Fuel (LPG) Combustion Analysis to

Determine Air/Fuel Ratio, Combustion

Efficiency and Flame Temperature

by

Muhammad Ahmed Sohail

BME203007

Submitted to:
Dr. Muhammad Mahabat khan

A Project Report submitted to the

Department of Mechanical Engineering in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the Assessment
Of Internal Combustion Engine project
Jan 2024
Faculty of Engineering
Capital University of Science & Technology,
Islamabad
 DECLARATION

It is declared that this is an original piece of our own work, except where otherwise
acknowledged in text and references. This work has not been submitted in any form for
another degree or diploma at any university or other institution for tertiary education and shall
not be submitted by us in future for obtaining any degree from this or any other University or

Institution.

Muhammad Ahmed Sohail

BME 203007

January 2024

2|Page
 CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL

It is certified that the project titled “Fuel (LPG) Combustion Analysis to Determine Air/Fuel
Ratio, Combustion Efficiency and Flame Temperature” carried out by Reg No. BME203007,
Muhammad Ahmed Sohail, under the supervision of Dr Muhammad Mahabat khan, Capital
University of Science & Technology, Islamabad, is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as
a seventh semester project for the degree of BS of Mechanical Engineering.

Supervisor: --------------------------

Dr Muhammad Mahabat khan

Associate Professor
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Faculty of Engineering
Capital University of Science & Technology, Islamabad

HOD: ----------------------------

Dr. Muhammad Mahabat Khan

Associate Professor
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Faculty of Engineering
Capital University of Science & Technology, Islamabad

3|Page
 Abstract

This research examines the combustion characteristics of diesel fuel by observing its combustion
process within a controlled chamber. The objective is to distinguish the chemical and thermal
properties of diesel fuel to enhance our understanding of its performance in an engine. The study
systematically investigates different aspects of the fuel's behavior, such as its reaction to lean or rich
mixtures, the production of pollutants, and thermal efficiency. The abstract seeks to concisely yet
comprehensively convey insights into both the differences and similarities in these traits.

4|Page
Table of Contents

DECLARATION ...................................................................................................................... 2

CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL ........................................................................................... 3

Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... 4

Chapter 1 .................................................................................................................................. 7

Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 7

1.1. Aims & Objectives ...................................................................................................... 7

Chapter 2 .................................................................................................................................. 8

Literature Review .................................................................................................................... 8

Chapter 3 .................................................................................................................................. 9

Observations & Calculations .................................................................................................. 9

3.1. Readings ...................................................................................................................... 9

3.2. Actual Air to Fuel Ratio ............................................................................................ 10
3.3. Stoichiometric Air to Fuel Ratio ............................................................................... 10
3.4. Combustion Efficiency .............................................................................................. 13
3.5. Results & Graphs ...................................................................................................... 14
Chapter 4 ................................................................................................................................ 16

4.1 Adiabatic Temperature ................................................................................................. 16

4.2 Dissociation of Carbon dioxide ................................................................................... 19
4.3 Dissociation of Water ................................................................................................... 21
Chapter 5 ................................................................................................................................ 23

5.1 Discussion ...................................................................................................................... 23

5.2 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 23

5|Page
 References ............................................................................................................................ 24

List of Figures
Figure 1. Combustion Laboratory Unit ...................................................................................... 7
Figure 2 Enthalpy of formation of substance ........................................................................... 16
Figure 3 Enthaply of formation at higher temperature ............................................................ 18
Figure 4 Kp values for dissociation ......................................................................................... 19

List of Figures.....................................................................................................................................6
Table 1 Readings from CLU and gas analyzer...................................................................................10
Table 2 Results...................................................................................................................................18

6|Page
Chapter 1

Introduction

The Combustion Laboratory Unit (CLU) is a crucial tool designed for the purpose of studying and
comprehending the behavior of various fuels in different conditions. This specialized unit provides
researchers with the capability to observe and analyze important factors that influence combustion
processes. These factors include the air/fuel ratio, combustion efficiency, adiabatic flame
temperature, and the dissociation of products during combustion. By exploring these aspects, the
CLU facilitates a deep understanding of how different fuels react and perform under diverse
circumstances. Researchers can manipulate variables such as air/fuel ratio to observe how they
impact combustion efficiency and the resulting temperature. Additionally, the unit allows for the
analysis of product dissociation, providing insights into the composition of combustion by-products.
Ultimately, the information obtained from studying these factors using the CLU contributes
significantly to the improvement of engine performance. Researchers can use the data to optimize
combustion processes, leading to more efficient and cleaner energy conversion in engines. This not
only enhances overall engine performance but also helps in minimizing the environmental impact of
combustion by identifying ways to reduce pollutants and increase efficiency.

