Int J Turbo Jet Eng 2017; aop
Yasin Şöhret*
Defining the Ecological Coefficient of Performance
for an Aircraft Propulsion System
https://doi.org/10.1515/tjj-2017-0042
Received September 18, 2017; accepted October 2, 2017
Abstract: The aircraft industry, along with other industries,
is considered responsible these days regarding environ-
mental issues. Therefore, the performance evaluation of
aircraft propulsion systems should be conducted with
respect to environmental and ecological considerations.
The current paper aims to present the ecological coefficient
of performance calculation methodology for aircraft propul-
sion systems. The ecological coefficient performance is
a widely-preferred performance indicator of numerous
energy conversion systems. On the basis of thermodynamic
laws, the methodology used to determine the ecological
coefficient of performance for an aircraft propulsion system
is parametrically explained and illustrated in this paper for
the first time. For a better understanding, to begin with, the
exergy analysis of a turbojet engine is described in detail.
Following this, the outputs of the analysis are employed to
define the ecological coefficient of performance for a turbo-
jet engine. At the end of the study, the ecological coefficient
of performance is evaluated parametrically and discussed
depending on selected engine design parameters and per-
formance measures. The author asserts the ecological coef-
ficient of performance to be a beneficial indicator for
researchers interested in aircraft propulsion system design
and related topics.
Keywords: ECOP, ecologic, exergy, turbojet,
thermodynamics
PACS® (2010). Irreversible thermodynamics, 05.70.Ln,
reaction turbines, 88.60.kt, energy conservation in classi-
cal mechanics, 45.20.dh, thermodynamic considerations,
88.05. De
Introduction
Propulsion systems, classified into many categories, are
known to be one of the essential subsystems of an aircraft.
*Corresponding author: Yasin Şöhret, School of Civil Aviation,
Department of Airframe and Powerplant Maintenance, Süleyman
Demirel University, Isparta, TR-32260, Turkey,
E-mail: ysohret@gmail.com
According to the physics of flight, drag, lift, weight and
thrust are the main forces acting on an aircraft during
flight. To govern the motion of flight, equilibrium of these
forces in pairs, namely lift-weight and drag-thrust, is essen-
tial during the cruise phase of flight. The main intended
purpose of a propulsion system is to provide the thrust
requirement of an aircraft at each flight phase, under dif-
ferent operating conditions, including the hottest or the
coldest ambient temperatures. More efficient and environ-
mentally friendly propulsion system design is commonly of
less importance as a result of a priority to meet thrust
demand. This is particularly true for military aircraft [1, 2].
Environmental concerns have been a major issue in the
last decade. Regulations to reduce the environmental
impact of anthropological resources have been released
by authorities in almost every industry and sector, includ-
ing aviation and aerospace. In the last report [3] of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, namely
IPCC, the aviation industry is identified as having higher
energy intensity than rail or sea transportation. Aviation is
also seen to be responsible for 6.52 % of total transportation
induced greenhouse gases up to 2010. Research to improve
aviation technology and increase efficiency has gained sig-
nificant importance after the Kyoto Protocol. As a result of
such research, under the guidance of the International Civil
Aviation Organization, the fuel efficiency improvement of
aircraft is predicted to be around 2 % by 2050 [3–5].
The thermodynamic based working principles of air-
craft propulsion systems allow for the utilization of the
laws of thermodynamics as a design or optimization tool
[6–8]. The most common method of measuring perfor-
mance by means of numerous indicators is known as
exergy analysis. Exergy analysis methodology, widely-
employed in thermal engineering, is a beneficial tool for
assessing performance, economy, environmental effects
and sustainability of aircraft propulsion systems [9, 10].
Lack of performance and efficiency failings are associated
with irreversibility occurring in the actual propulsion
system compared to the theoretical propulsion system.
Irreversible processes may be explained in a propulsion
system by friction losses, heat losses, normal behavior of
chemical reactions, and so on. Exergy and exergy based
analyses may not propose a solution for irreversibility, but
they could identify where irreversibility occurs. The benefit
Brought to you by | Anadolu Universitesi
Authenticated
Download Date | 10/20/17 3:44 PM
2 Y. Şöhret: Defining the Ecological Coefficient of Performance

