J. Inst. Eng. India Ser.

C (February 2024) 105(1):101–114

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40032-023-01002-2

ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION

Off‑Design Performance Simulation of Non‑mixed Twin‑Spool

Aero Turbine Engine
Saeed Jafaripanah1 · Fathollah Ommi1 ·
Zoheir Saboohi2

Received: 23 November 2022 / Accepted: 14 October 2023 / Published online: 11 November 2023
© The Institution of Engineers (India) 2023

Abstract In this article, a comprehensive and practical of error was 11% for the calculation of the specific fuel
method is presented for simulating the off-design perfor- consumption.
mance of twin-spool aero gas turbine engines. To achieve
this, required mathematical models and thermodynamic Keywords Twin-spool turbofan engine · Non-mixed flow
equations, including free flow, intake, fan, compressors and turbofan · Off-design · Mathematical modeling · Scaling
turbines (low and high pressure), combustion chamber, hot method · Nested loops method
and cold nozzles, and functional parameters, were integrated
into a comprehensive code. This approach can be applied Abbreviations
to all twin-spool turbofan engines and even more complex CC Combustion chamber
ones with any level of complexity. When compared to meth- CLP Compressor low-pressure
ods based on Newton–Raphson multidimensional iteration CN Cold nozzle
technique, fuzzy logic, artificial intelligence, Kalman filter, HN Hot nozzle
and computational fluid dynamics, the implementation of HPC High pressure compressor
this approach is more straightforward. Afterward, the per- HPT High pressure turbine
formance curves of a non-mixed twin-spool turbofan engine HP-spool High pressure spool
were derived based on established performance curves using LHV Lower heating value of the fuel
the scaling method of constant coefficients. For compatibil- LPC Low pressure compressor
ity analysis between the engine components, the method LPT Low pressure turbine
of nested sequential loops was applied before completing LP-spool Low pressure spool
the engine performance simulation. In order to validate the PR Pressure ratio
presented model against reference data at static sea level, a THP Turbine high pressure
comparison of the results of the on-design and off-design TSFC Specific fuel consumption
simulation of the specific engine was performed. The vari-
ations in matching error, thrust, fuel and air mass flow rates List of symbols
were presented for the off-design performance with rota- A Area
tional speeds ranging from 80 to 110 percent. Based on the Cp Specific heat
achieved outcomes, the lowest amount of error was 0.4% F Fan
for the calculation of the thrust, while the highest amount f Fuel-to-air ratio
H Height
ṁ a Air mass flow rate
* Fathollah Ommi ṁ c Mass flow rate
[email protected] ṁ f Fuel mass flow rate
1
Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran M Mach number
2
Khayyam Research Institute, Ministry of Science, Research, Nrel Relative rotational speed
and Technology, Tehran, Iran P Pressure

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
102 J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C (February 2024) 105(1):101–114

T Temperature to economic and environmental concerns, it is essential to

Tr Thrust have a comprehensive model for off-design performance
u Velocity analysis in the primary design phases. Off-design models
aim to calculate the state of the flowing fluid at different
Greek points of the engine’s flow. Finally, thrust, fuel consumption
𝛽 Bypass jet ratio and all other main parameters of engine components can be
𝛾 Specific heat ratio determined by using these results [4, 5].
Δpb Combustion chamber pressure drops Two critical factors determine the correctness of turbofan
𝜂 Isentropic efficiency engine off-design performance simulations. The first factor
𝜂0 Total efficiency to consider is the performance maps of components. The
𝜂b Thermal efficiency of the chamber second factor is how the off-design performance analysis is
𝜂m Mechanical efficiency formulated and solved, and how many simplifications are
𝜂pr Propulsive efficiency assumed during the analysis [6]. Off-design performance
𝜂r Air inlet pressure recovery coefficient calculations of turbofan engines can be obtained via vari-
𝜂th Thermal efficiency ous methods. These methods include component matching,
𝜋 Pressure ratio gas path analysis, Kalman filter methods, Wittenberg cycle
𝜋b Total pressure drops of the chamber analysis, and methods based on fuzzy logic, artificial intel-
𝜋d Static pressure drops ligence, and computational fluid dynamics. Some of these
𝜌 Density methods require testing of engine components, which, by
using interpolation and extrapolation methods, can predict
Subscripts engine performance [7–20]. It is possible to obtain the per-
0 Total formance curves of desired engine components merely by
a Air scaling the standard performance curves in the component
c Compressor matching approach with parameters of the desired engine
d Design point components at design point [21].
e Outlet condition One of the first studies on the off-design performance
f Fan/fuel simulation of twin- or triple-spool turbine engines named
FM Corrected compressor GENENG/GENENG II, which was based on the matching
g Hot condition components technique, was conducted by Koeing et al. The
hp High pressure governing equations of the engine were solved in matrix
i Inlet condition form. Also, it was possible to produce performance curves
lp Low pressure of engine components using the method of scaling the fixed
nhot Hot nozzle coefficients. Sellers et al. developed a model named DYN-
ncold Cold nozzle GEN for simulating steady-state and transient-state per-
t Turbine formance based on the previous models of GENENG and
TM Corrected turbine GENENG II, which only could simulate the steady-state
performance. This model could simulate the functioning
of single or twin-spool turbojet engines as well as twin- or
Introduction triple-spool turbine engines [22–27].
To determine the off-design performance characteris-
The thermodynamic analysis of turbofan engines involves tics of aero gas turbines, Pathak et al. [28] used compo-
evaluating the changes in thermodynamic properties of fluid nent matching techniques and studied how changes in fuel
passing through the engine. To properly analyze turbofan consumption affected these characteristics. According to
engines, two distinct parts are taken into consideration: the the temperature and pressure ratio functions of the turbine,
on-design analysis (cycle parametric analysis) and the off- Mattingly [1, 29] analyzed the off-design performance by
design analysis (engine performance analysis at different replacing constant values with the same performance val-
rotational speeds of operation) [1]. In analyzing the per- ues at the design point. Sanghi et al. [30] simulated the
formance curve related to on-design analysis, each point steady-state performance of an aero engine of interest by
represents a different engine. However, to estimate engine employing the basic equations at the design point. Gobran
performance in different weather conditions and at different [31] presented a new scaling method to produce charac-
engine rotational speeds, a modeling approach capable of teristic curves of compressor and turbine components and
describing the behavior of engine components in the absence drew their operating curves. Walsh [3] obtained the engine
of on-design conditions is necessary [2, 3]. Nowadays, due performance characteristics using the β lines method and

