Thermal Energy and Power Engineering
TEPE
A Comparison of performance parameters with use of ethanol & methanol fuel blends, and engine speed of SI engine Sandeep Kumar Kamboj*1, Munawar Nawab Karimi2 1-2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Jamia Millia Islamia, Central University New Delhi - 110025, India. 1 *
[email protected];2
[email protected]
Abstract- In this study, the performance parameters are investigated for a single cylinder, four-stroke, spark-ignition engine with varying speed (1200 to 1750 rpm) and different blends of fuels. For this analysis, Iso-octane (base fuel) and blends of ethanol with base fuel (E5, E20) and methanol with base fuel (M5 & M20) are used. The results show that the value of engine torque and volumetric efficiency are higher for E20 and M20 fuels as compared to base fuel. The thermal efficiency of M5 fuel is 35% higher than the base fuel and around 5% higher than the E5 fuel. The indicated power of E5 and E20 fuels are higher than the base fuel. In this study, E20 fuel gives best results in case of brake power analysis. The result also shows that indicated power, brake power, friction power, IMEP and exhaust temperature increases with the increase in engine speed for all the tested fuels. Indicated power, IMEP and friction power was highest for E5 fuel.
40%. The best compression ratios were found to be 10, 11 and 12 for 20%, 30% and 40% ethanol to give maximum indicated power, respectively. Hsieh et al. (2002) investigated experimentally the engine performance and emission of a spark ignition engine, using ethanol–gasoline blend fuels in ratios of 5%, 10%, 20% and 30%. It was concluded that by using the ethanol–gasoline blended fuels the engine torque and specific fuel consumption slightly increased. In the experimental study of Al-Hasan (2003), the effects of usage of unleaded gasoline–ethanol blends on spark ignition engine performance and exhaust emission were investigated. The best result at the engine performance and exhaust emissions was obtained by usage of 20% ethanol fuel blend. Dai et al (2003) did the study of engine cycle simulation of ethanol gasoline blends. It was concluded that GESIM has successfully predicted the trends of engine burn rates, fuel consumption, exhaust temperature, and various exhaust emissions for E22 and E85 fuels. Wei et al (2004) did the study of air – fuel ratio on engine performance and pollutant emission of an SI engine using ethanol – gasoline blended fuels. It was concluded that torque output increases slightly at small throttle valve opening when ethanol - gasoline blended fuel was used and CO and HC emission were reduced with the increase of ethanol content in the blended fuel. Yucesu et al (2007) did comparative study of mathematical and experimental analysis of spark ignition engine performance used ethanol – gasoline blend fuel (E10, E20, E40, and E60). It was concluded that torque with blended fuels was higher than that of base gasoline in all the speed range and a significant reduction in HC emissions was observed as a result of the leaning effect and additional fuel oxygen caused by the ethanol addition. Shenghua et al (2007) did the study of spark ignition engine fuelled with methanol gasoline blends. It was concluded that engine power and torque decreases while the brake thermal efficiency is improved. The maximum pressure is higher than that of pure gasoline operation under the same engine speed and throttle opening (50% WOT) when engine fuelled with M20. KOc et al (2009) evaluated the effects of unleaded gasoline and unleaded gasoline ethanol blends (E50 and E85) on engine performance and pollutant emissions experimentally in a single cylinder four- stroke spark ignition engine at two compression ratios (10.1 and 11.1) at varying engine speed 1500 rpm to 5000 rpm. It was concluded that ethanol addition to unleaded gasoline increase the engine torque,
KeywordsEthanol-Iso-octane blend; Methanol-Iso-octane blend; Iso-octane; Spark Ignition Engine