of exergy and related analyses is the evaluation of the law statements for a turbojet engine may be derived from
performance of a propulsion system from the perspective the governing equations expressed as follows [39]:
of quality of consumed energy. Within this framework, X X
many papers have presented performance, economic, m_ in − _ out = 0
m (1)
environmental and sustainability aspects of propulsion X    
Q_ − W
_ + _ in hin + Vin2 =2 + gzin
m
systems [11–31]. In these earlier papers numerous indica- X   2   (2)
tors have been used. Exergy efficiency, improvement − m_ out hout + Vout =2 + gzout = 0
potential, lack of productivity and fuel depletion rate
terms are defined as performance measures, whereas the Enthalpy, kinetic energy and potential energy terms are
exergoeconomic factor represents an economic aspect. The found by [39]:
environmental impact rate is defined to determine envir- ð
onmental effects, while the waste exergy ratio, recoverable h = cp ðT ÞdT (3)
exergy rate, exergy destruction factor, environmental
effect factor, and exergetic sustainability index are mea- 1
eKN = V 2 (4)
sures of sustainability. 2
As a result of progress in thermal engineering, a ePT = gz (5)
novel measure to express the relationship between the
performance and ecological impact of an energy conver- Before analysis, components of the exergy should be
sion or generation system is defined [32–37]. In the acces- defined. Exergy is comprised of physical, chemical,
sible literature, the ecological coefficient of performance potential and kinetic exergy components [39]:
is defined for many systems, but not for a propulsion  
_ =m
Ex _ exPH + exCH + exKN + exPT (6)
system. The current study aims to draw attention to the
necessity of exergy analysis in propulsion system perfor- Specific physical and chemical exergies are expressed as
mance evaluation and to contribute to the fund of avail- follows [39–41]:
able knowledge by defining the coefficient of
performance for aircraft propulsion systems. Within this ði ði
scope, the exergy analysis method is explained while exiPH = cp ðT ÞdT − T0 ds (7)
defining the ecological coefficient of performance for air- 0 0

craft propulsion systems, specifically a turbojet engine,

i = − RT0 lnðxi Þ
exCH (8)
differently from previous studies.
Equation 8 yields to the following form for gas mixtures
and aviation fuels respectively [40, 41]:
X X
Exergy analysis exCH
mix = xi exCH
i + RT0 xi lnðxi Þ (9)
h  i
fuel = LHV 1.0401 + 0.0728ðH=C Þfuel
exCH
The propulsion system under investigation in the present (10)
paper is a simple turbojet engine. It comprises an air
inlet, air compressor, combustion chamber, turbine and Specific kinetic and potential exergies of a substance are
exhaust. The station numbering used in the study is exactly equal to its specific kinetic and potential energies.
shown in Figure 1. The exergy analysis of a turbojet After identifying the components of the exergy, the
engine includes first and second law analyses. The first exergy balance equation of a steady-state system to

Figure 1: Demonstration of the turbojet under

examination [38].

Brought to you by | Anadolu Universitesi

Authenticated
Download Date | 10/20/17 3:44 PM
 Y. Şöhret: Defining the Ecological Coefficient of Performance 3

perform the second law analysis of a thermal system, as efficiency of a propulsion system is expressed as follows
well as of a turbojet engine, is written as follows [39]: [42–44]:
_ F − Ex
_ P − Ex
_ D − Ex
_ L =0 h i
Ex (11) a20 ð1 + f ÞðV06 =a0 Þ2 − M 2
ηth = (21)
Herein, the exergy rate of heat transfer and power should 2gfLHV
be noted as follows [39]:
 Exergy efficiency is an indicator to assist in understand-
_ExQ = 1 − T0 Q_ (12) ing the quality of energy conversion through an aircraft
Ti propulsion system [9, 25]:
Ex _
_ W =W (13) _ P, TJE
Ex
ε= (22)
Afterwards, the exergy balance statement can be derived _ F, TJE
Ex
as follows for each component of the turbojet engine:
Herein, the product exergy rate of an aircraft propulsion
Ex _ 02 − Ex
_ 01 − Ex _ D, IN − Ex
_ L, IN = 0 (14) system is the exergy rate of the generated thrust and is
  found by [25, 44]:
_ W, AC − Ex
Ex _ 03 − Ex
_ 02 − Ex _ L, AC = 0
_ D, AC − Ex (15)
  _ P = FT V06
_ f − Ex
Ex _ 04 − Ex _ D, CC − Ex
_ 03 − Ex _ L, CC = 0 (16) Ex T
(23)
 
