Applied Thermal Engineering 127 (2017) 1372–1381

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng

Research Paper

Experimental and theoretical study on a novel energy-saving ECS for

commercial airliners
Han Yang, Xingjuan Zhang ⇑, Chao Wang, Chunxin Yang
School of Aeronautic Science and Engineering, Beihang University, Beijing, China

h i g h l i g h t s

A novel energy-saving environmental control system is proposed.

The new system can save 35.2 kW of input power based on the theoretical analysis.

Tests at different flight altitudes confirm the feasibility of the proposed system.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: With the advancement of the design requirements for more electric airliners, subsystems such as the
Received 12 April 2017 environmental control system (ECS) are transforming from the traditional bleed engine driven style to
Revised 20 July 2017 the electrically driven type. Aiming at the electrically-driven ECS of the Boeing 787 dream airliner, in this
Accepted 8 August 2017
study, a novel energy-saving scheme for recovering power from the cabin-discharged air and convert it
Available online 10 August 2017
into shaft work to pre-pressurize fresh air is proposed. The thermodynamic parameters are analyzed by
using the enthalpy method. Compared with the B787 scheme, the proposed method can save 66.2% of the
Keywords:
input power and increase the coefficient of performance (COP) from 0.309 to 0.915. We use the take-off
Electrically-driven environmental control
system
gross weight method to evaluate the effects of the two schemes on the aircraft fuel penalty loss. The
Discharged air results show that the penalty loss difference between the power recovery and thrust recovery is less than
Energy saving 15 kg, and thus the overall impact on the aircraft can be ignored. A test platform using a turbocharger on
an automobile is built to test the performance of the power-recovery unit under different simulated flight
altitudes. The experimental results show that the turbocharger can recover shaft power in the range of
2.2–10.1 kW and that power is easily recovered via the novel energy-saving scheme.
Ó 2017 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

1. Introduction airliners A330–A380—use engine bleed air as an energy source to

Generally, commercial airliners cruise at an altitude of 10 km,
where the pressure is approximately 26.5 kPa and the temperature
is approximately 223.3 K for the standard atmosphere. To satisfy
the needs of human health and comfort, environmental control
systems (ECSs) are used to maintain the appropriate cabin pres-
sure, temperature, humidity, air quality, etc. According to the pro-
visions of FAR [1], the pressurized cabin altitude must be kept at no
less than 8000 ft (2438 m) at all flight altitudes; that is, the cabin
pressure must be no less than 76 kPa. Therefore, under the cruise
condition, large pressure difference (no less than 50 kPa) exists
between the inside and the outside of the cabin. Currently, most
civil airliners—such as Boeing airliners B747–B767 and Airbus
⇑ Corresponding author at: New Main Building C-1023, Beihang University, 37
Xueyuan Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100191, China.
E-mail address: zhangxingjuan@buaa.edu.cn (X. Zhang).
run the ECS [2–6]. Bleed air is introduced to the ECS and cooled/
depressurized before being fed to the cabin. Generally, some of
the air is re-circulated through the system, and the remainder is
dumped overboard [7].
In a conventional aircraft, fuel is converted into power by
engine. Most of this power is used as propulsive power to run
the aircraft, and the majority of the remaining power is used to
drive the ECS [8]. The engine is considered as a highly optimized
gas generator, and there are penalty losses for extracting bleed
air in a disproportionate amount to the power being extracted.
Typically, the ratio of the engine power needed for driving ECS to
aircraft heat load is 10:1. Considering the abolition of bleed air,
electrically driven compressors must be used as a source of air
for the ECS [9]. The Boeing 787 airliner employs an electrically dri-
ven compressor to replace the bleed air from the engine; the ECS
used in this study is also an electrically-driven ECS (EECS). On

