- Email: [email protected]
Comparative Evaluation of Edible and Non-edible Oil Methyl Ester Performance in a Vehicular Engine
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect Energy Procedia 75 (2015) 37 – 43
The 7th International Conference on Applied Energy – ICAE2015
Comparative Evaluation of Edible and Non-Edible Oil Methyl Ester Performance in a Vehicular Engine M. Mofijura, M.A. Hazrata*, M.G. Rasula, H.M. Mahmudulb
a
School of Engineering & Technology, Central Queensland University, Queensland 4701, Australia Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University Malaysia Pahang, 26600 Pekan, Pahang, Malaysia
b
Abstract This paper examines the performance and emission characteristics of biodiesel produced from edible oil source (palm) and non-edible oil source (Jatropha) and compared that with fossil diesel fuel. Only 20% palm and 20% Jatropha biodiesel (described by PB20 and JB20 respectively) were examined because it has been suggested by the commercial company that up to 20% biodiesel can be used in a diesel engine without any engine modification. The physical and chemical properties of PB20 & JB20 are also presented and compared with diesel fuel (B0). The performance of these fuels and their emissions were measured in a multi-cylinder diesel engine at different engine speeds and at full load condition. The test results indicated that both PB20 and JB20 fuels produces slightly lower brake powers and higher brake specific fuel consumption compared to diesel fuel. Engine emission results indicated that the PB20 and JB20 fuel reduces the average emissions of carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbons (HC). However, the PB20 and JB20 fuels slightly increases nitric oxides (NO) emissions compared to diesel fuel. Although PB20 have slightly better emission performance than JB20 biodiesel, JB20 biodiesel should be used in unmodified diesel engines to meet the global energy demand and to reduce emissions into the atmosphere because it does not create food versus fuel conflict. © Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license ©2015 2015The The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of ICAE Peer-review under responsibility of Applied Energy Innovation Institute
Keyword: GHG emission, edible oil source, non-edible oil source, engine performance
1.
Introduction
Transportation system has a great importance for social and economic development of any country. The rising issue for transportation sector is the energy, which is mainly fulfilled by gasoline and diesel fuel. Globally 1.1% in average energy consumption is increased in the transportation sector every year. The transportation sector accounts for the largest share (63%) of the total growth in world consumption of * Corresponding author. Tel.: +61749309634. E-mail address: [email protected].
1876-6102 © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of Applied Energy Innovation Institute doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2015.07.134
38
M. Mofijur et al. / Energy Procedia 75 (2015) 37 – 43
petroleum and other liquid fuels from 2010 to 2040 [1]. There are about 22% global GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions come from the transportation sector due the increasing demand of vehicles. Rapid growth of the number of vehicle industry in the world has resulted increase of exhaust emissions to the environment. Vehicular emissions such as particulate matter (PM), hydrocarbon (HC), carbon dioxides (CO2), carbon monoxides (CO) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) are hugely responsible for the air quality deterioration [2]. The International Energy Agency (IEA) forecasts that the emissions of CO 2 from transport sector will increase by 92% between 1990 and 2020 [3]. Also it is estimated that 8.6 billion metric tons of CO2will be released to the atmosphere from 2020 to 2035 [3]. The consumption of both petrol and diesel has been increasing rapidly with growing motorization and increasing the GHG emission worldwide. It is very urgent to find out alternative fuels for transportation sector as this sector is emitting higher GHG emission and contributing to the rapid growth of global oil demand [4]. Recently, attention has been drawn to develop cleaner alternative fuels