Portable Fuel Portable Fuel Analyzer System (PFAS)/ Analyzer System (PFAS)/Multiple Fuel Optimization Multiple Fuel Optimization

System(MFOSSystem(MFOS))

Advanced Multi-Fuel SystemsAdvanced Multi-Fuel SystemsPO Box 2191

Woodbridge, VA 22193

703-303-1752

The GoalThe Goal

Develop a compact, portable, remote fuel quality sensor capable of differentiating most types of fuels used in commercial, industrial, aviation and military applications.– Portable fuel Quality Analyzer (PFAS)– Combustion Optimization Network (MFOS)

04/21/23 2

Today’s ChallengeToday’s Challenge

Engines designed for diesel/distillate fuel, but required to use the lighter kerosene fuels, or gasoline/spark assisted engines operating on alternative fuels

Cannot design engine to operate optimally on two or more different fuels

Resultant compromise yields a “multi-fuel capability” but Lower fuel economy (mpg) Slower acceleration/top speed Reduced power at fuel rack settings Compromised exhaust emissions

04/21/23 3

The SolutionThe Solution

Develop system capable of instaneously optimizing engine performance regardless of fuel being consumed

True multi-fuel capability achieved without compromising performance

04/21/23 4

What is the MFOS?What is the MFOS?

MFOS is a two component unit consisting of a fuel-sensor coupled with a Neural Network main computer/engine control unit.

It uses state of the art, proven and patented technology to identify fuel patterns and electronically control internal and external combustion engines to achieve optimum performance for a wide variety of fuels.

04/21/23 5

Benefits of the MFOS SystemBenefits of the MFOS System

This low cost system will complement existing engine components, allowing operation at optimum levels with the ability to use locally available or environmental friendly fuels.

It will allow virtually all engines to run on a wide variety of fuels without loss of power, fuel efficiency or engine life, with the added benefit of lowering fuel consumption and exhaust emissions.

04/21/23 6

AMFS' Multiple Fuel SolutionAMFS' Multiple Fuel Solution

04/21/23 7

Potential MarketsPotential Markets

M ilita ryM arke ts

M A R IN EA P P L IC A TIO N S

A via tionR ec ip roca l an d TU R B IN E

M A S S TR A N S ITR A IL R O A D S

C O M M E R C IA L TR U C K IN GF L E E T O P E R A TO R S

R E C R E A TIO N A L V E H IC L E STR A C TO R S & M O W E R S

P A S S E N G E R V E H IC L E SS P O R T U TIL ITY V E H IC L E S

C IV IL IA NM A R K E T

C om m erc ia lA p p lica tion s

AMFS

04/21/23 8

Portable Analyzer Case DesignPortable Analyzer Case Design

04/21/23 9

04/21/23 10

Flowchart for DesignFlowchart for Design

Circuit Design Case Design

Evaluation Evaluation

Prototype Performance Quality Check NG

1. Variation2. Repeatability3. Temperature dependency4. Supply Voltage Dependency

Mass Production

OK

04/21/23 11

Sensor System DevelopmentSensor System Development

FEORC

9/99

FEORC

11/99

Results for the Portable Results for the Portable FuelFuel

Classification AnalyzerClassification Analyzer

Results for the Portable Results for the Portable FuelFuel

Classification AnalyzerClassification Analyzer 6 March 2000

Fiber & Electro-Optics Research CenterFiber & Electro-Optics Research CenterThe Bradley Department of Electrical

EngineeringVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State University106 Plantation Road 0356, Blacksburg VA 24061

04/21/23 13

87 Octane Fuel Signature87 Octane Fuel Signature

3…

Vrl7.1

7.2

7.3

7.4

7.5

7.6

7.7

7.8

0.128 0.122 0.115 0.108 0.100 0.091 0.081 0.070 0.067

Vrl [V](volts)

Ih [A]

87 Octane

04/21/23 14

89 Octane Fuel Signature89 Octane Fuel Signature

3…

Vrl7.1

7.2

7.3

7.4

7.5

7.6

7.7

0.128 0.122 0.115 0.108 0.100 0.091 0.081 0.070 0.067

Vrl [V]

Ih [A]

89 Octane

04/21/23 15

93 Octane Fuel Signature93 Octane Fuel Signature

0.128 0.122 0.115 0.108 0.100 0.091 0.081 0.070 0.067

30 sec

Vrl7.45

7.5

7.55

7.6

7.65

7.7

7.75

Vrl [V]

Ih [A]

93 Octane

04/21/23 16

Kerosene SignatureKerosene Signature

4…

Vrl5

5.2

5.4

5.6

5.8

6

6.2

6.4

6.6

6.8

0.128 0.122 0.115 0.108 0.100 0.091 0.081 0.070 0.067

Vrl [V]

Ih [A]

Kerosene

04/21/23 17

Diesel SignatureDiesel Signature

0.128 0.122 0.115 0.108 0.100 0.091 0.081 0.070 0.067

1 minute

Vrl4.5

4.7

4.9

5.1

5.3

5.5

5.7

5.9

6.1

6.3

6.5

Vrl [V]

Ih [A]

Diesel Fuel

04/21/23 18

Parameters DeterminedParameters Determined

Smaller organic solvent sensor evaluated and discarded

Successful signature difference achieved with one gas and one ammonia sensor

Heater control parameter switched from Vh to Ih Sampling times vary from 30 to 60 seconds Process automated Signature differentiation program created

04/21/23 19

Parameters to be DeterminedParameters to be Determined

Blanket sensor exposure time Effectively incorporating ammonia sensor data Humidity and temperature influences Repeatability, error, deviation, reliability of

measurements and reversibility Requirements on fluid/gas atomization and flow

rate

04/21/23 20

RecommendationsRecommendations

Compare increasing warm-up time with the existing signatures

Extend pre-sample waiting period Observe temperature fluctuations Possibly change the software to always

sample at certain thermistor voltage levels

04/21/23 21

Questions?Questions?

