Use of a fuel additive in diesel fuel for removing deposits in a diesel engine

Abstract

The present invention relates to the use of a diesel fuel additive for removing deposits in a diesel engine.

Claims

1. A method for preventing, reducing and/or removing deposits in a diesel engine comprising: adding a fuel additive comprising a peroxide to a diesel fuel; and, permitting a diesel engine to combust the fuel additive and the diesel fuel, wherein the fuel additive prevents, reduces and/or removes deposits formed in the diesel engine during the combustion.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the fuel additive comprises at least one organic peroxide.

3. The method of claim 2, wherein the at least one organic peroxide is a hydroperoxide, dialkylperoxide, a cyclic or acyclic ketone peroxide, a perketal or a combination thereof.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein the fuel additive comprises tert-butylhydroperoxide (TBHP), cumene hydroperoxide, methylethylketoneperoxide, acetone peroxide, tert-amyl hydroperoxide (TAHP), di-tert-butyl peroxide (DTBP), tert-butyl peroxybenzoate (TBPB), 1,1-Di-(tert-butylperoxy)-cyclohexan (CH) or tetramethyl-dioxa-cyclohexane (TMDOCH).

5. The method of claim 1, wherein the fuel additive comprises TBHP.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein the fuel additive comprises DTBP.

7. The method of claim 1, wherein the fuel additive comprises CH.

8. The method of claim 1, wherein the fuel additive is anhydrous.

9. The method of claim 8, wherein water in the anhydrous fuel additive is <5 wt.

10. The method of claim 1, wherein the fuel additive further comprises a solvent, wherein the solvent is an alcohol or a hydrocarbon.

11. The method of claim 10, wherein the alcohol is tert-butyl alcohol, and the hydrocarbon is isododecane, diesel, kerosene or 2,2,4-trimethyl-1,3-pentanediol diisobutyrate.

12. The method of claim 1, wherein the fuel additive comprises a mixture of TBHP and tert-butyl alcohol (TBA).

13. The method of claim 12, wherein the TBHP is anhydrous TBHP.

14. The method of claim 1, wherein the peroxide is in an amount of 0.001 wt. % to 10 wt. based on the total weight of the fuel.

15. The method of claim 1, wherein the deposits comprise small particles, soot and/or glycol.

16. The method of claim 1, wherein the diesel fuel with the fuel additive has a HFRR score of at least 70 lower than the diesel fuel without the fuel additive.

17. The method of claim 1, wherein the diesel fuel without the fuel additive has a cetane number of <50.

18. The method of claim 1, wherein the diesel fuel with fuel additive has a cetane number larger by at least 2 compared to the diesel fuel without fuel additive.

19. The method of claim 8, wherein water in the anhydrous fuel additive is <1 wt. %.

20. The method of claim 8, wherein water in the anhydrous fuel additive is <0.3 wt. %.

21. The method of claim 8, wherein water in the anhydrous fuel additive is <0.01 wt. %.

22. The method of claim 1, wherein the peroxide is in an amount of 0.25 wt. % to 10 wt. % based on the total weight of the fuel.

23. The method of claim 1, wherein the peroxide is in an amount of 0.1 wt. % to 3 wt. % based on the total weight of the fuel.

24. The method of claim 1, wherein the peroxide is in an amount of 0.1 to 0.5 wt. % based on the total weight of the fuel.

25. The method of claim 1, wherein the diesel fuel without the fuel additive has a cetane number of <45.

Description

EXAMPLE 1

(1) Reduction of Fuel Consumption with TBHP and TBA as Fuel Additive

(2) To a conventional US base diesel fuel (cetane number=42) was added 0.25 wt. % of a fuel additive consisting of TBHP (55 wt. %) and TBA (45 wt. %). The total amount of TBHP added to the diesel fuel is 0.14 wt. %.

(3) By addition of fuel additive to the above described diesel fuel the cetane number is increased from 42 (without fuel additive) to 48 (with fuel additive).

(4) The test engine used was a Caterpillar D3512-C V12 diesel engine exhibiting a total displacement of 58560 cm.sup.3, as well as a displacement per cylinder of 4880 cm.sup.3 and a compression ratio of 14.7:1. The test engine was used in a drilling rig.

