Printer Friendly

Fuel consumption in an air blower for agricultural use under different operating conditions/Consumo de combustivel em soprador de ar para uso agropecuario em diferentes condicoes operacionais.

INTRODUCTION

Currently, there are various stimuli (economic, social and environmental) to increase the use of biofuels to attenuate environmental issues and guarantee a certain level of selfsufficiency for Brazil, in its energy matrix, in relation to the global market of fossil fuels. From the total energy used in the world, more than 80% is used in combustion processes (RNC, 2016). Applications for power of medium or large size still use Diesel cycle (e.g. Diesel/Biodiesel-powered tractors), while small or medium size use Otto cycle (e.g. gasoline (petrol)/ ethanol). The literature has few results for two-stroke (2-S) engines. In four-stroke (4-S) engines, the consumption and specific consumption of fuel blends are the parameters usually evaluated in Diesel cycle or Otto cycle.

The conduction of tests in engines of agricultural machines with Diesel cycle is the most common, such as the consumption in sugarcane harvesters evaluated by Ramos et al. (2016), who observed increasing consumption as the angular speed increased, at the three evaluated rotations. In Diesel cycle engines, recent studies have equally demonstrated the importance of the parameters of consumption, performance and emissions for diesel/alcohol blends (ethanol, methanol and butanol) and little is known (Kumar et al., 2013; Putrasaria et al., 2013; Gonca, 2014; Abedim et al., 2016; Fayyazbakhsh & Pirouzfar; 2016; Kumar & Saravanan, 2016); and also fuel preheating when considering vegetable oils (Delalibera et al., 2017).

This study consists in the experimental evaluation of an air blower actuated by a 2-S internal combustion engine with Otto cycle, regarding fuel consumption (kg h-1), operating with different gasoline/ethanol blends and angular speeds of rotation of the engine/rotor shaft (RPM).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The operational consumption was determined for 5 blends of gasoline/ethanol, namely: Gasool A20, A30, A38, A45 and A50. Nine angular speed ranges were considered, from minimum to maximum rotation (~2500 to ~7000 RPM), with the blades of the air blower rotor exerting mechanical effort (or "load") of operation to the engine.

The experiments were conducted at the Laboratory of Agricultural Mechanization (LMA) of the course of Agricultural Engineering of the Federal University of Grande Dourados (UFGD). Mean values of the environmental parameters recorded during the tests (temperature, relative humidity and atmospheric pressure) are presented in Table 1, obtained as described in NBR 7.024 (ABNT, 2010).

Air blower and measuring instruments

The evaluated device was an air blower (brand: STIHL, model: BG 86 C), which has multiple use, encompassing applications in agriculture, gardening and residences. It is a system formed by an internal combustion engine (ICE) thermal machine and a centrifugal (or radial) fan fluid machine, with blades curved forward whose nominal diameter of the rotor (or volute) is 120 mm. Figure 1 illustrates the portable blower. The rotor shaft is directly actuated by the torque of the shaft of the 2-S 1-cylinder engine, with nominal power of 0.8 kW (~1.07 hp). Other technical characteristics are: cylinder capacity of 27.3 [cm.sup.3], mass of 4.5 kg, 810 [m.sup.3] [h.sup.-1] and 69 m [s.sup.-1] respectively for maximum volumetric flow rate and maximum air speed, with the outlet pipe. The standard fuel of this 2-S ICE is a mixture of STIHL 8017H lubricating oil and commercial gasoline at the proportion of 1:50 (recommended by the manufacturer).

The description and respective technical specifications of the measuring instruments used to measure the parameters during the tests are: A) Semi-analytical scale (Gehaka, model: BK 8000), range of 0-8100 g, resolution of 0.1 g and accuracy of [+ or -] 0.2 g, B) Tachometer (Instrutherm, model: TDR-100), range of 5-9999 RPM, resolution of 1 RPM and accuracy of [+ or -] 0.1% + 1 digit, C) Vacuum meter (Instrutherm, model: VDR-920), range of 1125 mmHg, resolution of 1 mmHg and accuracy of [+ or -] 1%, D) Chronometer (Instrutherm, model: CD-2800), range of 23 h 59' 59", resolution of 1/100", E) Software to acquire data from the tachometer and cable (Instrutherm, model: SW-U801 and SW-10).