from renewable sources to reduce the harmful emission to air and to reduce the dependency on the petro-diesel fuel [5]. The most clean alternative fuel for vehicles being considered globally is biodiesel [2]. Biodiesel is produces from available resources like vegetable oils (palm, soybean, peanut, sunflower, rape, coconut, karanja, neem, cotton, mustard, Jatropha, linseed and castor), animal fat (from pork, chicken) and greases (used cooking oils and restaurant frying oils) through a chemical process known as transesterification [6-8]. Biodiesel have several advantages over fossil fuel such as smoother engine operation by enhancing better lubricity and better combustion characteristics. Though biodiesel has some disadvantages, such as the higher production cost and the poor cold flow properties of biodiesel to use it in colder climate. Biodiesel can reduce greenhouse gas emission to the atmosphere by lowering CO, HC and particle matters etc. Many research projects around the world are now conducted to ensure the effectiveness of biodiesel addressing these problems including the utilization of biodiesel and by product of bio-diesel (glycerol) [9]. In this investigation, a comparison of engine performances (power, fuel consumption) and emissions (unburnt hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide and nitric oxide) of diesel engine using two different bio-diesels namely PB20 and JB20 and diesel fuel is performed. Table 1: Fuel properties of crude oils, biodiesel and diesel fuel Properties
Standards
CPO
CJO
PB20
JB20
B0
Dynamic viscosity at 40°C (mPa.s) Kinematic viscosity at 40°C (mm2/s) Density (kg/m3) Viscosity index Cold Filter Plugging Point (°C) Cloud Point (°C) Pour Point (°C) Flash point (°C) Calorific value (MJ/Kg) Acid value (mgKOH/g oil)
ASTM D445 ASTM D445 ASTM D1298 N/A ASTM D6371 ASTM D2500 ASTM D97 ASTM D93 ASTM D240 ASTM D664
36.30 40.40 898.4 192.1 8 9 165 39.44 3.47
31.52 34.93 902.5 204.5 -2 -3 220 38.66 -
2.92 3.47 840.1 149.8 4 7 -1 78.5 43.99 -
3.03 3.63 834.9 159 6 6 0 84 44.19 -
2.69 3.23 827.2 90 5 8 0 68.5 45.30 -
ASTM D6751 1.9-6 130 min 0.5 max
M. Mofijur et al. / Energy Procedia 75 (2015) 37 – 43
2.
Experimental Materials and Methods
Crude Palm oil (CPO) and Crude Jatropha oil (CJO) were collected from Forest Research Institute, Malaysia (FRIM). All other chemicals, reagents and accessories were purchased from local markets. Table 1 shows the properties of CPO and CJO. Biodiesel from those crude oils were produced using transesterification process described by Mofijur et al. [9]. The physico-chemical properties of the produced biodiesel were characterized according to the ASTM D6751 standards. Then the test fuels were blended with diesel for 20 minutes using a homogenizer operated at 2000 rpm to be used in the engine. A Mitsubishi Pajero (model 4D56T) multi-cylinder vehicular engine was used to perform the performance and emission test. Fig. 1 shows the schematic diagram of engine test bed. Table 2 shows the details specification of the engine. A BOSCH exhaust gas analyzer (model BEA-350) was used to measure the NO, HC and CO emissions from the engine.
Fig. 1: Schematic diagram of engine test bed Table 2: Details specification of the test engine Parameter Engine type Displacement (L) Cylinder bore x stroke (mm) Compression ratio Maximum engine speed (rpm) Maximum power (kW) Fuel system Lubrication System Combustion chamber Cooling system
3.
Description 4 cylinder inline 2.5 92 x 96 21:1 4200 55 Distribution type jet pump (indirect injection) Pressure feed Swirl type Radiator cooling
Results and discussion
3.1 Engine Performance Study 3.1.1 Brake Power (BP) Fig. 2 compares the engine brake power (BP) output of PB20, JB20 and B0 at different engine speeds. For all tested fuels, the brake power increased steadily with the engine speed up to 3500 rpm then it decreased due to the higher frictional force. At all test speeds, the average brake powers of the B0, PB20
39
40
M. Mofijur et al. / Energy Procedia 75 (2015) 37 – 43
and JB20 fuels were 28.72, 26.73 and 26.35 kW, respectively. Compared to diesel fuel, the PB20 and JB20 fuels produced lower brake powers (6.92% and 8.25%, respectively) due to their lower calorific values and higher viscosities (Table 1), which influenced combustion [10,11].
