Downloaded from SAE International by Shikhar Jain, Tuesday, March 26, 2019
2019-01-0793 Published 02 Apr 2019
Study of Performance and Emission Characteristics
of Propan-2-ol and Gasoline Fuel Blends in an
Unmodified Spark Ignition Engine
Naveen Kumar, Shikhar Jain, Aakriti Bagla, and Shivalika Sharma CASRAE, Delhi Technological University
Mukul Tomar Delhi Technological University
Citation: Kumar, N., Jain, S., Bagla, A., Sharma, S. et al., “Study of Performance and Emission Characteristics of Propan-2-ol and
Gasoline Fuel Blends in an Unmodified Spark Ignition Engine,” SAE Technical Paper 2019-01-0793, 2019, doi:10.4271/2019-01-0793.
Abstract
I
n view of the rapid depletion, increasing prices and uneven
distribution of conventional petroleum fuels; the interest
in the use of alternative fuels has increased exponentially.
Fuels such as biodiesel & alcohol have been evaluated both at
experimental and commercial scale due to improved emission
characteristics as compared to conventional fuels. Alcohols are
oxygenated and result in improving the engine performance.
As a blend with conventional gasoline, the alcohols enhance
the premixed and diffusive combustion phase which improves
the combustion efficiency. The present investigation evaluates
studies on stability and homogeneity along with physicochem-
ical properties like density, viscosity, calorific value,
Introduction
E
nergy is the key to achieve economic, social and envi-
ronmental targets of humankind, and the amount of
energy consumption, vanishing energy reserves, and
production methods have been the most controversial subject
in today’s world. The continuous increment in the population
of world results in increasing demands for energy to support
human existence. This increase in demand, emphasizes the
need for a more reliable and efficient way of energy consump-
tion and production. This led to the substantial effort to
develop alternative fuel sources, most notably biofuels. Though
there are varieties of clean energy vehicles available which
completely run on biofuels, it is very difficult to substitute
conventional (gasoline powered or diesel powered) vehicles,
due to the cost of infrastructure, maintenance, refuelling
involved and convenience of consumers [1]. Therefore, blends
of biofuel and conventional fuel are recent areas of research.
Production and consumption of biofuels from renewable
sources are critical, not only to achieve economic stability but
to reduce climate change and environmental depletion. The
combustion of petroleum for transport, industrial and
domestic use causes an increasing amount of carbon dioxide
and other greenhouse gases, which contributes to air pollution
and temperature rise. M.I Jahirul et al. analyzed air pollution
caused by gasoline in motor vehicles. He  concluded that
© 2019 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.
copper-strip corrosion and solubility at room temperature of
Propan-2-ol and gasoline blends. Comprehensive engine trials
on unmodified petrol engine fuelled with blends of Propan-2-ol
and gasoline blends in the proportions of 5, 10, 15 and 20% by
volume have been conducted. The performance characteristics
e.g. brake-specific energy consumption, brake thermal effi-
ciency and emissions characteristics such as NOX, CO and HC
were studied and analyzed to evaluate the optimum alcohol/
fuel blend for the petrol engine. The result yielded enhanced
combustion and performance characteristics as compared to
gasoline with reduced Carbon monoxide and un-burnt
hydrocarbon emissions. However, there was an increase
in the oxides of nitrogen emissions.
carbon dioxide is the largest contributor of greenhouse gases
and by 2020, estimated carbon dioxide emission will
be 41.79kton per day produced by automobiles running on
conventional liquid fuels [2].
When there is not enough oxygen to convert all carbon to
carbon dioxide, CO forms which is a colourless, odourless and
