MSC5 Monastir, Tunisia, September 9-13 2007

NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF ELECTRICAL SPARK

IGNITION IN A METHANE-AIR MIXTURE

H. Aghajani* and N. S. Mehdizadeh*

hamed.aghajan@gmail.com
* Aerospace Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of Technology, Hafez Ave.
No. 424 Tehran, Iran

Abstract
After studying some important papers, four phase of a spark ignition have been described.
A thermodynamic (zero dimensional) model is presented which predicts flame kernel
propagation. Its accuracy has been verified with experimental data. Then it has been used to
study spark energy and equivalence ratio effect on propagation rate.

Introduction
There has been an interest in modeling the spark ignition process in recent years with the
advance of computer power and also with greater interest in reducing the fuel consumption
and exhaust emissions. While improving fuel injection strategies and in-cylinder flow are still
getting the most attention as a way to reduce fuel consumption in engines, a better
understanding of the possibility to future improve the engine with more advanced ignition
systems. Published work on flame kernel formation falls into following four categories [1]:
PHENOMENOLOGY: Experiments in combustion chambers or test engines were carried
out to identify the interaction between globally measurable values (pressure, geometry, engine
speed, etc.) and presumed reasons (flow field, ignition energy, etc.).
ELECTRICAL SPARK IGNITION: Effect of spark current and voltage on size and
characteristics of spark plasmas as well as their effects on inflammability.
REACTION KINETICS: Influence of pressure, temperature and mixture composition on
burning velocity and influence of local losses on reaction rate and heat release.
MODLING OF FLAME KERNEL FORMATION: Modeling of flame kernel formation
requires a simultaneous treatment of spark physics, chemical kinetics and flow and turbulence
interactions.
Several models simplified the nature of the discharge like Sloane [2-4], who in his one
dimensional model increased the breakdown period to 1 µs, while normally it is in the order
of ten nanoseconds to achieve acceptable results. Champion and coworkers [5] were the first
to report a flame initiation model based on a critical radius that the kernel needed to reach to
be said self sustaining. Critical radius is a function of many physical-chemical parameters,
characteristic time and flame initiation initial energy. The model utilized a one step overall
reaction and a good agreement with experimental results was found. KO and coworkers [6]
developed a similar model for ignition in quiescent mixture. During the early growth of the
flame kernel, a blast wave is proposed to describe the kernel growth, assuming that thermal
diffusion governs the kernel growth. Thiele and coworkers [7-10] published a series of papers
on spark ignition simulation. The model was presented in [7] and used for other application in
the other papers. They first performed a comparison of different spark plug electrode
geometries with a spark plasma model. The model started after breakdown phase that
corresponds to plasma channel. In this case, the temperature and pressure of the plasma
channel were 35000 K and 100 bars respectively at the beginning of the simulation. They
used a detailed reaction mechanism for air and hydrogen, and for air and methane
combustion. Their results show that pressure wave is faster with square electrodes, and the
electrode geometry significantly influences the flame kernel development until chemical heat
release takes over after which the effect of the electrodes becomes smaller. The model
demonstrates that a larger spark gap slows down the transition of the kernel shape from
cylindrical to spherical. The comparison between their model and experiments is presented in
[10] for the methane-air mechanism. Yashar [11] used KIVA-3 to model a spark ignition
model to replace the simpler ignition model found in KIVA-3. His ignition model takes into
account flow through the discharge. The input for the ignition process is a simple current
curve as a function of time. The results showed that the chemical reaction is of importance
only in the last part of the ignition process. Akram and coworkers [12-14] presented in a
series of papers, two formulations and associated equations for one-dimensional spark
discharge. The first formulation is an Eulerian form of the governing equations, which
assumed that the plasma is a linear viscous fluid, while the second formulation is the
Lagrangian form, which assumed that the plasma is an inviscid homogeneous fluid.

Spark Ignition
Electrical spark discharge is characterized with four phases, as described in the following
briefly:
Pre-breakdown phase: As voltage is applied to the anode (Fig 1), the electric field in its
vicinity attracts drifting electrons, which are accelerated by the field. The electrons accelerate
in the electric field, and may reach to sufficient kinetic energy that once collides with an
atom; the atom becomes ionized and loses an electron. The region of ionized gas and
electrons is called streamer. As the streamer progresses to the cathode with aid of the
electromagnetic field, the number of electrons and ions grows exponentially. The electron
density in this phase is only function of E (electric field). Streamer diameter (Fig 2) is
function of applied voltage and gap width. The affect of ambient pressure and temperature on
streamer diameter or electron concentration is unknown. The chemical reactions, taking place
during the pre-breakdown phase, are non-thermal and the required energy is supplied by
electrostatic energy.

