International Journal of JOURNALEngineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN AND INTERNATIONAL Mechanical OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING 0976 6340(Print), ISSN

N 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue (IJMET) TECHNOLOGY 2, May-August (2012), IAEME

ISSN 0976 6340 (Print) ISSN 0976 6359 (Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, May-August (2012), pp. 754-768 IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijmet.html Journal Impact Factor (2012): 3.8071 (Calculated by GISI) www.jifactor.com

IJMET
IAEME

PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS OF SINGLE CYLINDER DIESEL ENGINE USING BLEND OF CHICKEN FAT BASED BIODIESEL
Jagadale S.S1., Jugulkar L.M.2 Research Scholar , RIT Sakharale 415414, Sangli, Maharashtra, India, Email ID- sharadsj_beprod@rediffmail.com 2 Asst. Prof., Dept. of Automobile Engg. , RIT Sakharale 415414, Sangli, Maharashtra, India, Email ID- lmjugulkar@rediffmail.com
1

ABSTRACT
This paper represents the Performance operating characteristics of single cylinder diesel engine using blend of chicken fat based Biodiesel at various loading conditions at constant speed. We compare the performance characteristics and smoke intensity of petroleum diesel with various blends of chicken fat based biodiesel with petroleum diesel.

KEY WORDS: Biodiesel, chicken fat based biodiesel, alternative fuel, diesel engine,
performance characteristics, blend.

INTRODUCTION
Performance test were conducted on stationary single cylinder diesel engine by using chicken fat based biodiesel blends with diesel fuel for no load to full load condition at constant speed. These tests were also conducted with conventional diesel fuel for comparison .Chicken fat based biodiesel is blended with petroleum diesel in proportion like 10%,15%,20%,25% and 30% these blends are termed as CFBD10,CFBD15,CFBD20,CFBD25 and CFBD30 Engine Performance ,Heat Balance sheet, using these blends and pure diesel have been evaluated and presented in following articles. All the Performance tests were conducted in the Automotive Power Plant lab, at Rajarambapu Institute of Technology, Sakharale, Islampur, Taluka-walwa and District-Sangli.

EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
The Performance test are conducted on a computerized single cylinder, four stroke, direct injection, water cooled diesel engine test rig. An engine indicator is fitted in control panel which
754

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, May-August (2012), IAEME

senses pressure and crank angle data interfaces with computer .Digital display of speed in RPM is indicated on engine indicator .The engine indicator is connected to COM port of computer .The engine and dynamometer were interfaced to a control panel ,which is connected to a computer .Performance analysis software Engine soft version 2.4,supplied by test rig supplier Apex Innovations Pvt. Ltd. was used for recording the test parameters such as fuel flow rate, air flow rate, temperatures, load etc and for evaluating the performance characteristics such as brake thermal efficiency, brake specific fuel consumption, mechanical efficiency ,volumetric efficiency etc. The calorific value and density of the particular fuel was fed to the software for calculating the above said parameters.

Experimental Test setup

Photograph 1: single cylinder Diesel Engine used for Chicken fat Based Biodiesel Testing

755

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, May-August (2012), IAEME

Photograph 2: computerized I.C. Engine Test Rig

SPECIFICATIONS OF TEST RIG

Computerized Single Cylinder Diesel Engine Test Rig : Description Manufacturer Engine Type Cylinder Stroke Cubic capacity Bore Net Power Compression Ratio Value Kirlosker oil engins Ltd .,Pune Single Cylinder, 4 Stroke, water cooled, Diesel engine. Single 110mm 661 cc (0.661 ltr.) 87.5 mm 7 HP @ 1500 rpm 17.5 :1

Dynamometer specification 1] Type Eddy Current 2] Max.Power.-20 kw@2450/10000 rpm.

