Downloaded from SAE International by American Univ of Beirut, Sunday, July 29, 2018

SAE TECHNICAL 2016-36-0391

PAPER SERIES E

Analysis of Engine Performance and Combustion Characteristics of

Diesel and Biodiesel Blends in a Compression Ignition Engine

MARIO EDUARDO SANTOS MARTINS

RENAN RAKOSKI ZIENTARSKI
PAULO ROMEU MOREIRA MACHADO
HENRIQUE MATHEUS DORNELLES
JACSON BELTRAO DE VARGAS ANTOLINI
MACKLINI DALLA NORA
 Downloaded from SAE International by American Univ of Beirut, Sunday, July 29, 2018
Analysis of Engine Performance and Combustion Characteristics of
Diesel and Biodiesel blends in a Compression Ignition Engine
Henrique Dornelles, Jácson Antolini, Rafael Sari,
Macklini Dalla Nora, Paulo Romeu Machado, Mario Martins
Copyright © 2016 SAE International
Abstract
Renewable fuels have received more attention in the last few decades
since the fuel demand is constantly increasing. In this scenario, fuels
from vegetable oils are emerging as an interesting alternative. In this
study, biodiesel produced from used cooking oil was studied. Several
concentrations of biofuel were tested to evaluate their performance and
combustion characteristics i.e. 7% (B07), 17% (B17), 27% (B27), 52%
(B52), 77% (B77) and 100% by volume of Biodiesel (B100) on
conventional diesel. Tests were conducted in a single cylinder four-
stroke compression ignition engine. A 1-D computational model was
built and compared to experimental results. The biodiesel
concentration in the blends had influence on engine performance by
increasing fuel consumption due to its reduced lower heating value. In
addition, larger fractions of biodiesel on conventional diesel presented
higher peak of heat release. Based on these preliminary results, it was
found that biodiesel from cooking oil has the potential to partially or
totally replace conventional diesel in compression ignition engines.
Introduction
The energy demand is rising due to the increasing of world population
and industrial growth, suggesting that more sources of fuels need to be
explored [1]. The utilization of fossil fuels intensifies the effects of
greenhouse gases, which is strongly linked to global warming [2].
Moreover, fossil fuels such as conventional gasoline and diesel have
finite sources. In this scenario, biofuels appear as an interesting
alternative. Biodiesel is a promising biofuel because it is
biodegradable, oxygenated, non-toxic and environmentally friendly
[3].
The biodiesel used in this study was produced by transesterification of
waste cooking oil (WCO) It presents a lower methyl ester content
(~67.5% by mass) when compared to biodiesel for commercial
applications in Brazil, which is regulated by the country’s agency ANP
[4]. Xue [5], Konthe [6] and Waghmare [7] related that WCO is
considered a promising raw material for biodiesel production. It
presents environmental benefits since waste cooking oil comes from a
renewable source of energy and allows the use of a waste that is often
incorrectly discarded in the enviroment. Furthermore, Issariyakul [8]
affirmed that the availability of this waste increases as world
population increases [8].
Recent researches have investigated exhaust emissions when WCO
biodiesel is used instead of petroleum diesel in CI engines. Lapuerta
[9] investigated the effects of biodiesel blends on particulate emissions
Page 1 of 7
2016-36-0391
Federal University of Santa Maria
and reported a sharp decrease in smoke and particulate matter as the
biodiesel fraction in the blend was increased. Gopal [10] investigated
exhaust emissions of a CI engine fueled with diesel, biodiesel and its
blends. Gopal observed a decrease in carbon monoxide (CO),
unburned hydrocarbon (HC) and smoke opacity when using WCO
biodiesel blends instead of petroleum diesel. On the other hand, oxides
of nitrogen were found higher compared to stock diesel.
Due the chemical and physical characteristics, biodiesel can present
some issues when used in engine systems designed for petroleum
diesel fuel. Liaquat [11] presented a comparison of lubrication oil from
an engine running for 250h with two fuels: Petroleum diesel and B20
(20% of biodiesel and 80% of standard diesel). The engine oil
presented a viscosity reduction and higher metallic particles
concentration for B20. Haseeb [12] and Sorate [13] affirmed that
Biodiesel is more corrosive than diesel, the main reason is attributed
to the presence of impurities and water in it composition, suggesting
the use of different materials for fuel system operating with biodiesel.
Pehan [14] studied the biodiesel influence on tribology characteristics
of a diesel engine. The focus of the study was on the pump plunger
surfaces and on carbon deposits at the critical components of a
mechanical fuel injection system. The results presented an increase in
the pump surface roughness when B100 was employed. Carbon
deposits on the combustion chamber were found similar, although
redistribution was observed. Injector deposition was found also critical
for biodiesel.
Diesel and Biodiesel have several distinct properties and
characteristics. Biodiesel presents a lower LHV per mass unit and
lower carbon content when compared to petroleum diesel. On the other
hand, biodiesel has a higher cetane number, density, viscosity and flash
point according to Hwang [15-16], Man[17] and Attia [18].
Depending on the quality of the materials used in the production of
biodiesel, several impurities can be present in the final fuel.
In the present study, biodiesel and its blends with petroleum diesel
were tested on a single cylinder compression ignition engine.
Performance and combustion characteristics were analyzed under full
load condition trough experimental data acquisition combined
computational simulation using 1-D software.
 Downloaded from SAE International by American Univ of Beirut, Sunday, July 29, 2018

