THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by Darren Morrison, Tuesday, August 27, 2013 06:41:37 AM
Air Evolution Influence on Gravity Fuel Flow
under Decreased Pressure Conditions
Darren Morrison
Airbus Operations Ltd.
Vladimir Zherebtsov, Marina Peganova, and Oleg Merkulov
RNC Applied Chemistry
Ekaterina Kitanina and Eduard Kitanin
Saint-Petersburg Politechnical University
Dmitry Bondarenko
EADS
ABSTRACT
The experimental results of air evolution research by gravity
fuel flow in a pipeline are presented. The pipe-line included
an inclined section and a horizontal section connected by a
bend. An orifice was installed at the entrance of the inclined
pipeline section. The experimental investigations were
carried out at pressures ranging from 20 to 80 kPa and
temperatures varying between −20°C and +20°C. A
significant fuel flow drop was observed by decreasing the
pressure to a certain boundary value. This effect was caused
by air evolution and the formation of two-phase air-fuel flow.
It was shown that the boundary pressure value corresponding
to the air evolution onset depended on temperature and fuel
velocity values.
1. INTRODUCTION
Air evolution in liquid flows corresponds to actual scientific
and technical problems. Possible air evolution should be
taken into account by designing and operation of pipelines,
pumps, heat exchangers, turbines etc.
Air evolution is important for aircraft fuel systems. Civil
aircraft fueling takes place at sea level conditions. Initially
fuel is saturated by air at pressure and temperature values
2013-01-2185
Published
09/17/2013
Copyright © 2013 SAE International
doi:10.4271/2013-01-2185
corresponding to sea level conditions. Atmospheric pressure
decrease leads to fuel oversaturation at cruise. The
atmospheric temperature decrease contributes to this effect.
Fuel pumps increase the pressure downstream of the pump
outlet and no air evolution occurs. If a pump is deselected,
gravity may drive the fuel flow via a bypass inlet. In this case
the pressure in the pipeline depends on the atmospheric
pressure and the supply tank fuel head. Under these
conditions, air evolution could take place, potentially leading
to flow rate decrease.
The scenario mentioned above may apply, for example, to
aircraft with a fuel trim tank. The main pressure loss
corresponding to long fuel pipes, which provide friction. It is
known that two-phase density dominated pressure losses may
be higher than corresponding one-phase friction pressure
losses.
Two-phase flow rate decrease is connected with flow
conditions (pressure, temperature) and pipeline design. For
example, a refuel line (including a refuel restrictor) may also
be used as a transfer line, this may be done as a weight saving
measure.
Other segments with high pressure losses could be
implemented into a fuel pipeline. Air evolution from the
 THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by Darren Morrison, Tuesday, August 27, 2013 06:41:37 AM

oversaturated fuel takes place downstream of a flow restrictor 2. TEST RIG DESIGN AND
(orifice) or some other local loss segment. This leads to the
flow rate decrease during gravity flow conditions. Experience EXPERIMENTAL METHODS
shows that air evolution starts only when there is a certain In Fig. 1. an experimental rig scheme can be seen.
environment pressure drop. Theoretically there is a limit
pressure value below which an intensive air evolution takes
place. If the pressure is higher than the limit value the air
evolution could not be observed.

A number of articles deal with two-phase flow problems. The

Chisholm model [1] allows calculation of two-phase friction
pressure losses. It is based on the Lockhart and Martinelli
model [2]. However this model could not provide a simple
method of prediction of two-phase flow regimes change.
Therefore it is difficult to estimate the model applicability
range. The calculation of two-phase pressure loss and air
concentration down-stream of various local loss segments
corresponds to the less investigated problems [3]. Great
varieties of physical parameters and pipeline segment
peculiarities have a considerable impact on the drag and air
evolution process and complicate an experimental design and
data generalization. Detailed investigations have been carried
out for two-phase flow in a pipeline with bends [4]. However, Fig.1. Experimental test rig: 1, 2, 3, 4 - ball valves in the
there is a lack of experimental data obtained for two-phase main lines, 5 - circulation fuel pump, 6 - electrical
flow in a pipeline with an orifice. heater, 7 - refrigerating system with a heat exchanger, a
shaded area marks a zone with a constant temperature in
Flow through a nozzle heated up to the saturation temperature a range of +20°C to −20°C; I, II, III, IV - temperature
can be treated as a similar process. These processes were and pressure measuring blocks and fuel samples for
investigated by Zysin and Barilovich [5] in detail. However chromatograph.
the investigations [5] have been performed for critical
velocities that do not match to the low velocities in fuel The main part of the test rig includes two fuel tanks. The
systems. The results of pressure loss investigations of steam- volume of each tank is 3 m3. The whole amount of fuel used
water flows in a pipeline with an orifice are presented in [6]. by the experiments is about 2.5 ton. TS-1 kerosene is used in
However it is not possible to use these results for air the investigations. A detailed description of TS-1 properties
evolution calculations. can be found in [10].

