ARTICLE IN PRESS

Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2007–2018

www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Experimental investigations of a four-stroke single cylinder direct

injection diesel engine operated on dual fuel mode with producer
gas as inducted fuel and Honge oil and its methyl ester (HOME)
as injected fuels
N.R. Banapurmatha,, P.G. Tewaria, R.S. Hosmathb
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, B.V.B. College of Engineering and Technology, Hubli 580031, Karnataka, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, K.L.E Society’s College of Engineering and Technology, Belgaum, Karnataka, India
Received 26 June 2007; accepted 30 November 2007
Available online 1 February 2008

Abstract

In order to meet the energy requirements, there has been growing interest in alternative fuels like biodiesels, methyl alcohol, ethyl
alcohol, biogas, hydrogen and producer gas to provide a suitable diesel oil substitute for internal combustion engines. Vegetable oils
present a very promising alternative to diesel oil since they are renewable and have similar properties. Vegetable oils offer almost the
same power output with slightly lower thermal efficiency when used in diesel engine [Srivastava A, Prasad R. Triglycerides-based diesel
fuels. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2000;4:111–33. [1]; Vellguth G. Performance of vegetable oils and their monoesters as fuels for diesel
engines. SAE 831358, 1983. [2]; Demirbas A. Biodiesel production from vegetable oils via catalytic and non-catalytic supercritical
methanol transesterification methods. Int J Prog Energy Combust Sci 2005;31:466–87. [3]; Jajoo BN, Keoti RS. Evaluation of vegetable
oils as supplementary fuels for diesel engines. In: Proceedings of the XV national conference on IC engines and combustion, Anna
University Chennai, 1997. [4]; Altin R, Cetinkaya S, Yucesu HS. The potential of using vegetable oil fuels as fuel for diesel engines. Int J
Energy Convers Manage 2000;42:529–38, 248. [5]; Gajendra Babu MK, Chandan Kumar Das LM. Experimental investigations on a
Karanja oil methyl ester fuelled DI diesel engine. SAE 2006-01-0238, 2006. [6]; Agarwal D, Kumar Agarwal A. Performance and
emission characteristics of a Jatropha oil (preheated and blends) in a direct injection compression ignition engine. Int J Appl Therm Eng
2007;27:2314–23. [7]]. Research in this direction with edible oils have yielded encouraging results, but their use as fuel for diesel engine
has limited applications due to higher domestic requirement [Scholl Kyle W, Sorenson Spencer C. Combustion Analysis of soyabean oil
methyl ester in a direct injection diesel engine. SAE 930934, 1993. [8]; Nwafor OMI. Effect of advanced injection timing on the
performance of rapeseed oil in diesel engines. Int J Renew Energy 2000;21:433–44. [9]; Nwafor OMI. The effect of elevated fuel inlet
temperature on performance of diesel engine running on neat vegetable oil at constant speed conditions. Renew Energy 2003;28:171–81.
[10]]. In view of this, Honge oil (Pongamia Pinnata Linn) being non-edible oil could be regarded as an alternative fuel for CI engine
applications. The viscosity of Honge oil is reduced by transesterification process to obtain Honge oil methyl ester (HOME).
Gasification is a process in which solid biomass is converted into a mixture of combustible gases, which complete their combustion in
an IC engine. Hence, producer gas can act as a promising alternative fuel, especially for diesel engines by substituting considerable
amount of diesel fuels. Downdraft moving bed gasifiers coupled with IC engine are a good choice for moderate quantities of available
biomass, up to 500 kW of electric power. Hence, bioderived gas and vegetable liquids appear more attractive in view of their friendly
environmental nature. Since vegetable oils produce higher smoke emissions, dual fuel operation could be adopted for improving their
performance.
r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Dual fuel engine; Honge oil; Honge oil methyl ester; Producer gas; Injection timing; Injection pressure

Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 9880726748.

E-mail addresses: nr_banapurmath@rediffmail.com, nr_banapurmath@bvb.edu (N.R. Banapurmath).

