4.7 Article

Effects of exhaust gas recirculation on the thermal efficiency and combustion characteristics for premixed combustion system

期刊

ENERGY
卷 49, 期 -, 页码 375-383

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2012.10.057

关键词

Exhaust gas recirculation (EGR); Premixed combustion; Equivalence ratio; NOx and CO emissions; Thermal efficiency

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea(NRF)
  2. Korea government(MEST) [2012R1A2A2A01013884]
  3. INHA UNIVERSITY
  4. National Research Foundation of Korea [2012R1A2A2A01013884] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this research, a boiler in a premixed combustion system used to achieve exhaust gas recirculation was investigated as a way to achieve high thermal efficiencies and low pollutant emissions. The effects of various exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) ratios, equivalence ratios and boiler capacities on thermal efficiency, NOx and CO emissions and the flame behavior on the burner surface were examined both experimentally and numerically. The results of the experiments showed that when EGR was used, the NOx and CO concentrations decreased and the thermal efficiency increased. In the case of a 15% EGR ratio at an equivalence ratio of 0.90, NOx concentrations were found to be smaller than for the current operating condition of the boiler, and the thermal efficiency was approximately 4.7% higher. However, unlike NOx concentrations, although the EGR ratio was increased to 20% at an equivalence ratio of 0.90, the CO concentration was higher than in the current operating condition of the boiler. From the viewpoint of burner safety, the red glow on the burner surface was noticeably reduced when EGR was used. These results confirmed that the EGR method is advantageous from the standpoint of reducing emission concentrations and ensuring burner safety. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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