Kerosene based hydrocarbon fuels are preferred candidates for the source of energy due to its stable properties. Based on the requirement of the combustor and the growing concern over pollutant, kerosene based fuels are modified. The fuel under investigation is a modified form of kerosene with ultra-low sulphur content. The effect of temperature on modified kerosene is studied for viscosity, surface tension, specific heat, density and ignition delay. The time delay for ignition of gas-phase mixtures of modified kerosene/oxygen have been measured using a shock tube facility. The experiments are conducted in the temperature range of 1200–1877 K, pressure range of 4–12 atm and equivalence ratio of Ø = 1.5, 1 and 0.5. The ignition delay time measurements were carried out using piezoelectric pressure transducers, which records the pressure rise due to ignition and simultaneously recording the light emission during the process of ignition using a photodiode. The ignition delay is represented as τign= 0.168841 ×P−1.49× Ø0.72×e(14310/T)
EdwardsT.Liquid fuels and propellants for aerospace propulsion: 1903–2003. Propuls Power2003; 19(6): 1089–1107.
2.
SonawaneSPatankarKFoglaAPuranikBBhandarakarUSunil KumarS.An experimental investigation of thermo-physical properties and heat transfer performance of Al2O3-aviation turbine fuel nano-fluids. Appl Therm Eng2011; 31: 2841–2849.
3.
WarrierPTejaA.Effect of particle size on the thermal conductivity of nanofluidscontaining metallic nanoparticles. Nanoscale Res Lett2011; 6: 247.
4.
ElyJFHanleyHJM.Prediction of transport properties. 2. Thermal conductivity of pure fluids and mixtures. Ind Eng Chem Fundam1983; 22(1): 90–97.
5.
NazievYMAlievMAÉfendievVS.Thermo-physical properties of A-72 gasoline at various temperatures and pressures. Chem Technol Fuels Oils1974; 10: 626–628.
6.
TottenGEShahRForesterD.Fuels and lubricants handbook: technology, properties, performance, and testing. Training2003; 2007: 8–21.
7.
CroswellTMBiddleTB.High temperature fuel requirementsand payoffs. In: KirklinPWDavidP.Aviation fuel: thermal stability requirements. ASTM STP 1138, Philadelphia: American Society for Testing and Materials, 1992, pp.57–72.
8.
SundararajAJPillaiBCAsirvathamLG.Convective heat transfer analysis of modified kerosene with alumina particles for rocketry application. J Mech Sci Technol2018; 32(4): 1685–1691.
9.
SafarovJAshurovaUAhmadovBAbdullayevEShahverdiyevAHasselE.Thermo-physical properties of Diesel fuel over a wide range of temperatures and pressures. Fuel2018; 216: 870–889.
10.
PalaszewskiBIanovskiLSCarrickP.Propellant technologies: far-reaching benefits for aeronautical and space-vehicle propulsion. Propuls Power1998; 14(5): 641–648.
11.
DagautPCathonnetM.The ignition, oxidation, and combustion of kerosene: a review of experimental and kinetic modeling. Prog Energy Combust Sci2006; 32: 48–92.
12.
DavidsonDFZhuYShaoJHansonRK.Ignition delay time correlations for distillate fuels. Fuel2017; 187: 26–32.
13.
LiangJHWangSHuHHZhangSTFanBCCuiJP.Shock tube study of kerosene ignition delay at high pressures. Sci China-Phys Mech Astron2012; 55: 947–954.
14.
WangSGouHJFanBCHeYZZhangSTCuiJP.Shock tube study of JP-10 ignition delay time. Chin J Chem Phys2007; 20: 60–64.
15.
DavidsonDFHaylettDRHansonRK.Development of an aerosol shock tube for kinetic studies of low-vapor-pressure fuels. Combust Flame2008; 155: 108–117.
DeanAJPenyazkovOGSevrukKLVaratharajanB.Autoignition of surrogate fuels at elevated temperatures and pressures. Proc Combust Inst2007; 31: 2481–2488.
20.
Tschuikow-RouxE.Reaction dwell time and cooling rate in single-pulse shock tube. Phys Fluids1965; 8: 821–825.
21.