Hans MummHans Mumm

Advanced Multi-Fuel SystemsAdvanced Multi-Fuel SystemsPO Box 2191

Woodbridge, VA 22193

703-303-1752

04/21/23 22

Multiple Fuel Optimization System(MFOSMultiple Fuel Optimization System(MFOS))

BACK UP SLIDES

Fractional DistillationFractional Distillation

04/21/23 23

04/21/23 24

Current Phase of DevelopmentCurrent Phase of Development

Three phases of the project– Analysis of the problem and wiring of the sensor – Automation of the data acquisition process– New circuit board

different load resistance temperature humidity

04/21/23 25

ParametersParameters

Load resistance– 1.5, 5, 8 and 20 k

Ambient temperature– 21.5 to 23.2 °C

Ambient humidity– 20.3 to 22.1 % RH

04/21/23 26

Normalized DieselNormalized DieselFuel SignaturesFuel Signatures

0 10 20 30 40 50 60-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1Comparison of the Normalized Diesel Fuel Signatures

04/21/23 27

Normalized KeroseneNormalized KeroseneFuel SignaturesFuel Signatures

0 10 20 30 40 50 60-1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6Comparison of the Normalized Kerosene Fuel Signatures

04/21/23 28

Normalized 87 Octane GasolineNormalized 87 Octane GasolineFuel SignaturesFuel Signatures

0 10 20 30 40 50 60-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1Comparison of the Normalized 87 Octane Gasoline Fuel Signatures

04/21/23 29

Normalized 93 Octane GasolineNormalized 93 Octane GasolineFuel SignaturesFuel Signatures

0 10 20 30 40 50 60-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1Comparison of the Normalized 93 Octane Gasoline Fuel Signatures

04/21/23 30

Derivatives of DieselDerivatives of DieselFuel SignaturesFuel Signatures

0 10 20 30 40 50 60-1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4Comparison of Derivatives of Diesel Fuel Signatures

04/21/23 31

Derivatives of KeroseneDerivatives of KeroseneFuel SignaturesFuel Signatures

0 10 20 30 40 50 60-1

-0.5

0

0.5Comparison of Derivatives of Kerosene Fuel Signatures

04/21/23 32

Derivatives of 93 OctaneDerivatives of 93 OctaneGasoline Fuel SignaturesGasoline Fuel Signatures

0 10 20 30 40 50 60-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6Comparison of Derivatives of 93 Octane Gasoline Fuel Signatures

04/21/23 33

Derivatives of 87 OctaneDerivatives of 87 OctaneGasoline Fuel SignaturesGasoline Fuel Signatures

0 10 20 30 40 50 60-0.6

-0.5

-0.4

-0.3

-0.2

-0.1

0

0.1Comparison of Derivatives of 87 Octane Gasoline Fuel Signatures

04/21/23 34

Cumulative Integrals ofCumulative Integrals ofDiesel FuelsDiesel Fuels

0 10 20 30 40 50 600

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16Comparison of Cumulative Integrals of Diesel Fuel Signatures

04/21/23 35

Cumulative Integrals ofCumulative Integrals ofKerosene FuelsKerosene Fuels

0 10 20 30 40 50 60-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10Comparison of Cumulative Integrals of Kerosene Fuel Signatures

04/21/23 36

Cumulative Integrals of 93 Cumulative Integrals of 93 Octane Gasoline FuelsOctane Gasoline Fuels

0 10 20 30 40 50 600

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18Comparison of Cumulative Integrals of 93 Octane Gasoline Fuel Signatures

04/21/23 37

Cumulative Integrals of 87 Cumulative Integrals of 87 Octane Gasoline FuelsOctane Gasoline Fuels

0 10 20 30 40 50 600

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18Comparison of Cumulative Integrals of 87 Octane Gasoline Fuel Signatures

04/21/23 38

Comparison of NormalizedComparison of NormalizedFuel SignaturesFuel Signatures

0 10 20 30 40 50 60-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1Comparison of the Normalized Fuel Signatures

04/21/23 39

Comparison of Derivatives of the Comparison of Derivatives of the Normalized Fuel SignaturesNormalized Fuel Signatures

0 10 20 30 40 50 60-1

-0.5

0

0.5Comparison of Derivatives of the Fuel Signatures

04/21/23 40

Comparison of Cumulative Comparison of Cumulative Integrals of the Fuel SignaturesIntegrals of the Fuel Signatures

0 10 20 30 40 50 60-5

0

5

10

15

20Comparison of Cumulative Integrals of the Fuel Signatures

04/21/23 41

Temperature SignaturesTemperature Signatures

0 10 20 30 40 50 604

4.5

5

5.5

6

6.5Thermistor Readings - Temperature Signature

04/21/23 42

ConclusionConclusion

Smaller load resistance yields increased signature details

First derivative and cumulative integral offer valuable additional information toward signature differentiation

Initial temperature variations observed