Experimental setup sensor OPTRAND D32281-Q. Pressure sensor accuracy of 1%.

Manifold pressure measurements were performed using piezo-
resistive sensors model MPX4250AP from Freescale. To synchronize
The experiments were conducted in a single cylinder four-stroke
all data with the crank angle an incremental encoder was employed.
compression ignition engine with mechanical fuel injection. Engine
All sensors were connected in data acquisition boards NI USB-6353
characteristics are specified in Table 1. An eddy current dynamometer
and NI USB-6000, both from National Instruments. A routine in
was used and torque values were acquired by an alfa instruments load
LabVIEW was used to monitor and calculate combustion parameters.
cell model SV 200. Torque acquisition equipment accuracy is
estimated about 5%. The experimental setup is shown in Figure 1.
Table 1 - Engine Specifications.

Engine model Agrale M95W

Bore 95 mm

Connecting rod length 168 mm

Stroke 105 mm

Sweep Volume 744 cm³

Compression Ratio 21:1

Fuel Supply Direct Injection – Mechanical System

IVO – IVC 19° BTDC – 229° ATDC

EVO – EVC 240° BTDC – 22 ATDC

Injector holes 5

Figure 1 - Engine and dynamometer setup Injection pressure 110-135 bar

All temperature measurements were made using K-type

thermocouples. In-cylinder pressure was acquired by a fiber optical

Figure 2 - Experimental setup and equipment.

Page 2 of 7
 Downloaded from SAE International by American Univ of Beirut, Sunday, July 29, 2018
The fuel consumption was obtained by metering the time required to
consume certain amount of fuel in a burette. A scheme of test setup is
presented in Figure 2.
Engine simulation and combustion analysis
The combustion analysis was performed in a one-dimensional
computational model (Figure 3) built in GT-Power software. The
model was setup with experimental input data such as crank angle
resolved cylinder and port pressures, intake and exhaust temperatures,
air and fuel flow as well as engine geometry specifications. For the fuel
characterization, chemical, physical and thermodynamic properties
were used from the literature.
For combustion simulation and analysis, GT-power three-pressure
analysis method (TPA) was employed. This method requires intake
pressure, in-cylinder pressure and exhaust pressure to proper simulate
the engine operation. The in-cylinder pressure profile is used to
calculate the combustion characteristics as burned fraction, heat
release rate and ignition delay in a two-zone model. Besides the three
pressures, temperatures and fuel injected mass were used to
characterize and validate the engine model.
Figure 3 - GT Power model.
Data acquisition procedure
The fuels used in the experimental data acquisition were commercial
diesel, biodiesel and its blends (B17, B27, B52, B77), classified as
BXX, where XX is the volumetric concentration of biodiesel on the
blends. The tests were conducted under constant engine speeds i.e.
2000 rpm, 225 0rpm, 2500 rpm, 2750 rpm and 3000 rpm. Full load
condition was attained and exhaust lambda was kept between 1.7 and
1.9. In order to certify the composition of in-cylinder fuel at each fuel
exchange, the fuel line was drained and the engine operated for several
minutes without data acquisition.
Page 3 of 7
Fuels
The diesel used in this work is regulated by the Biofuels, Natural Gas
and Petroleum National Agency, ANP (Brazil). It is commercialized
with mandatory addition of 7% of biodiesel on diesel.
The biodiesel used was produced in-house at the Federal University of
Santa Maria (UFSM) on a micro scale factory. The process used was
transesterification with methanol and sodium hydroxide (NaOH). The
process uses artisanal methods of mixing and filtering the biodiesel.
The biofuel analysis demonstrated a low fatty acid methyl ester content
(FAME) between 67.29% and 67.92%. For instance, ANP requires a
minimum of 98.5% to allow biodiesel commercialization.
Results and discussion
Brake Mean Effective Pressure
Figure 4 shows the average brake mean effective pressure (BMEP) for
biodiesel and it blends with petroleum diesel. The BMEP values
presented only slight differences for all tested blends at a constant
speed. According to Dos rReis [19], diesel has a higher LHV than
Biodiesel. However, the research engine used is equipped with a
constant volume displacement fuel pump. It means that more energy
was available during the combustion of biodiesel blends due to its
greater density compared to stock diesel (900 g/L against 840 g/L,
respectively). For this reason the BMEP differences were as lower as
4.3%, for all blends at 2000 rpm, 2250 rpm, 2500 rpm and 2750 rpm.,
values under torque measurement equipment uncertainty. . . At 3000
rpm the BMEP presented a difference of 6.34% among the blends
tested. This results may suggest that the injection timing and lower
injection pressure used affected the biodiesel combustion at higher
engine speeds.
Figure 4 - BMEP for all tested blends at different engine speeds.
 Downloaded from SAE International by American Univ of Beirut, Sunday, July 29, 2018

