Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 1358–1368

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Practice of diesel fuel blends using alternative fuels: A review

Bhupendra Singh Chauhan a,n, Ram Kripal Singh b, H.M. Cho c, H.C. Lim a,n
a
Department of Mechanical, Pusan National University, South Korea
b
Institut Supérieur de l'Automobile et des Transports (ISAT), Université de Bourgogne, Nevers, France
c
Department of Mechanical and Automotive Engineering, Kongju National University, South Korea

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In order to meet the growing global energy requirement, exhaustive research is carried to develop and to
Received 18 June 2014 use variety of renewable fuels. Concerns on the long-term availability of petroleum diesel and the
Received in revised form stringent environmental norms have mandated the search for a renewable alternative to diesel fuel to
7 January 2016
address these problems. Diesel engines have proven their utility in the transportation, agriculture, and
Accepted 13 January 2016
power sectors for small energy needs as a potential source of decentralized energy generation for
electrification. Mixing of diesel fuel with biodiesel has been considered as good alternative to diesel in
Keywords: the past couple of years. The objective of the present study is to compare the performance, emissions and
Biodiesel combustion characteristics of blended fuels in the unmodified diesel engine. Differences in the fuel
Ether
properties of non-edible vegetable oils, biodiesels and other diesel fuel blends are considered in this
Alcohol
review. Various diesel fuel blends with di-ethyl ether, ethyl-tert-butyl ether, mono-ethylene glycol ethyl
Emissions
ether, mono-ethylene glycol butyl ether, diethylene glycol ethyl ether, cottonseed oil, jatropha oil, karanja
oil, mahua oil, linseed oil, rubber seed oil, neem oil, cashew nut shell oil, marine gas oil, fish oil, were
used in diesel engine operation and their results were analyzed. It is clear from this review that all the
blends studied generally causes an increase in NOx emission and a decrease in HC, CO and PM emissions
compared to diesel. Biodiesel blended fuel shows lower brake thermal efficiency and slight increase in its
brake specific fuel consumption compared to conventional diesel for the same energy output. Result of
combustion and performance characteristics shows that biodiesels from different origin and its blends
with diesel at 10–20% is better than higher blends. Thus, biodiesel could be a potential fuel for diesel
engine and play a vital role in the near future especially for small and medium energy requirements.
Hence, use of 10% to 20% blend of biodiesel is favorable for long term application in diesel engines,
considering performance and emissions characteristics which are close to mineral diesel.
& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1359
2. Need analysis of blended fuel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1359
3. Fuel properties and their corresponding engine performances. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1360
4. Blended fuel for CI engines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1360
4.1. Blends of ether . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1360
4.2. Blend of vegetable oils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1362
4.3. Jatropha biodiesel and its blends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1362
4.4. Karanja biodiesel and its blends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1362
4.5. Mahua biodiesel and its blends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1363
4.6. Linseed biodiesel and its blends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1363
4.7. Rubber seed biodiesel and its blends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1363
4.8. Neem biodiesel and its blends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1364
4.9. Miscellaneous blended fuels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1364

n
Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: bhupendradce@gmail.com (B.S. Chauhan), hclim@pusan.ac.kr (H.C. Lim).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.01.062
1364-0321/& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 B.S. Chauhan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 1358–1368 1359

4.10. Higher alcohols as mixed fuel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1366

5. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . ............................................................................................ 1367
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . ............................................................................................ 1367
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............................................................................................ 1367

1. Introduction with fossil liquid fuels are vegetable oils, bio-diesels, bio-alcohols
and bio-ethers [13]. Hence, to pursue in this regard various diesel
Energy has always played an important role in the develop- blends and alternative fuels have been tested in diesel engines of
ment of a country. It is considered as an index of economic growth various capacities at various loads and the emissions and perfor-
and social development [1]. Per capita energy consumption is mance results were analyzed. The analysis showed that 10–20%
considered as a measure of prosperity of a country besides GDP blends with any biofuel give the optimum performance and
and per capita income. The ideology of more energy consumption emissions close to that of mineral diesel operation.
