Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Propane Fuel”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 91 records · Page 5

Optimization of the propulsion cycles for advanced shuttles. II - Performance model methodology

In 1988 computer codes from NASA and DLR were combined to analyze and optimize rocket engines for advance launch vehicles. Further effort has addressed performance propulsion parameters such as chamber pressure, cycle selection (including mixed and tripropellant cycles), nozzle extension, and new technologies. Results of the study indicate that lower dry masses can be reached with the staged combustion cycle than with the gas-generator cycle, using oxygen/hydrogen at relatively high mixture ratio (7:1) and modest chamber pressure (220 bar). For low dry masses the staged combustion cycle is only excelled by the dual-expander cycle using hydrogen and propane as fuels. The emphasis here is to explain the procedure and boundary conditions used for the analysis and the variety of configurations treated, as well as to demonstrate the methods used by presenting some of the major results.

Manski, Detlef↗

A simplified reaction mechanism for calculation of emissions in hydrocarbon (Jet-A) combustion

The paper presents a simplified reaction mechanism developed for use in calculations of NO(x) emissions in Jet-A combustion. The rate for the N2 + O2 reaction was selected to match available experimental results, and the reaction rates for other global reactions in the Jet-A are empirical reaction rates adjusted to match species concentrations using the detailed mechanism of Miller and Bowman (1989). The mechanism was validated by comparing the emission of NO(x) calculated using propane as fuel.

Kundu, K. P.↗

Soot Oxidation in Laminar Hydrocarbon/Air Diffusion Flames at Atmospheric Pressure

Soot oxidation was studied experimentally in laminar hydrocarbon/air diffusion flames at atmospheric pressure. Measurements were carried out along the axes of round jets burning in coflowing air considering acetylene, ethylene, proplyene and propane as fuels. Measurements were limited to the initial stages of soot oxidation (carbon consumption less than 70%) where soot oxidation mainly occurs at the surface of primary soot particles. The following properties were measured as a function of distance above the burner exit: soot concentrations by deconvoluted laser extinction, soot temperatures by deconvoluted multiline emission, soot structure by thermophoretic sampling and analysis using Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM), concentrations of stable major gas species (N2, H2O, H2, 02, CO, CO2, CH4, C2H2, C2H4, C2H6, C3H6, and C3H8) by sampling and gas chromatography, concentrations of some radical species (H, OH, O) by the deconvoluted Li/LiOH atomic absorption technique and flow velocities by laser velocimetry. It was found that soot surface oxidation rates are not particularly affected by fuel type for laminar diffusion flames and are described reasonably well by the OH surface oxidation mechanism with a collision efficiency of 0.10, (standard deviation of 0.07) with no significant effect of fuel type in this behavior; these findings are in good agreement with the classical laminar premixed flame measurements of Neoh et al. Finally, direct rates of surface oxidation by O2 were small compared to OH oxidation for present conditions, based on estimated O2 oxidation rates due to Nagle and Strickland-Constable, because soot oxidation was completed near the flame sheet where O2 concentrations were less than 1.2% by volume.

Xu, F.↗

Soot Oxidation in Hydrocarbon/Air Diffusion Flames at Atmospheric Pressure

Soot oxidation was studied experimentally in laminar hydrocarbon/air diffusion flames at atmospheric pressure. Measurements were carried out along the axes of round jets burning in coflowing air considering acetylene, ethylene, propylene and propane as fuels. Measurements were limited to the initial stages of soot oxidation (carbon consumption less than 70%) where soot oxidation mainly occurs at the surface of primary soot particles. The following properties were measured as a function of distance above the burner exit: soot concentrations by deconvoluted laser extinction, soot temperatures by deconvoluted multiline emission, soot structure by thermophoretic sampling and analysis using Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM), concentrations of stable major gas species (N2, H2O, H2, O2, CO, CO2, CH4, C2H2,C2H4, C2H6, C3H6, and C3H8) by sampling and gas chromatography, concentrations of some radical species (H, OH, O) by the deconvoluted Li/LiOH atomic absorption technique and flow velocities by laser velocimetry. It was found that soot surface oxidation rates are not particularly affected by fuel type for laminar diffusion flames and are described reasonably well by the OH surface oxidation mechanism with a collision efficiency of 0.10, (standard deviation of 0.07) with no significant effect of fuel type in this behavior; these findings are in good agreement with the classical laminar premixed flame measurements of Neoh et al. Finally, direct rates of surface oxidation by O2 were small compared to OH oxidation for present conditions, based on estimated O2 oxidation rates due to Nagle and Strickland-Constable (1962), because soot oxidation was completed near the flame sheet where O2 concentrations were less than 1.2% by volume.