0960-1481/$ - see front matter r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.renene.2007.11.017
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2008 N.R. Banapurmath et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2007–2018
1. Introduction
Energy is the lifeline of modern societies. But today,
India has 17% of the world’s population, and just 0.8% of
the world’s known oil and natural gas resources. India’s
annual requirement of oil is 114 million tonnes. Significant
part of this is consumed in the transportation sector. India
produces only about 25% of its total requirement. The
import cost today of oil and natural gas is over Rs. 2000
billion. Oil and gas prices are escalating; the barrel cost of
oil has doubled within a year. We have nearly 60 million
hectares of wasteland, of which 30 million hectares are
available for energy plantations like ‘‘Jatropha and
Honge’’. Once grown, the crop has a life of 50 years. Each
acre will produce about 2 tonnes of biodiesel at about
Rs. 20 per liter. Biodiesel is carbon neutral and many
valuable by-products flow from this agro-industry. India
has a potential to produce nearly 60 million tones of
biofuel annually, thus making a significant and important
contribution to the goal of energy independence.
India being predominantly agricultural country requires
major attention for the fulfillment of energy demands of a
farmer. Irrigation is the bottleneck of Indian agriculture, it
has to be developed on a large scale, but at the same time
diesel fuel consumption must be kept to a minimum level
because of the price of diesel and its scarcity. The increased
use of diesel in agriculture and transportation sectors has
resulted in diesel crisis. Finding an alternative fuel for
diesel fuel is critically important for our nation’s economy
and security. The complete substitution of oil imports for
the transportation and agricultural sectors is the biggest
and toughest challenge for India. In view of this,
promotion of biomass-based power generation in the
country is being encouraged. Producer gas can act as a
promising alternative fuel, especially for diesel engines by
substituting considerable amount of diesel oil. However,
diesel engines cannot be operated on producer gas without
injection of a small amount of diesel oil because the
producer gas will not ignite under the prevailing conditions
of temperature and pressure. A diesel engine needs to be
dual fuelled.
Use of wood gasifiers to drive engines in single fuel mode
of operation has the advantage of having complete
independence from petroleum fuels. This feature is very
convenient for electricity generation in more remote areas
or areas inaccessible for long periods over the year.
Further, compared to gasoline engines exhaust emissions
like NOx, CO and HC are lesser for producer gas operated
gas engines. The major problem with producer gas
operated gas engines is power derating. A power drop
from 40% upto 70% can be expected [11]. Because of very
high derating, retrofit applications of existing SI engines
for producer gas operation are less attractive. From
derating and fuel flexibility point of view, dual fuel engines
are highly acceptable. Modification of existing diesel engine
for dual fuel operation with producer gas is simple and
power derating is limited to 20–30%.
Dual fuel operation of existing diesel engines using
alternative renewable fuels is an effective approach for
diesel fuel conservation. Diesel savings up to 70–90% have
been reported for dual fuelling [12–20]. Commonly used
fuels for dual fuelling include hydrogen, LPG, CNG and
alcohols [21,22].
Reduction of engine emissions is a major research aspect
in engine development with the increasing concern on
environmental protection and the stringent exhaust gas
regulation. The lower running cost and the use of alternative
fuel sources with dual fuel engine operation has attracted
many investigators to apply this type of engine in different
areas. The main aspiration from the usage of dual fuel
engine is mainly to reduce particulate emissions and
nitrogen oxides. It is difficult to simultaneously reduce
NOx and smoke in normal diesel engines due to the trade-off
curve between NOx and smoke. One prospective method to
solve this problem is to use oxygenated alternative fuels to
provide more oxygen during combustion.
Performance of a dual fuel engine fuelled with producer
gas and diesel includes several parameters of interest such
as thermal efficiency, power capacity, and percentage of
diesel substitution at various loads and engine exhaust
emission. All these performance parameters depend upon
two factors, i.e., physico-chemical properties of producer
gas and basic engine design. In case of producer gas dual
fuelling, it is difficult to ensure uniform gas quality as it is
affected by flow conditions through the gasifier system, the
pressure drop across the gasifier system and the gas
temperature at the gasifier outlet, both vary with engine
design and operating conditions. Small gasifier systems
operating on engine suction encounter pulsating gas flow to
the engine. Such pulsations of gas flow depend upon engine
design, especially its operating speed, stroke to bore ratio
and the extent of damping provided by the gas cooling and
cleaning system [12,13].
1.1. Present work
The present work is an effort to evaluate feasibility of
popular alternative fuels in the form of Honge oil/Honge
oil methyl ester and producer gas as a total replacement for
fossil fuels. Experiments have been conducted on a single
cylinder four-stroke CI engine operated on single and dual
fuel modes at three injection timings of 191, 231 and 271
BTDC and three injection pressures of 190, 200 and 210
bar. Earlier, in single fuel mode of operation, optimum
conditions in terms of injection timings and injection
pressures for Honge oil and Honge oil methyl ester were
determined. The results obtained indicated brake thermal
efficiency in dual fuel mode of operation to be lesser than
single fuel mode of operation at all the injection timings
investigated. However, it was observed that the brake
thermal efficiency improved marginally when the injection
timing was advanced for both Honge oil and Honge oil
methyl ester. The smoke emission for producer gas–Honge
oil was found to be more than producer gas–diesel oil. This
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
N.R. Banapurmath et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2007–2018 2009

Table 1
The properties of Honge oil, Honge oil methyl ester and producer gas

Properties Diesel Honge HOME Producer gas

Density (kg/m3) 840 927 890 1.287

Calorific value (kJ/kg) 43,000 35,800 36,010 5000
Viscosity (cSt) 2–5 56 5.6 N/A
Flashpoint (1C) 75 187 163 N/A
Cetane number 45–55 40 45 N/A

is due to comparatively higher viscosity of Honge oil.

However, with producer gas–Honge oil methyl ester higher
brake thermal efficiency and reduced emissions were
obtained. With dual fuel operation, smoke and NOx
emissions were considerably reduced with increase in CO
emissions. The properties of Honge oil, Honge oil methyl
Fig. 1. Overall view of experimental setup.
ester and producer gas as determined experimentally are
summarized in Table 1.

2. Experimental heat release rate estimation

The heat release rate of the fuel causes a variation of gas

pressure and temperature within the engine cylinder
[23–28]. In-cylinder pressure and Top Dead Center
(TDC), signals were acquired and stored on a high-speed
computer-based digital data acquisition system. The data
from 100 consecutive cycles were recorded. These were
processed with specially developed software to obtain
combustion parameters. The heat release rate was calcu-
lated by first law analysis of the pressure crank angle data.
A program was developed to obtain the ensemble averaged
pressure crank angle data of 100 cycles.
Heat release analysis is done within the framework of
first law of thermodynamics [29]. Here, in single zone
model, cylinder contents were assumed to be uniform. Net
Heat Release Rate by using single zone Heat Release Fig. 2. Carburetor fitted producer gas induction system.
Model is given by the following Eq. (1).
         
dQn g dv 1 dp dQw
¼ p þ v þ , (1)
dy g1 dy g1 dy dy

where dQn/dy is the net heat release rate, dQw/dy is the heat
transfer rate to the cylinder wall, dQ/dy is the Gross heat
release rate and g is the ratio of specific heats.

3. Experimental setup and experiments

Overall view of the engine test-rig is shown in Fig. 1. The

carburetor gas induction system is shown in Fig. 2. The
Venturi used for producer gas induction before and after
the engine operation on dual fuel mode is given in Figs. 3
and 4, respectively. The engine tests were conducted on a
four-stroke single cylinder direct injection water-cooled
compression ignition engine. The specification of the
engine is given in Table 2. The engine was always operated
at its rated speed of 1500 rev/min. Table 3 shows the
specifications of the downdraft gasifier. Fig. 3. Venturi for producer gas induction.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2010 N.R. Banapurmath et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2007–2018

Table 3
Specifications of the downdraft gasifier

Type Downdraft gasifier

Deposits on Venturi
Rated capacity 62,700 kJ/h
Rated gas flow 15 N m3/h
Average gas calorific value 4186 kJ/m3
Rated woody biomass 5–6 kg/h
consumption
Hopper storage capacity 40 kg
Biomass size 10 mm (minimum)
50 mm (maximum)
Moisture content (DB) 5–20%
Typical conversion efficiency 70–75%
Typical gas composition CO ¼ 1973%, CO2 ¼ 1073%,
N2 ¼ 50%, H2 ¼ 1872%,
CH4 ¼ upto 3%
Supplier ANKUR Scientific Energy
Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Baroda
Fig. 4. Blocked Venturi with producer gas operation.