Brake Specific Fuel Consumption

Figure 5 shows the brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC) obtained

for the different biodiesel/diesel blends over the range of engine speeds
tested. It is possible to observe that when the biodiesel percentages
increased, the BSFC values also increased, which is also reported by
Qi [20]. Since biodiesel has a greater density than diesel and the
volume displaced by the fuel pump was constant, the injected fuel mass
was expected to increase as the biodiesel percentage increased in the
blend.

Figure 6 - In cylinder pressure profile.

Figure 5 - BSFC for all tested blends at different engine speeds.

In-Cylinder Pressure and burned fuel fraction

The in-cylinder pressure profiles per crank angle for diesel/biodiesel

blends are shown in Figure 6 . All blends followed the same profile
during the compression, since for all tests it was used same engine
compression ratio and injection timing. Figure 7 presents the peak in-
cylinder pressure results for diesel/biodiesel blends. It can be seen that
the peak in-cylinder pressure increased at greater biodiesel fractions,
with the highest peak presented by B100. According to Qi [20] the
higher peak of in-cylinder pressure on the CI engine running with
biodiesel and its blends can be associated to its high oxygen content
tending to increase the peak of temperature and pressure. Tesfa [21]
and Shehata [22] appointed that the presence of oxygen in biodiesel
improves the oxidation of hydrocarbons and leads to higher in-cylinder
pressure during the combustion. Due to the fact that the biodiesel used
in this work contains just about 67.5% of methyl ester, other
compounds resulted from the transesterification process may also
contain oxygen (e.g. water, methanol, glycerol and vegetal oil). These
compounds are often responsible for maintaining the higher oxygen
content in low methyl ester biodiesels.
Figure 7 - In cylinder pressure peak.
Also in Figure 6 it is shown that the combustion of biodiesel started
before that of conventional diesel, which generated more negative
work. The higher in-cylinder pressure for biodiesel was attributed to
the larger fuel mass injected by the mechanical pump. Nevertheless,
this fact did not result in higher BMEP (figure 4) due to the fixed
injection timing and consequently not optimized combustion phasing.
As seen in Figure 8 the crank angle where 50% of the fuel mass was
burned occurred earlier for biodiesel compared to petroleum diesel. It
can be also observed that B100 started to burn earlier, as previously
shown in Figure 6, and in a slower rate when compared to B07.