I. INTRODUCTION Ethanol and methanol are alcohol- based fuels made by fermenting and distilling starch crops, such as corn. Both ethanol and methanol produce less emission than gasoline. It is not sufficient to change the design of motor to cope with the legal regulations, so it is necessary to continue to work on alternative fuel technologies. Among the various alcohols, ethanol is known as the most suited fuel for spark ignition (SI) engines. Usages of alcohols as a fuel for spark ignition engines have some advantages to compare the gasoline. Both methanol and ethanol have better anti-knock characteristics than gasoline. The engine thermal efficiency can be improved with increasing of compression ratio. Alcohols burns with lower flame temperatures and luminosity owing to decreasing the peak temperature inside the cylinder. So that the heat losses and NOx emissions are lower. Both methanol and ethanol have high latent heat of vaporization. The latent heat cools the intake air, so the increased charge density and increases volumetric efficiency. However the oxygen content of methanol and ethanol reduces their heating value compared to gasoline. As a disadvantage for methanol and ethanol which reduce the vehicle range per liter of fuel tank capacity [Heywood (1988) and Bayraktar (2005)]. Abdel-Rahman and Osman (1997) conducted performance tests on a variable compression ratio engine using different percentages of ethanol in gasoline fuel up to
TEPE Volume 3, Issue 1 Feb. 2014, PP. 198-205 www.vkingpub.com/journal/tepe/ © American V-King Scientific Publishing 198
Thermal Energy and Power Engineering
TEPE
power and fuel consumption and reduce carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOX) and hydrocarbon (HC) emissions. Eyidogan et al (2010) evaluated the effects of ethanol–gasoline (E5, E10) and methanol–gasoline (M5, M10) fuel blends on the performance and combustion characteristics of a spark ignition (SI) engine experimentally. The tests were performed on a chassis dynamometer while running the vehicle at two different vehicle speeds (80 km/h and 100 km/h) and four different wheel powers (5, 10, 15, and 20 kW). The results indicated that when alcohol– gasoline fuel blends were used, the brake specific fuel consumption increased; cylinder gas pressure started to rise later than gasoline fuel. Almost in the all test conditions, the lowest peak heat release rate was obtained from the gasoline fuel use. Chen et al (2010) evaluated gasoline displacement and NOx reduction in an SI engine by aqueous alcohol injection. The author suggested that engine ran normally with a gasoline – alcohol fuel spray containing upto 30% ethanol and 16% water. Kamboj et al (2013) did an experimental investigation of spark ignition Engine fueled with ethanol/iso-octane and methanol/iso-octane fuel blends. The result showed that IP, IMEP, Volumetric efficiency and thermal efficiency was higher for the E10 fuel and BSFC was lower. In general, most suited blend for SI engines has been specified as a blend of 10% ethanol. Palmar (1986) showed that gasoline containing 10% ethanol could lower CO emission by 30%. Taylor et al. (1996) compared the performance of four alcohols. They found little difference in combustion efficiency of the four alcohols from gasoline. However, using alcohol can increase charge density because of the evaporative cooling in the intake manifold. He et al (2003) found that the addition of ethanol to gasoline increased the octane number and decreased the emissions of CO, THC, and NOx. Alexandrian and Schwalm (1992) found that air/fuel ratio variation greatly influenced CO emission and, under fuel-rich conditions, CO and NOx emissions could be reduced with blended fuels. Hamdam and Jubran (1986) concluded that under partial load the blended fuel containing 5% ethanol had the best engine performance and the thermal efficiency was increased by 4 to12%. Song et al (2006) showed that the replacement of MTBE by ethanol can improve CO, HC, and NOx emissions. Yuksel and Yeksel designed a new type of carburetor to solve the phase sepration problem and thus increased the alcohol fraction in the ethanol-gasoline blended fuel.
were tested. These fuels were iso-octane, iso-octane ethanol blend (E5, E20) and iso-octane methanol blend (M5, M20). The numbers following E and M indicate percentage of volumetric amount of ethanol, methanol. Properties of ethanol, methanol, and iso-octane are shown in table 1. Engine indicated power, brake power, friction power, indicated mean effective pressure, brake mean effective pressure, torque brake specific fuel consumption, exhaust gas temperature, volumetric efficiency, thermal efficiency and air fuel ratio were measured during the experiments. No data was taken until speed and load were maintained at 1% of the fluctuation. For each experiment, air fuel ratio was changed to maintain the same speed and load. The fuel blending has been achieved by slowly pouring the ethanol and methanol in the iso-octane container and then stirring it three four times so that proper mixing takes place.
