0
Technical Brief

Performance Improvements in Cooker-Top Gas Burners for Small Aspect Ratio Changes OPEN ACCESS

[+] Author and Article Information
Robson L. Silva

Energy and Mechanical Engineering,
Grande Dourados Federal University,
Road MS-270 (Dourados-Itahum), km 12,
Mail Box 533,
Dourados, MS 79.804-970, Brazil
e-mail: rlealsilva@hotmail.com

Bruno V. Sant′Ana, José R. Patelli, Jr.

Energy and Mechanical Engineering,
Grande Dourados Federal University,
Road MS-270 (Dourados-Itahum), km 12,
Mail Box 533,
Dourados, MS 79.804-970, Brazil

Marcelo M. Vieira

Mechanical Engineering,
Mato Grosso Federal University,
Road MT-270 (Rondonópolis-Guiratinga), km 06,
Rondonópolis, MT, 78.735-901, Brazil

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Heat Transfer Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF THERMAL SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS. Manuscript received October 10, 2016; final manuscript received March 17, 2017; published online May 9, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Amir Jokar.

J. Thermal Sci. Eng. Appl 9(4), 044503 (May 09, 2017) (6 pages) Paper No: TSEA-16-1290; doi: 10.1115/1.4036362 History: Received October 10, 2016; Revised March 17, 2017

This paper aims to identify performance improvements in cooker-top gas burners for changes in its original geometry, with aspect ratios (ARs) ranging from 0.25 to 0.56 and from 0.28 to 0.64. It operates on liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and five thermal power (TP) levels. Considering the large number of cooker-top burners currently being used, even slight improvements in thermal performance resulting from a better design and recommended operating condition will lead to a significant reduction of energy consumption and costs. Appropriate instrumentation was used to carry out the measurements and methodology applied was based on regulations from INMETRO (CONPET program for energy conversion efficiency in cook top and kilns), ABNT (Brazilian Technical Standards Normative) and ANP—National Agency of Petroleum, Natural Gas (NG) and Biofuels. The results allow subsidizing recommendations to minimum energy performance standards (MEPS) for residential use, providing also higher energy conversion efficiency and/or lower fuel consumption. Main conclusions are: (i) Smaller aspect ratios result in the same heating capacity and higher efficiency; (ii) higher aspect ratios (original burners) are fuel consuming and inefficient; (iii) operating conditions set on intermediate are lower fuel consumption without significant differences in temperature increases; (iv) Reynolds number lower than 500 provides higher efficiencies.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>

Minimum energy performance standards for home stoves and water heaters resulted in savings of 401 TJ (∼10,000 toe) only in Brazil in 2010, due to its energy efficiency law implemented since 2001. Countries as Canada and India already adopted similar regulations for standards and labeling programs. In May 2015, in comparison to 2014, prices for LPG (13 kg pressure vessel) final users increased by 7.7% [1]; in September 2015, prices at Petrobras refineries increased by 15% [2].

Residential burners are thermal equipment for final routing of gas or gas/air mixture to the combustion zone, allowing a controlled and stable burn [3]. Therefore, most ones support the combustion process (exothermic) of different fuels; LPG is the most frequent fuel in those devices, mainly composed of propane and butane [4], widely employed due to their rapid combustion and high heating rates and, at the same time, their relatively clean emission products [5,6]. Heat input rates (or TP) are predicted quite accurately by the Wobbe index (ratio between high heating value (HHV) and low heating value (LHV), and also square-root of gas and air density) changes [7] for domestic cooking appliances. Conventional Bunsen type is the most widely used gas burner, i.e., partially aerated [8]. In those types, typically primary air is naturally dragged as a consequence of the momentum quantity due to the gas jet flow, in high velocity, and the ambient air.