Xu, F.↗

High energy, low temperature gelled bi-propellant formulation

The present invention is a bi-propellant system comprising a gelled liquid propane (GLP) fuel and a gelled MON-30 (70% N.sub.2O.sub.4+30% NO) oxidizer. The bi-propellant system is particularly well-suited for outer planet missions greater than 3 AU from the sun and also functions in earth and near earth environments. Additives such as powders of boron, carbon, lithium, and/or aluminum can be added to the fuel component to improve performance or enhance hypergolicity. The gelling agent can be silicon dioxide, clay, carbon, or organic or inorganic polymers. The bi-propellant system may be, but need not be, hypergolic.

Di Salvo, Roberto↗

Development of a High-Pressure Fuel Injection System for Use with Propane-DME

Paper details the design approach and performance of a high-pressure common rail fuel injection system used with Propane-DME mixtures targeting high injection pressures on a light duty 2.2L inline-4 compression ignition engine. The study estimates the bulk modulus of elasticity based on the hardware geometry and operating pressures to assess the compressibility of Propane and DME across a range of pressures typical of the LD engine application. The compressibility factor ranges from 500 to 3000 bar, significantly lower than the theoretical values for the conditions tested. The high-pressure pump performance is optimized via the implementation of an inlet metering valve operated on a crank-angle open/close sequence to control pressure at the common rail. The application of a model-based controller and the use of high-speed sampling of rail pressure indicate that pressure at the rail can be attained with the pump metering valve, and without use of the pressure relieve valve present in the rail. Results show a significant reduction on pumping work parasitics and of fuel heating, on the order of 40°C, at typical working conditions with the proposed approach. Injector rates of injection with Propane-DME are very similar to those of Diesel. Paper compares bench data of rates of injection versus simulation predictions across operating pressures of 200 to 1000bar and from injection commands spanning 0.20 to 2.0ms. Furthermore, the accuracy of the model predictions are attributed in part by to the updated fuel compressibility modulus descriptions attained during the testing.

42 ENGINEERING↗

A Study of Propane Combustion in a Spark-Ignited Cooperative Fuel Research (CFR) Engine

Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), whose primary composition is propane, is a promising candidate for heavy-duty vehicle applications as a diesel fuel alternative due to its CO 2 reduction potential and high knock resistance. To realize diesel-like efficiencies, spark-ignited LPG engines are proposed to operate near knock-limit over a wide range of operating conditions, which necessitates an investigation of fuel-engine interactions that leads to end-gas autoignition with propane combustion. This work presents both experimental and numerical studies of stoichiometric propane combustion in a sparkignited (SI) cooperative fuel research (CFR) engine. Engine experiments are initially conducted at different compression ratio (CR) values, and the effects of CR on engine combustion are characterized. A three-pressure analysis (TPA) model based on the two-zone combustion concept is developed in GT-Power and validated using test results to estimate in-cylinder wall temperatures, residual gas fraction, etc. This model is further utilized to examine end-gas chemistry by enabling the SI turbulent flame combustion and unburned gas chemical kinetics modules. Finally, a three-dimensional (3D) computational fluid dynamic (CFD) model of the CFR engine is developed in CONVERGE, where the G-equation and SAGE detailed chemical kinetics models are implemented for combustion modeling. Here, a 153 species reduced chemical kinetics mechanism derived from the detailed NUIGMech1.1 mechanism based on the ignition delay and laminar flame speed (LFS) studies is used to generate an LFS lookup table and to describe end-gas autoignition chemistry. Multi-cycle Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) simulations are then performed for the tested CRs, and the numerical model is shown to be capable of predicting the propane combustion characteristics, particularly the end-gas autoignition behavior.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗

Photographic combustion characterization of LOX/hydrocarbon type propellants

Single element injectors and two fuels were tested with the aim of photographically characterizing observed combustion phenomena. The three injectors tested were the O-F-O triplet, the transverse like on like (TLOL), and the rectangular unlike doublet (RUD). The fuels tested were RP-1 and propane. The hot firings were conducted in a specifically constructed chamber fitted with quartz windows for photographically viewing the impingement spray field. All LOX/HC testing demonstrated coking with the RP-1 fuel leaving far more soot than the propane fuel. No fuel freezing or popping was experienced under the test conditions evaluated. Carbon particle emission and combustion light brilliance increased with Pc for both fuels although RP-1 was far more energetic in this respect. The RSS phenomena appear to be present in the high Pc tests as evidenced by striations in the spray pattern and by separate fuel rich and oxidizer rich areas. The RUD element was also tested as a fuel rich gas generator element by switching the propellant circuits. Excessive sooting occurred at this low mixture ratio (0.55), precluding photographic data.

