Comparing different piston-prop aircraft engines with combustion efficiency and exergy


Combustion efficiency is clearly related to burning of the fuel inside the combustion chamber, and it affects engine efficiency, energetic or exergetic. It is important first to determine the amount of inefficiencies of a system, and then, describe them in relation to engine performance. The novelty of the current paper is to determine a relationship between combustion efficiency and exergy analysis in piston-prop aircraft. In this study, initially, the relationship between combustion efficiency and exergy efficiency in the piston-prop aircraft was evaluated. Afterward, these parameters were calculated under four phases of LTO (landing and takeoff) and different power rates (150, 225, 350, 1200 Hps). The maximum energy efficiency, exergy efficiency, and combustion efficiency were determined as 44.86%, 53.94%, and 98.89%, respectively, in the 1200 Hp piston-prop aircraft. On the other hand, while maximum combustion efficiency was detected in the takeoff phase, maximum energy and exergy efficiencies were found in the climb-out and approach phases, respectively.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5


\(\dot{m}\) :

Mass flow rate

\(\dot{Q}\) :

Heat rate

\(\dot{W}\) :

Work rate

\(h\) :

Specific enthalpy

V :


g :

Gravitational acceleration

z :

Elevation of the center of gravity

\(H_{u}\) :

Heating value

\(\dot{W}\) :

Net work rate

\(\dot{E}\) :

Energy rate

\({\dot{\text{E}}\text{x}}\) :

Exergy rate

\(\dot{Q}\) :

Heat rate

\(\eta\) :

Energy efficiency

\(\varepsilon_{\text{fuel}}\) :

Specific exergy

\(\phi\) :

Chemical exergy factor

h :

Enthalpy or hydrogen

s :

Entropy or sulfur

o :


c :


y :

Mole fraction

T :



















Cooling air temperature




Dead (reference) state


  1. 1.

    Hancox R, Lowe S, Pulles H, Velzen A, Baarse G. Evaluating the economic and environmental effects of measures to reduce aircraft emissions. In: Proceedings of the AET European transport conference, held 10–12 Sept 2001, Homerton College, Cambrıdge, Uk-Cd-Rom.

  2. 2.

    Altuntas O, Karakoc TH. Investigation of the environmental concern in aircraft selection for domestic flights in some Turkish airports. J Aeronaut Space Technol. 2010;5(1):11–8 (in Turkish).

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    ICAO Secretariat Report. Airport air quality guidance manual. 2007. Report No. Doc 9889.

  4. 4.

    Jenichen EA. Embraer market outlook 2009–2028 6th ed. 2009. Embraer—Empresa Brasileira de Aeronáutica SA.

  5. 5.

