Energy Conversion and Management 115 (2016) 221–231

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enconman

Experimental investigation of performance, exhaust emission and

combustion parameters of stationary compression ignition engine using
ethanol fumigation in dual fuel mode
D.K. Jamuwa a,⇑, D. Sharma b, S.L. Soni b
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Govt. Engineering College, Ajmer 305025, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, MNIT, JLN Marg, Jaipur 302017, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Dwindling reserves and steeply increasing prices of the fossil-fuels, concern over climatic change due to
Received 12 October 2015 release of anthropogenic greenhouse gases and the strict environmental regulations have motivated the
Accepted 18 February 2016 researchers for the search for renewable alternative fuel that has clean burning characteristics and may
be produced indigenously. Alcohols, being oxygenated fuel improve the combustion and reduce green-
house gas emissions, thus enhancing agrarian economies and encouraging national economy as a whole.
Keywords: The objective of this paper is to investigate the thermal performance, exhaust emissions and combustion
Alternative fuels
behaviour of small capacity compression ignition engine using fumigated ethanol. Fumigated ethanol at
Ethanol fumigation
Combustion
different flow rates is supplied to the cylinder during suction with the help of a simplified low cost etha-
nol fuelling system. With ethanol fumigation, brake thermal efficiency decreased upto 11.2% at low loads
due to deteriorated combustion, whereas improved combustion increased efficiency up to 6% at higher
loads, as compared to pure diesel. Maximum reduction of 22%, 41% and 27% respectively in nitrogen
oxide, smoke and carbon-di-oxide emissions with simultaneous increase in hydrocarbon and carbon-
mono-oxide emissions upto maximum of 144% and 139% respectively for different rates of ethanol fumi-
gation have been observed, when compared to pure diesel operation. This is due to the changes in
physico-chemical properties of air fuel mixture, viz combustion temperature, oxygen concentration,
latent heat of vaporisation, fuel distribution, cetane number and ignition delay, that occurred with addi-
tion of ethanol content. The rise in peak pressure of cycle, heat release rate and ignition delay along with
decrease in combustion duration for different rates of ethanol fumigation have been observed. The
increasing fumigation levels of ethanol results in the increase of maximum rate of pressure rise by
0.3–0.5 bar/°crank angle and the crank angle after top dead centre, where peak pressure occurs, shifts
by 1–4° of crank angle. It is also observed that maximum heat release rate increases by 2–9 J/°crank angle
as compared to baseline diesel case. Coefficient of Variance of indicated mean effective pressure increases
with ethanol fumigation.
Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction engine manufacturers world wide to focus their attention on the

Diesel engines that are widely used in transportation, agrarian
and industrial equipments, etc. plays an important role in enhanc-
ing the energy-economy and reducing the exhaust emissions sig-
nificantly. The objective to develop the engines with high
efficiency and specific power output, obligation to comply with
stringent emissions regulations and concern over dwindling crude
oil reserves are the significant factors that have encouraged the
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: kdoraj@yahoo.com (D.K. Jamuwa).
use of renewable and cleaner alternative fuels [1–5].
The use of alternative fuels in CI engines that are produced from
non-petroleum resources is suggested as one of the promising
methods for improving their performance and emissions. These
fuels include alcohols (such as ethanol and methanol), ethers, veg-
etable oils, animal fats, gaseous fuels (hydrogen, natural gas, lique-
fied petroleum gas) and bio-diesel [6–14]. The use of biogas in
automobiles is restrained due to the requirement of high storage
pressure and the lethal effects in case of leakage. Hence, the use
of biogas as a substitute fuel for automobile is subjected to the
development of the facilities for the safe storage and handling of
the fuel. The exceedingly large demand for edible vegetable oil,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2016.02.055
0196-8904/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
222 D.K. Jamuwa et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 115 (2016) 221–231
Nomenclature
Symbols
AFR stoichiometric air fuel ratio (–)
_ w
Ex net exergy work rate (kJ/s)
_ in
Ex kJ/s input exergy rate
Pb brake power (kW)
qm mass flow rate (kg/h)
QLHV lower heating value (kJ/kg)
Greek symbols
e specific exergy of ethanol (kJ/kg)
u chemical energy factor (–)
w exegy efficiency (–)
Abbreviations
aTDC after top dead centre
BTE brake thermal efficiency
greater than its supply, in India has restrained its use and has com-
pelled to use non-edible oil. To initiate biodiesel program at large-
scale cultivation may result in decreased production of food crops.
Therefore, in the present scenario, alcohols seem to be the most
attractive alternate fuel from the view-point of availability, storage
and handling. Two alcohols commonly considered for automotive
application are methanol and ethanol. Methanol has certain disad-
vantages, such as its low calorific value and toxic effects.
Ethanol is a biomass based renewable fuel that can be produced
by alcoholic fermentation of sugar from vegetable materials, such
as corn, sugar cane, sugar beets, barley, sweet sorghum, cassava
and molasses. It can also be produced by agricultural residues,
feedstock and waste woods using modern and commercially viable
technologies [15]. Complete substitution of diesel with alcohol is
very difficult, but in recent years, various researchers have carried
out certain investigations using the lower alcohols such as metha-
nol and ethanol, employing different techniques with varying
amounts of alcohols in dual fuel mode. These techniques involves
alcohol–diesel blends [16–28], alcohol fumigation [29–34] and
alcohol–diesel fuel emulsification [35].
Sahin et al. [36] investigated experimentally the effects of 2%,
4%, 6%, 8% and 10% (by vol.) gasoline fumigation in a single cylinder
direct injection (DI) Diesel engine at the speed of 900–1600 rpm
and at the selected compression ratios of 18–23. The study with
objective of comparing the effect of applying a biodiesel with
either 10% blended methanol or 10% fumigation methanol was car-
ried out by Cheng et al. [37]. The biodiesel used in this study was
converted from waste cooking oil. Experiments were performed
on a 4-cylinder naturally aspirated direct injection diesel engine
operating at a constant speed of 1800 rev/min with five different
engine loads. Zhang et al. [38] conducted the experiments on a
four-cylinder direct-injection diesel engine with methanol or etha-
nol injected into the air intake of each cylinder, to compare their
effect on the engine performance, gaseous emissions and particu-
late emissions at various loads at the maximum torque speed of
1800 rev/min. In another experimental study, Zhang et al. [39] con-
ducted the experiments on same engine with methanol fumigation
to investigate performance parameters and emissions of the engine
at engine speed of 1920 rpm. Further, Zhang et al. [40] investigated
the combined application of fumigation methanol and a diesel oxi-
dation catalyst for reducing emissions of an in-use diesel engine.
Experiments were performed on a 4 cylinder naturally aspirated
direct-injection diesel engine operating at a constant speed of
1800 rev/min at various engine load. Hansdah and Murugan [41]
CI compression ignition
CO carbon monoxide
CO2 carbon dioxide
CoV Coefficient of Variance
°CA degree crank angle
HC hydrocarbons
HRR heat release rate
IMEP indicated mean effective pressure
NOx nitric oxides of nitrogen
O2 oxygen
Subscripts
air air
d diesel
e ethanol
st stoichiometric
investigated the influence of bioethanol fumigation on the perfor-
mance, emission and combustion characteristics of single cylinder,
four stroke, air cooled diesel engine. Bioethanol produced by the
fermentation of Madhuca indica flower was used as an alternative
fuel in this investigation. Bioethanol was fumigated at four differ-
ent flow rates in the suction, with the help of a vaporiser and a
microprocessor controlled injector. The results of the combustion,
performance and emissions of the engine, running with the
bioethanol fumigation, were compared with those of the diesel
operation.
Sudheesh and Mallikarjuna [42] carried out experimental inves-
tigations of a homogeneous charge compression ignition engine
using biogas as a primary fuel and diethyl ether as an ignition
improver. The results obtained in this study were compared with
those of the available biogas–diesel dual–fuel and biogas spark
ignition modes. In another study, Can et al. [43] studied the effects
of premixed ratio of diethyl ether on the combustion and exhaust
emissions of a single-cylinder, homogeneous charge compression
ignition direct injection engine. The amount of the premixed
diethyl ether was controlled by a programmable electronic control
unit. The effect of the variation of energy ratio of premixed DEE
fuel on various performance, emission and combustion parameters
was investigated and the results obtained were compared to neat
diesel operation. Hou et al. [44] modified two-cylinder direct injec-
tion diesel engine for a homogeneous charge compression igni-
tion–direct injection engine fuelled with dimethyl ether and
investigated experimentally the effects of premixed ratio on vari-
ous combustion characteristics.
From above, it is clear that numerous studies have been carried
out to determine performance and exhaust emission parameters of
CI engine using ethanol in fumigation mode for multi cylinder CI
engines, but only a small quantum of work has been undertaken
to study the performance, exhaust emissions and combustion char-
acteristics of small capacity single cylinder four stroke water
cooled CI engine fuelled with ethanol. The studies reported
included expensive micro controller operated device for supply
of ethanol whereas in the present study simplified low cost ethanol
fuelling system was developed.
The engine used in this investigation is the most versatile
engine that is widely used in diesel gensets in the urban areas
and to power agricultural pump-sets in rural areas. Owing to their
widespread use, there is a need to explore ways of making them
more efficient, less polluting, less expensive, and more eco-
friendly. The relevance of this study lies in the fact that it facilitates
 D.K. Jamuwa et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 115 (2016) 221–231 223

