Fuel 95 (2012) 247–256

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Fuel
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fuel

Effect of compression ratio on the performance and combustion of a biogas

fuelled spark ignition engine
E. Porpatham a,⇑, A. Ramesh b, B. Nagalingam b
a
School of Mechanical and Building Sciences, VIT University, Vellore 632 014, India
b
IC Engines Laboratory, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600 036, India

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

Article history: A single cylinder diesel engine was modified to operate as a biogas operated spark ignition engine. The
Received 1 July 2011 engine was operated at 1500 rpm at throttle opening of 25% and 100% at various equivalence ratios.
Received in revised form 24 October 2011 The tests were covered a range of equivalence ratios from rich to the lean operating limit and a number
Accepted 25 October 2011
of compression ratios. The spark timing was set to MBT (Minimum advance for Best Torque). The perfor-
Available online 18 November 2011
mance, emission and combustion characteristics with different compression ratios are compared. It has
been found from the results that the higher the compression ratio, the higher the brake thermal
Keywords:
efficiency. When the compression ratio was above a critical value of 13:1, brake power and thermal
Compression ratio
Equivalence ratio
efficiency increased little. At higher compression ratios above 13:1, increased NOx, HC, and CO emissions
Biogas were measured. Power and thermal efficiency reached their highest values with the compression ratio
SI engine between 13:1 and 15:1 and the equivalence ratio between 1.08 and 0.95. Under these conditions, HC
Engine performance and CO emissions were low but the NOx values were high. Power and thermal efficiency reduced for lea-
ner mixtures. The MBT spark timing is retarded with increase in compression ratio. The peak pressure
decreases, as the mixture becomes lean at all the compression ratios. The peak pressure is higher with
higher compression ratio. Increase in compression ratio leads to high heat release rate.
Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
In the mechanized and fast-moving world of today the con-
sumption of petroleum products has become an important yard-
stick of a country’s prosperity. There is a need to conserve
petroleum resources by its judicious use and by substituting it by
other alternatives wherever feasible. Apart from petroleum conser-
vation, there is a world wide threat to the environment due to pol-
lution from sources burning conventional fuels. These are the main
reasons for exploring alternatives, which are abundantly available
and less polluting in nature. Liquid fuels like alcohols and vegeta-
ble oils, gaseous fuels such as natural gas, Liquefied Petroleum Gas
(LPG), hydrogen, biogas, and producer gas, are promising alterna-
tive fuels. The conventional Internal Combustion (IC) engine con-
tinues to dominate many fields like transportation, agriculture
and power generation. Hydrocarbon fuels like gasoline and diesel
used in these engines lead to pollutants like Hydrocarbons (HC),
Carbon monoxide (CO), Carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen oxides
(NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), and particulates. Gaseous fuels will re-
sult in very low levels of pollutants and can be effectively utilized
in both Spark Ignition (SI) and Compression Ignition (CI) engines.
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 0416 2202268; fax: +91 0416 2243092.
E-mail address: porpatham.e@vit.ac.in (E. Porpatham).
Gaseous fuels are attractive because of their wide ignition limits
and capability to form homogeneous mixtures. Moreover gaseous
fuels have high hydrogen to carbon ratio. Thus very low emissions
are possible when they are used in IC engines. Natural gas and LPG
are the readily available petroleum-based fuels, while hydrogen,
biogas and producer gas can be obtained from renewable sources.
Biogas is one such a fuel and an attractive source of energy for rural
areas. It can be produced from cow dung and other animal wastes
and also from plant matter such as leaves and water hyacinth-all of
which are renewable and available in the countryside. Also called
‘‘gobar gas’’, it is generated during the anaerobic (out of contact
with air) digestion of organic matter-cow dung and leaves. It is
approximately two-thirds (by volume) methane (CH4) and the rest
CO2. It is produced by bacteria, which break down organic material
under air less conditions. This process is called ‘‘anaerobic diges-
tion’’. Biogas can be produced close to the consumption points in
rural areas such as engines driving pump sets and generators.
As a fuel, biogas has an extremely low energy density on the
volume basis an account of its high CO2 content. The flame speed
is just 25 cm/s as against 38 cm/s for LPG [1], which is shown in
Table 1. The large quantity of CO2 present in biogas lowers its cal-
orific value, flame velocity and flammability range compared with
natural gas. The self-ignition temperature of biogas is high and
hence it resists knocking which is desirable in SI engines. Thus bio-
gas has a high anti-knock index and hence biogas engine can use

0016-2361/$ - see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2011.10.059
248 E. Porpatham et al. / Fuel 95 (2012) 247–256

Table 1
Fuel properties [1].

Property LPG Natural gas Hydrogen Biogas Producer gas

Composition (% vol) C3H8-30% CH4-85% H2 CH4-60% CO-24.3%
C4H10-70% C2H6-7% CO2-30% H2-22.6%
C3H8-2% CO-0.18% CH4-2.2%
N2-1% H2-0.18% CO2-9.3%
CO2-5% N2-41.2%
Lower heating value at 1 atm and 15 °C (MJ/kg) 45.7 50 120 17 3500–6000 kJ/m3
Density at 1 atm and 15 °C 2.26 0.79 0.08 1.2 1.05
Flame speed (cm/s) 38.25 34 275 25 20–30
Stoichiometric A/F (kg of air/kg of fuel) 15.5 17.3 34.2 11 1.2
6 Nm3 air/Nm3 gas 0.95–1.3 Nm3air/Nm3 gas
Flammability limits (vol.% in air)
Leaner 2.15 5 4 7.5 7
Richer 9.6 15 75 14 21.6
Octane number
Research
Motor 103–105 120 130 130 100–105
90–97 120 130 – –
Auto ignition temperature (°C) 405–450 540 585 650 625