    Altuntas O. Calculation of domestic flight-caused global warming potential from aircraft emissions in Turkish airports. Int J Glob Warm. 2014;6(4):367–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Clark P. Buying the big jets: fleet planning for airlines. 2nd ed. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Ahmadi MH, Ahmadi MA, Aboukazempour E, Grosu L, Pourfayaz F, Bidi M. Exergetic sustainability evaluation and optimization of an irreversible Brayton cycle performance. Front Energy. 2019;13(2):399–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Ahmadi MH, Sadaghiani MS, Pourfayaz F, Ghazvini M, Mahian O, Mehrpooya M, Wongwises S. Energy and exergy analyses of a solid oxide fuel cell-gas turbine-organic rankine cycle power plant with liquefied natural gas as heat sink. Entropy. 2018;20(7):484.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Vandani A, Khoshkar M, Bidi M, Ahmadi MH. Energy, exergy and environmental analyses of a combined cycle power plant under part-load conditions. Mech Ind. 2016;17(6):610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Ahmadi B, Golneshan AA, Arasteh H, Karimipour A, Bach QV. Energy and exergy analysis and optimization of a gas turbine cycle coupled by a bottoming organic Rankine cycle. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Sadeghi S, Maghsoudi P, Shabani B, Gorgani HH, Shabani N. Performance analysis and multi-objective optimization of an organic Rankine cycle with binary zeotropic working fluid employing modified artificial bee colony algorithm. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2019;136:1645–65.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Mohammadi A, Ahmadi MH, Bidi M, Joda F, Valero A, Uson S. Exergy analysis of a combined cooling, heating and power system integrated with wind turbine and compressed air energy storage system. Energy Conv Manag. 2017;131:69–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Noroozian A, Naeimi A, Bidi M, Ahmadi MH. Exergoeconomic comparison and optimization of organic Rankine cycle, trilateral Rankine cycle and transcritical carbon dioxide cycle for heat recovery of low-temperature geothermal water. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part A J Power Energy. 2019;233(8):1068–84.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Ahmadi MH, Banihashem SA, Ghazvini M, Sadeghzadeh M. Thermo-economic and exergy assessment and optimization of performance of a hydrogen production system by using geothermal energy. Energy Environ. 2018;29(8):1373–92.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Mohammadi A, Ahmadi MH, Bidi M, Ghazvini M, Ming T. Exergy and economic analyses of replacing feedwater heaters in a Rankine cycle with parabolic trough collectors. Energy Rep. 2018;4:243–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Ashouri M, Ahmadi MH, Pourkiaei SM, Astaraei FR, Ghasempour R, Ming T, Hemati JH. Exergy and exergo-economic analysis and optimization of a solar double pressure organic Rankine cycle. Therm Sci Eng Prog. 2018;6:72–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Mirzaei M, Ahmadi MH, Mobin M, Nazari MA, Alayi R. Energy, exergy and economics analysis of an ORC working with several fluids and utilizes smelting furnace gases as heat source. Therm Sci Eng Prog. 2018;5:230–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Ashouri M, Ahmadi MH, Feidt M, Astaraei FR. Exergy and energy analysis of a regenerative organic Rankine cycle based on flat plate solar collectors. Mech Ind. 2017;18(2):217.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Vandani A, Khoshkar M, Joda F, Ahmadi F, Ahmadi MH. Exergoeconomic effect of adding a new feedwater heater to a steam power plant. Mech Ind. 2017;18(2):224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Altuntas O, Karakoc TH, Hepbasli A. Exergetic, exergoeconomic and sustainability assessments of piston-prop aircraft engines. J Therm Sci Technol. 2012;32(2):133–43.

    Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Altuntas O, Karakoc TH, Hepbasli A. A parametric study of a piston-prop aircraft engine using exergy and exergoeconomic analysis methods. Int J Green Energy. 2015;12(1):2–14.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Altuntas O, Karakoc TH, Hepbasli A. Exergoenvironmental analysis of piston-prop aircrafts. Int J Exergy. 2012;10(3):290–8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Altuntas O, Karakoc TH, Hepbasli A. Exergoeconomic environmental optimization of piston-prop aircraft engines. Int J Green Energy. 2015;12(1):41–50.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Yildirim E, Altuntas O, Mahir N, Karakoc TH. Energy, exergy analysis, and sustainability assessment of different engine powers for helicopter engines. Int J Green Energy. 2017;14(13):1093–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Altuntas O, Karakoc TH, Hepbasli A. Investigation of environmental impact caused by aircraft engines. Int J Glob Warm. 2013;5(3):282–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Cengel YA, Boles MA. Thermodynamics: an engineering approach. 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Heywood JB. Internal combustion engine fundamentals. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Altuntas O, Govce MS. Hava Araçlarında Piston-prop Motorlar. 1st ed. Ankara: Palme; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Smith WJ, Timoney DJ, Lync DP. Emissions and efficiency comparison of gasoline and LPG fuels in A 1.4 liter passenger car engine. SAE Pap. 1997;972970:1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Kotas TJ. The exergy method of thermal plant analysis. London: Anchor Brendon Ltd.; 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Moran MJ, Shapiro HN. Fundamental of engineering thermodynamics. 3rd ed. New York: Wiley; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Bejan A, Tsatsaronis G, Moran M. Thermal design and optimization. New York: Wiley; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Dincer I, Rosen MA. Exergy: energy environmental and sustainable development. Oxford: Elsevier; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Federal Office of Civil Aviation (FOCA). FOCA data base for aircraft piston engine. 2020. Accessed 30 Mar 2010.

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Onder Altuntas.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Altuntas, O. Comparing different piston-prop aircraft engines with combustion efficiency and exergy. J Therm Anal Calorim (2020).

Download citation


  • Combustion efficiency
  • Energy efficiency
  • Exergy efficiency
  • Piston-prop aircraft