- Email: [email protected]
Performance and emitted pollutants assessment of diesel engine fuelled with biokerosene
Author’s Accepted Manuscript Performance and emitted pollutants assessment of diesel engine fuelled with Biokerosene Noora Salih Ekaab, Noor Hussein Hamza, Miqdam T. Chaichan www.elsevier.com/locate/csite
PII: DOI: Article Number: Reference:
S2214-157X(18)30374-5 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2018.100381 100381 CSITE100381
To appear in:
Case Studies in Thermal Engineering
Received date: 20 November 2018 Revised date: 5 December 2018 Accepted date: 20 December 2018 Cite this article as: Noora Salih Ekaab, Noor Hussein Hamza and Miqdam T. Chaichan, Performance and emitted pollutants assessment of diesel engine fuelled with Biokerosene, Case Studies in Thermal Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2018.100381 This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting galley proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
Performance and emitted pollutants assessment of diesel engine fuelled with Biokerosene Noora Salih Ekaab1, Noor Hussein Hamza1, Miqdam T Chaichan2 1
Mechanical Eng. Dept., University of Technology- Iraq Energy and Renewable Energies Technology Center, University of Technology- Iraq
2
Abstract
Iraq is suffering from kerosene surplus in the summer because kerosene consumption is significantly reduced. This product contains less sulphur than diesel, and it gains viscous and lubrication properties similar to those of diesel when mixed with a small percentage of biodiesel. The possibility of using biokerosene as a fuel instead of conventional Iraqi diesel was investigated. The fuel consumption was relatively increased by 5.56% and 5.19% when the studied biokerosene KB10 and KB20 blends were used while the engine’s exhaust-gas temperatures and thermal efficiency were decreased. The biokerosene blends KB10 and KB20 also emitted lower concentrations of particulate matter (22.4%, and 25.63%), hydrocarbon (7.74%, and 21.93%), and carbon monoxide (15, and 20.31%) compared to diesel at small or medium engine loads. Nitrogen oxide concentrations increased by (2.11% and 4.57%) with KB10 and KB20, while the engine noise measurements were lower than those from diesel by (1.51% and 3.57%) for all tested engine-load ranges. The PM–NOx trade-off for biokerosene was the best among all tested blends.
Keywords: Biokerosene; NOx; PM; trade-off; sulphur
Nomenclature BSFC
Brake specific fuel consumption
CO
Carbon monoxide
CO2
Carbon dioxide
DB10
10% biodiesel + 90% diesel blend
DB20
20% biodiesel + 80% diesel blend
HC
Hydrocarbons
KB10
10% biodiesel + 90% kerosene blend
1
KB20
20% biodiesel + 80% kerosene blend
NOx
Nitrogen oxides
PM
Particulate matters
UHC
Unburnt hydrocarbons
Introduction Interest in the experience and use of alternatives to fossil fuels is increasing considering the increasing demand for oil products that inevitably leads to fast-paced depletion in the near future. Nevertheless, fossil fuels will continue to dominate the transport and energy sectors in the near future. Presently, the world consumes only 60% of its fuel produced for the transport sector [1]. The total dependence on oil products is accompanied by concerns on fluctuating crude oil prices [2, 3], energy supplies, energy security, and climate change [4, 5]. The shift to renewable and alternative energies has become a necessity, necessitated by the critical environmental changes experienced by most of the world [6]. For decades, researchers have worked hard to find alternative fuels to run diesel and gasoline commercial engines [7-9]. The greatest effort is that the proposed fuel will not cause significant changes in engine design or vehicle infrastructure. Recent research has focused on two fundamental improvements: reducing specific fuel consumption and engine emissions, particularly particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) [10]. Biodiesel and ethanol are at the forefront of fossil fuel alternatives and can now meet an important part of the demand for diesel and gasoline. Ethanol is used as an alternative fuel, in whole or in part, for gasoline in Brazil and the United States. Biodiesel is also used as an alternative to diesel in Scandinavia. The most important benefit of biodiesel may be it reduces sulphur content in fossil diesel [11]. The addition of biodiesel to diesel significantly reduces carbon monoxide (CO), hydrocarbon (HC), and PM emissions but increases NOx emissions and fuel consumption. These results were supported by many researchers in this field [12-15]. Biodiesel refers to processed fuel extracted from biological sources. This fuel is a combination of long-acting monounsaturated fatty acids (fatty acid methyl esters) produced from renewable sources such as animal fats and vegetable oils [16]. The use of biodiesel in diesel engines can offer many benefits, such as reduced greenhouse-gas emissions. In addition to reducing the pollutants emitted from these engines, biodiesel usage can inevitably increase development and society in general, especially in developing countries [17]. Biodiesel can create a balance
2
among agriculture, economic development, and the environment [18]. At the engine level, biodiesel improves lubrication properties and increases engine life. Many properties have been met in biodiesel; it is technically feasible, environmentally acceptable, and easily available. A property that works to increase its spread is to be economically competitive in terms of the cost borne by consumers [19]. Biodiesel has a bright yellow colour, and its viscosity is approached to diesel. This liquid is non-flammable and non-explosive. The flash point of biodiesel is 150°C while for petrodiesel is 64°C. Moreover, biodiesel is nontoxic and biodegradable, unlike diesel [20, 21]. Biodiesel has some disadvantages when compared to diesel such as low energy content, high corrosion of copper parts, cold start problems and difficulty of pumping fuel due to its high viscosity. When comparing biodiesel and diesel based on the cost of production today, biodiesel has a higher cost than diesel, and this factor is causing the delay in its use on a wide global scale. Besides, the current global production of biodiesel is insufficient to replace the use of petrodiesel [22]. Researchers have added biodiesel to petroleum diesel by certain percentages and investigated the leverage of this addition on the engine's performance and its emitted pollutants. Ref. [23] powered a conventional diesel engine with blends of diesel biodiesel; the added biodiesel was produced from soybean oil in percentages of SB10, SB20, and SB50. The authors studied the performance and emitted pollutants of the engine. The use of diesel– biodiesel mixtures dynamically reduced torque by 1%–4%, but it has increased brake fuel consumption (BSFC) by 2% -9% compared to those resulting from the use of diesel. As for emitted pollutants, the use of diesel–biodiesel blends reduced CO by 28%–46% and unburned HC (UHC) by 20%–44%. Carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitric oxide emissions increased by 1.5%–5% and 7%–18%, respectively. Ref. [24] evaluated the effects of adding gaseous hydrogen to biodiesel as a leading fuel and employing massive quantities of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) at 25 °C. The addition process caused an increment in NOx levels, whereas high EGR levels resulted in a reduction in the thermal efficiency of engine. CO2 and UHC emissions were also significantly reduced. Engine noise increased when hydrogen and biodiesel were used and decreased when high concentrations of EGR were added. Ref. [25] investigated the effects of operational variables that influence the emitted PM levels of diesel engines run by diesel-biodiesel blends. The authors confirmed that traditional Iraqi diesel has high sulphur content in its composition, causing high levels of particle emission. Utilizing neat biodiesel caused a significant reduction in PM, which amounted to 34.96% less than that when the engine was powered by diesel with constant speed and full loads. The emitted smoke was reduced by biodiesel addition to diesel at deceleration mode by 8.6%, 18%, and 39.75% for B20, B50, and B100, respectively, compared to neat diesel.