Table 2
The specification of the engine

Sl. no. Parameters Specification

4.1. Optimization of injection timing with Honge oil and
producer gas dual fuel operation
1 Machine supplier Apex Innovations Pvt. Ltd.,
Sangli, Maharastra, India 4.1.1. Performance characteristics
2 Type TV1. (Kirlosker make)
Figs. 5–10 show the effect of brake power on brake
3 Software used Engine soft
4 Nozzle opening pressure 200–225 bar thermal efficiency, exhaust gas temperature, smoke opa-
5 Governor type Mechanical centrifugal type city, hydrocarbon emissions, carbon monoxide emissions
6 No. of cylinders Single cylinder and nitrogen oxide emissions, respectively. Engine was
7 No. of strokes Four-stroke operated in both single fuel and dual fuel modes at three
8 Fuel H.S. diesel
injection timings. It is observed that over the entire power
9 Rated power 5.2 kW (7 HP) @1500 rpm
10 Cylinder diameter (Bore) 87.5 mm range dual fuel version operates at a lower brake thermal
11 Stroke length 110 mm efficiency for all the injection timings as shown in Fig. 5.
12 Compression ratio 17.5:1 This may be due to increase in ignition delay of Honge oil
Air measurement manometer with the presence of producer gas in dual fuel mode and
13 Made MX 201 also due to lower burning rate of the producer gas itself.
14 Type U-type Slight improvement was observed with the advancement of
15 Range 100–0–100 mm injection timing. This is due to faster combustion rate in
Eddy current dynamometer the phase following the premixed combustion. The
16 Model AG-10 improvement in the combustion rate is the reason for
17 Type Eddy current increase in brake thermal efficiency. The effect of injection
18 Maximum 7.5 kW at 1500–3000 rpm
timing is observed to be less at part loads. The brake
thermal efficiency with dual fuel operation at injection
timings of 191, 231 and 271 BTDC is 17.25%, 18.25% and
19.00%, respectively, as compared to 28.5%, 27% and
4. Results and discussion 26% for neat Honge oil operation.
Effect of brake power on exhaust gas temperature is
Experiments were conducted on dual fuel operation with shown in Fig. 6. Exhaust gas temperature is found to be
producer gas as inducted fuel and diesel, neat Honge oil higher for dual fuel mode as compared to single fuel mode
and its methyl ester as the injected fuels. A Venturi-type gas at all fuel injection timings. The increase in exhaust gas
induction device was designed and incorporated in the gas temperature in dual fuel mode of operation is due to the
pipeline. Performance, combustion and emission charac- excess energy supplied to the engine. Exhaust gas
teristics were investigated for three injection timings of 191, temperature is found to be less at an injection timing of
231 and 271 BTDC. The engine was operated under dual 271 BTDC, which is an indication of better combustion. At
fuel mode in which gas and liquid fuel supply being 80% load, the exhaust gas temperatures are 535, 510 and
adjusted manually for maximum diesel replacement at 485 1C for injection timing of 191, 231 and 271 BTDC,
each load. respectively.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
N.R. Banapurmath et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2007–2018 2011

32 180
Speed : 1500 rpm Speed : 1500 rpm
Injection Pressure : 205 bar Injection Pressure : 205 bar
28 Fuel : Honge oil and Producer Gas 160 Fuel : Honge oil and Producer Gas
Brake Thermal Efficiency ( % )

Honge oil 19 BTDC

24 140 Honge oil 23 BTDC
Honge oil 27 BTDC
20 120 Honge oil and Producer gas 19 BTDC
Honge oil and Producer gas 23 BTDC

HC (%)
16 100 Honge oil and Producer gas 27 BTDC

12 80
Honge oil 19 BTDC
Honge oil 23 BTDC
8 Honge oil 27 BTDC 60
Honge oil and Producer gas 19 BTDC
4 40
Honge oil and Producer gas 23 BTDC
Honge oil and Producer gas 27 BTDC
0 20
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
0
Brake Power (kW )
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Fig. 5. Effect of brake power on brake thermal efficiency. Brake Power (kW)

Fig. 8. Effect of brake power on HC emissions.

600 2.0
Speed : 1500 rpm Speed :1500 rpm
1.8 Injection Pressure : 205 bar
Injection Pressure : 205 bar Fuel :Honge oil and producer Gas
Fuel : Honge oil and Producer gas
Exhaust Gas Temperature (deg C)

500 1.6 Honge oil and Producer gas 19 BTDC

Honge oil and Producer gas 23 BTDC
1.4 Honge oil and Producer Gas 27 BTDC
400 1.2
CO (%)

Honge oil 19 BTDC

1.0 Honge oil 23 BTDC
Honge oil 27 BTDC
300 0.8
Honge oil 19 BTDC
0.6
Honge oil 23 BTDC
Honge oil 27 BTDC 0.4
200
Honge oil and Producer gas 19 BTDC
Honge oil and Producer gas 23 BTDC 0.2
Honge oil and Producer gas 27 BTDC 0.0
100 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Brake Power (kW)
Brake Power (kW)
Fig. 9. Effect of brake power on CO Emissions.
Fig. 6. Effect of brake power on exhaust gas temperature.