Biofuel blends-Use and preparation of the samples

The fuel samples used in the consumption measuring tests were prepared using as reference the requirements established in the technical norms: NBR 13.992, NBR 13.993 and NBR 8.689 (ABNT, 2001; 2002; 2011), and also on resolutions of the ANP-National Agency of Petroleum, Natural Gas and Biofuels (No. 06/2005; 21/2009 and 23/2010). The commercial gasoline had, since October 1, 2011, 20% of ethanol (BRASIL, 2011) and 25% from May 1, 2013; currently, since 2015, it has 27.5% of ethanol. The results may serve as reference for future ABNT/INMETRO norms for energy efficiency labeling in small combustion engines, as in the engines of passenger automobiles (PBE, 2016).

According to the definitions and terminologies, the EAR is the Anhydrous Ethanol Fuel of Reference (or AEAC, anhydrous ethyl alcohol fuel of reference), while EHR is the Hydrated Ethanol Fuel of Reference (or AEHC, hydrous ethanol fuel of reference). Gasool is the denomination for car fuel composed mainly by gasoline, containing also EAR. Commercial gasoline was obtained in a gas station (Dourados, MS), and the ethanol content was verified according to the procedure described by the NBR 13.992 (ABNT, 2001). The HCV-Higher Calorific Value (according to the IS, kJ [kg.sup.-1]) of the pure gasoline (Gasool A0) and pure ethanol (Gasool A100) are, respectively, 42.3 and 27.2 MJ [kg.sup.-1] (Brunetti, 2012a).

Five different blends of fossil fuel (gasoline) and biofuel (ethanol) were prepared (Silva et al., 2012a): 1) Gasool A20 (mixture of 80% in volume of pure gasoline, 20% in volume of EAR and 0% of EHR), commercial sample obtained during the tests (2012), 2) Gasool A30, 3) Gasool A38, 4) Gasool A45 and 5) Gasool A50.

Data acquisition-Description of the experimental procedure

The determination of fuel consumption, according to the NBR 7.024 (ABNT, 2010), was performed using the gravimetric method (Figure 1B). The consumed mass of fuel was indirectly measured by the difference of total mass of the device, recorded at the beginning and at the end of each test. The consumption through the volumetric method was measured using a graduated burette attached to the injector nozzle by a hose, as used by Barbosa et al. (2008) and Reis et al. (2013). Eqs. 1 and 2 are used, respectively, to determine fuel consumption and the discrepancy between the obtained values.

[C.sub.n] (kg [h.sup.-1]) = ([m.sub.final] - [f.sub.initial])/[DELTA][DELTA] (1)

D [less than or equal to] [([C.sub.1] - [C.sub.2])/[C.sub.1]] x 100 (2)

where:

[m.sub.initial]-total mass of the set (blower and fuel tank) at the beginning of the test [g];

[m.sub.final]-total mass of the set (idem) at the end of the test [g];

[DELTA]t-time of the test [min];

[C.sub.1]-fuel consumption in the first test [g min-1];

[C.sub.2]-fuel consumption in the test in duplicate [g min-1]; and,

D-discrepancy [%].

The tests considered the requirements and other information of interest described in NBR 6.396 (ABNT, 1976), applicable to 2-S, non-vehicular, reciprocating internal combustion engines, as in the case of the air blower. The angular speed (rotation) of the engine shaft was recorded using a tachometer with output to the automatic data acquisition system via software (Instrutherm, model SW-U801). Each test had duration of 10 min and the rotation value was recorded every second, totaling 600 points per test. The Eq. 3 was used to determine the mean value of the angular speed (rotation) for each test.

[v.sub.m] = [SIGMA] [v.sub.i]/n (3)

where:

[v.sub.m]-mean angular speed (rotation) of the rotor [rpm];

[v.sub.i]-angular speed recorded using a tachometer at the time "i" [m [s.sup.-1]]; and,

n-number of values recorded during the test.