Judd, D. C.↗

Projected Operational Energy Life Cycle Data 2025

These excel files contain the environmental emission projections for key building energy sources: electricity, natural gas, propane (LPG), and fuel oil. The sources and methods are provided in the report "Projected Operational Energy Life Cycle Data Development: 2025 Update." The report and data are an update to the data previously posted here: https://netl.doe.gov/energy-analysis/details?id=f8890fac-be55-44ac-aaa9-e2888bfabe93

annual energy outlook↗

Evaluation of Safety Standards for Fuel System and Fuel Container Integrity of Alternative Fuel Vehicles

There are two Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) in place that specify requirements for integrity of the fuel system and fuel container on compressed natural gas (CNG) fuel vehicles. These are FMVSS Nos. 303, “Fuel system integrity of compressed natural gas vehicles,” and FMVSS No. 304, “CNG fuel container integrity.” At this time, no FMVSS are defined for the fuel system and fuel container integrity of propane and liquefied natural gas (LNG) vehicles or fuel system integrity requirements for heavy-duty CNG vehicles on the road. However, there are voluntary industry design standards and best practices, as well as regulations defined in other countries. FMVSS No. 303 specifies requirements for the integrity of the CNG fuel system of light-duty vehicles and school buses, and FMVSS No. 304 specifies requirements for fuel container integrity on all CNG vehicles. FMVSS No. 304 applies to containers used for vehicle propulsion, whereas containers used to transport CNG and transportation of CNG containers are regulated by the DOT Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. FMVSS Nos. 303 and 304 are performance-based standards to consistently test and validate equipment and are not design restrictive. Despite the increasing number of natural gas and propane medium- and heavy-duty vehicles on the road, there are no FMVSS fuel system integrity requirements beyond light-duty and school buses for CNG vehicles and no FMVSS fuel system integrity requirements for propane vehicles. NHTSA is researching fuel system safety for medium- and heavy-duty natural gas and propane vehicles to update FMVSS Nos. 303 and 304. NHTSA is also researching current best practices and standards for high pressure fuel tanks in motor vehicles as they may apply to FMVSS No. 304.

30 DIRECT ENERGY CONVERSION↗

The behavior of fuel-lean premixed flames in a standard flammability limit tube under controlled gravity conditions

Fuel-lean flames in methane-air mixtures from 4.90 to 6.20 volume percent fuel and propane-air mixtures from 1.90 to 3.00 volume percent fuel were studied in the vicinity of the limit for a variety of gravity conditions. The limits were determined and the behavior of the flames studied for one g upward, one g downward, and zero g propagation. Photographic records of all flammability tube firings were obtained. The structure and behavior of these flames were detailed including the variations of the curvature of the flame front, the skirt length, and the occurrence of cellular instabilities with varying gravity conditions. The effect of ignition was also discussed. A survey of flame speeds as a function of mixture strength was made over a range of lean mixture compositions for each of the fuels studied. The results were presented graphically with those obtained by other researchers. The flame speed for constant fractional gravity loadings were plotted as a function of gravity loadings from 0.0 up to 2.0 g's against flame speeds extracted from the transient gravity flame histories for corresponding gravity loadings. The effects of varying gravity conditions on the extinguishment process for upward and downward propagating flames were investigated.

Wherley, B. L.↗

Nanotechnology Investigated for Future Gelled and Metallized Gelled Fuels

The objective of this research is to create combustion data for gelled and metallized gelled fuels using unique nanometer-sized gellant particles and/or nanometer-sized aluminum particles. Researchers at the NASA Glenn Research Center are formulating the fuels for both gas turbine and pulsed detonation engines. We intend to demonstrate metallized gelled fuel ignition characteristics for pulse detonation engines with JP/aluminum fuel and for gas turbine engines with gelled JP, propane, and methane fuel. The fuels to be created are revolutionary as they will deliver the highest theoretically maximum performance of gelled and metallized gelled fuels. Past combustion work has used micrometer-sized particles, which have limited the combustion performance of gelled and metallized gelled fuels. The new fuel used nanometer-sized aluminum oxide particles, which reduce the losses due to mismatch in the gas and solid phases in the exhaust. Gelled fuels provide higher density, added safety, reduced fuel slosh, reduced leakage, and increased exhaust velocity. Altogether, these benefits reduce the overall size and mass of the vehicle, increasing its flexibility.

