KR102073708B1 - an appropriate rate mixed fuel of fossil fuel and water electrolysis gas to enhance the fuel efficiency - Google Patents

Abstract

The main contents of the present invention are a variety of liquid and gaseous fossil fuels (gasoline, diesel biofuel, LPG, LNG, natural gas, other coal gasification gas, coke by-product gas, etc.) and water electrolysis gas (H2 + 1/2 O2) The present invention relates to a technology capable of dramatically improving the power generated by an engine or a generator by mixing and burning an oxyhydrogen equivalent mixed gas or "HHO".
The present invention to solve the above problems and needs,
In the fuel used for power generating devices, such as an engine,
The mixed fuel (C) which mixed gaseous fossil fuel (A) and water electrolysis gas (B) is provided.
In addition, the present invention is to mix (1-x) mol fossil fuel (A) and (x / n) mol of water electrolysis gas,
n = (calorie of 1 mol of fossil fuel / calorie of 1 mol of hydrogen)? (1 / SPF).
(Wherein mole fraction x is 0 <x <1)
In another aspect, the present invention provides a mixed fuel (C), characterized in that the SPF is 15 ~ 30.

Description

An appropriate rate mixed fuel of fossil fuel and water electrolysis gas to enhance the fuel efficiency}

The main contents of the present invention are liquid and gaseous fossil fuels (gasoline, diesel biofuel, LPG, LNG, natural gas, other coal gasification gas, coke by-product gas, etc.) and water electrolysis gas (H2 + 1/2 O2). The present invention relates to a technology capable of dramatically improving the power generated by an engine or a generator by mixing and burning an oxyhydrogen equivalent mixed gas or "HHO".

Conventional engines use gasoline, diesel, syngas or biodiesel obtained by refining fossil fuels as fuel.

One of the fundamental problems of operating gasoline or diesel engines is the spray combustion process because of the significant delay in atomization, vaporization and turbulent mixing of oxygen during spraying, which has a decisive impact on engine efficiency. Crazy This is given by the empirical equation (1) of the phenomenological turbulent reaction rate including atomization rate, mixing rate and chemical reaction rate as follows.

Specifically, as shown in this equation, the smaller the atomization rate term is, the larger the value (1 / atomization rate) becomes, so that the overall turbulence reaction rate is greatly delayed.

This results in structural defects in engines such as gasoline or diesel, where fuel is not efficiently converted to power within a short engine operating time.

Turbulent Reaction Rate = One / (   One/ Fig Speed + 1 Of Turbulent Mixing Speed + 1 Of Chemical Reaction Rate) ------- ( Equation 1)

From the point of view of engine efficiency, the problem of atomization, which collapses into small droplets of liquid fuel, and vaporization that changes to gaseous state after atomization, is a problem as well as the presence of 79% of unreacted nitrogen molecules contained in the oxidant air. In other words, the nitrogen molecules contained in the oxidant not only participate in the exothermic reaction, but also reduce the reaction rate by reducing the probability of direct collision between oxygen and fuel due to the presence of nitrogen molecules themselves. The presence of these nitrogen molecules is also a negative factor in the temperature rise and power generation of the engine operating for complete combustion in a short time. This problem of nitrogen becomes a mechanism in which the oxyhydrogen gas which electrolyzed water mixed with hydrogen and oxygen which do not contain nitrogen in the present condition is equivalent to the high explosive force. This is again mentioned later when explaining the rise of engine efficiency due to the mixing of oxyhydrogen gas.

More specifically, the problem of time delays due to atomization, vaporization, and turbulent mixing of fuels is caused by the delayed combustion reaction of the fuel from the intake compression, expansion, and expansion of the four stroke engine to the stage of post-expansion expansion. Loss is one of the biggest causes of inefficiency. This is one of the main reasons why the energy efficiency of modern automobile engines remains around 20-30% despite the 140 years since the engine of the four-stroke engine was invented by Otto in 1876. Only about one-third of the power is transferred to the power, and the remaining heat is delayed by the combustion speed of the fuel, so that the heat generated late is not converted into power and is discharged to the engine coolant or exhaust gas, resulting in a decrease in energy efficiency.

In order to solve the above problems, the present inventor (or the applicant) has submitted a prior patent and discloses a document (application number 1020140009690), a composition fuel in which a volatilized steam fossil fuel and water electrolysis gas are mixed and a combustion method using the same And an internal combustion engine using the same, an applicant; KPI Energy Co., Ltd. (filed date 2014 01 27)). In the above patent, volatilization of a fuel such as gasoline as a countermeasure against reduction of engine efficiency due to delayed combustion reaction is disclosed. This study suggests that the efficiency of the engine is improved by using a mixture of oxyhydrogen gas containing only oxygen as an oxidizing agent. In this patent, however, the mixing ratio of the fuel is quantitatively presented based on the physical mechanism according to the calorific value of the fuel and oxyhydrogen gas and the flame propagation speed.

The conventional fuel mixed with the fossil fuel and the water electrolysis gas has not been presented a specific configuration for maximizing the power generation efficiency bar according to the present invention the gaseous fossil fuel and water electrolysis having an optimal mixing ratio to solve this problem It is intended to provide a mixed fuel in which gas is mixed.

In addition, the present invention has the same power generation efficiency as fossil fuels, such as gasoline and diesel, which are fuels for generating power, such as a conventional engine, but gaseous fossil fuel, which is an optimal mixing ratio that can significantly reduce the amount of fuel and energy consumption. To provide a fuel mixture of water and electrolysis gas.

This efficiency enhancing effect is to reduce the greenhouse gas such as carbon dioxide in proportion to the amount of fuel decreases.

The present invention to solve the above problems and needs,

In the fuel used for power generating devices, such as an engine,

Provided is a mixed fuel (C) obtained by mixing a gaseous fossil fuel or a gaseous fossil fuel (A) vaporized with a liquid fossil fuel and an electrolysis gas (B).

delete

delete

delete

A mixed fuel (C) is provided, wherein n = (calorie of 1 mol of fossil fuel / calorie of 1 mol of hydrogen) * (1 / SPF).

The present invention also provides a mixed fuel (C), characterized in that the SPF is generally 15-30.

In another aspect, the present invention provides a mixed fuel (C), characterized in that the gaseous fossil fuel is LPG (butane), gasoline (octane), methane, anaerobic digestion biogas (methane and carbon dioxide composition) or diesel.

