Análise de desempenho de um motor ciclo otto a biometano em comparação com gasolina e etanol

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Garlet, Roberto Antonio
Data de Publicação: 2022
Tipo de documento: Dissertação
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM
dARK ID: ark:/26339/0013000003n4c
Texto Completo: http://repositorio.ufsm.br/handle/1/26485
Resumo: The increasing use of fossil fuels and the growing demand for energy in recent decades have led to a major problem of greenhouse gas emissions and the causes of climate change. Therefore, efforts must be made to reduce carbon emissions from various sectors, including the transportation sector, which is one of the largest contributors to emissions. In addition to ethanol, gaseous fuels such as biogas and biomethane are also on the rise, as they can be produced by processing biomass and are therefore renewable. Experiments were performed to compeare the performance of biomethane , ethanol and gasoline in a single cylinder research engine with spark ignition and fuel injection at the intake port under different load conditions: 3 bar, 6 bar and 9 bar IMEP, at two differen t compression ratios: 11.6:1 and 14.3:1 and engine speed of 1800 rpm on a dynamometer. Due to similar properties and better availability, CNG was used to simulate biomethane operation. The results show that CNG has the lowest specific fuel consumption at all load conditions, outperforming gasoline and ethanol. combustion phase can also be adjusted The to the ideal condition with CNG, burning half of the fuel mass at about 8° after top dead center. At a compression ratio of 11.6:1 and a load of 9 bar IMEP, the efficiency of the gaseous fuel was about 34%, that of gasoline was 33%, and that of ethanol was 36%, while at a compression ratio of 14.3:1 with the same load, the efficiency with CNG increased to about 35%, while gasoline remained at about 33% and ethanol increased to about 37%. The gaseous fuel with a compression ratio of 11.6:1 at a load of 9 bar IMEP had the lowest NOx emission levels, which were about 13 g/kWh, while these emissions were 15 g/kWh for ethanol and 19 g/kWh for gasoline.
id UFSM_cf4890f43b809aff71944ba067e7461a
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.ufsm.br:1/26485
network_acronym_str UFSM
network_name_str Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM
repository_id_str
spelling Análise de desempenho de um motor ciclo otto a biometano em comparação com gasolina e etanolPerformance analysis of an otto cycle engine with biomethane in comparison with gasoline and ethanolBiogásBiometanoMotoresRazão de compressãoEmissõesBiomethaneEnginesCompression ratioEmissionsCNPQ::ENGENHARIAS::ENGENHARIA DE PRODUCAOThe increasing use of fossil fuels and the growing demand for energy in recent decades have led to a major problem of greenhouse gas emissions and the causes of climate change. Therefore, efforts must be made to reduce carbon emissions from various sectors, including the transportation sector, which is one of the largest contributors to emissions. In addition to ethanol, gaseous fuels such as biogas and biomethane are also on the rise, as they can be produced by processing biomass and are therefore renewable. Experiments were performed to compeare the performance of biomethane , ethanol and gasoline in a single cylinder research engine with spark ignition and fuel injection at the intake port under different load conditions: 3 bar, 6 bar and 9 bar IMEP, at two differen t compression ratios: 11.6:1 and 14.3:1 and engine speed of 1800 rpm on a dynamometer. Due to similar properties and better availability, CNG was used to simulate biomethane operation. The results show that CNG has the lowest specific fuel consumption at all load conditions, outperforming gasoline and ethanol. combustion phase can also be adjusted The to the ideal condition with CNG, burning half of the fuel mass at about 8° after top dead center. At a compression ratio of 11.6:1 and a load of 9 bar IMEP, the efficiency of the gaseous fuel was about 34%, that of gasoline was 33%, and that of ethanol was 36%, while at a compression ratio of 14.3:1 with the same load, the efficiency with CNG increased to about 35%, while gasoline remained at about 33% and ethanol increased to about 37%. The gaseous fuel with a compression ratio of 11.6:1 at a load of 9 bar IMEP had the lowest NOx emission levels, which were about 13 g/kWh, while these emissions were 15 g/kWh for ethanol and 19 g/kWh for gasoline.O aumento da utilização de combustíveis fósseis e a crescente demanda energética nas últimas décadas geraram um grande problema de emissões de gases de efeito estufa e causadores de mudanças climáticas. Portanto, são necessários esforços para reduzir as emissões de carbono de diversos setores, dentre os quais o setor dos transportes, um dos grandes emissores. Além do etanol, combustíveis gasosos como biogás e biometano estão ganhando espaço devido ao grande potencial de serem obtidos por meio do processamento de biomassa e, portanto, serem renováveis. Com o objetivo de comparar o desempenho de operação do biometano, do etanol e da gasolina em um motor monocilindro de pesquisas de ignição por centelha com injeção de combustível na porta de admissão em diferentes condições de carga: 3 bar, 6 bar e 9 bar de IMEP, em duas diferentes razões de compressão: 11,6:1 e 14,3:1 e velocidade de motor de 1800 rpm em bancada dinamométrica. Devido a maior facilidade de aquisição e às propriedades semelhantes, foi utilizado gás natural veicular, simulando a operação com biometano nos ensaios. Os resultados mostraram que o GNV apresentou o menor consumo específico de combustível indicado para todas as cargas, superando a gasolina e o etanol. A fase de combustão também pôde ser ajustada, com GNV, para a condição ideal, com metade da massa de combustível queimada em cerca de 8° após ponto morto superior. Na razão de compressão de 11,6:1 e carga de 9 bar de IMEP o combustível gasoso apresentou eficiência indicada torno de 34%, a gasolina de 33% e o etanol de 36%, enquanto em razão de compressão 14,3:1 na mesma carga a eficiência com GNV aumentou para em torno de 35%, enquanto a gasolina permaneceu em torno de 33% e o etanol aumentou para em