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE:
First of all make all the electric supply switches ON and check water supply connections to engine and dynamometer through rotameter. Make fuel supply ON, if separate arrangement is done for storage and supply of biodiesel .After conditioning the equipment ,the engine is started and warm up for 10minutes.start the computer and select the mode configure to enter the data like fuel density and calorific value etc. Then select the RUN option, which continuously
756

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, May-August (2012), IAEME

displays the process screen. Each test is conducted and data is stored at five different loads, conditions namely no load, 25%, 50%, 75% and full load. Engine is run for 15-20minits for one test and data available is stored by log key at the end of time interval. Next tests are conducted. The tests are conducted in sequence like CFBD10, CFBD15, CFBD20, CFBD25, CFBD30 and with pure diesel. Engine Performance Analysis: The performance of an internal combustion engine is mainly studied with the help of operating characteristics. These characteristics obtained by using diesel and chicken fat based biodiesel in single cylinder, four stroke diesel engine are discussed below. Measurements and Results Measurement and results got by conducting trials using diesel and blends of chicken fat based biodiesel with the help of engine software are represented in the following tables 1to6.These results are used to study various operating characteristics of engine such as specific fuel consumption ,Brake thermal efficiency, torque and power etc. It also provided the necessary data for calculating heat balance sheet.

Measurement and result of trial using Diesel: - Computerized Test Rig Reading
Speed [rpm ] 1404 1391 1373 1324 1267 Load [kg] 0 4.32 8.65 12.98 17.31 T1 [c ] 23.83 24.37 24.46 25.10 24.95 T2 [c ] 29.93 31.25 33.01 35.01 37.89 T3 [c] 23.83 24.37 24.46 25.10 24.95 T4 [c ] 26.76 28.03 29.49 31.01 32.96 T5 [c ] 159.1 210.4 294 390 508.3 T6 [c ] 141.6 187.5 264.1 361.3 475.1 Fuel cc/min 6.81 10 13.5 17.2 24.8 Air mm 87.4 85.9 83.4 78.3 72.1 F1 Kg/hr 0.34 0.50 0.68 0.86 1.23 F2 Kg/hr 30.31 30.04 29.61 28.68 27.53 F3 [lph] 260 260 260 260 260 F4 [lph] 70 70 70 70 70

Result Table
Sr. No. 1 2 3 4 5 Torque [Nm] 0.31 0.78 1.71 2.64 3.47 B.P. [kw] 0.45 1.12 2.42 3.59 4.52 F.P. [kw] 1.89 1.40 2.09 1.29 0.58 I.P. [kw] 2.33 2.52 4.51 4.88 5.10 BMEP [ bar] 0.58 1.46 3.19 4.92 6.47 IMEP [ bar] 3.01 3.29 5.96 6.69 7.30 BThE % 11.29 19.19 30.62 35.89 31.37 IThE % 58.95 43.34 57.15 48.83 35.40 MechE % 19.15 44.28 53.58 73.49 88.63 SFC Kg/kwhr 0.76 0.45 0.28 0.24 0.27 VolE % 93.60 93.61 93.48 93.90 94.21 A/F Ratio 89.42 60.26 43.75 33.47 22.31

Heat Balance sheet

HBP 11.29 19.19 30.62 35.89 31.37 HGAS 34.76 32.90 35.28 36.94 33.18 HJW 46.65 35.79 32.72 29.97 27.16 RAD 7.30 12.12 1.38 0.0 8.29

757

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, May-August (2012), IAEME

Measurement and result of trial using CFBD10:- Computerized Test Rig Reading
Speed [rpm ] 1454 1438 1428 1401 1377 Load [kg] 0 4.32 8.65 13.11 17.09 T1 [c ] 25.73 26.12 25.83 25.98 26.12 T2 [c ] 32.37 32.67 33.79 35.35 37.89 T3 [c] 25.7 26.1 25.8 25.9 26.1 T4 [c ] 31.2 30.8 31.5 33.1 35.9 T5 [c ] 188 233 314 410 539 T6 [c ] 176 215 289 382 509 Fuel cc/min 5.71 10.0 14.6 18.6 25.8 Air mm 92 90.5 87.8 84.8 81 F1 Kg/hr 0.29 0.50 0.73 0.94 1.30 F2 Kg/hr 31.1 30.8 30.3 29.8 29.2 F3 [lph] 260 260 260 260 260 F4 [lph] 70 70 70 70 70