13
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C (February 2024) 105(1):101–114 103

reference performance diagrams. Yang et al. [32] presented conditions, with the efficiency of the turbofan being nota-
a new approach to changing the scale of compressor perfor- bly responsive to the compressor’s characteristics. Elevat-
mance curves by performing statistical analyses on a large ing component efficiency along with augmenting the high-
number of compressors’ performance curves. This method pressure ratio of the combustor emerges as a promising
yielded improved results compared to the linear scaling avenue for bolstering engine thrust and advancing environ-
change method, which uses constant coefficients for spe- mental sustainability, as highlighted by prior research [47].
cific pressure values. Gorji et al. [5] studied the thermo- The most important weakness of current methods in
dynamics of turbofan engines at off-design conditions and off-design simulation of turbine engines, such as turbofan,
represented thermodynamic parameters based on different turbojet and turboprop is the presence of many errors in
inlet Mach numbers and flight altitudes. Their method is the main parameters of the engine. The main reason for
based on replacing constant coefficients of the temperature these errors is due to the unavailability of the compressor
ratio and pressure ratio functions in the off-design mode and turbine maps of the investigated engines. In the past,
with the same performance at the design point condition, researchers tried to overcome this problem by using math-
which is frequently used in analyses. Hosseinimaab et al. ematical relations, although this approach proved some-
[33] presented an innovative method for analyzing gas tur- what effective. Moreover, this study presents a method that
bine engines that did not require repeat adjustments. A sys- has solved a large part of the problems and greatly reduced
tem of equations is solved using this method. the errors of the simulation results.
Simulating the off-design performance of a turbine engine An effective method is presented in this article to simu-
for aircraft is a complex nonlinear problem [34]. Accord- late the off-design performance of twin-spool aero engines.
ing to the conducted investigations, researchers usually Using this approach, the off-design performance of air-
employ iteration algorithms and use two main approaches craft turbofan engines can be modeled in a similar man-
for implementing this process. For the first approach, one or ner for all arrangements of engines, and the method can
more variables that require iteration loops are chosen based be employed with different degrees of accuracy for com-
on the engine configuration. By varying the values of the plex engines. Off-design performance analysis presents a
selected variables, compatibility between engine compo- simple and efficient approach for evaluating performance
nents is attempted to be satisfied. This method has gained based on up-to-date computer facilities and programming
more attention because it is easier to implement for engines environments. Additionally, it can be used in energy fields
compared to other methods [35–39]. The second approach by applying relevant governing equations. In the present
uses a multidimensional Newton–Raphson iteration proce- simulation, scaling and similarity methods are employed
dure instead of the first method [40, 41]. For convergence to obtain performance maps of the main components of
of the compatibility equations, quasi-Newton methods turbofan engines [48, 49]. Afterward, the model of turbo-
[42] or minimization algorithms [43] are employed. This fan engine performance is completed with the algorithm of
method, however, leads to nested loops that are very difficult off-design performance simulation based on the method of
to resolve due to the increasing complexity of its compo- consecutive nested loops and establishing the compatibil-
nents and variables. In addition to iteration, there is another ity conditions of engine components. Finally, performance
method of avoiding it. As a result, this method does not offer parameters of the JT9D turbofan engine, such as thrust,
adequate accuracy for industrial applications, as it assumes fuel consumption, engine inlet air flow rate, bypass ratio,
the turbine and compressor efficiency to be fixed and equal component pressure ratio, component efficiency, turbine
to the design point values [44, 45]. Additionally, some com- inlet and outlet temperature are determined in static or
mercial coding programs cannot be directly compiled with flight operation cycles, and the performance consistency
other programs, such as Matlab, to perform optimizations or of each engine module is ensured.
to conduct studies on innovative cycle configurations [46]. The Nested Loops method yields accurate results for pre-
There is a gap in the knowledge of off-design performance dicting the performance of turbofan engines in the design
analysis of aircraft engines, especially twin-spool turbofans, and analysis phases. The most important advantage of using
which has not been addressed so far. this method is in the extraction of compressors and turbines
Moreover, recent articles from 2022 have offered an maps, which is done using the scaling method of fixed coef-
opportunity to delve deeper into the evaluation of turbo- ficients. The closer the specifications of the analyzed engine
fan engine performance. This involves an exploration of design point are to the selected reference curves, the less
various design parameters aimed at fulfilling functional error there will be in the simulation results. It is worth men-
prerequisites, while also investigating the implications tioning that in off-design performance analysis, the perfor-
of component efficiency on mitigating environmental mance curves of the engine components play a key role, and
consequences. Notably, there exists a substantial dispar- more accurate and optimal extraction of these curves using
ity between performance criteria under ideal and real advanced mathematical models or conducting experimental

13
104 J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C (February 2024) 105(1):101–114

tests provides the possibility of a more precise simulation Free flow To compute the performance of the engine, it is
of the engine. crucial to consider the temperature and static pressure of the
free flow. These values are determined based on the flight
altitude above sea level (H). For altitudes up to 11 km from
2 Methodology sea level, which corresponds to the atmospheric troposphere,
the relationship between temperature, static pressure, and
To model the off-design performance of a non-mixed twin- altitude can be described using Eqs. (1) and (2) [50]. Beyond
spool turbofan engine, it was necessary to determine the this altitude range and up to 30 km, corresponding to the
thermodynamic equations that relate its various components, atmospheric stratosphere, the ambient temperature remains
such as the free flow, intake, fan, compressor, turbine (low fixed at − 56 °C. In this range of altitudes, the relationship
and high pressures), combustion chamber, and hot and cold between pressure changes and height can be represented by
nozzles. After formulating these equations, we developed a Eq. (3) [50]. The subscript "ref" in these equations indicates
mathematical model of the engine. reference conditions, with reference pressure and tempera-
To facilitate simulation of the engine’s performance, we ture values of 101,325 Pa and 15 °C, respectively.
numbered its components based on their axial position. The ( )
ARP755A standard was used, which is the global standard
T0 = Tref − 0.0065H + 273.15 (1)
for identifying gas turbine components in jet engines [1,
( )5.256
48]. Figure 1 provides a diagram of the engine’s numbering T0
system according to this standard, and Table 1 provides a P0 = Pref (2)
Tref
more comprehensive explanation of the numbering system.

