0
Research Papers: Internal Combustion Engines

Comparison of Propane and Methane Performance and Emissions in a Turbocharged Direct Injection Dual Fuel Engine

[+] Author and Article Information
C. M. Gibson, A. C. Polk, N. T. Shoemaker, K. K. Srinivasan

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Mississippi State University, Starkville, MS 39762

S. R. Krishnan1

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Mississippi State University, Starkville, MS 39762krishnan@me.msstate.edu

1

Corresponding author.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 133(9), 092806 (Apr 20, 2011) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4002895 History: Received September 27, 2010; Revised October 01, 2010; Published April 20, 2011; Online April 20, 2011

With increasingly restrictive NOx and particulate matter emissions standards, the recent discovery of new natural gas reserves, and the possibility of producing propane efficiently from biomass sources, dual fueling strategies have become more attractive. This paper presents experimental results from dual fuel operation of a four-cylinder turbocharged direct injection (DI) diesel engine with propane or methane (a natural gas surrogate) as the primary fuel and diesel as the ignition source. Experiments were performed with the stock engine control unit at a constant speed of 1800 rpm, and a wide range of brake mean effective pressures (BMEPs) (2.7–11.6 bars) and percent energy substitutions (PESs) of C3H8 and CH4. Brake thermal efficiencies (BTEs) and emissions (NOx, smoke, total hydrocarbons (THCs), CO, and CO2) were measured. Maximum PES levels of about 80–95% with CH4 and 40–92% with C3H8 were achieved. Maximum PES was limited by poor combustion efficiencies and engine misfire at low loads for both C3H8 and CH4, and the onset of knock above 9 bar BMEP for C3H8. While dual fuel BTEs were lower than straight diesel BTEs at low loads, they approached diesel BTE values at high loads. For dual fuel operation, NOx and smoke reductions (from diesel values) were as high as 66–68% and 97%, respectively, but CO and THC emissions were significantly higher with increasing PES at all engine loads.

Copyright © 2011 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Schematic of the VW 1.9L TDI experimental setup

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Maximum PES and intake boost pressure versus BMEP for diesel-C3H8 and diesel-CH4 dual fueling

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Brake thermal efficiency and overall equivalence ratio versus BMEP for straight diesel fueling, and for maximum PES diesel-C3H8 and diesel-CH4 dual fueling

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Brake-specific NOx and smoke emissions versus BMEP for straight diesel fueling, and for maximum PES diesel-C3H8 and diesel-CH4 dual fueling

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Brake-specific CO and CO2 emissions versus BMEP for straight diesel fueling, and for maximum PES diesel-C3H8 and diesel-CH4 dual fueling

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Trade-offs between brake-specific THC and NOx emissions at different BMEPs for straight diesel fueling, and for maximum PES diesel-C3H8 and diesel-CH4 dual fueling

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Trade-offs between smoke and brake-specific NOx emissions at different BMEPs for straight diesel fueling, and for maximum PES diesel-C3H8 and diesel-CH4 dual fueling

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Brake thermal efficiency and overall equivalence ratio versus PES for diesel-C3H8 dual fueling at different loads

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Brake-specific NOx and smoke emissions versus PES for diesel-C3H8 dual fueling at different loads

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Brake-specific CO and CO2 emissions versus PES for diesel-C3H8 dual fueling at different loads

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Trade-offs between brake-specific THC and NOx emissions at different PES for diesel-C3H8 dual fueling at different loads

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Brake thermal efficiency and overall equivalence ratio versus PES for diesel-CH4 dual fueling at different loads

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Brake-specific NOx and smoke emissions versus PES for diesel-CH4 dual fueling at different loads

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Brake-specific CO and CO2 emissions versus PES for diesel-CH4 dual fueling at different loads

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Trade-offs between brake-specific THC and NOx emissions at different PES for diesel-CH4 dual fueling at different loads

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In