Fig. 2: Variation of brake power with speed
BSFC [g/kWh]
3.1.2 Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (BSFC) Fig. 3 illustrates the variation of the BSFC values for all fuels at different engine speeds. Biodiesel blended fuels gave higher BSFC values than diesel fuel due to some factors such as volumetric fuel injection system, the fuel density, the viscosity and the lower heating value [12, 13]. At all speeds, the average BSFCs for the B0, PB20 and JB20 were 385.71, 406.42 and 413.32 g/kWh, respectively. Compared to diesel fuel, the BSFCs were 5.42 and 8.39 higher for the PB20 and JB20, respectively. The blends' BSFCs were higher for the biodiesels because their densities and viscosities are higher, and their energy densities are lower, than diesel [14]. Both the viscosity and the density of the JB20 were higher than for PB20 (Table 1). 550 500 450 400 350 300 250
B0 PB20 JB20
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
Engine speed [rpm]
Fig. 3: Variation of brake specific fuel consumption with speed
3.2 Engine emission study 3.2.1 CO emissions The variation of CO emissions with diesel and biodiesel blends is shown in Fig. 4. Over the entire range of engine speeds, the average reduction of CO emissions was by 36.68% and 27.23% for PB20 and JB20
M. Mofijur et al. / Energy Procedia 75 (2015) 37 – 43
relative to B0, respectively. Similar result was reported by Hirkude and Padalkar [15]. This reduction of CO emissions is attributed to the higher oxygen content and cetane number of biodiesel fuel. The higher oxygen content of biodiesel allows more carbon molecules to burn, and fuel combustion is complete. Thus, CO emissions are lower when diesel engines burn biodiesel fuel.
Fig. 4: Variation of CO emission with speed
3.2.2 HC emissions The variation of HC emissions for diesel and biodiesel blend fuels is shown in Fig. 5. For the PB20 and JB20, the unburned HC emissions are lower than for diesel fuel. Over the entire range of speeds, the average reductions in HC emission for the PB20 and JB20 are 30.26% and 19.78% relative to B0, respectively. These reductions are attributed to the high oxygen contents of these biodiesel fuels. Biodiesel contains more oxygen and less carbon and hydrogen than diesel fuel, which guarantees more complete combustion [5].
Fig. 5: Variation of HC emission with speed
3.2.3 NO emissions The variation of the NO emissions for diesel and biodiesel blend fuels is shown in Fig. 6. The NO values are higher for biodiesel blends than diesel fuel. On average, the PB20 and JB20 produce 6.91% and
41
42
M. Mofijur et al. / Energy Procedia 75 (2015) 37 – 43
15.10% higher NO emissions, respectively, than diesel fuel over the entire range of speeds. This result can be attributed to the higher adiabatic flame temperature. Biodiesel fuels that contain more unsaturated fatty acids have higher adiabatic flame temperatures, which cause higher NO emissions [16].
Fig. 6: Variation of NO emission with speed
4.
Conclusions
In this study, biodiesel was produced from crude Palm and Jatropha oils, and 20% biodiesel by volume blends were evaluated in a diesel engine. It can be concluded that, the performance of PB20 and JB 20 biodiesel is comparable with diesel fuel. Even though PB20 have better performance than JB20 biodiesel but JB20 biodiesel reduce exhaust emission in a great extent than diesel fuel and JB20 biodiesel doesn’t complete with food. So JB20 can replace diesel fuel in unmodified engines to reduce the global energy demand and exhaust emissions into the environment. References [1]. [2]. [3]. [4]. [5]. [6]. [7]. [8]. [9]. [10].
International Energy Outlook 2040 2013. Cited on [5th December 2014]. Availanle from: http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/pdf/0484%282013%29.pdf Liaquat AM, Kalam MA, Masjuki HH, Jayed MH. Potential emissions reduction in road transport sector using biofuel in developing countries. Atmospheric Environment 2010; 44: 3869-77. Gorham R. An assessment of causes, strategies and tactics, and proposed actions for the international community. Division for Sustainable Development, Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2002; http://www.un.org/esa/gite/csd/gorham.pdf. Surawski NC, Ristovski ZD, Brown RJ, Situ R. Gaseous and particle emissions from an ethanol fumigated compression ignition engine. Energy Conversion and Management 2012; 54: 145-51. Rahman MM, Hassan MH, Kalam MA et al. Performance and emission analysis of Jatropha curcas and Moringa oleifera methyl ester fuel blends in a multi-cylinder diesel engine. Journal of Cleaner Production 2014; 65: 304-10. Arbab MI, Masjuki HH, Varman M et al. Fuel properties, engine performance and emission characteristic of common biodiesels as a renewable and sustainable source of fuel. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2013; 22: 133-47. Edrisi SA, Dubey RK, Tripathi V et al. Jatropha curcas L.: A crucified plant waiting for resurgence. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2015; 41: 855-62. Hosseini SE, Wahid MA. Utilization of palm solid residue as a source of renewable and sustainable energy in Malaysia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2014; 40: 621-32. McCarthy, P., Rasul, M. G., Moazzem, S. Analysis and comparison of performance and emissions of an internal combustion engine fuelled with petroleum diesel and different bio-diesels. Fuel 2011; 90: 2147-57. McCarthy, P., Rasul, M. G., Moazzem, S. Comparison of the performance and emissions of different biodiesel blends against petroleum diesel. International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies, 2011; ctr012.
