4.6 Article

Use of Gasoline, LPG and LPG-HHO Blend in SI Engine: A Comparative Performance for Emission Control and Sustainable Environment

期刊

PROCESSES
卷 8, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/pr8010074

关键词

engine performance; emissions; hydroxy gas; LPG; SI engine; weibull distribution

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The rising global warming concerns and explosive degradation of the environment requires the mainstream utilization of alternative fuels, such as hydroxy gas (HHO) which presents itself as a viable substitute for extracting the benefits of hydrogen. Therefore, an experimental study of the performance and emission characteristics of alternative fuels in contrast to conventional gasoline was undertaken. For experimentation, a spark ignition engine was run on a multitude of fuels comprising of gasoline, Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and hybrid blend of HHO with LPG. The engine was operated at 60% open throttle with engine speed ranging from 1600 rpm to 3400 rpm. Simultaneously, the corresponding performance parameters including brake specific fuel consumption, brake power and brake thermal efficiency were investigated. Emission levels of CO, CO2, HC and NOx were quantified in the specified speed range. To check the suitability of the acquired experimental data, it was subjected to a Weibull distribution fit. Enhanced performance efficiency and reduced emissions were observed with the combustion of the hybrid mixture of LPG with HHO in comparison to LPG: on average, brake power increased by 7% while the brake specific fuel consumption reduced by 15%. On the other hand, emissions relative to LPG decreased by 21%, 9% and 21.8% in cases of CO, CO2, and unburned hydrocarbons respectively. Incorporating alternative fuels would not only imply reduced dependency on conventional fuels but would also contribute to their sustainability for future generations. Simultaneously, the decrease in harmful environmental pollutants would help to mitigate and combat the threats of climate change.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据