4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Experimental investigation of the oxygen enrichment in synthetic gases flames

期刊

FUEL
卷 270, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2020.117482

关键词

Synthetic gas; Oxygen enrichment; Emissions

资金

  1. Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey [TUBITAK-MAG-215M821]
  2. Erciyes University Research Foundation [FDK-2019-8816]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Today, there are many different studies on increasing combustion efficiency and reducing flue gas emission values. In this study, H-2 and CO have been added to 30% methane gas in a premixed laboratory scale model burner with high H-2 / CO ratio (3) and medium (1.5). Swirl numbers (s = 0.6 and 1) have been changed by keeping the equivalent ratios constant. The experiments have been carried out at a constant burner power (3 kW), regardless of the fuel composition. The effect of the swirl number on the temperature distribution and emission values in the combustion chamber has been investigated radially and axially. At the low swirl number, CO emissions tend to increase with the decrease of H-2/CO ratio. On the other hand, at the high swirl number, it has been observed that the decrease in CO emissions with the decrease of H-2/CO ratio. Because of the high heating value of the hydrogen, NO emissions increased with the high H-2/CO ratio, regardless of the swirl number. As a result of the experiments, it has been concluded that the swirl number and the rate of H-2/CO has a great effect on combustion characteristics and emissions of flames. In addition, oxygen enriched combustion has been performed at constant (1) swirl number at different H-2/CO ratios. Equivalence ratio was kept constant (0.7) for all experiments. It has been observed that the oxygen-enriched combustion has been caused the low CO and high NO emission at both mixtures. The experiments also showed that the increase of O-2 ratio in the air for high H-2/CO ratio (3) could be causing the increase in temperature.

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

4.7
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