An assessment of surrogate fuel using Bayesian multiple kernel learning model in sight of sooting tendency

Abstract

An integrated and systematic database of sooting tendency with more than 190 kinds of fuels was obtained through a series of experimental investigations. The laser-induced incandescence (LII) method was used to acquire the 2D distribution of soot volume fraction, and an apparatus-independent yield sooting index (YSI) was experimentally obtained. Based on the database, a novel predicting model of YSI values for surrogate fuels was proposed with the application of a machine learning method, named the Bayesian multiple kernel learning (BMKL) model. A high correlation coefficient (0.986) between measured YSIs and predicted values with the BMKL model was obtained, indicating that the BMKL model had a reliable and accurate predictive capacity for YSI values of surrogate fuels. The BMKL model provides an accurate and low-cost approach to assess surrogate performances of diesel, jet fuel, and biodiesel in terms of sooting tendency. Particularly, this model is one of the first attempts to predict the sooting tendencies of surrogate fuels that concurrently contain hydrocarbon and oxygenated components and shows a satisfying matching level. During surrogate formulation, the BMKL model can be used to shrink the surrogate candidate list in terms of sooting tendency and ensure the optimal surrogate has a satisfying matching level of soot behaviors. Due to the high accuracy and resolution of YSI prediction, the BMKL model is also capable of providing distinguishing information of sooting tendency for surrogate design.

Key words： sooting tendency; yield sooting index; Bayesian multiple kernel learning; surrogate assessment; surrogate formulation

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 52071216) and the Shanghai Rising-Star Program.

References

1 McEnally C S, Pfefferle L D, Atakan B, Studies of aromatic hydrocarbon formation mechanisms in flames: progress towards closing the fuel gap. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 2006, 32(3): 247–294

2 Zhang L, Yang K, Zhao R, Nanostructure and reactivity of soot from biofuel 2,5-dimethylfuran pyrolysis with CO₂ additions. Frontiers in Energy, 2020, online, doi:10.1007/s11708-020-0658-3

3 Liu W, Zhai J, Lin B, Soot size distribution in lightly sooting premixed flames of benzene and toluene. Frontiers in Energy, 2020, 14(1): 18–26

4 Wang W, Li B, Yao X, Air pollutant control and strategy in coal-fired power industry for promotion of China’s emission reduction. Frontiers in Energy, 2019, 13(2): 307–316

5 Blazowski W S. Combustion considerations for future jet fuels. Symposium (International) on Combustion, 1977, 16: 1631–1639

6 Das D D, McEnally C S, Kwan T A, Sooting tendencies of diesel fuels, jet fuels, and their surrogates in diffusion flames. Fuel, 2017, 197: 445–458

7 Frenklach M. Reaction mechanism of soot formation in flames. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics, 2002, 4(11): 2028–2037

8 Richter H, Howard J B. Formation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and their growth to soot—a review of chemical reaction pathways. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 2000, 26(4-6): 565–608

9 Pitz W J, Mueller C J. Recent progress in the development of diesel surrogate fuels. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 2011, 37(3): 330–350

10 Li A, Zhu L, Mao Y, Surrogate formulation methodology for biodiesel based on chemical deconstruction in consideration of molecular structure and engine combustion factors. Combustion and Flame, 2019, 199: 152–167

11 Dooley S, Won S H, Heyne J, The experimental evaluation of a methodology for surrogate fuel formulation to emulate gas phase combustion kinetic phenomena. Combustion and Flame, 2012, 159(4): 1444–1466

12 Violi A, Yan S, Eddings E G, Experimental formulation and kinetic model for JP-8 surrogate mixtures. Combustion Science and Technology, 2002, 174(11–12): 399–417

13 Eddings E G, Yan S, Ciro W, Formation of a surrogate for the simulation of jet fuel pool fires. Combustion Science and Technology, 2005, 177(4): 715–739

14 Calcote H F, Manos D M. Effect of molecular structure on incipient soot formation. Combustion and Flame, 1983, 49(1-3): 289–304

15 Mensch A, Santoro R J, Litzinger T A, Sooting characteristics of surrogates for jet fuels. Combustion and Flame, 2010, 157(6): 1097–1105

16 Gill R J, Olson D B. Estimation of soot thresholds for fuel mixtures. Combustion Science and Technology, 1984, 40(5–6): 307–315

17 Yu W, Yang W, Tay K, An optimization method for formulating model-based jet fuel surrogate by emulating physical, gas phase chemical properties and threshold sooting index (TSI) of real jet fuel under engine relevant conditions. Combustion and Flame, 2018, 193: 192–217

18 Szymkowicz P G, Benajes J. Development of a diesel surrogate fuel library. Fuel, 2018, 222: 21–34

19 McEnally C, Pfefferle L. Improved sooting tendency measurements for aromatic hydrocarbons and their implications for naphthalene formation pathways. Combustion and Flame, 2007, 148(4): 210–222