for higher industrial output has been replaced by better and effi-
cient energy management. The focus of country planners changed
to more efficiency, more productivity and reduced production cost
[2]. This resulted in an immediate, long term and multi-facet 2. Need analysis of blended fuel
solution to the problems resulting from increased energy demands
against short supplies. Energy conservation and management has Due to depleting fossil fuel resources, renewable energy sour-
since become the buzz word in industrial circles and ‘energy’ is ces such as solar, wind, biomass, small hydro power, etc. are
considered as a major component in the production cost [3–5]. emerging as alternative energy options. The potential for
Remaining global oil resources appear to be sufficient to meet expanding the use of RETs (Renewable Energy Technologies) for
demand up to 2030 as projected by IEA [6]. Therefore, a demand to energy generation is vast in India and awaits exploitation. These
develop alternative fuels resulted from the decreased availability renewable energy technology are environmental benign. However,
on fossil fuel due to the limited resources [4,5]. World consump- the high cost of these technologies has been a limiting factor in
tion of fossil fuels is 100,000 times faster than their natural pro- large scale adaptation. The global primary energy demand is
duction. According to an estimate the demand for these fuels will projected to increase by 1.6% per year between 2004 and 2030,
suddenly outstrip their availability in a matter of years. The world reaching 17.1 billion tonnes of oil equivalent (btoe) as shown in
is moving towards a sustainable energy era with major emphasis Table 1 [6]. Fossil fuels are projected to remain as a dominant
on energy efficiency and use of renewable energy sources. The source of primary energy globally. The process of energy genera-
renewable sources of energy cause lesser emissions, reduce che- tion, transport and utilization leads to air pollution. Inefficient use
mical and radioactive waste, produce clean and limitless energy. of energy has stretched the global environment to its limits as can
Advantages of the vegetable oils as engine fuels lie in their be seen from the unprecedented and unpleasant responses of the
renewable nature and wide availability from the variety of sources. nature in the past few years. Greenhouse effect, global warming,
This is particularly attractive to countries lacking sources of liquid acid rain, smog, shift in climatic conditions etc. are some of the
fossil fuels [1,6]. indications. Increase in the CO2 concentration has taken place in
The search for sustainable and environment friendly fuels are post industrial revolution era. Global energy-related carbon-
going to increase with increase in the human population and dioxide (CO2) emissions is expected to increase by 1.7% per year
increased awareness about climate change. Greenhouse emissions over 2004–2030. They shall reach 40.4 billion tonnes in 2030, an
from the biofuels can be recycled and hence favorable for atmo- increase of 14.3 billion tonnes, or 55%, over the 2004 level. By
spheric environment than fossil fuels. Diesel engines have proven 2010, emissions were 48% higher than in 1990 [6].
their utility in the transportation and power sectors due to their The solution of twin problems of fast depletion of fossil fuels
higher efficiency and ruggedness. They are also potential sources
and environmental degradation is to reduce dependence on pet-
of decentralized energy generation for small electrification plant
roleum derived fuels for better economy and environment.
[7,8].
Adaptation of alternative fuels and biofuels can address both these
Bio-fuels are getting a renewed attention because of global
issues. These fuels result in energy security and environmental
stress on reduction of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and clean devel-
benefits. Bio-fuels are renewable liquid fuels coming from biolo-
opment mechanism (CDM). The fuels of bio-origin may be alcohol,
gical raw material and have been proved to be good substitutes for
vegetable oils, biomass, and biogas. Vegetable oils have compar-
oil in the transportation, agriculture and power sector. Biofuels
able Physico-chemical properties with mineral diesel and they are
available in the current markets without government subsidy are
biodegradable, non-toxic, and have a potential to significantly
reduce pollution [3,9]. The qualities of this fuel, environmentally as ethanol, methanol, vegetable oils and biodiesel [5].
well as technically, have pushed this fuel close to the final stages of
Table 1
commercialization in many countries. Each country can proceed in
World primary energy demand (Btoe).