poisonous gas. It not only causes environmental hazards but
has a terrible impact on human health. CO damages coronary
arteries in the heart and cerebral arteries in the brain [2].
Photochemical smog is one of the serious concern of urban
cities which is caused due to NOX emission by automobile. NOX
plays important role information of the ground level ozone
layer that is harmful to biological tissues. This encouraged the
researchers to shift the burden to greener fuels, mainly alcohols
based liquid fuels. Liquid biofuels can readily replace gasoline
without major modifications in current transportation tech-
nologies. Global production of liquid biofuels has grown expo-
nentially in recent years. But the amount of biofuel produced
is of high prices due to less quantitative extraction from crops.
For example, in a typical ethanol plant, for every 100 kg of corn
used, roughly 40.1L of ethanol is produced with large quantities
of by-products. Similarly, 38.3kg of soybean (rapeseed) is used
to generate 10L of biodiesel [3].
Researchers have conducted various studies on the fuel
blends, of alcohol and gasoline, in past few years. Alcohols are
 Downloaded from SAE International by Shikhar Jain, Tuesday, March 26, 2019
2 STUDY OF PERFORMANCE AND EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS OF PROPAN-2-OL AND GASOLINE FUEL BLENDS
used as blends due to the presence of oxygen in their molecular
structure that results in high octane rating. Alcohol has better
anti-knock characteristics and reduced level of CO and UHC
emissions as and when compared to gasoline as a fuel for SI
Engines. Unfortunately, technology for use of alcohols as fuel
has not been developed fully yet and thus its use hasn’t reached
its highest potential [4, 5, 6]. Compared to gasoline, alcohol
appears to be  safer for transportation when evaluated on
various combustion characteristics such as flash point and
auto-ignition temperature [4, 5, 6]. Use of alcohol also leads
to a rise in volumetric efficiency as the temperature of the
intake manifold is lowered since, for alcohols latent heat of
evaporation is 3-5 times higher compared to gasoline [4, 5, 6].
Air essential for complete combustion of alcohol as a fuel is
less than gasoline since the stoichiometric air-fuel ratio (AFR)
for alcohol is about 2/3-1/2 that of gasoline [4, 5, 6].
Methanol being simplest among the class of alcohols was
initially tested. Liu et al. conducted methanol-gasoline blend
test on three-cylinder, spark-ignition engine, which showed
progress in brake thermal efficiency and a decline in emissions
of HC and CO with significant improvement in engine cold
start [7]. Xin Wang et al. evaluated methanol-gasoline blend
in passenger car and summarized that methanol exhibits the
better capability of lowering engine emission and fuel cost but
showed an increase in NOX (though lower than gasoline) [8].
Methanol is produced primarily from coal and petroleum-
based fuel, thus increasing dependency on fossil fuels.
However, ethanol is produced by alcoholic fermentation of
biomass feedstock, such as corn, sugarcane, barley, and agri-
culture residues [9]. Considering renewability, ethanol is pref-
erable alternative fuel blend as compared to methanol.
H.S. Yu cesu et al. [10] analyzed the consequences of
gasoline-ethanol blends on engine performance and exhaust
emission at different compression ratios. Results depicted
positive outcomes but require some engine modifications as
fuel system require more fuel. For a specific amount of fuel,
the distance travelled by alcohol is less as compared to
gasoline. Pure ethanol causes cold starting problem, therefore
blend of 15% ethanol and 85% gasoline has widespread use as
an alternative fuel. Various experimental investigations were
carried out on lower alcohols (methanol and ethanol) while
higher alcohols (propanol, butanol and pentanol) are recent
areas of interest as they provide better water tolerance, anti-
