@inproceedings{FunkeBeckmannStefanetal.2023,
  author    = {Funke, Harald and Beckmann, Nils and Stefan, Lukas and Keinz, Jan},
  title     = {Hydrogen combustor integration study for a medium range aircraft engine using the dry-low NOx "Micromix" combustion principle},
  series = {Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo 2023: Turbomachinery Technical Conference and Exposition. Volume 1: Aircraft Engine.},
  booktitle = {Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo 2023: Turbomachinery Technical Conference and Exposition. Volume 1: Aircraft Engine.},
  publisher = {ASME},
  address   = {New York},
  isbn      = {978-0-7918-8693-9},
  doi       = {10.1115/GT2023-102370},
  pages     = {12 Seiten},
  year      = {2023},
  abstract  = {The feasibility study presents results of a hydrogen combustor integration for a Medium-Range aircraft engine using the Dry-Low-NOₓ Micromix combustion principle. Based on a simplified Airbus A320-type flight mission, a thermodynamic performance model of a kerosene and a hydrogen-powered V2530-A5 engine is used to derive the thermodynamic combustor boundary conditions. A new combustor design using the Dry-Low NOx Micromix principle is investigated by slice model CFD simulations of a single Micromix injector for design and off-design operation of the engine. Combustion characteristics show typical Micromix flame shapes and good combustion efficiencies for all flight mission operating points. Nitric oxide emissions are significant below ICAO CAEP/8 limits. For comparison of the Emission Index (EI) for NOₓ emissions between kerosene and hydrogen operation, an energy (kerosene) equivalent Emission Index is used. A full 15° sector model CFD simulation of the combustion chamber with multiple Micromix injectors including inflow homogenization and dilution and cooling air flows investigates the combustor integration effects, resulting NOₓ emission and radial temperature distributions at the combustor outlet. The results show that the integration of a Micromix hydrogen combustor in actual aircraft engines is feasible and offers, besides CO₂ free combustion, a significant reduction of NOₓ emissions compared to kerosene operation.},
  language  = {en}
}
@techreport{EschFunkeRoosen2010,
  author    = {Esch, Thomas and Funke, Harald and Roosen, Petra},
  title     = {SIoBiA - Safety Implications of Biofuels in Aviation},
  publisher = {EASA},
  address   = {K{\"o}ln},
  pages     = {279 Seiten},
  year      = {2010},
  abstract  = {Biofuels potentially interesting also for aviation purposes are predominantly liquid fuels produced from biomass. The most common biofuels today are biodiesel and bioethanol. Since diesel engines are rather rare in aviation this survey is focusing on ethanol admixed to gasoline products. The Directive 2003/30/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of May 8th 2003 on the promotion of the use of biofuels or other renewable fuels for transport encourage a growing admixture of biogenic fuel components to fossil automotive gasoline. Some aircraft models equipped with spark ignited piston engines are approved for operation with automotive gasoline, frequently called "MOGAS" (motor gasoline). The majority of those approvals is limited to MOGAS compositions that do not contain methanol or ethanol beyond negligible amounts. In the past years (bio-)MTBE or (bio-)ETBE have been widely used as blending component of automotive gasoline whilst the usage of low-molecular alcohols like methanol or ethanol has been avoided due to the handling problems especially with regard to the strong affinity for water. With rising mandatory bio-admixtures the conversion of the basic biogenic ethanol to ETBE, causing a reduction of energetic payoff, becomes more and more unattractive. Therefore the direct ethanol admixture is accordingly favoured. Due to the national enforcements of the directive 2003/30/EC more oxygenates produced from organic materials like bioethanol have started to appear in automotive gasolines already. The current fuel specification EN 228 already allows up to 3 \% volume per volume (v/v) (bio-)methanol or up to 5 \% v/v (bio-)ethanol as fuel components. This is also roughly the amount of biogenic components to comply with the legal requirements to avoid monetary penalties for producers and distributors of fuels. Since automotive fuel is cheaper than the common aviation gasoline (AVGAS), creates less problems with lead deposits in the engine, and in general produces less pollutants it is strongly favoured by pilots. But being designed for a different set of usage scenarios the use of automotive fuel with low molecular alcohols for aircraft operation may have adverse effects in aviation operation. Increasing amounts of ethanol admixtures impose various changes in the gasoline's chemical and physical properties, some of them rather unexpected and not within the range of flight experiences even of long-term pilots.},
  language  = {en}
}