3
Kerosene is a product from distillate oil, which consists of paraffin and naphtha. At the beginning of the 19th century, kerosene appeared as a material used in lighting lamps before electricity was discovered. This usage continued until the spread of oil refineries and the production of kerosene for use in various fields, such as agriculture and industry. The production of this material has grown to become fuel for jet aircrafts. With the scientific and technological advancements in aviation and the desire to produce high-quality kerosene in line with the development of the jet engine industry, the kerosene production has expanded according to multiple uses in land or air [26]. In developing countries, including Iraq, kerosene is usually kept at home and is widely used for cooking, heating, and lighting. Kerosene ranked third after gasoline and diesel in the growth rate of consumption of basic petroleum products in Iraq; the quantities consumed increased from 2240 barrels/day in 1985 to 8370 barrels/day in 1995 (an increase of 6130 barrels/day); this consumption rate increase was a result of the increase in population at a rate of 1.2%, which reached 20358 thousand people in 1995 compared with the 15580 thousand people in 1985. The increase in consumption of white oil was also observed during the period of 2004–2008, and it will continue to increase with increased capita income of GDP and improving level of urbanisation of the Iraqi population [27]. The low price of white oil compared with those of diesel and gasoline have encouraged many diesel engine users (especially in oil-importing countries) to find alternatives for their engines by using white oil mixtures with vegetable oils and diesel fuel, thereby prompting many researchers to study the effects of these types of diesel alternatives on engine performance and exhaust emissions. Ref. [28] tested the performance and measured the pollutants emitted from a compression ignition engine run by diesel-biodiesel, diesel-biodiesel-additive, and kerosene-biodiesel. The authors used biodiesel extracted from canola oil. BSFC increased by increasing biodiesel levels in diesel-biodiesel and diesel-biodiesel-additive blends. An increase in this ratio caused a reduction in CO2 emitted when both fuels were used. When using kerosene–biodiesel, the levels of HC and NOx were low for all loading conditions. By contrast, NOx was increased by increasing biodiesel concentration in diesel-biodiesel and diesel-biodiesel-additive blends even at medium loads. Ref. [29] studied engine performance and emitted pollutants for blends of diesel fuel with a mixture of diesel and white oil at rates ranging from 10% to 40%, and compared the output with what a diesel engine produced. The use of a mixture of 30% white oil with diesel caused a decrease in the emitted CO, UHC, and sulphur dioxide concentrations compared with those when using diesel only. NOx concentrations were higher for all white oil additions than those for diesel. The addition of 30% of kerosene to diesel caused a 6.3% reduction in fuel
4
consumption compared with when using neat diesel. Ref. [30] investigated the changes in the performance of a single-cylinder diesel engine cooled by air with a mixture of 40% soybean oil and 60% kerosene. The study determined an improvement in the engine’s thermal efficiency, especially in case of heavy loads. Germany's Lufthansa has conducted a study on the use of bio-kerosene in a commercial Airbus A321 aircraft and evaluated the performance of the engine and compared it to a reference engine. With the exception of some simple observations about the potential effects of refueling equipment that are not caused by bio-kerosene and can be engineered, the study showed that the use of bio-kerosene gave better results than the commonly used kerosene [31]. Iraq is suffering from an abundance of kerosene production in the summer because its consumption is low locally, while the country has been suffering for years from a severe shortage of diesel fuel, which goes to most of its production for the processing of electricity. The price of white oil in Iraq of US$ 0.125 corresponds to the price per litre of diesel fuel of US$ 0.333; thus, the replacement of diesel with kerosene, especially during the summer (the period of abundance of this product), may endow the Iraqi government with important assets that can be spent on development projects. This study aimed to examine DI diesel engine's performance and emitted emissions levels when the engine was supplied with white oil and biodiesel of 10% and 20%. Results were compared with data obtained using a diesel–biodiesel mixture and diesel only. Success in this process may mean a reduction in diesel consumption, which the need for it increases in the summer for generating electricity, while consuming white oil instead of stacking it in warehouses in this season. Success may also mean high economic returns and environmental-pollution reduction.
2. Materials and methods 2.1. Materials The main materials used in this study were Iraqi diesel, pure sunflower oil, and kerosene. The main components used in the biodiesel production, such as methanol and sodium hydroxide, were purchased from local markets.
2.2. Fuel production and properties The transesterification method is the most common procedure used to produce biodiesel from oils and fats using methanol with catalyst presence. This process produces biodiesel and a small amount of glycerine (by-product). The reader interested in the details of this process can review Ref. [11]. Table 1 lists important characteristics of
5
the fuels tested in this study. Biodiesel was mixed with diesel and kerosene at volume rates, and the resulting blends were labelled with the value of biodiesel added; for example, DB20 means 20% biodiesel + 80% diesel.
Table 1 shows that the sulphur content of Iraqi diesel is very high (10 000 ppm) compared with kerosene, which contains 20% of this quantity (2000 ppm); thus, these bioblends have a lower sulphur content than diesel– biodiesel blends.
2.3. Engine test procedure In this study, a diesel engine FIAT type, which has four cylinders, was used in the tests. Table 2 summarises its specifications. The engine was warmed up to 15 min before data were taken in all experiments. Tests were run under 95% of the total load conditions and at an engine speed of 1800 rpm to limit the number of tests. The load on the engine was projected by a hydraulic dynamometer. The process of heating the engine started with diesel; when it reached the necessary temperature, the shift was performed to any other type of blends.
2.5. Emission measurement The emitted exhaust emissions such as CO2, CO, NOx and HC were measured using a multigas analyser (NOVA Model 7466 PK). Emitted PM levels were measured using Aerocet-USA. Engine noise was measured using a gauge type 4615 equipped with a microphone. For each blend, tests have been repeated for at least three times, and the average of the measured data was taken.
3. Results and discussion
6
Both kerosene and biodiesel have lower heating value than diesel, thus as a result, kerosene-biodiesel blend will have lower heating values than diesel. This characteristic means that when using biokerosene, the BSFC will be high, as shown by the curves in Fig. 1-A. The BSFC increase rate was 2.96%, 4.7%, 4.56% and 5.19% for DB10, DB20, KB10 and KB20, respectively compared to diesel's BSFC. The consumption of considerable fuel to reach the same brake power means low brake thermal efficiency, as depicted by Fig. 1-B curves. The low thermal value of biokerosene has been reflected on this efficiency. The reductions in the blends brake thermal efficiencies were 3.05%, 4.45%, 4.15% and 3.91% for DB10, DB20, KB10 and KB20, respectively compared to diesel's brake thermal efficiency. Given combustion improvement at high loads, KB20 showed higher thermal efficiency than KB10. Fig 1-C illustrates higher exhaust-gas temperatures compared with those of DB10 and DB20 at medium and high loads. The use of biokerosene at these loads provided a high engine performance comparative to that of biodiesel-diesel blends. Results of the study of the performance of the engine using biokerosene showed limited losses in BSFC and brake thermal efficiency, which can be compensated by the reduction of the biokerosene blends' cost, compared to diesel and biodiesel fuels.