Although cooker-top burners were designed quite a long time ago, actual commercial models show unclear operating conditions, inducing to inefficient use of them, implying on significant fuel costs for the final user (residential consumer). Improvements in their performance are still a current topic in R&D worldwide, for both swirl and radial types. Efficiency and CO emissions are strongly dependent on Ref. [5] swirl flow, loading height, primary aeration, gas flow rate (or heat input), gas supply pressure, and semiconfined combustion flame resulting in higher efficiency for swirl than conventional ones (radial flow); they also identified that increases in the loading height induced a decrease of CO emissions, and the gas pressure reduction (from 330 to 230 mm H2O) resulted in efficiency increases; first aeration did not affect η and, ultimately, thermal input growth resulted in the decrease of η and increase of CO emission. Moreover, investigations on Re, equivalence ratio, nozzle-to-plate distance, and the jet-to-jet spacing were conducted on the cooker-top burners with gas-fired-impinging-flame fueled with LPG [6]; also evidenced that η decreased at a constant rate as Re increased; elsewhere, as the equivalence ratio increased, η rose to a minimum value and then increased. In contrast, η rose to a maximum value and then decreased as the nozzle-to-plate distance was increased. Lastly, the growth of the jet-to-jet spacing caused η increase.

In this work, different ARs (0.25–0.56 and from 0.28 to 0.64) for modified burners were evaluated; operating on LPG fuel; what corresponds to eight different geometries and five TP conditions. The aim is to identify which design and/or TP condition is most effective for lowering fuel consumption and/or increasing performance (η). Main resulting parameters from tests are: TPnominal, mf, Tg, Re, and η.

Burners Geometry and Experimental Investigation.

A residential gas burner, cooker-top type was used in the tests, and its technical data available are: LPG as fuel; weight 20.90 kg; automatic, electric ignition (127/220 V); external dimensions (mm) 483 × 570 × 884; Labeling classification is “A” for both, burner and oven, according to CONPET—National Program to Rationalize the use of Petroleum and Natural Gas Derivatives [9]. Figure 1 indicates the experimental apparatus where the tests were carried out.

From an original radial type cooker-top burner, eight different AR designs (four Hcyl; two Dcap) were built, see Fig. 2 and Table 1. Five TP (kW) conditions were tested, namely, from minimum to maximum mf (kg/s): TP1, TP2, TP3, TP4, and TP5. Burners named as 5-α (AR = 0.64) and 5-β (AR = 0.56) correspond to the ones available in the market. Constant pressure was provided by the governor.

Measurements and Reference Quantities.

Reference values for HHV and LHV, temperatures, and density are indicated in Table 2. They correspond to mean values for main components in Brazilian commercial LPG (propane/propene and butane/butane [10]. The explosive limits, lower (LEL) and upper (UEL), are, respectively, for butane: 1.8 and 8.4; and for propane: 2.1 and 9.5; resulting in mean values for Brazilian LPG of LEL = 1.95 and UEL = 8.95 [11].

Table 3 indicates instrumentation and uncertainties in experimental measurements. Uncertainty analysis was performed for each one of the experimental parameters obtained in tests, whenever feasible [12].

Laboratory and Test Standard Conditions.

Tests were carried out under laboratory conditions for data acquisition as much as possible as indicated by regulations NBR 13.723-1 and NBR 13.723-2 [13,14], as Tlab = 25 ± 5 °C. Eventually, a single run could be slightly different, but does not interfere in the overall behavior of the results, discussions, and conclusions presented herein. Results were obtained for: 22.9 °C ≤ Tlab ≤ 31.6 °C, and for recording only, 49% ≤ RHlab ≤ 68%, 95.4 kPa ≤ Plab  ≤ 96.3 kPa.

The LPG pressure inside the pressure vessel (P-2) must be higher than 1.96 kPa [14]; a manometer was used to pressure check at the test beginning and ending. Pressure in the fuel supply was kept constant during all tests, in order to reflect the normal operation in the household; thus, increases in TP (kW) automatically increases mf (kg/s). The pressure regulator (or governor) is designed to provide low pressure (nominal values 2.8 kPa, residential use) with a maximum mf equal to 2 kg/h [13].

