technical and environmental improvement of lng carrier’s propulsion machinery using jatropha biao...

1

TECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT OF LNG CARRIER’S PROPULSION MACHINERY USING

JATROPHA BIAO DIESEL FUEL

Prof. M. A. MosaadNaval Architecture and Marine Engineering

Department Faculty of Engineering, Port Said University,

Egypt

2

Abstract

A promising alternative fuel Jatropha methyl easter has

drawn the attention of researchers in recent times as a high

potential substrate for production of biodiesel fuel. In this

paper the combustion, performance and emission

characteristics of a single cylinder diesel engine when fuelled

with JME, diesel oil and natural gas are evaluated

experimentally and theoretically. The experimental results

showed that the thermal and volumetric efficiency of diesel

engine is higher than Jatropha biodiesel engine. The specific

fuel consumption, exhaust gas temperature, HC, CO2 and NO

were comparatively higher in Jatropha biodiesel. While an

appreciable increase in CO emission when using diesel.

3

Abstract cont.

The CFD offers a powerful and convenient way to help

understanding physical and chemical processes involved in

internal combustion engines between diesel oil fuel and JME

fuel. It concluded that the deviation between diesel fuel

pressure and JME not exceeds 3 bar and the trend for

compression pressure almost same. The temperature

deviation between diesel fuel and JME not exceeds 40 k and

the trend for temperature almost same. Finally the

maximum heat release rate of JME is lower than that of

diesel fuel. The experimental and CFD investigations

indicated that the Jatropha biodiesel can be used instead of

diesel fuel oil with safe engine operation

4

IntroductionDefinition of the problem

4

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 20150

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Steam DFDEDRL

LNG Carriers in Service or Under Construction (2015)

1975

1977

1979

1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

2007

2009

2011

2013

2015

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Steam DFDEDRL

5

The aim of this research is to explore the technical feasibility of Jatropha biodiesel in direct injection compression ignition engine without any substantial hardware modifications.

Introduction

Aim of the study

6

Experimental Setup and Results

7

The study scenarios:


1st phaseExperimental Set Up

2nd phase Instrumentation and Measurements

3rd phase Instruments Calibration

4th phase Uncertainties And Error Analysis

5th phase Experimental Results And Discussion

8


ITEMS SPECIFICATIONS

Make/model Apan Diesel India

Brake power (kW) 7.5

Rated speed (rpm)

1200

Number of cylinders One – cylinder

Aspiration Natural

Cooling system Air cooler

Cycles Four stroke engine

Bore 102 mm

Stroke 110 mm

Compression ratio 16.5

Cubic capacity 896 cc

Starting Manual

Coupling Flexible

Fuel Tank capacity 7.5 liter

Lubrication oil type SAE 30/ 40

9

Measurements

installation

Equipment calibration

Record readings

Average readings

Final measured

data

Check Exhaust

gas analyzer

Reading accuracy

Yes

No

Experimental test procedures


10

Experimental Results and Discussion

Brake Thermal Efficiency

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 66

9

12

15

18

21

24

27

30

33

diesel onlydiesel with natural gasJatrophajatropha with natural gas

LOADS(KW)

Th

erm

al E

ffic

ien

cy %


• The thermal efficiency for diesel oil increased by 1.2% and the

characteristics are almost same

11

Experimental Results and Discussion

Volumetric Efficiency

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 682

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

diesel onlydiesel with natural gasJatrophajatropha with natural gasE.Kerkhof ref(15)

LOADS(KW)

Volu

met

ric

Effiec

incy

%


• Volumetric efficiency slightly higher when diesel fuel is used as a fuel but the maximum increased about 1.4%.

12

Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)

12

Engine Mesh

– 3 D Model– 221- 459 CA– 965,000 Cells–Mixed type cells– Δt = 0.5 CA

13

The study scenarios:


1st phaseBuilding a valid CFD model

2nd phase

SIMULATED CFD model

14

Diesel engine

Experimental

results

Assign measuring readings

Boundary conditions

Geometry

drawing

Mesh generati

on

Solver governi

ng equatio

ns

CFD model

Run packag

e

CFD results

Error analysi

s

Valid CFD Model

Measurement

readings


1st phase Building a valid CFD model

15


15

Model Validation

• Experimental & CFD model comparison error 7%

• Over predication 7%

250 270 290 310 330 350 370 390 410 430 4500

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Maker Curve

CFD Curve

P-θ Curve

Cyl

ider

pre

ssu

re (

bar

)