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.08.043
1359-4311/Ó 2017 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
 H. Yang et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 127 (2017) 1372–1381
Nomenclature
cp,g specific heat capacity, J/(kgK)
Ce specific fuel consumption, kg/(Nh)
d humidity ratio, g/kgdry air
D drag (positive value) or thrust (negative value), N
g gravitational acceleration, m/s2
G mass flow rate of air, kg/s
h enthalpy, kJ/kg
H cruising altitude, m
Hu calorific value of fuel, kJ/kg
K lift-drag ratio
Ma Mach number
mf,D fuel penalty loss caused by aerodynamic drag, kg
mf,P fuel penalty loss caused by power consumption, kg
N speed, RPM
Q0 cooling capacity, kW
P pressure, kPa
qm,f,P fuel consumption caused by power consumption, kg/h
t temperature, °C
T temperature, K
v velocity, m/s
W power, kW
one hand, the absence of bleed air allows the energy of the engine
to produce thrust. On the other hand, the variable-frequency
adjustable-speed motor optimizes the energy usage. EECS differs
from the conventional bleed-air ECS, which requires high temper-
ature/pressure bleed air to be cooled/depressurized, leading to
large energy losses [10]. It also faces the challenge of generators
with high electrical power consumption. The Boeing 787 has two
250-kVA generators installed on each engine, whereas the B767
has only one 120-kVA generator installed on each engine. The
increased power is mainly used to replace the bleed air for driving
systems in which the EECS consumes a large amount of electricity
[9]. Because of the large amount of electrical power consumed by
the ECS, the size of the generators must be appropriate [2]. There-
fore, it is vital to optimize the energy-utilization mode of the ECS
and make full use of the energy-saving potential of the aircraft.
Although the majority ECS of airliners adopt the reverse Brayton
air cycle, the energy saving methods of Brayton cycle are mainly
concentrated on industrial fields, such as internal combustion
engine. Fu et al. [11] proposed a concept of steam turbocharging
consists of heat exchanger and turbocharger to recover engine
exhaust energy and boost its intake pressure. The power of steam
turbocharging engine can be improved by 7.3% at most on the basis
of exhaust turbocharging engine. Liu et al. [12] studied direct/indi-
rect recovery methods of engine exhaust gas energy recovery and
analyzed the energy recovery potentials for various means of bot-
tom cycles. Furthermore, very few published articles focused on
the cabin exhaust energy recovery. The discharged air of aircraft
in service, including the B787, is dumped directly into the ambient
environment through the outflow valve. This process is likely to
generate thrust. The outflow valve was studied by Xavier via
experimental and numerical methods, and the results showed that
the measured thrust is approximately two thirds of the predicted
value. According to calculations using a corrected three-
dimensional computational fluid dynamics model, approximately
55.5 N of thrust is recovered under the cruising condition, where
the discharged flow rate is 0.353 kg/s [13]. Regarding the recovery
of power from the discharged air, Bernard proposed an ECS for a jet
airplane. In this scheme, the ECS is driven by the cabin discharged
air and ram air; thus, air pollution and energy waste are avoided in
1373
Greek symbols
s0 flight duration, h
ec coefficient of fuel combustion
pc pressure ratio of compressor
pt expansion ratio of turbine
n temperature ratio of turbine inlet temperature to com-
pressor inlet temperature
g efficiency
Subscripts
a stagnation condition
c compressor
e ambient
in input
re recovery
sat saturated condition
t turbine
f fan
v outflow valve
the air-compression process [14]. Inspired by the four-wheel air
cycle system (ACS) with high-pressure water separation [15],
Zywiak proposed a method using the exhaust to expand in an air
cycle machine turbine. The system can reduce the demand for
bleed air pressure [16]. The EECS has avoided the influence of the
bleed air on the engine thrust, energy waste due to excessive pres-
surization, and air pollution. Regarding the B787 EECS, more atten-
tion should be paid to saving energy. Herein, we propose a scheme
using a turbocharger to convert energy in the cabin discharged air
into mechanical energy and pre-supercharge the fresh air for
reducing the electrical power required by the EECS. The thermody-
namic parameters and fuel penalties of the B787 EECS and the pro-
posed scheme are quantitatively analyzed. We perform a test to
confirm the power-recovery working principle, aiming at a more
suitable scheme for application in the design of more electric
aircraft.
2. System description
2.1. B787 EECS
Fig. 1 shows a schematic diagram and the thermal process of
the B787 EECS [17]. The system consists of an electrically driven
compressor and a cooling pack. This study focuses on the refriger-
ation process of the ECS. We ignore the air-quality processes, such
as the ozone conversion in the fresh air and the removal of volatile
organic compounds and particulates from the recirculated air.
Under the cruising condition, ram air (also called fresh air) at a
low temperature and pressure enters the electrically driven com-
pressor C1 and undergoes temperature and pressure increases
(process a–1; in the ideal case, can be seen as an isentropic com-
pression process). The compressed air is cooled in the primary heat
exchanger HX1 (process 1–1a; in the ideal case, can be seen as an
isobaric process) and further compressed in the compressor C2
(process 1a–2; in the ideal case, can be seen as an isentropic com-
pression process). The outlet air enters the secondary heat exchan-
ger HX2 for cooling (process 2–2a; in the ideal case, can be seen as
an isobaric process) and then passes through the hot side of the
regenerator RH and condenser CON, where condensates form (pro-
1374 H. Yang et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 127 (2017) 1372–1381
Fig. 1. B787 EECS.
cess 2–2b–2c; in the ideal case, can be seen as an isobaric process).
After entering the water separator WS (process 2c–2d; in the ideal
case, can be seen as an isobaric process), the collected condensate
is sprayed into the cold side of HX2 to enhance heat transfer effect.
The export dry air undergoes temperature and pressure reductions
in the turbine T1 after passing through the cold side of RH (process
2d–2e–3; in the ideal case, can be seen as an isobaric process and
an isentropic expansion process in turn). The cool air enters the
cold side of the condenser (process 3–3a; in the ideal case, can
be seen as an isobaric process) and then expands in the turbine
T2 (process 3a–4; in the ideal case, can be seen as an isentropic
expansion process), fulfilling the requirements of the ventilated
air temperature and pressure. A mixture of ventilated and recircu-
lated air is supplied to the cabin to absorb the heat load (process 4–
5; in the ideal case, can be seen as an isobaric process). The cabin
exhaust air is divided into two parts: 50% of the exhaust is used as
recirculated air, and the rest is discharged into the atmosphere
though the outflow valve (process 5–6). In the B787 EECS, turbine
T1, T2, and compressor C2 are coaxial; thus, the two turbines drive
C2 jointly. An electronic fan sucks ram air as the heat sink of the
primary heat exchanger and secondary heat exchanger. In actual
application, two parallel electrically driven compressors complete
the supercharge process. In the following analysis, the two parallel
compressors are replaced by one electrically driven compressor.
Compared with the original compressor, the mass flow and power
of the integrated compressor are doubled, but the pressure ratio is
equal. Such a simplification does not affect the system
performance.
2.2. Novel energy-saving ECS
Fig. 2 shows a schematic diagram of the proposed novel energy-
saving ECS, which is hereinafter called the new system. In contrast
to the B787 EECS shown in Fig. 1, in the new system, 50% of the
cabin exhaust air enters a power-recovery turbine T0 (process 5–
6) before being discharged to the ambient environment. During
the process, internal energy is converted into mechanical work to
drive the coaxial compressor C0 to rotate at high speed. Similar
to the cooling pack of the Boeing 787 EECS, fresh air is compressed
in the compressor C0 and further compressed to a high-pressure
and high-temperature state by the compressor C1. The air then
enters the components HX1, C2, HX2, RH, T1, CON, WS, and T2
for the regulation of the temperature and pressure (consistent with
Fig. 1). Compared with the B787 EECS, the new scheme employs a
turbocharger to achieve the recycling and utilization of the exhaust
energy. The pre-compression in the compressor C0 can reduce the
pressure ratio of C1, thereby decreasing the input power of the ECS
and saving considerable energy. The thermodynamic process of the
scheme is shown in Fig. 2(b). The output power of the T0 expansion
process and the input power of the C0 compression process are
indicated by area I (shaded area of 5-6-A-C) and area II (shaded
area of 0-a-A-B), respectively, and are equal under ideal conditions.
3. System analysis
3.1. Thermodynamic calculation
China Southern Airlines Boeing 787 (Guangzhou–Beijing route,
flight time of 3.25 h) was selected to calculate the thermodynamic
performance difference between the two aforementioned systems.
The Boeing 787 airliner features a classic three-cabin layout with
228 seats and a cabin altitude of 1828 m. We used data from the
official websites of Boeing and China Southern Airlines [18,19].
The calculation conditions and aircraft parameters are shown in
Table 1, and the atmospheric parameters refer to the hot atmo-
sphere data of MIL-STD-210 [20]. The fresh air mass flow rate
refers to FAR Part 25 [1], which specifies that each occupant must
have at least 0.55 lb/min (250 g/min) of fresh air. Two sets of EECS
are equipped and can be operated independently; in this study, we
selected one unit for analysis.
Using the enthalpy method, the thermal parameters of the key
points in the ECS were obtained. The method proposed by our
group was previously used for the simulation of a bootstrap ACS,
 H. Yang et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 127 (2017) 1372–1381 1375

