Purpose
This study aims to contrastively investigate the effects of biodiesel and diesel on the power, economy and combustion characteristics of a compression ignition aviation piston engine for unmanned aerial vehicles.
Design/methodology/approach
Biodiesel used as alternative fuel will not be mixed with diesel during experimental study. Pure diesel fuel is used for the comparative test. Same fuel injection strategies, including pilot and main injection, are guaranteed for two fuels in same test points.
Findings
The engine-rated power of biodiesel is lower than diesel, which results in higher specific fuel combustion (SFC) and effective thermal efficiency (ETE). Biodiesel has the faster burning rate, shorter combustion duration. The crank angle of 50% mass fraction burned (CA50) is earlier than diesel. The ignition delay angle of biodiesel and diesel in the pilot injection stage is almost the same at high engine speed. As the speed and load decrease, the ignition delay angle of biodiesel in the pilot injection stage is smaller than diesel. At 100% high load conditions, the fuel-burning fraction of biodiesel in the pilot injection is the same as diesel. The peak heat release rate (HRR) of biodiesel is slightly lower than diesel. At 20% part load conditions, the fuel-burning fraction of biodiesel in the pilot injection stage is lower than diesel. Because of the combustion participation of unburned pilot injected fuel, the peak HRR of biodiesel in the main injection is equal to or even higher than diesel.
Originality/value
The application feasibility of alternative fuel and its effects on aviation engine power, economy and combustion characteristics will be evaluated according to the “drop-in“ requirements and on the low-cost premise without changing the aviation engine structure and parameters.
Assessment of the potential of dimethyl ether as an alternative fuel for compression ignition engines