_ 04 − Ex
Ex _ 05 − Ex _ D, GT − Ex
_ W, GT − Ex _ L, GT = 0 (17) _ 0 ½ð1 + f ÞV06 − V0  + A06 ðP06 − P0 Þ
FT = m (24)

_ 05 − Ex
Ex _ 06 − Ex
_ D, NZ − Ex
_ L, NZ (18) Specific fuel consumption, namely thrust specific fuel
consumption, indicates the amount of fuel consumed to
The exergy balance equation for the overall turbojet may
generate thrust and is found by [42–44]:
be written as:
_f
m
_ f − Ex
Ex _ F − Ex
_ D, TJE − Ex
_ L, TJE (19) SFC = (25)
T
FT
The exergetic fuel rate of a turbojet engine is the exergy
rate of fuel provided to the combustion chamber whereas
the exergetic product rate is the exergy rate of generated
thrust. The exergy destruction rate of the turbojet engine
is the sum of the components’ exergy destruction rate
Ecological coefficient of performance
and may be stated as follows:
The ecological coefficient of performance has previously
_ D, TJE = Ex
Ex _ D, IN + Ex
_ D, AC + Ex
_ D, CC + Ex
_ D, GT + Ex
_ D, NZ been defined for thermal systems in different ways.
(20) Earlier studies leading the ecological coefficient of per-
formance define the ecological performance function as
follows [45–47]:
 
_ D = 1 + TL Q_ H − 2Q_ L + TL − 1 Q_ L
_ − Ex
Major performance parameters ECO = W
TH TH
(26)

For the performance evaluation of an aircraft propulsion Ust [45] defines the ecological coefficient of performance
system a number of major parameters are employed. The to be the ratio of the power output rate of a system to the
following parameters are beneficial measures to evaluate recoverable exergy rate for any thermal system:
the performance as well as comparison of different air-
_
W
craft propulsion systems: ECOP = (27)
_ExD
– Thermal efficiency
– Exergy efficiency If thrust is considered to be the output power (product) of
– Specific fuel consumption a turbojet engine, eq. (27) can be re-written as follows:

The thermal efficiency of an aircraft propulsion sys- _ F

Ex T
tem is the ratio of gained power from the engine (thrust) ECOPTJE = (28)
_ D, TJE
Ex
to the energy provided by fuel [42–44]. The thermal