100 1800
Speed : 1500 rpm Honge oil and Producer gas 19 BTDC
90 Injection Pressure : 205 bar 1600 Honge oil and Producer gas 23 BTDC
Honge oil and Producer gas 27 BTDC
80 Fuel:Honge oil and Producer Gas Honge oil 19 BTDC
1400
Smoke Opacity ( HSU )

Honge oil 23 BTDC

70 Honge oil 27 BTDC
1200
NO (ppm)

60
1000
50
800
40 Honge oil 19 BTDC
Honge oil 23 BTDC 600 Speed : 1500 rpm
30
Honge oil 27 BTDC Injection Pressure : 205 bar
20 400 Fuel : Honge oil and Producer Gas
Honge oil and Producer gas 19 BTDC
Honge oil and Producer gas 23 BTDC 200
10
Honge oil and Producer gas 27 BTDC
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Brake Power ( kW ) Brake Power (kW)

Fig. 7. Effect of brake power on smoke opacity. Fig. 10. Effect of brake power on NO emissions.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2012 N.R. Banapurmath et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2007–2018

Fig. 7 shows the effect of brake power on smoke 80

Speed : 1500 rpm
opacity. The smoke emission in dual fuel operation is 75
70 Fuel : Honge oil and Producer gas
comparatively lower as compared to neat Honge oil 65 Injection Pressure : 205 bar

Honge oil Substituted (%)

operation. In dual fuel mode, increase in smoke density 60
was observed with the increase in producer gas flow rate. 55
50
However, smoke emission reduced with advanced injection 45
timings. At 80% load, the smoke opacity is 75, 68 and 40
57.50 HSU for injection timings of 191, 231 and 271 BTDC, 35
30
respectively. However, with neat Honge oil operation, 25
at the same load the smoke opacity is 76, 79.5 and 20
15 Honge oil and Producer gas 19 BTDC
82.5 HSU for injection timings of 191, 231 and 271 BTDC, 10 Honge oil and Producer gas 23 BTDC
respectively. 5 Honge oil and Producer gas 27 BTDC
Hydrocarbon emissions were observed in the range of 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
26–150 ppm for neat Honge oil and 30–90 ppm for
Brake Power ( kW)
Honge oil–producer gas throughout the load range at all
injection timings. Fig. 8 shows the effect of brake power Fig. 11. Percentage of Honge oil substitution with brake power.
on HC emissions for neat Honge oil and Honge
oil–producer gas dual fuel operation. At lower loads, HC
emissions were lower and found to increase with the load. 32
Speed : 1500 rpm
HC emissions trend is similar for both single fuel and dual Fuel : Home and Producer gas
fuel modes of operation. At 80% load, the HC emission is 28 Injection Pressure : 205 bar
found to be 90, 76 and 73 ppm for 191, 231 and 271 BTDC,
Brake Thermal Efficiency (%)

24
respectively.
The exhaust emission of carbon monoxide was lower for 20
neat Honge operations compared to producer gas–Honge
dual fuel operation as shown in Fig. 9. Higher concentra- 16
tion of CO in the exhaust is a clear indication of incomplete
12
combustion of the pre-mixed mixture. The CO levels were Home 19 BTDC
higher due to combustion inefficiencies. The mixture of 8
Home 23 BTDC
Home 27 BTDC
producer gas–air flow to the engine reduces the amount of
Home and Producer gas 19 BTDC
oxygen required for complete combustion and this creates 4
Home and Producer gas 23 BTDC
incomplete combustion and increase in the CO emissions. Home and Producer gas 27 BTDC
At lower loads, the mixture being leaner results in greater 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
extent of incomplete combustion and hence higher CO
Brake Power (kW)
concentration. This puts a lower load limit for the dual fuel
operation. At 80% load, the CO is found to be 1.30%, Fig. 12. Effect of brake power on brake thermal efficiency.
0.98% and 0.90% for 191, 231 and 271 BTDC, respectively.
Higher emission of CO in dual fuel mode could be due to
lower heating value of producer gas and Honge oil, lower 4.2. Optimization of injection timing with HOME and
adiabatic flame temperature and lower mean effective producer gas dual fuel operation
pressures.
Fig. 10 shows the effect of brake power on nitrogen The effect of brake power on brake thermal efficiency,
oxide emissions for both neat Honge oil and producer exhaust gas temperature, smoke opacity, hydrocarbon
gas–Honge oil dual fuel mode of operation. The nitrogen emissions, carbon monoxide emissions and nitrogen oxide
oxides emissions for dual fuel mode were significantly emissions are shown in Figs. 12–17, respectively. Engine
lower. This may be due to the lower adiabatic flame was operated in both single fuel and dual fuel modes at
temperature of producer gas and absence of organic three different injection timings. Trends obtained for
nitrogen in producer gas. It is observed that nitrogen HOME–producer gas dual fuel operations were similar to
oxides emissions increase with the increase in injection Honge–producer gas dual fuel operation. Brake thermal
timing advance. At 80% load, the NO is found to be 100, efficiency values were higher and emission values were
135 and 195 ppm for 191, 231 and 271 BTDC, respectively. lower. It is observed that over the entire power range dual
Effect of brake power on Honge oil substitution for three fuel version operates at a lower brake thermal efficiency for
different injection timing is shown in Fig. 11. Substitution all the injection timings as shown in Fig. 12. The effect of
is higher at lower loads and found to decrease with load. injection timing is observed to be less at part loads. The
The trend is similar for all injection timings. Maximum brake thermal efficiency with dual fuel operation at
Honge oil substitution up to 58% was observed at an injection timings of 191, 231 and 271 BTDC is 18.25%,
injection timing of 271 BTDC. 19.25% and 20.5%, respectively, as compared to 29.51%,
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
N.R. Banapurmath et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2007–2018 2013

600 2.2
Speed : 1500 rpm Home 19 BTDC
2.0 Home 23 BTDC
Injection Pressure : 205 bar Home 27 BTDC
Exhaust Gas Temperature (deg C)

Fuel : HOME and Producer gas Home and Producer gas 19 BTDC
500 1.8 Home and Producer gas 27 BTDC
Home and Producer gas 23 BTDC
1.6

400 1.4 Speed :1500 rpm

CO (%)
Injection Pressure : 205 bar
1.2 Fuel: Home and Producer gas
300 HOME 19 BTDC 1.0
HOME 23 BTDC
HOME 27 BTDC 0.8

200 HOME and Producer gas 19 BTDC 0.6

HOME and Producer gas 23 BTDC
HOME and Producer gas 27 BTDC 0.4

100 0.2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0.0
Brake Power (kW) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Brake Power (kW)
Fig. 13. Effect of brake power on exhaust gas temperature.
Fig. 16. Effect of brake power on CO emission.

