Thermal Energy and Power Engineering
A Comparison of performance parameters with use
of ethanol & methanol fuel blends, and engine speed
of SI engine
Sandeep Kumar Kamboj*1, Munawar Nawab Karimi2
1-2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Jamia Millia Islamia, Central University
New Delhi - 110025, India.
* sandeepkumarkamboj@rediffmail.com;2 mnkarimi64@gmail.com
1
Abstract- In this study, the performance parameters are
investigated for a single cylinder, four-stroke, spark-ignition
engine with varying speed (1200 to 1750 rpm) and different
blends of fuels. For this analysis, Iso-octane (base fuel) and
blends of ethanol with base fuel (E5, E20) and methanol with
base fuel (M5 & M20) are used. The results show that the value
of engine torque and volumetric efficiency are higher for E20
and M20 fuels as compared to base fuel. The thermal efficiency
of M5 fuel is 35% higher than the base fuel and around 5%
higher than the E5 fuel. The indicated power of E5 and E20
fuels are higher than the base fuel. In this study, E20 fuel gives
best results in case of brake power analysis. The result also
shows that indicated power, brake power, friction power,
IMEP and exhaust temperature increases with the increase in
engine speed for all the tested fuels. Indicated power, IMEP
and friction power was highest for E5 fuel.
Keywords- Ethanol-Iso-octane blend; Methanol-Iso-octane
blend; Iso-octane; Spark Ignition Engine
I. INTRODUCTION
Ethanol and methanol are alcohol- based fuels made by
fermenting and distilling starch crops, such as corn. Both
ethanol and methanol produce less emission than gasoline. It
is not sufficient to change the design of motor to cope with
the legal regulations, so it is necessary to continue to work
on alternative fuel technologies. Among the various alcohols,
ethanol is known as the most suited fuel for spark ignition
(SI) engines. Usages of alcohols as a fuel for spark ignition
engines have some advantages to compare the gasoline.
Both methanol and ethanol have better anti-knock
characteristics than gasoline. The engine thermal efficiency
can be improved with increasing of compression ratio.
Alcohols burns with lower flame temperatures and
luminosity owing to decreasing the peak temperature inside
the cylinder. So that the heat losses and NOx emissions are
lower. Both methanol and ethanol have high latent heat of
vaporization. The latent heat cools the intake air, so the
increased charge density and increases volumetric efficiency.
However the oxygen content of methanol and ethanol
reduces their heating value compared to gasoline. As a
disadvantage for methanol and ethanol which reduce the
vehicle range per liter of fuel tank capacity [Heywood (1988)
and Bayraktar (2005)].
Abdel-Rahman and Osman (1997) conducted
performance tests on a variable compression ratio engine
using different percentages of ethanol in gasoline fuel up to
TEPE Volume 3, Issue 1 Feb. 2014, PP. 198-205 www.vkingpub.com American V-King Scientific Publishing
198
TEPE
40%. The best compression ratios were found to be 10, 11
and 12 for 20%, 30% and 40% ethanol to give maximum
indicated power, respectively. Hsieh et al. (2002)
investigated experimentally the engine performance and
emission of a spark ignition engine, using ethanolgasoline
blend fuels in ratios of 5%, 10%, 20% and 30%. It was
concluded that by using the ethanolgasoline blended fuels
the engine torque and specific fuel consumption slightly
increased. In the experimental study of Al-Hasan (2003), the
effects of usage of unleaded gasolineethanol blends on
spark ignition engine performance and exhaust emission
were investigated. The best result at the engine performance
and exhaust emissions was obtained by usage of 20%
ethanol fuel blend. Dai et al (2003) did the study of engine
cycle simulation of ethanol gasoline blends. It was
concluded that GESIM has successfully predicted the trends
of engine burn rates, fuel consumption, exhaust temperature,
and various exhaust emissions for E22 and E85 fuels. Wei et
al (2004) did the study of air fuel ratio on engine
performance and pollutant emission of an SI engine using
ethanol gasoline blended fuels. It was concluded that
torque output increases slightly at small throttle valve
opening when ethanol - gasoline blended fuel was used and
CO and HC emission were reduced with the increase of
ethanol content in the blended fuel. Yucesu et al (2007) did
comparative study of mathematical and experimental
analysis of spark ignition engine performance used ethanol
gasoline blend fuel (E10, E20, E40, and E60). It was
concluded that torque with blended fuels was higher than
that of base gasoline in all the speed range and a significant
reduction in HC emissions was observed as a result of the
leaning effect and additional fuel oxygen caused by the
ethanol addition. Shenghua et al (2007) did the study of
spark ignition engine fuelled with methanol gasoline blends.
It was concluded that engine power and torque decreases
while the brake thermal efficiency is improved. The
maximum pressure is higher than that of pure gasoline
operation under the same engine speed and throttle opening
(50% WOT) when engine fuelled with M20. KOc et al
(2009) evaluated the effects of unleaded gasoline and
unleaded gasoline ethanol blends (E50 and E85) on engine
performance and pollutant emissions experimentally in a
single cylinder four- stroke spark ignition engine at two
compression ratios (10.1 and 11.1) at varying engine speed
1500 rpm to 5000 rpm. It was concluded that ethanol
addition to unleaded gasoline increase the engine torque,
Thermal Energy and Power Engineering
