The Double Annular Combustor design has been selected for these 

evaluations. The combustor incorporates all of the aero-thermal design 

features that evolved in the Phase II Program together with advanced mechanical and installation features derived from other General Electric combustor 

programs. General Electric is furnishing the required combustor parts, 

engine components and fuel supply/control components from another program. 

A large turbofan engine has never before been operated with a two-stage 

main combustion system. Therefore, the objectives of these engine evaluations are not only to obtain steady-state performance and pollutant em.iss.ion 

data, but to also determ.ine experimentally, the acceleration and deceleration 

character.istics of the engine. 

PROGRAM SCHEDULE 

The overall schedule plans of the NASA/General 

Clean Combustor Program are presented in Figure 1. 

bars indicate completed efforts and the striped bar 

currently under contract. 

Electric Experimental 

In this chart, the solid 

indicates efforts 

, 

1 

1 

.j 

.' .••. • p .•• _ •. ~"., •••.....•.• • A •• •• , •• ~_'".,., '>-'_~~"''''"''~_'''''~''''~'~'''''"''''M'~J'_"~'lli~'''~".~.,,=~.~=--._,~_ •.• ,,''';'''''"'''",,''~,,''. tt J 
r=:J ,---. 

PHASE 

II 

II I 

ACTI VITY 

COMBUSTOR SCREENI NG 

• Basi c Program 

• AST Addendum 

• Noise Measurement 

Addendum 

COMBUSTOR REFINEMENT 

AND OPTIMIZA n O N 

• Basic Program 

• Noise Measurement 

Addendum 

• Alterna te Fuels 

Addendum 

COMBUSTOR/ ENGI NE 

TESTING 

• Basic Program 

• T urbu I ence Measure -

ment Addendum 

r-- '---' .--, 

1973 1974 1975 1976 

Figure 1 . NASA/ General Electric Experimental Cl ean Combustor Program 
PROGRAM GOALS 

Pollutant Emission Level Goals 

The pollutant emission goals are presented in Table 1. As is shown by 

the comparison of the goals with the status levels of the current production 

CF6-50 engine, the attainment of these goals involves significant pollutant 

enlission level reductions by factors of three to seven on an emission index 

basis. 

These goals are intended to be optimistic projections of the attainable 

pollutant emission level reductions. The intent of the program is to gen- ,\ 

er.atc advanced combustor design technology rather than to verify already 

available combustor design technology. Further, the use of water injection 

into the combustor to obtain lower NOx emission levels, was specifi,cally 

excluded as an approach to be considered in the program. 

In Table I, the gaseous pollutant emission goals are expressed two ways; 

as emission indices at the engine operating mode where the peak levels of )/ 

each emission are generated, and as EPA parameters by which the gaseous 

emission standar.ds are d~fined in Reference 2. The EPA parameter is a 

thrust-normalized measure of the total mass of pollutant emitted in a prescribed takeoff and landing cycle. For the CF6-50 engine, the peak emission 

index goals are somewhat lower than needed to meet the EPA Standards. 

Combustor Performance Goals 

The key combustor performance goals are presented in Table II. Except 

for its combustion efficiency levels at low engine power operating modes, the 

current production CF6-S0 engine combustor already provides performance 

levels equal to or better than the goals. Thus, the major challenge of this 

program is to develop advanced combustor designs which significantly reduc~ 

pollution levels without compromising performance characteristics. The 

current CF6-S0 engine does not achieve the 99 percent combustion efficiency 

goal at the idle operating mode. This goal is specified as 99.0% to be 

consistent with the CO and HC emission level goals. Combined, these goals 

ar.e equivalent to a combustion efficiency at idle of 99.1%. 

10 

I __ F 

! ' 

" i 
r

---r~' 

'I ! , \ 

~ 

, -

r 

! 

r 

i 

! 

l 

\ , ' 

Table I. Pollutant Emission Level Goals of the NASAl 

General Electric Experimental Clean Combustor 

Phase II Program. 

• Sea Level Static Engine Operating Conditions 

• Standard Day Conditions 

• Aviation Kerosene Fuel 

• CF6-50C Power Rating 

A. Peak Emission Goals 

Engine Current 

Pollutant Operating Program CF6-50C Engine 

Emission Mode Goal Status 

NOx (as N02) - g/kg fuel Takeoff 10 35 

co - g/kg fuel Ground Idle 20 73 

HC (as Cm Hl. 9m ) - g/kg fuel Ground Idle 4 30 

Smoke - (SAE SN) Takeoff 15 12 

B. EPA Emission Parameter Goals 

* 

• Prescribed Class T2 Engine Takeoff/Landiti~ Cycle 

Pollutant 

Emission 

NOx (as N02) lb/1000 lb Thrust-hr 

CO lb/1000 lb Thrust-hr 

He lb/1000 1b Thrust-hr 

Same as EPA 1979 Class T2 engine standards. 

Program* 

Goal 

3.0 

4.3 

0.8 

Current 

CF6-50C Engine 

Status 

7.7 

10.8 

4.3 

11 

" 

" 
I 

I, 

, 

, 

r 

~ 

r 

f 

l 

r 

I 

I 

I 

I 

L 

l2 

Table II·~ Combustor Performance Goals of the NASA/General Electric 

Experimental Clean Combustor:/Program. 

Performance Parameter 

Minimum Crnnbustor Efficiency - % 

Maximum Pressure Drop - % 

Maximum Exit Temperature Pattern 

li'a{.~ Lor 

Al tHude Relight 

Mechanical Durability 

~ .. --:<~ 

Engine 

Operating 

Mode 

All 

Cruise 

Takeoff and 

Cruise 

Windmilling 

All 

Program 

Goal 

99.0 

6.0 

0.25 

Meet CF6-50 

Engine Relight 

.iEnvelope 

Equivalent to 

Current CF6-50 

Combustor 

I 

I 

t 

i 

1 

] 

1 

1 

1 

1 

j 

1 

, 

I 

j 

l ~ 
\ 

CHAPTER II 

PHASE II PROGRAM DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT APPROACHES 

CF6-50 ENGINE/COMBUSTOR 

The CF6-S0 engine is the higher power series of two CF6 high by~ass 

tur.bofan engines which have been developed by General .Electric. The other 

series is /;the\CF6-6 engine. The CF6-50 engine is i~ commerc~al service as .h 

the power' plari't for t;he McDonnell Douglas DC-lO Ser~es 30 Tr~-Jet long range' 

intercontinental aircraft and the Airbus Industrie A300B aircraft. The CF6-

50 engine is a ~~al-rotor, high bypass ratio turbofan incorporating variable 

stators, high pvessure ratio compressor, an annular combustor , ,"lrt air-cooled 

core engine turbine and a coaxial front fan w;ith a low pressure turbine. 

Major features of the engine are shown in Figl,lre 2. 

Several models of the CF6-50 engine are currently in production. The 

CF6-50C model was selected for the Phase II Program combustor design and test 

conditions . ley standard day combustor operating conditions for this model 

are presented in Table III. The idle operating conditions are averages from 

acceptance tests of 109 production engines and are more severe, from an 

emissions standpoint, than were early cycle data used in the Phase I Program. 

The high power operating conditions in Table III are averages from acceptance 

tests of IT production engines and are essentially the same as the early 

cycle data. 

The CF6-S0 engine combustor is a high performance design with demonstrated low exit temperature pattern factors, low pressure loss, high combustion efficiency and low smoke emission performance at all operating conditions. A cross sectional drawing of this combustor, as installed in the 

engines, is presented in Figure 3. Its key features are a low pressure loss 

step diffuser, a carburetillg swirl cup dome design and a short burning 

length. Additional details of the CF6-50 engine and combustor are contained 

in Reference 6. 

.TEST FACILITIES AND E§DIPMENT 

The Phase I Program eva1ua;!::ions were conducted with an existing full 

annular combustor test rig. The Phase II Program evaluations included both 

fu11 annular and sector combustor rig tests. A new 60° sector combustor rig 

was utilized primarily for altitude relight and cross-firing development. A 

new 12° sector combustor rig wa'~\, utilized for high pressure carboning and 

flashback development. Testing was conducted concurrently in all three rigs. 

Combustor modifications determined from sector rig tests were incorporated 

into the full annular combustor rig configurations where the bulk of the 

emission and performance deve~opment tests were conducted. All tests were 

conducted in facilities at the General Electric Evendale Plant. 

13 

I 

.) 

I 

\j 

t 
..... 

0&> 

2 . General Electric CF6- 50 High Bypass Turbofan 
.. ---

.- .. .... ;i

 

, 

, 

<. 

C 'J;> t"l 

(' 

gl-d lP-E; Table III. CF6-50 Engine/Combustor Operating Conditions. 

t:3 

...... 

UI 

Parameter 

Installed net thrust 

Percent takeoff thrust High pressure compressor physical speed 

High pressure compressor discharge total pressure High pressure compressor discharge total temperature High pressure compressor discharge air flow 

Combustor air flow 

Ideal fuel flow(3) 

Combustor refer.ence velocity 

Combustor fuel-air 

(l)Sea level static (2)Altitude = 10.67 krn. Flight Mach Number = 0.85 

(3)Assumes combustion efficiency = 100% 

'-----.. 

• Standard Day Conditions • No Bleed Air Extraction 

e Jet A Fuel 

Symhol Units Idle (1) 

FN kN 7.53 

PCFN % 3.39 

N rpm 6412 g 

P3 atm 2.92 

T3 K 429 

li3 kg/s 16.37 

li36 kg/s 13.81 

1'F'ideal kg/hr 547 

VR mls 18.3 

fideal - 0.0110 

Approach (1) Cruise(2) 

66.59 [f7.23 

30.0 -

8620 9585 

11.7 11.4 

630 733 

56.7 49.5 

47.6 41.8 

2395 3159 23.2 24.3 

0.0140 0.0210 

Climb (1) 

188.66 

85.0 

9890 

25.9 

786 

109.3 

92.1 

7104 

25.3 

0.0214 

----- 

............ _," ..... ... .......... ...:.;." ....... ................ .._.., ,"" '.,'"""" ... ,--'-.,"' ..... ;0".: ..l.-.... ,,_ .. - 0 .... _ .. .• _ •.• .• , ....... __ 
.. .. 

---

E • . 

:;: 

I BURNING LENGTH 

CARBURETING DOME 

SWIRL CUPS 

Figure 3. Production CF6-50 Engine Combustor. 

.:...... •.••. '<- •• ".-L_,_ •••. .•• 
.,..,... . ,...~,. 1,. . , I 

~ 

'T~' 

"~~,"",.,,j. Y ", ',n·" rr 

r·· I I 

r 

l 

Full Annular Combustor Rig 

Full annular combustor tests were conducted with the same facility, rig 

and data acquisition systems utilized in the Phase I Program. Detailed 

descriptions are presented in Reference 6 and are briefly reviewed in this 

!'lec tion. 

Tests were conducted in Test Cell A3 which is equipped with an indirect 

gas-fired air heater and exhaust ducting systems for high pressure or vacuum 

operation. Flow capabilities are such that the CF6-50 engine combustor 

operating conditions can be exactly duplicated at all altitude relight 

requirement conditions and at ground idle conditions. For higher power 

simulation, combustor inlet pressure is limited to about 9.5 atm. 

The test rig exactly duplicates the aerodynamic flow path and envelope 

dimensions of the CF6-50 engine. Included as a part of this rig is an exit 

plane rotating rake assembly for obtaining measurements of outlet temperatures and pressures and for extracting gas samples. A drawing of the rig is 

p'resented in Figure 4. Most of the tests were conducted with the rig connected to the facility exhaust system for pressure control. For ground 

starting and detailed pattern factor testing, the combustor was exhausted 

directly to the atmosphere. This atmospheric exhaust setup allows visual 

determi.nations of lightoff, propagation, blowout and provides a more detailed 

assessment of the exit temperature distribution. 

The exhaust gas sampling rake traversing assembly contains five gas 

sample rakes each having five sampling probes. The probe tips are designed 

to quench the chemical reactions of the extracted gas sample as soon as the 

sample enters the rake. The rakes are water cooled for mechanical integrity, 

and sample lines ,,,ithin the rakes are steam heated to prevent condensation of 

hydrocarbon compounds and water vapor in the sample. The. 25 individual 

sample lines are led out through steam heated bundles to a bank of selector 

valves in the control room~ and then to the emission analyzers. A flow 

diagram ()f the sample lines is shown in Figure 5. By manipulation of the 

appropr.iate valves, any individual element or any desired combination of 

elements can be selected for measurement. Normally, 15 elements were manifolded together for gaseous analysis and ten elements were manifolded together for smoke measurements. The C02, CO, HC, and NOx analyzers are 

electronically integrated with the test cell digital data acquisition system 

which allows gaseous emission data tc be automatically recorded and reduced 

in the test cell in a matter of minutes. The smoke emission data are obtained using the standard General Electric filter stain method. 

60° Sector Combustor Rig 

A cross sectional drawing and an overall photograph of the 60° rig are 

shown tn Figure 6·. The combustor housing is constructed from a segment of a 

CF6-50 engine compressor rear frame and seal bearing assembly so it exactly 

duplicates the engine comhustor flow path and ports. Radial sidewalls are 

uncooled, and air seals are provided to minimize end-wall effects. The exit 

instrumentation section has nine ports for mounting thermocouples or gas 

sample rakes in-line with and between fuel nozzles. 

17 

} 

I 

\ 

J 

j 

I j 

~ 
... .. ;"'_" .... m ' ..... .... ,-. 

.... 

00 

1-,;: !":J 

tfJ 

Inner Passage 

Bleed Extraction 

Port 

10 Struts 

Bleed Ports 

Wa ter Quench 

Bleed Ports 

Rotating 

Instrument 

Rake 

Instrument 

Drive Shaf

/ 

-" 

Figure 4. Full Annular CF6-50 Combustor Test Rig, Axial Cross Section View. 

j 

- -1 

. - . __ ,<_,''' 

__ ..... .:.,:,: ___ ,,,.,,.,.. .......... .... 
r .. ...,.v

...,..

 .... .. ... .. .. 

L 

f\. ,+: 

t.,i) 

10 I;:; c:t::.> p;,:Q 

k!ti5 

o Gas Sample Only 

!l?l Gas Sample 8< 

Sample Line Pressure 

o Pt 3.9.£!: Smoke (Select) 

I 

1 

2 

3 

4 

, 

2 I 3 i / 

6

1 I 1'" 

"oS 

(0" .. 

8/ 

9/ 

10/ 

11/ 

12 " 

a) Gas Sample Rake Locations, Combustor 

Exit Plane, Aft Looking Forward 

-

" I. 

Rake-Immersion To Purge 

H1 

Cl 

E1 

A2 

C2 

02 

B3 

03 

E3 

A4 

C4 

E4 

AS 

B5 

05 

To Emissions 

Equipm

0:-0-------- To Dewpoint 

A1 

01 

82 

E2 

A3 

C3 

84 

04 

C5 

E5 

b) 

Vent 

Only 

Off, On To Vent or Back Purge 

To 

Sc:anners 

To Smoke Me

Gas Line Line Manifoldi

Diagram 

Figure 5. Gas Sample Location and Manifolding Diagrams. 

1/ 

........ __ 
" • r 

' 1 v Pu 1 Ho&zl e Por • 

,...-------5 CoIIpr aaor ar 

60 ' S ~nt 

-

-.. Obi 

lnatru..entInlet Plenu.' ___ -+_----Collbultor " ouI1nl _____ ~-.t1on-_~--lx1t Plenu.,--_ -l 

Sect ton 

(a Tes Ri Schematic 

(b) Phot r ph 

ur o S . r mbu r R 

20 
r

------l  

~ 

I 

1 

Altitude relight testing was conducted in the.Euilding 301 Small-Scale 

Combustion Laboratory. This facility has capabilities for testing small 

combustor rigs over a wide range of simulated altitude relight conditions. 

Liquid nitrogen heat exchangers are available to independently regulate inlet 

air and fuel temperatures from ambient down to about 220 K. Steam ejectors 

in the exhaust ducting can be utilized to reduce inlet air pressure from 

ambient down to about 0.1 atmospheres. 

Other 60° sector combustor testing was conducted in the Building 306 

Small-Scale Combustion Laboratory. This facility has capabilities for 

exactly simulating engine idle operating conditions. For idle emissions 

tests, the sector rig was connected to the facility exhaust ducting for 

pressure control and the inlet air was heated by an indirect liquid-fueled 

heat exchanger. Exhaust gas samples were analyzed with an on-line system 

similar to the one utilized in the full annular combustor tests. For crossfire tests, the rig was exhausted directly to the atmosphere and the inlet 

air was heated by vitiation. 

.12° Sector Rigs 

Carboning and flashback development testing was conducted in 12° sector 

rigs installed in Test Cell AS. This facility has capabilities for testing 

components at high pressure/temperature conditions. An indirect gas-fired 

heat exchanger is utilized to heat the inlet air. Nominal air facility 

limits are 840 K, 18 atmospheres and 5.5 kg/so 

Fuel injector/air swirler carboning tests were conducted to develop configurations suitable for long-time engine operation without harmful carbon 

buildup. Results are applicable to both stages of the Double Annular Combustor and to the pilot stage of the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor. These 

development tests were conducted with a simple one-cup sector rig. The fuel 

injector/air swirler test configurations were each mounted on a can-type 

combustor as shown in Figure 7 which was then mounted in a 20 cm diameter 

pipe rig and subjected to a standard high temperature and pressure burning 

cycle. The test cycle, derived from other previous development programs" was 

made intentionally severe so that deficiencies in a design would show up 

Httel:" a relatively short time. Success was judged by post test inspection of 

the fuel injector and air swirler. 

A major concern with the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor is that flashback 

01:" upstream burning 1n the main stage premixing zone may occur under slOme 

operating conditions. A 12° sector rig was utilized to investigate this 

concern. The sector combustor, shown in Figure 8 was installed in the 20 cm 

diameter pipe rig. The tests consisted of setting increasingly severe operating conditions until flashback was detected or facility limits were 

reached. The sector was instrumented to measure and continuously record 

pressure drop, flameholder metal temperatures and air temperatures in the 

premixing region. 

~" 

21 

I 

j 

.J 
, . , .. ... .. ., 

, ( 

o 

« 

tID 

c: ~ 

~ ~ ~ 

oS rz. 

-0 

h 

aJ 

rz. 

,..., 

'-' 

22 
--

II.) 

w 

-

( a ) Forward 

igu 

--. .-..,"''' 

okin!! A (b) Aft Lookin g Forward 

12° Sector Combu stor r Flashback Tests. 
r---

~~r~" .. 

! 

, 

~ 

~ L 

.. __ J~ ... ~" r-- ~'I: ~,. .. n _ 

r-- r 1 } ,rj 

COMBUSTOR CO~CEPTS 

Based on the Phase I Program results, the Double Annular Combustor and 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor design app.roaches were selected for further 

development in the Phase II Program. Both of these low emissions combustor 

design approaches feature the use of multi-zone burning to provide proper 

combustion conditions both at low engine power operating conditions, so that 

low CO and HC emission levels may be obtained, and at high engine power 

operating conditions to limit the NOx emission levels. In both design 

approaches, all of the fuel is supplied to the pilot stage at low engine 

power operating conditions. At the higher engine power operating conditions 

both the pilot and the main stage are fueled. The two design approaches 

differ in the physical arrangement and design philosophy of the main stage. 

Double Annular Combustor 

The general arrangement of the Double Annular Combustor design and the 

full annular development combustor assembly is shown in Figure 9. The combustor consists of a dome assembly, a cowl and modified Cf6-s0 production 

combustor cooling liners. The dome assembly consists of two annular arrays 

of air swirlers (30 in each annulus) which .are s~f'arated by a short centerbody. The outer annulus is the pilot stage. In the Phase II Program, six 

features of the basic design were varied: 

l. Centerbody geometry 

2. Airflow distribution 

3. Fuel injector type 

4. Air swirler geometry 

5. Dilution hole location 

6. Intermediate and high power fueling modes 

Key design features of each full annular test configuration, together with 

the design intent of each configuration modification, are summarized in Table 

IV and Figures 10, 11, 12 and 13. The area/airflow distributions are summarized in Tables V and VI. 

Four different secondary swir1er configurations were used in the pilot 

stage d",:elopment and are shown in Figure 14. The key development feature 

was the introduction of the secondary mixing barrel in Configuration Ds. The 

main stage swi.rler configurations are shown in Figure 15. A key development 

feature as with the pilot stage, was the introduction of the mixing barrel. 

The three fuel injector assemblies used are shown in Figure 16. Simplex 

pressure-atomizing fuel nozzles were introduced into both the pilot and mai.n 

stage in Configuration D4. These were simplex nozzles without an air shroud 

24 

-1' .. -<-

( 

j 

~ 1 

1 

i 

j 

I 

, 

f 

i 
Figur 9. 

2 
r 

. .. 

____ 

..

 

___ 

. 

-

.... _........,. 

(j) 

OG 1'::Ijt:d H 

DI"C 

§! 

____ _ 

,. 

" 

Table IV. Double Annular Combustor Test Configurations, Full Annular Rig. 

I rrosSf'lre- I Hlxlnl/: T1Uuthm Air I I Length Slot: rilo: ... i::i3!l:£o I :-;t.1.ge P:l1ot <'tMte }!31n Stage Outer Unf'f I Inner tinct' I Inner Intent 

.....-.-

_____ _ _ __ _ _________ _> -4 __ __ _

__ -i(l --- ___ __ __ ._s" -_. ::: - -- - dope d

N Lung 'iea y"s neternlnt' ('rr('cot pC It:IProved inner :md puter swirl cup 

"np';",-+--","'h:-""r't - -- - - --- -- - - '." ----' .. 

-

----- 

--rr-... - -.... ------·-tH- _. . . -- - - . -Yc,,- ocretiJno- fhe effect fnner 5" ... lri 

-DR . ---,_. --.-.... 1-·_··· 

-,.1----- j---.. . .. ···1-······1-----

&':tLJ=t=t=4- flU \-._. 

__ i·±=·_-t--- -l--l-J----- -

T:ni\:-P:;O,otvpc-- -. .-.. -. 

i/ 

\;, 

-- Sa '" f-' ah!i'I:Tlcc-cif --inn-er-·l,}N diYut 

'\1"1 ii;er 

.---t-.y;;;- .. 

-j- ,.. \" .. --

cff;rt \\f Bl:irl ... ni an

n('Fzzlcs "n Cr.hH.l"n 

- Vetemhe the 1tl:,or 1" {OPJf "dUut!on 3irfl(l;? dist

1 1 'n'O, _. - liner dtlutfon nn

'Penl'trbtion on - -- ""O(:tc-r;:f.1e -t;U;-eTfe7-ft;r-rediltidlnllerThcr ,,-« -- -- -- -- of -p:llC1* -stage dlJ ftIon and 

£'n ltlle cnl'$!lloo,B \lith .. tllt\';!,. lh':odc$ 

..... -

......... 
.. .. 

,. \ (" 

0. 9. 

02 

Pt"d O:;vH_ t-4GD 

JJJ _. 

(

I r..j";f.91 -[;1-. .:;.1 p-,. "-1. /'" /I"' Ail • 

Ii?- ,.J "",/ • .1:.. ]. I 

Configuration [1-16 (Final Phase I Configuration) 

Radial Intlo".. Sll/trIers 

wtth Barrel Ext(lnsion 

narr,,). Added to SeCQndOl')' Swlder 

Inc reaRed Dome 

1.73 cm Inside 

Loome '\lOVed DQwllsLrcllm to ACCOlllol.!alo Darrel 

Configu ration 02 

,,'ll..-=1 """." ",-, , - 

, '-_'-, - - . 

\ -.j .. y Swi"er> 

\ 

I

,' .. ; ... 

" 

f "", \,"-J . " 

(::'.WO 51J 1,\ 

\ 'I." ''=1 ' ... n.n. .-- 

ct •• cn Cup. ,.;;.--<,,:>::.:;

_" ..z::;;"" 

- 60 Thimblo:d Holes • 1.73 em Inside Diameter 

Configuration 01 

. k 111-

__ 

AY 

Sarno PrimAry/SecondRry SW1rlt.'rs n!r D2 

Shoncncd Cent.erbod)' (OrlJ:tnal phase I Length) 

NJL6--==J--Xl!W Secondary Swirlers 

Configuration 03 

tv 

-.,J 

F-cigure 10. Double Annular Combustor Design Parameter Variations, Configurations 11-16 - 

"(1 

... _._ .. _ ... •• .. _ _ ____ __ -' __ __ 
... ,_m,,'" - , 

1 

i 

, 

, 

I 

I 

l 

i 

} 

! 

l. 

I 

l 

6f:s 

'-

, 

1:1:) 

00 

. . 

Unshrou<led Simplex Noz7.le Installed 

Primary SwirlQr Moved ream 

Unl'ihrouded Simplex 

Nozzle lnstallt;ld 

Configuration D4 

120 Dilution Uoles, 0.56 em 

Configuration D6 

Configuration D5 

'1: 120 1I011IS, 0.G7 em "in. 

..-Q d7 =6 --e 

Configuration D7 

Figure 11. Double Annular Combustor Design Parameter Variations, Configurations D4 - D

___ 

.. .. ,_ .. .. __ .. ........ > •• __ •• __ ' ........ ..-...' ...... :J.._:;.":""'-""', •. _""""'-,. 
r

f

illl .... .. 

 .. ..... ..... ..... .•• 

; 

,"').. 

\ -

, ..... 1."7I' 

(tl 

t"';:::) H 

,'-___ , ______ . .l':.z 

e. =t ,'----', 

<T. ;: 00 D'o 

...... \-0 cd"t_e -C 

..: .... , ':( I" 

\ ,,1::..;) I! ' V. " 1 I !. ',::JJ ! 

I ,

- --=;---:-t / 

11-> 

. 

"1 -D 

000 D"u1'on • I Holes ClSVsed 60 Boles, , • , 0.95 D-

"-.J--= . . ... 

\ 60 Holes , 1.43 -CUI Dia 

Configuration 08 

'=': D 

120 1I0les, 0.67 ern Dia 

-e --,.A: ="" '-. . . .c...-o 

J 

"p-,; "tJ Q" :2::. 

\' ·J.\I 

'1-T ..... Dilution 

Holes, 1.43 em Dia 

Configuration 010 

Holes .,-

, C:;! Dia 

:-0 ---'") -,: " \ .77'... I ' \ ! ,Iv I ,L c....L.,'- C. J. ' 

/ I::{:.,- ; -Doo. D'M' 

I I H 10::1 

;r: __ i I vIes Closed 

I 

60 Holes .. ' ".,. 7 5 em Dia 

Con£iguration 09 

)20 lIoleS 

a 67 c. 01a • 

. ' 

)1 

I DOCIe D. ilution 60 Holes, 0.9

I Hal •• CI"..,d 

I : 

__ \. 30 Holes, 1.,13 Dla, !let-c

.... Uoles, 1.43 em Dla. 

I 1n Line with Cups 

Configuration 011 

Figure 12. Double Annular Combustor Design Parameter Variations, 08 - 0

.t"-_ .• ...... ........ .... ,,,, ......... .. L._ ......... _"'-,' ... ........... _·'·:;..."i..ll ... <I'<l.< .. ..... ..... ... ........ ... 
.. -.

..,.,. ..... -. .. .. 

 ... 

;c 

. ; 

):' 

[ ......... . 

w 

o 

Oc 

Bfa .61 

'" ... 

C:s-e-d 'ii;;;;;:';=p t:: e ( r.;;e;! .... __ .3 

' 

Pr'l\:·Hyp.. _')' 'iozzle (s..;.::: Dt3) ,/i : cn:oro"cci SC;n?!., FU._ .. 

, .- 'u ::::-,..". 

. ..0-_ Hate,. ('.'57 uta. ==-C z-i7;=."".-">*-..

""I 

I .A..-=L-

'!!! l / '. : • t type "'-:.':1" 11 EUt;lnc P1n;";.::nturl '\ \ 5.1r c 

I \ I 60 Hole., ., 

I ' .::::oJ 11--- i En.in. Pro 'oty"" PrinT)' Surle./V.ntu", 

IInsbrouded Sl"pl.x FUel JIoul J;j'" •• 

\ -_. 'c' ., '==" ... ,. ,,0. J \ _,. 

II ,---=,,-,,;L\, "il u t ,u' \S;-"""=-a - Ii" 0.,.." I lcs " 10 

I 

;?' . . , - c'' n.a. 

: 1.,;\ .. ""'- "': 

o _--.--;...2:::::=::t 

! H' i-.............. t Dl7.le Dllution 

! 1I01e. Closed 

I y",- GO Thio:l.b1.ed Holes 

1.13 em Inside 

Configuration D12 Configuration DB 

. .' Unshrouded Simplex Fu .. el (Sh ' Engl.oe Prototype Fuel P own) Used in Dl4A 'ozzle (See D1?J' 'iL.-. :1 

Cooll •• no_ 1 - Used 1n DBB 

from' naen,e" - U,1:< to -"0 ",120 Holes. 0.67 em uia. " 

I 

, .};;"''::.:;\ ! i 

, ... ___ l I! !Tutot\' . 

, I.. ;".' pc ?rtm.lTY _ ; -.-!' oHI"T,"C"lU'! 

) i 

Dome Dilutlol"' Holes Closed :J 

t -...... I TI.llllbles "'I 'h i J I Sloe U1' · ... lth ifot 

... 

601f 0 1 •• , 0,93 cm ;hn 

, Holes 

• '. c;u lnsidc Dia, 

Configuration 014 

Figure 13. Double Annular Combustor Design Parameter Variations, Configurations D12 - D

,,,"_::oJ , .... ••• , :i.... . ",."" .. ...... .... .. _J""i ... .......... ... ... ... .. .... 
.... , ___ ..... 

.<, 

4,.,. 

00 ,-': .:.1 

"'tl ..:7" o t:;', 

C Table V. Double Annular Combustor, Area/Airflow Distributions,Full Annular Test 

Configurations Dl - D7 . .g 1'0 lYt.:: E Configuration D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 

W 

I-' 

Ae • Ae • Ae • Ae' A • A • 

%W 2 %Wc 2 %W 2 %W 2 %W e 2 %v] e 2 

Outer Swirl Cups 

Fuel nozzle shroud 

Primary swir1er 

Seconrlary swir1er 

Total 

Inner Swirl Cups 

Fuel nozzle shroud 

Primary swir1er 

Secondary swir1er 

Total 

Dilution 

Outer liner - Panel 1 

- Panel 2 

Inner dome 

Inner liner - Panel 1 

- Panel 2 

- Panel 4 

Total 

Cooling 

Outer liner 

Outer dome 

Centerbody 

Inner dome Inner liner 

Seal leakage 

Total 

Combustor Total 

c CI1l cm c cm c cm c cm c cm 

5 

19 

48 

n 

5 

19 

158 182 

o o 

26 

92 

o 

o 

lis 

42 

28 21 

27 

46 

8 

ill 

0.9 

3.5 

8.8 

13.2 

0.9 

3.5 

29.1 

33.5 

o o 

4.8 

16.9 

o o 

21. 7 

7.7 

5.1 

3.9 

5.0 

8.4 

1.5 

31.6 

544 /100.0 

5 

19 

38 

62 

5 

19 

158 

ill 

o o 

26 

92 

o 

o 

118 

42 

28 

21 26 

46 

8 

ill 

0.9 

3.6 

7.1 

11.6 

0.9 

3.6 

29.6 

3G 

o o 

4.9 

17.3 

o o 

22.2 

7.9 

5.3 

3.9 

4.9 

8.6 

1.5 

32.T 

533 /100.0 

5 

19 

38 

62 

5 

50 

202 

m 

o 

o 

26 

o 

o 

o 

26 

40 

28 

21 26 

60 

8 

ill 

0.9 

3.6 

7.2 

Tl.7 

0.9 9.5 

38.3 

48.7 

o o 

4.9 

o o o 

4.9 

7.6 

5.3 

4.0 4.9 

11.4 

1.5 

34.7 

0.5 

19 

47 

66.5 

0.5 

SO 

202 

E2.5 

o o 

26 

o o o 

26 

39 

24 21 

22 

60 

8 

174 

528 /100.0 /519 

0.1 

3.7 

9.0 

12.8 

0.1 9.6 

39.0 

48.7 

o 

o 

5.0 

o 

o 

o 

5.0 

7.5 

4.6 4.1 

4.2 

11.6 

1.5 

33.5 

0.5 

19 

47 

66.5 

0.5 

50 

202 

E2.5 

o 

o 

26 

o 

o 

o 

26 

43 

24 21 

22 

60 

8 

178 

100.0 I 523 

0.1 

3.6 

9.0 

12.7 

0.1 9.6 

38.6 

48.3 

o 

o 

5.0 

o 

o 

o 

5.0 

8.2 

4.6 

4.0 

4.2 

11.5 

1.5 

34.0 

0.5 

19 

47 

66.5 

0.5 

SO 

202 

252.5 

17 

o o 

23 

o 

o 

40 

43 

24 21 

22 

60 

8 

178 

100.0 I 537 

0.1 

3.5 

8.8 

12.4 

0.1 9.3 

37.6 

47.0 

3.2 

o 

o 

4.3 

o 

o 

T.5 

8.0 

4.5 

3.9 

4.1 

11.1 

1.5 

33.1 

0.5 

19 

47 

66.5 

0.5 

19 

158 

'l77:5 

25 

o 

26 

58 

o 

o 

109 

43 

24 21 

22 

60 

8 

i78 

100.0 I 531 

..... .. ,. __ ... •• ' .• _", • 

-

.... -"'N ... ... .... L .. .. 't .. ::::'-.. .. .. •• 
.. -,---

-.. 

" 

w 

Table VI. 

Configuration 

Outer Swirl CUEs 

Fuel nozzle shroud 

Primary swirler 

Secondary swirler 

Total 

Inner Swirl Cups 

Fuel nozzle shroud 

Primary swider 

Secondary swirler 

Total 

Dilution 

Outer liner - Panel 1 

- Panel 2 

Inner dome 

Inner liner - Panel 1 

- Panel 2 

- Panel 4 

Total 

Cooling 

Outer liner 

Outer dome 

Centerbody 

Inner dome Inner liner 

Seal leakage 

Total 

Combustor Total 

Double Annular Combustor, Area/Airflow Distributions, Full Annular Test 

Configurations D8 - D14. 

.-

D8 D9 DlO D11 J?l:I.;. D12B D13 D14A U

A • A • Ae; Ae' Ae' A • Ae' A • A • e 2 e' e2 e 2 e %W 2 %We %W 2 %We 2 %We 2 %W %W 2 

em e em em e em em em em 'e em e em 

1 0.1 1 0.1 1 0.1 1 0.1 5 O.q 1 0.1 1 0.1 1 0.1 5 

19 3.6 19 3.6 19 3.6 19 3.6 28 5.2 28 5.3 28 5.1 28 4.8 28 

47 8.8 47 8.8 47 8.8 47 8.8 39 7.3 3q 7.3 39 .L.l. 39 6.7 39 

67 12.5 67 12.5 T7 I2.5 67 12.5 n 13.4 6s 12.7 6s 12.5 6s IT.6 n 

1 0.1 1 0.1 1 0.1 1 0.1 1 0.1 1 0.1 1 0.1 1 0.1 19 

19 3.6 19 3.6 19 3.6 19 3.6 19 3.5 19 3.6 19 3.5 19 3.3 19

158 29.8 158 29.6 158 29.8 158 29.7 158 29.5 158 29.7 158 29.3 158 27.1 158 178 33.5 TIS 33.3 TIS 33.5 TIS 33.4 TIS D.I TIS 33.4 TIS 32.9 178 30.5 1% 

0 a 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 a a 0 0 

25 4.7 25 4.7 25 4.7 25 4.7 25 4.7 25 4.7 , 25 4.6 29 5.0 

0 0 e 0 26 4.9 0 0 a 0 0 0 I a a 0 0 a 

58 10.9 86 16.1 58 10.9 29 5.5 58 10.8 58 10.9 92 17.0 92 15.8 92 

0 0 0 0 0 0 29 5.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

26 4.9 0 0 0 _0_ 26 4.9 26 4.8 26 4.9 0 0 26 4.5 26 

109 20.5 111 20.8 109 20.5 109 20.6 109 20.3 109 2Q.5 117 21.6 147 25.3 147 

43 8.1 43 8.1 43 8.1 43 8.'1. 43 8.0 43 8.1 43 8.0 55 9.4 

55 

24 4.5 24 4.5 24 4.5 24 4.5 24 4.5 24 4.5 24 4.4 24 4.1 24 

21 4.0 21 3.9 21 4.0 21 4.0 21 3.9 21 3.9 21 3.9 21 3.6 21 

22 4.1 22 4.1 22 4.1 22 4.1 22 4.1 22 4.1 22 4.1 22 3.8 22 

60 11.3 60 11.3 60 11.3 60 11.3 60 11.2 60 11.3 60 11.1 60 10.3 60 

8 1.5 8 1.5 8 1.5 8 1.5 8 1.5 8 1.5 8 1.5 8 1.4 8 

178 33.5 178 33.4 TIS 33.5 """ill" 33.5 TIS '33.2 178 33.4 178 33.0 190 32.6 190 

532 100.0 534 100.0 532 100.0 532 100.0 537 100.0 533 100.0 541 100.0 583 100.0 605

.. -J· .......... "',d;..::· .... ••.• ,;,"-."""'_".JI..>C""'''''''''''' •• I. .. _''' ... 
t.l 

t.l 

Primary Swir1ers 

Configurations: 01-011 

012-014 

'j t;j 

---

, iIIIll 

!i!tlI 

02-03 

01 04 05-014 

Secondary Swir1ers 

Figure .14. Pilot Stage Air Swirler Conf i gurat i ons , Double Annular Combustor. 
w 

.;:. rimary s wir1er s 

Configura ti ons: 01-02. 07-011 D3-D6 

D7-Dl D3-D6 

01-D2 

Secondary Swl r ler s 

Figure : 5 . ,1 a i n Stage Ai r Swirle r Conf iguratio ns, Doubl e Annul ar Combu stor. 

a;"'" "'-'# . .. • .. · ,n ''i'¥'¥%' --=··· tt ·'"rttt·· .. · .• - ." 
(]I 

'Lu. AP lrlJnh.,n 

,\.;, Alr Shrnud 

nli guration s 01 - 0 3 

Figur 16 . 

nliguration s 04 - 011, 0128, 

013, 01 

Fue l In · o r Ooubl 

4 Ur Jnhl 

..... ". A1.r.hhs. \"zde . 

nth .\lr MtJ"OlUd (PHot "on,t. 

""1,1 

uration Dl 

Annular Combu r . 

0
r--"~- , 

1 . ,

'"'''''---<-''-~~' ".~'. 

J 1"'"'-'"'' -r l ~r' 

~ ... 'W" • .,"-' r,. t ".,. 'f'. '\ ,-,-.,,,., ~rl 

to prevent carbon buildup on the nozzle tip. Engine prototype fuel nozzles, 

introduced into the pilot stage of Configuration D12A, and D14B, did have an 

air shroud and closely simulated the spray characteristics of the engine 

desLgn. 1 A number of different fueling modes were investigated in both the 

Double Annular and Radial/Axial Staged Combustor development tests. The 

fueling modes explored on both combustors are summarized in Table VII. 

A 60° Double Annular Combustor sector, shown in Figure 17, which was 

identica.l to the full annular combustor, was used to screen promising design 

variations. Fifteen altitude relight test configurations and 12 idle emisslon test series are shown in Table VIII. Fifteen cross-fire test configurations were also evaluated and key design feature variations in this 

test series are shown in Table IX and Figure 18. 

The 12° sector combustor rig was utilized in parallel with the full 

annular and 60° sec tor rigs for carboning development. Eight 12° sector test 

configurations were evaluated. Key design feature variations are shown in 

Tnble X. 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor 

The general arrangement of the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor design 

approach, and the full annular development combustor assembly are shown in 

Figure 19. The combustor assembly consists of a cowl, a pilot stage dome 

assembly, a main stage flameholder assembly, and modified CF6-50 production 

combustor cooling liners. The pilot stage dome assembly consists of an array 

of air swirlers similar to those in the Double Annular Combustor. The main 

stage flameholder assembly consists of an array of sloping high blockage 

flameholders which are located radially outward from, and aft of, the pilot 

stage combustion zone. Main stage fuel is injected into the annular duct 

upstream of the flameholder array so that a carbureted fuel-air mixture is 

admitted through the slots between flameholders. The base of each flameholder is open to permit the pilot stage combustion products to flow radially 

outward in the flameholder wakes and pilot the main stage combustion process. 

In the Phase II Program, six features of the basic design were varied: 

l. Airflow distribution 

2. Pilot stage fuel injector type 

3. Dilution air hole location 

4. Number of flameholders 

5. Main stage f~el injection point 

6. Intermediate and high power fueling modes. 

3G 

, I 

r 

r "~~ 

{ 

o

, 

'1 , 

J 

I 

d 
i 

" 

., 

Table VII. Fueling Modes, Full Annular Rig Tests. 

W 

"-l 

Combustor 

Type 

Double Annular Radial/Axial Staged 

-

Operating 

Condition 

Idle 

Approach 

Cruise 

Climbout 

Takeoff 

Idle 

Approach 

Cruise 

Climbout 

Takeoff 

-_._-- ------

-

Fueling Patterns Tested 

Pilot Main 

Stage Stage Ranges of Fuel Splits 

Injectors Injectors (Pilot Fuel Flow/Total Fu

Uniform Not fueled 1.00 Uniform a) Not fueled o to 1.00 

b) Uniform 

c) Alternate 

d) 180 0 sector 

Uniform Uniform 0.15 to 0.60 Uniform Uniform 0.12 to 0.48 Uniform Uniform o to 0.45 

a) Uniform Not fueled 1.00 

b) Alternate 

a) Uniform a) Not fueled 0.28 to 1.00 

b) Alternate b) Alternate 

" Uniform a) Not fueled 0 •. 22 to 1.00 

b) Uniform 

c) Alternate 

Uniform a) Uniform 0.18 to 0.45 

b) Alternate 

a) Uniform Uniform 0.13 to 0.34 

b) Alternate 

----_._-

... .... , ......... ...... 

'-

.. ,-.' .-..... --... .. Q ... __ ........ __ •• __ ·.l.._i_ 

........' 

__ 

.. .-..... :..,.,"'-.. 
o 

CI) 

3 
 

 

" " 

,,;,< 

Table VIII. 

Gbnfigurat ions 

DSIA 

DSlR, DS2A 

thru D 

r-- --' ---"--'-'-.-" 

DS3, DS!, " 

Double Annular Combustor Test Configurations, 

60 0 Sector Rig. 

Altitude Relig~t Studies 

Key Design Features Explored 

Baseline test. Airblast fuel injectors. 

Fuel atomization investigation. Nozzle flow rates 

from 9.1 to 45.5 kg/hr at 6,8 atmospheres 

Alternate swirler configuration. 

! r.'~' V' c 

i 

range 

"-'-'--'- :"""'~----

DSSA thru D IHfect of fuel atomization in combination with pilot stage 

mixing barrels. 

- DS19 thru DS25 Effect of amount and distribution of pilot stage and/or 

D528 thru DS30 main stage dilution airflow. 

Idle Emission . Studies 

Configurations Key Design Features Explor.ed 

including l .' 

DS3 thru DS7 Pilot stage fuel nozzle/swirler combinations 

pilot stage mixing barrels. 

DS3lA thru D Pilot stage fuel nozzle atomization/spray angle, nozzle 

DS32A and B shroud airflow, nozzle axial immersion, first outer panel 

DS33A thru E cooling airflow, fuel nozzle/swirl cup radial positioning. 

DS34, DS35 Amount and distribution of pilot stage dilution airflow. 

thru DS38 Effect of aft profile trim airflow'. 

j 

j 

'1 
rr----'~~-T 

~ 

o 

Table IX. Double Annular Combustor Cross-fire Test Configurations, 

Main Stage Airflow Investigation, 60 0 Sector Rig. 

Confi!l:uration Key Design Features Explored· 

DSR 

DS9 

DS10 

DSll 

DS12 

DS13 

DS14 

DS15 

OS16 

OS17 

DS18 

10 

High flow inner swirlersj first panel inner dilution (like full 

annular D6) 

High flow inner swirlers; no first panel dilution 

Low flow inner secondary swir·Jers j no first panel dilution 

High flow inner primary swirlers j first panel dilution (like 

DS8) 

High flow inner primary swirlersj second panel dilution 

Low flow inner primary swirlersj second panel dilution 

Low flow inner primary swirlersj first panel dilution 

High flow inner primary and secondary swirlers; first 

panel dilution 

Low flow inner swirlers, dome holes; increased first panel 

dilution 

Same as DSl6 but with cross-fire slot 

Similar to DSl6 but with dome holes closed, cross-fire slot 

\ 
Slot Dim m 

Width 

Se 0 : 

DS22 0 

DS25 2 . 5 3. 

DS26 2 . 5 2 . 7 

DS2 1.2 3 . 

nnular: 

DI-D6 0 0 

7-Dl 2 . 5 3 . 

ur 1 . , 55- i' Slo onf urn on I D ubI nnuln' mbusto . 
, -" "' .. 

_ 

-.;. 

;: 

/ 

! 

I 

! 

I 

I 

> I 

t..:I 

Configurations 

Aes/AT 

LT/DT 

* Selected design. 

-

Table X. 12° Sector Combustor Test Configurations. 

Pilot Stage Carboning Configurations 

CS2 CS3 CS4 CS5 CS6 CS7 

0.188 0.275 0.322 0.387 0.322 0.386 

0.80 0.76 1.12 0.76 0.59 0.59 

-- ------

-po I 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor Configurations I 

Configurations FSI FS2 FS3 

No. of main stage flameholders 60 120 120 

..,; 

Main stage airflow (% Wc) 61 52 52 

Main stage premix length Long Long Long 

-------

- ------------

.. 

---- -

L-

______ 

---- -------

CS8 CS9* 

0.314 0.358 

/).59 0.59 

---- -

__ ,,_,, __ .. .. .... """,_" __ , .. ...... n'''_ ... 'h''''''''W ... .
;;:it~ ,.,._~ .A ... -- --h MAIN STAGE 

FLAMEHOLDER ASSE ---- SLY 

MAIN STAGE 

PREMIXING PASSAGE ~' .. 

/~' 

" 

Figur ~ 19. R d bu 

3 
Key design features of each full annular t~~~ copfiguration, together with 

the design intent of each configuration modification, are summarized in table 

XI. and Figures 20 and 21. The area/airflow distributions are summarized in 

Table XII. 

A 60° sector combustor, shown in Figure 22, identical to the full 

annular combustor was utilized for altitude relight development. Three 

configurations were evaluated. Key design feature variations in these tests 

are. shown in Table XIII. 

Three 12° sector combustor configurations were flashback tested. Key 

design feature variations are shown in Table X. 

TEST CONDITIONS AND PROCEDURES 

Full Annular Performance/Emission Tests 

The test conditions represented actual engine operating conditions, 

simulated engine operating conditions and parametric variations about these 

operating conditions. The most important test points are the CF6-50 engine 

standard day idle and takeoff conditions since the program goals for emissions and performance are specified at these cycle points. Other points of 

particular interest are the EPA-defined approach (30% power) and climbout 

(85% power) operating modes and the standard day cruise condition. A summary 

of the combustor operating conditions is presented in Tabl~ III. 

Combustor inlet temperatures, reference ve~ocities and turbine cooling 

air extraction rates of the CF6-50 engine were exactly duplicated. Combustor 

inlet pressure levels were duplicated at the idle condition, but reduced 

pressure levels, relative to those of the engine, consistent with the test 

facility air supply capacity were tested at the higher power conditions. 

Airflow and fuel flow rates of Table III were correspondingly reduced to 

simulate the true combustor reference velocities and fuel-air ratios. At the 

takeoff condition, the test pressure was 9.5 atm., compared to the engine 

pressure of 29.8 atm. 

Selected combustor configurations were tested over a range of combustor 

inlet pressures at the high power operating modes to evaluate the effects of 

pressure on emission levels. These effects were required to extrapolate the 

emission levels measured at the reduced pressure rig test conditions to the 

higher pressure levels encountered in the CF6-50 engine. The range of 

pressures evaluated during the Phase II tests were: 

44 

Idle 

Approach 

Cruise 

Climbout 

Takeoff 

2.9 atm. 

3.4 - 6.8 atm. 

4.8 - 9.5 atm. 

4.8 - 9.5 atm. 

3.1 - 9.5 atm. 

'I 

) 

j 

•

---=

; •

= 

-----............... ----.... 

0!.01" •..... -------_ •• d.· .
F .. ...... ..,--""I .. ·"",.. "",.,., ... ....... :!,F ..... ....... ','f" 

il. 

N 

n '" ... 

\";t)IQ 

.gpO 

..". 

U1 

". 

Table XI . Radial/Axial Staged Combustor Test Configurations, Full Annular Rig. 

}fain Stage Pilot Stage 

No. of Premix Radial Flow Turning Fuel Liner 

Config. Flameholders Length Splitter Vanes Injectors Dilution Design Intent 

Rl 60 Short No Yes Airblast No Determine the effect of circumferential fuel 

on emissions 

R2 60 Yes Yes Determine the effect of radial fuel staging o

emissions 

R3 120 No No Determine'the effect of increased wetted peri

main stage emissions 

R4 120 Long No No PressUl;e (1) Determine the effect of fuel nozzles on pilo

idle emissions and increased main stage prem

high power emissions 

R5 120 No Yes Determine the effect of main stage richness o

emissions 

R6 60 Yes Yes Yes Determine the effect of pilot stage dilution 

emissions and radial fuel staging on high pow

emissions 

R7 120 Short No No t Yes Determine the effect of reduced main stage pr

increased main stage wetted perimeter on emi

(1) Simplex fuel nozzles with 9.5 kg/hr @ 6.8 atm; 70° spray angle - unshrouded. 

------- - ----- ----------- -------

... ...... 

-

.. , •.. .• ... __ ...... ... ... 
... .. .... __ ..•.• 

_. __ 

_..,

.n.

 

, 

.1 

1 

I 

.;.. 

en 

. 

/. / , "". 7 

111-2 (Final Phase I Configuration) 

Configuration P.2 

-= 

Secondary Swirler 

Inserts Removed 

(Four Vanes Blocked) 

'"oJ 

1-

Splash Plates Removed \

from Fuel Injectors 

I .. 11 

1'_----'" . . ..... '--

,_, .. 

- .-- Chute Coolin

. " ___ __ Deflectors I

,\ \ \ J", Turning Vanes 

'\'\ /(1 'J i" (Two Inner 

",,' ,( "}J Reduced Flow Area Removed) 

.\ '\ (Flamespray) /. 

. Insert in se.condary 

Swirler (Like III-2) 

"', ""flJ 

__ . • ',' .. 

Configuration Rl 

____ 

" C.o'.'.' 

, . ___ 

- " .. _ ew l2Q-E '. '- . 

__ j' .=_ _. b Flameho lement \;. '1 ,,,. Am

.. .. . /"- 

SW11'1er . 

,.[ _ -'1l / 

, 

Configuration R3 

i 

1 

Figure 20. 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor Design Parameter Variations, Configurations 111-2 

j 

> 

,J 'ill'>-' ...... 

______ 

•• •.. ........ .... ".;;..h, •. _ .... .• ,_."." " .. "!_ ..... ,)._ ... .. 
.• --- - .. - 

.. 

,,0 

1-00-

I;jIP 

..-

'@l"O 

" 

New Point of 

Fuel Injection 

. , 

\, " T, 

'" \. .. I 

, 

Figure 21. 

Previous Point of 

Fuel Injectors 

Configuration R4 

Bent ._ 

trjrvd ____=_J£ 

Configuration R6 

Configuration R5 

Dilution 

1.11 cm Diam

MA cm 

Section A-A 

l2G-Element 

Flameilolder 

Pilot Stage Dil

Holes (Same as 

Configuration R7 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor Design Parameter Variations, Configurations R4 

." 

.- .... :";.c1l.... ... :__ .. c _: •••• -.:.....,. ... ........... ... .. '""'''''''......!1 __ ... 
l' 

f 

"'" CD 

Table XII. Radial/Axial Staged Combustor, Area/Airflow Distributions Full Annular Tes

Configurations. 

Configurations R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 

Ae' Ae' Ae' Ae' Ae' Ae. Ae· 

2· %I'e 2 %We 2 %I'e 2 %l"c 2 %He 2 %hTe 2 em em em em em em em 

Pilot Cups 

Fuel nozzle shroud 5.2 0.9 5.2 1.0 5.2 0.9 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.6 

Primary swir1er 19.4 3.2 19.4 3.6 19.4 3.2 19.4 3.3 19.4 4.0 19.4 3.4 19.4 

Secondary swir1er 32.9 5.5 47.7 8.7 47.1 7.9 47.1 7.9 53.5 11.2 53.5 9.4 53.5 

Total 57.5 9:6 72.3 13.3 71.7 12.0 67.1 11.3 73.5 15.3 73.5 12.9 73.5 

Main Sta8e F1ameho1ders 

Cay;bureted 383.9 63.7 101.0 18.6 389.7 65.0 389.7 65.5 225.0 46.9 101.0 17.7 219.3 

Unearbureted 0.0 0.0 231.0 42.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 231.0 40.7 0.0 

Total 383.9 63.B 332.0 61:"1 389.7 389.7 65.5 225.0 46.9 332.0 58.4 219.3 

Dilution 

Pilot stage 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.8 4.5 25.8 

Inner liner 0.0 0.0 0." 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 42.5 8.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Totnl, 0:0 -0.0 n-:u' 0:0 0:0 --0:0 0:0 0.0 42.5 8.9 25.8 ""4:5 25.8 

Cooling 

Pilot stage 66.5 11.0 45.2 8.4 45.2 7.5 45.2 7.6 45.2 9.5 45.2 7.9 52.3 

Flameho1ders 7.7 1.3 7.7 1.4 6.5 1.1 6.5 1.1 7.1 1.5 6.5 1.2 7.7 

Outer liner 33.7 5.6 33.7 6.2 33.7 5.6 33.7 5.7 33.7 7.0 33.7 5.9 33.7 

Inner liner 44.7 7.4 44.7 8.2 44.7 7.5 44.7 7.5 44.7 9.3 44.7 7.8 44.7 

Seal leakage 7.7 1.3 7.7 1.4 7.1 1.3 7.7 1.3 7.7 1.6 7.7 1.4 7.7 

Total 160.3 26.6 139.0 25.6 137.8 23.0 137.8 23.2 138.4 28.9 1,7.8 24.2 146.1 Combus tor Total 601. 7 100.0 543.3 100.0 599.2 100.0 594.6 100.0 479.4 100.0 569.1 100.0 ! 464.7 - -- --- ----- - - -- 

.. ' - .,. ->< 

............ , •. , •. __ ........... _ .. ., .•• ........ 
H 

o 

Ul 

=' .0 

6 
I 

1 

i 

r I 

, 

~ 

Table XIII. Radial/Axial Staged Combustor Altitude Relight 

Test Configurations, 600 Sector Rig. 

Configurations Intent of Test Sequence 

'0 

RSl Baseline t(~st with air blast fuel injectors 

RS2 Determine the effect of pressure-atomizing nozzles, 

increased secondary swirl angle, and increased igniter 

immerston. 

RS2A, RS2B Determine t'he. effect of reduced secondary swirl angle and , alternate igniter location. 

RS3 Determine the effect of pilot stage dilution. 

50 

1" '" ~-,---,,-

l' 

r' 

1 

I 

r 

\ 
r

1 I 

I 

~ "-,,, J, 

 

._ .. ["-- \ 

'''T-' 

"I 1. '\ ,.""'1: ... ..., ( 

In addition, at many test conditions, data were obtained over a range of 

combustor fuel-air ratios. At some fuel-air ratios the effect of varying the 

fuel flow splits between combustor stages was also examined. 

Test points were usually run in order of increasing combustor inlet 

temperature for safety considerations and to expedite testing, and data were 

recorded in two phases. First, the fixed combustor instrumentation was 

recorded, and then a survey of the combustor exit plane was made, collecting 

detailed exit temperature and pollutant emission data. The normal test 

procedure was to obtain exit thermocouple and. emission data at 6° intervals 

around the combustor exit annulus. At test points of particular interest, a 

high density traverse with 3° spacing was conducted. 

Smoke data were extracted from the combustor exit plane with ten probe 

eletnents which were manifolded together to provide one average sample. At 

least three smoke spots were taken at each test condition and the average SAE 

Smoke Number determined. 

A more complete description of the pollutant emissions measurement 

system and procedures can be found in Appendix B of Reference 6. 

Full Annular Ground Start Tests 

In addition to elevated pressure tests, the ground start ignition characteristics of three configurations were also evaluated. To determine the 

sea level ignition characteristics, the combustor was exhausted to the atmosphere allowing visual observation of the ignition attempts. A combustor 

airflow, within the range of starting airflows of the CF6-50 engine, was set 

with ambient temperature inlet air. The fuel flow was slowly increased and 

ignition attempted. The fuel flow was recorded where one cup was lit, where 

50% propagation occurred and where 100% propagation occurred. The fuel flow 

was then decreased and the conditions where one cup was out, where 50% of the 

cups were out and where lean blowout occurred were recorded. This process 

was repeated several times until sufficient data repeatability was achieved. 

A second, third and sometimes, fourth combustor airflow was then set and the 

ericire procedure was repeated. This test procedure is identical to that 

employed during the ground start testing conducted on the production CF6-50 

engine combustor. 

Full Annular and 60° Sector Altitude Relight Tests 

The altitude relight test procedures for both the full annular and 60° 

sector rigs consisted of determining combustor ignition and blowout limits 

over a range of test conditions selected from the CF6-50 engine altitude 

windmilling map, shown in Figure 23. Most of the tests were conducted with 

ambient temperature fuel and inlet air. The most promising 60° sector 

combustor configurations were also evaluated with both cold air and fuel. 

