| Literature DB >> 35351929 |
Sambandam Padmanabhan1, K Giridharan2, Balasubramaniam Stalin3, Subramanian Kumaran4, V Kavimani5, N Nagaprasad6, Leta Tesfaye Jule7,8, Ramaswamy Krishnaraj9,10.
Abstract
The widespread use of plastic goods creates huge disposal issues and environmental concerns. Increasing emphasis has been paid to the notion of a circular economy, which might have a significant impact on the demand for plastic raw materials. Post-consumer plastics recycling is a major focus of the nation's circular economy. This study focuses on energy recovery from waste plastics as an alternative fuel source to meet the circular economy demand. Waste plastic fuel produced through pyrolysis has been claimed to be utilized as a substituted fuel. This work focuses to determine the performance and emission standards of Waste Plastic Fuel (WPF) generated from the pyrolysis of High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE) in a single-cylinder Direct Injection Diesel Engine (DIDE). Three different ratios of WPF were combined with 10% ethanol and 10% ethoxy ethyl acetate as an oxygenated additive to create quaternary fuel blends. The ethanol has a low viscosity, a high oxygen content, a high hydrogen-to-carbon ratio as favourable properties, the quaternary fuel results the improved brake thermal efficiency, fuel consumption and reduced emissions. The blend WEE20 exhibits 4.7% higher brake thermal efficiency, and 7.8% reduced fuel consumption compared to the diesel. The quaternary fuel blends demonstrated decreased carbon monoxide of 3.7 to 13.4% and reduced hydrocarbons of 2 to 16% under different load conditions.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35351929 PMCID: PMC8963890 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-09148-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Waste plastic fuel blends and their performance with oxygenated additives.
| Authors and Year | Blend | BTE | BSFC | CO | HC | NOx | Smoke | Additives/Methodology |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gnanamoorthi and Murugan (2019)[ | 50D50W 50D40W10DEE 50D40W10MEA | ↑ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | MEA DEE |
| Bridjesh et al. (2019)[ | 50D50W 50D40W10MEA 50D40W10DEE | ↑ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | MEA DEE |
| Das et al. (2020)[ | D80W10E10 D70W15E15 D60W20E20 | ↑ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | – | Ethanol/Varied the compression ratio |
| Sudershan et al. (2021)[ | 70 PPO + 18D + 12E 70 PPO + 24D + 6E 70 PPO + 28D + 2E | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | Ethanol/Varied the Injection timing, Injection Pressure |
| Gadwal et al. (2019)[ | 70PPO + 15D + 15E 80PPO + 10D + 10E 90PPO + 5D + 5E 90PPO + 0D + 10E | ↓ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | Ethanol/Varied the Injection timing, Injection Pressure |
| Selvam et al. (2021)[ | W5DEE5 W10DEE5 W15DEE5 W20DEE5 | ↑ | ↓ | ↓ | ↑ | ↓ | – | DEE |
| Kumar and Puli (2018)[ | 25PPO 25PPO5E 25PPO5M | ↑ | ↓ | ↓ | ↑ | ↓ | – | Tested at Petrol Engine with ethanol blend |
| Ravi and Karthikeyan (2019)[ | D75-WPO 20-P05 D70-WPO 20-P10 D765-WPO 20-P15 | ↑ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | Propanol |
| Govinda Rao et al. (2018)[ | P90D10 P90D5E5 P80D10E10 | ↑ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↑ | ↓ | Varied Compression Ratio and Injection pressure |
| Dillikannan et al. (2019)[ | D 50-W 40-H 10 D 50-W 30-H 20 D 50-W 20-H 30 | ↓ | ↑ | ↓ | ↑ | ↓ | ↓ | n-Hexanol |
BSFC brake specific fuel consumption, BTE brake thermal efficiency, CO carbon monoxide, DEE diethyl ether, E ethanol, EEA ethoxy ethyl acetate, H n-Hexanol, HC hydrocarbons, M methanol, MEA methoxy ethyl acetate, NOx nitrogen oxides, P plastic oil, ppm parts per million, PPO plastic pyrolysis oil, W, WPO waste plastic oil.
↑: Increased; ↓: Decreased.
Figure 1Schematic engine setup.
Fuels properties utilized for quaternary fuel combination.
| Properties | Diesel | WPF | Ethanol | EEA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chemical formula | C10H22 | (C2H4)n | C2H5OH | C6H12O3 |
| Density at 20 °C (kg/m3) | 829 | 799 | 789 | 975 |
| Calorific valve (MJ/kg) | 45.3 | 42.8 | 26.8 | 23.6 |
| Cetane number | 52 | 65 | 8 | 61 |
| Viscosity at 40 °C (cSt) | 2.52 | 9.24 | 0.8 | 1.32 |
| Auto ignition temperature (°C) | 289 | 258 | 363 | 379 |
| Oxygen content wt.% | 0 | 4.5 | 35 | 17 |
Experimentation instruments details.
| Measurement | Range | Accuracy | Percentage of uncertainty | Instrument |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Load | – | + 0.1 to − 0.1 kg | ± 0.50 | Load cell |
| Speed | 0–10,000 rpm | ± 10 rpm | ± 0.10 | Digital tachometer |
| Fuel quantity | 0–50 cm3 | ± 0.1 cm3 | ± 0.50 | Burette Measurement |
| Hydro Carbon | 0–15% | ± 0.03% | ± 0.15 | AVL exhaust gas analyser, NDIR technique |
| Carbon Monoxide | 0–20,000 ppm | ± 10 ppm | ± 0.30 | AVL exhaust gas analyser, NDIR technique |
| Nitrogen Oxides | 0–5000 ppm | ± 10 ppm | ± 0.25 | AVL exhaust gas analyser, NDIR technique |
| Smoke | 0–100% | ± 1% | ± 1 | AVL smoke meter |
| Exhaust temperature | 0–1300 °C | ± 1 °C | ± 0.15 | Thermocouple |
Figure 2Performance of Brake thermal efficiency on engine loads.
Figure 3Performance of Specific fuel consumption on engine loads.
Figure 4Variation of Exhaust gas temperature on engine loads.
Figure 5Variation of Carbon monoxide emissions on engine loads.
Figure 6Variation of hydrocarbon emissions on engine loads.
Figure 7Variation of nitrogen oxide emissions on engine loads.
Figure 8Variation of smoke emissions on engine loads.