Fig. 2. Novel energy-saving ECS.

Table 1
Calculation conditions and aircraft performance parameters.

Parameter Value
Cruising altitude H, m 10,000
Cruising velocity v Ma = 0.85 (251 m/s)
Ambient pressure Pe, kPa 26.5
Ambient temperature Te, K 248.2
Ambient humidity ratio de, g/kgdry air 1.1
Exhaust pressure P5, kPa 85
Exhaust temperature T5, K 308.2
C1 outlet pressure P1, kPa 120
ECS supply pressure P4, kPa >90
ECS supply temperature T4, K <278.2
Fresh air mass flow Gf, kg/s 0.475

a three-wheel ACS, and a four-wheel ACS [21,22]. The enthalpy

method employs a hierarchical calculation and simplifies the
parameter-matching procedure, which is suitable for the compli-
cated ECS. The relevant component models are summarized in
Eqs. (1)–(14). Fig. 3 shows the calculation process. By setting the
specific enthalpy at 0 °C as 0 kJ/kg, we obtain

h ¼ f ðt; d; dsat Þ ð1Þ

The saturated humidity ratio of the moist is
P sat
dsat ¼ 622 ð2Þ
P  Psat
The saturated vapor partial pressure is
7:45t
Psat ¼ 602:4  10235þt ð3Þ
The inlet parameters of fresh air or ram air are

T a ¼ T e  ð1 þ 0:2Ma2 Þ ð4Þ Fig. 3. Calculation flowchart of the enthalpy method.

