Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)
xăng sinh học qua van bướm xăng sinh học qua van bướm xăng sinh học qua van bướm xăng sinh học qua van bướm xăng sinh học qua van bướm xăng sinh học qua van bướm xăng sinh học qua van bướm xăng sinh học qua van bướm xăng sinh học qua van bướm xăng sinh học qua van bướm xăng sinh học qua van bướm xăng sinh học qua van bướm xăng sinh học qua van bướm xăng sinh học qua van bướm xăng sinh học qua van bướm xăng sinh học qua van bướm xăng sinh học qua van bướm Thanks to all the study materials and adjustments during the study, my thesis has done properly and on time. Besides, I really appreciate the help of Mr. Nguyen Kim Trung, who is also a responsible head teacher, for continuously updating more information about the thesis. He has supported me all the way from the start of this project and always give his students opportunities to accurately complete the project. I want to say thanks to Dr. Dao Thi Kim Thoa, who is t
VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HO CHI MINH CITY BACH KHOA UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION OF OIL AND GAS PROCESSING GRADUATION THESIS SIMULATION OF FLUID FLOW THROUGH VALVES FOR MIXING GASOHOL INSTRUCTOR: TRAN HAI UNG STUDENT: LE DUY THANH PHAT STUDENT ID: 1412823 HO CHI MINH CITY, 2018 VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HO CHI MINH CITY BACH KHOA UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION OF OIL AND GAS PROCESSING GRADUATION THESIS SIMULATION OF FLUID FLOW THROUGH VALVES FOR MIXING GASOHOL INSTRUCTOR: TRAN HAI UNG STUDENT: LE DUY THANH PHAT STUDENT ID: 1412823 HO CHI MINH CITY, 2018 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First of all, I am greatly indebted to my thesis supervisor and instructor Tran Hai Ung for providing me with a definite direction, professional guidance, constant encouragement from the beginning of the work and moral support in many ways during the study period Thanks to all the study materials and adjustments during the study, my thesis has done properly and on time Besides, I really appreciate the help of Mr Nguyen Kim Trung, who is also a responsible head teacher, for continuously updating more information about the thesis He has supported me all the way from the start of this project and always give his students opportunities to accurately complete the project I want to say thanks to Dr Dao Thi Kim Thoa, who is the head of the gas and oil processing division, for encouraging me with this thesis Also, I am grateful for the help when I was having trouble with the thesis and for giving me another chance to it appropriately I would like to express my sincere thanks to all the professors in my chemical engineering faculty, in general, and the division of gas and oil processing, particularly for all the classes and knowledge during the past four years These are the key for me to finishing the thesis I am grateful to Bach Khoa University staffs for providing a great environment, which are all the modern facilities in classes and laboratories, for students to study and research Finally, my most beholden to my parents, who always encourage me on my decisions, for the mentally and physically backing throughout my student life Moreover, I acknowledge the help, advice and guidance of all my friends, they always aid me when I need the most, especially to my classmates and my roommate i ABSTRACT Gasohol is a mixture of ethanol and gasoline By using the butterfly valves to create a turbulent flow, which helps mixing gasohol through the valves and pipes The quality of the mixture is put into concerns such as deviation in volume fraction, head pressure and the size of the system, thus, experiments with different variables are conducted to make sure the valves’ combination works in the best conditions Firstly, study of Computational Fluid Dynamics is considered to support the project Methodologies and mathematical models regarding to CFD are essential, for instance, I studied Navier-Stokes equations, the mass and energy conservation equations, and the turbulence equations By studying these CFD models, I could have sufficient knowledge and ideas about boundary conditions, computational domains and flow initial set up to conduct the researches in FS In this project, FS for blending gasohol is conducted by Solidworks, which