Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ISS N 2229-5518
INTRODUCTION
Natural gas
purification 55%
crude oil
refining 45%
Figure 1: Propane Production
Properties/f uels
Chemical strcture
Energy density
Octane number
Lower heating value
(MJ/Kg)
High Heating Value
(MJ/Kg)
Stoichiometric air/fuel
ratio
Density at15C,kg/m3
Autoignition
temperature oK
Specific Gravity 60
F/60
G asoline
C7H 17/C4 to
C12
109,000125,000
Diesel
LPG
C8 to C25
C3H 8
128,00030,0000
84,000
CNG
CH 4
35,000 @ 3000
psi
120+
86-94
8-15
105+
43.44
42.79
46.60
47.14
46.53
45.76
50.15
52.20
17.2
14.7
14.7
15.5
737
820-950
1.85/505
0.78
531
588
724
755-905
0.72-0.78
0.508
0.85
0.424
IJSER 2012
http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 3, Issue 3, March -2012
ISS N 2229-5518
1.
120
100
60%less CO2
80
20%less Nox
60
gasoline
40
20
0
Gasolinepropanepropane
Type of Fuel
IJSER 2012
http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 3, Issue 3, March -2012
ISS N 2229-5518
4.
IJSER 2012
http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 3, Issue 3, March -2012
ISS N 2229-5518
5.
The study of engine noise has been carried out since the early
stages of engine development. In 1931, Ricardo first found a
descriptive relationship between the combustion pressure
rise and the noise produced . Later, a number of
parameters in determining the noise developments were
investigated which include the first and the second
derivative of cylinder pressure . These methods were effective
in revealing the relationship between engine combustion and
noise. Some of them still play an important role in identifying
the source of engine noise Ando. H.et.al[3].Although there are
a number of engine noise sources, one of the most
fundamental is the combustion-induced noise. It occurs
toward the end compression stroke and subsequent
expansion stroke. The rapid pressure change due to the
combustion transmits through engine structures and
forms a part of the airborne noise . This pressure change
also causes the vibration of the engine components such
as the cylinder head, pistons, connecting rods and engine
body.Because of its superior knock-resistance, propane is
preferred to butane as an automotive fuel.The lean
combustion limit of propane-gasoline mixtures is
considerably leaner than for gasoline, allowing the use of
lean-burn calibrations, which provides more resistant to
knocking and permit the use of still higher compression
ratios.LPG has many of the same emission characteristics as
natural gas. Graph shows IANGV emissions comparison
study between Gasoline, LPG and CNG.Switching from
gasoline to LPG and CNG results in a substantial reduction in
the CO emission. CNG also reduced HC and NOX emissions.
IJSER 2012
http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 3, Issue 3, March -2012
ISS N 2229-5518
40
Nox*10
30
20
CO
10
HC*10
0
Gasoline
LPG
CNG
Fuel
Figure 3: A Su mmary of Emission with Non-Catalyst Vehicle
On an energy basis LPG has a lower carbon content than
gasoline or diesel fuel. When used in spark-ignition engines,
LPG produces near-zero particulate emissions, very little CO
and moderate HC emissions. Variations in the concentration
of different hydrocarbons in LPG can affect the species
composition and reactivity of HC exhaust emissions. As
olen (such as propene and butane) are much more reactive
in contributing to ozone formation than paraffins (such as
propane and the butanes), an increase in the olen content of
LPG is likely to result in increased ozone-forming potential of
exhaust emissions. Due to the gas-tight seals required on the
fuel system, evaporative emissions are negligible.Exhaust
NMHC and CO emissions are lower with LPG than gasoline.
CO2 emissions typically are also somewhat lower than those
for gasoline due to the lower carbon-energy ratio and the
higher octane quality of LPG. NOx emissions are similar to
those from gasoline vehicles, and can be effectively controlled
using three-way catalysts. Overall, LPG provides less air
quality benets than CNG mainly because the hydrocarbon
emissions are photochemically more reactive and emissions
of CO are higher. Modern dual-fueled LPG cars have
achieved impressive results in reducing emissions. Average
emissions and fuel consumption test results for ve dualfueled passenger cars tted with closed-loop three-way
catalysts and third generation LPG equipment are
summarized in table 2.The tests were conducted over the
EDCE+EUDC cycle. Table 3 shows the limited emissions data
available for LPG vehicles.
TABLE II
PASSENGER CAR AND HEAVY DUTY ENGINE EMISSIONS FOR LPG.[20] [21]
Vehic le type
Passenger c ar (g/mile)
Heavy-duty engine
(g/bhp-hr)
NOx
0.2
NMHC
0.15
CO
1
2.8
0.5
23.2
Emissions(g/Km)
50
G asoline
LPG
0.87
0.14
0.12
8.7
2.8
0.72
0.12
0.16
11.3
2.7
1,3-butadiene
benzene
formaldehyde
Acetaldehide
TABLE III
COMPARISON OF EMISSIONS AND FUEL CONSUMPTION FOR FIVE MODERN DUAL
FUELED CARS OPERATING ON GASOLINE AND LPG.[20][21]
Sr.
no.
1
2
3
4
5
gasoline w/o
cat.*10
Gasoline
LPG
CNG
Fuel
Figure. 4- Unregulated emission components (average values)
for different fuel.
IJSER 2012
http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 3, Issue 3, March -2012
ISS N 2229-5518
CONCLUSION
Based on the reviewed paper for the emissions and
performance, its concluded that the LPG represents a good
fuel alternative for gasoline and therefore must be taken into
consideration in the future for transport purpose. Apart from
the fuel storage and delivery mechanism, LPG engines similar
to petrol engines, and deliver nearly similar performance and
good in combustion characteristics than Gasoline. In the short
term, LPG as a alternative fuels reviewed could displace 10
per cent of current usage of oil, or bring significant reductions
in CO, CO2 emissions and help to reduce harmful greenhouse
gas emissions. In the next five to ten years, LPG will be more
widely available and gaining market share across vehicle
ranges.
LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS
20
SYMBOLS
15
A/F=14.6
10
A/F=15.6
A/F=16.6
Acetaldehide
Acetone
DF DI -
propioaldehide
Duel Fuel
Direct Injection
IJSER 2012
http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 3, Issue 3, March -2012
ISS N 2229-5518
REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
IJSER 2012
http://www.ijser.org