3:5
Pa ¼ Pe  ð1 þ 0:2Ma2 Þ ð5Þ
hco þ 273:15cp;g 1
¼ 1 þ ðp0:286  1Þ ð8Þ
The enthalpy efficiency and thermal balance of the heat exchan- hci þ 273:15cp;g gc c
ger are
The enthalpy model of the fan is
g ¼ ðhhi  hho Þ=ðhhi  hci Þ ð6Þ
hfo þ 273:15cp;g 1
¼ 1 þ ðp0:286  1Þ ð9Þ
Gh ðhhi  hho Þ ¼ Gc ðhco  hci Þ ð7Þ hfi þ 273:15cp;g gf f
The enthalpy model of the compressor is The enthalpy model of the turbine is
1376 H. Yang et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 127 (2017) 1372–1381

hto þ 273:15cp;g demand for the B787 EECS and the new system are shown in
¼ 1  gt ð1  p0:286 Þ ð10Þ
hti þ 273:15cp;g t
Table 4. The input power of the new system is 35.2 kW lower,
i.e., approximately 66.2%. The models used in the analysis are as
The enthalpy model of the outflow valve is
follows:
hv o þ 273:15cp;g Recovered power W re ¼ W t0 ¼ Gf ðh5  h6 Þ ð15Þ
¼ 1  gv ð1  p0:286
v Þ ð11Þ
hv i þ 273:15cp;g
The enthalpy model of the water separator is Input power W in ¼ W c1 ¼ Gf ðh1  h0 Þ ð16Þ

ho ¼ hi ð12Þ
3.2.2. COP
The power balance of the turbine and compressor is Because of the reduction of the input power, the COP of the new
system is increased from 0.309 to 0.915, by a factor of nearly three.
W c2 ¼ W t1 þ W t2 ð13Þ
The model is as follows:
The power balance of the power-recovery unit is
Q0 Gf ðh5  h4 Þ
Coefficient of performance COP ¼ ¼ ð17Þ
W c0 ¼ W t0 ð14Þ W in W in
Table 2 lists the performance indicators for the key components
required for the thermal calculations. 3.2.3. Aircraft fuel penalty loss
According to the thermal processes and component parameters, In the B787 EECS, the cabin exhaust air is discharged through an
the state parameters of the whole scheme were computed using outflow valve. The generated thrust is calculated using Eq. (18) and
the enthalpy method. The results are shown in Table 3. helps to overcome the aircraft aerodynamic drag.
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
3.2. Performance comparison D ¼ G6 v 6 ¼ G6 2  1000  ðh5  h6 Þ ¼ 183:6N ð18Þ

To investigate the performance of the new system, the analysis

was performed from three viewpoints: the power demand, the
coefficient of performance (COP), and the fuel penalty loss of the
Table 4
aircraft. Comparison of power.

B787 New system

3.2.1. Power demand
Recovered power, kW – 35.6
The new system recovers 35.6 kW of mechanical power for
Input power, kW 53.2 18.0
fresh air pre-pressurization by introducing the power-recovery
device, therefore saving energy. The calculated results of the power Note: ‘‘–”stands for none.

Table 2
Parameters of the key components.

Parameter B787 New system Parameter B787 New system Parameter B787 New system
gc1 0.88 0.88 gCON 0.35 0.35 gt0 – 0.85
gHX1 0.85 0.85 gWS 0.95 0.95 gc0 – 0.88
gc2 0.72 0.72 gt1 0.80 0.80 gv 0.85 –
gHX2 0.82 0.82 gt2 0.77 0.77
gRH 0.51 0.51 gf 0.25 0.25

Note: ‘‘–”stands for none.

Table 3
Thermal parameters of the key points.

Index B787 New system

P, kPa T, K h, kJ/kg P, kPa T, K h, kJ/kg
a 42.5 284.0 13.7 42.5 284.0 13.7
0 – – – 88.02 358.7 89.2
1 120.0 395.4 126.4 120.0 396.3 127.3
1a 118.0 320.7 50.8 118.0 320.9 51.0
2 138.0 341.3 71.7 138.0 341.5 71.9
2a 136.0 294.3 24.2 136.0 294.4 24.2
2b 134.0 290.6 20.4 134.0 290.7 20.4
2c 132.0 287.1 16.8 132.0 287.1 16.8
2d 130.0 287.1 16.8 130.0 287.1 16.8
2e 128.0 290.8 20.6 128.0 290.8 20.6
3 109.3 280.5 10.1 109.3 280.5 10.2
3a 107.3 284.1 13.7 107.3 284.1 13.8
4 90.7 273.7 3.3 90.7 273.8 3.3
5 85.0 308.2 35.4 85.0 308.2 35.4
6 26.5 233.9 39.3 26.5 233.9 39.3

Note: ‘‘–”stands for none.

