Magnetizing Kerosene For Increasing Combustion ... - Website Staff UI

JURNAL TEKNOLOGI, Edisi No. 2, Tahun XIX, Juni 2005, 155-162 ISSN 0215-1685

Magnetizing Kerosene For Increasing Combustion Efficiency

Nelson Saksono Gas & Petrochemical Departement Faculty of Engineering, University of Indonesia , Depok 16424, Indonesia Tlp. (021) 7863515 Fax. (021) 7863516 e-mail : nelson @che.ui.edu

Abstrak Penghematan sumber energi, terutama yang berasal dari bahan bakar fosil, dapat dilakukan dengan peningkatan efisiensi pembakaran. Magnetisasi merupakan salah satu teknik yang dipercaya dapat meningkatkan efisiensi pembakaran, namun hal tersebut masih menjadi kontroversi dan perdebatan di masyarakat. Untuk itu diperlukan suatu penelitian yang dapat membuktikan sekaligus menjawab kontroversi yang berkembang. Penelitian pengaruh magnetisasi dengan kompor minyak tanah bertekanan dilakukan dengan menguji beberapa variasi, yaitu laju alir minyak tanah, kuat medan magnet, jarak magnet terhadap burner, dan orientasi kutub magnet. Magnetisasi menggunakan magnet permanen dan parameter kinerja yang akan diukur adalah waktu pemanasan untuk mendapatkan efisiensi termal. Hasil pengujian menunjukkan magnetisasi meningkatkan efisiensi termal kompor minyak bertekanan. Peningkatan Efisiensi termal tertinggi yang didapat adalah sebesar 17.49% menggunakan magnet Alnico berkekuatan 2370 Gauss pada laju alir 2.13 ml/min dengan orientasi kutub dipole. Jarak optimal antara magnet dengan burner dicapai pada jarak 10 cm . Kata kunci : Magnetisasi, Minyak tanah , Pembakaran dan Efisiensi termal

Abstract Energy source thrifty, esspecially fossil fuel, can be achieved by increase the thermal efficiency. Magnetization is one of several techique to increase thermal efficiency which is still remain controversy. To achieve that, we need a research to prove and also to answer those controversy. The influence of magnetization to thermal efficiency research with kerosene pressurized stove is done by examining some variation, which are fuel flow rate, magnetic field force, magnet distance, and magnetic pole orientation. Permanent magnet was applied on magnetization of fuel and The parameter, which is examined, is heating time to calculate the thermal efficiency. Based on the research, magnetization has proven that it can increase the thermal efficiency for kerosene pressurized stove. Maximum increasing thermal efficiency that can be achieved from magnetization at flow rate 2.13 ml/min, it is achieved 17.49%, using Alnico with magnetic field 2370 Gauss in dipole system. The optimum distance betwen magnet and burner has achieve at 10 cm. Key-words: Magnetization, Kerosene, Combustion and Thermal efficiency

1. Introduction

been developed, are not able to completely resolve the problems yet [1].

For many years, researchers tried to design which a combustion system has low air pollution through completely combustion hydrocarbon. Various techniques, such as air-fuel mixing, ignition, temperature controlling combustion chamber and catalyst that have

Low efficiency of combustion heat, unburned fuel and air pollution (like CO, NOx, SOx and shoot) are still problem now. It is caused by which some aspects are not explored yet, they are:

155

N. Saksono

a.) Hydrocarbons (HC) form the so called associations, close molecular groups, interior of which is deprived of access of the suitable amount of air, and the lack of oxygen impedes the full combustion. The tendency of HC molecules to cluster causes local macro-groupings (condensing) of molecules to clog the pipes and fuel nozzles. The excess of air in the fuel mixture will not provide for the complete combustion. Hence the exhaust gas contain considerable amounts of unburned CO, NOx, SOx, HC and soot [1]. b.) Oxygen molecule is polar compound and hydrocarbon molecules have neutral (non-polar). When they are coming together in a combustion chamber, and produce weak interaction between them (incomplete combustion). Some researches have been focused on fuel reactivity to oxygen (oxygenated fuels) [2]. c.) The hydrogen reactivity of hydrocarbon in combustion is relatively low due to the para state (i.e. low energetic) form [3, 4]. Enhancement of hydrogen reactivity is one of important ways in order to reach the complete combustion [5]. There is a novel technique to minimize the problems above. Magnetization, of which hydrocarbon fuel is diamagnetic, is able to break clusters of hydrocarbon molecules and changes the electron spin direction of para state (low energetic) into orto state (high energetic). They become normalized & independent, distanced from each other, having bigger surface available for binding (attraction) with more oxygen (better oxidation) [1]. While hydrogen of hydrocarbon with orto state has high reactivity to oxygen. Finally, the complete combustion can be achieved. Beside that, magnetization of hydrocarbon fuel, i.e. gasoline internal combustion, more promise the other advantages [6]: • • •

156

Combustion efficiency The toxicity of flue gas such as CO, HC, NOx and soots would decrease. Magnetization technique is relatively cheap and not dangerous comparing existing additive fuel.

The declustering, polarization and reactivity phenomena due to magnetization of hydrocarbon are still in controversy. It caused by very limited scientific publications, which can explain it. One of these research orientations is therefore to investigate Influences of magnetizing on efficiency of kerosene combustion on pressurized fuel tank. Within this research, before combusting the kerosene will be magnetized by magnetic field. 2. Magnetic Field And Hydrocarbon Properties Application of magnetic field is able to affect rotation plane of hydrocarbon molecules, called as Faraday effect. E. Verdet in Handbook of Chemistry and Physic [4] has reported that magnetic rotation ratio of hydrocarbon molecules and water is high enough. High permanent magnetic device, strong enough to break down, i.e. de-cluster these HC associations. They become normalized & independent, distanced from each other, having bigger surface available for binding (attraction) with more oxygen (better oxidation) [1]. The phenomena of declustering can be observed through changing in liquid viscosity of hydrocarbon. Tung et. Al [7] investigated the relation between magnetization and viscosity, on crude oil containing high paraffin. The results show that there was an enhancing in viscosity due to magnetizing.

Figure1. Magnetic field influence on the viscosity of Vietnamese crude oil [7]

JURNAL TEKNOLOGI, Edisi No. 2, Tahun XIX, Juni 2005, 155-162


Figure 1 informs that strength of magnetic field is opposite to hydrocarbon viscosity. This indicates declustering of hydrocarbon molecules due to magnetizing. Nelson et.al [8, 9] have found similar result for kerosene and water . 3. Magnetic Flux Density And Magnet Orientation Magnetic flux density represents magnitude of the internal field strength within a substance that is subjected to an external field. The units for magnetic flux density are teslas or Gauss (1 T = 104 G). Magnitude of magnetic strength is an indicator of which magnetic energy can be provided by a magnetic source [10]. The magnetic flux density to be imparted to fuel widely varies depending upon fuel, combustion rate, and combustion equipment. Kita. Et. al [11] recommended the value 1500 – 1750 Gauss for most hydrocarbon fuels. Yoshifusa et. al with V– letter Shape magnetic device found that 2500 – 4000 Gauss is favourable [12]. Kita at. al [11] formulated the magnitude of electromagnetic field (E) as multiple of magnetic flux (B) and flow rate of hydrocarbon (V) : E = B x V. Distance between magnetization and combustion area is also important. To obtain good magnetic effect, it should be as close as possible. But temperature of the magnetic material should be maintained under critical temperature of magnetic properties in magnetic material. 4. Monopole and Dipole System

Some researchers in magnetic field like Peter A. Kulish, Carpenter and, Janczak [13, 14, 15] believe monopole system (only south poles are directed to fuel ) have fields more effective. However arrangement two opposite poles in same direction (dipole system) is commonly used by some researchers in this field like Yoshifusa, Katsutoshi , Fujita and Etuo [12, 16], because its device is more practice and easy.