Brought to you by | Anadolu Universitesi

Authenticated
Download Date | 10/20/17 3:44 PM
4 Y. Şöhret: Defining the Ecological Coefficient of Performance
Results and discussion
In the present study, the exergy analysis of an aircraft
propulsion system is explained and the ecological coeffi-
cient of performance is defined. To address the depen-
dence between the design parameters of an aircraft
propulsion system and its ecological coefficient of perfor-
mance, a parametric study is conducted. The aim of the
current study is to investigate the ecological coefficient of
performance of a turbojet engine relying on the engine
design parameters summarized in Table 1. While model-
ing the propulsion system thermodynamically, with the
aid of a cycle analysis derived from the first law of
thermodynamics, the turbojet engine and its components
are considered to be operating under steady-state condi-
tions. On the other hand, each component is irreversible
and adiabatic as well as the turbojet engine. The working
fluids, air and combustion gases are considered to
behave in compliance with perfect gas law. In contrast
to numerous previous studies, kinetic energy and exergy
alternations throughout the engine are taken in consid-
eration. The model of the turbojet engine is developed for
a test-cell condition. The pressure and the ambient tem-
perature where the turbojet engine is assumed to be
operating are 100 kPa and 280 K, whereas the altitude
is equal to sea level.
Table 1: Turbojet engine parameters.
Parameter Min Value Max Value
Inlet pressure ratio .
Compressor isentropic efficiency (%) .
Compressor inlet Mach number .
Compressor pressure ratio .
Combustion efficiency (%) .
Combustion chamber pressure loss (%) .
Fuel heating value (MJ/kg) .
Air to fuel ratio .
Turbine isentropic efficiency .
Turbine inlet temperature (K) 
Nozzle outlet velocity (m.s−) .
Nozzle pressure ratio (%) .
Shaft mechanical efficiency (%) .
At the end of the analyses, the thermal efficiency,
exergy efficiency and ecological coefficient of the per-
formance variances are obtained. As illustrated in
Figure 2, a rise in turbine inlet temperature leads to an
improvement of the thermal efficiency of the turbojet
engine for a constant compressor pressure ratio. On
the other hand, for a constant turbine inlet temperature
the thermal efficiency of the turbojet engine increases
with a rise in compressor pressure ratio.
The alternation of the exergy efficiency of the turbo-
jet engine is contrary to the thermal efficiency variance.
Figure 3 clearly indicates the impact of turbine inlet
temperature and compressor pressure ratio. According
to Figure 3, while a rise in turbine inlet temperature
yields a reduction of exergy efficiency, a rise in compres-
sor pressure ratio leads to the augmentation of exergy
efficiency. The highest exergy efficiency is observed to be
57.12 % at the junction point of compressor pressure ratio
13 and turbine inlet temperature 1100 K.
Figure 4 shows how the ecological coefficient of
performance behaves being dependent on two major
engine parameters; compressor pressure ratio and tur-
bine inlet temperature. The highest ecological coeffi-
cient of performance value is found to be 1.53 for an
1800 K turbine inlet temperature and a 13 compressor
pressure ratio.
Figures 5–8 are plotted to express the behavior of
specific fuel consumption, thermal efficiency, exergy effi-
ciency and ecological coefficient of performance for the
variable compressor pressure ratio and turbine inlet tem-
perature. Implications addressed from these graphs are
similar to inferences gained from Figures 2–4. However,
the alternation of specific fuel consumption, thermal effi-
ciency, exergy efficiency and ecological coefficient of
performance are clearly seen.
Figure 5 indicates the influence of both turbine inlet
temperature and compressor pressure ratio on the spe-
cific fuel consumption of the turbojet. The specific fuel
.
consumption is known to be a substantial measure of
.
.
performance. It quantifies the consumed fuel mass flow
. rate for the produced thrust. According to Figure 5,
. specific fuel consumption is reduced by a rise in
. compressor pressure ratio while a rise in turbine inlet
. temperature causes an increment of the specific fuel
.
consumption.
.
 To clarify the characteristics of the turbojet engine, a
. compressor pressure ratio value of 13 is selected to be the
. evaluation point due to the achievement of the highest
. exergy efficiency at this compressor pressure ratio. As
shown in Figure 9, the ecological coefficient of perfor-
mance augments while the turbine inlet temperature
rises. A similar interpretation is obtained from the plot-
ting for produced thrust at a constant compressor pres-
sure ratio.
If Figure 10 is viewed, the specific fuel consumption
is observed to have a similar trend to the thrust plotted in
Figure 9. While both the ecological coefficient of perfor-
mance and the thrust have a parabolic alternation
Brought to you by | Anadolu Universitesi
Authenticated
Download Date | 10/20/17 3:44 PM
 Y. Şöhret: Defining the Ecological Coefficient of Performance 5

Figure 2: Thermal efficiency variation of the turbojet engine.

Figure 3: Exergy efficiency variation of the turbojet engine.