Fig.1 Schematic arrangement of test engine Source: Apex innovations (Research equipment supplier in India)
The setup consists of single cylinder, four stroke, multifuel, research engine connected to eddy current type dynamometer for loading. The operation mode of the engine can be changed from diesel to petrol or from petrol to diesel with some necessary changes. In both modes the compression ratio can be varied without stopping the engine and without altering the combustion chamber geometry by specially designed tilting cylinder block arrangement. The injection point and spark point can be changed for research tests. Setup is provided with necessary instruments for combustion pressure, Diesel line pressure and crank-angle measurements. These signals are interfaced with computer for pressure crank-angle diagrams. Instruments are provided to interface airflow, fuel flow, temperatures and load measurements. The set up has stand-alone panel box consisting of air box, two fuel tanks for duel fuel test, manometer, fuel measuring unit, transmitters for air and fuel flow measurements, process indicator and hardware interface. Rotameters are provided for cooling water and calorimeter water flow measurement. A battery starter and battery charger is provided for engine electric start
The above literature survey shows that alcohol –isooctane blended fuel can effectively reduce the emissions of HC,CO, and NOx and increases the engine performance. But the comparison of performance parameters with the change in engine speed for different blending of ethanol and methanol with iso-octane on the same engine was not yet clearly studied. Therefore, a sincere attempt has been made to discuss the above said problem in this paper. II. EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS The experiments were conducted at four different engine speeds ranging between 1200 to 1750 rpm at a constant load of 8 kg at different throttle openings. At each of these engine speeds, five different fuels (iso-octane, E5, E20, M5, M20)
TEPE Volume 3, Issue 1 Feb. 2014, PP. 198-205 www.vkingpub.com/journal/tepe/ © American V-King Scientific Publishing 199
Thermal Energy and Power Engineering
TEPE
arrangement. The setup enables study of VCR engine performance for brake power, indicated power, frictional power, BMEP, IMEP, brake thermal efficiency, indicated thermal efficiency, Mechanical efficiency, volumetric efficiency, specific fuel consumption, A/F ratio, heat balance and combustion analysis. Lab view based Engine Performance Analysis software package “Enginesoft” is provided for on line performance evaluation. F1
F2 F3 F4 T3 T4 T5 T6
Fuel consumption kg/hr
Air consumption kg/hr Rotameter water flow for engine Kg/hr Calorimeter water flow kg/hr Calorimeter water inlet temperature 0K Calorimeter water outlet temperature 0K Exhaust gas to calorimeter inlet temperature. 0K Exhaust gas from calorimeter outlet temperature.
0K TABLE 1 COMPARISON OF FUEL PROPERTIES
Property
Methanol
Ethanol
Iso-octane
Chemical formula
CH3OH
C2H5OH
C8H18
Molecular weight(Kg/kmol)
32.04
46.07
114.228
Oxyzen present (wt %)
49.9
34.8
-
-1
Density (g cm )
792
789
740
Freezing point at 1 atm (0C)
-97.778
-80.0
-107.378
Boiling temperature at 1 atm (0C)
64.9
74.4
99.224
0
Auto-ignition temperature( C)
463.889
422.778
257.23
Latent heat of vaporization at 200C (KJ/Kg)
1103
840
349
Stoichiometric air/fuel ratio (AFR)
6.47
9.0
15.2
Lower heating value of the fuel (KJ/Kg)
20000
26900
44300
Research octane number (RON)
111
108
100
Motor octane number (MON)
92
92
100
TABLE 2 SPECIFICATION OF THE ENGINE
Type
1 cylinder, 4 stroke, water cooled
Cylinder bore and stroke
110 mm, 87.5 mm
Compression ratio
10
Maximum power
4.5 kW at 1800 rpm
Spark variation range
0 – 70 deg btdc
Spark timings
30 degree btdc
Dynamometer
Eddy current, water cooled, with loading unit
Air Box
Calorimeter
M S fabricated with orifice meter and manometer Capacity 15 ltr, dual compartment, with fuel metering pipe of glass Pipe in pipe
Piezo sensor
Combustion 5000 psi
Crank angle sensor
1 deg, speed 5500 rpm with tdc pulse
Temperature sensor
Type RTD, PT 100 and Thermocouple, type k
Fuel tank
Load indicator
Digital, range 0-50 kg, supply 230 V AC
Fuel flow transmitter
DP transmitter, Range 0- 500 mm WC
Air Flow Transmitter
Pressure transmitter
Rotameter
Engine cooling 40- 400 LPH; Calorimeter 25-250 LPH
increment is 6.72% at low speed to minimum increment 1.73% at 1400 rpm for E5 fuel in comparison to iso-octane. It is because of the reason that oxygenated fuels have better combustion efficiency. The value of IP is minimum for the M20 fuel among all the tested fuels. The indicated power of M20 is nearly 4% lower than the iso-octane Indicated power of M20 fuel is lowest because blending of methanol reduces the heating value of the mixture therefore, a less amount of heat would be liberated during its combustion which results
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS A. Indicated Power Fig.2 represents the change in indicated power with respect to change in speed when the engine is fuelled with different fuels (E5, E20, M5, M20, & iso-octane) at a constant load of 8 Kg. It is shown in the figure that the indicated power is maximum for E5 fuel and maximum
TEPE Volume 3, Issue 1 Feb. 2014, PP. 198-205 www.vkingpub.com/journal/tepe/ © American V-King Scientific Publishing 200
Thermal Energy and Power Engineering
TEPE
in low indicated power. It is also shown that indicated power increases with the increase in engine speed for all the tested fuels.
