A320 Strange fuel consumption scenario!
Um, why did you apply the fuel imbalance procedure anyway? Surely you would just secure the engine at idle and then see how the fuel burn pans out, if it looks like it is going to be a problem THEN apply the feed procedure. In any case it would appear that you have just applied the fuel imbalance procedure incorrectly, you have only turned off ONE of the wing pumps which could result in fuel from the right tank being feed to the 'bad' engine if the pressure from the one wing pump still working is superior to the wing tank pumps in the left wing. Seems to me that you ended up running the no2 and no1 engine from the right tank and ended up with the reverse imbalance to what was expected because you didn't apply the procedure correctly. Usually in the sim with a full blown engine failure I will only consider the imbalance procedure if I have a Go around or an extended diversion and will only then apply it once I see an imbalance starting to form.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about balaning fuel in case of engine failure? In my outfit we are taught to switch the x-feed on and keep all 4 pumps in to draw fuel from both tanks to the live engine. In the sim it works like a charm. How about real life? I suspect it may lead to situation similar to that described by the OP?
If you open the fuel X feed (with no fuel leak), then the imbalance rate cannot be any worse (it may even be less if you have a stronger pump on the dead engine side). The benefit is all the fuel is now available to your only running engine. You won't starve the engine until all the fuel is exhausted
Our training altered, if only in part because the ECAM drill also altered - the "Open X-Feed" IIRC was removed in a later software standard, and replaced with "Monitor Fuel Balance" or similar? I now tend:
- Engine failure on takeoff
- In ECAM drill write down the tank quantities, but don't touch anyhting unless urgent. Quick assessment v serious leak?
- Complete climb, assessment, doodar etc.
- Now look at fuel again - you will have built up a fair imbalance. Can now take a longer look at leaks and quantity/balance v "plan"
- Now decide if it's worth balancing? If so do it, but keep an eye at every "review".
- In the unlikely (or very likely in the Sim) event of a GA, reassess.
Never mind what really happens, but if I was a Sim Instructor and saw someone merrily open the X-Feed I know I would now be pressing the Fuel Leak option
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a specific fuel imbalance procedure that is run in case any fuel balancing is needed. Just opening all pumps and hope for the best might lead to some rude awakening. It has happened in the past and probably will again if used like that, and of course stuff like the OP experienced is a direct result of that.
And yes, opening the xfeed outside the scope of a procedure is very actively discouraged. By the way, both on the bus and the boeing in my outfit, for the same reasons. Just the limits are much tighter on the boeing with 453kgs imbalance instead of 1500kg on the bus.
As NoD said current software on the bus only uses the line "Monitor imbalance" which does not mean to push the xfeed button (although that still removes that line), instead our FCOM advises us to actively monitor the fuel situation for both leakage and imbalance. Writing fuel quantities down and comparing them later to fuel burn is a very good method of doing that. After all we have that nice table for our pen and paper...
And yes, opening the xfeed outside the scope of a procedure is very actively discouraged. By the way, both on the bus and the boeing in my outfit, for the same reasons. Just the limits are much tighter on the boeing with 453kgs imbalance instead of 1500kg on the bus.
As NoD said current software on the bus only uses the line "Monitor imbalance" which does not mean to push the xfeed button (although that still removes that line), instead our FCOM advises us to actively monitor the fuel situation for both leakage and imbalance. Writing fuel quantities down and comparing them later to fuel burn is a very good method of doing that. After all we have that nice table for our pen and paper...
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NigelOnDraft
As you have said the procedure to simply open cross feed was changed because in real life it may not balance the fuel due to pressure difference in fuel pumps. So they changed it to "imbalance monitor" and if you see the fuel imbalance procedure in the FCOM at bottom it says:
Note: There is no requirement to correct an imbalance, until the ECAM fuel advisory is displayed.
So you do not have to do any thing at EFATO. When the advisory appears apply the procedure. That is how it is taught now. Incidentally airbus can be landed with one tank empty and the other full.