Figure 1. Combustion Laboratory Unit

7|Page
1.1. Aims & Objectives
Following are the aims of the project;

1. Establish the connection between the air-to-fuel ratio and the thermal efficiency of combustion of
LPG.

2. Explore the impact of varying the air-to-fuel ratio on the combustion process.

3. Contrast experimental findings with theoretical outcomes for analysis.

4. Induce stoichiometric reactions to comprehend ideal scenarios and determine air-to fuel ratio.

5. Examine and calculate the adiabatic flame temperature and dissociation of products.

Chapter 2
Literature Review

The primary function of a combustion laboratory unit is to offer a controlled setting for the
methodical examination of combustion processes. Researchers utilize these laboratories to
conduct experiments that provide insights into different aspects of combustion, such as fuel
combustion characteristics, pollutant formation, alternative fuel exploration, flame dynamics
analysis, combustion system optimization, model validation, and safety and stability studies.
These experiments enable a thorough exploration of various fuels' combustion, combustion
process efficiency, and flame behavior dynamics. These laboratories also act as testing
grounds for assessing the viability of alternative and sustainable fuels. Moreover, researchers
leverage combustion laboratory units to study pollutant formation during combustion,
contributing to efforts aimed at minimizing environmental impact. The optimization of
combustion systems, such as engines or burners, is another crucial aspect, with the goal of
enhancing overall performance, reducing emissions, and improving efficiency. Through these

8|Page
investigations, combustion laboratories play a pivotal role in advancing our understanding of
combustion science and contributing to the development of cleaner and more efficient energy
technologies.

The efficiency of combustion in a system is closely tied to the air-to-fuel ratio, a pivotal
parameter influencing the combustion process. Changes in the ratio of air to fuel
correspondingly affect combustion efficiency. Shifting towards a higher air-to-fuel ratio,
known as a lean mixture, typically results in increased combustion efficiency. This is because
an excess of air provides more oxygen for the combustion reaction, promoting a more
complete burning of the fuel. However, extremely lean mixtures may pose challenges, such as
lower flame temperatures and potential increases in nitrogen oxide (NOx) formation due to
elevated combustion temperatures. On the other hand, a decrease in the air-to-fuel ratio,
leading to a rich mixture with insufficient air, can result in reduced combustion efficiency. In
a rich mixture, incomplete combustion occurs, leading to the production of carbon monoxide
(CO) and unburned hydrocarbons, which can diminish overall efficiency. Striking a balance
close to the stoichiometric ratio, where there is just enough air for complete combustion, is
often the goal for optimizing combustion systems. Engineers and researchers consider various
factors, including combustion chamber design and operating conditions, to achieve this
balance and enhance both efficiency and environmental performance.
Chapter 3

Observations & Calculations

The experimental data collected from the CLU has to be verified through theoretical calculations
that present the ideal case scenario.

3.1. Readings

9|Page
To collect data from the Combustion Laboratory Unit (CLU) using a flue gas analyzer, begin
by calibrating the analyzer and linking it to the combustion unit. Once the connection is
established, initiate the combustion process to allow the analyzer to monitor real-time gas
concentrations. Evaluate the data on combustion efficiency and pollutants, and make any
necessary adjustments. Safely shut down both systems upon completion of the experiment. In
summary, readings are acquired from the apparatus and gas analyzer during this process.