The complete experimental procedure is described by Silva et al. (2015). Step 1: Mount and turn on the data acquisition system for rotation; Step 2: Turn on the scale (15-20 min before use) for equilibrium with ambient conditions; Step 3: Turn on the air blower and maintain it in operation for 30 min in slow gear, for pre-heating of the 2-S ICE and adaptation to the utilized fuel blend; Step 4: After 30 min, turn off the engine and put it on the scale, wait for stabilization and record the mass value; Step 5: Turn on the engine and initiate the data acquisition relative to the rotation for the period of 10 min; Step 6: Turn off the device and repeat step 4; Step 7: Through Eq. 1, calculate fuel consumption; Step 8: Repeat steps 5, 6 and 7. These procedures must be repeated because of the need for valid tests in duplicate (two times) for each rotation; Step 9: After making the duplicate, calculate the discrepancy of the obtained results using Eq. 2. If the discrepancy is [less than or equal to] 5%, the values are acceptable; otherwise, repeat steps 5, 6, 7 and 9; Step 10: Alter the position of the rotation control ("trigger") to the next rotation of test and return to steps 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9; Step 11: End of test, repeat the procedure for a new fuel blend.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Figure 2 presents the raw data of rotation along the time of test for the sample Gasool A38 and fuel consumption for the sample Gasool A20. It is noticed that there is a level of oscillation in the recorded values of rotation, especially in the first minute, but considered as normal for a 2-S ICE. Even with the pre-heating for permanent regime performed for 30 min, according to NBR 6.396 (ABNT, 1976), the oscillations in the rotation occur because of the operation principle and vibration level, higher than that of electric engines. Therefore, a mean value for the rotation is essential in the determination of fuel consumption for the different operational conditions analyzed, used for the results presented below. Still in Figure 2A, the operation range of the device is represented by 9 different rotations (mean values), for the sample Gasool A20, which corresponds to the commercial gasoline. In Figure 2B, minimum and maximum consumptions occur, respectively, for rotations below 5000 RPM with [C.sub.A20,min] ~0.10 kg [h.sup.-1] and [C.sub.A20,max] ~0.40 kg [h.sup.-1] (6500 RPM). For values immediately above 5000 RPM, there is a significant increase in fuel consumption from ~0.15 to ~0.35 kg [h.sup.-1].

Figure 3 shows the fuel consumption in the air blower (2-S ICE) for the tests performed with non-commercial fuel samples: Gasool A30, A38, A45 and A50. Since all tests were conducted using the same volume of combustion air in the internal fuel delivery system (there was no change in the carburetor regulation), the results presented here must consider the stoichiometric ratios correspondent to each fuel blend. The results for the Gasool A30 blend exhibit an approximately constant and regular consumption for any rotations below 4500 RPM, but immediately above these values it changes from ~0.15 to ~0.40 kg [h.sup.-1], increasing until the maximum consumption, close to 7000 RPM, with [C.sub.A30,max] ~0.45 kg [h.sup.-1]. The fuel consumption for the sample Gasool A30, [C.sub.A30] (g [min.sup.-1]) was presented in detail and briefly discussed by Silva et al. (2012b). In addition, the minimum rotation exhibited by the air blower (2-S ICE) is ~2500 RPM, lower than that of the Gasool A20 blend (~3500 RPM). Increase in fuel consumption due to the rotation was also reported by Ramos et al. (2016).

Regarding the blends Gasool A38, A45 and A50 in Figure 3 (A, B, C, D), the fuel consumption shows a more regular increasing trend, as the rotation increases, without abrupt increments like those observed for Gasool A30 and A20. Additionally, it is also observed that the rotation of the device with trigger position for minimum rotation gradually increases as the ethanol content increases, but it is still inferior to 3500 RPM, which is the value recorded for Gasool A20. This fact can be explained by the difference in the HCV of pure gasoline (42.3 MJ [kg.sup.-1]) and pure ethanol (27.2 MJ [kg.sup.-1]), and by the stoichiometric ratio of the air:fuel ([lambda] = 1), which corresponds to values between 15:1 and 9:1 (Brunetti, 2012b), respectively for ICE of pure gasoline (Gasool A0) and pure anhydrous ethanol (Gasool A100). Thus, from the condition of Gasool A20 to A30, the 2-S ICE requires a smaller volume of air to maintain [lambda] = 1 and, since the regulation of fuel injection in the carburetor is kept constant, there will be excess of air (trend to [lambda] > 1) in the Gasool A30 blend and, consequently, lower rotation; for the other blends, this condition is intensified.

Figure 4 shows mean fuel consumption curves for the 5 tested samples of fuel. The behavior and intensity of consumption for the blends Gasool A38, A45 and A50 are very similar and there is a small difference in fuel consumption at rotations below 4500 RPM. At maximum rotation, the Gasool A38 blend shows the highest consumption, with [C.sub.A38,max] ~0.42 kg [h.sup.-1]. In addition, for a wide range of consumption, the blends Gasool A45 and A50 are virtually coincident.

