0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Combustion, Fuels, and Emissions

Experimental Studies of High Efficiency Combustion With Fumigation of Dimethyl Ether and Propane Into Diesel Engine Intake Air

[+] Author and Article Information
Bhaskar Prabhakar

Department of Energy and Mineral Engineering,
The Pennsylvania State University,
University Park, PA 16802
e-mail: bhaskar.lp@gmail.com

Srinivas Jayaraman

Department of Industrial Engineering,
The Pennsylvania State University,
University Park, PA 16802
e-mail: srinivas.jayaraman03@gmail.com

Randy Vander Wal

Department of Energy and Mineral Engineering,
The Pennsylvania State University,
University Park, PA 16802
e-mail: ruv12@psu.edu

André Boehman

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
e-mail: boehman@umich.edu

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Combustion and Fuels Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received May 27, 2014; final manuscript received June 8, 2014; published online November 11, 2014. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 137(4), 041505 (Apr 01, 2015) (9 pages) Paper No: GTP-14-1251; doi: 10.1115/1.4028616 History: Received May 27, 2014; Revised June 08, 2014; Online November 11, 2014

This work explores the role of the ignition quality of a fumigated fuel on combustion phasing and brake thermal efficiency (BTE), which was investigated in a 2.5 l turbocharged common rail light-duty diesel engine. Different combinations of dimethyl ether (DME) and propane were fumigated into the intake air and displaced some of the directly injected ultralow sulfur diesel fuel (ULSD) needed to maintain the engine and a constant speed and load. Fumigation of DME and propane significantly increased BTE and reduced brake specific energy consumption (BSEC) compared to the baseline diesel condition with no fumigation. A mixture of 20% DME with 30% propane provided the maximum BTE, with 24% reduction in BSEC, however, at the expense of increasing peak cylinder pressure by 6 bar, which was even higher at greater DME substitutions. Fumigated DME auto-ignited early, ahead of top dead center (TDC), showing the typical low temperature heat release (LTHR) and high temperature heat release (HTHR) events and propane addition suppressed the early LTHR, shifting more of the DME heat release closer to TDC. Total hydrocarbon (THC) emissions increased, while NOx emissions reduced with increasing fumigation.

Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Φ–T map showing soot and NOx formation zones, with advanced combustion modes, adapted from December [1]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Custom intake air manifold system for DME and propane fumigation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

BTE at varying DME and propane substitution levels

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

BSEC at varying DME and propane substitution levels

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

ITE at varying DME and propane substitution levels

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

FP at varying DME and propane substitution levels

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Volumetric efficiency at varying DME and propane substitution levels

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Cylinder pressure versus crank angle for 0% DME substitution and 0–30% propane substitution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Cylinder pressure versus crank angle for 10% DME substitution and 0–30% propane substitution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Cylinder pressure versus crank angle for 20% DME substitution and 0–30% propane substitution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Cylinder pressure versus crank angle for 30% DME substitution and 0–30% propane substitution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Heat release rate versus crank angle for 0% DME substitution and 0–30% propane substitution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Heat release rate versus crank angle for 10% DME substitution and 0–30% propane substitution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Heat release rate versus crank angle for 20% DME substitution and 0–30% propane substitution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Heat release rate versus crank angle for 30% DME substitution and 0–30% propane substitution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Bulk-averaged cylinder temperature versus crank angle for 0% DME substitution and 0–30% propane substitution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Bulk-averaged cylinder temperature versus crank angle for 10% DME substitution and 0–30% propane substitution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Bulk-averaged cylinder temperature versus crank angle for 20% DME substitution and 0–30% propane substitution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Bulk-averaged cylinder temperature versus crank angle for 30% DME substitution and 0–30% propane substitution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

THC at varying DME and propane substitution levels

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

NOx emissions at varying DME and propane substitution levels

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

CO emissions at varying DME and propane substitution levels

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