Brought to you by | Anadolu Universitesi

Authenticated
Download Date | 10/20/17 3:44 PM
6 Y. Şöhret: Defining the Ecological Coefficient of Performance
Figure 4: Ecological coefficient of performance variation of the turbojet engine.
Figure 5: Specific fuel consumption characteristics of the turbojet
engine.
pattern, the specific fuel consumption varies linearly
depending on the turbine inlet temperature.
The characteristics of the ecological coefficient of
performance, thermal efficiency and exergy efficiency
have been discussed individually. At a constant pressure
ratio, the behavior of these parameters is graphed
together in Figure 11. As a result of the turbine inlet
temperature increment, the thermal efficiency and
Figure 6: Thermal efficiency characteristics of the turbojet engine.
ecological coefficient of performance augment.
However, it is clear from the Figure 11 that exergy effi-
ciency is inversely proportional to turbine inlet tempera-
ture, thermal efficiency and ecological coefficient of
performance.
The characteristics of the turbojet engine at a con-
stant turbine inlet temperature are evaluated for a value
of 1100 K by virtue of the maximum exergy efficiency
Brought to you by | Anadolu Universitesi
Authenticated
Download Date | 10/20/17 3:44 PM
 Y. Şöhret: Defining the Ecological Coefficient of Performance
Figure 7: Exergy efficiency characteristics of the turbojet engine.
Figure 8: Ecological coefficient of the performance characteristics of
the turbojet engine.
Figure 9: Ecological coefficient of performance and thrust variation
of the turbojet engine at constant pressure ratio.
7
Figure 10: Ecological coefficient of performance and specific fuel
consumption variation of the turbojet engine at a constant pressure
ratio.
Figure 11: Ecological coefficient of performance, exergy efficiency
and thermal efficiency variation of the turbojet engine at a constant
pressure ratio.
observed at this temperature. Figures 12–14 reveal the
behavior of the ecological coefficient of performance at
a variable compressor pressure ratio at a constant tur-
bine inlet temperature. In Figure 12 variances of the
ecological coefficient of performance and thrust depen-
dent on the compressor pressure ratio is plotted whereas
the behavior of the specific fuel consumption and the
ecological coefficient of performance are compared in
Figure 13.
When all the findings are considered, the optimum
operating compressor pressure ratio value is determined
to be 13 at a constant turbine inlet temperature from the
point of view of the ecological coefficient of perfor-
mance, efficiencies and fuel consumption. According
to examination by the author, the same implication of
Brought to you by | Anadolu Universitesi
Authenticated
Download Date | 10/20/17 3:44 PM
8 Y. Şöhret: Defining the Ecological Coefficient of Performance

the turbojet engine can be addressed for each turbine

inlet temperature individually.

Conclusion
The current paper discusses the ecological coefficient of
performance for an aircraft propulsion system for the first
time. For this purpose, exergy analysis methodology has
been successively introduced for a turbojet engine.
Following this, ecological coefficient of performance and
exergy efficiency definitions are presented following the
described thermodynamic methodology. At the end of the
study, the behavior of the ecological coefficient of perfor-
Figure 12: Ecological coefficient of performance and thrust variation
of the turbojet engine at a constant turbine inlet temperature.
mance versus selected engine design parameters and certain
other performance measures are discussed in detail from a
parametric study perspective. The author considers the pre-
sent study to be beneficial to those interested in aerospace,
thermal, and environmental engineering and sciences.

Acknowledgements: The author thanks the reviewers for

their positive and constructive comments and contribu-
tion to the improvement of the quality of the paper.

Nomenclature
AC Compressor section of the turbojet
CC Combustion chamber section of the turbojet
GT Gas turbine section of the turbojet
cp Specific heat capacity under constant pressure (kJ.kg−1.s−1)
Figure 13: Ecological coefficient of performance and specific fuel
e Specific energy (kJ.kg−1)
consumption variation of the turbojet engine at a constant turbine
f Air to fuel ratio
inlet temperature.
ECO Ecological performance function
ECOP Ecological coefficient of performance
Ex Exergy (kJ)
ex Specific exergy (kJ.kg−1)
h Specific enthalpy (kJ.kg−1)
IN Inlet section of the turbojet engine
LHV Lower heating value (kJ kg−1)
m Mass flow (kg)
FT Thrust
Q Heat flux (kJ)
SFC Specific fuel consumption (g.kN−1.s−1)
s Specific entropy
T Temperature (K)
t Time (s)
V Velocity (m.s−1)
W Work (kJ)

Greek letters
Figure 14: Ecological coefficient of performance, exergy efficiency
and thermal efficiency variation of the turbojet engine at a constant η Efficiency
turbine inlet temperature. ε Exergy efficiency

Brought to you by | Anadolu Universitesi

Authenticated
Download Date | 10/20/17 3:44 PM
 Y. Şöhret: Defining the Ecological Coefficient of Performance 9