Page 4 of 7
 Downloaded from SAE International by American Univ of Beirut, Sunday, July 29, 2018
Figure 8 - Burned fuel fraction comparison between B07 and B100.
Ignition Delay
The ignition delay for B07 and B100 are presented in Figure 9. It is
well documented in the literature that biodiesel has higher cetane
number than petroleum diesel [24], which results in shorter ignition
delays. Accordingly the longest ignition delay was observed for B07
at all tested speeds. Tesfa [21] reported that the higher the BMEP, the
longer is the ignition delay, which was also found in this research as
observed in figures 6 and 8.
Figure 9 - Ignition delay comparison between B07 and B100.
Heat Release Rate
The heat release rate comparison (HRR) between biodiesel and its
blends with diesel is shown in Figure 10. It is possible to observe all
phases of CI combustion i.e. ignition delay, premixed phase, mixing-
controlled phase and late combustion. When the biodiesel fraction
Page 5 of 7
increased in the blends the premixed phase peak decreased, although
an increased mixing –controlled phase peak was observed. Tesfa [21]
suggests that this phenomenon is also attributed to the presence of
additional oxygen molecules in biodiesel fuel. This may have led to a
more complete combustion and consequently higher peak of heat
release. The heat release rate could be also impacted for other
substances present in this biodiesel with lower methyl ester content.
Figure 10 - Heat release rate for all tested blends.
Conclusions
In the present work low methyl ester content biodiesel and its blends
with diesel were evaluated in a single cylinder compression ignition
engine. Performance and combustion characteristics were
experimentally and numerically investigated through 1-D code. The
lower methyl ester biodiesel presented similar BMEP values when
compared to commercial diesel. The BSCF was found higher when the
biodiesel fraction increased in the blends due to its lower LHV
compared to commercial diesel. Biodiesel presented higher in-cylinder
pressure peaks combined with a shorter ignition delay, attributed to the
higher oxygen content leading to a more complete combustion. The
burned fuel fraction appointed to a higher mass burned in the mixing-
controlled combustion phase of biodiesel, confirmed by the HRR. The
higher oxygen content of biodiesel was found to be the main reason for
a higher peak in the controlled combustion region and a weaker
premixed phase. Nevertheless, other substances present in the biofuel
could have also caused the reduction of the premixed combustion
phase.
Overall it could be seen that biodiesel from waste cooking oil is a
potential biofuel, even if it has not reached a high level of esters during
its production process. Differences in operation compared to
petroleum diesel were found marginal and performance characteristics
were very similar. Therefore, it is possible to state that biodiesel with
lower methyl esters content was able to partially or totally replace
petroleum diesel in compression ignition engines without severe
hardware changes.
 Downloaded from SAE International by American Univ of Beirut, Sunday, July 29, 2018
Further study is suggest to investigate the influence of water, glycerol
and methane content in biodiesel performance, combustion
characteristics and emissions. Moreover, possible issues caused by
biodiesel on engine fuel supply and lubrication oil are suggest.
References
1. Takase M., T. Zhao, M. Zhang, Y. Chen, H. Liu, L. Yang, et al.
An expatriate review of neem, jatropha, rubber and Karanja as
multipurpose non-edible biodiesel resources and comparison of
their fuel, engine and emission properties Renew Sustain Energy
Rev, 43 (2015), pp. 495–520
2. Dogan T. H., The testing of the effects of cooking conditions on
the quality of biodiesel produced from waste cooking oils.
Renewable Energy 2016; 94: 466-473.
3. Tran T. T.V., Kaiprommarat S., Kongparakul S., et al., Green
biodiesel production from waste cooking oil using an
environmentally benign acid catalyst. Waste Management 2016;
52: 367-374.
4. ANP. Agência Nacional de Petróleo, Resolução Nº45 2014.
Disponível em: http://www.anp.gov.br/ Acesso em: 11 maio.
2016.
5. Xue Y. et al, Ternary blends of biodiesel with petro-diesel and
diesel from direct coal liquefaction for improving the cold flow
properties of waste cooking oil biodiesel. Fuel 2016; 177:46-52.
6. Konthe G. Biodiesel and renewable diesel: a comparison. Prog
Energy Combust Sci 2010;36:364-73
7. Waghmare V. G., Rathod V. K., Ultrasound assisted enzyme
catalyzed hydrolysis of waste cooking oil under solvent free
