## 1 Introduction  
There has been worldwide interest in finding solutions to the problems of fossil fuel shortage, air pollution, and climate change. Moreover, of concern is the kinetics of reactions, which can involve hundreds of reactants and form an enormous number of intermediate species. For these reasons, researchers have been looking into and implementing power and energy systems that operate on renewable, low-, or no-carbon fuels. The key outcomes of this application were in optimizing the engine conditions and the combustion characteristics, increasing energy efficiency, and pursuing a sustainable system and possibilities of alternate fuel for the combustion process [1]. Hydrogen and ammonia fuels are proposed as energy carriers to store and transport intermittent renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind, over long distances. They are also considered popular carbon-free fuels. The blending of hydrocarbons with hydrogen or ammonia fuels has garnered tremendous attention from researchers in overcoming these challenges, given their popularity as carbon-free fuels. However, the diversity in the laminar burning velocity (LBV) is quite interesting. Hydrogen exhibits the highest LBV with vast flammability limits and low minimum ignition energy. In contrast, ammonia has not traditionally been considered as a fuel due to its lower combustion intensities and narrower flammability limits [2]. It has one of the lowest LBVs, approximately five times lower than that of methane [3], resulting in low burning efficiency in engines and high fuel NO\({}_{x}\) production, which contributes to significant environmental problems [4]. Moreover, ammonia exhibits lower adiabatic flame temperatures, high minimum ignition energy, and contains a nitrogen atom in its molecule. These can lead to a low heat release rate, poor flame stabilization, low combustion efficiency, and high fuel NO emissions [5]. However, ammonia is not only a suitable hydrogen carrier made up of 17.8% by weight of hydrogen, but it also offers higher hydrogen density (121 kg-H\({}_{2}\)/m\({}^{3}\)) compared to liquid hydrogen (70.8 kg-H\({}_{2}\)/m\({}^{3}\)), which makes it a more feasible alternative [6]. Table 1 demonstrates that hydrogen requires a very low temperature to liquefy compared with ammonia. This means that ammonia can be easily stored after liquefaction at room temperature and a pressure of 8.5 bar or cooled to \(-\)33.4 \({}^{\circ}\)C at ambient pressure. Hydrogen needs to be liquefied at room temperature and a pressure of 350-700 bar or at \(-\)252.9 \({}^{\circ}\)C as a liquid at ambient pressure [7]. It can be noticed that the storage of ammonia is much cheaper than hydrogen storage. Furthermore, the heat of combustion and LBV for ammonia compared with methane are 20% and 40%, respectively. Ammonia has the narrowest flammability range, the highest minimum autoignition temperature, and the lowest flame temperature. Moreover, the radiation heat transfer from the ammonia flame is lower than that of a hydrocarbon flame due to the lack of CO\({}_{2}\) in the product of ammonia combustion. However, the NO\({}_{x}\) emission remains a significant challenge. Moreover, the production, storage, and transportation of ammonia have already been well established as is the infrastructure for the distribution. In other words, compared with hydrogen, ammonia has lower storage pressure and volume by about 10 and 47 times, respectively. These are significant features in storage and transportation cost reduction [1]. Because of these advantages, ammonia represents a potentially valuable CO\({}_{2}\)-free fuel in fuel cells [8; 9], gas turbines [10; 11], boilers, or internal-combustion engines [12; 13]. Laminar burning velocity (S\({}_{I}\)) is a physicochemical parameter that defines the movement of the reactant mixture to the reaction zone, encompassing mixing and reaction processes. It represents the fundamental aspects of combustion, including diffusion, exothermicity, and reactivity of fuel mixtures [14].