Fig. 1  Schematic of non-mixed

twin-spool turbofan engine [2]

Table 1  Standard numbering of Station Engine component Station number Engine component
non-mixed turbofan engines number

0 Free flow conditions 31 Combustion chamber inlet

1 Intake 4 Combustion chamber outlet
2 Fan inlet 41 High-pressure turbine inlet
13 Fan outlet 44 High-pressure turbine outlet
16 Cold nozzle inlet 45 Low-pressure turbine inlet
18 Cold nozzle outlet 5 Low-pressure turbine outlet
21 Low-pressure compressor inlet 6 Hot nozzle inlet
25 High-pressure compressor inlet 8 Hot nozzle outlet
3 High-pressure compressor outlet

13
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C (February 2024) 105(1):101–114 105

( ) Combustion chamber To calculate the total outlet pres-

11000 − H
P0 = 0.2234Pref exp (3)
6342 sure and fuel-to-air ratio of the combustor (f),𝜋b , 𝜂b , and
T04 must be known. Equations (11) and (12) [52] can then
Intake To calculate the performance of turbofan engine
be used for this purpose. In Eq. (12), the subscripts “a”
intakes, it is important to note that regardless of the flow pro-
and “g” denote the cold (air) and hot (gas) components of
file, P0 and T0 at the entrance of the intake always equal the
the engine, respectively.
corresponding values for free flow. These values can be calcu-
lated using Eqs. (4) and (5) [51], where M and γ represent the P04 = 𝜋b P03 (11)
Mach number and specific heat ratio, respectively. Addition-
ally, the subscript "a" indicates the cold condition of the engine ṁ f Cpg T04 − Cpa T03
components [46]. f = = (12)
ṁ a LHV𝜂b − Cpg T04
( )
𝛾 −1 2
T01 = T0a = Ta 1 + a Ma (4) Turbine To determine the total outlet temperature of the
2
HPT during steady-state operation when its power produc-
tion equals the power consumption of the HPC, Eq. (13)
[ ] 𝛾a
𝛾 −1 2 𝛾a−1 can be used [52]. Likewise, for the LPT, where the tur-
P01 = Pa 1 + 𝜂i a Ma (5) bine’s power production is equal to the power consump-
2
tion of the LPC and fan, the outlet temperature can be
Equation (6) can be used to calculate the total flow pres- obtained using Eq. (14) [52]. The outlet pressures of both
sure at the end of the intake, while Eq. (7) [46] can deter- the HPT and the LPT can be calculated using Eqs. (15)
mine the static pressure drop ( 𝜋d ), which accounts for the and (16) [52], respectively. These equations incorporate
effect of friction loss. The symbol 𝜋dmax represents the maxi- the mechanical efficiency of the spool, represented by 𝜂m.
mum possible value of 𝜋d and typically ranges between 0.95
ṁ chp Cpa ( )
and 0.99 at the design point. In Eq. (7), the intake pressure T044 = T041 − T03 − T025 (13)
recovery coefficient 𝜂r is derived from Eq. (8) [46] using the ṁ thp 𝜂mhp cpg
flight Mach number.
1 ( ) ( )
P02 = 𝜋d P01 (6) T05 = T045 − (ṁ C T − T021 + ṁ a Cpa T013 − T02
ṁ thp 𝜂mlp cpg clp pa 025
(14)
𝜋d = 𝜋dmax 𝜂r (7)
[ ( )] 𝛾g
1 T044 𝛾a−1
P044 = P041 1 − 1− (15)
⎧ 1 M<1 𝜂thp T041
⎪ � �1.35
𝜂r = ⎨ 1 − 0.075 M0 − 1 1<M≤5 (8)
⎪ 4800 M≥5 [ ( )] 𝛾g
⎩ M0 +935 1 T05 𝛾a−1
(16)
P05 = P045 1− 1−
𝜂thp T045
Assuming adiabatic flow in the intake, the total tempera-
ture of the intake’s outlet can then be calculated using [46]. Nozzle Eq. (17) [46] defines the critical expansion ratio
(P ) in the converging nozzle component. When the
P0ni
T01 = T02 (The adiabatic assumption of the inlet flow) Critical
nozzle expansion ratio ( P ) is less than the critical
P0 ni

Fan and compressor To analyze the performance of aero

Critical
expansion ratio, the static pressure at the nozzle outlet
engines, it is necessary to determine the total pressure and equals the ambient pressure. The static temperature of the
total temperature at the outlet. This can be achieved by using nozzle outlet can then be calculated using Eq. (18) [46].
Eqs. (9) and (10), provided that the values of π and η for If, however, the nozzle expansion ratio exceeds the critical
the fan, LPC, and HPC are known. In these equations, the expansion ratio, the static pressure and temperature at the
subscripts e and i refer to the exit and inlet positions, respec- engine outlet equal the critical pressure and temperature,
tively [46]. respectively. Equations (17) and (19) [46] can be used to
P0e = 𝜋P0i (9) calculate these values. In such conditions, the nozzle
becomes choked, and the Mach number at the nozzle outlet
( 𝛾a −1 ) equals 1. The subscript “n” denotes the nozzle in the fol-
𝜋 𝛾a −1 lowing equations:
T0e = T0i 1 + (10)
𝜂

13
106 J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C (February 2024) 105(1):101–114

[ ( )] 𝛾 ṁ f
P0 ni 1 𝛾 − 1 𝛾−1 (28)
= 1− (17) TSFC =
Tr
PCritical 𝜂n 𝛾 + 1

( ) 𝛾−1
Pne 𝛾
Tne = T0 ni { 1 − 𝜂n [1 − ]} (18) 3 Off‑Design Performance Simulation
P0 ni
of Non‑mixed Turbofan Engine

T0 ni 𝛾 +1 Off-design performance of a turbofan engine is determined

= (19)
Tcritical 2 by using the performance parameters at the design point.
Compared to off-design calculations, engine performance
After calculating the static pressure and temperature at the calculations at the design point are much simpler and can be
outlet of the nozzle, taking into account the assumption of done without trial and error. Table 2 lists the inputs required
adiabatic flow in the nozzle, other parameters at the outlet of for analyzing the performance of a turbofan engine at the
the nozzle such as velocity (u), density (𝜌) and area ( A) can be design point, which include 21 parameters specific to the
calculated using Eqs. (20) to (22) [46]: non-mixed twin-spool turbofan engine. During the design
√ [ phase, designers rely on their expertise to select appropriate
√
√ ( ) 𝛾−1 ]
√
une = To ni cp 𝜂n 1 −
Pne 𝛾
(20) values for these parameters based on primary turbine engine
Poni design principles. However, during the performance analy-
sis phase, values of these parameters can often be obtained
from engine performance manuals. Additionally, certain per-
Pne
𝜌ne = (21) formance parameters of turbofan engines can be estimated
RTne using available reference information such as ref. [50].

