4.7 Article

Performance optimization of a diesel engine fueled with hydrogen/biodiesel with water addition based on the response surface methodology

期刊

ENERGY
卷 263, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2022.125869

关键词

Hydrogen; Water; Biodiesel; Response surface methodology; Marine engine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose of this research was to achieve the best performance, combustion and emission characteristics of a marine engine fueled with hydrogen, water and rapeseed methyl ester blend fuel. The study found that adding appropriate amounts of hydrogen and water to biodiesel can achieve efficient, low carbon and clean combustion in marine engines.
The purpose of this research was to achieve the best performance, combustion and emission characteristics of a marine engine fueled with hydrogen (5%, 10% and 15% energy fraction), water (2, 4 and 6 wt%) and rapeseed methyl ester (RME) blend fuel by the multi-objective optimization. Based on the experimental results of the engine at 50%, 75% and 100% loads, the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model was developed, and an improved chemical kinetic mechanism was developed to simulate the fuel combustion process. The response surface methodology (RSM) was used to optimize the combustion and emission characteristics of the marine diesel engine. The result showed that the hydrogen and water can improve the combustion and emission characteristics of the marine engine. The best solution was to select the desirable value of 0.632, and the engine achieves the best state by fueling R + 15H + 2.5W at 74.69% load. At the point, the optimum values of brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC), brake thermal efficiency (BTE), nitrogen oxide (NOx), hydrocarbon (HC) and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions were 208.31 g/kW.h, 39.22%, 941.21 ppm, 325.86 ppm and 1073.4 ppm, respectively. For this study, adding appropriate hydrogen and water to biodiesel can achieve efficient, low carbon and clean combustion in marine engine.

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