100 1800
Speed :1500 rpm Home and Producer gas 19 BTDC
90 Injection Pressure : 205 bar 1600 Home and Producer gas 23 BTDC
Home and Producer gas 27 BTDC
80 Fuel : Home and Producer gas
1400 Home 19 BTDC
Home 23 BTDC
70
Smoke opacity (HSU)

1200 Home 27 BTDC

NO (ppm)

60
1000
50
800
40
600 Speed : 1500 rpm
Home 19 BTDC
30 Home 23 BTDC Injection Pressure : 205 bar
Home 27 BTDC 400 Fuel : Home and Producer gas
20
Home and Producer gas 19 BTDC 200
10 Home and Producer gas 23 BTDC
Home and Producer gas 27 BTDC 0
0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Brake Power (kW)
Brake Power (kW )
Fig. 17. Effect of brake power on NO emission.
Fig. 14. Effect of brake power on smoke opacity.

140 28.70% and 27.45% for neat HOME operation. The brake
Home and Producer gas 19 BTDC
Home and Producer gas 23 BTDC thermal efficiency values in dual fuel mode operation for
120 Home and Producer gas 27 BTDC HOME–producer gas were better compared to Honge–
Home 19 BTDC producer gas operation.
100 Home 23 BTDC
Home 27 BTDC Fig. 13 shows the effect of brake power on exhaust g
as temperature. Exhaust gas temperature is found to be
HC (ppm)

80 Speed : 1500 rpm

Injection Pressure : 205 bar higher for dual fuel mode as compared to single fuel
60 Fuel: Home and Producer gas mode at all fuel injection timings. Exhaust gas tempera-
tures were found to be lower at an injection timing of 271
40 BTDC, which is an indication of better combustion.
At 80% load, the exhaust gas temperature was found to
20 be 545, 495 and 470 1C for injection timing of 191, 231
and 271 BTDC. Exhaust gas temperatures for HOME–
0 producer gas operation were comparable to Honge–producer
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
gas operation.
Brake Power (kW)
The effect of brake power on smoke opacity is shown in
Fig. 15. Effect of brake power on HC emissions. Fig. 14. The smoke emission in dual fuel operation
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2014 N.R. Banapurmath et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2007–2018

is comparatively lower as compared to neat HOME 80

Speed : 1500 rpm
operation. At 80% load, the smoke opacity is 65, 59 Injection Pressure : 205 bar
and 54 HSU for injection timing of 191, 231 and 271 BTDC, 70 Fuel : Home and Producer gas
respectively. However, with neat HOME operation,
60
at the same load the smoke opacity is 67, 78 and

Home Substituted (%)

84 HSU for injection timing of 191, 231 and 271 BTDC, 50
respectively. Smoke opacity values were lower for
HOME–producer gas operation compared to Honge– 40
producer gas operation.
Fig. 15 shows the effect of brake power on HC emissions 30
Home and Producer gas 19 BTDC
for neat HOME and HOME–producer gas dual fuel Home and Producer gas 23 BTDC
20 Home and Producer gas 27 BTDC
operation. Hydrocarbon emissions were observed in the
range of 17–132 ppm for neat HOME and 16–88 ppm for 10
HOME–producer gas throughout the load range at all
injection timings. HC emissions trend is similar for both 0
single fuel and dual fuel modes of operation. At 80% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
load, the HC emissions were 88, 44 and 39 ppm for 191, 231 Brake Power (kW)
and 271 BTDC, respectively. Hydrocarbon emissions
Fig. 18. Effect of brake power on HOME substitution.
were found to be significantly lower for HOME–producer
gas operation compared to Honge–producer gas operation.
Fig. 16 shows the effect of brake power on CO emissions 32
for neat HOME and HOME–producer gas dual fuel Speed :1500 rpm
28 Injection Pressure : 205 bar
operation. The exhaust emission of carbon monoxide was
Brake Thermal Efficiency (%)

Injection Timing : 27 BTDC

lower for neat HOME operation compared to producer
gas–Honge dual fuel operation. At 80% load, the CO is
found to be 1.62%, 1.1% and 0.7% for 191, 231 and 271
BTDC, respectively. Carbon monoxide emission values
were comparable for HOME–producer gas and Honge–
producer gas dual fuel mode of operation.
The effect of brake power on nitrogen oxide emissions
for both neat HOME and producer gas–HOME dual fuel
mode of operation is shown in Fig. 17. The nitrogen oxides
emissions for dual fuel mode were significantly lower. It is
observed that nitrogen oxides emissions increase with the
increase in injection timing advance. At 80% load,
the NO is found to be 110, 145 and 175 ppm for 191, 231
and 271 BTDC, respectively. Nitrogen oxide emission
values obtained were comparable to Honge–producer gas
operation.
Fig. 18 shows the effect of brake power on HOME
substitution for three different injection timings. Substitu-
tion is higher at lower loads and found to decrease with the
load. The trend is similar for all injection timings.
Maximum HOME substitution up to 67% was observed
at an injection timing of 271 BTDC, which was higher
compared to Honge oil substitution.
4.3. Comparison of performance of Honge oil–producer gas,
Honge oil methyl ester–producer gas with diesel–producer
gas using carburetor
In this section, the performance, emission and combus-
tion characteristics of the engine in dual fuel mode under
variable load conditions have been compared at their
optimum injection timings with Honge oil, HOME and
diesel as injected fuels and producer as inducted fuel.
24
20
16
12
8
4 Diesel and Producer gas
Honge oil and Producer gas
Home and Producer gas
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Brake Power (kW )
Fig. 19. Effect of brake power on brake thermal efficiency in dual fuel
mode for different injected fuels.
4.3.1. Performance and emission parameters
Figs. 19–24 show the effect of brake power on brake
thermal efficiency, smoke opacity, hydrocarbon emissions,
carbon monoxide emissions, nitrogen oxide emissions, and
exhaust gas temperatures, respectively, in dual fuel mode
for different injected fuels. The brake thermal efficiency is
found to be higher for producer gas–diesel dual fuel mode
of operation compared to Honge oil–producer gas and
HOME–producer gas operation over the entire load range.
Producer gas being common, properties of the injected fuel
has a major effect on the engine performance. Honge oil
has higher viscosity than diesel, which makes atomization
difficult and also has lower calorific value, which together
result in lower brake thermal efficiency. However, HOME
has viscosity comparable to that of diesel and relatively
higher calorific value as compared to Honge oil. Hence,
brake thermal efficiency for producer gas–HOME opera-
tion is higher compared to Honge–producer gas operation.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
N.R. Banapurmath et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2007–2018 2015