ṁ ne 3.1 Determination of the Performance Curves

Ane = (22)
une 𝜌ne
After performing design point calculations, it is now time to
Performance parameters The most critical performance extract the performance curves of the engine components.
parameters of the non-mixed twin-spool turbofan engine are; To determine the performance curves of the fan, compres-
Thrust ( Tr ), specific thrust (STr ), thermal efficiency (𝜂th ), sors, and turbines of the turbofan engine, the scaling method
propulsive efficiency (𝜂pr ), total efficiency (𝜂0), specific fuel of constant coefficients was utilized. In this method, the per-
consumption (TSFC) whose values can be calculated, respec- formance curves of the components were obtained based
tively, using Eqs. (23) to (28) [46]. In the following equations, on similar performance curves that are already available.
𝛽 represents the bypass jet ratio. For this research, the performance curves presented in sev-
{ } eral NASA reports [12, 22, and 23] were used as reference
1[ ] [ ]
Tr = ṁ a (1 + f )u8 − u0 + u18 − u0 curves of the fan, turbine, and compressor. The performance
𝛽 (23)
{( ) ( ) } curves for the fan, HPC, and LPC were obtained according
+ P8 − P0 A8 + P18 − P0 A18 to the on-design performance data and the reference curves
using Eqs. (29) to (31) [51]. In the following equations, the
Tr
STr =
ṁ a (24)

(1 + f )u28 + 𝛽u218 − (1 + 𝛽)u20 Table 2  Required inputs at the design point of a non-mixed twin-
𝜂th = (25) spool turbofan engine
2f × LHV
No. Symbol No. Symbol No. Symbol
[ ]
2u0 (1 + f )u8 + 𝛽u18 − (1 + 𝛽)u0 1 ṁ a 8 𝜂chp 15 𝜂nhot
𝜂pr = (26) 2 𝛽 9 𝜋hpc 16 𝜂ncold
(1 + f )u218 + 𝛽u218 − (1 + 𝛽)u20
3 𝜋dmax 10 𝜂b 17 𝜂mhp
4 𝜂f 11 Δpb 18 𝜂mlp
𝜂0 = 𝜂th 𝜂pr (27) 5 𝜋f 12 T04 19 M0
6 𝜂clp 13 𝜂thp 20 H
7 𝜋lpc 14 𝜂tlp 21 LHV

13
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C (February 2024) 105(1):101–114 107

subscripts d and ref represent the on-design and reference the corrected mass flow rate leads to a greater concavity of
conditions, respectively. the efficiency ratio and a steeper slope of the pressure ratio
𝜋−1d ( ) curve. These relationships can be utilized to generate the
𝜋= 𝜋 −1 +1 (29) characteristic curve of a low-pressure compressor.
𝜋dref ref
Figure 3 displays a graph with the corrected mass flow
rate on the horizontal axis and the efficiency of the low-pres-
ṁ cd sure compressor on the vertical axis. The method presented
ṁ c = ṁ
ṁ cdref cref (30) in this study illustrates that the low-pressure compressor
exhibits consistent behavior at the same rotational speed, and
𝜂d this behavior remains predictable even as the rpm changes.
𝜂= 𝜂
𝜂dref ref (31) The results indicate that as the corrected mass flow rate
increases, the concavity of the efficiency ratio also increases.
Figure 2 displays the pressure ratio ( 𝜋f ) and efficiency It is important to note that the curve with CLP index repre-
(𝜂f ) curves for the JT9D engine fan, plotted against corrected sents the reference data, whereas the data indicated by the
mass flow rate ( ṁ c2 ) in different rotational speed ( Nrel ) of FM subscript represents the extracted and scaled map for the
the LP-spool. The horizontal axis represents the corrected low-pressure compressor of the JT9D engine.
mass flow rate, while the vertical axis shows the pressure Figure 4 illustrates a graph with the corrected mass flow
ratio and efficiency. The presented method demonstrates rate and the pressure ratio of the low-pressure compressor on
that the fan’s behavior remains consistent at the same rota- the horizontal and vertical axes, respectively. The presented
tional speed, while also remaining predictable as the rota- method reveals that the low-pressure compressor exhibits
tion speed changes. The results indicate that an increase in consistent behavior at the same rotational speed, and this
behavior can be predicted even with variations in rpm. The
data indicate that as the corrected mass flow rate increases,
the slope of the pressure ratio curve also increases.
When simulating the off-design performance of a turbo-
fan engine, it is possible to simplify the analysis process
by assuming that the efficiency of both the high-pressure
turbine (HPT) and low-pressure turbine (LPT) remain con-
stant and equal to their design values. To determine the per-
formance curves of the engine turbines, Eq. (32) and the
reference performance curves [46] were used. For instance,

Fig. 3  Efficiency changes in terms of mass flow rate (display based

Fig. 2  Efficiency and pressure ratio extracted diagrams of JT9D on reference low pressure compressor (CLP) and corrected compres-
engine fan in terms of corrected mass flow rate sor (FM))

13
108 J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C (February 2024) 105(1):101–114

Figure 6 illustrates the modified flow curve of the LPT

( ṁ c45) in relation to the inverse pressure ratio (1∕𝜋TLP ) in
different rotational speed of the JT9D engine. The point of
highest mass flow rate corresponds to the pressure ratio at
which choking conditions occur, these conditions can occur
in throat or annular sections.
Assumptions In order to simplify the mathematical model
and simulation algorithm for simulating the off-design per-
formance of an aircraft turbine engine, certain simplifying
assumptions were taken into consideration as follows:

• The humidity in the air was neglected.

• The air used for turbine cooling and cabin air compres-
sion was neglected.
• The fluid flow inside the air inlet and engine nozzle was
considered adiabatic.
• The working fluid inside the engine was considered a
Fig. 4  Pressure ratio changes in terms of mass flow rate (display
based on reference low pressure compressor (CLP) and corrected perfect gas.
compressor (FM)) • γ in the cold (intake, HPC, LPC, fan, and cold nozzle)
and hot (combustor, HPT, LPT, and hot nozzle) com-
ponents of the engine were considered equal to 1.4 and
1 ( ) 1.33, respectively.
1 −1 1
=
𝜋 td
−1 +1 (32) • Cp in the cold and hot components of the engine was
𝜋t 1 𝜋tref
𝜋tdref
−1 considered equal to 1005 and 1150 J/kg.K, respectively.
• Engine power consumption for side systems such as fuel
According to Fig. 5, the pressure ratio remains nearly and oil pumps was considered insignificant.
constant over a wide range of rotational speeds. This is sup- • The values of ( 𝜋d max ), ( 𝜋b ), ( 𝜂b ), ( 𝜂thp ), ( 𝜂tlp ), ( 𝜂n, cold ),
ported by the fact that different lines with the THP index in (𝜂n, hot ), (𝜂m ) in the off-design performance of the engine
the diagram of Fig. 5 are located close to each other. It is were considered constant and equal to the design point
important to note that as the reference map gets closer to the values.
scaled map, the simulation error will be lower.

