4.7 Article

A comparative study of the chemical kinetics of methyl and ethyl propanoate

期刊

FUEL
卷 134, 期 -, 页码 26-38

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2014.05.035

关键词

Methyl propanoate; Ethyl propanoate; Biodiesel; Pyrolysis; Shock tube

资金

  1. Clean Combustion Research Center at King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST)
  2. CEFRC, an Energy Frontier Research Center - U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Basic Energy Sciences [DE-SC0001198]
  3. US Department of Energy, Office of Vehicle Technologies
  4. Office of Basic Energy Sciences
  5. US Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory [DE-AC52-07NA27344]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

High temperature pyrolysis of methyl propanoate (CH3-CH2-C(=O)O-CH3) and ethyl propanoate (CH3-CH2-C(=O)O-CH2-CH3) was studied behind reflected shock waves at temperatures of 1250-1750 K and pressure of 1.5 atm. Species time-histories were recorded for CO, CO2, C2H4, and H2O using laser absorption methods over a test time of 1 ms. Pyrolysis of methyl propanoate (MP) appears to be faster than that of ethyl propanoate (EP) under the present experimental conditions, where CO and CO2 reach their plateau values faster for MP at a specific temperature and fuel concentration. Higher plateau values are reached for CO in case of MP while the CO2 levels are similar for the two ester fuels. Ethylene production is larger for EP due to the presence of six-centered ring elimination reaction that produces ethylene and propanoic acid. Very little H2O is produced during MP pyrolysis in contrast with appreciable H2O production from EP. Sensitivity and rate-of-production analyses were carried out to identify key reactions that affect the measured species profiles. Previous kinetic mechanisms of Yang et al. (2011) [1,2] and Metcalf et al. (2009, 2007) [3,4] were used as base models and then refined to propose a new MP/EP pyrolysis mechanism. (C) 2014 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