knock characteristics, and volatility control. M. Gautam et al.
conducted gasoline and higher alcohol blend test on single-
cylinder cooperative fuel research engine to compare knock
limits, fuel properties and combustion characteristics at
different blend. The results showed higher alcohol blends are
more resistant to pure gasoline and as oxygen content
increases, flame speed also increases [11].
Butanol is more operational as compared to ethanol and
methanol, as it shows preferable outcomes while using an IC
engine. It requires lesser engine modifications; due to its high
tolerance to water contamination, it can be used in existing
distribution pipelines. Butanol has a lower vapour pressure
that reduces vapour lock occurrence and shows better blending
ability [12, 13]. In spite of having more desirable properties,
butanol lags behind ethanol in competitive market due to the
cost and complexity in the production method i.e. ABE
(acetone-butanol-ethanol) fermentation. Ethanol yielded from
fermentation is 10-30 times more than butanol yielded from
ABE [14].
Among higher alcohols such as Propanol, especially
isopropyl alcohol blend with gasoline has limited information
available. H. Sivasubramanian et al. [15] studied performance,
emission and combustion characteristics of isopropanol using
4-cylinder MPFI spark-ignition engine with mixtures of 10%,
20% and 30% isopropanol by volume in unleaded gasoline.
Experiments showed an increase in brake thermal efficiency
as the concentration of isopropanol increases and reduction
in emission of CO and HC, due to the higher latent heat of
vaporization and oxygen content as compared to unleaded
gasoline. But NOX emission was increased at higher concentra-
tion of isopropanol. Jing Gong et al. analyzed gaseous and
particulate emission at different percentage of the isopro-
panol-gasoline blends, at various loads on engine and emission
recirculation rates. Results showed, at full load condition, NOX
emission was highest and the value decreased by the recircula-
tion of the exhaust gas. It was further observed that the partic-
ulate emission incremented smoothly as load increases and
the rate of recirculation of emission gas decreases [16].
The current investigation deals with the evaluation of the
physicochemical properties, performance and emission char-
acteristics of Propan-2-ol and gasoline blend in the propor-
tions of 5%, 10%, 15% and 20% by volume. Each blend was
tested and the resulting Brake thermal efficiency and Brake
specific fuel consumption were calculated and plotted at
different loads to evaluate performance characteristics of the
fuel blends of gasoline and Propan-2-ol. Similarly, percentage
volume of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides (in ppm) and
hydrocarbons (in ppm) were measured through AVL gas
analyzer and smoke meter. Results were plotted against
varying load to evaluate emission characteristics.
Propan-2-ol
Propan-2-ol which is commonly called isopropyl alcohol is a
colourless, flammable chemical compound having a strong
odour. It readily mixes in water, ethanol, ether, and chloro-
form at all concentrations forming a homogeneous mixture.
But, unlike ethanol or methanol, it is immiscible in the salt
solution and separates out from aqueous solution by addition
of salts like sodium chloride. This process of salting out helps
in obtaining a distinct concentrated layer of Propan-2-ol [17].
Water and isopropanol forms azeotropic mixture, there-
fore cannot be separated by simple distillation. It is produced
TABLE 1  Physico-chemical Properties of Fuels
Properties Gasoline Propan-2-ol
Density (kg/m3, at 15°C) 766 781
Boiling Temperature ( °C) 35 82.6
Flash Point ( °C) -40 10
Octane Number 89 108
Viscosity (cSt at 40 °C) 0.42 1.3
Calorific Value (MJ/kg) 42 25
© 2019 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.
© 2019 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Shikhar Jain, Tuesday, March 26, 2019

 STUDY OF PERFORMANCE AND EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS OF PROPAN-2-OL AND GASOLINE FUEL BLENDS 3

TABLE 2  Physico-chemical properties of Test Samples

Properties Equipment Test Method IPA5G95 IPA10G90 IPA15G85 IPA20G80

Density (kg/m3, at 15°C) DMA 4500 Anton Paar ASTM D4052 762.5 763.1 763.8 764.1
Viscosity (cSt at 40 °C) Visco bath, Petrotest ASTM D445 0.51 0.58 .78 .81
Calorific Value (MJ/kg) Parr 6100, oxygen bomb ASTM D240 43.9 44.3 45.3 46.3
calorimeter
© 2019 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.

primarily by hydration reaction or by hydrogenation of  FIGURE 1   Engine Setup Layout

acetone [18, 19]. To obtain anhydrous propanol, it is further
azeotropically distilled using di-isopropyl ether or cyclo-
hexane as azeotroping agents [17]. Isopropanol is commonly
found in detergents, antiseptic and disinfectants. Apart from
using as a gasoline additive, it is also used as a solvent for
non-polar compounds and specimen preservative in the
biological laboratory.

© 2019 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.

Propan-2-ol and Gasoline
Blend Development
The process of blending Propan-2-ol and gasoline is quite
simple, and Propan-2-ol can be easily blended with gasoline
without any phase separation problems. Blends were prepared
by adding Propan-2-ol, 5% by volume in gasoline 95% by
volume which is named as IPA5G95. In the same manner,
10%, 15%, 20% of Propan-2-ol was added to 90%, 85%, 80%
petrol fuel respectively to form blends named as IPA10G90,
TABLE 3  Engine Specifications
IPA15G85, IPA20G80 respectively. Density according to
ASTM D402 standards was experimentally evaluated using Number of Cylinder One
DMA 4500 Anton Paar and results show, with an increase in Type 4-stroke, side valve type (L-head)
the concentration of Propan-2-ol, density increases. Increase Displacement Volume 272 cc
in density is due to higher density of isopropanol as compared Cooling System Forced-air cooled
© 2019 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.

to gasoline, thus blend shows slight increment. Viscosity is

Ignition System Flywheel Magneto Ignition
tested using the Visco bath and petrotest as per ASTM D445
Air Cleaner Semi-dry
standards. The calorific value of blends is more than calorific
value of both Propan-2-ol and gasoline individually, and it Dry Weight 23.0 kg
increases with the concentration of Propan-2-ol in the blends. Cylinder Bore 76.0 mm
All the equipment with the test method of the blends and their Piston Stroke 60.0 mm
corresponding properties are listed in Table 2. Compression ratio 6.5:1
Length (mm) 385
Width (mm) 410

Experimental Test Rig Height (mm) 470

Figure 1 shows the schematic diagram of the experimental potential difference and the current flowing through the
set-up used in the present investigation. The engine used for circuit which provides a means for calculation of power gener-
the exhaustive performance and emissions evaluation is ated by the engine generator setup. Through the switch, the
Honda, single-cylinder, vertical, air-cooled, four strokes, load on the generator and hence engine can be varied and the
unmodified spark ignition engine and all specifications of the corresponding values of voltage and current can be measured
engine are listed in Table 3. The engine is coupled with a from measuring instruments. The exhaust pipe is connected
generator and RPM sensor (tachometer) is placed at a permis- to a thermocouple to measure the temperature of exhaust gas
sible distance, measuring the rpm of the output shaft. The at the particular load applied. At the end of the exhaust pipe,
engine is equipped with a governor which helps to gain AVL smoke meter and AVL gas analyzer are connected to
constant RPM in very less time by altering the fuel supply analyze the exhaust gases and the emissions produced.
through the actuator. At the exit of the generator, an AC Performance evaluation is done by varying the load and
output is connected to 10 bulbs (200W each) in parallel and, measuring the fuel consumption rate. Before using the instru-
a voltmeter and an ammeter are connected to measure the ments for the measurement of the engine emissions: CO, HC
© 2019 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Shikhar Jain, Tuesday, March 26, 2019

4 STUDY OF PERFORMANCE AND EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS OF PROPAN-2-OL AND GASOLINE FUEL BLENDS

and NOX, they were calibrated. All the instruments used were  FIGURE 3   B.S.F.C (kg/kWh) vs LOAD (Watt)
of standard quality and the error was within permissible
range. AVL Di-Gas 4000 was used to measure the emission
of NOX, CO and HC. Emission evaluation is carried out, using
AVL gas analyzer and AVL smoke meter. The details of instru-
mentation including their accuracy are stated in the appendix.

© 2019 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.