Table 1 Table 2
Fuel properties. Specifications of diesel engine.

Diesel Ethanol Details Specification

3
Density (kg/m ) at 15.5 °C 827 789 Model Kirloskar-AV1
Molecular weight 190–220 46.07 Type of engine Vertical/single acting, 4 stroke, totally
Auto-ignition temperature (°C) 230 423 enclosed, high speed compression ignition
Lower heating value at 25 °C (MJ/kg) 42.5 26.8 diesel engine
Latent heat of vaporisation at 20 °C, kJ/kg 250 920 Rated power and speed 5.0 H.P. (3.7 kW) at 1500 RPM
Cetane number 50 8 Bore  stroke (mm) 80  110
Viscosity(cP) at 20 °C and 1 atm 3.35 1.2 Compression ratio 16.5:1
Carbon content (wt%) 87 52.1 Piston (standard) Hemispherical
Hydrogen content (wt%) 13 13.1 Cooling system Water cooled
Oxygen content (wt%) 34.8 Lubrication system Forced feed
Cubic capacity 0.553 L
Type of governor Mechanical centrifugal type
Inlet valve open (°)
4.5 °CA
deeper insight into the variation of performance, exhaust emission Inlet valve closed (°) 215.5 °CA
and combustion parameters of single cylinder four stroke water Exhaust valve open (°) 504.5 °CA
cooled stationary CI engine using ethanol-fumigation in dual fuel Exhaust valve closed (°) 724.5 °CA
Fuel injection timing (°) 337 °CA
mode. In the present research, the engine has been operated with
Fuel injection pressure 200
pure diesel and different ethanol fumigation rates (0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 (bar)
and 0.5 kg h
1) that are designated as e0, e1, e2, e3, e4 and e5. The Injector Single hole nozzle, centre conical spray
performance characteristics, exhaust emissions and combustion Nozzle type Pintle
parameters have been recorded and analysed at different engine Dynamometer Eddy current dynamometer at 230 V A.C., 12 A
at 1500 rpm
loads (at nine discrete engine loads), i.e., no load, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2,
2.5, 3, 3.5 and 3.7 kW. Furthermore, these parameters have been
compared with those of pure diesel case (e0). The loads ranging
from zero to 1 kW, 1.5 kW to 2.5 kW and 3 to 3.7 kW respectively Table 3
are referred as low, medium and high loads in the entire Specifications of exhaust gas analyser.
manuscript.
Details Specifications
Make i3sys
2. Experimental methodology Gases measured CO, CO2, O2, HC & NOx
Principle Non-dispersive infrared for CO, CO2 & HC,
2.1. Experimental set-up electrochemical sensor for O2 & NOx
Measuring range CO: 0–15% vol, O2: 0–25% vol, CO2: 0–20% vol
HC: 0–30,000 ppm, NOx: 0–5000 ppm
A single cylinder, water-cooled, four-stroke stationary diesel Data resolution CO, O2, CO2: 0.01%
engine (3.7 kW at 1500 rpm) coupled to an AC alternator as shown HC & NOx: 1 ppm
in Fig. 1 has been selected for the study due to its wide application Accuracy ±3% Relative, ±0.02% absolute
in agricultural sector and household electricity generation. The
standard properties of the fuel used for the investigation are given
in Table 1 and the detailed specifications of the test engine are
Table 4
summarized in Table 2. The experimental setup includes two fuel
Specifications of smoke-meter.
tanks (each for diesel and ethanol), fuel consumption measuring
unit, electrical loading arrangement and data acquisition system. Details Specifications
K type thermocouples and multi-channel digital temperature indi- Make i3sys
cators are used to measure and display the temperature at the sali- Principle Attenuation of light beam
Geometry Folded Hartridge geometry
ent points of the test rig viz., inlet and outlet of the cooling water;
Measurement Smoke opacity in Hartridge smoke units
exhaust gas and intake air. ARAI certified 5 gas analyser of make (HSU) & K (m
1)
i3sys is used to analyse NOx, CO, HC, CO2 and O2. Out of these emis- Range 0–100% opacity in HSU:0 to 1 K (m
1)
sions, CO, HC and CO2 are measured by Non-dispersive Infra-red Resolution 0.1% in HSU, 0.1 M
1 in K
technique and NOx and O2 are measured by electrochemical sen- Light source & detector Led & photocell
Time constant 1 ms
sors. The values of HC and NOx emissions are provided in ppm,
whereas that of other gases in percentage (by vol.). Smoke in
exhaust is measured with the help of ARAI certified smoke meter
of i3sys make. Smoke meter works on the principle of attenuation conditions. Engine can be started manually, using decompression
of light beam as it propagates in matter owing to the joint action of lever. Proximity rpm sensor is used to measure the speed. The
the absorption and scattering of light. The specifications of 5 gas engine loading is changed by varying the load on the engine alter-
analyser and smoke meter, respectively are being given in Tables nator, with the help of a series of incandescent bulbs of 100 W each
3 and 4. and suitable on or off switches.
For each set of readings, the engine is run for a few minutes For acquiring the variation of cylinder pressure with crank-
until the exhaust gas temperature and the cooling water tempera- angle, pressure pick-up assembly consisting of piezoelectric trans-
ture have stabilized. The flow-rate measurement of each fuel is car- ducer (PCB make, Piezotronics Inc., USA), with pressure range of
ried out separately, with the help of burette. The measured 200 bar, resolution of 0.1 bar, and response time of 4 ls is flush
quantity of diesel flows from fuel tank and burette into the engine mounted to the cylinder head and connected to charge amplifier
through fuel pump injector whereas regulated and quantified etha- (Parametric make) and crank angle encoder. The data acquisition
nol is introduced in the intake manifold of the engine with the help system consists of an interface unit and suitable analogue-
of 12 V DC pump. Speed governor adjusted the quantity of diesel digital-converter, which are connected to computer. The
injected to keep the engine speed almost constant at different load interface-unit receives the pressure signals from the output of
224 D.K. Jamuwa et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 115 (2016) 221–231