the production of particular oil, depending upon the climate and
economy. Different countries have taken initiatives in this field 1980 2004 2010 2015 2030 2004–2030 (%)
and re-forestation has a very important role to play in meeting the
Coal 1785 2773 3354 3666 4441 1.8
challenge of climate change. Several initiatives have been taken in
Oil 3107 3940 4366 4750 5575 1.3
recent years in different parts of the country to promote large Gas 1237 2302 2686 3017 3869 2.0
scale cultivation of oilseed bearing plants [2–5,10]. Nuclear 186 714 775 810 861 0.7
Several oxygenated fuels are known to have the potential for Hydro 148 242 280 317 408 2.0
use such as alternative gasoline and diesel fuel [11,12]. Those Biomass and waste 765 1176 1283 1375 1645 1.3
Other renewables 33 57 99 136 296 6.6
oxygenates can be classified as alcohol, ether, ester, carbonate and Total 7261 11,204 12,842 14,071 17,095 1.6
acetate compounds. The most promising bio-fuels for blending
1360 B.S. Chauhan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 1358–1368
Ethanol is used as fuel or as oxygenate to gasoline. Raw material
used for producing ethanol varies from sugar in Brazil, cereals in USA,
sugar beet in Europe to molasses in India. Brazil uses ethanol as 100%
fuel in about 20% of vehicles and 25% blend with gasoline in the rest
of the vehicles. USA uses 10% ethanol–gasoline blends whereas a 5%
blend is used in Sweden. Australia uses 10% ethanol–gasoline blend
[3]. Use of 5% ethanol–gasoline blend is already approved by BIS and
is dispensed in some Indian states. Methanol could conceivably be
made from grain, but its most common source is natural gas. Use of
natural gas is better for reducing carbon dioxide production in
comparison to other fossil fuels, but use of renewable fuels instead of
natural gas would be still better. It can be made from coal or wood
with more difficulty and lower efficiency than from natural gas
[14,15].
Biodiesel is a derivative of vegetable oils. Biodiesel is made
from vegetable oils (both edible and non-edible) and animal fats
through a chemical process named transesterification [5]. Biodie-
sel can be blended in any ratio with petroleum diesel fuel. Its
higher cetane number improves the combustion even when
blended in the petroleum diesel. It can also be used as an additive
to achieve the following objectives:
1. To reduce the overall sulfur content of blend,
2. To compensate for lubricity loss due to sulfur removal from the
diesel fuel,
3. To enhance the cetane number of diesel fuel.
The rationale of taking up a major program for the production
of bio-fuels for utilization in IC engines in many countries lies in
the context of ethanol and biodiesel being superior fuels from the
environmental point of view, use of bio-fuels becomes imperative
in view of the stringent emission norms and court interventions,
need to provide energy security, need to create employment,
providing nutrients to soil, checking soil erosion and thus pre-
venting land degradation, addressing global concern relating to
containing carbon emissions, reducing dependence on oil imports,
usability of biofuel in the present engines without any major
modification [2,3],
Alternative fuels should be renewable, should be suitable for
use in existing engines and associated systems (such as fuel tank,
pumps and hoses) as well as other existing fuel storage, trans-
portation and retail infrastructure. Since diesel engine plays an
important and indispensable role in Indian economy and various
sector of the country, fuels of bio-origin can provide a feasible
solution to the problem. Some of these fuels can be used directly
while others need to be transformed to bring the relative prop-
erties close to the conventional fuels. Ethanol is an attractive
alternate liquid source for IC engines since it can be produced from
renewable sources such as grains. Given the widespread use of
diesel fuels, in various sectors, the study on the performance of
vegetable oils when used as a fuel in the neat or blended form is
desirable. Since the viscosity of these oils, hence of the fuel is of
prime concern, the reduction in the viscosity is required which can
be carried out by blending process for safer and long term use.
The concerns about long term availability of petroleum diesel
and stringent environmental norms have mandated that renew-
able alternative to diesel fuel should be expeditiously explored.
