比较两艘液化天然气动力船舶的模拟和测量废气成分

IF 3.8 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Mikko Heikkilä , Niina Kuittinen , Tiia Grönholm
{"title":"比较两艘液化天然气动力船舶的模拟和测量废气成分","authors":"Mikko Heikkilä ,&nbsp;Niina Kuittinen ,&nbsp;Tiia Grönholm","doi":"10.1016/j.aeaoa.2024.100275","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Bottom-up modelling is used frequently to estimate emissions produced by seagoing vessels, and the accuracy of modelling is dependent on the data the model is trained with. Observational studies can be used to increase the model accuracy. Here we compared data from two measuring campaigns conducted on board ships that use Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) as primary fuel in internal combustion engines (ICE) in a diesel-electric setup with values obtained from the Ship Traffic Emission Assessment Model (STEAM).</p><p>The power demand for propulsion calculated using Automatic Identification System (AIS) data matched observations reasonably. The root mean square error between the modelled and observed power demand was 759–914 kW (28.6–34.5%) for the measured ropax vessel and 1869–1916 kW (16.7–17.1%) for the large cruise vessel over four voyages while the ships were underway. The discrepancy is largely explained by the auxiliary power demand, which was 4 times higher on the large cruise vessel than the model prediction.</p><p>Using meteorological data to estimate the increase of resistance did not improve the goodness of fit between modelled and observed engine power demand. STEAM model's base-specific fuel consumption calculation method fits observed values reasonably when the engine load is over 50%, but ICEs used in constant speed mode have increased consumption at lower engine loads compared to variable speed ICEs.</p><p>The share of pilot fuel of total energy consumption was found to play a significant role in the emission factors for measured exhaust gas compounds. More accurate functions to model fuel consumption and emissions were derived using the observed data.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37150,"journal":{"name":"Atmospheric Environment: X","volume":"23 ","pages":"Article 100275"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259016212400042X/pdfft?md5=f11af917e38ca03e2457fa39e04e963e&pid=1-s2.0-S259016212400042X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing modelled and measured exhaust gas components from two LNG-powered ships\",\"authors\":\"Mikko Heikkilä ,&nbsp;Niina Kuittinen ,&nbsp;Tiia Grönholm\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.aeaoa.2024.100275\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Bottom-up modelling is used frequently to estimate emissions produced by seagoing vessels, and the accuracy of modelling is dependent on the data the model is trained with. Observational studies can be used to increase the model accuracy. Here we compared data from two measuring campaigns conducted on board ships that use Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) as primary fuel in internal combustion engines (ICE) in a diesel-electric setup with values obtained from the Ship Traffic Emission Assessment Model (STEAM).</p><p>The power demand for propulsion calculated using Automatic Identification System (AIS) data matched observations reasonably. The root mean square error between the modelled and observed power demand was 759–914 kW (28.6–34.5%) for the measured ropax vessel and 1869–1916 kW (16.7–17.1%) for the large cruise vessel over four voyages while the ships were underway. The discrepancy is largely explained by the auxiliary power demand, which was 4 times higher on the large cruise vessel than the model prediction.</p><p>Using meteorological data to estimate the increase of resistance did not improve the goodness of fit between modelled and observed engine power demand. STEAM model's base-specific fuel consumption calculation method fits observed values reasonably when the engine load is over 50%, but ICEs used in constant speed mode have increased consumption at lower engine loads compared to variable speed ICEs.</p><p>The share of pilot fuel of total energy consumption was found to play a significant role in the emission factors for measured exhaust gas compounds. More accurate functions to model fuel consumption and emissions were derived using the observed data.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37150,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Atmospheric Environment: X\",\"volume\":\"23 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100275\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259016212400042X/pdfft?md5=f11af917e38ca03e2457fa39e04e963e&pid=1-s2.0-S259016212400042X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Atmospheric Environment: X\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259016212400042X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Atmospheric Environment: X","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259016212400042X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自下而上的建模经常用于估算海船产生的排放,而建模的准确性取决于模型所使用的数据。观测研究可用于提高模型的准确性。在此,我们比较了在柴油-电力设置中使用液化天然气(LNG)作为内燃机(ICE)主要燃料的船舶上进行的两次测量活动的数据与船舶交通排放评估模型(STEAM)获得的数值。在船舶航行的四个航次中,测得的罗巴逊船和大型游轮的动力需求模型和观测值之间的均方根误差分别为 759-914 kW(28.6-34.5%)和 1869-1916 kW(16.7-17.1%)。出现差异的主要原因是辅助动力需求,大型游轮上的辅助动力需求是模型预测值的 4 倍。使用气象数据估算阻力的增加并没有改善模型和观测到的发动机动力需求之间的拟合度。STEAM 模型的基础特定油耗计算方法在发动机负荷超过 50%时与观测值吻合度较高,但与变速内燃机相比,在恒速模式下使用的内燃机在发动机负荷较低时油耗会增加。利用观测数据得出了更精确的燃料消耗和排放建模函数。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing modelled and measured exhaust gas components from two LNG-powered ships

Bottom-up modelling is used frequently to estimate emissions produced by seagoing vessels, and the accuracy of modelling is dependent on the data the model is trained with. Observational studies can be used to increase the model accuracy. Here we compared data from two measuring campaigns conducted on board ships that use Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) as primary fuel in internal combustion engines (ICE) in a diesel-electric setup with values obtained from the Ship Traffic Emission Assessment Model (STEAM).

The power demand for propulsion calculated using Automatic Identification System (AIS) data matched observations reasonably. The root mean square error between the modelled and observed power demand was 759–914 kW (28.6–34.5%) for the measured ropax vessel and 1869–1916 kW (16.7–17.1%) for the large cruise vessel over four voyages while the ships were underway. The discrepancy is largely explained by the auxiliary power demand, which was 4 times higher on the large cruise vessel than the model prediction.

Using meteorological data to estimate the increase of resistance did not improve the goodness of fit between modelled and observed engine power demand. STEAM model's base-specific fuel consumption calculation method fits observed values reasonably when the engine load is over 50%, but ICEs used in constant speed mode have increased consumption at lower engine loads compared to variable speed ICEs.

The share of pilot fuel of total energy consumption was found to play a significant role in the emission factors for measured exhaust gas compounds. More accurate functions to model fuel consumption and emissions were derived using the observed data.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Atmospheric Environment: X
Atmospheric Environment: X Environmental Science-Environmental Science (all)
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
47
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信