The calorific value of the mixed fuel of gaseous fossil fuel and water electrolysis gas according to the present invention is only 30 to 50% of the calorific value of the fuel of fossil fuels such as gasoline and diesel in a power generator such as an engine. Even the input creates the effect of generating the same power, and the effect of fuel saving is remarkable.

In addition, the calories of gaseous fossil fuel or liquid fossil fuel vaporized gaseous fossil fuel and the mixed fuel of water electrolysis gas according to the present invention is used for generating the same power in a power generator such as an engine, gasoline, diesel, etc. Only 30-50% of the calories used in fossil fuels is reduced so that CO2, a representative greenhouse gas, is reduced by the amount of fossil fuels reduced, and other air pollutants such as dust, NOx and SOx are also reduced. It is expected.

1 is a relationship between reaction speed and engine power generation.
2 is a graph of the crank angle versus the combustion fraction of fuel in the engine.
3 is an experimental view of the combustion system of a single cylinder engine according to the present invention and the generation of mixed fuel of gasified gasoline and water electrolysis gas.
4 is an engine used in the experiment of the present invention.
4b is another engine used in the experiments of the present invention;

Hereinafter, the present invention will be described in detail.

The present invention provides a mixed fuel (C) obtained by mixing fossil fuel (A) and water electrolysis gas (B) used in a power generating device.

The power generator of the present invention means a device such as an engine, a turbine, etc. that converts thermal energy into mechanical energy, and mainly means an engine.

The fossil fuel (A) used in the above-described power generation of the present invention generally means a fuel used in an engine which is a means for generating power.

Therefore, fossil fuels (A) used for power generation are LPG (butane), gasoline (octane), methane, anaerobic digestion biogas (methane and carbon dioxide composition, preferably 65% carbon dioxide and 35% carbon dioxide), diesel, etc. Means.

The fossil fuel (A) of the mixed fuel of the present invention is preferably mixed in the gas phase, so the present invention is a gaseous fossil fuel (A) vaporized gaseous fossil fuel or liquid fossil fuel (A) and water electrolysis gas ( The technical feature is that it is a mixed fuel (C) which mixed B).

The technical feature of the present invention is to reduce the fossil fuel (A) by x mole fraction in 1 mole (mole) of the fossil fuel (A) used to generate the power, and water electricity corresponding to the fossil fuel (A) by the reduced x mole fraction. The point is to mix water electrolysis gas (WEG) by (x / n) moles.

That is, this invention provides the mixed fuel (C) which mixed (1-x) mol fossil fuel (A) and (x / n) mol water electrolysis gas.

(Wherein the mole fraction x has a value of 0 <x <1)

The fossil fuel (A) refers to gaseous fossil fuel (A) vaporized gaseous fossil fuel or liquid fossil fuel.

As will be described in detail below, the mole fraction x is 0.1 to 0.9 is appropriate, 0.4 to 0.6 is more appropriate, more preferably 0.5 is very effective in generating the optimum power.

N of the present invention means a reduction coefficient of replaced fuel (Reduction Coefficient of Replaced Fuel).

One mole of the water electrolysis gas is composed of H ₂ + (1/2) O ₂ .

The fuel replacement reduction coefficient n of the present invention is defined by the following equation and obtained.

n = (calorie of 1 mol of fossil fuel / calorie of 1 mol of hydrogen) * (1 / SPF).

The amount of electrolytic gas to replace the SPF means synergistic power factor (SPF) synergistic effect of heating capacity and flame propagation speed.

In general, SPF is a value obtained by combining the heating capacity of water electrolysis gas (WEG) and the flame propagation velocity and has a value of about 15 to 30.

In the present invention, the water electrolysis gas is referred to as oxyhydrogen gas, water electrolysis gas (WEG), H ₂ + 1/2 O ₂ , HHO gas and the like, and all have the same meaning.

The theoretical background of the above configuration of the present invention is based on the inventors' paper "Bahng et al. 2016, Bahng G., D. Jang, Y. Kim, M. Shin," A new technology to overcome the limits of HCCI engine through fuel modification ”Applied Thermal Engineering Vol 98 pp. 810-815 (2016)”.

The contents are explained in a compressed manner as follows.

Although more than 130 years have elapsed since the invention of the four-stroke engine by Nicolaus Otto in 1876, the overall efficiency of automotive engines remains at 25-40%, including gasoline or diesel engines. The main reason is that more than 50% of energy is not converted to power due to the delay of combustion, but is discharged as waste heat of cooling water or exhaust gas. At present, we are desperately trying to improve engine efficiency both domestically and internationally. In the last 10 ~ 20 years, commercialization has been attempted due to development of HCCI (Homogeneous Charged Compression Ignition) engine, which is called the dream engine. The situation is not successful.

As mentioned above, despite overall research on improving automobile efficiency at home and abroad, the relatively low efficiency of engine combustion remains relevant to the complexities of the two-phase turbulent reactions occurring in engines. This is because it is not coped. Specifically, liquid fuels such as gasoline or diesel have to go through a three-step process occurring in a two-phase turbulent reaction in order to effectively mix with air. That is, firstly, the atomization and vaporization process by the dispersion of the fuel, and secondly, the vaporized fuel is mixed with an oxidant such as air by turbulent mixing. Thirdly, the mixed fuel is a process that depends on the chemical kinetic rate of reacting with oxygen in the air. In this series of processes, the overall reaction rate is given by a phenomenological empirical form of the harmonic mean of each process.

(1)Overall reaction rate =

(One)

In the above equation, RR1, RR2, and RR3 represent the progress rates of the three detailed processes, respectively, where the atomization and vaporization process of RR1 fuel occurs, RR2 is the mixing rate due to turbulent flow of fuel and air, and finally RR3 It refers to the rate at which fuel and air react chemically in a well-premixed state. In general, in turbulent combustion of liquid fuels such as gasoline or diesel, the chemical reaction rate (RR3) is much faster than the atomization and vaporization rate (RR1) or the turbulent mixing rate (RR2). Therefore, the process of RR3 in the overall reaction is so fast (RR3 ~ ∞) that the 1 / RR3 term is generally ignored and the rate of progress of the total combustion is expressed as follows.