1600 rpm. The friction power of M20 is 3.33, 25.33 and 32.2% lower than the iso-octane at an engine speed of 1400, 1600 and 1750 rpm. But it is very interesting to see that there is a large difference between the values of friction power of different fuels at low and high speed but this gap is very less at a speed of 1400 rpm. So all the all tested fuels will have better brake thermal efficiency at this speed (1400 rpm).
B. Brake Power Fig.3 shows the variation in brake power with respect to engine speed at the same load for all the tested fuels. It is shown in the figure that brake power increases with the increase in engine speed for all the tested fuels and it is because of the reason that indicated power increases so the brake power increases. The brake power of E20 and M20 fuels is higher than that of iso-octane at medium and higher speeds. The brake power of E20 is nearly 4% higher than the iso-octane between the engine speed of 1400 rpm and 1600 rpm. The brake power of M20 is nearly 4% higher than the iso-octane between the engine speed of 1600 rpm and 1750 rpm. It is because of the reason that friction power of E20 and M20 is much lower than that of iso-octane.
D. IMEP (Indicated mean Effective Pressure) Fig.5 shows the variation in indicated mean effective pressure with the change in engine speed at a constant load of 8 Kg for all the tested fuels. Figure 5 shows that IMEP increases with the increase in engine speed for all the tested fuels. The value of IMEP is maximum for E5 fuel and this increment is 12.5, 2.8, 2.7 and 5.5% in comparison to base fuel at 1200, 1400, 1600 and 1750 rpm, respectively. The value of IMEP for the E20 fuel is 12.5, 2.8, 2.7 and 5.5% greater than the iso-octane at 1200, 1400, 1600 and 1750 rpm, respectively. The IMEP is minimum for M20 fuel and this is because of the reason that heating value of methanol is 50% lower than the iso-octane so when methanol is blended with iso-octane, the heating value of the blended fuel goes down which reduces the IMEP of blended fuel. Methanol has better combustion efficiency also so there is trade – off between these two values and the net effect is reduction in IMEP.
C. Friction Power Fig.4 represents the effects of change in engine speed on the friction power for different fuels (E5, E20, M5, M20 & iso-octane) at a constant load of 8 Kg. The engine speed was varied from 1200 to 1750 rpm. It is shown in the figure that friction power increases with the increase in engine speed for all the examined fuels. It is because of the reason that as engine speed increases, the number of cycles per second increases which results in more frictional power. Friction power is maximum for the E5 fuel and minimum for the M20 fuel. The friction power of E20 is 1.61 & 13.33% lower than the iso-octane at a engine speed of 1400 rpm and
E. BMEP (Brake Mean Effective Pressure)
TEPE Volume 3, Issue 1 Feb. 2014, PP. 198-205 www.vkingpub.com/journal/tepe/ © American V-King Scientific Publishing 201
Thermal Energy and Power Engineering
TEPE
Fig.6 represents the effect of engine speed on brake mean effective pressure at a constant load of 8 Kg. The value of BMEP for all the fuels lies between 2.7 to 2.8 kW. In naturally aspirated engines, brake mean effective pressure is not stress limited, it then reflects the product of volumetric efficiency (ability to induct air), fuel air ratio (effectiveness of air utilization in combustion and fuel conversion efficiency). In supercharged engines BMEP indicates the degree of success in handling higher gas pressures and thermal loading.