provides many tools to support the design and simulation In order to model the system, the valve is carefully studied and analyzed, then, divided into different parts The parts are designed in Solidworks with sketch tools, then, featured to become a 3-D model Many parts of the valve are assembled to complete the BV Next, pipe sizing is decided to fit the valve and start the FS package Various experiments are conducted to ensure the mixing process is working well with the variable of miscibility and pressure drop The final results are optimized in terms of energy consumption, which relating to the pressure drop through valves and economic aspects, which belong to the initial cost and operation cost The results are potential, however, there are limitations in the simulation, leaving the project a need for further experiments Although having limits, the results are acceptable regarding the head pressure and efficiency All the variables such as valve actuator’s angle, distance from ethanol intake pipe, the gap between valves and valves’ position are optimized to meet the goals In the final and optimized study, the system only occupies a small space of roughly m but could blend to a deviation of 1E-5 in volume fraction The inlet required pressure approximately 150 kPa, results in various choices for pump at about 25.9m of total head ii TABLE OF CONTENTS NOMENCLATURE AND ABBREVIATION LIST vii LIST OF TABLES viii LIST OF CHARTS ix INTRODUCTION General Objectives Field of study Study limitation LITERATURE REVIEW .4 Gasoline 2.1.1 Additives 2.1.2 Properties 2.1.3 Safety Ethanol 2.2.1 Ethanol properties 2.2.2 Bioethanol production Gasohol 2.3.1 Industry of biofuel 2.3.2 Production of biofuel 2.3.3 Restriction in using gasohol 10 Butterfly valve .11 2.4.1 Introduction 11 2.4.2 Construction 12 2.4.3 Operation 13 iii 2.4.4 Characteristics .13 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 14 Fluid dynamic laws 14 3.1.1 Conservation laws 14 3.1.2 Compressible vs incompressible flow 16 3.1.3 Newtonian vs non-Newtonian fluids 16 3.1.4 Inviscid, viscous and Stokes flow 16 3.1.5 Steady vs unsteady flow .17 3.1.6 Laminar vs turbulent flow 17 3.1.7 Subsonic vs transonic, supersonic and hypersonic flows .17 3.1.8 Reactive vs non-reactive flows .18 3.1.9 Magneto hydrodynamics .18 3.1.10 Relativistic fluid dynamics 18 Computational Fluid Dynamic 18 3.2.1 Basic principles .19 3.2.2 CFD methodology .20 Solidworks 22 3.3.1 Introduction 22 3.3.2 Design method 23 3.3.3 Model editing 24 3.3.4 Flow simulation 25 METHODOLOGY .28 Phase one: Designing and simulation 28 4.1.1 Parts 28 4.1.2 Assembly and Flow simulation 29 iv Phase 2: Results analysis and optimization 30 4.2.1 Goals .30 4.2.2 Influence factors 30 4.2.3 Influence of inlet distance and open angle 31 4.2.4 Different ethanol volume fractions and gasoline inlet velocity 31 4.2.5 Valves’ angle influence 32 4.2.6 Trend line of different gaps 32 4.2.7 Position angle of two valves 32 4.2.8 Optimal variables 33 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 34 One-valve system 34 5.1.1 Typical pattern 34 5.1.2 Actuator’s angle and inlet distance .37 5.1.3 Inlet gasoline velocity and Ethanol ratio 41 Two-valve system 42 5.2.1 Typical pattern 43 5.2.2 Angles of two valves 44 5.2.3 Distance between valves .47 5.2.4 Positions of valves 49 5.2.5 Comparison with one-valve system 52 5.2.6 Optimal results 53 SYSTEM DESIGN .57 Process 57 6.1.1 Process Flow Diagram 57 6.1.2 System layout 57 v Simple calculation 58 6.2.1 Requirements 58 6.2.2 Tanks .58 6.2.3 Pipe .61 6.2.4 Pump .62 CONCLUSIONS 63 Conclusions 63 7.1.1 Simulation .63 7.1.2 Results and optimization .63 Recommendations 65 Further study 66 REFERENCES .68 vi NOMENCLATURE AND ABBREVIATION LIST 3D Three Dimensions BV Butterfly Valve CAD Computer Aided Design CFD Computational fluid dynamic d diameter E Ethanol Volume Fraction EtOH Ethanol FEM Finite Element Method FS Flow Simulation FVM Finite Volume Method LES Large eddy simulation M Mach numbers M83 Mogas 83 M92 Mogas 92 M95 Mogas 95 ON Octane number PFD Process Flow Diagram QCVN Quy Chuan Viet Nam (Vietnam standards) RANS Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes Re Reynold Number RON Research Octane Number SW Solidworks US United States vii LIST OF TABLES Table Relation of inlet distance and open angle 31 Table Effects of