M. Mofijur et al. / Energy Procedia 75 (2015) 37 – 43
[11]. [12]. [13]. [14]. [15]. [16].
Mofijur M, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA et al. Comparative evaluation of performance and emission characteristics of Moringa oleifera and Palm oil based biodiesel in a diesel engine. Industrial Crops and Products 2014; 53: 78-84. Liaquat AM, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA et al. Effect of Coconut Biodiesel Blended Fuels on Engine Performance and Emission Characteristics. Procedia Engineering 2013; 56: 583-90. Qi DH, Chen H, Geng LM, Bian YZ. Experimental studies on the combustion characteristics and performance of a direct injection engine fueled with biodiesel/diesel blends. Energy Conversion and Management 2010; 51: 2985-92. Mofijur M, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA et al. Properties and use of Moringa oleifera biodiesel and diesel fuel blends in a multi-cylinder diesel engine. Energy Conversion and Management 2014; 82: 169-76. Hirkude JB, Padalkar AS. Performance and emission analysis of a compression ignition: Engine operated on waste fried oil methyl esters. Applied Energy 2012; 90: 68-72. El-Kasaby M, Nemit-allah MA. Experimental investigations of ignition delay period and performance of a diesel engine operated with Jatropha oil biodiesel. Alexandria Engineering Journal 2013; 52: 141-9.
Biography M.A. Hazrat is currently enrolled in PhD program in the School of Engineering & Technology, Central Queensland University, Australia. He has a keen interest on applied engineering analysis in the areas of thermo-fluid, thermodynamics and energy engineering. At present, he is pursuing research on alternative fuel processing, properties determination and application in the automotive engines.
43
ScienceDirect Energy Procedia 75 (2015) 37 – 43
The 7th International Conference on Applied Energy – ICAE2015
Comparative Evaluation of Edible and Non-Edible Oil Methyl Ester Performance in a Vehicular Engine M. Mofijura, M.A. Hazrata*, M.G. Rasula, H.M. Mahmudulb
a
School of Engineering & Technology, Central Queensland University, Queensland 4701, Australia Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University Malaysia Pahang, 26600 Pekan, Pahang, Malaysia
b
Abstract This paper examines the performance and emission characteristics of biodiesel produced from edible oil source (palm) and non-edible oil source (Jatropha) and compared that with fossil diesel fuel. Only 20% palm and 20% Jatropha biodiesel (described by PB20 and JB20 respectively) were examined because it has been suggested by the commercial company that up to 20% biodiesel can be used in a diesel engine without any engine modification. The physical and chemical properties of PB20 & JB20 are also presented and compared with diesel fuel (B0). The performance of these fuels and their emissions were measured in a multi-cylinder diesel engine at different engine speeds and at full load condition. The test results indicated that both PB20 and JB20 fuels produces slightly lower brake powers and higher brake specific fuel consumption compared to diesel fuel. Engine emission results indicated that the PB20 and JB20 fuel reduces the average emissions of carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbons (HC). However, the PB20 and JB20 fuels slightly increases nitric oxides (NO) emissions compared to diesel fuel. Although PB20 have slightly better emission performance than JB20 biodiesel, JB20 biodiesel should be used in unmodified diesel engines to meet the global energy demand and to reduce emissions into the atmosphere because it does not create food versus fuel conflict. © Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license ©2015 2015The The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of ICAE Peer-review under responsibility of Applied Energy Innovation Institute
Keyword: GHG emission, edible oil source, non-edible oil source, engine performance
1.
Introduction
Transportation system has a great importance for social and economic development of any country. The rising issue for transportation sector is the energy, which is mainly fulfilled by gasoline and diesel fuel. Globally 1.1% in average energy consumption is increased in the transportation sector every year. The transportation sector accounts for the largest share (63%) of the total growth in world consumption of * Corresponding author. Tel.: +61749309634. E-mail address: [email protected].