And finally, the latent heat of evaporation of blended fuels is higher than that of base gasoline; this provides lower temperature intake manifold and increases volumetric efficiency. The charge into the cylinder directly affects on torque and power. The average increment in engine torque compared with iso-octane at medium speeds was about 0.68 and 2.79% with E20 and 1.39% with M20 at compression ratio of 10:1. G. Exhaust Temperature Fig.8 shows the variations in exhaust gas temperature with respect to engine speed for various fuels tested at a constant load of 8 kg. It is shown in the figure that exhaust temperature increases with the increase in engine speed for all the tested fuels. This is explained with several reasons. With the increase in engine speed, combustion gases gets less time to remain in contact with cylinder wall and therefore more quantity of energy is released with exhaust gases which increases the temperature of exhaust gases. At 1200 rpm, the value of exhaust temperature is maximum for M20 fuel and minimum for E5 fuel. At 1750 rpm, the value of exhaust temperature is maximum for M5 fuel and minimum for E5 fuel. At medium speed, the value of exhaust temperature is maximum for E20 & M5 fuel. These variations in exhaust temperature can be attributed to increase in thermal efficiency or A/F ratio which affects the combustion temperature. Higher combustion temperature leads to higher exhaust temperature. The thermal efficiency and air fuel ratio of M5 is higher (as indicated in fig. 11 and fig. 12) which results in higher exhaust temperature.
F. Torque Fig.7 shows the variations in torque with the change in engine speed for the E5, E20, M5, M20 and iso-octane fuels at constant load of 8 kg. It is seen from the figure that at the medium speed (1400 to 1600 rpm), the torque is maximum for the E20 followed by M20. The value of torque is higher for iso-octane fuel at low and high speed. It is also observed that torque increases with the increase in engine speed. This is explained with several reasons. Beneficial effect of ethanol as an oxygenated fuel is a possible reason for more complete combustion, thereby increasing the torque. In addition, a larger fuel for the same volume is injected to the cylinder due to higher density of ethanol. This results in increase in torque and power.
TEPE Volume 3, Issue 1 Feb. 2014, PP. 198-205 www.vkingpub.com/journal/tepe/ © American V-King Scientific Publishing 202
Thermal Energy and Power Engineering
TEPE
8 kg. It is shown in the figure that 5% ethanol addition in base fuel causes 15.1 and 39.3% increment in BSFC at 1400 and 1600 rpm, 20% ethanol addition in base fuel (E20) causes 30.3, 15.1 and 30% increment in BSFC in comparison to iso-octane at 1400, 1600 and 1750 rpm and 20% methanol addition to base fuel causes 66.6, 33.3 and 33.3% increment in BSFC in comparison to iso-octane at 1400, 1600 and 1750 rpm. It is well known fact that heating value of fuel affects the BSFC. The lower energy content of ethanol-iso-octane and methanol iso-octane fuels causes some increment in BSFC of the engine when it is used without any modification. The increment mainly depends upon the percentage of ethanol and methanol addition in isooctane. The heating value of ethanol & methanol are approximately 39.27% & 54.85% less than the values of isooctane. Therefore, more blends of fuel are required to produce the same power at the same operating conditions due to its lower heating value in comparison to base fuel. As a result, BSFC increases. The value of M5 is minimum among all the tested fuels because of its increased thermal efficiency and high air fuel ratio. At l200 rpm, BSFC of isooctane is maximum because of low thermal efficiency and rich fuel supply (see in fig 11 and fig 12).
H. Volumetric Efficiency Fig. 9 represents the change in volumetric efficiency with the change in engine speed at the constant load of 8 kg for all tested fuels. It is shown in the figure that volumetric efficiency of M20 is maximum among all the fuels and it is because of the reasons that as liquid fuels have high latent heat of vaporization, they produce a cooling effect on the intake charge during vaporization. Therefore, there will be an increase in intake charge density and consequently in volumetric efficiency. A/F ratio is another important parameter that affects volumetric efficiency. When stoichiometric A/F ratio is high that means there is more quantity of air injected in inlet air and results in increased volumetric efficiency. The methanol has highest latent heat of vaporization and A/F ratio is low therefore volumetric efficiency of M20 is maximum. The volumetric efficiency of iso-octane is lower than the M20, E20 and M5 and it is because of the reason that latent heat of vaporization of isooctane is lowest among all the fuels. The latent heat of vaporization of ethanol and methanol is 3.16 and 2.4 times greater than the iso-octane.