The numerical simulation of air evolution in a hydrocarbon
fuel flowing in a pipeline with an orifice have been
performed in [7]. The numerical method was based on the
model of Kumzerova and Schmidt [8]. This model uses the so
called Euler-Euler description of the boiling process in a two-
phase two-velocity flow. The preliminary results [8] need
additional verification. It can be noted that the numerical
simulation could not be used by parametric studies of
engineering problems due to a rather time-consuming
process.
The present paper deals with experimental investigation of
kerosene gravity flow. The fuel is oversaturated by air. The
pipeline includes an inclined and a horizontal section
connected with a smooth bend.
The main goal of the present work is the experimental
investigation of air evolution and pressure losses in the
pipeline described above. An evaluation of the limit pressure
corresponding to the beginning of an intensive air evolution
and pressure influence on the fuel flow rate were also
investigated. A purpose built experimental test rig was
created for the experiments.
The test rig includes the systems of fuel saturation by air, a
fuel temperature control system (cooling/heating system), a
vacuumization system, an automatic control system, a system
for measuring, writing, preprocessing and saving of
experimental data.
The fuel in the upper supply tank is saturated by dry air with
a dew-point temperature of −40°C. A barbotage method is
used for saturation. A saturated fuel is cooled or heated up to
the necessary temperature. Fuel cooling is fulfilled by a
refrigeration system and a heat exchanger (See number 7 in
Fig.1)
The fuel circulation through the heat exchanger was
controlled by a circulation pump (See number 5 in Fig. 1).
The heater 6 and the pump 5 were switched on for heating up
to temperatures higher than the environment temperature. The
fuel preparation took about 5-6 hours. As the result, fuel
saturated by air at atmospheric pressure and heated up to the
given temperature was obtained.
Then valve 2 was closed and the fuel was pumped up to the
supply tank. A vacuum was applied to the whole fuel system
 THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by Darren Morrison, Tuesday, August 27, 2013 06:41:37 AM
to bring it down to the given pressure level by using two
special pumps. Note that the equilibrium concentration of
dissolved air corresponded to the ground pressure and given
temperature. Therefore, after pressure decrease, the fuel
became oversaturated by air.
Fuel temperature and pressure were measured at the outlet of
the supply tank. Fuel sampling for dissolved air concentration
evaluation was carried out at the same point. The
measurements had shown that the dissolved air concentration
corresponded to sea level pressure and actual temperature.
Thus no air evolution took place in the tank. The pressure
was measured in 10 positions along the pipeline.
After valve 2 opened, the fuel flowed into the pipeline
working section. The experimental pipe-line, 0.015 m
diameter, included vertical (L1 = 1 m) and horizontal (L2=
0.5 m) sections connected by a smooth bend with radii of
0.15 m. The inlet part of the pipeline could be inclined to the
different angles. The maximum tilt angle was 90°. The outlet
part was always horizontal. An orifice was implemented into
the upper part of the working pipeline section. Two different
orifices with a 7.5 mm and 10 mm diameter hole were used.
Temperature, pressure and dissolved air concentration were
measured at the section located after the orifice. The same
measuring sections were situated in three places downstream
the orifice.
Temperature measurements were performed by resistance
thermometer. The temperature varied during the present
investigations from −20°C to +20°C, the measurement error
didn't exceed one degree.
Pressure measurements were fulfilled by standard Metran
pressure sensors with a variable range. Absolute pressure
during the experiments varied from 0.2 bar to 1.0 bar. The
pressure measurements error was equal to 1% of measured
value.
The dissolved air concentration was measured by
chromatographs. A special system of sample collection was
designed. A helium flow was used to carry a fuel sample to
the chromatograph. The dissolved air concentration error was
about ±20%. The concentration measurements were carried
out for the range of 5·10−5 to 2.5·10−5 kg/kg. The dissolved
air concentration change in a fuel in any pipeline segment is
equal to the change of the mass flow quality with opposite
sign. Note that the majority of experiments were carried out
at rather low pressure values. This explains why the volume
flow quality exceeded sometimes 50% though the
corresponding mass flow quality value was rather low.
No air evolution took place at the pipeline inlet. The fuel
velocity in this section, U0, was defined on the base of supply
tank fuel level measurement using a level meter calibration.
The velocity at the pipeline inlet varied between 0.4 m/s and
1.5 m/s. The corresponding velocity definition error was
evaluated as 5%.
The test rig adjustment system and data collection were
controlled by computer software. The tank fuel level,
pressure and temperature were measured once per second.
The velocity value was calculated using the fuel level change
during a minute. A statistical data manipulation and bad
results rejection filter has been applied. After that the results
were averaged over a minute and over the whole time of the
experiment.
The dissolved air concentration measurements required much
more time because of time-consuming fuel samples collection
process. Usually an experiment was completed in 18-20
minutes. About 3-5 fuel samples could be collected, carried
to the chromatograph and analyzed during this time period. In
this time the fuel level in the supply tank changed by 0.1 to
0.15 m. The corresponding pressure decrease was not much
more than 1 kPa, i.e. 5%. The relatively small pressure
change allowed the flow regime to be described as a
stationary one. The data measurements were averaged over
the time. In the case of unsteady flow regime the pressure
couldn't be averaged. Only one measurement corresponded to
the pressure value. Therefore the pressure error increased up
to 20%.
3. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
ANALYSIS
A distribution of dissolved air concentration, C, and pressure,
P, along the working section of the pipeline was obtained for
every experiment. Corresponding initial conditions sets are
indicated in the article as (P0, T0, U0).
The concentration measurement is of great importance
because it allows calculation of mass flow quality value, Xi,
corresponding to any two-phase flow section. A mass flow
quality change, ΔXi,i+1, due to air evolution at the distance
from (i) to (i+1) sections can be calculated as following.
(1)
Here C0 represents an equilibrium air concentration in the
supply tank by P0 and T0.
The volume flow quality is calculated from mass flow quality
data
(2)
Some results of experiments and corresponding calculations
are shown below. In Fig. 2 the dissolved air concentration
measurement data and the equilibrium air concentration
calculation results corresponding to the experimental pressure
and temperature conditions are displayed along the pipeline.
 THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by Darren Morrison, Tuesday, August 27, 2013 06:41:37 AM