Experimental Procedures for Brazilian Standard Regulations.

The following procedure was applied in all tests, with measurements at the test beginning and ending: (i) ambient conditions and pressure check (manometer) inside the P-2 vessel; (ii) fuel mass consumed in the test. Fuel properties are from Table 3, as, for example, μ (N s/m2).

Experimental Test 1: mf and TP.

The following steps were applied: (1a) Burner's ignition and shut down after 300 s (5 min); (2a) repeat steps for each TP setting. Measured values are Δm (kg) and Δt (s), while mgas (kg/s) and TPexperimental (kW) and its respective uncertainties are determined by Eqs. (4) and (5). Tg (K) is from Eq. (3), a theoretical value when assuming that all the heat resulted from the combustion process is converted into enthalpy of the combustion products; thus, there is no heat transfer to the environment or heat loss by fuel dissociation [15] Display Formula

(1)mgaṡ=Δm/Δtandumgaṡ=(uΔm.1/Δt)2+(uΔt.Δm/Δt2)2
Display Formula
(2)TP=mgaṡ.(HHV)anduTP=(umgaṡHHV)2+(uHHV.m˙)2

assuming that uHHV=0(HHV=cte)Display Formula

(3)Tg=Tair+(mḟ.LHV)/(mġ.CPg)

Experimental Test 2: η (Energy Conversion From Fuel Gas for Water Heating).

The following steps were applied: (1b) mass measurements for water (∼2 kg and 20 ± 1 °C) and water containers (two standard water pans), then fill one of them; (2b) Burner's ignition and water preheating during the 600 s (10 min). Note: water pan positioning at the center burner's flame; (3b) transferring preheated water into another container; (4b) thermocouple positioning at the container's center; (5b) Burner's shut down when Tw = 90 ± 1 °C, recording maximum Tw after shutdown; (6b) repeat steps for each TP setting.

Measured values are: mw (kg),ΔT(K), and Δt(s).Qw (J/s),Qgas(J/s)andη(%) and its respective uncertainties are determined by Eqs. (4)(9). The thermal efficiency of a gas burner is defined as the percentage of the thermal energy input transferred to the loading water [5], see Eq. (8). Equation (10) provides Re, referring to burner's inner cylinder data, see Fig. 1. Display Formula

(4)Qgas=Δm.HHV
Display Formula
(5)uQgas=(uΔm.HHV)2+(uHHV.Δm)2, assumingthatuHHV=0(HHV=constant)
Display Formula
(6)Qw=mw.hw.ΔT
Display Formula
(7)uQw=(umw.hw.ΔT)2+(uhw.mw.ΔT)2+(uΔT.mw.hw)2uhwater=0(h=constant)
Display Formula
(8)η=(Qw/Qgas).100
Display Formula
(9)uη=(uQw.(1/Qgas).100)2+(uQgas.(Qw/Qgas2).100)2
Display Formula
(10)Reynolds=ρ.v.Di,rod/μ=4.m˙/μ.π.Di,rod

Experimental Test 3: ΔT = f(Δt), Water Heating.

Direct temperature measurements by using a thermocouple and a chronometer, for Tw (°C) and t (s) until test completion after 600 s (10 min). The sequence of the experimental procedure was applied: (1c) mass measurements of water (∼2 kg and 20 ± 1 °C) and container (one standard water pan), then fill in; (2c) Burner's ignition, positioning the container at the center burner's flame; (3c) thermocouple positioning at the container's center; (4c) Burner's shut down after reaching 600 s (10 min), recording water temperature each 30 s; (5c) repeat steps for each TP setting. Tw at the test beginning was the same for all conditions, in order to have the same reference; 20 ± 1 °C indicated [13].