References 21. Aydın H, Turan O, Midilli A, Karakoc TH. Energetic and

exergetic performance assessment of a turboprop engine at
various loads. Int J Exergy. 2013;13:543–64.
1. Yechout T, Morris S, Bossert D, Hallgren W. Introduction to
22. Balli O. Afterburning effect on the energetic and exergetic
aircraft flight dynamics. Reston, VA: AIAA, 2003.
performance of an experimental turbojet engine (TJE).
2. Phillips WF. Dynamics of flight. New York: Wiley, 2004.
Int J Exergy. 2014;14:212–43.
3. IPCC. Fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel
23. Tai VC, See PC, Mares C. Optimisation of energy and exergy of
on climate change. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge
turbofan engines using genetic algorithms. Int J Sustainable
University Press, 2014.
Aviation. 2014;1(1):25–42.
4. Lee JJ. Can we accelerate the improvement of energy efficiency in
24. Baklacioglu T, Turan O, Aydin H. Dynamic modeling of exergy
aircraft systems? Energy Convers Manage. 2010;51(1):189–96.
efficiency of turboprop engine components using hybrid
5. Babikian R, Lukachko SP, Waitz IA. The historical fuel effi-
genetic algorithm-artificial neural networks. Energy.
ciency characteristics of regional aircraft from technological,
2015;86:709–21.
operational, and cost perspectives. J Air Transport Manag.
25. Sohret Y, Dinc A, Karakoc TH. Exergy analysis of a turbofan
2002;8(6):389–400.
engine for an unmanned aerial vehicle during a surveillance
6. Riggins DW, Taylor T, Moorhouse DJ. Methodology for perfor-
mission. Energy. 2015;93:716–29.
mance analysis of aerospace vehicles using the laws of ther-
26. Zhao X, Thulin O, Grönstedt T. First and second law analysis of
modynamics. J Aircr. 2006;43(4):953–63.
intercooled turbofan engine. J Eng Gas Turbines Power.
7. Bejan A, Siems DL. The need for exergy analysis and thermo-
2015;138(2):021202.
dynamic optimization in aircraft development. Exergy
27. Yucer CT. Thermodynamic analysis of the part load perfor-
Int J. 2001;1(1):14–24.
mance for a small scale gas turbine jet engine by using exergy
8. Arntz A, Atinault O, Merlen A. Exergy-based formulation for
analysis method. Energy. 2016;111:251–59.
aircraft aeropropulsive performance assessment: theoretical
28. Ekici S, Altuntas O, Acikkalp E, Sogut MZ, Karakoc TH.
development. Aiaa J. 2014;53(6):1627–39.
Assessment of thermodynamic performance and exergetic-
9. Şöhret Y, Ekici S, Altuntaş Ö, Hepbasli A, Karakoç TH. Exergy
sustainability of turboprop engine using mixture of kerosene
as a useful tool for the performance assessment of aircraft gas
and methanol. Int J Exergy. 2016;19(3):295–314.
turbine engines: a key review. Prog Aerospace Sci.
29. Çoban K, Çolpan CO, Karakoç TH. Energy and exergy analysis
2016;83:57–69.
of an helicopter engine. J Sustainable Aviation Res. 2016;
10. Hayes D, Lone M, Whidborne JF, Camberos J, Coetzee E.
1(1):27–39.
Adopting exergy analysis for use in aerospace. Prog Aerospace
30. Sohret Y, Sogut MZ, Karakoc TH, Turan O. Customised appli-
Sci. in press. DOI:10.1016/j.paerosci.2017.07.004.
cation of exergy analysis method to PW120A turboprop engine
11. Riggins DW. The thermodynamic continuum of jet engine per-
for performance evaluation. Int J Exergy. 2016;20(1):48–65.
formance: the principle of lost work due to irreversibility in
31. Balli O. Exergy modeling for evaluating sustainability level of a
aerospace systems. Int J Thermodyn. 2003;6:107–20.
high by-pass turbofan engine used on commercial aircrafts.
12. Turgut ET, Karakoc TH, Hepbasli A. Exergetic analysis of an
Appl Thermal Eng. 2017;123:138–55.
aircraft turbofan engine. Int J Energy Res. 2007;31:1383–97.
32. Gonca G, Sahin B. Thermo-ecological performance analyses
13. Balli O, Hepbasli A. Energetic and exergetic analyses of
and optimizations of irreversible gas cycle engines. Appl
T56 turboprop engine. Energy Convers Manage.
Thermal Eng. 2016;105:566–76.
2013;73:106–20.
33. Long R, Liu W. Ecological optimization and coefficient of per-
14. Najjar YS, Balawneh IA. Optimization of gas turbines for
formance bounds of general refrigerators. Physica A: Stat
sustainable turbojet propulsion. Propul Power Res. 2015;
Mech Appl. 2016;443:14–21.
4(2):114–21.
34. Frikha S, Abid MS. Performance optimization of irreversible
15. Struchtrup H, Elfring GJ. External losses in high-bypass turbo
combined Carnot refrigerator based on ecological criterion. Int
fan air engines. Int J Exergy. 2008;5:400–12.
J Refrigeration. 2016;62:153–65.
16. Turgut ET, Karakoc TH, Hepbasli A, Rosen MA. Exergy
35. Açıkkalp E. Performance analysis of irreversible solid oxide
analysis of a turbofan aircraft engine. Int J Exergy. 2009;6:
fuel cell-Brayton heat engine with ecological based thermo-
181–99.
environmental criterion. Energy Convers Manage.
17. Tona C, Raviolo PA, Pellegrini LF, De Oliveira Jr S. Exergy and
2017;148:279–86.
thermoeconomic analysis of a turbofan engine during a typical
36. Açıkkalp E. Ecologic and sustainable objective thermodynamic
commercial flight. Energy. 2010;35:952–59.
evaluation of molten carbonate fuel cell–supercritical CO2
18. Aydin H, Turan O, Karakoc TH, Midilli A. Component-based
Brayton cycle hybrid system. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2017;
exergetic measures of an experimental turboprop/turboshaft
42(9):6272–80.
engine for propeller aircrafts and helicopters. Int J Exergy.
37. Açıkkalp E. Analysis of a Brownian heat engine with ecological
2012;11:322–48.
criteria. Eur Phys J Plus. 2016;131(12):426.
19. Ehyaei MA, Anjiridezfuli A, Rosen MA. Exergetic analysis of an
38. Sforza PM. Theory of aerospace propulsion. New York, NY:
aircraft turbojet engine with an afterburner. Thermal Sci.
Elsevier, 2012.
2013;17:1181–94.
39. Bejan A, Tsatsaronis G, Moran M. Thermal design and optimi-
20. Grönstedt T, Irannezhad M, Lei X, Thulin O, Lundbladh A. First
zation. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1996.
and second law analysis of future aircraft engines. J Eng Gas
40. Heywood JB. Internal combustion engine fundamentals.
Turbines Power. 2013;136(3):031202.
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1988.