power and fuel consumption and reduce carbon monoxide
(CO), nitrogen oxides (NOX) and hydrocarbon (HC)
emissions. Eyidogan et al (2010) evaluated the effects of
ethanolgasoline (E5, E10) and methanolgasoline (M5,
M10) fuel blends on the performance and combustion
characteristics of a spark ignition (SI) engine experimentally.
The tests were performed on a chassis dynamometer while
running the vehicle at two different vehicle speeds (80 km/h
and 100 km/h) and four different wheel powers (5, 10, 15,
and 20 kW). The results indicated that when alcohol
gasoline fuel blends were used, the brake specific fuel
consumption increased; cylinder gas pressure started to rise
later than gasoline fuel. Almost in the all test conditions, the
lowest peak heat release rate was obtained from the gasoline
fuel use. Chen et al (2010) evaluated gasoline displacement
and NOx reduction in an SI engine by aqueous alcohol
injection. The author suggested that engine ran normally
with a gasoline alcohol fuel spray containing upto 30%
ethanol and 16% water. Kamboj et al (2013) did an
experimental investigation of spark ignition Engine fueled
with ethanol/iso-octane and methanol/iso-octane fuel blends.
The result showed that IP, IMEP, Volumetric efficiency and
thermal efficiency was higher for the E10 fuel and BSFC
was lower. In general, most suited blend for SI engines has
been specified as a blend of 10% ethanol. Palmar (1986)
showed that gasoline containing 10% ethanol could lower
CO emission by 30%. Taylor et al. (1996) compared the
performance of four alcohols. They found little difference in
combustion efficiency of the four alcohols from gasoline.
However, using alcohol can increase charge density because
of the evaporative cooling in the intake manifold. He et al
(2003) found that the addition of ethanol to gasoline
increased the octane number and decreased the emissions of
CO, THC, and NOx. Alexandrian and Schwalm (1992)
found that air/fuel ratio variation greatly influenced CO
emission and, under fuel-rich conditions, CO and NOx
emissions could be reduced with blended fuels. Hamdam
and Jubran (1986) concluded that under partial load the
blended fuel containing 5% ethanol had the best engine
performance and the thermal efficiency was increased by 4
to12%. Song et al (2006) showed that the replacement of
MTBE by ethanol can improve CO, HC, and NOx emissions.
Yuksel and Yeksel designed a new type of carburetor to
solve the phase sepration problem and thus increased the
alcohol fraction in the ethanol-gasoline blended fuel.
The above literature survey shows that alcohol iso-
octane blended fuel can effectively reduce the emissions of
HC,CO, and NOx and increases the engine performance. But
the comparison of performance parameters with the change
in engine speed for different blending of ethanol and
methanol with iso-octane on the same engine was not yet
clearly studied. Therefore, a sincere attempt has been made
to discuss the above said problem in this paper.
II. EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS
The experiments were conducted at four different engine
speeds ranging between 1200 to 1750 rpm at a constant load
of 8 kg at different throttle openings. At each of these engine
speeds, five different fuels (iso-octane, E5, E20, M5, M20)
TEPE Volume 3, Issue 1 Feb. 2014, PP. 198-205 www.vkingpub.com American V-King Scientific Publishing
199
TEPE
were tested. These fuels were iso-octane, iso-octane ethanol
blend (E5, E20) and iso-octane methanol blend (M5, M20).
The numbers following E and M indicate percentage of
volumetric amount of ethanol, methanol. Properties of
ethanol, methanol, and iso-octane are shown in table 1.
Engine indicated power, brake power, friction power,
indicated mean effective pressure, brake mean effective
pressure, torque brake specific fuel consumption, exhaust
gas temperature, volumetric efficiency, thermal efficiency
and air fuel ratio were measured during the experiments. No
data was taken until speed and load were maintained at 1%
of the fluctuation. For each experiment, air fuel ratio was
changed to maintain the same speed and load. The fuel
blending has been achieved by slowly pouring the ethanol
and methanol in the iso-octane container and then stirring it
three four times so that proper mixing takes place.
Fig.1 Schematic arrangement of test engine
Source: Apex innovations (Research equipment supplier in India)
The setup consists of single cylinder, four stroke, multi-
fuel, research engine connected to eddy current type
dynamometer for loading. The operation mode of the engine
can be changed from diesel to petrol or from petrol to diesel
with some necessary changes. In both modes the
compression ratio can be varied without stopping the engine
and without altering the combustion chamber geometry by
specially designed tilting cylinder block arrangement. The
injection point and spark point can be changed for research
tests. Setup is provided with necessary instruments for
combustion pressure, Diesel line pressure and crank-angle
measurements. These signals are interfaced with computer
for pressure crank-angle diagrams. Instruments are provided
to interface airflow, fuel flow, temperatures and load
measurements. The set up has stand-alone panel box
consisting of air box, two fuel tanks for duel fuel test,
manometer, fuel measuring unit, transmitters for air and fuel
flow measurements, process indicator and hardware
interface. Rotameters are provided for cooling water and
calorimeter water flow measurement. A battery starter and
battery charger is provided for engine electric start
Thermal Energy and Power Engineering TEPE