Fig. 2 shows the influence of engine-load variation on the emitted emissions in the exhaust gas. Increased CO2 indicates better combustion characteristics, as shown in Fig. 2-A. KB10 and KB20 presented better CO2 combustion than other blends. The increments in CO2 levels were 8.43%, 10.28%, 14.49%, and 16.37% for DB10, DB20, KB10 and KB20, respectively compared to diesel. The increase in carbon dioxide emissions is due to lower emissions of the remaining hydrocarbons pollutants (CO, HC and PM). The emitted CO concentrations of biokerosene blends were lower than those of diesel and biodiesel blends, especially at low and medium loads, as illustrated in Fig. 2-B. The reduction rate in emitted CO was 5.58%, 16.77%, 15%, and 20.31% for DB10, DB20, KB10 and KB20, respectively compared to diesel. This result was due to the presence of biodiesel, which contains a large amount of oxygen in its chemical composition that improves oxidation, in the kerosene–biodiesel blends. The diesel–biodiesel blends emitted the lowest CO at high loads. Fig. 2-C shows the impacts of engine loads on HC concentrations. KB20 emitted the lowest HC rates at low and medium loads, and DB20 had minimum HC concentrations at high loads. The results showed that the effect of
7
adding 10% biodiesel to diesel was small compared with that of adding 20% on the resulting HC concentrations. The reductions in HC concentrations were 5.96%, 24.88%, 7.74%, and 21.93% for DB10, DB20, KB10 and KB20, respectively compared to diesel. Fig. 2-D manifests that the PM concentrations increased at very low and very high loads while it was at its minimal values at medium loads. At low loads, the low temperature inside the combustion chamber caused high PM levels. At high loads, more fuel was injected and more PM concentrations were resulted. PM levels for KB20 and KB10 were lower than those for diesel-biodiesel blends and neat diesel because of biodiesel's oxygen content and smaller sulphur content in kerosene than diesel. The presence of sulphur in fuel causes nucleus where carbon particles will build on, thereby forming large concentrations of PM; consequently, the reduction of sulphur concentrations will certainly reduce the levels of the resulting PM. This result is consistent with the findings of references [24 and 32]. The reductions in PM levels were 5.08%, 11.77%, 22.4%, and 25.63% for DB10, DB20, KB10 and KB20, respectively compared to diesel. Fig. 2-E presents the emitted NOx rates when the tested blends were used in the engine. NOx needs availability of three main parameters, namely, high temperature, oxygen supply, and sufficient time for formation. The effect of each factor on the other factors was determined when neutralising the time factor. Diesel emitted the maximum concentration of NOx at small and medium loads, whereas BD10 and BD20 were superior at high loads due to the high oxygen availability with high temperature inside combustion chamber at these loads. As for biokerosene, the effect of heating value overshadowed the effect of oxygen availability and caused higher NOx levels than diesel. The increase in NOx rates were 6.01%, 9.57%, 2.11%, and 4.57% for DB10, DB20, KB10 and KB20, respectively compared to diesel. These results indicate limited NOx increase with biokerosene use compared to diesel and biodiesel fuels. Fig. 2-H illustrates the impacts of engine loads on emitted noise. The high heat and pressure generated inside the combustion chamber resulted in increasing engine noise. The noise levels from the biodiesel and kerosene blends were relatively lower than diesel engine because kerosene and biodiesel have lower heating values than diesel, and this applies to all biodiesel blend used. The reductions in noise levels were 0.6%, 2.3%, 1.51%, and 3.57%, respectively compared to diesel
8
An inverse relationship exists between PM and NOx in traditional engine operating conditions. The conditions that cause NOx to increase, such as high combustion chamber temperature and oxygen availability, incur a decrease in PM. The use of techniques to reduce NOx, such as recycling exhaust gas, causes high concentrations of emitted PM. Fig. 3 shows the above relationship for the blends used in this study. The use of biokerosene at low and medium loads provided the best tradeoff relationship between NOx and PM.
Conclusions The possibility of using mixtures of Iraqi kerosene and biodiesel instead of Iraqi diesel fuel was investigated. The aims were to utilise the surplus kerosene in warehouses of the Iraqi Ministry of Oil in the summer and to suggest an alternative fuel with low sulphur content. Biokerosene use caused a rise in fuel consumption because it has lower heating value compared to diesel. The increase in BSFC was 5.56% and 5.19% when KB10 and KB20 were used as fuels. Also, exhaust-gas temperatures and thermal efficiency of biokerosene blends were lower than those of diesel. At low and medium loads, biokerosene blends KB10 and KB20 emitted lower levels of CO (15% and 20.31%), HC (7.74%, and 21.93%), and PM (22.4%, and 25.63%) compared to diesel. At the same loads range, NOx levels increased by 2.11% and 4.57% while engine noise was reduced by 1.51% and 3.57% than diesel. Analysis of PM–NOx tradeoff indicated that biokerosene blends provided better results than the other studied blends, especially at low and medium loads. All these results confirmed that the proposed biokerosene blends can be considered an acceptable alternative to Iraqi diesel because it reduces the sulphur content, which resulted in better emitted pollutants characteristics. Moreover, the minimal increase in fuel consumption can be offset by the lower fuel costs than diesel. The significant reduction in the sulphur content of biokerosene compared to Iraqi diesel encourages the use of catalysts to reduce pollutants' concentrations while it cannot be used with high sulphur diesel. Also, adding cetane number improver to the biokerosene can increase its performance characteristics to be close to diesel.
Conflict of Interests The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper
9
References
[1]
A. Llamas, M-J García-Martínez, A-M Al-Lal, L. Canoira, M. Lapuerta, Biokerosene from coconut and palm kernel oils: Production and properties of their blends with fossil kerosene, Fuel 102 (2012) 483– 490.
[2]
C. T. Lee, N. E. M. Rozali, Y. V. Fan, J. J. Kleme, S. Towprayoon, Low‑ carbon emission development in Asia: energy sector, waste management and environmental management system, Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 20 (2018) 443–449.
[3]
H. M. S. Al-Maamary, H. A. Kazem, M. T. Chaichan, The impact of the oil price fluctuations on common renewable energies in GCC countries, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 75 (2017) 989-1007.
[4]
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Climate change 2014: Mitigation of climate change (Vol. 3). Cambridge University Press, (2015).
[5]
H. M. S. Al-Maamary, H. A. Kazem, M. T. Chaichan, Climate change: the game changer in the GCC region,
Renewable
and
Sustainable
Energy
Reviews,
76
(2017)
555-576.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.048. [6]
H. M. S. Al-Maamary, H. A. Kazem, M. T. Chaichan, Changing the energy profile of the GCC States: A review, International Journal of Applied Engineering Research (IJAER), 11(3) (2016) 1980-1988.
[7]
M. Canakci, Combustion characteristics of a turbocharged DI compression ignition engine fueled with petroleum diesel fuels and biodiesel, Bioresour Technol. 98 (2007) 1167–1175.
[8]
F. Zaher, M. S. Gad, S. M. Aly, S. F. Hamed, G. A. Abo-Elwafa, H. A. Zahran1, Catalytic cracking of vegetable oils for producing biofuel, Egypt. J. Chem. 60(2) (2017) 921- 300.
[9]
A. C.
Petcu, F. G. Florean, I. Porumbel, C. Berbente, V. Silivestru, Experiments regarding the
combustion of camelina oil/kerosene mixtures on a burner, Energy for Sustainable Development 33 (2016) 149–154. [10]
M. T. Chaichan, Combustion and emission characteristics of E85 and diesel blend in conventional diesel engine operating in PPCI mode, Thermal science and Engineering progress, 7 (2018) 45-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsep.2018.04.013
10
[11]
M. T. Chaichan, Performance and emission study of diesel engine using sunflowers oil-based biodiesel fuels, International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 6(4) (2015) 260-269.