Ignition attempts were usually made at the engine minimum fuel flow rate 

~ ,,-

t 

i 

51 
r"-~-' ~ 

--1 ~. -.-  I ~ i 

~ ,,~' ~""'. • y ".,., -, ,( 

--r . -----1 

i ., 

I~.------r-----:~~---r----~~----~--~~~----­

P3 == 0.27 / 

52 

Hequin'(\ / 

Rpl i.!;ht. t I/' 

EnVell"~ v~ /.>1 / I 

I. () I ~ 

(i 

1 111----1, 

0.5 0.6 0.7 

Flight Mach Number 

---- W3 , kg/s 

---P atm 3' 

0.8 0.9 

Figure 23. CF6-50 Estimated Windmilling Combustor Conditions. 

1.0 

 . 

I 

,J 

! 

1 
1 

I 

~ 

of 249 kg/hr. When the ignition attempt was unsuccessful, the process was 

repented at higher fuel flow rates. When the attempt was successful, pressure blowout and lean blowout limits were measured. The procedure was then 

repeated at progressively more severe simulated windmilling conditions to map 

the relight capabilities of each test configuration. 

12° Sector Carbon/Flashback Tests 

The carboning test procedure consisted of subjecting a fuel injector/ 

air swirler configuration to a simulated combustor duty cycle. At the completion of the standard test cycle, shown in Table XIV, the parts were visually inspected for carbon deposits. The tests lasted 4-1/2 hours and a 

heavy distillate fuel was used to impose a severe condition upon the fuel 

nozzle/air swirler configuration. Experience from previous combustor development programs has shown that results obtained f~om this test adequately 

represent results obtained from long-time full annular combustor tests using 

normal kerosene fuel. 

For the flashback tests with the Radial/ru~ial Staged Combustor sector, 

the sector was instrumented to measure pressure loss, flameholder metal 

temperatures, and air temperatures in the premixing passage in order to 

detect upstream Durning. Simulated climbout and takeoff operating conditions 

at two pressure levels, with a range of fuel flow splits between combustor 

stages, were investigated. The test conditions were: 

Combustor dome 6P/P3 Inlet pressure 

Inlet temperature 

Pilot stage fuel-air ratio 

Overall fuel-air ratio 

4.0% 

9.5, 16 atm. } 

786, 821 K 

0.004, 0.006, 0.008 

0.026 

12 total 

test conditions 

Each of the 12 combinations of inlet conditions was set with only the 

pilot stage fueled. The main stage fuel flow was then cycled from zero to 

maximum then back to zero, while the various temperatures were monitored on 

strip chart recorders to detect upstream btrning. 

DATA .ANALYSIS PROCEDURES 

Combustor Pei"formance Data Processing 

A summary of the important combustor operating performance parameters 

whicQ were measured or calculated in the full annular combustor tests is 

shown in 'rable XV. Most of the parameters and equations are self-explanatory, 

but a few require further clarification: 