charge amplifier which after being processed are stored in its inter- Table 5
nal memory and displayed as digital data on computer, on the Physical quantities measured and their uncertainties.

completion of 50 combustion cycles. Physical quantity Range Resolution Uncertainties (%)

Load (W) 0–3700 100 1.4
2.2. Error analysis Temperature (°C) 0–600 1 1.6
Vol flow rate of fuel (ml) 1–50 1 2
Error in the experimental value can arise from instrument NOx (ppm) 0–5000 1 1.8
selection, condition, calibration, environment and observation. HC (ppm) 0–20,000 1 1.1
CO (%) 0–15 ±0.01 0.6
Error analysis is performed to prove measurement accuracy of
CO2 (%) 0–20 ±0.1 0.8
the physical quantities during the experimentation. To determine
Smoke opacity (HSU in %) 0–99 0.1 0.6
the realistic error limits for the computed result, the principle of
root mean square method [45] has been used.
"
2
2
2 #
@R @R @R 6
DR ¼ Dx1 þ Dx2 þ  Dxn ð1Þ e0 e1 e2
@x1 @x2 @xn
e3 e4 e5
where R is the derived quantity, DR is the error limit, and Dx1, Dx2, 5
Dx3, and Dxn are error limits of the measured values. The details of

Relative air fuel ratio (λ)

the error analysis for some measured and derived quantities are
4
shown in Table 5.

3. Results and discussions 3

3.1. Effect of ethanol on engine-performance parameters

2
3.1.1. Relative air–fuel ratio and ethanol energy ratio
Relative air fuel ratio (k) is an informative parameter for defin- 1
ing mixture composition, as the composition of combustion prod-
ucts vary significantly with the strength of the mixture. Relative air
fuel ratio is defined as 0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
qm;air
k¼ ð2Þ Load (kW)
ðqm;d  AFRst;d Þ þ ðqm;e  AFRst;e Þ
Fig. 2. Variation of relative air fuel ratio, k with load.
Fig. 2 depicts the variation of relative air fuel ratio, k at various loads
for the different fumigation rates. The stoichiometric air fuel ratio is
14.5 for diesel and 9 for ethanol. For the different fumigation rates 0.8
used, k varies from 1.5 to 5.1 at various loads, in this investigation. e1 e2 e3
For a given ethanol flow rate, the increased flow rate of diesel with 0.7 e4 e5
increasing load results in the lower values of relative air fuel ratio.
The variation of ethanol energy fraction for different values of k at
0.6
different loads is shown in Fig. 3. Ethanol exhibits an increasing
Ethanol Energy fraction

trend with the relative air fuel ratio. As the engine load increases,
0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5
Relative air fuel ratio (λ)

Fig. 3. Variation of ethanol energy fraction for different values of k.

the amount of energy supplied by ethanol reduces, as compared

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of experimental set up. 1. Engine, 2. Alternator, 3.
Resistance load bank, 4. Air box, 5. Manometer, 6. Fuel tank for diesel, 7. Burette, 8.
Fuel tank for ethanol, 9. Fuel pump, 10. Vaporiser, 11. Smoke meter, 12. Gas
analyser, 13. Piezoelectric transducer, 14. Speed sensor, 15. Control panel board, 16.
Data acquisition system and computer.
to total energy of fuel. Moreover, the amount of fuel increases with
load thus decreasing k. Since, ethanol has lower calorific value as
compared to diesel, the energy share of ethanol in required quantity
of fuel for a particular load decreases significantly with increasing
load whereas increases slightly with increasing ethanol fraction,
as evident from Fig. 3.
 D.K. Jamuwa et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 115 (2016) 221–231 225

3.1.2. Brake thermal efficiency (BTE) _ w

Ex
w¼ ð4Þ
Brake Thermal efficiency (BTE) is defined as the useful power _ in
Ex
(or brake power, Pb) divided by the energy supplied by combustion
of fuel(s) per unit time. Thermal efficiency is expressed by the fol- where net exergy work rate is equal to the brake power and input
lowing equation: exergy rate represents only chemical exergy of fuel (neglecting
the exergy rate of air and water). Therefore, input exergy rate [48]
Pb is defined by
BTE ¼ ð3Þ
ðqm;d  LHVd Þ þ ðqm;e  LHVe Þ
_ in ¼ q ed þ q ee
Ex ð5Þ
m;d m;e
Fig. 4 shows the variation of BTE with different rates of ethanol
flow rates under various engine loads. At low loads, decrease in BTE where ed ¼ LHVd ud þ LHVe ue and chemical exergy factor [47] is
upto 11.2% has been observed, whereas BTE increased upto 6% at defined by the following
high loads, as compared to e0. At full load, while BTE have been
h o
found to be 28.3% for e0, the BTE increase (as compared to e0) of u ¼ 1:0401 þ 0:1728 þ 0:0432 þ 0:2169
3.2%, 4.3%, 5.3%, 6% and 5% respectively have been recorded for c c