(5) In a comparative test the consumption of the above mentioned US base diesel fuel was measured without and with diesel fuel additive consisting of TBHP and TBA in the Caterpillar D3512-C diesel engine over a continuous period of time of 22 days. The measurement of fuel consumption of the US base diesel fuel without diesel fuel additive (baseline) is the average of 14 wells tested with the diesel engine. In the period of measurement 1 the fuel additive has been applied for the first time to the diesel engine. Period of measurement 1 is followed by period of measurement 2, which in turn is followed by period of measurement 3. In the period of measurement 2 and 3 the same diesel engine has been used as for period of measurement 1.

(6) In the following table 1 the fuel consumption is indicated as consumption of liters per hour (l/h) as average value for the respective day. FIG. 1 illustrates this result.

(7) TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Comparison of the reduction of fuel consumption without and with TBHP and TBA as fuel additive US base diesel Period of Period of Period of fuel measurement 1 measurement 2 measurement 3 without TBHP US base diesel US base diesel US base diesel in TBA fuel with TBHP fuel with TBHP fuel with TBHP (average in TBA (average in TBA (average in TBA (average consumption in consumption in consumption in consumption in day l/h) l/h) l/h) l/h) 1 62.26 67.98 42.96 50 2 72.52 84.82 48.60 53.97 3 75.81 80.51 62.91 52.46 4 80.66 94.25 70.29 43.94 5 92.73 103.52 81.19 54.92 6 99.01 97.77 91.10 66.96 7 106.13 106.36 94.44 73.50 8 114.72 110.64 109.69 82.89 9 114.61 107.15 104.69 84.97 10 116.35 106.28 105.79 88.61 11 116.24 110.26 101.82 90.80 12 119.83 111.13 101.70 96.82 13 120.44 107.80 104.96 98.49 14 117.64 107.42 99.62 96.93 15 121.80 110.26 100.64 101.06 16 120.70 108.36 103.44 101.51 17 121.31 111.24 101.25 101.02 18 122.48 114.12 102.31 100.08 19 123.69 112.72 104.39 102.50 20 123.73 113.59 104.05 101.97 21 124.26 114.31 103.10 103.67 22 122.97 114.38 100.83 101.74 average 108.63 104.31 92.69 84.03

(8) In the course of testing, an increase of fuel consumption was observed for fuel both with and without a fuel additive consisting of TBHP and TBA. Due to the use of the test engine in a drilling rig, the increase of fuel consumption depended on the earth drilled. With longer drilling periods, the drill advanced into deeper and more rigid layers of earth. In order to advance through more rigid layers of earth, the test engine needed more energy, hence consumed more fuel. Although the absolute values of fuel consumption are increasing during drilling, the relative values of fuel consumption of the fuel without and with fuel additive are decreasing.

(9) Over the total period of measurement of 22 days an average consumption of 108.63 l/h was yielded for US base diesel fuel without fuel additive and of 104.31 l/h (period of measurement 1), 92.69 l/h (period of measurement 2) and 84.03 l/h (period of measurement 3) was yielded for the same US base diesel fuel with fuel additive. This corresponds to an average fuel saving of 4.32 l or 3.97% (period of measurement 1), 15.94 l or 14.67% (period of measurement 2) and 24.6 l or 22.65% (period of measurement 3) per hour measured.

(10) It is observed that from day 1 to day 6 of period of measurement 1, the fuel consumption is higher using a fuel with fuel additive compared to a fuel without fuel additive. This is attributed to the cleaning of the engine by using the fuel with fuel additive. More fuel with fuel additive is consumed to reduce the deposits in the engine. From day 7 of period of measurement 1, the deposits in the engine are reduced to such an extend that lower fuel consumption compared to the baseline period is observed. During period of measurement 2 the engine is cleaned to such an extend that lower fuel consumption compared to period of measurement 1 is observed. During period of measurement 3 the engine is cleaned to such an extend that even lower fuel consumption compared to period of measurement 2 is observed.

(11) This is also impressively demonstrated in a longer test over a period of 1306 hours 154662 l US base diesel fuel without fuel additive was consumed and 131684 l US base diesel fuel with fuel additive. This corresponds to a total fuel saving of 22978 l or 14.86%.

EXAMPLE 2

(12) Reduction of Fuel Consumption with TBHP and TBA as Fuel Additive

(13) To a US marine diesel (cetane number=40) was added 0.25 wt. % of a fuel additive consisting of TBHP (55 wt. %) and TBA (45 wt. %). The total amount of TBHP added to this diesel fuel is 0.14 wt. %.