E-number and velocity 31 Table Valves’ angle combination influence 32 Table Impact of gap between two valves 32 Table Valves’ position matter 33 Table Double-check results .33 Table Courses' thickness calculation 60 viii RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 5.2.6.4 Comparisons 0.014 0.012 Deviation 0.01 0.008 50°x60° op 50°x60° 50° 0.006 50° op 0.004 0.002 0 10 12 Length (m) Chart 22 Comparison of volume fraction deviation between optimized and normal valves' position In terms of deviation, a one valve 50° is not much to be considered, while with an optimum position of valve, the one-valve could reach the deviation of a two-valve combination Finally, the ultimate combination is 50°x60° which could reach a desirable depth of deviation, 1E-5 55 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 136000 134000 132000 Pressure (Pa) 130000 128000 126000 124000 122000 120000 118000 50°x60° op 50°x60° 50° 50° op Chart 23 Comparison of inlet pressure between one optimized and normal positions system Comparison of pressure drop by cases: the optimized 50°x60°, the normal 50°x60° (without re-rotation of the valves), a one valve 50° and one valve optimized 50° The pressure decline from left to right, however, not much in value 56 SYSTEM DESIGN SYSTEM DESIGN Process 6.1.1 Process Flow Diagram In this project, a small-scale gasohol blending station is taken in consideration Overall, the PFD, including tanks which contain gasoline, gasohol and off-spec gasohol; pumping system of pairs of centrifugal pumps; and a mixing system of two butterfly valves V-16 Gasoline Gasohol P1-A/B P3-A/B V-4 V-9 V-1 V-2 V-18 Ethanol V-8 Off-spec tank V-7 P4-A/B P2-A/B Diagram Process flow of a small-scale blending depot Gasoline and ethanol is introduced to the blending system through pump one and two respectively The flow rates are controlled to meet the specified volume fraction of ethanol Then, the two flows are mixed and enter the blending system After mixing process, the flow is, firstly, put into the off-spec tank (V-4 closed) where the mixture is determined If the mixing process works perfectly and the gasohol E number is appropriate, then the liquid will be pumped into the gasohol storage tank (V-7 closed) Otherwise, the mixture will be cycled to the blending system, where gasoline and ethanol has been re-calculate to meet the specs, and then, enter gasohol tank After the checking step, gasohol is guaranteed and is directly flows to the storage tank From the storage tank, biofuel is pumped out by pump three 6.1.2 System layout My suggestion for the system to meet the goals such as easy for adding gasoline and ethanol and accessible to transport gasohol out 57 SYSTEM DESIGN Gasoline Gasoline and ethanol import area Gasohol Gasohol export area Blending system Off-spec gasohol Ethanol Diagram Blending station layout Gasoline and ethanol tanks are placed by each other for a simple and accessible intake from chemical truck Next, blending system does not occupy too much space, thus, it can be put inside the station where people can access to for maintaining Lastly, gasohol and off spec storage is placed opposite and is faced to the street in order to support the fuel transportation Simple calculation In this section, a basic design for storage tanks and pumps is calculated to meet the requirements 6.2.1 Requirements Assuming the flow rate of the product is 50 m3/h Another assumption for a daybatch, which results in the volume of the storage should be: V = 20x24x2 = 2400 m3 6.2.2 Tanks There are four tanks in the station, however, only the gasoline and gasohol storage tanks are significant, while ethanol and off spec gasohol tanks are smaller in size 58 SYSTEM DESIGN Gasoline and gasohol tanks are approximately equaled because, in Vietnam, E5 is the most common biofuel Besides, ethanol and off spec gasohol tanks are similar and smaller in comparison Firstly, calculation of the bigger tanks is conducted according to API650 standards and QCVN By QCVN 09:2012/BCT, tank specifications and storage of biofuel required fixed roof; floating inner tube or cylindrical horizontally tank Biofuels should not be stored with floating tanks, riveted tanks Other tanks used for bio-fuel storage must have a closed cap and a vent valve installed In this project, I choose fixed roof tank According to API650 – Table 