Brought to you by | Anadolu Universitesi

Authenticated
Download Date | 10/20/17 3:44 PM
10 Y. Şöhret: Defining the Ecological Coefficient of Performance
41. Kotas TJ. The exergy method of thermal plant analysis. Greaat
Britain: Anchor Brendon Ltd; 1985.
42. Dinc A. Sizing of a turboprop unmanned air vehicle and its
propulsion system. J Thermal Sci Technol. 2015;35(2):53–62.
43. Turan O. Experimental set-up, testing and performance mod-
eling of a turbojet engine for target drone applications. Omer
Halisdemir Univ J Eng Sci. 2017;6(2):717–28.
44. Ekici S, Şöhret Y, Karakoç TH. Performance evaluation para-
meters for turbojet engines. J Aviation. 2017;1(1):32–38.
45. Ust Y. Ecological performance analysis and optimization of
energy production systems. Master Dissertation, Naval
Architecture and Marine Engineering Department., Yildiz
Technical University, Istanbul, 2005.
46. Angulo-Brown F. An ecological optimization criterion
for finite-time heat engines. J Appl Phys. 1991;69:
7465–69.
47. Yan Z. Comment on an ecological optimization criterion for
finite-time heat engines. J Appl Phys. 1993;73:3583.
Brought to you by | Anadolu Universitesi
Authenticated
Download Date | 10/20/17 3:44 PM