4.5 Article

Combustion, Performance, and Emission Evaluation of a Diesel Engine with Biodiesel Like Fuel Blends Derived from a Mixture of Pakistani Waste Canola and Waste Transformer Oils

期刊

ENERGIES
卷 10, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/en10071023

关键词

waste transformer oil; waste canola oil; combustion; performance; emissions; diesel engine

资金

  1. Institute of Chemical Sciences, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan
  2. M/s Chicago Metal Works Pvt. Ltd. Multan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this work was to study the combustion, performance, and emission characteristics of a 5.5 kW four-stroke single-cylinder water-cooled direct-injection diesel engine operated with blends of biodiesel-like fuel (BLF15, BLF20 & BLF25) obtained from a 50:50 mixture of transesterified waste transformer oil (TWTO) and waste canola oil methyl esters (WCOME) with petroleum diesel. The mixture of the waste oils was named as biodiesel-like fuel (BLF). The engine fuelled with BLF blends was evaluated in terms of combustion, performance, and emission characteristics. FTIR analysis was carried out to know the functional groups in the BLF fuel. The experimental results revealed the shorter ignition delay and marginally higher brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC), brake thermal efficiency (BTE) and exhaust gas temperature (EGT) values for BLF blends as compared to diesel. The hydrocarbon (HC) and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions were decreased by 10.92-31.17% and 3.80-6.32%, respectively, as compared to those of diesel fuel. Smoke opacity was significantly reduced. FTIR analysis has confirmed the presence of saturated alkanes and halide groups in BLF fuel. In comparison to BLF20 and BLF25, the blend BLF15 has shown higher brake thermal efficiency and lower fuel consumption values. The HC, CO, and smoke emissions of BLF15 were found lower than those of petroleum diesel. The fuel blend BLF15 is suggested to be used as an alternative fuel for diesel engines without any engine modification.

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

4.5
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