dc.contributor.author | Wang, Z | |
dc.contributor.author | Lei, T | |
dc.contributor.author | Lin, L | |
dc.contributor.author | Yang, M | |
dc.contributor.author | Li, Z | |
dc.contributor.author | Xin, X | |
dc.contributor.author | Qi, T | |
dc.contributor.author | He, X | |
dc.contributor.author | Shi, J | |
dc.contributor.author | Yan, X | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2017-06-08T08:39:22Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2017-03-28 | |
dc.description.abstract | In this study, fuel blends EL5-B10-D85 (5 vol % ethyl levulinate, 10 vol % biodiesel, and 85 vol % diesel), EL10-B15-D75, nBu5-B10-D85 (5 vol % n-butanol, 10 vol % biodiesel, and 85 vol % diesel), and nBu10-B15-D75 were compared on a horizontal, four-stroke, and single-cylinder engine. Ethyl levulinate–biodiesel–diesel (EL-B-D) blends and n-butanol–biodiesel–diesel (nBu-B-D) blends showed good miscibility. Generally, EL-B-D blends were more effective than nBu-B-D blends for decreasing kinematic viscosity, increasing closed cup flash point and oxygen content, although nBu-B-D blends were more effective than EL-B-D blends for decreasing cold filter plugging point and distillation. Overall, when used in a diesel engine, the fuel blends showed a slightly higher brake-specific fuel consumption (BSFC) than neat diesel, with EL-B-D being slightly higher than nB-B-D. EL-B-D blends were more effective than nB-B-D blends for reducing carbon monoxide (CO) emissions and smoke opacity, while nitrogen oxides (NOx) and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions increases were more obvious in EL-B-D blends. Compared with EL-B-D blends, hydrocarbon (HC) emissions of nBu-B-D blends were higher. The results provide a useful reference for further research of the effects of using these blends on emissions. | en_GB |
dc.description.sponsorship | This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant 51506049). | en_GB |
dc.identifier.citation | Vol. 31 (5), pp. 5055 - 5062 | en_GB |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.6b02851 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10871/27856 | |
dc.language.iso | en | en_GB |
dc.publisher | American Chemical Society | en_GB |
dc.rights.embargoreason | Publisher policy | en_GB |
dc.subject | Ethyl levulinate-biodiesel-diesel blends | en_GB |
dc.subject | n-butanol-biodiesel-diesel blends | en_GB |
dc.subject | Physical, chemical properties | en_GB |
dc.subject | Diesel engine | en_GB |
dc.subject | Performance | en_GB |
dc.subject | Emissions | en_GB |
dc.title | Comparison of the Physical and Chemical Properties, Performance, and Emissions of Ethyl Levulinate–Biodiesel–Diesel and n -Butanol–Biodiesel–Diesel Blends | en_GB |
dc.type | Article | en_GB |
dc.identifier.issn | 0887-0624 | |
dc.description | This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from the American Chemical Society via the DOI in this record. | en_GB |
dc.identifier.journal | Energy and Fuels | en_GB |