5-2a-(SI), Permissible Plate Materials and Allowable Stresses, the carbon steel with plate specification of A 573M Grade 485, the ASTM specifications of the shell Minimum yield strength of 290 MPa, minimum tensile strength of 485a MPa, product design stress (Sd) is 193 Mpa, hydrostatic test stress (St) is 208 Mpa Choosing the height equals to 12 m, therefore, the diameter is 16 m to satisfy the volume The specific gravity of gasohol is approximately 0.75 g/cm3 As the height is 12 m, the tank is divided into courses, the higher the course, the lower the shell’s thickness According to API650, 5.6.1.1, if the diameter is lower than 15 m, the minimum thickness is mm Assuming there are courses in the tank, each equals to 2400 mm Bottom thickness by Variable-Design-Point For the test condition: t1t =[1.06- t1d =(1.06- 0.0696D H 0.0696D H H 4.9 HD ][ ] 3.95mm St St H 4.9 HDG )( ) CA 6.19mm Sd Sd Thus, the bottom thickness is 6.19 mm Other courses thickness: To calculate the upper-course thicknesses for both the design condition and the hydrostatic test condition, a preliminary value tu for the uppercourse corroded thickness shall be calculated using the formulas in 5.6.3.2, and then the distance x of the variable design point from the bottom of the course shall be calculated using the lowest value obtained from the following: Course to from the bottom up, thickness is calculated by these equations: 59 SYSTEM DESIGN ttx tdx 4.9 D ( H x ) 1000 St 4.9 D ( H Sd x ) 1000 G CA The x is calculated from equation: x1 0.61( r tu )0.5 320CH x2 1000CH x3 1.22( r tu )0.5 With tu 4.9 D( H 0.3 H n )G ; St tu = corroded thickness of the upper course at the girth joint, (in); K 0.5 ( K 1) K tL C ; tu ; K 1.5 fL = corroded thickness of the lower course at the girth joint, (in.); H = design liquid level, (ft); Table Courses' thickness calculation Course tu tL K C x1 x2 x3 x tt td 3875 124.8 124.8 3.298 5.701 2.094 3.298 1.574 0.242 1242 1.736 3.062 1.763 0.303 1555 4853 113.6 113.6 3.062 5.508 1.378 2.826 2.050 0.382 1958 6114 101.2 101.2 2.826 5.315 1.020 2.591 2.539 0.486 2489 87.14 87.14 2.591 5.122 7776 According to 5.10.2.2, Roof Plate Thickness: Roof plates shall have a nominal thickness of not less than mm Increased thickness may be required for supported cone roofs Any required corrosion allowance for the plates of self-supporting roofs shall be added to the calculated thickness unless otherwise specified by the Purchaser Any 60 SYSTEM DESIGN corrosion allowance for the plates of supported roofs shall be added to the greater of the calculated thickness or the minimum thickness of mm Therefore, I choose mm Regarding ethanol and off spec gasohol, sizing the tank depends on ethanol flow rate Assuming the maximum of E20, then, the ethanol flow rate is 10 m3/h Therefore, a tank of 480 m3 is required for a day-batch I choose a fix roof tank of m of diameters and m height Thickness assuming equaled to that of the bigger tank for safety 6.2.3 Pipe The required flow rate of gasoline is 50 m3/h, assuming the velocity of a fully developed gasoline flow is 1.5 m/s Therefore, the inside diameter is 108 mm So I choose the pipe diameter based on ASME standards; with the outside diameter of 4.500 in and inside diameter of 4.026 in Wall thickness calculations - using B31.4 Code The code for Standard B31.4 is used often as the standard of design for crude-oil piping systems in facilities, such as pump stations, pigging facilities, measurement and regulation stations, and tank farms The wall-thickness formula for Standard B31.4 is stated as t Pd o 2( FESY ) Where t = minimum design wall thickness, in; P = internal pressure in pipe, psi; do=OD of pipe, in; SY=minimum yield stress for pipe, psi; F=design factor; E=longitudinal weld-joint factor; T=temperature The maximum working pressure as researched is 150 kPa = 21.7557 psi DO = 4.5 inch; SY=17114 (the allowable stress for 304 stainless steel); F=0.72; E=0.85 t Pdo CA CB 3.005mm 2( FESY ) As a result, choosing SCH30, which of wall thickness is 4.775mm, to ensure safety 61 SYSTEM DESIGN 6.2.4 Pump The head pressure required for the pump to work is roughly 150 kPa Equation to calculate the height of pump, according to Bernoulli equation: P v2 H z g 2g Where P is pressure (atm); is density of water; g is gravitational acceleration The total height of pump is 25.9 m