Fig. 5  Inverse pressure ratio changes in terms of mass flow rate (dis- Fig. 6  Inverse pressure ratio changes in terms of mass flow rate (dis-
play based on reference high pressure turbine (THP) and corrected play based on reference low pressure turbine (TLP) and scaled map
turbine (TM)) of turbine)

13
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C (February 2024) 105(1):101–114 109

4 Off‑Design Performance Simulation ∙ ∙

𝛽 m21 = m18 = 𝜌18 V18 A18 (40)

In this research, the nested loops method was employed to

simulate the off-design performance of a non-mixed twin- The average error of the loops, also known as the match-
spool turbofan engine. Three nested loops were utilized to ing error, holds special importance in the approach of
achieve steady-state off-design performance. The first inner sequential nested loops. For the turbofan engine, this error
loop satisfied compatibility conditions between the compres- can be calculated using Eq. (41). During off-design perfor-
sor and the HPT, corresponding to Eqs. (33) to (35) [46]. To mance simulation, the solution is considered complete when
achieve this, it was necessary to search for a specific rota- the matching error reaches its minimum value. Equation (41)
tional speed on the performance curves of the fan and find a uses subscripts 1 to 3 to indicate the error related to each
point that satisfied the compatibility conditions between the simulation loop.
turbine and the HPC. The second loop satisfied the compat- error1 + error2 + error3
ibility conditions between the fan, compressor, and turbine errorMatch = (41)
3
(low-pressure), which corresponded to equations (36) to (38)
[26, 46]. In order to establish the compatibility conditions To analyze the performance of the non-mixed twin-spool
between the LP-spools, different rotational speeds of the fan turbofan engine, Table 3 lists other inputs needed in addi-
were searched to find the rotational speed at which compat- tion to the five reference performance curves used for the
ibility conditions were met. The third loop ensured compat- fan, compressors, HPT and LPT. Rows 4 to 28 of this table
ibility between the LPT outlet mass flow rate and hot nozzle. contain parameter values that can only be attained by ana-
For this purpose, altered fuel-to-air ratios of the engine were lyzing engine performance at the design point, and cannot
searched to find the ratio that satisfied the compatibility con- be changed during off-design analysis. However, it is pos-
dition between the LPT outlet flow rate and the hot nozzle sible to alter the HP-spool relative rotational speed, free flow
(Eqs. (39) and (40)) [46]. Figure 7 depicts the algorithm Mach number, and height above sea level, along with the
used to simulate the off-design performance of a non-mixed reference performance curves, during off-design analysis.
twin-spool aero turbine engine.
�
Nhp Nhp T02.5 5 Results and Discussion
√ =√ (33)
T04 T02.5 T04
In this article, the Matlab R2019b software was utilized to
√ √ � program the presented equations. In this regard, the estima-
ṁ 4 T04 ṁ 2,5 T02.5 T04 P02.5 P03 ṁ 4 tion of the performance of the twin-spool turbofan engine in
= (34)
P04 P02.5 T02.5 P03 P04 ṁ 2,5 the off-design simulation is similar to that of the on-design
simulation. To verify the validity of the developed code, the
( ) ( ) off-design performance analysis calculations for the JT9D
m∙2.5 Cpa T03 − T02.5 = 𝜂mhp m∙4 CPg T04 − T04.5 (35) twin-spool turbofan engine were compared with published
literature data.
� �
Nlp Nlp T013 Nlp T02
√ =√ =√ (36) 5.1 On‑Design Performance
T04.5 T013 T04.5 T02 T04.5
To analyze the on-design performance of the JT9D twin-
√ √ √ ∙ √
∙
m4.5 T04.5
∙
m21
∙
T021 T04.5 P013 m4.5 m2 T02 P02
spool turbofan engine, the input data presented in Table 4
= = √ were used. As shown in the table, the design point data
P04.5 P021 T013 P04.5 m∙ P02 T02
13 were considered under static conditions (M0 = 0). This
∙ √ √ ∙
m13 T013 T04.5 m4.5 Mach number can vary based on the availability of com-
− 𝛽
P013 P04.5 m∙ −𝛽 m∙ pressor and turbine maps considering the conditions. This
2 13
(37) assumption was made due to the unavailability of the JT9D
∙ ( ) ∙ ( ) engine design point data. It should be noted that the design
mclp Cpa T02.5 − T013 + ma Cpa T013 − T02 point of an aircraft turbine engine is typically measured
∙ ( ) (38) under flight conditions, but if these data are not available,
= mtlp CPg 𝜂mlp T04.5 − T05
the engine’s performance in static sea-level conditions can
be used for analysis.
∙ ∙
m5 = m8 = 𝜌8 V8 A8 (39)

13
110 J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C (February 2024) 105(1):101–114

Fig. 7  Simulation algorithm

M0, H, Nhprel

Estimate fuel to air ratio

Estimate the relative rotational speed of the fan

Pick a point on the fan performance curve

Determine the initial conditions of the air inlet (Eq: (1),(2),(3))

Determine the fan inlet conditions (Eq: (4),(5))
Determine the fan outlet conditions (Eq: (9),(10))
Determine the flow rate and bypass ratio of the fan (Table (4))
Determine the compressor outlet conditions (Eq: (11))
Determine the combustion chamber outlet conditions (Eq: (11))
Determine the pressure ratio of the HPT using the performance curve
Determine the new pressure ratio of the HPT (Eq: (32))

No Check the consistency of flow

rate, compressor and HPT
rotational speed
(Eq: (33),(34),(35))

Yes

Determine the pressure ratio of the LPT using the performance

curve
Determine the new pressure ratio of the LPT (Eq: (32))

No Checking the compatibility of the

rotational speed, the fan and the
LPT work (Eq: (36),(37),(38))

Yes
Determine the hot nozzle outlet conditions
(flow rate, pressure and temperature)
(Eq: (17),(18),(19))

No
Check the mass compatibility
between the low pressure turbine
and the hot nozzle (Eq: (39))

Yes
Calculate the engine performance parameters
(thrust and TSFC (Eq: (23),(28))