[12]
A.C. Mangra ⁎, I. Porumbel, F.G. Florean, Experimental measurements of Camelina sativa oil combustion, Energy for Sustainable Development 44 (2018) 109–116.
[13]
A. Eloka-Eboka, C. Onunka, F. Inambao, Detailed design and optimization of a sustainable micro-algal biofuel process plant, International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies 13 (2018) 122-130.
[14]
B.G. Díaz, D. M. Argollo, M. C. Franco, S. M. Nucci, W. J. Siqueira, D. M. de Laat, C. A. Colombo, High genetic diversity of Jatropha curcas assessed by ISSR, Genetics and Molecular Research (GMR) 16 (2) (2017) 1-12.
[15]
K. R. Patil, S. S. Thipse, Experimental investigation of CI engine combustion, performance and emissions in DEE–kerosene–diesel blends of high DEE concentration, Energy Conversion and Management 89 (2015) 396–408.
[16]
M. M. K. Bhuiya, M. G. Rasul, M. M. K. Khan, N. Ashwath, A. K. Azad, Prospects of 2nd generation biodiesel as a sustainable fuel—Part: 1 selection of feedstocks, oil extraction techniques and conversion technologies, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 55 (2016) 1109-1128.
[17]
O. Dumont, R. Dickes, M. De Rosa, R. Douglas, V. Lemort, Technical and economic optimization of subcritical, wet expansion and transcritical Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) systems coupled with a biogas power plant, Energy Conversion and Management 157 (2018) 294-306.
[18]
S. Afzal, M. W. Mumtaz, U. Rashid, M. Danish, M. A. Raza, A. Raza, H. Mukhtar, S. I. Al‑ Resayes, Exhaust emission profiling of fatty acid methyl esters and NOx control studies using selective synthetic and natural additives, Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 20 (2018) 589–601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-018-1489-3
[19]
M. T. Chaichan, S. T. Ahmed, Evaluation of performance and emissions characteristics for compression ignition engine operated with disposal yellow grease, International Journal of Engineering and Science, 2 (2) (2013) 111-122.
[20]
N. Shibasaki-Kitakawa, K. Hiromori, T. Ihara, K. Nakashima, T. Yonemoto, Production of high quality biodiesel from waste acid oil obtained during edible oil refining using ion-exchange resin catalysts, Fuel 139 (2015) 11-17.
11
[21]
B. K. Uprety, W. Chaiwong, C. Ewelike, S. K. Rakshit, Biodiesel production using heterogeneous catalysts including wood ash and the importance of enhancing byproduct glycerol purity, Energy Conversion and Management 115 (2016) 191-199.
[22]
A. E. Atabani, A.S. Silitongaa, I. A. Badruddina, T.M.I. Mahliaa, H.H. Masjuki, S. Mekhilef, A comprehensive review on biodiesel as an alternative energy resource and its characteristics, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 16 (2012) 2070–2093. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2012.01.003
[23]
O. Ozener, L. Yuksek, A. T. Ergenc, M. Ozkan, Effects of soybean biodiesel on a DI diesel engine performance, emission and combustion characteristics. Fuel 115 (2014) 875–883.
[24]
M. T. Chaichan, Performance and emissions characteristics of CIE using hydrogen, biodiesel, and massive
EGR,
International
Journal
of
Hydrogen
Energy,
43
(2018)
5415-5435.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.09.072 [25]
M. T. Chaichan, Evaluation of emitted particulate matters emissions in multi-cylinder diesel engine fuelled with biodiesel, American Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 4(1) (2016) 1-6. DOI: 10.12691/ajme-4-1-1
[26]
M. Badami, P. Nuccio, D. Pastrone, A. Signoretto, Performance of a small-scale turbojet engine fed with traditional and alternative fuels, Energy Conversion and Management 82 (2014) 219–228.
[27]
Q. L. A. Al-Rubai, H. Abdul-Hussein, Measuring and analysis of demand function on oil derivatives of a selected countries the period 1985-2008, Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences/ University of Baghdad, 17(64) (2011) 143-165.
[28]
M. M. Roy, W. Wang, M. Alawi, Performance and emissions of a diesel engine fueled by biodiesel– diesel, biodiesel–diesel-additive and kerosene–biodiesel blends, Energy Conversion and Management 84 (2014) 164–173.
[29]
V. P. Sethi, K. S. Salariya, Exhaust analysis and performance of a single cylinder diesel engine run on dual fuels, IE (I) Journal. MC, 85 (2004) 1-7.
[30]
T. K. Ghormade, N. V. Deshpande, Soybean oil as an alternative fuels for I. C. engines, Proceedings of Recent Trends in Automotive Fuels, Nagpur, India (2002).
[31]
M. Kaltschmitt, U. Neuling, Biokerosene: Status and prospects, Chapter in (Biokerosene: Status and Prospects), Springer Berlin Heidelberg, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-662-53065-8, 2017.
12
[32]
M. T. Chaichan, A. H. Kadhum, A. A. Al-Amiery, Novel technique for enhancement of diesel fuel: Impact of aqueous alumina nano-fluid on engine's performance and emissions, Case Studies in Thermal Engineering, 10 (2017) 611–620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2017.11.006
13
A- The impact of engine load variation on BSFC for the tested blends
A- The impact of engine load variation on brake thermal efficiency for the tested blends
C- The impact of engine load variation on exhaust gas temperatures for the tested blends Fig. 1, impact of load variation on the engine performance for the tested blends
14
A-The impact of engine load variation on emitted CO2 for the tested blends
B-The impact of engine load variation on emitted CO for the tested blends
C- The impact of engine load variation on emitted HC for the tested blends
D- The impact of engine load variation on emitted PM for the tested blends
B- The impact of engine load variation on emitted NOx for the tested blends
H- The impact of engine load variation on emitted noise for the tested blends
Fig. 2, impact of engine-load variation on the emitted emissions from the tested blends
15
NOx Concentrations (ppm)
N=1800 rpm, CR=17:1, IT=38°BTDC 600 500 400 Diesel DB10 DB20 KB10 KB20
300 200 100 0 3
5 7 9 11 PM concentrations (μg/m3)
13
Fig. 3. Impact of engine-load variation on PM–NOx tradeoff for the tested blends
16
Table 1. Properties of tested fuels Fuel
Density (kg/m3)
Diesel DB10 DB20 B100 KB10 KB20 K100
830 835.1 840.2 881 862 854 790
Viscosity (cSt @ 40 °C) 1.86 2.19 2.5 4.2 3.6 3.07 1.02
Heating value (kJ/kg)
Cloud point (°C)
45,573 45,016 44,466 40,296 40,839 41,390 46,250
-41 -34 -25 -4 -8 -9 -78
Table 2. Tested engine specifications Engine model Cylinders number Stroke number Displacement Injection mode Air induction mode Cooling mode Compression ratio Valve per cylinder Bore Stroke Fuel injection pump Plunger diameter Fuel injection nozzle Holes per nozzle Nozzle hole dia. Spray angle Nozzle opening pressure
Stationary diesel engine type Fiat TD 313 Four cylinders, Four stroke 3.666 L Direct injection (DI) natural aspirated water cooled 17:1 Two 100 mm 110 mm Unit pump 26 mm 10 holes (0.48mm) 160o 40 MPa
17
Sulfur content (ppm) 10000 9000 8000 0 1800 1600 2000
PII: DOI: Article Number: Reference:
S2214-157X(18)30374-5 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2018.100381 100381 CSITE100381
To appear in:
Case Studies in Thermal Engineering
Received date: 20 November 2018 Revised date: 5 December 2018 Accepted date: 20 December 2018 Cite this article as: Noora Salih Ekaab, Noor Hussein Hamza and Miqdam T. Chaichan, Performance and emitted pollutants assessment of diesel engine fuelled with Biokerosene, Case Studies in Thermal Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2018.100381 This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting galley proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
Performance and emitted pollutants assessment of diesel engine fuelled with Biokerosene Noora Salih Ekaab1, Noor Hussein Hamza1, Miqdam T Chaichan2 1
Mechanical Eng. Dept., University of Technology- Iraq Energy and Renewable Energies Technology Center, University of Technology- Iraq
2
Abstract
Iraq is suffering from kerosene surplus in the summer because kerosene consumption is significantly reduced. This product contains less sulphur than diesel, and it gains viscous and lubrication properties similar to those of diesel when mixed with a small percentage of biodiesel. The possibility of using biokerosene as a fuel instead of conventional Iraqi diesel was investigated. The fuel consumption was relatively increased by 5.56% and 5.19% when the studied biokerosene KB10 and KB20 blends were used while the engine’s exhaust-gas temperatures and thermal efficiency were decreased. The biokerosene blends KB10 and KB20 also emitted lower concentrations of particulate matter (22.4%, and 25.63%), hydrocarbon (7.74%, and 21.93%), and carbon monoxide (15, and 20.31%) compared to diesel at small or medium engine loads. Nitrogen oxide concentrations increased by (2.11% and 4.57%) with KB10 and KB20, while the engine noise measurements were lower than those from diesel by (1.51% and 3.57%) for all tested engine-load ranges. The PM–NOx trade-off for biokerosene was the best among all tested blends.