under the water surface Therefore, the total head of pump is 25.9 m (ignored other loss such as friction in pipe pressure loss) (b) (a) Figure Pump model (a) CDXM/A 90/10 and (b) Ebara CMA 1.00M In my case, I choose Ebara pump, model: CDXM/A 90/10 pump specifications: power of 10Hp; pump height is 19.5~30.3 m; its flow rate varies from 12 to 60 m3/h As for ethanol and offs pec pumps, assuming E10 gasohol, therefore, the flow rate of ethanol is m3/h I choose Model: Ebara CMA 1.00M with specifications: power of 1Hp, total head 25~34 m; flow rate of 1.2 to m3/h 62 CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS Conclusions 7.1.1 Simulation In terms of design the BV, parts are sketched first, then featured by extrude or revolve tool to create a 3D part model The most crucial parts are body and disc While the body influence pipe diameter and the volume flow rate, the disc affects the type of flow because the thickness and the characteristic directly affect the flow, thus, although the valve openness to 80° or even up 90°, turbulence flow may form if the flow velocity is appropriate Assembly created by dozens of mates such as concentricity, coincidence… As the fully assembled valve, the mates connected parts one by one must ensure a fully motion for disc and actuator Regarding the simulation, initially, the model had a full input data, such as choosing a unit system, analysis type, fluids, wall conditions and initial conditions After the setup, computational domain must cover all the model, otherwise, misleading data will take place Boundary conditions include three values: environmental pressure of 101325 Pa, inlet gasoline of 2.5 m/s produce E20 gasohol which defined the volume flow rate of the ethanol Then, the basic mesh is set up which affects the accuracy of this project, in this simulation, number of meshes through dimension x is 500, and 16 and 32 for dimension y and z respectively Cut plots give as a clear look of volume fraction or pressure at any specific surface, while the surface plot could show the change on the pipes’ surface Then, the flow trajectories, the main results collecting tool I used, could present both surface and interior as a 3D flow, however, the flows are limited in number of points and spacing, causing the measurement uncertainty 7.1.2 Results and optimization The ultimate goals are higher blending efficiency, lower the head pressure and reducing in length of the system By initial study, there are six factors affecting the goals which are a distance from inlet ethanol pipe to valve, open angle of the disc, the gap between valves, E number, valve positioning and intake velocity In the first study, relations between inlet distance and actuator angle are stated Pressure is critically depended on the angle of the disc, the lower the angle, the higher 63 CONCLUSIONS the pressure For example, at 20°, the head pressure reaches over 1000 kPa, while that of 30° just above 200 kPa Regarding volume fraction concentration, the value is still heavily influenced by the disc’s angle, the lower the angle, the faster the convergence In contrast, distance from inlet ethanol to the valve is not as effective The pressure seems to have the same pace for angles above 20°, while only that of 20° fluctuates with no rules by the distance Moreover, volume fraction is nearly identical for all the lines of distance To conclude, actuator angle has great impact on goals, but inlet distance is not I choose the 40° actuator to be the most optimal because it meets the concerns, but leave the distance fixed at 15d for further research The second study case took the of E number and gasoline velocity into account, the results show that the higher the velocity, the higher the pressure and the same matter for E number, however, the increasing pressure is not considerable In terms of fraction deviation value, a 2.5 m/s are optimal for convergence, nevertheless, the differences are not noticeable Therefore, only the velocity affects the pressure value, but small effect on the desired volume fraction while E ratio has little effects I choose a constant pair of 2.5 m/s and E20 for newer case studies Starting with two-valve model, after fixing the value of the velocity, inlet distance and E number, the remaining variables are two valves position, gap and open degree Because in the one valve