Result Table
Torque [Nm] 0.30 0.84 1.66 2.56 3.33 B.P. [kw] 0.46 1.24 2.43 3.68 4.71 F.P. [kw] 3.07 4.43 3.35 0.82 0.93 I.P. [kw] 3.53 5.67 5.78 4.50 5.65 BMEP [ bar] 0.57 1.57 3.09 4.76 6.21 IMEP [ bar] 4.40 7.15 7.34 5.83 7.44 B.Th,E % 1.27 1.98 2.65 3.14 2.91 I,ThE. % 9.85 9.02 6.31 3.85 3.48 Mech.E. % 12.9 21.95 42.07 81.71 83.48 SFC Kg/kwhr 0.63 0.40 0.30 0.25 0.28 VolE % 92.74 92.96 92.21 92.40 92.01 A/F Ratio 108.4 61.26 41.43 31.86 22.5

Heat Balance sheet HBP 1.27 1.98 2.65 3.14 2.91 HGAS 4.82 3.51 3.35 3.48 3.33 HJW 5.60 3.15 2.63 2.42 2.19 RAD 88.31 91.36 91.37 90.96 91.57

Measurement and result of trial using CFBD15:- Computerized Test Rig Reading
Speed [rpm ] 1449 1442 1419 1406 1370 Load [kg] 0.00 4.32 8.65 12.9 17.3 T1 [c ] 26 26.2 25.5 27.4 23.4 T2 [c ] 33.0 33.25 34.72 36.38 38.67 T3 [c] 26.07 26.27 25.54 27.39 23.39 T4 [c ] 32.18 31.93 32.67 33.64 35.94 T5 [c ] 182.6 237.3 313.9 414.4 540 T6 [c ] 175.7 216.8 284.1 378.9 501.9 Fuel cc/min 6.35 10.4 14.0 19.6 25.8 Air mm 91.6 91 87.2 84.9 80.2 F1 Kg/hr 0.32 0.52 0.71 0.99 1.30 F2 Kg/hr 31.03 30.92 30.27 29.87 29 F3 [lph] 260 260 260 260 260 F4 [lph] 70 70 70 70 70

758

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, May-August (2012), IAEME

Result Table
Torque [Nm] 0.30 0.88 1.70 2.57 3.44 B.P. [kw] 0.45 1.30 2.48 3.71 4.84 F.P. [kw] 0.0 3.16 1.60 0.53 0.65 I.P. [kw] 0.16 4.47 4.09 4.24 5.5 BMEP [ bar] 0.56 1.64 3.18 4.78 6.41 IMEP [ bar] 0.20 5.62 5.22 5.47 7.28 BThE % 1.14 2.03 2.86 3.06 3.04 IThE % 0.42 6.94 4.71 3.5 3.45 MechE % 40 29.21 60.82 87.41 88.13 SFC Kg/kwhr 0.71 0.40 0.28 0.27 0.27 VolE % 92.84 92.94 92.46 92.10 91.84 A/F Ratio 97.37 58.92 42.76 30.28 22.33

Heat Balance sheet HBP 1.14 2.03 2.86 3.06 3.04 HGAS 4.25 3.52 3.52 3.41 3.37 HJW 5.36 3.29 3.20 2.24 2.90 RAD 89.25 91.18 90.42 91.29 90.69

Measurement and result of trial using CFBD20:- Computerized Test Rig Reading
Speed [rpm ] 1460 1434 1421 1390 1341 Load [kg] 0 4.32 8.65 12.98 17.31 T1 [c ] 26.56 26.76 24.02 27.39 27.59 T2 [c ] 32.28 32.71 34.08 37.21 38.43 T3 [c] 26.56 26.76 24.02 27.39 27.59 T4 [c ] 30.52 31.05 32.37 34.38 36.67 T5 [c ] 168 226 311 422 532 T6 [c ] 156 208 287 398 506 Fuel cc/mi n 6.87 10.1 15.2 19.8 26 Air mm 93.07 90.47 87.46 83.50 78.07 F1 Kg/hr 0.35 0.51 0.77 1.00 1.31 F2 Kg/hr 31.27 30.83 30.31 29.61 28.64 F3 [lph] 260 260 260 260 260 F4 [lph] 70 70 70 70 70