Figure 1. Electrodes schematic

Figure 2. Streamer’s propagation with time

 2) Breakdown phase: This phase is followed by the breakdown itself for which
subsequent three definitions are presented:
− Threshold process during which a non-conducting material transforms into a conductor,
by applying a sufficiently strong electric field. So, breakdown occurs instantaneously when a
streamer closes the gap [15].
− Maly defined the breakdown phase from the moment when the gap is closed to the
point, where the voltage has dropped to 100 Volts. By this definition, he covered the closing
of the gap and also the transient electrical reaction of the ignition system [16].
− This phase starts from the moment when the gap is bridged up, to the moment when
thermal equilibrium between the electron temperature and the gas temperature is achieved in
the plasma channel. The advantage of this definition is that it covers all non-equilibrium part
of the breakdown where the chemistry is both thermal and non-thermal [17].
So far, only breakdown in air has been modeled and the non-thermal mechanisms are not
well defined in the literature. Kravchik, Sher and coworkers [18] have published papers on
modeling of spark channel. The first one is related only on the breakdown phase in the spark
channel. This model calculates the temperature of the gas inside the plasma channel from the
energy deposition. Then they calculated the expansion of the plasma channel and hence the
new diameter of the plasma. From this expansion they calculated a new plasma temperature.
They obtained a plasma temperature of 45000 K, which corresponds to an expanded plasma
temperature of 27000K. This temperature is then used in their spark ignition model as an
initial condition.
3) Arc Phase: This phase is characterized by Maly [16] as having a current exceeding
17 3
100mA and an electron density of 10 e.cm . Basically, high but falling currents and low
voltages characterize the arc phase. Most of cathode erosions take place in this phase. In a
definite value of spark gap, current transition from arc to glow phase occurs. The current in
the gap is due to electron emission from the cathode. This electron emission is governed by
following two basic mechanisms:
− Thermionic emissions (arc phase)
− Bombardment of positive ions on the cathode (glow phase)
4) Glow phase: This phase is the final phase of the spark. During glow phase, the
mechanism of the emission of electrons from the cathode surface changes. The glow phase
begins when the dominance of the thermionic emissions of electrons ends. The bombardment
of positive ions on the electrode surface now becomes the dominant mechanism. The glow
phase is characterized by low currents and high voltages [19].

Model Description and Numerical Method

In this study a thermodynamic (zero dimensional) model is presented which predicts
flame kernel growth rate correctly. Considering simplicity and adequate accuracy of model, it
can be used in studying spark ignition engines. The system is schematically shown in (Fig 3).
The following assumptions are Considered [1,20,21]:
• Thermodynamically equilibrium is applicable.
• The pressure is uniform both inside outside of the kernel.
• The temperature inside the kernel is uniform.
• The perfect gas law is applicable.
• The flame kernel volume is much smaller than the combustion chamber volume.
• The calculation starts at 1µs after the breakdown period.
• The ignition kernel is assumed to be spherical.
• Heat transfer between kernel and unburned gas is neglected.
• The ignition flame kernel is very thin and it separates the burned and unburned gases.
• For simplicity only mean values for thermodynamic properties are used.
 Increase in flame kernel mass is written as:

mdV d  
s Al k u   m k  k k
 )1(
td td

ρu , A k and Sl are unburned gas density, flame kernel surface area and laminar flame
speed, respectively. Measurements in engines show that the flame kernel is influenced by
turbulence as early as 0.1 ms after spark onset [22]. Laminar and turbulent velocities can be
calculated using Metghalchi’s equation [23-24]. By differentiating ideal gas law, the mean
expansion velocity of flame kernel (rk) can be obtained as:

Td k V 1u rd k 1Vd 
k
   s )2(
td T A td A td k k k l

The energy balance for the control volume surrounded by ignition kernel surface is given
by:

 
.Vd
 . Ed

p  m  h    
Q  u k )3(
 td VC  td VC


Net heat transfer rate to the kernel ( Q ) is a summation of heat loss rate to the electrodes (
Q ht ), reaction heat release rate ( Q ch ) and electrical energy transfer rate ( Q spk ). The changes in
flame kernel internal energy, assuming no pressure gradient, can be written as:

Ud Ed p
um d  h m d     
)4(
    P k m k h mk k
td td td td

Figure 3. Thermodynamics of flame Kernel

dh dT
 C pk
Combining equations (3) and (4), and assuming dt dt , the equation (3) can be
rewritten as:

Td 1
   h h m Q  k k   )5(
C m
u
td p k k
 Kernel initial temperature is assumed to be 4000 K, which is the flame kernel expected
temperature.
Q ch is calculated using purposed relation in []:

N
W i hi i Q hc   . .  )6(
i1

To model heat transfer to the electrodes, following relation is used:

T w T Ahw Q th    )7(

2
The value of heat conducting coefficient have been selected as 200 W /m K which is
presented by Fan [21].
Considering a propagating flame kernel as a constant pressure reactor, in which
temperature, species concentration and reactor volume are functions of time, species
concentration can be calculated as below:

X iV N i   )8(

Nd i
 V i )9(
td

In the above equations, N is the number of moles.

V N d X d    N 1Nd Vd
 i i i i
2 )10(
td V td V td td

X i X d 
 i    
Vd )11(
i
td V td

In this study, a 31 reactions mechanism is used, which is presented in a detailed manner in

appendix. It involves following 15 species:
CH 4 , CH 3 , CH 2O, CHO, CO2 , H 2O, H 2 , O2 , N 2 , CO, OH , NO, N , O, H

The general form of mechanism reactions can be presented as (12) in which  k and I are
chemical symbols for kth species and number of chemical species, respectively.
K K
∑ ν ik' χ⇔
''
k ∑ νik χ k , =
(i 1 , .. . ,I ) )12(
k= 1 k= 1

The superscript (‘) indicates forward stoichiometric coefficient, while (“) indicates reverse
stoichiometric coefficients. The rate of progress variable qi for the i th reaction is given by the
difference of forward and reverse rate as:

  K K  K
q i         
 ik  ik
Xk k ir Xk k if Xk ik   )13(
  k1 k1  k 1
 Where  k  is the molar concentration of k th species and fi and r i are forward and
X k k
reverse rate constants of i th reaction. If all species in the mixture contribute equally as third
bodies,  ki  1 for all k ’s, and the first factor is the total concentration of the mixture:
K
]i∑ α ik X[
M[ = k ] )14(
k= 1


where ij is enhanced efficiency of k th species as third body in i th reaction. It is often the
case that some species act more efficiently as third bodies than do others. The production rate
of k th species can be written as a summation of the rate-of-progress variables for all reactions
involving the k th species:
I
ω˙ = )15(
k∑ νik q i
i 1
=
'' '
where ν ki =ν ki −ν ki .

The forward rate constants for the

k k
To complete calculations, fi and r i in (13) should be calculated for all reactions. In
pressure independent reactions, k can be calculated as:

 j  E j
TAj k i pxe
  )16(
 T R c

Aj ,  j E
Where and j are Arrhenius coefficients and their related information are
available in chemical mechanism. Under certain conditions, certain reaction rate expressions
depend on pressure as well as temperature. Generally speaking, the rate for uni-
molecular/recombination fall-off reactions increases with increasing pressure, while the rate
for chemically activated bimolecular reactions decreases with increasing pressure. There are
several methods for representing the rate expressions in fall-off region. The simplest one is
due to Lindemann []. Arrhenius rate parameters are required for both the high- and low-
pressure limiting cases, and the Lindemann form for the rate coefficient blends them to
produce a pressure-dependent rate expression. The rate constants at any pressure are taken to
be:

P
k=
jf k∞
( )
j
1+P
r j

rj
F j
)17(

where the reduced pressure is given by

P r= k 0 M
j[ ] j¿ k ∞ j )18(
j
 The molar enthalpy, molar specific heat and molar entropy of the plasma constituents are
required for the proper modeling of dissociation, ionization, species concentrations, energy
transport and temperature decay. To calculate thermodynamic properties of each species,
fitting functions are used identical to those of CHEMKIN [25]. The fitting functions are:

C 0
T ak 5k T ak 4k T ak 3k T akkp2k  a 14k 3 2
)19(
R
0
a a a k a k a k H
k
k Tk 6
T k 5
Tk 4
T k k
3 a 14k 2 3 2
)20(
T k 5 4 TR k 3 2

a a a S0
k a 7k T kk T  kk T k T ak 2k T k k a 15knl 4 4 3 3 2
)21(
R 4 3 2

The 18 equations -involving eq.1, eq.2, eq.5 and eq.11 which the last one contains 15
species- have been solved using DVODE code [26].