study, I chose the optimal angle of 40° for the first valve, thus, open angle of the both valve will vary from 40° to 80° due to the increasing in head pressure of an additional valve For instance, if the first valve optimized at 40°, the second valve open at 20° or 30° will cause a significant increase of inlet pressure, so the case even worse than one-valve case, as a result, I neglect the values of 20° and 30° for both valve The third case study is on open degree of the both valves The required pressure values are acceptable in all cases (lower than 200 kPa), therefore, choosing a combination will base on its deviation of volume fraction As a results, the 50x50 pairs are as effective as other lower-degree pair, additionally, its pressure is just above 140 kPa, thus, I choose the 50x50 for the next research The next study is on the influence of the gap, I picked pair of angles which are 50x50, 40x50, 50x40, 50x60 and 60x50 and varied the gap by 5d, 10d and 20d As a 64 CONCLUSIONS result, no significant deviation of pressure showed, however, at 10d, the deviation converges faster than that of the others Therefore, I chose 10d as a fixed gap One more reason is that the size of the system should not be too large to be restricted in placement The final study is on valves position This time, the valves’ angles are fixed at 50x50 After a few rotations, there are two pairs of position are impressively optimum in volume fraction is the 90x90 and the 90x0 Regarding these two, the 90x0 has lower head pressure, so I chose it as an optimized position To finish the optimization, another step to check the valves’ angles are conducted This checking step is similar to the fourth study Five pairs of angle combinations are put into comparison with other variables are constant Surprisingly, the 50x60 has nearly the same pattern as that of 50x50 but with a lower inlet pressure Therefore, I chose 50x60 as the most optimized for goals To be clear, I conducted another test and the optimal results is as expected Recommendations Theoretically, the mixing valves could work efficiently in the small-scale blending station Future applications may be in some station depots where gasohol could directly mixed and transport from truck to the station or reverse Therefore, the application is more effective in comparison with static mixer, which is more expensive and circulation agitator, which required a large area to occupy but less effective In order to be more precise, the simulation should be increased in number of meshes, thus, the results are more continuous rather than discrete Secondly, the valve should be accurately drawn and calculate to reduce the deviation My variables are only about to variables, which leaves the results to be uncertain Therefore, more angles, distances and positions should be taken, in general, more experiments Moreover, different environment temperatures and pressure should be taken into account because these variables are changeable and could affect our blending effectiveness In my simulation, there are just about 22 curves has been created inside the system to represent all the flows, so the errors are existed Thus, more curves and points to simulate will ensure the results rather than less curves However, a better performance simulator must be taken into concern 65 CONCLUSIONS In Solidworks, the fluid properties were already pre-defined, however, that values are not the incase of Vietnam Consequently, defining the liquid package in the conditions of Vietnam would help the results to be trustworthy One of my biggest limitation is gravity simulation, without the forces, results are not authentic, so, an experimental pilot for gravity should be applied Further study Due to the quick drop in pressure, this system can be further studied for cavitation effect and applied to chemical engineering field 110000 100000 90000 80000 70000 60000 50000 3d 5d 20° 7d 30° 9d 40° 50° 11d 60° 13d 70° 15d 80° Chart 24 Vacuum pressure through valve by different actuators and inlet distances An open of 20° has the lowest absolute pressure, but it fluctuated due to the change of inlet distance while others are not Therefore, cavitation could be created by closing the valve angles However, other open angles have less significance in vacuum pressure, so the cavitation effect potential lower when we