high compression ratios, which can lead to improvements in ther-
mal efficiency. It also contains a small percentage of H2S, which can
cause corrosion in metal parts such as those in engines. Biogas can-
not be used to run a CI engine directly on account of its high self-
ignition temperature. However, it can be utilized in a CI engine
with the dual fuelling approach. The dual fuel engine is basically
a modified CI engine. In this case, a mixture of air and biogas or
other gaseous fuel is sucked into the engine, compressed and then
ignited by a spray of fuel with a low self-ignition temperature like
diesel, vegetable oil or biodiesel, which is called a pilot fuel [2–4].
Dual fuel operation always needs a small amount of pilot fuel for
ignition.
2. Background
Experiments conducted on a Ricardo engine using simulated
biogas at different speeds, compression ratios and equivalence ra-
tios revealed that the presence of CO2 can significantly lower NOx
emissions [5]. However cylinder pressures, power and brake ther-
mal efficiency were lower as compared to other gaseous fuels and
the level of unburnt hydrocarbon emission was also higher. Also
it has been reported that it is possible to significantly increase the
Compression Ratio (CR) as an effective means of improving biogas
fuelled engine’s performance when CO2 is present. They also found
that an increase in compression ratio with biogas resulted in an in-
crease in brake thermal efficiency, HC and NOx emissions. The
influence of reduction in the concentration of CO2 in biogas was
studied experimentally in a constant speed spark ignition engine
at different equivalence ratios with a compression ratio of 13:1
[6]. It has been found that with a reduction in the CO2 level there
was a significant improvement in the performance and reduction
in emissions of hydrocarbons particularly with lean mixtures. Also
it has been reported that a reduction in the CO2 level by 10% seemed
to be sufficient for reducing HC levels and the NO levels were also
not significant. Macari et al. [7] developed a spark-ignited engine
to operate on landfill gas without any derating of power from the
standard natural gas rating. Crookes [8] examined the performance
and emissions from spark and compression ignition engines run-
ning on a variety of biofuels, including simulated biogas and com-
mercial seed oil. Tests were performed at an engine speed of
2000 rpm with a relative air fuel ratio ranging from rich to the lean
misfire limit and compression ratios of 11:1 and 13:1 (before onset
of detonation) in the SI mode. Raising the compression ratio is
known to have the effect of increasing in cylinder temperature,
NOx and HC. NOx was again found to reduce by dilution with either
CO2 or N2, except at the highest fraction of N2.
Experiments were conducted on a single cylinder lean burn
spark ignition engine fuelled with LPG and natural gas at different
compression ratios. They found that an increase in the compres-
sion ratio with both LPG and natural gas was more effective with
lean mixtures. The lean limit is extended and the thermal effi-
ciency increased in both the cases. With an increase in the com-
pression ratio there is a slight rise in the emission levels of HC
and oxides of nitrogen. Also it has been reported that an increase
in compression ratio leads to a high peak heat release rate, which
also occurs close to Top Dead Center (TDC) [9]. Porpatham et al.
[10] conducted experiments on a single cylinder spark ignition en-
gine fuelled with biogas and LPG with a compression ratio of 9.3:1
with two throttle openings to represent low and high load opera-
tion. It has been found that brake power and brake thermal effi-
ciency were better with LPG compared to biogas on account of
the higher combustion rate. HC level is higher with biogas than
LPG and NO level is extremely small with biogas as compared to
LPG at the same equivalence ratio.
Porpatham et al. [11] conducted experiments on a biogas
fuelled SI engine with different hydrogen proportions (5%, 10%
and 15%) on the energy basis. They found that addition of hydrogen
in small quantities to biogas can improve power and thermal effi-
ciency and reduce HC emissions. They also found that beyond 15%
hydrogen the need to retard the ignition timing to control knock
and there is a reduction in cycle by cycle variations in combustion
with lean mixtures. Rakopoulos and Michos [12] examined the
availability analysis on a spark ignition engine fuelled with bio-
gas-hydrogen blends during the closed part of the engine cycle,
with volumetric fractions of hydrogen up to 15%. It has been re-
ported that the addition of increasing amounts of hydrogen in bio-
gas promotes the degree of reversibility of the burning process
mainly during the combustion of the later burning gas, due to
the incurred increase in its combustion temperatures. They also
found that, any measure that would increase the temperature of
the early burning gas, located in the vicinity of the spark plug,
would be beneficial from the second law view point. Jeong et al.
[13] investigated the generating efficiency and pollutant emissions
of a four stroke SI gas engine generator of 10 kW operating on bio-
gas-hydrogen blends of varying excess air ratios and hydrogen con-
centrations. It has been reported that the peak values of generating
efficiency, maximum cylinder pressure and NOx emissions were
elevated at an excess air ratio of around 1.2 as the hydrogen con-
centration was increased and the combustible lean limit was
 E. Porpatham et al. / Fuel 95 (2012) 247–256
extended, due to the fast flame propagation speed of hydrogen. CO2
emission decreased as the excess air ratio and hydrogen concentra-
tion increased, due to lean-burn conditions and hydrogen
combustion.
Rakopoulos and Michos [14] developed a zero dimensional, mul-
ti-zone combustion model for predicting the performance and ni-
tric oxide emissions of a SI engine. The model is validated against
experimental data from a multi-cylinder four-stroke, turbocharged
and after cooled SI gas engine running with syngas fuel. They found
that the computed NO emissions from the multi-zone model match
with the respective experimental values. Shah et al. [15] conducted
experiments to determine the performance and exhaust gas emis-