e1, e2, e3, e4 and e5. The reduction of BTE, which has been found a h
 1
2:0268 ð6Þ
to be significant in most of the cases at lower load conditions can c c
be explained by following facts. At low loads, lean mixture of air
h, c, o and a are the mass fraction of hydrogen, carbon, oxygen, and
and ethanol is formed due to excess amount of air which deterio-
sulphur in the fuel, respectively.
rates the combustion. Moreover, the higher heat of vaporisation of
The values are tabulated in Table 1 for diesel and ethanol fuels,
ethanol might cool down the combustible mixture thus decreasing
the mass-fraction of sulphur a is generally assumed to be zero.
BTE.
Fig. 5 shows the variation of exergy efficiency at various loads for
Alcohol has high laminar flame propagation speed, which
different rates of fumigation.
results into increased premixed combustion, which was evident
The exergy efficiencies of the engine under investigation, exhi-
by higher rate of pressure rise and increased in-cylinder pressure
bit similar behaviour to the thermal efficiencies given in Fig. 4. The
values for increasing rate of ethanol substitution during 320 °CA
exergy efficiencies are slightly lower than the corresponding ther-
to about 350 °CA. The increased premixed combustion (discussed
mal efficiencies.
in Section 3.3.1) due to enhanced combustion of homogeneous
air–ethanol mixture at higher engine loads increases BTE. More-
over, the lower cetane number of ethanol and consequently 3.1.4. Exhaust gas temperature
increased ignition delay causes greater heat release rate (HRR) Fig. 6 shows the variation of exhaust temperature of diesel fuel
and reduced heat losses from the cylinder wall to the coolant, with different rates of ethanol fumigation for various engine loads.
which increases BTE. Also, the higher oxygen content present in It is obvious that exhaust temperature increases with the load for
ethanol enhances the combustion with the higher flow rates of diesel as well as for all rates of ethanol fumigation, as the heat
ethanol. release rate is increased. The exhaust temperatures (°C) of 161,
155, 151, 144, 135 and 131 at no-load whereas 521, 524, 528,
533, 538 and 544 at full load were observed at e0, e1, e2, e3, e4
3.1.3. Exergy efficiency
and e5 respectively. The results show that the exhaust gas temper-
The combustion process being an exothermic chemical reac-
ature decreased with increase in ethanol substitution at low and
tion; the reactants are usually air and fuel and the products, which
medium loads, which is attributed to the quenching of cylinder
are mainly mixture of common environmental substances, exergy
charge due to higher latent heat of vaporisation of ethanol. The
efficiency of combustible substance is calculated by the following
expression [46,47]
30
e0 e1 e2
35 e3 e4 e5
e0 e1 e2
25
e3 e4 e5
30
Exergy Efficiency (%)

20
Brake Thermal Efficiency (%)

25

20 15

15
10

10
5
5

0
0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Load (kW) Load (kW)

Fig. 4. Variation of brake thermal efficiency with load for different ethanol Fig. 5. Variation of exergy efficiency with load for different ethanol fumigation
fumigation rates. rates.
226 D.K. Jamuwa et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 115 (2016) 221–231

600 the combustion temperature and lead to the reduction of NOx for-
e0 e1 e2 mation especially under very lean conditions. Thus, lower combus-
550 e3 e4 e5 tion temperature associated with low engine load may yield the
significant reduction in NOx emission. At high engine load, the
500
increase in ignition delay and richer mixture tend to reduce the
Exhaust Gas Temperature (°C)

450 cooling effect. However at high engine load, in the fumigation

mode, there is a reduction in relative air/fuel ratio and the diesel
400 fuel is now combusted in a mixture of air and alcohol that
adversely affects the availability of oxygen for NOx formation
350 and ultimately resulting in the reduction in NOx emission at high
loads as compared to pure diesel operation. However, the increase
300 of heat release in the premixed mode at high loads competes with
abovementioned factors resulting in the insignificant changes in
250
NOx for low flow rates of ethanol, viz., e1 and e2 as compared to
200 pure diesel case.

150
100
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
Load (kW)
Fig. 6. Variation of exhaust temperature at various loads for different ethanol
fumigation rates.
increase of exhaust temperature with increase in ethanol substitu-
tion at higher loads is caused due to the increase in heat release
rates which predominates the quenching factor.
3.2. Effect of ethanol on engine-emissions
3.2.1. Oxides of nitrogen (NOx)
NOx is the term coined for the emission composed of nitric
oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). As shown in Fig. 7, maxi-
mum reduction in NOx emission of 22%, 16%, and 9% respectively,
have been observed at low, medium and high loads conditions for
all rates of ethanol flow rates as compared to e0. For e1, e2, e3, e4
and e5, the decrease in NOx of about 9%, 14%, 17%, 19% and 22%
respectively have been observed as compared to e0 at no load con-
dition. The formation of NOx in a diesel engine is dependent on the
combustion temperature, along with the concentration of oxygen
present in the combustion process. Thus, different mechanisms
are involved when fumigation is applied. Due to its higher latent
heat of evaporation of ethanol, ethanol-substitution could reduce
2000
e0 e1
1800 e3 e4
1600
3.2.2. Hydrocarbons and carbon mono-oxide (HC and CO)
Fig. 8 exhibits the increase of HC emission with different rates
2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 of ethanol-fumigation. Maximum increase of 144%, 76% and 44%
in HC emissions were observed at low, medium and high loads
respectively for different ethanol flow rates in comparison with
pure diesel. The high latent heat of vaporisation of ethanol slow
the vaporisation as well as the mixing of fuel and air, thus leading
to deteriorated combustion and the lower combustion tempera-
ture. The poor combustion enhances the formation of HC and that
increases with increasing ethanol fumigation rates. The HC
increase has been found to be highest at low loads and lowest at
high loads for different ethanol fumigation modes. For e1, e2, e3,
e4 and e5, there is an increase of about 41%, 61%, 84%, 113% and
144% respectively, in HC emissions as compared to e0 at no-load
condition. At low load conditions, due to large amount of air, poor
fuel distribution and low exhaust temperature, lean fuel–air mix-
ture regions has the susceptibility to escape into the exhaust thus
yielding higher HC emissions. No change in HC emission for e1 and
e2 whereas marginal change of about 7%, 12% and 17% respectively,
have been found at high load conditions. With increasing loads at
different ethanol fumigation modes, HC emissions decreases, due
to improved mixing of fuel and air and thus, the enhanced
combustion.
CO, another toxic gaseous emission from diesel engine results
either due to the deficiency of oxygen or lower in-cylinder temper-
ature during combustion process, inadequate to support the com-
bustion. As shown in Fig. 9, CO emissions decreased up to certain
load and then again increased with the increasing loads. It is
explained by the fact that improved combustion with increasing
e2
160
e5 e0 e1 e2
140 e3 e4 e5

1400 120
NOx (ppm)

1200
100
HC (ppm)

1000
80
800
60
600
40
400
200 20

0 0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Load (kW) Load (kW)

Fig. 7. Variation of NOx with load for different ethanol fumigation rates. Fig. 8. Variation of HC with load for different ethanol fumigation rates.
 D.K. Jamuwa et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 115 (2016) 221–231 227

0.08 It happens due to the fact that the large latent heat of vaporisation
e0 e1 e2 of ethanol reduces in-cylinder temperature thus leading to incom-
e3 e4 e5
0.07 plete oxidation of hydrocarbons into CO, during expansion stroke
thus decreasing CO2. In comparison to e0, CO2 emissions decreased
0.06 by 7%, 12%, 16%, 19% and 24% respectively, for e1, e2, e3, e4 and e5
respectively e0 at no-load condition. At low engine load, the cool-
CO (% by vol.)