100 250
Diesel and Producer gas Diesel and Producer gas
90 Honge oil and Producer gas Honge oil and Producer gas
Home and Producer gas Home and Producer gas
80 200
Speed :1500 rpm
Injection Pressure : 205 bar Speed : 1500 rpm
Smoke Opacity (HSU)

70 Injection Timing :27 BTDC Injection Pressure : 205 bar

NO (ppm)
60 150 Injection Timing : 27 BTDC

50
100
40

30
50
20

10
0
0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Brake Power (kW)
Brake Power (kW)
Fig. 23. Effect of brake power on NO emissions in dual fuel mode for
Fig. 20. Effect of brake power on smoke opacity in dual fuel mode for different injected fuels.
different injected fuel.

80 550
Diesel and Producer gas
70 Hong oil and Producer gas 500
Exhaust Gas Temperature (Deg C)

Home and Producer gas 450

60
400
50
350
HC (ppm)

Speed : 1500 rpm

40 300 Injection Timing : 27 BTDC
250 Injection Pressure : 205 bar
30
200
20 Speed : 1500 rpm
Injection Pressure : 205 bar 150
10 Injection Timing : 27 BTDC 100 Diesel and Producer gas
Honge oil and Producer gas
50 Home and Producer gas
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0
Brake Power (kW) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Brake Power (kW)
Fig. 21. Effect of brake power on HC emissions in dual fuel mode for
different injected fuels. Fig. 24. Effect of brake power on exhaust gas temperature in dual fuel
mode for different injected fuels.
1.2
Speed :1500 rpm
1.1 Injection Pressure : 205 bar
1.0 Injection Timing : 27 BTDC The brake thermal efficiency values were 24.25%, 18% and
0.9 Diesel and Producer gas 20.5% at 80% with producer gas–diesel, producer gas–
Honge oil and Producer gas Honge oil and producer gas–Honge oil methyl ester,
0.8 Home and Producer gas
respectively.
0.7
The smoke opacity was lower for producer gas–diesel
CO (%)

0.6 dual fuel operations compared to producer gas–HOME

0.5 operations (Fig. 20). The heavier molecular structure of
0.4 Honge oil compared to diesel results in higher smoke levels
0.3 in producer gas–Honge operation. However, with producer
gas–HOME dual fuel operation lower levels of smoke were
0.2
obtained due to better atomization of injected fuel leading
0.1 to better combustion. The smoke opacity of 34.5, 57.5 and
0.0 54 HSU were obtained with producer gas–diesel, producer
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 gas–Honge oil and producer gas–Honge oil methyl ester,
Brake Power (kW) respectively.
Fig. 22. Effect of brake power on CO emissions in dual fuel mode for Figs. 21 and 22 show the effect of brake power on HC
different injected fuels. and CO emissions, respectively. Hydrocarbon emissions
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2016 N.R. Banapurmath et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2007–2018

were observed in the range of 16–75 ppm for producer
gas–Honge dual fuel operation. HC emissions were higher
throughout the load range compared to producer gas–
diesel and producer gas–HOME operation as shown in
Fig. 21. The exhaust emissions of carbon monoxide were
lower for producer gas–diesel dual fuel operations com-
pared to producer gas–Honge and producer gas–HOME
operation. This may be due to higher heat release leading
to better combustion with producer gas–diesel mixture.
Nitrogen oxides emissions in dual fuel mode (Fig. 23) do
not vary significantly with the change in injected fuel. At
maximum power developed by the engine, the NOx
emissions were in the range of 130–195 ppm. NOx
emissions were lower for producer gas–diesel dual fuel
operation. Nitrogen oxide emissions in dual fuel mode of
operation were 130, 195 and 175 ppm with diesel, Honge oil
and HOME as injected fuel, respectively. Higher NOx
emissions for producer gas–Honge oil dual fuel operation
may be due to availability of higher oxygen that is present
in the Honge molecular structure.
Exhaust gas temperatures at different power outputs in
dual fuel mode of operation is presented in Fig. 24. The
EGT is found to be higher for producer gas–Honge oil and
lower for producer gas–diesel operation. The exhaust gas
4.3.2. Combustion parameters
Figs. 26–29 show the effect of brake power on ignition
delay, cylinder peak pressure, maximum rate of pressure
rise and combustion duration for different modes of
operation.
Ignition delay in dual fuel operation strongly depends on
the type of gaseous fuel used and their concentrations
in the cylinder charge. The associated changes in the
charge temperature during compression, pre-ignition
energy release, external heat transfer to the surroundings
and the contribution of residual gases appear to be the main
factors responsible for controlling the length of the ignition
delay of the engine [30]. The ignition delay is calculated
based on the static injection timing. Honge oil–producer gas
and HOME–producer gas show longer ignition delays
compared to diesel–producer gas dual fuel operation
(Fig. 26). However, Honge oil methyl ester–producer gas
24
Speed : 1500 rpm
22 Injection Timing : 27 BTDC
Injection Pressure : 205 bar
20
18
Ignition Delay (Deg CA)

temperature of 455, 485 and 470 1C were obtained with 16

producer gas–diesel, producer gas–Honge oil and producer 14
gas–Honge oil methyl ester, respectively. 12
Fig. 25 presents the fuel substitution for dual fuel 10
operation at different power outputs. Fuel substitution 8
values were higher for diesel–producer gas operation 6
Diesel
Honge oil
compared to Honge oil–producer gas, HOME–producer Home
4 Diesel and Producer gas
gas operations. Injected fuel properties such as cetane Honge oil and Producer gas
number, viscosity and calorific value may be considered as 2 Home and Producer gas
responsible for the observed trend. The percentage of fuel 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
substituted with producer gas–diesel, producer gas–Honge
oil and producer gas–Honge oil methyl ester are 71%, 54% Brake Power (kW)
and 64.5%, respectively. Fig. 26. Effect of brake power on ignition delay for different modes of
operation.