Table 5 presents the results of the investigation into the that the maximum error in the results was related to the
on-design performance of the JT9D aero engine, includ- engine’s fuel consumption, which was approximately 11%.
ing various performance parameters. The analysis showed However, other performance parameters such as thrust,

13
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C (February 2024) 105(1):101–114 111

Table 3  Required inputs at the design point of a non-mixed twin- Ighodaro et al. [52] conducted off-design modeling of a tur-
spool turbofan engine bojet engine with an operative afterburner and reported a
No. Symbol No. Symbol No. Symbol 5.62% error in thrust estimation, while Balli and Caliskan
[43], who studied a specific turboprop engine, reported a
1 11 21 1∕𝜋tlpd
Nhp rel ṁ c2.5d
2.34% error. In contrast, the presented method has reduced
2 12 𝜂chpd 22 𝜂tlpd
M0
the error in thrust estimation to below one percent by utiliz-
3 13 𝜋chpd 23 𝜂nhotd
H ing the nested loops method. This method maximizes the
4 𝜋dmax 14 𝜂bd 24 𝜂ncoldd
accuracy of the results by estimating the performance maps
5 ṁ c2d 15 Δpbd 25 𝜂mhpd
of the turbines and compressors using a scaling technique.
6 𝜂fd 16 ṁ c4d 26 𝜂mlpd
Regarding the 11% error in specific fuel consumption
7 𝜋fd 17 1∕𝜋thpd 27 A8
estimation, it is worth noting that in off-design performance
8 ṁ c13d 18 𝜂thpd 28 A18
analysis, the performance curves of the engine components
9 𝜂clpd 19 𝜂thpoly 29 LHV
play a crucial role. More accurate and optimal extraction of
10 𝜋clpd 20 ṁ c4.5d
these curves, using advanced mathematical models or con-
ducting experimental tests, can provide the possibility of
more accurately simulating the engine. In addition, simplify-
Table 4  On-design simulation inputs for JT9D engine [45, 48] ing assumptions in simulation, such as considering constant
No. Symbol Value No. Symbol Value
specific heat at constant pressure in hot or cold components
of the engine, can be the source of the most significant errors
1 ṁ a 677.2 12 T04 1349.8 in specific fuel consumption predictions.
2 𝛽 5 13 𝜂thp 0.89
3 𝜋dmax 0.99 14 𝜂tlp 0.89 5.2 Off‑Design Performance
4 𝜂f 0.95 15 𝜂nhot 0.98
5 𝜋f 1.537 16 𝜂ncold 0.96 The inputs required for simulating the off-design perfor-
6 𝜂clp 0.85 17 𝜂mhp 0.99 mance of the engine largely overlap with those needed for
7 𝜋clp 2.184 18 𝜂mlp 0.99 on-design performance analysis. Some additional inputs
8 𝜂chp 0.88 19 M0 0 are obtained by conducting the on-design point analysis.
9 𝜋chp 9.844 20 H 0 Table 6 presents the input data necessary for simulating the
10 𝜂b 0.98 21 LHV 42,800 off-design performance of the JT9D engine.
11 Δpb 0.95 The performance simulation of the JT9D engine was con-
ducted under static sea-level conditions, ranging from 80 to
110 percent. Figure 8 demonstrates the changes in matching
specific thrust, and engine outlet cross-sectional area were error and thrust of the JT9D engine concerning the relative
calculated with high accuracy. rotational speed of the HP-spool in static sea-level condi-
It should be noted that the main cause of the error in the tions. Figure 8 indicates that at high rotational speeds of
TSFC parameter was the value of the fuel-to-air ratio. This the HP-spool, the simulation exhibited less matching error,
ratio is strongly influenced by the ratio of specific heat of implying a more suitable matching of all engine compo-
the engine in the hot and cold components, which affects the nents. As shown in the graph, from 95% rotational speed
amount of Cp in the cold and hot parts of the engine. onward, the matching error was below 20%, indicating a
In describing the results presented in Table 5, it is impor- more appropriate matching of engine components, resulting
tant to note that the discrepancies between the achieved and in more accurate simulation results.
benchmark results are acceptable when compared to previ- It is essential to note that this diagram cannot be gen-
ous studies in gas turbine parametric modeling. For example, erated in GSP software, which prevents analyzing the

Table 5  Results of on-design No. Performance parameter GSP Simulating code Unit Error (%)
performance simulation of
JT9D engine 1 Thrust 198.050 197.236 kN 0.4
2 Specific thrust 292.454 291.253 m/s 0.4
3 Fuel mass flow rate 1.711 1.898 kg/s 10
4 Specific fuel consumption 0.031 0.035 kg/ N.hr 11
5 Hot nozzle outlet cross-sectional area 0.445 0.482 m2 8
6 Cold nozzle outlet cross-sectional area 1.792 1.748 m2 2

13
112 J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C (February 2024) 105(1):101–114

Table 6  Off-design simulation inputs for the JT9D engine

No. Performance Value No. Performance Value
parameter parameter

1 Nhp rel Variable 12 𝜂chpd 0.88

2 M0 Variable 13 𝜋chpd 9.844
3 H Variable 14 𝜂bd 0.98
4 𝜋dmax 0.99 15 Δpbd 0.95
5 ṁ c2d 784.04 16 ṁ c4d 7.992
6 𝜂fd 0.95 17 1∕𝜋thpd 4.233
7 𝜋fd 1.537 18 𝜂thpd 0.89
8 ṁ c13d 79.11 19 𝜂thpoly 84.19
9 𝜂clpd 0.85 20 ṁ c4.5d 28.687
10 𝜋clpd 2.184 21 1∕𝜋tlpd 4.645
11 ṁ c2.5d 41.208 22 LHV 42,800

Fig. 9  Changes in the inlet air and fuel mass flow rates of the JT9D
engine in terms of HP-spool rotational speed

reference data, the maximum error in calculating the engine

inlet air mass flow rate was about 11% for rotational speeds
in the range of 90% to 110%, corresponding to a rotational
speed of 90%.
As revealed by the graph, the calculation error for air
flow initially decreased as the HP-spool rotational speed
increased but then increased again to around 5% at the rota-
tional speed of 110%. Moreover, Fig. 9 shows that the maxi-
mum error in calculating the engine fuel flow was approxi-
mately 14%, which decreased to about 7% as the rotational
speed increased.

