Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Fuel
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fuel
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: In this study, the effects of methanoldiesel (M5, M10) and ethanoldiesel (E5, E10) fuel blends on the
Received 18 December 2009 performance and exhaust emissions were experimentally investigated. For this work, a single cylinder,
Received in revised form 5 February 2010 four-stroke, direct injection, naturally aspirated diesel engine was used. The tests were performed by
Accepted 10 February 2010
varying the engine speed between 1000 and 1800 rpm while keeping the engine torque at 30 Nm. The
Available online 21 February 2010
results showed that brake specic fuel consumption and emissions of nitrogen oxides increased while
brake thermal efciency, smoke opacity, emissions of carbon monoxide and total hydrocarbon decreased
Keywords:
with methanoldiesel and ethanoldiesel fuel blends.
Exhaust emissions
Engine performance
2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Methanol
Ethanol
1. Introduction Signicant amount research has been carried out on the perfor-
mance and emission characteristics of diesel engines fuelled with
In the last two decades, the researchers and manufacturers have ethanoldiesel and methanoldiesel blends. Huang et al. [10]
provided major reductions in the exhaust emission levels of the investigated the engine performance and exhaust emissions of die-
diesel engines due to increasing global concern about the air pollu- sel engine when using 10%, 20%, 25% and 30% ethanol-blended die-
tion. However, increasing number of diesel vehicles will probably sel fuels. In that study, the results showed that the brake thermal
bring the same air pollution problem again in the next years. These efciencies (BTE) decreased with increasing amount of ethanol in
forecasts have triggered various research studies in many countries the blended fuels because of the lower heating value (LHV) of eth-
to replace diesel fuel with oxygenated fuels such as methanol, eth- anol. The smoke emissions from the engine fuelled by the blends
anol, etc. [1,2]. Using alternative fuels, such as methanol and etha- were all lower than that fuelled by diesel. Carbon monoxide (CO)
nol in internal combustion engines has the potential to reduce the emission reduced when the engine was run at and above its half
dependency on petroleum fuels. Alcohols can be used in compres- loads, but it increased at low loads and low speed. Total hydrocar-
sion ignition (CI) engines as pure or blended with conventional die- bon (THC) emissions were all higher except for the full loads at
sel fuel [37]. high speed and the nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions were different
The advantages of alcohols as a fuel include: for different speeds, loads and blends.
Di et al. [11] researched the effect of ethanol addition (2%, 4%,
Low viscosity compared to diesel fuel, therefore it can easily be 6% and 8% in volume) to ultra low sulfur diesel fuel on the emis-
injected, atomized and mixed with air. sions of a direct injection (DI) diesel engine. With the increasing
Less emission because of its high stoichiometric fuelair ratio, amount of ethanol in the fuel blends, the BTE improved slightly.
high oxygen content, high H/C ratio and low sulfur content. The THC and CO emissions decreased but NOx emission increased
High evaporative cooling, which results in a cooler intake pro- when compared to the diesel fuel.
cess and compression stroke. This raises the volumetric ef- Rakopoulos et al. [12] studied the effects of ethanol blends with
ciency of the engine and reduces the required work input in conventional diesel fuel, with 5% and 10% (by volume) on the per-
the compression stroke. formance and emissions of a turbocharged, DI diesel engine. The
High laminar ame propagation speed, which may make com- results showed that CO and NOx emissions decreased, THC emis-
bustion process nish earlier, thus improve engine thermal ef- sions increased with the use of ethanol. Increasing the ethanol
ciency [8,9]. amount in the fuel blend increased the brake specic fuel con-
sumption (BSFC) and decreased the BTE.
* Tel.: +90 216 3365770; fax: +90 216 3378987.
Naga and Yusaf [13] examined the effect of methanoldiesel
E-mail addresses: csayin@marmara.edu.tr, sayincenk@yahoo.com blends on diesel engine performance. In that study, the diesel
0016-2361/$ - see front matter 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2010.02.017
C. Sayin / Fuel 89 (2010) 34103415 3411
engine was tested using methanol-blended diesel fuel at certain as BSFC and BTE) and exhaust emissions (such as smoke, THC,
mixing ratio of 10:90, 20:80 and 30:70. Experimental results CO, CO2 and NOx). However, it has not been clearly studied com-
showed that the effective power and torque for diesel fuel were parison of the engine performance and exhaust emissions of etha-
lower when compared to methanol-blended diesel fuel. The best noldiesel and methanoldiesel blended fuels, in particular with
mixing ratio that produced the lowest exhaust temperature was experiments conducted on the same engine. Comparison of perfor-
at 10% of methanol in 90% of diesel fuel. The exhaust temperature mance and emission data from the same engine using different fuel
for diesel fuel was higher compared to any mixing of the blended blends is more meaningful. Therefore, this study focused on the
fuel. The lowest BSFC values were obtained with 30% methanol inuences of ethanoldiesel and methanoldiesel blended fuels
and 70% diesel fuel. The BSFC for diesel fuel was much lower com- on the engine performance and exhaust emissions of the same
pared to any mixing ratio. In that study, it was noticed that BTE im- engine.
proved in almost all operation conditions with the methanol-
blended diesel fuels.
Popa et al. [14] researched the effect of methanoldiesel fuel 2. Test engine and fuel properties
blends on the exhaust emissions. This paper presented the exper-
imental results obtained by providing two different methods of Experiments were carried out on a four-stroke, naturally
diesel fuel and methanol engine supplying. The rst method con- aspirated, single cylinder direct injection diesel engine. The
sists in the methanol admission through a carburetor combined engine has a 770 cc cylinder volume and compression ratio of
with the classic diesel fuel injection and the second one refers to
the separate fuel injection. The exhaust emissions measurements
Table 1
resulted that the smoke and NOx levels signicantly reduced for
Fuel properties of euro-diesel, methanol and ethanol.
all the engine loads with increasing amount of methanol in the
blend. Euro-diesel Methanol Ethanol
[23] [24] [24]
In another study [15], the effect of injection timing on the ex-
haust emissions of a diesel engine was experimentally investigated Chemical formula C14H28 CH3OH C2H5OH
Molecular weight (kg/kmol) 196 32 46
by using methanol-blended diesel fuel from 0% to 15% with an
Flame speed rate (cm/s) 33 35 39
increment of 5%. The tests were conducted for three different injec- Boiling temperature (C) 190280 64.7 78.1
tion timings (15, 20 and 25 CA BTDC) at four different engine Density (g/cm3, at 20 C) 0.84 0.79 0.78
loads (5 Nm, 10 Nm, 15 Nm, 20 Nm) at 2200 rpm. The experimen- Flash point (C) 52 11 13
tal test results showed that BSFC, the emissions of NOx and CO2 in- Autoignition temperature (C) 254 464 423
Lower heating value (MJ/kg) 42.74 20.27 28.40
creased, BTE, smoke opacity, the emissions of CO and THC Cetane number 56.5 4 6
decreased with increasing amount of methanol in the fuel mixture. Stoichiometric air/fuel ratio 14.7 6.66 8.96
When compared the results to those of original injection timing, Octane number Not 109 109
NOx and CO2 emissions decreased, smoke opacity, the emissions applicable
C/H ratio 0.50 0.25 0.33
of THC and CO increased for the retarded injection timing (15
Kinematic viscosity at 298.15 K 2.5 106 0.75 106 151 106
CA BTDC). On the other hand, with the advanced injection timing (cm2/s)
(25 CA BTDC), smoke opacity, the emissions of THC and CO dimin- Carbon content (wt.%) 86 37.5 52.2
ished, NOx and CO2 emissions boosted at all test conditions. In Hydrogen content (wt.%) 14 12.5 13.1
terms of BSFC and BTE, retarded and advanced injection timings Oxygen content (wt.%) 0 50 34.8
Sulfur content (wt.%) <50
gave negative results for all fuel blends in all engine loads. Stoichiometric airfuel ratio 14.28 6.66 9.03
As seen in the literature review, both ethanoldiesel and meth- Heat of vaporization (MJ/kg) 0.27 1.11 0.92
anoldiesel blends inuence the diesel engine performance (such
Mixer
Fuel consumption
Fuel tank
measurement
17:1. The experimental set up consists of a diesel engine, an engine The fuel blends were prepared just before starting the experi-
test bed and fuel consumption metering equipment, gas analyzers ment to provide that the fuel mixture is homogenous. A mixer
and smoke meter. The schematic diagram of the experimental set was mounted inside the fuel tank in order to prevent phase-sepa-
up is shown in Fig. 1. ration. Also, dodecanol was added in proportions of 1% by volume
The fuels used in this study include euro-diesel, methanol and to each dieselmethanol and dieselethanol blends to satisfy mix-
ethanol. Euro-diesel was obtained from TUPRAS Petroleum Corpo- ture homogeneity and prevent phase-separation. The principal
ration. Ethanol and methanol, with a purity of 99%, were purchased specications of the engine and its fuel injection system are given
from a commercial supplier. The major properties of these fuels are in Table 2. To determine the engine torque, the shaft of the test en-
shown in Table 1. The volume percentages tested were 0%, 5% and gine is coupled to an electrical dynamometer, which is loaded by
10% of methanol with 100%, 95% and 90% of diesel fuel, respec- electrical resistance. A strain load sensor was employed to deter-
tively, which were named as D100, M5 and M10. The same pro- mine the load on the dynamometer. The engine speed was mea-
cesses for the mixing were performed with the blends of ethanol sured by electromagnetic speed sensor installed on the
and diesel, the volume percentages were 5% and 10% of ethanol, dynamometer. Fuel consumption was quantied by combined con-
which were named as E5 and E10. tainer method. The temperatures of air inlet, exhaust gas engine
outlet, cooling water and engine oil were measured with a
chromealuminum thermocouple TChK-400 U connected to the
Table 2
galvanometer MKD-50M. CO, CO2 and THC emissions were mea-
Technical specications of the test engine [25]. sured with an infrared gas analyzer (Bilsa Mod 210) with an accu-
racy 0.01%, %0.01% and 1 ppm, respectively. Smoke opacity was
Engine type Super Star 7710
Cylinder number 1
measured with the use of a Bosch system with an accuracy 0.1%
Cylinder bore 98 mm NOx emissions were recorded using an electrochemical gas ana-
Stroke 100 mm lyzer (Kane-May Qintox KM9106) with an accuracy 1 ppm. The
Total cylinder volume 770 cc analyzers were calibrated with standard gases and zero gas before
Compression ratio 17:1
each experiment. The emission data were expressed as brake spe-
Intake valve opens 15 CA BTDC
Exhaust valve opens 15 CA ATDC cic basis (g/kWh) except for the smoke opacity. Brake specic
Original injection pressure 220 bar emissions are the mass ow rate of the pollutant divided by the en-
Original injection timing 27 CA BTDC gine power. The photo of the experimental apparatus is shown in
Injection nozzle Needle valve and four hole nozzles Fig. 2.