 H. Yang et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 127 (2017) 1372–1381 1377

Table 5
Performance parameters of GEnx.

pc K Ce, kg/(Nh) Hu, kJ/kg ec n cp,g J/(kgK)

23 20.8 0.052 43,000 0.98 3 1130

Table 6 3.3. Summary of analytical results

Performance penalty analysis.

Penalty loss B787 New system The system performance results are summarized and compared
in Fig. 4. The difference between the fuel penalties of the two sys-
mf,D, kg 32.30 –
mf,P, kg +29.32 +9.92 tems is 12.90 kg; relative to the aircraft weight, this difference is
Total penalty, kg 2.98 +9.92 almost negligible. The novel ECS can achieve significant energy
saving effect, which is more important. On one hand, it reduces
Note: ‘‘–”stands for none.
the demand on the engine power and enhances the self-
maintenance ability. On the other hand, it decreases the perfor-
mance requirements of the electrically driven compressor. As the
key component of the EECS, the electrically driven compressor in
the B787 requires a rigorous design to achieve a high speed, high
pressure ratio, and high power consumption. The pressure ratio
and input power of the compressor C1 are decreased by 51.8%
and 66.2%, respectively, through the power-recovery and pre-
pressurization process.

4. Principle test

4.1. Test platform

For testing and verifying the power-recovery effect of the pro-

posed novel energy-saving system, the ideal method was to man-
ufacture an turbocharger according to the matched results listed
Fig. 4. Performance comparison. in Tables 3 and 4 (gt0 ¼ 0:85, gc0 ¼ 0:88). Considering the develop-
ment cycle, a vehicle turbocharger (Holset HX35W) was selected
All the factors such as thrust, recovered power from the cabin- according to the aircraft ECS ground test bench, and a power-
discharged air and weight of ECS that influence the flight perfor- recovery test platform was established, as shown in Fig. 5. The Hol-
mance of an aircraft can be expressed in terms of fuel penalties set HX35W turbocharger has not been tested at high flight alti-
using the takeoff gross weight method. The influences of thrust tudes by the manufacturer. The test platform consisted of the
and power consumption caused by the two cabin-discharged air following parts: an air source (two 110-kW Sullair-LS20-150L
utilization methods for were compared. Eq. (19) shows the thrust screw air compressors), an HX35W turbocharger, an oil-cooling
penalty in terms of takeoff fuel weight [23], which is related to system (turbocharger bearing cooling), a vacuum system (simu-
specific fuel consumption, lift-drag ratio and flight duration. Eq. lates the pressure condition at different flight altitudes; included
(20) shows the power penalty in terms of takeoff fuel weight a vacuum chamber, four NAHA-2BE1 vacuum pumps, some valves,
[23]. In addition to the above factors, relevant factors include the etc.), a data acquisition system (used to obtain the thermal param-
characteristic parameters of engine combustion. Table 5 shows eters; included mass flow, pressure, and temperature measure-
the parameters of the GEnx engine for the B787 [24,25]. In the ment device, data gathering module, computer, etc.). Fig. 6 shows
respect of system weight, the new proposed system reduces the photos of the test platform.
weight of electrically driven compressor, removes the outflow The test steps were as follows. Air flowed through the valve
valve, and adds a turbocharger compared with the B787 EECS. MV1 to regulate the mass flow; entered the turbine of HX35W,
The total weight change has not been taken into consideration where it expanded; and finally flowed into the vacuum chamber.
for the penalty loss calculation at present, and it would be evalu- The outlet pressure of the turbine was regulated by adjusting the
ated in the detailed design phase. vacuum pump or adjusting the valve MV2 to change the turbine
   
DK C e s0 g outlet resistance coefficient, thus simulating different flight alti-
mf ;D ¼ exp 1 ð19Þ
g K tudes. The mass flow of the turbine was measured by the flow
meter G1. The inlet and outlet temperature and pressure were
   
qm;f ;P K C e s0 g measured by the temperature sensor T1/T2 and pressure sensor
mf ;P ¼ exp 1 ð20Þ P1/P2, respectively. Using the data from G1, T1, and T2, the turbine
Ceg K
output power W t was calculated. The turbocharger speed was
where measured by a remote laser sensor.
2:94cp;g n Considering that the purpose of the test was to verify the
qm;f ;P ¼ Pm ð21Þ power-recovery function, the inlet and outlet of the compressor
Hu ec ðp0:286
c  1Þ
were connected to the ambient environment. The flow meter G2
Table 6 shows the analysis of the performance penalty. In the was used to measure the mass flow of the compressor. The pres-
B787 EECS, the generated thrust reduces the fuel penalty loss by sure sensor P3/P4 and temperature T3/T4 were used to measure
32.30 kg, and the electrical power consumption increases the fuel the compressor inlet and outlet pressure and temperature. Using
penalty loss by 29.32 kg. Therefore, the overall net fuel penalty loss the measured G2, T3, and T4, we calculated the compressor power
is 2.98 kg. The total penalty loss of the new system is 9.92 kg. consumption W c .
1378 H. Yang et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 127 (2017) 1372–1381