arrangement. The setup enables study of VCR engine F2 Air consumption kg/hr
performance for brake power, indicated power, frictional F3 Rotameter water flow for engine Kg/hr
power, BMEP, IMEP, brake thermal efficiency, indicated
F4 Calorimeter water flow kg/hr
thermal efficiency, Mechanical efficiency, volumetric
efficiency, specific fuel consumption, A/F ratio, heat T3 Calorimeter water inlet temperature 0K
balance and combustion analysis. Lab view based Engine T4 Calorimeter water outlet temperature 0K
Performance Analysis software package Enginesoft is T5 Exhaust gas to calorimeter inlet temperature. 0K
provided for on line performance evaluation.
T6 Exhaust gas from calorimeter outlet temperature.
F1 Fuel consumption kg/hr 0K
TABLE 1 COMPARISON OF FUEL PROPERTIES

Property Methanol Ethanol Iso-octane

Chemical formula CH3OH C2H5OH C8H18
Molecular weight(Kg/kmol) 32.04 46.07 114.228
Oxyzen present (wt %) 49.9 34.8 -
-1
Density (g cm ) 792 789 740
Freezing point at 1 atm (0C) -97.778 -80.0 -107.378
Boiling temperature at 1 atm (0C) 64.9 74.4 99.224
0
Auto-ignition temperature( C) 463.889 422.778 257.23
Latent heat of vaporization at 200C (KJ/Kg) 1103 840 349
Stoichiometric air/fuel ratio (AFR) 6.47 9.0 15.2
Lower heating value of the fuel (KJ/Kg) 20000 26900 44300
Research octane number (RON) 111 108 100
Motor octane number (MON) 92 92 100

TABLE 2 SPECIFICATION OF THE ENGINE

Type 1 cylinder, 4 stroke, water cooled

Cylinder bore and stroke 110 mm, 87.5 mm
Compression ratio 10
Maximum power 4.5 kW at 1800 rpm
Spark variation range 0 70 deg btdc
Spark timings 30 degree btdc
Dynamometer Eddy current, water cooled, with loading unit
Air Box M S fabricated with orifice meter and manometer
Capacity 15 ltr, dual compartment, with fuel metering pipe
Fuel tank
of glass
Calorimeter Pipe in pipe
Piezo sensor Combustion 5000 psi
Crank angle sensor 1 deg, speed 5500 rpm with tdc pulse
Temperature sensor Type RTD, PT 100 and Thermocouple, type k
Load indicator Digital, range 0-50 kg, supply 230 V AC
Fuel flow transmitter DP transmitter, Range 0- 500 mm WC
Air Flow Transmitter Pressure transmitter
Rotameter Engine cooling 40- 400 LPH; Calorimeter 25-250 LPH