0.05 ing effect, together with the leaner air–alcohol mixture, results in
poorer combustion and hence decrease of CO2 emissions is evident,
0.04 as reflected in the poorer BTE. At high engine load, decrease of 13%,
16%, 19%, 21% and 25% respectively have been observed in CO2 for
0.03 e1, e2, e3, e4 and e5 as compared to e0, which is attributed to the
reduced air/fuel ratio and poor mixing further decreases the CO2
0.02 emissions.

0.01
0 Smoke might result due to engine design factors, such as fuel
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Load (kW)
Fig. 9. Variation of CO with load for different ethanol fumigation rates.
load results into decreased values of CO up to a particular load. But
at a certain higher load condition, CO exhibit increasing trend due
to rich mixture leading to poor mixing. Maximum increase of 21%,
56%, 83%, 106% and 139% in CO emissions respectively for e1, e2,
e3, e4 and e5 have been observed as compared to e0. CO emission
for different ethanol flow rates is found to increase up to 66%, 126%
and 139% respectively at low, medium and high loads in compar-
ison with baseline diesel case. Increase of CO emission with
increasing ethanol substitution is attributed to the combustion
quenching due to high latent heat of vaporisation and subsequent
charge cooling leading to incomplete combustion. Moreover, the
low cetane number renders the fraction of ethanol trapped in cre-
vices, non-ignitable during the expansion stroke thus increasing
CO emissions, especially at low loads. At high engine load, the
reduced air/fuel ratio associated with poor mixing, leads to higher
CO emission.
3.2.3. Carbon di-oxide (CO2)
CO2 is a major contributor to global warming at higher concen-
trations. As shown in Fig. 10, the CO2 concentration increases with
the engine load for pure diesel as well as for different ethanol fumi-
gation modes because of enhanced combustion due to availability
of more oxygen and higher in-cylinder temperature. As evident,
CO2 concentration decreases with increase in ethanol substitution.
3.2.4. Smoke opacity
2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
used, engine rating, injection system characteristics, induction-
system and governor control. Smoke opacity is an indirect indica-
tor of soot content in the exhaust gases. Smoke-meter quantifies
the visible black smoke emission utilizing the physical phe-
nomenon as extinction of a light beam by scattering and
absorption.
As shown in Fig. 11, smoke opacity, in general increases with
the increase in engine load at pure diesel as well as for various
ethanol fumigation modes. Normally, the delay period decreases
with increasing load on CI engine. At the engine start conditions,
however, the delay increases due to the large drop in mixture tem-
perature associated with evaporating and heating the fuel. As load
is increased, the charge temperature at injection increases thus
shortening the ignition delay. This shortening of delay period inhi-
bits thermal cracking which is responsible for soot formation.
With fumigated ethanol, smoke opacity have been found to
decrease for the entire load range. However, the reduction in
smoke was more obvious at high loads. For e1, e2, e3, e4 and e5
respectively, decrease in smoke opacity of about 11%, 12%, 15%,
16% and 20% have been observed as compared to e0 at no-load con-
dition, whereas corresponding reduction at full load are 18%, 23%,
28%, 33% and 37%. The reduction of smoke emission, with ethanol
fumigation modes is explained by several reasons. Firstly, the
increase in ignition delay increases the amount of diesel fuel
burned in the premixed mode, which reduces the amount of diesel
fuel burned in the diffusion mode. Secondly, increasing the flow
rate of ethanol not only reduces amount of diesel fuel for a given
engine load when compared with pure diesel operation, but also
leads to reduction of aromatics so as to reduce smoke.

11 60
e0 e1 e2 e0 e1 e2
10 e3 e4 e5
e3 e4 e5 50
9
Smoke Opacity (% in HSU)

8 40
CO2 (% by vol.)

7
30
6
5 20
4
10
3
2
0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Load (kW) Load (kW)

Fig. 10. Variation of CO2 with load for different ethanol fumigation rates. Fig. 11. Variation of smoke opacity with load for different ethanol fumigation rates.
228 D.K. Jamuwa et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 115 (2016) 221–231

3.3. Effect of ethanol on combustion parameters 4.0

e0 e1 e2
Pressure histories are indicative of combustion characteristics e3 e4 e5
and engine performance, viz., peak cylinder pressure, rate of pres- 3.0

Rate of pressure rise (bar/deg CA)

sure rise, heat release rate, mean gas temperature, ignition delay
and combustion duration. 2.0

3.3.1. In-cylinder pressure and rate of pressure rise 1.0

Owing to the facts that the piezoelectric pressure transducers
experience drift in the output signal with changing temperature
and excess heat (due to the high temperatures in the cylinder head
and the combustion chamber) can destroy a piezoelectric pressure
transducer, water-jacketed transducer is employed. As shown in
Fig. 12, that at any load, the pressure in the cylinder first increases,
reaches a maximum value, called peak pressure, and then
decreases with crank travel, during a definite period of working
cycle. It is desirable that peak pressure in the cylinder occurs close
to top dead centre of piston for increased power output of the
engine. The values of peak pressure (in bars) at full load observed
are 62.1, 62.9, 63.3, 63.7, 64.1 and 65.3 respectively for e0, e1, e2,
e3, e4 and e5. As evident, the position of occurrence of peak pres-
sure is shifted by 1–2 °CA as compared to e0. Moreover, as shown
in Fig. 12, the marginally higher values for in-cylinder pressures
are observed for ethanol fumigation, before the combustion starts.
It is explained as follows. The working substance or charge consists
of air and residual gases in case of pure diesel operation whereas
air, ethanol vapour and residual gases in the case of ethanol fumi-
gation mode. The compression process in the internal combustion
engines is considered as a polytropic process. The value of pressure
obtained by the compression of working substance or charge is
higher (due to higher value of polytropic exponent, n) in case of
ethanol fumigation as compared to that in diesel only operation.
As the combustion initiates, the increased rate of pressure rise
due to enhanced heat release rate for different modes of ethanol
fumigation are noticed, subsequently. The rate of pressure rise
once ignition has occurred is also affected by the amount of fuel
mixed with air to within combustion limits during the delay. Rate
of pressure rise influences knock intensity and combustion noise in
the engine, while in operation. With the increase of ethanol fumi-
gation rate, combustion rate augments and intensifies, and eventu-
ally causes objectionable noise and the substantial engine damage,
and also results the high levels of NOx emissions.
0.0
320 340 360 380 400
Crank angle (deg)
-1.0
-2.0
-3.0
Fig. 13. Variation in rate of pressure rise with crank angle at full load.
Fig. 13 illustrates the trends for the rate of pressure-rise with
the crank angle for pure diesel as well as for different ethanol-
fumigation rates. At full load, the maximum rate of pressure rise
(bar/°CA) has been found to be 2.15, 2.29, 2.43, 2.53, 2.75 and
2.83 for e0, e1, e2, e3, e4 and e5 occurring 1–4 °CA later as com-
pared to e0. The peak-pressure for diesel and as well as for differ-
ent rates of fumigation increases consistently with increasing
engine loads and also with increasing ethanol substitution, as evi-
dent from Fig. 14. In general, peak pressure varies from about
46.7 bar to 65.3 bar throughout the entire load range considered
for different ethanol flow rates.
Cycle by cycle variability is an important parameter to investi-
gate the combustion characteristics of engine. It is known that the
cycle-by-cycle variability in cylinder peak pressures and indicated
mean effective pressure (IMEP) is the result of variations in com-
bustion process itself. It has been found that CoV (Coefficient of
Variance) of IMEP should not exceed 10%, in order to avoid vehicle
drivability problems. As the combustion variations are within lim-
its, in-cylinder pressure data from 50 cycles injection (firing) are
sufficient to be recorded for computation of average IMEP. In
Fig. 15, statistical values of cycle to cycle variations are shown as