The instruments used for measurement in the experiment are Table 7

shown in Table 7. An orifice flow meter which consists of an orifice List of data acquisition system equipment.

plate, a pressure difference sensor DPG1 , a pressure sensor PG1, and No. Apparatus Specifications Quantities
a temperature sensor TG1 is adopted to measure mass flow rate G1. 1 Tachometer 1–250,000 RPM, Monarch ROS- 1
Another similar flow meter is used to measure mass flow rate G2. W
Turbine output power W t , compressor power consumption W c , 2 Pressure sensor Various range, ColliHigh JYB- 6
and turbine efficiency gt can be calculated through Eqs. (22)–(24). KO-H
3 Temperature sensor Various range, ColliHigh JWB 6
W t ¼ G1 cp;g ðt 1  t 2 Þ ð22Þ 4 Pressure difference 0–20 kPa, ColliHigh JYB 3151 2
sensor

W c ¼ G2 cp;g ðt 4  t 3 Þ ð23Þ

t1  t2 where
gt ¼ h
0:286
i ð24Þ  
T 1 1  ðP 1 =P2 Þ DPG1  PG1 0:5
G1 ¼ k ð26Þ
T G1
4.2. Uncertainty analysis And
Dt12 ¼ t 1  t 2 ð27Þ
Taylor Series Method is used for propagation of the uncertain-
ties in the measured variables into the uncertainty of the result The relative uncertainty of G1 and Dt 12 are
[26,27]. The relative uncertainty of W t can be defined: s
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2  2  2
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi uðG1 Þ @ lnG1 @ lnG1 @ lnG1
 2  2 ¼ uðDP G1 Þ2 þ uðP G1 Þ2 þ uðT G1 Þ2
uðW t Þ @ ln W t @ ln W t G1 @ DP G1 @P G1 @T G1
¼ uðG1 Þ2 þ uðDt 12 Þ2 s
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Wt @G1 @ Dt 12 2  2  2ffi
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi uðDP G1 Þ uðP G1 Þ uðT G1 Þ
 2  2 ¼ þ þ
uðG1 Þ uðDt 12 Þt 2DPG1 2P G1 2T G1
¼ þ ð25Þ
G1 Dt12 ð28Þ

Fig. 5. Schematic diagram of the test bench.

Fig. 6. Picture of the test bench.

 H. Yang et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 127 (2017) 1372–1381 1379

Table 8
Uncertainties of the experimental instrument.

Apparatus No. Range Accuracy grade Uncertainty

pffiffiffi
Pressure sensor 1 P1 0–500 kPa 0.5% 2:5= 3 kPa
pffiffiffi
2 P2 0–500 kPa 0.5% 2:5= 3 kPa
pffiffiffi
3 P3 0–300 kPa 0.5% 1:5= 3 kPa
pffiffiffi
4 P4 0–1000 kPa 0.5% 5= 3 kPa
pffiffiffi
5 PG1 0–800 kPa 0.5% 4= 3 kPa
pffiffiffi
6 PG2 0–500 kPa 0.5% 2:5= 3 kPa
pffiffiffi
Temperature sensor 7 T1 60 to 150 °C 0.5% 1:05= 3 °C
pffiffiffi
8 T2 50 to 200 °C 0.5% 1:25= 3 °C
pffiffiffi
9 T3 0–85 °C 0.5% 0:425= 3 °C
pffiffiffi
10 T4 50 to 200 °C 0.5% 1:25= 3 °C
pffiffiffi
11 TG1 0–500 °C 0.5% 2:5= 3 °C
pffiffiffi
12 TG2 50 to 200 °C 0.5% 1:25= 3 °C
pffiffiffi
Pressure difference sensor 13 DPG1 20 kPa 0.2% 0:04= 3 kPa
pffiffiffi
14 DPG2 20 kPa 0.2% 0:04= 3 kPa
pffiffiffi
Tachometer 15 N 1–250,000 RPM 1 RPM (precision) 1= 3 RPM

Fig. 7. Power balance curve. Fig. 8. Turbine efficiencies at different speeds.

qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
uðDt12 Þ ¼ uðt 1 Þ2 þ uðt 2 Þ2 ð29Þ The relative uncertainty of gt can be defined:
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
where  2  2  2
uðgt Þ @ ln gt @ ln gt @ ln gt
¼ uðDt12 Þ2 þ uðT 1 Þ2 þ uðYÞ2
T G1 ¼ t G1 þ 273:15 ð30Þ gt @ Dt 12 @T 1 @Y
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
The uncertainty of T G1 is
 2  2  2
uðDt 12 Þ uðT 1 Þ uðYÞ
¼ þ þ
uðT G1 Þ ¼ uðtG1 Þ ð31Þ Dt12 T1 Y1
ð34Þ
Substituting Eqs. (28), (29), and (31) into Eq. (25), the relative
uncertainty of W t can be expressed as Eq. (32). The relative uncer- where
tainty of W c are similar, as shown in Eq. (33):
s
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi T 1 ¼ t 1 þ 273:15 ð35Þ
2  2  2
uðW t Þ uðDPG1 Þ uðP G1 Þ uðtG1 Þ uðt 1 Þ2 þ uðt 2 Þ2
¼ þ þ þ Y ¼1C ð36Þ
Wt 2 DP G 1 2PG1 2T G1 Dt 212
ð32Þ The uncertainty of T 1 and Y are

ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
s uðT 1 Þ ¼ uðt1 Þ ð37Þ
2  2  2
uðW c Þ uðDPG2 Þ uðPG2 Þ uðtG2 Þ uðt 3 Þ2 þ uðt 4 Þ2
¼ þ þ þ uðYÞ ¼ uðCÞ ð38Þ
Wc 2 DP G 2 2PG2 2T G2 Dt 243
ð33Þ where
1380 H. Yang et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 127 (2017) 1372–1381

4.3. Test results

A total of 22 sets of data were obtained, and the operating con-

ditions were as follows: turbine mass flow of 0.097–0.223 kg/s and
turbine back pressure of 38.2–89.5 kPa (equivalent to a flight alti-
tude of 7.4–1.1 km).Fig. 7 shows the power balance curve of the
turbocharger; the shaft efficiency is 0.9. The maximum output
power of the turbine is 10.1 kW (mass flow of 0.223 kg/s, expan-
sion ratio of 2.86). The turbine efficiencies at different speeds are
shown in Fig. 8 and are approximately 0.6 on average. The test data
were processed according to Eq. (42) [28]. The theoretical solution
of formula (42) was obtained with gT ¼ 0:6. The experimental data
and the calculated results are compared in Fig. 9, and the error is
less than 10%. The results show that Eq. (42) is very suitable for
predicting the output power of the novel energy-saving ECS.
Fig. 10 shows the calculation results for the output power at differ-
ent flight altitudes and mass flow rates (cabin pressure of 85 kPa).
The results indicate that generated power increases with the mass
flow and flight altitude.
In practical application, the efficiency of turbocharger can be
improved through better mechanical design. Assuming a turbine
efficiency of 0.85, an ECS with a mass flow rate of 0.475 kg/s can
Fig. 9. Comparison between the experimental and calculated values.
recover 35.6 kW of power at a cruising altitude of 10 km, which
is consistent with the analysis results presented in Section 3.2.1.

Wt
¼ gt ð1  p0:286
t Þ ð42Þ
Gt cp;g T i

5. Conclusion

A novel energy-saving ECS for commercial airliners is proposed,

and a theoretical analysis and experimental validation are per-
formed. Because of the large pressure difference between the cabin
and the atmosphere, a turbocharger is used to recover power from
the cabin-discharged air to realize the conversion of internal
energy into mechanical work. The recovered shaft power is favor-
able to the pre-pressurization of the fresh air. A case study shows
that compared with B787 EECS, the new system can save 35.2 kW
of input power for each cooling pack which is equivalent to a 66.2%
reduction. It reduces the demand of the engine power and
enhances the self-maintenance ability. The pressure ratio of the
electrical compressor is decreased by 51.8%, and the lower com-
pression ratio reduces the difficulty of the compressor design.
The power recovered by a turbocharger at different flight altitudes
using the vacuum system is tested. The performance parameters of
the turbocharger with a turbo efficiency of 0.6 under different back
Fig. 10. Energy saving at different mass flow rates and flight altitudes. pressures are obtained. The maximum recovery power in the tests
is 10.1 kW when the mass flow rate is 0.223 kg/s and the expansion
C ¼ ðP 1 =P2 Þ0:286 ð39Þ ratio is 2.86. If the turbine efficiency increases to 0.85 and the mass
The relative uncertainty of C is flow rate is 0.475 kg/s, the power recovered reaches 35.6 kW at a
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi cruising altitude of 10 km. The feasibility of recovering energy from
 2  2 the cabin-discharged air is verified. However, the present study
uðCÞ @ ln C @ ln C
¼ uðP1 Þ2 þ uðP2 Þ2 focuses only on power recovery; future studies can investigate
C @P1 @P2
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi the pressurization performance at different heights of the com-
 2  2
uðP 1 Þ uðP2 Þ pressor in the turbocharger. The theoretical analysis and experi-
¼ 0:286 þ ð40Þ
P1 P2 mental data show that the novel energy-saving ECS can
effectively exploit the exhaust energy. The results provide techni-
Substituting Eqs. (29), (37), (38), (40) into Eq. (34), the relative cal support for the energy optimization of the EECS and the devel-
uncertainty of gt can be expressed: opment of more electric aircraft.
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
! 2 " ffi
u
uuðt Þ2 þ uðt Þ2 uðt Þ2 2  2 #
uðgt Þ t 1 2 1 0:286ðP1 =P2 Þ0:286 uðP 1 Þ uðP 2 Þ
¼ þ þ þ Acknowledgements
gt Dt212 T1 1  ðP1 =P 2 Þ0:286 P1 P2
ð41Þ
The research presented in this paper was supported financially
The uncertainties of the experimental instrument are shown in by the National Basic Research Program of China (the 973 Program)
Table 8. through Grant No. 2012CB720100.
 H. Yang et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 127 (2017) 1372–1381 1381