Keywords: Biokerosene; NOx; PM; trade-off; sulphur
Nomenclature BSFC
Brake specific fuel consumption
CO
Carbon monoxide
CO2
Carbon dioxide
DB10
10% biodiesel + 90% diesel blend
DB20
20% biodiesel + 80% diesel blend
HC
Hydrocarbons
KB10
10% biodiesel + 90% kerosene blend
1
KB20
20% biodiesel + 80% kerosene blend
NOx
Nitrogen oxides
PM
Particulate matters
UHC
Unburnt hydrocarbons
Introduction Interest in the experience and use of alternatives to fossil fuels is increasing considering the increasing demand for oil products that inevitably leads to fast-paced depletion in the near future. Nevertheless, fossil fuels will continue to dominate the transport and energy sectors in the near future. Presently, the world consumes only 60% of its fuel produced for the transport sector [1]. The total dependence on oil products is accompanied by concerns on fluctuating crude oil prices [2, 3], energy supplies, energy security, and climate change [4, 5]. The shift to renewable and alternative energies has become a necessity, necessitated by the critical environmental changes experienced by most of the world [6]. For decades, researchers have worked hard to find alternative fuels to run diesel and gasoline commercial engines [7-9]. The greatest effort is that the proposed fuel will not cause significant changes in engine design or vehicle infrastructure. Recent research has focused on two fundamental improvements: reducing specific fuel consumption and engine emissions, particularly particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) [10]. Biodiesel and ethanol are at the forefront of fossil fuel alternatives and can now meet an important part of the demand for diesel and gasoline. Ethanol is used as an alternative fuel, in whole or in part, for gasoline in Brazil and the United States. Biodiesel is also used as an alternative to diesel in Scandinavia. The most important benefit of biodiesel may be it reduces sulphur content in fossil diesel [11]. The addition of biodiesel to diesel significantly reduces carbon monoxide (CO), hydrocarbon (HC), and PM emissions but increases NOx emissions and fuel consumption. These results were supported by many researchers in this field [12-15]. Biodiesel refers to processed fuel extracted from biological sources. This fuel is a combination of long-acting monounsaturated fatty acids (fatty acid methyl esters) produced from renewable sources such as animal fats and vegetable oils [16]. The use of biodiesel in diesel engines can offer many benefits, such as reduced greenhouse-gas emissions. In addition to reducing the pollutants emitted from these engines, biodiesel usage can inevitably increase development and society in general, especially in developing countries [17]. Biodiesel can create a balance
2
among agriculture, economic development, and the environment [18]. At the engine level, biodiesel improves lubrication properties and increases engine life. Many properties have been met in biodiesel; it is technically feasible, environmentally acceptable, and easily available. A property that works to increase its spread is to be economically competitive in terms of the cost borne by consumers [19]. Biodiesel has a bright yellow colour, and its viscosity is approached to diesel. This liquid is non-flammable and non-explosive. The flash point of biodiesel is 150°C while for petrodiesel is 64°C. Moreover, biodiesel is nontoxic and biodegradable, unlike diesel [20, 21]. Biodiesel has some disadvantages when compared to diesel such as low energy content, high corrosion of copper parts, cold start problems and difficulty of pumping fuel due to its high viscosity. When comparing biodiesel and diesel based on the cost of production today, biodiesel has a higher cost than diesel, and this factor is causing the delay in its use on a wide global scale. Besides, the current global production of biodiesel is insufficient to replace the use of petrodiesel [22]. Researchers have added biodiesel to petroleum diesel by certain percentages and investigated the leverage of this addition on the engine's performance and its emitted pollutants. Ref. [23] powered a conventional diesel engine with blends of diesel biodiesel; the added biodiesel was produced from soybean oil in percentages of SB10, SB20, and SB50. The authors studied the performance and emitted pollutants of the engine. The use of diesel– biodiesel mixtures dynamically reduced torque by 1%–4%, but it has increased brake fuel consumption (BSFC) by 2% -9% compared to those resulting from the use of diesel. As for emitted pollutants, the use of diesel–biodiesel blends reduced CO by 28%–46% and unburned HC (UHC) by 20%–44%. Carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitric oxide emissions increased by 1.5%–5% and 7%–18%, respectively. Ref. [24] evaluated the effects of adding gaseous hydrogen to biodiesel as a leading fuel and employing massive quantities of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) at 25 °C. The addition process caused an increment in NOx levels, whereas high EGR levels resulted in a reduction in the thermal efficiency of engine. CO2 and UHC emissions were also significantly reduced. Engine noise increased when hydrogen and biodiesel were used and decreased when high concentrations of EGR were added. Ref. [25] investigated the effects of operational variables that influence the emitted PM levels of diesel engines run by diesel-biodiesel blends. The authors confirmed that traditional Iraqi diesel has high sulphur content in its composition, causing high levels of particle emission. Utilizing neat biodiesel caused a significant reduction in PM, which amounted to 34.96% less than that when the engine was powered by diesel with constant speed and full loads. The emitted smoke was reduced by biodiesel addition to diesel at deceleration mode by 8.6%, 18%, and 39.75% for B20, B50, and B100, respectively, compared to neat diesel.