As you have said the procedure to simply open cross feed was changed because in real life it may not balance the fuel due to pressure difference in fuel pumps. So they changed it to "imbalance monitor" and if you see the fuel imbalance procedure in the FCOM at bottom it says:
Note: There is no requirement to correct an imbalance, until the ECAM fuel advisory is displayed.
So you do not have to do any thing at EFATO. When the advisory appears apply the procedure. That is how it is taught now. Incidentally airbus can be landed with one tank empty and the other full.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: N5109.2W10.5
Posts: 720
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
vilas
Correct. With all engines operating normally, then fuel used should be almost symmetrical and the ECAM advisory limit is there to reduce pilot work load.
When you have an engine failure, the fuel used will be asymmetric and you should anticipate that there may be a requirement to balance fuel. There are two types of pilots who:
1) Do nothing until ECAM says do something (which may be during a high work load situation)
2) Anticipate the problem and during suitable low work load opportunity, check there is no leak and then take steps to mitigate the potential fuel imbalance.
Which sort of pilots do you train?
Lessons Learned
There is no requirement to correct an imbalance, until the ECAM fuel advisory is displayed.
So you do not have to do any thing at EFATO. When the advisory appears apply the procedure. That is how it is taught now.
1) Do nothing until ECAM says do something (which may be during a high work load situation)
2) Anticipate the problem and during suitable low work load opportunity, check there is no leak and then take steps to mitigate the potential fuel imbalance.
Which sort of pilots do you train?
Lessons Learned
Last edited by Goldenrivett; 31st Jan 2015 at 11:44.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As Goldenrivett says, you can either start balancing the fuel on the SE Go Around with some real work / decisions to be done, or you could "plan ahead" in a low work load moment and maybe prevent the "Fuel Balance" ECAM ever occurring.
I know what I do, and would take any trainer to task who advocated the line of "you must not balance until the ECAM comes up"
I know what I do, and would take any trainer to task who advocated the line of "you must not balance until the ECAM comes up"
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Goldenrivett
Just don't jump the gun.This is airbus procedure for EFATO and not my creation. I am talking about EFTO. During EFATO while applying ECAM there is no possibility of imbalance when every thing was balanced few minutes ago. So complete your other procedures, take your decisions. If you are landing in 30 minutes all that you say is not going to happen and as it is imbalance during landing is not life and death situation in airbus. Also fuel does not get balanced instantly you need time for that. But if your OEI flying time is going to be considerable then your need for that fuel itself is greater than any requirement of balancing and should make you apply the necessary procedure.
Just don't jump the gun.This is airbus procedure for EFATO and not my creation. I am talking about EFTO. During EFATO while applying ECAM there is no possibility of imbalance when every thing was balanced few minutes ago. So complete your other procedures, take your decisions. If you are landing in 30 minutes all that you say is not going to happen and as it is imbalance during landing is not life and death situation in airbus. Also fuel does not get balanced instantly you need time for that. But if your OEI flying time is going to be considerable then your need for that fuel itself is greater than any requirement of balancing and should make you apply the necessary procedure.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: N5109.2W10.5
Posts: 720
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
villas,
What gun?
You are missing the point about potential fuel starvation and intelligent fuel management.
Assume Fuel Loaded = 4,400 kgs i.e. 2,200 each side; and assume No 1 EFTO & 30 mins flying before ready to commence approach. Assume 1400 kgs was consumed (Therefore No ECAM warning yet)
Fuel distribution would be 800 LHS; 2200 RHS
Fly approach & GA and consume say 700 kgs before aircraft clean and MCT set.
Fuel distribution = 100 LHS; 2200 RHS.
Who would you rather have if you were a passenger, pilot A (who might do ECAM during the approach & GA when work load is high) or pilot B?
What gun?
If you are landing in 30 minutes all that you say is not going to happen and as it is imbalance during landing is not life and death situation in airbus.
Assume Fuel Loaded = 4,400 kgs i.e. 2,200 each side; and assume No 1 EFTO & 30 mins flying before ready to commence approach. Assume 1400 kgs was consumed (Therefore No ECAM warning yet)
Fuel distribution would be 800 LHS; 2200 RHS
Fly approach & GA and consume say 700 kgs before aircraft clean and MCT set.