80 90
Speed : 1500 rpm
80 Injection Timing : 27 BTDC
70
Injection Pressure : 205 bar
Cylinder Peak Pressure (bar)

70
60
60
Fuel Substituted (%)

50
Speed : 1500 rpm 50
40 Injection Pressure : 205 bar
40
Injection Timing : 27 BTDC
30 30 Diesel
Honge oil
Home
20 20 Diesel and Producer gas
Diesel and Producer gas Honge oil and Producer gas
Honge oil and Producer gas Home and Producer gas
Home and Producer gas 10
10
0
0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Brake Power (kW)
Brake Power (kW)
Fig. 27. Effect of brake power on cylinder peak pressure for different
Fig. 25. Effect of brake power on fuel substitution for dual fuel operation. modes of operation.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
N.R. Banapurmath et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2007–2018 2017

5 depends on the combustion rate in initial stages, which in

Speed : 1500 rpm
turn is influenced by the amount of fuel taking part in the
Injection Pressure : 205 bar
uncontrolled combustion phase. The premixed or uncon-
Max. Rate of Pressure Rise (bar/deg CA)

Injection Timing : 27 BTDC

trolled combustion phase is governed by the ignition delay
4 period and by the mixture preparation during the delay
period. Thus, higher viscosity and lower volatility of the
Honge oil which lead to poor atomization and mixture
preparation with air and slow burning nature of producer
3
gas during the ignition delay period are the reasons for this
trend of peak pressure and maximum rate of pressure rise.
Diesel
Honge oil The combustion duration shown in Fig. 29 was
Home calculated based on the duration between the start of
2 Diesel and Producer gas
Honge oil and Producer gas combustion and 90% cumulative heat release. The
Home and Producer gas
combustion duration increases with increase in the power
output with all the selected fuels and their dual fuel
1 operation with producer gas. This is due to increase in the
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 quantity of fuel injected with the increase in power output.
Brake Power (kW) In single fuel mode, combustion duration is maximum for
Honge oil followed by HOME and diesel. In dual fuel
Fig. 28. Effect of brake power on maximum rate of pressure rise for
different modes of operation. mode, again Honge–producer gas operation has maximum
combustion duration. Observed trends are similar in both
the modes of operation. However, it was observed that
60 combustion duration during dual fuel mode operations was
Speed : 1500 rpm
higher compared to single fuel mode of operations.
Injection Pressure : 205 bar
50 Fig. 30 presents comparative data pertaining to heat
Injection Timing : 27 BTDC
Combustion Duration (Deg CA)

release rate for dual fuel mode of operation at optimum

injection timings for the selected fuel combinations. The
40
premixed burning phase associated with a higher heat
release rate is significant with diesel–producer gas dual fuel
30 operation. This is the reason for the higher thermal
Diesel efficiency of diesel–producer gas operation. The diffusion-
Honge oil burning phase indicated under the second peak is greater
20 Home
Diesel and Producer gas for Honge oil–producer gas and HOME–producer gas
Honge oil and Producer gas
Home and Producer gas compared to diesel–producer gas dual fuel operation. This
10 is consistent with the expected effects of vegetable oils
viscosity on the fuel spray and reduction of air entrainment
0 and fuel air mixing rates along with slow burning nature of
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 producer gas. This leads to less fuel being prepared for
Brake Power (kW) rapid combustion with Honge oil–producer gas after the
Fig. 29. Effect of brake power on combustion duration for different
ignition delay. Therefore, more burning occurs in the
modes of operation.

Speed : 1500 rpm

shows shorter ignition delay than neat Honge oil–producer Inj. Timing
80
Diesel and PG : 23 BTDC
gas operation. 70 Honge oil and PG : 27 BTDC
Heat Release Rate (J/deg CA)