• By General ELectric convention, reference velocity is based on 

total inlet airflow, total inlet density and casing cross sectional 

area at the dome exit. For the CF6-50 flowpath, this reference 

area is 3,729 cm2• 

53 

i 

1 

1 

1 

, 
~~~~~.!jR':lit',.·:io1~~·~~~~V~ __ ;,vr:~""'~'''''''''7 

.... t'''''''''''_-''''''''':'·'''''~'''''''''''~_~.'.., .. :~ __ ~~~ ........... ..,.

C11 

M:> 

Table XIV. Standard Carboning Test Cycle. 

• Single Nozzle Rig 

• Heavy Distillate Fuel \'\ 

r--------------,-----------------------,-----------------------r------------------------,---~'·'i----------------~-------

Test 

Condition 

c

1 

(.1 

,'Ii ~ ,12 

J/' '\ ( ". IL 3 lL 

" l 

" '\l:P 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

Combustor Inlet 

Pressure, atm 

2.14 

8.30 

10.95 

11.70 

11.97 

\\ 11. 70 

10.95 

8.30 

2.14 

Combustor Inlet 

Temperature, K 

383 

-::' 

569 

619 

666 

693 

666 

619 

569 

383 

Fuel Flow Rate 

(one nozzle), kg/hr 

~ 

15.3 

70.8 

107.5 

130.6 

138.3 

130.6 

107.5 

70.8 

15.3 

Com1:lustor Dome 

Pressure Drop, i~ "3.1 

3.1 

2.7 

2.7 

2.6 

2.7 

2.7 

3.1 

3.1 

Hold 

minu

3

3

3

3

3

3

1: 4.5 h

_.~",-,_ •.. .)., ~~ ... _~b...._,y_ .-.. """"'.if~"'. __ ~ ... ~_, .... _2 .. _._ •• _,-'_,._ ..... , •. ___ ~,_ ...... ""__, ...... ...,.".~_""'" ___ ~._, ... ____
" 

f 

; 

! 

i 

i 

 

[ 

 

, 

f 

r~"·-~' r 

. 

! 

~ ~J.~ j .--

T" 'r , 

.,'. '\ ~., ... .., T(j I 

• Each combustor exit temperature was computed from the metered, 

fuel-air ratio and average gas sample combustion efficiency (with 

measured inlet temperature and standard thermodynamic charts). 

Thermocouple data were used to compute exit temperature profile 

factors and pattern factors. No radiation or convection corrections were applied to the thermocouple data. 

\ 

i 

r 

I 

The performance parameters of Table XV, along with the appropriate 

emission levels, are tabulated in Appendix C for each full annular combustor 

test and in Appendix D for the 60° sector tests. In Appendix D, the airflows 

and fuel flows have been converted to "equivalent" annular flow levels by 

multiplying the sector levels by 6. 

P01;lution Emission Data Processing 

Gaseous pollution data were transmitted directly to an on-line data 

reduction computer for calculation of the emission concentrations, the 

emission indices, the combustion efficiency and the fuel-air ratio of the gas 

sample at each traverse position. Based on the individual gas sample emisBiqJ~\ index, fuel-air ratio and combustion efficiency values at each traverse 

loca'tion, the overall average emission indices, sample fuel-air ratio and 

coinbustion efficien,ey for the test, conditions were determined by mass averaging. These averaged values are presented in tables and figures in this 

report. 

The emission data processing and reduction program, developed in the 

Phase 1 Program, was utilized. The equations used were basicaliy those 

contained in SAE ARP 1256 (Reference 10). CO and C02 concentrations were 

corrected for the removal of water from the sample before its analysis. 

Aviation kerosene (JP-S fuel), with a typical value for the fuel hydrogen-tocarbon atom ratio of 1.92 was used throughout these tests. Frequent fuel 

analyses, obtained throughout the tE~:;;t "series, confirmed this value. 

Pollution Emissions Correlation 

Correlations relating pollutant emission levels to combustor operating 

conditions were used to: 

• Extrapolate data from the reduced pressure test conditions to 

the full engine operating pressure. 

• Extrapolate data to combustor inlet conditions which were not 

investigated during a test. 

• Normalize a range of data to standard test conditions. 

The basis for the emissions extrapolation relationships are discussed in 

deULil in Appendix A. The following relationships were used: 

55 

," 

/J 

'./ 

r PTswrw' 

\.J I 

i 

. 

.'. 

;;"X 

.j 

1 

1 

j 

]I 

I! 

'1 

1 

J 

1 

1 

1 

1 

I 

! 

i 

) ~ 

j 

j 

~ , 

J! 

./ ~ 

j 

1 

i 

J 

J 

1 

i 

j 

~ 

J 
FG6G4Jt!

.

.j

i\ , ..... .• .......... .. .... •. .. t .... ¥.

...-vr< ••• ... 

>

 _, 

'l' 

.' 

U1 

O'l 

DC) ,Itij ro' P-cl0 

I:; 

kfCij 

.... .... _ ........ 

Table XV. Summary of Measured and Calculated Combustor Parameters for Full Annular Te

Parameter 

Inlet Total Pressure 

Exit Total Pressure 

Total Pressure Loss 

Total Inlet Airflow 

Combustor Bleed Airflow 

Combustor Airflow 

Reference Velocity 

To tal Fuel Flow 

Pilot Stage Fuel Flow 

Hain Stage Fuel Flow 

Overall Metered Fuel-Air Ratio 

Pilot Stage Fuel-Air Ratio 

Stage Fuel-Air Ratio 

Inlet Air Humidity Inlet Total Temperature 

Exit Total Temperature 

Pattern Factor 

Profile Factor 

Symbol 

PT3 

PT3,9 

I1PT/PT3 

W3 

Wbleed 

We 

VR 

H£ 

Wf Tv p 

fp 

frn 

H 

TT3 

TT3 ,9 

PF Pr F 

*Haximum individual exit temperature measured. 

Units 

atm 

atm % 

kg/s kg/s kg/s 

m/s 

kg/hr kg/hr 

kg/hr 

g/kg 

K 

Measured 

x 

X 

x 

X 

x X 

X 

X X 

Calculated 

X 

X X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

**Haximum of the aver-age exit temperatured calculated at each radial immersion. 

Value Determined From Average of from 5 immersions on 4 rakes Average of measurements from 2 immersions on 5 rakes 100 (PT3 - PT3.9)/PT3 

ASHE orifice 

ASHE orifice 

W3 - Wbleed 

!-is/PT3 AR = 0.0248 W3 

Turbine flowmeter 

Turbine flowmeter 

Turbine flowmeter 

IVf/3600 We 

I'f /3600 Ivc 

W//3600 We 

point hygrometer 

Average of measurements from 2 immersions on 4 rakes 

Combustion temperature rise curves, using PT3, TT3' f

max. - TT3.9, avJ/ (TT3.9 avg - TT3) - from th

immersion average, max.- TT3)/(TT3 .9 avg - TT

thermocouples 
r---'~ -·-··~~···I-·~~···· 

, 'l'~-­

"i 

.\ --·-·~c~· .. 

.... ~~, .... . .. -r 

Where 

[

T' - T 3 3 

169 

I 

+ H-6.29] 

53.19 

n = 0.2 for pi1ot~stage-on1y data at approach conditions 

n = 0.5 otherwise 

El He 

where n (

ioo ) 0.7 

0.2 El 

CO 

0.6 (~ 

100 ) 0.7 

CO 

for two-stage data 

for pilot-stage-only 

data 

( 

The primed symbols refer to the extrapolated condition and the unprimed 

symbols refer to the measured condition. Only pressure corrections were 

applied to the CO and HC emission levels. Occasionally, the NOx data were 

extrapolated to test conditions that differed in pressure t temperature and 

reference velocity, such as when climbout data were extrapolated to the 

cruise condition for some configurations. 

Data tables and figures of this report utilize the extrapolated " engine 

levels" for NOx , CO, HC and combustion efficiency (calculated from extrapolated CO and HC levels) unless otherwise noted. 

EPA Parameter Calculation 

The extrapolated "engine emi~sion levels" were used to calculate EPA 

parameter values, from the following equation: 

EPAP. 

1. 0.1365 Eli, idle + 0.0912 Eli, approach + 0.1487 Eli, climb 

+ 0.0571 Eli, takeoff 

where i = CO, HC or NOx 

The derivation of this equation is discussed in detail in Appendix B. Since 

numerous fueling mode combinations were tested, several EPAPs were calculated 

for each test configuration. 

57 

( 

, 

J 
) 

i 

"" 

\ 

~ .. 

·----r- , -._-... -.-. 

\ 

f 

CHAPTER III 

PHASE II EXPERIMENTAL TEST RESULTS 

In the Phase II Program, the performance and emission characteristics of 

the Double Annular Combustor and the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor were 

improved through an extensive sequence of tests. In developing a final combustor design capable of meeting all performance, durability and emission 

requirements, a significant degree of iteration was required between the 

full annular, 60° sector and 12° sector tests. Any design changes which 

provided reduced idle emission results, for example, required testing in 

:'lectors to determine the effect of the design change on ·.celight, performance 

and cn.rbon formation. Similarly, favorable design changes identified from 

the sector. tests were then subsequently evaluated in the full annular configurations to determine their impact on emissions and performance. As a 

result, certain compromises and tradeoffs were required in the evaluation of 

the final design in order to meet all operating requirements to the greatest 

degree possible. 

~ total of fourteen Double Annular Combustor configurations and seven 

Hadial/Axial Staged Combustor configurations were evaluated in the full 

annular tests. More Double Annular Combustor tests were conducted since this 

concept proved to be the most promising and most readily adaptable to engine 

installation. A total of 52 configurations were tested in the sector tests. 

Measurements were also taken as part of the Alternate Fuels Addendum and 

Noise Addendum. 

The large number of configurations and the resulting vast quantity of 

data precludes a discussion of the results obtained with each configuration. 

Thus, the following sections present a brief summary of the significant test 

results obtained with each combustor type. Summaries of the performance and 

emission 'results for each full annular and sector configuration can be found 

in Appendix C and D. The test results ~btained under the Noise and Alternate 

Fuels Addendums are published under separate covers (References 8 and 9). 

DOUBLE ANNULAR COMBUSTOR 

Phase I Results 

During the Phase I tests, the Double Annular Combustor produced significant CO, HC and NOx reductions, relative to the production CF6-50 combustor, 

at all operating modes. In particular, at high power conditions, NOx 

reductions of almost 50% were obtained with essentially no loss in combustion 

efficiency. At idle conditions, CO and HC reductions of 50 and 80%, respectively were obtained. The areas of concern with this design at the beginning 

of Phase II were: (1) the performance and emission levels at intermediate 

5H 

I 

I " 
\ , 

1 

~ 

.. -

: \ 

, 

r r'-'-' T ."~r,,,,,,,.",,,~\_< 

l ,. .. ~'r .. .....··.~_r_", ~_ ; 

-,' . ) 

..... ", ,.,"', .rl [ 

power operating conditions; (2) the ignition and stability of the'main stage 

dut' to the presence of the centerbody and the high airflow, high velocity 

C()mbllstion zone; (3) control of the exit temperature profile characteristics; 

(4) dev~lopment of suitable altitude relight performance, and (5) carbon~free 

opcr;lL ton of the pilot stage with no loss in emission performance. In addition, rurther emission reductions were required at idle and takeoff operating 

conditions to meet the ECCP goals and 1979 EPA standards. 

Exhnust Emission Results 

The key emission results for each full annular Double Annular Combustor 

configuration at standard day idle, approach, climbout and takeoff operating 

cond [tions, are summarized in Tables XVI and XVII. Standard day cruise 

resu] ts are summarized in Table XVIII. Generally at each operating condition, except idle, a range of fuel flow splits between stages was investigated to determine the split that produced the lowest emission levels. All 

of the splits are tabulated in Tables XVI-XVII as well as data from each 

combustor inlet pressure level tested. 

Jdle Pollution Results - Several design features were identified during 

Initial tests which significantly reduced the idle emissions from this combustor. The first Phase II pilot stage configuration (Dl) was similar to the 

final Phase I configuration (11-16) except for the incorporation of a longer 

ccnterbody. Both the idle CO and HC emission levels, shown in Figure 24, were 

slightly reduced from Configuration 11-16. However, the long centerbody made 

the cross-fire ignition of the inner dome more difficult and compromised the 

combustor exit temperature profile. In view of the small emissions improvement and significant performance difficulties introduced, the centerbody was 

shortened to its original length after configuration D2. A radial-inflow 

secondary swirler was installed in the pilot stage for D2, but no CO or HC 

reductions were obtained. The 60° sector altitude relight tests showed that 

pressure-atomizing fuel nozzles were required in the pilot stage of this 

combustor to approacfl the relight requirements. Similar nozzles were installed 

1n the full annular combustor for Configuration D4, along \vith an axial flow 

Hccondary swirler in the pilot stage. The resulting CO and HC levels were 

somewhat below those of previous configurations, with emission indices of 39 

and 6, respectively, at the engine idle fuel-air ratio. Mixing barrel extensions on the pilot stage swirl cups, evaluated in Configuration D5, provided 

HC levels below the ECCP goals for the first time. At fuel-air ratios below 

O.Oll, the CO levels were also significantly reduced, minimizing at an EI of 

about 20 at a fuel-air ratio of 0.009. The barrels provided additional 

mixing length for the fuel-air mixture and helped to keep the mixture away 

from cold metal surfaces within the combustor. It then remained only to 

shi.ft the CO characteristic curve obtained with D5 to minimize the CO level 

at tho design fuel-air ratio of 0.011. At fuel-air ratios above 0.009, 

insufficient oxygen was available in the primary zone of the pilot stage to 

complete the oxidation of CO. Therefore, additional air was supplied through 

120 small-diameter dilution holes installed in the first panel of the outer 

liner. The use. of many small holes instead of fewer, larger holes provided 

59 

T 

"!; 

j 
 

•••. : 

 

 , 

r 

(j) 

o 

--

Table XVI. Double Annular Combustor Emission Results, Configurations Dl - D7.-

o 

l::tjpj 

1-0-1 

£) 

ConL 

No. 

Std. Prod. 

D1 

D2 

D3 D4 D5 

D6 

D7 

Wf Rdg. 

No. 

- -

32 1.00 94 1.00 

156 1.00 

230 1.00 

238 1.00 

288 1.00 

451 1.00 

474 1.00 

487 1.00 

Idle 

EI 

CO HC NOx 

meas. @ 2.9 atm 

73.0 30.0 2.5 

46.5 9.0 3.4 

44.9 9.8 3.4 

67.0 37.6 3.0 

39.1 6.2 3.9 

38.0 2.4 3.7 

24.7 2.1 3.B 

20.7 1.3 -

24.9 1.3 -

16.7 0.6 -

Approach 

P3 Wfp -- Rdg. Test EI 

No. atm CO I HC INOx 

corr. to 11.7 arm, 

- - - 4.3 0 10.0 

37 3.4 1.00 7.7 0.1 10.6 

48 6.9 1.00 4.7 0.5 11.7 

45 6.9 0.58 71.8 25.8 6.0 

44 6.8 0.30 112.5 20.0 3.6 

47 6.9 0 64.0 7.1 4.1 

55 3.4 0.59(1) 56.9 9.5 7.1 

46 6.9 0.58(1) 52.8 14.8 6.3 

56 1.4 0.44(1) 60.8 10.5 4.8 57 3.4 0.31(1) 75.0 14.5 3.7 58 3.4 0(1) 58.1 35.2 2.1 

97 3.4 1.00 5.3 0.2 10.8 

115 6.8 0.58 53.6 12.3 9.7 114 6.8 0.29 98.1 12.3 4.6 116 6.8 0 49.7 6.3 5.1 

163 3.4 1.00 16.2 0.3 8.5 168 6.8 1.00 14.9 0.1 9.4 

- - - - - -

243 3.4- 1.00 13.1 0.04 7.7 292 l.00 6.4 0.03 9.6 

440 3.4 1.00 3.8 0.1 -

(1) Alternate main injectors fueled 

--

- ._._-

I ••. ........... •••• --........-......,.",... ..... 

C1imbout Takeoff 

1'3 Wfp 11-'3 Wfp Rdg. Test Wft EI Rdg. Test EI No. atm CO IHC I NOx No. atm CO I HC I NOx 

orr. to 25.9atm corr.to 29.0 a

- - - 0.3 0 29.5 - - - 0.2 a 35

38 4.8 0.48 6.7 0.3 25.5 49 4.7 0.44 0.6 0.04 29_39 4.S 0.29 0.6 0.1 15.5 SO 4.7 0.27 0.1 0.02 18

40 4.8 0.20 0.9 0.1 14.4 51 4.7 0.18 0.1 0.02 1641 4.8 0.15 2.6 0.1 14.4 52 4.7 0.14 0.6 0.02 14

107 4.7 0.47 1.7 0.1 32.5 100 4.7 - 0.44 0.3 0.3 37

108 4.7 0,.29 0.3 0.1 16.3 99 4.7 0.26 0.1 0.5 lS109 4.8 0:.20 0.9 0.1 13.3 111 6.8 0.27 0.1 0.1 20110 4.8 Q·.14 3.3 0.1 13.6 101 4.7 0.18 0.4 0.2 17

112 6.8 0.18 0.2 0.1 17

102 4.7 0.13 1.0 0.1 18

113 6.8 0.14 0.8 0.1 18103 4.7 0 0.8 0.1 22

181 4.7 0.47 8.4 0.1 29.3 173 4.8 0.44 2.2 0.03 35182 4.7 0.28 1.6 0.04 21.1 174 4.7 0.26 0.6 0.02 25183 4.7 0.19 2.5 0.03 17.9 170 6.8 0.26 0.5 0.1 26

184 4.7 0.14 5.4 0.1 17.7 175 4.7 0.18 1.0 0.02 23

171 6.8 0.18 0.7 0.1 24

176 4.7 0.13 2.5 0.1 24172 6.8 0.13 2.0 0.1 23

177 4.7 0 4.2 0.1 28

- - - - - - - - - - - 

254 4.8 0.48 8.0 0.1 27.7 256 8.5 0.28 0.2 0.03 22

253 4.8 0.29 -1.,5 01 16.9 255 8.5 -0.23 0.2 0.02 21

252 4.8 0.19 1i· 2 OJ 15.1 

- - - - - - - - - - - 

445 4.8 0.29 1.3 0.1 - 448 4.8 0.45 0.8 0.02 449 4.8 0.26 0.8 0.03 - 472 9.6 0.35 0.2 0 

444 4.8 0.19 1.9 0.04 - 447 4.8 0.2-7 0.1 0.01 

473 9.6 0.27 0.2 0 

454 9.5 0.25 0.2 0.03 446 4.8 0.17 0.4 0.02- 471 9.6 0.18 0.3 0 
r !~~-r 

! 

1 

~ 

-, 

.! 

., -

" 

---~~C'-~-'~' -- ~ T---

t \ 

Table XVII. Double Annular Combustor Emission Results, Configurations DB - Dl4. 

Idle ADD roach 

- Climbout Takeoff 

Wfp P3 ~ \'1, P3 Wf P3 Canf. Rdg. EI Rdg. Test EI Rdg. Test _:J!. E1 Rdg. Test ' -~ EI 

No. No. ~ CO HC I NOx No. atm Wft CO IIC NOx No. 3tm Wft CO He NOx No. .tm Wft co -, HC I NOx meas. r, 2.9 aCm corr. to 11.7 acm carr. to 25.9atm carr. to 2.9.8 atm 

Std. Prod. - - 73.0 30.0 2.5 - - - 4.3 a 10.0 - - - 0.3 a 29.5 - - - 0.2 a 35.5 

08 490 1.00 24.3 1.9 3.1 536 3.4 1.00 2.5 0.1 8.4 540 4.8 0.38 0.8 0.1 20.4 544 4.8 0.35 0.1 0.01 24.9 539 6.8 0.66 60.8 21.9 7.2 541 4-.8 0.29 0.2 0.02 17.7 547 4.8 0.27 0.1 0.01 21.8 533 3.4 0.50 85.4 15.1 6.6 542 4.8 0.20 0.3 0.02 15.3 546 4.8 0.18 0.1 a 19.6 537 6.S 0.51 81.7 21.5 6.! 543 4.8 0.15 0.8 0.02 14.8 545 4.8 0.13 0.2 0.01 1~. 7 534 3.4 0.41 99.3 14.6 5.:3 535 3.4 0.32 115.8 14.9 4.2 538 6.8 0.33 108.4 17.8 4.8 

09 551 1.00 21.2 3.0 3.2 556 3.4 1.00 1.8 0.1 8.4 574 4.8 0.28 0.1 0.01 16.9 578 4.8 0.44 0.2 a 26.5 579 1.00 19.2 1.6 3.4 502 3.4 0.81 52.2 11.0 9.4 573 4.8 0.20 0.3 0.01 14.5 577 4.8 0.26 0.1 a 21.2 563 3.4 0.65 66.9 15.2 7.8 57,2 4.8 0.17 0.8 0.01 13.9 576 4.8. '0.18 0.1 0 19.1 564 3.4 0.51 88.4 16.2 6.3 575 4.8 0.13 0.3 a 19.2 567 3.4 0.80(1) 35.8 6.3 10.1 566 3.4 0.65(1) 44 .• 4 6.7 8.7 

565 3.4 0.51(1) 48.6 7.4 7.0 

OlD 585 1.00 17.8 1.4 3.3 598 3.4 1.00 1.8 0.2 9.1 588 4.8 0.38 3.5 0.05 19.2 592 4.8 0.35 0.2 0 22.9 608 3.4 0.75(1) 36.3 7.2 9.8 587 4.8 0.30 1.6 0.02 17.4 594 6.8 0.35 0.2 a 23.6 596 6.8 0.75(1) 29.6 9.2 9.7 586 4.8 0.19 1.8 0.02 14.5 591 4.8 0.27 0.1 a 21.9 607 3.4 0.51(1) 47.0 8.9 7.1 589 4.8 0.14 3.3 0.01 14.8 590 4.8 0.18 0.2 0 19.9 595 6.8 0.49(1) 41.6 12.7 6.7 593 4.8 0.14 0.6 0 19.2 606 3.4 0.29(1) 71.5 15.6 4.5 

Dll 611 1.00 20.1 2.5 3.2 614 3.4 1.00 1.6 0.04 8.7 627 4.8 0.39 0.2 0.01 20.1 634 4.8 0.36 0.04 a 25.0 620 3.4 0.81 48.3 8.8 8.9 626 4.8 0.29 0.1 0.01 18.2 633 4.8 0.27 0.03 0 23.4 621 3.4 0.51 81.5 13.2 5.~ 625 4.8 0.20 0.1 0.01 15.6 632 4.8 0.18 0.05 a 20.7 622 3.4 0.23 114.2 10.4 3.1 624 4.8 0.15 0.2 0.01 15.1 631 4.8 0.16 0.1 0 20.4 635 6.8 0.25 104.1 12.3 4.3 630 4.8 0.14 0.1 0.01 19.7 623 3.4 a 69.5 4.1 4.1 619 3.4 0.80(2) 30.8 4.1 10.8 637 6.8 0.79(2) 29.0 6.2 10.3 618 3.4 0.50(2) 11.5 0.7 8.6 636 6.8 0.50(2) 10.8 1.1 7.7 617 3.4 0.23(2) 36.9 3.7 5.9 

D12 642 1.063 24.5 7.3 3.3 676 3.4 ~:~~(2) 3.4 0.1 9.0 680 4.8 0.38 0.7 0.04 21.8 689 4.8 0.35 0.05 a 24.9 673 .1.00 22.0 2.8 3.1 685 6.8 32.8 8.0 10.0 679 4.8 0.29 0.2 0.03 17.4 688 4.6 0.26 0.05 0.01 22.5 684 6.8 0.65(2) 30.1 3.8 8.8 678 4.8 0.19 0.2 0.04 14.8 687 4.8 0.18 0.1 0.02 19.6 683 6.8 0.51(2) 15.1 1.5 7.8 677 4.8 0.15 0.8 0.04 14.6 690 4.8 0.15 0.1 O.?l 20.1 682 6.7 0.40(2) 10.8 1.4 7.0 681 4.8 0.12 1.4 Q.04 15.8 686 4.8 0.14 0.2 0.06 19.9 

Dl3 698 1.00 19.0 2.0 3.3 712 3.4 ~:~~ (2) 3.1 0.03 8.5 745 4.7 0.38 0.8 0.01 17.2 750 2.7 0.27 0.1 0 19.4 704 6.8 22.0 2.5 8.0 744 4.7 0.29 0.2 o 14.8 746 4.7 0.27 0.1 0 20.0 703 6.8 0.43(2) 11.5 2.4 6.2 743 4.7 0.19 0.4 o 13.1 701 6.8 0.26 0.1 0.01 20.4 702 6.8 0.21(2) 39.8 7.5 6.0 742 4.7 0.14 2.1 0.02 13.7 725 9.5 0.26 0.1 0.01 19.1 747 4.7 0.20 0.1 0 18.0 724 9.5 0.19 0.1 0.01 18.3 748 4.7 0.16 0.2 0 19.1 723 9.5 0.15 0.2 0.01 18.3 

749 4.8 0.11 1.0 0 18.7 699 9.5 0.11 0.5 0.1 16.8 

D14 769 1.00 26.4 3.1 2.6 782 3.4 1.00 3.4 0.2 7.7 777 9.5 0.29 0.3 0.01 19.2 796 9.5 0.27 0.2 0.03 22.9 788 1.0~3 28.2 3.7 3.0 799 6.8 0.65 62.3 22.9 7.6 776 9.5 0.19 0.4 0.01 17.6 795 9.5 0.18 0.2 0.03 21.6 837 1.00 48.4 18.8 3.2 798 6.8 0.44 77 .9 16.6 6.5 775 9.5 0.14 0.7 0.01 17.0 794 9.5 0.13 0.5 0.05 21.5 797 6.8 ~:~~(3) 90.8 12.8 4.3 778 9.5 0.12 1.4 0.03 17.1 793 9.5 0.09 1.3 0.1 21.8 831 3.4 7.1 0.1 8.3 830 5.1 1.00(3) 5.5 0.03 8.7 

(1) Alternate main 'injectors fueled 

(2) 180" sector: main injectors fueled 

(3) Engine prototype pilot stage fuel nozzles 

61 

·1 

1 

I 

! 

1 

j 

'! 
__ .--_.-

C) 

N 

.. 

--

.... _-----" 

- . _T<_ 

Table XVIII. Standard Day Cruise Emission Results. 

::ii" ._J 

H 

Pilot Fllel 

Configuration. Reading Test Fraction 

"S(lmber ani W'D'Wf, 

Bc". 

Prod. - - -

HI 10 4.8 n.33 

9 4.8 0.28 

a 4.8 0.23 

R2 80 4.8 1.00 

76 4.7 

83 4.8 0.34 

75 4.7 0.29 

7:, 4.8 0.23 

84 4.6 0.23 

79 4.8 0.35 

HI 4.7 0.34 

78 0.28 82 4.0 0.23 

77' 0.23 

R3 119 4. ? 0.33 

151 9.5 0.31 

138 1 •• 7 0.13 

lSI) 9.5 0.23 

III Ji ... 7 0.18 

14q 9. ; O.lS 

140 4.8 0.33 

141 4.7 0.18 

R; 200 4.8 

IW, 4.8 0.17 

19; 4.$ o.n 

199 4.$ o.n 196 4.3 0.1-+ 

198 4. o.n 

197 4.$ 

R<; 216 4.8 n.4tj 

217 4.8 0.3) 

223 4.S 0.33 

220 4.8 0.23 

218 y,7 cr.22 

2l9. 4. i 0.19 

Rb 268 4.'1 0.38 

269 4.8 0.35 

In 4.8 O.H 

27(J 4.8 0.24 

R; 39:' 4. i 0.37 

398 4.1 0.)2 

19'> 4.7 0.23 

)91 7 0.23 

H6 4.1 0.18 

1)1 • .a 0.48 

J9 4.S 0.29 

M'! 4.S 0.20 

.\1 4.-8 0.15 

(l} fu<::tr.lpol.ucd frp!:! ClinbO'.J.t TC'st Points. 

C} Altern.:1te M.Jh fnleCtQ,(s f",c1t·d. 

Correc:.ted to Engine Combustor 

Cor):"ected £mission 

Index. e/kg lucl 

CO lie NOx 

0.7 0.3 16.4 

39.9 2.4 11.6 

8).B 6.7 8.4 

104.7 14.1 ,.6 

6.0 0.1 10.9 

18.8 0.7 12.2 

23.3 0.4 11.0 

23.2 1.3 8.4 

2.5 7.5 

36.8 1.9 7.2 

21.5 1.1 10.0 

2S.7 0.7 11.7 

24.6 1.6 ! 7.9 

36.8 ].9 7.3 

29.3 2.5 I 6.8 

"1.t; 3.1 ' 10.5 

,2 3.1 9.9 

87.; 19.0 i 5.9 

80. J 14.0 6.1 

118.0 61.1 , oi.1 52.3 i 4.3 

38.7 2.1 ; 

67.8 ll. i 7.0 

71).7 ;.2 ! n." 

6.9 10.2 

1;!. S 11.1 8.1 

J 7,9 

82.9 16.1 

111.$ 28.8 .i.l 

lJ7.2 82.6 

40.3 :.2 8.0 

4.) 6.1 

58.7 4.0 6.0 

8-i.4 1B.2 3.3 

72.6 30.0 3.1 

123.0 79.1 2 ... 

27.4 0.1 f 8.4 n.r, 0.9 

j 

7.9 

24.0 .. ' . , 6.9 

58.5 12.:1 5.1 

<;8. j • I .. , 71.5 11.4 1.1, 6J.S 66.8 

128.9 

t 

1.5-

97.4 er.8 

13.5 1. ! 12.0 

,j,9 O. t 7.3 

O. I 7.1 12.; n. 7.1 

PT3 "" 11.4 atm 

TT3 • 733 K 

I , 

I 

1 1 1 

1 

1 

2 

1,2 

2 

1,2 

2 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1,2: 

1,2 

1 

I 

I 

1 

i 

1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

VR = 24.4 mls 

f = 0.0210 

Pilot Fuel Correc'ted £mission 

Configuration Reading Tesc P(cssure Index. slits fuel 

NUm!-,er atm l-lfp CQ He N0y' 

02 120 4.7 0.60 lB. g I 0.6-: 19.5 

107 4.7 0.47 10.9 0.4 I 16.1. 

119 4.7 0.46 )0.6 0.4 1 15.2 

llg 4.7 0.31 4.2 '0.4 B.B 

lOB 4.7 0.29 3.5 I 0.3 I 8.2 

Hl9 4.8 0.20 7.2 I 0.3 , 6.7 

117 4.7 0.10 IB.4 0.6 i 6.7 

no 4.8 0.14 15.9 , 0.4 I 6.9 

03 181 4.7 0.47 29.B " O.B t 14.B 

182 4.7 0.2B 9.5 0.2: 10.7 

183 4.7 0.19 13.1 I 0.2 i 9.0 

184 4.7 0.14 21.7 i 0.6 ,B.9 

05 254 4.8 0.48 29.1 ! 0.5 ) 14.0 

253 4.S 0.29 9.0 I 0 ' B.5 252 4.8 0.19 B.4 I 0 I 7.6 

08 540 4. B Q.35 5.4 Ii 0.3 10.3 

541 4.8 0.29 2.7 0.1 \' 9.0 

4.a 3.1 I 0.1 7.7 

543 4.8 0.10 5.6 I 0.1 7.5 

D9 570 4.8 0.29 5.6 l (j.1 a.8 

'57:' 4.8 0.28 1.4 j 0.03 8.5 

569 4.$ 0.20 6.6 I 0.1 a.2 

573 4.8 0.20 4.1 ! 0.03 7.3 

572 4.$ 0.17 6.3 i O.l 7.0 

568 ... 8 0.15 10.1 0.1 7.5 

1)10 5SS 4.$ 0.38 15.9 I I 9.7 

587 4.R 0.30 9.3 j 0.1 I B.a 

58& 4.S 0.19 10.5 , 0.1 I 7.3 

4.8 (1.1':' ' 0.1 I 7.5 

DIl 627 4.8 0.39 3.3 , 0.1 , 10.1 

626 • •• 8 0.29 1.3 I 0.04 I' 9.2 

625 4.8 0.20 1.6 . 0.1 7.9 624 4.8 0.15 3.1 ' 0.1 i 

D12 680 0.38 5.5 0.2! 1l.O 

677 4.$ 0.15 6.1 l 1.J 

681 ·\.8 8.8 0.2 i S.O 

Dll 745 0.38 0.,1 1 $,; 

744 :'.7 0.29 La f 0.03! 7.5 

i"-4J .... 1 !'),19 S.8 0.0) ?6 

1-

_____ 1-_'_:.2. '-401 0.14 10.9 I 0.1 j 6.9 

!IlZ! SO!] 0 • .39 6.9" j 11 .. I 11.2 

fin!. .... ff O.7Q :',6- r!. I 10.1 

'717 I), -S fI.2f1 3.Z 0.!'.1 I 9. i 

;80 0.20 5-.2 0 .. 1 5.7 

;:-6 -+.1 0.03, 8.9 

4.B 0.15 e.8 n.2 I 8.0 

:-;5 q.S 0.1.. f,.!. 0.1 1 8.6 

7iB '1'.::' 0.12 0 . .3 1 S.fot 

............... Ll ..... 

___ ............ .... . .............. ______ ......... _ ......... -.......-. !'I "*81 ........ .' __ iN 1 "olD 
r-~'--'-" '1 

r 

, " 

~ 

) 

~ .. , .... - . .,. .... " -,. ~ ..... "'.;' ,., .. '" 

r- _ .. 

  .. ",-,-,,~."~ 

HI 

- - - II-16 Phase I Final Conf. -

Corrected to Std. Day Idle 

>: 

(l) 

40 

"g 20 ..... 

Q 

o 

• ,-l 

IJl 

IJl 

.,-l 

s 10 ~ 

u 

::r: 

o 

100 

0 01 

0 04 

6 05 

0 D7 

~ DS 

Phase II Baseline 

Pressure-Atomizing Nozzles 

Barrels 

Pilot 

Pilot 

Stage 

Stage 

Dilution (Panel 1) 

Dilution (Panel 2) 

Engine Fuel-Air 

~Ratio 

",ti I I ....... I ~ ..... ..... -

SO ~------4~------4-------+--------+---- M 

(l) 

::l 

~ 

bt. 

~ bD 60 I----\,--.-:lor-'-.~,_ 

§ 40 ~-- ,,-\-f---------t--="A-...-lI""~I-------,.J/ ""/------1 .,-l 

IJl 

IJl 

.,-l 

S 

~ 

o 

u 20 ~---

o~ ______ ~ ______ ~ __ ~ __ ~ ______ ~ ______ ~ 

\ 

j 

0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014 0.016 

Fuel-Air Ratio 

Figure 24. Double Annular Combustor Idle Emission 

Charaeteri sties, Configurations Dl - D8. 

' ~ "'" i 

\ . 1 

( 

.. , 

63 

d 
'''''"'''"''.~,,-

I I'""'~~" 

". , ,-,.., HI 

the air more uniformly to the combustion zone and avoided quenching of the CO 

consumption reactions. The quantity of this dilution airflow was increased 

in two steps in Configurations D6 and D7. With a total of about 4.7% of the 

combustor airflow (D7), CO levels minimized very near the design fuel-air 

rlltio as shown in Figure 24. Both CO and HC levels below the ECCP goals were 

recorded. 

The incorporation of the pressure-atomizing fuel nozzle, barrel and 

outer liner dilution airflow into the pilot stage provided idle emission 

levels below the ECCP goals and below the levels required for compliance 

with the 1979 standards. During the subsequent tests, the main emphasis was 

placed on maintaining these low idle emission levels while introducing the 

design changes identified from the sector tests to allow the p:i.lot stage to 

meet the altitude relight requirements and to operate free of harmful carbon 

deposits. The outer liner dilution holes were shifted from the first to the 

second panel in Configuration D8. This improved the relight characteristics, 

wtth essentially no increase in idle emissi0n levels (Figure 24). No further 

changes were made to the pilot stage until Configuration D12 when an alternate 

primary swirler (termed the engine prototype swirler) developed in the 12° 

sector carbon elimination tests was installed. Again, no significant change 

in 'idle cmissj.ons resulted, as shown in Figure 25. A pilot stage cooling 

nirflow adjustment and lowered combustion pressure loss introduced in Configuration Dl4A caused a slight increase in CO and HC levels. The engine 

combuRtor design being manufactured for the Phase III engine tests is most 

li.ke Configuration D12 and comparable idle emission levels are expected 

during engine tests. 

During the tests of Configuration D12 and D14, engine design prototype 

pLlot stage fuel nozzles were also investigated. These configurations were 

designated D12A and D14B. The use of these prototype nozzles 'caused a small 

'increase in the HC levels with essentially no change in the CO levels of 

Configuration D12A. However, in Configuration D14B, a substantial increase 

in both He and CO resultec.,. It appeared from the data that severe quenching 

of HC and CO occurred in the pilot stage. Subsequent investigations in the 

60° sc~tor were conducted to determine the cause. A number of conf~gurations 

were investigated, including extreme radial positioning of th~ cups (posit1.oned outward as near the liner metal surface as possible) and severe circumferential misalignment of the fuel nozzles, but the high emission levels of 

Configuration D14B could not be duplicated. In fact, the design was found to 

be relatively insensitive to a number 6f design variables. 

Climbout and Takeoff Pollution Results - A number of design features 

were investigated within the main stage of the Double Annular Combustor to 

achieve further NOx reductions at high power and intermediate power operating 

~ond:i.tions. The NOx levels from all configurations were found to be very 

sensItive to the fuel flow split between burner stages and were minill1ized 

when about 80-85% of the fuel was supplied to the main stage at takeoff 

conditions, as shown in Figure 26. Combustion efficiencies greater then 

99.9% were obtained at this flow split, as well as for a wide range of flow 

'F ss' 

mmm # 

1 

i 

l 

1 

, 

j 
r"""~-'- 

_._\_ .... 

... "J~ r 

, i 

~ 

\ 

~ 

r 

' .• 'I. ,~ ..--,\ 

r-I 

0) 

:;j 

"'" b.O 

.!ld 

"'-

b.O 

>< -

Q) 

't'l 

5:: 

1-4 

C 

0 

,.-I 

(/) 

(/) 

,.-I 

S 

~ 

U 

::t: 

r-I 

Q) 

::l 

"'" b.O 

.!ld 

"'-

b.O 

>< Q) 

't'l 

5:: 

1-4 

C 

0 

'.-I 

(/) 

(/) 

'M 

S 

~ 

0 

U 

r-~'-· 

I 

"I 

15 

10 

5 

0 

80 

60 

40 

20 

o 

0.006 

T ~"~'r~.-~-

I 

1 

0 D8 ~ D12 

0 D9 CJ D13 

~ DIO 0 D14 

Dll 

Engine Fuel-Air 

~ Ratio 

I 

I 

I 

-I 

0.008 0.010 0,012 0.014 0.016 

Fuel-Air Ratio 

Figure 25. Double Annular Combustor Idle Emission 

Characteristics, Configurations D8-D14. 

"-'1 \ 

( 

i , 

1 

.. 

65 
fiG 

'T', " .r"'! .... , '·r 

>. 101-""----_r_------r------~----_r_----__, 

+-' 

.,-l 

'd 

.,-l 

S 

;:j 

::c 

'0 

+J 

U) 

'd 

d 

C1S 

Q) 

l-< 

;:j 

Ul 

Ul 

Q) 

l-< 

Po. 

Q) 

s:: 

.,-l 

b.O 

~ 10 

o 

+-' 

Corrected Combustion 

Efficient ~ 99.9% Configurations 

ODI OD3 

o D2 ~ D5 'd 

Q) 

j-l 

t> 

Q) 

l-< 

l-< 

o 

CJ 

O~-------~------~-------~------------------~ 

M 

~ 30~------~----~-----~-------~--------~ t:<. 

b.O 

~ 

'-, 

biJ 

-

o 

~ 20~--------~~~~~~~~+----­ 'd 

s:: 

I-! 

d 

o 

",-l 

Ul 

Ul 

.g 10 

~ 

Configurations I 0 D8 ~Dl2 Corrected Combl,lstion 0 D9 LJ D13 

Efficient ~ 99.9% 

6Dll 

I 

ODlO ODl1 

OLI ________ ~ ______ ~ ________ ~I ________ ~" ______ ~ o 

Figure 26. 

0,1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 

Pilot Fuel Flow/Total Fuel Flow 

Double Annular COmbUfJtor NOx Emission Characteristics at Takeoff Conditions. 

~--~-~'f-- -<"'~"T ~- -r--- 

[ ~ 

J 

1 

J 
I ~ .. 

{. 

~ 

I ~ 

17"~' 

r.' ,~-, H·I 

'--'T .-

r 

splits, at takeoff and c1imbout conditions. This combustor can be operated 

at tht· fuel flow split which produces the minimum NOx level, with no loso in 

efficiency resulting. 

The NOx levels were found to be relatively insensitive to many of the' 

design features investigated. The longer centerbody of Configurations Dl and 

])2 produced NOx levels at takeoff and climbout as low as any of the configurations tested. These were EIs of 1,6.4 - 17.8 at takeoff and 13.3 - 14.4 at 

cl imbout. But, the operational difficulties introduced by the longer centerbody out' . .;elghed the NOx reductions obtained. When all of the available main 

s tngl' airflow was introduced into the swirl cups, and the inner liner diluti.on holes were closed, the NOx levels increased sharply (Configuration D3). 

This was probably due to the lack of mixing between the fuel and air in the 

f'lwir\er prior to combustion. The large quantity of swirler airflow, the 

short swirler axial length, and the lack of inner dilution jets contributed 

to this mixing deficiency. With pressure-atomizing fuel nozzles, the mixing 

in the swirl cups was improved in Configuration D5 with a resulting decrease 

in NOx levels to 21. 6 at takeoff. Due to main stage ignition find stability 

problems associated with this high flow swirl cup (discussed in a later 

paragraph), this cup design was abandoned after Configuration D6. The main 

stage swirl cups utilized for the Phase I, D1 and D2 configurations were 

reinstalled in the main stage for Configuration D7. 

The remaining tests were aimed at optimizing the dome and liner dilution 

airflow quantities and locations to obtain the lowest NOx levels. The elimination of the dome dilution airflow was found to have no effect on NOx. 

This is shown in the comparison of Configurations D8 and DIO in Figure 26. 

Thus dome dilution was eliminated after Configuration D10. Introducing all 

of the dilution airflow into the first liner panel was found to be more 

effective than staging the dilution (comparison of Configurations Dll and 

D12). ~len the size of the dilution holes was increased to supply more 

dilution airflow, the NOx levels were reduced, (Configurations D9 and D13). 

However, the quantity of dilution airflow introduced in Configurations D9 and 

D13 is not available in the engine combustor due to higher dome cooling 

requirements and the need for profile trim air. Configuration D12 is the ,.-

best simulation of the final engine design and produced NOx levels of 19.6 

and 14.8 at takeoff and climbout, respectively. 

The smoke levels of all Double Annular Combustor test configurations at 

high power operating conditions were extremely low (Appendix C), generally 

below a smoke number of two. Although a somewhat higher level would be 

expected at engine pressures, the smoke levels of this combustor should not 

be a source of concern. 

Approach Pollution Results - The approach operating mode, as defined in 

the EPA landing/takeoff cycle, presents unique problems for all two-stage 

combustors including the Double Annular design. Because of the relatively 

low power setting of 30 percent, the combustor inlet conditions and fuel-air 

ratio are low enough so that only the pilot stage need be fueled. Operating 

;:-he combustor witn only the pilot stage fueled at approach has been found to 

produce the extremely high combustion efficiencies required to meet the 1979 

EPA standards. Results are shown in Figure 27. However, from an engine 

67 

: t If TY-

, 

I 

1 

j 

1 

i 

; 

I 

d 
(jH 

r"'c, l'""C~~ 

. ,~ _ ~ ~. j . Y 1., ,- ,., "j 

r-i 

W W 

::l H 

>y ::l 

Ul 

00 Ul 

~ W 

'" 1-1 

bO p.. 

~ W 

)-: ~ 

W ,,-1 

-0 on ~ ~ 

H~ 

>=: 0 

0 +' '.-1 

Ul -0 (I) W ,,-1 +' 

S () 

W W' 

H 

0 1-1 

C,) 0 

u 

:WO .--------,------,-------r------or-------y 

20 1-------\ 

10 

Alternate 

Main Stage 

Cups Fueled 

All Main Stage 

Main Stag~e~~~~~~~ Sector Fueled 

5 ~----------~------,------t_----------_T------------+_-----------~ 

2 

1 

\5 r-------------------------r------------T------------~----------~ 

0 Dl ~Dl2 

0 D2 C)013 

0 D8 o Dl4 

0 D9 

10 o DIU 

6DH 

o 

o 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.8 1.0 

Pilot Puel Flow/Total Fuel Flow 

Figure 27. Effect of Fuel Flo~{ Split on Emission Levels of the Double 

Annular Combustor a..t Approach Conditions. 

'T 

( 

I 

" 

\' 

" 

; 

1, 

~t 

l 
r~'--'--- --- 1- '-c---

, -r~···---­

HI 

T 

_ .. _.,,

. 

I 

I 

, 

( 

I 

operational and flight safety standpoint, it is somewhat undesirable to 

npprooc.:h an aircraft landing with only the pj.lot stage fueled. Ir~ case of a 

wave-off of the landing attempt, the main stage must be rapidly ignited so 

that the aircraft can have sufficient thrust to climb out of the approach 

pattern. Thus, it would be desirable. for both sta,gesSQ .. be fueled at the 

approach operating condition. . , 

The effects on emissions ot scheduling the fuel floJI to both combustion 

stages at approach were investigated in detail. As shown in Figure 27, by 

supplying fuel to both stages, reduced NOx levels can be obtained due to the 

leaner combustion zones. However, poor combustion efficiency and ac:company-· 

Lng high CO and HC levels result. If the fuel is supplied to the pilot stage 

and only alternate main stage cups, somewhat lmver CO levels are obtained, 

but they remain too high for compliance with the EPA standards. But, if fuel 

is supplied to the pilot stage and to a 180 0 continuous sector of the main 

stage, significantly reduced CO levels result. With an equal fuel split 

between stages, a CO emission index of about 10 can be obtained. This is 

still Homewhat higher than. the levels obtained with pilot-stage-only operatLon, hut is reduced 90% from the levels obtained by fueling all of the main 

stage. Although this staging technique will produce CO and HC emission 

l.evels which allow compliance with the CO and HC EPA standards, several 

operational difficulties would be introduced if it is implemented. A third 

degree of freedom would be required in the already complex fuel control 

Hystem, and severe exit temIJerature gradients, both radial and circumferential, would result. Signif/icant further development would be required to !-

overcome these difficulti~;s. It therefore, appears that pilot-stage-only 

operati.on at approach is/'the only feasible fueling mode at this stage of 

development to meet the emission standards. 

Cruise Pollution Results - The emission levels of the Double Annular 

Combustor at the cruise condition are summarized in Table XVIII for each 

Phase II configuration. Some of these data are extrapolated from the climbout test points, as noted on the table. All configurations produced NOx 

levels significantly Imver than those of the production CF6-50 combustor, and 

very high combustion efficiencies. The lowest NOx levels were obtained with 

Configuration D13 where an NOx index of 6.6 was obtained with a combustion 

efficiency .above 99.8%. This represents a 60% NOx reduction from the standard 

CF6-50 combustor. Configuration D12, which is the Phase III engine prototype 

configuration, produced a NOx level of 7.3, also with an efficiency of over 

99.8%. 

EPAP Results - The status of each Phase II test configuration relative 

to l1{e 1979 EPA standards is shown in Table XIX for pilot-stage-only operation at approach. As can be seen, Configurations D7 to D14 all provided CO 

and HC levels which are below the standards. However, no configuration met 

the NOx standard. The lowest NOx EPA parameter (4.2) was obtained with 

Conflguration D13. This represents a 45% reduction relative to the production CF6-50 combustor. The NOx levels of the remaining configurations ranged 

from EPA parameters of 4.4 - 4.8, except for D3 which was higher. Significant further development would be required to meet the NOx standard with this 

,,-, ' 
.... ... 

-..) 

--, 

Table XIX. Double Arnular Combustor Emission Parameters with Pilot-Stage-Only 

Operation at Approach. 

--

Pilot/Total Fuel Split EPA2 (lb/1000 1b 

Configuration Idle App. Climb T/O CO HC NOx 

Std. Prod. - - - - 10.8 4.3 7.7 

Dl 1. 00 1. 00 0.20 0.18 6.9 1.3 4.6 

D2 1.00 1. 00 0.20 0.18 6.8 ],4 4.4 D3 1.00 1.UO 0.19 0.13 11.0 5.2 5.3 

D4(1) - - - - - - -

DS 1. 00 1. 00 0.19 0.23 6.6 0.3 4.7 

D6(1) - - - - - - -

1J7 1.00 1. 00 0.26 0.25 3.3 0.2 _(2) 

D8 1. 00 1.00 0.15 0.18 3.7 0.3 4.5 

lJ9 1. 00 1.00 0.17 0.18 3.1 0.3 4.4 

D10 1. 00 1. 00 0.19 0.14 2.9 Q.2 4.5 

011 1. 00 1. 00 0.15 0.14 2.9 0.4 L,·.6 

nI2;:, 1. 00 1. 00 0.15 0.18 3.4 0.4 4.5 

DB 1. 00 1. 00 0.19 0.13 3.0 0.3 4.2 

DIM 1.00 1. 00 0.14 0.13 4.2 0.5 4.8 

-, 

(1) Incomplete test 

(2) NOx data StWpel't 

1--" 

-." ....... •• ___ ... h _____ _ , 

.- -<' .- ... >.t .. __ 
: -

.. --]~-.. --

•• _ .,. ...... "t, .... 1. '\ ,..,. .. ..., 

.. --.--\~­

"I 

1- ---I I I 

combustor. The EPA parameters resulting from staging the fuel at approach 

conditions are summarized in Table xx. The differences in the EPA parameters 

for (~aeh configuration between Tables XIX and XX are due, only to the contrihutions of the approach condition to the overall EPA parameter. As shown, 

H~vcTnl configurations would meet the CO and HC standards with sector burning 

:1t approac.h. Other configurations might have, but that mode was not investigated in all tests. The 1m .st NOx EPA parameter was obtained with Configuration D13 with sector staging at approach, where an EPA parameter of 4.0 was 

obtained. This combination also produced CO and HC EPA parameters below the 

standards. 

Combustor Performance Results 

The key performance parameters for all full annular and sector configurations tested are tabulated in the data summary tables in Appendix C and D. 

In addition to the development of acceptable altitude relight rerformance, 

eliml.nation of harmful carbon formation and the attainment of satisfactory 

exit temperature profiles, two other major performance areas of concern were 

uncovered and resolved during Phase II. These were acoustic resonance from 

both combustor stages, and serious deficiencies with main stage cross-fire 

and combustion stability. 

Altitude Relight Results - The first Double Annular Combustor configuratjon evaluated during Phase II was deficient in altitude relight capability, 

as shown in Figure 28. Fu~J. flows approximately twice as high as desired 

(249 kg/hr) were required f0r ignition at the high altitude windmilling 

conditions. This was largely due to the lack of adequate combustor pressure 

drop to sufficiently atomize the fuel droplets at windmilling conditions with 

low pressure drop, air blast fuel injectors. When pressure-atomizing nozzles 

were installed in the pllot stage, with essentially no change :L11 .st7~rl cup 

configuration, significantly reduced fuel flows were required to ignite the 

comhustor. Fuel flows above the desired 249 kg/hr were required only at the 

high flight Mach number conditions. 

The addition of dilution air to the outer liner, required for CO reduction, was found to adversely affect the relight capabilities (Figure 28). 

But, as shown, when these holes were moved to the second panel downstream of 

the igniter location, the excellent relight charactet;'istics were restored. 

The introduction of the pilot stage primary swirler developed in the carbon 

('limi.nation tests did not affect the r.elight performance. The results 

obtained with the sector and full annular combustors configured with prototype pilot stage swirlers are compared in Figure 29. As shown, ignition was 

obtained over the entire required altitude windmilling map at the CF6-50 

engine minimum fuel flow of 249 kg/hr in both the sector and the annular 

tests. 

Ground Start:: Results - The. sea level ignition and subidle temperat1lre 

rise eharacteristics of the fincil design configuration are shown in Figure 

30. As shown, subidle'\temperature rise characteristics essentally equivalent to thQse of the production CF6-50 combustor were obtained over a wide 

I 

j 

1 

71 
72 

> . T>'~'" "'i" 

,,,>-.~...,.J,y ,.,,,-., 

Table XX. Double Annular Combustor EPA Emission Parameters with 

Two-Stage Operation at Approach. 

Approach EPA Parameter 

Pilot/Total Fuel Split Fueling 1b/1000 1b Thrust-Hrs. 

Configuration Idle App. Climb T/O Mode'" CO HC NOx 

Std. Prod. - - 10.~ 4.3 7.7 

D1 LOa 0.58 0.20 0.18 1 13.0 3.6 4.1 

LOa 0.30 0.20 0.18 1 16.7 3.1 3.9 

LaO a 0.20 0.18 1 12.3 1.9 3.9 

1. 00 0.59 0.20 0.18 2 11. 7 2.1 4.2 

LOa 0.58 0.20 0.18 2 11.3 2.6 4.1 

1. 00 0.44 0.20 0.18 2 12.0 2.2 4.0 

1.00 0.31 0.20 0.18 2 13.3 2.6 3.9 

LOa a 0.20 0.18 2 11.8 4.5 3.7 

D2 1.00 0.58 0.20 0.18 1 11. 2 2.5 4.3 

1. 00 0.29 0.20 0.18 1 15.2 ,2.5 3.0 

1.00 a 0.20 0.18 1 10.8 1.9 3.9 

D8 1.00 0.66 0.15-' 0.18 1 9.0 2.3 4.4 

1. 00 0.50 0.15 0.18 1 11.2 1.6 4.3 

1. 00 0.51 0.15 0.18 1 10.9 2.2 4.3 

LaO 0.41 0.15 0.18 1 12.5 1.6 4.2 

1. 00 0.32 0.15 0.18 1 14.0 1.6 4.1 

LaO 0.33 0.15 0.18 1 13.3 1.9 4.2 

D9 LOa 0.81 0.17 0.18 1 7.6 1.3 4.5 

1.00 0.65 0.17 0.18 1 9.0 1.7 4.3 

1. 00 0.51 0.17 0.18 1 10.9 1.8 4.2 

1. 00 0.80 0.17 0.18 2 6.1 0.9 4.5 

1. 00 0.65 0.17 0.18 2 6.9 0.9 4.4 

1. 00 0.51 0.17 0.18 2 7.3 1.0 4.2 

DlO 1. 00 0.75 0.19 0.14 2 6.0 0.9 4.6 

i. 00 0.75 0.19 0.14 2 5.4 1.0 4.6 

1.00 0.51 0.19 0.14 2 7.0 1.0 4.4 

1.00 I 0.49 0.19 0.14 2 6.5 1.4 4.3 

J..OO 0.29 0.19 0.14 2 9.3 1.6 4.1 

D11 1. 00 0.81 0.15 0.14 1 7.2 1.1 4.6 

1. 00 0.51 0.15 0.14 1 10.2 1.5 4.3 

1. 00 0.23 0.15 0.14 1 13.2 1.3 4.1 

1. 00 0.25 0.15 0.14 1 12.3 1.5 4.2 

1. 00 a 0.15 0.14 1 9.1 0.7 4.2 

1.00 0.80 0.15 0.14 3 5.6 0.7 4.8 

1. 00 0.79 0.15 0.14 3 5.4 0.9 4.7 

1. 00 0.50 , 0.15 0.14 3 3.8 0.4 4.6 

1. 00 0.50 0.15 0.14 3 3.8 0.4 4.5 , 1. 00 0.23 0.15 0.14 3 6.1 0.7 4.3 

Dl2B 1. 00 0.79 0.15 0.18 3 6.1 1.1 4.6 

1. 00 0.65 0.15 0.18 3 5.9 0.7 4.5 

1.00 0.51 0.15 0.18 3 4.5 0.5 4.4 

1. 00 0.40 0.15 0.18 3 4.1 0.5 I 4.4 

DB 1.00 0.61 0.19 0.13 3 4.7 0.5 4.1 

1.00 0.43 0.19 0.13 3 3.7 0.5 4.0 

----"-. 1.00 0.21 0.19 0.13 3 6.3 1.0 4.0 

D14A 1. 00 0.65 0.14 0.13 1 9.5 2.6 4.8 

1.00 0.44 0.14 0.13 1 11. a 2.0 4.7 

1. 00 0.22 0.14 0.13 1 12.1 1.6 4.5 

*Approach Fueling Hode: 

1 = All inner cups fueled 

2 = Alternate inner cups fueled 

3 = 1800 sector of inner cups fueled 

"'T 

( 

·T···· 

I 

\ 

I~ 

{ 

I 

r 

I 

I 

i 

I 

, 

, 

d 

1 

'

j 

·

~ 

.

-

·~

j 

\ 

1 
... ........ .. .. 

_

_ 

,

.. 

---1 

W 

12 12 

- 60° Sector Combustor Tests - Fuel and Air Temperature; Ambie

10 10 -. • Successful Light At 24.9 kg/hr 

• Successful Light At 279 kg/hI' 

8 8 • Successful Light At 376 kg/Ill' 

6 6 

• Successful Light At 463 kg/hr 

Successful Light At Fuel Flow 

Indicated 

<1 4 Pressure Blowout 

'" 2 2 Open - No Light .;:: 

<!) 

-0 0 o 

0.3 

1 

;:! 0.3 +> 0.5 0.7 0.9 0.5 0.7 0.9 

'M 

.:.> 

rl 

< 

Flight Much Number 

Airblast Fuel Injectors 18 kg/hI' Simplex Fuel Nozzles 

CJ Configuration DS2D (Like Dl) Configuration DS2B (Like D4) 

; !2 12 , 12 

:n 

Ul 

CJ 

;., 

P-.IO 101 -;;;r-T 10 

8 I-+-/"" I 81---+-/,--1--1. I 8 

6 I-I I ------r--, 6 I I I :'51 I 6 

"1 ir 4 II 4 

2r-r--r-- I 2 I 1r rr /h " 2 

o 

0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 

o 

0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 

o 

0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 

So Liner Dilution Air 

Configuration DS20 (Like D5) 

Flight Mach Number 

4.7% Dilution in 1st Panel 

Configuration DS 19 (Like D7) 

4.7% Dilution in 2nd Panel 

Configuration DS22 (Like D8) 

Figure 28. Effect of Design Modifications on Double Annular Combustor Altitude 

Relight Characteristics, 

I 

I 

:1. _ 

.. _u •. 

, .•. .............. .. 
... ",_=_=_._ .._ .. .. _____________ _ 

I i 

, 

,! r 

, 

I i, ,I 

.1 

.] 

-l 

..::. 

12 

10 

5. 8 .:.; 

tI) 

'0 

;:l 

6 

tI) 

..... , 

;:l 

!J} !J} 

Q) 

k 4 Pi 

2-

o 

.. , 

-....-..::i. I. 0 - .e-C1_-,L IT· 

• . --+---t----1 

V Relight 

Envelope 

• 

I I_ • 

J 

I 60° Sector Test 

I . Like Configuration D12 

• 

. 

--

. 

__ __ 

-L 

__ ____ 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

-:; 

-

T = 298 - 303 K Fuel 

T 3-= 298 - 306 K 

_I' 1° I 0 

.... 

• I I I .. V. I .•• 

lit/ : ., {-- '; - - - • C, 

. I 

V 

eSuccessful Light at 24

ONb Light . 

I I 

V IFuIl Alnula

I 

Configuratio

• 

l . "c. -

" .. '-"- --' 

0 .. 3 QA iO.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 

o 

1. 0 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0

Flight Mach Number Flight Mach Number 

Figure 29. Altitude Relight Characteristic:s of Final Double Annular Combustor Design Configur

__ ____ ::::: ___ :: _____ ::___ 
I--j 

, i 

~ 

I' • 

l ""'"" .""-~". '[ " ...... . 

I 

1 

\ 

I 

14oor----------r----------~--------~----------~--------~ 

::.:: 

_1200 

Q) 

~ 

::i 

1-' 

as 

~ 

Q) 

0-

S 

Q) 

~1000~--------~---~,-----+----------4-----------+----------4 

1-' 

.... 

>-: 

~ 

~ 

o 

.p 

III 

:;:J 

~ 800 

o 

u 

Simulated 3500 rpm 

60° Sector Tests 

~ Double Annular 

DS34, Like Dl2 

(] Production CFG-50 

600~ __ ~~~~--------~--------~--------~--------~ 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0 •. 06 

Fuel-Air Ratio.",,"_ 

300~--------_r----------+_--------~----------~--------~ 

CF6-50 Engine 

__ ~~m...EEe1...F..!2w_ 1----1

--0 - ;..., 

~ Jt 200 I------+----'~~~ 

B Ambient Inlet P3 , 

Blowout. 

~ 

~ Pilot Stage Only FueleQ 

Full Annular Test~' . 

; 100 "COnfigUration D1~~,._ .. _.--" ='--+-_____ --+-__ ~~ 

~ 

O~--------~--------~--------~--------~------~ 1 

Figure 30. 

2 3 5 6 

Combustor Airflow Rate, l\.g/sec 

Sea Level Ignition Performance of Final Double AnnUlar 

Combustor Design Configuration. 

75 

I 
-~--r~' ~-.-.- ~r----'-'--- .... ---r-------,.-.-~·--·-,--·-· 

~ ! .-~ -~ '-'" • y , ,,, • ., ,( l ( 

rnngc of fuel-air ratios, thereby ensuring good subidle acceleration charact~rlHtics with this pilot stage design. In addition, the fuel flows required 

for engine sea level starting are below or just slightly above the minimum 

CP6-50 engine scheduled fuel flow over the range of airflows normally encountered during ground start operation. 

Cnrbonina Results - Generally, small carbon deposits are permissible 

downstream of the primary swirler venturi throat since no possible restriction to the airflow would result. However, no carbon deposits upstream of 

the venturi throat or on the fuel nozzle are acceptabll~. In the initial test 

configuration, carbon deposition was present on both the fuel noz2;1e tips and 

the primary swirler, near the exit of the swirler vane passages. If allowed 

to accumulate over a period of time, these deposits might plug the fuel 

nozzle or the vane passages and produce serious combustor damage. 

Eight additional configurations were evaluated in the 12° sector rig 

and harmful carbon deposits within the swirl cups were I~liminated. Results 

arc shown in Figure 31. The important design parameter~, were found to be the 

primary swirler-to-vent:uri throat area ratio, and the distance from the 

primary swirler vane exit plane t.o the venturi throat. Based on these· / 

parameters, a primary swirler cod'~iguration, No. 9 in Figure 31, suitable for 

use in both combustor stages was da'."eJpped. This primary swir1er design was 

incorporated into the pilot stage of full annular combustor Configuration D12 

and is the design being procured for both stages of the Phase III engine 

demonstrator combustor. 

Acoustic Resonance Results - Acoustic resonance is not tolerable in an 

eng:l.ne application because of the danger. of cyclic mechanical failure of any 

combustor or engine hardware whose natural vibratory frequence is near the 

combustor-generated excitation frequency. No resonance was encountered 

during the Phase I tests. However, resonance was encountered and successfully overcome in Phase II. Results are summarized in Table XXI. 

Nenrly pure-tone acoustic resonance was encountered at high power 

operating conditions in Configuration D5 and at low power operating conditiops in Configurations D7-Dll. With Configuration D5, a strong 800 Hz 

8.lgnal was observed immediately upon ignition of the main stage. Visual 

observation of the main stage combustion zone in the 60° sector rig showed 

the flame to be very unstable. An unstable, unseatedf1.ame is capable of 

- I'; 

producing a resonant--frequency due to interactions with the combustor geometry. The unstable flame was apparently caused by the high airflow swirl cup 

nod l1ccompanying lean combustion zone incorporated in the main stage for NO,:' 

reciuc·tion. A return to t.he lowe,,t;airflow main ,stage swirl cup previously 

Lested in Phase I and Configurations D1 and DZ;, .~liminated the high power 

reHOTUlnCe condition in Configuration D7. It ~as not encountered again in 

subsequent configurations. However, the addition of buter liner dilution 

airflow tn D7 caused resonance at idle where only the pilot stage is fueled. 

A predominant 360 Hz resonant frequency was encountered at certain fuel-alr 

raUos. It disappea.red at combustor operating conditions ,above idle. This 

resonance was eliminated in Conf1.guration Dil with the. introduction efthe 

76 

l 

J 

I 

1 

j 

j 

I 

i 

1 
f 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I.' 

r

.

} -I ---------~r--

Y( I I 

1.2 _--___ --,-------,.-------,..-----..,.-----...., 

o 

I-' 

1.0 

O.H 

~--+-- CD -.-+-----1 

1------+----02--

.r:: Configuration 10 ~n o. () I------r-------r--------::s ~~ 6-6 

:5 I \ 9 7{;\ 

~ \ ~ 8 \ ~ \ .,-4 0.4 1-----+-----+-----+---\---+------~ ;.. 

;j 

.jJ 

~ 

Q) 

b 

I-' 

I 

~ 0.2 rl 

H 

'''; 

(h 

o 

o 

Symbol 

o 

o 

6 

Carbon on 

Fuel Nozzle Venturi 

Yes 

No 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

No 

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 

AES/AT Swirler-to-Venturi Throat Area Ratio 

Figure 31. Swirl Cup Carboning Test Results. 

0.5 

I. 

-~r-~----

i 

I 

1 

l 

"J 

) 

j 

I 

j 

j 

1 

1 

f 

j 

1 

i 

1 

1 

1 

i 

.. 

"1 

1 

j 

1 

1 

I 

I 

I 

77 1 

1 
r 

 

I 

 

 

I 

!/ 

r r~··· 

I 

, 

·r 1 

engine prototype pilot stage primary swirler design. The ftnal three full 

annular configurations (D12-D14) exhibited no resonant frequencies at any 

operating conditions. 

Table XXI. Double Annular Combustor Acoustic Resonance Summary. 

Pilot Stage Outer Liner Main Stage Swirl R@.sonance 

Configurati~ Primary Swirler Dilution Cup Airflow (%Wc ) Idle High 

D5 Original No 48.3 No Yes 

D7-Dll Original Yes 33.3 - 33.5 Yes No 

D12-D14 Prototype Yes 30.5 - 33.4 No No 

at: 

Power 

~o1nbustor Exit Temperature Profile Results - The exit temperature profIle characteristics of the Double Annular Combustor were found to be a 

strong function of fuel flow split between stages. With only the pilot stage 

fueled, the average profile was strongly outward peaked. With both stages 

fueled, and the fuel flow highly biased to the inner annulus (about 85% at 

takeoff), the profile was more nearly symmetrical. Figure 32 shows the wide 

range of profile factors encountered over the operating range of Configuration DI2B. At low power operating conditions such as idle and approach, 

fairly high profile factors are tolerable due to the low combustor inlet 

temperature and fuel-air ratio. At climbout and takeoff conditions, profile 

factors of about 1.1 or below, are mandatory for safe engine operation. As 

seen in Figure 32, these profile factors were obtained at climbout and 

takeoff with approximately 20% of the total fuel supplied to the pilot stage. 

This is also about the fuel split that provides the lowest NOx levels. 

A comparison of the average and peak radial temperature profiles at 

approach conditions with pilot-stage-only, two-stage uniform, and two-stage 

sector fueling modes is presented in Figure 33. As shown, the average profiles are somewhat less severe with two-stage operation. However, with both 

stages uniformly fueled unacceptably high CO and HC levels are produced. 

With the sector fueling technique, the temperature profile of half of the 

combustor, corresponding to the sector where the main stage is not fueled, is 

significantly colder than the average, while the profile of the fueled sector 

is significantly hotter than the average. Thus, in addition to the radial 

exit temperature variation and the normal circumferential temperature variations, with sector fueling, the turbine rotor would see significant thermal 

grndients as each blade entered and left the hot sector. Additional studies 

would be required to assess the impact on the mechanical performance of the 

turbine at the moderately high combustor inlet temperature corresponding to 

the approach operating condition. 

The exit temperature profile ~haracteristics of the Phase III combustor 

prototype configuration (D12) at takeoff conditions with 18% of the fuel 

78 

• 

J 

1 

1 

I 

j 

l 

j 

J 

1 

1 

j 

t 
~ 

f 

i 

I 

~-! 

" 

~-'~, ~. r---~' 

t 

L 

~ 

..... 1 

1.4r---------~----------~---------T----------~--------~ 

1.3,-__ ,..-

1 'J . -

1.1 

Full Annular 

Operating Mode 

o 

o 

o 

6 

Idle 

Approach 

Climbout 

Takeoff 

D12B 

1.0~ ________ ~ __________ ~ __________ ~ __________ ~ ________ ~ 

o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 

Pilot Fuel Flow/Total Fuel Flow 

Figure 32. Effect of Fuel Flow Split on Profile Factor for the Double 

Annular Combustor. 

79 

j 

1 

1 

i 

, 

L",~""",="",,,,,",,=~~~,,,,,,",~~~,,,,,,=s""F'",,,"~;=~'~_=~-"""-""'=-=' """' . ..,""'''''''''£ ... '''*_, ..... r _"", !!!!1!I!I!!_e~' ""·"''''' .. ;:II/OLiM?S!I!!!'!lijMt!o!lJ!!ij!l!l!-z!!!I!!!:!!!.!!!!!I!!!!!Il!!! __ - _____ ....:I\'f:'!'D!I _____ 1IIIil!1 
r i 

, -

'-'-~-l~-~ ..  --I~-~'-

., ~ T.'" ", • Y l.,.~ . ., H 1 

HO 

100~--------~--------~--------r-----~~~--------~ 

Pilot-Stage-Only Operation 

SO ~--------~---------1----------~)?-------r-----

60 

40 ~--------~--~~---~---------r--~"---~--------~ 

20 I-----/-~--------~-------~ 

o Peak ProIile 

o ~--------~--------~--------~------------------

100 r----------,.--------r--------~-----,._-----__, 

i-> 

.cl 

bO 

.,-1 

(lJ 

::r: HO 

(lJ 

b.O 

(1j 

Ul 60 ~--------~--------~---~ 

III 

(1j 

Po. 

..., 

.,-1 10 

:< 

ril 

..., 

t:: 

20 ~--------~-~~---I_+----------T 

(lJ 

() 

1-4 

(lJ 

Po. o ~------~------~--------~-----~--------

Stage 

40 I----./---+--------~ ~ 

o 

0.2 0.6 1.0 1.4 1.8 2.2 

6T /6T Local Average 

,li 

Figure 33. Effect of Fueling Mode on Exit T~mperature Profiles 

of the Double Annular Combustorh Approach 

Conditions. 

I 
f 

i 

t 

t 

! 

, 

--~~~-'---~r-~~~--'~-~~ ~r~--

I 

f 

supplied to the main stage, are shown in Figure 34. The average profile is 

more inward-peaked than the production CF6-50 combustor. The profile factor 

is about 1.1 for each combustor. Peak temperatures are higher for the Double 

Annular Combustor, especially at the inner immersions. Two values for the 

peak temperature are shown at the outermost ilmnersion for the Double Annular 

CombuHtor. The higher temperatur.,c-;f.f!,due to the presence of the centerbody 

crasH-fire slot. The lower tempe'~:':lt!:.ure is the highest peak temperature at 

that radial immersion elsewhere in the combustor exit plane. No attempt was 

made during Phase II to adjust the peak profile characteristics of the combustor. When the engine demonstrator combustor is received during Phase III; 

a series of tests will be conducted to trim the peak profile to th£:e levels 

required for engine operation. ~~ 

Mclin Stage Cross-Fire Results - Although some difficulties had been 

encountered with cross-firing the main stages of Configurations Dl-D5, ignition was always obtained. For Configuration D6, success-ful cross-fire ignition of the main stage could not be obtained over wide ranges Qf inlet temperature, pressure, airflow and fuel flow. A series of tests were conducted 

in the 60° sector rig which successfully resolved the cross-fire problem. 

These tests indicated two sources of concern. First, the lean stability 

of the main stage swirl cup was poor with a blowout fuel-air ratio of 0.015 

at approach inlet conditions and a very unstable flame ;l:one. A return to the 

lower airflow primary and secondary swirler utilized in Phase I and in Configurations Dl and D2 lowered the lean blowout limit to below 0.005. This 

swirl cup was incorporated into full annular test configurations D7 - D14. 

Second, even with the lower airflow rate in the main stage swirl cups, 

the fuel-air ratio required to achieve ignition of the main stage was greater 

than 0.035. A cutout in the centerbody in line with 'a swirl CliP, shown in 

Figure 18, significantly reduced the cross-fire fuel-air ratio of the combustor. The cross-fire slot was incorporated into the remaining Phase II 

full annular test configurations, and is also included in the Phase TIl 

demonstrator combustor design. With the two modifications, significantly 

fmproved main stage ignition and stability characteristics were demonstrated. 

An extensive mapping '6f the capabilities of the combustor was undertaken with 

Configuration DB which contained the same main stage swirl cup and dilution 

pattern .;1$ D12. Results are shown in Figure 35. Generally, the required 

main stag~ cross-fire fuel-air ratio was 0.012 - 0.014, depending on the 

pilot stage fuel-air ratio, and the lean blowout limit was 0.002 - 0.004. 

Summary of Combined Results 

Pollution-Performance Tradeoff Considerations - The lowest idle emission levels were achieved with the pilot stage design of Configurations D8-

Dn. Both CO and HC levels below the program goals were repeatedly obtained. 

However, the pilot stage swirl cup utilized in these configurations did not 

meet the altitude relight, carbon or ground start performance requirements 

and acoustic resonance was encountered at idle conditions. 

81 

.. ) 

. 

! 

~~-----""'>'ll!"--- ~"=X~~ __ ~~~"'!... _____________ I1111"=\":it.i.:;,jjj-;--.----____ ...-1) #;' ::;:,'"- 3Wtff =='~ ~ ;: 
.. -"',7 .f til_Pili liFfilflitllflijTlttlfajii!.-.1 .... """""" .. i+j ...... .. 

t.,j 

+> 

::: 

Ql 

u 

Ql 

a.. 

+> 

.c 

co 

'M 

Ql 

::: 

Ql 

co 

.. 

tI) 

'p.. 

+' 

'r-! 

IJq 

.:1 

(! 

100 

8,0 

60 

(J 

Average 

! 

4q 

c' 

20 

o 

0.7 0.8 0,9 

0 1,0 ,"--1---\:-1' /; I I 'J \ 1/' 6 Production CF6-50 

,'-...... 

o D12B (Wf /W f p ,t 

+----+1- \ I"' 6. \ .. 

I 7 - I I 

;: 0.18

.;tf Peak Profile (', 

I /.- ",- ", I /---+----+----1 

-" I d 

I 