Biofuels, alcohol ethers have always been considered as a good
alternative to diesel for last many years and the blended form of
such fuels has been considered as a sustainable substitute to diesel
fuel by the researchers, globally. Many researchers have reported
difficulties encountered with the use of complete substitute of
such fuel in diesel engine. These problems are mainly attributed to
physico-chemical properties of such fuels. The issue like high
viscosity of biofuels can be resolved for its long term utilization in
diesel engine. Due to high viscosity, there are two strategies for
using vegetable oil as fuel for use in diesel engine. The first one is
to modify the engine to adapt the fuel and the second one is to
process the fuel for the same. The quality and other safety issues
also preclude massive adaptation of fuel modification methodol-
ogy. Therefore, it is necessary that a system should be developed
which could make use of new fuel into the engine hardware
without much modification, for its large scale adaptation in diesel
engine for attaining much needed energy security.
3. Fuel properties and their corresponding engine
performances
Di methyl ether has heating value of 31.68 MJ/kg and di-ethyl
ether has heating value of 33.9 MJ/kg, kinematic viscosity of 0.23
stokes, density 7134 kg /m3, high volatility and low flash point
with high cetane number of 85–96. For the same reason it is also
used as a component of the fuel mixture for carbureted com-
pression ignition model engines. Methanol has higher heating
value of 22.884 MJ/kg and ethanol has higher heating value of
29.847 MJ/kg [3], butanol has higher heating value of 37.334 MJ/kg,
acetone has heating value of 31.862 MJ/kg. The higher heating
value of most biodiesel lies in the interval of 37–40.5 MJ/kg.
The characteristics of variety of available biodiesel fall within a
fairly narrow band and are closer to those of diesel. Kinematic
viscosity of vegetable oils varies in the range of 30–40 cSt at 38 °C.
High viscosity of these oils is due to larger molecular mass and
chemical structure. Vegetable oils have high molecular weights in
the range of 600–900, which are three or more times higher than
diesel fuel. The flash point of vegetable oils is very high (above
200 °C).The heating value of these oils is in the range of 39–40 MJ/
Kg which is low compared to diesel fuels (about 44 MJ/kg) [5]. The
presence of chemically bonded oxygen in vegetable oils lowers the
heating value by about 10%. The cetane number is in the range of
32–40. The iodine value ranges from 0 to 200 depending upon un-
saturation. The cloud and pour point of vegetable oils are higher
than the diesel fuel. Petroleum based diesel fuels have different
chemical structure than vegetable oil. The former contains only
carbon and hydrogen atoms which are arranged in normal
(straight chain) or branched chain structures as well as aromatic
configurations. The normal structure is preferred for better igni-
tion quality. Diesel fuels contain both saturated and straight or
unbranched chain unsaturated hydrocarbons, but the later are not
present in large amounts to make oxidation a problem [6]. Vege-
table oils consist of triglycerides to about 97%, the other 3% dis-
tribute among di- and mono-glycerides and furthermore 3 fatty
acids and the fat accompanying which are mostly removed with
refining. Structurally, a triglyceride is a reaction product of one
molecule of glycerol with three fatty acid molecules to yield three
molecules of water and one molecule of triglyceride [5]. Some of
the properties of diesel and test methods required by ASTM are
summarized in Table 2 [6] and diesel fuel properties are compared
with various biofuel oils and their important physico-chemical
properties in Table 3.
4. Blended fuel for CI engines
4.1. Blends of ether
One of the blends of ether is diethyl ether (DEE), CH3CH2OCH2CH3,
which is a fuel with similar attractive properties of DME for use in
diesel engines, but in liquid form (at ambient conditions), thus over-
coming the problems of current vehicle technology and fuel delivery
infrastructure. It can be produced from ethanol, which is produced
itself from biomass, via a dehydrating process with strong dehydrating
 B.S. Chauhan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 1358–1368 1361

Table 2 Table 3
Tests and limits for fuel properties. Physico-chemical properties of different bio-fuels as compared to diesel.