5. Kerosene and Combustion Process Kerosene is one of straight-run fractions resulting from distilating crude oil between 205 0C until 260 0C. This fraction having flash point and boil point about 25 0C and 150 0C until 300 0C, respectively is commonly used as fuel and heating. Main components of kerosene are paraffin, cycloalkanes (naphtha) and aromatic compounds, where paraffin is the highest composition. Ultimate analisis composition of kerosene are 84.3 % wt Carbon, 14.2 % wt Hidrogen, and remainder are sulfur and nitrogen [17]. Combusting of 1 gram of kerosene, naphtha or gasoline results in about 3.1 grams of carbon dioxide. Because of different densities of these fuels, volume of carbon dioxide obtained will be about 1.2 – 1.5 m3/liter. Knowing consumption rate of the fuel, we can calculate number of carbon dioxide product. If the combustion is not complete, CO gas will be produced and a number of fuels will be not combusted. Incomplete combustion giving lower flame temperature and heating rate. These will effect on thermal efficiency decreased. Number of CO gas and unburned fuel products depends on setting up of combustion equipment and the other factors, such a flash point. Consumption rate of kerosene has decreased tendency towards increase of CO2 production. Enhancing of combustion thermal system for kerosene is one of important subjects to be researched in order to improve combustion system. Kerosene Stove consists of wick stove and pressurized stove. Thermal efficiency of kerosene stove is 20 – 40 % depending on stove and cooking equipment design. Flue Gas emission of pressurized kerosene stove has been reported ware 2749 ppm CO2, 73 ppm CO, and 3.8 ppm CH4 . [17].


157

N. Saksono

ηtermal = 6. Experimental The research will be done to get increasing combustion reaction, which is happened by putting permanent magnet at fuel line before entering burner. Main parameter which is observed are fuel flow rate and heating time of water. The simple process diagram can be seen At Figure 1. The variation are fuel flow rate, magnetic field force, magnet distance to burner, and magnetic pole orientation. In this experiment will be used three different permanent magnet with magnetic flux density are 2370 gauss Alnico (covered by plastic insulation) , 4860 gauss NdFeB (covered by alumina metal) , 5500 Gauss NdFeB (not covered) respectively. Data which is collected from experiments is the water heating time from 35°C to 75°C, with recording time in every 10°C, that are 45°C, 55°C, 65°C, and 75°C. Thermocopel Hydrostatic Presurize kerosine Tank

o

C

Boiler

High of tank

Burner

Magnet Figure 1. Experimental Setting up for thermal Efficiency

Thermal efficiency of pressurized kerosene stove is stated how large effectiveness fuel energy which is used by the system. Thermal efficiency can be calculated by the following formula:

mwater x Cpwater x ΔTwater v fuel x Hvfuel x t

x 100%

Where : ηtermal : Thermal efficiency (%) mwater : Mass of water in katel (1000 g) Cpwater : Thermal capacity of water ( J/g) vfuel : Flow of fuel (ml/min) Hvfuel : Heating value of kerosene (2,130 J/ml) ΔTwater : Increasing temperature of water from 35 to 75 oC (40 oC) t : Heating time of water (minute) 7. Results and Discussions 7. 1. High Flow Rate This experiment use flow rate 4.10 ml/min and was done twice, without and with magnet. Magnet was putting 10 cm from burner. By using three different kind of magnet will be seen the influence of magnetization to heating time. The result of the experiment is shown at Table. 1 Table 1. shown how the phenomena of kerosene combustion at high flow rate. Also, we can see that the heating time looks linear from 35° to 75°C. Despite for the system with magnet can be seen that the heating time is shorter than the system without magnet. This is the first indication that the influence of magnetization to thermal efficiency is exist. Influence of magnetization to heating time, directly, influencing thermal efficiency. The best result in this experiment is gained by 2370 Gauss magnet with heating time about 6.4 minutes. There are no significant difference of heating time between without magnet and using 4680 and 5500 gauss magnet . These because magnetizing time of kerosene is not enough due the high of fuel flow rate. Table 1. Heating time at flow rate 4.10 ml/ min in dipole system Heating time (minute) 4860 5500 Temperature Without 2370 (°C) Magnet (Gauss) (Gauss) (Gauss)