70
e0 e1 70
e2 e3
60
e4 e5
65
Peak Cylinder pressure (bar)

50
60
Pressure (bar)

40
55
30

50
20

10 45
e0 e1 e2
e3 e4 e5
0 40
310 330 350 370 390 410 430 450 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Crank angle (deg) Load (kW)

Fig. 12. Variation in cylinder pressure with crank angle at full load. Fig. 14. Variation in peak cylinder pressure with load and fumigation rates.
 D.K. Jamuwa et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 115 (2016) 221–231 229

6 loads. At full load condition, the higher cylinder gas temperature

were noticed for different ethanol fumigation rates, as compared
to diesel. This may be ascribed to the augmented heat release rate
5 and increased ignition delay for various ethanol flow rates that
outperforms the effect of quenching factor.

4
3.3.3. Heat release rate (HRR)
CoV of IMEP

HRR is one of the most important parameters to characterise

3 the combustion process in compression ignition engine. It is mea-
sure of how fast chemical energy of fuel is converted to the thermal
energy by process of combustion and calculated from the acquired
2 pressure histories using the zero dimensional heat release model
[8]. The calculation of rate of heat release depends on the rate of
pressure rise and the cylinder pressure.
1 Heat release is zero during the compression process until
shortly after the start of fuel injection. Negative heat release indi-
cates the fuel evaporation and heat transfer from the cylinder gas
0 to the cylinder walls. After the end of injection, the rate of heat
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 release decreases as the pockets of the remaining fuel are con-
Ethanol flow rate (kg/hr) sumed. When auto ignition occurs, the heat release rate rises
rapidly as the premixed fuel burns. The premixed combustion
Fig. 15. Variation in CoV of IMEP with ethanol fumigation rates.
gives a characteristic spike to the heat release rate. After the pre-
mixed fuel is consumed, the combustion rate decreases to the
COV of IMEP. The values of CoV of IMEP (%) were calculated as 1.6, slower rate of the mixing controlled combustion. Using the HRR
2.2, 2.6, 3.3, 4.4 and 5.2 respectively for e0, e1, e2, e3, e4 and e5. diagram, it is possible to determine the start of combustion, the
The cyclic dispersion in IMEP is attributed to the variation in fraction of fuel burned in the premixed mode, and the differences
amount of fuel supplied to the cylinder as well as the variability in combustion rates.
of mixture composition and gas motion during the combustion Fig. 17 shows the variation in HRR with the crank angle at full
within the cylinder each cycle. Low value of COV for e0 indicates load with pure diesel and all rates of fumigation. The values of
the small cycle to cycle variations in cylinder-pressure and IMEP HRR have been found to be 52, 54.1, 56, 58.5, 59.6 and 60.8 (J/
and great repeatability in combustion process. Higher values of °CA) for e0, e1, e2, e3, e4 and e5. The occurrence of maximum
CoV implies the greater combustion variability thus causing rough HRR for different rates of fumigation is retarded by 1–4 °CA, in
and unstable operation of the engine and increased hydrocarbon comparison to that of e0. Ethanol being oxygenated fuel, HRR
emissions. increases due to availability of more oxygen and thus improves
combustion. Due to increase in HRR, the peak cylinder pressure
as well as rate of pressure rise also increases.
3.3.2. Cylinder gas temperature
Fig. 16 portrays the variations of cylinder gas temperatures at 3.3.4. Ignition delay, combustion duration and mass fraction burned
full load for various ethanol fumigation rates. The cylinder gas The changes in the combustion process are observed with the
temperature is calculated by assuming uniform temperature use of different fuels owing to the physical and chemical differ-
within the engine cylinder using ideal gas law [8,49]. The results ences in their fuel structure. Ignition delay which is defined as
are valid between intake valve closing and exhaust valve opening. the period between the start of fuel injection into the combustion
Peak cylinder gas temperatures are obviously higher at higher chamber and the start of combustion, is a function of mixture tem-
perature, pressure, air–fuel ratio and fuel properties. The duration
of ignition delay reflects the ignition characteristics of the fuel.
1,800 Hence it is an important property that determines the various
e0 e1 e2
1,600 e3 e4 e5
70
1,400 e0 e1 e2
Cylinder gas temperature (K)

60 e3 e4 e5
Rate of heat release (J/ deg CA)

1,200
50
1,000
40
800
30
600
20
400 10

200 0

0 -10
360 370 380 390 400 340 360 380 400 420 440
Crank angle (deg) Crank angle (deg)