3
Kerosene is a product from distillate oil, which consists of paraffin and naphtha. At the beginning of the 19th century, kerosene appeared as a material used in lighting lamps before electricity was discovered. This usage continued until the spread of oil refineries and the production of kerosene for use in various fields, such as agriculture and industry. The production of this material has grown to become fuel for jet aircrafts. With the scientific and technological advancements in aviation and the desire to produce high-quality kerosene in line with the development of the jet engine industry, the kerosene production has expanded according to multiple uses in land or air [26]. In developing countries, including Iraq, kerosene is usually kept at home and is widely used for cooking, heating, and lighting. Kerosene ranked third after gasoline and diesel in the growth rate of consumption of basic petroleum products in Iraq; the quantities consumed increased from 2240 barrels/day in 1985 to 8370 barrels/day in 1995 (an increase of 6130 barrels/day); this consumption rate increase was a result of the increase in population at a rate of 1.2%, which reached 20358 thousand people in 1995 compared with the 15580 thousand people in 1985. The increase in consumption of white oil was also observed during the period of 2004–2008, and it will continue to increase with increased capita income of GDP and improving level of urbanisation of the Iraqi population [27]. The low price of white oil compared with those of diesel and gasoline have encouraged many diesel engine users (especially in oil-importing countries) to find alternatives for their engines by using white oil mixtures with vegetable oils and diesel fuel, thereby prompting many researchers to study the effects of these types of diesel alternatives on engine performance and exhaust emissions. Ref. [28] tested the performance and measured the pollutants emitted from a compression ignition engine run by diesel-biodiesel, diesel-biodiesel-additive, and kerosene-biodiesel. The authors used biodiesel extracted from canola oil. BSFC increased by increasing biodiesel levels in diesel-biodiesel and diesel-biodiesel-additive blends. An increase in this ratio caused a reduction in CO2 emitted when both fuels were used. When using kerosene–biodiesel, the levels of HC and NOx were low for all loading conditions. By contrast, NOx was increased by increasing biodiesel concentration in diesel-biodiesel and diesel-biodiesel-additive blends even at medium loads. Ref. [29] studied engine performance and emitted pollutants for blends of diesel fuel with a mixture of diesel and white oil at rates ranging from 10% to 40%, and compared the output with what a diesel engine produced. The use of a mixture of 30% white oil with diesel caused a decrease in the emitted CO, UHC, and sulphur dioxide concentrations compared with those when using diesel only. NOx concentrations were higher for all white oil additions than those for diesel. The addition of 30% of kerosene to diesel caused a 6.3% reduction in fuel
4
consumption compared with when using neat diesel. Ref. [30] investigated the changes in the performance of a single-cylinder diesel engine cooled by air with a mixture of 40% soybean oil and 60% kerosene. The study determined an improvement in the engine’s thermal efficiency, especially in case of heavy loads. Germany's Lufthansa has conducted a study on the use of bio-kerosene in a commercial Airbus A321 aircraft and evaluated the performance of the engine and compared it to a reference engine. With the exception of some simple observations about the potential effects of refueling equipment that are not caused by bio-kerosene and can be engineered, the study showed that the use of bio-kerosene gave better results than the commonly used kerosene [31]. Iraq is suffering from an abundance of kerosene production in the summer because its consumption is low locally, while the country has been suffering for years from a severe shortage of diesel fuel, which goes to most of its production for the processing of electricity. The price of white oil in Iraq of US$ 0.125 corresponds to the price per litre of diesel fuel of US$ 0.333; thus, the replacement of diesel with kerosene, especially during the summer (the period of abundance of this product), may endow the Iraqi government with important assets that can be spent on development projects. This study aimed to examine DI diesel engine's performance and emitted emissions levels when the engine was supplied with white oil and biodiesel of 10% and 20%. Results were compared with data obtained using a diesel–biodiesel mixture and diesel only. Success in this process may mean a reduction in diesel consumption, which the need for it increases in the summer for generating electricity, while consuming white oil instead of stacking it in warehouses in this season. Success may also mean high economic returns and environmental-pollution reduction.
2. Materials and methods 2.1. Materials The main materials used in this study were Iraqi diesel, pure sunflower oil, and kerosene. The main components used in the biodiesel production, such as methanol and sodium hydroxide, were purchased from local markets.
2.2. Fuel production and properties The transesterification method is the most common procedure used to produce biodiesel from oils and fats using methanol with catalyst presence. This process produces biodiesel and a small amount of glycerine (by-product). The reader interested in the details of this process can review Ref. [11]. Table 1 lists important characteristics of
5
the fuels tested in this study. Biodiesel was mixed with diesel and kerosene at volume rates, and the resulting blends were labelled with the value of biodiesel added; for example, DB20 means 20% biodiesel + 80% diesel.
Table 1 shows that the sulphur content of Iraqi diesel is very high (10 000 ppm) compared with kerosene, which contains 20% of this quantity (2000 ppm); thus, these bioblends have a lower sulphur content than diesel– biodiesel blends.
2.3. Engine test procedure In this study, a diesel engine FIAT type, which has four cylinders, was used in the tests. Table 2 summarises its specifications. The engine was warmed up to 15 min before data were taken in all experiments. Tests were run under 95% of the total load conditions and at an engine speed of 1800 rpm to limit the number of tests. The load on the engine was projected by a hydraulic dynamometer. The process of heating the engine started with diesel; when it reached the necessary temperature, the shift was performed to any other type of blends.
2.5. Emission measurement The emitted exhaust emissions such as CO2, CO, NOx and HC were measured using a multigas analyser (NOVA Model 7466 PK). Emitted PM levels were measured using Aerocet-USA. Engine noise was measured using a gauge type 4615 equipped with a microphone. For each blend, tests have been repeated for at least three times, and the average of the measured data was taken.
3. Results and discussion
6
Both kerosene and biodiesel have lower heating value than diesel, thus as a result, kerosene-biodiesel blend will have lower heating values than diesel. This characteristic means that when using biokerosene, the BSFC will be high, as shown by the curves in Fig. 1-A. The BSFC increase rate was 2.96%, 4.7%, 4.56% and 5.19% for DB10, DB20, KB10 and KB20, respectively compared to diesel's BSFC. The consumption of considerable fuel to reach the same brake power means low brake thermal efficiency, as depicted by Fig. 1-B curves. The low thermal value of biokerosene has been reflected on this efficiency. The reductions in the blends brake thermal efficiencies were 3.05%, 4.45%, 4.15% and 3.91% for DB10, DB20, KB10 and KB20, respectively compared to diesel's brake thermal efficiency. Given combustion improvement at high loads, KB20 showed higher thermal efficiency than KB10. Fig 1-C illustrates higher exhaust-gas temperatures compared with those of DB10 and DB20 at medium and high loads. The use of biokerosene at these loads provided a high engine performance comparative to that of biodiesel-diesel blends. Results of the study of the performance of the engine using biokerosene showed limited losses in BSFC and brake thermal efficiency, which can be compensated by the reduction of the biokerosene blends' cost, compared to diesel and biodiesel fuels.