6 Conclusion
Fig. 8  Changes in matching error and thrust of the JT9D engine
This article presents a comprehensive approach for mod-
matching error’s amount in this software. From Fig. 9, it eling the off-design performance of turbofan engines.
can be observed that the maximum thrust calculation error Most of the current methods for off-design analysis have
at rotational speeds from 92 to 110 percent was about 14%, been developed over time and require designers to have
corresponding to the rotational speed of 92 percent. expertise and experience in identifying repeated variables.
Based on this diagram, it can be inferred that increas- Additionally, thermodynamic analysis software packages
ing the HP-spool rotational speed decreases the value of the for gas turbines have limitations. Therefore, it is neces-
matching error. However, for rotational speeds higher than sary to provide an accurate and non-complex method for
100%, the matching error increased to 11% at the rotational off-design performance simulations that can be applied to
speed of 110%. more complex engines with varying degrees of accuracy.
It should be noted that the turbofan engine has been ana- The engine performance was independently visualized
lyzed and determined up to a speed of 110% rpm, which is based on compatibility equations and characteristics, and
beyond its design specifications. In the event that the engine the results of the off-design performance simulation of a
reaches a stall mode, further analysis greater than 110% rpm biaxial turbofan engine were well-aligned with verified
is deemed unnecessary as it becomes critical. Figure 9 illus- data, indicating the acceptable accuracy of the developed
trates the changes in fuel and air mass flow rates of the JT9D code.
engine concerning the HP-spool rotational speed in static According to the engine thrust calculation results, it was
sea-level conditions. Figure 9 indicates that compared to the observed that at high rotational speeds (95% or higher) of

13
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C (February 2024) 105(1):101–114 113

the HP-spool, the matching error in the simulation was less, 4. G. Oates, "Aerothermodynamics of Gas Turbine and Rocket Pro-
suggesting that all engine components were appropriately pulsion", Aiaa, 1997
5. M. Gorji, A. Kazemi, D. Ganji, Thermodynamic study of turbofan
matched. As a result, the maximum thrust calculation error engine in off-design conditions. J. Basic Appl. Sci. Res. 2(11),
was about 14%, corresponding to a rotational speed of 92%. 11239–11253 (2012)
Furthermore, the maximum error in calculating the inlet air 6. G. Alberto Misté, E. Benini, Turbojet engine performance tuning
flow rate was around 11%, which occurred at a rotational with a new map adaptation concept. J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power
136(7), 071202 (2014)
speed of 90%. Similarly, the maximum error in calculating 7. Y. Li, Gas turbine performance and health status estimation using
the engine fuel flow rate was approximately 14%, decreasing adaptive gas path analysis. J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 136(4),
to about 7% as the rotational speed increased. 041701. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1115/1.​31593​78
The most significant factor causing errors in the off- 8. S. Ogaji, R. Singh, Gas path fault diagnosis framework for a
three-shaft gas turbine. Proceed. Inst. Mech. Eng Part A J. Power
design simulation results was found to be the performance Energy 217(2), 149–157 (2003)
curves obtained from the scaling method of constant coeffi- 9. G. Denney, "F16 jet engine trending and diagnostics with neural
cients. It was observed that if the analyzed object was closer, networks, in Applications of Artificial Neural Networks IV (Vol.
the presented curves related to the fan, compressor, and tur- 1965)-SPIE, pp. 419–422, 1993
10. Y. Yu, L. Chen, F. Sun, C. Wu, Neural-network based analysis
bine were also closer to each other, and the amount of error and prediction of a compressor’s characteristic performance map.
in the simulation results reduced. To reduce this error, it Appl. Energy 84(1), 48–55 (2007)
is recommended to employ more advanced mathematical 11. A. Lazzaretto, A. Toffolo, Analytical and neural network models
models to calculate the thermophysical characteristics of the for gas turbine design and off-design simulation. Int. J. Thermo-
dyn. 4(4), 173–182 (2001)
fluid. In this article, the authors aim to discuss the engine’s 12. R. M. Plencner, "Plotting Component Maps in the Navy/NASA
performance within the range of 80% to 110% of its design Engine Program (NNEP)", NASA technical memorandum
point. This will allow them to cover both the on-design and 101433, Jan 1989
off-design conditions of the engine. Additionally, analyzing 13. J. Suraweera, "Off-Design Performance Prediction of Gas Tur-
bines Without the Use of Compressor or Turbine Characteristics",
the engine’s performance beyond 110% is unnecessary since 2012
its behavior within the design point range (100%) accurately 14. H. Wittenberg, Prediction of off-design performance of turbojet
represents its performance. and turbofan engines. AGARD, Conf. Proc. 242, 1997. https://​
Considering the results of the simulation of the perfor- pascal-​franc​is.​inist.​fr/​vibad/​index.​php?​action=​getRe​cordD​etail​
&​idt=​PASCA​L7980​029182
mance of the JT9D engine, it was observed that the use of a 15. P. Mohammadian and M. Saidi, "Mean-Line Model Development
sequential nested loop method provides sufficient accuracy for Off-Design Performance Prediction of Transonic Axial Com-
for predicting the performance of non-mixed twin-spool tur- pressor of an Industrial Gas Turbine Based on Computational
bofan engines. It was also observed that the most important Fluid Dynamics Database," Proceedings of the Institution of
Mechanical Engineers, Part A: Journal of Power and Energy, 2022
factor causing errors in the results of the off-design simula- 16. Y. Zheng, D. Hu, Y. Cao, Y. Dai, Preliminary design and off-
tion is the extracted performance curves from the coefficient design performance analysis of an organic rankine cycle radial-
scaling method. In this method, the closer the design point inflow turbine based on mathematic method and CFD method.
of the reference curves used is to the design point of the ana- Appl. Therm. Eng. 112, 25–37 (2017)
17. H. Golchin, F. Ommi, Z. Saboohi, Assessment of converting
lyzed engine, the closer the performance curves become to approach to efficient design of micro-turboprop engines. Chin. J.
each other, and the error in the simulation results decreases. Aeronaut. 33(2), 572–588 (2020)
Therefore, if possible, one of the most effective solutions to 18. H. Kadhim, A. Rona, J. Gostelow, K. Leschke, Optimization of
reduce the error level is to change the reference curves used the non-axisymmetric stator casing of a 1.5 stage axial turbine.
Int. J. Mech. Sci. 136, 503–514 (2018)
in the scaling method. It should be noted that in the analysis 19. E. Saturday, P. Nweke, Off-design performance analysis of gas
of off-design performance, the performance curves of the turbines. Glob. J. Eng. Technol. Adv. 4(2), 1–10 (2020)
engine components play a very important role, and obtain- 20. Y. Li and R. Singh, "An Advanced Gas Turbine Gas Path Diag-
ing more accurate and optimal curves through advanced nostic System-PYTHIA," XVII International Symposium on Air
Breathing Engines, Munich, Germany, Paper No. ISABE-2005–
mathematical models or experimental tests provides a more 1284, 2005
accurate simulation of the engine. 21. Q. Al-Hamdan and M. Ebaid, "Modeling and Simulation of a Gas
Turbine Engine for Power Generation." 2006
22. R.W Koenig., and Fishbach L.H., GENENG II: "A Program for
Calculating Design and Off-Design Performance of Twoand
References Three- Spool Turbofans with as Many as Three Nozzles", NASA
Techninal note, D-6553, 1972
23. R. Koenig, A Program for Calculating Design and Off-Design
1. J. Mattingly, "Aircraft Engine Design", AIAA, 2002 Performance for Turbojet and Turbofan Engines (National Aero-
2. J. Kurzke, "GasTurb 10 User Manual", 2004 nautics and Space Administration, USA, 1972)
3. P. Walsh, P. Flectcher, Gas Turbine Performance (Wiley, London, 24. J. Sellers and C. Daniele, "DYNGEN: A Program for Calculating
2004) Steady-State and Transient Performance of Turbojet and Turbofan