;l.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1

!::.T / tsr local average 

Figure 34. Exit Temperature Profile Characteristics of Final Double Annular Comb

Design Configuration at Takeoff Conditionf'. 

(-; 
r

 t,

r

<

L<

cT«

<

 

L ... ' .... ... .. 

il 

,; 

1";.0 to 

u 

---., 

? 

--, 

0.020 

o 0.015 

.... 

;..> 

ex:: 

r.. 

.... 

<: 

Q) & 0.010 Q) 

b.O 

ro 

+' 

Ul 

G 

.... 

Ii!! 0.005 

o 

400 

3,&. 

.' ".-...t 

---. i 

I 

Ground, 

Idle 

Ar- I 

'.:-' 

... 

• 

.............. , 

I 

Flight 

Idle 

..:0-

I 

j 

• I 

Full Propagation 

Lean Blowout 

500 

I 

.:;) 

1 

I 

I 

I 

[ 

'''«< • 

I 

• • 

Approach 

-8--

Pil'o.t Stage 

Fuel-Air Ratio 

0 0.007 

0 O.Oll 

6. 0.014 

P = 3 atm. 3 

{]-

600 

Combustor Inlet Temperature, K 

{'''4 

I 

i i 

I 

• 700 

Double Annular Combustor Main Stage Cross-Fire/Stability Characteristics. e; 

L 

.... ",q;lIi<''' <;" ''''''W'''itt!n.< q trl""' ""'wi ••• w"" ...... '"',,,., <,<""<",
 

i 

I 

I 

 

, 

r > 

I ~. ,. 

~ ~""---'-'~"-""I , 

The lowest NOx levels were obtained with Configurad~n D13 in which 17% 

of the combustor airflow was used as main stage dilution; \ For the Phase III 

t'ngine tes~s, however, 17% of the airflow will not be avi.,llable for main 

Ktnge liner dilution. Due to the higher ?ressure levels at engine conditions, 

durability considerations require increased dome cooling airflows. Some ait 

dilution. air must also be provided for trimming the combustor exit temperature profiles. 

The additional airflow required for engine-combustor operation is not 

ava i lable from other sources. The liner cooling airflows" the pilot and main 

stage swirl cup airflows and the outer liner dilution airflows must remain 

unchanged because of the strong effect of each on the durability, performance, ignition and low power emission levels. It appear:s that the engine 

combustor design can incorporate only 10.6% of the combus:tor airflow as main 

stage dilution flow, rather than the higher airflow levels of Configuration 

D13. Configurations which meet this requirement are D7, DB, DIO, n11, and 

D12. 

!3est Engine-Combustor Compromise Desigr. - The Double Annular Combustor 

configuration which met or most closely approached all of the emission and 

perforinance goals, while adhering to the engine-combustor airflow design COn" 

stratrits. was Configuration D12. The pilot stage demonstrated satisfactory 

Bea Jlcvel and altitude ignition performance and carbon-free and resonancefree operhtion at all operating conditions. The main stage demonstrated 

satisfactory cross~fire ignition and stability characteristics~ suitable 

average exit temperature profiles at takeoff and resonance-free operation at 

all operating conditions, while incorporati~g a main stage dilution airflow 

of 10.9% in the first liner panel. The CO and HC EPA parameters of this 

configuration were below the 1979 standards, and were 3.4 and 0.4 respectively. The NOx EPA paramet'er was 4.S. While this value is above the 1979 

standard value, it represents a substantial reduction compared to current 

production CF6-S0 values. The Phase III engine demonstrator combus1tor design 

has been modeled as closely as possible after Configuration D12, -

RADIAL/AXIAL STAGED COMBUSTOR 

Phase I Results 

The Radial/Axial Staged Combustor produced the lowest CO and HC emission levels at idle and the lowest NOx emission levels. at takeoff of any 

combustor design tested during Phase LAt idle operating conditions, CO and 

HC reductions of 62% and 93%, respectively were obtained relative to the 

production CF6-S0 combustor. At takeoff a NOx reduction of 66% was obt:fhled. 

The areas of concern with this design at the beginning of Phase II were (1) 

the performance and emission levels at intermediate power operating conditions; (2) the control of ' the exit temperature profile characteristics; 

0) the possibility of flashback occurring in the premixing main stage; and, 

(4) the development of satisfactory altitude relight performance and carbon~ 

free operation of the pilot stage with no loss in emissions performance. In 

addition, further emission reductions were required at idle and takeoff 

operating conditions to meet the ECCP goals and 1979 EPA standards. 

I 

j 
! •. ~, -1 

~ 

: -

I ~ . . I . f 

i 

I, 

f . 

{ 

, i 

l· . 

... J ..

r-"o T <-. (- 

.,._~_.~., 

I .. -1

 

T(~ I I .... '\ , ..... .., ~ 

Exhaust Emission Results 

The key emission results for all full annular Radial/Axial Staged Combustor configurations at standard day inle, approach, climbout and takeoff 

operati.ng conditions are summarized in Table XXII. The standard day cruise 

results are summarized in Table XVIII. As in the Double Anuular Combustor 

tests, a range of fuel flow splits between pilot and main stage was investigated at each operating condition above idle to determine the effect on 

emission levels. All of these splits are tabulated in Table XXII. 

Idle Pollution Results - HC levels below the program goals and CO levels 

very near the program goals were obtained at the standard day idle condition 

wtth this combustor during Phase II. The CO and HC levels of significant 

configurations are shown in Figure 36 for a range of fuel-air ratios. 

The final Phase I configuration had produced idle emission levels significantly higher than any previous configuration. Turning vanes installed 

in the main fnage flameholder array or inserts in the vane passages of the 

ptlot stage secondary swirlers were design changes which might have produced 

the high 1.dle emission levels. The effects of these two design changes were 

assessed 1.n the first two Phase II test configurations. The pilot stage of 

Configuration RI was essentially identical to the last Phase I configuration, 

with some of the turning vanes in the main stage flameholder :array removed. 

In Configuration R2, the secondary swirler inserts were removed and four:vane 

passages of the secondary swirler were closed to. maintain the correct flow 

area. As shown in Figure 36, the idle emission levels of Configuration Rl 

were hlgh, but the levels of Configuration R2 were significantly reduced~ This 

indicated that the secondary swirler vane inserts were responsible for the' 

high idle emission levels. In the 60 0 sector tests, pressure-atomizing fuel 

nozzles were found to improve the altitude relight performance of the combustor. Similar nozzles were installed in the full annular combustor for 

Configuration R4. The resulting HC levels were significantly lower than any 

previous configuration and met the program goal. The CO levels were reduced 

from previous Phase II configurations, especially at fuel-air ratios below 

O.OlJ. The addition of many small dilution holes in the pilot st~ge, evaluated with Configuration R6, reduced the CO levels by almost 50% at the design 

idle fuel-air ratio, and the program goal for CO was closely approached. The 

HC levels were also slightly lowered. In contrast, to the Double Annular 

Combustor CO characteristics at idle, the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor 

produced CO levels which are nearly constant over a wide range of idle fuelair ratios. 

Climbout and Takeoff Pollution Results - The NOx emission characteristics of this concept were found to be highly dependent on the fuel flow split 

between stages at the climbout and takeoff operating conditions. As shown in 

Figure 37, NOx levels below the program goal at takeoff were achieved with 

several configurations with the fuel flow highly biased to the main stage. 

Unl1.ke the Double Annular Combustor, however, as a greater proportion of the 

fuel was scheduled to the main stage, combustion efficiency decreased along 

with the NOx level. In order to maintain high combUstion' efficiency levels 

consistent with engine requirements, this design could not be~operated 'at the 

85 

T 

I 

, 

J 

j 
GIl 

c:n 

'i c.' 

1-" 

1:1 'i.:. 

D 

Table XXII. Radial/Axial Staged Combustor Emission Results. 

Idle Approach C1irubout Takeoff 

Wf - P3 Wf P3 Wf P3 Wf Conf. Rdg. E1, Rdg. 'Test"":£ E1 Rdg. Test 2 E1 Rdg. Test E1 

No. No. Wit Co. .. J J NOx i No. atm Wft CO I HC I NOx No. atm Wft CO I HC I NQx No. atru Wft CO I HC 

meas. @ 2.9 atm corr. to H .• t atm corr. to 25.9 atm corr. to 2

Std. I 

Prod. - - 73.0. 30.0 2.5 - - - 4.3 0 10.0 - - - 0 .• 3 0 29.5 - - - 0.2 0 

R1 5 1.00(1) 86.8 2.2 7 3.4 1.00 4.8 0.1 6.3 10 4.8 0.33 18.7 0.4 23.1 13 4.8 0.34 2.8 0.03 

3 1.00 88.7 26.2 2.3 23 6.8 1.00 5.4 0.2 6.9 9 4.8 0.28 31.4 1.2 16.7 12 4.8 0.25 4.4 0.1 

24 3.4 1.00(1) 5.4 0.7 5.5 8 4.8 0.23 40.0 2.5 11.2 19 9.6 0.26 6.0 0.1 27 3.4 0.53(2) 83.5 27.3 7.9 11 4.7 0.16 16.0 0.5 21 6.9 0.53(2) 89.6 40.5 7.7 18 9.6 0.17 15.1 0.5 

- 28 3.4 0.42(2) 87.2 45.3 4.8 16 4.8 0.21(1) 11.6 0.6 

20 6.8 0.42(2) 90.7 58.6 5.0 15 4.8 0.17(1) 18.1 1.5 

25 3.4 0.47(1,2)74.3 25.5 5.5 14 4.8 0.13(1) 29.1 3.9 

22 6.9 0.42(1,2)77.7 42.9 5.1 17 9.6 0.12(1) 28.5 2.9 26 3.4 0.28(1,2)82.8 49.6 4.0 

R2 61 1.00 53.6 5.7 3.0 66 4.8 1.00 2.1 0.2 9.1 81 4.7 0..34(3) 7.4 0.1 23.2 85 4.6 0.30 1.7 0.03 

71 4.8 0.43 93.1 38.7 I 3.6 83 4.8 0.34(2) 6.1 0.1 21.8 86 4.6 0.21 3.7 0.1 

70. 4.8 0.35 82.6 45.1 3.5 82 4.8 0.23 11.3 0.4 14.5 87 4.8 0.17 8.9 0.1 

73 4.8 0.28 108.1 93.6 1.8 84 4.6 0.23 10.5 0.2 14.2 

67 4.7 0.54(3) 67.1 17.1 7.8 

69 4.8 0.42(3) 75.2 30.9 4.6 

72 4.8 0.35(3) 98.9 56.9 2.6 

R3 129 1.00 51.9 6.7 3.1 135 3.4 1.00 1.4 0.1 7.5 139 4.7 0.33 15.3 0.7 20.7 145 4.7 0.30 4.0 0.1 

153 6.8 1.00 2.5 0.2 8.0 151 9.5 0.32 18.1 0.6 19.6 148 9.5 0.30 2.1 0.2 

138 4.7 0.23 33.3 3.G 11.9 144 4.7 0.22 11.0 0.4 150 9.5 0.23 32.5 2.8 12.0 147 9.5 0.22 6.1 0.3 137 4.7 0.18 46.6 11.1 8.1 143 4.7 0.17 21.9 1.9 149 9.5 0.18 49.5 10.0 8.6 146 9.5 0.17 15.0 1.5 140 4.8 0.33(3) 13.5 0.4 25.6 141 4.7 0.18(3) 29.5 2.6 15.1 

R4 188 1.00 44.8 1.3 3.0 193 3.A_ 1.00 1.5 0.03 7.6 200 4.8 0.45 30.4 1.0 27.6 204 4.8 0.30 8.6 0.3 

! 199 4.8 0.32 35.0 1.5 15.7 203 4.8 0.22 18.3 1.0 

i 198 4.8 0.22 48.2 5.4 8.1 202 4.8 0.17 34.0 4.8 

197 4.8 0.18 58.8 15.3 5.0 

R5 211 1.00 40.4 2.2 3.0 215 -3.4 1.00 1.3 0.03 8.5 223 4.8 0.33 21.8 0.8 11.4 225 4.7 0.22 17.5 2.2 

220 4.8 0.23 32.3 3.3 6.3 224 4.7 0.18 23.1 2.0 

219 4.7 0.19 52.2 15.4 4.5 

R6 260 1.00 23.9 0.3 2.8 263 3.5 1.00 1.0 0.03 9.3 271 4.8 0.33 6.7 0.6 13.6 - - - - - 

267 0.50 112.5 62.6 2.9 266 3.5 0.35 81.3112.1 1.3 

R7 377 1.00 48.8 7.9 2.6 392 3.4 1.00 0.8 0.1 6.4 398 4.7 0.32 27.4 2.2 1.2 400 4.7 0.25 13.0 0.7 

(1) Al:ternate pilot injectors fueled (2) Alternate pairs of main injectors fur\ed (3) Alternate main injectors fueled . , 

397 4.7 0.23 59.2 18.0 3.0 399 4.8 0.21 35.4 5.3 

396 4.7 0.18 41.4 34.2 1.6 401 9.5 0.21 27.4 5.9 

l , ..... ---.... I"'MH'" '" ! to " ' ...... 16 .0. .....""""'-'-' ........................... .. ..-..... _ .. l.& __ .- .. _.. -,- ,-
: (

11 

\ I 

; I , . 

i , 

I 

I 

.. f 

r 

1 • 

r 

r 

'J 

, 

[, fl 

I 

i [ 

[' 

1 

.... 

Q) 

:s 

rab/) 

~ 

....... 

b/) 

>< ell 

'tI 

r:: 

.... 

s:: 

0 

.... 

III 

III 

.... 

EI 

ra::I 

~ 

.... 

ell 

:s 

rab/) 

~ 

........ 

b/) 

>< ell 

i 

.... 

r:: 

0 

.... 

III 

III 

.... 

r9 

0 

C,) 

---11-7 Best Phase I Configuration-Corrected to Std. Day Idle 

Phase II Baseline 

40 

30 

20 

I 

10 

0 

100 

! 80 

60 

40 

20 

ORI 

o R2 

l:SR4 

, ClR6 

I 

Alternate Pilot Secondary Swirler Configuration 

Pressure-Atomizing Nozzles 

Pilot Stage Dilution 

o L-______ ~ ______ ~~~~ ______ ~ ______ ~ 

0.006 

Figure 36. 

0~008 0.010 0.012 0.014 0.016 

Fuel-Air Ratio 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor Idle Emission 

Characteristics. 

--- ."

87 
r

 , ........ .., N

,r 

r' 

, 

l( 

•• .. .. -

\1: 

IX 

. '. 

--

40. I 40 

CLIMBOUT I TAKEOFF 

-' 

J 

I.Ll 

30r 1.1..0:: 30 ::::> 

0"> Vl .... 71= 99.8_ cro 

_ 

I.Ll ,./ 71= 99.6 % eO:: 25 25 0'lQ.. 

.L&J 

x Z 

I.Ll -

'20 L I V I 20 

- L&J 

20 

01-

Vl 0 15 0 Rl 15 Vl LLJ 

_ t- 0 R2 

:E u D. R3 

0 R4 

10 t x 0:: 10 0 0 0 R5 ZU 0 R6 . 71= 97.3 % 

0 R7 

5 ;J£}lo 95. 6 5 

0 0 

0 .2 .4 .6 .8 1.0 0 .• 2 .4 .6 .8 

PILOT STAGE FUEL FLOW 

TOTAL FUEL FLOW 

Figure 37. Effect of Fuel Flow Split on NOx Emission Levels of the Radial/Axial 

Staged Combustor at Climbout and Takeoff Conditions. 

1 

1.0 
r' 

L 

, 

, 

, , 

i 

i I 

, ~ 

, 

i 

fuel flow split which produced the lowest NOx level. As shown in Figure 38, 

a direct tradeoff between NOx level and CO level exists. In order to assess 

the effects of design changes on emission levels, the NOx levels of different 

configurations must be compared at the same CO (or efficiency) level if 

meaningful conclusions are to be drawn. The differences between configurations tended to be more pronounced at climbout conditions than at takeoff. 

Three principal approaches for increasing combustion effictency levels 

at high power operating conditions while maintaining low NOx production were 

investigated. These were: varying the amount of main stage airflow passing 

through the premix passage; varying the flame holder wetted perimeter; varying the premix passage length. 

Main stage premix passage airflows were 64 percent for Rl, 18 percent 

for R2 and R6, and 47 percent for R5 and R7. Results of varying premix 

passage airflow can be seen in Figures 37 and 38. Both R2 and R6 showed 

significant improvements in NOx and CO levels compared to R3 especially at 

the climbout condition. However, flashback was encountered with ConfiguraUon R6. Configurations R5 and R7 produced CO and NOx levels lowet than Configuration RI, but somewhat higher than Configurations R2 and R6. Flashback 

was encountered with Configuration R5. 

The effect of increasing the wetted perimeter of the flameholder array 

by doubling the number of flameholders to promote mixing, can be assessed by 

comparing the test results of Configurations Rl and R3. A. slight improvement 

in NOx and CO was indicated at climbout with the 120 flameholder array of 

Configuration R3. No significant difference was noted at takeoff. 

The effect of increasing the premixing length can be determined from a 

comparison of the test results of Configuration R2 versus R6, R3 versus R4, 

and RS versus R7. For Configurations R2 and R6, and Configurations R5 and 

R7, increasing the premixing length by shortening the main stage fuel tube 

length produced no noticeable change in the NOx or CO emission levels at 

climbout or takeoff. For Configurations R3 and R4, the increased premixing 

length of R4 resulted in higher CO and NOx levels, particularly at climbout. 

The very high main stage airflow (about 65%) and the improved mixing resulted 

from the added mixing length, apparently produced a mixture which was too 

lean for efficient combustion. 

The smoke levels of all test configurations of this combustor were very 

low at high power operating conditions (Append:!.xC), generally below a smoke 

number of two. Al~though somewhat higher levels would be expected at engin,~ 

p~essures, the smoke levels of this combustor should not be a source of 

cdncern. 

I I AEProach Pollution Results - Several fuel staging techniques were 

examined at approach. These techniques included: (1) fueling all injectors 

o~ both stages, (2) fueling all injectors of the pilot stage, and either 

a]ternate or alternate pairs of injectors of the main stage, (3) fueling 

alternate injectors of the pilot stage and alternate pairs of injectors of 

the main stage, and (4) fueling the pilot stage only. Results are presented 

in Figure 39. 

'~1~'~ "~'~, 

t 

89 
r 

i: 

'

'~~',',"" \\ 

'" 

'I !i 

" ii 

60 

G::i \ ....I 0:: LI.J :::J =:) III LL. I III 

~ ~ , LI.J 

, 0:: 

c:JI 0..40 

I.i.I x· z LI.J 

0 (,!) 

z z 

I.i.I 

z 0 

0 ~ 

III 020 

en ~ 

:E (.) 

LI.J LI.J 0:: 

0'0:: (.) § 

0 

0 5 

Figure 38. 

90 

10 

40 " 

~RI 20 

..... ~'R3 

.... £1 .... R6 D_ R2 

0 

15 20 25 30 35 0 5 10 

NOx EMISSION INDEX, g/kg FUEL 

(CORRECTED TO ENGINE PRESSURE) 

TAKEOFF 

15 20 25 30 

Tradeoff Between NO and CO Emissions at Climbout and Takeoff 

Conditions for the ladial/Axial Staged Combustor. 

0 

35 

''''l~'-'' 

I 

j 

11 1/ j 

11 : , i ; 

; 

'J 

l 

I 

j 

1 

j 

"~ 

i 

, 
U 

n t ; 

f' I 

1 

I { 

I 

l 

1. 

!. 

J 

o 

200 

.... Q) 100 ,Q) ~ -)::1 ::s 

r... til 

til 50 bO Q) 

~, .:..: 0. '" 

bO Q) 

~ r:: 20 ~ OM Q) bO " ~ .91¥ 10 0 ~ ., 0 

,~ '6 III Q) 5 III .... ,~ CJ 

-'--~~ I - I 

I I 

i I 

1 I 

! I 

ORl 

: I 

OR2 

OR3 1"-f--. I 

c6R4 I 

-

.'\ 

~R5 0 

S Q) 

~ M 

M 

0 0 2 

uu 

ClR6 

I .1 ! OR7 

1 I 

15 

.... I 

Q) Q) I 

::s "" '" ::s I 

til 

bOtIl 

.:..: Q) I 

"... ;.. bO 0. >. 10 I., 

~ Q) ,~ 

x r::" Q) 'M 'M 

" I=l ~3 ~~:x: 

~ 0 '0 

,~ f ~ til '0"0 5 til Q) r:: ,~ ., ro 

S iJ+' ~ Q)CIl 

M 

X M " o 0 ~ 

Zu CIS 

I I 

I 

I~ B11 ~~ 

'/ H 

/i§ I 

0 

0 o 0 CJ /0 ,PC] 

0 

o 0.2 0,4 0,6 0.8 1.0 

Pilot Fuel Flow/Total Fuel Flow 

It'igure 39. Effect of Fuel Flow Split on Emission Levels of the Radial/ 

Axial Staged Combustor at Approach Conditions. 

. "~.;:" ,~. , .. 

91 

. -. -"~r~'-

) 

I 

I , 

I 

1. 

j 

i 

1 

I 

--

/' 

j 

I 

~ l 

j 

J 

i 

1 

i 

~ 

I , 

j 

l 

~ 

~ 1 

1 
L. 

The first three techniques produced high CO levels, with no discernible 

differences between the results obtained with each two-stage fueling mode 

tested. None of the two stage fueling modes shows any promise of achieving 

the 1979 EPA CO emission standard. As with the Double Annular Combustor, 

pilot-stage-only operation at approach appears mandatory with the Radial/ 

Axial Staged Combustor to achieve the standards. 

Cruise Pollution Results - The emission levels at the standard day 

cruise condition are summarized in Table XVIII. As noted in the table, some 

of/these data are extrapolated from the climbout test points. All configuratlens produced NOx levels below those of the production CF6-50 combustor, but 

th~ combustion efficiency levels were also somewhat lower. Tradeoffs between 

NOx levels and combustion efficiency are shown in Figure 40. Generally, the 

be~t results were obtained with Configurations R2, R5, R6, and R7, all of 

wh~ch had decreased main stage airflow levels. At a combustion efficiency of 

99%, a NOx emission index of about 7 was obtained with these configurations. 

Although the emission levels at the cruise condition are not currently regulated,- very high combustion efficiencies must be maintained at this flight 

mode in order to maintain current CF6-S0 fuel economy performance. 

EPAP Results - The status of each Phase II test configuration relative 

to the 1979 EPA standards is shown in Figure 41. Data from several Double 

Annular Combustor configurations are also included for comparison. All data 

are for pilot-stage-only operation at the approach condition. Data for each 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor configuration are presented as multi-point 

curves rather than single points to include different pilot to main stage 

fuel splits at climbout and takeoff. Table XXIII presents a summary of EPA 

parameter results for the fuel splits which produced the lowest CO/HC EPA 

parameters, the lowest NOx EPA parameters and the lowest combined parameters 

for each configuration. 

I 

With pilot-stage-only operation at approach, several Radial/Axial Staged 

Co~bustor configurations meet the HC standard. Several configurations would 

arso meet the NOx standard, but at the expense of the CO standard. No single 

configuration approached the CO standard, even though excellent CO levels 

w~re obtained at idle. Unlike the Double Annular Combustor, where nearly all 

of the EPA parameter CO level came from the idle flight mode contribution, 

nearly half of the CO EPA parameter level of the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor was produced at climbout and takeoff. Configuration R6 showed the 

most promise of approaching the CO standard, but flashback was encountered 

arid data at all the flight modes were not obtained. If the pilot stage 

emission levels at idle and approach for Configuration R6 are combined with 

the emission levels at climbout and takeoff from Configuration R2, which had 

essentially the same main stage configuration, CO, HC and NOx EPA parameters 

of 5.4, 0.1 and 4.3 could be obtained. An alternate fuel split at climbout 

and takeoff would reduce the CO EPA parameter to 4.4 but the NOx EPA parameter would climb to 5.9. 

92 

U 

II 

n 

•• 

n .. 

il ~. 

~ 

] .. -f ,.i 

-t 

... 1 -~ 

J 

1 _i 

] 

j 

II 

n 

TI ... 

If 

~l I 

j 

l 

l 

, 

I 

1 

! 

~ 

t 

1 

1 

1 

~ 

l 

1 't 

"~ 

W 

~ 

, ~ 

1 

j 

i 

1 

I 

! 

i ., 

, 

t 

I 

~ J 

I 

> 

i 

i 

i 

t 

J 

i 

~ 

/ 

;,tl 

1 

1 

f 
[ 

,. 

..-4 

QI 

:3 

llI) 

"' llI) 

X 

-

QI 

'0 

c: c: 

o 

·rot 

{/l 

(/l 

·rot 

e 

i 

x 

-1 .... "' ... -" .. ,. 

,,_. __ ._ .f •.. _.,_t 

20 

I 

Data Corrected to 

T3 = 733 K 

15 r 

p 3 = 11,4 atm 

V = 24,4 m/sec R 

f = 0,0210 

H = 

I 

10 

51 

80,d 90.0 95.0 

- -. -.-

Standard Production 

Combustor ):( 

L 

__ 

' 

o R1 

+/ / OR2 ---.

I I . Wfp 

Increasing 

f t 

98,0 99.0 99,50 99,80 

Combustion Efficiency, percent 

6R3 

CJ R5 

+-

__ 

4-0 R6 _f

o R7 

99, 9 -99.95 99

Figure 40. Tradeoff Between Combustion Efficiency and NOx Emission Level at Cruise Con

the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor. 

" 

- ,.-

.... ,.., .. 

-

-

. 

.-- -- .

• ... .... ...... ... ............. __ •• _ ... " .• 'k .. :ni!o!iHeIrIti.JA H l' "".'t# H' n. oJ it'f!:!"tH'$
i, 

I 

I 

i; 

'iii 

" " 

91 

... J--

6 r-------~------~----~~~------~------__ R1 

4 ~--------IProduction Combustor + 

2 ~~~~+----n~-r----~~~~----4·I-----~ 1979 D2 Dl 

EPA Standards 0 0 

o 

D7-D13 

o ~----~~~~----~----~~----____ L-______ -J 

1,2 

8 

4 

o 

R2 & R6 

Production Combustor 

\ 

R2 & R6 

D8 _ D13 k D5 q R2 

I---~~ ~)~1_~ , ~ R5 ~':-_.....j~~V"~ 

o 

1979 EPA 

Standards 

4 8 12 16 

CO EPA Parameter, Ibs/lOOO Ib Thr.ust-Hours 

Figure 11. EPA Parameter Tradeoffs for the Radial/Axial 

Staged Combustor. 

20 

'0. '1~-"-~ 

I 

I, 

j 

I. • 

; I 

" I 

. ; ; 
.... 

. '.' 

--

- -

r--i c:l 

'II 

£)l;-f 

f:::..tJ;; 

WI 

c-: 

________ 

r.::::::I r.::::::l r .J 1:'.:"":' ..... _-.... t.:,:: .. L_-':: L_.J ... j 

", 

Table Staged Combustor EPA Emission Parameters •. _ 

Pilot/Total Fuel Split EPAP (lb/lOOO lb thrust-hrs) 

Configuration Idle App. Climb T/O CO HC NOx Comments 

Std. Prod. - - - - 10.8 4.3 7.7 

Rl 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.34 15.7 4.6 6.2 Low CO/HC 

1.00 1.00 0.28 0.17 18.3 4.7 4.1 Intermediate 

1.00 1.00 O.AL. 0.17 19.6 3.2 Low NOx 

1.00 0.42(1) I 0.28 0.17 24.9 8.6 3.9 Approach staging 

R2 1.00 1.00 0.34 0.30 8.5 0.8 j.ow CO/HC 

1.00 1.00 0.23 0.30 9.2 0.8 4.8 Intermediate 

--'- 1.00 1.00 0.23 0.l7. _. 9.6 0.8 4.3 Low NOx 

1.00 0.54(2) 0.23 0.17 15.5 2.4 4.2 Approach staging 

. .. 

R3 1.00 1.00 0.32 0.30 1l.0 1.8 5.4 Low CO/HC 

1.00 1.00 0.23 0.22 p.3 2.1 3.7 Intermediate 

-'-1.00 1.00 0.18 0.17 -16.4 3.2 3.1 Low NOx 

R4 - --1.00 ,\ 1.00 0.45 0-.30 -- 11.3 0.3 5.6 Low CO/HC 

1 1.00 1.00·.:\ 0.22 0.22 .... 14.5 1.0 2.9 Intermediate 

1.00 LaO 0.18 0.17 17.0 2.7 2.2 Low NOx 

R5 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.22 9.9 0.5 3.4 LQw 

1.00 1.00 0.23 0.22 11.4 0.9 2.7 Intermediate 

1.00 1.00 0.19 0.18 14.7 2.7 2.3 Low NOx 

R6(3) _. - - - - - -

.-

R7 1.00 1.00 0.32 0.25 11.6 1.5 2.6 Low CO/HC 

1.00 1.00 0.18 0.21 14.5 6.5 

, 

1.6 Low NOx 

R2/R6(4) - 1.00 1.00 0.3'4" 0.30 4.4 0.06 5.9 LowCO/HC 

1.00 1.00 0.23 0.30 5.0 0.08 4.8 Intermediate 1.00 1.00 0.23 0.17 5.4 0.08 4.3 Low NOx 

1.00

1 

0.50 _ .. - 0.23 0.1'7 15.6 5.8 3.7 Approach staging 

(1) Alternate stage injectors and alternate pairs of main stage injec'tors fueled 

(2)Alternate main stage injectors fueled 

(3)Incomplete test 

.. 

(4)Idle and approach data from R6 combined witp"climb and takeoff da,ta from.R2 

'-

---- 

It 

•. :L ____ , __ ... " .... _ "", . ., .. , "'''.''''-''''_-_''''''_''' __ '''--- ------.. ----.-" .. 

,;w/.;;tM.! •. .... _ ...... ",; ...... H}"'il" .. .......... • wi ...... ' -"'::::::,:'::::==:: 
Combustor_Performance Results 

The key:·performance parameters for each full annular and sfi!ctor confl.guration tested are tabulated in the detailed data summary tables in 

Appendix C and D. 

Altitude Relight Results - The first Phase II Radial/Axial Staged Combustor configuration had poor altitude ignition characteristics, as shown in 

Figure 42. Almost a 5 km altitude deficiency existed at low flight Mach 

numbers, with the low pressure drop, airblast fuel injector design. When. 

pressure-atomizing nozzles were installed in the pilot stage, with essen- . 

tially no other change in swirl cup configuration, successfullightoffs were 

obtained over nearly the entire required windmilling map. However, the 

required fuel flows were higher than the target level of 249 kg/hr. An 

alternate downstream ignitor location was ~valuated in the sector tests, and 

as shown in Figure 42, the altitude relight requirements were met. Thus, 

with an alternate ignitor location, satisfactory relight performance was 

. obt~ined wlth this combustor design. - . 

Ground Start Results - The sea level ignition and subidle temperature 

rise characteristics of Configuration R7 are .shown in Figure 43. tempera-';' 

ture rise characteristics similar to those of the production CF6-50 combustor 

were obtained over a wide range of fuel-air ratios, thus assuring "good subidle acceleration characteristics. The fuel flows required for sea level 

ignition are slightly higher than the CF6-S0 ,lengine niinimu~ scheduled fuel 

flow, and the lean blowout limits are somewrrat ~igh, especially at the high 

combustion air flows. It should be noted, however:, that this configuration 

did not utilize the same pilot stage swirl cups as the final Double Annular 

Combustor design, since the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor testing was terminuted midway through Phase II. It is expected that with the final Double 

Annular pilot stage swirl cups, satisfactory sea level ignition and effiiciency characteristics would be obtained with this combustor. 

Carboning Results - The carbon-free swirl cup eiol~tion,discussed in 

the Double Annular Combustor section of this chapter, is directly applicable 

to the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor as well. The prim~ry swirlef developed 

in these tests was not tested in a Radial/Axial Staged Combustor full annular 

tet:it, since the testing of th'is combustor was terminated before development 

ofc the carbon-free swirl cup was completed. It would be expected, however, 

to produce carbon-free operation in the pilot stage of the Radial/Axial 

Staged Combustor. 

Flashback Results - Three 12° sector combustor configurations, simulating annular Configurations R3, RS, and R7 were tested to assess the capability of this concept to avoid flashback. The key features investigated 

were the safety of increased premixing length9f R5 and the reduced main 

stage airflow of R5 and R7. More severe combustor inlet conditions were 

tested in these sector tests than were achievable in the annular tests. 

Combustor inlet pressures and temperatures up to 15 at~ and 830 K were 

investigated. No flashback or auto-ignition was obtained in these sector 

tests over a Ji'ange of main stage fuel-air ratios up to 0.022. ;, ; 

96· 

i 

j 

I 

J 

1 

~ 

1 

j ...... ~ I 

1 

I : 

1 ... ~ 

~ 

"':"t 1 j .it 

t; ! 
I 

" • 4 ' ~ .. , " 

Fli;:h t Much Numb" " 

A,rblast Fuel I n Jec t o r s 

r. o nfi.:ur a lI nn RS lA (L, ke Rl) 

(1 , 3 0 , 5 0,7 0 ,9 

18 kg/ hr Simplr. Fuel o~z le s 

Con figuration R~ lD (L, ke R4 ) 

_.1. ~ y . • c'lll'_ 

-

I 

1-- / 

:,.....-

- ~ - I 

-I0 . 3 0 , 5 0 .7 0.9 

Flight Mach Numbe r 

Forward 19 n i l or LOCUL 1 0n 

Con r i gu 1".1 tion RS2A 

A t L 1 9:n l LOI" La a t ion 

Conf' l;u ,'nt ion RS2B 

_ 60 0 S C l o r Combu s Ln t" T "' s l s 

- Fu el and Ai.' Temp r a tul'c; Amb lcl1l 

-

Succ ssful Li ght at 249 kg/ hI 

• Success fu i Li ght at 376 kg/ hr 

• Suc c essful Li ght at 46 ~ kg / hr 

):( Pressure Dl owou t 

Open - No Li ght 

I g nIto r LocatIo ns E 

Figur8 42 . Effect o f Design Modifications on Radial/ Axial Staged Combustor 

Relight Characteristics. 

AI; PAGE IS 

) QUA TTY 

97 
, 

l 

f 

 

i 

, 

I 

I 

98 

·~-l~~--·~- .. ].~-~-~. ~ ~~ ---~r 

_ ._ T 

1400 

:.:: ~ 1200 1-----+----_+----- Q) 

'" ::l 

+> cU 

~ '" 

S 

Q) 

~ 1000 .------V( 

+> .r-! 

~ 

I":( 

'" o 

+> Ul 

::l 

~ o 

u 

800 

Simulated 3500 rpm 

Full Annular Tests 

6 R7 

[] Production CF6-50 

I 

600L-__ ~ ____ ~ ________ ~ ________ ~ ________ ~ ________ __ 

0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 

Fuel-Air Ratio 

400 

300 b---~--~-----_+----------+_~~~--_r-----~ 

200 

. I _--;---0 

-- ~ ~.....a-::::t:: __ 

0--1 

Ambient Inlet P 3' T 3. 

Pilot Stage Only Fueled 

Full Annular Test 

Configuration R7 

100 ~-------+-----~~~-~---+_-----_r-------_4 o Lightoff 

(] Full Propagation 

o Lean Blowout 

o ~ ______ , __ ~ ________ .~ ________ ~ ________ ~ ________ __ 

1 

Figure 43. 

2 3 4 5 6 

COmb\lRtor Airflow Rate, kg/s 

Sea Level Ignition Performance of Final Radial/ 

Axial Staged Combustor Configuration. 

• i 

1 

1 

j 
 

 I, 

I i 1 

 

L. 

1 · L 

j 

• 

j 

\ 

1. 

j ~. 

.... 

• • 

, . 

j 

\ 

I. 

. --~~ .]~'~~J-'-~~ .... ,. --~~ ...... ......-~ 

. -. .. - .,.. 

However, flashback was enc.ountered in the full annular tests. Two 

annular configurations, R5 and R6, experienced burning in the main stage 

premi.xing passage resulting in combustor damage. Configuration R5 incorpor.,ted the 120 chute flameho1der array in the main stage, with the openings 

between f1ameho1ders reduced by f1amespraying to provide less main stage 

airflow. An equivalent amount of area was opened in the 4th panel of the 

main stage liner to maintain the total combustor open area at the desired 

level. Indication of upstream burning was obtained at simulated takeoff 

cqnditions of 4.8 atm and 820 K. Posttest examination of the hardware 

sllowed the f1ameho1ders to be burned in several circumferential locations. 

Aria1yses of the burn patterns led to the conclusion that the main stage 

dilution airflow was probably the cause of the damage. Indications were that 

the dilution airflow, which was located directly across from the f1ameho1ders, 

forced the hot pilot stage gases against the chutes, causing them to overh~at. They sub3equent1y melted and allowed the combustion gases to enter the 

premixing passage. This explanation is substantiated by the observance of 

s~vera1 flameho1ders which were scorched on the downstream side but in good 

c0ndition on the upstream side. During previous configurations, the f1ameholder metal temperatures were generally very low. The inner liner dilution 

air was not inc1udl1d in the 12° sector configuration simu1at.ing R5" since the 

sector test was run ~rior to the inclusion of the dilution holes in the 

annular combustor. 

Configuration R6 incorporated a splitter in the main stage airflow 

passage ,which allowed only a portion of the main stage airflow to be fueled 

(see Figure 21). Upstream burning was indicated at the c1imbout condition 

during full annular testing. Posttest inspection revealed damage in several 

circumferential locations. From examination of the h,ardware, it appears that 

the main stage f.ue1 tubes created a wake along the surface of the airflow 

splitter. The flame propagated into the premixing passage in the low ve10citywake region. A posttest view of the flow splitter is shown in Figure 

44. In this photograph, which is a view frdm the cold side (OD) of the 

splitter, a typical fuel tube wake and resulting metal discoloration and 

damaged f1ameholder can be clearly seen. 

It appears that this combustor concept has a tendency to flashback, 

which can b~ triggered by small details in the hardware design. This ten-

{.ency would be enhanced by lower main stage airflows, which are required to 

provide a suitable high power combustion efficiency level, due to the richer 

stoichiometry in the premixing passage. Additional design effort is required 

with this combustor to assure a completely safe,:premixing design suitable 

for engine operation. 

, Combustor Exit Temperature Profile Results - The combustor exit temperature profile characteristics of this combustor were generally very good. 

Unl'ike the Double Annular Combustor, the exit temperature profile factor is 

not a strong function of the fuel flow split between stages, as shown in 

Figure 45, due to the intense radial mixing promoted by the sloping flameholder arrays. Even with only the pilot stage fueled, profile factors of 

about 1.07 resulted, compared to 1.3-1.4 with the Double Annular Combustor. 

99 

i 

j 

J 
J.-. 

• o o 

Figure 44 . 

ru .. l Tutu' 

Dama ged Radial/ Axial Staged Combu stor F lameholder Arra y . 
r r~~-··., \ 

l,,--~ 

E 

[ 

[ 

r 

r 

L 

f 

r" 

L 

... 

1.3 

1.0 

o 

I 

I 

I 

., 

ope)ating Mode 

OldIe i 

o Approach Configuration 

OClimbout , 

6 Takeoff 

~ .~ 

~ ., 

0.2 0.4 0.6 

Pilot Fuel Flow/Total Fuel Flow 

R7 

-8 

0.8 1.0 

Figure 45. Effect of Fuel Flow Split on Profile Factor for the Radial/ 

Axial Staged Combustor. 

-r-····· 

I 

\ 

• 

......... 

~ 

1 
i 

 

 

i 

I 

 

Th;e prof l.le shape at takeoff conditions with 79% of the fuel supplied to the 

m,~in stage, is shown in Figure 46 for the final configuration. The average 

pr:of.ilc is somewhat more inward-peaked than the production combustor, but the 

mdximum average profile temperature rise ratio is slightly lower. The peak 

tymperatures were higher for R7, especially at the inne_r immersions, but no 

a~tempts were made during Phase II to adjust the peak profile of the combustor. 

Other Performance Results - Other performance aspects of this combustor 

were -excellent. In partie.ular, the ignition of the main stage was always 

very smooth, with no ignition problems encountered. Because of the geometric 

p()sit.loning of the two combustor stages within this design, the hot gases 

from the pilot stage are in close contact with the main stage fuel-air mixture. This results in excellent piloting action. No evidence of acoustic 

rl'50panCe was encountered during Phase II with either pilot stage only or 

t~o-stage operation. Except for the damage resulting from the two flashback 

incidences, the mechanical condition of this combustor wlas very good at the 

completion of testing. 

Summary of Combined Results 

I I Pollution-Performance Tradeoff Considerations - The lowest idle emission 

levels were obtained with Configuration R6. HC levels were well below the 

ptogram goals and CO levels were near the program goal with this conffguraUon. All Phase II configurations tested produced much lower NOx levels than 

the production combustor at high power operating conditions, but generally 

w~th reduced combustion efficiencies. As shown in Figure 47 strong tradeoffs exist at climbout and takeoff between NOx and combustion efficiency. At 

the ECCP program target efficiency level of 99%, Configurations RS and R7 

produced lower NOx levels than any other configurations tested during Phase 

II. With either configuration, NOx emission indices at climbout and takeoff 

w~re about 6.3 and 7.5, respectively, at the 99% efficiency level. This 

represents a NOx reduction of almost 80% from the production combustor. The 

takeoff NOx level is also 25% below the program goal. 

However, in order to meet the 1979 EPA Emissions Standards, combustion 

efficiencies significantly higher than 99% are required at the high power 

operating conditions due to the high engine fuel flows. If the CO and HC 

standards are to be met, efficiency levels of about 99.8% or higher, are 

required at the climbout and takeoff conditions. 

.\\est Engine-Combustor Compromise Design - Configuration R2 produced high 

combustion efficiencies at climbout and takeoff while still providing signifi-

~ant Nqx reductions relative to the production combustor. Configuration R6 

dlso showed promise at climbout, but flashback was encountered, and most of 

~he high power test points were not obtained. The pilot stage configuration 

df R6, combined with the main stage configuration of R2, appears to be the 

most attractive Radial/AXial Staged Combustor design combination in terms of 

apptoaching all of the 1979 EPA Standards. With this hybrid configuration, 

102 

¥?4 

'. 

, i 

i I 

-r 

: J 

: r 

, . ... 

...... 

I 

I 
1 

I 

L 

:1 1 .. 

Ii 

'L 

\;, .. 

, 

I 

.. 

100 ,----r---.,----r----r---'---,---..,...-------

.. HO 

s:: 

Q) 

t.i 

~ 

Q) Peak Profile 0. 

60 6 Production .j.J CF6-50 fn 

.... 

Q) 

::c 

CI> 40 bO 

(\I 

Ul 

til 

(\I 

"" 

.. 20 .... 

>'. 

r.:I 

o ______ ~ ______ ~ ____ ~ ____ ~ _____ ~ ____ ~ ______ ~ ____ _J 

0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.6 

f:,T '/f::,T Local Average 

~'i~ure 46. Exit Temperature Profile Characteristics of Final Radial/Axial 

Staged Combustor Configuration. 

103 

.' ""}"-'-'" 

t 

I 

I 

_··,,';"1 • 

/ 

j 

J 

i 

l 

1 

1 

j 

1 
,J 

t 

" 

~: 

l 

r 

I 

f 

, 

 104 

r 

L .• 

40 ~---T------~--~----~----~----~----~----~----' 

CHm out 

All Data Corrected to Engine 

30 1---- Pressure Level of 25.9 atm I------if-- Production --- Combustor 

>< 20 r-----1i----..,.---;- ~'---tl---t--r---+- 0 Rl 

~ c= 

1-1 

o = 

.... 

!II 

!II 

.... 

OR2 

Do R3 

~R4 

a 10 1---+---+ I-+-------t--+---+--Q R5 

>< i 

r-I 

CD 

::s 

r.. 

bD 

,:;: 

"-

bD 

>< CD 

't:I 

c= 

M 

= 0 

.... 

!II 

!II 

.... 

a 

>< i 

o R6 

OR7 

o ~--~------~----~--~~----~----------~----------~ 

Production 

Combustor 

All Data Corrected to Engine 

30 ~---I- Pressure Level of 29.8 atm --+-r-.-+----f-----i 

10 1---=11-----.,'----+ ........ 

o~ __ ~ ______ ~ __ ~ ____ ~ ____ ~ ____ ~ __ ~ ______ ~ __ ~ 

90 95 98 99 99.5 99.8 99.9 99.95 99.98 99.99 

Combustion Efficiency, percent 

Figure 47. Tradeoff Between Combustion Efficiency and NO 

Emission Levels at Climbout and Takeoff Operafing 

Conditions for the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor. 

TI 

r ... 

r.t .4 

, , , , 

, 

.. 

] 

1 .... 

] 

1 

1 

j 

I 

1 
r 

~o, He, and NOx EPA parameters of 5.4, 0.1 and 4.3 I ill ternate fuel split at c1imbout and takeoff would 

eter to 4.4, but the NOx EPA parameter would climb 

could be obtained. An 

reduce the CO EPA par amto 5.9. 

I . 

Since development of this combustor design was stopped midway through 

Phase II in favor of the Double Annular Combustor, no single configuration 

met all of the performance requirements. The pilot stage swirl cup design, 

which operated carbon-free and met the altitude relight requirements in the 

Double Annular Combustor, was not tested in the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor. However, based on the results obtained in the Double Annular Combustor tests and in the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor sector tests, it is 

expected that the altitude relight and carbon-free requirements could be met 

with this combustor with a small amount of further development and with 

little or no impact on the emission levels. More development effort would be 

required, however, to eliminate the main stage flashback tendencies encountered. 

105 

i 

i 

j 

j 

I 

I 

i 

I 

., 

j 

I 
, 

I 

. 

CHAPTER IV 

ASSESSMENT OF PHASE II TEST RESULTS 

COMMON RESULTS 

Both of the Phase II combustor design concepts proved capable of 

providing large emission reductions, relative to the production CF6-50 

combustor, while meeting or closely approaching most performance goals 

required for engine application. The design features responsible for the 

reduced levels of CO, HC, and NOx were very similar for the two combustors 

~nd are the significant features which appear necessary in any combustor 

design to obtain low NOx emission levels, as well as low CO and HC emission 

levels. 

Both the Double Annular and the Radial/Axial Staged Combustors consist 

of two-stage designs, wherein the first (pilot) stage operates alone at low 

engine power operating conditions and both stages (pilot and main) operate 

together at high engine power operating conditions. The pilot stage of 

both combustors was designed to utilize only a small fraction of the combustor airflow (15-20%). The sheltered, low velocity pilot dome region 

produced low idle CO and HC emission levels and excellent altitude and sea 

level ignition characteristics. Good fuel atomization and careful introduction of the fuel-air mixture into the pilot combustion zone to avoid wall 

quenching effects were found to be important design feateres. In addition, 

the inclusion of many small dilution holes in the pilot stage primary zone 

region proved to be essential for reducing the CO emission levels to the 

degree required. 

The main stage of each compressor is supplied with a significant propo:rtion of the total combustor airflow (40-60%) to provide a lean, high 

velocity combustion zone in order to minimize the formation of NOx at the 

high power operating conditions. In each combustor design concept, most of 

the fuel flow (75-85%) is supplied to the main stage at takeoff conditions. 

In the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor, the main stage airflow is carbureted 

in a premixing passage before combustion and ignited by the piloting action 

of the first stage. In the Double Annular Combustor, about three-fourths 

of the main stage airflow is supplied to the swirl cups and one-fourth is 

sJpplied to large dilution holes designed to quench the NOx reactions. 

This design was found to be more favorable than $upplying all of the main 

stage airflow to the swirl cups due to improvements in the main stage 

ignition and stability characteristics and elimination of resonance tendenc~es. 

From the investigations undertaken in Phase II, it appears that each combustor 

must be operated on only its pilot stage from lightoff to a power setting 

above the EPA-defined approach condition (30% power), in order to obtain 

acceptable low CO and HC EPA parameters. The main stage can preferably be 

cut in slightly above approach power and remain on for the rest of the 

operating range. 

106 

c I 

1 

~ , 

1 

1 

l 

1 

! 
r 

f 

 

r 

 

I 

 

 

 

 

i 

 

I 

--, -"-l~-' ]- \ __ ... 4 __ .. 

f ' 

""'~r ''''''_H, 

~(/,A 

i 

" I 

~ DOUBLE ANNULAR COMBUSTOR RESULTS 

The performance and emissions development status of the Double Annular 

b Combustor is summarized in Table XXIV. 

. I 

Table XXIV. Phase II Development Status of the Double Annular Combustor~ 

Parameter 

• 

• 

.' 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Emissions 

- CO - HC - NOx - Smoke 

Ground Starting 

Altitude Relight 

Lean Blowout - At Idle 

Main Stage Cross-Firing 

Pressure Loss 

Combustion Efficiency 

Exit Temperature Profile/ 

Pattern 

Resonance 

Flashback 

Carboning 

Metal Temperatures 

Current Status 

Significant 

Further Further 

Meets. Refinement Development 

Requirements Needed Required 

X 

X 

I 

X! 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

107 
r $.:Wil4e &4 

~l"""""""'-- -'-'-'~r""""""- ,- ----r -r---\-. _ 

; 434i i '41',_' ,SU""ifl!+,t -'l~ 

___ ~."... • Y n. n', rd I I _ _,:L---, 

ill 

! 

Pollution Status 

The CO and HC emission levels of this combustor are very low at all 

operating conditions and the 1979 EPA standards were met in the component 

tests. The smoke levels were also below the applicable standard, but the 

NOx levels remain about 50% above the 1979 standard. NOx reductions of _, 

about 45 percent were achieved, compared to the production CF6-50 combustor, 

with essentially no loss in combustion efficiency. 

Based on the Phase II test results, the Double Annular Combustor can 

operate at cruise conditions with both stages burnipg at the fuel split 

which produces the lowest NOx levels, with combustion efficiencies greater 

than 99.8%. At the approach mode, however, it appears that pilot stage 

only operation is required to obtain the high combustion efficiency (and 

corresponding low CO and HC levels) demanded by the EPA 1a.n4ing-takeoff 

cycle. The effect of fueling both'stages at approach will 'iii' investigated 

further in the Phase III engine demonstration tests. 

Performance Status 

The Double Annular Combustor met all of the performan~e requirements 

during Phase II, as shown in Table XXIV. However, no attempt was made to 

trim the exit temperature peak profile during Phase II. This will be done 

with the engine demonstrator combustori during the Phase III component 

testing prior to the engine buildup. for this reason, the exit temperature 

profile/pattern is indicated as"f~rther refinement needed" in Table XXIV. 

The control of exit temperature profiles is much more difficult with the 

Double Annular Combustor than with conventional single annular combustors, 

because much less of the total combustor airflow is available for introduction as dilution air through holes in the cooling liners. However, the 

development engine exit temperature profile requirements at· takeoff are 

expected to be attained during the Phase III component tests. The crossfiring characteristics of this combustor will be under close scrutiny 

during Phase III in order to determine the impact on engine acceleration/ 

deceleration performance. The Phase II---cross-fire tests were conducted in 

a quasi-steady-state manner with no attempt made to simulate the transient 

pressure and temperature conditions encountered in the engine operation as 

the main stage is cut in. From these component test results, it is felt 

that the cross-fire performance will prove satisfactory during Phase III. 

Nonetheless, some questions do exist which can only be answered by actual 

engine tests. 

RADIAL/AXIAL STAGED COMBUSTOR RESULTS 

The performance and emissions development status of the Radial/Axial 

Stagec Combustor at the conclusion of the Phase II program is summarized in 

Table XXV. 

108 

u 

r; 

T i . , 

· . , 

· 

, 

, 

, 

· . 

, 1 i , 

, 

j 

j 

i 

1 

i 
1 ,- \. 

"~'I 

~~ 

:~ \ 

:~J 

" j 1 

.,...J 

"." 

J ! 

~ 

U 

U 

r 

t ~ - r 

t • 

[1 

! 

~ n n 

L I 

L 

1 

, " - \ 

{ 

J 

f i 

L~ D 

Table XXV. Phase II Development Status of the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor. 

Current Status 

Significant 

Further Further 

Meets, Refinement Development 

Parameter Requir~ents Needed Required 

• Emis-'3ions 

CO X} Various 

HC :it Tradeoffs 

'NOx X Possible 

Smoke X ,'; , 

• Ground Starting X* 

• Altitude Relight ' X 

• Lean Blowout - At Idle X 

• Main Stage Cross-Firing X 

• Pressure Loss X 

• Combustion Efficiency X 

• Exit Temperature Profile/ 

Pattern X 

, 

ResQnance X 

• Flashback X 

• Carhoning X* 

• Metal Temperatures X 

*Expect~d to meet based oil sector tests and Double Annular Combustor 

development test r~sults. 

Pollution Status 

Various configurations of this combustor met the HC, NOx and efficiency 

goals of the,ECCP Program and very closely approached the CO goal. This 

combustor was found to be more sensitive to changes in the combustor inlet 

conditions and the fuel split between stages than the Double Annular Combustor. A direct tradeoff was found to exist between NOx and combustion efficiency when both stages are fueled. From a fuel utilization standpoint, 

combustion efficiencies of 98 or 99% are tolerable at takeoff and climbout 

109 

/ 

I 

i 

1 

1 

j 

j 

j 
, 

~ 

I 

l 

I 

l 

r l·,. 

 

due to the small amount of time spent at these modes and the resulting 

small impact on the overall fuel economy performance of the engine. In 

order to meet the 1979 EPA CO and HC standards, however, combustion efficiencl~s of greater than 99.8% are mandatory. To increase the high power 

effictlncy of the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor from S9% to 99.8%, requires 

a f~el flow split and main stage airflow design change at takeoff and . 

climbout which increases the NOx, level more than 100%. The resulting NOx 

levels are then comparable to o.r higher than those of the Double Annular 

Combustor. 

At cruise conditions, the combustion efficiency must be 99.8% or 

higher because of the impact on the ,overall engine fuel economy. Because 

of .the combustor inlet pressure and temperature at the cruise condition, i 

pilQ't-stage-only operation maybe required with th~_Radial/ Axial Staged 

Combustor to achieve the required efficiency level.'O;'If this is the case, 

NOx levels only slightly lower than those of the production, combustor:would 

be expected (Figure 40). As with, the Double Annular Combustor, pilotstage-only operation at approach appears to be the only feasible fueling 

mode in order to meet the EPA standards. 

Further development efforts are required to improve the' combustion 

efficiency levels of the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor at high power operating conditions, while simultaneously maintaining the low NOx levels demonstrated in Phase II. These efforts should probably incorporate somewhat 

lower main stage airflow levels and improved main stage premixing features 

to more carefully control the stoichiometry of the main stage mixture. 

Further, it appears that a longer combustion zone, downstream of the f+ameholder array, is required to allow more residence time for CO and HC.consumption to occur. Gas temperatures in this zone are high enough to allow 

further CO and HC consumption, but low enough to limit further NOx formation. 

Therefore, the increased length would be expected to significantly increase 

the overall combustion efficiency, with only a small impact on the N?x 

level of the combustor. 

Performance Status 

The Radial/Axial Staged Combustor met most of the performance requirements during Phase II. However, flame flashback into the main stage premixing passage was (mcountered with two annular test configurations. In 

the Phase II development efforts, it was evident that no trouble would be 

encountered in meeting the ground. starting, ,altitude relight and carboning 

requirements with the additional PhagaII development efforts afforded. the 

Double Ann'i.llar Combustor. The performance problems which were found to be 

the most troublesome with the Doul?le Annular C()mbustor - main stage i. ignition, 

exit temperature profile control and resonance - were not encountered at 

all with the Radial/Axial IStaged qombustor. The exit temperature parameter 

shown in Table XXV is indi'cated "further refinement needed" since further 

adjustments to the peak profile would be required before incorporation in 

an engine. However, "significant further development" is required to 

eliminate the fl,ashback tendencies of the main stag~ of this combustor. 

lin 

· • .', i '. , 

;1 

q 

..... 

· , ~ " 

1 1 ,., -, 

~ 

~ 

• • -

I , 

! 

~ J -

1 

.;-. ; 

"''1 

i 

) 

1 

1 

~ 

1 

J 

l 
r' 

f 

,. 

i 

l 

r 

: 

-, '\ 

~ 

L 

f • 

t 

t 

, . 

, ' 

I 

1. 

, 

I 

. . 

, i , ! 

l . 

These further development efforts should emphasize the aerodynamic features 

of the premixing passage to avoid any features which may tend to trigger 

flashback. Any potential low velocity regions, such as those arising from 

wakes behind fuel tubes, protruding bolts or other surface' disruptions must 

be eliminated. The potential for flashback would also be greatly reduced, 

in a lower pressure ratio cycle due to the lower combustor inlet temperatures. 

APPLICATION OF RESULTS 

Phase III Engine-Combustor Selection 

Hoth the Double Annular Combustor and the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor demonstrated strong points and weak points during their development. 

In the final aSgessment, however, it was the overall excellent performance 

and lower CO and HC emission levels of the Double Annular Combustor, and 

the more conventional dome design concept involved, weighed against the 

flashback concerns of the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor, and the severe 

compromise in NOx characteristics required to obtain the necessary high 

efficiencies that led to selection of the Double Annular Combustor design 

for further development effort and demonstration in the Phase III Program • 

Phase III Engine-Combustor Testing 

While significantly reduced pollutant emissions and promising performance characteristics have been obtained in the component tests of the 

Double Annular Combustor, it must be recognized that this advanced combustor is considerably more complex than current technology c,ombustors. 

Although the combustor has been developed to the point of demonstration in 

an engine, s(r'Teral potential problem areas must be addressed and resolved 

before it can be incorporated into operational engtLnes. M;any of these 

problem areas are engine related and therefore, cohld not be adequately 

evaluated in the'Phase II combustor component tests a10ile. A number of 

these areas will be investigated in the Phase III engine testS.i Others, 

however, are beyond the scope of the Experimental Clean Combustor Program. 

One of the important unknowns with -,a staged combu"tor is the transient 

operating characteristics of the engine during acceleration and deceleration 

operations. Combustion staging, which involves cross-firing between stages 

during acceleration operations in the case of the Double Annular Combustor, 

must proceed smoothly and rapidly. Because of the additional required 

features in the fuel control and supply systems and the need for ignition 

of onecomb~stor stage by another stage, the attainment of smooth and 

adequately tapid engine acceleration characteristics with this advanced 

combustor is a much more formidable development problem than with current 

technology combustors. Similar development problems must be anticipated in 

meeting deceleration performat~ce requiretnents. 

III 
r, 

~'~--r-' 

! .J. . \~~'~1~'-~-

[ : 

At present, the transient performance characteristics of the Double 

Annular Combustor are not well established since it is not possible to 

obtain an adequate e,raluation in component tests. Therefore, an important 

part of the Phase III demonstrator engine investigations will be devoted to 

~8sesRments of the engine acceleration/deceleration characteristics. 

Possible fuel nozzle carboning at engine power settings where the main 

stage is shut off after being in operation is another development concern. 

This area was not a problem during the component tests because purge air 

was ulsed to evacuate the residual fuel from the fuel system whenever the 

main istage fuel flow was shut off. The main stage nozzle used in the 

compdnent tests had a smaller orifice size than the engine nozzles because 

of the lower fuel flows required in ,the reduced pressure component tests. 

Accordingly. the use of purge air was necessary to prevent plugging of the 

nozzle orifices. In the engine, provisions for purging the main stage 

nozzles are not available. 

Another area of possible concern with regard to engine application is 

the highly peaked exit temperature profiles at the low power operating 

conditions, when only the pilot stage is fueled. At steady state low power 

operating conditions, peaked profiles are expected to be 'tolerable. However, 

during low power thrust transients, excessive exit temperatures may result 

for brief time periods and may affect the cyclic life characteristics of 

the turbine components of the engine. 

The significant impacts on the fuel control and supply systems of 

engines which result from the use of multi-stage combustor design concepts 

are another area of concern. Much additional complexity and sophistication 

must be added to the fuel control and supply systems to permit the use of 

these advanced combustors. Provisions for accurately dividing the total 

fuel,flow into the proper proportions required in each combustor stage, at 

all engine operating conditions, are needed in the fuel control system. To 

meet this need, complex logic and fuel flow valving equipment is required 

to accommodate the wide ranges of total fuel flows and required fuel flow 

splits associated with engine operation at both ground level and cruise 

conditions. At cruise conditions, for example, most of the fuel is supplied 

to the main stage. The total fuel flows at these cruise conditions are 

similar in magnitude to those at low power settings at sea level. However, 

at these low power sea level conditions, all of the fuel must be supplied 

to the pilot stage. A prototype add-on fuel control system mechanism of 

this kind for sea level operation has been designed for use in the Phase 

III CF6-50 engine tests. The development and demonstration of fully operational versions of these required new fuel control system features suitable 

for both sea level and altitude operation will involve significant further 

effort. 

Following the completion of the Phase III investigations, it is 

expected that the magnitude of several of the presently identified development concerns associated with the engine application of the Double Annular 

Combustor design concept will be much better defined and that means of 

resolving these concerns will be identified. It is expected that additional 

112 

• ! 

j 

1 

l 

I 

I 

1 

~ 
~ . 

~ 

combustor component and engine development efforts will be needed following 

these Phase III investigations to develop and implement any needed improvements. 

Thus, the Double Annular Combustor design concept appears to offer 

considerable promise as a means of obtaining significant reductions in 

pollutant emission levels, relative to current combustors, without incurring 

significant compromises or losses in other key combustor performance and 

op¢rational capabilities. The key emission reduction design features have 

be~n identified in the development tests of Phase I and Phase II, and 

implemented into the final design configuration for Phase III. Prototype 

versions of this final design, tested during Phase II, demonstrated these 

significant emission reductions while meeting essentially all of the combustor performance Tequirements specified for. engine operation. Some further 

development concerns with this combustor, primarily engine-related operating 

characteristics, have been identified. The magnitude of these concerns 

should be much better defined following the Phase III Program. After the 

completion of the Phase III Program, therefore, it is anticipated that it 

will be possible to specify, in detail, the needed additional design imprmTementa, needed further development efforts and needed development time 

schedules required to permit the use of this new and advanced combustor 

design technology in operational engines. 

113 
, 

t 

r 

t 

I 

 

 

I 

! 

I 

 

I 

~~·-·r~~·-·· ~ .. l 

CHAPTER V 

PHASE II - ENGINE-COMBUSTOR DESIGN ITEMS 

In addition to the combustor testing and evaluations described in 

Chapters III and IV, Phase II also included several concurrent design efforts. 

These consisted of mechanical design of engine-combustor hardware for the 

Dotible Annular and the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor concepts suitable for 

in~tallation in the CF6-50 engine, resolution of interface problems associated with engine installation and design of a breadboard engine fuel control system design capable of controlling fuel flows for either multi-stage 

combustor. 

ENGINE COMBUSTOR DESIGNS 

Engine combustor design efforts were initiated using the aerothermal 

results of the Phase I Program. The inputs to both designs were continually 

revised as test results became available. At the completion of Radial/Axial 

Staged Combustor testing, design efforts on this design were terminated. 

The Double Annular design effort was carr~ed through to completion of an 

engi.ne-combustor design. 

The mechanical designs of the two combustor concepts were configured 

to fit into the current production CF6-50 engine with a minimum change in 

current engine hardware. The swirl cup, venturi and the swirler arrays for 

the pilot stages of both combustor concepts are identical. The mechanical 