increment is 6.72% at low speed to minimum increment

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
A. Indicated Power
Fig.2 represents the change in indicated power with
respect to change in speed when the engine is fuelled with
different fuels (E5, E20, M5, M20, & iso-octane) at a
constant load of 8 Kg. It is shown in the figure that the
indicated power is maximum for E5 fuel and maximum
1.73% at 1400 rpm for E5 fuel in comparison to iso-octane.
It is because of the reason that oxygenated fuels have better
combustion efficiency. The value of IP is minimum for the
M20 fuel among all the tested fuels. The indicated power of
M20 is nearly 4% lower than the iso-octane Indicated power
of M20 fuel is lowest because blending of methanol reduces
the heating value of the mixture therefore, a less amount of
heat would be liberated during its combustion which results

TEPE Volume 3, Issue 1 Feb. 2014, PP. 198-205 www.vkingpub.com American V-King Scientific Publishing
200
Thermal Energy and Power Engineering TEPE

in low indicated power. It is also shown that indicated power
increases with the increase in engine speed for all the tested
fuels.
1600 rpm. The friction power of M20 is 3.33, 25.33 and
32.2% lower than the iso-octane at an engine speed of 1400,
1600 and 1750 rpm. But it is very interesting to see that
there is a large difference between the values of friction
power of different fuels at low and high speed but this gap is
very less at a speed of 1400 rpm. So all the all tested fuels
will have better brake thermal efficiency at this speed (1400
rpm).

B. Brake Power
Fig.3 shows the variation in brake power with respect to
engine speed at the same load for all the tested fuels. It is
shown in the figure that brake power increases with the
increase in engine speed for all the tested fuels and it is
because of the reason that indicated power increases so the
brake power increases. The brake power of E20 and M20
fuels is higher than that of iso-octane at medium and higher
speeds. The brake power of E20 is nearly 4% higher than the
iso-octane between the engine speed of 1400 rpm and 1600
rpm. The brake power of M20 is nearly 4% higher than the
iso-octane between the engine speed of 1600 rpm and 1750
rpm. It is because of the reason that friction power of E20
and M20 is much lower than that of iso-octane.
D. IMEP (Indicated mean Effective Pressure)
Fig.5 shows the variation in indicated mean effective
pressure with the change in engine speed at a constant load
of 8 Kg for all the tested fuels. Figure 5 shows that IMEP
increases with the increase in engine speed for all the tested
fuels. The value of IMEP is maximum for E5 fuel and this
increment is 12.5, 2.8, 2.7 and 5.5% in comparison to base
fuel at 1200, 1400, 1600 and 1750 rpm, respectively. The
value of IMEP for the E20 fuel is 12.5, 2.8, 2.7 and 5.5%
greater than the iso-octane at 1200, 1400, 1600 and 1750
rpm, respectively. The IMEP is minimum for M20 fuel and
this is because of the reason that heating value of methanol
is 50% lower than the iso-octane so when methanol is
blended with iso-octane, the heating value of the blended
fuel goes down which reduces the IMEP of blended fuel.
Methanol has better combustion efficiency also so there is
trade off between these two values and the net effect is
reduction in IMEP.

C. Friction Power
Fig.4 represents the effects of change in engine speed on
the friction power for different fuels (E5, E20, M5, M20 &
iso-octane) at a constant load of 8 Kg. The engine speed was
varied from 1200 to 1750 rpm. It is shown in the figure that
friction power increases with the increase in engine speed
for all the examined fuels. It is because of the reason that as
engine speed increases, the number of cycles per second
increases which results in more frictional power. Friction
power is maximum for the E5 fuel and minimum for the
M20 fuel. The friction power of E20 is 1.61 & 13.33%
lower than the iso-octane at a engine speed of 1400 rpm and E. BMEP (Brake Mean Effective Pressure)