(2)

(2)

Therefore, in order to improve the efficiency of the engine, it is necessary to minimize the value of the term by increasing the speed of the process of RR1 and RR2, and this method has been used as a method for improving the engine efficiency. Specifically, if the fuel and oxidant can be effectively and uniformly filled inside the engine, the overall reaction rate can be greatly improved by promoting the process of RR1 and RR2. Indeed, various direct and indirect fuel injection technologies have been developed for this purpose. As part of this research, HCCI engines by Homogeneous Charging are emerging as dream engines for the practical increase in efficiency. As is well known, this is judged to be the result of recognizing the need for shortening of the process of RR1 and RR2. If uniform filling is effectively achieved, as shown in Eq. (1), the overall reaction rate is only affected by the combustion chemistry rate, or RR3, and the HCCI engine also shows this characteristic.

In order to utilize the uniform filling concept, the HCCI engine greatly reduces the fuel injection amount to 1/2 to 1/3, while the amount of air injected into the engine cylinder is used as is. Therefore, a large amount of air can be efficiently mixed with air with a large amount of fuel. Therefore, we aimed to achieve the purpose of improving the engine efficiency by rapid combustion reaction which only depends on chemical reaction (RR3), which minimizes the process of liquid fuel vaporization or turbulent mixing. In fact, considering the fact that more than 50% of the energy is wasted in waste heat energy from conventional engine combustion, the HCCI engine operating concept of significantly reducing fuel injection and increasing the air volume saves fuel and shortens the reaction time to increase efficiency. Seems. In addition, when homogeneous mixing is performed in a lean fuel state, the 'knocking' phenomenon is suppressed, and a high compression ratio such as a diesel engine can be suppressed, and multiple ignitions can be simultaneously performed inside the engine, thereby saving time required for flame propagation or turbulent mixing. Can be. When such combustion occurs, it is possible to reduce the time lag caused by the flame mixing caused by the turbulent mixing process of the diesel engine combustion or the spark ignition of the gasoline engine. Therefore, it is considered that the core concept of HCCI engine is that the effective temperature rise and the increase of the number of moles of the generated gas due to the fast combustion speed can effectively increase the fuel efficiency by increasing the power. However, commercialization of HCCI engines based on these concepts has become a global concern since Onishi presented the concept of HCCI engines in 1979, but unfortunately

As of 2015, no success stories for commercialization models have been reported.

One of the decisive problems that HCCI engines are not commercially available is the reported lack of power, especially at high rpm (above 3,500 rpm). Specifically, the operation mechanism of HCCI engine is defective in the case of lean burn operation with 100-200% or more surplus air, which causes a rapid chemical reaction simultaneously due to compression in a well-mixed state. This seems no way. However, one of the decisive physical mechanisms that may have been overlooked in HCCI engine research is that although HCCI engines burn, ie chemical reaction rates are fast, power generation may not be sufficient.

(3)

(3)

Let's look at this more specifically. Equation (3) is the change in temperature and the number of moles of the reactor, the change in PV work generated during power generation during combustion. In other words, it is necessary to increase the temperature or the reaction gas (nRT) in order to increase power (PV) with time.

In other words, effective power generation should be indicated by an increase in temperature or an increase in the number of moles. Even though chemical reactions occur rapidly in the engine at the same time, lean combustion, in particular, under high load and high rpm, does not have sufficient reaction molarity or temperature rise. Otherwise, the driving force of the HCCI engine will be subject to practical limitations. In the case of lean combustion in gasoline fuel, let's consider the possibility that there may be a problem in increase of the number of reaction moles or rise in temperature. If the gasoline fuel is assumed to be octane, the heat generated per mole of gasoline is expressed as follows when the air-fuel ratio is equivalent.

(4)

(4)

In this case, the number of moles of the reaction product is 64 moles, so the calories per mole of combustion product corresponds to 79,940 J. If 100% surplus air is used by lean combustion, the amount of heat required for heating per mole is greatly reduced to 41,426 J due to the increase of nitrogen and oxygen. Also, as shown in equation (4), when air is used as the oxidant, the presence of a large amount of nitrogen in the air of 79% makes substantially no change in the number of moles before and after the combustion reaction. For example, in the formula (4), the total number of moles of the reaction moles before the reaction is 59.5 moles and the number of moles after the reaction is 64 moles. Therefore, the increase of the number of moles before and after the reaction is only 8% increase from (64-59.5) /59.5 to 0.08. If excess air is used, this phenomenon is exacerbated by the effect of large amounts of nitrogen molecules in the air. Therefore, in Eq. (3), the power generation equation by PV-work can be expressed only by the temperature change as follows when the change of mole number by reaction is small.

(5)

(5)

  It can be inferred from this point of view that the HCCI engine has succeeded in producing a rapid reaction by simultaneous ignition by uniform filling and lean combustion, but it is not effective in generating sufficient power due to temperature rise if absolute heat is insufficient.

This will be discussed later in more quantitative terms, but it should be noted that the delay in chemical reaction rates at low temperatures is important. In other words, when the premix is very good and the turbulent mixing effect is not considered, the overall reaction rate depends only on the chemical reaction rate of RR3.

Even in this case, when the temperature is low due to a large amount of excess air, the chemical reaction rate is substantially lowered because sufficient activation energy cannot be supplied. Not to mention another dimension, the use of surplus air in the combustion reaction always significantly reduces the “maximum amount of work available” or exergy. In other words, lean burning by a large amount of air is a way to bear the inherent weakness of increasing entropy. In light of these considerations, it is considered that the lack of effective heating capacity is important if the HCCI engine does not operate effectively at particularly high rpms. This theoretical reasoning is a problem that has appeared in the development of HCCI engines over the last few decades. In order to solve this problem in the HCCI engine, the mixing and the like by various fuel combinations have been attempted in terms of combustion stability and power increase.

Considering the problems of the HCCI engine, a high-efficiency engine leads to the provisional conclusion that the heat supply should be sufficient while taking advantage of the uniform charging. As a solution to this, this paper will examine concretely the combustion method using mixed material as a high efficiency engine operation method. As discussed earlier, the core concept of the HCCI engine was the rapid reaction of homogeneous mixing due to the enhancement of turbulent mixing using surplus air. However, the problem was judged that the desired power was not obtained by failing sufficient temperature rise despite achieving the desired purpose. One of the reasons for not achieving the rapid rise in temperature is the presence of nitrogen molecules that do not participate in the reactions present in large amounts of combustion air. However, lean combustion due to the use of surplus air seems inevitable for uniform filling and fuel saving. Therefore, in order to make up for the problems in lean combustion, it is reasonable to select a fuel that increases the heating capacity of the combustion gas as a mixed material after the reaction. However, when the existing hydrocarbon is used as a fuel for mixing, the presence of 79% of nitrogen in the air used as an oxidant acts as a factor that prevents effective heating.