Result Table Torque [Nm] 0.32 0.83 1.68 2.63 3.43 B.P. [kw] 0.49 1.22 2.45 3.76 4.73 F.P. [kw] 4.29 3.27 3.25 2.25 1.10 I.P. [kw] 4.77 4.49 5.70 6.00 5.83 BMEP [ bar] 0.60 1.54 3.13 4.91 6.40 IMEP [ bar] 5.93 5.68 7.28 7.84 7.89 BThE % 1.14 1.93 2.60 3.05 2.93 IThE % 11.2 7.11 6.04 4.88 3.62 MechE % 10.18 27.18 43.03 62.61 81.13 BSFC Kg/kwhr 0.71 0.42 0.31 0.27 0.28 VolE % 92.84 93.59 92.47 92.36 92.57 A/F Ratio 90.34 60.11 39.57 29.61 21.87

759

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, May-August (2012), IAEME

Heat Balance sheet BP 1.14 1.93 2.60 3.05 2.93 HGAS 3.57 3.38 3.21 3.39 3.24 HJW 4.05 2.85 3.22 2.41 2.03 RAD 91.24 91.84 90.96 91.15 91.80

Measurement and result of trial using CFBD25:- Computerized Test Rig Reading
Speed [rpm ] 1426 1413 1393 1368 1322 Load [kg] 0 4.32 8.42 12.84 17.33 T1 [c ] 25.44 26.42 26.9 23.49 27.69 T2 [c ] 31.59 33.15 34.67 36.13 38.48 T3 [c] 25.44 26.42 26.9 23.49 27.69 T4 [c ] 30.27 31.20 31.64 34.42 36.72 T5 [c ] 162.6 223.14 300.78 395 526 T6 [c ] 151 204 277 374 504 Fuel cc/min 6.35 10.38 14.16 19.31 24.69 Air mm 90.35 87.97 85.35 82.32 76.39 F1 Kg/hr 0.32 0.52 0.71 0.97 1.24 F2 Kg/hr 30.81 30.40 29.94 29.41 28.33 F3 [lph] 260 260 260 260 260 F4 [lph] 70 70 70 70 70

Result Table
Torque [Nm] 0.30 0.85 1.64 2.50 3.38 B.P. [kw] 0.45 1.23 2.35 3.52 4.59 F.P. [kw] 0.40 1.38 00 2.74 0.69 I.P. [kw] 0.85 2.61 1.23 6.26 5.28 BMEP [ bar] 0.57 1.58 3.06 4.67 6.30 IMEP [ bar] 1.08 3.35 2.26 8.3 7.24 BThE % 1.16 1.96 2.75 3.01 3.08 IThE % 2.2 4.16 2.02 5.36 3.54 MechE % 52.79 47.16 51.68 56.2 86.98 BSFC Kg/kwhr 0.72 0.42 0.30 0.28 0.27 VolE % 93.65 93.26 93.18 93.19 92.89 A/F Ratio 96.43 58.19 42.02 30.24 22.79

Heat Balance sheet HBP 1.16 1.96 2.75 3.01 3.08 HGAS 3.74 3.31 3.37 3.30 3.41 HJW 4.85 3.25 2.74 3.27 2.19 RAD 90.25 91.49 91.14 90.41 91.32