increase the valve degree 66 CONCLUSIONS 1200000 Pressure drop (Pa) 1000000 20° 800000 30° 40° 600000 50° 400000 60° 70° 200000 80° 3d 5d 7d 9d 11d 13d 15d Inlet distance Chart 25 Pressure drop through valve by different actuators and inlet distances Pressure drop is more significant when the valve’s angle is smaller Therefore, small open could form a great environment for cavitation effect takes place For example, pressure drop of a 3d open 20° is over MPa, but that of 7d is only 40000 Pa Therefore, it may affected by the inlet distance 67 REFERENCES 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Podbielniak, W., Apparatus and Methods for Precise Fractional-Distillation Analysis: New Design of Adiabatic Fractioning Column and Precision-Spaced Wire Packing for Temperature Range-190* to 300* C Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Analytical Edition, 1941 13(9): p 639-645 Quimby, B.D., V Giarrocco, and K.A McCleary, Fast analysis of oxygen and sulfur compounds in gasoline by GC‐AED Journal of Separation Science, 1992 15(11): p 705-709 Neef, J.F.E., Method of removing dye and tetraethyl lead from gasoline 1945, Google Patents Aleiferis, P., J Serras-Pereira, and D Richardson, Characterisation of flame development with ethanol, butanol, iso-octane, gasoline and methane in a directinjection spark-ignition engine Fuel, 2013 109: p 256-278 Lodder, J and R Kreger-Van, The yeasts-a taxonomic study The yeasts-a taxonomic study., 1952 Hill, J., et al., Environmental, economic, and energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels Proceedings of the National Academy of sciences, 2006 103(30): p 11206-11210 Sarkar, N., et al., Bioethanol production from agricultural wastes: an overview Renewable energy, 2012 37(1): p 19-27 Anh Tuan, L and P Minh Tuan, Impacts of Gasohol E5 and E10 on Performance and Exhaust Emissions of In-used Motorcycle and Car: A Case Study in Vietnam Tạp chí Khoa học Cơng nghệ trường đại học kỹ thuật, 2013(73): p 98 Balat, M., Global bio-fuel processing and production trends Energy Exploration & Exploitation, 2007 25(3): p 195-218 Balat, M and H Balat, Recent trends in global production and utilization of bioethanol fuel Applied energy, 2009 86(11): p 2273-2282 Mussatto, S.I., et al., Technological trends, global market, and challenges of bioethanol production Biotechnology advances, 2010 28(6): p 817-830 Le Anh Tuan, P.H.T., N.D Khanh, and T.T Chuan, SIMULATION STUDY OF MOTORCYCLE ENGINE’S CHARATERISTICS FUELED WITH ETHANOLGASOLINE BLENDS Kimura, T., et al., Hydrodynamic characteristics of a butterfly valve—prediction of pressure loss characteristics ISA transactions, 1995 34(4): p 319-326 Guralnik, G.S., C.R Hagen, and T.W Kibble, Global conservation laws and massless particles Physical Review Letters, 1964 13(20): p 585 Elger, D.F and J.A Roberson, Engineering fluid mechanics 2016: Wiley Hoboken (NJ) Tezduyar, T.E., et al., Incompressible flow computations with stabilized bilinear and linear equal-order-interpolation velocity-pressure elements Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 1992 95(2): p 221-242 Wilkinson, W.L., Non-Newtonian fluids: fluid mechanics, mixing and heat transfer Vol 1960: Pergamon Bertalmio, M., A.L Bertozzi, and G Sapiro Navier-stokes, fluid dynamics, and image and video inpainting in Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2001 68 19 20 21 CVPR 2001 Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE Computer Society Conference on 2001 IEEE Versteeg, H and W Malalasekera, Computational fluid dynamics The finite volume method, 1995 Wilcox, D.C., Turbulence modeling for CFD Vol 1993: DCW industries La Canada, CA Matsson, J.E., An Introduction to SolidWorks Flow Simulation 2013 2013: SDC publications 69 ... of maximum flow Equal percentage Equal percentage characteristic means that equal increments of valve travel produce equal percentage changes in flowrate as related to the flowrate that existed... are present However, gasoline vapor rapidly mixes and spreads with air, making unconstrained gasoline quickly flammable Ethanol Ethanol, also called alcohol, ethyl alcohol, grain alcohol, or drinking... characteristics, the auto-ignition temperature and the flash point are higher than those of gasoline, which makes it safer for transportation and storage The latent heat of evaporation of ethanol