Table 1 Readings from CLU and gas analyzer

Parameters 1 2 3 4 5
∆ 𝑃 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.5
(LPM) 22 20 25 22 23
𝐿pg
4.85 4.2 3.7 1.4 3.4
( 𝑚̇3/ )
𝜂𝑐 44.2 50.5 54.2 50.7 53.3
% 𝐶 12.9 12.9 12.9 12.9 12.9
𝑂2
𝑇 amb ( °C 12.6 14.8 11.8 12.4 15.2

% 𝑂2 0 0 0 0 0
𝑃 𝑔as ( 0.02 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.01
𝑚̇bar)
% l 55.3 48.5 43.2 47.6 41
osses
𝑇 𝑓lue( °C 834 667 695 560.3 640
𝑇 1 ( °C
14.6 16.7 15.9 17.7 21
water inlet
𝑇 2( °C )
wate r 42.5 26.9 34.8 27.5 30.5
ou

10 | P a g e
 t

let

𝑇 3 ( °C)

ai
ri
10.1 11.3 11.8 12.6 12
nl
e
t

𝑇 4 ( °C) 758 667 599.2 560 603

exh
au
st

3.2. Actual Air to Fuel Ratio

11 | P a g e
 Where value of k depends upon on indicated no of numbers assuming no of dampers of 1 so
value of k=4.1 (from apparatus manual)

3.3. Stoichiometric Air to Fuel Ratio

The stoichiometric A/F ratio presents the most ideal combustion case whether that may be for
complete combustion, incomplete or with excess air.

12 | P a g e
In this case 𝑂2 = 5%, 𝐶𝑂 = 0% , 𝐶𝑂2 = 12.9%, 𝐶3𝐻8 = 30% 𝐶4𝐻10 = 70%

The composition of LPG is such that it has 30% propane & 70% butane. The percentage of CO2
& CO is taken from the gas analyzer data. The percentage of O2 is assumed in order to satisfy
the following chemical reaction

0.3𝑋𝐶3𝐻8 + 0.7𝑋𝐶4𝐻10 + 𝑌(𝑂2 + 3.76𝑁2) 12.9𝐶𝑂2 + 5𝑂2 + 𝑍𝐻2𝑂 + 3.76𝑌𝑁2

% of 𝑁2 in dry products of combustion:

= 100 − (12.9 + 5)

= 82.1%

If 𝑁2 is not reacting then:

3.76𝑌 = 82.1

𝑌 = 21.83

Balancing C on both sides

0.3(3)𝑋 + 0.7(4)𝑋 = 12.9

0.9𝑋 + 2.8𝑋 = 12.9

3.7𝑋 = 12.9

13 | P a g e
𝑋 = 3.486

By 𝑂2 balance:

0.3(3.486)𝐶3 𝐻8 + 0.7(3.46)𝐶4 𝐻10 + 21.83(𝑂2 + 3.76𝑁2 ) 12.9𝐶 𝑂2 + 5𝑂2 +

7.86 𝐻2 𝑂 + 3.76(21.83)𝑁2

1.0458𝐶3 𝐻8 + 2.4402𝐶4 𝐻10 + 21.83𝑂2 + 82𝑁2 12.9𝐶 𝑂2 + 5𝑂2 +

𝑍 = 2(21.83 − 17.9)
7.86 𝐻2 𝑂 + 82𝑁2
𝑍 = 7.86

𝐿. 𝐻. 𝑆 𝐻2 𝑏𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑔 = 16.3842

𝑅. 𝐻. 𝑆 𝐻2 𝑏𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑔 = 7.86

𝐻2 = 16.3842 − 7.86

𝐻2 = 8.5242

Now half of this is added as oxygen in the reactant side to balance out:

1.0458𝐶3𝐻8 + 2.4402𝐶4𝐻10 + 21.83𝑂2 + 82𝑁2 + 4.2621𝑂2 12.9𝐶𝑂2 +

14 | P a g e
 5𝑂2 + 16.3842 𝐻2𝑂 + 82𝑁2

Stoichiometric calculation for air to fuel ratio

The stoichiometric ratio will be utilized to judge whether the actual A/F ratio is lean or Rich.

𝐶𝑝𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 = 4.185 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚̇ 𝐶𝐿𝑈 𝑚̇𝑎𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙

𝐶𝑎𝑙𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑐 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝐿𝑃𝐺 𝑄𝐻𝑉 = 42.7 × 103

The thermal efficiency can be calculated using the heat energy absorbed by water, the heat
energy released by the combustion & the heat absorbed by the flue gases.
3.4. Combustion Efficiency
The experimental combustion efficiency of the CLU is obtained through a gas analyzer which can
be compared with the theoretical efficiency.