Fig. 2 shows the influence of engine-load variation on the emitted emissions in the exhaust gas. Increased CO2 indicates better combustion characteristics, as shown in Fig. 2-A. KB10 and KB20 presented better CO2 combustion than other blends. The increments in CO2 levels were 8.43%, 10.28%, 14.49%, and 16.37% for DB10, DB20, KB10 and KB20, respectively compared to diesel. The increase in carbon dioxide emissions is due to lower emissions of the remaining hydrocarbons pollutants (CO, HC and PM). The emitted CO concentrations of biokerosene blends were lower than those of diesel and biodiesel blends, especially at low and medium loads, as illustrated in Fig. 2-B. The reduction rate in emitted CO was 5.58%, 16.77%, 15%, and 20.31% for DB10, DB20, KB10 and KB20, respectively compared to diesel. This result was due to the presence of biodiesel, which contains a large amount of oxygen in its chemical composition that improves oxidation, in the kerosene–biodiesel blends. The diesel–biodiesel blends emitted the lowest CO at high loads. Fig. 2-C shows the impacts of engine loads on HC concentrations. KB20 emitted the lowest HC rates at low and medium loads, and DB20 had minimum HC concentrations at high loads. The results showed that the effect of
7
adding 10% biodiesel to diesel was small compared with that of adding 20% on the resulting HC concentrations. The reductions in HC concentrations were 5.96%, 24.88%, 7.74%, and 21.93% for DB10, DB20, KB10 and KB20, respectively compared to diesel. Fig. 2-D manifests that the PM concentrations increased at very low and very high loads while it was at its minimal values at medium loads. At low loads, the low temperature inside the combustion chamber caused high PM levels. At high loads, more fuel was injected and more PM concentrations were resulted. PM levels for KB20 and KB10 were lower than those for diesel-biodiesel blends and neat diesel because of biodiesel's oxygen content and smaller sulphur content in kerosene than diesel. The presence of sulphur in fuel causes nucleus where carbon particles will build on, thereby forming large concentrations of PM; consequently, the reduction of sulphur concentrations will certainly reduce the levels of the resulting PM. This result is consistent with the findings of references [24 and 32]. The reductions in PM levels were 5.08%, 11.77%, 22.4%, and 25.63% for DB10, DB20, KB10 and KB20, respectively compared to diesel. Fig. 2-E presents the emitted NOx rates when the tested blends were used in the engine. NOx needs availability of three main parameters, namely, high temperature, oxygen supply, and sufficient time for formation. The effect of each factor on the other factors was determined when neutralising the time factor. Diesel emitted the maximum concentration of NOx at small and medium loads, whereas BD10 and BD20 were superior at high loads due to the high oxygen availability with high temperature inside combustion chamber at these loads. As for biokerosene, the effect of heating value overshadowed the effect of oxygen availability and caused higher NOx levels than diesel. The increase in NOx rates were 6.01%, 9.57%, 2.11%, and 4.57% for DB10, DB20, KB10 and KB20, respectively compared to diesel. These results indicate limited NOx increase with biokerosene use compared to diesel and biodiesel fuels. Fig. 2-H illustrates the impacts of engine loads on emitted noise. The high heat and pressure generated inside the combustion chamber resulted in increasing engine noise. The noise levels from the biodiesel and kerosene blends were relatively lower than diesel engine because kerosene and biodiesel have lower heating values than diesel, and this applies to all biodiesel blend used. The reductions in noise levels were 0.6%, 2.3%, 1.51%, and 3.57%, respectively compared to diesel
8
An inverse relationship exists between PM and NOx in traditional engine operating conditions. The conditions that cause NOx to increase, such as high combustion chamber temperature and oxygen availability, incur a decrease in PM. The use of techniques to reduce NOx, such as recycling exhaust gas, causes high concentrations of emitted PM. Fig. 3 shows the above relationship for the blends used in this study. The use of biokerosene at low and medium loads provided the best tradeoff relationship between NOx and PM.
Conclusions The possibility of using mixtures of Iraqi kerosene and biodiesel instead of Iraqi diesel fuel was investigated. The aims were to utilise the surplus kerosene in warehouses of the Iraqi Ministry of Oil in the summer and to suggest an alternative fuel with low sulphur content. Biokerosene use caused a rise in fuel consumption because it has lower heating value compared to diesel. The increase in BSFC was 5.56% and 5.19% when KB10 and KB20 were used as fuels. Also, exhaust-gas temperatures and thermal efficiency of biokerosene blends were lower than those of diesel. At low and medium loads, biokerosene blends KB10 and KB20 emitted lower levels of CO (15% and 20.31%), HC (7.74%, and 21.93%), and PM (22.4%, and 25.63%) compared to diesel. At the same loads range, NOx levels increased by 2.11% and 4.57% while engine noise was reduced by 1.51% and 3.57% than diesel. Analysis of PM–NOx tradeoff indicated that biokerosene blends provided better results than the other studied blends, especially at low and medium loads. All these results confirmed that the proposed biokerosene blends can be considered an acceptable alternative to Iraqi diesel because it reduces the sulphur content, which resulted in better emitted pollutants characteristics. Moreover, the minimal increase in fuel consumption can be offset by the lower fuel costs than diesel. The significant reduction in the sulphur content of biokerosene compared to Iraqi diesel encourages the use of catalysts to reduce pollutants' concentrations while it cannot be used with high sulphur diesel. Also, adding cetane number improver to the biokerosene can increase its performance characteristics to be close to diesel.
Conflict of Interests The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper
9
References
[1]
A. Llamas, M-J García-Martínez, A-M Al-Lal, L. Canoira, M. Lapuerta, Biokerosene from coconut and palm kernel oils: Production and properties of their blends with fossil kerosene, Fuel 102 (2012) 483– 490.
[2]
C. T. Lee, N. E. M. Rozali, Y. V. Fan, J. J. Kleme, S. Towprayoon, Low‑ carbon emission development in Asia: energy sector, waste management and environmental management system, Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 20 (2018) 443–449.
[3]
H. M. S. Al-Maamary, H. A. Kazem, M. T. Chaichan, The impact of the oil price fluctuations on common renewable energies in GCC countries, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 75 (2017) 989-1007.
[4]
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Climate change 2014: Mitigation of climate change (Vol. 3). Cambridge University Press, (2015).
[5]
H. M. S. Al-Maamary, H. A. Kazem, M. T. Chaichan, Climate change: the game changer in the GCC region,
Renewable
and
Sustainable
Energy
Reviews,
76
(2017)
555-576.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.048. [6]
H. M. S. Al-Maamary, H. A. Kazem, M. T. Chaichan, Changing the energy profile of the GCC States: A review, International Journal of Applied Engineering Research (IJAER), 11(3) (2016) 1980-1988.
[7]
M. Canakci, Combustion characteristics of a turbocharged DI compression ignition engine fueled with petroleum diesel fuels and biodiesel, Bioresour Technol. 98 (2007) 1167–1175.
[8]
F. Zaher, M. S. Gad, S. M. Aly, S. F. Hamed, G. A. Abo-Elwafa, H. A. Zahran1, Catalytic cracking of vegetable oils for producing biofuel, Egypt. J. Chem. 60(2) (2017) 921- 300.
[9]
A. C.
Petcu, F. G. Florean, I. Porumbel, C. Berbente, V. Silivestru, Experiments regarding the
combustion of camelina oil/kerosene mixtures on a burner, Energy for Sustainable Development 33 (2016) 149–154. [10]
M. T. Chaichan, Combustion and emission characteristics of E85 and diesel blend in conventional diesel engine operating in PPCI mode, Thermal science and Engineering progress, 7 (2018) 45-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsep.2018.04.013
10
[11]
M. T. Chaichan, Performance and emission study of diesel engine using sunflowers oil-based biodiesel fuels, International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 6(4) (2015) 260-269.