Test ASTM test ASTM limits Fuel Density Cetane Lower calorific
(kg/m3) number value MJ/kg
Kinematic viscosity, mm2/s D445 1.9–4.1
Distillation temperature, °C D86 282–338 @ 90% pt. Diesel 837 (at 20 ° 50 43
Cloud point, °C D2500 * C)
Pour point, °C D97 4.4–5.5 °C Diethyl ether 713 125 33.9
Flash point, °C D93 52 °C min Ethyl-tert-butyl ether (ETBE) 739 (at 25 ° 8 –
Water and sediment, vol% D1796 0.05% max C)
Carbon residue @ 10% residue D524 0.35% max Monoethylene glycol butyl ether 900 (at 15 ° – –
Ash by weight, % D482 0.01% max (EGBE) C)
Sulfur by weight, % D129 0.5% max Diethylene glycol ethyl ether 986 (at 15 ° – –
Copper strip corrosion D130 3 max (DEGEE) C)
Cetane no. D613 40 min Monoethylene glycol ethyl ether 920 (at 15 ° – –
(EGEE) C)
Cloud Point is not specified by ASTM. Satisfactory operation should be achieved in Cottonseed oil 910 (at 20 ° 38 36.8
most cases if the cloud point is 6 °C above the tenth percentile minimum tem- C)
perature for the area where the fuel will be used. Cottonseed bio-diesel 885 (at 20 ° 52 37.5
C)
n-Butanol 810 (at 20 ° ~25 33.1
agents, thus also being a bio-fuel (bio-DEE). DEE has several favorable C)
properties for diesel engines, including exceptional cetane number Jatropha 910–940 33.7–51 38.20–42.15
(at 40 °C)
(higher than 125), reasonable energy density for on-board storage, Karanja 870–928 45–67 34.0–38.8
high oxygen content, low autoignition temperature, broad flamm- (at 40 °C)
ability limits and high miscibility with diesel fuel, unlike its high Mauha 891–960 43.5 35.6–38.9
volatility, its propensity for peroxidation in storage and its anesthetic (at 40 °C)
Linseed 865–950 28–35 37.7–39.8
effects on human health that raise some concerns. The smoke emis- (at 40 °C)
sion, NOx emission and CO emissions are significantly reduced with Rubber seed 910–930 37 37.5
the use of the DEE/diesel fuel blends with respect to that of the neat (at 40 °C)
diesel fuel, with this, the higher the reduction reduction the higher the Neem 912–965 51 33.7–39.5
(at 40 °C)
percentage of DEE in the blend whereas the unburned hydrocarbons Jatropha oil methyl ester 862–886 43–59 37.2–43.0
(HC) emissions are increased. Concerning the engine performance (at 40 °C)
with the DEE/diesel fuel blends against the neat diesel fuel case, Karanja oil methyl ester 865–898 36–61 36.0–42.1
higher specific fuel consumption is observed with increasing per- (at 40 °C)
Mahua oil methyl ester 828–865 47–51 36.8–43.0
centage of DEE in the blends, with practically unaltered brake thermal
(at 40 °C)
efficiency, and slightly increasing exhaust gas temperature [13]. Linseed oil methyl ester 874–920 48–59 37.5–42.2
Another oxygenate proposed for use with diesel oil is ethyl- (at 40 °C)
tert-butyl ether (ETBE), which is synthesized from ethanol and Rubber seed oil methyl ester 858–900 49–57 36.5–42.1
(at 40 °C)
isobutene. There have been a few studies on investigating the
Cotton seed oil methyl ester 872–885 45–60 40.1–40.8
effect of ETBE addition to diesel oil. In a recent work, De Menezes (at 40 °C)
et al. examined the effect of adding ETBE to diesel oil on the Neem oil methyl ester 820–942 51–53 39.6–40.2
physicochemical properties of the mixture. They added ETBE in (at 40 °C)
Cashew nut shell oil 958 (at 15 ° 33 –
volumetric proportions of 5%, 10%, 15%, and 20% to Brazilian diesel
C)
oil and examined their effect on density, viscosity, volatility, Camphor oil 894 (at 15 ° 5 –
characteristics at low temperatures, and cetane number of the C)
various formulations. It was found that ETBE can significantly alter Cashew nut shell oil with 10% 955 (at 15 ° 32 –
camphor oil C)
the viscosity, volatility (flashpoint and distillation curve) and
Cashew nut shell oil with 20% 936 (at 15 ° 35 –
reduce the cetane number, impairing the fuel’s performance. It camphor oil C)
was found that blending diesel oil with ETBE can significantly Cashew nut shell oil with 30% 944 (at 15 ° 35 –
reduce particulate matter and smoke emissions from a diesel camphor oil C)
Marine gas oil 855 (at 15 ° 47 42.8
engine [16–18].