Table 2 shows the direct comparison between the fuel consumptions at minimum and maximum rotations, respectively, minimum and maximum efforts in the rotor shaft of the air blower. The highest and lowest consumptions in all tests were highlighted, which occurred for the blends Gasool A30 and Gasool A20, respectively. Among the other blends, the consumptions gradually increase for A38, A50 and A45 at the minimum angular speed and, in the inverse order occurs for maximum angular speed.

Typically, the 2-S ICE operates in a condition of poor stoichiometric mixture ([lambda] < 1), which leads to incomplete combustion and emissions in significant amounts in the exhaustion gases, usually ten times higher compared with a 4-S ICE. Based on the obtained results, if the air injection system in the carburetor is not altered, there is a trend to obtain a rich mixture, with excess of air, which is a beneficial aspect that helps to reduce the amount of emissions (ppm) in the exhaustion gases.

Reductions in the emissions of up to 35% in CO (and reduction also in C[O.sub.2] and N[O.sub.x]) in a small 2-S ICE (model JAP-J34, 0.5kW&4000 RPM) were reported by Ghazikhani et al. (2013; 2014), operating with the blends Gasool A5, A10 and A15, besides obtaining other characteristics of improvement in the performance, attributed to the faster evaporation of ethanol in the combustion chamber, compared with the evaporation of gasoline. Nietiedt et al. (2011) and Monteiro et al. (2013) evaluated the consumption of diesel/biodiesel blends from various origins in Diesel cycle engines.

The evaluation of combustion engines under actual operation conditions without alterations in the air and/or fuel delivery system, with mixtures of gasoline/ethanol and/ or diesel/biodiesel, exhibits some interesting characteristics recorded in the literature. Zhang et al. (2013) report increase in the operation range (rotations) of 2-S ICE, in comparison to 4-S ICE, using auxiliary control of autoignition. On the other hand, these authors highlight the significant reduction of emissions as the ethanol content increases in the fuel blend and also better thermodynamic and combustion efficiency, due to the reduction of thermal losses, with 5% more of efficiency in fuel conversion using Gasool A85.

CONCLUSIONS

1. There is a significant increase of fuel consumption for the operation above 4500 RPM (Gasool A20 and A30), indicating a possible restrict performance for certain percentages of ethanol as biofuel in these devices.

2. For non-commercial blends (Gasool A30, A38, A45 and A50), there is an increase in the minimum value of the angular speed of rotation, when the ethanol content increases.

3. For the operational conditions of minimum and maximum rotations, the blends Gasool A30 and A20 exhibit highest and lowest consumptions, respectively. Among the others, the consumptions gradually increase for A38, A50 and A45 at minimum rotation, and the inverse order occurs for maximum rotation.

4. Operating conditions of the device at rotations lower than 4500 RPM, for any of the test fuel blends, lead to reduced fuel consumption and rotation not much different from the maximum value (7000 RPM).

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v21n8p579-584

Ref. 141-2016--Received 30 Aug, 2016 * Accepted 24 Feb, 2017 * Published 29 Jun, 2017

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

To the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) No. 14/2013--Universal, through the research project "Motores de combustao 2T (Ciclo Otto): Caracteristicas de operacao com (bio)combustiveis nao convencionais" and ITI scholarships through MCT/FINEP/ CT-Petro PromoPetro 02/2009 (Project BIOCOMB). To the Laboratory of Agricultural Mechanization (FCA/UFGD) and Prof. Cristiano M. A. Souza, for the facilities to conduct the tests, and to the students and technicians (Energy Engineering/ FAEN).

LITERATURE CITED

Abedin, M. J.; Imran, A.; Masjuki, H. H.; Kalam, M. A.; Shahir, S. A.; Varman, M.; Ruhul, A. M. An overview on comparative engine performance and emission characteristics of different techniques involved in diesel engine as dual-fuel engine operation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, v.60, p.306-316, 2016. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.01.118

ABNT-Associacao Brasileira de Normas Tecnicas. NBR 6.396. Motores alternativos de combustao interna, nao veiculares. 1976. 29p.

ABNT-Associacao Brasileira de Normas Tecnicas. NBR 13.992. Gasolina automotiva-Determinacao do teor de alcool etilico anidro combustivel (AEAC). 2001. 3p.