Needle valve lifting pressure 150 0.5 bar
Experiments were conducted on at steady states for ve differ-
Maximum torque 39.8 Nm (at 1650 rpm)
Maximum power 7.4 kW (at 1900 rpm) ent speeds (10001800 rpm with 200 rpm intervals) at an engine
load of 30 Nm. At each mode operation, the engine was sufciently
CO emissions for diesel and four fuel blends are shown in Fig. 3. 3.3. Nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions
CO, formed by incomplete combustion of fuels, is produced most
readily from petroleum fuels, which contain no oxygen in their NOx emissions are shown in Fig. 5 for diesel fuel and fuel blends.
molecular structure. Increasing alcohols content in a fuel blend re- Thermal NOx refers to NOx formed through high temperature oxi-
sults in leaner combustion due to partially oxidized nature of alco- dation of nitrogen (N2) in combustion chamber. The formation of
hols relative to hydrocarbons [16]. Thus, for a given airfuel ratio NOx highly depends on in-cylinder temperatures, the oxygen con-
as shown in Table 1, the use of alcohol allows a higher relative con- centration and residence time for the reaction to take place. At high
centration of oxygen to exist in the combustion gases and this combustion (ame) temperatures, N2 and O2 in the combustion
achieves a greater conversion of CO to CO2 than for diesel fuel. This chamber disassociate into their atomic states and participate in a
effect would be expected to be most pronounced for methanol series of reactions. The three principal reactions producing thermal
since oxygen accounts for a larger percentage of its molecular NOx are described in Zeldovich Mechanism:
weight than for ethanol. The data in Fig. 3 show this expected
trend. Comparing the D100, there was an average of reduction in N2 O ! NO N
CO emissions 29.7%, 27.3%, 24.2% and 7.1% for M10, M5, E10 and N O2 ! NO O
E5, respectively, at 1400 rpm. N OH ! NO H
At maximum speed (1800 rpm), the minimum CO was found
0.19% for M10 and 0.21%, 0.22%, 0.23% and 0.25% for M5, E10 and For the alcohol blends several mechanism are involved. Firstly,
E5, respectively. The values of CO in all working conditions de- the oxygen in the fuel might enhance NOx formation. Secondly, the
creased with increasing the engine speed as a result of improved cooling effect of alcohol, due to the higher latent heating, might
combustion process. Increase in speed could probably augment lower the combustion temperature and hence reduce NOx forma-
volumetric efciency, boosting turbulence in combustion chamber tion. Thirdly, alcohol can lead to an increase of burned in the pre-
hence ensure better combustion [17]. mixed mode because of its lower cetane number and thus an
0.5
0.4
D100 D100
0.45 M5
M5
0.35
E5 E5
0.4 M10
THC (g/kWh)
M10
CO (g/kWh)
0.3 E10
E10
0.35
0.25
0.3
0.2 0.25
0.15 0.2
800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Engine speed (rpm) Engine speed (rpm)
4 1
D100 D100
3.5 M5 M5
0.9
E5 E5
M10
0.8
E10 E10
2.5
0.7
2
0.6
1.5
1 0.5
800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Engine speed (rpm) Engine speed (rpm)
Table 4 D100
310
Exhaust gas temperature (C) at different engine speeds.
M5
Engine speed (rpm) E5
280
1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 M10
0.3 [2] Hansen AC, Zhang Q, Lyne PWL. Ethanoldiesel fuel blends; a review. Biores
Technol 2005;96(3):27785.
D100 [3] Kisenyi JM, Savage CA, Simmonds AC. The impact of oxygenates on exhaust
0.28 M5 emissions of six European cars. SAE paper no. 940929; 1994.
E5 [4] Agarwal AK. Biofuels (alcohols and biodiesel) applications as fuels for internal
combustion engines. Prog Energy Combust Sci 2007;33:23371.
0.26 M10 [5] Kremer FG, Jordim JLF, Maia DM. Effect of alcohol composition on gasoline
BTE (%)