Can I use zero article before an acronym term?

Normally zero-article is used only when the noun identifies a single object.

When Jenny arrives, Billy opens the door as soon as possible.

When Russia sends a sends a spyplane to British airspace, Britain intercepts it with fighters.

There is only one Jenny, Billy, Russia and Britain.

In your case BLK-engine identifies a type of engine, not a single engine. You should not use zero article. It's irrelevant whether it's an acronym, it's entirely dependent on what the acronym means. "NATO did this..." is fine because NATO represents a single entity. "NGO did this..." is not and should be "The NGO..." or "An NGO..." because NGO does not define a single entity.

Single entity acronyms take a definite article (and not the zero article) when the definite article is part of the full name. "The British Broadcasting Corporation" is abbreviated to "The BBC", and "The United Nations" is abbreviated to "The UN" when used as a noun. But there are also exceptions which defy analysis.

If the acronym does not represent a single entity, such as in your case, it is acceptable to use either the indefinite or definite article. "The BLK-engine" or "A BLK-engine" would both work. You might want to read this answer about the difference between using zero article and definite article with types. Types of things vs. types of thing