attachment of the swirl cups to the dome is likewise similar for both 

designs. Although the cooling liners are not common, due to the f10wpath 

considerations, both combustors employ the same advanced machined cooling 

ring concept. This new combustion liner design gives added mechanical 

stiffness while maintaining a high film cooling effectiveness. 

Both combustors are designed to provide a minimum of 100 hours of life 

at the maximum temperature and stress condition. The minimum low cycle 

fatigue life is calculated to be at least 300 cycles with a calculated high 

cycle fatigue capability in excess of 106 cycles. Table III shows the 

design conditions used for the mechanical analysis of both combustors. 

Double Annular Combustor 

The engine combustor design incorporates the key design features ,and 

optimum flow distribution determined by the development tests, and duplicates Double Annular Combustor Configuration D12 to as large an extent as 

possible. 

114 

-'''-'''''I~'-' 

I 

\ 

... 

.. .. 
r ~\ 

I -.-~ 

L 

Ii 

L 

L 

L 

r 4. 

r 

r 

L 

E 

, , [ f : ~ 

! 

r i 

I 

~ 

i I" ! 

, t . 

, 

t 

 

f 

[ 

r 

j 

 

 

, 

 l

 

 

! 

I 

i I, 

r 

t. 

L 

-.....-, .. 

. HO" '" --r'"~-'" 

The key design features are: 

1- Pilot and main stage secondary swirler mixing barrels 

2. Pilot and main stage pressure-atomizing nozzles 

J. Pilot and main stage clilution 

4. Short centerbody 

5. Cross-fire slot 

The flow distribution of the demonstrator engine test configuration 

together lJith the key combustor design velocities are shown in Table XXVI. 

For comparison, similar information for Configuration Dl2 is also shown. 

Minor differences are due to the higher cooling flows required for the 

engine demonstrator. 

Figure 48 shows the design layout of the Double Annular Combustor. 

The combustor is structurally supported at the forward end by 30 pins as is 

the production CF6-50 combustor. The combustor is allowed to slip radially 

on the pins and axially at the aft end through fishmouth seals. The inner 

and outer domes, centerbody and liners are supported through the cowl, and 

all of the individual structut:'es are bolted to the cowl for easy maintainability or replaceability. 

The cowl consists of three flow guides which are supported through 30 

rudial struts. The flow guides serve the dual purpose of dividing the compressor discharge flow and providing a continuous structure for bolting the 

individual components. The struts provide the path for the mechanical 

loads from the liners, dome and centerbody to be transmitted to the engine 

casing. Thirty pin mounts are located on the upper cowl surface. The pin 

mounts and the radial struts are aerodynamically streamlined to minimize 

the pressure drop across them. The struts and cowl flow guides are designed 

to maintain an axial stiffness comparable to the current CF6-50 combustor 

cowl. The cowl is fabricated from Hastelloy-X sheet and bar stock. The 

individual flow guides are rolled, welded and spun sheets. The 30 radial 

struts and the pin supports are welded in place. 

There are 30 swirl cups in each of the inner and outer dome",. The 

swirl cups are integral assemblies which are mechanically fastened to the 

dome through radial slip joints. The cups slip radially relative to the 

dome assembly, permitting the differential thermal expansion during transients and the mechanical stack-up between the dome assemblies, fuel nozzles 

and casing to be alleviated. The dome structures are made from Hastelloy-X 

material. On the hot side of the structures, the thermal loads are borne 

by splash plates attac,hed to each swirl cup. These splash plates are 

exposed to the extran~ly hot combustion gases, and shield the dome structures 

from excessive temperatures. These splash plates are impingement-cooled by 

holes located in the dome structures. 

115 

, 

\ 

i-

! 

1 

I 

l 

1 

l 

.j 

1 
CJl 

Table XXVI,.- Double Annular -Combustor Design--for Phas_e_ III Engine Tests_. 

1

": 

, 

! 

i 

I; 

!i 

li 

I 

" 

Airflow Distribution (%Wc) 

• Outer dome 

Swirlers 

Dilution (from second liner panel) Cooling ---- ---

• Inner dome 

Swirlers 

Dilution (from first liner. panel) 

Cooling 

• Centerbody 

• Inner liner dilution (trim air) 

• Liner cooling • Af,t seal 

Key Velocit1.es 

Outer dome (m/s) 

Inner dome (m/s) 

Outer passage (m/s) 

Inner passage (m/s) 

Reference (m/ s) 

Demonstrator 

Engine Design 

Configuration 

12.6 

4.5 

7.2 

33.0 

10.6 

5.4 

3.1 

2.0 

20.2 

1.4 

100.0 

10 

29 

37 

46 

23 

Phase II 

Prototype (D12) 

Configuration 

13.4 

4.7 

4.5 

33.1 

10.8 

4.1 

3.9 

4.8 

19.2 

1.5 

100.0 

11 

29 

24 

59 

26 

••••. __ ___ ..•• .. c .......... _ •• __ .,, ____ ..·.. ..

10 
u 

· u~· I 

.... 

'rJ 

l. 

I 

t . 

r 

J 

.. 

, 

L 

r: : i 

i , ' . 

, 

i 

i \ ' 

\ r 

ORIGINAL PAGE IS 

OF POOR QUALITY 

, 

., 

Soi 

,", 

Ill' QI: 

Cli , 

~: ~: 

Ill' 

::I' ,Qi 

Ell 01 

01 

o ani 

, ! 

COl 

r&. 

o 

Fo4: 

CIS 

1""4' 

~ r:: 

< 

Q) 

1""4 

,Q 

::I 

o 

CI 

117 

....... y_ ......... 

, 

I 

, 
I 

f 

I 

.... , 

~ 

I 

I 

I 

I 

! 

i 

r 

I 

, -~ '-, ,,-

The Double Annular Combustor design incorporates 60 fuel nozzles, 30 

for both the inner and outer dome. The nozzles have been designed to allow 

the utili.zation of the 30 fuel nozzle ports which currently exist on the 

CF6-50 compressor rear frame. With this design, both sets of fuel nozzles 

cart be inserted or removed with the combustor installed in the engine for 

ea~y maintainability. The assembly sequence for the nozzles is shown in 

th~ series of pictures of Figure 49. Both sets of fuel nozzl.es are designed 

with natural vibratory frequencies above the range of current engine frequencies in order to prevent possible resonant interactions • The nozzle 

cross sections are aerodynamically contoured to minimize losses and reduce 

aerodynamic loads on them. 

The fuel distribution valve for each fuel nozzle is mounted outside 

the combustor casing above the nozzle support plate. With a conventional 

single annular combustor, the constantly-flowing fuel is used as a heat 

sihk to protect the valves from overtemperature. With the Double Annular 

Combustor, however, the inner dome fuel nozzles will not be fueled at low 

or intermediate power operating conditions. Therefore, the distribution 

valves are set away from the casing somewhat in order to minimize thermal 

soaking (and possible damage) of the valves. 

The inner dome fuel nozzles incorporate a simplex orifice decign. In 

order to provide adequate protection against carbon formation or gumming of 

the residual fuel within the fuel tube when the fuel is shut off to the 

inner dome, a false wall construction is used. A tube is placed within the 

inner nozzle structure surrounding the fuel-carrying tube, in order to 

in~ulate the fuel tube from the hot compressor discharge temperature airflow. The outer dome fuel nozzles are duplex orifice nozzles in order to 

en~ure good fuel atomization over the range of starting and steady-state 

fuel flow required. The existing CF6-50 engine fuel manifold and pigtails 

will be used to fuel the inner dome nozzles. A separate, newly-constructed 

fuel manifold will be required to supply the outer dome nozzles. 

The outer and inner dome regions are phYSically isolated by the combustor centerbody. The centerbody is a machined ring structure whose outer. 

po:rtion is bolted to the center flow guide of th~ cowl. The inner portion 

of: the centerbody is not bolted but is allowed to slip, relative to the 

inner dome, to allow axial and radial thermal growth without resulting 

mechanical distortion. The upstream panels of the centerbody are cool~d by 

film-cooling holes, while the aft panel is also cooled with long convective 

holes. 

The axial locations of the centerbody cooli~g rings were selected to 

m~nimize the temperature gradients of the aft panel between the inner and 

oJter diameters. This is essential to the mechanical integrity of the 

c~nterbody. During various engine operating conditions, the inner and 

miter dome gas temperatures and heat transfer coefficients are different, 

thereby inducing a thermal gradient across the centerbody. In order to 

minimize this gradient, the inner ring was positioned further aft, thereby 

providing a higher film cooling effectiveness to this surface. 

us 

, i 

>I, I 

i 

-"J 

, 

-* 

.... 
I 

'" , , .

.. , ·,1 

.... 

..., 

til 

:::z 

.D 

E 

~ 0 

u 

.... 

c:; 

::l 

r: 

r: 

< 

<l) 

..... 

.D 

::l 

0 

0 

<l) 

u 

r: 

<l) 

::l 

0-

<l) 

CJ) 

r: 

0 

. ..; 

.,..J 

c:l 

..... 

..... 

("j 

..., 

til 

r: 

.... 

119 
~~""""'r 

, l' 

r", .• -~ 

-T 

~r~-~ .. ~-.f.........--

? ~ 

The combustion liners are made from HS 188, a cobalt based alloy. Each 

film slot is fabricated from a machined ring, which is electron-beam welded 

together at the top of the film-cooling slot plenum. This design yields a 

high degree of film-cooling effectiveness while providing mechanical stiffness greater than the current CF6-50 stacked ring configuration. The increased mechanical stiffness provides greater resistance to creep buckling. 

Air enters through electrical discharge machined (EDM) holes. The air 

washes the ring, thereby convectively cooling it and then exists as a continuous film, providing protection for the structural wall. This approach 

is used on the inner and outer liners of both the Double Annular and Radial/ 

Axial Staged designs. 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor 

The engine combustor design incorporates the key design features determined by development tests. These key features are: 

1. Pressure-Atomizing nozzles in the pilot stage 

2. Pilot stage dilution 

3. Reduced main stage carbureted airflow 

4. lncreased number of main stage flameholders (and, hence, increased 

active perimeter for flamespreading) 

5. Radial main stage fuel staging at intermediate power settings. 

The [low distribution of the demonstrator engine test configuration together 

with the key combustor design velocities are shown in Table :XXVII. The main 

stage premix velocity is very important, since it is a key parameter in main 

stage flashback and/or pre-ignition. This velocity has been set at a higher 

value in the engine demonstrator than in Configuration R7 in order to better 

assure that flashback or pre-ignition will not occur. 

The Radial/Axial Staged Combustor design layout is shown in Figure 50. 

The combustor consists of six basic sub-assemblies which are bolted together 

to form the combustor assembly. They are the cowl, dome, chute, splitter, 

outer liner, and inner liner. The combustor is supported at two places on 

the. compressor rear frame casing. The cowl, dome, and inner liner are 

supported by pins engaged in struts on the splitter. 

The main structural cowl supports the inner liner and the pilot stage 

dome. The cowl consists of two flow guides, which are supported by 30 airfoil shaped struts. The inner liner and dOIli"~ <!!:e bolted to the cowl inner 

flow guide. The upper portion of the dome is bolted to the. outer cowl flow 

guide through a structure which allows air to enter the forward outer liner 

while providing a means to mechanically attach the structure to the cowl. 

The cowl is attached to the combustor outer casing by 30 pins in a similar 

fashion to the production CF6-50 and the Double Annular Combustor designs. 

120 

--------------------------------__________________ :N~ 
__ ___ ___ .. _____ 

I ,;.. , . 

" 

! ",,----- --.......-...,. --

Table XXVII. Staged CF6-S0 Combustor Design For Phase 111 Engine Tests. 

t\:) 

Airf1ow-D-istribu-tion---{%Wc) 

• Pilot stage 

Swirlers 

Dilution (from liners) 

Cooling 

• Main stage 

• Liner dilution air) 

• Liner cooling • Main stage f1ameholder cooLing 

• Aft seal 

Key Velocities 

• Pilot dome (m/s) 

• Main stage premix (m/s) 

Demonstrator 

Engine Design· 

Configuration 

12.2 

4.5 

11.1 

50.0 

2.0 

17 .4 

1.4 

1.4 

100.0 

13 

75 

Phase II 

Prototype (R7) 

Configuration 

15.8 

5.6 

11.3 

47.2 

0 

16.9 

1.6 

1.6 

100.0 

15 

57 

II '.c •• __ , • .... " ..... ,_'"" ..... "h .•.... "_" ... .• __ ...... __ ,,_,_,"._._ .. • ..... " II,,' WW'" ,,:t !IN'. " 
I 

I 

r 

i 

! 

Il 

l~, .. 

'."-1' I 

I 

ORIGINAt PAGE IS 

()F POOR QUALITY 

122 

0 

s: 

btl 

.,;. 

til 

Q.J 

c:;l 

~ 0 

+> 

Ul 

::l 

~ 0 

t.) 

0 

In 

rb 

ra. 

t.) 

'0 

<II 

btl 

til 

+> 

Ul 

~ 

111 

'1"4 

>< <C 

"-

~ 

as 

'1"4 

'0 

til 

cr:: 

o 

0 

In 

Q.J 

M 

::I 

btl 

or! 

ra. 

,I 

, , . .' 

! 

1 

: tI 

1 

1 

i 

; 

i 

I 

, 

1 

I 

1 

I 

1 

.~ 

j 

1 

.1 

1 

-~ 
r ,N 

,,K_, 

, 

t 

, 

\ 

'. 

i 

, 

\ 

f 

~ 

, i~ 

~~l-=--- ---~---'-l~-·--l 

... r 'T/"! N '" T 1'\ '\ ,.....-, f(" 

"',l 

Thl' pills allow radial movement of the cowl, relative to the dome~' thereby 

relieving any potential thermal stress during transient or off-design 

operation. The entire assembly would be made from Hastelloy-X sheet and bar 

stock. 

The Radial/Axial Staged combugtor pilot stage is identical in concept 

to the outer dome of,the Double Annular Combustor. The dome consists of 30 

swirlt:ups m~chah:i:cal1y held in a dome plate. The dome plate is formed by 

11'pdivid~{l1 plates, butt-welded together to form a continuous ring. Machined 

d~.ol ing lxj.ngs are welded to the end of the plate to cool the dome/liner 

in'terrace joint. The structural plate is protected from the hot combustion 

KaseH by individual splash plates. The structural plate has impingement 

holeH drilled in it, for impingement cooling the splash plates. 

Two holes are required in the structure between the pilot dome and the 

main slage premixing passage to allow insertion of the igniters.' The outer 

hole haH a floating ferrule to effect a seal between the outer flowpath and 

f,ilm supply cavity, therefore avoiding C .... 0SS flow from the main stage flow 

passage. The inner hole is sized to permit sufficient axial thermal growth 

n f the l'ombus tor. 

The main stage flameholder assembly would be fabricated of Ha/:lte.J.loy-X 

east cilutes welded to outer and inner Hastelloy-X sheet bands. ThEi outer 

band is a double layer construction with holes in the outer layer. This 

permits cooling air to paj>s through the outer layer, impinge on and cool the 

inner Layer. The inner iayer requires cooling due to hot gases impinging on 

the inside after passing along the aft side of the chutes. The inner shell 

of the flameholder assembly interfaces with the pilot dome/cowl structure 

with "fish-mouth" type joints which provide radial restraint but allow 

relative axial motion. This eliminates unnecessary redundancy and minimizes 

thermal stresses. 

The chute assembly is supported through the splitter. The forward and 

aft outer combustor liner mechanical loads pass through the chute assembly, 

into the splitter where they are passed into the outer combustor case 

through 20 support pins., The splitter fo:tms the converging-di'lferg~ng flbw;-

path for the chute assembly. It also isolates the aft outer liner cooling',· ' 

flow from the main stage combustion &ir. Thespiitter would be fabricated 

from Inco 718, a nickel based alloy. ''The flange, which supports the chute 

and outer liner, is scalloped to minimize thermal stress and blockage of the 

flow ar()und the outsj.de of thecombustO'r. 

The Radial/Axial Staged Combustor design incorporates 30 conventional 

dtiplex fuel nozzles in the pilotst.age and 60 spray bar inj ectors in the 

main stage. The pilot/stage nozzles are inserted through the existing 30 

fuel nozzle ports of the CF6-50 engine casing. The main stage injectors 

would require additional ports to be added to the casing. The pilot stage 

nozzles are supplied from~he existing CF6-50 engine fuel manifold. A 

separate, newly-constructed fuel manifold would be required to supply the 

main stage injectors. 

123 

1 

1 

l 

It II I 

1~ ! ' 
L. 

The CF6-50 compressor rear frame would require modification to accommod.,te the main stage fuel system and new ignitor location. The mounting 

provi:-d.ons for the pilot stage fuel nozzles and forward support pins are 

the !-"lme as in the production CF6-S0 configuration. 

Engine Combustor Interfacing 

Roth combustors have been designed to fit into the current prqductiqn 

CF6-50engine with a minimum change in curr~nt engine hardwar~. Irlterfaces 

with the current turbine stator and compressor rear frame are identical in 

both designs to those of the production design. However, several modifications to existing CF6-50 hardware are required by the two combustors. 

R~quirements for both combustors are summarized in Table XXVIII. 

Table XXVIII. Engine/Combustor Interfacing Requirements. 

Double Annular Combustor 

• New inner structural turbtne npzzle support to accommodate 

increased height of the DOlJble Annular Combustor (i. e~, a new i t 

inner casing').' \ ) 

• A second fual manifold for the pilot stage nozzles. 

• An add-on fuel flow splitter control. 

• 

• 

Radial/Axial Staged Combustor 

Oute:r casing modification to accommodate the 60 main stage fuel 

injector assemblies, mounting pins for the outer liner and chute 

assembly, and new ignitor locations. 

A second fuel manifold for the main stage fuel injectors. 

• An add-ori fuel flow splitter control. 

I For the Double Annular Combustor! design, the inner structural turbine 

nOZt1e support (inner casing) had to be 'changed to accommodate the increased 

height of the Double Annular Combustor dome. 1tl addition, a second fuel 

manifold was provided for the 30 pilot stage -duplex nozzles. This permits 

theloutcr (pilot) dome to be fueled at the low power flight mode without 

fuel flow to the inner dome. This is an esSential feature of the fuel 

scheduling and will be discussed in a later section of this chapter. Both 

eombustor designs utilize an add-on fuel flow splitter control to achieve 

fuel staging. 0 

124 

, .. -"We " ~r~'" - t 

\ 

)~ ; 

J; 

, 
I 

! 

t 

I 

'. , 

. I 1 

1 

i ',I 

For the Radial/Axial Staged Combustor design, the outer combustor 

casing requires modification to accommodate the main stage fuel injection 

~:ystelll, and to provide a mounting point for the outer liner and chute 

:wselllbly. This modification to the casing was confined to one of the cast 

HCl~tions. Since the main stage fuel injectors penetrate the casing aft of 

the existing fuel ports an additional fuel manifold is required to supply 

ruel to these injectors. This permits separate fueling of the pilot and 

111:1 in stages. As with the Double Annular Combustor, an add-on fuel flow 

splitter control is required. 

ENGINE FUEL CONTROL DESIGN 

The engine fuel control system is the means by which the fuel staging 

n·qu.lrelllents of either combustot will be implemented in the engine tests. 

Initial studies were appJicable to either combustor design. After the 

selection of the Double Annu\lar Combustor as the preferred combustor design, 

a U further design efforts were directed toward this concept. 

Ln either design, to most closely approach the 1979 EPA. emission standards, particular fuel flow splits between stages at the four EPA-defined 

test conditions hav~ been identified from Phase I and II testing efforts. 

Test data obtained to date indicate that the best fuel schedule for the sea 

level static engine operating line, from an emissions standpoint, is to: 

1. Fuel only the pilot stage at the idle and approach operating 

conditions. 

2. Split the fuel flow at climbout and takeoff so that about 15 to 

25 percent of the total fuel flow is supplied to the pilot stage, 

and the remainder to the main stage. 

The add-on fuel flow splitter design concept for the Phase I!I demonstration 

tests is shown in Figure 51. The main engine fuel control (MEC) supplies 

the engine fuel flow required by the throttle setting. The add-on flow 

splitter then splits the fuel flow between the pilot stage manifold and the 

lII<1in stage manifold. The flow splitter has two adjustable settings. The 

lIIain stage cut-in point, and the pilot-to-total fuel flow split after cut 

in. The design requirements of the combustor determine the levels of the 

adjustable settings in the flow splitter. The design requirements are 

shown by the curve in Figure 51. The pilot stage alone is fueled from 

ground idle to a preset cut-in point, the main stage fuel flow is initiated, 

,lI1d the pilot stage flow is rapidly decreased. At the 40 percent l;hrust 

operating condition, typically about 20 percent of the fuel is supplied to 

the pilot stage and 80 percent is supplied to the main stage. This fuel 

flow split is maintained until 85 percent thrust, and then transitions to 

about 15 percent pilot stage flow. The cross-hatched region in Figure 51 

indicates the general range in which the preferred fuel splits are expected 

to he found. 

125 

l 

l 

i 

j 

1 

1 

1 

I 

I 

I 

] 
I 

, 

! 

I 

[ 

[ 

t-: 

",. 

W f 

p 

W-- f t 

1.0 

I 

o 

o 

MEC 

I I ( I ( { { { 

A C 

'!oFn 100 

Operating Requirements Pilot Manifold 

Main Stage Manifold 

Cut 

Throttle .. 1\ .. - .I."'''' In 

Figure 51. Add-on Fuel Flow Splitter Design Concept. 
r 

A fuel flow splitter component ~esign has been developed in Phase II 

whi.ch closely approaches the desired fuel flow schedule and is compatible 

w'ith the current CF6-50 main engine fuel control system. A schematic of 

lhe fuel flow divider component design is shown in Figure 52. Although a 

nominal rue] schedule has been select.ed for the sea level engine operating 

t i.nc r rom Phase I and Phase II testing, an important part of the Phase III 

progr:UJ! will he to determine the preferred fuel flow scheduling. The 

design shown in Figure 52 will allow the fuel flow split between stages of 

the comhustor to be varied at approach and at any operating condition above 

the programmed cut-in point of the main stage. The main stage cut-in point 

ean also be varied with this design. These adjustments will be made from 

the test cell control room during engine operation. 

DESIGN STATUS OF COMBUSTOR FOR PHASE III PROGRAM 

The Double Annular Combustor is currently being manufactured for 

('urttler evaluation during Phase III. As of the end of Phase II, the mechanical design of the Double Annular Combustor is complete. All of the important I 

design features identified in the testing efforts have been included in the 

desi~n. Detailed manufacturing drawings have been prepared for the required 

combustor hardware and manufacturing orders have been placed. Delivery of 

all eombustor hardware is expected by January 1976. 

The design of the engine fuel nozzles and add-on fuel flow splitter is 

also complete and delivery of this hardware is expected during January 

1976. Prior to the engine demonstration testing scheduled for the second 

quarter of 1976, the fuel splitter will undergo laboratory checkout tests 

to verify its performance characteristics. The hardware required for these 

bench tests has been fabricated and set up is nearing completion. 

Some slight modifications to the full annular test rig have been 

identifi.ed to allow component checkout tests of the engine combustor prior 

to engine installation. These modifications principally include recontouring of the inner combustor casing to allow for the increased dome height of 

the engine combustor, compared to the Phase II development combustor. 

These modifications have been completed. 

127 

--T-Ol I 

\ 

. 

i 

I 

J \ 
N 

CD 

£) 

PILOT STAGE ZERO AOJUST " 

WFT lERO ADJUST 

(WINOOW AX IAL DISPlACEMENT) 

FUEL INLET ... PI I II 

(TOTAl flOW ,lOot ..... IN 

FUEL CONT ROIJ 

10 MAIN 

PZ+-

,.---- I PIlRG£ --AIR -----------. 

+ 

P4 

TO PILOT STAGE 

INJf.CTORS 

I/SW RATE ADJUST 

I 

I 

I 

'- I __ J 

--""P2T 

-PI 

PILOT STAGE 

PEIIC£HT ADJUST 

Figure 52 . Add-on Fuel Flow Splitter. 
r !"'-~'~'r 

i J. 

r 

[ 

'T-

~ 

t 

1 • 

j 

'! 

•• 

i 

•• 

~ 

t 

J 

t 

. 

{ 

f 

• 

I 

I 

APPENDIX A 

m1ISSIONS CORRECTION FACTORS 

This appendix presents factors which were established in the Phase II 

Program to correct test rig emission data to engine operating conditions. 

Gen~ral.l.y, combustor inlet temperature, reference velocity and fuel-air ratio 

were exactly duplicated in the test rig, but at approach, cruise, climbout 

and takeoff., pressure levels were reduced. The main problem was, therefore, 

to estnblish pressure correction factors. 

Pressure Correctlons 

Periodically throughout the Phase II Program, tes t data were ob tained 

at two or more pressure levels, with other operating parameters held constant, 

to establish pressure correction factors which were assumed to be of the form: 

where the pressure exponent (n) is dependent upon the type of emission and 

operating conditions. 

The test data and calculated pressure exponents are presented in Table 

XXIX. TIle data have been blocked according to simulated engine condition 

and fuel staging. Generally, each pair of test points represents a two-toone variatlon in combustor inlet pressure. A few of the cases represent a 

pressure variation of 1.5:1. 

Selected values of the exponents, together with statistical analyses of 

the data, are presented in Table XXX. 

The NOx emissions follow the square root law predicted by simple 

hot air kinetic calculations quite well for lean, two-stage burning conditions. 

However, at approach, pllot only conditions, where the primary zone is near 

or over stoichiometric, a much weaker pressure effect is indicated. Apparently, the prompt NOx mechanisms, which is virtually independent of pressure, 

1s important under these conditions. 

The HC emissions exhibit an inverse linear pressure effect with no strong 

effect of other operating parameters. Large deviations in the exponent are 

attributed to the difficulty in accurately sampling low HC concentration 

levels. 

129 

j 

1 
130 

L 

Table XXIX. Effect of Pressure on Emissions, 

Phase II Full Annular Combustor Tests. 

Ihmd1UI{ 

Oporntl.llit 

COnllltlon ~~r. I---~I",.::::u=m~,,~o"-'~I"~'I~,-I 

fll 112 

ApprOil<:h, 

Pilot onto,. 

ApprOi~(:h, 

Two·Sta~c 

Climbout, 

Two-Stage 

Takeoff, 

Two-Stage 

RI 

R3 

01' 

03 

DI1 

~ DHA 

~ Dt413 

I 

III 

11' 

B7 

!(d 

1M 

713 

71-1 

715 

7"' 

78·) 

785 

"" 

8J3 

B30t 

'829 

i 818 

i BlL 

, 2' 

27 

1:;3 

4l 

, 43 

08 SH 

, m 

010 t.07 

Rl 

RI 

~ R3 

~ R7 

nl 

~ 03 

+ 

07 

, 

DID 

DI' 

137 

138 

139 

... 

Il 

II 

14; 

1·14 

14' 

399 

99 

101 

10' 

174 

175-

17& 

446 

447 

S9' 

750 

746 

701 

7017 

748. 

749 

711 

710 

i09 

{ll Eleot Pol :- IP /p ,nco 

EICa,PI 1 Z 

(Z) ~~:;~:~~ " ll)l/P~tHC 

(3) EINO)C,Pl -" IPZlPllnNOx 

EINO

x,Pl 

" 

153 

·18 

". 

1.7 

70S 

706 

707 

800 

"01 

80l 

822 

8ll 

821 

sa 

"B 

8Z,; 

149 

ISO 

lSI 

17 

19 

18 

14& 

147 

14" 

401 

111 

I~ 2 

III 

170 

171 

In 

471 

4" 

'94 

725 

ns 

72.$ 

n·, 

723 

699 

726 

n7 

728 

Fue\-

AI, 

Rutin 

Low l'rel'lSllrC 

"'''' co 

W 

lie NOx {2} (3) 

0.014 1}9.3 27.9 o. , l.l(i o. n 0,33 

o.c,t-t 99.6 

0.014 99.1 

0.014 9t:1.7 

0.008 99. s 

0,012 99.7 

0,010 

0.008 

O.Oll 

0.010 

0.008 

O,OU. 

O.OiO 

0.008 

O.ll 

0.10 

0.008 

0.14 

99.9 

99.9 

99.1 

'J9.8 

99.9 

99. '3 

99.8 

99.9 

99.7 

99.8 

99.9 

81.9 

88. I 

Il.o.1. O.l 

35.3 0.4 

51. IS 

13.£. 

1I.S \1.1 

4.1 

2.7 

12.. S 

•• 1 

,.S 

18.3 

9.2 

-1.7 

Il.9 

6.4 

3.4 

C. I 

J.I 

0.4 

0.2 

0.3 

0.3 

0.3 

0.3 

0.1 

0.1 

0.1 

1.18 ~O.1j8 0.30 

j.37 .. 1.00 0.34 

0.7';' l.ZO 0.301 

l.Z7 

1.19 

0.84 

O.Bl 

0.1)7 

0.80 

0.8·1 

0.95 

0.90 

0.79 

1.0l 

0.97 

1. 30 0.43 

0.42 

0.58 

0.5B 

0.78 

l.l6 

1.00 

0,19 

0.09 

0.14 

0.Z.7 

0,1(. 

O.OJ 

o. ]a 

0.l9 

0.17 

0.2.5 

0.26 

0.18 

111.0 155.0 0.10 0.1J! 0.56 

107.0 93.9 0.10 0.44 1).46 

{)S.O 76.6 32. (, 0.31 0.37 O. II 

S9.7 100. I 79. l 0.30 0.83 0.48 

n. L 13'1. b 4(,. I) 0.13 O. ·16 0.46 

96.7 83. Z 13.5 0.19 0.16 0.31 

9l.3 101.9Sl.0 o.lol 0.49 0.39 

91.(, 140.8 51.3 0.l4 0.74 0.7t 

9').465.5 30.50.400.·18 0.oJ2 

53.3 

23.51 

47. '1 

l4. (, 

l.S 

14.2 

0.53 

0.55 

0,.40 

O.~5 

0.47 

0.41 

0.49 

0.36 

0.44 

0.OlI92.2 73.0 bO.7 0.15 1.14 0.59 

96. '1 

98.7 

o. all 96.-\ 

I 99.6 

98.9 

1)7.8 

99.1 

99./J 

9<;. :! 

9'1,6 

9'1.7 

99.7 

99 • .8 

99.8 

99.7 

99.9 

99.9 

99.9 

100,0 

99.9 

')9.') 

99.S 

O,OlO 99.9 

0.Ot7 99.7 

0.014 99.1 

56.4 

j3.1 

53.0 

It..9 

31.i' 

43.7 

l8.1 

1b.O 

60.1 

3.B 

( •• 1 

8.S 

6.S 

8.·1 

Il.t 

5.7 

4.1 

4.9 

S.2 

.. 4 

3.4 

4.9 

B.l 

5.' 

11.0 

)4.8 

1'1.9 0.l7 1.37 0.51 

3.7 

24.0 

0.4 

3.4 

Il.1 

2.4 

0.5 

n.3 

l.o 

l.l 

0.9 

0.1 

0.1 

O.l 

0.1 

0.1 

0.1 

0.8 

0.14 1.09 0.4'?' 

0.36 1.42. 0.51 

0.30 0.99 0.4:5 

0.45 1.15 0.55 

0.68 1.38 0.34 

0.91 1.29 0.2.4 

0.98 O.lf:! 0.43 

0.53 O.IN 0.(,(. 

Z..01 0.99 0.14 

1.57 4.50 11.58 

0.80 3.4l 0.55 

0.89 0.51 . 

ldZ 0.53 

0.78 (f • .;8 

1.07 

1.03 

1.09 o.SIJ 

1.36 0.49 

1.2.5

1 

0.43 

1. 18 o.z.? 

1.Z1 Q.5l 

1.14 0.44 

0.96 0.35 

0.61 0.45 

0.55 0.49 

0.33 O.(l9 (t.S8 

.. 

j 

i 

1 

! 

'1 

'l 

1 

j 

I 

1 

1 

I 

1 

1 

l , 
:-"""""1' , , 

i ,1 

[ 

r 

{ 

.. 

j . 

it. • 

i· 

Tahle XXX. Summary of Pressure Exponents, Phase II Full Annular Combustor 

Tests. 

Operating Pressure Exponent Data Statistical Analysis (4) 

~~lIIiss i Oil Condition Used, n - On 2 On N n n I 

NO Approach 

17(1) x Pilot Only 0.2 .241 .104 .862 

Two Stage 0.5 12 .456 .102 .450 

Climbout 0.5 3 .507 .085 .336 , 

Takeoff 0.5 23 .489 .115 .469 

HC .All 1.0 38 (2) 1. 038 1.364 2.628 

( )0.7 4(3)0.500 (~~O ) 0.7 

CO Pilot Only 06~ -20 • EI <. 

CO CO 

eOO )O.!.-. (~~O ) 

0.7 

Two Stage 0.2 ~ <2.0 40 0.191 

CO· CO' 

(1) 0.008 < f < 0.014 

(2) EIHC 1 ~ 0.2 g/kg , 

Gn f 0.014 

(4) N Number of Data Points 

n - .En· _1 (mean) 

N 

(standard deviation) 

131 

I 

l' 

I 

I 

l 

j 
... --r

 

The CO emissions were the most difficult to correlate, and no general 

explicit relationship with conroustor or operating parameters was found. Confif.uration operating combinations which produced low CO levels at low pressure 

9howed a strong pressure effect. On the other hand, when the configuration/ 

operating combination was such that a high CO level was produced at the low 

pressure condition, increasing pressure had a weak effect. This characterIstic was approximated from early data by the expression: 

C (~) 0.7 

nCO = < 2.0 , 

E1CO 

where: C .- 0.2 for two-stage data 

C = 0.6 for pi1ot-stage-on1y data 

Figure 53 presents all of the Phase II Program data and shows that the 

correlation leaves much to be desired. 

Special Configuration D13 Test 

At the conclusion of the Double Annular Combustor Configuration D13 

evaluations for the Experimental Clean Combustor Program, additional comr 

bustor noise tests were conducted under Contract DOT-FA75WA-3688. These 

evaluations covered a broad range of combustor inlet conditions with a 

constant fuel-air ratio setting. Exhaust emission data were also obtained 

(at one rake traverse position). These data allow inlet temperature and 

pressure, velocity and, to some extent, inlet humidity effects to be assessed. 

Emission data correlations are shown in Figure 54, 55, and 56. The NOx 

emission correlation (Figure 54) is quite good and shows: 

1. 'l11E~ linear velocity correction is good over a velocity ratio 

range of at least 1.5:1. 

2. The NASA exponential humidity correction is good over a humidity 

ratio range of at least 2:1. 

3. The exponential temperature correction factor is weaker than has 

been previously used in the ECCP (195.6 K versus 168.9 K). This . 

new value is, however, in close agreement with some recent GE data. 

4. At pressure levels above about four atmospheres, the square root 

law is good. Apparently below this pressure level, the flame 

effects upon NOx formation rates are significant. 

TI1e CO emission correlation presented in Figure 55 points out the problem 

indicated earlier in this appendix. The low inlet temperature data (556 K) 

show a weak pressure exponent (0.67) while the high temperature data (820 K) 

1~12 

j 

j 

j 

.j 

1 
) 

f 

I 

i' i 

! 

, 

t 

I' 

I 

>".",.---"t ... ' __ rlt._.. -'-<Of Jt-'-........... .........--.. 

2.0 +-- -

3,0 I I I I I 

iii I I I 

- - - -fY-.._ - - -;-- __ __ .. - ____ , .---1--+ 

I I I I I', I \ 

8 6 1-4 r-I 

;.1 

1.0 - '-' 6 6' 6'--6- N 

8 0.7 A 

1-4 C 

r-I 6 I 

c 0.4 

6 

'" I r1 ,.., L.J 

+> 

c 

Q) 

6 6 

c 

0 

g. Symbol x Condition 

Q) 0.2 • Approach., Pilot Only 

;:1 

Ul 0 

Ul 

Q 0 "" 6 Two-Stage 

Approach, Two-Stage 

Climbout, Two-Stage 

'fakeoff, ( )

0.7 0 

n = 0.2 I 

O. 1 t 

0.07" I I I I 

1 2 4 7 10 20 40 -- 70 100 

CO Emission Index @ PI' g/kg Fuel 

Figure 53. Effect of CO Emission Index on Pressure Exponent, Phase II Program Full Annular 

Tests. 

te' <I. .. ...... '_ .. 1 d' ffl .,!IO ........ it.1ft 'j 
, 

-_ ..... \ 

I,·· ~ -T- ..... _ .... ~ .. 'J:" ...... T 1-... " ,...... ... ..., 

,r-

=i 

-gi 

(111 I 

d 

o 

.,-l 

Ul 

.!II 

r-1 

Q) 

::l 

~ 

b/) 

.!t! 

-...... b/) 

'g~ 

~ ~ 

~ 1-4 

40 

30 

5 

~ ~ 2 

0 

0 

2 

" 

T3 , K 

556 

820 

f 

--T -r \ 

! 

VR; mls H, g/kg 

19.2 to 23.8 5.6 to 10.4 

23.2 to 28.4 4.5 to 12.0 

0.024 

0.25 

} r· 5 

19.7\2:.8) 

'lot 

'lot 

0 

Q) Configuration D13 .!t! 

(11 

Eo< 

Q) 

~ .,-l , 

b/) 

s:: 

~ 

5 10 20 30 

P3 , Inlet Total Pressure, atm 

Figure 54. Effect of Pressure on NOx Emissions, Double Annular 

Combustor. 

,,_e'"-r '¥"--'- e.,

1 

40 
r 

r. 

t . 

r' 

f 

t 

of 

M 

f-t 

'0 

C 

III 

tz: 

:;. 

.... 

.... 

0 

QI 

.!f. 

\1S 

f-t 

0 

+> 

'0 

QI 

+> 

to> 

QI 

M 

M 

0 

U 

>< 

ell 

'0 

::: 

H 

::: 

0 

.~ 

!/l 

Ul 

.... 

S 

tr:I 

8 

ao 

~l • c:: .-r:> 

/Q' 

~ 

u H 

10 

5 

2 

1 

~ 

W 0 r; .~ 

0 

0 

T

3

, K 

556 

820 

VR 

mls , 

19.2: to 23.8 

23.2 

f = 0.024 

Wfp 

= 0.25 Wf t 

tp 28.4 

Configuration D13 

~ ____ -+ __ y = 0.66(2~.8JO.67 

(Low T

3

) 

o. 2 ,:::-__ ~_~_J..-..J--..L.....J.-..L....l... ____ --L __ -..JL.....--J 

2 5 10 20 30 40 

P3 , Inlet Total Pressure, atm 

Fi~urc 55. EffecL of Pressure on CO Emissions, Double Annular 

Combustor. 

135 
r 

0.300 ~--------------~----------~~------~----------~ 

8 

0.200 

~ o 

o 556 

o 820 

19.2 to 23.8 

23.2 to 28,4 

f = 0.024 

O. 100 ...... ----.,,-""---+-- W fp 

= 0.25 

Wft 

Tailed Symbols: 

'H 

'H 

o 

b.O 0.050 I--------i-'\: 

~ EIRC < 0.005 

b.O 

JJ 00 Configuration D13 

t!~ ~IC') 

... 

o C\I 

00 

III 

~ 

• 

~L 0 i ~ 0.020 I~ ___ -l-__ O_O 

~~ 

i~ S:::~ 

I )-1.8 0.0025\2;.8 

I ..... ~ 0 0 Engine § ...r 0.010 1-----------/------1---".--- Takeoff 

.;;: .....:::-.- II) 

.~ 

S 

~ 

U 

~ 

0.005 

0.002 L-____ ~ __ ~ __ ~~ __ ~~~ __________ ~ ____ ~ __ ~ 

2 5 10 20 30·· 40 

P

3 , Inlet Total Pressure, atm 

Fib~re 56. Effect of Pressure on HC Emissions, Double Annular 

Combustor. 

J."l4I. += '~ 

, 1 

i \ 

I 

~ i 

. \ 

.. i , , . I 

. , 

, 

i: 

i 

i 

i 

1 

j 

j 

.~ 

j 

j 

rl 
r 

~--- ·····~ _ ... 

r 

l . 

Ii 

Ii 

I 

I~ 

: f 

--r-··· ,'I,,'! ....... J ' ... ~-

.. L __ .. .~ ,., .... J-.. _ .. ____ .J .. 

show a much stronger pressure exponent (1. 25). Both values are approximately 

in :agreement with the earlier correlation. 

TIll' He emission correction presented in Figure 56 show 

exponent (1.8) which is within the confidence limits of the 

a strong pressure 

earlier data.~-.: ''( . 

'~, 

'~\. 

\1, 

137 

I 

I 

1 

i , 

~ 

I 1 
r 

~ .. 

APPENDIXB 

EPA EMISSION PARAl-lETER CALCULATION PROCEDURE 

This appendix presents calculation procedures which were derived to 

calculate EPA emission parameters for the Phase II 'Program test configurations. 

The gaseous o exhaust emission standards in Reference 2 are expressed in 

terms of maximum allowable quantity of emission per 1000 pounds-thrust hours, 

for a prescribed takeoff-landing cycle: 

where 

EPAP i 

= E(~)(~ Eli 

j' (.~) (F~) E 60· iooo 

EI = Emission index (lb /1000 Ib fuel) 

EPAP - Emission parameter (lb/lOOO lb thrust-hr) 

FN = Net thrust (lb) 

t = Prescribed time (minutes) 

Wf = Fuel flow rate (pph) 

and the subscripts are: 

i = Type of emission (CO, He, NOx) 

j = Prescribed power level (idle, approach, . climb out , 

and takeoff) 

For a particular engine cycle, Equation 1 can be reduced to: 

= 

where: 

= (

t (Wf) ~) Toio ' 

j (t.), ( FN. ) E -d' "riito c 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

=-=~:I ~ 

'\,rt ' tt ' I .. } ; / \, l 

I" ~-I )H 

'f ... 1 

r " 1.1 

n 

I; 

j I t \ 

" ! 

\ 

I 

I J 
r ) 

~ 

L 

I 

1 

! 

! 

l. 

.... J .. '1-'''' T 

_.

... , ....... '~'""'-

\ 

:\ ""'--r-'--T-~' 

1' .. '", ""'-:1 rei 

The coefficients (Cj ) for the CF6-50C engine cycle are derived. in Table XXXI, 

and Equation 2 becomes: 

EPAP. = 0.1365 (Eli .d1) + 0.0912 (EI. h) 1. ,1. e 1., approac 

+ 0.1487 (Eli, climb) + 0.05H (Eli, takeoff) 

Alternately, Equation 2 can be expressed as .. 

j 

gPAPi = (EPAP i, .. std) E Elij 

(EP~~.std ) 

where (EPAPi, std) is the standard for each type of emission. For the 

CF6-50, Equation 5 becomes: 

= 4 3 ~(Eleo, idle) + (Eleo, approach) + (BICO • Climb) EPAPeo • ~ 31.49 . 47.15 28.91 

+ I (FI 'eo, takeoff, )] 75.30 

= 0 8 ~(EIHc.idle) + (EIHC , approach) + (EIHC • Climb') EPAPHC • ~ 5.859 8.771 5.379 

+ (EIHC • takeoff)ll 

14.01 ~ 

(4) 

(5) 

(6a) 

(6b) 

= 3.0 x. idle + x. approach + x. climb 

~r EINO ) (EINO ) (EINO ) 

21.97 32.89 20.17 

(6c) 

+ (

EINO x,takeoff )~ 52.53 

139 
I: 

i, 

r 

I, 

I 

I: I r 

-

.::. 

-- Table xx.XI. EP.\P Coefficients for Phase II Program, CF6-50C Engine. 

FN W (2) Power t 

Level Minutes 1b f F pph 

Idle (1) 26.0 1,692 1,219 

Approach 4.0 14,969 5,292 

Climb 2.2 42,412 15,692 

Takeoff 0.7 49,896 18,938 

L 

j 

EPAP. = E reo (E1io)J L J 

(Class T2 Engine) 

e 

K1b f-hr. K1b - hr. 1bm/1b f -hr. m 

0.7331 0.5282 0.1365 

0.9979 0.3528 0.0912 

1.5551 0.5753 0.1487 

0.5821 0.2209 0.0571 

3.8682 

(EPAPo 

j 

std) E [ std) ] 

(EPAPeo, std) = 4.3, (EPAPHC , std) = 0.8, ( EPAPNO ) = x, std 

(1) Assumes no enp bleed or thrust reverse. 

ec3) 

31.49 5.859 

47.15 8.771 

28.91 5.379 

75.30 14.010 

3.0 1b

m

/K1b f-hr. 

(2) Assumes target levels of cOffibustion efficiency (99.0% at idle, 99.8% elsewhere). 

21

32

20

52

. ....... •. '±'" __ •• 

_ 

__ _ __ 

. 

_

__ .. 

" _ ... - 
-~r'" 

~ 

Each term in the summations is the fraction of the total allowable emission 

produced at that operating mode. Equation 6 was used to calculate the EPAP 

values of the Phase II Program test configurations which are presented in 

Chaptt'r 111. For the production engine status the same procedure was used 

except that actual fuel flow rates reflecting actual current engine combustion efficiency levels were used. 

Four sample EPAP calculations using this procedure are presented in 

Table XXXII. The first calculation presents the status of the current production combustor using measured engine data. The next two calculations are 

for the Double Annular Combustion Configuration D12 rig data corrected to 

engine pressure levels. The test points for these calculations were selected 

to illustrate the minimum emission levels obtained without and with fuel 

staging at approach power level. The final calculation presents one possible 

combination of emission indices which would meet the standards. 

141 

I 

1 

j 

1 

1 

1 

i 

I 

1 

! 

, _O-.~-=_' ~"="==_'_~..:...:::c=-",=:::,:::~=---,:-",,-,"~-,."""''''''''''''-· ... ______ ...................... r ... ~ ......... · ... im' ..... t~ 
_

1 

.J 

t. ~ 

Table XXXII. Sample EPAP Calculations. /': 

-, 

• CF6-50C Engine Standard Day Cycle 

• Idle Thrust 3.34% of Rated Power 

• No Bleed Air Extraction 

• NOx Levels Corrected to Standard Humidity (6.29 g/kg) 

a) Curren t production Power El2 lbLKlb Fuel % EPAPstd 

cOlllb us tor l.evel CO HC NOx CO HC NOx 

Idle 73.0 30.0 2.5 240.98 532.13 11.83 

Approach 4.3 0.01 10.0 9.11 0.11 30.37 

Cli~b 0.3 0.01 29.5 1.04 0.19 146.00 

Takeoff 0.2 0.01 35.5 0.26 0.07 67.47 

E 251. 39 532.50 255.67 

EPAP, lbm/1000 

1bf thrust-hr. 10.81' 4.26 7.67 

h) Gbn[iguration D12 Power EI2 lbLKlb Fuel % EPAP d st 

• Pilot only at Level CO HC NOx CO HC NOx 

approach 

• Readings 673,676, Idle 22.0 2.8 3.1 69.86 47.79 14.11 

677, and 687 Approach 3.4 0.1 9.0 7.21 1.14 27.36 

Corrected to Climb 0.8 0.04 14.6 2.77 0.74 72.38 

engine pressure Takeoff 0.1 0.02 19.6 0.13 0.14 37.31 

L: 79.97 49.82 151.17 

l EPAP, Ibm/WOO 

1b £ thrus t-hr. 3.44 0.40 4.54 

c) Cunfiguration DI2 Power EI2 lb/K1b Fuel % EPAP st d I 

j 

• SecLor Htaged at Level CO HC ~ CO HC NOx 

approach 

• Readings 673,682, Idle 22.0 2.8 3.1 69.86 47.79 14.11 

()77 and 687 Approach 10.8 1.4 7.0 22.91 15.96 21.28 

Corrected to CHmb 0.8 0.04 14.6 2.77 0.74 72.38 

engine pressure Takeoff 0.1 0.02 19.6 0.13 0.14 37.31 

L: 95.67 64.64 145.09 

EPAP, Ibm/1000 

1bf thrust-hr. 4.11 0.52 4.35 

d) Levels required to Power El, lb/K1b Fuel % EPAP d st 

IIIce t standards Level CO HC ~ CO HC N0x,< 

• (One possible 

combination) Idle 28.3 5.7 3.2 89.87 97.29 14.57 j 

'';. 

Approach 3.0 0,.1 7.0 6.36 1.14 21.28 j Climb, 1.0 0.04 8.7 3.46 0.74 43.13 

1 jlUGlNAL PAGE IS 

Takeoff 0.2 0.02 10.9 0.27 0.14 ~.75 

z; 99.96 99.31 99" 'l3 OF POOR QUALITY EPAP, lbm/lOOO .. 1 lbf thrust-hr. 4.30 0.79 2.99 , ::'" 

ItJ2 

~ 
r--

---r 

~ T 

APPENDIX C 

FULL ANNULAR RIG TEST DATA 

This appendix contains summaries of the operating conditions, combustor 

performance data and exhaust emission data for each full annular rig test 

qmducted in the Phase II Program. The sequence in which these tests were 

dmducted is presented in Table XXXIII. The detailed summaries (Tables XXXIV 

through LXVI) are then ordered according to combustor type and configur<:ltion 

n~mber within each combustor type. Descriptions of each of these test configurations and key results are presented in Chapter II and III. 

In the data tables, only the measured combustor airflows are shown for 

the sake of brevity. In conducting the tests, the total airflow and the 

bleed airflows were actually measured and the combustor airflow was calculated as the difference between these two measured values. Nominally, the 

combustor airflow was 84 percent of the total inlet airflow. 

Within each high pressure performance/exhaust emissions test summary, 

the data were ordered according to simulated standard day engine operating 

conditions (idle, approach, cruise when tested, climbout and takeoff). 

Within each simulated engine operating condition data block, the NOx and CO 

emission indices are presented two ways; as actually measured at rig conditions and corrected to true engine operating conditions using the correction 

procedures described in Chapter II and Appendix A. 

143 

I 

" <-7:TH"lIII 
r

T 

I 

... 1 

-.. ------T---.-~-·"--T ---. 

( ~ 

" . 

Table XXXIII. Full Annular Combustor Test Sequence. 

: Final 

Run (1) Test Configuration Reading Noise 

I Number Date Number Number Measurements 

I 

! 1 ., 2 

3 

Ii 4 

5 

6 

I 7 

8 

9 

10 

IJ 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

30 

31 

32 

3.3 

3,4 

35 

36 

37 , 

38 

39 

(1) 

~2) 

~3) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

144 

~0/15/74 Rl 28 --- 1,0/30 D1 58 --- :Ll/8 R2. ~7 --- ]1/11 R2 88 --- 11/16 D2 125 --- 1/24/75 R3 141 --- 1/27 j i R3 153 --- i 2/5 D3 165 --- 2/6 D3 184 --- 2/10 R4 204 --- 2/28 R5 208 --- 3/3 R5 225 --- 3/10 D4 234 --- 2/25 D5 256, --- 4/7 R6 273, --- (2) 4/14 D6 276. --- (3) 4/15 D6 285 --- 4/17 D6 298 --- 4/22 Std 315 --- 4/23 Std 333 yes 

4/24 Std 350 --- (2) 5/6 R7 363 --- (3) 5/8 R7 374 --- 5/12 R7 416 --- 5116 D7 457 --- 5/19 D7 487 yes 

(4) 6/9 D8 547 --- 6/13 D9 579 --- 6/24 DI0 608 --- 7/8 D11 637 --- 7/14 D12A 657 --- (3) 7/16 D12A 670 --- 8/5 D12B 696 --- 8/15 D13 740 yes 

(5) 8/17 D13 767 yes 

8/27 D14<\ 792 --- 9/2 D14A 807 --- (6) 9/3 D14B 820 --- 9/4 D14B 840 ---

High pressure emissions/performance test unless noted. 

Atmospheric discharge pattern factor test. 

Atmospheric discharge sea level ignition/efficiency test. 

High pressure emissions/performance & crossfire test. 

Noise test conducted under contract DOT-FA75WA-3688. 

Sub-atmospheric altitude relight test. 

J:tlGINAL PAGE IS 

·ll!~POOR QUALITY 

Alternate l)ilta 

Fuel Table 

Points Number , 

--- LVII 

--- XXXIV 

--- LVIII 

--- LVIII 

-""!- XXXV 

--- LIX 

--- LIX 

--- XXXVI 

--- XXXVI 

--- LX 

--- LXI 

--- LXI 

--- XXXVII 

--- XXXVIII 

--- LXII 

--- XXXIX, XL 

--- XLI 

--- XLII 

yes Ref 9 

yes Ref 9 

yes Ref 9 

--- LXIII 

--- LXIV, LXV 

yes LXVI & Ref 9 

--- XLIII 

yes XLIII & Ref 9 

--- XLIV, XLV 

--- XLVI 

--- XLVII 

--- XLVIII 

yes XLIX & Ref 9 

--- L, LI 

--- XLIX 

yes LII & Ref 9 

--- LII, LIII 

--- LIV 

--- LIV 

--- LV 

--- LVI 

j 

, 

j 

j 

1 

I 

1 

1 

, 

1 

1 

1 

I 
l 

=

..... 

.. . . , .t .......... -

-

 ..... 

,. , 

, (4) 

i t;j 

.... 

(,11 

Table JQQCIV. Summary of Test Configuration DI. 

Inlet I --- ! - : -- Fuel/Air Ratio ---- --- -I ----- - -rAVerage 

T()tnl Tot!!11 Inlet _ _ __... g fuel/g nir Snmple • Emission Indlc.:es Total . Exit 

RCnd:1 ng IP('J1nt 

:Xl-unhar Number 

Iplct 

Totnl 

PreSSure 

Atrn 

Combustor Fuel I Air Reference Metered Sam Ie Combusn:urr--- - °k- F 1 -_ ... -flAFr- Pressul"Iarr4Jmper-

",tUl'O Airflow Flow Humidity Velocity Outer Over- Over- Efficiency--CI g uo I r,;nglne .r..ng1J1C Smoke Loss ,niure If'rOfileipauernl 

K kg/sea kg/hI" g/kg AIr m/sec Annulus Annulus all all % co lie NOx NO CO Number I K Factor IFactor i N

29 

33 

100 

101 

2..99 ·129 14,3 0 ! 4.9 18.2 a 0 0 __ __ __ __ __ __ __ -- 4.31 i 429 

2,92 429 14.1 440 f 7.4 118.1 0.0087 0 0,(10870.0108 96.3 57.3 23.7 2.6 2.7 -- -- 4.24 760 i 1. 

32 102 

103 

10·1 

50 

2.93 ,128 H.O 89·1 7.0 18.1 0.0178 0 0.01780.02'18 91.5 83.8 5.6 2,9 2.9 -- -- 4.35 ,1082 1.52 0.90 

2.91 ·129 i 13.8 I 582 7.5 18.0 0.0117 0 0.0111Q.0149 9B.0 40.5 9.0 3.4 3.4\ -- 1 1 4.18 870\ 11.5-1 1.77 

2.93 ,128' 13.9 694 7.-4 118.0 0.0138 0 0.0138 0.0175 98.0 61.61 6.1 3.5 3,5 -- l - 4.28 948 1.56 1.17 

2.93 f -1'29 13.1 636 8.7 17.2 0.0135 0 v.013S 0.0175 98.0 56.8 6.9 3.6 3.6 J -- -- 3.85 938 1.53 1.24 (Slm

35 1 1U6 2.94 I .131 I 12.2 70< 7.2 16.2 O.OlGO 0 0.01600.0208 97.4 78.2 7.3 3.6 3.2! - -- 3.48 jl023 1.53 0.971 (Sirn31 30 31 105 

I 36 1 601 j 3.12 ! 451 113 .. 3 G73 9.7 19.1 0.0114 a 0.0114 0.0141 98.5 39.1 5.7 3.7 3.4 -- 4.62 ,887 1.56 1.22 I 

37 j201 3.44 i 620 14.1 It 698 8.0 122.5 10.0138 0 0,01380.0158 P9.1 35.31 0.4 7.8 10.6 7.7 I 1 4,66 1 1122 

iii. I 211 6.88 I 631 ! 2!L3 1393 8 .. 2 t 23.0 jll.0137 a 0.0137 0.0138 99.6 13.7 0.810.3 1l.7 4.7 3 4.63 '1132! 1,54 1 1.12 

So 202 3.'11 1 631 I 13.7 695 6.9 1 22.6 0.0083 ,0.0058 0.0141 0.0159 95.0 76.6 32.6 3.9 7.1 56.9 -- 4.85 1120 1.24 0.B1 

·16 212 6.89 G31! 27.9 1382 6,0 22.7 0,,0080 0.00580.01380.0155 96.1 61.3 25.2 5.0 6.3 52.S -- 4,65 1118 1.26 0.63 

SG 2u3 !J.40 (,31.: 13,7 691 7.2 2:!.!1 0.0063 0.00790.01420.0164 94.5 81.0 36,0 2.6 '1.8 60.8 -- 4.82 I 1121 1,16 0.68 

57 

';H 

53 

1:1 

5·' 

1:! 

:W'l I' 3.'12 IS31. '13.9 698 7.8 22.S 0.0043 0.00960.01390.0161 92.8 96.5 49.8 2.0 3.7 75,0 -- 4,86 \U05 )..10 0.93 

205 ,3,35 630 101.0 695 I 7.6 23.2 (l 0,01360.01380.0156 as.9 78.2 123.1 2.1 4.1 58,1 1 5,46 1064 1.22 1.92 2(l9 ! 3.38 (i36 13.8 699

1 

7.6 23.0 0.0082 0.00590.01410.0152 89.7 100.1 79.2 3.3

1

6.1 78.1 -- 4.74 1099 1.26 0.65 

219 i 632 27.9 1392 6.0 22.8 0,0081 0,0058 0.0139 0.0151 93.7 81.2 44.0 4.8 6,0 71,8 f -- 4.73 1109 1.25 0.70 

2f)S 3.38 630 13.8 691 7.3 22.8 0.0062 0.00710.01390.0148 90.7 ,12L7 63.2 2.2 4.1 1103.6 j -- 4.88 1094 1.l4 0.46 2(17 3 .• '2 635 13.6! 709 t 7,3 22.5 P,0044 0.01010.01450.0153 92,1 135.6 46.9 2.1 3.7 111,2 -- 4.55 1123 11.08 0.28 

H 211 j 6.8l 632 27.4 ha9" 5.7 22,6 0.0042 0,0099 0.0141 0.0152 93.7 123.5 34.2 2.9 3.6 112.5 -- 4.75 ]116 1.11 0.33 . I ' I ·13 206 r 3.<10 o:n 13.7 1 u98 7.:1 22,6 ,0 0.01410.01410.0156 96.7 83.2 13.5 2.5 4.5 1 4.90 1132 j 1.23 0.54 

-17 216 6.89 1 631 t 28.3 1402 6.0 23,0 jo 0.01380.01380.0156 91.1 73.0 12.1 3.2 4.1, 64.0 -- 5.10 1123 1.23 0.56 

:lP ,1011 4.83 I' 7St:) 1 17 • 2 1300 7.9 25.0 10-.0101 0.01080.02090.0236 99.4 19.4 1.810.9 25.5 6.7 I ; 4,46 1498 I 1.14 0.30 

311 403 4.76 782 16.8 1295 7.7 j 24.7 0.0063 0.01510.0214 0.0242· 99.8 6.2 0.7 6.5 15.5 0,6 -- 14.42 1510 I 1.08 0.21 

-10 402 4.76 1 782 ! 16 .. 8 1308 7.9 124.6 0.0044 0.01720.02160.0247 99.8 7.3 0 .. 5 6.0 14.4 0.9 i 1 4.34 1519 1.13 0 .. 35 

-11 'IU\ 4..771182 t 16.7 1303 7.5 t 21.5 0.0032 0.01840.02160.0245 99.7 11.8: 0.4 6.1 14.4 2,6 -- 4.53 1518 1.16 0.40 

r-:t9 !:1O", 4.73 1 820 1 16.6 .135917.8 25.6 0.0101 0.01270.02280.0249 99.8 6.9 0.311.2 29.0 0,6 I -- 4.67 1585 1.10 L,2S 

50 5U:i 4.74 f 820 t 16.4 11374 7.6 25.4 0.0063 0.0170 0.0233 0.0257 99.9 3.0 0.1 1.2 18.3 0.1 I -- 4.70 1599 1.09 0.26 

:;1 50'2 4.74 ,82U I 16.4 1375 7.4 25.3 0.0043 0.0190 0.0233 0.0261 99.9 4.2 0.1 6.4 16.4 0.1 -- 4.84 1601 1.15 0.33 

52 501 4.13 I 820 I 16.4 11370 7.4 25.4 0.0033 0.02000.02330.0262 99.8 6.7 0.1 5.9 14.9 0.6 I 1 4.82 1600 1.17 0.41 

IIOTES: 

1. High Density Sampl1nc Mode 

2. A1 ternate Cup. Fueled 1n Inner Annulu 

3. Engine mx Calculated Vaing 0.2 Power ot P3 

I

1

--_ .... H_""--..... _ ..... .......... ....:.....-.l"" __ ...... •• - • 

__ 

--'-- •• ........ •• '_O. ...... ___ _ ,,' d'. 
.... 

"" 0) 

Jtco •. ttnC 

Jabt-r 

90 

91 

92 

93 

'4 

9S 

96 

97 

115 

UI 

116 

113 

\2·1 

123 

122 

121 

120 

lL9 

118 

117 

107 

109 

110 100 

119 

III 

101 

112 

102 

1\3 

103 

101 

105 

1. ••• 

PoID. 

!h""'",r 

100 

101 

102 

103 

11)4 

106 

. 201 

U3 

214 215 

310 

309 

3011 

307 

3<16 

321 

323 

322 

321 

101 

402 

103 

401 

SO, 

522 503 523 

501 

521 

50S 

50. 

S07 

lID8 

l.l.t 

Total 

Prt· •• ure 

,\t. 

2.93 2.93 

2.93 

2.91 2.93 2.93 

3.39 6.77 6.79 

4.7-1 

4. ,!3 4.73 

75 

4.13 

4.12 4.73 4.14 

1.70 

4.72 

4.13 

1.78 

1 .71 

4 . 71 

4 .74 

6.80 

4.72 

S.77 

1.72 

•• 81) 

t . 7I 

4.74 

4.71 

1.71 

Sote.: 

1. 

2. 

l. 

4.-

Tab le XXXV. Summary of Test Results, Configuration D2. 

Inlf't Fuel-Air Ratto 

Total Total Jnlet I fuel I « u r S •• pl. Eal • .ton lodiu'. 

T •• Co.bustor Fuel Air .. Mflterf'(l •• pl. Coebu_tioa ,Ik, luel SAl! 

_turo. Airflow Flow Huatdtt)" Veloci ty Outer I nner Over- Over- Efficienc) £n,l ne En,l ne SltOkl!' 

I k,/Ne k,lIIr ,Ike Air a/lf!c Annulu. Annulu. 011 all ,. CO He SOx NO. CO YUlUbe r 

13 .8 0 3.0 17.6 0 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

13.8 1043 3.0 17.8 0.0209 0 0.0209 0.0301 97.1 89. I 2.9 2.8 -- 66 

III 13.8 891 2.9 17.9 0.0179 0 0.0179 0.0274 97.7 78.1 3.1 -- --

431 13.8 893 2.9 18.0 0.0139 0 0.0139 0.0219 98.1 58.2 5.8 4 . 0 3.6 -- --431 13.7 3.1 18.0 0.0110 0 0.0110 0.0166 98.0 44.9 9 .8 3.7 3.4 -- I 

130 13.8 3.0 18 .1 0.0079 0 0.0079 0.0114 93 .0 76. 5 34.5 2 . 4 2.2 -- --

1 

430 13.8 250 2.8 18.0 0.0050 0 0.0050 0.0061 77.3 199.9 180.0 1.3 1.2 . -- --

&36 14 .• 890 2.7 24 .1 0.0131 0 0.0131 0.0177 99.3 29.1 0.7 9.0 10. 8 5.3 0 

626 27.9 2.7 22.7 0.0080 0.0058 0.0138 0.0185 96. 4 62.8 21.2 7.9 9.7 5l.6 --621 27.5 1392 2 .3 22.4 0.1'041 0.0100 0.0141 0.01515 9S .3 109 .2 21.3 3 . 7 4.6 98.1 --

826 27.8 1391 2 . 7 22.7 0 0.0140 0.0140 0.OH3 58.7 10.9 4.2 5.1 49.7 I 

662 19 .2 1371 2.7 23.7 0 . 0198 0 0.0198 0 . Ol37 98. 7 53.2 0 . 3 7.3 7.1 31.9 41 662 19.1 1-123 2.9 23 . 6 0.0082 0 . 0207 0 . 028 2 98.7 39. 7 4.2 9.5 9.3 32.2 --

663 18.9 1437 2.8 23.3 0.0096 0 . 0115 0 . 0211 0.0136 99.1 29. 7 2.1 7.4 7.1 2l.0 0 

664 19.1 1127 2.9 23 . 5 0.0063 0.0145 0 . 0208 0.0233 99 . 3 26.2 1.3 4.5 4.3 19.8 --

664 19 . 1 1427 2.9 23.9 0.0032 0.0175 0.0207 0 . 0219 98.' 4.2 3.4 3.2 44.7 --

730 17.6 1316 3.1 2,1 . 1 0 . 0083 0 . 0208 0 . 0273 99 . 2 29 . 2 I.G 13. 19. 5 19.2 --731 17.7 1312 3.0 24.3 0.0094 0.0112 0 . 0206 0.0239 99 . 5 19.1 1.0 10. 15.2 10.9 0 

730 17.' 1312 3.1 24.1 0 . 0064 0 . 0143 0 . 0207 0.023S 99. 7 10. 3 1 . 0 6.0 4.3 --733 17.8 1317 3.2 0.0032 0.0174 0.0206 0 . 0226 99.2 28.7 4.6 6.9 IS.7 --

789 16.8 1307 3.6 25.0 0.0102 0.0114 0 . 0216 0.0257 99.7 9.9 0.4 15.1 1.7 --785 11.7 1307 2 . 9 24.1 0.0063 0.015. 0.0217 0.0241 99.9 4 . 9 0.3 7.6 16.3 0.3 --

7b6 16.9 1310 3.1 24.8 0.0042 0.0113 0.0215 99.8 7.6 0.3 6.2 13.3 0.9 0 

7815 17.0 1315 3.0 24.9 0.0031 0.0184 0.0215 0 . 0230 99.6 13.6 0.5 6.3 13.6 3.3 --

&22 16.6 1371 2.1 25.6 0.0101 0.0130 0.0231 0.0266 99 . 7 1.7 16 . 3 37.5 0.3 --

821 16.6 1379 1.6 0.0061 0.0110 0.0231 0.0249 99.6 3.8 3.0 8.2 18.7 G.I --

822 24.1 1954 2.1 25.9 0.0060 0.0166 0.0226 0.0247 99 . 9 1.8 0.2 10 .5 20.4 0.1 --822 16.6 1378 2 .5 25 .• 0.0041 0.0190 0.0231 0.0243 99.7 6 . 1 1.2 7.4 17.3 0.4 --823 23.9 Ins 2.9 25 .8 0.0040 0.0188 0.0228 0.0248 99.9 3.4 0.2 9.1 17 . 8 0.2 --

822 18.5 1380 2.9 25 •• 0.0031 0.0202 0.023J 0.0254 99.7 8.5 0.9 7 . 8 18 1 1.0 I 

23 .• 2.8 25 .6 0.0031 0.0198 0.0229 0.0241 99.8 6.3 0.3 9.6 18.4 0.8 I 

822 1376 2.4 25.6 0 0.0232 0.0232 0.0244 99.8 7.8 9.7 22 .15 0.8 --

822 16.4 1130 2.4 25 . 4 0 0.0192 0.0192 0.0205 99.8 7.2 0.6 8 . • 19.2 0.7 --823 16.3 889 2.4 25.3 0 0.0152 0.0 15 2 0.0 175 99. 8 8 .5 7 . 9 17. 9 1.0 --823 1 •. 3 647 2 . 7 25 . 4 0 0.0110 0.0110 0.011 4 119.0 33.9 1.6 7. 8 17 . 8 14.8 --

HI, .. O .... lty S .. pIlD, lIode 

S •• ,le PooIUoo Saaplla. Mode 

Ea,la. SOx Caltulal ed U.ial 0.2 Pot.-er of P3 

CrulH Coiidltlon-Macb No . • Altitude . 12 . 8 kII 

Total £x1 t 

Pre",.urf' 

Lo .. ature IPrortle 

" JC I Flctor 

4.23 I -- 

f.liO 1178 

4.48 1090 

4.M 934 1.57 4.43 8S0 1.58 4.42 729 1.56 

388 1.50 

5.601 1.57 

5.16 lIH 1.28 

Ill6 1.16 

5.41 ll26 -- 

5.34 1354 1.48 

5.37 1381 1.28 5.27 1399 1.14 5.60 1391 1.10 

4.76 1386 1.16 

5.11 1446 -- 

4 . 95 1442 - 

5.22 1446 -- 5.28 1440 - 

5.0. 1523 1.15 

1524 1.10 

5.23 1519 1.15 5.31 I.l-I 5.20 1.12 

5.34 1591 1.10 

5.31 1581 1.10 

1596 1.14 

1.14 

5.34 1601 1.15 

S.31 1593 1.17 

1S99 1.17 

5.11 1414 1.18 5.00 -- 

4.81 1210 1.22 

- -- -- --- 
..... 

.to 

-.l 

lIeadiD, 

158 157 

158 

U. 

160 

161 

162 

16$ 

lU 

16S 

16. 

167 

169 

131 

Ih2 

1'3 

1'4 

173 

174 

170 

175 

171 

176 

172 

171 118 119 

1110 

Point 

IC ... ber 

100 

101 

101 

102 103 

104 105 

106 

200 210 202 212 203 213 214 4Jl 

402 4U3 

401 

501 502 

'12 

S03 

513 

504 511 505 

5(16 

l(17 

508 

,..........., r-- ...--. --.... - --- ---. 

Table XXXV I . Summar y of Test Resu lts , Configuration D3. 

Iolet J'uel-Alr Ratio 

Inlet Total Total IDlet a fuell g air Suple Eat •• ion l ndic •• Total 

Tot-al Te.per- COIIbUltor Fuel Air Reteren<:.e Me tered S .. ple Coebustlon 1I!',;'t(1' SAB Pre •• \lre f---;. 

Pr •• ,ure ature Airflow Pi .... n ... ldlty Velocity Oue,er I nner Over- Over- S!'!tciency 

CO I He En, En, Sacke Lo .. At. It kg/a.., kc/hr &/l<g Air a/Icc Annulus Annulus Al! Ali , NO. NO" CO Su.ber , 

2.91 426 13.8 0 -- 18.1 0 0 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3.71 2.96 429 14.1 531 2.0 18.2 0.0105 0 0.0105 0.0133 94.7 67.0 37.6 3.3 3.0 -- 2 3.98 2.93 428 13.8 531 2 .0 18. 0 0.0106 0 0.0106 0.0137 94.7 &8.2 36.9 3.3 3.0 -- -- 3.86 2.91 428 14.0 386 2.2 18.2 0.0076 0 0.0076 0.0095 91.8 77.4 63.7 2.9 2.7 -- -- 3.90 2.91 428 13.1 616 4.3 17.4 0 0.0130 0.0163 94.4 80.5 37.6 3 . 3 3.1 -- -- 3.58 2.87 429 12.3 678 3.4 16.6 0.r153 0 0.0153 0.0190 94.1 90.8 37.6 3.1 2.9 -- --

3 . 58 U8 16.9 623 3.0 19.3 0.0102 0 0.0102 0.0123 96.9 50. 8 4.2 4.1 -- -- 4.11 

4.50 490 21.1 767 4.5 20.2 r.Ol0l 0 0.0101 0.0127 98.6 33.2 6.8 5.0 5.5 -- I 4.37 

:".10 .38 14.2 0 -- 25.1 0 0 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5.47 

6.7. 629 27.7 0 -- 22.9 0 0 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4.21 

3.13 129 13.9 694 5.0 22.7 0.0139 0 0.0139 0.0162 98.7 51.5 0.9 6.9 16.2 2 4.31 

6.19 '28 27.5 139h 3.1 22.' 0.0141 0 0.0141 0.0181 99.3 aO.8 0.2 9.0 9.3 U.B •• 4.33 

3.42 632 14.0 397 4.6 23.0 0.0079 0 0.0079 99.5 13.6 1.7 8.7 10.0 1.2 -- 4.2$ 

6.7S 627 :7.5 793 3.0 22.7 0.0080 0 0.0080 0.0100 99.8 5.7 0.7 11.7 12.4 1.9 -- 4.21 

6.78 628 27.5 I", 22.6 0 0.0\.15010.0057 99.2 22.8 2.8 <1.5 8.7 16.8 -- 4.21 

4.74 788 17.0 12&9 2.7 25.1 0.0098 0.0112 0.0210 0.0242 99.4 22.2 0.8 13.6 29.3 s .• -- 4.39 

, 

4.73 786 17.0 1313 3.4 25.2 0.0061 0.0154 0 .0215 0.0242 99.8 9.3 0.2 9.7 21.1 I.' -- 4.34 

4.73 787 17.0 1313 3.3 25.2 0.0040 0.0174 0.0214 0.0244 99.7 11.7 0.2 8.2 17.' 2 •• U 4.30 

4.74 788 17.2 1307 3.5 25.5 0.0029 0.0182 0.0211 0.020 99.5 17.2 0.6 &.0 17.1 5.4 -- 4.a4 

4.76 820 19.3 1373 2.3 25.3 0.0102 0.0132 0.0234 0.0263 99.7 11.1 0.2 IS.7 35:. 2.2 -- 4.2t 

4.73 821 19.3 1363 3.0 25.S 0.0060 0.0231 0 .0258 99.8 6.5 0.1 11.1 25.' 0.1 -- 4.3' 

6.80 821 23.2 1964 2.1 25.2 0.0060 0.0175 0.0235 0.0264 99.9 4.7 0.4 13.7 2d.0 0.5 -- 4.H 

4.73 820 16.4 1378 1.9 25.2 0.0041 0.0193 O.Op' 0.0258 99.8 8.4 0.1 HI.3 1.0 -- 4.31 

6.80 820 23.0 196$ 2.6 25.0 0.0042 0.0195 0.0237 0.026$ 99.9 5.6 0.2 12 .• 24.1 0.7 -- 4. 

f.73 820 16.S 1377 2.2 25.5 0.0030 0.0203 0.0233 0.0260 99.7 12.2 0.3 10.4 24.0 2.5 0 f.33 

6.S0 820 %3.5 1966 2.4 25.4 0.0031 0.0202 0.0233 0 .0257 99.8 9.2 0.3 12.3 23.8 2.0 1 4.2f 

4.12 820 16.3 1373 3.2 25.3 0 0."234 0.0234 0 . 0255 99.6 IS.9 0 •• 12.0 28.0 4.2 -- 4.37 : 

4.74 821 16.3 1127 3.2 25.3 0 0.0192 0.0192 0.0""8 99 •• 14.3 0.5 10.3 24.0 3.f 4.l0 4.76 821 16.3 2.1 25.2 0 0.0150 0.0150 0 .0160 99.4 20.1 0.9 9.1 20.' 6.5 -- I 4.2. 4.74 822 16.5 6-U 3.2 25.5 0 0.0109 0.0109 0.0117 98.8 49 . 4 3.0 0 18.7 ::1,0 -- 4.25 

.tr-ote,: 

l. 1tad1el l.aere1oD SUpl1UI Mode 

2. "11h De.aU, Supl1n. 110<1. 

3. EDline liOx Calculated UeiD, 0.2 Po, .. er of P3 

A"eraa-e 

Exlt 

T .. perature Prohle Pat

K raClOr Fac

431 -- --

817 1.56 

821 -- -

708 1.55 1.7

903 1.52 1.2

980 1.51 1.

843 1.52 1.5

1175 I.U 1.4

131 -- --

62. -- --

1131 1.)2 1.

lltl 1.53 1.

83. 1.60 1. 

826 1.5

1121 1.53 1.5

UOO 1.24 CI.

151. 1 . 14 0.J

1lI1S I. IS 0.4

150$ 1. I' 0.41602 1.20 0.5

150' 1.14 0.3

1.13 0.3

111«1 1.16 0.3

1613 1.15 0.f

ueM 1.17 0.

1599 0 . 

16(13 1.2«' 0.5

1478 1.21 0.5

1341 1.24 0.6

120)4 1.23 J.5
.... 

tI:o 

co 

Table XXXVII. 

Jnlt't 

Inlot I TMol Total 1",I.t Total T ... per- C_bu_tor ruet Air ,h'ferenOf' 

aead:;ol PotDl "r ••• ure .ture Alrtl_ P10_ .u.ld! ty 

Ii ... b@r l'u'Ibe>r A t. K kc/H(, kalbr ,,Ike Air .IH4." 

227 100 2.89 429 13.9 0 18.3 

.2. 10$ 2.90 .3. .3.' 777 3.1 18.4 

.28 101 2.91 .3. 13.8 691 3.1 18.3 

230 102 2.91 '3' 13.' 548 3.1 18.3 

231 to. 2.91 '3' \3.8 547 3.1 18.2 232 103 2.90 43. 13.8 3 •• 3.1 18.3 233 10. 2." .. , 14.0 299 2.3 18.3 

23' 200 3.11 129 14.2 0 24.8 

I. Radlel J-..uton ' .. pUn, Mod. 

2. DAta Takelt aHer Fuel Noulp De.eloppd Lto .... 

3, Htlh De •• t t.) , 5."pl t. 

Summary 0 Test Results Configuration D4. 

'I,el-Air Ratto I IA"oroP I tuellc air 5_1'1. £ai •• ion ]ndic", Total Ex) t Mt'tf"red 8111' e Co. ... u.tton Ilk. fud SA£ Pre •• unt Te.peruu\,.r I nner Ove.- ,(h°er- ZHtd.DC'J lOl'lIte' EO,infO 9IIItoke 1.0.19; ature 'tProfllelPlttern 

Annulu. Annulua All All CO He NO. NO" CO Su.ber K 'ector ';letor 

0 0 0 t.ll 429 

0 0.01$5 0.0178 97.7 85.0 3.3 3.2 3.0 4.30 1010 11.39 

1

1

•

01 

0.0139 0 V.Ul39 0.0157 '8.1 61.0 3.9 3.6 3.3 ".27 1.38 1.15 0.0110 0.0110 0'0.121 98.5 39.1 6.2 4 .3 3.9 4.19 856 1.31 1.02 

0.0110 0.0110 0.0103 98.3 41,0 1.8 4 .5 4.1 ".17 8$, 

1

0

•

0080 0 0,0080 0.0081 '8.' 32.' 2,' 2.1 " .• 1 133 1.31 1.30 12

C.OO59 0 0.0059 0.0054 74.4 14).t 221. 7 0 •• 0 •• '.09 eo. 1.32 I. 

in 0 0 5.19 
)1:0. 

Table XXXVIII. Summary of Test Results, Configura tion D5. 

lat.l 

Toul 10'.. rufOt j Tot.' I IT ... ' 

I ft.di.aIPotnt jP,.. •• ur •• ht ... I Atrf1\JIW 'I_ 

l l!> ."' . -tr At. • k,l .. e k,lbr 

100 2.94 42f' 1'.0 C) I 

2:i& 100 :1.91:) -131 13.1 0 231 

2JIt 

2.'1 2.e, 

Air It. t.re.u:... SAl Io'.t I 

Hu .. ldU, V.loctt) .... 

.,I)C At r 'lriu."", 

2." 

2.' 

".6 

18.2 

" 

o o 

11.1 0.01011 0 

o 

1).OINt 0.0128 31.0 2.' 4.0 3.7 _.-

ne 

u 

2. 

241 

10' 

,02 ,02 

103 

103 

11'H 

2. 

2.e2 

2.'1 2.'1 

130 

4.C) 

31 

43' 431 