ABNT-Associacao Brasileira de Normas Tecnicas. NBR 13.993. Alcool etilico combustivel-Determinacao do teor de gasolina. 2002. 2p.

ABNT-Associacao Brasileira de Normas Tecnicas. NBR 7.024. Veiculos rodoviarios automotores leves-Medicao do consumo de combustivel-Metodo de ensaio. 2010. 13p.

ABNT-Associacao Brasileira de Normas Tecnicas. NBR 8.689. Veiculos rodoviarios automotores leves-Combustiveis para ensaio-Requisitos. 2011. 5p.

Barbosa, R. L.; Silva, F. M. da; Salvador, N.; Volpato, C. E. S. Desempenho comparativo de um motor de ciclo diesel utilizando diesel e misturas de biodiesel. Revista Ciencia e Agrotecnologia, v.32, p.1588-1593, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1590/S141370542008000500035

Brasil. Portaria MAPA No. 678, de 31 de agosto de 2011, Fixa em vinte por cento o percentual obrigatorio de adicao de etanol anidro combustivel a gasolina, a partir de zero hora do dia 1 de outubro de 2011. Diario Oficial da Republica Fed. do Brasil.

Brunetti, F. Motores de combustao interna. v.1. Sao Paulo: Edgard Bluncher, 2012a. 554p.

Brunetti, F. Motores de combustao interna. v.2. Sao Paulo: Edgard Bluncher, 2012b. 486p.

Delalibera, H. C.; Johann, A. L.; Figueiredo, P R. A.; Toledo, A.; Weirich Neto, P H.; Ralisch, R. Performance of diesel engine fuelled with four vegetable oils, preheated and at engine working temperature. Engenharia Agricola, v.37, p.302-314, 2017. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1590/1809-4430-Eng.Agric.v37n2p302-314/2017

Fayyazbakhsh, A.; Pirouzfar, V. Investigating the influence of additives-fuel on diesel engine performance and emissions: Analytical modeling and experimental validation. Fuel, v.171, p.167-177, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2015.12.028

Ghazikhani, M.; Hatami, M.; Safari, B.; Ganji, D. D. Experimental investigation of performance improving and emissions reducing in a two stroke SI engine by using ethanol additives. Propulsion and Power Research, v.2, p.276-283, 2013. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.jppr.2013.10.002

Ghazikhani, M.; Hatami, M.; Safari, B.; Ganji, D. D. Experimental investigation of exhaust temperature and delivery ratio effect on emissions and performance of a gasoline-ethanol two-stroke engine. Case Studies in Thermal Engineering, v.2, p.82-90, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/jxsite.2014.01.001

Gonca, G. Investigation of the effects of steam injection on performance and NO emissions of a diesel engine running with ethanol-diesel blend. Energy Conversion and Management, v.77, p.450-457, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.enconman.2013.09.031

Kumar, B. R.; Saravanan, S. Use of higher alcohol biofuels in diesel engines: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, v.60, p.84-115, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.01.085

Kumar, S.; Cho, J. H.; Park, J.; Moon, I. Advances in diesel-alcohol blends and their effects on the performance and emissions of diesel engines. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, v.22, p.46-72, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.01.017

Monteiro, L. A. de; Pianovski Junior, G.; Velasquez, J. A.; Rocha, D. S.; Bueno, A. V. Performance impact of the application of castor oil biodiesel in diesel engines. Engenharia Agricola, v.33, p.11651171, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-69162013000600009

Nietiedt, G. H.; Schlosser, J. F.; Russini, A.; Frantz, U. G.; Ribas, R. L. Performance evaluation of a direct injection engine using different blends of soybean (Glycine max) methyl biodiesel. Engenharia Agricola, v.31, p.916-922, 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S010069162011000500009

PBE-Programa Brasileiro de Etiquetagem, 2016. Disponivel em <http://www.inmetro.gov.br/consumidor/tabelas_pbe_veicular. asp> Acessado em: 1 Jan. 2016.