1876-6102 © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of Applied Energy Innovation Institute doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2015.07.134
38
M. Mofijur et al. / Energy Procedia 75 (2015) 37 – 43
petroleum and other liquid fuels from 2010 to 2040 [1]. There are about 22% global GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions come from the transportation sector due the increasing demand of vehicles. Rapid growth of the number of vehicle industry in the world has resulted increase of exhaust emissions to the environment. Vehicular emissions such as particulate matter (PM), hydrocarbon (HC), carbon dioxides (CO2), carbon monoxides (CO) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) are hugely responsible for the air quality deterioration [2]. The International Energy Agency (IEA) forecasts that the emissions of CO 2 from transport sector will increase by 92% between 1990 and 2020 [3]. Also it is estimated that 8.6 billion metric tons of CO2will be released to the atmosphere from 2020 to 2035 [3]. The consumption of both petrol and diesel has been increasing rapidly with growing motorization and increasing the GHG emission worldwide. It is very urgent to find out alternative fuels for transportation sector as this sector is emitting higher GHG emission and contributing to the rapid growth of global oil demand [4]. Recently, attention has been drawn to develop cleaner alternative fuels from renewable sources to reduce the harmful emission to air and to reduce the dependency on the petro-diesel fuel [5]. The most clean alternative fuel for vehicles being considered globally is biodiesel [2]. Biodiesel is produces from available resources like vegetable oils (palm, soybean, peanut, sunflower, rape, coconut, karanja, neem, cotton, mustard, Jatropha, linseed and castor), animal fat (from pork, chicken) and greases (used cooking oils and restaurant frying oils) through a chemical process known as transesterification [6-8]. Biodiesel have several advantages over fossil fuel such as smoother engine operation by enhancing better lubricity and better combustion characteristics. Though biodiesel has some disadvantages, such as the higher production cost and the poor cold flow properties of biodiesel to use it in colder climate. Biodiesel can reduce greenhouse gas emission to the atmosphere by lowering CO, HC and particle matters etc. Many research projects around the world are now conducted to ensure the effectiveness of biodiesel addressing these problems including the utilization of biodiesel and by product of bio-diesel (glycerol) [9]. In this investigation, a comparison of engine performances (power, fuel consumption) and emissions (unburnt hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide and nitric oxide) of diesel engine using two different bio-diesels namely PB20 and JB20 and diesel fuel is performed. Table 1: Fuel properties of crude oils, biodiesel and diesel fuel Properties
Standards
CPO
CJO
PB20
JB20
B0
Dynamic viscosity at 40°C (mPa.s) Kinematic viscosity at 40°C (mm2/s) Density (kg/m3) Viscosity index Cold Filter Plugging Point (°C) Cloud Point (°C) Pour Point (°C) Flash point (°C) Calorific value (MJ/Kg) Acid value (mgKOH/g oil)
ASTM D445 ASTM D445 ASTM D1298 N/A ASTM D6371 ASTM D2500 ASTM D97 ASTM D93 ASTM D240 ASTM D664
36.30 40.40 898.4 192.1 8 9 165 39.44 3.47
31.52 34.93 902.5 204.5 -2 -3 220 38.66 -
2.92 3.47 840.1 149.8 4 7 -1 78.5 43.99 -
3.03 3.63 834.9 159 6 6 0 84 44.19 -
2.69 3.23 827.2 90 5 8 0 68.5 45.30 -
ASTM D6751 1.9-6 130 min 0.5 max
M. Mofijur et al. / Energy Procedia 75 (2015) 37 – 43
2.
Experimental Materials and Methods
Crude Palm oil (CPO) and Crude Jatropha oil (CJO) were collected from Forest Research Institute, Malaysia (FRIM). All other chemicals, reagents and accessories were purchased from local markets. Table 1 shows the properties of CPO and CJO. Biodiesel from those crude oils were produced using transesterification process described by Mofijur et al. [9]. The physico-chemical properties of the produced biodiesel were characterized according to the ASTM D6751 standards. Then the test fuels were blended with diesel for 20 minutes using a homogenizer operated at 2000 rpm to be used in the engine. A Mitsubishi Pajero (model 4D56T) multi-cylinder vehicular engine was used to perform the performance and emission test. Fig. 1 shows the schematic diagram of engine test bed. Table 2 shows the details specification of the engine. A BOSCH exhaust gas analyzer (model BEA-350) was used to measure the NO, HC and CO emissions from the engine.