Performance
Characteristics
Brake Thermal Efficiency
Brake thermal efficiency refers to the ability of the engine to
accept the experimental fuel. It also provides comparable
means for accessing the efficiency of the engine in the conver-
sion of the chemical energy to mechanical energy at the output
shaft i.e. it is a quantitative way to compare the efficiency of
the combustion system to convert energy in the fuel to produce variation of Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (B.S.F.C) in
useful work. relation with load at the output shaft is shown in Figure 3.
The variation of Brake Thermal Efficiency (BTE) in It shows a decrement in B.S.F.C with increment in the
relation with load at the output shaft is shown in Figure 2. It volume of Propan-2-ol in the fuel blends. This decrement was
shows increment in the BTE values with increment in the approximately 9.84%, 16.39%, 19.67% and 22.95% at maximum
volume of Propan-2-ol in the fuel blends. This increment was operating load for IPA5G95, IPA10G90, IPA15G85, and
approximately 5.6%, 12.09%, 15.24%, and 16.45% at maximum IPA20G80 respectively. At part load, the decrement was
operating load for IPA5G95, IPA10G90, IPA15G85, and approximately 7.31%, 10.97%, 15.85%, and 20.73% for
IPA20G80 respectively. At part load, the increment was IPA5G95, IPA10G90, IPA15G85, and IPA20G80 respectively.
approximately 1.81%, 5.75%, 9.77%, and 13.71% for IPA5G95, The reason for lower brake specific fuel consumption for fuel
IPA10G90, IPA15G85, and IPA20G80 respectively. The reason blends can be attributed towards the higher calorific value of
for higher brake thermal efficiency for fuel blends can fuel blends as it results in lesser fuel consumption to generate
be attributed towards the higher calorific value of fuel blends the same amount of power as compared to gasoline.
as it results in lesser fuel consumption to generate the same
amount of power as compared to gasoline.
Emission Characteristics
Brake Specific Fuel
Consumption In this section, the variation of CO, unburnt HC and NOX
with the addition of Propan-2-ol is studied.
Brake specific fuel consumption is the ratio of the rate of fuel
consumed by the engine to the power delivered by it. The
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
 FIGURE 2   BTE (%) vs LOAD (Watt) Carbon Monoxide is a colourless and odourless gas.
Haemoglobin in the blood has a higher affinity for Carbon
Monoxide than for Oxygen gas. Therefore, if inhaled, it
replaces the oxygen in the bloodstream and affects the
body’s metabolism.
Figure 5 shows the variation of percentage of carbon
monoxide in the exhaust gases emitted from the gasoline
© 2019 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.

engine at different loads for the fuel blends and gasoline. It

shows a decrement in the CO emissions with increment in
the volume of Propan-2-ol in the fuel blends. At the
maximum operating load, the decrease in the amount of CO
emissions was found to be 11.11%, 18.51%, 25.92% and 29.62%
for IPA5G95, IPA10G90, IPA15G85, and IPA20G80 respec-
tively. At part load, the decrement was approximately
5%, 15%, 20%, and 25% for IPA5G95, IPA10G90, IPA15G85,
and IPA20G80 respectively. The reason for the observed
trend is explained below:
© 2019 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Shikhar Jain, Tuesday, March 26, 2019

 STUDY OF PERFORMANCE AND EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS OF PROPAN-2-OL AND GASOLINE FUEL BLENDS 5

 FIGURE 4   CO (%) vs LOAD (Watt)  FIGURE 6   NOX (ppm) vs LOAD (Watt)
© 2019 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.

© 2019 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.

 FIGURE 5   HC (ppm) vs LOAD (Watt)

can cause several health effects such as asthma etc. These

un-burnt hydrocarbons are produced as a result of
incomplete combustion.
Figure 6 shows the variation of the amount of unburnt
hydrocarbons (HC) with the increasing load. It is observed
that with an increase in the volume of Propan-2-ol in the fuel
blends, there is a decrement in the amount of HC emissions
© 2019 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.

produced by the engine. At the maximum operating load, the

decrease in the amount of HC emissions was found to
be 8.33%, 16.67%, 25% and 41.67% for IPA5G95, IPA10G90,
IPA15G85, and IPA20G80 respectively. At part load, the decre-
ment was approximately 14.28%, 28.57%, 42.85%, and 57.14%
for IPA5G95, IPA10G90, IPA15G85, and IPA20G80 respec-
tively. The reason for lower HC emissions can be attributed
towards better combustion of the fuel blends as compared to
the gasoline. It is due to the higher availability of Oxygen for
combustion in fuel blends than in gasoline.