Results and conclusion

To verify model results (Fig.4), experimental observations of Maly [27] have been used
and also it have been compared with numerical simulation results of Fan [21 in figure 5.

Ignition Kernel in Stoichiometric Mixture

2

1.8

1.6
Flame Kernel Radius (mm)

1.4

1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0 -6 -5 -4
10 10 10
Time (sec)

Figure 4. Flame kernel radius in a stoichiometric Methane-air mixture.

 Figure 5. Flame kernel radius in a stoichiometric Methane-air mixture [21].
Difference between model and experimental data reaches to 4.4% at the end of
simulation.
In order to examine the effect of electrical energy supplied by the spark, conditions were
computed for three different energies over a period of 100  s : 1.7 mJ , 2.8 mJ and 5.0 mJ .
Figure 6 shows the spark kernel radius as a function of time. Differences are observable after
about 1  s and they grow gradually until the end of electrical discharge. After 200  s , the
kernel radius is larger by 7% when energy is increased from 1.75-2.8 mJ (60% increase in
energy) and by 10% between 2.8 and 5.0 mJ (79% increase).The effect of increasing the
energy on the kernel radius is gradually reduced in time as a result of the growth in energy
losses to the electrodes which offset the different electrical energy amounts.

Effects of spark electrical discharge energy

2

1.8

1.6
Flame Kernel Radius (mm)

1.4
5.00 mJ
1.2
2.80 mJ
1 1.75 mJ
0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0 -6 -5 -4
10 10 10
Time (sec)

Figure 6. Effect of electrical spark energy on flame kernel development in a

stoichiometric mixture at 101.3kPa pressure
Figure 7 presents spark kernel radius in the ignition of combustible CH4-air mixtures with
equivalence ratios of 0.75(lean mixture), 1.0(stoichiometric mixture) and 1.4(rich mixture).
The plasma expansion rate of the combustible mixtures is higher than the non-combustible
one due to the chemical power release, and differences in the expansion radii increase
gradually with time. The mixture composition at the vicinity of the spark electrodes has a
considerable effect on the inflammation and combustion processes. The mixture equivalence
ratio has a negligible effect on the flame kernel growth at the early stage (10  s ), in
accordance with experimental observation (Maly, [27]). Later, when chemical reactions
contribute sensibly to the volume expansion of the plasma, the fastest flame propagation
speed is obtained with the stoichiometric mixture. In the rich and furthermore in the lean
mixtures, reactions are “delayed” due to lower flame temperature which results from lower
chemical power release. Differences in chemical power between lean and atoichiometric
mixtures are observable already after 10  s while in rich mixtures, chemical power release
diverges from the stoichiometric one after 25  s . The relative advantage of the rich mixture
over the lean one at the early stages results from chemical kinetics. The excess amount of fuel
in the rich mixture allows more H atoms to be produced initially and this result in an increase
in the rate of following reaction:

H  O2  OH  O )22(

This reaction controls largely the rate of below reaction:

CH 3  O  CH 2O  H )23(

This is principal exothermic reaction during the early stages of the inflammation process
due to its high rate and exothermicity [4]. The H  O2 reaction supplies this reaction the
reactants either directly (O atoms) or indirectly (CH3 radicals) through these reactions:

CH 4  OH  CH 3  H 2O )24(

CH 4  O  CH 3  OH )25(

The advantage of the rich mixture disappears at more advanced stages. Once the oxygen
concentration drops to a low value the H  O2 reaction must depend on high temperature to
continue to provide enough O and OH to lead to flame propagation. The falling temperature
of the kernel therefore has a greater effect on decelerating this reaction. After 125  s the
chemical power release of the rich mixture is lower than the lean one.
 Effects of equivalence ration
2

1.5

Flame Kernel Radius (mm)

Eq.ratio = 0.75
Eq.ratio = 1.00
Eq.ratio = 1.30
1

0.5

0 -6 -5 -4
10 10 10
Time(sec)

Figure 7. Effect of equivalence ratio on flame kernel development in a stoichiometric

mixture at 101.3kPa pressure
There is good agreement between the results. The developed zero-dimensional
thermodynamic model predicts, correctly the flame kernel development trend. This model and
those which have been used by Fan, both, underestimate the flame kernel radius. It should be
up to our assumptions on temperature.

