JT9D INDIVIDUAL ENGINE

PERFORMANCE MODELLING
Sakhr Abu Darag1 and Tomas Gronstedt2
Received Oct. 2005, accepted after revision March. 2006

ABSTRACT
The aim of this work is to pick out the best cycle design point, which gives the desired
power. The selection has been done by employing numerical optimization algorithms, that
produce a single cycle and fulfils all constrains.
To build up the engine model, we estimate just six performance parameters. The search
method that has been used here is the SQP method (Sequential Quadratic program). Results
show very good agreement for the thrust (fn), fan rotational speed and high pressure
compressor rotational speed. Also the results represent very good agreement for pressure
parameters pt3, ps4 and pt7. By contrast the maximum disagreement does not exceed
3.75% for the exit temperature (tt7).

Keywords: gas turbine, Airbus A310, optimization technique, sequential quadratic program.

Nomenclature
comp Compressor
GA Genetic Algorithm
fn Total thrust[N]
n1 Fan rotation speed[rev/s]
n2 High pressure compressor rotation
speed[rev/s]
pt3 Stagnation pressure at booster
outlet[Pa]
ps4 Static pressure at hpc outlet[Pa]
pt7 Stagnation pressure in hot nozzle[Pa]
rc Pressure ratio
SQP Sequential Quadratic program
TIT Turbine inlet temperature[k]
tt7ha Stagnation temp. at harness[k]
tt2 Stagnation temp. at fan inlet [k]
tt3 Stagnation temp. at booster outlet[k]
tt4 Stagnation temp. at hpc outlet[k]
turb Turbine
W Power
c Isentropic efficiency
1. INTRODUCTION
During preliminary design, pressure ratios and
temperatures required to give the desired
engine power is determined. When such
calculations have been made for a range of
parameters, the most suitable design for a
particular application may be chosen. From
1
SUST, Aeronautical Engineering Dept., P.O. Box 72, Khartoum, Sudan.
2
CTH, Thermo and Fluid Dynamics Dept. SE-41 296, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Sudan Engineering Society JOURNAL,
this engine it is then possible to design the
individual components of the engine so that
the complete unit will give the required
performance when the engine is running at the
design point. The design point thus refers to
the running at a particular speed, pressure ratio
and mass flow, for which the components
were designed. The remaining simulation
problem is then to model the performance
variation of the gas turbine over the complete
operating range, i.e. variation of flight speed
and power output. This task is normally
referred to as off-design performance
calculation.
2. OBJECTIVE
The main objective of the paper is to model
the individual performance of JT9D-7R4E1
engine to pick out the desired thermodynamics
design point. The JT9D engine illustrated in
Figure 1 represents the first large, high-bypass
ratio turbofan used for commercial transport
such as Airbus A310. The method uses
measured data to estimate the optimal set of
parameters. This is achieved by an
optimization technique. The tool to achieve
this uses a non-linear steady state, generic gas
turbine model. The program includes many
optimization methods for solving this problem.
May 2006, Volume 52 No.46 49
3. PERFORMANCE MODEL
ESTIMATION TECHNIQUES
Here, a particular design and off-design
problem is studied, namely to find the cycle
with an off-design agreement that optimally
matches the measured data. Thus the question
that arises is: What is the best thermodynamic
cycle design point? Actually, selecting the best
cycle, is an optimisation task which can be
approached by two ways, one can rely on
carrying out a series of parameter variations
and pick out, from the resulting graphs, the
best solution. The other approach employs
numerical optimisation algorithms. The second
method has been applied here. This was done
because selecting the thermodynamic cycle to
optimally agree with measured data based on
parameter variation is too much time
consuming for a complex engine such as a
JT9D.
When more than a few variables have to be
determined, numerical optimisation routines
can help to find the optimum faster and with
greater accuracy. The simulation tool used to
find the optimal cycle is the GESTPAN
program. This tool includes several different
search methods such as GA:s methods, SQP
(Sequential Quadratic program) and recently
the Levenberg Marquardt method.
4. PROBLEM FORMULATION
The relation between the measuring
parameters and performance parameters can be
formulated by the function:
z = h( x, w) + v ... (1) scaling
where [z ] is the measured parameters. These
depend non-linearly on the design point
parameter vector x and the engine rating and
ambient conditions w , through the function h .
The function v is the measurement noise
model.
By this formula we can obtain the relation for
optimal estimation of the design point
parameter vector [x] which can be defined by
the minimization of the following objective
function:
50 Sudan Engineering Society JOURNAL, May 2006, Volume 52 No.46
2
z i , j hi ( x, w j )
i =1 j =1 z
n m
f ( x) = i, j i . (2)
m.n
where m is the number of off design
conditions, and n is the number of measured
signals. i represents the standard deviation
of the i:th measurement. The measuring
instrument error has been neglected. The
formulation is the same as used by Gronstedt
[1].
5. IDENTIFIABILITY PROBLEM
Assessing the performance of a gas turbine
system is faced by a number of difficulties. A
part from engine to engine variations, it is
appreciated that the performance of the engine
components will degrade over time and that
rig testing inevitably will be influenced by
measurement noise and measurement biases.
Furthermore, the relation between
measurements and the performance parameters
is non-linear, which introduces a number of
additional difficulties. Another aspect
contributes in assessment difficulty is the
instrumentation of the engine may be
relatively poor. To address this identifiability
problem arising due to the lack of sensor
information, a method using a multi-point
technique has been used. This technique
models the engine component performance
through the use of a small number of key
performance variables, either by scaling maps
distributed by the engine manufacture or by
generalized models. These
performance parameters are then selected in
such away that the agreement with model data
(computed through design and subsequent off-
design evaluations) and measured data is
optimized in a nonlinear least square sense.
The simulation has been conducted with
general transient and steady state code
GESTPAN.
6. IDENTIFIABILITY THEORY
A local quadratic approximation of the
objective function around the point x as given
in [2] is:
f ( x + x) f ( x) + f ( x) T x 7. GPA TOOL LAYOUT
1 .. (3) Figure 2, which considered by Gronstedt [3]
+ x T 2 f ( x)x
2 represents the principal schematic of the gas
path tool.
where x is a non-zero perturbation of x .
The thermodynamics design point can be
The expressions f ( x) T and 2 f ( x) are calculated directly through the preliminary
normally referred to as the gradient and the design procedure using the relation between
Hessian of f in x . The gradient is defined as: the pressure ratios and temperatures at the inlet
T
and outlet of each component of the engine.
f f These relations were described by Cohen in
f ( x ) = , , . (4)