TEPE Volume 3, Issue 1 Feb. 2014, PP. 198-205 www.vkingpub.com American V-King Scientific Publishing
201
Thermal Energy and Power Engineering
Fig.6 represents the effect of engine speed on brake
mean effective pressure at a constant load of 8 Kg. The
value of BMEP for all the fuels lies between 2.7 to 2.8 kW.
In naturally aspirated engines, brake mean effective pressure
is not stress limited, it then reflects the product of
volumetric efficiency (ability to induct air), fuel air ratio
(effectiveness of air utilization in combustion and fuel
conversion efficiency). In supercharged engines BMEP
indicates the degree of success in handling higher gas
pressures and thermal loading.
F. Torque
Fig.7 shows the variations in torque with the change in
engine speed for the E5, E20, M5, M20 and iso-octane fuels
at constant load of 8 kg. It is seen from the figure that at the
medium speed (1400 to 1600 rpm), the torque is maximum
for the E20 followed by M20. The value of torque is higher
for iso-octane fuel at low and high speed. It is also observed
that torque increases with the increase in engine speed. This
is explained with several reasons. Beneficial effect of
ethanol as an oxygenated fuel is a possible reason for more
complete combustion, thereby increasing the torque. In
addition, a larger fuel for the same volume is injected to the
cylinder due to higher density of ethanol. This results in
increase in torque and power.
TEPE Volume 3, Issue 1 Feb. 2014, PP. 198-205 www.vkingpub.com American V-King Scientific Publishing
202
TEPE
And finally, the latent heat of evaporation of blended
fuels is higher than that of base gasoline; this provides lower
temperature intake manifold and increases volumetric
efficiency. The charge into the cylinder directly affects on
torque and power. The average increment in engine torque
compared with iso-octane at medium speeds was about 0.68
and 2.79% with E20 and 1.39% with M20 at compression
ratio of 10:1.
G. Exhaust Temperature
Fig.8 shows the variations in exhaust gas temperature
with respect to engine speed for various fuels tested at a
constant load of 8 kg. It is shown in the figure that exhaust
temperature increases with the increase in engine speed for
all the tested fuels. This is explained with several reasons.
With the increase in engine speed, combustion gases gets
less time to remain in contact with cylinder wall and
therefore more quantity of energy is released with exhaust
gases which increases the temperature of exhaust gases. At
1200 rpm, the value of exhaust temperature is maximum for
M20 fuel and minimum for E5 fuel. At 1750 rpm, the value
of exhaust temperature is maximum for M5 fuel and
minimum for E5 fuel. At medium speed, the value of
exhaust temperature is maximum for E20 & M5 fuel. These
variations in exhaust temperature can be attributed to
increase in thermal efficiency or A/F ratio which affects the
combustion temperature. Higher combustion temperature
leads to higher exhaust temperature. The thermal efficiency
and air fuel ratio of M5 is higher (as indicated in fig. 11 and
fig. 12) which results in higher exhaust temperature.
Thermal Energy and Power Engineering
H. Volumetric Efficiency
Fig. 9 represents the change in volumetric efficiency
with the change in engine speed at the constant load of 8 kg
for all tested fuels. It is shown in the figure that volumetric
efficiency of M20 is maximum among all the fuels and it is
because of the reasons that as liquid fuels have high latent
heat of vaporization, they produce a cooling effect on the
intake charge during vaporization. Therefore, there will be
an increase in intake charge density and consequently in
volumetric efficiency. A/F ratio is another important
parameter that affects volumetric efficiency. When
stoichiometric A/F ratio is high that means there is more
quantity of air injected in inlet air and results in increased
volumetric efficiency. The methanol has highest latent heat
of vaporization and A/F ratio is low therefore volumetric
efficiency of M20 is maximum. The volumetric efficiency of
iso-octane is lower than the M20, E20 and M5 and it is
because of the reason that latent heat of vaporization of iso-
octane is lowest among all the fuels. The latent heat of
vaporization of ethanol and methanol is 3.16 and 2.4 times
greater than the iso-octane.
I. BSFC (Brake Specific Fuel Consumption)
Fig.10 shows the variations in brake specific fuel
consumption with respect to engine speed at constant load of
TEPE Volume 3, Issue 1 Feb. 2014, PP. 198-205 www.vkingpub.com American V-King Scientific Publishing
203
TEPE
8 kg. It is shown in the figure that 5% ethanol addition in
base fuel causes 15.1 and 39.3% increment in BSFC at 1400
and 1600 rpm, 20% ethanol addition in base fuel (E20)
causes 30.3, 15.1 and 30% increment in BSFC in
comparison to iso-octane at 1400, 1600 and 1750 rpm and
20% methanol addition to base fuel causes 66.6, 33.3 and
33.3% increment in BSFC in comparison to iso-octane at
1400, 1600 and 1750 rpm. It is well known fact that heating
value of fuel affects the BSFC. The lower energy content of
ethanol-iso-octane and methanol iso-octane fuels causes
some increment in BSFC of the engine when it is used
without any modification. The increment mainly depends
upon the percentage of ethanol and methanol addition in iso-
octane. The heating value of ethanol & methanol are
approximately 39.27% & 54.85% less than the values of iso-
octane. Therefore, more blends of fuel are required to