Heat Energy Absorbed by water

Heat Energy released by Combustion

15 | P a g e
𝐻𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑏 = 132.31 𝑘𝑊

Heat Energy Absorbed by flue gases

𝑂2 = 5%

𝐶𝑂 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑆𝑂2 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑠𝑜 𝑠𝑚̇𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑛𝑒𝑔𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑜

𝐻𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑒 = [(𝐶𝑝𝑐𝑜2 × 𝑀𝑜𝑢𝑡) + (𝐶𝑝𝑜2 × 𝑀𝑜𝑢𝑡)](𝑇4 − 𝑇3) ………………………………(1)

Put in Eqaution (1)

𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑒 = [𝐶𝑝𝐶𝑂2𝑀𝐶𝑜2 + 𝐶𝑝𝑁2𝑀𝑁2 + 𝐶𝑝𝑂2𝑀𝑂2 + 𝐶𝑝𝐶𝑜𝑀𝐶𝑜 + 𝐶𝑝𝐻2𝑂𝑀𝐻2𝑂] × [Δ𝑇𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑒]

𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑒 = [48.7 × 0.129 + 0 + 32.62 × 0.05 + 0 + 0] × [758 − 10.1]

𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑒 = 7.91 𝑘𝑊

16 | P a g e
 𝑇𝑜𝑡 = 𝐻𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑒 + 𝐻𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟

𝑇𝑜𝑡 = 7.91 + 36.86

𝑇𝑜𝑡 = 44.77 𝑘𝑊

𝜂𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑏𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 100 − %𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒

𝜂𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑏𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 100 − 66.163

𝜂𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑏𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 33.84 %

The remaining set of data collected for 5 more iterations is as follows

3.5. Results & Graphs

Table 2 Results

Serial number Air to Fuel Calculated Experimental

Air to Fuel Efficiency
Ratio Efficiency
Ratio (actual)
(stoichiometric) (%) (%)
1. 17.76 16.69 33.84 44.2
2. 20.45 16.69 19.97 50.5
3. 23.22 16.69 36.1 54.2

17 | P a g e
4. 61.39 16.69 45.22 50.7
5. 25.29 16.69 19.5 53.3

18 | P a g e
19 | P a g e
 Chapter 4

4.1 Adiabatic Temperature

Figure 2 Enthalpy of formation of substance

𝐻𝑃 = 𝑛𝐶𝑂2[ ℎ̅𝑓° + (ℎ̅𝑓° − ℎ̅298° )]𝐶𝑂2 + 𝑛𝐻2𝑂[ ℎ̅𝑓° + (ℎ̅𝑓° − ℎ̅298° )]𝐻2𝑂

20 | P a g e
 + 𝑛𝑂2[ ℎ̅𝑓° + (ℎ̅𝑓° − ℎ̅298° )]𝑂2 + 𝑛𝑁2[ ℎ̅𝑓° + (ℎ̅𝑓° − ℎ̅298° )]𝑁2

𝐻𝑃 = 12.9[−393.52 + (ℎ̅𝑓° − ℎ̅298° )]𝐶𝑂2 + 16.3842[−241.82 + (ℎ̅𝑓° − ℎ̅298° )]𝐻2𝑂

+ 5[0 + (ℎ̅𝑓° − ℎ̅298° )]𝑂2 + 82[0 + (ℎ̅𝑓° − ℎ̅298° )]𝑁2

𝐻𝑃 = (12.9 × −393.52) + 12.9 × (ℎ̅𝑓° − ℎ̅298° )𝐶𝑂2 + (16.3842 × −241.82)

+ 16.3842 × (ℎ̅𝑓° − ℎ̅298° )𝐻2𝑂 + 5(ℎ̅𝑓° − ℎ̅298° )𝑂2 + 82(ℎ̅𝑓° − ℎ̅298° )𝑁2

𝐻𝑝 = −9038.43 + 12.9 × (ℎ̅𝑓° − ℎ̅298° )𝐶𝑂2 + 16.3842 × (ℎ̅𝑓° − ℎ̅298° ) 𝐻2 𝑂 +

5(ℎ̅𝑓° − ℎ̅298° )𝑂2 + 82(ℎ̅𝑓° − ℎ̅298° )𝑁2

Now we have the most moles in nitrogen now comparing:

21 | P a g e
Now from Table 3.3 from Gupta book:

Figure 3 Enthaply of formation at higher temperature

Now,

22 | P a g e
𝑇𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑏𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑐 = (0.818) × 100 + 2200