Putrasari, Y.; Nura, A.; Muharam, A. Performance and emission characteristic on a two cylinder DI diesel engine fuelled with ethanol-diesel blends. Energy Procedia, v.32, p.21-30, 2013. doi: 10.1016/j.egypro.2013.05.004

Ramos, C. R. G.; Lancas, K. P; Lyra, G. A. de; Sandi, J. Fuel consumption of a sugarcane harvester in different operational settings. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agricola e Ambiental, v.20, p.588-592, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/ agriambi.v20n6p588-592

Reis, E. F. dos; Cunha, J. P B.; Mateus, D. L. S.; Delmond, J. G.; Couto, R. F Desempenho e emissoes de um motor-gerador ciclo diesel sob diferentes concentracoes de biodiesel de soja. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agricola e Ambiental, v.17, p.565-571, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-43662013000500015

RNC-Rede Nacional de Combustao. Disponivel em: <http://www redenacionaldecombustao.org/objetivos.php> Acessado em: 1 Jul. 2016.

Silva, M. J. da; Souza, S. N. M. de; Souza, A. A.; Martins, G. I.; Secco, D. Motor gerador ciclo diesel sob cinco proporcoes de biodiesel com oleo diesel. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agricola e Ambiental, v.16, p.320-326, 2012a. https://doi.org/10.1590/S141543662012000300014

Silva, R. L.; Rossato, H. R. F.; Cachute, L. O. Consumo de um soprador de ar acionado por um motor de combustao interna dois tempos alimentado com diferentes misturas combustiveis. In: Congresso Nacional de Engenharia Mecanica, 7, 2012, Sao Luis. Anais... Rio de Janeiro: ABCM--Associacao Brasileira de Engenharia e Ciencias Mecanicas, 2012. 10p. CD-Rom. 2012b.

Silva, R. L.; Vieira, M. M.; de Brito Jr., S. X. Two-stroke engine behavior (small chainsaw) operating with non-commercial fuel blends and diverse lubrication. Engenharia Termica, v.14, p.23-30, 2015.

Zhang, Y.; Zhao, H.; Ojapah, M.; Cairns, A. CAI combustion of gasoline and its mixture with ethanol in a 2-stroke poppet valve DI gasoline engine. Fuel, v.109, p.661-668, 2013. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.fuel.2013.03.002

Robson L. da Silva (1)

(1) Universidade Federal da Grande Dourados/Faculdade de Engenharia/Grupo de Pesquisa ARENA-CNPq. Dourados, MS. E-mail: rlealsilva@hotmail.com (Corresponding author)

Caption: Figure 1. Air blower: (A) complete set, (B) with scale and (C) opened rotor

Caption: Figure 2. Gasool A38-Data acquisition for angular speed (RPM) (A) and Gasool A20-Fuel consumption versus angular speed (B)

Caption: Figure 3. Fuel consumption versus angular speed--Gasool: A30 (A), A38 (B), A45 (C) and A50 (D)

Caption: Figure 4. Fuel consumption (mean curves)--Gasool A30, A38, A45 and A50
Table 1. Environmental conditions during the tests for the intake air

Fuel blends (Gasool)            A20    A30    A38    A45    A50

T, Temperature ([degrees]C)     32.9   30.0   33.0   33.0   26.5
[PHI], Relative humidity (%)     37     62     43     40     76
P, Barometric pressure (atm)    0.93   0.95   0.94   0.93   0.94

Table 2. Fuel consumption at minimum and maximum
speeds or rotations ([DELTA][T.sub.test] = 120 s)

                      Blend

                  Minimum speed              Maximum speed

Gasool A20   17.7 x [10.sup.-3] kg *    62.1 x [10.sup.-3] kg *
Gasool A30   23.6 x [10.sup.-3] kg **   74.5 x [10.sup.-3] kg **
Gasool A38    20.9 x [10.sup.-3] kg      69.7 x [10.sup.-3] kg
Gasool A45    21.7 x [10.sup.-3] kg      65.6 x [10.sup.-3] kg
Gasool A50    21.2 x [10.sup.-3] kg      67.8 x [10.sup.-3] kg

* Lowest consumption; ** Highest consumption
COPYRIGHT 2017 ATECEL--Associacao Tecnico Cientifica Ernesto Luiz de Oliveira Junior
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2017 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:da Silva, Robson L.
Publication:Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agricola e Ambiental
Article Type:Ensayo
Date:Aug 1, 2017
Words:4098
Previous Article:Phytoremediation of chlorobenzenes in sewage sludge cultivated with pennisetum purpureum at different times/Fitorremediacao de clorobenzenos em lodo...
Next Article:Dripper testing: application of statistical quality control for measurement system analysis/Ensaios de gotejadores: aplicacao de controle estatistico...
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters