See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/260172247

The Fuel Consumption Study on E85 with Conventional EFI Vehicle

Conference Paper · March 2011

CITATIONS READS

0 564

3 authors:

Parinya Kongsukanant Krongkaew Laohalidanond

KNUTNB,TGGS King Mongkut's University of Technology North Bangkok
1 PUBLICATION   0 CITATIONS    20 PUBLICATIONS   93 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Raksit Thitipatanapong
Michibiki Sora Co. Ltd.
46 PUBLICATIONS   121 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Eco Driving View project

Ice Slurry View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Raksit Thitipatanapong on 14 February 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The 7th International Conference on Automotive Engineering (ICAE-7)
March 28 – April 1, 2011, Challenger, Impact, Muang Thong Thani, Bangkok, Thailand

The Fuel Consumption Study on E85 with

Conventional EFI Vehicle
Parinya Kongsukanant and Krongkaew Laohalidanond
The Sirindhorn International Thai-German Graduate School of Engineering
King Mongkut’s University of Technology North Bangkok

Raksit Thitipatanapong
National Electronics & Computer Technology Center

ABSTRACT consumer. Therefore, the concept idea is to

The performance of a retrofit vehicle fuelled by
gasoline-ethanol mixture emphasizing on fuel
consumption, energy efficiency and fuel
economy was investigated in this
study. Several driving tests using a retrofit
passenger car with engine management
system for E10 and E85 were carried out on
different driving conditions. The results
obtained directly from each driving test were
mass of air flow rate into an engine read from
mass air flow sensor and oxygen sensor. By
applying mass of air flow rate in the
combustion equation, the fuel consumption
rate was thereafter determined. From driving
tests and calculations, tests with E85 have 15
% higher fuel consumption rate (in km/l) than
tests with E10, while energy efficiency (in
km/MJ) is not different. With respect to carbon
dioxide emission, E85 is 5-10 % less than E10.
From this study, it can be concluded that
ethanol can used as alternative fuel in a spark-
ignition engine by blending with conventional
gasoline. By installation of engine
management system, the fuel-air
compensation is effectively controlled and it
will lead to the higher performance of flexible
fuel vehicle.
INTRODUCTION
modify the engine for using ethanol-gasoline
mixture; E10-E85, called “Flexible fuel vehicle”
(FFV). As ethanol and gasoline have similar
characteristics, they can be blended together;
however, engines must be modified by
installing engine management system to
control fuel compensation. The fuel injection
duration was increased to compensate the
lower heating value of ethanol. If the engine is
modified in appropriate way, it can reduce the
amount of oil consumption and consequently
oil import. Moreover, using ethanol also builds
up value added of agriculture products which
are used as raw material for ethanol
production. Hence, engine modifying is
significantly useful.
The objective of this research is to
experiment performance of a modified engine
for using ethanol-gasoline mixture as fuel by
focusing on rate fuel consumption, energy
efficiency and carbon dioxide emission. Then
compare these results between E10 and E85,
All driving tests conducted in this study is a
real driving test on-road.
ETHANOL
Ethanol or Ethyl alcohol is a liquid fuel from
degradation of starch and sugar by
enzyme. Ethanol's chemical formula is
C H OH. Ethanol must be refined to a high
2 5

Presently, oil price in the world market tends to
continuously increase influencing Thai people
and Thai economy, especially domestic
transportation. For this case, alternative energy
has been promoted. Thailand is able to support
enough ethanol to export to the world market
by processing raw planted material not only
carbohydrate and sugar but also cellulose and
hemi-cellulose by fermenting; sugar cane, rice,
corn, cassava, etc. Therefore, Thai’s
government has lunched the policy to promote
the use of alternative energy in order to reduce
oil import, by mixing ethanol in conventional
gasoline, starting from; 10 % ethanol to 85 %
ethanol. Transportation is the largest oil
purity of 99.5 % before using in gasoline
engine as fuel. If there is high moisture content
in ethanol, it will cause the problems to engine,
e.g. corrosion at engine parts and equipments.
Raw materials for ethanol production
can be divided into three major categories:
1. Starch containing materials, e.g. rice,
wheat, corn, barley, sorghum, cassava, potato,
sweet potato etc.
2. Sugar containing materials, e.g. sugar
cane, molasses, sweet sorghum, etc.
3. Cellulosic materials, e.g. rice straw, corn
cobs, rice bran, wood waste, including weeds,
sugar cane waste and included industrial
waste such as paper plant, etc.
 The 7th International Conference on Automotive Engineering (ICAE-7)
March 28 – April 1, 2011, Challenger, Impact, Muang Thong Thani, Bangkok, Thailand

