Advertisement

Improvement of ternary fuel combustion with various injection pressure strategies in a toroidal re-entrant combustion chamber

  • Harish Venu
  • M. Dinesh Babu
Research Article
  • 11 Downloads

Abstract

The present experimental work focuses on the influence injection pressure and toroidal re-entrant combustion chamber in a single cylinder diesel engine fuelled with ternary fuel (diesel-biodiesel-ethanol) blend. Ternary fuel (TF) is prepared by blending 70% diesel, 20% biodiesel, and 10% ethanol blends and its fuel properties were investigated and compared with diesel fuel. Since the physic-chemical properties of TF are well behind the diesel fuel, it is proposed to be blended with 20 ppm alumina nano additives which act as an ignition enhancer and catalytic oxidizer. The resulting fuel mixture (TF + 20 ppm alumina additive) is named as high performance fuel (HPF). Experimentations were conducted on HPF subjected to various injection pressures of 18 MPa, 20 MPa, 22 MPa, and 24 MPa respectively and are operated in toroidal re-entrant chamber geometry (TG) at an injection timing of 22 obTDC. From experimentation, it was identified that, for TG-HPF, higher injection pressure of 22 MPa ensued highest BTE (Brake Thermal Efficiency) of 35.5% and lowest BSEC (Brake Specific Fuel Consumption) of 10.13 MJ/kWh owing to the pooled effect of higher swirl formation, improved atomization enhanced evaporation rate, and better air-fuel mixing. Emission wise TG-HPF operated at 22 MPa lowered the HC (hydrocarbon), CO (carbon monoxide), and smoke emissions by 18.88%, 7.19%, and 5.02%, but with marginally improved NOx (oxides of nitrogen) and CO2 (carbon dioxide) emissions by 3.92% and 3.89% respectively. In combustion point of view, it is observed that injection pressure increased the cylinder pressure, heat release rate (HRR), and cumulative heat release rate (CHRR) by 5.35%, 5.08%, and 3.38% respectively indicating improved combustion rate as a result of enhanced atomization, evaporation, and high turbulence inducement. Overall, it is concluded that operating the ternary fuel at 22 MPa injection pressure at toroidal re-entrant combustion chamber results in improved performance and minimized emissions.

Keywords

Alumina Ternary fuel Engine performance Combustion Exhaust emission 

Abbreviations

Al2O3

aluminum oxide nanoparticle

TF

ternary fuel

HPF

high performance fuel

CI

compression ignition

TG

toroidal re-entrant combustion chamber

CFD

computational fluid dynamics

SG

hemispherical chamber

DI

direct injection

FAME

fatty acid methyl ester

FTIR

Fourier transform infra red

SEM

scanning electron microscope

TEM

transmission electron microscope

XRD

X-ray diffraction

EDS

energy dispersive spectroscopy

BTE

brake thermal efficiency

BSEC

brake specific energy consumption

HRR

heat release rate

CHRR

cumulative heat release rate

CRDI

common rail direct injection

HC

hydrocarbon

CO

carbon monoxide

DEE

diethyl ether

NOx

oxides of nitrogen

CO2

carbon dioxide

EGR

exhaust gas recirculation

EGO

exhaust gas oxygen

EGT

exhaust gas temperature

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author thanks the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE) of Government of India for its technical support for this investigation, Institute for Energy Studies (Anna University) for its financial support, and Centre for Nanotechnology (Anna University) for synthesis, characterization of nanoparticles.

