(546l) Suitability of Alternative Aviation Fuels to Modern Aircraft: Impact of Fuel Composition on Liquid Phase Oxidation and Deposit Growth in Aircraft Fuel Systems

The aviation sector has undergone major changes in the recent years to adapt to environmental, economic and energy context. This led, in one hand, to the increasing use of alternative fuels as a means to diversify the energy sources and reduce the environmental impact of aviation and, in the other hand, to the development of high-performance combustion systems which involve more severe thermodynamic conditions. These evolutions were however accompanied by a more frequent occurrence of fuel deterioration and injection system durability issues [1-3]. This poster proposes a study of liquid-phase reactivity of aviation fuels. 21 different conventional and alternative jet fuels were selected. Deposit growth was measured on a heated metal surface as a function of surface temperature from 255 to 380°C using the Jet Fuel Thermal Oxidation Tester associated to thickness measurement by advanced optical interferometry tube rating. Results show a significant impact of fuel composition on the rate of deposit build-up especially the content and the molecular structure of aromatics [4-5]. Additionally, the study proposes an original global kinetic model to represent the growth of deposit function of temperature and residence time. The model allows to represent adequately the growth of deposit in a large temperature range using few number of tests and to rapidly determine the critical breakpoint temperature. These results encourage further developments towards fit-for-purpose formulations of future alternative jet fuels.

[1] US Energy Information Administration,” ISBN 9780160933332.

[2] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCC, ISBN 978-1-107-65481-5, 2014.

[3] Benini, E., ISBN 978-953-307-611-9, 2011.

[4] Matthew J. DeWitt, Zachary West, et al., Energy & Fuels 28(6):3696–3703, 2014, doi:10.1021/ef500456e.

[5] Arij Ben Amara, Skander Kaoubi et al. «Fuel 173:98–105, 2016, doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2016.01.040.