Comparative Analysis of Liquid Fuels and Oxidizers for Internal Combustion Engines Using a Composite Scoring Approach

Abstract

In this study, oxidizers like oxygen, atmospheric air, nitrous oxide, and fluorine are compared with liquid fuels like hydrogen, ethanol, jet fuel, and methane. A composite scoring framework that weighs efficiency (65%), temperature (25%), and cost (10%) was created using empirical validation, second-degree polynomial regression, and Python-based numerical simulations. Although its high cost restricts its economic viability, the analysis revealed that hydrogen with fluorine had the highest composite score, exhibiting exceptional thermal performance and combustion efficiency. Methane with nitrous oxide and fluorine also scored highly, providing stability and high efficiency at a more balanced price. Even though jet fuel was marginally less effective, it was more affordable when combined with fluorine or nitrous oxide. Air and oxygen, on the other hand, produced significantly lower scores, indicating limited combustion intensity despite their affordability and accessibility. Sensitivity analysis showed that top and bottom rankings stayed constant, but mid-tier rankings might change depending on parameter changes. With implications for propulsion, aerospace, and power generation systems, these findings offer a useful framework for choosing fuel-oxidizer pairs under performance and cost constraints.