43' 

11.2 III 

IH,O 0.010' ° 

<-,01101° . °1971 ft8.1 

0.0109 0.012 4 ' '8.' 

16'411.°13"1 3'2,---

31i1 .... 2.S 4.0 J.. ---

1:!'.& 

13.8 13.7 

u.MI HI I ::: '0.' 111 ' 00"1° 1°·00··1°· ..... ·1 ".3 120.112.21 .. 2 

636 

5301 

U.' ItO 2 7 1 •. 2 0 v.IX .. ' 0.0\01 M.3 It,I 2.2 4.2 

1l.7 3. 2.7 IH.I 0.0073 0 10.,.,730.0078 ftJi.' 23.0 $.5 3.3 

3.B 

... 

3.0 

T'Jt.l 

lA>1'. 

, 

.4H 

" 

".3& 

-4.4.$ 

C.' 

I.eo 

4.73 

-1,03 

243 

... 

.. , 

24. 

203 

20. 

3.-11) 

'.4+ 

3.40 3.41 

13,7 181 2,1 22.. 0. 0140 1° O.OI-W o,oln i 914.9 I c • 

U. 7 2," 22.. 0.11\01t 0 O'OI060'Ol:t81 eft.S 2 •• 

13.7 391 2,$ 22,8 O.(MJ7II0 0.007" O.()o,S 99.8 U.S 

.. 13.8 2 1l 2,') 22.6 O.tMt49 0 0.00," 0.00)1 ".:1 2.' 

832 

"'2 

12' 

. , 

' .... 

11 

7. 

IJLit 

T A, ..... ...... r-' ! 

.turl!! Profs 1 .. Patt.,rn 

I r.('tN' rae tor 

'2' 

43' 

U 

., 

J.12 

1.31 

1.27 

1.2M 

1.1. 11 

0.87 2 

7111 1.2. 0.' 

771 1.2& 0.'3 

11t J.H 0.'2 

,,< 

253 

2!'i2: 

401 

402 

4')3 

4. ". 

.1. 

.,84 

T8.\ 11.1 1, 1313 2.' 23.1 10.0103 0.0110 0.0213 0.0244 8 .0 I · 11 I 150",1.21 I 0.47 

713 17.2 : 12tH) 2 • .0 2S.1 n,OOIO 0.0148 O,0208 0.0;U1 l.:l''''' 14,,4 1.14 0,31 

7t.3 17.1 : I2flJI 2,0 ,n,7 0,0041 U .0170 0.(,1211 0.023" 1. 2 "to.l 1505 1. U 0.311 I 1 

256 25$ 

... : 

$2' 

&U 

8.'4 8.U 

>1, 

821 

1. lip Den.! tt a •• pltn 

29.$ 124)3 1 2 .' 25." 1°·0064 1000161 1 (1.0231Io.":U(l1 ".t 22.*" , 0.41 

29.5 2.1 2$.4 O.0tl54 0.0177 0.0231 0.0261 1.)0.0 2.00.1 12.51 21.6 0.2 

"2. l.d,,1 l .... ut_ '.pll •• Mod. 

3. latln. lID .. C.l("uhted Ii ..... 0 .2 r...r of P, 

1.7/'1' 

"8 

Ultci l' 1.13 ,- o.lti 

1 •• 4 (,. 34 

So
., 

c 

Tabl e XXXIX . Pat tern a nd Profil e Fa 

Con fi guration 06 . 

Inlet 1nl 

r s 

otal Total Combustor 

Tempera tu re AirfloH 

Number atm K kg/s 

o 1. 05 626 4 .01 

r Atmosphe ri c Pr essure Combust or Test

g Fuel/g Air Pattern Prof

P ilnt" , Main , Total Factor Fa cto

. 0145 0 . 0145 1.01 1. 1 
Table XL. Summary of Sea Level I gnition Test Results, Configuration 06. 

Inlet I nlet 

:o ta1 To tal Combustor Requi r ed Fue l Flows 

Po int Pre;:\slxe Tempe r atur e Airflow Type 50% 50% 

atm K kg/s Igr..it or Lightoff Pr opagation Propagation Cups Ou t B

50 - 287 2 . 72 spark 337 364 377 - 

60 1.01 284 3 .58 tor ch 401 409 417 375 

379 - 433 380 

418 418 432 382 

80 1.02 282 4 . 51 s park 428 429 429 356 

428 435 439 364 

423 440 440 360 

70 1.03 283 5 . 47 spark 418 432 447 .• 353 

428 457 460 304 

428 449 459 291 

IU 1. 03 284 5 . 53 t orch 399 416 482 

No t es: 

a . JP- 5 at 285 K . 

b . Barome tric pressure '" . 987 atmospheres l 

:J ...l. 

.. 
l 

:"1 

c..; 

Table XLI . Summa r y of Sea Level Efficiency Lest Res ults , Conf igu r ation Dv . 

Inle t 

Total 

Notes: 

T 

K 

b . 

JP- 5 at 285 K 

r ome tric pr essure 

Combustor 

kg/s 

He t e r ed 

Fuel-Air 

.0278 

.0210 

.0230 

.0243 

. ... 8 7 atmosp heres 

nc 
~ 

(Jl 

(..) 

I 

Readln, 

):_~r 

2H8 

287 

U8 

289 

290 

291 

292 

293 

291 

Inlet 

Total 

Point Pr~ •• ure 

N .... ber At. 

100 2.93 

101 2 ••• 

102 2.94 

102 2.95 

103 2.94 

lOt 2.93 

201 3. 10 

202 3.41 

203 3. 12 

Tab l e XLII . Summa r y of Test Results 

Iftl_t 

FUel-Air Ratlo 

Total Total Inlet C fuel I Air $ample 

T_per- C ... buator J'uel Alr It._terence Metered Saepl. C..-buatlon 

eture A,1rtlcw J'lu .. HUJlldlly Veloci'), Outer Inner OVer- Over- Efficiency 

K k«taee ·Irhr Itk, Air a/sec I Annulua Annulua All All " 

131 13.7 0 ~.1 18.0 r 0 0 0 0 --

430 13.' 691 , ~.I 11.0 0.0131 0 0.013b 0.0167 98.~ 

430 13.6 539 5.8 17 .• 0.0110 0 0 . 0110 0.012S 99.2 

432 13.7 537 5.0 17.9 0.0109 0 0.0109 0.0122 99.1 

429 13.8 tH ~.t 18.0 0.00~9 0 0.0089 0.0097 99.3 

429 13.7 346 1.7 17.9 0.0070 0 0.0070 0.0084 97.~ 

628 13.4 697 4.0 22.1 I 0.0144 0 0.0144 0.0180 99.2 

629 13.6 Me 4 .1 22.3 0.0113 0 0.0113 0.013S 99.7 

631 13.7 400 4.' 22.~ I 0.0081 0 0.0081 0.0095 99.9 

~ote.: 

1 . Hllh Density SaapUni lIod. 

2. Radial l .... r.lon. sa.pIta, Ko.lde 

3 . IDlln. NO. Calculated U.1D, 0 . 2 Power 01 P3 

Con

fi~

ratio n 06 . 

A,erac· t.lt •• lon Indicte. Total Extt 

Ilk, Cuel SAE PT •• aurt> T .. .,.rEnl Inc S!oc.k. Lo .. .ture Pro111_ Pat

00 He 110. "O"{ 00 Su..bttr " I Fact ar rac

-- -- -- -- -- -- 4.35 131 -- -

M.O 2.2 3.~ 3.4 -- -- 1. SS UI 1.21 0.

21.7 2.1 3.9 3.8 -- I 1.39 857 I.H 0

27.0 2.3 4 .0 3.8 .- -- 1.43 853 1.12 0.

18.5 2.4 3.7 3.6 -- -- 4.18 77. 1.10 0.

43.7 15. 3 ~.I 2.0 -- -- 4.43 701 1.12 1.

32.1 0.1 8.1 9.6 6.4 1 4.60 11S2 l1. n9 1.

11.4 0.1 8.8 10.4 1.0 -- 4.71 10,16 1.09 1.

3.0 0.1 7 . 2 8.6 0.3 1 1.77 938 1.11 1
(Jl 

Inlet 

Tn 

Tab l 

10 ... 

I. 

XLIII. Summar y 0 Test Re sult s, Con f i guration D7. 

f ..;,,·l -Alr It.H 

L •••• -, .. A " 

Sld4:r,'d Is 

... 

L.: t 

; 

T :.t l,n 

r 

1(11 Tt,"P ... •r -

I,. Airl" .. 

1..c.M"t: 

"1 t•• I II A,. 

... 

A.·t,·,-, 

'\"t""-c ! J 4 I"" , I I t.n':"IM'i . !-fUUI,:\o ( ) r. '0 

AI a.. tier H( I" " l,j 

1:.1 

1;1 

t .. : 

UJ 

tl1 

'Ill 

U. 

W .. 

Hll 

2Ul 

• )2 

.. 

.. 

1. 

l.IH 

J' 

l:lq 

'2 

1:1:, 

11.. 

13.7 

D.ti 

0/'4'" 

I:JJ I;" .. 

., 

I.U 

' lJl D." 1.601 I 

... 

7. )"',:' 

1. 14-.:. 

, . 

1i._ 

1I 

l.l' 

Ht 1

1"'1," (ll)1 

• (lIiD 

II:!I)" 

• 'J 

• 0lnO !1 

o I . ,,(i7',1 ,:1 

4f)21 ... 

7. 

.. ) 

.. 

j"'. > 

• ;'".1 

"

.', 

.lIt ., 

J I,') 

.' ... 

'.1 

l.l I _. 

1.:J 

' .. 

l." 

I.U 

·'.h 

.Lltl 63$ :"'CI fi e 4._ 1110 1,1111" 

1.1(1 1l.\ &.1., ')"2 6.,," 2.i .... If . • nI1f; II,.; • • ,1 .. ·,,1--· 

u .;.2j 11,0 ; . 1 1.1.n INI;!! ""." 'l ot'l .-

til 4i'(1.fi ]..., ':: l'! lin fi.1) ':2 . 1 11 I' 1:'.2 

UJ J05 f . U 62'> •• _ :t'.!. H(It-:! ,to 11.1 ,,·' · "IIO.,l ....... 

.K 

I.' 

U,:S 

""'." 

'''' .... 

.7 

.. 

0 •• 

o. 

1.1 ... 

1.6N 

1.:;S 

1.1'" 

I."'" 

1. ... " 

1.1 .. 

:5.11 

.21": 

9:1 

" . 

" 

,..21 

.. 

16.13 

l.:H 

1.2'1 

1.2l 

l. 

1.23 

J.lt" 

1.2'" 

1 . 27 

• J 

.11 

1. , 

a'i "Ol 1.1'1 ;-;6 14.'1 l UI:.! 6.1 -I I.,., .UflU j H21:\' I 1"_1 III.; It"! ,_ .. 

d3 JUl 1.1d 1",l ,-K.9 ;l" _utll,2 'I:!lj • 1!1.'" .... " •• 1 .--

"'.. 'U] I.hi ;1') Jt5 . $ UlIK 6.1 .0" ;, " .' ,6-;: 1 . .!!l;!C . r:'zI " ;) • .:t -_. : •• 1 I. - I I_I:! 

UI :.''- If . $[. -I :.1 .!J : .OO.:!I I,'l\ 1.'" • . 7 Go _ IfiUl I.U 1 

1.9 

I. 

n 

Ul 

II 

i71 II. 

II 

1. 

,IJ fi . '51 ,,'ill f2.. 2Jnjj .. 2 J... .UUt.! .'U,,. .,) .. d) ,11. .. _ 1 'Iil.tt t." '41 u.(. 1.7 . ' I' ) 1.12 

1·1 

51 

,I 

!"JT£: 

. 

.. , 32.iio 201", ).J ;.!} I '""hi .olln . '; IT.! .nICJ; I! •• ".t'! . '1 ( •• 11 1.J ',.re UUi!\ 1.11 

14.19 

1.71 

U.5'1 

1.17 

32 . 9 Hils ".; . 1 . utS:, ""1. 1 1.1 1 .... & 1.:1 111 130:; 1.,1 

",I!t 

•• $. .'9 

1.1" 

.>7 • 

I. !aDJt Del_ Su.:; ... t (t... .. J 

1 . H .. "h 0"$1,.11,, Solql 

1;111 fi.3 _ . ')Ulu .i'l1Iit .t.JlO . :12,),:1 •. \,1 H.I (I.... n.:' 10.1" l5!\r ... 11 

.1 :l1$1 :.. .. '1 Z_.I .-')011 U)!II) .. ·,1 01.-:' o .. t fl." ) .'!l 15·9.) ).12 

::11:1 r . J ."I{i!1 I.T'231 . n2',1' 99.9 1,1 ltd V.1 I..... :' . '-1 J).f!.!) 1.11 

2121 :II ." !L.6 .1 .1111,'7 . ·:It;'.1 j()cJ .•• J ... . I. I •• ,,: 1\., 1.1 

'",1''' ",0 .! . • :! • 1,,1 .lIlb .nz.l:..J .'I:n:, 99.'" 1.;' 11.1 O. H , ..... 1' ....... ..10 1.1 

•• 11 2:;.1 .001'1 .(11HI . r)r.ln • .,!,un 10u.I' 2.:1 

.2 

., 

, 

3 .. &ac-1n.!C'J" Calculi·ff-' UJ bl 0 .2 IU 1'3 
~ 

(,II 

(,II 

_r ",.d1'11 .... n' '\,.--r 

.' 101 

.. V 101 

4eo 102 

491 103 

4.2 10' 

531 201 

533 202 

5J4 203 .3. 204 

537 212 

~l. 

213 

531 214 

542 401 

~4\ 

4n2 

500 

'U 

-

404 

546 SOl 

• 41 502 

.44 503 

• 43 SOL 

Inlet 

Total 

P,.. •• ur. 

At. 

3 .01 

2.93 

2.94 

2.94 

2." 

3.3e 

3.4\ 

3.40 

3.3' 

'.80 

'.80 

'.11 

4 .7' 

4 .7' 

4 .7" 

4.7' 

4 .7' 

4 .7. 

4.75 

4 .71 

Inlet 

lotal 

T ..... r- Ca.buato 

at,..,. Airflow 

a ",/ MC 

. U 13.8 

431 13 •• 

42* 13.' 

431 13.8 

'30 IJ.9 

.. , 14.1 

128 14.0 

I2t 14.0 

'2, 14.0 

830 27.7 

631 27.' 

121 27.' 

1Kl 11.1 

783 17.0 

771 17.0 

781 17 .0 

120 11.5 

8lf 11.5 

112 11.5 

'15 II .• 

Table XLIV. Summary 0 Test Results, Confi guration D8. 

""1-41r bUo Averace hum

Total Jnlet Cruel I I( "r Sa.,l. £al .. 10n Indlc:ea ToUI Exit h.1 Atr Rel.rene. Metered ... pu Co.bdtto .. Ike fuel SAl: Pre •• ure T..,.rn_ 'haleUt, Velocity Outer ! Inner Owr O'4r- Ifftdertc ::'''' -ne'" 5., ... Lo .. ature ProfH. q,br I:q Air .-- AnftulualAllDuld All All S CO He >0- CO !'I.~r • & Fac.tor r.ctu

0 •• 3 17 •• 0 0 0 - - - - - - - - 4.151 .2. - -

69. 10.0 11.1 .0140 0 .014e .0178 H.O 36.' 1.3 2.' 3.0 - - •••• til 1.3. 1.0

578 5.4 lI.O .OUI 0 .0Ut .OU7 H.2 24.3 1.. 3.2 3.1 - I 4 .78 887 I.)" 1.0

445 5.7 18.0 .0090 0 .009Ol .0106 99.2 18.5 3.3 2.' 2.8 - - 4." 712 1.28 0.7

344 5.7 11.0 .006' 0 .006 .001\0 1111.3 '5.0 31.1 \.8 1.8 - - 4.11 6n 1.48 1.7

194 7.1 23.1 .0137 0 .';'J"J .=;\-8 H.5 2\.2 0.5 6.' 8.4 1.5 2 5." 112. 1 .3' 1.0

70. 7.4 22.V .0070 .006' .OU .0151 12.3 07.' 52.0 3.5 e." &5.4 - 5.'5 1100 1.27 0.6

700 7.2 22.V .0056 .0083 .013 .0149 12.1 23.0 SO.I 2.8 •• 3 ".S 2 5.'7 \0 .. 1.11 0.4

.sa 7.1 23.0 .0044 .009:' .OU .0146 'l.' 40.' 51.3 1.2 4. 2 15.8 - S.IO IOU 1.13 0.4

3~1 

1.0 22.1 .0011 .0061 

I 

.oue .0153 ".2 91.7 37.0 4 .8 '.1 81.7 - 5.32 1113 1.2~ 0.5

3.7 5 •• 22 •• .00'" .0094 .014C .0150 1<.2 U.3 30.' 3 .8 4.8 OB.4 2 5.34 1113 1.\2 0.3

3U 5.7 22 •• .OO$! .004.8 .014e .01$5 94.' 69.' S7.' 5.' 7 .2 60.8 - 5.23 1112 1.31 0.9

310 4.7 2'.0 .0042 .0171 .0213 .0234 99 .9 '.B 0.1 8.e 15.3 0.' - 5.31 1501 La. 0.3

"7 •• 3 U.O .0012 .0150 .0212 .0233 H.I •. 4 0. 1 7.7 11.7 0.2 3 ~.27 15(>8 1.e7 0.2

301 7.' 2 4 .8 .0081 .0132 .0213 .0221 89.8 7.0 0.' &.3 20. ' 0.8 - 5.20 1_ 1.12 0.3

lOB 4.7 2!LO .003' .0181 .0214 .0235 99.8 6.1 0.1 '.5 14 .8 0.8 - •• 33 1511 1.0& 0.3

,,, 4 .' 25 •• .0042 .0181 .0231 .024.6 19.9 2.8 0 8.1 1t.1 o 1 - '.Z8 15'4 1.0. 0.3

S .. 4 .5 2:1. 4 .0062 .016' .0231 .024.' 89.1 2.3 0.1 I '.0 21.8 0.1 I 5.20 151 .. 1.01 0.2

3 .. 4 . < 25.2 . 0082 .0\49 .0231 .020 19.1 2 . 4 0.1 1.1 24 . 1 0. 1 - 5.12 15" 1.10 0.3

sn 4.' U.3 .0031 .0200 .023\ .0252 89.1 4.' 0. 1 8 .0 1'.7 0.2 - 5.28 15tl 1.08 0.S

lCot. •• : 

1. RiC" __ .tt, Supl1a1 Mode 

.. Sac'''' NO. Caltulated U.lac 0 . 2 Power of P, 
I-' 

tJl 

0'1 

.... d!'" ' ... ..,.r 

.10 

'''4 

. .,

... 

..... 

00. 

.... 

Polnt 

,.,.be-r 

101 

-

.... 

I.' 

-

-

.... 

I. 

1at.l., 

Total 

Pr" •• u.r. 't. 

.... 

.... 

3.10 ..• 

.... 

3.1$ 

.. 

2 .... 

'.03 

'.01 

Tabl 

Inlet 

Total 

atUJ"'e 

• 

430 

431 43' 

." 

433 

43' 

432 

'" 431 

XL Summary of Cross- f ire Test Results, Conf i guration D8. 

f..whAlr Ratiu 

CD--..'or 

Airflow 

.. ,

-

Toul Illliet I 5.p1 • '",,1 Air .. f .... nc. • ... 1. Coathla" 

n_ ft"ldlt , \'elocit" o...r.!,tttcl., • I kc hr . ' kc At r .J -tee All 'I 

.. 

• 

.... ... T.' '"., \.0 .. 0 I 0 I'OU'I'O'" I " .• I·T.II •.• " .• 13.3 li22, 7 11.0 nlf;2 .0115 .0137 .0Ut .... '4.1 , 15.7 2.' 

U.' UQ '.7 17.0 .0Util .0121 .o:ta .0310 ".11 11.1 , 4.,1 2.1 

13.' U11 7.1 17.' 

n.. 541 7.0 11.1 

13.' 1"1 A.5 II.' 

13.7 1127 '1.2 17.' 

13.' kill 7.3 1 •• 2 

U.I l<U 7,2 111.2 

.OUM 

.01DA .0114 .0110 

.0101 

n.' &92 7.4 ,.,,12 

• 0071 .022' .0214 

.0101 .0147 

.01611 .0282 .0302 

.0111 .0227 .023' .0087 .on. .0198 

.00&1 •• 000B 

• 011Z 

.0131 

1., I 12.4 -I 82.2 I 2 •• " .. 1,.$ 1.21 J.l 

•. iO.D T I ".4 TO.' I . 11.' 21.T I'" 1.1 

81.0 8 •• 1 ' 110.2 1.. 

".4 .... 40.' 1.7 

-. """r Tou.' ,1'8 ..... \Ia'.' 1.111 ....,.. at., I 

4.1. I I6a 

.... 

1167 

120. 

... 

n 

, 

"" .... 

.tl 

Pr ... 

f11. 

18CtD1' 

Pl Her" 

Jat.tor 

13.' 1241) 7 .2 17 .5 .0012 

13.1 HZ 7.4 lh.O .0070 

15." 782 7.0 20.7 .0140 

III l 604 611 432 

60$ 7fn- -0 3.« 5ie-

.0079 

.0254 .0274 

.0203 .0216 

.0 ..... OU3 

"140 .0201 

.... h7.' 

flO.S 

.... -J

- ::: 

-:::-,..+--+'-+--l--l---l 5.:11 III 

.... .... ....,

-t-:-i ---1-

DO 702 3.74 liil 15.1 nat ' .. 2 U . O .OU' .017' .0' n. .()3,. 

5.T 70] 3 .07 :tlu u.s 14 .. 0 7.. :W.I .OttJ .0123 .0268 .n213 .... 17.. 11.1 3.1 

.... 1'04 3.44 lU' 15.7 11.4 , .. 8 21 . (.1 .0111 .0011 .02141 .024. '4.1 18.2 40.' 3.1 

M9 706 3.U 5::1 15.7 613 7 .1 21.1 .0101 .010. .Q14' H.. ..I! 0.1 4.5 

510 ,..... J •• " &20 15.5 1581 •• 1 11." .t)IU .0174 .028& .0304 11.1 M.l '.0 2.' $11 , 101 3.4" 520 U.S 1115 .0112 .0124 .02;'8 . Oli" I •. ' M1.2 :n.7 2.' $12 1C1e 5U 15.6 11'136 111.1 :n.o .0110 .0074 .01114 .011& to.' 0.. til6 2.1 $ U 70H '.41 S18 15.' IQ3:! 7.. 21.0 .01" .007. .0183 .0UIl to.S "1.1 11'.:1 :1.2 

loll 7lt) ,..... S12 U.' lJ09 •. 0 20 . 4 .0110 .OU] .0233 .02$1 _L& 12.' I 2'.3 2.1 

51$ 711 '.40 511 15.7 389 7.1 21.2 .0061 .000'.()OII3 ..... 22.3 1 5.& l.1 $16 112 ).tt 520 15.5 1.' a.1 .0012: .01111 52.11 1.3 1.3 

S.Ol 115., 

$ .44 1421 

5 .71 12 ..... 

I» 

5.11 14 

i.'l 

.... 

.... 

1.$$ 

.. 

U23 

1133 

1311 

Til 

1141 

'.

111 1U !." 517 15.1 1212 )1.1 20.. .0070 .0145 .0215 .0U. 15.1 .7.1 :hi .• 1.7 I" a.to;. 12$1 

IU 714 3.31 511 15.1 •. 0 31.2 .0011 .OOM .0161 .Ola:. ".7 ' 111.4 "., 1.' '.03 1014 - -l- 

:n. ..Ol 3.40 ell 13.. &II '.0 22.' .OU' .onl .0201 ".S 21.. 0.2 '.1 .. I .. &.20 11M 

!l20 102 '.50 U4 n.l 1&41 '.2 21.' .0143 .OUO .Oll] .0340 ".3 at.7 0.' 4.7 .. I .. 5.$5 1.71 

621 lien 3.3' .OZI 14.0 12.,. '.4 23.0 .0140 .OUI .0251' .02tr7 •. 5 49.5 3 •••• 

522 tII04 3.41 ,2. 14.0 Ion 11.2 22.. .0140 .()C)IIta.Q2c)II .n2)O W.' " 4 .J 11.' I.' 523 "',$ 3.40 ':"4 13.' 547 ".0 22.' .eHOI .0109 .0141 H.. $.1 0.3 '.7 

124 10(". 3 44 &44 n.1 14H 7.' ;02.5- .0111 .0117 .0215 ".2 30.0 1.0 4.0 

1125 IHJ7 .3 ., .,7 14.0 1134 1.4 22.' .0111 .01U .0225 .0242 .7.1 '1.0 1.1 4.1'1 

126 101 In 13.9 na 1.4 22.' .DUO .()4)a .0115 .0188 14.1 .2.4 )2.iIJ 4.3 

127 IH' 3." 1.2. 14.0 .. 80 7.5 23.0 .0110 .nou .OIU .0114 11.0 ".2 161.J '. 4 

1021 .1... :I I. a. 14.0 1154 7.1 23.0 .0110 .OUI .02;:& .on, •. 0 5-4.' 7.8 4.1 

121 III :S.) a. ".0 3... 1.5 13.0 .OM' .0011 .0014 H.' $.1 1.3 $.1 

6JO 112 I •• ') _2.1 14.0 1288 7 . ' 22.' .0071 ...... 7 .onll .0211 U.t 1.2 '.1 

In :t •• ) 6Z8 14.0 10... 1.7 22.' .01110 .(\131 .02011 .olta •. 1 60.0 S.4 1.1 

14 , .) .21 14 .0 7f"! 1.7 2::.. .006' .«-" .01S7 I .01U .,.. I",.' '10;.5 3.1 

.. 

1. U",I ••• OUtu'u" . • 1"" . ......... 1 ... ·11 S_p11ft& M.1d 

I. hel.--pn.itio. I ... " .... 

iI . e ...... f n. 1 0 1..-1' Dc.-

I.Il3 no. 

,.5' 

1030 

S.M 1"1 

5.78 5,11 1221 

.... \.13 S.U 1414 

1 .24 •• 

5-''', U14 

S.,3 1114 

I.. 11'1 

'.
.

o 

c 

o 

O'l 

,-1 

o - 0 ..: 

• 00 .., •• .-

~:=RS:: 

= = = ~ : = : ~ ~ - ..: ..; ..; ..: ..: ..: ..: 

~ ::I :1 ::: .,., !Ii oft .; .,; ~I . ~ ~!_ 1ft 

r------. ----------~----------------~--~--~----~ 

_c 

~. 

-

~;i' ,,-

. ": ... ... .:: . 

~~ .. ~I~~~li~§i ; 

iIi • ~ 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ 

.... 

. .. 

.. 

~­

A 

!! 

-

1 7 
.... 

CJ1 

OD 

RNdl nQ 

'\Wlher 

'.80 

581 

SII, 

!i8:! 

',84 

'97 

;98 

59') 

600 

601 

602 60) 604 

60', 

600 

607 

"'5 

608 

5'J6 

SIIb 

5117 

5'18 

589 

"90 

... 9i 

'i'9:! 

1)9'. 

;')) 

In let 

Tot . l 

lItunt PreJI.ur e 

' u.I)er Al. 

100 - . 9) 101 2 . q] 

10= 2. 9) 

10) 2. 91 

10) 2. 94 

10'. 2. 9) 

001 ) . 40 002 ) . t,o 

00) ) . 40 

:JOlt ) . t,o 

205 ) . 4<' 

206 ) . 42 

007 ) . J:; 

008 ) . 40 

009 ) . 42 

:!:!1 ) . 42 :!ZZ ) . t,o 

:!J2 6.82 

ZZ) ) . t,o 

21, 6 . 8= 

'.01 4 . 78 

'to:! 4 . 79 

40) ',.-;'<' 

404 4 . 77 

<.ell ' ... 7i 

'.02 4.77 

4. 76 

't.) 6 . 82 

'.04 4 . 78 

Table XLVII. Summary o f Test Results, Configuration 010 . 

Inlet Fue l-Aj r Ra llO Ea 1 •• 10n Indice. 

To t al ota1 9 fue l / '1 a .i.r Sa.ple I./IIC fue l Tota l T_pe.-_ Co.bWf l O Fuel In l et A.l.r 101 , 're-no:.' Mfoolered !:)a . p J e eo.l ,u to tio l SA& Pr ••• ure 

Alure Al. rfJow F l oy tlU.J.dl ty Veloc ity Outer I nner Ove r - Over- Elflcienc\ EngIne Englnfl s.oke l.o .. 

I[ kg/oec <o/hr olkv Au ra,I,.ec Annulu.. Annulw All All " CO IIC NO. N01( CO " 14 . 0 0 &.9 lB. ) 0 0 0 4. 77 

4)1 14 . 0 6&. 10. 6 lB. ) . 01)7 0 . 01)7 .0166 '1'). 1 2 . 0 ) . 0 4 . B5 

4)0 1). 7 1)4:: 7 . 8 . 0110 0 . 0110 . 011.0 9') . 4 17. 8 1.4 J. ) ) . ) 

4)1 1). 9 492 10. ) 18. ) . 00')8 0 . 00'>8 . 0110 '1'). 4 l"j . O :!. 9 ) . 1 ,. . 82 4:!'! 14 . 1 490 7. 7 18. ) . 00')6 0 . 00')6 .010' '1') . ) 17 . 1 : .7 ) . 1 ) . I 4 . 88 

4)0 14 . 1 )')4 7 . '1 111 . ) .0078 0 . 0078 .0084 98 . 4 )1 . '1 8 . 4 2. 5 2. 6 0 .84 

6)) 14 . 0 787 8 . 0 . 0157 0 .0157 .018) :!'!. 7 O. !) 6 . 9 8 . ? I) . S 5. 07 

6zn 14.0 690 7 . 6 .01)7 0 .01)7 . 01';8 99 . 6 18. 6 0 . 2 7 .0 9 . 1 1.8 

629 1}. 9 59) 7 .. 7 . 0118 0 . 0118 .01)8 !I?8 9 . 4 0 . 1 , . 1 9 . 2 0 . 8 :; . 1) 

6;><) 1). '1 )'17 7 . 6 .. 9 . 0079 0 .OOrJ . 0086 '1'} . 9 0 . : 6 . 8 8 . 8 0 . ) 5. 11 

629 1). '1 007 i .. ;' • ()()I, I 0 • ()()I, I .or))8 'I, . ) ::! .. J 18 .. ', ) . 6 {t . ; 64 .. 2 5. 10 6:!" 14. 1 9')) 7 . 4 . 01:;8 . 00)8 . 0196 .0:':: <JO .O . 0 :; .. 0 5 · 21 629 14 . 1 '197 7 . 4 . 0119 .. 00;8 . 0197 . 01'14 .) ) . b 6:!'! 9')6 6 . 9 Z) . l . OOi9 . 0118 .0197 . 02:xl q{· .7 70. 4'16. 1 ) . 5 5. 84 6:!'! 14.0 'J?) 7. :l 22 . 8 . 01<6 . 0 1?8 .O!!:'6 97 . ) "'r .. ; 5 · 58 6:!'! 14 . 0 69'5 8 . 4 "_.9 . 0040 . 00')8 . 01)8 . 01 , 1 92 .. '; 92. 7.). 5 2. 4 4 . 5 71. , -, . )8 62'1 14 . 0 b?1 7 . 4 . 0070 I •• )()68 , ' 0 1 )8 . 01'. ; 9"> . 4 6'; .. ... , . 5 ) . 8 7 . 1 47. 0 :;. 29 6)0 27 . '1 14:!j 8 . 4 . QU(.') 1.(07 ) .Ol'. :! . 01(,1 '16 . 7 49 . 6 1. 8 5 .0 6 . 7 41 . 6 5· )) 62'1 14 . 0 M2 7. 7 .010) . 0014 . 01)7 . 01';1 'J6 . ) 5). ) , •• 6 5. :! 9 . 8 ) 6 . ) 5 . 19 

(,)0 :!7.q J4); 8 . 4 ZZ. Q . 0107 .00)6 .014) . 0168 97 . 6 5 . 7 ; . 2 9 . 7 :!'I. 6 I .M 

l:"l) 8 . 0 24 .. 4 .00'. 2 .OJ77 . 0:1<) . 02)6 9') . 8 10. 2 0 . 1 6 . 2 14 • ., 1.8 :-:-

i82 17.' 1)18 7 . 9 .006) J .(;149 .02)6 9'). 8 9 . 7 0 . 1 7 · ' 17. 4 1.6 5. 00 

781 J,. 12'1) 7 . 9 .0080 . 012'1 .02): '1'). 6 0 . ) 7. 9 ) . 5 5· 16 

786 8 . 0 O!'i .. ) . OOJO .. 01i8 . 03)1\ . O:!)':; 99. 7 1). 6 0 . 1 14 . 8 ) . ) 5. 44 

819 16. & 1)6) 7 . 7 2"; . 6 . 0041 . 0187 . 0::-.!lI .O.!L'. 99. '1 4 . '1 0 7 .. ; 1'1 . 9 I 0 . 2 :; . )0 82) 16. 6 1)(.6 7. 7 ;.!'i . 6 . 0061 . 0167 .0:28 '19 . '1 4 . 0 0 8 . 6 :!1 . f) 0 . 1 5 . 28 824 16. "; I){,O 7. 1j :0) . 6 . 0081 . 0148 qq . '1 4 . 9 0 '1 . 1 __ . 9 I o .. 

2). 6 1946 6 . 1 2" . 4 . 0080 . 0149 .02:.:9 . 0:><.(, qq. ,} ) . , 0 1. 10 o.z 5. 16 

lb. ;' 116) 7. " . 6 . 00)1 . OI'l6 . O; ;.!":" . C ';Q '19 . 11 " • .! 0 "" .'\ 1'1. 2 I 0 . 6 <. 18 

Mot •• : 

1. 1Hc:h o.nlUy 'Surhnc Mode 

2. Alternat. Cupa fueled ... n I nnor Ann\Alus 

3. );ncine JriOx Cah'ulated C.1Di, 0 . 2 h..,.'er of r3 

A\crae:e 

Ex it 

Tellpe r alur e Prof il e Pa

J[ f'_c t o r f'ftc 

4)0 

95) 10 )1 0 

8'"j8 1. :l8 0 

81 4 1. 28 805 1. 2) 0 

7)4 0 

1197 0 

1. 24 0 

1066 1. 26 1

1. :!'l 1

782 1. 19 1

lZ')<} 1. :!4 0 

1007 1. 26 O

I JOB 1.14 0 

1)15 I. I) O

10'l7 1.1, 0 

1111 1 . 17 0 

II)) 1. 15 0 

111 1 . 25 0 11:. 1 1. 0 

J5;:') 1. 11 0 . 

10;04 I. 10 0 . 

1495 1. 10 0 .

I.JJ 0 . 

1585 1 . 1) o.

1.11 0 . 

1,9) 1.10 0 . 

1'0'1) 1. 10 O. 

1".81 1. J2 0 . 
Table XL

VIII. 

S

ummary 

of Test R ults 01 1 . 

Fuel-Air Ratto 

Inl .. t Inh·t Total Inh·t tu.l / & oir Sample- £aualOa. Total 

Total ToUl Co.bustor Puel AI r Rf' ff>rt"Dce Metered Sam Ie COllbu8tjon Il"lkll fuel SAE Pr ••• Exit 

1-•• ,11n« Point Pr .... TeMp Airflow Flow Humtdit1 Vt.>tOClt y Outer Jnner Over- 0. ... Efficiency EDKin. Enctn .. S.,k.c Lo .. T .. l'p Proflle Pat t

"Q. No. At. K k« IH'C kIf hr .'kg Air aJsec Annulus Annulu. 011 .11 , CO HC lHo. NO" CO '\ K Pactor Facto

.'9 1"0 2.90 130 13.8 0 - 18.3 0 0 0 0 - - - - - - - 130 - . 

610 WI 2.90 429 13.7 1190 8 . 6 18.1 0.0139 0 o.olav 0.0160 98.8 399 2 . 6 2.8 3.0 - - 958 I. 58 1.0611 11'2 2.91 429 13.H 540 10.3 It(,l 0.0109 0 0.0109 0.0119 99.3 20. I 2.!. 2.9 3.2 - I 4.74 .so 1.53 1.

612 1')3 2.91 129 13.7 492 9.8 18.0 0.0100 0 0.0100 0.0109 99.1 17.6 2.4 3.0 3.2 - - t.76 8U I. 47 0.8

rill :(1, 2.92 1.3.6 392 9.5 17.9 0.0080 0 0.0000 0.0087 98.9 24.3 5.5 2.5 2.6 - - 1.61 743 1. S2 1.

611 201 3.12 626 IJ.8 6119 H , 2 22.5 0.0138 0 0.0138 99.6 I 0.1 6.6 •• 7 1.6 I 503 1132 1.51 1.617 202 3.40 624 11,9 686 8.5 22 . 6 0.W31 0.0106 0.0137 0.0145 97.1 54.8 12.8 3.0 5.9 I 36.9 I 5.39 1116 1.07 1.

51H 20J J.39 621 13.9 8.0 22.6 0.0070 0.0069 0.0139 0.0146 99.2 23.5 2.5 ' •. t 8.6 11.5 I 5.25 1\31 1.20 0.9

636 213 6.ijO 626 27.7 138; 6.7 22 0.0070 0.0069 0 . 0139 99.4 16.U 1.8 5.9 7.7 10.8 - 5.14 1134 1.21 0.

619 2o.t 3.1U 630 13.7 689 8.0 22.6 0.0111 0.0028 0.0139 97.5 41.1 11.2 5. , lU. '" 30.8 1 5.34 112" I.M 1.

637 211 6.79 627 27.6 138$ 70 22.7 0.0110 0.W29 0.0139 0.0148 98.1 36 . 2 10.7 7.8 lu.3 29.0 - 5.18 ll2h 1.52 1.620 205 3.12 63, 13.9 6P5 6.9 2:.:.t4 0.0112 0.0027 0.0139 0.C156 95.4 6".1 30.2 4.9 H.9 48.3 - 1118 1.54 1.

"21 211(, 3.11 S'I\ 11.0 695 7.2 22.9 0.0070 0.0068 93.0 105.0 45.4 2.9 5.4 81.5 - 5.61 1103 1.32 0.6

623 2." 3.40 ""2 11.0 692 7.3 23.0 0.0031 0.0106 0.0137 0.0147 93.1 140.4 1.7 3.1 114.2 - 5.66 1101 1.07 0.4

635 6.80 627 27.9 1387 3.4 22.8 0.0035 0.0103 0.0138 0.0154 95.2 ; 114.9 21.2 3.S 4.3 104.1 - 5.3S 1110 I.{,. 0.3623 20M 3.41 632 13.M 6,H 7 . 7 22.9 0 0.0137 0.01370.0149 96.5 i 90.5 H.I 2 : 4.1 69.5 - $.69 1116 1.12 0.4

liZ I 101 ".76 17.1 1309 25.1 0.0033 0.0213 0.0238 99.9 4.6 " I" 15.1 0.2 . 5.25 1511 1.0a O.3

625 4-'12 1. 76 '><8 16.9 IJ03 ij.6 25.0 0.0042 0.0172 0.0214 0.0237 99.9 3.0 , 0.1 6.9 15.6 0.1 I 5.22 1519 1.(,8 0.626 1,"3 4.7M 7"!9 17.0 129' 7.3 25.1 0.0061 0.0151 0.0212 0.0233 99.9 2.7 0.0 7.9 1 •. 2 0.1 - 5.13 1512 1.08 0.627 .1'" 1.7H 17.0 1299 7. I 0.0082 0.0130 0.0212 0.0232 99.9 4.5 0.1 20.l 0.2 - 5.11 1514 1.12 0.

628 , .. S 1.78 78' 17.1 1600 8.8 25.1 0.0011 0.0220 0.0261 0.02&9 99.9 3.5 .... 0 7.5 17.6 - - 5.3b 1659 1.10 0.

"2'1 *16 l,7M 7., 17 I I-- 8 .6 25 2 0.0027 00136 00163 001110 99 6 17 8 o 2 I " • . . - - 5 1.10 o 

630 501 1.78 H27 16.6 nflll 7.7 25.1 0.0031 0.0197 0.0228 99.9 2.7 0.1 7.8 19.7 0.1 . 5.28 1592 I. 10 0.4

431 4.71 H2. 16.6 \363 '.2 25.S 0.0036 0.0193 0.0229 0.0359 100.0 2.3 0.0 &.0 20.4 0.1 I 1594 1.09 0

632 :103 1.76 H2V 16.' 1371 8.3 25.S 0.0041 0.0188 0.0229 0.0258 100 .0 1.9 0.0 8 .0 20.7 0.1 - 1589 1.09 0.633 1.7' 819 \6.6 1361 9.3 25.4 0.0062 0.0167 0.0229 0 . 0255 100.0 1.4 0.0 8.11 23.4 0.0 - 1588 1.08 0.

4.76 H2O \381 8.5 25.4 00082 0.0148 0.0230 0.0256 100 .0 1.5 0.0 9.6 25.0 0.0 - 1593 1.11 0.

Note.: I. H.,h Dea.By Saapl1,.. _. 

2. l$-Cup Sector I'u.led: in Jnaer Aa.aulua 

3. ID,lDe NOx Calculated U.1 •• 0.2 Power of P3 
" 

• v 

a~ 

~~ 

. "' ... 

: 

. 

'! t:o: ~.:! .. 

~ ~ .. !!:.~ C\1 ~ctj 

0 

~ 

wi . "0 ~j,~ 

CIS 

r:: 

· 

50 

~ &5 u 

~ . • 0 ~ -!d' 

r:: 1- &5:'< ~.;: 

0 ~~ · • ..-1 0 

+> .. z 

CIS ~ ~ u 

~ '" bD 

'..-1 u 

0 

0 

r:: ... U g ~ 

H~ .. UJ "Hl u 

~ 

+> .! 

· ~ 

! " UJ : 

Q) 0 

0:: ~ • 

+> Q " 

:~ • UJ 0 

Q) ~-

~ <~ ." 

· j~ ~ 

H ! .. . . 0 ::i 

· 

« 

" . .. q CIS 6· « 

~ i~~ · 

en · ~ . .. 

• • E 

J!~-

> 

X ~~~ 1-4 ~~!' 

~ 5"' .... 

Q) 3"ii ,~ 

~ ~'i::: 

CIS 

D 

S ~ v ~ 

8"-

H: 

«~ 

.. 

u 

.5 

:H:o: .... 

.!!~o:< 

~3:§ 

;; . 

.. 

·i 

! 

l:! 

160 

__ .0 _ 

I-:":~":~W: ------

OOOQOOOOOO 

=~:!:~t:;';~~:J~~=N2~t~2::~!::~~ 

I~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~ 

QOr-N_NO'o04_0"O..o N~ONNOO_ ... O~NN.N~ O_~OO __ N_OO_OO~~O 

on ............ -D o-0I0 ... ..Q ... -lJ ~,.. 

....... .;. .. .:.. ....... . .~~ .. ~~~~~~~~~~~ . .;.~ 

I N _____ t • _ • t ••••• '_""'NN'" t • • '- • 

•• I I I I I • 1'1'1 I I I' .~~-:-:~~~"'!":~""!--:'":--:-: .... :.!~~20000-00000 

I~"'!~~"':~ ..o1D .. _Or-

... 

.NNN....,'" 

. . . . . . . IDe> ....... 00 .. ~~~O' 

000080 

~=:~!~~ 

.000000 

•• ~~ ... ~ .... ~"O~.~4~ .... ~ 

I 00 ,i, r-:.D"; ,,;~..o r: .. -4i ,:": .. v. ,.: 

.~~~~~~~""!~~~~~--:-:~~ O .... O~..QNNOOOOOOOooo 

~I· -

""""~:i~,.. 

":~;~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

a:;:~~I~~~:~~:~~: 

OOQOOOOoooooooooo 

S~I!~~~!~~~~~:~~~~~ 

.00000000000000000 

~~g:~~ ~=o;~~~o:~;~~~~~.~;~~~~~~ 0008go 000gg~00ggooggggg&g~ggg8g 

.oo~~~~~ 

OCOOOOO?OOOOQQooococoo~Jooooooooo 

__ ~_O~ __ .o~c~.~~o ... O ___ .~~ 

~ .. _::C:».,j~.i._~.~_ ·..: .. ...;...:...;,.IN,J..;~.n.J....;.;~.;..J. ... __ ...... ___ ......... _ ... r= ....... _ .... ,.4 ........ ..., "" ........ N "" N N N N N 

.~~~~ .. ,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~.~ ~O~.~~~ •• ~~~~~~ •• ~=.~.~ ~ 

"';...; 

~:;;;~;;.:~~~~N~~;;~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

N"";"'; N"~'" ..; N ~..,;,..,;...;...; NN";';;'':''''; .; ... ..;.;.; .. .; .. .;.; 

~ 

f 

. 

! 

. 
f-J 

en 

f-J 

r"'-'I 

Table L. Summary Sea Level I gnition Test Results, Configuration Dl2A. 

Inle t Inle t 

To tal To t al Combustor Requi r ed Fuel Flows (kS! /hd 

Point Pressure Temperatur e Airflow Type 50r. 100% 50% 

Number atm K kg/s Ignitor Lightoff Propaga t ion Propagat ion Cups Out 

61 1.00 315 2 . 72 spark 208 208 219 133 

206 211 217 122 202 202 214 152 

205 - - -

71 1.01 309 3 . 31 spar k 220 - - 128 

- -

81 1.01 315 3.63 spar k 217 222 - 173 

231 - 249 161 

217 230 244 161 

222 229 247 163 

226 - - -

101 1.03 310 4 . 81 spar k - - - 217 120 1.04 319 5 . 49 spark 231 252 254 -

230 248 253 213 

254 - 277 227 

Notes: 

a . JP- 5 at 3Q2 K 

b . Barometr ic pr essur e ".990 atmospheres 

-

B
t,· 

Tabl e LI. Summary of Sea Level Effic iency Test Results , Conf i gu r ation Dl lA . 

Poin 

"umber atro 

1.01 

1.01 

1.0 

1.0 

1.02 

1.05 

1. 05 

.0 

o t es : 

b . 

314 312 

31 

316 

31 

316 

315 

315 

JP- 5 at 302 K 

Combustor 

Air flo'" 

kg/s 

. 69 

7 

3 . 67 

3 . 69 

3 . 64 

5 . 51 5 . 50 

5 . 51 

He t er ed 

Fuel- Air 

Ratio 

g Fuel/ 

.0233 

.0280 

. 020 

.0238 

.0277 

.018 .0206 .0229 

3 

793 

591 

89 

767 

597 

65 

71 

Combustor 

Efficiency 

"{. 

9.6 

74 . 2 

73 . 

.8 
g ~ 

"'. 

.. 

~ 

.-

• a 

E o • < 

-L GINAD PAGE IS 

F POOR Q ITY 

'0000000000 

-

.... " ....... c ..... O'o"""------ ·ccoo~~~~~ooooooo 

.: 

j 

3 
..... 

m 

autln. 

-

..... , 

1104 

,.-

153 

'" .,,,1 

1&1 

'!l! 

751 

751 

-

.. 

,:'9 

1.0 

·;7 

1-. 

1:'5 

• • ft 

Point 

s:Ulber 

• I 

I 

· , 

• I • " 11 

II 

I 

\4 

1) 

1. 

1; 

.. 

I. 

2. 

Table LIII. Summary of Test Results, Configuration D13 (DOT). 

tnlf't Fuel-Air "'tlo 

Inlt·t tout 1"ta1 Illlet (-_1.1/,., afr (.at_doe ,_itu )'r)td 

Tat.l 1' .. ..,. .... Fila I A', le'.r .. nul' ·'eter.ct S_lth eo.bll .. tlbD Ilk "' .. $Al h .... "..-. 

P ..... u..-4' .turf' Aidlow Fl_ ttu.t.i.t, hJodty Outer I new,. (Iv"r- 0 • .,- trUdel", , i.af;. ...... 1>00>" lAo. A,. • 11.&/&« k./hr • 111.11: AII' aI ... AnnulU!l .11 .11 . m lit """ "", m ....... 1 

1.11 )'i 112 5.' 1'.1 .0060 .0177 .0211 '6.' ... 9 16.2' I._ - - - 4.62 

loll 81b 9 •• '1/1 5.) 21.5 00'1 .0171 .0'lJI .026) ''f.' '.6 0.) ... - - - 6.h 

117 18.1 19, 10.0 a.5 .O'lr .0U90 .OU2 .014) '8.1 11.1 2.2 5.2 - - - 6.18 

1.11 ... 9.! 18' '.S :1 .. 9 .00ttl .0177 •• 211 .0158 "'ii.9 ). , •• 2 6.1 - - - 4.1J 

1.8'" 120 11.0 9S- 1.0 ".0 .0061 .0119 .0240 .0262 " .. 5.0 n.: 4.9 - - - '.1_ 

I.' '" 16 •• UI7 11.4 23.1 .0061 .OU' _"21' .02" ".6 ttl-O 10.) 1.1 - - - 6.S9 4 " :U .. 18.2 1S7'J 19.) .OOM .01iO • 0241 .0210 .. .. J".2' ).1 2.1 - - - .!; .'1 

... 'fI "0 1190 •. 1 26.' .C06) .01&0 .Ol'} • 0210 " .. ) .. • 6.' - - - '.)6 

... 1;1 8U 1 ... ' 1292 7.9 21.2 .00") .0119 .0241 .1)216 .c,'f.' 2 •• 0 ... - - - ..36 

S.7'i ... 18.1 '.7 1).' .OOf>2 • 0111 .024) .0:10 100 •• 2.) 0 .. ) - - - 4.17 

1.1 .. ... ,.. S ]146 U.O .0085 .0155 .OZ40 .0:7'9 91. ) 74.) .. I - - - 4.47 

7.1] '" lb.4 lUI 10.6 .00tll .0) i' .0240 .0277 ) .. 2.6 - - - b.50 I." 5" )J.l 119' 19.1 .0(1)1 .017'1 .0140 .0282 99.2 2S.) 1.) ) .. - - - •• O '.11 H. 31>.1 liS. 10.0 19.2 .0iSJ .0:4) ,0280 .t.4 :). ') I •• ).1 - - - 4.')1 '1.n 554 41.0 »)40 10.4 20 .4 .0062 .0178 .0240 9'.r lJ.: 1., ).) - - - s." 

<I. "2 117 36.2 lUI 1.4 :11.4 .OO6l ."110 .0;':0: .02'73 100.0 • J • , .. - - - .. ,. 

•• SO <" 36.3 tH8 '.4 27. '5 .\lOll .0090 .0121 .01)8 915.) . ) .. ... 7.' - - - •• 14 

SIMI. p("tHlrta .... 

lind .lrfJov lu. than dt>tSp 

--_._.-

"\leu,_ txi, t.,.....-

alure Pro/n. hu

• FactDr r_1O

11'1 - -

16lJ - -

1241 - - 

161) - -

10n - -

1)14 - -

1400 - - 

1627 - - 1624 - -

- -

1205 - -

ll'll - -

1_01 - -

1412 - -

n'l7 - 

1627 - -

)2)8 - -
I 

\ 

<:l 

E' 

.--.... 

Tab l e LIV. S umm ary of Te s t Resul ts, Co n figuration Dl4A. 

Total 

Fuel-Air RUlo 

• Cue 1 I I atf 

S...mpl. 

Inhel,Alr I Combu.hon lIunwhty I Velocl.ty £lfkiency I hmoke 

'Tf)ul 

£oUt 

,/k, A, r I rn/.ec '''- NcI. _ 

"

.0 o 10 0 18.1 r.0141 0 0.0141 

18.2 0 .011 1 0 o.Olill 

17.9 0 D.Glll 0.0117 

17.9 (i.DIOO ,0 0.0100 O. 010S 

IS. I C.COIU ' 0 - ---- - ----

i.Z:6 ".u ... 1 g 

"ZZ.S f). Olll 0 

ZZ.7 D.OIll 0 

ZZ . 6 to.OIOl 0 

Z4i . " 0.0101 0 

:Z.O 0.0081 0 

ll.7 •• 0081 0 

Q 

O. Oll";' C.CZ!lO 

t:to02l7 e.Ol1...4 

0.02)-4 o.on) O. O: Ol.70 0.0'360 0.017< O. all! 

L . ...... -..... , -" ....... O.l Po ..... ! P, 

,lL"1 2.6 94.0 Z8 . 2 3. 7 2.6 1.0 

9 Zt:. . 8 "' . S Z.i 1.9 

... 

J.O 

".9 l.' 11'1."1 ... 

... O.l fl.l , • . 9 '.J O. I Il.1 "

.9 Z •• 0 .1 ll. Sill. ti 

100. 0 1.9 0.1 11.' 1l.9 

,4. tZ I a6' 4.'8 an 

-I. it . 816,. 

1.37 

1.45 

1.·U 

1.1 

1.'11 

11

1
... 

m 

Tabl e L\· . Altitude Rel i ght Test Re sults . Co nfigu r ation Dl-lB . 
Table Ln. T Re su lt.:s on lIraLion D14B . 

AWlra«e 

Total I Ed t 

e •• u re TelllPer-1 

1.67 1.4U 

"49 1.66 1. 6

815 1.67 l. 6

4.05 HO 1. 70 1.7

5.65 1.66 I. 7

7. a 4.50 1140 1. 61 1.3

1.6 0 I. 45 1063 1.59 1.2

0.8 -1.3; 1005 1.69 1. 1

0.4 4.12 933 1.66 1.3

7.15 0.9 4.35 kl<3 1.68 ' . .J

7.1 M.7 5.5 4.tt 1155 I. tiM .2

7.7 9.u 2.4 0 4.29 1. 67 1.3

8.0 9.4 1.2 4.25 1012 1.6H 1.3

7.9 9.4 0.6 4.33 1. 76 1.2

... 6 1. ·1 4.30 k61 1.69 1.2

3.4 4.30 1086 1.62 1. 4

1.6 4.23 1012 J 61 1.3

4.19 941 1.66 1.3

2.2 4.29 ,63 1.86 1.2

l:m I 6.'79 il 6JO I 21.4 8.2 [")7 IU J" 

·te".: 

H \!h .... U1 SooopU •• lIod •• 

'""' 

-.J 
I-' 

(7) 

00 

Tabl LVII. Summar Tcs R ults, ion Rl. 

4.31\ '''''< 

•. 16 J03> 

4.1i 113-1 

•. 24 1138 

3.91t "' .•. 

O.~ 

I 3.9~ IllH 

•• H9 

l~"~ 

'.21 l!l66 

1.7 I 3." Uto.4 

.... l2 1!.70 

0.": 

1.07 o. 7~ 

1.14 O.~ 

1.0> 1.00 

l,1I7 0.40 

'.09 0." 

1."" I 0.71 

I I. i 0,10 

1,('; 0.2M 

1.09 0.2'1 

1.~ 

0.30 

1.09 0.28 
TobIe LVIII . Sununar y o f Te st Res Ll lts . Co n fir.mr a tion R2. 

J A""rt'lf" Total [xU Teap(:r- i i i i Profll.1 ft 

1.0 •• .turf;' 

'10 K Factor 

4.IH 429 

3.4 ",.9 _. 

I 

-- 3.56 1035 l.U9 

2.9 2.6 -- -- 1.53 951 l.07 

3.6 3.2 -- I -- 3.9:; 949 l.09 I 3.3 3.0 -- i 0.8 4.34 H71 l.OS 3.2 3.0 -- . -- 794 

1.8 1.1 -- -- 4.19 611 

3.6 4.4 -- -- 4.3ij 7<>.: 

4.38 625 

9.1 2.1 11.06 

I 

0.8 5.01 1148 

7.8 1)7.1 -- 5.04 1120 1.0' 

1.6 15.2 0.6 4.57 101b 11. 11 I 

I 3.5 82.6 -- 4.65 1065 I'" 

3.6 93.1 1.2 4.20 10H5 1.13 

98.9 -- I 4.12 1068 1.16 

1.8 f108.1 -- 4.25 1019 1. 19 

6.0 5.3 4.38 .455 1.07 

6.7 10.0 1 21.5 -- 4.49 1449 l.07 

Ul 7.9 24.6 -- 4,52 1137 1.07 

i 

29,3 -- 4.68 1-137 1.04 

8.0112 . 2 p8.S -- 4.24 14&9 1.07 

23.2 -- 4.31 1-188 1.07 

28.5 -- 4.15 1483 1.01 

7.4 -- 4.69 1499 1 1.05 

11.3 -- 4.52 1506 1.05 

9.4121.8 6.1 -- 4.53 1511 11.06 

26.4 l.1 6.2114.2 10.5 -- 4.56 1513 1.01 

10.: I 0.2 9.8 125 •0 1.1 -- 4.46 1583 i 1.07 

15.4 0.3 1.2 18.1 3.7 -- 4.55 1573 1.07 

23.3 0.9 6.4 16.4 8.9 -- 4.55 1572 1.07 

IN •• tll6:.h'le C.lcula"ed Cain. 0.2 r"".r or P3 

!-' 
'-' 

--l 

o 

3 . Engl n 

T ab IX . ummary 

".0 u 

7.ft 7. I 

!. " 

ih.:I 

Tes R ults 

v , '.1 

CJ,,. 12u ,'--'.UIZ: 110;3" .... 

'. .,7 ,S71 •• 1' tot ....... 

to. I"J, ·'I..t .... j 

, I 

t··.! I II II, 1I 1.!'1 IIg, j 

i", -: 

tl II III H lt.d 'Y' ,u 

'n 

1l"' . .2 

'

· .... H 

'1;,'" 

... ;J 

.... r 99. -

)9.1, 

." 

99 .... 

nfiguration R3 . 

fro! I 

I., t o

12 

I i,i 111 I I' I 0.',':'; 

. 

1:'1 '*' fl. J.J' 1,1 1. ... 1" "1,· 1 

.. :!." 

,Ii _I 'Lx 

I • .! :t. . Q'2 1. :.\ U.S} 

1.1 I. 13 0, ;i 

I II J.' 1_ . ; "19(1 I Hi 0 .73 

.!Ij.ti 1. ;t 

f 

I f I I 

-+ 

7 . (,' 9.5 

I 9. II.I 

lit)"' '. 

""'1 11 • 3 j .! 

7.5 • 1 1.:.n ]1n 

1.11 3.91 

fi!i. ... 127.3 5.t' 

.. 

p .:1 I 11.9 J3.3 

'. Q 7. :!. j:!.':' 

3:1. II J.7 •• h 21J. i n . ..; 

.9.ti 1M. I 

6.5 l!..l 

I 

1.7.:L 1 l,b 

!!-c." Z, \ 
Table LX. SlAmmar o Te st Resu.l ts, Configur ation R4. 

. 

-- ract

1 •• 5 (I 10 0 L -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3.99 430 -- -- 

• 

11.2 0 0.0133 0.0133 0.0149 118.8 48.7 0.8 2 .9 2. 7 -- -- 4.09 936 I. 13 0.518.3 0 0.11115 0.0115 98.8 44.8. 1.3 3.2 3.0 -- 0 873 I. 13 0.6

.9 18.'2 10 0.0<J93 0.0093 0.010; 37.5 1 . 8 3.8 3.6 -- -- 4. JJ 793 1.16 I 0.6 

10 i i IH.2 0.00'0{) o. n. L-c, d3 98.5 37.5 6.5 3.8 3.6 -- -- 1.19 740 1.13 I 0.4

I I J 0.3 1 -- -- 3.60 551 1.17 0.8

7.61 1.5 1 4.0" 1095 1.21 U.6

10.111.3 -- 1197 I 1. 20 ! n.7

I I 

9.4 1. 1 -- 4.03 HH9 I 1.22 I 0,,

"r'j -- 3.99 1424 1.0; 0.2

I t-,.2 72.5 -- 4.113 1416 I 1.0" 0.2

4.2 82.111 -- 4.06 1373 I 0.3

--+ 

30.41 -- 3.97 I 1505 1.07 0,3

I 

35.0 -- 3.97 I 1500 1.07 0.2

48.2 1 3. \IV 14"3 1.0ti 0.3

37.01 6 •6 4.6 10.4 19.3 -- 4.17 1614 1.01 O.2

tilt.1t K3.5 2.3 5.0 58.8 -- 3.\13 I 1U" 1.06 

n'! " ''I'" 8.6 _. 6.5 5.1 12.3 18.3 0 

I I I 9.8 , 3.4 H.3 34.0 -- ].96 I I , 1556 1.06 (J.

I I I I I 

.. : 

1. 

:. l:fta:1a. 1O .. C'alC':'Ul.ted V.1DIl: O. a l'cNer of r 
'I 

Tab le 

1. 1I1~ """'.1\, 

2 • .E~lD" NO. Calculated tJ', 

LXI. 

IH.I 

1~.2 

IH.O 

1".2 

2 •• ~ 24 9 

2S.4 

2S.S 

Summar y of Test Results, Configu ra tion R5 . 

I.I-At r a.tin 

r 

DC: ~·I co I He INO. Eng1n~ EnClntol6.okP rl NO" co Number 

0 0) 0 0 

0 0 0 0 

I 

... 0.0136 0.0136 0.01S7 98.9 46.3 O.S 3.2 2.8 

I: 0.0121 0.OL21 0.(1l36 98.8 43.8 I.S 3.4 3.0 0.O10~ O.OIOS O.(Jl12 98.8 40.4 z.2r· 4 . 3.0 

0 0.0090 0.0090 0.0092 9R.S 39.9 S.8 2.8 : 2.!\ 

9·1.3 It6.4 36.8 loS 1.3 

99.6 I's.1I o. I I,·2 ul 1.3 

99. , 10.3 0.2 8.6 10. 3 0.9 

Ibm~' I 

Lo .. .tort> IProflh'IPette

~ K 

1.61 430 

~.80 134 

~.21 

431 

S.73 94& 1.f)8 0.3

S.S8 89S 1.09 U,3

S.39 83" I.U5 0.21

4.~1 

77M 1.07 0.2 

4.72 6~2 I.U 0.4

5.02 1130 1.10 O.

5.1:-' lllOt) 1.11 0.3
o~ 

~~ 

l~ 

~~ 

\~ 

-..! 

W 

bl LXII . Summar Tes Results, Configu r a tion R6. 

co Inc INO. I~O~ I co IN ... U8ber 

.. -- -- -- --

99.3 

1

29

.

9 0.2 3.1 2.8 -- --

!HI.4 23.9 0.3 3.1 2.8 .- 2 

99.1 23.2 1.1 3.2 2.t -- --

2.1 2.7 2.4 .- --

1.6 1.\ -- --

0.11 7 • 8 '9.3 

1.0 11 

0 . 11 7 • 6 ~.9 O.t --

5.41 0.2 5.3 6.2 (1.5 --

138.3203'.,1.8 2.9 112.5 --

371.6 0.8 1.3 81.3 --

2.4 - . 9 ... -11:17.,. --

Y •• 9 1 '9.21 2 • 2 5.5 7.t 27 .6 --

5.3 73.4 30.0 3.5 5.1 58.5 -- I 

99.2 I 2'1.01 3.0 fi °113., 6.7 ,I -- I 

" K I raC'tor I F.cto

29 

3.81 I 119 

4.2~ 

I 913 1 1. Of; I 0.34 ~. 31 

4.32 

1.13 

3.82 

,1.21 I 110. I 1.05 I 0.2

'.19 

4.15 I 891 I 1. 07 I 0.2

3.92 

4 01 9.',' 1.15 0.b

I 21 l-Hl 

I 

l,r.S D.2

1.21 I _nH 1.05 I a.2

4.33 H23 1.00; 0.3

1,3911~" I 1."5 I 0.3
Ta L 

Su y of P Pr ur 

Inl t 

nd Pr of 

T s 

nn r 

Total Total Combustor ur Ai flo 

kg/s P 

Fo 

n R7. 

.0109 

Profile 

Factor 

1.07 

1.05 

1.0 

1.1 

1.11 

1.10 

. 1 
~ 

-.J 

til 

Point 

Number 

50 

60 

.-

60 

70 

Table LXIV. Summar Sea Leve l I gnition Test Results, Configuration R7. 

I nle t I nle t Required Fuel Fl ow (kg/hr ) 

Total To t al COl'lbust or 

Pressu r e Tempera ture Air flow Type 50% 100% 50% 

Atm K kg/s Ignit or Lightoff Propaga t ion Pr opagat ion Cups Out 

.99 299 2 . 67 spar k 266 266 266 152 219 225 246 157 

223 244 247 148 

227 255 255 

1 . 01 300 3 . 64 spar k 233 246 261 214 266 266 266 190 

266 271 289 205 

261 271 278 -

1. 01 300 3 . 64 t orch 227 - - 197 

1.03 "304 5 . 35 spa r k 266 290 317 290 264 308 323 285 

280 299 329 289 

No t es : 

n . JP- 5 aL 295 K 

b . Bar ometr i c pressure - .982 atmospher es 

L

Bl
b LXV . Summary of Se evel iciency Test Results, Conf iguration R7 . 

1n1 

Total Total Combustor Fuel-Air Temperature Combustor 

Point Pr essure Temperature Airflow Ratio Rise Efficiency 

m K kg/s g Fuel/g Air K % 

1.00 299 2 . 67 . 0234 604 67 . 2 

. 00 298 2 . 66 . 0282 848 81.2 

.0207 612 76 . 0 

. 0241 783 85 . 0 

. 0281 892 85 . 

. 0184 584 80 . 8 

. 0206 688 86.0 

I .. I I I . 0224 768 89.2 

,.0 tes: 

JP-5 

b. Barometric Pr essure = 0 . 982 a tmospheres 
...... 

-J -J 

Table LXVI. Summary Test Re sults, Configura tion R7 . 

1 ... lalulOG IGdloea An lit!' 

I.t Total 't',l.-l C/k .. Fuo-·\ Total E, 

T .. tal 't'tomper-o- ,FU'el 1"\1_«: Air ... lII.u· ... ·d SallllPleo C:.bustinft E lnl' :aA! PT" ....... rlo. Tt.·r1pt:r-

-..4111 I'" lure _tUnt .AlrUo- l1CJW H. it" \' : t PUot OYC"r- Over- Etltcl."C'J ,: 1",1" $eIok(1 atlJrt' Pr';'!lh' 

".JIlbpr o\t. II; kU_oJ-C k6ti'tI .. , .. 4: at •• e lit_._ aU 00 He . lC .. co )·J'1ttbrr rae 'or 

31$ 13 -433 13.1 tIJ.l 0 0 0 1 •• £t 41:1 

17& ... J5 431 Il.; 6,:. -I • .J'--' lri,;) 0 .0t10 . 0110 .0159 37.1 3.-1 2.8 o .!) G. U 983 1.0;; 

1fT )0:1 2..92 "'3 13.7 &15 4.08 11.2 0 .011& .<lUd . 0128 98.1 11i.H 7.9 2.8 2.8 0.3 S.H h76 1.06 

.;.'1, 103 2 tH 429 13,1 "US " .Of. 1'1. ... 0 .(HOG .0100 .tU.07 91.5 $6.3 12.1 2.7 $.%3 ail) loN' 

.Jt. 10:' 29] n.T 39G 4.21 17." 0 .. 1 .0080 .OOht) 91.2 123.0 :'9.2 1.7 1.6 rJ.3 5.21 119 1.09 

J,2 

'120' J.tlO 119 fiUl <I.U '22.6 0 99.8 '9.0 I 0.2 50.21 6 ..... 5.11 1111 1.07 

l'" 2M 3.3" 421 lJ '8 4H9 S.fH 22.1 .0098. , OIM 99.7 0 , 5 l,tI 6.0 J,ts !) . 7Z tt91 1.09 

1M 'I 3ql '.71 133 11.5 1317 " .17 21.2 .uUI .00781 .0""" 95.2 72.6 30.7 I'" $0.3 &.5' 1<23 1.07 

»> ,# ",. no ".. "" .... ".' .••• '-'1'- ."K ".' "., .. , '.' •.• ".' ....,," o.K 

.utI *1 ,I.n "I 1301 ".6.5 21.2 . 011'11.0039 .0%22· .0182 79.7 1181 0.7 1., 41.' 0.9 5.HO U,,1 1.11 

;)lit 402: 4.12 .". 16.6 1305 t.St 2-1.6 .oosn .02Ui . 02)0 thL:l 850.8 1.3 3.0 $9 .2 2.9 $ .12 1433 l.Oft 

'.74 1>3 .16.7 1305 •• 55 Z'.. .0117 .0<)70 .02171.0241 97.7 17 .", 11..13.2 7.2 27.' 1.1 1505 LOti 

-;::ol" +h'7f 1604 13)") ".US ".2 .GU7 .02,,1 .0270 ".it 3n.3 1.1 3.9 L-: , 13.0 0.1'1 $.'IQ 1$92 1.06 

m @ J ",". ell' 16..3 1313 4.21'$ 23.0 .Q18" .00"" .02.33 .02413 9.5.3 tifJ.2 33.3 2.8 6.1i 35." 1.1 So.'tfI U60 1.07 

iOI "'l •• 0; "18 3%.7 2112 Sob .0011' .0232 .026' 97.2 H." 18 . 6 t.4 1 . 6 27.1 0.' 50.01'\ 1$7$ 1.07 

ttt2 ,,"U •• Ill IU7 ;U." $.tO 23 • .1 ;outs2 .0049 .0201 . 02211 93.2 18.M It.1 3.3 6.0 0,' ;.\.01 loUl 1.014 to3 $U •• 13 jll' 31.1 2OOS· . 2',2 .0.112 .00· .. 1 .0170 .01"2 ... ·S.I 12:\ 105 2.4 -1.3 I lCl3. 0.3 1.,",1 IJ19 l.09 

6JS ..... '1.0 t.18 2'.$ • noel .OOUiI . 0139 ,() .. 28 1,s.' \91 201 2.2 1.1 165 l. I .. ) 1.. 

t. lip LQ&:,M·xt. 

•• £Ntl ulated U_I.I,,, 0 .1 of p .. 
~ ., J ... .. ,,' 

ndu 

h n pr nt 

APP D 

SE.,;TOR RIG TEST DATA 

umm r s of 

t em·ssion d 

Th s qu nc 

XVI. Th 

throu h XC . 

combusto 

con-
" A. • .., ,r 

s r C mbu T s t 

ion y (1) 

T s r 

2 L & R f 9 

3 

4 2 

2 L I 

2 LXXX 

7 2 

H 2 LXX 

2 LXX 

3 LXX 

2 L 

2 L XX X 

D LXX 

III 4 2 LXX I 

DS 4 LXXX II 

S 4 LXXX II 

DS5 4 LXXXI 

DS5 4 LXXXIII 

DS 

DS7 4 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

LXXXV II 

DS 6 L " II 

D 10 6 LXXX II 

DSll 6 LXXXVII 

6 

6 

6 

ill 2 

(I 2 R 

4 

) . 
Tab l LXVII. Sec or Com us or T s S qu n (Con ·nued) 

Typ ( ) 

D 

Tab 1 

T s umber 

44 / 14/75 DS20 2 

45 5/15/75 D 20 2 

4 / 1/75 S 2 

47 5/23/75 RS3 2 R 

48 5/27/ 75 RS3 2 R 

'19 5/27/75 RS3 2 CI & R f 

50 5/ 28/75 DS21 2 LXX I 

51 / 29/75 DS22 2 LXXVII 

52 / 30/75 D 2 2 LXXVIII 

5 5/ 0/75 DS2 2 LXX 

54 / 6/75 DS22 6 LXXXVII 

55 / 0/75 D 25 

5 /11/75 DS2 6 

57 6/16/75 DS2 7 

58 6/20/75 DS28 2 

59 7/2/75 DS29 2 

60 7/21/75 DS30 2 

1 7/25/75 DS30 2 R 

2 7/29/75 DS30 2 LXXXI I & R f 

63 7/ 29/75 DS30 2 R 

64 7/30/75 DS30 2 R f 9 

65 9/ /75 DS30 3 LXXXII 

6 9/17/75 DS lA LXXXIV 

7 /18/75 DS31B 4 LXXXIV 

8 9/23/75 DS31C IV & LXXXV 

9 / 24/75 DS3lD 

70 9/25/75 DS32A 4 

71 / 25/75 DS32B 4 

72 10/6/75 DS33 

73 10/7 /75 DS33B 

74 10/ /75 DS3 

75 1 / /75 D 3D 

7 1 /10/75 DS3 E 

77 / /75 DS 

7 0/2 /7 D 3 5 

7 /2 /75 DS 4 5 

0 / 2 /7 5 

0/ 0/75 5 

1/ /75 

1/7 /75 

/ /75 

1 
r ,., .. r-····· \ 

Table LXVII. Sector Combustor Test Sequence. (Concluded) 

. ", 

12° Sector Rig Type (1) 

Data 

Run Test Configuration Table· 

Number Date Number Test Number ---

1 1/30/75 FSl 8 XCIII 

2 3/12/75 CS2 7 XCII 

3 3/13/75 CS2 7 XCII 

4 3/31/75 CS2 7 XCII 

5 4/3/75 FS2 8 XCIV 

6 4/15/75 CS3 7 XCII 

7 4/29/75 CS4 7 XCII 

8 5/5/75 CS5 7 XCII 

9 5/8/75 CS6 7 XCII .~ -, 10 5/15/75 CS6 7 XCII & Ref 9 

11 5/16/75 FS3 8 XCV & Ref 9 

12 6/12/75 CS7 7 XCII 

13 6/16/75 CS8 7 XCII 

14 8/6/75 CS9 7 XCII & Ref 9 

(1) Type Test 

(2) Altitude Relight Ambient Air and Fuel 

(3) Altitude Relight Cold Air and/or Cold Fuel 

(4) Idle Emissions 

(5) Subid1e Efficiency (exit temperatures) 

, (6) Atmospheric Discharge Cross-fire 

(7) Carboning 

r- (8) Flashback 

f 

181 

j 

I 

j 

1 

1 

1 
 

 

I 

[ 

, 

I 

I 

 -

 

r 

Rdg 

No. 

10 

1 

2 

35 

3 

9 

8 

7 

6 

11 

12 

13 

31 

14 

33 

28 

30 

20 

22 

24 

26 

36 

5 

34 

18 

8 

1 

2 

3 

5 

11 

12 

14 

15 

16 

4 

8 

1 

2 

3 

6 

4 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

7 

182 

... ---",---~-----,-.~-" 

Table LXVIII. Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration 81. 

Combustor Type - Std. Prod. CF6-50 Fuel Injector - Std. Production Nozzles 

Alternate Nozzles Fueled 

Simulated Blowout (1) 

Flight Combustor Operating Condition Lil!lttoff Attem t :::ondition 

Condition PT/V wf -Wf 

Alt. Tp 1'3 P3 I?c ",p/p atm-K/ (EQUIV) Light (EQUIV) 

km }lp K K atm kg/s % m/s kg/hr f Off kg/hr f Notes 

3.2 0.29 306 301 0.68 1.33 - 45.4 249 0.0520 Yes 29 0.0061 

6.1 0.35 310 307 0.47 1.36 1.06 21.9 249 0.0509 Yes 29 0.0059 

7.7 0.38 311 305 0.38 1.53 2.04 12.7 249 0.0452 Yes 37 0.0067 

7.8 0.38 311 311 0.38 1.53 - 12.7 249 0.0452 Yes - - 8.4 0.48 311 307 0.37 1.99 3.78 9.3 249 0.0348 Yes 64 0.0089 

3.7 0.39 307 302 0.66 2.29 1.43 25.3 249 0.0302 Yes 50 0.0061 

6.0 0.46 311 302 0.52 2.29 2.34 15.6 249 0.0302 Yes 59 0.0072 

6.9 0.49 311 305 0.47 2.30 1.43 12.9 249 0.0300 Yes 48 0.0058 

8.7 0.55 311 307 0.39 2.30 2.34 8.9 249 0.0300 Yes 50 0.0060 

4.6 0.49 306 301 0.64 3.15 2.83 17.3 249 0.0220 Yes 42 0.0037 

7.3 0.61 ,306 301 0.50 3.15 4.83 10.5 249 0.0220 Yes 48 0.0042 

8.2 0.65 311 317 0,46. 3.22 5.67 8.7 249 0.0215 Yes 48 0.0041 

8.3 0.65 313 312 0·46. 3.17 5.93 8.7 249 0.0218 Yes - - 8.9 0.68 313 317 0.44 3.22 6.27 7·8 249 0.0215 Yes 37 0.0032 

9.1 0.68 312 312 0.43 3.17 6.74 7.7 249 0.0218 Yes - - 6.6 0.67 313 312 0.58 4.16 5.90 10.7 249 0.0166 Yes 55 0.0037 

10.5 0.90 313 312 0.53 4.16 7.31 8.8 249 0.0166 Yes - - 9.3 0.81 311 317 0.50 4.24 8.16 7.7 249 0.0163 Yes - - 7.7 0.84 312 317 0.70 5.41 6,1,8 11.9 249 0.0128 Yes 68 0.0035 

10.7 1.02 313 314 0.62 5.38 8.46 9.3 249 0.0129 Yes 66 0.0034 

>10.7 >1.00 312 313 0.59 5.35 9.17 8.6 249 0.0129 Yes - - 8.7 0.42 313 311 0.34 1.53 - 9.6 249 0.0452 :<10 - - 9.1 0.57 311 307 0.37 2.30 5.05 8.0 302 0.0300 ~o - - 9.4 0.58 312 311 0.36 2.31 4.84 7.3 249 0.0300 '<0 - - 9.8 0.73 313 319 0.36 4.24 16.4 4.0 249 0.0163 No - - 3.2 0.29 307 274 0.68 1.35 - 44.9 :U.9 lL05IT les - - 6.1 0.35 306 263 0.47 1.38 - 21.5 249 0.0501 Yes 31 0.0062 

7.9 0.42 306 251 0.39 1.55 - 12.8 249 0.0446 Yes 27 0.0049 

8.7 0.51 306 252 0.37 2.01 - 9.1 249 0.0344 Yes - - 6.9 0.49 306 260 0.48 2.33 - 12.8 249 0.0297 Yes 48 0.0057 

7.2 0.60 306 267 0.51 3.19 - 10.7 249 0.0217 Yes 46 0.0039 

9.0 0.68 .306 262 0.43 3.19 - 7.6 249 0.0217 'les 42 0.0036 

8.2 0.74 307 279 0.54 4.19 - 9.2 249 0.0165 'les - - 9.1 0.79. 307 279 0.52 4.19 - 8.6 249 0.0165 'les 57 0.0037 

9.2 0.43 306 245 0.30 1.38 - 8.1 249 0.0501 Ho - - 9.1 0.57 306 252 0.37 2.33 - 8.0 21,9 0.0297 Ho - - 3.3 0.29 252 288 0.68 1.33 0.47 45.4 249 0.0520 Yes - - 5.8 0.35 253 261 0_49 1.35 0.89 23.3 249 0.0512 Yes - - 7.8 0.41 252 253 0.39 1.52 1.58 13.1 249 0.0455 ~es - - 7.9 0.48 253 260 0.41 1. 98 2.35 11.1 249 0.0349 Yes - - 4.4 0.51 249 258 0.37 1.98 2.78 9.2 249 0.0349 Yes - - 1 Cup, 'i[o Prop. 

8.4 0.54 249 257 0.41 2.29 3.13 9.6 249 0.0302 Yes - - 7.1 0.60 252 281 0.51 3.13 3.81 11.0 249 0.0221 Yes - - 7.9 0.63 251 288 0.1.8 3.13 4.50 9.5 249 0.0221 Yes - - 9.0 0.68 252 281 0.43 3.13 5.33 7.7 249 0.0221 Yes - - 1 Cup, No Prop. 

7.6 0.70 253 298 0.55 4.11 7.05 9.5 249 0.0168 Yes - - 8.7 0.76 251 298 0.52 4.J.1 7.76 8.7 249 0.0168 Yes - - 9.6 0.47 253 250 0.30 1. 52 2.62 8.1 249 0.0455 No - - 9.1 (). 57 249 257 0.38 2.29 3.70 8.1 249 0.0302 No - -

Note: 1. Lean Blowout, Unless Otherwise Noted 

, 

• i 

I 

J 

I 
[ 

Tab1 LXI X, A1 itud R 11gh T s R s u1 s, Co n figura i on DSlA and DS1B, 

r 

C","bultor Type - Double Annular Fuel Injector - AI Noted 

All Pilot Staae Injectorl Fueled 

Like Confiauration II-16 Except Fuel Injeetora .. Noted f Sieulated Blowout (1) Fl1&ht eolllbU8tor Oper 'Unit Condition Ugh off Atte, t Condition 

Condition PTtV wf Wf 

ada Alt. TF T3 P3 We tJ'/P at_K/ (EQUIV) U&ht (EQUIV) 

110. ka 

"" K K ar- kl/_ % aI. ka/hr f Off kalhr f Not ... 

4 3.1 0.29 289 284 0.69 1.35 0.63 46.5 465 0.0953 Yel - - Airblut Injector f 1 3.3 0.29 290 287 0.67 1.33 0.66 44.6 463 0.0965 Yel 95 0.0199 (OSlA) 

[ 3 6.1 0.35 292 286 0.48 1.35 1.37 22.1 376 0.0773 Yel - - 2 7.3 0.39 292 286 0.40 1.35 2.26 15.8 376 0.0773 Yea 82 0.0168 

7 1.3 0.33 290 286 0.91 2.27 0.83 48.4 376 0.0459 Yea - - 20 3.7 0.39 294 283 0.67 2.27 1.61 26.2 376 0.0459 Yea 163 0.0200 

6 5.7 0.45 293 283 0.54 2.27 2.49 17.1 376 0.0459 Yel 290 0.0366 

5 7.1 0.50 292 285 0.47 2.27 3.34 12.7 376 0.0459 Yea 340 0.0416 

9 4.1 0.48 296 283 0.67 3.24 3.03 18.4 376 0.0322 Y • 204 0.0175 

10 6.6 0.58 291 281 0.54 3.24 4.83 11.8 376 0.0322 Yea 332 0.0284 

11 7.1 0.60 296 281 0.51 3.24 5.27 10.7 376 0.0322 Yea 318 0.0273 f. 13 5.2 0.59 296 281 0.65 4.11 5.26 13.6 249 0.0169 Yea 139 0.0094 

14 8.0 0.73 294 283 0.54 4.11 8.06 9.2 249 0.0169 Yes 123 0.0083 

15 8.3 0.74 294 283 0.53 4.11 8.28 8.9 249 0.0169 Yea 158 0.0107 

16 5.7 0.74 291 285 0.76 5.30 6.69 14.5 249 0.0130 Yes 164 0.0086 

17 8.4 0.88 292 283 0.68 5.29 7.95 11.6 249 0.0132 Yea 154 0.0081 

18 9.4 0.94 292 286 0.65 5.29 8.65 10.6 249 0.0132 Yes !S6 0.0082 

21 8.3 0.41 292 286 0.35 1.35 - 12.2 - - - 376 0.0773 2 

[ 22 9.0 0.56 292 285 0.45 2.27 - 11.5 - - - 376 0.0459 2 

23 6.8 0.59 296 281 0.53 3.24 - 11.3 - - - 376 0.0322 2 

24 8.7 0.77 294 283 0.52 4.11 - 8.7 - - - 249 0.0169 2 

25 >11.0 >1.00 292 286 0.60 5.29 - 8.9 - - - 249 0.0131 2 

8 1.2 0.26 290 283 0.90 1.35 0.37 78.5 463 0.0953 No - - 5 1.3 0.26 286 296 0.89 1.44 0.43 72.0 249 0.0484 Yea 33 0.0063 9 kg/hr nozzles 

8 3.2 0.29 287 294 0.68 1.44 0.76 42.1 249 0.0481 Yee 49 0.0094 (D51B) 

6 7.5 0.39 287 296 0.40 1.44 2.48 14.3 249 0.0484 Yea - - 2 7.6 0.39 286 293 0.39 1.51 2.62 13.2 249 0.0461 Yea 104 0.0191 

7 1.3 0.33 287 292 0.90 2.26 0.90 47.7 249 0.0308 Yea 71 0.0087 

9 3.6 0.38 287 291 0.68 2.27 3.33 26.8 249 0.0307 Yes 104 0.0127 

10 5.6 0.45 287 291 0.55 2.27 2.52 17.3 249 0.0307 Yea 116 0.0142 

12 7.0 0.50 287 291 0.47 2.27 3.47 13.0 249 0.0307 Yea 117 0.0143 

4 9.1 0.57 286 291 0.38 2.27 5.43 8.2 249 O.O~I Yea 122 0.0150 

19 1.3 0.40 287 292 0.92 3.20 1.64 35.1 249 0.0218 Yee 120 0.0104 

20 4.0 0.47 287 292 0.68 3.20 3.15 19.0 249 0.0218 Yes 127 0.0111 

21 8.4 0.68 287 292 0.43 3.20 8.24 7.7 249 0.0218 Yea - - 11 1.9 0.49 287 284 0.94 4.28 2.65 27.0 249 0.0162 Yea 122 0.0079 

13 5.5 0.63 287 283 0.65 4.24 5.78 13.0 249 0.0164 Yea 122 0.0080 

14 8.9 0.79 292 290 0.54 4.24 8.83 9.1 249 0.0164 Yes 125 0.0082 

IS 10.6 0.92 290 288 0.52 4.25 9.55 8.5 249 0.0125 Yes 117 0.0077 

16 5.4 0.72 292 286 0.78 5.46 6.73 14.6 249 0.0127 Yes 147 0.0075 [ 17 8.4 0.88 291 284 0.68 5.46 8.95 11.2 249 0.0127 Yeo 120 0.0061 

18 9.4 0.94 295 296 0.65 5.40 9.88 10.4 249 0.0126 Yes 134 0.0069 

14 >10.7 >1.00 292 290 0.47 4.24 - 7.0 - - - 249 0.0164 2 

23 9.3 0.44 287 293 0.30 1.51 4.47 8.0 249 0.0421 No - - 22 9.6 0.59 287 292 0.35 2.26 5.18 7.2 249 0.0308 No - r - Note: 1. Lean Blowout. Unless OtheIViee Noted 

f 2. Pre •• ure Blowout 

1 3 
i 

I 

I 

I 

r II 

184 

Table LXX. Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration 

DS~, DS2B, DS2C and DS2D. 

Combulltnr '''IlC • lJoublt' IInnlllilr Fuel In1t't:tor .. As flotcd 

• All PUot St.lj;(' Injcctorl.i .'u['lcd 

• Ukc Con!1gur,JUon fI4. rXf'ept FUf'l In1crtotfl Ill< IT(ltrd 

Simulate'''' 

night (;<lrllll,aor O'C't.ltinr; Cl'1ndltioll 

t;.)ndilton 

Ru~ " ., T, 13 ", We (,P/r 

No. km '\, K K "to kGh • 18 1,0 D.U, '" '" 0.91 1.47 0.3 

" 3.4 0.30 '" 301 0.6:8 1.47 0 •• 

21 '1.2 0.31 19J laO 0.(,2 1.41 I •• 2, 9.1 0.4] <0, 299 0.11 1.47 4.' 21 9.8 0.44 291 29B 0.28 1.47 J.6 14 1.2 0.32 291 2!J4 0.9) 2.J9 0.1 16 9.1 0.56 292 294 Od8 2.)9 4.4 17 9.4 0,57 29" '" 0.37 2.39 5.5 9 1.2 0.40 289 2., U.93 J.J5 1.3 1) 1.9 0.62 291 293 0.48 3.35 5.3 

12 B.5 0.67 290 '" O.4':i 3.35 '.2 1 2.4 0.57 291 .2H6 0.9J S.M, J.4 8 8.2 0.H7 281 2B9 0.6!! 5.42 6.2 5 10.0 0.98 268 284 0.63 5.lt/i 7.5 6 10.0 0.98 '88 lB4 0.63 5.47 7.5 4 >10.5- ;.1.-0 291 219 0.60 5.50 •• 5 25 .. 11.2 -'0.5 292 297 0.21 1.47 - 26 10.5 0.63 191 294 Q.31 2.39 - 21 ;.10.5 0.18 2B9 291 0.35 J.)5 - 28 .-10.5 --loa '91 286 0.50 5.4t, - 20 lL2 0.5 289 2!18 0.2'4 1.47 4.8 

19 :>11.2 .;>0.5 289 298 0.21 1.47 6.' 1> 10.5 0.6J 292 '" 0.31 2.39 6.1 11 9.', 0.71 290 Z9J 0.42 3.15 1.3 10 >lO.S 0.78 290 192 0.35 J.1S 10.9 

3 >10.5 ;.1.0 291 279 0.56 5.50 9.7 7 9.' 0.96 288 2Bl 0.56 5.50 9.5 2 .;>10.5 >1.0 291 284 0.50 5.41 1.3 14 U., 0.26 291 "8 0.9', 1.:"0 0.33 19 J.4 0.29 '9' 291 0.67 1.49 0.66 18 5.2 0.33 291 28B 0.53 1.50 1,0(, 

l' '.2 0.43 292 '" 0.)0 1.50 ).48 11 1.1 0.33 '" 28& 0.94 2.42 0.68 13 •• 8 0.56 192 268 0.39 2.42 4.H 1 1.2 0.39 290 284 0.94 3.39 1.:30 10 7.1 0.62 293 2" 0. 1,9 ].38 5.27 9 B.4 0~65 291 2B4 0.115 3.')9 6.12 

2 2.1 0.95 291 290 0.94 5.4,) 3.J!) 

11 ... 0.90 290 lB. 0.61 5.48 .6.S7 6 10.0 0.91 287 2Bl U.64 5.4t! 7.76 

" 10.<; O.4Q , .. ~.lR n.", 1.1)0 

- '0 9.' 0.60 2R9 186 0.14 2.42 - 21 9.2 0.69 290 '"' 0.42 3.39 - " >11.0 .. 1.0 291 290 0.50 5.4.') - 12 ... 0.59 292 28) 0.35 2.42 S.26 8 '.2 0.f>9 '" '84 0.42 3.')9 7.22 

13 0.' 0.26 292 28B 0.95 1.50 0.10 

17 1.2 0.29 292 291 0.G8 1.49 0.67 16 4.9 0.33 29Z 291 0.55 1.49 1.03 15 B.' 0.42 292 291 0.33 1.49 2.87 

14 9.1 0.44 291 288 0.10 1.50 3.59 9 1.1 0.33 291 288 0.95 2.42 0.68 12 B.9 0.56 291 287 D.lt! 2.42 4.70 11 '.6 0.:;'9 290 288 0.3'1 2.4Z 5.67 5 1.2 0.39 291 291 0.94 3.34 1.29 8 8.7 0.67 291 291 0.44 3.)4 6.67 

7 9.6 0.71 291 293 0.41 3.34 7,8S 

1 Z.I 0.55 192 294 0.9'1 5 • .37 3.22 , 10.0 0.91 291 291 0.64 5.40 B.ll 

3 ;.11.0 ;.1.0 291 292 0.60 5.J9 8.66 

18 10.0 0.45 '92 288 0.27 1.50 

- 19 10-.4 0.62 291 2B8 0.12 2~41 - 20 10,la 0.75 291 298 O. J7 3.)4 - 1 0.' 0.26 2,7 193 0.94 1.59 0.31 2 3.2 0.29 254 m 0.68 1.59 0.65 3 6.1 0.)5 253 "5 -0.43 1.59 1.0R 4 7.' 0.39 25) 251 0.J9 1.59 1.8g 

6 1.1 D.ll 250 268 O.9ia 2.41 0.65 1 3.' 0.18 251 2., 0.68 2.43 1.12 B 5 •• 0.45 251 263 0.65 2.43 1.75 11 1.2 0.39 m 217 0.91i 3.39 l.ll 

12 4.0 n.47 251 261 0.68 1.39 2.24 

15 2.1 0.55 252 '" 0.94 S.t,s 3.21 16 5.5 0.73 m 287 0.77 5.45 4.95 17 8.4 0.8B 253 287 0.68 5.45 6.28 

18 9.4 0.9

/, 25J 28' 0.65 5.45 6,95 , 9.1 0.43 250 244 0.31 1.59 2.71 9 8.2 0.54 m 251 0.41 2.43 3,21 10 ", 0.59 249 247 0,% 2.43 4.23 13 6.4 0.57 252 26. 0.55 3.39 3.61 

,..g... ~ 0.118 m 2fJ2 0.41 1.19 'i.94 21 3. O.JO 289 29' 0.66 1.48 0.71 23 5 0~33 291 '" 0.53 1.f,9 1.12 2. 7.' 0.39 290 2., 0.40 1.49 1.98 25 8.0 0. 1,0 290 2" 0.36 1.49 2.43 9 1.1 0.)3 '8B 30B 0.9fi 2 • .34 0.72 11 7.7 0.52 ZBB 10' 0.44 2.35 3.61 10 '.4 0.54 287 301 0.41 3.24 4.7.7 

Z 1.2 0.39 2B5 "0 0.94 3.31 1.29 

4 2.2 0.41 284 JOO 0.82 3.11 1.12 7 6 •• 0.58 286 30. O~54 3.27 4.36 6 8.1 0.63 2BJ 30S 0.47 l.2a- 5.41 5 '.8 0.61 "2 30' 0,44 3.2£, 6.49 17 2.1 0.55 ZB' 302 D.94 5.3.!. 3.27 19 8.8 0.91 295 302 0.61 5.)0' 6.90 

18 10.0 0.9~ 29' 102' 0.64 5.30 7.61 24 '.0 0.',0 290 '" 0.36 l.li9 - 13 4./j 0.41 2sa 30, 0.62 2~JS - 1t 1.0 0.49 288 306 (J.lt7 2.15 - 27 9.2 0.137 288 308 0.37 2.34 - 18 2.5 0.1i8 28> 300 0.79 J.31 - 29 9 •• 0.71 2.' JOO 0.41 l.lI - 30 >1l.{) "1.0 '" 302 0.54 5.31 -

" 0.9 0.26 288 lO~ 0.9" 1.46 0.29 

liqtel 1. Lean nlowouh Un1ctls Otherwise Notod 

2. I'rvll/!.11rl;!DJolol"ollt 

ORIGlNAL PAGE IS 

OF POOR QUALITY . 

1.1 ~htoff Att,'m,t w~!:;~~~on U} 

I'" V W. , i!tr.l.~KI (lQU1V) Lir,ht (f.QlIiV) 

m/r; kr,/llr ! Off Iq~/hr ! 

77.1 249 u.fl411 ,,, 30 0.0056 41.4 '" 0.0471 '0" 46 0.1)087 

n.l 249 11.0471 Y(.'fl IJ7 0.0221 

'.1 '" O.O!i]3 y" 122 O.O2l! 

6.9 24') O.O47."! Yell 111 O.O22l 47.6 249 0.0291 '[\,(1 41 0.0047 7.9 249 0.0291 Yen 136 0.0158 6.6 249 0.0291 Y," 139 0.0162 )4.0 249 0.0207 Ye, 139 11.0115 9.1 249 0.0206 YOR 141 0.0122 7.8 24!1 0.020H y" 152 0.0127 2LO '" 0.0128 y" 166 0.0085 11.2 249 0.0128 Yen 166 0.0085 ~ .. 249 0.0127 Ye, 16, 0.0086 ... m 0.0189 Y., m 0.0086 •• 6 249 0.0127 y" 182 0.0092 4.0 - - - 249 0.0471 

5.1 - -

- 249 0.0291 4.7 - - - 249 0.0201 6.0 - - - 249 0.0128 5.3 249 0.0472 Nn - - 4.0 249 0.0472 N. - - 5.3 24. 0~0291 N. - - 6.1 249 0,0208 N. - - 4.1 2" 0.0208 N. - - 7.6 i" 0.0127 N. - - 7.1 313 0.01S8 No - - 6.0 249 0.0129 II. - - 77.3 249 0.u4.54 Yen 41 0.0076 39.3 .149 0.0456 Yo, 2l 0.0086 25.1 249 0.04')4 Ye, 10. 0.0197 8.1 249 O.Oft54 Ye" 166 0.0308 1i7.t! '" 0.0281 'fl'U 48 0.00')5 8.2 '" O.OOlBa Yef) 193 0.0222 )4,2 '" 0.0200 Ye, 1B2 0.OU9 

'.2 249 0.0201 y('~ l4l 0.0116 8.0 2" 0.0191 Yt'S 201 0,016'3 2J.3 316 0.0191 Yea m 0.0125 10.l) J76 0.0192 Yon 201 0.0106 9 •• 316 0.0190 Yes 20' 0.0103 h.4 - - - 249 0.04')4 

6.5 

-

-

- 24, 0.0281 6.9 - - - 249 0.0200 

'.1 -

-

- 24' 0.0191 

6.' 149 0.0281 1/, 

-

- h.9 376 0.0308 No - - 79.6 249 0.0453 Y~!I 46 0.00B6 

41.0 249 0.0455 Yen '" 0.0268 26.5 249 0.0455 Yen 163 0.030) ,., 249 0.0455 Ye' 174 0,0324 , .. 249 0.0453 Yen IBS 0.0341 49./, 249 0.0281 Vcr. 196 0.0225 8.0 m 0,04)1 Yen 190 0.0218 

•• 7 1,08 0.0469 Yeo '" 0.0266 34.9 249 0.0703 Yeo - - 7.6 m 0.0312 Yo; 183 0.0152 6.5 m 0.0312 Yo, 190 0.0158 21.8 176 0.0194 Yes 211 0.0110 9.9 J1& 0.0193 y" 192 0.0099 8.9 J76 0.0193 Yen 256 a.allZ 6.3 - - - 249 0.045] 

5.' 

-

-

- 24, 0.0281 

5.5 - - - ". O.OlU 73.ft 376 0.0655 Yco - - 38.4 37<J 0.0655 Yo, - - 18.8 3/6 0.0655 y"" - - 12.6 ". 48.1 0.0655 Ye, - - 316 0.0430 Y,n - - 25.2 316 0.0430 Yes - - 16.3 316 0.0430 Yes - - 3/j.5 376 0.0308 Ye, - - 18.0 316 0.0308 Yell - - 21.4 316 0.0191 ¥c. - - 14.4 116 0.0191 y" - - 11.2 376 0.0191 y" - - 1Q.4 37& 0.0191 Yen - - ... 116 0~0655 Ye, - - 9.1 316 0.0430 Yeo - - 6.9 316 0.0430 Vee - - 11.7 

7.2 544 

176 0,0308 

0.0447 

Yco 

y., 

-

-

-

- 38.8 J1fr a.D70;! Yen L.!J 0.0249 24.6 316 0.0699 Yes 285 0.05)2 14.0 316 0.0699 Yos 367 0.0684 11.7 ~76- O~0699 Yea lS4 0.0659 1i9.8 4" 0.0549 Yen 95 0-.0113 10.ft '" 0.0547 Yco 291 0.0354 9.3 '" 0.0549 Yes m 0.0468 

35.1 376 0.0315 Yes 256 0.0215 27.0 472 0.0388 Yea 264 0.0221 11.6 A12 0.0394 Ye. 'B9 0.0')31 

'.0 412 0.0392 Yos 415 0.0369 7.7 472 0.0.392 Ye, 435 0.0%a- 21.9 24. 0.0128 Y,s 225 0.0118 11.1 J76 0.0197 Yeo - - 10.0 37f. 0.0197 'c. '68 0.00a8 11.7 - - - 249 0.0456 21.1 - - - 249 0.02:90 12.5 - - - 376 0.0441t 1.' - - - 4n 0.0549 24.S - - - '16 0.0315 6.5 - - - 472 O.OJSS 1.2 - - - 2tl9 0.0128 19.6 412 0.0878 No - -

lio~cll 

I} ku/hr nczllIc!> (05211) 

(4 of 5 cups) 

I (3 0(: 5 cups) 

2 

2 

2 

2 

18 kg hr nozzles (n528) 

, 

2 

2 

i 

45 kg/hI' noz:dclI 

(OS2C) 

2 

2 

2 

Airblnsr Injector (DS2D) 

Z 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 
1 

Table LXXI. Altitud R light T t R ults, Configuration DS3. 

r eo.bultor Type - Doubt Annular FU 1 laj tor - td. Production 111. 

All pilot ata,o injoction. (u le4 

Ltk coaUaurltlon Dl «xc pt for pUct wirler. 

Sial1ated 

FHch' Co.bustor Operating concUtian 1Ij! toff Atte ~!~~~on(l) • Condition P'I/V Wf Wf 

ilia A.! t. "p Tp T) p) Wc AP/P .t.-'I./ (EQUlV) LI.ht- (EQU1V) 

\10. g I K .. a kala % .1. k&/hr f off ka/hr f IIot .. 

12 0.9 0.26 291 292 0.94 1.36 0.25 85.8 249 0.0502 Yel 68 0.0139 

16 3.3 0.29 294 294 0.67 1.85 0.51 43.6 249 0.050) Y. 68 0.0140 

15 5.1 0.33 294 294 0.)4 1.35 0.78 27.9 249 0.050) Yea 79 0.0162 

13 2.6 0.39 293 294 0.39 l.JS 1.68 14.7 249 0.0503 Y • 82 0.0168 

14 8.2 0.41 293 294 0.)5 1.35 1.97 12.3 249 0.050) Y •• 82 0.0168 

9 1.1 0.33 292 289 0.'14 2.36 0.69 49.4 249 0.0289 Y •• 82 0.0096 

11 8.1 0.53 296 292 O •• ~ 2.34 3.73 10.0 249 0.0290 Y.o 117 0.0139 

10 8.8 0.56 294 291 0.39 2.38 4.49 8.5 249 0.0289 Y .. 106 0.0125 

1 1.1 0.39 291 286 0.94 3.24 1.33 3s'8 249 0.0209 Y •• 101 0.0086 

3 8.0 0.64 288 283 0.47 3.25 5.46 9.0 249 0.020Q Y •• 125 0.0107 

4 8.8 0.67 288 283 0.44 3.25 6.50 7.8 249 0.0209 Yoo 12S 0.0107 

5 2.1 0.55 291 284 0.94 5.48 3.63 21.2 249 0.0124 Y .. 144 0.0073 

7 8.8 0.91 289 284 0.67 5.47 7.53 10.8 249 0.0124 Yo. 175 0.0089 

6 10.1 0.98 291 288 0.64 5.47 8.38 9.7 249 0.0124 Y •• 173 0.0088 

[ 8 12.0 >1.0 289 287 0.59 5.46 9.92 8.4 408 0.0203 Yoo 185 0.0094 

17 8.9 0.42 298 294 0.32 1.35 - 10.1 - - - 245 0.0503 2 

18 9.6 0.59 292 291 0.35 2.36 - 7.1 - - - 245 0.0289 2 

19 10.5 0.75 291 286 0.37 3.25 - 5.6 - - - 245 0.0209 2 

20 13.5 1.0 291 284 0.56 5.48 - 7.4 - - - 244 0.0124 2 

2 9.6 0.71 293 283 0.41 3.26 7.61 6.6 249 0.0209 Ito - -

Note. : 

1. Le.an Blowout. Unle •• Othervl •• Noted 

2. Pr"'llr. a:'owout 

I 

Table LXXII. Altitude Relight T st Results, Configuration DS4. 

(oabu.tor Typ .. - Doubl e Annular fuel lnjeeror - Std. Production ~o~zlp. 

• All pilot ataee injector. fueled 

• Like confiauratlon D4 except for pilot Iwlrler. 

I St .. l,ted Ilowout 

PHcht Combuator Operating Condition Llahtoff Att~1 t Condition (1) 

Condition PT/V Wf W( 

Ida AU. Hp TF T3 P3 W I!.P/P ... -It/ (EQUIV) LIRht- (EQUIV) 

No. k. K It at. ka~. % ./. ka/hr f 0(( ka/hr ( Notes 

12 0.9 0.26 295 293 0.94 1.34 0.34 87.1 249 0.0508 Yo. 55 0.0113 

16 3.3 0.29 292 296 0.67 1.34 0.81 44.3 249 0.0509 Y •• b8 0.0141 

[ 15 5.1 0.33 292 29. 0.54 1.34 1.35 28.4 249 0.0509 Y •• 60 0.0124 

14 7.6 0.39 296 294 0.39 1.34 2.77 IS .0 249 0.OS09 Y •• 60 0.0124 

13 8.9 0.42 296 294 0.32 1.34 3.73 10.3 249 0.0509 Ye. 60 0.0124 

9 1.1 0.33 296 294 0.'14 2.34 0.78 49.9 249 0.0291 v •• 82 0.0097 

II 8.4 0.54 295 293 0.41 2.32 4.89 9.4 249 0.0293 Y •• 117 0.0140 

10 9.1 0.57 296 294 0.37 2.33 6.02 7.9 249 0.0292 Y •• 117 0.0140 

1 1.2 0.39 293 289 0.94 3.20 1.45 36.4 249 0.0212 Yel 104 0.0090 

3 8.0 0.64 295 287 0.47 3.21 6.49 9.2 249 0.0212 Y .. 104 0.0090 

2 8.8 0.67 294 287 0.44 3.21 7.29 8.0 249 0.0212 Yea 100 0.0087 

4 1.2 0.39 296 287 0.94 3.26 4.07 21.6 249 0.0126 Yoo 62 0.0053 

8 8.8 0.90 290 287 0.67 5.45 8.50 10.9 249 0.0125 Y •• III 0.0067 

7 10.0 0.97 290 287 0.64 5.45 9.48 9.8 249 0.0125 Y •• 120 0.0061 

6 11.2 >1.0 291 287 0.61 5.45 10.78 8.9 249 0.0125 Yo. 120 0.0061 

5 12.6 >1.0 291 286 0.57 5.45 12.12 8.0 249 0.0125 Y •• ll2 0.0057 

17 8.9 0.42 296 293 0.32 1.34 - 10.3 - - - 249 0.0508 2 

18 9.9 0.60 296 293 0.34 2.34 - 6.5 - - - 249 0.0291 2 19 9.6 0.71 293 289 0.41 3.20 - 6.8 - - - 249 0.0291 2 l 20 14.2 .1.0 296 287 0.54 5.40 - 9.1 - - - 249 0.0216 2 

Notea: 

1. Lean Blowout. Unl •• a Oth.rvi .. Hoted 

2. Pre •• ure Blowout 

1 5 
j .. 

Tabl LXXIII. Altitude R light Test R sults, Configuration OS5A, DS5B, ana DS5 

Coahu tor Ty - Double A aular fU 1 Injector - Aa ott'd 

11 pilot Ita. tnjector. (utled 

L k. conflauratlon 05 except M. proprototype pr1 .. ry .wirler (CS2) 

Swul.ted 

Blowout 

Fl1lht Co.bultor Op.rat1ng Condition LfRhtoff Attempt Condltlon(1) 

Condition I'T/V We we 

MI All. HI' TF T3 '3 W 6P/P .tll-I(j (EQI1IV Lf&ht (EQUIV) 

110. lea I( I( Ita q~. % -I. q/hr f Off kl/hr f Not •• 

28 O.~ 0.26 286 280 1.02 1.41 0.24 97.2 209 0.0482 V .. 60 0.OU8 9 kl/hr 1I0ul •• 

14 3.5 0.30 290 281 0.65 1.41 0.52 39.9 249 0.0482 V • 68 0.0134 (OSSA) 

12 6.7 0.37 290 281 0.44 1.41 1.40 18.1 249 0.0482 Yeo 68 0.0134 

10 8.2 0.41 290 281 0.36 1.41 1.41 11.9 249 0.0482 Ve. 66 0.0129 

24 0.9 0.34 286 280 0.99 2.32 0.63 55.8 249 0.0294 Ye. 82 0.0098 

6 7.6 0.52 290 280 0.44 2.32 3.38 11.2 249 0.0294 Y •• 82 0.0098 

8 8.2 0.54 290 280 0.42 2.32 4.36 9.9 249 0.0294 V •• 102 0.0122 

20 0.8 0.40 286 278 1.01 3.28 1.20 40.6 249 0.0208 Y .. 89 0.0074 

4 7.7 0.62 290 288 0.49 3.25 5.40 9.6 249 0.0210 Ve. 102 0.0087 

1 9.7 0.71 290 283 0.40 3 .2~ 8.28 6.6 249 0.0210 Ye. 123 0.0105 

30 1.1 0.52 286 279 1.05 5.58 3.14 25.9 249 0.0122 Ye. 149 0.0074 

16 5.2 0.71 286 278 0.78 5.60 5.89 14.5 249 0.0121 V •• 149 0.0074 

18 9.5 0.94 286 278 0.65 5.46 8.19 10.2 249 0.0125 Ye_ 171 0.0087 

12 0.8 0.26 286 279 0.96 1.38 0.25 88.9 249 0.0494 Y •• 