[12]
A.C. Mangra ⁎, I. Porumbel, F.G. Florean, Experimental measurements of Camelina sativa oil combustion, Energy for Sustainable Development 44 (2018) 109–116.
[13]
A. Eloka-Eboka, C. Onunka, F. Inambao, Detailed design and optimization of a sustainable micro-algal biofuel process plant, International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies 13 (2018) 122-130.
[14]
B.G. Díaz, D. M. Argollo, M. C. Franco, S. M. Nucci, W. J. Siqueira, D. M. de Laat, C. A. Colombo, High genetic diversity of Jatropha curcas assessed by ISSR, Genetics and Molecular Research (GMR) 16 (2) (2017) 1-12.
[15]
K. R. Patil, S. S. Thipse, Experimental investigation of CI engine combustion, performance and emissions in DEE–kerosene–diesel blends of high DEE concentration, Energy Conversion and Management 89 (2015) 396–408.
[16]
M. M. K. Bhuiya, M. G. Rasul, M. M. K. Khan, N. Ashwath, A. K. Azad, Prospects of 2nd generation biodiesel as a sustainable fuel—Part: 1 selection of feedstocks, oil extraction techniques and conversion technologies, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 55 (2016) 1109-1128.
[17]
O. Dumont, R. Dickes, M. De Rosa, R. Douglas, V. Lemort, Technical and economic optimization of subcritical, wet expansion and transcritical Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) systems coupled with a biogas power plant, Energy Conversion and Management 157 (2018) 294-306.
[18]
S. Afzal, M. W. Mumtaz, U. Rashid, M. Danish, M. A. Raza, A. Raza, H. Mukhtar, S. I. Al‑ Resayes, Exhaust emission profiling of fatty acid methyl esters and NOx control studies using selective synthetic and natural additives, Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 20 (2018) 589–601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-018-1489-3
[19]
M. T. Chaichan, S. T. Ahmed, Evaluation of performance and emissions characteristics for compression ignition engine operated with disposal yellow grease, International Journal of Engineering and Science, 2 (2) (2013) 111-122.
[20]
N. Shibasaki-Kitakawa, K. Hiromori, T. Ihara, K. Nakashima, T. Yonemoto, Production of high quality biodiesel from waste acid oil obtained during edible oil refining using ion-exchange resin catalysts, Fuel 139 (2015) 11-17.
11
[21]
B. K. Uprety, W. Chaiwong, C. Ewelike, S. K. Rakshit, Biodiesel production using heterogeneous catalysts including wood ash and the importance of enhancing byproduct glycerol purity, Energy Conversion and Management 115 (2016) 191-199.
[22]
A. E. Atabani, A.S. Silitongaa, I. A. Badruddina, T.M.I. Mahliaa, H.H. Masjuki, S. Mekhilef, A comprehensive review on biodiesel as an alternative energy resource and its characteristics, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 16 (2012) 2070–2093. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2012.01.003
[23]
O. Ozener, L. Yuksek, A. T. Ergenc, M. Ozkan, Effects of soybean biodiesel on a DI diesel engine performance, emission and combustion characteristics. Fuel 115 (2014) 875–883.
[24]
M. T. Chaichan, Performance and emissions characteristics of CIE using hydrogen, biodiesel, and massive
EGR,
International
Journal
of
Hydrogen
Energy,
43
(2018)
5415-5435.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.09.072 [25]
M. T. Chaichan, Evaluation of emitted particulate matters emissions in multi-cylinder diesel engine fuelled with biodiesel, American Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 4(1) (2016) 1-6. DOI: 10.12691/ajme-4-1-1
[26]
M. Badami, P. Nuccio, D. Pastrone, A. Signoretto, Performance of a small-scale turbojet engine fed with traditional and alternative fuels, Energy Conversion and Management 82 (2014) 219–228.
[27]
Q. L. A. Al-Rubai, H. Abdul-Hussein, Measuring and analysis of demand function on oil derivatives of a selected countries the period 1985-2008, Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences/ University of Baghdad, 17(64) (2011) 143-165.
[28]
M. M. Roy, W. Wang, M. Alawi, Performance and emissions of a diesel engine fueled by biodiesel– diesel, biodiesel–diesel-additive and kerosene–biodiesel blends, Energy Conversion and Management 84 (2014) 164–173.
[29]
V. P. Sethi, K. S. Salariya, Exhaust analysis and performance of a single cylinder diesel engine run on dual fuels, IE (I) Journal. MC, 85 (2004) 1-7.
[30]
T. K. Ghormade, N. V. Deshpande, Soybean oil as an alternative fuels for I. C. engines, Proceedings of Recent Trends in Automotive Fuels, Nagpur, India (2002).
[31]
M. Kaltschmitt, U. Neuling, Biokerosene: Status and prospects, Chapter in (Biokerosene: Status and Prospects), Springer Berlin Heidelberg, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-662-53065-8, 2017.
12
[32]
M. T. Chaichan, A. H. Kadhum, A. A. Al-Amiery, Novel technique for enhancement of diesel fuel: Impact of aqueous alumina nano-fluid on engine's performance and emissions, Case Studies in Thermal Engineering, 10 (2017) 611–620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2017.11.006
13
A- The impact of engine load variation on BSFC for the tested blends
A- The impact of engine load variation on brake thermal efficiency for the tested blends
C- The impact of engine load variation on exhaust gas temperatures for the tested blends Fig. 1, impact of load variation on the engine performance for the tested blends
14
A-The impact of engine load variation on emitted CO2 for the tested blends
B-The impact of engine load variation on emitted CO for the tested blends
C- The impact of engine load variation on emitted HC for the tested blends
D- The impact of engine load variation on emitted PM for the tested blends
B- The impact of engine load variation on emitted NOx for the tested blends
H- The impact of engine load variation on emitted noise for the tested blends
Fig. 2, impact of engine-load variation on the emitted emissions from the tested blends
15
NOx Concentrations (ppm)
N=1800 rpm, CR=17:1, IT=38°BTDC 600 500 400 Diesel DB10 DB20 KB10 KB20
300 200 100 0 3
5 7 9 11 PM concentrations (μg/m3)
13
Fig. 3. Impact of engine-load variation on PM–NOx tradeoff for the tested blends
16
Table 1. Properties of tested fuels Fuel
Density (kg/m3)
Diesel DB10 DB20 B100 KB10 KB20 K100
830 835.1 840.2 881 862 854 790
Viscosity (cSt @ 40 °C) 1.86 2.19 2.5 4.2 3.6 3.07 1.02
Heating value (kJ/kg)
Cloud point (°C)
45,573 45,016 44,466 40,296 40,839 41,390 46,250
-41 -34 -25 -4 -8 -9 -78
Table 2. Tested engine specifications Engine model Cylinders number Stroke number Displacement Injection mode Air induction mode Cooling mode Compression ratio Valve per cylinder Bore Stroke Fuel injection pump Plunger diameter Fuel injection nozzle Holes per nozzle Nozzle hole dia. Spray angle Nozzle opening pressure
Stationary diesel engine type Fiat TD 313 Four cylinders, Four stroke 3.666 L Direct injection (DI) natural aspirated water cooled 17:1 Two 100 mm 110 mm Unit pump 26 mm 10 holes (0.48mm) 160o 40 MPa
17
Sulfur content (ppm) 10000 9000 8000 0 1800 1600 2000