sions of a commercial 5.5 kW generator modified to operate with
100% syngas at different syngas flows and compared the results
with gasoline operation at same electrical power. It has been re-
ported that the maximum electrical power output for syngas oper-
ation was 1392 W and that for gasoline operation was 2451 W.
However, the overall efficiency of the generator at maximum elec-
trical power output for both the fuels were found to be the same.
They also found that the concentrations of CO and NOx in the gen-
erator exhaust were lower for the syngas operation. Gamino and
Aguillon [16] developed a numerical simulation of syngas combus-
tion with multi-spark ignition system in a diesel engine adapted to
work at the Otto cycle operation. The model predicts the profiles of
syngas speed, temperature, chemical composition, pressure, and
turbulence intensity for the gases when the working parameters
and the supply characteristics are modified.
Development of a gas engine using producer gas has been ad-
dressed in recent times by a few researchers [17–19] and attempts
have been made to convert standard CI engines to gas engines with
different compression ratios from 7.5:1 to 12:1. It has been re-
ported that the Coefficient of Variation (COV) of indicated mean
effective pressure (IMEP) at all compression ratios occurred well
with in 3–3.5% implying low cycle-to-cycle variation. They identi-
fied fast burning because of the hydrogen content in producer gas.
HC emission was lower for producer gas operation and CO emis-
sion was higher as compared to gasoline. Shashikantha et al. [20]
developed a simulation model for estimating the in-cylinder
parameters of producer gas SI engine. It has been reported that
the developed simulation models for estimating in cylinder param-
eters are encouraging.
3. Present work
In the present study, a stationary, single cylinder agricultural
diesel engine with a rated output of 4.4 kW at 1500 rpm was con-
verted to operate as a gas engine using biogas as the fuel. Table 2
shows the specifications of the modified engine. The tests were
conducted at 1500 rpm at two throttle openings namely 25% and
100% of maximum were evaluated at various equivalence ratios
and number of compression ratios ranging from 9.3:1, 11:1, 13:1
and 15:1. The best spark timing was maintained for all the loads.
Table 2
Engine specifications.
Type Four stroke, air cooled, single cylinder,
OHV, CI engine modified to run in the
SI mode, masked valve
Fuel Biogas
Number of cylinders One
Bore  stroke 87.5  110 mm
Displacement volume 661.5 cc
Compression ratio 17.5:1 (CI version)
9.3:1,11:1, 13:1 & 15:1 (SI version)
Rated power 4.4 kW @ 1500 rpm
249
Instruments were provided for obtaining the performance, emis-
sion, and combustion characteristics of the engine. Performance
parameters like brake thermal efficiency, exhaust gas temperature,
emissions of HC, CO and NO and combustion parameters like igni-
tion delay, peak pressure, heat release rate and cycle by cycle vari-
ations in indicated mean effective pressure were studied and
compared.
4. Experimental setup and experiments
Fig. 1 shows the schematic diagram of the experimental setup
used in this work. A diesel engine was modified because it can
withstand high compression ratios and knock. This engine was
tested with different compression ratios between 9.3:1 and 15:1.
In this work combustion chamber was modified to a hemispherical
shape by forming a bowl on the piston as shown in Fig. 2. Different
compression ratios were obtained by changing the volume of the
piston bowl and clearance height simultaneously, while maintain-
ing the calculated maximum squish velocity at 4 m/s. The required
clearance height was provided by placing shims of standard thick-
ness between the cylinder block and crank case. The reason for
keeping the maximum squish velocity constant while changing
the compression ratio is to bring out the effect of compression ratio
alone. The equations used for the calculation of theoretical squish
velocity for the given configuration of the combustion chamber are
given below [21].
" #
2
ða2  b Þv b
usquish ¼ ðupiston Þinst
2bSðAS þ v b Þ
" ( )#
 piston
p cos h
ðupiston Þinst ¼ u sin h 1 þ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2 2
R2  sin h
 piston ¼ 2LN
u
The engine was coupled to an electrical dynamometer, which
can control the speed in the closed loop mode. Airflow was mea-
sured with turbine type flow meter (Make: Elster, Model: DN 25)
with surge tank connected on suction side. Biogas was generated
from cow dung in a fixed dome plant and collected in a flexible
bag and brought near to the engine and sucked from the collection
bag by a diaphragm pump and sent to a floating drum placed near
the engine for maintaining a constant pressure of about 2 kPa
(gauge). The fuel was throttled by a control valve and the gas flow
was measured with a positive displacement gas flow meter (Make:
Insref, Model: IRI 09 A). The volume flow rate was converted to
mass basis from multiplying its actual density. The stoichiometric
air fuel ratio was calculated from known concentration of methane
and carbon dioxide. The equivalence ratio was determined from
measured air and fuel flow rate. The fuel was inducted into the
throat of the venturi. Mixture flow rate was controlled by the
throttle. The engine is equipped with an electronically controlled
Capacitor Discharge Ignition (CDI) system. A PC based spark
advancing system using LAB VIEW software along with a FPGA
module (Field Programmable Gate Array) was used. It takes the in-
put from the angle encoder and fires the spark at a specified crank
angle. Instruments were provided for obtaining the performance,
emission, and combustion characteristics of the engine. A PC based
data acquisition system was used to read cylinder pressure data
from a flush mounted piezoelectric transducer (Make: Kistler,
Model: 701 A). The fluctuating intake manifold pressure was ob-
tained from a piezoresistive transducer (Make: Kistler, Model:
4045 A) at each crank angle. An optical crank angle encoder was
used to acquire these pressures on the crank angle basis rather
than the time basis. At each operating condition 100 cycles were
250 E. Porpatham et al. / Fuel 95 (2012) 247–256

AIR
9
IN

8 5

7 4
13
15 16

3
6
14 17
12

10
1
11 2

ENGINE BED

1. Engine 10. Pressure pickup

2. Dynamometer 11. Angle encoder
3. Gas carburetor 12. Charge amplifier
4. Air drum 13. Computer
5. Air flow meter 14. Engine exhaust
6. Gas flow meter 15. HC/NO analyzer
7. Control Valve 16. CO analyzer
8. Diaphragm pump 17.Dynamometer Controller
9. Biogas bag
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the experimental setup.

STDimep
COVimep ¼
Meanimep
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
u( )2
u 1 X 100
STDimep ¼t fIMEPi  Meanimep
100 i¼1

Fig. 2. Hemispherical combustion chamber geometry.
acquired. The data acquisition frequency and data length were
selected depending on the engine speed, number of cycles of data
to be processed, number of signals and resolution required. The
signals were taken with a resolution of one sample per degree of
crank angle. The data of pressures and TDC were stored as voltages
in three columns at every crank angle at uniform time intervals for
processing. Since the piezoelectric transducer provides only rela-
tive pressures, it is necessary to know the absolute pressure at
some point in the cycle so that the manifold pressure can be used
to reference the signal. Software was developed to compute the
average pressure crank angle values for the specified number
of consecutive cycles. From this pressure, IMEP, average peak
pressure, occurrence of peak pressure, maximum rate of pressure
rise, ignition delay, combustion duration, etc., were calculated.
The standard deviation (SD) and coefficient of variation (COV) of
the above said parameters have also been calculated. Following
are the formulae used for the calculations.
1 X100
Meanimep ¼ IMEPi
100 i¼1
where COVimep is the coefficient of variation of IMEP for 100 consec-
utive cycles, Meanimep the mean value of IMEP for 100 cycles,
STDimep = Standard deviation of IMEP for 100 cycles, and IMEP is
the indicated mean effective pressure.
The pressure crank angle variation is the net result of many ef-
fects like combustion, change in cylinder volume and heat transfer
from the gases in the engine cylinder. In order to get the effect of
only the combustion process, it is necessary to relate each of the
above processes to the cylinder pressure and thereby separate
the effects of the combustion process alone. The method by which
this is done is known as the heat release analysis. The heat release
data provides a good insight into the combustion process that
takes place in the engine. Cylinder pressure versus crank angle data
is analyzed under the frame work of the first law of thermodynam-
ics to obtain the heat release rate and the mass burn rate [22,23].
During this work a computer program was developed to obtain
the heat release rate with the following main assumptions:The first
law of thermodynamics can be written as follows with suitable
assumptions during the period when the valves are closed.
 E. Porpatham et al. / Fuel 95 (2012) 247–256 251

dQ hr c dV 1 dP dt Table 4
¼ P þ V þ hAs ðT  T w Þ Uncertainty values.
dh c  1 dh c  1 dh dh
Operating condition Uncertainty values (%)
where Qhr is the heat release rate and h is crank angle in degrees, c is
Speed ±2
the ratio of specific heats of the fuel, air and residual gas mixtures.
Torque ±0.5
In the program total mass of the mixture per cycle is calculated by Air flow rate ±0.9
adding the mass of fuel, mass of air and mass of residual gas trapped Fuel flow rate ±0.9
in the clearance volume. The trapped mass of residual gas is calcu- Exhaust gas temperature ±1.2
NO emission ±5.8
lated from the ideal gas equation in which the pressure and temper-
HC (FID) ±6.4
ature are assumed to be equal to the measured exhaust manifold Brake power ±1
pressure and temperature respectively [24]. The gas constant of Brake thermal efficiency ±1.7
residual gas was assumed to be that of air. From the above data,
mole fractions of fuel, air and residual gas, the molecular weight
and gas constant of the charge were found out. Knowing the com-
The uncertainty value for speed, load, airflow reading, fuel flow
position of biogas, Cp value for each constituent gas of the mixture
reading, and exhaust gas temperature, NO emission, HC concentra-
was calculated by using the expressions of polynomials. T is the cyl-
tion and O2 concentration are calculated. The estimated uncer-
inder gas temperature, calculated at every degree crank angle using
tainty values at a typical operating condition [26] are given in
the ideal gas equation. Tw is the combustion chamber wall temper-
Table 4.
ature.The calculation of heat transfer coefficient was made using
the Hohenberg’s correlation as given below [25].