References
[1] Herweg, R., and Maly, R.R, Proceedings of SAE, paper 922243, (1992)
[2] Sloane, T.M, J. Comb. Science and Technology, 63, 287-313, (1989)
[3] Sloane, T.M., J. Combustion Science and Technology, 73, 367-381, (1990).
[4] Sloane, T.M., J. Combustion Science and Technology, 86, 121-133, (1992).
[5] Champion, M., Deshaies, B., Joulin, G. and Kinoshita, K., Combustion and Flame, 65,
319-337, (1986).
[6] Ko, Y., Arpaci, V.S., Anderson, R.W., J. Combustion and flame, 83, 75-87, (1991).
[7] Thiele, M., Selle, S., Riedel, U., Warnatz, J., Maas, U., Proceeding of the Combustion
Institute, 28, 1177-1185, (2000).
[8] Thiele, M., Warnatz, J., Maas, U., Combustion Theory and Modeling, 4, 413-434, (2000).
[9] Thiele, M., Selle, S., Riedel, U., Warnatz, J., Schielßl, R., Maas, U., SAE paper, 2002-01-
1110, (2002).
[10] Thiele, M., Warnatz, J., Dreizler, A., Lindenmaier, S., Schielßl, R., Maas, U., Grant, A.,
Ewart, P., Combustion and Flame., 128, 74-87, (2002).
[11] Yaşar, O., J. Parallel Computing, 27, 179-200, (2001).
[12] Akram, M., Lundgren, E. (1996), Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, 29, 2129-2136.
[13] Akram, M., J. of Physics D: Applied Physics, 29, 2137-2147, (1996).
[14] Akram, M., AIAA Journal., 34, 9, 1835-1845, (1996).
[15] Raizer, Y.P., Gas Discharge Physics, Springer-Verlag, 1997.
[16] Maly, R., Vogel, M., Proceedings of 17th Symposium on Combustion, 821-831, (1978).
[17] Seers, P., Spark Ignition: An Experimental and Numerical Investigation, PHD
Dissertation, the University of Texas, Austin, 2003.
[18] Kravchik, T., Sher, E., Heywood, J.B., Combustion Science and Technology, 108, 1-30,
(1995).
[19] Meek, J.M., Craggs, J.D., Electrical Breakdown of Gases, Oxford at the Clarendon Press,
1953.
[20] Fan, L., Reitz, R.D., Proceedings of SAE, Paper 2000-01-2809, (2000).
[21] Fan, L., Li, G., Han, Z. and Reitz, R.D., Proceedings of SAE, paper 1999-01-0175,
(1999).
[22] Heywood, J.B., Internal Combustion Engine Fundamentals, Mc Graw-Hill, 1988.
[23] Metghalchi, M., Keck, J.C., Combustion and Flame, 38, 143-154, (1980).
[24] Metghalchi, M., Keck, J.C., Combustion and Flame, 48, 191-210, (1982).
[25] Kee, R. J., Rupley, F. M., Miller, J. A., Coltrin, M. E., Grcar, J. F., Meeks, E.,
Moffat, H. K., Lutz, A. E., Dixon-Lewis, G., Smooke, M. D., Warnatz, J., Evans, G. H.,
Larson, R. S., Mitchell, R. E., Petzold, L. R., Reynolds, W. C., Caracotsios, M., Stewart, W.
E., Glarborg, P., Wang, C., Adigun, O., Houf, W. G., Chou, C. P., Miller, S. F., Ho, P.,