Figure 3 indicates the heating capacity linear behavior for burners “β” (De-cap = 80 mm), in all TP conditions. Uncertainties are the same as the ones of the instruments (thermometer, uT = ±0.1 °C; chronometer, uC = ±0.005 s), since data acquisition was obtained directly. For all burners, highest and lowest ΔT (°C) increases were achieved, respectively, by TP5 and TP1 (maximum and minimum). Nevertheless, the increase of temperature (water) for burners 3-β and 4-β are at the same order of magnitude for TP5, TP4, and TP3 conditions (see Table 4). Then, with no relevant differences in the ΔTt for TP5 (maximum) and TP3 or TP4 (intermediate), lower mf achieves the same heating capacity. Considering that the burner's ultimate purpose is to provide energy as a heating source, TP3 is the best operating condition (Fig. 3).

TP and mf are closely related from basic heat transfer theory, Eq. (2), and experimental results in Fig. 4 legitimate that phenomenon, no matter how simple it is. Thus, linear behavior is consistent for experimental results once there are no changes in fuel gas composition (HHV). Similar analysis, ranging from 10 to 16 kW at 0.8–1.2 kg/s, for industrial burners fueled with LPG and NG, also indicated close consistency [16]. Moreover, burner 2-β reaches maximum values for TP (∼24.67 × 10−1 kW at 5.00 × 10−5 kg/s) and the minimum values for burner 5-β (∼7.07 × 10−1 kW at 1.43 × 10−5 kg/s), indicating that as AR (Hcyl differences) increases the lower are TP values. That occurs due to a longer way to go inside the burner, thus reducing the momentum transfer (pressure/velocity loss) from the gas jet flow of dragged air that provides premixed flames. An interesting conclusion arises from that analysis, once small AR corresponds a burner design with less building material, thus low cost and high TP. Burners α (De-cap = 70 mm is ∼20% smaller) present a slightly different behavior, probably for not reaching “fast” classification. Cooker-top burners are classified as “semifast” (1.16 kW ≤ TP < 2.30 kW) and the burner 2-β as fast (2.30 kW ≤ TP < 3.50 kW), according to NBR 13723-1 [13].

Figure 5, from experimental data and trend lines (at right), indicates a nonlinear behavior for η (TPexperimental) according to changes in the hable position selector (Fig. 2(b)). 3-β burners have a consistent increase as TP selector is moving forward, while other β burners are curling up and down; as for α burners, decreases occur only at last two TP positions. Here, AR plays a significant role, obtaining higher η for burners 2-α/β, 3-α/β, and 4-α/β in comparison to the original ones (5-α/β). Again, the best option is for smaller AR, which corresponds to low cost (less material) and higher η. In general, η for both burners (α and β) converge to a single value at the last TP position, ∼31% and ∼37%, respectively, for burners α and β; a strong indicative they were designed to operate at that condition (maximum mf).

Figure 6 indicates how Re interferes on η, and thus in the premixed flames combustion process. A parabolic behavior occurs, obtaining laminar flow in all conditions (Re < 500), see Eq. (3). As Re increases, additional air/LPG mixture flows toward the reaction zone to participate in the process, so turbulence ensures and enhances the combustion [6]; these authors obtained 200 < Re < 500 when evaluating η for cooked-top gas-fired burners. Meanwhile, if there is insufficient air for the combustion to be fully completed, η declines.

Best AR design for η is achieved for burner 3-β, while 5-α has ηminimum. Elsewhere, it is evident that the original burners (5-α and 5-β) presented the worst performance among all. This difference reached 13.7% between burners 2-α and 5-α in TP 3 and 11.9% between 3-β and 5-β at the same TP condition. As an example, in Brazil an LPG pressure vessel (13 kg) for residential purposes cost ∼US$15.00 (∼R$46.00); 2015 first half [1]; and it lasts usually 60 days. If households in Brazil, and worldwide, use their cooker-top burners in an intermediate position (TP3), instead of the final selector position (TP-5), and also replacing original component parts (5-α and 5-β), it would result in 11.9–13.7% efficiency improvement (2-α and 3-β). It implies a saving of ∼9–11 kg of LPG or ∼US$11–13 per year. Nevertheless, it should be pointed out that the emissions must be determined from changes in designs, in order to ensure their levels according to each country's regulations.