(14) The test engine used was a John Deere 6081 PowerTech 8.1 L, 6 cylinder, marine engine exhibiting a total displacement of 8100 cm.sup.3, as well as a displacement per cylinder of 1350 cm.sup.3 and a compression ratio of 15.7:1.

(15) In a comparative test the consumption of the above mentioned US marine diesel was measured with and without diesel additive consisting of TBHP and TBA in the John Deere 6081 PowerTech 8.1 L marine diesel engine over a period of time of 25 days. The average consumption of diesel fuel without fuel additive was 25.55 l/h. The average consumption of the diesel fuel with diesel fuel additive was reduced compared to the diesel fuel without fuel additive during the period of measurement 1 (day 11-15) by 2.1%, during the period of measurement 2 (day 16-20) by 8.9% and during the period of measurement 3 (day 21-25) by 17.9%. This test result is illustrated in FIG. 2.

(16) The increase of fuel consumption during day 1-5 and day 6-10 is due to removal of impurities and deposits in the engine which impurities clog the engine filter. Clogged filters have been changed on day 6, 11 and 16. From day 13 on, the engine is cleaned to such an extend that reduction in fuel consumption is observed.

EXAMPLE 3

(17) Reduction of Fuel Consumption with TBHP and TBA as Fuel Additive

(18) To a conventional US base diesel fuel (cetane number=42) was added 0.25 wt. % of a fuel additive consisting of TBHP (55 wt. %) and TBA (45 wt. %). The total amount of TBHP added to the diesel fuel is 0.14 wt. %.

(19) In comparative tests the average consumption of the above mentioned base diesel fuel was measured without and with diesel fuel additive consisting of TBHP and TBA in diesel engines of various types of buses. In the following table 2 the average consumption is indicated as consumption in liters per 100 km for various buses.

(20) TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Comparison of the reduction of fuel consumption without and with TBHP and TBA as fuel additive in various types of buses. US base diesel fuel US base without diesel fuel total km TBHP in with TBHP travelled reduction TBA in TBA with a US of (average (average base diesel average consumption consumption fuel with consumption Bus in in TBHP in (in No. Bus description l/100 km) L/100 km) TBA %) 1 1995 Amtran 47.47 40.94 676 14 International V 14.5 tons 2 2002 Amtran 97.51 69.73 686 28 International V 14.5 tons 3 2008 Caterpillar I-6 47.00 41.37 3156 12 16.5 tons 4 2008 Caterpillar I-6 44.17 40.80 3125 7.7 16.5 tons 5 2008 Caterpillar I-6 43.20 39.76 3323 8.0 16.5 tons 6 2008 Caterpillar I-6 44.59 40.24 2790 9.8 16.5 tons 7 2008 Caterpillar I-6 44.51 39.97 2771 10 16.5 tons 8 2008 Caterpillar I-6 40.73 28.21 3294 31 16.5 tons 9 2008 Caterpillar I-6 46.35 27.04 3663 42 16.5 tons 10 2009 Mercedes Benz 38.59 35.77 2597 7.3 I-6 16.5 tons 11 2009 Mercedes Benz 40.73 37.72 2294 7.4 I-6 16.5 tons 12 2009 Mercedes Benz 47.19 42.41 3489 10 I-6 16.5 tons 13 2009 Mercedes Benz 46.53 28.38 2246 39 I-6 16.5 tons

EXAMPLE 4

(21) Reduction in Friction by Using TBHP and TBA as a Fuel Additive

(22) To an untreated ultra-low sulfur diesel (cetane number=42) was added 0.25 wt. % of a fuel additive consisting of TBHP (55 wt. %) and TBA (45 wt. %). The total amount of TBHP added to the diesel fuel is 0.14 wt. %.

(23) In comparative tests the HFRR score of the above mentioned untreated ultra-low sulfur diesel was measured without and with different diesel fuel additives. In the following table 3 the HFRR score of untreated ultra-low sulfur diesel is indicated as well as the HFRR score of ultra-low sulfur diesel with different fuel additives. Moreover, the HFRR score of the fuel with fuel additive is compared to the fuel without fuel additive.