h ¼ C 1 V 0:06 P0:8 T 0:4 ðv p þ C 2 Þ0:8 5. Results and discussions

where h is the heat transfer coefficient in W/m2 K, C1 and C2 the tun-
ing constants, 130 and 1.4, V the cylinder volume in m3, P the cyl-
inder pressure in bar, T the cylinder gas temperature in Kelvin,
and VP the mean speed of the piston in m/s.
As is the area in m2 through which heat transfer from gas to
combustion chamber walls takes place. This includes surface areas
of piston bowl, top land, cylinder head and walls. All areas except
cylinder wall area are constant for a given configuration of the
combustion chamber and are evaluated by incorporating suitable
expressions in the program. Cylinder wall area was calculated at
every degree crank angle.
The exhaust gas is analyzed with a Flame Ionization Detector
(FID) for HC emission, chemiluminescent analyzer for NOx and
Non-Dispersive Infra Red (NDIR) for CO emissions. The instrument
was periodically calibrated using the calibration gas which con-
tained a known mixture of NO and NO2 in the background of nitro-
gen. The HC analyzer was calibrated using standard calibration gas
which contained a known mixture of methane and nitrogen. The
measured HC was in methane equivalent. The list of instruments
used in this study is given in Table.3. The uncertainty in any mea-
sured parameter was estimated based on Gaussian distribution
method with confidence limits of ±2r (95.45% of measured data
lie within the limits of ±2r of mean). For the analysis, 20 sets of
readings have been taken at the same engine operating condition.
5.1. Performance and emission parameters at different compression
ratio
The variation of brake power with equivalence ratio is shown in
Fig. 3 for all the compression ratios at full throttle opening. We find
that as the compression ratio goes up the peak power increases due
to the improvement in the thermal efficiency. The leanest point
shown in the figure corresponds to the condition just before the
onset of misfire. The range of equivalence ratios covered the lean
misfire limit on one side to the knock limit on the rich side. It
may be noted that the lean limit is defined as the lowest equiva-
lence ratio beyond which misfire occurs. On the rich side there is
a drop in power output with increase in the compression ratio
due to the need to retard the spark timing to prevent knock. This
particularly evident with the higher compression ratio. It is seen
that the lean misfire limit gets extended as the compression ratio
increases. The lean limit indicated by misfire is an equivalence ra-
tio of 0.64 with a compression ratio of 15:1 as against 0.77 with
that of a compression ratio of 9.3:1. Thus an increase in compres-
sion ratio extends the lean limit of operation because of higher gas
temperatures and lesser dilution by the residual exhaust gases. We
find that the increase in the brake power becomes least significant
as we move to higher compression ratios. Even the thermal effi-
ciency of the ideal Otto cycle exhibits this trend. The peak power

Table 3
6
Details of measuring instruments.
CR=9.3:1
CR=11:1
Measuring instruments Make Accuracy CR=13:1
5
CR=15:1
Air flow meter Elster Handel, Germany ±5% full scale reading
Brake Power (kW)

Fuel flow meter INSREF, India ±0.5% of full scale

reading 4
Pressure pick up-Piezo- KISTLER, Switzerland ±0.4% full scale reading
Electric
3
Charge amplifier KISTLER, Switzerland ±1% full scale reading
Crank angle encoder AVL, Austria 0.1 deg.CA
Fuel:Biogas
Digital data acquisition Contec ±2 bit 2
system microelectronics, USA
Throttle:100%
HC analyzer ROSEMOUNT ±0.5% of full scale Speed:1500 rpm
ANALYTICAL, USA reading 1 Timimng:MBT
NO analyzer ROSEMOUNT ±5% of full scale reading
ANALYTICAL, USA
0
CO/CO2 analyzer Horiba, Japan CO: ±0.06% of full scale
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
reading
CO2: ±0.5% of full scale Equivalence Ratio
reading
Fig. 3. Variation of brake power with equivalence ratio at full throttle.
252 E. Porpatham et al. / Fuel 95 (2012) 247–256

output with a compression ratio of 15:1 is 4.8 kW and it is 10%
higher than that with a compression ratio of 9.3:1 is 4.4 kW.
The variation of brake power at 25% throttle is shown in Fig. 4
for compression ratio between 11:1 and 15:1. In the case of all
compression ratios the brake power output decreases significantly
as the mixture becomes lean on account of the drop in the amount
of fuel inducted and also the reduction in the thermal efficiency.
With very lean mixtures, power output falls suddenly when misfir-
ing occurs. There is no significant effect of compression ratio on
brake power output at any equivalence ratio at this part throttle
condition. The lean limit indicated by misfire is an equivalence ra-
tio of 0.65 with a compression ratio of 15:1 as against 0.69 with
that of a compression ratio of 11:1. Thus an increase in compres-
sion ratio extends the lean limit of operation because of higher
gas temperatures and lesser dilution by the residual exhaust gas.
It is found that increase in compression ratio has a greater effect
at 100% throttle as compared to 25% throttle.
From Fig. 5 we find that the brake thermal efficiency at full
throttle improves significantly when the compression ratio is rised
as expected. With an increase in compression ratio from 9.3:1 to
15:1, the peak brake thermal efficiency increases from 23% to
26.8%. The difference between the thermal efficiencies at the two
compression ratios between 9.3:1 and 11:1 is significant. Apart
from the thermodynamic advantage the increase in the compres-
sion ratio also rises the combustion rate as shown later even with
lean mixtures. This is why there is a significant improvement even
in the lean mixture range. Fig. 6 shows the variation of brake ther-
mal efficiency at part throttle. A rise in the compression ratio in-
creases the brake thermal efficiency slightly. However, at high
equivalence ratios it is observed that the brake thermal efficiency
is lower with the highest compression ratio of 15:1. With increase
in compression ratio from 11:1 to 15:1, the peak brake thermal
efficiency increases from 18% to 20%. Percent increase in thermal
efficiency with 100% throttle is 16.5% and at 25% throttle the value
is 11%.
At any equivalence ratio an increase in the compression ratio
results in an increased level of hydrocarbon emissions as seen in
Fig. 7. At full throttle condition increase in the compression ratio
results in a rise in the mass of unburned fuel in the crevices. In
addition a rise in the compression ratio reduces the post oxidation
of HC in the exhaust since the exhaust temperature is lowered as
seen Fig. 8. At an equivalence ratio of 0.94 the compression ratio
increased from 9.3:1 to 15:1, HC level increases from 1184 ppm
to 2000 ppm. Fig. 8 shows the variation of exhaust gas temperature
at full throttle. Increase in the compression ratio lowers the
exhaust gas temperature as the expansion ratio also goes up. The
exhaust gas temperature falls from 507 °C to 463 °C when the com-
pression ratio is rised from 9.3:1 to 15:1 at the equivalence ratio of
0.98. The HC levels at 25% throttle opening are generally much