J. Thermal Efficiency Fig.11 represents the effect of engine speed on the thermal efficiency of various fuels at a constant load of 8 Kg. It is shown in the figure that thermal efficiency increases with the increase in engine speed and it is because of the reason that at higher speed, less quantity of heat is being lost through the cylinder wall. The thermal efficiency variations are (23.1 to 38.13%) for E5, (18.63 to 36.12%) for M5, and (14.3 to 35.9%) for iso-octane. Maximum thermal efficiency was obtained for E5 at a engine speed of 1200 & 1750 rpm. It is interesting to note that thermal efficiency of M5 fuel is 35% higher than the base fuel and nearly 5% higher than the E5 fuel at a speed of 1400 rpm. It is because of the reason that M5 fuel contains nearly 50% more oxygen than the base fuel and 5% more oxygen than the E5 fuel and the air fuel ratio is highest at that speed. So there is a complete combustion of the fuel at 1400 rpm which results in high thermal efficiency. The thermal efficiency varies (20.1 to 30.59%) for E20 and (17.64 to 27.46%) for M20 fuels in all the speed range.
I. BSFC (Brake Specific Fuel Consumption) Fig.10 shows the variations in brake specific fuel consumption with respect to engine speed at constant load of
TEPE Volume 3, Issue 1 Feb. 2014, PP. 198-205 www.vkingpub.com/journal/tepe/ © American V-King Scientific Publishing 203
Thermal Energy and Power Engineering
TEPE
because the ethanol have the same anti-knock qualities as the aromatics have. IV. CONCLUSION In this study, engine performance were measured on the utilization of the ethanol- iso-octane (E20) and methanol iso-octane blended fuels under different engine speed at the constant load of 8 Kg. General results concluded from this study can be summarized as follows: 1.
2.
3. K. Air Fuel Ratio
4.
The variations in engine speed with respect to air fuel ratio are shown in fig.12. Generally when load and speed increases, a more quantity of fuel is being supplied to the engine that means a fuel of low air fuel ratio is supplied. Here we are interested in finding out the condition at which less quantity of fuel is being supplied. It is shown in the figure that at 1200 rpm, air fuel ratio is high for E20 and low for iso-octane. At 1400 rpm, air fuel ratio was high for M5 and low for M20. At 1600 rpm, air fuel ratio was high for M5 and it was low for E5 fuel. At 1750 rpm, air fuel ratio was high for iso-octane & E5 and it was low for M 5 & M20. Another important parameter which controls the air fuel ratio is volumetric efficiency, higher the volumetric efficiency, higher would be the air fuel ratio.
5.
6. 7. 8.
The IP, BP, FP, IMEP, torque and exhaust temperature increases with the increase in engine speed for the all tested fuels. Ethanol and methanol addition to iso-octane leads to leaner operation because of increased volumetric efficiency and improves combustion. Consequently, the cylinder pressure and temperature increases. The value of volumetric efficiency was highest for M20 fuel and minimum for iso-octane. The value of BSFC was maximum for M20 fuel and minimum with M5 fuel. The value of thermal efficiency was maximum for M5 fuel at 1400 rpm and it was minimum for M20 fuel which leads to high exhaust temperature for M5 fuel. The value of air fuel ratio was near stoichiometric with M5 fuel at 1400 rpm. Indicated power, IMEP and friction power was highest for E5 fuel. The above result shows that the ethanol and methanol addition in iso-octane can be used as a alternative fuels without any modification in the engine if it is economical to do so. The best results would be obtained with M5 fuel because of high efficiency and low brake specific fuel consumption. REFERENCES
J. B. Heywood, “Internal combustion engine fundamentals”, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1988. H. Bayraktar, and O. Durgun,“Mathematical modeling of sparkignition engine cycles”, Energy Sciences, vol.25, pp. 651-666, 2003. Abdel-Rahman, A.A.,and M.M Osman, “Experimental investigation on varying the compression ratio of SI engine working under different ethanol–gasoline fuel blends”, Int J Energy Res. 1997. W.D Hsieh, R.H. Chen, T.L. Wu, T.L, and T.H. Lin, T.H, “Engine performance and pollutant emission of an SI engine using ethanol–gasoline blended fuels”, Atmospheric Environment 36(3), 403–410, 2002. M. Al-Hasan, “Effect of ethanol–unleaded gasoline blends on engine performance and exhaust emissions”, Energ. Conver and Manag, 44, 1547–1561, 2003. W.Dai, S. Cheemalamarri, W. Eric, R. Boussarsar, and R.K. Morton,. “Engine cycle simulation of ethanol and gasoline blends”, SAE paper 2003-01-3093. Society of Automotive engineers. 2110 – 2117, 2003. Wu, C-W., Chen, R-H., Pu, J-Y., Lin, T-H., “The influence of air – fuel ratio on engine performance and pollutant emission of an SI engine using ethanol – gasoline blended fuels”, Atmospheric Environment. 38, 7093-7100, 2004.