Therefore, it is reasonable that water electrolysis gas (WEG, H ₂ + 1/2 O ₂ ), which has electrolyzed water as an effective fuel that excludes nitrogen gas during combustion, is used as an auxiliary fuel.

(6)

(6)

As shown in Equation (6), since 1 mol of hydrogen molecules exist in WEG of 1.5 mol of water, it generates calories of about 240,000 J as the low calorific value, but the number of moles of gas generated after combustion is only 1 mol, which is heated per mol of unit. Ability increases significantly. In other words, 79% of unreacted nitrogen is not present as in the case of using air as the oxidant. Therefore, the water electrolysis gas generated in one mole of water has a heating capacity of 241,827 / 79,940 = 3.03 more than three times as compared with gasoline combustion using 100% theoretical air. If 100% surplus air is compared with gasoline combustion, the heating capacity is increased by 5.8 times. This increase in heating capacity per mole generated unit is a very positive factor for HCCI engines that use lean combustion by uniform filling using surplus air. In addition, the flame propagation velocity of hydrogen gas is five times or more faster than the flame propagation velocity of octane in air, and the effect is greatly increased when the oxidant is pure oxygen. Therefore, the synergistic effect in power generation combined with two positive factors, heating capacity and flame speed, is estimated to be at least 3X5 to 15 times. If we mix existing fossil fuels such as gasoline with WEG to reduce the amount of gasoline and increase the heating capacity of WEG to improve engine efficiency, the following empirical formula can be created.

(7)

(7)

In Eq. (7), x is the mole fraction of gasoline reduced from 1 mole of gasoline for intermixing, and n is the “Reduction Coefficient of Replaced Fuel” of the auxiliary fuel replacing gasoline. The meaning of the combustion equation in equation (7) is consistent with the concept of HCCI engine in that lean combustion is used for uniform filling, but after removing x mole of gasoline from one mole of gasoline in gasoline combustion, The difference is that water has been replaced by a fuel with high heating capacity, electrolyzed. In this case, the amount of replacement electrolytic gas should naturally take into account the synergistic power factor (SPF) of the heating capacity and flame propagation velocity mentioned above. The SPF value is a value obtained by combining the heating capacity of the WEG and the flame propagation speed, and is estimated to have a value of about 15 to 30. This value was confirmed to be in this region by a later experiment. In equation (7), the fuel substitution reduction factor n is given by

(8)

(8)

  In other words, if the amount of fuel is reduced by about 60% in HCCI engine operation, x = 0.6, and WEG obtained by electrolyzing water with a portion of heat of 60% gasoline, that is, about 1 / SPF (1/15 ~ 1/30) Is replaced by For example, if you save 1 mole of gasoline and replace the water with a gas that is electrolyzed to operate the engine, assuming that the calorific value of 1 mole of gasoline is approximately 5,000,000 J, the amount of heat generated by electrolysis of 1 mole of water is 250,000 J In order to replace the same amount of heat, roughly 20 moles of water must be decomposed and used as fuel. However, if the SPF value considering the heating capacity and flame propagation velocity of water electrolyzed gas is estimated to be about 20, the water electrolysis gas used is 1/20 as 1 / SPF. It is the logic of this paper that the same power can be generated if the water is used by electrolysis.

In this case, of course, the amount of gasoline used and the relative amount of water electrolysis gas and air-fuel ratio are important variables. However, it should be noted here that this mixed combustion method is effective when gasoline is only steam.

As mentioned in Eq. (1), if gasoline is injected into liquid droplets, it must be subjected to turbulent mixing (RR2) while atomizing and vaporizing (RR1), in which case the heating capacity of the WEG and the flame propagation velocity are combined. This is because the significant advantage will be seen by the substantial delay caused by RR1 and RR2. In fact, the study of engines using water electrolyzed gas or a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen did not contribute substantially to the improvement of engine efficiency. The Homogeneous Charged Fuel Vaporized Spark Ignition (HCFVSI) method, which improved the HCCI combustion method, successfully operated WEG and intermixers of various liquid fuels, including diesel and gasoline, and WEG and hybrids within 10 kW for the past 6-7 years. As a result, the overall fuel consumption was generally less than 1/2, and the device layout for the system is shown in FIG.

In addition, in order to more easily understand the understanding of the present invention, for example, a general description will be given as fossil fuel.

If you run an engine or a generator by mixing LPG with HHO gas (which means WEG) as fossil fuel, if you reduce the amount of LPG fuel (e.g. 50%), how much HHO should be injected at this time? Is it generating the same power?

This is quite different from the existing method of combustion of engine or boiler by mixing hydrogen gas or oxyhydrogen gas.

The methods described in the existing literature or patent differ from the present invention in that only 10 to 20% of the hydrogen gas is mixed without taking the method of dramatically reducing the existing fossil fuel as described in the present invention. Can be. In addition, the results of these studies report fuel efficiency improvement of up to about 10%.

(Herein, HHO gas refers to water and electric sea gas (or oxyhydrogen gas, WEG) generated by decomposing water molecules as described above.)

One of the representative contents to be differentiated in the present invention is that the amount of HHO introduced is determined in consideration of the heating capacity and flame propagation speed of the fossil fuel replaced with the HHO.

For LPG fuel, for example, HHO gas is estimated to be 20 times more capable of generating power than LPG.

Therefore, if the amount of LPG fuel is reduced by 50%, the amount of HHO energy input is about 1/20 of the reduced amount of LPG energy equivalent to 50%, thereby producing the same power generating effect.

Specifically, if the LPG fuel is reduced by 50% and the calorific value of the reduced LPG fuel is replaced with HHO fuel, which is an oxyhydrogen gas, it is a technology that improves engine performance with a more reactive HHO gas with the same calorific value.

However, in the present invention, instead of the conventional method, a method based on a physical mechanism that obtains the same power by inputting only about 1/20 of the LPG calories reduced by 50% into HHO gas is obtained. This is possible because the HHO gas is 20 times more capable of generating power than LPG.

As a result, as shown in the following equation, the energy cost and calorie ratio of 50% of LPG fuel can be directly reduced by the difference between HHO gas energy cost corresponding to 1/20.

Direct energy cost savings = reduced fossil fuel Sheep replaced HHO  Supply cost of gas

In addition, if we reduce LPG fuel by 50% and replace it with HHO gas, we can reduce CO2, a greenhouse gas that is currently an international issue, by exactly 50%.