25
2.5
BrakeThermal Efficiency (%)

Fuel:Biogas 20
2 Throttle:25%
Speed:1500 rpm
Brake Power (kW)

Timing:MBT 15
1.5

10
1 Fuel:Biogas
Throttle:25%
5 CR=11:1
Speed:1500 rpm
0.5 CR=11:1 CR=13:1
Timing:MBT CR=15:1
CR=13:1
CR=15:1 0
0 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 Equivalence Ratio
Equivalence Ratio
Fig. 6. Variation of brake thermal efficiency with equivalence ratio at part throttle.
Fig. 4. Variation of brake power with equivalence ratio at part throttle.

10000
30
9000 Fuel:Biogas
Hydro carbon Emission (ppm)

Throttle:100%
8000
Brake Thermal Efficiency (%)

25 Speed:1500 rpm
7000 Timimng:MBT
20
6000 CR=9.3:1
CR=11:1
5000 CR=13:1
15
CR=15:1
4000
Fuel:Biogas
10 3000
Throttle:100%
Speed:1500 rpm 2000
CR=9.3:1
5 CR=11:1 Timimng:MBT
CR=13:1 1000
CR=15:1
0 0
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Equivalence Ratio Equivalence Ratio

Fig. 5. Variation of brake thermal efficiency with equivalence ratio at full throttle. Fig. 7. Variation of hydrocarbon emission with equivalence ratio at full throttle.
 E. Porpatham et al. / Fuel 95 (2012) 247–256 253

600 3000
CR=9.3:1 CR=9.3:1
CR=11:1 CR=11:1 Fuel:Biogas
Exhaust Gas Temperature (°C)

500 CR=13:1 2500 CR=13:1 Throttle:100%

Nitric Oxide Emission (ppm)

CR=15:1 CR=15:1
Speed:1500 rpm
Timimng:MBT
400 2000

300 1500

200 1000
Fuel:Biogas
Throttle:100%
100 500
Speed:1500 rpm
Timimng:MBT
0
0
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Equivalence Ratio
Equivalence Ratio
Fig. 8. Variation of exhaust gas temperature with equivalence ratio at full throttle.
Fig. 10. Variation of nitric oxide emission with equivalence ratio at full throttle.

higher as lower temperatures and higher charge dilution levels

lead to inferior combustion as shown in Fig. 9. HC level increases 3
CR=9.3:1
from 2528 ppm to 4320 ppm when the compression ratio in- CR=11:1
creased from 11:1 to 15:1 at an equivalence ratio of 0.98 where 2.5
CR=13:1
Carbon monoxdioxide (%) CR=15:1
the brake thermal efficiency is maximum.
Nitric oxide emission levels are seen in Fig. 10 at full throttle
2 Fuel:Biogas
condition. An increase in the compression ratio resulted in in-
Throttle:100%
creased levels of NO emission. This is due to increase in peak gas
Speed:1500 rpm
temperature. At an equivalence ratio of 0.98 the compression ratio 1.5 Timimng:MBT
increased from 9.3:1 to 15:1, NO level increases from 2125 ppm
to 2650 ppm, which is significant. The rise in the NO level is not
1
so dominant till a compression ratio of 13:1. The CO levels seen
in Fig. 11 are very low as most of the experiments were conducted
in the leaner than stoichiometric ratio range. In the rich region the 0.5
CO level shoots due to incomplete combustion. There is no signif-
icant difference in the CO level with change in the compression
0
ratio. 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Equivalence Ratio
5.2. Combustion parameters at different compression ratio
Fig. 11. Variation of CO emission with equivalence ratio at full throttle.
The pressure crank angle variations with different compression
ratios at lean and rich equivalence ratios are seen in Figs. 12 and 13
respectively, at 100% throttle. We see that peak pressure increases 70
CR=9.3:1
significantly with increase in compression ratio in case of lean mix- CR=11:1
tures (Fig. 12). This is due to faster combustion, which also results 60 CR=13:1
CR=15:1
Average Pressure (bar)

50
9000
Fuel:Biogas 40
8000
Hydro carbon Emission (ppm)

Throttle:25%
7000 Speed:1500 rpm 30
Timing:MBT
6000
20 Fuel:Biogas
5000 Equivalence ratio:0.78
10 Throttle:100%
4000
Speed:1500 rpm
3000 0
320 340 360 380 400 420
2000 Crank angle (degrees)
CR=11:1
1000 CR=13:1
CR=15:1
Fig. 12. Variation of average pressure at an equivalence of 0.78 at full throttle.
0
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Equivalence Ratio in improved thermal efficiency and power output at these condi-
tions. However, with rich mixtures (Fig. 13) the increase in peak
Fig. 9. Variation of hydrocarbon emission with equivalence ratio at part throttle. pressures with increase in compression ratio is not significant as
254 E. Porpatham et al. / Fuel 95 (2012) 247–256

70 5
CR=9.3:1 CR=9.3:1
Fuel:Biogas
CR=11:1 4.5 CR=11:1
60 CR=13:1 Throttle:100% CR=13:1
Average Pressure (bar)

CR=15:1 4 Speed:1500 rpm CR=15:1

50 Timimng:MBT
3.5

COV of IMEP (%)

40 3

2.5
30
2
20
Fuel:Biogas 1.5
Equivalence ratio:1.04
10 1
Throttle:100%
Speed:1500 rpm
0 0.5
320 340 360 380 400 420
0
Crank angle (degrees) 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Equivalence Ratio
Fig. 13. Variation of average pressure at an equivalence of 1.04 at full throttle.
Fig. 15. Variation of COV of IMEP with equivalence ratio at full throttle.