based on the assumption that the flow was one-phase. The

second method used the two-phase calculation model.

Fig. 2. Actual and equilibrium concentration of dissolved

air along the working section of the pipeline. Air
pressure above the fuel level in the supply tank is equal Fig. 4. Pressure distribution along the pipeline, p =
to 60kPa, the average fuel temperature is about 20°C. 60kPa, T = 20°C.

The dissolved air equilibrium concentration was calculated The pressure changes calculated by one-phase flow model
using a standard method elaborated for hydrocarbon fuels took into account friction and leveling losses.
[11]. As can be seen from the figure the dissolved air
concentration remains nearly constant along the whole
pipeline section. It is about C0 = 2.45*10−4 and doesn't (3)
change even downstream of the orifice with a large change in where
the cross-sectional area (Fd/F0 = 0.25). The equilibrium
concentration is essentially lower than the experimental one.
After the orifice it is about 2.5 times lower than the
experimental value. No air evolution takes place. So it can be (4)
concluded that the fuel remains oversaturated with air in spite
of high flow velocity. Here Li,i+1 - a distance between measuring points.

The distributions of the evolved air mass flow quality and

volume flow quality along the pipe-line are shown in Fig. 3. (5)

(6)
The Chisholm model [1] extending the Lokkart Martinelli
method [2] of two-phase pressure loss calculations was used
for second model calculations. In accordance with this model
a friction pressure loss is calculated as following