Fuel distribution = 100 LHS; 2200 RHS.
Who would you rather have if you were a passenger, pilot A (who might do ECAM during the approach & GA when work load is high) or pilot B?
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't make it so dramatic. Passengers don't know who is in front and how was he trained. My point is it is not necessary to check when ECAM says monitor imbalance. Once you have finished all actions and take a situational awareness decision fuel situation will be considered and if the fuel situation is like you stated you should apply the procedure. It depends on circumstances. There is no requirement means do not have to balance for balance sake, but if it is necessary because of the fuel scenario then apply it by all means. Even if you don't outer tank fuel transferred should trigger you to do it anyway in any situation.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by hossein
Hi there, please check my hyperlink in below, and answer my questions if you can.
For the fuel situation, as other have already stated, the R FUEL PUMP was stronger to the point to feed both engines but also to crossfeed to the left side at the same time.
Hi hossein,
Looking at the data that you supplied I think you have two unrelated problems. Your fuel and engine instruments are ok, they are doing their job.
Engine first... 300kg fuel used difference due to left engine at flt idle and right engine at high power setting for some time. Look at your photos and compare EPR's and fuel flows.
Higher EGT suggests possible older engine with more wear and tear and therefore operates slightly harder to maintain selected thrust settings. All other parameters are stable.
Higher oil pressure with stable oil quantity and temp would indicate to me an impending oil filter blockage.
Now fuel... I can only assume you had 1000kgs of fuel in the centre tank at takeoff and used that first. Centre tank fuel pumps have a higher output pressure than the wing tank pumps. Looks to me like the left tank pumps may have a failed check valve either in one (rare) or both (extremely rare) pumps. This will enable fuel to pumped past the check valve and into the tank which results in that tank "making" fuel as indicated on your fuel page. This scenario will cause a run around circuit of fuel even with centre tank pumps off and wing pumps on. You will not see the left tank decrease until crossfeed valve is closed and wing tanks are supplying their respective engines. Hope this helps.
Looking at the data that you supplied I think you have two unrelated problems. Your fuel and engine instruments are ok, they are doing their job.
Engine first... 300kg fuel used difference due to left engine at flt idle and right engine at high power setting for some time. Look at your photos and compare EPR's and fuel flows.
Higher EGT suggests possible older engine with more wear and tear and therefore operates slightly harder to maintain selected thrust settings. All other parameters are stable.
Higher oil pressure with stable oil quantity and temp would indicate to me an impending oil filter blockage.
Now fuel... I can only assume you had 1000kgs of fuel in the centre tank at takeoff and used that first. Centre tank fuel pumps have a higher output pressure than the wing tank pumps. Looks to me like the left tank pumps may have a failed check valve either in one (rare) or both (extremely rare) pumps. This will enable fuel to pumped past the check valve and into the tank which results in that tank "making" fuel as indicated on your fuel page. This scenario will cause a run around circuit of fuel even with centre tank pumps off and wing pumps on. You will not see the left tank decrease until crossfeed valve is closed and wing tanks are supplying their respective engines. Hope this helps.
I've seen this occur a few years back with a wing tank pump fault. From memory the ECAM called for the faulty pump to be turned off and cross feed opened. This resulted in the same situation as hossein. At top of climb we had a 500 kg imbalance with the heavier wing being on the side with 2 good pumps. Never did find out the actual reason. I have always thought it could possibly be due to system plumbing ( pipe diameters, junctions etc) causing a Venturi effect and sucking the fuel from the side with only one pump operating to the other. Part of the reason for this thought is the inconsistency with the fuel temperatures. In hossein's case the left outer is a lot warmer which (if both IDGs are running well) would indicate that more fuel is returning from the engine. The right outer temp is probably colder because lower fuel pressure within the engine and minimal fuel returning to tank.
Please note this is all assumptions but the best I could come up with. I also don't think you could test this in a sim I think you would have to check it in a real aircraft.