YouXEgolfopoulosFWangH.Detailed and simplified kinetic models of n-dodecane oxidation: the role of fuel cracking in aliphatic hydrocarbon combustion. Proc Combust Inst2009; 32: 403–410.
22.
ZhangYHuangZWangJ.Shock tube study on auto-ignition characteristics of kerosene/air mixtures. Chin Sci Bull2011; 56: 1399–1406.
23.
YangyeZSijieLDavidsonDFHansonRK.Ignition delay times of conventional and alternative fuels behind reflected shock waves. Proc Combust Inst2015; 35: 241–248.
24.
SundararajAJPillaiBCGunaKRSubashANHaranAPKumarP.Investigation of ignition delay for low molecular weight hydrocarbon fuel by using shock tube in reflected shock mode. J Geol Soc India2019; 93: 218–222.
CookeDFWilliamsA.Shock tube studies of methane and ethane oxidation. Combust Flame1975; 24: 245–256.
27.
BurcatASchellerKLifshitzA.Shock-tube investigation of comparative ignition delay times for C1-C5 alkanes. Combust Flame1971; 16: 29–33.
28.
ShinKSParkKKimK.The addition effect of CH3Cl on methane ignition behind reflected shock waves. Bull Korean Chem Soc2001; 22: 330–332.
29.
OlchanskyEBurcatA.Decane oxidation in a shock tube. Int J Chem Kinet2006; 38: 703–713.
30.
VasuSSDavidsonDFHansonRK.Jet fuel ignition delay times: shock tube experiments over wide conditions and surrogate model predictions. Combust Flame2008; 152: 125–143.
31.
WangHOehlschlaegerMA.Autoignition studies of conventional and Fischer-Tropsch jet fuels. Fuel2012; 98: 249–258.
32.
IrvineSAMeyerMLSchoettmerAKBatesRW.History of sulfur content effects on the thermal stability of RP-1 under heated conditions. In: 40th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE joint propulsion conference and exhibit, 14 July 2004. Fort Lauderdale, Florida: AIAA.
33.
ZhaoWZhangYHuangG, et al. An experimental study of the injection strategies on engine performance of the butanol/biodiesel dual-fuel Intelligent Charge Compression Ignition mode. Int J Eng Res. Epub ahead of print October 2020. DOI: 10.1177/1468087420963994.
34.
GordonDWoutersCKinoshitaS.Homogeneous charge compression ignition combustion stability improvement using a rapid ignition system. Int J Eng Res2020; 21(10): 1846–1856.
35.
GroganKPGoldsboroughSSIhmeM.Ignition regimes in rapid compression machines. Combust Flame2015; 162: 3071–3080.
36.
PaykaniAKakaeeAHRahnamaPReitzRD.Progress and recent trends in reactivity-controlled compression ignition engines. Int J Eng Res2016; 17: 481–524.
37.
KimHBaekSW.Combustion of a single emulsion fuel droplet in a rapid compression machine. Energy2016; 106: 422–430.
38.
SiminskiVJWrightFJEdelmanREconomosCFortuneO.Technical report AFAPL 72-Vol I and II, 1972.
39.
BurkeUMetcalfeWKBurkeSMHeuferKADagautPCurranHJ.A detailed chemical kinetic modeling, ignition delay time and jet-stirred reactor study of methanol oxidation. Combust Flame2016; 165: 125–136.
40.
AgostaACernanskyNPMillerDLFavarelliTRanziE.Reference components of jet fuels: kinetic modelling and experimental results. Exp Therm Fluid Sci2004; 28(7): 701–708.
41.
BurdenSTekawadeAOehlschlaegerMA.Oehlschlaeger. Ignition delay times for jet and diesel fuels: constant volume spray and gas-phase shock tube measurements. Fuel2018; 219: 312–319.
42.
SundararajAJPillaiBCGunaKR.Experimental investigation of effect of temperature on ignition behaviour of seeded modified kerosene. Thermochemica Acta2020; 683: 178469.
43.
HaylettDRDavidsonDFHansonRK.Ignition delay times of low-vapor-pressure fuels measured using an aerosol shock tube. Combust Flame2012; 159: 552–561.
44.
WangSFanBHeYCuiJ.Shock tube study of kerosene ignition delay. In: HannemannKSeilerF (eds) Shock waves. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2009.
