Professional Documents
Culture Documents
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273217504
CITATIONS
READS
34
19
1 AUTHOR:
Robert Dunn
United States Department of Agriculture
61 PUBLICATIONS 2,399 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
ABSTRACT. Air quality standards set forth by the Clean Air Act and its amendments have established guidelines for reduction
of harmful ground level emissions from the aviation sector. Biodiesel, defined as the monoalkyl esters of fatty acids derived
from vegetable oil or animal fat, in application as an extender for combustion in compression ignition (diesel) engines, has
demonstrated a number of promising characteristics including reduction of exhaust emissions. This work examines the fuel
properties of BioJet fuel blends consisting of 0.100.30 vol. frac. methyl soyate (SME) in JP8 and in JP8+100 jet fuels.
Testing of cold flow properties indicated that blends with as little as 0.10 vol. frac. SME may limit operation of aircraft to
lower altitudes where ambient temperature remains warmer than 295 C. Treatment of SME with cold flow improver additives
may decrease this limit to 375 C. Blends with winterized SME gave the best results, reducing the limit to as low as 475 C,
a value that meets the standard fuel specification for JP8. Water reactivity studies indicated that SME/JP8 blends absorbed
very little water from buffered solution following contact with the oil phase. Although interface ratings for blends with up
to 0.50 vol. frac. SME were 1b (clear bubbles covering not more than 50% of the interface) or better, separation ratings
no better than (3) (formation of cloudy suspensions in the oil layer) were observed. Even though fatty derivatives such as
biodiesel undergo oxidative degradation more readily than jet fuels, careful production, transport, and storage of BioJet fuels
should not present a significant problem.
Keywords. Biodiesel, Cloud point, Cold filter plugging point, Flash point, Jet fuels, Kinematic viscosity, Methyl soyate, Oil
stability index, Water reactivity.
1751
1752
Figure 1. Cloud point (CP, in 5C) of BioJet fuel blends. Legend: squares =
JP8 blends; triangles = JP8+100 blends. Source for methyl soyate
(SME): Ag Environmental Products.
Figure 2. Pour point (PP, in 5C) of BioJet fuel blends. Legend: squares =
JP8 blends; triangles = JP8+100 blends. Source for SME: Ag Environmental Products. See Fig. 1 for other abbreviations.
Figure 3. CP (5C) of BioJet fuel blends prepared with 0.10 vol. frac. additivetreated SME. Additive loading = 1000 ppm (before blending). Source
for SME: Interchem. See figure 1 for abbreviations.
Figure 4. CP (5C) of BioJet fuel blends prepared with 0.10 vol. frac. winterized SME. Additive loading = 2000 ppm (before winterization).
Sources for SME: Ag Environmental Products for winterized SME
(neat); Interchem for winterized SMEadditive. See figure 1 for abbreviations.
1753
(1)
Ester
FP
Jet fuel
Additive[b]
(mm@/s)
(_C)
None
None
SME
SME
SME
SME
SME
SME
Winterized SME
Winterized SME
Winterized SME
Winterized SME
Winterized SME
Winterized SME
JP8
JP8+100
JP8
JP8
JP8
JP8+100
JP8+100
JP8+100
JP8
JP8
JP8
JP8+100
JP8+100
JP8+100
None
None
None
DFI200
Winterflow
None
DFI200
Winterflow
None
Winterflow
DFI200
None
Winterflow
DFI200
5.0
5.1
5.8
5.8
5.8
5.8
6.0
6.0
5.8[c]
5.8
5.9
6.0[c]
6.0
6.0
64.5
56.2
74.6
59.8
56.1
63.8
55.9
55.9
Source for SME: Interchem, unless noted otherwise. Variances for data
< 0.000027; variances for FP = 1.08.3. See figure 1 for other abbreviations.
[b] Additive loading = 1000 ppm for blends with nonwinterized SME (before blending); 2000 ppm for blends with winterized SME (before winterization).
[c] Blended with AEPSME (neat).
[a]
710C. On the other hand, treating SME with cold flow improvers appears to decrease FP, in some cases to values below
those for nonblended jet fuel. In most cases, JP8+100
based blends yielded results with smaller variances than JP8
based blends. This may have been an effect caused by the
presence of thermal stability additives in the JP8+100 fuel.
Overall, blending 0.10 vol. frac. SME does not offer any significant advantages for storage and handling of the blended
fuels with respect to FP.
WATER REACTIVITY AND PENETRATION
Results from water reactivity determinations for 0.00,
0.10, 0.20, 0.30, 0.50, and 1.00 vol. frac. SME in JP8 blends
are shown in table 2. Essentially, for blend ratios up to at least
0.50 vol. frac. SME, very little absorption of water into the
oil layer takes place (<0.50 mL). In contrast, water reactivity
of neat SME showed a decrease of 8.50 mL in the aqueous
layer. Similar tests (not shown) on JP8+100 blends showed
Table 2. Water reactivity of InterchemSME/JP8 blends
(measured by ASTM method D1094).[a]
Blend ratio
V
Interface[b]
Separation[c]
(vol. frac. SME)
(mL)
0
10
20
30
50
100
0.50
0.00
0.10
0.00
0.10
8.50
1
1
1b
1
1
2
(1)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
Figure 5. Leastsquares fit of cold filter plugging point (CFPP, in 5C) versus CP (5C) data for 0.10 vol. frac. BioJet fuel blends. Legend: squares =
additivetreated SME blends; triangles = winterized SME blends; closed
squares and closed triangles = JP8 blends; open squares and open
triangles = JP8+100 blends. See figure 1 for other abbreviations.
1754
measurements.
Bondioli et al., 1995; Thompson et al., 1998). Extended degradation can positively or negatively affect fuel quality of jet
fuels with respect to total acid number, specific gravity, cetane number, viscosity and heat of combustion.