40
CR=9.3:1
CR=11:1 80
35
CR=13:1
Spark Timing (deg.bTDC)

CR=15:1
70
30

60
Peak Pressure (bar)

25

50
20

40
15
Fuel:Biogas 30
10
Throttle:100%
Speed:1500 rpm 20 Fuel:Biogas
5
Timimng:MBT Throttle:100% CR=9.3:1
10 Speed:1500 rpm CR=11:1
0 CR=13:1
Timimng:MBT
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 CR=15:1
0
Equivalence Ratio
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Fig. 14. Variation of spark timing with equivalence ratio at full throttle. Equivalence Ratio

Fig. 16. Variation of peak pressure with equivalence ratio at full throttle.

the spark timing had to be retarded suitably to avoid knock. Fig. 14

shows the MBT (Minimum advance for Best Torque) gets retarded
30
as the compression ratio is increased as expected. This is due to the
increase in the combustion rate and thus the need to shift the heat
release to crank angles where the energy conversion efficiency is 25
the maximum. This is particularly significant in the case of lean
Ignition Delay (deg.CA)

mixtures where the increase in the compression ratio seems to 20

have a significant effect in improving combustion. It may be noted
that with a rise in the compression ratio the lean limit of combus-
tion gets extended. Fig. 15 shows that the coefficient of variation of 15
indicated mean effective pressure increases sharply when the lean
misfire limit is reached. This coincides with the equivalence ratio 10
at which the HC rises suddenly. At low equivalence ratios the peak
Fuel:Biogas
pressures of all the compression ratios is low as shown in Fig. 16. Throttle:100% CR=9.3:1
5
As expected the values increase with compression ratio. Increasing Speed:1500 rpm CR=11:1
CR=13:1
the equivalence ratio increases the peak pressure in most cases due Timimng:MBT CR=15:1
to increase in the combustion rate. However, at a given equiva- 0
lence ratio the peak pressure reduces probably due to the need 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
to retard the ignition timing for best efficiency. In the case of the Equivalence Ratio
compression ratio of 15:1 the peak pressure is lower than with
Fig. 17. Variation of ignition delay with equivalence ratio at full throttle.
13:1 at high equivalence ratios (where knock is likely to occur).
This is because the spark timing was retarded at high equivalence
ratios to avoid knocking. mass fraction burnt. From this it is clear that increase in compres-
Figs. 17 indicate the variation of ignition delay. Ignition delay sion ratio has an effect on the entire combustion process due to in-
was calculated from time between occurrence of spark and 5% of creased pressure and temperature of cylinder gases. The heat
 E. Porpatham et al. / Fuel 95 (2012) 247–256 255

60  There is an improvement in thermal efficiency and brake power

55
CR=9.3:1 Fuel:Biogas output with increase in compression ratio. The peak power out-
CR=11:1
CR=13:1 Equivalence ratio:0.78 put with a compression ratio of 15:1 is 4.8 kW and it is 10%
50
Heat release rate (J/deg.CA)

CR=15:1 Throttle:100% higher than that with a compression ratio of 9.3:1 is 4.4 kW.
45 Speed:1500 rpm With an increase in compression ratio from 9.3:1 to 15:1, the
40 peak brake thermal efficiency increases from 23% to 26.8%.
35  There is an increase in HC and NO level with rise in compression
30 ratio. This is mainly due to the improvement in combustion by
way of extension of the lean limit and increase in the combus-
25
tion rate. At an equivalence ratio of 0.94 the compression ratio
20 increased from 9.3:1 to 15:1, HC level increases from 1184 ppm
15 to 2000 ppm and NO level increases from 2125 ppm to
10 2650 ppm, which is significant.
5  The reduction in the ignition delay and higher heat release rate
with increase in compression ratio.
0
320 340 360 380 400 420
Crank angle (degrees) On the whole increase in compression ratio seems to be desirable
to enhance performance and reduce emissions with biogas.
Fig. 18. Variation of heat release rate at an equivalence ratio of 0.78 at full throttle.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the Ministry of Non-Conventional

60 Energy Sources (MNES) for the financial support extended in doing
CR=9.3:1
Fuel:Biogas this project.
55 Equivalence ratio:1.04
CR=11:1
Heat release rate (J/deg.CA)