Young, P. D., Young, D. J., Hodgson, D. W., Petrova, M. V., and Puduppakkam, K. V.,
“Thermodynamic Data Core Utility Manual: Thermodynamic Property Database and the
FITDAT Datafitting Utility”, Chemkin Collection Release 4.1, Reaction Design, Inc., Sand
Diego, CA, (2006).
[26] Brown, P. N., Byrne, G. D., and Hindmarsh, A. C., SIAM Journal of Scientific Statistic
Computing, 10, 1989.
[27] Maly R.,Vogel M., 17th Symposium on Combustion, 821-831, 1978.
Appendix
Chemical Reaction Forward Reaction Backward Reaction
A β Ea A β Ea
1 HC =4HC 3+H 004
1 . D +71 0 .0 8.840D+4 2.840D+11 1.00 1.951D+4-
2 HC HO4+ =HC 3+H 2O 000
3 . D +31 0 .0 6.000D+3 4.972D+12 0 .0 2.068D+4
3 HC 4+H=HC 3+H 2 1.250D+14 0 .0 1.190D+4 4.800D+12 0 .0 1.143D+4
4 HC 4+O=HC HO
3+ 2.000D+13 0 .0 9.200D+3 3.340D+11 0 .0 6.640D+3
5 HC 3+O =2HC 2OHO+ 6.920D+11 0 .0 4.530D+3 7.210D+11 0 .0 5.805D+4
6 HC HO+
3 =HC O
2 +H 2 4.000D+12 0 .0 0.0 1.200D+14 0 .0 7.172D+4
7 HC 3+O=HC 2O +H 1.300D+14 0 .0 2.000D+3 1.700D+15 0 .0 7.163D+4
8 HC 2OHO
+ OHC
= +H 2O 5.400D+14 0 .0 6.300D+3 1.870D+14 0 .0 3.612D+4
9 HC 2O +O= OHC HO + 5.000D+13 0 .0 4.600D+3 1.750D+12 0 .0 1.717D+4
10 HC 2O +H= OHC +H 2 1.350D+13 0 .0 3.760D+3 1.070D+12 0 .0 1.843D+4
11 OHC HO + =OC +H 2O 1.000D+14 0 .0 0.0 2.800D+15 0 .0 1.051D+5
12 OHC +H=OC +H 2 3.000D+10 1.00 0.0 1.970D+11 1.00 9.000D+4
13 OHC +O=OC HO + 1.000D+14 0.0 0.0 2.880D+14 0.0 8.790D+4
14 OC +O=OC 2 5.900D+15 0.0 4.100D+3 5.500D+21 1.00- 1.318D+5
15 OC HO + =OC 2+H 1.500D+07 1.30 7.650D+2- 1.680D+09 1.30 2.157D+4
16 OC +O = 2OC 2+O 3.140D+11 0.0 3.760D+4 2.780D+12 0.0 4.383D+4
17 H +O 2 OHO
= + 2.200D+14 0.0 1.679D+4 1.740D+13 0.0 6.770D+2
18 H 2O= H HO
+ 7.420D+28 3.00- 1.226D+5 2.200D+22 2.00- 0.0
19 O +H= HO 1.000D+16 0.0 0.0 8.000D+16 1.00- 1.037D+5
20 H=2 H +H 7.790D+23 2.00- 1.074D+5 1.000D+18 1.00- 0.0
21 H 2O +O= HO HO + 6.800D+13 0.0 1.835D+4 6.300D+12 0.0 1.100D+3
22 O +O=O 2 4.700D+15 0.28- 0.0 5.100D+15 0.0 1.150D+5
23 H 2+O= H HO+ 1.800D+10 1.00 8.900D+3 8.300D+09 1.00 6.950D+3
24 H HO
2+ = H 2O +H 2.200D+13 0.0 5.150D+3 9.520D+13 0.0 2.030D+4
25 O +N =2ON +N 7.600D+13 0.0 7.554D+4 1.600D+13 0.0 0.0
26 ON +O= N +O 2 2.097D+09 1.00 3.856D+4 9.810D+09 1.00 6.610D+3
27 NHO
+ =ON +H 9.620D+13 0.0 7.350D+2 2.600D+14 0.0 4.880D+4
28 N +N= N 2 2.970D+17 0.99- 0.0 1.246D+24 1.99- 2.286D+5
29 ON = N +O 4.000D+20 1.50- 1.510D+5 2.500D+19 1.33- 0.0
30 HC OHC
3+ =HC OC4+ 3.000D+11 0.50 0.0 5.140D+13 0.5 9.047D+4
31HC HC
3+ O=
2 HC OHC
4+ 1.000D+10 0.50 6.000D+3 2.090D+10 0.5 2.11D+4