Palaszewski, Bryan A.↗

Piston geometry and stroke optimization for high efficiency propane spark ignition engines

Propane has unique properties and offers interesting characteristics for high-efficiency spark ignition engines. Its high volatility reduces or completely eliminates fuel-wall wetting and facilitates fuel air mixing. Furthermore, propane has a research octane number of 112 and a high octane sensitivity of 15. Finally, its laminar flame speed is on the same order as that of conventional gasoline, and it exhibits high dilution tolerance. Modern spark ignition internal combustion engines rely on fast combustion rates and high dilution to achieve high brake thermal efficiencies. To accomplish this, high stroke-to-bore ratios and high geometric compression ratios have been used in new engine designs. Therefore, propane’s relatively high laminar flame speeds, high knock resistance, and dilution tolerance make it an excellent candidate fuel for modern spark ignition engines. The objective of this work is to co-optimize the piston geometry and the engine stroke to maximize the efficiency of a spark-ignition engine fueled with propane. 3D computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations employing the extended coherent flamelet model were used to study the parametric effects of piston shape and stroke length. A piston geometry based on high performing pistons was parameterized using four controlling parameters. The piston geometry and engine stroke design space was explored using deterministic and quasi-random sampling techniques. In conclusion, a Gaussian process regression model was built using the simulation data to explain the results observed.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

Operational Energy Life Cycle Data Development for the National Institute of Standards And Technology (NIST) Building Industry Reporting and Design for Sustainability (BIRDS) Neutral Environmental Software Tool (NEST)

For this analysis, regionalized life cycle assessment (LCA) results for environmental impacts (using the Tool for Reduction and Assessment of Chemicals and Other Environmental Impacts [TRACI] 2.1) and cumulative energy demand (using the Federal Life Cycle Analysis Commons Elementary Flow List [FEDEFL] Inventory Methods v1.0.0) were evaluated for the production and utilization of electricity, natural gas, fuel oil, and propane as commodities within residential and commercial buildings. These results can used as a framework for future research into net zero, high-performance buildings, such as done here for the Building Industry Reporting and Design for Sustainability (BIRDS) database by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Engineering Laboratory. The geographical results were assigned to each United States (U.S.) Zone Improvement Plan (ZIP) code based on the ZIP code location and corresponding Balancing Authority Area, natural gas basin, and Petroleum Administration for Defense Districts (PADDs). Additionally, previously developed models were utilized to develop future life cycle profiles. Projections were based on data available from the U.S. Energy Information Administration Annual Energy Outlook 2022 through 2050 (AEO 2022). Electricity LCA models were updated based on AEO 2022 projected annual generation mixes, while the natural gas baseline model was updated based on projected shares of natural gas types (conventional, shale, tight, and coalbed methane). Projections of crude oil production rates and export rates were applied to the petroleum baseline model in five-year increments to investigate their effects on the life cycle profile of fuel oil and propane. While only 100-year Global Warming Potential (GWP-100) with climate carbon feedback (CC-FB) and Cumulative Energy Demand are shown in Section 4: Results, the complete results, including Acidification Potential, Eutrophication Potential, Freshwater Ecotoxicity Potential, GWP-100 without inclusion of CC-FB, Human Health Impacts Potentials (Cancer, Non-Cancer), Ozone Depletion Potential, Particulate Matter Formation Potential, and Photochemical Smog Formation Potential, are tabulated for each ZIP code in the Excel worksheets that accompany this analysis. For the Excel spreadsheet tools associated with this report, please go to https://www.netl.doe.gov/energy-analysis/details?id=f8890fac-be55-44ac-aaa9-e2888bfabe93

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Autoignition Delay Time Measurements of Dimethyl Ether at 110 Bar Inside a Shock Tube

Fuel mixtures of propane and dimethyl ether have been proposed as potential diesel substitutes for use in compression-ignition engines. There is an interest in phasing out diesel fuel because its combustion byproducts are harmful to the environment. Propane and dimethyl ether burn cleaner and produce significantly less carbon dioxide than diesel. The combustion of these fuels at engine-relevant conditions must be characterized to create an engine capable of running on propane and dimethyl ether. In this work, IDT measurements of stoichiometric neat DME diluted in 75% argon were completed for temperatures spanning 800-1200K at 110 bar. A shock tube will be used for all experiments in this work. Experimental IDTs were then compared to simulated values using several well-established mechanisms in the literature.