Any engineers out there have any answers?
Please note this is all assumptions but the best I could come up with. I also don't think you could test this in a sim I think you would have to check it in a real aircraft.
Any engineers out there have any answers?
Have to say, I am disturbed that here we have a crew who are inventing their own fuel procedures; (leaving one pump on in the lighter tank) - why did you do that and not what it says in the QRH ???
Inventing your own drills is a highly dangerous road to go down guys.
Follow the QRH.
Inventing your own drills is a highly dangerous road to go down guys.
Follow the QRH.
clark y,
I think your boost pump problem is different to hosseins as in, his pumps were operational (except for possible boost pump chk valve failure/s) and I think you too may have had chk valve failure on the other wing with the two operational pumps. But you neglected to explain what happened with fuel tank qty indication once in cruise.
With regards to hosseins fuel temps, 3 temps are above zero and 1 temp below zero. I tend to think a false/faulty temp sensor indication on right outboard tank. My reason being that all tanks have had the same amount of "cold soak" while airborne, all be it, it was a short flight and not really long enough for a good cold soak. As far as the warm fuel and IDG theory, it doesn't happen, fuel does not return to the tanks from the engines.
I think your boost pump problem is different to hosseins as in, his pumps were operational (except for possible boost pump chk valve failure/s) and I think you too may have had chk valve failure on the other wing with the two operational pumps. But you neglected to explain what happened with fuel tank qty indication once in cruise.
With regards to hosseins fuel temps, 3 temps are above zero and 1 temp below zero. I tend to think a false/faulty temp sensor indication on right outboard tank. My reason being that all tanks have had the same amount of "cold soak" while airborne, all be it, it was a short flight and not really long enough for a good cold soak. As far as the warm fuel and IDG theory, it doesn't happen, fuel does not return to the tanks from the engines.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: N5109.2W10.5
Posts: 720
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capt Quentin McHale,
Please see Fuel Recirculation System | IDG Cooling
& Page 115 of http://www.academia.edu/8535109/Training_Manual_A319_A320_A321
Lufthansa Technical Training table suggest that up to 500Kg/hr can be returned to the outer fuel tank if the IDG oil Temp >93 deg C.
If the fuel pressure was greatest from the tank pump in the RHS, then fuel could be transferred into the LHS outer fuel tank via the IDG cooling flow mechanism as clark y suggests.
As far as the warm fuel and IDG theory, it doesn't happen, fuel does not return to the tanks from the engines.
& Page 115 of http://www.academia.edu/8535109/Training_Manual_A319_A320_A321
Lufthansa Technical Training table suggest that up to 500Kg/hr can be returned to the outer fuel tank if the IDG oil Temp >93 deg C.
If the fuel pressure was greatest from the tank pump in the RHS, then fuel could be transferred into the LHS outer fuel tank via the IDG cooling flow mechanism as clark y suggests.
Last edited by Goldenrivett; 6th Feb 2015 at 07:28.
As far as the warm fuel and IDG theory, it doesn't happen, fuel does not return to the tanks from the engines.
Capt Quentin,
With my problem, the fuel went out of balance by about 500kgs in about 20mins(top of climb). After that we applied the imbalance checklist. Can't remember how long it took to rebalance the fuel but I do remember it took a lot longer than expected.
With my problem, the fuel went out of balance by about 500kgs in about 20mins(top of climb). After that we applied the imbalance checklist. Can't remember how long it took to rebalance the fuel but I do remember it took a lot longer than expected.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: FL390
Age: 38
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The answer is in the FCOM.
FUEL CTR PUMP 1 (2) LO PR, although not directly linked to the above scenario, see the note.
A fuel imbalance may occur, if the performance of the pumps of one wing is different from that of the other wing......
....In this case, apply the fuel imbalance procedure, as required
FUEL CTR PUMP 1 (2) LO PR, although not directly linked to the above scenario, see the note.
A fuel imbalance may occur, if the performance of the pumps of one wing is different from that of the other wing......
....In this case, apply the fuel imbalance procedure, as required