~~~ ~:~~~~ 18 h/hr Monle. 

11 6.1 0.35 286 278 0.48 1.32 1.03 22.6 249 0.0514 Y •• (0 '58) 

7 8.5 0.41 286 278 0.34 1.38 1.73 11.1 249 0.0494 V •• 103 0.0208 

6 10.3 0.46 286 277 0.25 1.33 4.09 6.0 249 O.OSlO Y •• 102 0.0213 

13 1.0 0.33 286 279 0.97 2 20 0.59 56.4 249 0.0308 Ve. 137 0.0173 

5 7.3 0.51 286 277 0.46 2.23 3.01 12.3 249 0.0305 Y .. 109 0.0136 

4 8.6 0.55 286 277 0.40 2.23 4.46 9.3 249 0.0305 Yea 88 0.0110 

10 10.5 0.62 286 277 0.31 2.20 - 6.0 249 0.0306 Veo 101 0.0129 

14 1.0 0.39 286 278 0.98 3.15 1.18 40.3 249 0.0216 Ye. 137 0.0121 

3 8.3 0.65 286 277 0.45 J.15 5.66 8.9 249 0.0216 V •• 119 0.f)105 

2 9.7 0.71 286 276 0.40 3.14 7.55 6.7 249 0.0217 V .. 117 0.11101 

15 1.3 0.52 286 278 1.0 5.32 3.24 25.5 249 0.0128 Y •• 157 0.0082 

9 7.9 0.86 286 276 0.69 5.40 7.36 11.8 249 0.0126 Ye. 161 0.0084 

8 10.5 1.0 286 276 0.62 5.35 9.24 9.6 249 0.0127 Yeo 170 0.0088 

30 0.7 0.26 241 296 0.99 1.36 0.25 94.4 249 0.0449 Yeo 204 0.0416 

17 7.5 0.39 240 290 0.40 1.39 2.48 14.8 249 0.0481 Ye. 177 0.0352 

16 7.5 0.39 240 290 0.40 1.39 2.48 14.8 249 0.0489 Yeo 163 0.0326 F.cUlty U_it 

18 9.5 0.44 248 289 0.29 1.39 3.26 8.2 249 0.0490 Y • - - No Prop. Fac. li •. 

27 0.8 0.34 238 295 1.00 2.25 0.67 58.3 321 0.0340 Ye. 212 0.0262 

13 5.1 0.43 2H 289 0.58 2.28 2.00 19.6 

I 249 0.0298 Yeo 139 0.0169 

15 7.8 0.52 243 290 0.44 2.31 3.83 10.8 249 0.0294 Veo 239 0.0284 

14 7.9 0.53 252 290 0.43 2.35 3.88 10.4 249 0.0290 Ve. 217 0.0257 F.cUity Lait 

3 0.9 0.40 257 283 1.00 3.25 1.30 40.7 376 0.0321 V •• 150 0.0128 

7 4.1 0.48 253 286 0.68 3.16 2.76 19.1 249 0.0215 V •• 147 0.0129 

22 4.2 0.48 243 294 0.67 3.20 3.06 18.3 249 0.0213 Y • 144 0.0125 

9 7.5 0.61 243 289 0.50 3.24 5.92 10.0 249 0.0210 Yeo 136 0.0120 

10 7.5 0.61 243 289 0.50 3.24 5.92 10.0 249 0.0210 Veo 137 0.0117 F.CUfr tall 21 9.3 0.69 243 293 0.42 3.19 8.38 7.3 249 0.0213 Ve. 135 0.0118 

25 1.1 0.52 243 295 1.05 5.43 3.27 2b.5 249 0.0125 Y •• 154 0.0079 

12 7.9 0.86 242 289 t'.69 5.37 8.47 11.8 249 0.0127 Veo 147 0.0076 

11 >11.0 >1.0 237 289 0.60 5.41 11.19 8.9 249 0.0126 Y .. 164 0.0084 

22 0.9 0.26 252 303 0.94 1.33 0.27 87.8 249 0.0510 v •• 13b 0.0284 14 !ttl/hI' Nozzl •• 

8 3.1 0.29 252 272 0.69 1.36 0.50 45.5 249 0.0502 Yeo 163 0.0334 (OS5C) 

1 6.1 0.35 252 260 0.47 1.43 0.98 20.7 249 0.0474 Ve. 177 0.0342 

2 7.6 0.39 252 251 0.39 1.40 1.62 14.2 249 0.0486 Ye. 185 0.0367 

23 9.2 0.43 252 242 0.30 1.39 2.46 8.8 249 0.0491 Ve. 211 0.0423 

21 1.1 0.33 252 304 0.94 2.29 0.78 51.1 249 0.0297 V •• 177 0.0214 

6 5.7 0.45 252 272 0.55 2.32 2.17 16.8 249 0.0293 Yeo 211 0.0752 

5 7.0 0.49 251 261 0.47 2.33 2.74 12.7 249 0.0292 Y •• 196 0.0233 

24 8.4 0.54 252 256 0.41 2.36 3.91 8.8 305 0.0359 Y •• 210 0.0247 

20 1.1 0.39 252 304 0.94 3.15 1.38 37.2 249 0.0216 V •• 188 0.0166 

10 6.5 0.57 253 272 0.52 3.16 4.52 10.9 305 0.0268 Ye. 286 0.0251 

11 7.1 0.60 252 272 0.52 3.16 4.52 10.9 305 0.0268 Veo 286 0.0251 

12 9.0 0.68 251 262 0.48 3.17 6.60 7.6 3>9 0.0315 Yeo 267 0.0234 

19 2.0 0.55 752 304 0.94 5.31 3.95 22.1 249 0.0128 Yal 197 0.0103 

16 6.1 0.75 252 303 0.75 5.38 6.37 14.0 249 0.0128 Y •• 191 0.0019 

17 8.5 0.88 252 303 0.68 5.31 8.01 11 4 249 0.0128 Ve. 210 0.0110 

18 9.4 0.94 252 303 0.65 5.31 8.78 10.6 249 0.0128 Ye. 231 0.0121 

25 9.8 0.45 252 272 0.28 1.36 1.24 7.5 - - - 249 0.0502 2 

25 9.9 0.60 252 256 0.34 2.36 4.68 6.5 - - - 305 0.0359 2 

27 9.4 0.70 251 262 0.42 3.17 ~.81 7.2 - - - 359 0.0315 2 

28 9.1 0.68 253 272 0.43 3.17 5.29 7.5 - - - 245 0.0215 2 

29 >11.0 >1.0 252 303 0.57 5.33 - 7 9 - - - 245 0.0128 2 

4 9.1 0.57 251 251 0.37 2.33 - 7.9 249 0.0292 No - - 22 8.9 0.42 252 244 0.32 1.33 - 10.4 305 0.0648 - - 21 9.6 0.71 252 261 0.41 3.16 - 6.9 463 0.0406 No - - Notel: 

l. Lean Blowout I Unl ••• Othervlle Noted 

2. Pre •• ure Blowout 

1 6 
adg 

No; 

7 

9 

8 

3 

5 

4 

10 

2 

Rdg 

No. 

11 

14 

13 

12 

8 

10 

9 

5 

7 

6 

1 

4 

3 

2 

15 

16 

17 

18 

l 

Tabl LXXIV. Altitud Relight T t R ult , Configuration DSl9. 

Combustor Typ - Double Annulsr Fuel Injector - 14 19/hr Prototyp Nozzles 

All pilot at g injectors fu led 

Like configuration D7 axe pt haa preprototype pri .. ry Iwirl r (CS2) 

S1adated Blowout 

Flight Combustor Opera ting Cond ition Lighto£f Attempt Cond 1 tion (1) 

Condl tion YC/V Wf We 

Alt. Hp Tp T3 P3 Wc 6P/P atll-KI (EQUIV) Light (EQUIV) 

k.a K K at. kala % mI. kg/hr f Off kg/hr f 

1.2 0.39 298 299 0.93 3.17 1.53 36.0 267 0.0234 Yea 231 0.0203 

6.4 0.57 298 299 0.55 3.18 3.81 12.3 305 0.0266 Yea 217 0.0190 

7.9 0.63 298 296 0.48 3.17 5.08 9.6 376 0.0329 Y a 199 0.0174 

2.3 0.56 301 301 0.93 5.32 4.40 21.3 332 0.0173 Yes 238 0.0124 

5.8 0.74 298 299 0.76 5.33 6.46 14.4 381 0.0199 Yea 232 0.0121 

10.3 0.99 298 300 0.63 5.33 9.61 9.8 286 0.0149 Yes 278 0.0145 

8.9 0.68 298 299 0.44 3.17 - 7.6 - - - 267 0.0234 

>11.0 >1.0 301 301 0.60 5.32 - 8.8 - - - 376 0.0196 

Notes: 

1. Lean Blowout, Un1es. Otherwise Noted 

2. Pressure Blowout 

-. 

Table LXXV. Altitude Relight Test R sults, Configuration DS20. 

Sillll11ated 

Flight 

Condition 

Alt. 

ka 

Hp 

0.9 0.26 

3.l 0.29 

5.0 O.ll 

9.5 0.44 

1.1 0.33 

9.2 0.57 

9.9 0.60 

1.2 0.39 

8.8 0.67 

9.6 0.71 

2.1 0.55 

8.7 0.90 

9.9 0.97 

>10.7 >1.0 

9.5 0.44 

9.9 0.60 

9.6 0.71 

>10.7 >1.0 

Combustor Type - Double Annular Fuel Injector - 14 kR/hr Prototype Nozzles 

All pilot atage injectors fueled 

• Like configuration D7 except has preprototype primary swir1er (CS2) 

and no pilot dilution 

Blowout 

Combustor Operating Condition Lightoff Attempt Condit ion (1) 

PT/V Wf Wf 

TF T3 P3 Wc f:.p/p atm-KI (EQUIV) Light (EQUIV) 

K K stll ka/s % mls ka/hr f Off kg/hr f 

299 l09 0.94 1.32 0.25 88.1 249 0.0515 Yea 95 0.0200 

298 309 0.67 1.~2 0.59 44.7 249 0.0516 Yes 101 0.0212 

298 309 0.54 1.32 1.01 28.6 249 0.0516 Yes 136 0.0286 

298 l09 0.29 1.32 0 8.3 2~9 0.0515 Yea 131 0.0286 

301 304 0.94 2.27 0.76 51.3 249 0.0300 Yes 122 0.0150 

300 l04 0.37 2.26 3.11 8.0 249 0.0300 Yea 155 0.0190 

299 309 0.34 2.26 3.56 6.7 249 0.0300 Yea 150 0.0184 

298 308 0.94 3.12 1.49 37.3 249 0.0218 Yes 163 0.0145 

298 309 0.44 3.12 5.94 8.1 249 0.0218 Yea 163 0.0146 

298 308 0.41 3.12 7.04 6.9 249 0.0218 Yes 177 0.0158 

298 304 0.94 5.28 4.26 22.0 249 0.0129 Yea 169 0.0082 

300 308 0.67 5.26 8.53 11.3 249 0.0129 Yea 169 0.0089 

298 307 0.64 5.27 9.49 10.2 249 0.0129 Yes 167 0.0088 

300 306 0.61 5.28 10.66 9.2 249 0.0129 Yes 169 0.0089 

299 309 0.29 1.32 - 8.3 - - - 249 0.0515 

301 309 0.34 2.27 - 6.7 - - - 249 0.0300 

298 308 0.41 3.12 - 6.9 - - - 249 0.0218 

298 304 0.57 5.28 - 8.2 - - - 249 0.0129 

Note.: 

1. Lean Blowout, Un1e.s Otherwise Noted 

2. Pressure Blowout 

Notes 

2 

2 

Notes 

--

2 

2 

2 

2 

1 7 
Rdg 

No. 

12 

13 

9 

11 

6 

8 

2 

5 

4 

15 

14 

7 

10 

Rdg 

No. 

3 

1 

4 

2 

,,1 

Tabl LXXVIII. Altitude R light T t R suIts, Configuration DS23. 

Siallated I Flight 

Condition .. . Alt. K ' TF 

Combu.tor Type - Double Annular Fuel Injector - 17 kg/hr Prototype ol&le. 

• All Pilot Sta Injectors Fueled 

Like Configuration Except Has Preprototype Pri .. ry Swirler 

(CS2) and Dilution in Fourth Panel 

Combustor Ooeratin2 Condition U2htoff AttellDt 

Blowout 1 

Condi tion ( ) 

PT/V Wf Wf 

T3 P3 Wc 6P/P atm-K/ (EQUIV) Light (EQUIV) 

n p K K at1l kR/a X m/a kll/hr f Of[ kll/br f Note. 

1.0 0.26 301 298 0.93 1.35 0.28 84.7 249 0.0454 Yea 112 0.0230 

9.4 0.44 301 298 0.30 1.35 3.23 8.6 249 0.0516 Yea 122 0.0252 

1.2 0.33 301 298 0.93 2.31 0.82 49.4 249 0.0262 Y • 150 0.0180 

9.7 0.59 301 298 0.35 2.31 6.52 6.8 249 0.0301 Yes 109 0.0131 

1.2 0.39 301 298 0.93 3.18 1.46 35.9 249 0.0209 Yes 133 0.0121 

9.9 0.72 301 297 0.40 3.18 8.98 6.5 249 0.0219 Yes 134 0.0117 

2.2 0.55 301 302 0.93 5.32 4.04 21.5 249 0.0121 Yes 163 0.0085 

9.1 0.92 301 297 0.66 5.36 8.70 10.7 249 0.0119 Yes 174 0.0090 

<11.0 <1.0 301 297 0.61 5.36 10.29 9.3 249 0.0119 Yea 154 0.0088 

9.4 0.44 301 298 0.30 1.35 --- 8.6 -- -- -- 251 0.0516 

10 .9 0.64 301 298 0.30 2.31 -- 5.3 --- --- --- 251 0.0301 

10.7 0.76 301 297 0.36 3.18 --- 5.5 --- --- -- 250 0.0219 

10.6 0.62 301 298 0.31 2.31 8.16 5.6 249 0.0301 No -- ---

Notes: 

1. Lean Blowout, Unless Otherwise Noted 

2. Pressure Blowout 

Table LXXIX . Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration DS24. 

Simulated 

Flight 

Condition 

Alt. K TF 

km p K 

1.2 0.39 301 

2.2 0.55 301 

9.7 0.95 301 

2.2 0.55 301 

Combustor Type - Double Annular Fuel Injector - 17 kg/hr Prototype Nozzles 

• All Pilot Sta"e Injectors Fueled 

• Like ConfiRuration DB Except Haa Preprototype Primary 

Swirler (CS2) and Dilution in Firat and Second Panels 

Combuator OperatinR Condition Lhhtoff AttellDt 

Blowout (1 Condition ) 

PT/V Wf Wf 

T3 P3 Wc 6P/P at_K/ (I!QUIV) Light (EQUIV) 

K atm kg/s X m/a kll/hT f Off kg/hr f 

296 0.93 3.19 1.45 35.6 318 0.0277 Yes 256 0.0223 

300 0.93 5.33 4.13 21.3 329 0.0172 Yes 274 0.0143 

300 0.65 5. 33 --- 10.2 -- -- -- 251 0.0131 

300 0.93 5.10 3.73 22.3 ~54 0.0193 No --- ---

Notes: 

1. Lean Blowout, Unle ... Otherwise Noted 

2. Preasure Blowout 

2 

2 

2 

Notee 

2 

189 
r r

1 

, 

~ 

 

r 

 -

 

 . 

 . , 

L-~ 

r- I··~· ··-l I -T -I I \ 

".~ .. , ...... J.Y 

I ,(I t 1"" >\ ,.-.,; .-" l I 

Rdg 

No. 

12 

13 

9 

11 

6 

8 

2 

5 

4 

15 

14 

7 

10 

I 

Rdg 

No. 

3 

1 

4 

2 

Table LXXVIII. Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration DS23. 

Simulated I Flight 

Condition 

Alt. M ," TF 

Combustor Type - Double Annular Fuel Injector - 17 kg/hr Prototype Nozdes 

• All Pilot Stage Injectors Fueled 

• Like Configuration Except Has Preprototype Primary Swir1er 

(CS2) and Dilution in Fourth Panel 

Combustor Operating Condition Ligh toff Attempt 

Blowout 1 

Condition( ) 

PT/V Wf Wf 

T3 P3 lic 6p/p atm-KI (EQUIV) Light (EQUIV) 

km p K K atm kg/s % m/s kg/hr f Off kg/hr f Notes 

1.0 0.26 301 298 0.93 1.35 0.28 84.7 249 0.0454 Yes 112 0.0230 

9.4 0.44 301 298 0.30 1.35 3.23 8.6 249 0.0516 Yes 122 0.0252 

1.2 0.33 301 298 0.93 2.31 0.82 49.4 249 0.0262 Yes 150 0.0180 

9.7 0.59 301 298 0.35 2.31 6.52 6.8 249 0.0301 Yes 109 0.0131 

1.2 0.39 301 298 0.93 3.18 1.46 35.9 249 0.0209 Yes 133 0.0121 

9.9 0.72 301 297 0.40 3.18 8.98 6.5 249 0.0219 Yes 134 0.0117 

2.2 0.55 301 302 0.93 5.32 4.04 21.5 249 0.0121 Yes 163 0.0085 

9.1 0.92 301 297 0.66 5'.36 8. 70 10.7 249 0.0119 Yes 174 0.0090 

<11.0 <1.0 301 297 0.61 5.36 10.29 9.3 249 0.0119 Yes 154 0.0088 

9.4 0.44 301 298 0.30 1.35 --- 8.6 --- --- --- 251 0.0516 

10.9 0.64 301 298 0.30 2.31 --- 5.3 --- --- --- 251 0.0301 

10.7 0.76 301 297 0.36 3.18 --- 5.5 --- --- --- 250 0.0219 

10.6 0.62 301 298 0.31 2.31 8.16 5.6 249 0.0301 No --- ---

Notes, 

1. Lean Blowout, Unless OtherHise Noted 

2. Pressure Blowout 

Table LXXIX. Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration DS24. 