Domestic gas burner manufacturers usually built those thermal equipments based on trial and error knowledge [17]. Wider operational ranges and lower CO emission, both for energy efficiency improvements on domestic gas burners [18], were obtained by burner cap redesign (Dcap and Hcap) to obtain swirling flows, once premixed flames usually have restricted operational range. Thermal efficiency performance of residential gas burners showed to be not satisfactory when using as fuel, natural gas with variable constituents [7]. Further investigation on the literature highlights pointed out is suggested to have a broader discussion on cooker-top design improvements.

Although it is not possible to apply the conclusions obtained herein to all gas burners manufactured worldwide, once some characteristics as aspect ratio and primary aeration can interfere on main results, it is reasonable to consider the behavior of the results in order to achieve better performance as a very interesting general conclusion. Also, gas burner shape (number of holes and its diameter, as well as radial or axial positioning) can imply in different performances, for better or worse, according to its design.

  • (i)Smaller ARs (low cost, less material) result in very similar heating capacity and higher efficiency than the original ones;
  • (ii)Higher ARs (original burners) are fuel consuming and inefficient;
  • (iii)Operating conditions set on TP3/TP4 (intermediate position selector) correspond to lower fuel consumption without significant differences in water temperature increases; Efficiencies at TPmaximum are quite the same, probably corresponding to its design operational condition;
  • (iv)Re < 500 for laminar flow in premixed flames provides higher efficiencies;

Experimental data from manufactures in Brazil are not available as open documents, thus it is not possible to compare the results obtained herein; only the Labeling program indicates as A quality (see Fig. 1). As for other countries standards and regulations, Brazilian regulations are based on ISO normatives [19]; thus conclusions obtained are possible to be applied worldwide where ISO is used as reference for gas burners regulations [14,2022].

Support from UFGD/PROPP, Grant No. 2012/0031 (2012–2015). To UFGD/FAEN Energy Engineering facilities where the experiments were carried out from ARENA/CNPq team assistance (laboratory technicians). To scholarships for engineering undergraduate students granted by CNPq/CAPES.

  • AR =

    aspect ratio

  • Cpg =

    gas specific heat (kJ/kg K)

  • Di,cyl =

    internal diameter of the burner's cylinder (mm)

  • Di,rod =

    internal diameter of burner's rod (m)

  • hw =

    water specific heat (4178 kJ/kg K)

  • HHV =

    high heating value (kJ/kg)

  • LHV =

    low heating value (kJ/kg)

  • LPG =

    liquefied petroleum gas

  • mf =

    mass of the fuel burned during tests (kg/s)

  • mg =

    mass of exhaust gases (kg/s)

  • mw =

    water mass inside the test container, standard pan (kg)

  • NG =

    natural gas

  • Plab =

    ambient pressure in the lab (kPa)

  • PLPG =

    internal pressure of the pressure vessel (kPa)

  • RHlab =

    relative humidity at the lab (%)

  • Tair =

    air temperature (K)

  • Tg =

    adiabatic gas temperature (K)

  • Tlab =

    ambient temperature of the lab (°C)

  • toe =

    tons of oil equivalent

  • TP =

    thermal power (or firing rate or heat input rate of gas appliance)

  • v =

    fuel gas velocity inside the burner's rod (m/s)

  • Δm =

    total mass variation of the pressure vessel (kg)

  • Δt =

    time elapsed during a single test (s)

  • ΔT =

    water temperature variation (K)

  • μ =

    kinematic viscosity (N s/m2)

