4.7 Article

Investigation of engine performance, combustion, and emissions using waste tire Oil-Diesel-Glycine max biodiesel blends in a diesel engine

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.csite.2022.102435

关键词

Waste tire; Pyrolysis oil; Diesel engine; Engine performance; Exhaust emissions

资金

  1. Kuwait Foundation for the Advancement of Sciences [CR19-45EM-01]
  2. Central Queensland University [RSH/5221]
  3. Dhaka University of Engineering Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the engine performance and emissions of waste tire oil-diesel-biodiesel blends, finding that the maximum blending limit for waste tire pyrolysis oil was 30% in diesel fuel.
This work investigated engine performance and emissions using waste tire oil-diesel-biodiesel blends. A sustainable fuel glycine max biodiesel was blended with the tire oil-diesel blends to improve performance, combustion, and exhaust emissions. The seven fuels including a 100% diesel 10-30% waste tire oil to 90-70% diesel, 10% tire oil +10% biodiesel +80% diesel, 30% tire oil+10% biodiesel+60% diesel and 10% biodiesel+90% diesel was used as fuels in a direct injection diesel engine. Up to 30% (vol) waste tire pyrolysis oil was blended with diesel. More than 30% of waste tire pyrolysis oil shows inferior solubility issues and inferior engine performance and emissions. Thus, this investigation was limited to 30% waste tire pyrolysis oil. All fuel blends showed similar properties to diesel. With similar engine performance, like torque, power, efficiency, energy, and exergy metrics, the blends showed insignificant variations in emissions (carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxide) compared to a reference diesel fuel. Interestingly, the experimental results were compared with the modelling results, and the maximum variations between them were 10%. The outcome of this research can promote waste tire pyrolysis oil as an alter-native fuel for diesel engines and accords with alternative energy development initiatives all over the world.

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