Combustor Type - Double Annular Fuel Injector - 17 kg/hr Prototype Nozzles 

Simulated 

• All Pilot Star-e Injectors Fueled 

• Like Configuration D8 Except Has Preprototype Primary 

SHir1er (CS2) and Dilution in First and Second Panels 

Flight Combustor Operatinp, Condition Lip,htoff Attempt 

Blowout (1 

Condition ) 

Condition 

Alt. M TF T3 P3 

km p K K atm 

1.2 0.39 301 296 0.93 

2.2 0.55 301 300 0.93 

9.7 0.95 301 300 0.65 

2.2 0.55 301 :l00 0.93 

Notes: 

vRIGJNAIJ PAGE lB 

OF. POOR QU~ 

PT/V Wf Hf 

We AP/p atm-KI (EQUlV) Light (EQUIV) 

kg/s % m/s kg/hr f Off kg/hr f 

3.19 1.45 35.6 318 0.0277 Yes 256 0.0223 

5.33 4.13 21.3 329 0.0172 Yes 274 0.0143 

5.33 ---- 10.2 --- --- --- 251 0.0131 

5.10 3.73 22.3 :'154 0.0193 No --- ---

1. Lean Blowout, Unless OtherHise Noted 

2. Pressure Blowout 

PRECEDING PAGE BLANK NOT FILMm 

2 

2 

2 

Notes 

2 

._, 

I 

, 

189 
..... 

__ 

.... 

o 

Rdg 

No. 

1 

9 

8 

7 

6 

15 10 14 

13 

16 

20 

19 

22 27 26 25 

12 

24 

5 

4 

18 

Simulated 

Flight 

Condition 

Alt. M 

km p 

0.6 0.26 

5.5 0.34 

6.4 0.36 

8.4 0.41 

9.2 0.43 

0.9 0.34 

6.0 0.46 

8.3 0.54 

9.1 0.57 

0.9 0.40 

3.1 0.64 

9.0 0.68 

1.5 0.53 

7.9 0.86 

9.6 0.95 

<11.0 <1.0 

10.4 0.62 

<11.0 <1.0 

10.0 0.45 

10.0 0.61 

9.9 0.72 

Table LXXX. Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration DS28. 

TF 

K 

302 

302 302 302 

302 302 

302 

302 

302 

299 

299 

299 

301 

301 

301 

301 302 

301 302 

302 

299 

Combustor Type - Double Annular Fuel Injector - 17 kg/hr Prototype Nozzl

• All Pilot Stage Injectors Fueled • Like Configuration D12A Except Primary Swir1er AD. 733 cm

e 

Blowout , 

COmDustor Operating Condition Lightoff Attempt Condition C) 

PT/V Wf Wf 

T3 P3 Wc IJ.P/P atm-K/ (EQUIV) Light (EQUIV) 

K atm kg/s % m/s kg/hr f Off kg/hr f 

317 0.99 1.32 0.24 98.3 167 0.0352 Yes 76 0.0159 317 0.51 1.32 1.06 26.1 162 0.0341 Yes 90 0.0190 317 0.46 1.32 1.27 20.8 172 0.0363 Yes 80 0.0168 

317 0.34 1.32 1.83 11.7 178 0.0375 Yes 66 0.0139 

317 0.31 1.32 2.13 9.3 180 0.0380 Yes 67 0.0142 

314 0.98 2.18 0.56 58.4 167 0.0213 Yes 83 0.0105 

314 0.52 2.18 2.35 16.5 189 0.0241 Yes 86 0.0110 

314 0.41 2.18 3.17 10.2 178 0.0226 Yes 83 0.0106 

314 0.37 2.18 4.13 8.5 167 0.0212 Yes 91 0.0116 

314 0.99 3.09 1.13 41.5 171 0.0154 Yes 112 0.0101 

314 0.47 3.09 5.39 9.4 179 0.0161 Yes 126 0.0113 

314 0.43 3.09 6.54 7.8 193 0.0174 Yes 120 0.0108 312 1.00 5.23 3.13 25.0 198 0.0105 Yes 149 0.0079 

312 0.69 5.23 6.69 12.1 194 0.0103 Yes 143 0.0076 

312 0.65 5.23 7.88 10.6 183 0.0097 Yes 145 0.0077 

312 0.58 5.23 10.31 8.4 203 0.0108 Yes 145 0.0077 

314 0.32 2.18 --- 6,2 --- --- -- 247 0.0314 312 0.50 5.23 --- 6.3 --- --- --- 247 0.0131 

317 0.27 1.32 3.86 7.1 143 0.0301 No --- ---314 0.34 2.18 5.04 6.8 181 0.0230 No --- ---314 0.40 3.09 7.63 6.7 191 0.0172 No --- ---

Notes: 

1. Lean Blowout, Unless Otherwise Noted 

2. Pressure Blowout 

... ... .. .. .... 
r

;

q

 .

.. 

.

t ."' ,.1 " 

Table LXXXI. Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration DS29. 

I-' 

t.D 

I-' 

00 

Rdg 

No. 

37 

41 42 

31 

24 

34 33 

32 

31 30 

29 

28 

13 

23 

22 

21 20 

18 18 

16 

IS 

I 

11 

10 

9 

7 

6 

38 

27 

14 

4 

Simulated 

Flight 

Condition 

Alt. M TF p K 

0.7 0.26 299 

8.3 0.41 299 

8.7 0.42 299 

9.0 0.43 299 

0.9 0.34 298 

6.1 0.46 298 6.6 0.48 298 

7.1 0.50 298 7.6 0.52 298 

8.1 0:53 298 

8.7 0.55 298 

9.1 0.57 298 

0.9 0.40 297 

5.9 0.55 297 

6.5 0.57 297 

6.9 0.59 297 

7.4 0.61 297 

7.8 0.63 297 

8.1 0.64 297 

9.0 0.68 297 9.7 0.71 297 

1.5 0.53 295 

8.4 0.88 295 

9.0 0.91 295 

9.8 0.96 295 

10.7 1.0 295 

<10.7 <1.0 295 

10.2 0.46 299 

10.2 0.61 298 

10.3 0.74 297 

<10.7 <1.0 295 

Combustor Type - Double Annular Fuel Injector - 17 kg/hr Prototype Nozzles 

• All pilot Stage Injectors Fueled • Like Configuration D12A 

Combustor Operating Condition Lightoff Attempt (1) Condl.tl.on 

PT/V Hf Hf 

T3 P3 Wc {;p/p atm-KI (EQUIV) Light (EQUIV) 

K atm Kg/s % !'lIs kg/hr f Off kg/hr f 

313 0.99 1.33 0.22 95.9 173 0.0360 Yes 137 0.0286 

313 0.35 1.33 1.85 12.2 208 0.0432 Yes 120 0.0250 313 0.33 1.33 5.94 10.8 200 0.0415 Yes 125 0.0261 313 0.31 1.33 1. 89 9.6 212 0.0441 Yes 116 0.0242 312 0.99 2.23 0.54 58.3 181 0.0225 Yes --- ---312 0.52 2.23 2.07 16.1 206 0.0257 Yes 135 0.0169 

312 0.49 2.73 2.09 14.5 205 0.0255 Yes 137 0.0170 

312 0.47 2.23 2.41 13.0 206 0.0258 Yes 133 0.0166 

312 0.44 2.23 2.99 11.6 211 0.0264 Yes 137 0.0170 

312 0.42 2.23 3.28 10.4 239 0.0299 Yes 115 0.0143 312 0.39 2.23 4.25 9.1 260 0.0324 Yes --- ---312 0.37 2.23 5.12 8.3 282 0.0328 Yes 122 0.0153 308 0.99 3.15 1.17 41.1 204 0.0180 Yes 134 0.0118 

308 0.57 3.15 3.62 13.6 194 0.0171 Yes 135 0.0119 

308 0.54 3.15 4.03 12.4 196 0.0173 Yes 140 0.0123 

308 0.52 3.15 4.33 11.4 208 0.0183 Yes 142 0.0126 308 0.50 3.15 4.75 10.5 215 0.0110 Yes 137 0.0120 

308 0.48 3.15 5.09 9.8 199 0.0176 Yes 139 0.0122 308 0.47 3.15 5.62 9.1 198 0.0155 Yes --- ---

308 0.43 3.15 6.98 7.7 272 0.0240 Yes --- ---

308 0.40 3.15 7.71 6.7 271 0.0239 Yes --- ---

302 0.99 5.40 3.22 24.1 209 0.0107 Yes 151 0.0078 302 0.68 5.40 7.13 11.3 225 0.0116 Yes 151 0.0077 302 0.66 5.40 7.55 10.8 227 0.0117 Yes 160 0.0082 302 0.64 5.40 8.32 10.1 275 0.0142 Yes 152 0.0078 

302 0.62 5.40 8.95 9.4 213 0.0110 Yes --- ---

302 0.58 5.40 10.67 8.2 219 0.0112 Yes 177 0.0091 

313 0.26 1.33 --- 6.5 --- --- --- 249 0.0515 312 0.33 2.23 --- 6.3 --- --- --- 249 0.0308 308 0.38 3.15 --- 6.0 --- --- --- 249 0.0218 302 0.55 5.40 --- 7.3 --- --- --- 249 0.0127 

Notes: 

1. Lean B1mmut, Unless Otherwise Noted 

2. Pressure B1oY7out 

-----

Notes 

2 

2 2 2 

.---- .•. -.. .. --".""""""-.-.. 
T 

, 

~ 

i 

 

. 

 

 

~"'~[ l~ -l~ -~T "", 

r- ~·-r--·-~I~ 

~ I I 

r 1·, 0\ i'.,. .. , H~ 

Table LXXXII. Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration DS30. 

Simulated 

Flight 

Condition 

Rdg Alt. TF M No. km p K 

28 1.0 0.26 302 

30 2.2 0.27 302 

32 4.7 0.32 302 

35 9.5 0.44 302 

26 1.1 0.33 302 

20 7.3 0.50 302 

24 8.6 0.55 302 

11 1.1 0.39 304 

18 6.9 0.59 304 

16 8.3 0.65 304 

15 9.0 0.68 304 

3 1.1 0.52 305 

10 5.6 0.73 305 

9 6.7 0.78 305 

7 10.5 1.0 305 

5 >10.7 >1.0 305 

23 9.4 0.58 302 

34 10.1 0.46 302 

13 9.8 0.71 304 

15 0.8 0.25 300 

33 4.9 0.32 302 

10 8.2 0.40 300 

11 9.4 0.43 300 

13 10.1 0.45 300 

17 0.9 0.32 300 

5 6.7 0.47 301 

28 7.6 0.52 303 

6 7.9 0.53 300 

24 9.8 0.58 302 

19 0.9 0.37 300 

34 4.7 0.50 303 

2 7.3 0.60 300 

35 9.4 0.70 304 

22 1.2 0.53 302 

32 6.1 0.74 303 

30 9.8 0.97 . 303 

23 10.3 0.65 302 

14 10.4 0.77 304 

11 1.1 0.26 243 

1CJ 6.1 0.35 238 

9 7.6 0.38 226 

12 1.2 0.33 248 

7 7.0 0.48 244 

13 1.5 0.40 242 

5 6.4 0.56 241 

1 7.9 0.86 248 

2 9.1 0.93 243 

8 8.5 0.53 244 

6 7.9 0.62 244 

192 

Combustor Type - Double Annular Fuel Injector - 17 kg/hr Prototype Nozzles 

• All Pilot Stage Injectors Fueled 

• Like Configuration D12A Except Primary 

Swir1er A = .833 cm2 e 

11lowout 1 

Combustor Operating Condition Wf 

Lightoff Attempt wCondition( ) 

T3 P3 W PTtV f c AP/p atm-KI (EQUIV) Light (EQUIV) 

K atm kg/s % rols kg/hr f Off kg/hr f 

313 0.93 1.34 0.32 85.0 175 0.0364 Yes 37 0.0077 

313 0.77 1.34 0.45 58.7 181 0.0377 Yes 37 0.0077 

313 0.57 1.34 1.08 31.6 175 0.0364 Yes 80 0.0167 

313 0.29 1.34 3.04 8.3 195 0.0406 Yes 81 0.0169 

313 0.94 2.23 0.66 52.7 176 0.0219 Yes 76 0.0095 

313 0.46 2.23 2.83 12.5 171 0.0214 Yes 116 0.0145 

313 0.40 2.23 3.92 9.3 176 0.0220 Yes 105 0.0131 

313 0.95 3.13 0 37.7 176 0.0156 Yes 82 0.0073 

313 0.52 3.13 3.96 11.4 186 0.0165 Yes 105 0.0093 

313 0.46 3.13 4.96 8.9 199 0.0176 Yes 106 0.0094 

313 0.43 3.13 6.49 7.7 195 0.0173 Yes 104 0.0092 

313 1.05 5.31 3.01 27.2 199 0.0104 Yes 134 0.0070 

313 0.77 5.31 5.83 14.6 191 0.0100 Yes 134 0.0070 

313 0.73 5.31 6.53 13.3 181 0.0095 Yes 118 0.0062 

313 0.63 5.31 9.06 9.7 208 0.0109 Yes 118 0.0062 

313 0.58 5.31 10.79 8.4 225 0.0118 Yes 128 0.0067 

313 0.36 2.23 - 7.7 - - Yes 249 0.0308 

313 0.26 1.34 7.35 6.7 247 0.0513 No - - 313 0,40 3.13 7.75 6.7 247 0.0219 No - - 308 0.99 1.36 0.2 95.4 173 0.353 Yes 151 0.0307 

313 0.56 1.33 1.1 31.6 247 0.0233 Yes 150 0.0311 

306 0.36 1.36 1.8 13.0 170 0.0346 Yes 152 0.0311 

306 0.30 1.36 2.7 9.2 166 0.0340 Yes 147 0.0299 

306 0.26 1.36 3.6 6.9 169 0.0345 Yes 145 0.0297 

308 0.99 2.23 0.6 58.4 172 0.0214 Yes 136 0.0169 

305 0.49 2.26 2.8 14.0 176 0.0217 Yes 169 0.0208 

311 0.43 2.23 3.8 10.8 167 0.0208 Yes 156 0.0195 

305 0.42 2.26 4.0 10.4 176 0.0216 Yes 168 0.0207 

313 0.38 2.23 5.7 8.6 170 0.0212 Yes 111 0.0138 

308 1.01 3.16 1.2 42.5 181 0.0159 Yes 123 0.0108 

302 0.64 3.18 3.1 16.9 182 0.0159 Yes 173 0.OJ51 

302 0.53 3.18 5.4 10.0 185 0.0161 Yes 172 (LOBO 

313 0.43 3.13 6.5 7.7 215 0.0191 Yes 104 0.0092 

309 1.05 5.33 3.1 26.9 194 0.0101 Yes 184 0.0096 

302 0.73 5.42 6.4 13.3 193 0.0099 Yes 163 0.0084 

300 0.63 5.42 9.1 9.8 201 0.0103 Yes 158 0.0081 

313 0.36 2.23 - 7.7 - - Yes 249 0.0311 

313 0.39. 1.15 7.8 6.8 249 0.0221 No - - 307 0.94 1.31 0.2 87.7 249 0.0521 Yes 41 0.0086 

257 0.48 1.31 0.8 22.4 249 0.0526 Yes 122 0.0258 

249 0.39 1.31 1.3 15.0 249 0.0527 Yes 136 0.0286 

308 0.93 2.29 0.7 50.2 249 0.0305 Yes 101 0.0123· 

262 0.48 2.26 2.5 13.1 249 0.0307 Yes 117 0.0144 

309 0.93 3.10 1.4 36.2 249 0.0224 Yes 182 0.0163 

274 0.54 3.10 3.6 12.7 249 0.0244 Yes 199 0.0178 

308 0.68 5.25 7.6 11.5 249 0.0132 Yes 191 0.0101 

311 0.65 5.23 8.3 10.7 367 0.0195 Yes 204 0.0108 

258 0.40 2.26 3.4 9.3 367 0.0451 No - - 268 0.48 3.10 4.8 9.6 408 0.0365 No - -

Notes: 

1. Lean Blowout, Unless Otherwise Noted 

2. Pressure Blowout 

Notes 

2 

2 

i 

j 

j 

! 

1 
l 

L 

--

... .' 

Table LXXXIII. Idle Emissions Test Results, Swirl Cup Investigation. 

I-' 

CO 

t.) 

Configura tion 

Number 

DS3 

DS4 

DS5A DS5B 

DS6 DS7 

2ilot Stage(l) Features 

Secondary 

Fuel Primary Hixing .008 

Nozzle Type Swider Type Section CO HC 

Standard B5 No - -

Production 

CF6-50 

Standard B5, 25% No 80.5 50.4 

?roduction Reduced 

CF6-50 Flowrate 

Prototype Prototype Yes 48.3 12.5 Development Prototype Yes - -

Development Development Yes - -

Development Development No - -

(l)Double Annular Combustor Like D5 Except as Noted 

(2) P3 2.91 atm 

T3 - 429 K 

VR = 18.3 m/s 

Emission Index,(2) g/kg @ f = 

.009 .010 .011 .012 .013 

CO HC CO HC CO HC CO HC CC HC 

77 .1 lf9.:' 68.8 35.6 66.2 24.9 68.0 26.2 70.1 16.5 

67.6 25.7 

71.2 34.9 71.3 25.3 74.7 18.9 - - 77.6 12.4 

- - 40.0 3.0 39.8 2.4 48.1 1.4 - -

39.5 1.7 

48.0 14.5 - - 35.9 5.0 - - 36.8 2.0 

37.6 8.1 39.7 7.4 35.7 5.2 36.3 3.0 42.1 2.4 

37.7 3.8 

68.0 35.0 - - 67.0 35.0 - - 69.0 31.0 

CO 

- 

- - 

48

- 

- 
r -~-=--== ~~~~' '" -

 '---"---~~~--'-"~---------------'----

I . ~ r 

I 

..... 

co 

tI:>o 

~o §§ :! 

~~ 

fJ 

$ 

Test Rig 

Full Annular 

60° Sector 

I 

Table LXXXIV. Idle Emissions Test Results, Fuel Nozzle Investigation*. 

IFirst Outer Emission Index, g/kg, @ f = 

Con£igura- Cooling Ring Pilot Stage .008 .009 .010 .011 .012 .013 

tion Number Flmf % We Fuel Nozzle Type CO HC CO HC CO HC CO HC CO HC CO HC 

D12A l%. Annular Prototype Std. 30.3 14.1 22.5 10.0 21.2 8.1 24.5 7.3 30.5 6.8 38.0 6.5 

D12B 1% Unshrouded Simplex 23.7 6.5 19.0 4.5 18.1 2.9 22.0 2.8 26.0 2.6 34.0 2.7 

D14A 3% Unshrouded Simplex 34.8 9.2 30.0 6.2 26.8 4.5 26.4 3.1 32.0 3.0 38.0 3.0 

D14B 3% Annular Prototype Std. 49.3 31.0 44.0 26.8 43.7 21.7 48.4 18.8 53.5 17.1 62.0 15.9 

DS31A 1% Annular Prototype Std. - - 21.2 7.ll 25.8 7.6 28.9 5.1 34.2 4.2 - -

(Like Dl2A) 

DS31B 1% Annular Prototype Hod. 29.2 6.3 24.5 5.0 24.9 5.2 26.2 4.5 25.8 3.1 32.6 2.8 Shroud Air Closed 

DS31C 

(Like. D12B) 

1% Unshrouded Simplex 20:6" 4.4 19.2 3.6 20.2 3.2 23.5 3.1 28.2 2.7 30.1 2.0 

DS31D 'l' Sector Prototype 61.1 14.2 25.4 3.1 19.9 2.3 18.6 0.9 18.9 0.5 20.1 0.3 

DS32A 2% (Engine Annular Prototype. Mod. 37.5 9.0 30.8 6.4 25.2 4.8 24.1 3.7 28.3 3.5 32.4 3.1 

Design) 62° Sorav Ano:le 

DS32B ?'l' Unshrouded Simolex - 21.4 2.6 20.0 2.0, 20.1 2.1 25.9 3.2 32.9 4.6 

DS33A 3% Unshrouded Simplex 40.1 6.5 31.9 4.9 25.0 3.9 26.0 3.7 27.9 3.4 36.6 4.8 

(Like D14A 

Pilot) 

DS33B 3% Annular Prototype Mod. 29.8 5.0 21.6 5.8 21.9 7.2 25.9 3.3 28.6 7.1 31.9 4.7 62° Spray Angle 21. 7 4.3 25.0 6.5 36.0 4.1 

DS33C 3% Annular Prototype Std. 53.5 17.5 39.1 13.2 33.1 10.9 26.5 7.2 26.5 5.7 33.3 8.2 

(Like D14B 48° Spray Angle 27.9 6.1 

Pilot) 

DS33D 3% Same, }lax Radial 101.9 56.0 74.4 32.7 39.6 11.4 27.9 7.3 27.2 6.0 30.0 4.4 

& }lax Axial Inunersion 

DS33E 3% Same, Max Radial 48.8 22.4 35.4 16.5 27.1 11.4 22.5 8.8 21.5 6.2 26.5 6.8 & }lin Axial Immersion 

* Double Annular Combustor 

P3 = 2.91 atm T3 = 429 K 

VR = 18.3 mls 

-_ .. _------- --

CO 

46.

44.

45.

71.

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

'~-'----------'~~-~.--........~.--~--"----------~-, 

"-- --"--.----~---~---------

---
.,," . '"" :------.--, -: 

 

O£ 

lO Table LXXXV. Idle Emissions Test Results, Airflow Investigation(l). 

I-' 

CO 

c:.n 

Airflow, % Wc 

1st 2nd 4th 4th 

Test Conf. Outer Outer Outer Inner 0.008 0.009 

Rig No. CooL Dil. Dil. Dil. CO HC CO HC 

Full Dl2B 1.0 4.5 0 4.4 23.7 6.5 19.0 4.5 

Annular DB 1.0 4.5 0 4.4 34.3 9.5 27.0 5.0 

D14A 3.0 4.5 0 4.4 34.8 9.2 30.0 6.2 

600 DS3lC 1.0 4.5 0 t..4 20.6 4.4 19.2 3.6 

Sector DS32B 2.0 4.5 0 4.4 21.4 2.6 

DS33A 3.0 4.5 0 4.4 40.1 6.5 31.9 4.9 DS34 3.0 4.5 2.0 4.4 29.3 5.6 25.2 4.6 DS35 3.0 A.5 2.0 0 27.3 3.5 23.6 2.6 

Ds:l6 3.0 4.5 0 0 26.3 3.6 22.4 2.7 Ds37 3.0 6.5 0 0 27.4 3.3 22.0 2.4 

(1)Doub1e Annular Combustor (2)p3 = 2.91 atm Unshrouded Simplex Fuel Nozzles T3 = 429 K 

Engine Prototype Pilot Stage Swir1ers VR = 18.3 m/s 

Emission Index(2) JUkg, @ f = 

0.010 0.011 0.012 0.013 0.014 

CO HC CO HC CO HC CO HC CO HC 

18.1 2.9 22.0 2.8 26.0 2.6 34.0 2.7 44.3 3.0 

21.8 3.0 19.0 2.2 21.8 2.0 :,2.0 2.0 49.0 2.5 

26.8 4.5 26.4 3.1 32.0 3.0 .18.0 3.0 45.9 3.3 

20.2 3.2 23.5 3.1 28.2 2.7 30.1 2.0 - -20.0 2.0 20.1 2.1 25.9 3.2 32.9 4.6 - -25.0 3.9 26.0 3.7 27.9 3.4 36.6 4.8 - -

23.4 3.9 24.1 3.9 25.0 3.5 28 .• 4 3.4 32.2 2.9 

24.1 3.2 32.6 2.6 

21.6 1.8 21.9 1.6 21.3 1.4 24.5 1.4 29.3 1.7 

20.4 2.0 21.1 1.7 22.6 1.6 27.3 1.8 30.9 1.8 

19.4 1.8 18.4 1.4 21.0 1.4 24.8 1.5 28.8 1.6 

- ---

! 0.015 

CO HC 

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

- -

34.9 2.4 

31.3 loS 35.8 2.1 31.0 1.6 

-

33

3

3

i 

It; ._. __ __ _____ "'" __ .. __ ,. __ ' __ __ .. _._._ _ .-c'": ::::: , : 
f .' I: 

r-... , 

l 

.... 

Table LXXXVI. Subidle Temperature Rise Test Results, 

Wc 

Simulated (EQUIV) T3 P3 Temperature Rise, K, at f = 

Configuration RPH kg/s K Atm 0.0150 0.0175 0.0200 0.0225 0.0250 0.0275 

DS34 3000 4.52 300 1.22 - 392 530 649 751 -

3500 5.50 294 1.37 242 409 558 704 781 817 

4000 6.34 301 1.55 414 646 732 782 825 -

DS35 3500 5.50 286 1.35 271 439 564 632 767 884 

DS36 3500 5.50 297 1.36 235 444 647 805 819 926 

Standard 

Production 

Combustor 

(Reference) 3500 5.50 294 1.37 328 428 528 628 736 767 

--'----- --L-_____ --- --- --- L-_ --- ---- -----

.•• ... ..."., ..... .... - .. _ ......... , .. " .• - ... ,,-.• .. ... •• -..:; _ .................. , .......... _. __ .. .. • ......... ... 

0.0300 0.0325 

- - 

868 909 

- - 

935 979 961 981 

778 778 

_"H" .
I 

:/ 

II 

:1 

'I. 

~~~-~ 

~i 

PI 

Iff 

..... 

~ 

o..l 

,;'1 

'7 

Table LXXXVII. Cross-Fire Test Results, Airflow Investigation*. 

Hain Stage Fuel-Air Ratio 

Full Propagation 

Main Stage Airflow Distribution (%H ) (1) Crossfire T3 = 630 K T3 = 533 K 

Config. 

c Slot 

fpilot = f = Pilot 

Primary Secondary Dome Inner Liner 

Swirler Swirler Holes Holes 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.005 0.010 0.015 

DS8 9.2 37.1 0 4.2(lst Panel) No 0.030 0.027 0.023 --- --- ---

DS9 9.1 37.0 0 0 No 0.029 0.025 0.022 0.032 0.028 0.031 

DS10 3.4 28.9 0 0 No 0.025 0.022 0.018 0.032 0.031 0.031 

DSll 9.1 28.8 0 8.4(lst Panel) No No 0.028 --- --- --- --- Light 

DS12 9.1 28.8 0 8.4(2nd Panel) No --- 0.025 0.023 --- --- ---

DS13 3.4 28.7 0 8.3(2nd Panel) No 0.027 0.022 0.019 --- --- ---

DS14 3.4 28.7 0 8.3 (lst Panel) No 0.030 0.028 0.021 --- --- ---

DS15 3.4 36.9 0 8.4(lst Panel) No 0.028 0.026 0.026 --- --- ---

DS1G 3.5 28.9 4.8 10.6 1st Panel No 0.024 0.024 0.023 --- 0.025 ---

DS17 3.5 28.9 4.8 10.6 (1st Panel) Yes 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.025 0.024 ---

DS18 3.5 29.0 0 10.G(lst Panel) Yes 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.024 0.022 0.018 

*60 0 Sector Double Annular Combustor Like Configuration D6 Except as Noted 

P3 = 1.1 atm 

VR = 23.2 m/s at 630 K, 20.0 m/s at 533 K 

(1) Pilot Stage Cup Flmv = 12.2-13/8% HC 

Pilot Stage Dilution Flow = 3.1-4.6% Wc 

L-- ____ . ___ _ __ _ ___ __ __ __ _ __ __ __ _ __ - -- - ----_ .. - ---.----~ 

- -- --_ .. - --- ------ --- ._-- -- --- -

-

Lean Blo

f pilot = 

T = 3 

630 K 

0.015 

0.017 

0.005 

0.015 

0.018 

0.004 

0.004 

0.019 

0.006 

0.005 

0.005 

.~~.--' ....... --'~~~ 

•••• '"".~~~.~ •• --.. -----.~.'--~ ........ ~. 

-

.... ~-...~-.~~ 

•• -~-~ ...... ~.-~-~~-~-'-'---, .... -.- ........ -"'--".~'"""' ........... '"'---...-...i 

~.. 
r 

I 

f 

t 

I 

, 

.... 

co 00 

Table LXXXVIII. Cross-Fire Test Results, Slot Geometry Investigation*. 

Crossfire Slot 

Gemnetry Main Stage Fuel-Air Ratio for Full 

Axial Circumferential f pilot - 0.005 f pilot - 0.010 f pilot - 

Configuration Length Width T, c T3 c T3 = 

Number em em 429 K 520 K 630 K 429 K 520 K 630 K 429 K 520 K 

DS25 3.9 (2) 2.5 (2) 0.030 0.021 0.017 0.025 0.019 0.016 0.023 0.022 DS27 3.9 1.2 >0.030 0.030 0.020 >0.030 0.030 0.018 >0.030 0.030 

DS26 2.7 2.5 >0.030 0.021 0.018 >0.030 0.020 0.020 >0.030 0.020 

DS22 0 0 >0.030 >0.030 >0.030 >0.030 >0.030 >0.030 >0.030 >0.030 

(1)60· Sector Double Annular Combustor Like Full Annular Configuration D8 Except for Slot Geometry Changes 

P3 = 1.1 atm 

VR = 23.2 mls @630 K, 19.5 m/s @520 K, 1913 mls @429 K 

(2)Like DS17, 18 & Full Annular D8-14 

--_. - ---

----

----- -- -----------

..... .•. ..................... ....-.. •••• -·-""' 

__ __ "'_._ 

__ "w,_ •• __ 
r 

I 

L 

f 

I 

!~ 

f 

1 

i 

I 

I 

~ 1 

Table LXXXIX. 

Simulated 

--r-··· 

Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration RSlA and RSIB. 

Comhustor Type - Radial/Axial Staged Fuel Injector - As Noted 

• All Pilot Stage Injectors Fueled 

• Like Configuration R2 Except Fuel Injectors 

as Noted 

Blowout 1 Flight Combustor OoerntiI1Il Condition Wf 

Lightoff Attempt WCondition ( ) 

Condition TF T3 P3 W PT/V f Rd .. Ale. M c 6P/P atm-K/ (EQUIV) Light (EQUIV) 

No. km p K K atm kg/s % m/s kg/hr f Off kg/ln: f Notes 

19 1.2 0.38 288 288 0.95 2.93 0.92 40.6 373 0.0354 Yes 297 0.0281 Airblast Injector 23 4.7 0.48 288 290 0.63 2.92 Z.26 18.0 373 0.0355 Yes 250 0.0238 (RSlA) 21 5.2 0.50 288 289 0.60 2.93 2.47 16.1 373 0.0354 Yes 250 0.0238 12 1.6 0.46 289 286 0.95 4.03 1.72 29.4 373 0.0257 Yes 248 0.0171 17 3.5 0.53 288 287 0.76 4.03 2.69 19.1 373 0.0257 Yes 278 0.0192 14 4.0 0.55 287 286 0.73 4.03 2.95 17.5 272 0.0187 Yes 218 0.0150 

2 2.0 0.53 288 279 0.95 5.01 8.90 6.9 373 0.0207 Yes 231 0.0126 10 8.0 0.81 289 283 0.63 5.02 5.88 10.4 373 0.0206 Yes 185 0.0108 

7 >10.7 >1.0 288 281 0.60 5.03 6.58 9.3 373 0.0206 Yes 191 0.0105 25 5.8 0.52 288 288 0.56 2.93 - 14.3 - - - 373 0.0354 2 26 4.3 0.56 289 286 0.71 4.03 - 16.6 - - - 373 0.0257 2 27 >10.7 >1.0 288 278 0.48 5.07 - 6.0 - - - 373 0.0204 2 24 0.9 0.29 288 291 0.95 1.68 0.34 70.4 463 0.0764 No - - 17 0.9 0.26 291 303 0.94 1.47 0.39 79.7 249 0.0464 Yes 68 0.0129 18 kg/hr Nozzles 21 3.3 0.29 293 302 0.67 1.47 0.66 40.5 249 0.0464 Yes 84 0.0160 (RSIB) 20 5.1 0.33 293 303 0.54 1.47 1.01 26.0 249 0.0464 Yes 117 0.0222 

19 7.2 0.38 292 303 0.41 1.47 1. 75 14.9 249 0.0464 Yes 150 0.0284 

18 7.9 0.40 291 303 0.37 1.47 2.04 12.6 249 0.0464 Yes 155 0.0294 

9 1.1 0.33 291 300 0.94 2.37 0.82 49.3 376 0.0440 Yes 68 0.0080 

10 5.4 0.44 288 302 0.56 2.37 2.25 17.3 376 0.0440 Yes 163 0.0191 

11 6.0 0.46 2&8 302 0.52 2.37 2.58 15.3 376 0.0440 Yes 171 0.0201 

12 6.7 0.48 289 303 0.49 2.36 2.93 13.5 376 0.0442 Yes 176 0.0208 

13 7.3 0.51 289 302 0.46 2.36 3.44 11. 7 376 0.0442 Yes 176 0.0208 

14 8.0 0.53 290 303 0.42 2.36 3.94 10.0 376 0.0442 Yes 186 0.0218 

2 1.1 0.39 289 280 0.94 3.42 1.46 34.2 376 0.0305 Yes 106 0.0086 

7 6.2 0.56 287 281 0.56 3.36 4.27 12.2 249 0.0202 Yes - - 6 6.9 0.59 287 281 0.52 3.36 4.78 10.8 249 0.0202 Yes 183 0.0151 

5 7.6 0.62 287 281 0.49 3.42 5.60 9.3 462 0.0375 Yes 139 0.0113 

23 2.1 0.55 293 288 0.94 5.46 3.76 21.4 376 0.0191 Yes 189 0.0096 

25 4.2 0.65 291 285 0.82 5.46 4.98 16.4 376 0.0191 Yes 163 0.0083 

27 7.6 0.84 290 285 0.70 5.47 6.95 11.9 376 0.0191 Yes - - 28 8.8 0.90 293 283 0.67 5.48 7.81 10.8 376 0.0191 Yes - - 30 8.5 0.41 291 303 0.34 1.47 - 10.4 - - - 249 0.0464 2 

31 8.4 0.54 291 300 0.41 2.37 - 9.2 - - - 376 0.0440 2 

15 10.9 0.64 290 303 0.30 2.36 - 4.9 - - - 249 0.0288 2 

16 9.5 0.58 290 303 0.36 2.36 - 7.1 - - - 340 0.0400 2 

32 9.9 0.72 289 280 0.39 3.42 - 5.9 - - - 376 0.0305 2 

29 >11.0 >1.0 293 283 0.52 5.48 - 6.6 - - - 249 0.0124 2 

24 >11.0 >1.0 291 288 0.51 5.46 - 6.2 - - - 376 0.0191 2 

4 8.3 0.65 287 281 0.46 3.42 6.55 8.1 462 0.0375 No - - 3 9.1 0;69 289 281 0.42 3.42 7.53 6.9 462 0.0376 No - - Notes '1. Lean Blowout, Unless Otherwise Noted 

2. Pressure Blowout 

199 

, 

j 

1 
I 

f 

i 

 

;i 

1 

! 

r- 

l\:) 

o 

o 

Rdg 

No. 

f--

17 

22 

21 20 

18 10 

16 13 

1 

15 

7 

6 

23 

25 11 

8 

19 14 

4 

5 

24 

11 

9 

10 

5 

8 

7 

1 

4 

3 

6 

2 

Table XC. Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration RS2A and RS2B. 

Simulated 

Flight 

Condition 

Alt. H kIn p 1-. 

0.8 0.26 

4.1 0.31 

6.6 0.37 

7.9 0.40 

8.7 0.42 

1.0 0.33 

5.7 0.45 

7.8 0.52 

0.9 0.40 

3.5 0.45 

5.1 0.51 

5.5 0.53 

1.3 0.52 

8.4 0.88 

9.7 0.59 

9.7 0.71 

9.2 0.43 9.2 0.58 

8.2 0.65 

6.7 0.58 

>11.0 >1. 0 

9.3 0.44 

10.1 0.61 

10.6 0.62 

0.9 0.40 

8.4 0.65 

10.4 0.74 

1.2 0.52 

7.6 0.84 

11. 2 >1.0 

10.7 0.76 

15.5 >1.0 

-- -

Combustor Type - Radial/Axial Staged Fuel Injector - 18 kg/hr Nozzles 

• All Pilot Stage Injectors Fueled 

• Like Configuration R3 Except Ignitor as Noted 

Blowout (1) 

Combustor Operating Condition Wf Lightoff Attempt WCondition 

TF T3 P3 W PT/V c bP/P atm-K/ (EQUIV) 

K K atm kg/s % m/s kg/hr f 

291 289 0.96 1.39 0.23 88.1 249 • 0.0489 

291 291 0.61 1.39 0.63 34.8 249 0.0491 290 290 0.44 1.43 1.55 18.1 249 0.0477 

290 290 0.37 1.39 - 13.2 249 0.0489 

291 289 0.33 1.39 - 10.3 249 0.0489 291 289 0.98 2.16 0.48 57.6 376 0.0481 

289 289 0.55 2.16 1.80 18.2 249 0.0314 

290 289 0.44 2.16 2.87 11.6 249 0.0314 291 290 0.99 3.23 1.12 39.8 249 0.0210 

291 289 0.71 3.26 2.27 20.6 249 0.0209 

291 289 0.62 3.26 3.19 15.4 249 0.0209 

292 291 0.59 3.37 3.79 13.6 249 0.0202 

291 289 1.02 5.49 2.91 25.1 249 0.0124 291 287 0.68 5.47 6.57 11.2 376 0.0191 291 289 0.35 2.17 - 7.3 - -291 289 0.40 3.26 - 6.6 - -291 289 0.31 1.39 - 8.9 249 0.0489 291 289 0.37 2.19 4.72 8.2 376 0.0477 

292 293 0.46 3.21 5.73 8.8 376 0.0325 292 290 0.53 3.24 4.36 11.4 376 0.0322 291 287 0.59 5.42 8.73 8.6 376 0.0192 

291 287 0.30 1.41 2.46 8.4 249 0.0482 291 287 0.33 2.17 4.54 6.6 249 0.0314 

291 287 0.31 2.17 5.25 6.0 249 0.0314 

291 287 0.99 3.18 1.02 40.1 249 0.0214 291 287 0.46 3.20 5.33 8.6 249 0.0213 291 287 0.38 3.22 8.02 5.8 249 0.0211 291 286 1.03 5.52 2.88 25.1 249 0.0123 

291 286 0.70 5.52 6.S3 11.8 249 0.0123 

292 286 0.61 5.52 8. '0 8.8 249 0.0123 

291 287 0.36 3.18 - 5.5 - -

291 286 0.51 5.51 - 6.3 - -

Notes: 

1. Lean Blowout, Unless Otherwise Noted 

2. Pressure Blowout 

" 

Light 

Off 

Yes Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Yes 

Yes Yes 

Yes Yes 

-

-

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes Yes Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

-

-

f 

(EQUIV) 

kg/hr 

-

143 161 

-

142 103 

207 

198 

218 

198 197 

177 

182 169 

376 

375 

---

-

-

211.0 200.0 201.5 

210.9 

194.7 

196.2 

186.7 188.6 

198.6 

245.3 

245.9 

• '. Ii 

f 

-

0.0286 0.0313 

-

0.0283 

0.0132 

0.0265 

0.0253 

0.0187 

0.0169 

0.0168 0.0146 0.0092 0.0086 

0.0481 

0.0320 

-

-

-

-

-

0.0415 0.0256 0.0258 0.0184 0.0169 0.0169 0.0094 0.0095 0.0100 0.0214 0.0124 

to 

Notes 

Upstream Ignito

(RS2A) 

2 

2 

Downstream Igni

(RS2B) 

2 I 

Facility Limi

-

... ----.,-............... 
 

 

r 

I 

t. 

,:..:-: 

I:\j 

o 

.... 

Sim1.l1ated 

Flight 

Condition 

Rdg A1t·1 M' 

No. km ,_ p 

1 1.0 0.26 

5 3.4 0.29 

4 5.2 0.33 

3 8.6 0.42 

2 9.3 0.44 

6 1.2 0.33 

8 7.5 0.51 

7 8.1 0.54 

10 1.2 0.39 

12 7.0 0.52 

11 7.8 0.63 

13 2.2 0.55 

15 9.0 0.91 

14 10.1 0.98 

16 9.3 0.44 

17 8.1 0.54 

18 7.8 0.63 19 10.1 0.98 

1'_'-'-_°\ •• .... .... ... 

Table XCI. Altitude Relight Test Results, Configuration RS3. 

Combustor Type - Radial/Axial Staged Fuel Injector - 18 kg/hr Nozzles 

• All Pilot Stage Injectors Fueled 

• Like Configuration R5 Except has 60 F1ameho1ders 

Blowout (1) Combustor Operating Condition w£ Lightoff Attempt wCondition 

TF T3 P3 W PT/V £ c !JJ?/P atm-K/ (EQUIV) Light (EQUIV) 

K K atm kg/s % m/s kg/hr f Off kg/hr f Notes 

298 298 0.93 1.35 0.20 85.2 249 0.0515 Yes 68 0.0140 Downstream 

298 298 0.66 1.35 0.41 43.0 249 0.0516 Yes 73 0.0150 

298 298 0.53 1.35 0.42 27.5 249 0.0516 Yes 85 0.0174 

298 298 0.33 1.35 0.20 10.9 249 0.0516 Yes 114 0.0235 

298 298 0.30 1.35 0.10 8.8 249 0.0516 Yes 134 0.0275 

298 297 0.93 2.32 0.60 49.7 249 0.0300 Yes 98 0.0117 

298 296 0.45 2.32 1.80 11.5 249 0.0300 Yes 130 0.0157 298 297 0.42 2.32 2.06 9.9 249 0.0300 Yes 127 0.0153 

298 296 0.93 3.18 1.13 36.2 249 0.0218 Yes 131 0.0114 

298 295 0.52 3.18 3.18 11.1 249 0.0218 Yes 136 0.0119 298 295 0.48 3.18 3.66 9.7 249 0.0218 Yes 139 0.0121 

298 295 0.94 5.37 3.18 21.4 249 0.0130 Yes 149 0.0077 

298 294 0.66 5.37 6.21 10.8 249 0.0129 Yes 141 0.0073 

298 294 0.63 5.37 6.90 9.9 249 0.0129 Yes 141 0.0073 298 298 0.30 1.35 - 8.8 - - - 251 0.0516 2 

298 297 0.42 2.32 - 9.9 - - - 250 0.0300 2 

298 295 0.48 3.18 - 9.7 - - - 250 0.0218 2 

298 294 0.63 5.37 - 9.9 - - - 249 0.0129 2 

Notes: 

1. Lean Blowout, Unless Otherwise Noted 

2. Pressure Blowout 

___

.... 
, 

t 

tI:i 

o 

Table XCII. Carboning Test Results. 

• 12° Sector Rig, Boattail Shrouded Fuel Nozzle 

• 4.5 Hour Test Cycle with Heqyy·Distillate Fuel 

Swirler Assembly * CSl CS2 CS3 CS4 CS5 CS6 

Configuration Number 

Prima!:Z Swirler 2 Aes' Effective Flow Area, cm 0.645 0.535 0.535 0.755 0.755 0.755 

Swirl Angle, degrees from axial 60 57.5 57.5 37 37 37 

Venturi 

LT, Throat length, em 1.19 1.52 1.19 1.93 1.19 1.02 

DT, Throat diameter, cm 1.91 1.91 1.57 1. 73 1.57 1. 73 

Design Ratios 

AesfA.r 0.226 0.188 0.275 0.322 0.387 0.322 

LTfDT 0.63 0.80 0.76 1.12 0.76 0.59 

Posttest Inspection Results 

Carbon on Fuel Nozzle? Yes Yes No No No Ng 

Carbon on Venturi? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No 

*Development Design for Airblast Fuel Injectors, Carbon Tested in another Program. 

CS7 CS8 

0.923 0.735 

37 37 

1.02 1.02 

1. 73 1. 73 

0.386 0.314 

0.59 0.59 

No No No Yes 

- ---------------- -- - ---

.. 

--

.. 

----

--

----- ""-----' ::...-.J 

........ ___ , ...... ............ ... _ •• _ .............. ..... 
 ,- ---1" 

! 

~ 

L 

r I , 

; 

I 

Reading 

Number 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

r 

,-

! 

1 

 f .

~ 

f 

Table XCIII. Flashback Test Results, Configuration FSl. 

• Like Configuration R3 Except Premix Length of 10.2 cm 

Pressure (Temperature)-(In1et Temperature). Inlet Air Fuel-Air Ratio Loss * Pressure Temperature Actual Flameholders* Air 

Fuel Type Atm K Pilot Main Overall % Design 1 2 3 4 5 6 

JP-5 

JP-5 

JP-S 

JP-S 

JP-S 

JP-5 

JP-S 

JP-S 

JP-5 

JP-S 

JP-5 

JP-S 

JP-S 

JP-S 

JP-S 

JP-S 

JP-S 

JP-S 

JP-S 

JP-5 

JP-S 

JP-S 

JP-S 

JP-S 

9.7 775 0.004 -- 0,004 3.94 

10.1 778 0.004 0.022 0.026 3.78 

9.6 776 0.006 -- 0.006 3.96 

9.5 776 0.006 0.020 0.026 4.02 

11.8 815 0.004 -- 0.004 3.21 

9.5 815 0.004 0.022 0.026 3.98 

9.5 816 0.006 -- 0.006 4.01 

11.8 814 0.006 0.020 0.026 3.25 

9.5 815 0.008 -- 0.008 4.00 

9.6 815 0.008 0.018 0.026 3.90 

9.6 777 0.008 -- 0.008 3.83 

9.S 765 0.008 0.018 0.026 3.93 

12.9 810 0.004 -- 0.004 4.00 

12.9 817 0.004 0.022 0.026 3.87 

12.8 814 0.006 -- 0.006 4.02 

12.9 811 0.006 0.020 0.026 4.00 

12.9 811 0.008 -- 0.008 3.98 

13.0 810 0.008 0.018 0.026 3.98 

15.0 829 0.004 -- 0.004 3.88 

15.0 829 0.004 0.022 0.024 3.94 

15.2 825 0.006 -- 0.006 ~-

IS.2 825 0.006 0.020 0.026 4.31 

14.8 831 0.008 -- 0.008 -- 14.8 831 0.008 0.018 0.026 3.9S 

A ) 

& ) 

0) 

* Thermocouple Locations 

ORIGINAL PAGE 1S 

OF pOOR QUALlTYI 

1.05 449 131 484 147 -2 -4 

1.10 422 105 461 125 -263 -249 

1.06 776 224 768 222 1 1 

1.05 763 205 756 209 -253 -240 

1.02 -- 124 -- -- 2 2 

1.00 -- 108 -- -- -275 -157 

1.01 - 198 -- -- -I -2 

0.98 -- 188 -- -- -265 -262 

1.00 -- 252 -- -- 0 0 

0.98 -- 253 -- -- -251 -256 

0.96 -- 293 -- -- -2 -3 

0.96 -- 270 -- -- -242 -177 

0.99 -- 137 -- -- I 0 

0.97 -- 124 -- -- -256 -238 

0.94 -- 198 -- -- I 2 

0.98 -- 19'/ -- -- -246 -246 

0.97 -- 2SS -- -- 2 0 

0.97 -- 246 -- -- -244 -236 

1.02 -- 122 - -- 2 -- 1.03 -- 97 -- -- -255 -238 

-- -- 12 -- -- 6 -- 1.05 -- 120 -- -- -238 -224 

-- -- 10 -- -- I -- 0.99 -- 54 -- -- -244 -188 

1,3 Gns Thermocouples 

K 

203 

j 
~ 

••••• 

'-~~"==-===.-~~~-"~-.-.~. __ 

-.::.~ 

. .............;....T'~""":""' _____ 

t\:) 

o 

M:>o 

Reading 

Number 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11** 

12 

13 

14 

Fuel Type 

JP-5 

JP-5 

JP-5 

JP-5 

J1'-5 

J1'-5 

J1'-5 

JP-5 

JP-5 

J1'-5 

J1'-5 

JP-5 

J1'-5 

JP-5 

'-~~"'''''''''''' 

.. , .... -.~ . ...---...~ ... --......~"~--.~-~-.... "-

Table XCIV. Flashback Test Results, Configuration FS2. 

• Like Configuration R5 Except Fremix Length = 10.2 cm 

Pressure (Temperature)-(In1et Temperature) 

Inlet Air 

Pressure Temperature 

atm K 

4.8 726 

4.8 730 

4.8 781 

4.8 785 

4.7 806 

4.8 805 

9.5 820 

9.5 820 

12.9 823 

12.9 822 

16.3 818 

9.6 824 

12.9 821 

ll.8 834 

. ; 

Fuel-Air Ratio Loss 

Actual F1ameho1ders* 

Pi·1ot Hain Overall % 'DesIgn 1 2 3 4 5 

0.004 0.017 0.021 3.75 1.17 45 47 409 -132 322 

0.008 0.017 0.025 3.75 1.05 -95 -45 226 -166 205 

0.004 0.019 0.023 3.80 1.09 -67 -21 227 -188 205 

0.008 0.0l9 0.027 3.66 1.05 21 27 441 -134 362 

0.004 0.0l9 0.023 3.77 1.07 -54 -12 227 -182 204 

0.008 0.019 0.027 3.71 1.07 41 46 434 -140 336 

0.004 0.022 0.026 3.96 0.98 24 49 259 -162 255 

0.008 0.018 0.026 4.06 0.93 134 136 483 -81 410 

0.004 0.022 0.026 4.00 1.00 34 34 63 -127 249 

0.008 0.018 0.026 3.95 0.93 134 154 601 -23 540 

0.004 0.022 0.026 3.98 0.76 97 131 333 333 325 

0.008 0.018 0.026 4.04 0.48 184 204 615 -19 592 

0.008 0.018 0.026 4.02 0.42 164 203 634 -10 594 

0.008 0.018 0.026 3.52 0.42 170 179 638 4 599 

r- ---) + 2X lX 

6 X ~ :fci 

r--=:J +X9 XS X 7 

C----o) 

3,5 Gas Thermocouples 

* Thermocouple Locations ** Pressure Drop Indicates Liner Failure Occurred at this Condition 

1 

... 

--""'~~.~~.i 

.• ' __ .".'_"'--'-"--~""""'~_--'_~_""""""'''''''''''''''' 

" ~ ~ • 

6 

ll8 

79 

79 

139 

79 

129 

94 

158 

91 

221 

131 

250 

257 

264 

7 8 

- -143 

- -186 

- -192 

- -129 

- -190 

- -105 

- -19 

- 54 

- 38 

- 156 

- 56 

- 84 

- 80 

- 92 ~ K 

9 

88 

48 

39 

98 

33 

86 

52 

li8 

78 

167 

105 

167 

171 

172 
Reading 

Number Fuel Type 

1 JP-5 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 Blend B 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 ** 14 

15 

16 JP-5 

i 

I 

1· 

17 1 18 

19 

Table XCV. Flashback Test Results, Configuration FS3. 

Pressure (Tempcrnture)- (Inlet Temperature), K 

Inlet Air Fuel-Air Ratio Loss 

Prc/3sure Temperature Act! Flameholders* Air+ 

Atm K Pilot Main Overall 1- Des. 1 2 3 4 5 0 7 8 9 

3.0 434 0.0045 0 0.0045 -- -- 292 274 272 229 174 131 132 -6 -6 

11.8 632 0.0041 0 0.0041 3,87 1.03 108 106 91 90 68 11 58 -12 -10 

9.7 820 0.0037 a 0.0037 3.92 0,99 87 87 72 78 58 -79 58 -24 -24 

9.7 822 0,0037 0,0177 0,0214 3,90 0,99 12 2 79 89 -27 -65 50 -21 -53 

9.7 820 0.0075 0.0140 0.0215 3.78 0.95 144 131 187 190 43 -15 102 -23 -71 

9,7 820 0,0037 0,0176 0,0213 4.06 1,01 29 20 69 81 -26 -45 44 -71 -56 

9.6 820 0,0077 0,0144 0.0221 3,76 0,99 127 113 198 201 49 -32 103 -59 -78 

9,6 822 0,0038 0 0,0038 4,02 1.02 106 120 82 94 68 -2 81 -21 -11 

13,0 824 0,0039 0 0,0039 3,92 0,93 108 122 88 102 71 49 81 -13 -11 

13,2 819 0.0037 0.0178 0.0215 3.87 1.01 16 17 72 83 -19 -148 58 -25 -39 

13,0 823 0,0075 0.0144 0.0219 3.86 0.99 152 144 201 211 70 -43 135 -38 -54 

16.1 830 0.0041 0 0.0041 3,73 1.01 104 113 76 84 58 17 64 -13 -13 

16.2 825 0.0053 0,0151 0,0204 2,82 0.77 67 54 64 117 23 0 69 -18 -32 

16.1 823 I 0.0078 0.0145 0,0223 3.62 0.93 -36 149 66 206 151 -6 117 -22 -34 

16.5 821 0,0059 0.0166 0,0225 3,25 0,84 227 219 175 180 133 2 122 -22 -10 

15.9 825 0.0079 0.0140 0,0219 3.44 0.88 Out 206 100 204 190 50 87 -104 -33 

16.1 826 0,0080 0.0148 0,0228 3.33 0,87 Out 219 129 224 203 26 79 -77 -43 

15.6 829 0,0079 0,0149 0.0228 3,65 0.87 Out 202 62 179 223 -21 77 -56 -39 

13,4 827 0.0067 0,0123 0,0190 3,86 0.79 Out 172 22 158 106 6 65 -31 -73 

) 

) 

0) 

* Thermocouple Locations 

** Pressure Drop Indicates Burnout Occurred at this Condition 

g~POoGINA.I; PAGE IS ~J . R QUALITY 

SAE 

6mo),e 

Number 

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

4.9 

--

--

6.3 

--

--

5.6 

--

1,7 

205 

'r i 

, 
1--

Symbol 

Ae 

/I.e . s 

AT 

CO 

CO 2 

DT 

ET 

EPAI' 

f 

It 

HC 

P '3 or PT 3 

P3.9 or PT).9 

T3 

T3.9 

i1Tlocal 

1\'1' average 

2 Of) 

r 

NOMENCLATURE 

Quality 

Effective flow area (geometric area X area 

coefficien t) 

Swirler effective area 

Primary swirler venturi throat area 

Carbon monoxide pollutant emission 

Carbon dioxide emission. 

Primary swirler venturi throat diameter 

Emission index 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Emission Parameter 

Total combustor metered fuel-air' ratio 

Main stage metered fuel-air ratio 

Pilot stage metered fuel-air ratio 

Sample fuel-air ratio, determined from 

gas analysis 

Combustor inlet air humidity 

Total unburned hydrocarbon pollutant 

emission 

Length from primary swirler vane exit to 

venturi throat 

Aircraft flight mach number 

Total oxides of nitrogen pollutant 

emission 

Combustor inlet total pressure 

Combustor exit total pressure 

Combustor inlet total temperature 

Combustor exit total temperature 

Local combustor temperature rise 

(T - T ) 3.9,local 3,average 

Average combustor temperature rise 

(T - T ) 3.9,average 3,average 

Combustor reference velocity 

Compressor discharge airflow rate 

Units 

cm 

2 

cm 

2 

cm 

cm 

g/kg fuel 

lbs emission/ 

1000 lb thrust - hrs 

cm 

atm 

atm 

K 

K 

K 

K 

m/s 

kg/s 

: « 

r~-­

i 

, 
r c- _. 

I ... ~. 

, 

, 

.. ,J 

[ 

r 

1~ 

r '" . ~ 

~ ... ,. 

W h 

~ " 

:1 

~ • 

" 

, 

.. 

\ 

l 

l 

--... 

S~llIbol 

We 

Wr 

Wr 

III 

Wr p 

Wf t 

tI 

NOMENCLATURE (Concluded) 

Quantity 

Combustor airflow rate 

Fuel flow rate 

Main stage fuel flow rate 

Pilot stage fuel flow rate 

Total combustor fuel flow rate 

Combustion efficiency 

Units 

kg/s 

kg/hr 

kg/hr 

kg/hr 

kg/hr 

I 

j 

1 

, 

1 

1 

, 

j 

1 

i 

1 

1 

1 

I 

i 

I 

I 

J 

207 
r 

f b.: 

Ai 

----[ 

1

I 

RE'FERENCES 

1. "Aircraft Emissions: Impact on Air Quality and Feasibility of Control, II 

U.S. Ji;nv.ironmentul Protection Agency, July 1973. 

2. "Control of Air Pollution from Aircraft and Aircraft Engines," U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Register Volume 38, Numher 136, 

July 1973. 

J. Grobecker, A.J.; "Presentation to the Second Conference on the Climatic 

Impact Assessment Program," U.S. Department of Transportation, November 

1972. 

4. Grobecker, A.J.; Coroniti, S.C.; and Cannon, R.H., Jr.; "Report of 

Findings - The Effects of Stratospheric Pollution by Aircraft, 

Executive Summary," U,S. Department of Transportation, DOT-TST-75-50, 

December 1974. 

5. Niedzwiecki, R.H. and Jones, R.E.; "The Experimental Clean Combustor 

Program - Description and Status," NASA 'I'M X-71547, May 1974. 

6. Bahr, D.~.J. and Gleason, C.C.; "Experimental Clean Combustor Program, 

Phase I Final Report," NASA-CR-134737, June 1975. (basic program) 

7. Emmerling, J. J.; "Experimental Clean Combustor Program, Noise Heasurement Addendum, Phase I Final Report," NASA-CR-134853, July 1975. 

8. Emmerling, J. J., "Exp~rimenta1 Clean Combustor Program, Noise Measurement 

Addendum, Phase II Final Report," NASA-CR-135045. 

9. r.1ea~on, C.C., and Bahr, D.W.; "Experimental Clean Combustor Program, 

Alternate Fuels Addendum, NASA-CR-134972. 

10. I'Procedure for the Continuous Sampling and Measurement of Gaseous 

Emissions from Aircraft Turbine Engines," SAE Aerospace Recommended 

Practice 1256, October 19 n. 

20H 

i 

. 

t'