20 Das D D, St. John P C, McEnally C S, Measuring and predicting sooting tendencies of oxygenates, alkanes, alkenes, cycloalkanes, and aromatics on a unified scale. Combustion and Flame, 2018, 190: 349–364

21 Gao Z, Zou X, Huang Z, Predicting sooting tendencies of oxygenated hydrocarbon fuels with machine learning algorithms. Fuel, 2019, 242: 438–446

22 Kohse-Höinghaus K, Osswald P, Cool T A, Biofuel combustion chemistry: from ethanol to biodiesel. Angewandte Chemie, 2010, 49(21): 3572–3597

23 Choi B C, Choi S K, Chung S H. Soot formation characteristics of gasoline surrogate fuels in counterflow diffusion flames. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 2011, 33(1): 609–616

24 Consalvi J L, Liu F, Kashif M, Numerical study of soot formation in laminar coflow methane/air diffusion flames doped by n-heptane/toluene and iso-octane/toluene blends. Combustion and Flame, 2017, 180: 167–174

25 Gao Z, Cheng X, Ren F, Compositional effects on sooting tendencies of diesel surrogate fuels with four components. Energy & Fuels, 2020, 34(7): 8796–8807

26 Yaws C L. Thermophysical Properties of Chemicals and Hydrocarbon. New York: William Andrew Inc., 2008

27 Gao Z, Zhu L, Zou X, Soot reduction effects of dibutyl ether (DBE) addition to a biodiesel surrogate in laminar coflow diffusion flames. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 2019, 37(1): 1265–1272

28 Tian B, Gao Y, Balusamy S, High spatial resolution laser cavity extinction and laser-induced incandescence in low-soot-producing flames. Applied Physics B, Lasers and Optics, 2015, 120(3): 469–487

29 Linton O, Nielsen J P. A kernel method of estimating structured nonparametric regression based on marginal integration. Biometrika, 1995, 82(1): 93–100

30 Camps-Valls G, Bruzzone L. Kernel-based methods for hyperspectral image classification. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2005, 43(6): 1351–1362

31 Gönen M, Alpaydın E. Multiple kernel learning algorithms. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 2011, 12: 2211–2268

32 Gönen M. A Bayesian multiple kernel learning framework for single and multiple output regression. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, 2012, 242: 354–359

33 Tzikas D G, Likas A C, Galatsanos N P. The variational approximation for Bayesian inference. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 2008, 25(6): 131–146

34 George E I, Makov U E, Smith A F M. Conjugate likelihood distributions. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 2010, 20: 147–156

35 Qian Y, Yu L, Li Z, A new methodology for diesel surrogate fuel formulation: bridging fuel fundamental properties and real engine combustion characteristics. Energy, 2018, 148: 424–447

36 Dooley S, Won S H, Chaos M, A jet fuel surrogate formulated by real fuel properties. Combustion and Flame, 2010, 157(12): 2333–2339

37 Lapuerta M, Armas O, Rodriguez-Fernandez J. Effect of biodiesel fuels on diesel engine emissions. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 2008, 34(2): 198–223

38 Chang Y, Jia M, Li Y, Development of a skeletal oxidation mechanism for biodiesel surrogate. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 2015, 35(3): 3037–3044

39 Kholghy M R, Weingarten J, Thomson M J. A study of the effects of the ester moiety on soot formation and species concentrations in a laminar coflow diffusion flame of a surrogate for B100 biodiesel. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 2015, 35(1): 905–912

40 Gao Z, Zhu L, Liu C, Comparison of soot formation, evolution, and oxidation reactivity of two biodiesel surrogates. Energy & Fuels, 2017, 31(8): 8655–8664

41 Lapuerta M, Barba J, Sediako A D, Morphological analysis of soot agglomerates from biodiesel surrogates in a coflow burner. Journal of Aerosol Science, 2017, 111: 65–74

42 Liu W, Sivaramakrishnan R, Davis M J, Development of a reduced biodiesel surrogate model for compression ignition engine modeling. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 2013, 34(1): 401–409

43 Feng Q, Jalali A, Fincham A M, Soot formation in flames of model biodiesel fuels. Combustion and Flame, 2012, 159(5): 1876–1893

44 Herbinet O, Pitz W J, Westbrook C K. Detailed chemical kinetic oxidation mechanism for a biodiesel surrogate. Combustion and Flame, 2008, 154(3): 507–528

45 Kholghy M R, Weingarten J, Sediako A D, Structural effects of biodiesel on soot formation in a laminar coflow diffusion flame. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 2017, 36(1): 1321–1328

46 Mueller C J, Cannella W J, Bruno T J, Methodology for formulating diesel surrogate fuels with accurate compositional, ignition-quality, and volatility characteristics. Energy & Fuels, 2012, 26(6): 3284–3303