  • ρ =

    specific mass or absolute density (kg/m3)

MME–Ministério de Minas e Energia, 2015, “ Boletim Mensal de Energia (Maio 2015),” Brasília, Brazil, accessed Aug. 31, 2015, http://goo.gl/s2rFEL
SINDIGAS, 2015, “ Preço do gás de Cozinha vai ter Aumento Médio de 15%, diz Sindigás,” SINDIGAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, accessed Sept. 15, 2015, http://www.sindigas.com.br/noticia/interna.aspx?id=7945
ABNT-Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas, 2011, “ NBR 13.148: Fogões, Fogões de Mesa, Fornos e Fogareiros a gás de uso Industrial—Terminologia,” ABNT, São Paulo, Brazil, p. 58.
Turns, S. R. , 2013, Introdução à Combustão: Conceitos e Aplicações, 3rd ed., AMGH, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Hou, S.-S. , Lee, C.-Y. , and Lin, T.-H. , 2007, “ Efficiency and Emissions of a New Domestic Gas Burner With a Swirling Flame,” Energy Convers. Manage., 48(5), pp. 1401–1410. [CrossRef]
Li, H. B. , Wong, T. T., Leung, C. W., and Probert, S. D., 2006, “ Thermal Performances and CO Emissions of Gas-Fired Cooker-Top Burners,” Appl. Energy, 83(12), pp. 1326–1338. [CrossRef]
Zhang, Y. , Qin, C. , Xing, H. , and Liu, P. , 2013, “ Experimental Research on Performance Response of Domestic Gas Cookers to Variable Natural Gas Constituents,” J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng., 10(1), pp. 41–50. [CrossRef]
Ko, Y.-C. , and Lin, T.-H. , 2003, “ Emissions and Efficiency of a Domestic Gas Stove Burning Natural Gases With Various Compositions,” Energy Convers. Manage., 44(19), pp. 3001–3014. [CrossRef]
INMETRO–Instituto Nacional de Metrologia, Qualidade e Tecnologia, 2012, “ Portaria 400/2012—Requisitos de Avaliação da Conformidade Para Fogões e Fornos a gás de uso Doméstico,” INMETRO, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, p. 3.
PETROBRÁS, 2013, “ Gás Liquefeito de Petróleo–Informações Técnicas (Versão 1.2),” PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, accessed Sept. 15, 2015, http://sites.petrobras.com.br/minisite/assistenciatecnica/public/downloads/manual-tecnico-gas-liquefeito-petrobras-assistencia-tecnica-petrobras.pdf
Yaws, C. L. , 2001, Matheson Gas Data Book, 7th ed., McGraw-Hill Professional, Parsippany, NJ, p. 982.
Balbinot, A. , and Brusamarello, V. J. , 2010, Instrumentação e Fundamentos de Medidas, 2nd ed., Vol. 1, LTC, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, p. 385.
ABNT-Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas, 2003, “ NBR 13723-1: Aparelho Doméstico de Cocção a gás Parte 1: Desempenho e Segurança,” ABNT, São Paulo, Brazil, p. 58.
ABNT–Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas, 1999, “ NBR 13723-2: Aparelho Doméstico de Cocção a gás Parte 2: Uso Racional de Energia,” ABNT, São Paulo, Brazil, p. 3.
Garcia, R. , 2002, Combustíveis e Combustão Industrial, 1st ed., Interciência, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Rocha, M. S. , Neto, E. P. , Panella, L. S. , Ferreira, E. S. , and Moreira, J. R. S. , 2010, “ Conversion Methods for Commercial Stoves From LPG to Natural Gas Firing,” 13th Brazilian Congress of Thermal Sciences and Engineering—ENCIT, Uberlândia, Brazil, Dec. 5–10, p. 7.
Makmool, U. , and Jugjai, S. , 2013, “ Thermal Efficiency and Pollutant Emissions of Domestic Cooking Burners Using DME-LPG Blends as a Fuel,” Fourth TSME International Conference on Mechanical Engineering, Parraya, Chonburi, Oct. 16–18, p. 8.
Zhen, H. S. , Leung, C. W. , and Wong, T. T. , 2014, “ Improvement of Domestic Cooking Flames by Utilizing Swirling Flows,” Fuel, 119(1), pp. 153–156. [CrossRef]
ISO–International Organization for Standardization, 2011, “ Safety and Control Devices for Gas Burners and Gas-Burning Appliances—General Requirements,” ISO, Geneva, Switzerland, p. 41, Standard No. ISO 23550:2011.
ATLAS, 2015, “ Fogão Tropical Plus 4 Bocas,” ATLAS, Pato Branco, Brazil, accessed Sept. 15, 2015, http://www.atlas.ind.br/site/pt/produtos/49/fogao-a-gas-tropical-plus-4-bocas
Nabi, M. N. , 2010, “ Theoretical Investigation of Engine Thermal Efficiency, Adiabatic Flame Temperature, NOx Emission and Combustion-Related Parameters for Different Oxygenated Fuels,” Appl. Therm. Eng., 30(8–9), pp. 839–844. [CrossRef]
Nogueira, L. A. H. , Cardoso, R. B. , Cavalcanti, C. Z. B. , and Leonelli, P. A. , 2015, “ Evaluation of the Energy Impacts of the Energy Efficiency Law in Brazil,” Energy Sustainable Dev., 24(1), pp. 58–69. [CrossRef]
Copyright © 2017 by ASME
View article in PDF format.