1x x nx [4]. When performing cycle calculations,
values of c and t will be assumed and the
The Hessian is defined as the n x n x matrix temperature equivalents of the work transfers
with elements: for a given pressure ratio are then found as
2 f follows:
f ( x) i , j
2
= .. (5)
xi x j tt 2 tt 3'
tt 3 tt 2 = 1 . (9)
If it is assumed that x is a point where a c tt 2
minimum of the goal function occurs.
The gradient will vanish in that point and a ( 1)
local model of f is then: tt2 pt3
tt3 tt2 = 1 . (10)
c pt2

f ( x + x) f ( x) +
1 T 2
x f ( x)x . (6)
2
It is required for the existence of a local where tt2 and tt3 are compressor inlet and
minimum that the gradient is zero. outlet stagnation temperatures respectively.
Furthermore, the eigenvalues (1 , 2 , , nx ) pt2 and pt3 are compressor inlet and outlet
stagnation pressures respectively.
of the Hessian matrix can be directly related to
the lengths of the half-axes of the hyper ( 1)
ellipsoid in the nx-dimensional parameter 1

space. The ellipsoid is defined by a constant
tt5 tt6 = t tt5 1 (11)
pt
5 / pt6
f ( x + x) = C ... (7)

The directions of the half-axes of the ellipsoid where tt5 and tt6 are turbine inlet and outlet
are given by the eigenvectors stagnation temperatures. Pt5 and pt6 are
(v1 , v 2 , , v nx ) and the lengths are given by: turbine inlet and outlet stagnation pressures
respectively.
1
i = 1,2,, n x ... (8) The off-design characteristics of the individual
i
components can be obtained either from actual
The eigenvectors of the Hessian in general will tests or previous experience.
be linear combinations of the gas turbine Thus, the parameter estimation procedure
parameters, which means that the solution catches the cycle with an off-design agreement
effected by a particular parameter. that optimally matches the measured data.
To idle this effect, the components of the
eigenvectors of the problem must be
considered.