158



35 45 55 65 75

0 1.59 3.10 4.86 6.59

0 1.58 3.08 4.73 6.4

0 1.61 3.08 4.85 6.57

0 1.58 3.11 5,00 6.57

7.2. Medium Flow Rate This experiment use flow rate 2.66 ml/min and was done twice, without and with magnet to see how magnetization influence the heating time. The experiment is similar with the first one.

plastic insulator is effective to protect the magnet from heat of burner, and magnetic temperature critical of Alnico magnet is higher then NdFeB magnet (540 oC and 150 o C respectively). Table 3. Heating time at flow rate 2.13 ml/ min in dipole system Temperature (°C)

Table 2. Heating time at flow rate 2.66 ml/ min in dipole system

35 45 55 65 75

0 2.65 5.38 8.26 11.24

0 2.48 5.07 7.69 10.46

0 2.55 5.15 7.83 10.66

0 2.64 5.37 8.08 11.10

From Table 2, the similar thing also happened in the first experiment. For this experiment, the best result is gained by 2370 Gauss magnet with heating time about 10.46 minutes and heating time for medium flow rate is more longer than one for high flow rate. 7.3. Low Flow Rate This experiment use flow rate 2.13 ml/min and was done twice, without and with magnet to see how magnetization influence the heating time. This is also similar with the first and second experiment. The result can be seen at table 3. The same thing happened in the first and second experiment. The best result in this experiment is achieved by 2370 Gauss magnet with heating time about 15.48 minutes. This shows that operational condition, in this case are temperature and fuel flow rate, also determined the kind of magnet and it’s cover/insulation , which is most effective. The 2370 gauss magnet is the best performance due two reason ,

35

0

0

0

0

45 55 65 75

3.45 7.24 11.47 16.21

3.07 6.98 11.36 15.48

3.16 6.99 11.12 15.52

3.07 6.94 11.08 15.56

From those three experiments, we can conclude that the increasing of flow rate will increase the heating rate, and then it will decrease the heating time. 7.4. Flow Rate on Thermal Efficiency Work principle of pressurized kerosene stove is using air pressure and tank height so that the fuel can flow to the burner. This is similar to commercial pressurized kerosene stove which use pressing gas so that the fuel can flow to the burner. In this burner design, there are phenomena which are able to increase thermal efficiency, that are preheating and evaporation of kerosene which can increase the surface contact fuel to the air in combustion process. Result of this experiment can be seen in figure 2. 35 Efficiency (%)

Heating time (minute) Temperature Without 2370 4860 5500 (°C) Magnet (Gauss) (Gauss) (Gauss)

Heating time (minute) Without 2370 4860 5500 Magnet (Gauss) (Gauss) (Gauss)

33 31 29 27 25 2

3 4 Flow rate (ml/min)

5

Figure 2. Influence of flow rate to the thermal efficiency with 2370 Gauss in dipole system


159

N. Saksono

Figure 2 shows that thermal efficiency is increasing by the increasing of fuel flow rate. It can be happened because increasing the flow rate, then it will increase rate of reaction and combustion temperature, in the end it will increase thermal efficiency. 7.5. Magnetic Field Force on Thermal Efficiency With the influence from magnetic field force, achieved thermal efficiency which better than system without magnetization. Result of this experiment is shown in figure 3. It can be seen thermal efficiency of magnetization system is better than system without magnetization. Maximum efficiency that is achieved is 33.95%, from the system which use magnet 2370 Gauss at flow rate 4.1 ml/min. This explains that for the increasing of magnetic field force does not equal with the increasing of thermal efficiency. It can happen because physical outline of magnet, surface area, and its resistance in high temperature.