As alcohols are oxygenated fuels, Propan-2-ol and

gasoline fuel blends have a higher amount of oxygen as
Nitrogen Oxide (NOX)
compared to gasoline which leads to better combustion as The variation of emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOX) with
compared to gasoline. As a result, with increment in the the increasing load for all the blends is shown in Figure 7.
volume of Propan-2-ol in the fuel blends, there is a decrement Nitrogen Oxide is produced by the chemical reaction of oxygen
in the CO emissions produced by the engine. and nitrogen by combustion of fuel at very high temperature.
NOX emissions were found to increase with the increase
Unburnt Hydrocarbon (HC) in the volume of Propan-2-ol in the fuel blends. At the
maximum operating load, the increase in the amount of NOX
Hydrocarbons at lower concentrations i.e. those present in emissions was found to be 11.01%, 15.25%, 19.49% and 27.11%
the ambient air are not harmful to health. However, their for IPA5G95, IPA10G90, IPA15G85, and IPA20G80 respec-
levels are altered by vehicular emissions and thus, the study tively. At part load, the increment in the NOX emissions was
of un-burnt hydrocarbons released in the atmosphere is of approximately 1.33%, 4%, 8%, and 12% for IPA5G95,
utmost importance. These un-burnt hydrocarbons are IPA10G90, IPA15G85, and IPA20G80 respectively. The reason
responsible for the trapping of heat reflected by the earth for higher NOX emissions can be attributed towards higher
surface which increases the average temperature and leads availability of oxygen in the combustion chamber and the
to a loss in quality of the environment. The volatile organic greater amount of heat released upon combustion due to the
compounds present in the unburnt hydrocarbons mix with higher calorific value of the fuel blends which is responsible
sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides to form smog which for higher temperatures of exhaust gases.
© 2019 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Shikhar Jain, Tuesday, March 26, 2019
6 STUDY OF PERFORMANCE AND EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS OF PROPAN-2-OL AND GASOLINE FUEL BLENDS
Conclusions
The current paper explores the feasibility of Propan-2-ol as a
viable supplement for petrol. The following conclusions can
be drawn for its performance and emission characteristics:
1. The Brake thermal efficiency (BTE) was found to
be increasing with the increase in alcohol
concentration in the gasoline. At maximum operating
load, increase in the BTE of IPA20G80 was found to
be 16.45%. At part load condition, the increase in BTE
was found to be 13.71%.
2. Brake specific fuel consumption is inversely
proportional to the brake thermal efficiency and
hence, minimum consumption was found for
IPA20G80 at both part load and maximum
operating load.
3. The carbon monoxide (CO) and unburnt hydrocarbon
(HC) emissions were decreased by significant
amounts. With the increase in the concentration of
Propan-2-ol in the fuel blends, there is a decrease in
the CO and HC emissions. For IPA20G80, at
maximum operating load, CO and HC emissions
were found to be decreased by 25.92% and 41.67%
with respect to gasoline. At part load for IPA20G80,
CO and HC emissions were found to be decreased by
25% and 57.14% as compared to gasoline.
4. However, the oxides of nitrogen (NOX) were increased
with the increase in the concentration of Propan-2-ol
in the fuel blends which is due to the increased
availability of oxygen in the combustion chamber. In
the worst case i.e. for IPA20G80, at maximum
operating load NOX emissions were increased by
27.11% as compared to gasoline. An engine is rarely
used at maximum operating load for long periods.
Generally, it is used at partial load. At partial load, for
IPA20G80, NOX emissions increase by 12% as
compared to that of gasoline.
Comparing the performance and emission characteristics
of the four fuel blends namely IPA5G95, IPA10G90, IPA15G85,
and IPA20G80, IPA20G80 is found as the optimized fuel blend
of Propan-2-ol in gasoline.
References