References

MME–Ministério de Minas e Energia, 2015, “ Boletim Mensal de Energia (Maio 2015),” Brasília, Brazil, accessed Aug. 31, 2015, http://goo.gl/s2rFEL
SINDIGAS, 2015, “ Preço do gás de Cozinha vai ter Aumento Médio de 15%, diz Sindigás,” SINDIGAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, accessed Sept. 15, 2015, http://www.sindigas.com.br/noticia/interna.aspx?id=7945
ABNT-Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas, 2011, “ NBR 13.148: Fogões, Fogões de Mesa, Fornos e Fogareiros a gás de uso Industrial—Terminologia,” ABNT, São Paulo, Brazil, p. 58.
Turns, S. R. , 2013, Introdução à Combustão: Conceitos e Aplicações, 3rd ed., AMGH, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Hou, S.-S. , Lee, C.-Y. , and Lin, T.-H. , 2007, “ Efficiency and Emissions of a New Domestic Gas Burner With a Swirling Flame,” Energy Convers. Manage., 48(5), pp. 1401–1410. [CrossRef]
Li, H. B. , Wong, T. T., Leung, C. W., and Probert, S. D., 2006, “ Thermal Performances and CO Emissions of Gas-Fired Cooker-Top Burners,” Appl. Energy, 83(12), pp. 1326–1338. [CrossRef]
Zhang, Y. , Qin, C. , Xing, H. , and Liu, P. , 2013, “ Experimental Research on Performance Response of Domestic Gas Cookers to Variable Natural Gas Constituents,” J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng., 10(1), pp. 41–50. [CrossRef]
Ko, Y.-C. , and Lin, T.-H. , 2003, “ Emissions and Efficiency of a Domestic Gas Stove Burning Natural Gases With Various Compositions,” Energy Convers. Manage., 44(19), pp. 3001–3014. [CrossRef]
INMETRO–Instituto Nacional de Metrologia, Qualidade e Tecnologia, 2012, “ Portaria 400/2012—Requisitos de Avaliação da Conformidade Para Fogões e Fornos a gás de uso Doméstico,” INMETRO, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, p. 3.
PETROBRÁS, 2013, “ Gás Liquefeito de Petróleo–Informações Técnicas (Versão 1.2),” PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, accessed Sept. 15, 2015, http://sites.petrobras.com.br/minisite/assistenciatecnica/public/downloads/manual-tecnico-gas-liquefeito-petrobras-assistencia-tecnica-petrobras.pdf
Yaws, C. L. , 2001, Matheson Gas Data Book, 7th ed., McGraw-Hill Professional, Parsippany, NJ, p. 982.
Balbinot, A. , and Brusamarello, V. J. , 2010, Instrumentação e Fundamentos de Medidas, 2nd ed., Vol. 1, LTC, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, p. 385.
ABNT-Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas, 2003, “ NBR 13723-1: Aparelho Doméstico de Cocção a gás Parte 1: Desempenho e Segurança,” ABNT, São Paulo, Brazil, p. 58.
ABNT–Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas, 1999, “ NBR 13723-2: Aparelho Doméstico de Cocção a gás Parte 2: Uso Racional de Energia,” ABNT, São Paulo, Brazil, p. 3.