2.66 2.13

7.46 17.49

5.48 17.3

1.48 16.03

Table 4 shown that the most optimum increasing of thermal efficiency for all flow rates is achieved by 2370 Gauss magnet. Table 4 also shows us that the maximum increasing of thermal efficiency happened at low flow rate for all type of magnet, it is caused by the longer magnetization time at low flow rate and the lower reaction temperature. 7.6. Influence of Magnet Distance to Burner This experiment is done to know the influence of magnet distance to burner towards thermal efficiency. The experiment uses four distance variation, that are 2 cm, 10 cm, 100 cm, and 200 cm as shown on Figure 4. Burner Fuel tank

Fuel pipe

Magnet

Efficiency (%)

Figure 3 shown that the magnetization system will result higher thermal efficiency at high flow rate. Figure 4. Location of magnet instalation

35 33 31 29 27 25 0 2000 High flow rate Medium flow rate Low flow rate

4000

6000

Magnetic field force (Gauss)

Figure 3. Influence of magnetic field force to thermal efficiency in dipole system Tabel 4. Flow rate and increasing of thermal efficiency in dipole system The increasing of efficiency (%) Flow rate (ml/min) 4.1

160

2370 (Gauss) 3.03

4860 (Gauss) 0.42

5500 (Gauss) 0.30

The magnet that was used in this experiment are magnet 5500 Gauss permanent magnet and 2.66 ml/min flow rate. The increasing of temperature will cause the increasing of atomic vibration as well; therefore it will distract some oriented moment. Thermal vibration will eliminate coupling strength among dipole moment from near atoms, hence magnetization will decrease. The effect of magnet distance to burner to thermal efficiency can be seen in figure 4. From that figure, can be seen that maximum thermal efficiency is 30.16% achieved from the distance of 10 cm. We also can see, with the increasing of magnet distance to burner will decrease



thermal efficiency. This can be happened by the distance was too far, so the magnetic memory effect will disappear. The distance that too far caused disappearance of magnetic memory effect. So does for the distance 2 cm from burner not produce better thermal efficiency from 10 cm. It can be happened because of high temperature at the distance that too close to burner, it also causes disappearance of magnetic memory effect. From previous discussion, the increasing of temperature will decrease the magnetization effect.

Efficiency (%)

Figure 5 obtained the increasing of thermal efficiency 0.57% for 2 cm, 1.35% for 10 cm, 1.21% for 100 cm, and 0.1% for 200 cm.

30,2 30,1 30 29,9 29,8 29,7

Table 5 shown that thermal efficiency of all monopole system tends to be better then the dipoles. The increasing of the thermal efficiency of monopole system comparing to dipole system takes place for almost the flow rate of every kind of magnet, except for magnet 4860 Gauss at flow rate 2.66 ml/min. Magnetization resulted from a couple of similar magnetic pole or monopole is better than which resulted from the dipole, this according to Peter Kulish is caused by the dipoles magnetization which gives neutralizing magnetization effect [11]. Furthermore we may conclude that monopole magnetization system has a tendency to be better than the dipole, comparable to the research done by Peter Kulish , however it is not significant (less then 4 %). Tabel 5. Increasing of thermal efficiency of monopole comparing to dipole system. The increasing of efficiency (%)

0

50

100 150 Distance (cm)

200

Figure 5. Magnet distance to burner vs thermal efficiency at flow rate 2.66 ml/min and 5500 Gauss

Flow rate (ml/min) 4.10 2.66 2.13

2370 (Gauss) 0.09 4.00 0.52

4860 (Gauss) 0.45 0 0.26

5500 (Gauss) 0.67 0.70 1.47

8. Conclusions 7.7. Magnetic Pole Orientation The aim of this experiment is to know the effect of magnetic pole orientation towards the thermal efficiency of combustion. The variance is made by the different of three magnetic field strength which are 5500 Gauss, 4860 Gauss, and 2370 Gauss permanent magnet. Comparison will be made for the thermal efficiency of dipole magnetization and monopole magnetization.