760

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, May-August (2012), IAEME

Measurement and result of trial using CFBD30:- Computerized Test Rig Reading
Speed [rpm ] 1439 1395 1336 1294 1334 Load [kg] 0 4.32 8.65 12.98 17.33 T1 [c ] 26.46 27.25 26.66 26.81 26.90 T2 [c ] 33.35 33.40 35.08 35.25 37.45 T3 [c] 26.46 27.25 26.66 26.81 26.9 T4 [c ] 31.49 31.93 31.59 33.35 34.42 T5 [c ] 172.8 225.1 299 376 523 T6 [c ] 167.4 210 276.8 357.4 496.5 Fuel [cc/mi n] 5.93 10.8 12.6 17.3 25.3 Air [mm] 91.29 86.45 80.29 75.65 78.23 F1 Kg/hr 0.30 0.54 0.64 0.87 1.27 F2 Kg/h r 30.9 30.13 29.04 28.19 28.66 F3 [lph] 260 260 260 260 260 F4 [lph] 70 70 70 70 70

Result Table
Torque [Nm] 0.30 0.84 1.74 2.49 3.40 B.P. [kw] 0.45 1.20 2.39 3.30 4.66 F.P. [kw] 5.26 1.88 3.05 3.66 0.37 I.P. [kw] 5.71 3.09 5.44 6.96 5.03 BMEP [ bar] 0.57 1.56 3.24 4.63 6.34 IMEP [ bar] 7.20 4.01 7.38 9.76 6.84 BThE % 12.45 18.22 30.79 31.19 30.18 IThE % 157.8 46.8 70 65.7 32.6 MechE % 17.89 38.92 43.87 47.44 82.60 BSFC Kg/kwhr 0.66 0.45 0.27 0.26 0.27 VolE % 93.2 93.6 94.2 94.4 93.1 A/F Ratio 103 55.36 45.41 32.22 22.49

Heat Balance sheet HBP 12.45 18.22 30.79 31.19 30.18 HGAS 42.87 31.53 35.83 33.23 33.23 HJW 57.55 28.22 32.78 24.11 20.66 RAD 00 22.04 0.59 11.71 15.92

PERFORMANCE OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS GRAPHS :

1] Load Vs Torque for various blends of chicken fat biodiesel and Diesel. Load Vs Torque
4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 5 10 LOAD [Kg] 15 20 DIESEL CFBD10 CFBD15 CFBD20 CFBD25 CFBD30 TORQUE [N-m]

761

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, May-August (2012), IAEME

The effect of chicken fat biodiesel and its blends and diesel fuel on engine torque are as shown in above graph .The values of torque for fuel are given in test result tables .The engine torque increases with increasing loads for biodiesel and diesel. It is observed that the torque values of biodiesel blends are slightly lower than diesel at all load conditions. But there is no significant variation. 2] Load Vs Brake Power for various blends of chicken fat biodiesel and Diesel. Load Vs Brake Power
6 BRAKE POWER[Kw] 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 5 10 LOAD [Kg] 15 20 DIESEL CFBD10 CFBD15 CFBD20 CFBD25 CFBD30

The variation of brake power with load for chicken fat biodiesel blends and diesel is shown in above graph. The values of Brake power for each fuel are given in test result tables .it is observed that the brake power for chicken fat based biodiesel blends is slightly more than diesel at 25% load condition .CFBD10, CFBD15, CFBD20 has brake power is slightly more than diesel at 50%,75% and at full load condition. 3] Load Vs Friction Power for various blends of chicken fat biodiesel and Diesel. Load Vs Frictional Power
FRICTIONAL POWER [Kw] 6 5 4 3 CFBD20 2 1 0 0 5 10 LOAD [Kg] 15 20 CFBD25 CFBD30 DIESEL CFBD10 CFBD15

762

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, May-August (2012), IAEME

The variation of friction power with load for chicken fat biodiesel blends and diesel are shown in above graph. The values of friction power for each fuel are given in test result tables. CFBD10 has less frictional power than diesel at 75 % load only. For 50%, 75% load CFBD15 has less frictional power than diesel and nearly equal power at full load that of diesel. It is observed that Frictional Power for CFBD25 is lower than the diesel at 25% load and nearly equal to diesel at full load condition. CFBD 20 and CFBD30 have more frictional power than diesel at all loading conditions. The trend of friction power curves for biodiesel blends is dissimilar to that of diesel fuel. 4] Load Vs Indicated Power for various blends of chicken fat biodiesel and diesel: Load Vs Indicated Power
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 5 10 LOAD [Kg] 15 20 INDICATED POWER [Kw] DIESEL CFBD10 CFBD15 CFBD20 CFBD25 CFBD30