Garcia, R. , 2002, Combustíveis e Combustão Industrial, 1st ed., Interciência, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Rocha, M. S. , Neto, E. P. , Panella, L. S. , Ferreira, E. S. , and Moreira, J. R. S. , 2010, “ Conversion Methods for Commercial Stoves From LPG to Natural Gas Firing,” 13th Brazilian Congress of Thermal Sciences and Engineering—ENCIT, Uberlândia, Brazil, Dec. 5–10, p. 7.
Makmool, U. , and Jugjai, S. , 2013, “ Thermal Efficiency and Pollutant Emissions of Domestic Cooking Burners Using DME-LPG Blends as a Fuel,” Fourth TSME International Conference on Mechanical Engineering, Parraya, Chonburi, Oct. 16–18, p. 8.
Zhen, H. S. , Leung, C. W. , and Wong, T. T. , 2014, “ Improvement of Domestic Cooking Flames by Utilizing Swirling Flows,” Fuel, 119(1), pp. 153–156. [CrossRef]
ISO–International Organization for Standardization, 2011, “ Safety and Control Devices for Gas Burners and Gas-Burning Appliances—General Requirements,” ISO, Geneva, Switzerland, p. 41, Standard No. ISO 23550:2011.
ATLAS, 2015, “ Fogão Tropical Plus 4 Bocas,” ATLAS, Pato Branco, Brazil, accessed Sept. 15, 2015, http://www.atlas.ind.br/site/pt/produtos/49/fogao-a-gas-tropical-plus-4-bocas
Nabi, M. N. , 2010, “ Theoretical Investigation of Engine Thermal Efficiency, Adiabatic Flame Temperature, NOx Emission and Combustion-Related Parameters for Different Oxygenated Fuels,” Appl. Therm. Eng., 30(8–9), pp. 839–844. [CrossRef]
Nogueira, L. A. H. , Cardoso, R. B. , Cavalcanti, C. Z. B. , and Leonelli, P. A. , 2015, “ Evaluation of the Energy Impacts of the Energy Efficiency Law in Brazil,” Energy Sustainable Dev., 24(1), pp. 58–69. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Experimental apparatus, TP levels (handle position selector) and Brazilian label

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Burner—top and frontal views

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Heating capacity tests on β burners—water temperature increases at different TP conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Nominal thermal power behavior—Burners “α” (left) and β (right)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Thermal efficiency changes for different handle position selection

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Reynolds influence on efficiency (heating test)

Tables

Table Grahic Jump Location
Table 1 Burner geometry and the aspect ratio [4]
Table Grahic Jump Location
Table 2 Fuel properties [4]
Table Footer NoteNote: Measured at T = 298.15 K and p = 0.1 MPa.
Table Footer NoteaGases at boiling temperature (liquefied gas).
Table Grahic Jump Location
Table 3 Instrumentation for residential gas burners tests
Table Grahic Jump Location
Table 4 Water temperature slope over time, ΔTt

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In