In addition, pollutants generated in proportion to various pollutants contained in the fuel itself, such as SOx, Fuel NOx, and dust, are reduced in proportion to the reduction of fuel amount.

In the case of thermal NOx, the total amount of heat supplied decreases and the conversion rate to power is high, so substantial reduction is expected.However, since the generation mechanism of thermal NOx is very sensitive to the combustion process, it is uniform for liquid and gaseous fossil fuels. It is difficult to quantify.

The gas introduced in the present invention is not a simple hydrogen gas (H2) but an HHO gas (H2 + 1/2 O2) in which hydrogen and oxygen are combined in an equivalence ratio. The mixed gas is obtained by electrolysis or by each individual method (fuel reforming). Refers to a gas obtained by mixing a mixture of hydrogen gas and oxygen gas separated from air.

It is emphasized that this HHO mixed gas is significantly different from the simple hydrogen gas in engine performance. If the hydrogen gas was simply mixed with LPG fuel and combusted with air containing 79% of nitrogen, the improvement of efficiency and the NOx reduction effect were less than 10% as shown in the literature. This fact is evident in the fact that many hydrogen mixed papers published in the past have not shown any significant improvement in efficiency.

The reason for this is that when hydrogen is supplied with oxygen necessary to burn hydrogen, the heating capacity and flame propagation speed of the hydrogen gas are greatly reduced by the presence of nitrogen molecules present in the air. In addition, when the mixing rate due to vaporization or turbulent mixing due to liquid fuel is slow, the problem of efficiency decrease is further exacerbated, and the effect of improving efficiency becomes even smaller. Therefore, although the highly reactive gas such as hydrogen is mixed as an auxiliary fuel, the overall power generating ability is greatly impaired.

However, when mixing a gas capable of pure oxygen combustion that does not contain nitrogen such as HHO gas, it is a premixed combustion without turbulent mixing process, which shows a very fast reaction rate and generates only 1 mole of heat. Used to heat H 2 O.

On the contrary, when the hydrogen gas is simply burned by air, as mentioned above, it is non-premixed combustion, which not only causes a time delay due to turbulent mixing but also simultaneously uses 79% of nitrogen contained in the air. Significant differences in heating rate and temperature rise due to heating (see equations (1) and (2) below)

H2 + 1/2 O2 ---- H2O + 241,827 J (1)

H2 + 1/2 O2 + 1.88 N2 ----- H2O + 1.88 N2 + 241,827 J (2)

Comparing (1) and (2) above, in the case of pure oxygen combustion (1), not only oxygen and hydrogen gas are premixed, but also the number of moles of H2O produced, so the heating capacity per mole of combustion products is It corresponds to approximately 240,000 Joule.

On the contrary, in the case of supplying air to the oxidant, it is a non-premixed combustion, which not only has a primary delay due to turbulent mixing, but also generates a calorific value of 241,827 J / 2.88 moles = 83,968 J / mole as 83,968 / 241.827 = 34.7% as a result of turbulent mixing. Combustion of the gas with air can be seen that the heating capacity is reduced by about one third compared to pure oxygen combustion.

Oxyhydrogen  gas( Water electrolysis gas Energy saving by

Detailed description of the above-mentioned technology is as follows. LPG has a calorific value of about 2.12 million Joules per mole (if the LPG is assumed to be propane, see the combustion equation given in Equation (3)). LPG with these calories is reduced by 50% and supplied with a small amount of oxygen-hydrogen gas. It is an object of the present invention to obtain.

(3)

(3)

At this time, the amount of oxyhydrogen gas to be replaced is as shown in Equation (4). In the case of 50% reduction of LPG fuel, when the amount of LPG fuel is reduced by 0.5 moles, hydrogen gas is introduced into about 0.2 moles. This is specifically mentioned below.

(4)

(4)

In terms of calories, one mole of LPG fuel is 2.20 million J, so using only 50% LPG reduces 0.5 mole of calories, or 1020,000 Joules. This is replaced by oxyhydrogen gas. Since the explosive capacity of oxyhydrogen gas is about 20 times that of LPG, only 50,000 Joules corresponding to 1/20 of the reduced heat of 102.10 Joule are replaced by oxyhydrogen gas. However, the calorific value per mole of hydrogen in oxyhydrogen gas is about 240,000 Joule, so it is 5/24 ~ 0.208 moles. That is, oxyhydrogen gas of about 50,000 Joules is introduced as a substitute mixed fuel except for LPG corresponding to 1020,000 Joules.

The energy efficiency in terms of total calories is as follows. One mole of LPG calories is 2.12 million J, and the energy saved in the double is 1.20 million J, which is 1/2. The newly added calories are about 50,000 joules of hydrogen gas. Since hydrogen gas has a calorific value of about 240,000 joules per mole, the calorific value of 50,000 J corresponds to about 0.2 mol of hydrogen gas. This is summarized as follows.

  Combustion method  LPG  HHO system Saving energy LPG engine 1 Mall 2,40,000 Joule    0  214 million J  0 LPG 50% + HHO Mixed
(Efficiency calculation by simple calorie calculation) 0.5 mole
102 million Joule  0.2 moles
50,000 Joule 102 + 5 =
 107 million J 48% LPG 50% + HHO blend
( HHO  Energy generated
 Calculation considering efficiency) 0.5 mole
102 million Joule 0.2 moles
50,000 J / 0.3 *
= 160,000 J 102 + 16 =
1.18 million J 42% * Calculation of energy of electrolysis gas-by electrolysis Oxyhydrogen  If supplied, the overall efficiency of electrolysis would be 0.4 x 0.75 = 40% for generation efficiency and 75% for electrolysis efficiency. As 0.3  It corresponds to about 30%. Therefore, if you use gas that is electrolyzed with water, if you do not achieve at least 3.3 times synergy effect, Uneconomic  Choose the method Could  have. Therefore the above energy Detention HHO in the calculation  If the amount of heat used by fuel is about 50,000 Joules, this is 3.3 times that of 50,000 Joules / 0.3 = 160,000 Joule Bonn  In content HHO  It is possible because the gas has 20 times more power than LPG fuel. Could  have. HHO  Getting In the way  If necessary, not through electrolysis Hydrogen gas Oxygen gas  It is also possible to supply in different ways. In that case On fuel reforming  by Hydrogen gas  Supply price and To the Air Separation Unit (ASU)  We think that the oxygen supply price should be considered.