produce the same power at the same operating conditions
due to its lower heating value in comparison to base fuel. As
a result, BSFC increases. The value of M5 is minimum
among all the tested fuels because of its increased thermal
efficiency and high air fuel ratio. At l200 rpm, BSFC of iso-
octane is maximum because of low thermal efficiency and
rich fuel supply (see in fig 11 and fig 12).
J. Thermal Efficiency
Fig.11 represents the effect of engine speed on the
thermal efficiency of various fuels at a constant load of 8 Kg.
It is shown in the figure that thermal efficiency increases
with the increase in engine speed and it is because of the
reason that at higher speed, less quantity of heat is being lost
through the cylinder wall. The thermal efficiency variations
are (23.1 to 38.13%) for E5, (18.63 to 36.12%) for M5, and
(14.3 to 35.9%) for iso-octane. Maximum thermal efficiency
was obtained for E5 at a engine speed of 1200 & 1750 rpm.
It is interesting to note that thermal efficiency of M5 fuel is
35% higher than the base fuel and nearly 5% higher than the
E5 fuel at a speed of 1400 rpm. It is because of the reason
that M5 fuel contains nearly 50% more oxygen than the base
fuel and 5% more oxygen than the E5 fuel and the air fuel
ratio is highest at that speed. So there is a complete
combustion of the fuel at 1400 rpm which results in high
thermal efficiency. The thermal efficiency varies (20.1 to
30.59%) for E20 and (17.64 to 27.46%) for M20 fuels in all
the speed range.
Thermal Energy and Power Engineering
K. Air Fuel Ratio
The variations in engine speed with respect to air fuel
ratio are shown in fig.12. Generally when load and speed
increases, a more quantity of fuel is being supplied to the
engine that means a fuel of low air fuel ratio is supplied.
Here we are interested in finding out the condition at which
less quantity of fuel is being supplied. It is shown in the
figure that at 1200 rpm, air fuel ratio is high for E20 and low
for iso-octane. At 1400 rpm, air fuel ratio was high for M5
and low for M20. At 1600 rpm, air fuel ratio was high for
M5 and it was low for E5 fuel. At 1750 rpm, air fuel ratio
was high for iso-octane & E5 and it was low for M 5 & M20.
Another important parameter which controls the air fuel
ratio is volumetric efficiency, higher the volumetric
efficiency, higher would be the air fuel ratio.
L. Effects of Alcohol Blending on Exhaust Emissions
Exhaust emissions such as HC, CO, and CO2 are reduced
by using the alcohol gasoline blends because alcohols
contain oxyzen atoms. Aromatic hydrocarbons ( such as
benzene) which are toxic, were eliminated and the sulphur
content was reduced as well by using ethanol gasoline blend
TEPE Volume 3, Issue 1 Feb. 2014, PP. 198-205 www.vkingpub.com American V-King Scientific Publishing
204
TEPE
because the ethanol have the same anti-knock qualities as
the aromatics have.
IV. CONCLUSION
In this study, engine performance were measured on the
utilization of the ethanol- iso-octane (E20) and methanol
iso-octane blended fuels under different engine speed at the
constant load of 8 Kg. General results concluded from this
study can be summarized as follows:
1. The IP, BP, FP, IMEP, torque and exhaust
temperature increases with the increase in engine
speed for the all tested fuels.
2. Ethanol and methanol addition to iso-octane leads
to leaner operation because of increased volumetric
efficiency and improves combustion. Consequently,
the cylinder pressure and temperature increases.
3. The value of volumetric efficiency was highest for
M20 fuel and minimum for iso-octane.
4. The value of BSFC was maximum for M20 fuel
and minimum with M5 fuel.
5. The value of thermal efficiency was maximum for
M5 fuel at 1400 rpm and it was minimum for M20
fuel which leads to high exhaust temperature for
M5 fuel.
6. The value of air fuel ratio was near stoichiometric
with M5 fuel at 1400 rpm.
7. Indicated power, IMEP and friction power was
highest for E5 fuel.
8. The above result shows that the ethanol and
methanol addition in iso-octane can be used as a
alternative fuels without any modification in the
engine if it is economical to do so. The best results
would be obtained with M5 fuel because of high
efficiency and low brake specific fuel consumption.
REFERENCES
J. B. Heywood, Internal combustion engine fundamentals,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1988.
H. Bayraktar, and O. Durgun,Mathematical modeling of spark-
ignition engine cycles, Energy Sciences, vol.25, pp.
651-666, 2003.
Abdel-Rahman, A.A.,and M.M Osman, Experimental
investigation on varying the compression ratio of SI
engine working under different ethanolgasoline fuel
blends, Int J Energy Res. 1997.
W.D Hsieh, R.H. Chen, T.L. Wu, T.L, and T.H. Lin, T.H, Engine
performance and pollutant emission of an SI engine using
ethanolgasoline blended fuels, Atmospheric
Environment 36(3), 403410, 2002.
M. Al-Hasan, Effect of ethanolunleaded gasoline blends on
engine performance and exhaust emissions, Energ.
Conver and Manag, 44, 15471561, 2003.
W.Dai, S. Cheemalamarri, W. Eric, R. Boussarsar, and R.K.
Morton,. Engine cycle simulation of ethanol and
gasoline blends, SAE paper 2003-01-3093. Society of
Automotive engineers. 2110 2117, 2003.
Wu, C-W., Chen, R-H., Pu, J-Y., Lin, T-H., The influence of air
fuel ratio on engine performance and pollutant emission
of an SI engine using ethanol gasoline blended fuels,
Atmospheric Environment. 38, 7093-7100, 2004.
Thermal Energy and Power Engineering TEPE