(7)
where
Fig. 3. Mass flow quality and volume flow quality of
evolved air after the orifice, p = 60kPa, T = 20°C.
(8)
As can be seen from Fig. 3 that the evolved air amount is
negligible. There is a one-phase flow in the pipeline. The
pressure distribution along the pipeline shown in Fig. 4
proves this statement. Note that the experimental conditions (9)
are the same for the both figures.
A = 10 for Re < 1000 and A = 20 for Re>1000.
The calculated pressure values for three sections downstream
of the orifice are presented in the figure. The calculations The leveling pressure loss is calculated by taking into account
were performed using two methods. The first method was the mean flow density change.
 THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by Darren Morrison, Tuesday, August 27, 2013 06:41:37 AM
The acceleration losses are calculated by,
(10)
As can be concluded from Fig. 4 the one-phase model
calculation points fully coincide with the experimental data.
The measured flow quality data also confirm that no air
evolution took place by the considered experimental
conditions.
The same graphs obtained for different pressure conditions (p
= 20 kPa) are presented in Fig. 5 and 6.
Fig. 5. Actual and equilibrium dissolved air
concentration along the working pipeline section, p = 20
kPa, T = 20°C.
Fig. 6. Volume and mass flow quality of air after the
orifice, P = 20 kPa, T = 20°C.
As can be seen from the graphs (Fig. 5 and 6) the results
obtained at the lower pressure level are quite different in
comparison to the high pressure graphs. Downstream of the
orifice (see the section from 0.5 m to 1.0 m) the dissolved air
concentration drops abruptly and approaches to the
equilibrium air concentration corresponding to actual
pressure and temperature conditions. The mass flow quality
value is about X ≈0.015. However, at the low pressure
conditions a volume flow quality reaches a relative high
value of 0.3. The pressure distribution after the orifice is also
under the influence of the air evolution process.
The measured and calculated pressure distributions along the
pipeline are shown in Fig. 7. The data corresponds to the
following conditions: pressure above the fuel level is equal to
20kPa, the fuel temperature is equal to 20°C. As can be seen
from the figure the measured data matches the calculations
performed by using the two-phase model. It proves that the
two-phase flow regime takes place after the orifice. The
coincidence of the measured and calculated pressure values
proves the reliability of two-phase flow characteristics
calculated on the basis of dissolved air concentration
measurements.
Fig. 7. Pressure distribution along the pipeline, p = 20
kPa, T = 20°C.
It should be noted that the air evolution can essentially
change the gravity fuel flow rate. Both the pressure loss
increase and gravity driving force decrease can lead to the
flow rate reduction. Note that the reduction in force is
changed due to the effective flow density decrease.
An experimental series was conducted to prove this
observation. The flow velocity in a pipeline with an orifice
was measured under conditions of simultaneous pressure
decrease in the upper and lower tank. A pressure change
graph is presented in Fig. 8.
Fig. 8. Pressure above the fuel level in the tanks.
Fig. 9 shows the corresponding inlet fuel velocity behavior in
time. Some spread of the data points is connected with two-
phase flow pulsations.
In Fig. 10 the results obtained for the temperature range from
+30°C to −20°C are presented. The graph illustrates fuel
velocity dependence on environmental pressure.
 THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by Darren Morrison, Tuesday, August 27, 2013 06:41:37 AM
Fig. 9. Inlet fuel velocity time variation by corresponding
supply and receive tanks pressure decrease.
Fig. 10. Fuel velocity dependence on environment
pressure, for gravity flow in a pipeline with an orifice.
As can be seen from the graph, the fuel velocity decreases
slightly due to pressure change from 100 kPa to 40 kPa. It
seems to be connected with the fuel level change in the
supply tank. When the pressure value reaches the value of 20
kPa (corresponding to 12km altitude) a dramatic velocity
drop takes place.
As stated above the flow drop can be explained by an
intensive air evolution process. It leads to the friction loss
increase. On the other hand the driving force is decreased due
to effective flow density reduction.
Therefore one of the most important tasks is to evaluate the
minimal pressure value corresponding to the air evolution
start. Then the gravity fuel flow rate drop will be correctly
defined.
The results of more than 100 experiments fulfilled for the
pressure range of 2 to 100 kPa and temperature varying from
20°C to +30°C were analyzed. All the experiments dealt with
the gravitational flow of TS-1 fuel in a pipeline of Ø15 mm
with an orifice of Ø7.5 mm or Ø10.5 mm. It was concluded
that the limit pressure value corresponding to an intensive air
evolution start depends both on the fuel temperature and on
the flow velocity. The experiments were carried out for the
inlet one-phase fuel velocity ranging from 0.4 m/s to1.8 m/s.
It was observed that the flow kinetic energy and the fuel
temperature have an additive influence on the limit pressure
value:
(11)
Here plim - pressure corresponding to an intensive air
evolution start at any temperature and fuel velocity, A -
kinetic energy coefficient, ΔpT - temperature influence
correction.
The experimental data analyze had shown that
Here the 11.39 coefficient has kPa dimension, temperature
units are K. For T > 303 K the temperature influence
correction, ΔpT, is equal to ΔpT = − 0.13 kPa.
So the final equation looks as below
(12)
In a strict sense, equation (12) can be used for pipelines being
similar to the experimental one, i.e. pipelines with an orifice
in the inlet segment. It should be noted that the value of the
second summand in equation (12) amounts to about 3-5% of
the result pressure value. Therefore it can be concluded that
the equation (12) can be used for the pbeg value evaluation
also for the pipelines of different pressure loss segments.
4. CONCLUSIONS
The experimental investigation of air evolution from TS-1
fuel has been discussed. Gravity driven flow regimes by
decreasing environmental pressure conditions have been
investigated.
An abrupt fuel flow rate decrease took place for these
conditions due to intensive air evolution processes. Two
reasons of this effect were discussed in the article. The first
one is the two-phase friction pressure loss increase. The
driving force reduction due to effective flow density decrease
corresponds to the second one.
An empirical equation for calculation of pressure value
corresponding to the air evolution start has been derived.
SYMBOLS
P - pressure (Pa, kPa);
ΔP - pressure change (Pa, kPa);
pbeg - pressure value corresponding to the intensive air
evolution begin;
ΔpT - a temperature influence correction;
 THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by Darren Morrison, Tuesday, August 27, 2013 06:41:37 AM