13
114 J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C (February 2024) 105(1):101–114

Engines," National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Vol. engines with arbitrary control systems. Int. J. Turbo Jet Eng. 2(1),
7901), 1975 19–28 (1985)
25. W. Visser, M. Broomhead, GSP A Generic Object-Oriented Gas 41. A. Stamatis, K. Mathioudakis, K. Papailiou, Adaptive simula-
Turbine Simulation Environment (National Aerospace Laboratory tion of gas turbine performance. Am. Soc. Mech. Eng. 79139, 83
NLR, Netherlands, 2000) (1989)
26. W. Visser, S.C.A. Kluiters, Modelling the Effects of Operating 42. A. Sehat, F. Ommi, Z. Saboohi, Effects of steam addition and/or
Conditions and Alternative Fuels on Gas Turbine Performance injection on the combustion characteristics: a review. Therm. Sci.
and Emissions (National Aerospace Laboratory NLR, Nether- 25(3 Part A), 1625–1652 (2021)
lands, 1998) 43. O. Balli, H. Caliskan, On-design and off-design operation perfor-
27. W. Visser, O. Kogenhop and M. Oostveen, "A Generic Approach mance assessmentsof an aero turboprop engine used on unmanned
for Gas Turbine Adaptive Modeling", 2006. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ aerial vehicles (UAVs) in terms of aviation, thermodynamic, envi-
1115/1.​19957​70 ronmental and sustainability perspectives. Energy Conv. Manag.
28. M. Pathak, P. Kumar, U. Saha, Prediction of off-design perfor- 1(243), 114403 (2021)
mance characteristic of a gas turbine cycle using matching tech- 44. S.S. Talebi, A. Madadi, A.M. Tousi, M. Kiaee, Micro gas turbine
nique. Int. J. Turbo Jet Eng. 22(2), 103–119 (2005) fault detection and isolation with a combination of artificial neural
29. J. Mattingly, Elements of Gas Turbine Propulsion (Vol. 1) network and off-design performance analysis. Eng. Appl. Artif.
(McGraw-Hill, New York, 1996) Intell. 1(113), 104900 (2022)
30. V. Sanghi, B. Lakshmanan, V. Sundararajan, Digital simulator for 45. B. Gunston, Aero Engines (Janes Press, London, 2021)
steady-state performance prediction of military turbofan engine. 46. H. Saravanamuttoo, G. Rogers, and H. Cohen.," Gas Turbine
J. Propul. Power 14(1), 74–81 (1998) Theory, 2001
31. M. Gobran, Off-design performance of solar Centaur-40 gas tur- 47. S.A. Cihangir, H. Aygun, O. Turan, Energy and performance
bine engine using Simulink. Ain Shams Eng. J. 4(2), 285–298 analysis of a turbofan engine with the aid of dynamic component
(2013) efficiencies. Energy 1(260), 125085 (2022)
32. C. Yang, Z. Huang, Z. Yang, X. Ma, Analytical off-design char- 48. S. Farokhi, Aircraft Propulsion (Wiley, London, 2014)
acteristics of gas turbine-based CCHP system. Energy Procedia 49. R. Flack, Analysis and matching of gas turbine components. Int.
75, 1126–1131 (2015) J. Turbo Jet Eng. 7(3–4), 217–226 (1990)
33. S.M. Hosseinimaab, A.M. Tousi, A new approach to off-design 50. S. Gilani, A. Baheta, M. Majid and M. Amin, "Thermodynamics
performance analysis of gas turbine engines and its application. Approach to Determine a Gas Turbine Components Design Data
Energy Conv. Manag. 1(243), 114411 (2021) and Scaling Method for Performance Map Generation," Proceed-
34. C. Lü, Q. Sun, W. Zhang, J. Geng, Y. Qi, L. Lu, The effect of high ings of the 1st International Conference on Plant Equipment and
temperature on tensile strength of sandstone. Appl. Therm. Eng. Reliability (ICPER), Selangor, Malaysia (Vol. 27), 2008
111, 573–579 (2017) 51. North Atlantic Treaty Organization, "Performance Prediction and
35. Y. Huang, A. Turan, Mechanical equilibrium operation integrated Simulation of Gas Turbine Engine Operation", RTO Technical
modelling of hybrid SOFC–GT systems: design analyses and off- report 44, 1, 3–39, 40, 47, 2002
design optimization. Energy 1(208), 118334 (2020) 52. O.O. Ighodaro, E.I. Aburime, A.A. Erameh, Off-design modelling
36. Y. Cao, Y. Dai, Comparative analysis on off-design performance of a turbo jet engine with operative afterburner. Open J. Energy
of a gas turbine and ORC combined cycle under different opera- Eff. 11(3), 88–107 (2022)
tion approaches. Energy Convers. Manage. 135, 84–100 (2017)
37. J. Lee, T. Kim, Development of a gas turbine performance analysis Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
program and its application. Energy 36(8), 5274–5285 (2011) jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
38. Y. Li, G. Zhang, L. Wang, Y. Yang, Part-load performance analy-
sis of a combined cycle with intermediate recuperated gas turbine. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds
Energy Conv. Manag. 1(205), 112346 (2020) exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the
39. J. Kurzke, About simplifications in gas turbine performance calcu- author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted
lations. Turbo Expo Power Land Sea Air 47926, 493–501 (2007) manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of
40. J.R. Palmer, Y. Cheng-Zhong, Turbotrans—α programming lan- such publishing agreement and applicable law.
guage for the performance simulation of arbitrary gas turbine

13