Fig. 16. Variation in cylinder gas temperature with crank angle at full load. Fig. 17. Variation in heat release rate with crank angle at full load.
230 D.K. Jamuwa et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 115 (2016) 221–231
engine operating characteristics of CI engine such as thermal effi-
ciency, smoothness of operation, misfire and smoke emissions.
For fuels having low cetane numbers with excessively long delay,
ignition occurs sufficiently late in the expansion process and
quench the burning process, thus leading to incomplete combus-
tion, reduced power-output and lower thermal efficiency. With
the increase in loads, decrease in ignition delay is observed, due
to richer fuel supply. Moreover, increase in ignition delay is
observed with increasing fumigation rates due to the low cetane
number and large latent heat of vaporisation of ethanol.
Start of combustion is more difficult to determine precisely. It is
best identified from the change in slope of HRR, determined from
cylinder pressure data. The combustion duration is the time inter-
val elapsed or crank angle traversed between 10% mass burned and
90% mass burned. With the increase in load, the combustion dura-
tion increases due to better mixing of fuel and air. The combustion
duration decreases with increasing rate of fumigation due to
increase in ignition delay. Moreover, the initial (or premixed) burn
duration is characterised by the difference between CA10 (crank
angle at which 10% of mass fraction burned) and CA50 (crank angle
of 50% mass fraction burned). CA50–CA10 is the duration where
the heat release is driven mostly by the combustion of both diesel
and ethanol in a pre-mixed mode. It is noticeable in Fig. 17 that the
premixed burn duration decreases with increasing ethanol frac-
tion, thus indicating the fast burning of the premixed charge and
consequently increasing IMEP and BTE.
As shown in Fig. 18, the ignition delay of e0 at full load is 15 °CA
and increases by about 1–3 °CA at full load for all rates of ethanol
substitution. The increased ignition delay is caused due to low
cetane number and large latent heat of vaporisation of ethanol.
The ignition delay (°CA) of 15, 15.3, 16.4, 16.8, 17.4 and 18.2 and
the combustion duration (°CA) of 37.3, 36.9, 35.3, 34.9, 34.4 and
32.9 respectively were observed for e0, e1, e2, e3, e4 and e5 at full
load, as shown in Fig. 17. The decreasing values of combustion
duration with increasing ethanol content is attributed to enhanced
mixing of fuel and air and increased availability of oxygen.
Mass fraction burned (Mfb), an indicator of the energy conver-
sion during a combustion cycle at a specific crank angle degree and
expressed as normalized quantity with a scale of 0–1, depends on
engine geometry, engine speed, air–fuel ratio, ignition angle, resid-
ual mass, etc. For the estimation of Mfb, a procedure developed by
Rassweiler and Withrow, also known as a single-zone heat release
method, is still used widely because of its simplicity and computa-
tional efficiency. The mass fraction burned at the end of interval is
expressed by assuming that mass of the charge burned in the inter-
40
35
30
Comb Duration Ignition Delay CA50-CA10
Burn Duration
25
20
15
10
5
0 emission characteristics as compared to baseline diesel case.
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Ethanol flow rate (kg/hr)
Fig. 18. Variation of burn duration with ethanol content at full load.
1.0
e0 e1
0.9 e2 e3
e4 e5
0.8
0.7
Mass fraction burned
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
360 370 380 390 400
Crank angle (deg.)
Fig. 19. Variation in mass fraction burned with crank angle at full load.
val is proportional to pressure rise due to combustion [8]. Fig. 19
shows the variation in the Mfb with the crank angle at full load.
The mass fraction burned increases with the rate of fumigation,
due to increase in oxygen content and enhanced HRR. For e0, the
combustion has been found to be faster up to 17–18° aTDC, after
which, the combustion rate enhanced for different rates of ethanol
fumigation, the rate increasing with increasing ethanol content.
4. Conclusions
The research work was undertaken to investigate the variations
in the engine performance, exhaust emissions and combustion
characteristics of single cylinder, four stroke, water cooled, and sta-
tionary diesel engine using various ethanol flow rates in dual fuel
mode. The fumigation was achieved by injecting ethanol at the
air-intake of the engine through a low pressure 12 V DC pump,
thus eliminating major modification in the experimental set up.
At no-load condition, the exhaust temperature varies from 161 °C
(for pure diesel) to 131 °C (for e5) whereas for full load condition,
the exhaust temperatures starts from 521 °C and increases up to
544 °C. At a certain high engine load, a maximum of 6% efficiency
gain is achieved with ethanol flow rate of 0.4 kg/h. Using ethanol
in CI engine in dual fuel mode yields improved thermal efficiency
at high engine load conditions as compared to baseline diesel case.
It is suggested that the observed trend of increasing efficiency and
exhaust gas temperatures at high loads with increasing ethanol
flow rates is the result of the faster burning of the premixed etha
nol–air–diesel mixture that increases the rate of heat release.
The various ethanol energy fumigation modes results into max-
imum reduction of 22% in NOx emission, 27% in CO2 emission and
41% in smoke opacity. The different ethanol fumigation modes can
yield the increase of 144% and 133% in HC and CO emissions,
respectively. Simultaneous reduction of NOx, smoke and CO2
whereas increase in HC and CO has been observed with increasing
rate of fumigation. Therefore, it is feasible to operate ethanol
fuelled CI engine in dual fuel mode for better performance and
0.5 At full load, the values of peak pressure and peak HRR respec-
tively, increases from 62.1 bar and 52 J/deg °CA (pure diesel) to
65.3 bar and 60.8 J/deg °CA (for ethanol flow rate of 0.5 kg/h). The
maximum increase in ignition delay of about 3 °CA whereas
 D.K. Jamuwa et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 115 (2016) 221–231
maximum decrease in combustion duration of about 5 °CA were
observed for different ethanol modes as compared to baseline die-
sel case. With the induction of ethanol in CI engine, increased rate
of heat release and increased peak pressure increases thus enhanc-
ing the thermal efficiency. The premixed burn duration decreases
with increasing ethanol substitution, thus indicating the fast burn-
ing of the premixed charge and consequently increasing indicated
mean effective pressure and thermal efficiency. The stable opera-
tion of engine limits the maximum usable ethanol flow rate at a
given operating condition.
Cycle to cycle variations were very small with the diesel fuel
alone. Distinct engine cycle variations as indicated by higher value
of CoV of IMEP were evident with various ethanol flow rates.
Increasing values of CoV render the operation of engine rough
and unstable with larger combustion variability.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to the All India Council of Technical
Education, New Delhi, India (Ref. No. 8023/RID/
RPS/040/11/12,1604) and Department of Science and Technology,
Rajasthan, India (Ref. No. F 7(3)DST/R&D/2013/4378) for providing
financial assistance.
References
[1] Kouremenos DA, Rakopoulos CD, Kotsiopoulos PN. Comparative performance
and emission studies for vaporized diesel fuel and gasoline as supplements in
swirl-chamber diesel engines. Energy 1990;15:1153–60.
[2] Rakopoulos CD, Kyritsis DC. Comparative second-law analysis of internal
combustion engine operation for methane, methanol and dodecane fuels.
Energy 2001;26:705–22.