condition. Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 2016;32:60-67.
8. Issariyakul T, Dalai AK. Biodiesel from vegetable oils. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev2014;31:446-71
9. Lapuerta M., Fernández J. R., Agudelo J. R., Diesel particulate
emissions from used cooking oil biodiesel. Bioresource
Technology 2008;99:731-740.
10. Gopal N. T., Pal A., Sharma S., et al, Investigation of emissions
and combustion characteristics of a CI engine fueled with waste
cooking oil methyl ester and diesel blends. Alexandria
Engineering Journal 2014; 53:281-287.
11. Liaquat A. M., Masjuki H. H., Kalam M.A., et al, Impact of
biodiesel blend on injector deposit formation. Energy 2014;
72:813-823.
12. Haseeb A.S.M.A., Fazal M. A., Jahirul M.I., et al, Compatibility
of automotive materials in biodiesel: A review. Fuel 2011;
90:922-931.
13. Sorate K. A., Bhale P.V., Biodiesel and automotive system
compatibility issues. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews 2015; 41: 777-798.
14. Pehan S., Jerman M. S., Kegl M., et al, Biodiesel influence on
tribology characteristics of a diesel engine. Fuel 2009; 88:970-
979.
Page 6 of 7
15. Hwang J., Qi D., Jung Y., Bae C., Effect of injection parameters
on the combustion and emission characteristics in a common-rail
direct injection diesel engine fueled with waste cooking oil
biodiesel. Renewable Energy 2014; 63:9-17.
16. Hwang J., Bae C., Gupta T., Application of waste cooking oil
(WCO) biodiesel in a compression ignition engine. Fuel 2016;
176: 20-31.
17. Man X. J., Cheung C.S., Ning Z., et al, Influence of engine load
and speed on regulated and unregulated emissions of a diesel
engine fueled with diesel fuel blended with waste cooking oil
biodiesel. Fuel 2016; 180: 41-49.
18. Attia A.M.A., Hassaneen A. E., Influence of diesel fuel blended
with biodiesel produced from waste cooking oil on diesel engine
performance. Fuel 2016; 167:316-318.
19. Dos Reis F.E., Desempenho e emissões de um motor-gerador
ciclo diesel sob diferentes concentrações de biodiesel de soja.
Revista Brasileira de engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental. 2013
V.7, n.5,565-571
20. Qi D.H., Geng L.M., et al. Combustion and performance
evaluation of a diesel engine fueled with biodiesel produced
from soybean crude oil. Renewable Energy 2009:34 2706-273
21. Tesfa B., Combustion and performance characteristic of CI
(compression ignition) engine running with biodiesel. Energy
2013;51:101-115.
22. Shehata M. S., Emissions, performance and cylinder pressure of
diesel engine fuelles by biodiesel fuel. Fuel 2013;112:513-522.
23. Qu L., Wang Z., Zhang J., Influence of waste cooking oil
biodiesel on oxidation reactivity and nanostructure of particulate
matter from diesel engine. Fuel 2016; 181: 389-395.
24. Can O., Combustion characteristics, performance and exhaust
emissions of a diesel engine fueled with a waste cooking oil
biodiesel mixture.
25. Heywood JB., Internal combustion engine fundamentals. New
York: McGraw Hill; 1988. Cap. 10.
Contact Information
Mario Martins, PhD
mario@mecanica.ufsm.br
Henrique Dornelles, BEng
mdornelles.henrique@gmail.com
Universidade Federal de Santa Maria
Departamento de Engenharia Mecânica-CT
Avenida Roraima, nº1000 – Camobi
CEP: 97105-900
Santa Maria – RS
Brazil.
 Downloaded from SAE International by American Univ of Beirut, Sunday, July 29, 2018

Acknowledgments B100 Biodiesel

The authors would like to thank the research supporting agencies MAP Manifold absolute pressure
CNPq and FAPERGS, as well as the Federal University of Santa
Maria for the financial support and scholarships provided. BMEP Brake mean effective pressure

CO Carbon monoxide

Definitions/Abbreviations PM Particulate matter

RPM Revolutions per minute HC Hydrocarbon

CI Compression ignition WCO Waste cooking oil

BSFC Brake specific fuel consumption

HRR Heat release rate

LHV Low heating value

FAME Fatty acid methyl ester

IVO Intake valve open

IVC Intake valve close

EVO Exhaust valve open

EVC Exhaust valve close

NaOH sodium hydroxide

TPA Three pressure analysis

ANP Biofuels, Natural Gas and Petroleum National

Agency

B07 Commercial Diesel added 7% of biodiesel

B17 Diesel added 17% of biodiesel

B27 Diesel added 27% of biodiesel

B52 Diesel added 52% of biodiesel

B77 Diesel added 77% of biodiesel

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or
by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE.
ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright © 2016 SAE International.
Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE. The authors solely
responsible for the content of the paper.

Page 7 of 7