The variation of indicated power with load for chicken fat based biodiesel blends and diesel are shown in graph above .the values of indicated power for each fuel are given in result tables. CFBD 10 has less indicated power at 75 % load only. CFBD15 has less Indicated power than diesel at no load, 50 % and 75% load. Indicated power of CFBD25 is lower than diesel at no load and 50 % load.CFBD20 and CFBD 30 has more indicated power at all loading condition than diesel. 7] Load Vs Brake Thermal Efficiency for various blends of chicken fat biodiesel and diesel: Load Vs Brake Thermal Efficiency
BRAKE THERMAL EFFIECINCY[%] 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 5 10 LOAD[Kg] 15 20 DIESEL CFBD10 CFBD15 CFBD20 CFBD25 CFBD30

763

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, May-August (2012), IAEME

The variation of Brake Thermal Efficiency with load for chicken fat biodiesel blends and diesel is shown in graph. The values of Brake Thermal Efficiency for each fuel are given in result tables. The overall range of brake Thermal efficiency is up to 35%.CFBD10 has Brake Thermal Efficiency at no load and full load is more than diesel. CFBD 15, CFBD 20 and CFBD 25have brake Thermal efficiency at no load, 25% and full load is more than diesel. CFBD 30 has brake Thermal efficiency at no load, 50 % is similar to diesel. 8] Load Vs Indicated Thermal Efficiency for various blends of chicken fat biodiesel and diesel: Load Vs Indicated Thermal Efficiency
Indicated Thermal Efficiency [%] 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 5 10 LOAD[Kg] 15 20 DIESEL CFBD10 CFBD15 CFBD20 CFBD25 CFBD30

The variation of Indicated Thermal Efficiency with load for chicken fat biodiesel blends and diesel is shown in graph. The values of Indicated Thermal Efficiency for each fuel are given in result tables. The overall range of brake Thermal efficiency is up to 88%.CFBD10, CFBD 15, CFBD 20 and CFBD 25have Indicated Thermal Efficiency except no load is more than diesel. CFBD 30 has indicated Thermal Efficiency except at full load is more than diesel. 9] Load Vs Mechanical Efficiency for various blends of chicken fat biodiesel and diesel: Load Vs Mechanical Efficiency
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 5 10 Load [Kg] 15 20 Mechanical Efficiency[%] DIESEL CFBD10 CFBD15 CFBD20 CFBD25 CFBD30

The variation of Mechanical Efficiency with load for chicken fat biodiesel blends and diesel is shown in graph. The values of mechanical efficiency for each fuel are given in result table .CFBD10 has mechanical efficiency more only at 75% load and nearly equal to diesel at full load. CFBD 15 has mechanical efficiency is more than diesel at no load, 50%, 75% and nearly
764

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, May-August (2012), IAEME

equal at full load. CFBD 20 has mechanical efficiency is less than diesel at no load, 50%, 75% and nearly equal at full load. CFBD 25 have mechanical efficiency is more than diesel at only no load, 25% load and at full load is nearly equal to diesel. CFBD 30 has of Mechanical Efficiency except at full load is less than diesel. 10] Load Vs Specific fuel consumption for various blends of chicken fat biodiesel and diesel: Load Vs Specific Fuel Consumption

0.8 0.7 S.F.C.[Kg/kw-hr] 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0

DIESEL CFBD10 CFBD15 CFBD20 CFBD25 CFBD30 5 10 LOAD[Kg] 15 20

The variation of Specific fuel consumption with load for chicken fat biodiesel blends and diesel is shown in graph. The values of Specific fuel consumption for each fuel are given in result table .CFBD10, CFBD 15 has Specific fuel consumption less only at all load and nearly equal to diesel at full load only. CFBD 20, CFBD 25 and .CFBD 30 has Specific fuel consumption is nearly equal to diesel at 50%, 75% and full load. 11] Load Vs Volumetric Efficiency for various blends of chicken fat biodiesel and diesel:
95 Volumetric Efficiency[%] 94.5 94 93.5 93 92.5 92 91.5 0 5 10 Load [kg] 15 CFBD25 CFBD30 20