𝑇𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑏𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑐 = 𝟐𝟐𝟖𝟐 𝑲
4.2 Dissociation of Carbon dioxide
Now the dissociation of carbon dioxide is calculated:
12 .9
12.9𝐶 𝑂2 12.9𝐶𝑂 + 2
𝑂2

12.9𝐶 𝑂2 12.9𝐶𝑂 + 6.45 𝑂2

𝛼
𝛼𝐶 𝑂2 𝛼𝐶𝑂 + 2 𝑂2

Now by linear interpolation and from Table 3.5:

23 | P a g e
 Figure 4 Kp values for dissociation

ln𝐾𝑝 = (0.41)(1.26) − 5.126

24 | P a g e
𝐴𝑡 𝑃 = 1𝑎𝑡𝑚̇

Now by iterations we get the values:

𝛼 = 0.598 𝐾𝑝 = 77.58

𝛼 = 0.591 𝐾𝑝 = 119.64

𝛼 = 0.5938 𝐾𝑝 = 100.62
𝛼 = 0.5938

Now we have 59.38 % of dissociation of carbon dioxide.

4.3 Dissociation of Water

25 | P a g e
This above function is for single loop but we have 12.9 mole

𝐾𝑝 𝑎𝑡 2282.1 𝐾 𝑏𝑦 𝑢𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 3.5 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚̇ 𝑔𝑢𝑝𝑡𝑎 𝑏𝑜𝑜𝑘

𝑙𝑛𝐾𝑝 = −6.303 = 𝑘𝑝 = 546.208

Partial pressure in term of molar fraction

26 | P a g e
Since p is at atmospheric pressure 𝑝 = 1atm

is 0.589 kp = 512.687
is 0.5885 kp =543.21

𝛼 = 0.58824

At 2281 K, 58.824 %. of Water will dissociate

27 | P a g e
 Chapter 5
5.1 Discussion
The graphical representation of LPG flow rate versus calculated efficiency reveals an
interesting non-linear trend, showcasing fluctuations in calculated efficiency as the LPG flow
rate increases. The observed pattern suggests that optimal combustion conditions are achieved
at intermediate LPG flow rates, highlighting the complexity of the combustion process.

Simultaneously, the graph depicting LPG flow rate versus actual air-to-fuel ratio illustrates a
consistent decrease in the air-to-fuel ratio as the LPG flow rate increases. This trend aligns
with expectations, as a higher LPG flow rate typically results in a richer mixture, influencing
combustion dynamics.

Furthermore, the graph comparing LPG flow rate versus both calculated and experimental
efficiency unveils a noteworthy disparity. The experimental efficiency, obtained from the gas
analyzer, consistently surpasses the calculated efficiency. This discrepancy suggests that
realworld combustion behavior may be influenced by factors not fully captured in the
calculated model, emphasizing the importance of empirical measurements for a
comprehensive understanding of combustion processes. The higher experimental efficiency
values at various LPG flow rates indicate potential inefficiencies or complexities that need to
be considered for accurate predictions and optimization in practical applications.

5.2 Conclusion

28 | P a g e
In summary, the investigation involving calculations such as stoichiometric and actual air-
tofuel ratios, combustion efficiency, adiabatic flame temperature, and dissociation of carbon
dioxide and water provided valuable insights. The observed non-linear trend in calculated
efficiency with varying LPG flow rates highlights the intricate nature of combustion,
suggesting optimal conditions at intermediate flow rates. Simultaneously, the consistent
decrease in the air-to-fuel ratio aligns with expectations for a richer mixture at higher LPG
flow rates. Notably, the discrepancy between calculated and experimental efficiency
emphasizes the influence of unaccounted factors, underscoring the necessity of empirical
measurements for a comprehensive understanding of combustion processes. These findings
accentuate the indispensable role of combustion laboratory units in advancing combustion
science. Such systematic experimentation, aligned with Sustainable Development Goal (SDG)
13, contributes to climate action by informing the development of cleaner and more efficient
energy technologies.

References

[1] Gupta - INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES pdf.

[2] White, C., & Brown, G. (2019). Influence of air-fuel ratio on the performance and emissions
of a natural gas engine. International Journal of Environmental Research, 15(4), 567-578.

[2]. Ganesan - INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES-McGraw-Hill education (2017).

29 | P a g e