One earlier study (Dunn, 1998) reported results from oil
stability index (OSI, related to induction period)
measurements of SME and SME/D1 blends. These studies
were performed in accordance with American Oil Chemists
Society method Cd 12b92 (AOCS, 1993) modified for a
block temperature of 50C. For neat SME, OSI = 13.6 hours
(h), while winterization reduced OSI to 6.89.5 h. On the
other hand, a 0.20 vol. frac. blend of SME with D1 increased
OSI to 77.0 h, while a 0.30 vol. frac. winterized SME blend
with D1 gave OSI = 51.7 h. Similar testing of nonblended
D1 resulted in OSI values exceeding the limit (500 h)
imposed by the experimental apparatus. Given the
similarities between D1 and jet fuels, BioJet fuel blends may
be expected to have a relatively robust oxidative stability.
COMPARISON OF BIODIESEL AND JP8 FUEL
SPECIFICATIONS
Although corresponding ASTM fuel specifications for
biodiesel and jet fuels are similar in many respects, there are
several notable differences. With respect to acid
neutralization, the specification for JP8 (U.S. DOD, 1992)
gives a maximum total acid number of 0.015 mg KOH/g oil
while the provisional specification for biodiesel (ASTM,
2000c) gives a maximum acid number of 0.80 mg KOH/g oil.
Thus, some care should be taken during processing and
storage of biodiesel prior to blending it with jet fuel.
As stated above, jet fuels have a maximum freezing point
measured by ASTM method D2386 (ASTM, 2000b)
requirement of 47C (U.S. DOD, 1992). Although biodiesel
may be tested for CP by the customer, PS121 (ASTM, 2000c)
specifies no maximum value because this provisional
specification was developed with the philosophy that
biodiesel would be primarily applied as a fuel extender.
Nevertheless, corresponding methods for measuring freezing
point and CP require very different test conditions. For
freezing points, mixtures are stirred constantly and samples
are first tested by cooling in 1C increments until cloudiness
is observed, then removed from the cooling bath and
retested in 0.5C increments while warming up; the
measured freezing point is taken as the temperature where
cloudiness disappears. For CPs, mixtures remain quiescent
and samples are tested during cooling in 1C increments; CP
is taken as the temperature where cloudiness is first observed
in the sample.
The third notable difference in ASTM guidelines between
JP8 and biodiesel lies in how heats of combustion are
measured and reported. For biodiesel as well as D1 and D2,
gross heats of combustion, defined as the heat released by one
unit mass of fuel in a constant volume bomb with
substantially all of the water condensed to the liquid state
(ASTM, 2000a), are quantified. Clark et al. (1984) reported
gross heats of combustion of 39.8 MJ/kg for SME and
45.2 MJ/kg for D2. Given that D1 as a lighter distillate
fraction typically has a smaller heat content than D2,
biodiesel should compare more favorably with jet fuels
because these fuels have composition and physical properties
similar to those of D1. To effectively compare heat contents,
the net heat of combustion of biodiesel should be determined.
Net heat of combustion is defined as the heat released by
1755
RECOMMENDATIONS
The studies reported herein are preliminary and should be
followed up with a more extensive evaluation to confirm the
feasibility of applying biodiesel in alternative jet fuel blends.
Examples of future studies within this context include the
following:
S Testing for freezing point (ASTM D2386) of neat
biodiesel and BioJet fuel blends including comparison
with CP and CFPP results such as those reported in this
work.
S Develop lowtemperature filterability tests to evaluate
fuels with respect to filter screens common in aircraft fuel
systems.
S Oxidative and thermal stability testing of BioJet fuels to
predict effects of longterm storage degradation. This
may require development of test methods including those
requiring accelerated experimental conditions.
S Testing for Custrip corrosion (D 130) of BioJet fuels
under conditions stipulated for aviation fuels (2 h, 100C).
Completion of these studies should provide a basis for developing a database on fuel properties of BioJet fuel blends.
Once the database has been established, the next step should
initiation of performance and emissions testing of BioJet fuel
blends in jet turbine engines.
CONCLUSIONS
1756
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
H. Khoury, B. Mernick, A. Callison, and D. Ehmke
provided technical assistance for experimental studies and
analyses. J. Cummings, Naval Air Systems Command
(Patuxent River Naval Air Station, MD), provided jet fuel
specification data. L. A. Dockman, Cardinal Aircraft Corp.
(Townsend, MD), provided advice and guidance for
designing the studies behind this work.
REFERENCES
Anon. 2000. Article posted in USA Today Weather News (22 Sept.
2000). Available at:
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/wstdatmo.htm.
AOCS. 1993. Cd 1292. Oxidative stability index (OSI). In Official
Methods and Practices of the AOCS, Vol. 1. Champaign, Ill.:
American Oil Chemists Society.
ASTM. 1995a. D93. Standard test method for flash point by
PenskyMartins closed cup tester. In Annual Book of ASTM
Standards, Vol. 05. West Conshohocken, Pa.: American Society
for Testing and Materials.
_____. 1995b. D97. Standard test method for pour point of
petroleum products. In Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol.
05. West Conshohocken, Pa.: American Society for Testing and
Materials.
_____. 1995c. D445. Standard test method for kinematic viscosity
of transparent and opaque liquides (and the calculation of
dynamic viscosity). In Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol.
05. West Conshohocken, Pa.: American Society for Testing and
Materials.
_____. 1995d. D2500. Standard test method for cloud point of
petroleum oils. In Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 05.
West Conshohocken, Pa.: American Society for Testing and
Materials.
_____. 1999. D1094. Standard test method for water reaction of
aviation fuels. In Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 05.
West Conshohocken, Pa.: American Society for Testing and
Materials.
1757
1758