L. Effects of Alcohol Blending on Exhaust Emissions Exhaust emissions such as HC, CO, and CO2 are reduced by using the alcohol gasoline blends because alcohols contain oxyzen atoms. Aromatic hydrocarbons ( such as benzene) which are toxic, were eliminated and the sulphur content was reduced as well by using ethanol gasoline blend
TEPE Volume 3, Issue 1 Feb. 2014, PP. 198-205 www.vkingpub.com/journal/tepe/ © American V-King Scientific Publishing 204
Thermal Energy and Power Engineering
TEPE
H.S.Yucesu, A. Sozen, T. Topgu, and E Arcakliog, “Comparative study of mathematical and experimental analysis of spark ignition engine performance used ethanol – gasoline blend fuel”, Appl Thermal Eng. 27, 358–368, 2007. L. Shenghua, E.R.C. Clemente, H. Tiegang, and W. Yanjv, “Study of spark ignition engine fueled with methanol/ gasoline fuel blends”, Appl. Thermal Eng. 27(11-12), 1904-1910, 2007. M.Koç, Y. Sekmen, T.Topgu, and H.S. Yu-cesu, “The effects of ethanol–unleaded gasoline blends on engine performance and exhaust emissions in a spark-ignition engine”, Renewable Energ. 34, 2101–2106, 2009. M.Eyidogan, A.N. Ozsezen, M. Canakci, T. Ali, “Impact of alcohol – gasoline fuel blends on the performance and combustion characteristic of an SI engine”, Fuel. 89, 2713- 2720, 2010. R.H.Chen, L.B.Chiang, M.H. Wu, T.H. Lin, “Gasoline displacement and NOx reduction in an SI engine by aqueous alcohol injection”, Fuel. 89, 604–610, 2010. S.K.Kamboj, M.N.Karimi, “An experimental investigation of spark ignition Engine fueled with ethanol/iso-octane and methanol/iso-octane fuel blends”, International journal of Automotive Engineering, 3(2), 368-378,2013. F.H Palmer, “Vehicle performances of gasoline containing oxygenates” In: International conference on petroleum based fuels and automotive applications, London, UK; 33–46, 1986. A.B.Taylor, D.P.Moran, A.J.Bell, “Gasoline/alcohol blends: exhaust emissions, performance and burn rate in a muti valve production engine. SAE paper 961988: 143-60, 1996. B.Q.He ,J.X. Wang, J.M.Hao ,X.G. Yan ,J.H. Xiao. “A study on emission characteristics of an EFI engine with ethanol blended gasoline fuels”, Atmospheric Environment” 37:949–5, 2003.. M. Alexandrian, M. Schwalm, “Comparison of ethanol and gasoline as automotive fuels”, ASME Paper 92-WA/DE15. M.A.S. Hamdam, B.A. Jubran, “The effect of ethanol addition on the performance of diesel and gasoline engine”, Dirastat 13 (10), 1986.
C.L. Song, W.M. Zhang, Y.Q.Pei, G.L.Fan, G.P.Xu, Comparative effect of MTBE and ethanol addition into gasoline on exhaust emission”, Atmospheric environment,40, 403-10, 2006. F. Yuksel, B. Yuksel, “The use of ethanol gasoline blend as a fuel in an SI engine”, Renewable energy,29, 1181-1191, 2004.
TEPE Volume 3, Issue 1 Feb. 2014, PP. 198-205 www.vkingpub.com/journal/tepe/ © American V-King Scientific Publishing 205