In Thailand sugar cane, molasses and 2. Normally, the air/fuel ratio of gasoline is
cassava fresh are suitable to be used as raw 14.612, E10 is 14.365 and E85 is 10.678
materials for ethanol production. (Fig.2) [2]. Thus, engines must be modified by
Since ethanol contain OH-group which install engine management system to control
is more corrosive than conventional fuel compensation in order to complete
gasoline. Corrosive properties of ethanol are combustion (Stoichiometric Combustion λ =1).
prevented by using coatings that can resist
corrosion on the parts and fuel tank. Other 3. As already mentioned, corrosion properties
properties of ethanol compared to conventional of ethanol is higher than gasoline, some parts
gasoline are shown in Table 1. of engine must be made from high quality
materials to prevent corrosion and some parts
Table.1 Properties of fuel [1] which directly contact with ethanol must often
be changed [3].
Fuel Ethanol Gasoline
Formula C2H5OH C8H15
Molar C/H ratio 0.333 0.445
Molecular weight (kg/kmol) 46.07 114.18
heating value (MJ/kg) 26.9 47.1
Stoichiometric air/fuel ratio 9 14.6
Auto-ignition temperature ºC 425 257
Heat of vaporization (kJ/kg) 840 305
Research octane number 108.6 88-100
Motor octane number 89.7 80-90
Fig.2 Relationship between air fuel ratio and
Freezing point ºC -114 -40 fuel compensation
Boiling point ºC 78 27-225
Density (kg/m3) 785 765

Fig.3 Density of fuel as a function of ethanol

concentration

Fig.1 Relationship between the fuel mixtures

with the heating value [2] METHODOLOGY

From the Table 1, ethanol and EQUIPMENTS

gasoline have difference properties. Thus, the
engines must be modified in order to suit the
properties of ethanol. The main improvements
for this study are as follows. From Fig.1 Show
the heating value of fuel mixtures.
1. Because the heating value of ethanol is
lower than gasoline, the fuel injection time was
increased to compensate the lower heating
value of ethanol by install engine management
system.
In this study, CHEVROLET ZAFIRA 2.2
SPORT (table 2) was examined, this vehicle
was modified for retrofit flexible fuel (Fig.4).
Moreover, the vehicle was installed additional
equipments which were mass-air flow sensor
(Fig.5) and wide-band oxygen sensor (Fig.6).
In addition, the signal from additional sensors
and engine parameter (RPM, vehicle speed,
and injector percentage) were logged via
“innovate SSI-4” as illustrated in Fig.7
 The 7th International Conference on Automotive Engineering (ICAE-7)
March 28 – April 1, 2011, Challenger, Impact, Muang Thong Thani, Bangkok, Thailand

Fig.7 Process of the signal for analyze

ANALYSIS
The fuel consumption can be analyzed
indirectly from mass air flow rate from the fact
Fig.4 Test Vehicle that spark ignition engine (or gasoline engine)
is operated stoichiometrically combustion
Table.2 vehicle specification
which mean the air to fuel ratio (AFR) is remain
constant at theoretically value[4]. As shown in
Z 22 SE ECOTEC equation (1) is indirectly estimate of fuel
Type 4 cylinder 16 valves volume flow rate (FFR ) in liter/second. The
V

fuel consumption rate is shown in equations (2)

Displacement (cc.) 2.198 which normally ratio between distance over
Bore 86 fuel consume.
Stroke (mm.) 94.6
Compression ratio 10.0 : 1
(1)
Power (Horsepower/kW/Rpm) 144.83 / 108 / 5800
Toque (N-m/Rpm) 203 / 4000
Injection MPFI (2)

In this study, Both E85 and E10 were

compared, so for E85 AFR=10.678 and
3
ρ=781g/m and E10 AFR=14.365 and
ρ=742g/m3. Furthermore, the energy efficiency
was estimated from equation (3).

(3)
Fig.5 Mass air flow sensor (MAF)

In addition, the CO2 emissions is

estimated from carbon-balance equation with
completed combustion between gasohol (E10)
and air as shown in equation (4) and the rate
of CO2 emissions is simplified as equation (5)
and (E85) in equation (6) and (7) respectively.