(24) TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 HFRR score of base fuel without as well as with diesel additives HFRR Additive/Fuel score Reduction Standard Engine Manufacturers <460 Association (desired) Untreated ultra-low sulfur diesel 636 1 2-EHN (25.3-38.6 wt. %); petroleum 447 189 naphta (27.2-41.3 wt. %) trimethyl- benzene (0.4-1.96 wt. %), naphthalene (3.12 wt. %), 2-ethylhexanol (0.4-1.96 wt. %) 2 2-EHN (10-19.9 wt. %), petroleum 461 175 naphta (60-69 wt. %) trimethylbenzene (20-29 wt %) 3 2-EHN (30-60 wt. %), light aromatic 470 166 petroleum naphta (30-60 wt. %) 1,2,4- trimethylbenzene (10-30 wt. %) 4 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene (30-60 wt. %) 488 148 trimethylbenzene (30-60 wt. %) solvent naphta, heavy aromatic (5-10 wt. %) 5 Distillates petroleum, hydrotreated light 603 33 (30-50 wt. %), 2-EHN (20-30 wt. %), naphta (petroleum), heavy aromatic 10-30 wt. %) 6 TBHP (55 wt. %), TBA (45 wt. %) 316 320

(25) The diesel additive consisting of TBHP and TBA resulted in a reduction of the HFRR score of 320 and is below the standard of the Engine Manufacturers Association.

EXAMPLE 5

(26) Reduction of Fuel Consumption with DTBP, CH or TBHP as Fuel Additive

(27) Tests were performed, wherein to a conventional diesel fuel (cetane number=42) was added each 0.25 wt. % of a fuel additive comprising DTBP, CH or TBHP, respectively, whereby in each of the used fuel additive formulations DTBP was present in pure form, CH as a 80% solution in isododecane and TBHP as a 55% solution in TBA. The total amount of DTBP added to the diesel fuel is 0.25 wt. %. The total amount of CH added to the diesel fuel is 0.20 wt. %. The total amount of TBHP added to the diesel fuel is 0.14 wt %.

(28) The diesel generator used in each of the tests was a SDMO 30 kVA generator with a 2.9l 3-cylinder diesel John Deere motor. The diesel fuel used for testing was Engen Dynamic Diesel 50 ppm. The test engine was used at a temperature range between 25 C. to 31 C.

(29) In a comparative test, the consumption of the above-mentioned diesel fuel was measured without and with diesel fuel additive consisting of DTBP, CH or TBHP. The measurement of fuel consumption (under no load condition) of the US based diesel fuel without diesel fuel additive (base line) was established over a course of seven individual 30-minute runs using 2l of untreated fuel. For testing the fuel additives, the generator fuel system was purged with 2 l of fuel treated with the respective fuel additives and the diesel consumption (under no load condition) using the treated fuel was established over a course of seven individual 30-minute runs.

(30) In the following Table 4, the full consumption is indicated as consumption of milliliter as average value for the respective run.

(31) TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 Pure DTBP CH TBHP 50 ppm dosed dosed dosed Run (30 minutes) Diesel diesel diesel diesel 1 735 630 660 660 2 780 672 648 639 3 690 690 645 639 4 690 711 630 666 5 723 660 645 669 6 744 666 639 651 7 729 687 645 624 Average consumption per 727.29 673.71 644.57 649.71 run (ml) Average consumption per 1454.57 1347.43 1289.14 1299.43 hour (ml) Average diesel consumption 53.57 82.71 77.57 reduction (ml) Percentage reduction 7.37% 11.37% 10.67%

(32) Over the total period of measurement of seven runs, an average consumption per run of 727.29 ml/run was yielded for the diesel fuel without fuel additive. A reduction of average fuel consumption to 673.71 ml/run (DTBP), 644.75 ml/run (CH) and 649.71 ml/run (TBHP) was yielded for the diesel fuel dosed with the respective fuel additives. This corresponds to an average reduction of fuel consumption of 53.57 ml/run and percentage reduction of 7.37% for DTBP dosed fuel additive, and respectively of 82.71 ml/run and 11.37% for CH dosed fuel additive and 77.57 ml/run and 10.67% for TBHP fuel additive for the overall measurement.

(33) These test results indicate that each of the three fuel additives have a significant and immediate impact of reducing diesel consumption when added to a US base diesel fuel.

(34) Moreover, a marked and immediate visual impact of reduced smoke emission and cleaner (whiter) smoke emission could be observed (data not shown) from the generator when using the diesel treated with the fuel additives as opposed to the untreated diesel.