1. Morita, K., “Automotive Power Source in 21st Century,” JSAE
Rev. 24(1):3-7, 2003, doi:10.1016/S0389-4304(02)00250-3.
2. Jahirul, M.I., Saidur, R., Hasanuzzaman, M., Masjuki, H.H.
et al., “A Comparison of the Air Pollution of Gasoline and
CNG Driven Car for Malaysia,” Int. J. Mech. Mater. Eng.
2(2):130-138, 2007.
3. Taheripour, F., Hertel, T.W., Tyner, W.E., Beckman, J.F. et al.,
“Biofuels and their By-Products: Global Economic and
Environmental Implications,” Biomass and Bioenergy
34(3):278-289, 2010, doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2009.10.017.
4. Yüksel, F. and Yüksel, B., “The Use of Ethanol-Gasoline
Blend as a Fuel in an SI Engine,” Renew. Energy 29(7):1181-
1191, 2004, doi:10.1016/j.renene.2003.11.012.
5. Koç, M., Sekmen, Y., Topgül, T., and Yücesu, H.S., “The
Effects of Ethanol-Unleaded Gasoline Blends on Engine
Performance and Exhaust Emissions in a Spark-Ignition
Engine,” Renew. Energy 34(10):2101-2106, 2009, doi:10.1016/j.
renene.2009.01.018.
6. Canakci, M., Ozsezen, A.N., Alptekin, E., and Eyidogan, M.,
“Impact of Alcohol-Gasoline Fuel Blends on the Exhaust
Emission of an SI Engine,” Renew. Energy 52(x):111-117, 2013,
doi:10.1016/j.renene.2012.09.062.
7. Liu, S., Cuty Clemente, E.R., Hu, T., and Wei, Y., “Study of
Spark Ignition Engine Fueled with Methanol/Gasoline Fuel
Blends,” Appl. Therm. Eng. 27(11-12):1904-1910, 2007,
doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2006.12.024.
8. Wang, X., Ge, Y., Liu, L., Peng, Z. et al., “Evaluation on Toxic
Reduction and Fuel Economy of a Gasoline Direct Injection-
(GDI-) Powered Passenger Car Fueled with Methanol-
Gasoline Blends with Various Substitution Ratios,” Appl.
Energy 157:134-143, 2015, doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.08.023.
9. Mielenz, J.R., “Ethanol Production from Biomass: Technology
and Commercialization Status,” Curr. Opin. Microbiol.
4(3):324-329, 2001, doi:10.1016/S1369-5274(00)00211-3.
10. Yücesu, H.S., Topgül, T., Çinar, C., and Okur, M., “Effect of
Ethanol-Gasoline Blends on Engine Performance and
Exhaust Emissions in Different Compression Ratios,” Appl.
Therm. Eng. 26(17-18):2272-2278, 2006, doi:10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2006.03.006.
11. Gautam, M. and Martin, D.W., “Combustion Characteristics
of Higher-Alcohol/Gasoline Blends,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng.
Part A J. Power Energy 214(5):497-511, 2000,
doi:10.1243/0957650001538047.
12. He, B.Q., Liu, M.B., Yuan, J., and Zhao, H., “Combustion and
Emission Characteristics of a HCCI Engine Fuelled with
N-Butanol-Gasoline Blends,” Fuel 108:668-674, 2013,
doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2013.02.026.
13. Merola, S.S., Tornatore, C., Marchitto, L., Valentino, G. et al.,
“Experimental Investigations of Butanol-Gasoline Blends
Effects on the Combustion Process in a SI Engine,” Int. J.
Energy Environ. Eng. 3(1):1-14, 2012, doi:10.1186/2251-6832-3-6.
14. Kumar, M. and Gayen, K., “Developments in Biobutanol
Production: New Insights,” Appl. Energy 88(6):1999-2012,
2011, doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.12.055.
15. Sivasubramanian, H., Pochareddy, Y.K., Dhamodaran, G.,
and Esakkimuthu, G.S., “Performance, Emission and
Combustion Characteristics of a Branched Higher Mass,
C3alcohol (Isopropanol) Blends Fuelled Medium Duty MPFI
SI Engine,” Eng. Sci. Technol. an Int. J. 20(2):528-535, 2017,
doi:10.1016/j.jestch.2016.11.013.
16. Gong, J., Zhang, Y., Tang, C., and Huang, Z., “Emission
Characteristics of Iso-Propanol-Gasoline Blends in a Spark-
Ignition Engine Combined with EGR,” Thermal Science.
18:269-277, 2014.
17. Zhigang, T., Rongqi, Z., and Zhanting, D., “Separation of
Isopropanol from Aqueous Solution by Salting-Out
Extraction,” J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 76(7):757-763,
2001, doi:10.1002/jctb.447.
18. Herbo, C.I., J. Chim. Phys. 47:454, 1950, doi:10.1016/0095-
8522(56)90169-6.
19. Lee, J.Y., Kim, K., Kim, S.J., and Technology, L., “United
States Patent [19] Date of Patent,” 1998.
© 2019 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Shikhar Jain, Tuesday, March 26, 2019