Fig. 1: Schematic diagram of engine test bed Table 2: Details specification of the test engine Parameter Engine type Displacement (L) Cylinder bore x stroke (mm) Compression ratio Maximum engine speed (rpm) Maximum power (kW) Fuel system Lubrication System Combustion chamber Cooling system
3.
Description 4 cylinder inline 2.5 92 x 96 21:1 4200 55 Distribution type jet pump (indirect injection) Pressure feed Swirl type Radiator cooling
Results and discussion
3.1 Engine Performance Study 3.1.1 Brake Power (BP) Fig. 2 compares the engine brake power (BP) output of PB20, JB20 and B0 at different engine speeds. For all tested fuels, the brake power increased steadily with the engine speed up to 3500 rpm then it decreased due to the higher frictional force. At all test speeds, the average brake powers of the B0, PB20
39
40
M. Mofijur et al. / Energy Procedia 75 (2015) 37 – 43
and JB20 fuels were 28.72, 26.73 and 26.35 kW, respectively. Compared to diesel fuel, the PB20 and JB20 fuels produced lower brake powers (6.92% and 8.25%, respectively) due to their lower calorific values and higher viscosities (Table 1), which influenced combustion [10,11].
Fig. 2: Variation of brake power with speed
BSFC [g/kWh]
3.1.2 Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (BSFC) Fig. 3 illustrates the variation of the BSFC values for all fuels at different engine speeds. Biodiesel blended fuels gave higher BSFC values than diesel fuel due to some factors such as volumetric fuel injection system, the fuel density, the viscosity and the lower heating value [12, 13]. At all speeds, the average BSFCs for the B0, PB20 and JB20 were 385.71, 406.42 and 413.32 g/kWh, respectively. Compared to diesel fuel, the BSFCs were 5.42 and 8.39 higher for the PB20 and JB20, respectively. The blends' BSFCs were higher for the biodiesels because their densities and viscosities are higher, and their energy densities are lower, than diesel [14]. Both the viscosity and the density of the JB20 were higher than for PB20 (Table 1). 550 500 450 400 350 300 250
B0 PB20 JB20
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
Engine speed [rpm]
Fig. 3: Variation of brake specific fuel consumption with speed
3.2 Engine emission study 3.2.1 CO emissions The variation of CO emissions with diesel and biodiesel blends is shown in Fig. 4. Over the entire range of engine speeds, the average reduction of CO emissions was by 36.68% and 27.23% for PB20 and JB20
M. Mofijur et al. / Energy Procedia 75 (2015) 37 – 43
relative to B0, respectively. Similar result was reported by Hirkude and Padalkar [15]. This reduction of CO emissions is attributed to the higher oxygen content and cetane number of biodiesel fuel. The higher oxygen content of biodiesel allows more carbon molecules to burn, and fuel combustion is complete. Thus, CO emissions are lower when diesel engines burn biodiesel fuel.
Fig. 4: Variation of CO emission with speed
3.2.2 HC emissions The variation of HC emissions for diesel and biodiesel blend fuels is shown in Fig. 5. For the PB20 and JB20, the unburned HC emissions are lower than for diesel fuel. Over the entire range of speeds, the average reductions in HC emission for the PB20 and JB20 are 30.26% and 19.78% relative to B0, respectively. These reductions are attributed to the high oxygen contents of these biodiesel fuels. Biodiesel contains more oxygen and less carbon and hydrogen than diesel fuel, which guarantees more complete combustion [5].
Fig. 5: Variation of HC emission with speed
3.2.3 NO emissions The variation of the NO emissions for diesel and biodiesel blend fuels is shown in Fig. 6. The NO values are higher for biodiesel blends than diesel fuel. On average, the PB20 and JB20 produce 6.91% and
41
42
M. Mofijur et al. / Energy Procedia 75 (2015) 37 – 43
15.10% higher NO emissions, respectively, than diesel fuel over the entire range of speeds. This result can be attributed to the higher adiabatic flame temperature. Biodiesel fuels that contain more unsaturated fatty acids have higher adiabatic flame temperatures, which cause higher NO emissions [16].