LPG fuel and Oxyhydrogen  Comparison of gas generating power

As mentioned above, this technology uses the equivalent mixture of hydrogen and oxygen, oxyhydrogen gas (HHO, H2), which has about 20 times the explosive power, instead of LPG fuel after excluding LPG fuel by a certain amount from the combustion of engines using LPG as fuel. + 1/2 O2) is mixed to improve fuel economy and reduce pollutants.

At this time, the amount of oxyhydrogen gas supplied is supplied with oxyhydrogen gas (H 2 + 1/2 O 2) corresponding to a heat amount of about 1/20 of the reduced LPG calorific value.

An important physical mechanism here is how oxyhydrogen gas has about 20 times the power generation capacity of LPG fuel.

In conclusion, power generation in engine combustion is a matter of how quickly a chemical reaction occurs, the temperature rises, and thus volume expansion occurs to convert power into power. If the crank angle of the engine is about 50 degrees, most of the combustion is completed, the combustion time of 90% according to RPM will be terminated in the range of 1 ~ 10ms (ie 0.001 ~ 0.02 sec) as shown in the table below. The results show that the fast flame propagation speed and temperature rise in the engine cannot be overestimated to improve fuel economy.

Mixture Burn Time vs Engine Speed Engine condition N (RPM) t 90% (ms) standard car
at idle  500 16.7 standard car
at max power 4,000 2.1 Nature of Heat Release Rate in an Engine
web.iitd.ac.in/~pmvs/courses/mel713/mel713-20.ppt, PMV Subbarao. Professor. Mechanical Engineering Department, IIT Delhi India

Let's look at it more quantitatively.

The heat output from the original engine should be given by the very complex expression given in the above equation, and the reaction speed is very important in engine power generation as suggested in the figure below.

As shown in FIG. 1, in the present invention, a very simple theory is empirically calculated based on the fact that the temperature rise effect due to the combustion reaction is proportional to the generation of power in a very simple empirical formula, and the following very simple theory is used to compare the results with experimental data. Deploy.

The power generation capacity is the change of PV-work per unit time, which is given by the following equation (5) using the ideal gas state equation commonly used in engine models.

d (PV) / dt to d (nRT) / dt to nR d (T) / dt + T d (nR) / dt to nR d (T) / dt (5)

In the above formula, the T d / dt (nR) term does not change before and after combustion because the amount of nitrogen molecules in the air is absolutely high.

For example, for LPG fuels, for example, with a theoretical air ratio of 100%, for example, equation (3), the number of moles of reactant is n (reactant) = 1 + 5 + 18.8 = 24.8 moles and the product is n (product) = 3+ 4 + 18.8 = 25.8 moles

(3)

(3)

Therefore, the ratio of the number of moles after the reaction and before the reaction was n (after the reaction) / n (before the reaction) = 25.8 / 24.8 = 1.04, indicating that only about 4% of the moles increased by the combustion reaction. Therefore, it can be seen that the power generation equation of Eq. (5) can be neglected as the number of moles of gas change over time, T d (nR) / dt ~ 0. If surplus air is used, such as lean burns, this change appears to be smaller.

 The power generation capacity thus depends on how quickly the temperature rises over time. The temperature rise inside the engine depends primarily on how fast the chemical reaction occurs and how much heat the combustion product has.

As can be seen from the graph of the combustion fraction of the fuel in the crank angle versus the engine as shown in FIG. 2, the mass fraction burned of the fuel may show a great difference depending on variables such as engine operation. .

As a concrete example, according to the research results of the gasoline engine paper based on the present invention, the value given by the product of the heating capacity and the flame propagation speed is calculated as the rough power generation capacity according to the fuel in the engine, and the experimental results agree well. Indicated.

Thus, in the present invention, in comparing the power generation capability between LPG fuel and oxyhydrogen gas, (1) the heating capacity of each combustion product and (2) the flame propagation speed were compared.

(Bahng et al. 2016, Bahng G., D. Jang, Y. Kim, M. Shin, “A new technology to overcome the limits of HCCI engine through fuel modification” Applied Thermal Engineering Vol 98 pp. 810-815 (2016 ))

 A) heating capacity of combustion products of LPG and oxyhydrogen gas

First, the heating capacity of LPG and oxyhydrogen gas will be compared. For 100% of the theoretical air of LPG fuel and oxyhydrogen gas, the combustion equation is given by equations (1) and (3), respectively, as shown above.

 H2 + 1/2 O2 ---- H2O + 241,827 J (1)

(3)

(3)

 In the above equations (1) and (3), one mole of steam is generated in combustion of oxyhydrogen gas per one mole of combustion product gas, and the caloric value at that time is 241,827 J, which is low calorific value. Has On the other hand, propane generates 2,147,874 Joules of heat in 25.8 moles (3 + 4 + 18.8 = 25.8) of the product, as shown in Eq. (3). Therefore, the amount of heat available for temperature rise per mole of combustion gas in each combustion is summarized as follows.

 fuel  Creation  Low calorific value Per mole of combustion gas
Calories used for heating Remarks LPG    One 2,147,874 Joule 83,250 Joule / mole HHO gas has 2.9 times or 3 times higher heating capacity than LPG Oxyhydrogen gas (HHO)  25.8  241,827 Joule 241,827 Joule / mole Heating by calories
Simple comparison of abilities   -   - 241,827 / 83,250 = 2.90

B) Comparison of flame propagation speed

The following data shows "Burning Velocity (cm / sec)" in air for several fuels, including hydrogen and propane at equivalent conditions.

(Milton, B.E. and J.C. Keck, Laminar burning velocities in stoichiometric hydrogen and hydrogen-hydrocarbon gas mixtures, Combustion and Flame, 58: 13-32 (1984))

Fuel H2-air C2H2-air C3H8-air CH4-air Of hydrogen and propane
Speed comparison   1 atm 230 cm / s 135 cm / s 38 cm / s 35 cm / s 230/38 = 6.05   2 atm 340 cm / s 172 cm / s 43.5 cm / s 39 cm / s 340 / 43.5 = 7.82   3 atm 425 cm / s 228 cm / s 49 cm / s 42 cm / s 425/49 = 8.67   5 atm 510 cm / s 275 cm / s 56 cm / s 45 cm / s 510/56 = 9.11

C) Power generation effect and engine excellence

Comparing the heating capacity and flame propagation velocity of the combustion products mentioned above, it can be seen that oxyhydrogen gas has at least 20 times more power generation capacity than LPG fuel.