Optimum thermal efficiency that can be achieved by magnetization at flow rate 2.13 ml/min is 33.95 % under 2370 Gauss permanent magnet. The same condition also give 17.49 % increase in thermal efficiency compared with non magnetized fuel. Alnico magnet performed better than NdFeB due to its high magnetic temperature critical and good isolation material.

In this experiment, it will be seen the direct effect of magnetic pole orientation, the difference between thermal efficiency of dipole magnetization and monopole magnetization of which will be discussed later.

Magnet distance from burner has effect on thermal efficiency. The optimum distance on the research was 10 cm. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thanks the Osaka Gas Foundation of International


161

N. Saksono

Culture Exchange (OGFICE) Japan for financially supporting this research under contract no. 3230/10000/97-SO. References 1. Mundimex. Inc , Hydrocarbon Fuel Research Div & Publish USA 1997; http://www.mundi.com 2. Ki Hoon Song, Pratyush Nag, Litzinger A T and Daniel C, Effects of oxygenated additives on aromatic species in fuelrich, premixed ethane combustion, Combustion and Flame, Volume 135, Issue 3, November 2003, Pages341-349 3. David R Lide, Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 73 nd Ed , CRC Press, 1992., p 3-636 4. Kirh-Othmer, Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, Vol 13 , Fourth Ed, 1995., Jhon Wiley & Son, New york ., p 845 850. 5. R. McCarty, Hydrogen Technologycal Survey – Thermophysical Properties , NASA SP-3089, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C., , 1975 p. 518-519. 6. Hutagalung R, Sugiarto B, Nelson S, Pengaruh Magnetisasi Bensin Terhadap Kinerja Mesin Dan Emisis Gas Buang Yang Dihasilkan, Laporan Tugas Akhir Departemen Mesin FTUI, 2002. 7. Tung. N. P, Vinh. Q. N, et.Al., Physica B. 327 (2003) p.443-447. 8. Nelson S, Efek Magnetisasi Terhadap Karakteristik Air, Prosiding Seminar Teknik Kimia Soebardjo Broto Hardjono, Surabaya , 2004. 9. Chalid M, Nelson S, A study on Influences of Monopole Magnetization System on Kerosine Characteristics, International Conference Quality in Research FTUI, Depok, 2004. 10. Simon Ruskin ., U.S. Utility Patent no. 328,868 , 1950. 11. Kita; Ronald J; Kulish; Peter ,. “Electromagnetic device for the magnetic treatment of fuel”., US patent No. 5,829,420 , 1998. 12. Yoshifusa; Katsutoshi., Apparatus for magnetic treatment of fluid ’ US patent No. 6,277,275., 2001.

162

13. Kulish P, Apparatus for magnetic treatment of liquids,. US patent No. 4,605,498 , 1986. 14. Carpenter , Apparatus for magnetically treating liquid flowing through a pipe and clamping means therefor ., US patent No. 4,367,143 ., 1983. 15. Janczak et al. Permanent magnetic power cell system for treating fuel lines for more efficient combustion and less pollution ,. US patent No. 5,124,045 , 1992. 16. Fujita, Etuo , Fuel combustion and magnetizing apparatus used therefore., US patent No. 4,188,296 ., 1980. 17. Smith K R, Uma R, et al, Greenhause Gases From Small Combustion Devices in Developing Countries, EPA Research & Depelopment Report USA, June 2000.