Fig. 6: Variation of NO emission with speed
4.
Conclusions
In this study, biodiesel was produced from crude Palm and Jatropha oils, and 20% biodiesel by volume blends were evaluated in a diesel engine. It can be concluded that, the performance of PB20 and JB 20 biodiesel is comparable with diesel fuel. Even though PB20 have better performance than JB20 biodiesel but JB20 biodiesel reduce exhaust emission in a great extent than diesel fuel and JB20 biodiesel doesn’t complete with food. So JB20 can replace diesel fuel in unmodified engines to reduce the global energy demand and exhaust emissions into the environment. References [1]. [2]. [3]. [4]. [5]. [6]. [7]. [8]. [9]. [10].
International Energy Outlook 2040 2013. Cited on [5th December 2014]. Availanle from: http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/pdf/0484%282013%29.pdf Liaquat AM, Kalam MA, Masjuki HH, Jayed MH. Potential emissions reduction in road transport sector using biofuel in developing countries. Atmospheric Environment 2010; 44: 3869-77. Gorham R. An assessment of causes, strategies and tactics, and proposed actions for the international community. Division for Sustainable Development, Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2002; http://www.un.org/esa/gite/csd/gorham.pdf. Surawski NC, Ristovski ZD, Brown RJ, Situ R. Gaseous and particle emissions from an ethanol fumigated compression ignition engine. Energy Conversion and Management 2012; 54: 145-51. Rahman MM, Hassan MH, Kalam MA et al. Performance and emission analysis of Jatropha curcas and Moringa oleifera methyl ester fuel blends in a multi-cylinder diesel engine. Journal of Cleaner Production 2014; 65: 304-10. Arbab MI, Masjuki HH, Varman M et al. Fuel properties, engine performance and emission characteristic of common biodiesels as a renewable and sustainable source of fuel. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2013; 22: 133-47. Edrisi SA, Dubey RK, Tripathi V et al. Jatropha curcas L.: A crucified plant waiting for resurgence. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2015; 41: 855-62. Hosseini SE, Wahid MA. Utilization of palm solid residue as a source of renewable and sustainable energy in Malaysia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2014; 40: 621-32. McCarthy, P., Rasul, M. G., Moazzem, S. Analysis and comparison of performance and emissions of an internal combustion engine fuelled with petroleum diesel and different bio-diesels. Fuel 2011; 90: 2147-57. McCarthy, P., Rasul, M. G., Moazzem, S. Comparison of the performance and emissions of different biodiesel blends against petroleum diesel. International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies, 2011; ctr012.
M. Mofijur et al. / Energy Procedia 75 (2015) 37 – 43
[11]. [12]. [13]. [14]. [15]. [16].
Mofijur M, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA et al. Comparative evaluation of performance and emission characteristics of Moringa oleifera and Palm oil based biodiesel in a diesel engine. Industrial Crops and Products 2014; 53: 78-84. Liaquat AM, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA et al. Effect of Coconut Biodiesel Blended Fuels on Engine Performance and Emission Characteristics. Procedia Engineering 2013; 56: 583-90. Qi DH, Chen H, Geng LM, Bian YZ. Experimental studies on the combustion characteristics and performance of a direct injection engine fueled with biodiesel/diesel blends. Energy Conversion and Management 2010; 51: 2985-92. Mofijur M, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA et al. Properties and use of Moringa oleifera biodiesel and diesel fuel blends in a multi-cylinder diesel engine. Energy Conversion and Management 2014; 82: 169-76. Hirkude JB, Padalkar AS. Performance and emission analysis of a compression ignition: Engine operated on waste fried oil methyl esters. Applied Energy 2012; 90: 68-72. El-Kasaby M, Nemit-allah MA. Experimental investigations of ignition delay period and performance of a diesel engine operated with Jatropha oil biodiesel. Alexandria Engineering Journal 2013; 52: 141-9.
Biography M.A. Hazrat is currently enrolled in PhD program in the School of Engineering & Technology, Central Queensland University, Australia. He has a keen interest on applied engineering analysis in the areas of thermo-fluid, thermodynamics and energy engineering. At present, he is pursuing research on alternative fuel processing, properties determination and application in the automotive engines.
43