References [13] C. Xavier et al., Evaluation of the thrust recovery of an aircraft flapped outflow
valve, J. Aircraft 47 (2010) 1473–1480.
[14] I.S. Bernard, Ram Air Cabin Pressurizing Systems, Patent, 1956, US2767561.
[1] FAA, FAR Part 25, Airwothiness Standard: Transportation Category Airplanes,
[15] L. Kim, C. Ronald, What’s next in commercial aircraft environmental control
Federal Aviation Administration.
systems? SAE Technical Paper Series, 1993, 932057.
[2] Jacques Herzog, Electrification of the environmental control system, in: 25th
[16] Zywiak, Regenerative Condensing Cycle, Patent, 1995, US5461882A.
International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences, Hamburg, Germany, 2006.
[17] Boeing, 787 Dreamliner Airplane Systems Ebook, 2007, 7.
[3] H. Elwood et al., Commercial airliner environmental control system
[18] Boeing, 787, <http://www.boeing.cn/productsandservices/787> (2017.4.11).
(engineering aspects of cabin air quality), in: The Aerospace Medical
[19] CSAIR, B787, <http://www.csair.com/cn/tourguide/flight_service/
Association Annual Meeting, Anaheim, California, 1995.
B787mxfj/cabin/> (2017.4.11).
[4] S. Ronald, Z. Sijmen, Bleed air versus electric power off-takes from a turbofan
[20] U.S. Department of Defense, MIL-STD-210, The US Department Non-Standard
gas turbine over the flight cycle, in: 7th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration
Atmospheres.
and Operations Conference, Belfast, Northern Ireland, 2007, pp. 18–20.
[21] Xingjuan Zhang et al., A calculation method for matching enthalpy parameter
[5] A. Brasseur et al., Inside the 747-8 new environmental control system,
of three-wheel bootstrap high pressure water separation refrigeration system
Aeromagazine 1 (2012) 19–25.
for aircrafts, in: 6th International Symposium on Heating, Ventilating and Air
[6] W. Zhou M.Sc. Thesis, in: Cabin Environment and Air Quality in Civil Transport
Conditioning, Nanjing, China, 2009, pp. 2135–2140.
Aircraft, Cranfield University, England, 2012, p. 82.
[22] Long Chen, Xingjuan Zhang, Chunxin Yang, A new concept environmental
[7] B. Richard, Shyy Wei, in: Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering, John Wiley &
control system with energy considerations for commercial aircraft, in: 44th
Sons Ltd, England, 2010, p. 4986.
International Conference on Environmental Systems, Tucson, Arizona, 2014.
[8] J.A. Rosero et al., Moving towards a more electric aircraft, IEEE A&E Systems
[23] SAE, Aircraft Fuel Weight Penalty Due to Air Conditioning, 2011, AIR1168-8.
Magazine, 2007, March, pp. 3–9.
[24] G. Chen, Design Characteristics and GEnx Engine for B787, Aeroengine 36
[9] I. Moir, A. Seabridge, Aircraft Systems Mechanical Electrical and Avionics
(2010) 1–6 (in Chinese).
Subsystems Integration, third ed., John Wiley & Sons Ltd, England, 2008, pp.
[25] Z. Zhao, S. Zhang, Analysis of effects of BWB airliner design parameters on its
386–387.
economic profitability, J. Beijing Unive. Aeronaut. Astronaut. 37 (2011) 937–
[10] Mike Sinnett, 787 no-bleed systems: saving fuel and enhancing operating
942 (in Chinese).
efficiencies, Aero Quart. 4 (2007) 6–11.
[26] H.W. Coleman, W.G. Steele, Experimentation, Validation, and Uncertainty
[11] Fu. Jianqin et al., A new approach for exhaust energy recovery of internal
Analysis for Engineers, third ed., A John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2009.
combustion engine: steam turbocharging, Appl. Therm. Eng. 52 (2013) 150–
[27] Guangfeng Yu, Xingjuan Zhang, et al., Experimental study on specific heat
159.
capacity of lithium thionyl chloride batteries by a precise measurement
[12] J.P. Liu et al., Comparison and analysis of engine exhaust gas energy recovery
method, J. Electrochem. Soc. 160 (2013) A985–A989.
potential through various bottom cycles, Appl. Therm. Eng. 50 (2013) 1219–
[28] Mark W. Zemansky, Richard H. Dittman, Heat and Thermodynamics, sixth ed.,
1234.
McGRAW-HILL International Book Company, 1981.