0
Internal Combustion Engines

Performance and Emissions Characteristics of Bio-Diesel (B100)-Ignited Methane and Propane Combustion in a Four Cylinder Turbocharged Compression Ignition Engine

[+] Author and Article Information
N. T. Shoemaker, C. M. Gibson, A. C. Polk, S. R. Krishnan

 Mississippi State University, Starkville, MS 39762

K. K. Srinivasan1

 Mississippi State University, Starkville, MS 39762srinivasan@me.msstate.edu

It is assumed that the molecular composition of the biodiesel and the primary gaseous fuel are known.

1

Corresponding author.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 134(8), 082803 (Jun 15, 2012) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4005993 History: Received October 20, 2011; Revised October 21, 2011; Published June 15, 2012; Online June 15, 2012

Different combustion strategies and fuel sources are needed to deal with increasing fuel efficiency demands and emission restrictions. One possible strategy is dual fueling using readily available resources. Propane and natural gas are readily available with the current infrastructure and biodiesel is growing in popularity as a renewable fuel. This paper presents experimental results from dual fuel combustion of methane (as a surrogate for natural gas) and propane as primary fuels with biodiesel pilots in a 1.9 liter, turbocharged, 4-cylinder compression ignition engine at 1800 rev/min. Experiments were performed with different percentage energy substitutions (PES) of propane and methane and at different brake mean effective pressures (BMEP/bmep). Brake thermal efficiency (BTE) and emissions (NOx , HC, CO, CO2 , O2 and smoke) were also measured. Maximum PES levels for B100-methane dual fueling were limited to 70% at 2.5 bars bmep and 48% at 10 bars bmep, and corresponding values for B100-propane dual fueling were 64% and 43%, respectively. Maximum PES was limited by misfire at 2.5 bars bmep and the onset of engine knock at 10 bars bmep. Dual fuel BTEs approached straight B100 values at 10 bars bmep while they were significantly lower than B100 values at 2.5 bars bmep. In general, dual fueling was beneficial in reducing NOx and smoke emissions by 33% and 50%, respectively, from baseline B100 levels; however, both CO and THC emissions were significantly higher than baseline B100 levels at all PES and loads.

Copyright © 2012 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

BTE (solid lines) and overall equivalence ratio (dotted lines) versus PES for biodiesel-methane dual fueling

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

BTE (solid lines) and overall equivalence ratio (dotted lines) versus PES for biodiesel-propane dual fueling

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

AHRR versus CAD ATDC at 2.5 bmep. CH4 and C3 H8 are shown at the maximum PES of 71% and 64%, respectively.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

AHRR versus CAD ATDC at 5 bmep. CH4 and C3 H8 are shown at the maximum PES of 51% and 50%, respectively.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

AHRR versus CAD ATDC at 7.5 bmep. CH4 and C3 H8 are shown at the maximum PES of 50% and 49%, respectively.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

AHRR versus CAD ATDC at 10 bmep. CH4 and C3 H8 are shown at the maximum PES of 48% and 43%, respectively.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Smoke and NOx tradeoffs for straight biodiesel and for maximum PES of CH4 -biodiesel and C3 H8 -biodiesel dual fueling

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Brake specific NOx and smoke emissions versus PES for CH4 -biodiesel dual fueling

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Brake specific NOx and smoke emissions versus PES for C3 H8 -biodiesel dual fueling

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Brake specific CO and CO2 emissions versus PES for biodiesel-CH4 dual fueling

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Brake specific CO and CO2 emissions versus PES for C3 H8 -biodiesel dual fueling

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Brake specific THC emissions versus PES for biodiesel-CH4 dual fueling

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Brake specific THC emissions versus PES for C3 H8 -biodiesel dual fueling

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Brake specific THC emissions versus BSNOx tradeoff at various loads and maximum PES for straight B100, B100-methane and B100-propane dual fuel combustion

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