Crank angle

16

Valid CFD Model

JMEDiesel oil

Comparison study

CFD results for diesel oil

CFD results for JME

2nd phase SIMULATED CFD model


17

Results and discussion

18


COMPARISON BY USING P-Θ CURVE

pressure Contour using Diesel oil pressure Contour using JME

CFD Contour for static pressure before compression

19

230 250 270 290 310 330 350 370 390 410 4300

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Diesel CFDJatropha CFD

P-Θ CURVE

Cylin

der

Pres

sure

(bar

)Crank Angle

CFD P-θ curves for Diesel oil Pressure – crank angle diagram for JME and diesel

COMPARISON BY USING P-Θ CURVE

CFD P-θ curves for JME


Indicated Pressure decreased by 6.4% when

using Jatropha biodiesel as compared with

diesel fuel cylinder indicated pressure

20

Comparison By Using Temperature Curve

Temperature Contour of combustion using JME

Temperature Contour of combustion using Diesel oil

Temperature Contour before injection


21

Comparison By Using Temperature Curve

Combustion temperature using diesel oil

Combustion temperature using JME

230 280 330 380 430300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300CFD diesel

Crank Angle

Tem

per

atu

re

(k)

Temperature – crank angle diagram for JME and diesel


Exhaust temperature increased by 4.3% when used Jatropha biodiesel

22

Comparison By Using P-V Diagram

2E-19 1E-04 2E-04 3E-04 4E-04 5E-04 6E-04 7E-04 8E-04 9E-04 1E-030

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

CFD dieselCFD JME

Volume m3

Pre

ssu

re (

bar

)

P-V Diagram


• The work done for diesel oil is increased by about 3% more than JME

23

Comparison By Using Heat Release Curves

300 320 340 360 380 4000

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Crank Angle

Rat

e of

hea

t re

leas

e

Cyl

ind

er P

ress

ure

(b

ar)

300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 4000

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Cylin

der

Pres

sure

(bar

)

Crank Angle

Rate

of h

eat

rele

ase

heat release curves for diesel heat release curves for JME


24

300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400-40-30-20-10

0102030405060708090

100110120130

Crank angle

Rate

of h

eat

rele

ase

Comparison By Using Heat Release Curves

Heat release curves for diesel and JME


• The maximum heat release rate of JME is lower than that of diesel fuel, the maximum heat release rate of JME is 74.97 J/deg CA compared with 127.96 J/deg CA for diesel fuel.

25

Nitric Monoxide NO Emissions

NOx emissions Contour of Diesel oil

NOx emissions Contour of JME


26

Nitric Monoxide NO Emissions

0 1 2 3 4 5 60

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Diesel CFD

JME CFD

Diesel EXP

JME EXP

NOx emmision

NO

x pp

m

NOx emission curves for diesel oil and JME


NOx emissions of JME was increased by about 9% as compared to diesel fuel

27

CO2 EMISSIONS

CO2 emissions Contour for JME

CO2 emissions Contour for Diesel oil


28

CO2 EMISSIONS

0 1 2 3 4 5 60

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

0.035

0.04

0.045CFD dieselCFD JME

Mas

s w

eigh

t av

-er

age

Load (kw)


CO2 emissions Contour for JME and diesel oil

The JME CO2 emission increased by 7%

29

Conclusions

• Experimental & CFD model comparison error was 7%

• The work done for diesel oil is increased by about 3% more than

JME

• Indicated Pressure decreased by 6.4% when using Jatropha

biodiesel as compared with diesel fuel cylinder indicated pressure

• Exhaust temperature increased by 4.3% when used Jatropha

biodiesel.

30

Conclusions

• The thermal efficiency for diesel oil increased by 1.2% and the

characteristics are almost same

• Volumetric efficiency slightly higher when diesel fuel is used as a fuel but the maximum increased about 1.4%.

• NOx emissions of JME was increased by about 9% as compared to diesel fuel

• The JME CO2 emission increased by 7%

• The CO emissions for JME is lower than diesel oil by 6.4%.

31

Overall Conclusions

The overall conclusion of the experiments and

the CFD study shown that the JME

successfully replace pilot diesel oil in dual

engine burning natural gas in LNG carriers.

32

Recommendations for future work

• The experiments may be repeated for a high power diesel engine and more engine settings to study different types of Jatropha biodiesel Contaminants.

• Study the injection timings and excess air ratio for each type.

• Measure the temperature in the combustion chamber instead of exhaust manifold.

• Study the effect of changing injection timing in diesel engine performance when using JME and diesel fuel

• The properties of JME must be carefully studied in order to reduce the emission produce from JME

33

THANK YOU

technical and environmental improvement of lng carrier’s propulsion machinery using jatropha biao...

Documents