Guenther, Aaron C. [University of Central Florida]↗

Physics model validation of propane and methane for Hydrogen Plus Other Alternative Fuels Risk Assessment Models (HyRAM+)

HyRAM+ is a toolkit that includes fast-running models for the unconstrained (i.e., no wall interactions) dispersion and flames for non-premixed fuels. The models were developed for use with hydrogen, but the toolkit was expanded to include propane and methane in a recent release. Here, in this work we validate the dispersion and flame models for these additional fuels, based on reported literature data. The validation efforts spanned a range of release conditions, from subsonic to underexpanded jets and flames for a range of mass flow rates. In general, the dispersion model works well for both propane and methane although the width of the jet/plume is predicted to be wider than observed in some cases. The flame model tends to over-predict the induced buoyancy for low-momentum flames, while the radiative heat flux agrees with the experimental data reasonably well, for both fuels. The models could be improved but give acceptable predictions for propane and methane behavior for the purposes of risk assessment.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

Sources of Propane Consumed in California

Project Scope: The objective of this study is to specify the sources of propane consumed in California. It answers the questions, where does the propane used in California come from and how was it produced? The results of this study provide comprehensive, transparent, and verifiable estimates, based on the 2018 market. The information provided in this report is suitable for use to assess the life cycle carbon intensity of propane used as a transportation fuel in California. As the 2009 Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) aims to reduce California’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other smog-forming and toxic air pollutants, the appropriate designation of carbon intensity for propane as a transportation fuel is important for evaluating propane’s potential to contribute to GHG goals and understandings in the context of various actions. This study focuses on estimating the shares of total propane consumed in the state of California produced from petroleum refineries, natural gas plants, and bituminous sands sources inside California and elsewhere. Results: An estimated 590 million gallons of propane were consumed in California in 2018, of which, 59.5% originated from refinery production and 40.5% originated from natural gas plants. The majority of this was sourced from refinery production in California, 334 million gallons. Most of the propane imported to California for consumption was sourced from natural gas plants, 113 million gallons, with over half of the imported volume sourced from Canada. The volume sourced from bituminous sand upgrader and fractionator operations was negligible. Details from this analysis are presented in the table below which provides an overview of the propane flows estimated in this study by region and production method. The shares and volumes presented here represent a snapshot for 2018. A significant increase in propane demand, such as could be caused by increased use of propane as a transportation fuel in the state, would affect California’s propane production, imports, and exports. The method and data sources used for the estimates provided in this report also provide the framework which could be used for future updates. Key Method Considerations: The values presented here are based on a two-step approach where the first step was to determine the flows of propane into and out of California from different regions and the second step was to estimate the propane production methods in each region. A volume balance approach is used as the primary method for tracking the volume of propane in and out of California as propane production and import volumes are available by Petroleum Administration of Defense District (PADD) from EIA and neither inter-PADD propane transfers nor state-specific non-prime supplier consumption are available from a public data source. The volume balance performed for this study covered PADD 5 (the West Coast), which includes Arizona, California, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. The volume balance used all available public datasets to determine propane production, imports, exports, and consumption. Volumes unaccounted for by these datasets were estimated using the resulting volume balance by assuming market equilibrium. Consumption within each state in PADD 5 was estimated based on known import, export, and production volumes and this amount was used to develop the volume balance. EIA only tracks consumption at the state level by prime supplier sales. The volume balance approach provides the basis to correct for additional propane consumed in-states where propane is transferred to California. To determine the California propane sources and trade in 2018. volume of propane consumed in California, the volume balance approach is again used where it was estimated all imported volumes not specifically flagged for re-export were consumed, and the remaining consumption was produced in-state. The California Energy Commission (CEC) provided the total volume of propane imported and exported from California in 2018; this volume data set along with commodity tracking from the Canada Energy Regulator (CER) and the International Trade Commission (ITC) which tracks port of entry and final destination was used to determine where propane originated from and where it was ultimately consumed. For example, the CER tracks propane leaving Canada and entering each state within the U.S. Imported propane from Canada to California – marked for California – is assumed to be consumed in California. When no further data were available, import volumes were assumed to be consumed in California without pass-through (i.e., no propane imported to California was directly sold and exported). In most cases, the production method for each propane source region was applied to the volume of propane transferred to California. In other words, the shares of propane sourced from natural gas and refineries for each production region was assigned to California imports based on their contribution to the total volume flows into California to determine the production method for propane consumed in-state. For volumes imported into California from PADD 4, Washington State, Canada, and the rest of the world (Argentina, Chile, Norway, Peru, South Korea, and Trinidad and Tobago), the volumes sourced from petroleum refineries and natural gas plants reflect the either production ratio for the region or, in cases where the sources specific to the amounts exported to California could be determined, the sources specific to the volumes transferred to California.

03 NATURAL GAS↗