T - temperature (K): 7. Kumzerova E.Yu, Kitanin E.L., Chernyshov A.S., Shmidt

U - velocity (m/s) A.A. Fuel degassing in a pipe by pressure decreasing
conditions ZhTF Letters, 2007, 33, #16.
C - mass concentration (kg/kg, %)
D - diameter (m); 8. Kumzerova E.Yu., Schmidt A.A. Bubble nucleation in
ducts (numerical simulation) Proc. of 3rd International
F - cross-section (m2); Symposium on Two-Phase Flow Modelling and
L - length (m); Experimentation, Italy, Pisa, 2004. ISBN88-467-1075-4.
G - fuel mass flow rate (kg/s); Edizioni ETS.Paper No.MS20.
Re=U0D0/ν - Reynolds number; 9. Idelchik I.E. Hydroulic loss handbook 1992, M, 672 c.
Φ2 - two-phase friction calculation coefficient; 10. Handbook of aviation fuel properties, Coordination
ρ - density (kg/m3); research council, inc, Report № 635, 2004, 418 p.
α - volume flow quality; 11. Standard test method for estimation of solubility of gases
λ - one-phase friction coefficient; in petroleum liquids. ASTM Standards, ASTM D2779-92
(2012).
ν - kinematic viscosity (m2/s);
μ - dynamic viscosity (Pa*s)

Indexes
i - a beginning/end pipeline segment number;
ML - Lockhart and Martnelli coefficient:
acc - acceleration;
1-ph - one-phase;
2-ph - two-phase.
0 - supply tank parameters;
d - Orifice parameters.

REFERENCES
1. Chisholm D. Two-phase flow in pipelines and heat
exchangers, G. Godwin, 1983.
2. Lockhart R. W., Martinelli R. C. Proposed correlation of
data for isothermal two-phase, two-component flow in pipes.
Chem. Engng Progr. 1949. N 45(1), P. 38-48
3. Multiphase handbook, edited by Crowe Clayton T., Taylor
and Francis, 2005. P. 1220.
4. Azzi A., Friedel L., Belaadi S. Two-phase gas/liquid flow
pressure loss in bends. Forschung im Ingenieurwesen 2000.
65, P 309-318.
5. Zysin V.A., Baranov G.A., Barilovich V.A., Parfenova
T.N. Boiling adiabatic flows, M.: Atomizdat, 1976, 152c.
6. Thermal and hydraulic calculation method of nuclear
power plants heat exchangers, Fedorovich E.D. et al, L: NPO
ZKTI, 1991, 211c.

The Engineering Meetings Board has approved this paper for publication. It has Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not
successfully completed SAE's peer review process under the supervision of the session necessarily those of SAE. The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper.
organizer. This process requires a minimum of three (3) reviews by industry experts. SAE Customer Service:
Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada)
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a
Tel: 724-776-4970 (outside USA)
retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, Fax: 724-776-0790
photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE. Email: CustomerService@sae.org
ISSN 0148-7191 SAE Web Address: http://www.sae.org
Printed in USA