Effect of brake power on cylinder peak pressure and 60 HOME and PG : 27 BTDC
maximum rate of pressure rise for single fuel mode with 50
Load : 60 %
diesel, Honge and HOME and dual fuel mode with 40 Diesel and Producer gas
diesel–producer gas, Honge oil–producer gas and HOME– 30 Honge oil and Producer gas
producer gas is shown in Figs. 27 and 28. Dual fuel modes
20 HOME and Producer gas
of operations were carried out at the optimum injection
10
timing previously determined for the selected fuel combi-
0
nation. The peak pressure with Honge oil–producer gas is
-10320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480
about 63.59 bar, Honge oil methyl ester–producer gas is Crank Angle (deg)
67.6 bar and for diesel it is 71.52 bar at 80% load. The -20
trends of the maximum rate of pressure rise are also Fig. 30. Variation of heat release rate with Honge oil–producer gas and
similar. In a compression ignition engine, peak pressure Honge oil methylester–producer gas at optimum injection timings.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2018 N.R. Banapurmath et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2007–2018
diffusion phase rather than in the premixed phase with
Honge oil–producer gas. Significantly higher combustion
rates during the later stages with Honge oil–producer gas
leads to higher exhaust temperatures and lower thermal
efficiency. However, HOME–producer gas operation
shows improvement in heat release rate compared to neat
Honge oil–producer gas dual fuel operation.
5. Conclusion
Dual fuel mode of operation with the selected combina-
tion of fuels resulted in lower brake thermal efficiency.
However, on advancing the injection timing to 271 BTDC
brake thermal efficiency improved moderately. The
lower calorific value, higher viscosity of Honge oil
and lower burning velocity of producer gas are responsible
for lower brake thermal efficiency. However, with HOME–
producer gas dual fuel operation better efficiency is
obtained due to higher calorific value and comparable
viscosity of Honge oil methyl ester. The brake thermal
efficiency values of 24.25%, 22.25% and 23% were
obtained with producer gas–diesel, producer gas–Honge
oil and producer gas–Honge oil methyl ester, respectively.
With dual fuel operation, emissions such as smoke and
NOx reduced considerably. However, CO and HC emis-
sions increased considerably.
On the whole it is seen that operation of the engine is
smooth on Honge oil–producer gas, Honge oil methyl
ester–producer gas dual fuel operation. Honge oil–producer
gas results in a slightly reduced thermal efficiency and
increased smoke, HC and CO levels.
References
[1] Srivastava A, Prasad R. Triglycerides-based diesel fuels. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2000;4:111–33.
[2] Vellguth G. Performance of vegetable oils and their monoesters as
fuels for diesel engines. SAE 831358, 1983.
[3] Demirbas A. Biodiesel production from vegetable oils via catalytic
and non-catalytic Supercritical methanol transesterification methods.
Int J Prog Energy Combust Sci 2005;31:466–87.
[4] Jajoo BN, Keoti RS, Evaluation of vegetable oils as supplementary
fuels for diesel engines. In: Proceedings of the XV national conference
on IC engines and combustion, Anna University Chennai, 1997.
[5] Altin R, Cetinkaya S, Yucesu HS. The potential of using vegetable oil
fuels as fuel for diesel engines. Int J Energy Convers Manage
2000;42:529–38. 248.
[6] Gajendra Babu MK, Chandan Kumar Das LM. Experimental
investigations on a Karanja oil methyl ester fuelled DI diesel engine.
SAE 2006-01-0238, 2006.
[7] Agarwal D, Kumar Agarwal A. Performance and emission char-
acteristics of a Jatropha oil (preheated and blends) in a direct
injection compression ignition engine. Int J Appl Therm Eng
2007;27:2314–23.
[8] Scholl Kyle W, Sorenson Spencer C. Combustion analysis of
soyabean oil methyl ester in a direct injection diesel engine. SAE
930934, 1993.
[9] Nwafor OMI. Effect of advanced injection timing on the performance
of rapeseed oil in diesel engines. Int J Renew Energy 2000;21:433–44.
[10] Nwafor OMI. The effect of elevated fuel inlet temperature on
performance of diesel engine running on neat vegetable oil at
constant speed conditions. Renew Energy 2003;28:171–81.
[11] Kaupp A, Goss JR. Small scale gas producer engine systems.
Braunschweg/Wiesbaden: Friedr Vieweg and Sohn; 1984.
[12] Vyarawalla F, Parikh PP, Dak HC, Jain BC. Utilization of biomass
for motive power generation—gasifier engine system, vol.3, 1984.
p. 227–42.
[13] Parikh PP, Bhave AG, Kapse DV, Shashikantha. Study of thermal
and emission performance of small gasifier dual fuel engine systems.
Int J Biomass 1989;19:75–97.
[14] Bhattacharya SC, Shwe Hla S, Pham H-L. A study on a multi-stage
hybrid gasifier–engine system. Int J Biomass Bioenergy
2001;21:445–60.
[15] Sridhar G, Dasappa S, Sridhar HV, Paul PJ, Rajan NKS. Gaseous
emissions using producer gas as fuel in reciprocating engines. SAE
2005-01-1732, 2005.
[16] Uma R, Kandapal TC, Kishore VVN. Emission characteristics
electricity generation system in diesel alone and dual fuel modes. Int J
Biomass Bioenergy 2004;27:195–203.
[17] Bridgwater AV, Toft AJ, Brammer JG. A techno-economic
comparison of power production by biomass fast pyrolysis with
gasification and combustion. Int J Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2002;6:181–248.
[18] Mohammadi Ali, Shioji Masahiro, Ishiyama Takuji, Kitazaki
Masato. Utilization of low-calorific gaseous fuel in a direct-injection
diesel engine. J Eng Gas Turbines Power 2006;128:915–20.
[19] Singh RN, Singh SP, Pathak BS. Investigations on operation of CI
engine using producer gas and rice bran oil in mixed fuel mode. Int J
Renew Energy 2007;32:1565–80.
[20] Ramadhas AS, Jayaraj S, Muraleedharan. Power generation using
coir-pith and wood derived producer gas in diesel engines. Int J Fuel
Process Technol 2006;87:849–53.
[21] Senthil Kumar M, Ramesh A, Nagalingam B. Use of hydrogen to
enhance the performance of a vegetable oil fuelled compression
ignition engine. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2003;28:1143–54.
[22] Alam M, Goto S, Sugiyama K. Performance and emissions of a DI
diesel engine operated with LPG and ignition improving additives.
SAE 2001-01-3680, 2001.
[23] Lancaster DR, Krieger RB, Lienesh JH. Measurement and analysis
of engine pressure data. SAE 750026, 1975.
[24] Brunt Michael FJ, Platts Kieron. Calculation of heat release rate in
direct injection diesel engines. SAE 1999-01-0187, 1999.
[25] Hayes TK, Savage LD, Soreson SC. Cylinder pressure data
acquisition and heat release analysis on a personal computer. SAE
860029, 1986.
[26] Aman Charles A. Cylinder pressure measurement and its use in
engine research. SAE 852067, 1985.
[27] Rocco VDI. Diesel engine in cylinder pressure data analysis under
TDC setting error. SAE 930595, 1993.
[28] Homsy Samuel C, Atreya A. An experimental heat release rate
analysis of a diesel engine Operating under steady state conditions.
SAE 970889, 1997.
[29] Heywood JB. Internal combustion engine fundamentals. New York:
McGraw-Hill; 1988.
[30] Karim GA, Jones W, Raine RR. An examination of the ignition
delay period in dual fuel engines. SAE 892140, USA, 1989.