Therefore, in general, when the combustion equation is completed, a reduction of 50% of LPG fuel in one mole of LPG fuel can be expressed by a general equation such as Eq. (4).

(4)

(4)

 Note that the amount of air as the oxidant is to use the combustion air as it is when using 1 mol of LPG. The purpose is to provide sufficient combustion air to keep the fuel and air sufficiently premixed to create HC-Homogeneous Charging. This is also the goal of the HCCI engine, which is said to be the “dream engine”. However, the difference between this development goal and the Homogeneous Charged Compression Ignition (HCCI) engine is that the HCCI engine uses surplus air for uniform charging. Although the operation was not performed properly, the product under development does not reduce power generation since the energy density is reduced to the explosive power of the original LPG fuel after achieving uniform filling.

D) Power generation capacity index based on the heating capacity and flame propagation velocity of representative fuels;

 Compare the heating capacity of the combustion products for various fossil fuels with 100% theoretical air and 100% surplus air with an additional 100% increase in air volume.

[Octane 1 mole reaction scheme]

In case of 100% of theoretical air: the number of moles produced is 64 moles and the total calories is 5,116,172 J. Therefore, the amount of heat generated per unit moles is 79,940 J.

100% surplus air: If 100% surplus air is used for combustion air, the molar number of oxygen increases by 12.5 moles and the molar number of nitrogen increases by 47 moles. Greatly reduced to / mole

[Methanol 1 Mole Reaction Formula]

In case of 100% of theoretical air: 10.52 moles of generated moles and total heat of 802,303 J, the calorific value per mole of generated units is 76,265 J.

100% surplus air: For 100% surplus air, 2 moles of oxygen and 7.52 moles of nitrogen increase. Therefore, the total moles are 10.52 + 9.52 = 20.04 moles, so the calorific value per mole of combustion produced is reduced to 40,035 J.

[Aerobic Digestion Biogas 1 Mole Reaction Formula (Methane 65% Carbon Dioxide 35% Composition Home)]

In case of 100% of theoretical air: the number of moles produced is 7.19 moles and the total calories is 521,497 J, so the calorific value per mole of generated units is 72,531 J.

In case of 100% surplus air: In case of 100% surplus air, the total amount of oxygen and nitrogen is increased by 6.2 mol. Therefore, the total moles are 7.19 + 6.2 = 13.39, so the calorific value per mole of combustion produced is reduced to 38,947 J.

[Promole 1-mole reaction scheme]

100% of theoretical air: (25.8 moles of moles generated, 2,044,027 J of total calorific value, 79,226 J of calorific value per mole of generated units).

100% surplus air: 5% oxygen and 18.8 mol of nitrogen increase for 100% surplus air. Therefore, the total moles are 25.8 + 23.8 = 49.6 moles, so the calorific value per mole of combustion produced is reduced to 41,210 J.

[Butane 1 mol reaction formula]

100% of theoretical air: 33.44 moles of moles generated and total calorific value of 2,658,493 J, yielding 79,500 J calories per mole of generated units.

In case of 100% surplus air: In case of 100% surplus air, 6.5 mol of oxygen and 24.44 mol of nitrogen increase. Therefore, the total moles are 33.44 + 30.94 = 64.38 moles, so the calorific value per mole of combustion produced is reduced to 41,294 J.

[Diesel 1 mole reaction scheme]

In case of 100% of theoretical air: the number of moles produced is 90.24 moles and the total calorific value is 7.50MJ, so the calorific value per generation gas is 83,000 J.

With 100% surplus air: 17.75 moles of oxygen and 66.74 moles of nitrogen increase with 100% surplus air. Therefore, the total moles are 90.24 + 17.75 + 66.74 = 174.73 moles, so the calorific value per mole of combustion produced is reduced to 42,923 J.

[1.5 mol reaction of oxygen and hydrogen premixed gas (water electrolysis gas)]

 (1 mole of generated moles, total calorific value 241,827 J, calorific value per unit molar generated 241,827J)

fuel HHO octane diesel Propane butane methane Aerobic cracking gas Calories per mole in 100% theory air 241,827 79.940 83,000 79,226 79,500 76,265 72,531 HHO Oxygen Standard
Relative heating capacity  One 33.1% 34.3% 32.8% 32.9% 31.5% 30.0% 100% surplus air
Calories per mole  - 41,426 42,923 41,210 41,294 40,035 38,947 HHO Oxygen Standard
Relative heating capacity  - 17.1% 17.7% 17.04% 17.1% 16.6% 16.10%

[Experimental implementation]

1. Several experiments were carried out using an apparatus with an engine having one cylinder to measure the combustion efficiency for the new mixed fuels described above.

As shown in FIG. 3, the experimental apparatus includes a single cylinder engine using a water electrolysis device, a bubbler, a centrifugal mixer, an engine, control and Consists of control / gauge panels.

4 and 4b show photographs of the engine used in the experimental device.

The water electrolysis apparatus of the present invention used a high efficiency electrolyte cell in distilled water mixed with KOH to decompose hydrogen and oxygen in a stoichiometric ratio.

Water electrolysis gas passes through the liquid gasoline (gasoline) pipe and the water electrolysis gas and gasoline vapor form a homogeneous mixture by the air bubbling action of the bubbler.

The premixed gas mixture is fed directly to the engine intake valve by means of a regulating throttle valve and supply of excess air.

The amount of water electrolysis gas is controlled by the amount of power supplied to the electrolyte cell.

The engine performance comparison of the mixed fuel and liquid gasoline of the present invention is measured as fuel consumption for the same rotational speed output.

2. Conduct experiment

Experiment 1  : Basic by Mitsubishi GB 130 mover Under load  Fuel consumption comparison experiment

Experiment No. One
Type of engine  Basic load operation
    (1 hours) Liquid gasoline
fuel With gasoline steam
Electrolytic gas
Mixed fuel Mitsubishi Air-cooling
Short term
4.2 hp ( 3 kW )
Displacement 126 cc
Rated output 1,800 rpm rpm (output)
1,400 rpm

1,400 rpm
Electrolysis gas
Generation amount and calories   - 144 L
(Electrolysis gas
 6.4 mole), 1.03 MJ Power consumption 400 Watts Fuel level 432 cc (2.84 mole)
14.54 MJ 150 cc ((0.99 mole)
5.06 MJ fuel Total calories (MJ) 14.54 1.03 + 5.06 = 6.09 Used Fuel calorie ratio
6.09 / 14.54 = 0.42
Electrolysis efficiency 1.03MJ  / ( 400Wx3600s ) = 0.71

Mitsubishi Petrol Generator GB130 4.2 HP

As shown in [Table 7], the mixed fuel of liquid gasoline (petrol) fuel, gasoline steam and electrolysis gas has a fuel calorific ratio of only 0.42 used to output the same 1,400 rpm in the same engine, and the gasoline fuel consumption is 35%. (150cc / 432cc = 0.35) and therefore the gasoline calories for the remaining 65%, 9.45MJ (14.54 MJ * 0.65), should be replaced by water electrolysis gas (WEG). Substituting for the amount of calories results in the same engine power, which means that 10% (1.03 MJ / 9.45 MJ = 0.109) of water electrolysis gas can be replaced.