C)
Another experiment was conducted by Li et al. [19] in which Diethylene glycol dimethyl ether 950 (at 15 ° 126 24.5
Ethyl tert-butyl ether (ETBE) was synthesized by reacting bioe- C)
thanol (47% v/v) and isobutene (53% v/v) with heat over a catalyst. Marine gas oil and diethylene gly- 864 (at 15 ° 54.9 40.97
It can be considered a ‘‘bio-fuel”, therefore ETBE helps to reduce col dimethyl ether blend C)
Marine gas oil & jatropha oil 857 (at 15 ° 48.8 42.23
the vehicle-out carbon dioxide (a greenhouse gas) introduced in methyl ester blend C)
the atmosphere. As an additive to gasoline, ETBE has been Ultra-low sulphur diesel 823 (at 20 ° 72 43
extensively examined with regard to its impact on exhaust emis- C)
sions, exhaust gas after treatment systems, evaporative emissions, Rapeseed oil methyl esters 873 (at 20 ° 53 39.8
C)
cold start ability, materials used in the fueling systems and others Palm oil methyl ester 878 (at 20 ° 64 40
in spark ignition engine-powered vehicles. ETBE has the properties C)
of low auto-ignitability, low boiling point, oxygenated, and infinite Fish oil biofuel 825 (at 20 ° 57 –
solubility in diesel fuel. The effects of ETBE addition to diesel fuel C)
Methanol-to-diesel – 60–70 36.54
on the characteristics of combustion and exhaust emissions of a Hydrotreated vegetable oils 779 (at 15 ° 88.2 47.216
common rail direct injection diesel engine with high rates C)
of cooled EGR were investigated. An appropriate ETBE addition Dimethyl ether 667 55–66 27.6
to diesel fuel helps to suppress the smoke increasing with Dimethyl carbonate 1075 35–36 15.78
Dimethoxymethane 859 o 30 22.4
EGR, enabling the more extensive utilization of EGR to suppress
2-Methoxyethyl acetate 1010 – 21.1
the combustion noise and NOx emissions. Therefore, smokeless,
1362 B.S. Chauhan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 1358–1368
ultra-low NOx, and efficient diesel combustion can be extended to
higher loads with the ETBE blended fuel than the pure diesel fuel.
With further increase in the engine load, however, the trade-offs
between NOx, smoke, combustion noise, thermal efficiency appear
to be problematic again, and other strategies such as multiple fuel
injections, intake boosting, and exhaust after treatment become
necessary. In addition, the issue with the increased unregulated
toxic emissions due to ETBE addition must be addressed, especially
at higher loads and with high rates of cooled EGR [18].
Several researchers studied blends of some glycol ethers with
diesel fuel, a decrease in CO, hydrocarbons or particulate matter
emissions being found. The ethers used were mono-ethylene
glycol ethyl ether (EGEE), mono-ethylene glycol butyl ether
(EGBE), diethylene glycol ethyl ether (DEGEE). Moreover, these
results showed that oxygen addition by glycol ether addition was
more effective than oxygen addition by alcohols. Liotta and Mon-
talvo used three glycol ethers (named A–C) and di-glyme and their
diesel fuel blends with similar cetane number (from 42 to 45) and
low oxygen concentrations (from 0.5 to 1.8) in a DDC Series diesel
engine. They observed a reduction of CO, and particulate matter
emissions and a slight increase of NOx. Although the viscosity of
the diesel was reduced with the use of glycol ether, the fuel oxi-
dation stability and Conradson carbon residue remained same. At
2.5% concentration, the additive efficiency in decreasing order was
EGEE 4DEGEE 4 EGBE for CO emissions and DGEE 4EGEE 4EGBE
for hydrocarbon emissions. For NOx, both its behavior and the
sequence are opposite to that of CO [17].