Sudan Engineering Society JOURNAL, May 2006, Volume 52 No.46 51

8. RESULTS
Table 1 represents the exact values obtained at
the design point for the performance
parameters.
Figures from 3 to 11 show the fitting
agreement between the measured data and
modeling parameters. Figure 3 represents very
good agreement for the thrust (fn). By contrast
Figure 4 represents an error of about 3.75% for
the exit temperature (tt7), which is not
reasonable. Figure 5 shows the error for the
inlet temperature (tt3) of the high-pressure
compressor, which is about 0.66% off the
measured data, whereas Figure 6 represents
the fitting agreement for the combustion
chamber inlet temperature(tt4) , which has an
error of about 2.6% .
According to Figures 7, 8 and 9 these results
represent very good agreement for pressure
parameters pt3, ps4 and pt7. The last two
Figures 10 and 11, for fan rotational speed and
high pressure compressor rotational speed
indicate an accurate fitting agreement.
9. ANALYSIS
From the measurement data files [5], one can
conclude that there was a problem with the
measuring probes for the exit temperature.
This causes a too high spread around the mean
value. This problem will affect the modeling
process and the only way to manage and avoid
this problem is to assume a high weight for tt7
in the least square method matching.
From the results it is clear that only six
performance parameters have been estimated,
which should be reasonable compared with the
total number of variables. The problem is that
we get stuck every time on a boundary when
we try to estimate more than six variables. The
search method that has been used here is the
SQP method. This is done in accordance with
the extensive work on the PW100 engine
which indicated a uni-modal function search
space. Thus, the use of GA:s is a waste of time
[6].
Actually, the engine is very difficult to model
due to many design variables and also it is a
turbofan with high a by-pass ratio which
means that more information should be
required. However there is a lack of detailed
52 Sudan Engineering Society JOURNAL, May 2006, Volume 52 No.46
information on measurement data. For
example the thrust is the sum of the nozzle one
and nozzle two without any specification
about individual thrusts. Since the nozzle one
thrust is controlled by the fan pressure ratio
and at the same time the fan is rotated with the
low pressure turbine, it is evident that there is
also an effect by the low pressure turbine
efficiency on the thrust split.
10. CONCLUSION
1. The attempt to model this engine indicates
that problem complexity is substantially
greater than posed by the PW100 and the
Whittle engine.
2. The results indicate good matching with
the measurement data at off-design points.
Also, the estimated parameters are within
their desired bounds.
3. The simulation tool includes several
gradient based methods that work
efficiency for gas turbine performance
estimation. If gradient based methods fail,
Genetic Algorithms are a viable but a
frequently time consuming alternative.
REFERENCES
1. Tomas U. J. Gronstedt, Identifiability in
Multi-Point Gas Turbine Parameter
Estimation Problems, ASME Turbo Expo:
Land, Sea and Air, 3-6 June 2002
Amsterdam, 2002
2. Stephen G. Nash, Ariela Sofer, Linear and
Nonlinear programming, International
Editions, 1996
3. Gronstedt, U. T. J. A Multi-point gas path
analysis tool for gas turbine engines with a
moderate level of instrumentation, 15th
International Symposium on Air Breathing
Engines, Bangalore, India, Sept 3-7, 2001
4. H Cohen, GFC Rogers, HIH
Saravanamuttoo, Gas Turbine Theory, 4TH
Edition 1996.
5. Acceptance Test Report Matrxopt Y/LS,
Aerovolvo, 2002, Sweden.
6. Patrik Skolde, 2003, Model development in
GESTPAN, Master Thesis, Chalmers
University.
 Table1: Performance Parameters Estimated
Parameter Value Lower Upper
rc comp -1 1.41973 1.30000 1.80000
rc comp -2 1.52432 1.40000 1.90000
rc comp -3 9.26467 7.00000 10.50000
c comp -1 0.83412 0.80000 0.90000
c turb -1 0.892017 0.75000 0.90000
c turb -2 0.868969 0.75000 0.92000

Figure1: JT9D-7R4E1

GA or gradient
optimizer
x-vector:
f(x)
c, rc
TIT, m, mc
Objective function
evaluation Thermodynamic design

Off-design evaluation
W1 W2 WM-1 WM

OFF-DESIGN OFF-DESIGN OFF-DESIGN OFF-DESIGN

POINT NO 1 POINT NO M 2 POINT NO M-1 POINT NO M

Figure2: Gas Path Tool

Sudan Engineering Society JOURNAL, May 2006, Volume 52 No.46 53

 810

tt4 (K)
220000
fn (N) Modeled Data
Modeled Data
215000 800
Measured Data Measured Data
210000 790

205000 780
200000
770
195000
760
190000
750
185000
740
180000 0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4 Off-design Points
Off-design Points

Figure 3: Thrust for Three Off-design Figure 6: Combustion Chamber Inlet

Points Temperature for Three Off-design Points
tt3 (K)

380
240000

Pt3 (Pa)
Modeled Data
378 Modeled Data
Measured Data 235000 Measured Data
376
230000
374
225000
372

370 220000

368 215000

366 210000
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Off-design Points Off-design Points

Figure 7: Stagnation Pressure at Booster

Figure 5: High Pressure Compressor Inlet Outlet for Three Off-design Points
Temperature for Three Off-design Points
2350000
ps4 (Pa)

860 Modeled Data

tt7ha (K)

Modeled Data 2300000

Measured Data
850 Measured Data 2250000
840
2200000
830
2150000
820
2100000
810
2050000
800

790 2000000
0 1 2 3 4
780 Off-design Points
770
0 1 2 3 4 Figure 8: Static Pressure at High Pressure
Off-design Points
Compressor Outlet for Three Off-design
Figure 4: Exit Temperature for Three Off- Points
design Points

54 Sudan Engineering Society JOURNAL, May 2006, Volume 52 No.46

 p t7 (P a) 150000 126

n2 (r/s)
Modeled Data Modeled Data
148000
125 Measured Data
146000 Measured Data
144000 124
142000 123
140000
138000 122
136000 121
134000 0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4 Off-design Points
Off-design Points
Figure 11: High Pressure Compressor
Figure 9: Stagnation Pressure in Hot Rotational Speed for Three Off-design
Nozzle for Three Off-design Points Poin

57
n1 (r/s)

Modeled Data
56 Measured Data

55
54

53
52
0 1 2 3 4
Off-design Points

Figure 10: Fan Rotational Speed for Three

Off-design Points

Sudan Engineering Society JOURNAL, May 2006, Volume 52 No.46 55