torno de 37%. O combustível gasoso em razão de compressão 11,6:1 em carga de 9 bar de IMEP apresentou os menores valores emissões de NOx que foram em torno de 13 g/kWh, enquanto com etanol estas emissões foram de 15 g/kWh e com gasolina de 19 g/kWh.Universidade Federal de Santa MariaBrasilEngenharia de ProduçãoUFSMPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia de ProduçãoCentro de TecnologiaMartins, Mario Eduardo Santoshttp://lattes.cnpq.br/4000658451843066Rosa, Josimar SouzaLanzanova, Thompson Diordinis MetzkaGarlet, Roberto Antonio2022-10-14T19:39:56Z2022-10-14T19:39:56Z2022-10-03info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesisapplication/pdfhttp://repositorio.ufsm.br/handle/1/26485ark:/26339/0013000003n4cporAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internationalhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSMinstname:Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM)instacron:UFSM2022-10-14T19:39:56Zoai:repositorio.ufsm.br:1/26485Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertaçõeshttps://repositorio.ufsm.br/ONGhttps://repositorio.ufsm.br/oai/requestatendimento.sib@ufsm.br||tedebc@gmail.comopendoar:2022-10-14T19:39:56Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM - Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Análise de desempenho de um motor ciclo otto a biometano em comparação com gasolina e etanol
Performance analysis of an otto cycle engine with biomethane in comparison with gasoline and ethanol
title Análise de desempenho de um motor ciclo otto a biometano em comparação com gasolina e etanol
spellingShingle Análise de desempenho de um motor ciclo otto a biometano em comparação com gasolina e etanol
Garlet, Roberto Antonio
Biogás
Biometano
Motores
Razão de compressão
Emissões
Biomethane
Engines
Compression ratio
Emissions
CNPQ::ENGENHARIAS::ENGENHARIA DE PRODUCAO
title_short Análise de desempenho de um motor ciclo otto a biometano em comparação com gasolina e etanol
title_full Análise de desempenho de um motor ciclo otto a biometano em comparação com gasolina e etanol
title_fullStr Análise de desempenho de um motor ciclo otto a biometano em comparação com gasolina e etanol
title_full_unstemmed Análise de desempenho de um motor ciclo otto a biometano em comparação com gasolina e etanol
title_sort Análise de desempenho de um motor ciclo otto a biometano em comparação com gasolina e etanol
author Garlet, Roberto Antonio
author_facet Garlet, Roberto Antonio
author_role author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Martins, Mario Eduardo Santos
http://lattes.cnpq.br/4000658451843066
Rosa, Josimar Souza
Lanzanova, Thompson Diordinis Metzka
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Garlet, Roberto Antonio
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Biogás
Biometano
Motores
Razão de compressão
Emissões
Biomethane
Engines
Compression ratio
Emissions
CNPQ::ENGENHARIAS::ENGENHARIA DE PRODUCAO
topic Biogás
Biometano
Motores
Razão de compressão
Emissões
Biomethane
Engines
Compression ratio
Emissions
CNPQ::ENGENHARIAS::ENGENHARIA DE PRODUCAO
description The increasing use of fossil fuels and the growing demand for energy in recent decades have led to a major problem of greenhouse gas emissions and the causes of climate change. Therefore, efforts must be made to reduce carbon emissions from various sectors, including the transportation sector, which is one of the largest contributors to emissions. In addition to ethanol, gaseous fuels such as biogas and biomethane are also on the rise, as they can be produced by processing biomass and are therefore renewable. Experiments were performed to compeare the performance of biomethane , ethanol and gasoline in a single cylinder research engine with spark ignition and fuel injection at the intake port under different load conditions: 3 bar, 6 bar and 9 bar IMEP, at two differen t compression ratios: 11.6:1 and 14.3:1 and engine speed of 1800 rpm on a dynamometer. Due to similar properties and better availability, CNG was used to simulate biomethane operation. The results show that CNG has the lowest specific fuel consumption at all load conditions, outperforming gasoline and ethanol. combustion phase can also be adjusted The to the ideal condition with CNG, burning half of the fuel mass at about 8° after top dead center. At a compression ratio of 11.6:1 and a load of 9 bar IMEP, the efficiency of the gaseous fuel was about 34%, that of gasoline was 33%, and that of ethanol was 36%, while at a compression ratio of 14.3:1 with the same load, the efficiency with CNG increased to about 35%, while gasoline remained at about 33% and ethanol increased to about 37%. The gaseous fuel with a compression ratio of 11.6:1 at a load of 9 bar IMEP had the lowest NOx emission levels, which were about 13 g/kWh, while these emissions were 15 g/kWh for ethanol and 19 g/kWh for gasoline.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022-10-14T19:39:56Z
2022-10-14T19:39:56Z
2022-10-03
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis
format masterThesis
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://repositorio.ufsm.br/handle/1/26485
dc.identifier.dark.fl_str_mv ark:/26339/0013000003n4c
url http://repositorio.ufsm.br/handle/1/26485
identifier_str_mv ark:/26339/0013000003n4c
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal de Santa Maria
Brasil
Engenharia de Produção
UFSM
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia de Produção
Centro de Tecnologia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal de Santa Maria
Brasil
Engenharia de Produção
UFSM
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia de Produção
Centro de Tecnologia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM
instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM)
instacron:UFSM
instname_str Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM)
instacron_str UFSM
institution UFSM
reponame_str Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM
collection Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM
repository.name.fl_str_mv Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM - Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv atendimento.sib@ufsm.br||tedebc@gmail.com
_version_ 1815172276271710208