4.7 Review

A comparative study of performance and emission characteristics of neat biodiesel operated diesel engine: a review

期刊

JOURNAL OF THERMAL ANALYSIS AND CALORIMETRY
卷 146, 期 3, 页码 1015-1025

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10973-020-10121-2

关键词

Diesel engine; Brake thermal efficiency; Antioxidant additive; Catalyst-coated piston

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that combining neat nerium biodiesel with ZrO2-coated piston andl-ascorbic acid can significantly improve the efficiency and emissions of diesel engines, bringing performance closer to that of traditional diesel fuel.
Environmental concern and fossil fuel depletion, researchers are forced to find alternate fuel lead to the internal combustion (IC) engines. One of the best options is biodiesel and substitute wholly or partially in the diesel engine for diesel fuel. It is obvious that the use of biodiesel in diesel engine reduced emissions such as Carbon monoxide (CO), hydrocarbon (HC), and smoke because of its higher oxygen content. The drawback of neat biodiesel-operated diesel engine is higher oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and lower performance. In order to improve the brake thermal efficiency and to reduce the emissions of diesel engine using neat biodiesel, a detailed review has been carried out in the present study. The in-cylinder treatment method is the most suitable because the efficiency and emission can be modified in the combustion chamber itself which will make it a viable solution for diesel engines. Neat nerium biodiesel with ZrO2-coated piston andl-ascorbic acid of are combined together and experiments are conducted. From the investigation, it has been found that ZrO2-coated piston and nerium biodiesel withl-ascorbic acid showed better results, which is very closer to diesel when compared in all aspects. From the investigation, it has been found that catalyst-coated piston with biodiesel along with antioxidant additive showed better results, which is very closer to diesel when compared in all aspects.

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