STUDY OF PERFORMANCE AND EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS OF PROPAN-2-OL AND GASOLINE FUEL BLENDS 7

Contact Information CO2 - Carbon Dioxide

HC - Hydrocarbon
Centre for Advanced Studies and Research in Automotive
NOX - Nitrogen Oxides
Engineering, Department of Mechanical Engineering, DTU
naveenkumardce@gmail.com ppm - parts per million
Contact no: +91-9891963530 v/v - volume by volume
rpm - revolution per minute
Acknowledgements Kg - kilogram
BTE - Brake thermal efficiency
Authors of the paper wish to extend their heartfelt gratitude
towards Centre for Advanced Studies and Research in KJ - kilojoule
Automotive Engineering (CASRAE), Delhi Technological KW - kilowatt
University, Delhi for providing assistance and laboratory m3 - cubic metre
support for this research work.
mm - millimetre
cc - cubic centimetre
Abbreviations IPA0G100 - Gasoline
% - Percentage IPA5G95 - 5% Propan-2-ol and 95% Gasoline
SI engine - Spark-Ignition engine IPA10G90 - 10% Propan-2-ol and 90% Gasoline
BMEP - Brake Mean Effective Pressure IPA15G85 - 15% Propan-2-ol and 85% Gasoline
BSFC - Brake Specific Fuel Consumption IPA20G80 - 20% Propan-2-ol and 80% Gasoline
CO - Carbon Monoxide

Appendix
Measurement Range Accuracy Measurement Technique Percentage Uncertainty
Carbon Monoxide 0-9.99% vol. ±1% Non-dispersive Infrared principle ±0.20
Hydrocarbon 0-10,000 ppm ±20ppm FID ( Flame Ionization Detector ) ±0.20
Oxides of Nitrogen 0-10,000 ppm ±10 ppm Chemiluminescence Principle ±0.20
RPM 0.5 to 100,000 rpm ±0.05% + 1 digit Digital Photo Tachometer _
Exhaust Temperature 0-1000°C ±1°C K-type Thermocouple _
Current 0-10A ±1% Digital Ammeter _
Voltage 0-750 V AC ±1.0 Digital Voltmeter _
© 2019 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.

© 2019 SAE International. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE International.

Positions and opinions advanced in this work are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE International. Responsibility for the content of the work lies
solely with the author(s).

ISSN 0148-7191