References

  1. Agarwal AK, Dhar A, Gupta JG, Kim WI, Choi K, Lee CS, Park S (2015) Effect of fuel injection pressure and injection timing of Karanja biodiesel blends on fuel spray, engine performance, emissions and combustion characteristics. Energy Convers Manag 91:302–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Avulapati MM, Ganippa LC, Xia J, Megaritis A (2016) Puffing and micro-explosion of diesel–biodiesel–ethanol blends. Fuel 166:59–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barabas I, Todoruţ A, Băldean D (2010) Performance and emission characteristics of an CI engine fueled with diesel–biodiesel–bioethanol blends. Fuel 89(12):3827–3832CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beck, N.J. and Chen, S.K., 1990. Injection rate shaping and high speed combustion analysis-new tools for diesel engine combustion development (no. 900639). SAE technical paperGoogle Scholar
  5. Benajes J, Payri R, Molina S, Soare V (2005) Investigation of the influence of injection rate shaping on the spray characteristics in a diesel common rail system equipped with a piston amplifier. J Fluids Eng 127(6):1102–1110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Celıkten I (2003) An experimental investigation of the effect of the injection pressure on engine performance and exhaust emission in indirect injection diesel engines. Appl Therm Eng 23(16):2051–2060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Desantes JM, Benajes J, Molina S, González CA (2004) The modification of the fuel injection rate in heavy-duty diesel engines: part 2: effects on combustion. Appl Therm Eng 24(17):2715–2726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dhar A, Agarwal AK (2015a) Experimental investigations of the effect of pilot injection on performance, emissions and combustion characteristics of Karanja biodiesel fuelled CRDI engine. Energy Convers Manag 93:357–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dhar A, Agarwal AK (2015b) Experimental investigations of the effect of pilot injection on performance, emissions and combustion characteristics of Karanja biodiesel fuelled CRDI engine. Energy Convers Manag 93:357–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Divakara BN, Upadhyaya HD, Wani SP, Gowda CL (2010) Biology and genetic improvement of Jatropha curcas L.: a review. Appl Energy 87(3):732–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Francis G, Edinger R, Becker K (2005) ‘A concept for simultaneous wasteland reclamation, fuel production, and socio-economic development in degraded areas in India: need, potential and perspectives of Jatropha plantations’, in natural resources forum, Blackwell publishing. Ltd 29(1):12–24Google Scholar
  12. Gafoor CA, Gupta R (2015) Numerical investigation of piston bowl geometry and swirl ratio on emission from diesel engines. Energy Convers Manag 101:541–551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ganapathy T, Gakkhar RP, Murugesan K (2011) Influence of injection timing on performance, combustion and emission characteristics of Jatropha biodiesel engine. Appl Energy 88(12):4376–4386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gumus M, Sayin C, Canakci M (2012) The impact of fuel injection pressure on the exhaust emissions of a direct injection diesel engine fueled with biodiesel–diesel fuel blends. Fuel 95:486–494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. İçıngür Y, Altiparmak D (2003) Effect of fuel cetane number and injection pressure on a DI diesel engine performance and emissions. Energy Convers Manag 44(3):389–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Imtenan S, Rahman SA, Masjuki HH, Varman M, Kalam MA (2015a) Effect of dynamic injection pressure on performance, emission and combustion characteristics of a compression ignition engine. Renew Sust Energ Rev 52:1205–1211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Imtenan S, Rahman SA, Masjuki HH, Varman M, Kalam MA (2015b) Effect of dynamic injection pressure on performance, emission and combustion characteristics of a compression ignition engine. Renew Sust Energ Rev 52:1205–1211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jaichandar S, Annamalai K (2012) Effects of open combustion chamber geometries on the performance of pongamia biodiesel in a DI diesel engine. Fuel 98:272–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jindal S (2011) Experimental investigation of the effect of compression ratio and injection pressure in a direct injection diesel engine running on Karanj methyl ester. Int J Sustainable Energy 30(sup1):S91–S105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jindal S, Nandwana BP, Rathore NS, Vashistha V (2010) Experimental investigation of the effect of compression ratio and injection pressure in a direct injection diesel engine running on Jatropha methyl ester. Appl Therm Eng 30(5):442–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jyothi US, Reddy KV (2017) Experimental study on performance, combustion and emissions of diesel engine with re-entrant combustion chamber of aluminum alloy. Materials Today: Proceedings 4(2):1332–1339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kannan GR, Anand R (2011a) Experimental evaluation of DI diesel engine operating with diestrol at varying injection pressure and injection timing. Fuel Process Technol 92(12):2252–2263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kannan GR, Anand R (2011b) Experimental evaluation of DI diesel engine operating with diestrol at varying injection pressure and injection timing. Fuel Process Technol 92(12):2252–2263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Karthikeyan S, Sankaranarayanan G, Karthikeyan R (2015) Green technology effect of injection pressure, timing and compression ratio in constant pressure heat addition cycle by an eco-friendly material. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 121:63–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kumar N, Varun, Chauhan SR (2016) Evaluation of the effects of engine parameters on performance and emissions of diesel engine operating with biodiesel blend. Int J Ambient Energy 37(2):121–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Labecki L, Ganippa LC (2012) Effects of injection parameters and EGR on combustion and emission characteristics of rapeseed oil and its blends in diesel engines. Fuel 98:15–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Laforgia D, Ardito V (1995) Biodiesel fueled IDI engines: performances, emissions and heat release investigation. Bioresour Technol 51(1):53–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lapuerta M, Armas O, Garcia-Contreras R (2007) Stability of diesel–bioethanol blends for use in diesel engines. Fuel 86(10–11):1351–1357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Li J, Yang WM, An H, Maghbouli A, Chou SK (2014) Effects of piston bowl geometry on combustion and emission characteristics of biodiesel fueled diesel engines. Fuel 120:66–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mamilla VR, Mallikarjun MV, Rao GLN (2013) Effect of combustion chamber design on a DI diesel engine fuelled with jatropha methyl esters blends with diesel. Procedia Engineering 64:479–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mofijur M, Rasul MG, Hyde J, Azad AK, Mamat R, Bhuiya MMK (2016) Role of biofuel and their binary (diesel–biodiesel) and ternary (ethanol–biodiesel–diesel) blends on internal combustion engines emission reduction. Renew Sust Energ Rev 53:265–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Monyem A, Van Gerpen JH, Canakci M (2001) The effect of timing and oxidation on emissions from biodiesel-fueled engines. Trans ASAE 44(1):35–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nishimura T, Satoh K, Takahashi S, Yokota K (1998) Effects of fuel injection rate on combustion and emission in a DI diesel engine. SAE Technical Paper 981929:1998.  https://doi.org/10.4271/981929 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pang X, Shi X, Mu Y, He H, Shuai S, Chen H, Li R (2006) Characteristics of carbonyl compounds emission from a diesel-engine using biodiesel–ethanol–diesel as fuel. Atmos Environ 40(36):7057–7065CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Qi D, Leick M, Liu Y, Chia-fon FL (2011) Effect of EGR and injection timing on combustion and emission characteristics of split injection strategy DI-diesel engine fueled with biodiesel. Fuel 90(5):1884–1891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Raheman H, Ghadge SV (2008) Performance of diesel engine with biodiesel at varying compression ratio and ignition timing. Fuel 87(12):2659–2666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ribeiro NM, Pinto AC, Quintella CM, da Rocha GO, Teixeira LS, Guarieiro LL, do Carmo Rangel M, Veloso MC, Rezende MJ, Serpa da Cruz R, de Oliveira AM (2007) The role of additives for diesel and diesel blended (ethanol or biodiesel) fuels: a review. Energy Fuel 21(4):2433–2445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sayin C, Gumus M (2011) Impact of compression ratio and injection parameters on the performance and emissions of a DI diesel engine fueled with biodiesel-blended diesel fuel. Appl Therm Eng 31(16):3182–3188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shahir SA, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA, Imran A, Ashraful AM (2015) Performance and emission assessment of diesel–biodiesel–ethanol/bioethanol blend as a fuel in diesel engines: a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 48:62–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sharma A, Murugan S (2015) Combustion, performance and emission characteristics of a DI diesel engine fuelled with non-petroleum fuel: a study on the role of fuel injection timing. J Energy Inst 88(4):364–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Singh P, Tiwari SK, Singh R, Kumar N (2017) Modification in combustion chamber geometry of CI engines for suitability of biodiesel: a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 79:1016–1033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tse H, Leung CW, Cheung CS (2015) Investigation on the combustion characteristics and particulate emissions from a diesel engine fueled with diesel-biodiesel-ethanol blends. Energy 83:343–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Xiaoyan SHI, Yunbo YU, Hong HE, Shuai S, Hongyi DONG, Rulong LI (2008) Combination of biodiesel-ethanol-diesel fuel blend and SCR catalyst assembly to reduce emissions from a heavy-duty diesel engine. J Environ Sci 20(2):177–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Yang WM, An H, Chou SK, Vedharaji S, Vallinagam R, Balaji M, Mohammad FEA, Chua KJE (2013) Emulsion fuel with novel nano-organic additives for diesel engine application. Fuel 104:726–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Yilmaz N (2012) Comparative analysis of biodiesel–ethanol–diesel and biodiesel–methanol–diesel blends in a diesel engine. Energy 40(1):210–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Yilmaz N, Vigil FM, Donaldson AB, Darabseh T (2014) Investigation of CI engine emissions in biodiesel–ethanol–diesel blends as a function of ethanol concentration. Fuel 115:790–793CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chennai Institute of TechnologyChennaiIndia
  2. 2.Panimalar Engineering CollegeChennaiIndia

Personalised recommendations