Experiment 2  : Basic made by Chinese Honda TB33 engine Under load  Fuel consumption comparison experiment

Experiment No. 2
Type of engine  Basic load operation
     (1 hours) Liquid gasoline fuel With gasoline steam
Electrolytic gas
Mixed fuel Mitsubishi Air-cooling
4 stroke OHV Short term  6 hp (4.4kW)
181cc displacement
 Rated output
1,800 rpm rpm (output)
1600
1,600 Electrolysis gas
Generation amount and calories          - 144L
( HHO  6.4 mole)
1.03 MJ
Electrolysis power consumption 400 Watts Gasoline Consumption and Calories 857 cc (5.64 mall)
28.87 MJ 333 cc (2.19 mole)
11.21 MJ fuel Total calories (MJ) 28.87 1.03 + 11.21 = 12.24 Used fuel Calorie ratio 12.24 / 28.87 = 0.42 Electrolysis efficiency 1.03MJ  / ( 400Wx3600s ) = 0.71

As shown in [Table 8], the mixed fuel of liquid gasoline (petrol) fuel, gasoline steam and electrolysis gas has a fuel calorific ratio of 0.42 used to output the same 1,600 rpm in the same engine, and the gasoline fuel consumption is 39%. (333cc / 857cc = 0.39) and therefore 17.6MJ (28.87 MJ * 0.61) of gasoline calories for the remaining 61% should be replaced by water electrolysis gas (WEG). Substituting for the amount of calories results in the same engine output, which means that 5.9% (1.03MJ / 17.6MJ = 0.059) of water electrolysis gas can be replaced.

Experiment 3 . Honda On GX 160  Basic by Under load  Fuel consumption Comparative experiment

Experiment No. 3
Type of engine  Basic load operation
 (1 hours) Liquid gasoline fuel With gasoline steam
Electrolytic gas
Mixed fuel Honda Air Cooling
4 stroke OHV Short term  4.8 horsepower
163cc
 Rated output
 3,600 rpm rpm (output)  2,400 2,400 Electrolysis gas
Generation amount and calories   - Electrolysis Gas144  L
( HHO  6.4 mole)
1.03MJ Electrolysis consumption  power 400 Watts Gasoline Consumption and Calories 825 cc  (5.43 moles)
27.77 MJ 330cc (2.17mol)
11.11 MJ fuel Total calories (MJ) 27.77  12.14 Used fuel Calorie ratio 12.14 / 27.77 = 0.44

As shown in [Table 9], the mixed fuel of liquid gasoline (petrol) fuel, gasoline steam and electrolysis gas has a fuel calorific ratio of 0.44, which is used to output the same 2,400 rpm in the same engine, and the gasoline fuel consumption is 40%. (330cc / 825cc = 0.4) and therefore 16.7 MJ (27.77 MJ * 0.6), the gasoline calorific value for the remaining 60%, should be replaced with water electrolysis gas (WEG), which in practice has a water electrolysis gas (WEG) of 1.03 MJ. Substituting for the calorific value will produce the same engine power, which means that 6.2% (1.03MJ / 16.7MJ = 0.062) of water electrolysis gas can be replaced with water electrolysis gas.

Experiment 4. Honda GX 270  Basic by mover Under load  Fuel consumption comparison experiment

Experiment No. 4
Type of engine Basic load operation
 (1 hours) Liquid gasoline fuel With gasoline steam
Electrolytic gas
Mixed fuel Honda Air Cooling
4-stroke OHV short-term 8.4 hp
270cc displacement
 Rated output 3,600 rpm rpm (output) 3,200  3,200 Electrolysis gas
Generation amount and calories   - Electrolysis Gas 288 L
(HHO 12.8 mol)
2.06 MJ Electrolysis power consumption 800 Watts Gasoline Consumption and Calories 2400 cc (15.79 mall)
80.78MJ 950cc (6.25 mol)
31.98 MJ Fuel total heat (MJ) 80.78 34.04 Fuel heat ratio used 34.04 / 80.78 = 0.42

As shown in [Table 10], the mixed fuel of liquid gasoline (petrol) fuel and gasoline steam and electrolysis gas has a fuel calorific ratio of only 0.42 used to output the same 3,200 rpm in the same engine, and the gasoline fuel consumption is 39.6%. (950cc / 2400cc = 0.396) and therefore 48.79 MJ (80.78 MJ * 0.604), the gasoline calorific value for the remaining 60.4%, should be replaced with water electrolysis gas (WEG). Substituting for the calorific value will produce the same engine power, which means that 4.2% (2.06 MJ / 48.79 MJ = 0.042) of water electrolysis gas can be replaced with water that is reduced.

The present invention thus provides a mixed fuel made of the above-described configuration, function and action.

The present invention is very useful in the industry of producing, manufacturing, selling, distributing or researching fuel for use as an energy source of a power generator such as an engine.

Claims (4)

In the method of manufacturing a mixed fuel of fossil fuel and water electrolysis gas,
Mix fossil fuel (A) and water electrolysis gas (B),
(1-x) moles of fossil fuel (A) and (x / n) moles of water electrolysis gas,
n = (calorie of 1 mol of fossil fuel / calorie of 1 mol of hydrogen) * (1 / SPF),
The SPF is characterized in that 15 to 30,
Mixed fuel production method for obtaining an optimal mixing ratio of fossil fuel and water electrolysis gas.
(Wherein the mole fraction x is 0 <x <1,
x is the mole fraction of fossil fuel
SPF is synergy power factor (SPF)
delete delete The method of claim 1,
Fossil fuel is a gaseous LPG, gasoline, methane, anaerobic digestion biogas or diesel mixed fuel production method for obtaining an optimum mixing ratio of fossil fuel and water electrolysis gas.

Images