E10

0.9[C8H15]+0.1[C2H5OH]+10.875([O2]+3.76[N2])

7.05[H2O] + 7.4[CO2] + x[N2] (4)

Fig.6 Oxygen sensor (AFR Sensor)
 The 7th International Conference on Automotive Engineering (ICAE-7)
March 28 – April 1, 2011, Challenger, Impact, Muang Thong Thani, Bangkok, Thailand

Furthermore, the energy consumption

was shown in (Fig.9). Although, the fuel
consumption rate for E85 was less than E10 at
same constant speed, the energy consumption
(5) for E85 was remained same rate as E10 at
E85 constant speed. It is obvious that both fuels
operate at same energy conversion efficiency
0.15[C8H15]+0.85[C2H5OH]+4.3125([O2] for this vehicle.

+3.76[N2]) 3.675[H2O]+2.9[CO2]+x[N2] (6)

(7)

Where: FCR = fuel consumption rate (km/l)

ηEnergy = energy efficiency (km/MJ)
CO = carbon dioxide emission (g/km)
2

VSS = speed of vehicle (Hz) to (km/h)

MAF = mass air flow (g/s)
Fig.9 The energy consumption
λ = lamda (Oxygen Sensor)
AFR = air/flow ratio
From the fact that E85 contain less
ρ = density of fuel (g/m ) 3

carbon than E10 so that ethanol fuel has less

HHV = E10=46.52, E85=37.49 (MJ/kg)
emission. As analysis illustrated in (Fig.10), the
E85 was emitted less CO than E10 for all
2

range which reduced by approximately 10%.

RESULTS

The rate of fuel consumption, comparison

between E10 and E85 at constant speed, was
illustrated in (Fig.8). With the vehicle profile, at
low speed, the fuel consumption rate was
better than high speed for both fuels. For E85,
the rate of fuel consumption was between 7.9
km/l and 5.7km/l and for E10, it was between
8.6 km/l and 7.1 km/l. Furthermore, the E85
fuel had bad fuel consumption rate than E10
by about 15% as expected from less energy
content in the fuel. To be comparative, the
energy consumption was considered.

Fig.10 Carbon dioxide emission

CONCLUSION REMARK

In this study, the retrofit flexible fuel vehicle

Fig.8 Fuel consumption rate
was investigated for fuel consumption and
carbon dioxide emission. Although, the fuel
consumption rate for E85 fuel was lesser, the
energy consumption was same as E10.
Therefore, the carbon dioxide emission was
reduced. In conclusion, the E85 fuel could be
feasible to apply in conventional vehicle with
retrofit kit.
 The 7th International Conference on Automotive Engineering (ICAE-7)
March 28 – April 1, 2011, Challenger, Impact, Muang Thong Thani, Bangkok, Thailand

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This study has financial support from National

Science & Technology Development Agency
(NSTDA) in Service Research Innovation
Program.

REFERENCES

1. Tanawat Sriraksa and Chinda

Charoenphonphanich, “Ethanol Fuel
Motorcycle”, (in Thai)The 22 Conference
rd

of theMechanical Engineering Network of

Thailand (ME-NETT22), 2551, AEC 030.
2. Jarut Kunanoppadon, “Air-Fuel ratio and
combustion energy analysis of gasohol”,
(in Thai)The4 Conference on Energy
th

Network of Thailand (E-NETT), 2551.

3. Kalong Buanak, Panya Kansuwan,
Chinda Charoenphonphanich, “The
investigation of ethanol fuel and E85
impacts on fuel supply system:
Material compatibility test”, (in Thai)The
23rd
Conference of the Mechanical
Engineering Network of Thailand
(ME-NETT23), 2552, AEC-021153.
4. Raksit Thitipatanapong and Thanud
Luangnarutai, “A Driving Condition
Acquisition and Analysis: Vehicle Fuel
Consumption”,(inThai)The24 Conference
rd

of the Mechanical Engineering Network of

Thailand (ME-NETT24), 2553, ETM031.

CONTACT

Raksit Thitipatanapong, M.Sc. is a research

engineer working on driver behavior analysis
for safety & saving at Telemetric Engineering
section, National Electronic & Computer
Technology Center, Thailand.
Email: raksit.thi@nectec.or.th

View publication stats