H.S.Yucesu, A. Sozen, T. Topgu, and E Arcakliog, Comparative C.L. Song, W.M. Zhang, Y.Q.Pei, G.L.Fan, G.P.Xu, Comparative
study of mathematical and experimental analysis of spark effect of MTBE and ethanol addition into gasoline on
ignition engine performance used ethanol gasoline exhaust emission, Atmospheric environment,40, 403-10,
blend fuel, Appl Thermal Eng. 27, 358368, 2007. 2006.
L. Shenghua, E.R.C. Clemente, H. Tiegang, and W. Yanjv, Study F. Yuksel, B. Yuksel, The use of ethanol gasoline blend as a fuel
of spark ignition engine fueled with methanol/ gasoline in an SI engine, Renewable energy,29, 1181-1191, 2004.
fuel blends, Appl. Thermal Eng. 27(11-12), 1904-1910,
2007.
M.Ko, Y. Sekmen, T.Topgu, and H.S. Yu-cesu, The effects of
ethanolunleaded gasoline blends on engine performance
and exhaust emissions in a spark-ignition engine,
Renewable Energ. 34, 21012106, 2009.
M.Eyidogan, A.N. Ozsezen, M. Canakci, T. Ali, Impact of
alcohol gasoline fuel blends on the performance and
combustion characteristic of an SI engine, Fuel. 89,
2713- 2720, 2010.
R.H.Chen, L.B.Chiang, M.H. Wu, T.H. Lin, Gasoline
displacement and NOx reduction in an SI engine by
aqueous alcohol injection, Fuel. 89, 604610, 2010.
S.K.Kamboj, M.N.Karimi, An experimental investigation of spark
ignition Engine fueled with ethanol/iso-octane and
methanol/iso-octane fuel blends, International journal of
Automotive Engineering, 3(2), 368-378,2013.
F.H Palmer, Vehicle performances of gasoline containing
oxygenates In: International conference on petroleum
based fuels and automotive applications, London, UK;
3346, 1986.
A.B.Taylor, D.P.Moran, A.J.Bell, Gasoline/alcohol blends:
exhaust emissions, performance and burn rate in a muti
valve production engine. SAE paper 961988: 143-60,
1996.
B.Q.He ,J.X. Wang, J.M.Hao ,X.G. Yan ,J.H. Xiao. A study on
emission characteristics of an EFI engine with ethanol
blended gasoline fuels, Atmospheric Environment
37:9495, 2003..
M. Alexandrian, M. Schwalm, Comparison of ethanol and
gasoline as automotive fuels, ASME Paper 92-WA/DE-
15.
M.A.S. Hamdam, B.A. Jubran, The effect of ethanol addition on
the performance of diesel and gasoline engine, Dirastat
13 (10), 1986.

TEPE Volume 3, Issue 1 Feb. 2014, PP. 198-205 www.vkingpub.com American V-King Scientific Publishing
205