[3] Rakopoulos CD, Antonopoulos KA, Rakopoulos DC. Experimental heat release
analysis and emissions of a HSDI diesel engine fueled with ethanol–diesel fuel
blends. Energy 2007;32:1791–808.
[4] Galadima A, Muraza O. Waste to liquid fuels: potency, progress and challenges.
Int J Energy Res 2015;39(11):1451–78.
[5] Abdel-Rahman AA. On the emissions from internal-combustion engines: a
review. Int J Energy Res 1998;22(6):483–513.
[6] Turner J, Sverdrup G, Mann MK, Maness PC, Kroposki B, Ghirardi M, et al.
Renewable hydrogen production. Int J Energy Res 2008;32(5):379–407. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1002/er.1372.
[7] Saravanan N, Nagarajan G. Experimental investigation on a DI dual fuel engine
with hydrogen injection. Int J Energy Res 2009;33(3):295–308.
[8] Heywood JB. Internal combustion engine fundamental. 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill;
2003.
[9] Gravalos I, Gialamas T, Koutsofitis Z, Kateris D, Xyradakis P, Tsiropoulos Z, et al.
Comparison of performance characteristics of agricultural tractor diesel engine
operating on home and industrially produced biodiesel. Int J Energy Res
2009;33(12):1048–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/er.1533.
[10] Venkanna BK, Reddy CV. Direct injection diesel engine performance, emission,
and combustion characteristics using diesel fuel, nonedible honne oil methyl
ester, and blends with diesel fuel. Int J Energy Res 2012;36(13):1247–61.
[11] Mythili R, Venkatachalam P, Subramanian P, Uma D. Production
characterization and efficiency of biodiesel: a review. Int J Energy Res
2014;38(10):1233–59.
[12] El-Adawy M, Ibrahim Amr, El-Kassaby MM. An experimental evaluation of
using waste cooking oil biodiesel in a diesel engine. Energy Technol 2013;1
(12):726–34.
[13] Agarwal AK. Biofuels (alcohols and biodiesel) applications as fuels for internal
combustion engines. Prog Energy Combust 2007;33:233–71.
[14] Balat M, Balat H. A critical review of bio-diesel as a vehicular fuel. Energy
Convers Manage 2008;49:2727–41.
[15] Demirbas A. A realistic fuel alternative for diesel engines. Springer; 2008.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-995-8.
[16] He B, Shuai S, Wang J, He H. The effect of ethanol blended diesel fuels on
emissions from a diesel engine. Atmos Environ 2003;37:4965–71.
[17] Bilgin A, Durgun O, Sahin Z. The effects of diesel–ethanol blends on diesel
engine performance. Energy Source 2002;24:431–40.
[18] Lapuerta M, Armas O, Herreros JM. Emissions from a diesel–bioethanol blend
in an automotive diesel engine. Fuel 2008;87:25–31.
231
[19] Kim H, Choi B. Effect of ethanol–diesel blend fuels on emission and particle
size distribution in a common-rail direct injection diesel engine with warmup
catalytic converter. Renew Energy 2008;33:2222–8.
[20] Rakopoulos DC, Rakopoulos CD, Kakaras EC, Giakoumis EG. Effects of ethanol–
diesel fuel blends on the performance and exhaust emissions of heavy duty DI
diesel engine. Energy Convers Manage 2008;49:3155–62.
[21] Xing-cai L, Jian-guang Y, Wu-gao Z, Zhen H. Effect of cetane number improver
on heat release rate and emissions of high speed diesel engine fueled with
ethanol–diesel blend fuel. Fuel 2004;83:2013–20.
[22] Huang J, Wang Y, Li Shuangding, Anthony PR, Yu Hongdong, Li Huifen.
Experimental investigation on the performance and emissions of a diesel
engine fuelled with ethanol–diesel blends. Appl Therm Eng 2009;29:2484–90.
[23] Murayama T, Miyamoto N, Yamada T, Kawashima J. A study on diesel-engines
with alcohol fuels (engine performance with ethanol–castor oil fuel blends).
Bull JSME 1983;26(216):1043–9.
[24] Weidmann K, Menrad H. Fleet test, performance and emissions of diesel
engines using different alcohol–dieselfuel blends. SAE 841331; 1984.
[25] Hansen AC, Taylor PW, Lyne L, Meiring P. Heat release in the compression-
ignition combustion of ethanol. Trans ASAE 1989;5:1507–11.
[26] Czerwinski J. Performance of HD-DI-diesel engine with addition of ethanol and
rapeseed oil. SAE 940545; 1994.
[27] Ali Y, Hanna MA, Borg JE. Effect of alternative diesel fuels on heat release
curves for Cummins N14–410 diesel engine. Trans ASAE 1996;2:407–14.
[28] Ajav EA, Singh B, Bhattacharya TK. Experimental study of some performance
parameters of a constant speed stationary diesel engine using ethanol–diesel
blends as fuel. Biomass Bioenergy 1999;17(4):357–65.
[29] Abu-Qudais M, Haddad O, Qudaisat M. The effect of alcohol fumigation on
diesel engine performance and emissions. Energy Convers Manage
2000;41:389–99.
[30] Ajav EA, Singh B, Bhattacharya TK. Thermal balance of a single cylinder diesel
engine operating on alternative fuels. Energy Convers Manage
2000;41:1533–41.
[31] Gao X, Borman G, Foster D, Ye Z. Ignition delay and heat release analysis of an
ethanol fumigated turbocharged diesel-engine. In: 6th Annual energy sources
technology and exhibit ASME; 1983 [83-DGP-1].
[32] Walker JT. Diesel tractor engine performance as affected by ethanol
fumigation. Trans ASAE 1984;27(1):49.
[33] Shropshire GJ, Bashford LL. Comparison of ethanol fumigation systems for a
diesel engine. Agric Eng (USA) 1987;65(5):17–24.
[34] Chaplin J, Janius RB. Ethanol fumigation of a compression-ignition engine
using advanced injection of diesel fuel. Trans ASAE 1987;30(3):610–4.
[35] Fahd MEA, Wenming Y, Lee PS, Chou SK, Yap CR. Experimental investigation of
the performance and emission characteristics of direct injection diesel engine
by water emulsion diesel under varying engine load condition. Appl Energy
2013;102:1042–9.
[36] Sahin Z, Durgun O, Bayram C. Experimental investigation of gasoline
fumigation in a single cylinder direct tinjection diesel engine. Energy
2008;33:1298–310.
[37] Cheng CH, Cheung CS, Chan TL, Lee SC, Yao CD, Tsang KS. Comparison of
emissions of a direct injection diesel engine operating on biodiesel with
emulsified and fumigated methanol. Fuel 2008;87:1870–9.
[38] Zhang ZH, Tsang KS, Cheung CS, Chan TL, Yao CD. Effect of fumigation
methanol and ethanol on the gaseous and particulate emissions of a direct
injection diesel engine. Atmos Environ 2011;45:2001–8.
[39] Zhang ZH, Cheung CS, Chan TL, Yao CD. Experimental investigation of
regulated and unregulated emissions from a diesel engine fuelled with Euro
V diesel fuel and fumigation methanol. Atmos Environ 2010;44:1054–61.
[40] Zhang ZH, Cheung CS, Chan TL, Yao CD. Emission reduction from diesel engine
using fumigation methanol and diesel oxidation catalyst. Sci Total Environ
2009;407:4497–505.
[41] Hansdah D, Murugan S. Bioethanol fumigation in a DI diesel engine. Fuel
2014;130:324–33.
[42] Sudheesh K, Mallikarjuna JM. Diethyl ether as an ignition improver for biogas
homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI) operation – an
experimental investigation. Energy 2010;35:3614–22.
[43] Can C, Can Ö, Sahin F, Yucesu HS. Effects of premixed diethyl ether (DEE) on
combustion and exhaust emissions in a HCCI-DI diesel engine. Appl Therm Eng
2010;30:360–5.
[44] Hou J, Wen Z, Jiang Z, Liu Y. Effects of premixed ratio on combustion
characteristics of a homogeneous charge compression ignition-direct injection
engine fuelled with dimethyl ether. J Renew Sustain Energy 2014;6(1):013106.
[45] Holman JP. Experimental methods for engineers. 7th ed. Mc Graw-Hill; 2007.
[46] Caliskan H, Hepbasli A. A review on exergetic analysis and assessment of
various types of engines. Int J Exergy 2010;7(3):287–310.
[47] Morsy MH. Assessement of a direct injection fumigated engine fumigated with
ethanol/water mixture. Energy Convers Manage 2015;94:406–14.
[48] Kotas TJ. The exergy method of thermal plant analysis. Paragon Publishing;
2012.
[49] Wray AP, Ibrahim SS, Carrotte JF. Engineering thermodynamics. Departmental
Publication No. 18, AAE Department, Loughborough University; 1997.