Load Vs volumetric Efficiency

DIESEL CFBD10 CFBD15 CFBD20

The variation of volumetric efficiency with load for chicken fat biodiesel blends and diesel is shown in graph. The values of volumetric efficiency of each fuel are given in result table .CFBD10, CFBD15 has volumetric efficiency less at all loads than diesel. CFBD 20 has volumetric efficiency less at all loads than diesel except at 25% load. CFBD 25 has volumetric efficiency less at all loads than diesel except at no load. CFBD 30 has volumetric efficiency is more than diesel at diesel at 50%, 75% load.
765

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, May-August (2012), IAEME

EMISSION MEASUREMENT RESULTS:

In this testing we use Bosch smoke meter to measurement of the intensity of smoke stain on filter paper at full load for all samples of chicken fat biodiesel blends and diesel fuel are as follows. 1] At 100% load Pure Diesel Emission sample paper obtain from Bosch smoke meter as shown

Bosch Smoke Unit no = 1BSU 2] At 100% load CFBD10 Emission sample paper obtained from Bosch smoke meter as shown

Bosch Smoke Unit no = 2 BSU 3] At 100% load CFBD15 Emission sample paper obtained from Bosch smoke meter as shown

Bosch Smoke Unit no = 2 BSU

4] At 100% load CFBD20 Emission sample paper obtained from Bosch smoke meter as shown

Bosch Smoke Unit no = 2 BSU 5] At 100 % load CFBD25 Emission sample paper obtained from Bosch smoke meter as shown
766

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, May-August (2012), IAEME

Bosch Smoke Unit no = 4 BSU 6] At 100% load CFBD 30Emission sample paper obtained from Bosch smoke meter as shown

Bosch Smoke Unit no = 3 BSU From above sample observations smoke intensity for all blends is CFBD 25 and CFBD 30 are slight more than diesel but within allowable range that nearly equal to diesel and in safe zone.

CONCLUSION
The Chicken fat based biodiesel with10%, 15%, 20%, 25%and 30%blend with petroleum diesel are used in the conventional diesel engine without any modification in engine design or fuel system, performance evaluation. To improve cold flow behavior during winter session only we have use Magnesium based additives reduce the pour point, flash point and viscosity of chicken fat biodiesel fuel .No any trouble was found during entire running period of engine. It was observed that the Performance operating characteristics that is Torque, brake power, frictional power, indicated power, brake thermal efficiency, Indicated Thermal Efficiency, Specific fuel consumption Volumetric Efficiency, and mechanical efficiency is nearly equal to petroleum diesel at various loading conditions at constant speed for Chicken fat based biodiesel blend with diesel at 10% [CFBD10], CFBD15, CFBD20, CFBD25and CFBD30 Biodiesel blends. Smoke intensity we checked for all blends were found nearly equal to diesel sample. Due to the health risks of waste chicken oils, it is considered as waste oil by the food industry. Therefore, waste chicken fat is a cheap raw material and its low operating cost in biodiesel production make this study a capable one for possible technological applications. Chicken fat biodiesel blended with diesel fuel can be used as an alternative fuel in conventional diesel engines without any major modification.

767

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET), ISSN 0976 6340(Print), ISSN 0976 6359(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, May-August (2012), IAEME

REFERENCES
1] John B Haywood, Fundamentals of Internal combustion Engine, McGraw Hill Intentional Edition (2005)26-50. 2] Metin Guru, Atilla Koca, Ozer Can, Can Cinar, Fatih Sahin, Biodiesel production from waste chicken fat based sources and evaluation with Mg based additive in a diesel engine, Renewable Energy 35 (2010) 637643 .

768