50 CR=13:1
CR=15:1
Throttle:100%
45 Speed:1500 rpm
References
40
[1] Sita Rama Raju AV. Experimental investigations on the performance of a lean
35
burn spark ignited gas engine. PhD thesis I.C.engines lab, IIT Madras, Chennai,
30 India; 2001.
[2] Senthil Kumar, Ramesh A, Nagalingam B. Use of hydrogen to enhance the
25
performance of a vegetable oil fuelled compression ignition engine. Int J
20 Hydrogen Energy 2000;28(10):1143–54.
[3] Prakash G. Investigations on a biogas diesel dual fuel engine. M.S thesis
15
I.C.engines lab, IIT Madras, Chennai, India; 2001.
10 [4] Narayana Reddy J, Ramesh A. Experimental studies on a straight vegetable oil-
biogas dual fuel engine. Fourth International symposium on fuels and
5 lubricants, Delhi, India, SAE Paper No. 2004; 146.
0 [5] Jingdang Huang, Crookes RJ. Assessment of simulated biogas as a fuel for the
320 340 360 380 400 420 spark ignition engine. Fuel 1998;77(15):1793–801.
Crank angle (degrees) [6] Porpatham E, Ramesh A, Nagalingam B. Investigation on the effect of
concentration of methane in biogas when used as a fuel for a spark ignition
engine. Fuel 2008;87:1651–9.
Fig. 19. Variation of heat release rate at an equivalence ratio of 1.04 at full throttle. [7] Macari NC, Richardson RD. Operation of a Caterpillar 351 Spark ignited engine
on low-Btu fuel. J Eng, Gas Turb, power, Trans ASME 1987;109(4):443–7.
[8] Crookes RJ. Comparative bio-fuel performance in internal combustion engines.
Biomass Bioenergy 2006;30:461–8.
release rates at an equivalence ratio of 0.78 and 1.04 (where the [9] Sita Rama Raju AV, Ramesh A, Nagalingam B. Effect of intensified swirl and
squish on the Performance of a lean burn engine operated on LPG. 2000 CEC/
pressure crank angle data was already shown in Figs. 12 and 13) SAE International Spring Fuels and Lubricants Meeting and Exposition, June
are indicated in Fig. 18 and 19 respectively. In case of lean mixture 19–22, Le Palais des Congress, Paris, France, Paper No.2000; 00Fl-450.
as the compression ratio increases from 9.3:1 to 15:1 the heat re- [10] Porpatham E, Ramesh A, Nagalingam B. Investigations on the use of biogas and
LPG in a spark ignition engine. In: International conference on Environment-
lease pattern is steeper and close to TDC due to higher flame speed
Friendly Transportation-PRITHVI-2005-Global Eco Meet-February 24th and
with increase in compression ratio. With rich mixture at compres- 25th, Trivindrum, India.
sion ratio of 15:1 the spark timing was retarded to avoid knock and [11] Porpatham E, Ramesh A, Nagalingam B. Effect of hydrogen addition on the
performance of a biogas fuelled spark ignition engine. Int J Hydrogen Energy
this leads to lower peak pressure and the entire combustion pro-
2007;32:2057–65.
cess occurs in the expansion stroke and thus leads to lower heat re- [12] Rakopoulos CD, Michos CN. Generation of combustion irreversibilities in a
lease rate. spark ignition engine under biogas-hydrogen mixtures fueling. Int J Hydrogen
Energy 2009;34:4422–37.
[13] Jeong Chulyoung, Kim Taesoo, Lee Kyungtaek, Song Soonho, Chun Kwang Min.
6. Conclusions Generating efficiency and emissions of a spark-ignition gas engine generator
fuelled with bio-gas-hydrogen blends. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2009;34:9620–7.
[14] Rakopoulos CD, Michos CN. Development and validation of a multi-zone
Based on this experimental work on the use of biogas to en- combustion model for performance and nitric oxide formation in syngas
hance the combustion characteristics of biogas the following con- fueled spark ignition engine. Energy Convers Manage 2008;49:2924–38.
clusions are drawn: [15] Shah A, Srinivasan R, Filip To SD, Columbus EP. Performance and emissions of a
spark-ignited engine driven generator on biomass based syngas. Biores
Technol 2010;101:4656–61.
 The lean misfire limit of combustion of biogas under actual [16] Gamino B, Aguillon J. Numerical simulation of syngas combustion with a
engine operating conditions gets considerably extended with multi-spark ignition system in a diesel engine adapted to work at the Otto
increase in compression ratio. The lean limit indicated by mis- cycle. Fuel 2010;89:581–91.
[17] Tewari PG, Subrahmanyam JP, Gajendra Babu MK. Experimental investigations
fire is an equivalence ratio of 0.64 with a compression ratio of on the performance characteristics of a producer gas fuelled spark ignition
15:1 as against 0.77 with that of a compression ratio of 9.3:1. engine. SAE Paper No.2001; 01-1189.
256 E. Porpatham et al. / Fuel 95 (2012) 247–256
[18] Shashikantha, Parikh PP. Spark ignition producer gas engine and dedicated
compressed natural gas engine- technology development and experimental
performance optimization. SAE Paper No.1999; 01-3515.
[19] Sridhar G, Paul PJ, Mukanda HS. Biomass derived producer gas as a
reciprocating engine fuel – an experiment analysis. Biomass Bioenergy
2001;21:61–72.
[20] Shashikantha KloseW, Parikh PP. Development of a 15 kWe spark ignition
producer gas engine and some investigations of its in-cylinder processes.
Renew Energy 1994;5:835–7.
[21] Heywood JB. Internal combustion engines fundamentals. New York: McGraw-
hill; 1998.
[22] Hayes TK, Savage LD, Sorenson SC. Cylinder pressure data acquisition and heat
release analysis on a personal computer. SAE Paper No.1986; 860029.
[23] Gatowski JA, Balles AN, Chun KM, Nelson FE, Ekchian JA, Heywood JB. Heat
Release Analysis of Engine Pressure Data, SAE Paper No.1984; 841359.
[24] Pedersen PS, Qvale B. A Model for the Physical Part of the Ignition Delay in a
Diesel Engine, SAE Paper No.1974; 7407716.
[25] Hohenberg GF. Advanced Approaches for Heat Transfer Calculations, SAE Paper
No. 1979; 790825.
[26] Kilne SJ, McClintock FA. Description uncertainties in single sample
experiments. Mech Eng 1953;75:3–8.