In another experimental investigation, the combustion and
exhaust emission characteristics of cottonseed oil and its (methyl
ester) bio-diesel in blends with 20% by vol. of either n-butanol or
diethyl ether (DEE), fueling a standard, experimental, single-
cylinder, four-stroke, high-speed direct injection (HSDI), ‘Hydra’
diesel engine was evaluated. The smoke, NOx and CO emissions
are reduced with the use of these fuel blends with respect to those
of the neat cottonseed oil or its neat bio-diesel. The unburned HC
emissions are increased with the use of these fuel blends with
respect to those of the neat cottonseed oil or its neat bio-diesel.
The brake specific fuel consumption decreases with the use of
these fuel blends with respect to those of the neat cottonseed oil
or its neat bio-diesel, and the corresponding brake thermal effi-
ciencies increase. The DEE blends show a little better behavior
against their corresponding n-butanol blends. It is revealed that n-
butanol and DEE, which can be produced from biomass (bio-
butanol and bio-DEE), when added to the vegetable oil or its bio-
diesel improve the behavior of diesel engine both performance-
and emissions-wise, not requiring solubilizers and not presenting
stability problems of engine operation [18].
4.2. Blend of vegetable oils
As mentioned in the introduction, the most promising bio-fuels
for fossil liquid fuels substitution are vegetable oils and their
derived bio-diesels. Babu and Devaradjane [20] reported the
review work on the performance and emission characteristics of
neat vegetable oil, biodiesel, and its blends in CI engine. Their
results show that compared to No. 2 diesel fuel, all of the vegetable
oils are much more viscous, are much more reactive to oxygen,
and has higher cloud point and pour point. They also found that
compared with diesel fuel, vegetable oils and their biodiesels offer
lower engine noise, and lower smoke, HC, and CO, slightly higher
NOx and higher thermal efficiency. In addition, 25/75 blend of
vegetable oil with diesel fuel, 20/80 blend of biodiesel with diesel
fuel offers better engine performance and lower emissions. The
disadvantage of nonedible vegetable oil as a diesel fuel are higher
viscosity, lower volatility, the reactivity of unsaturated hydro-
carbon chains, and higher percentage of carbon residue. Seven
inedible vegetable oils were selected based on two criteria such as
oil content in the feedstock and available number of literature
4.3. Jatropha biodiesel and its blends
It is widely known that biodiesel generally causes an increase
in NOx emission and a decrease in unburned hydrocarbon (UHC),
carbon monoxide (CO) and particulate matter (PM) emissions
compared to diesel fuel. A performance evaluation of JO biodiesel
had been carried out by Prasad et al. [21] on a low heat rejection
diesel engine and compared with the pure diesel operation of a
conventional diesel engine. They found that JO biodiesel was
found to be an effective substitute for use in CI engine, except for
higher smoke levels.
Subramanian et al. [22] tested jatropha oil biodiesel (jatropha
oil methyl ester–JOME) blended with diesel in 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%
and 100% in the IDI diesel engine with EGR. Best fuel economy was
observed with 10% biodiesel blended fuel in their study. In addi-
tion, NOx emissions increased while smoke emission was reduced
at all speed ranges in two test modes. The blends of 25%, 50%, 75%
and 100% by volume of JOME and diesel were tested in single
cylinder diesel engine by Sundaresan et al. [23] and found that
brake thermal efficiency of JOME blends was comparable with
diesel fuel at all loads. For pollutant emissions, NOx emission from
the blends of JOME was comparatively higher, smoke emission was
lower and CO emission was also lower at peak load than diesel
fuel. It is known that stability of biodiesel is inferior compared to
diesel fuel and therefore doping of biodiesel in diesel fuel will
affect the stability of fuel significantly. Jatropha biodiesel has poor
oxidation stability with good low temperature properties. On the
other hand, palm biodiesel has good oxidative stability, but poor
low temperature properties.
Manieniyan and Sivaprakasan [24] performed the experimental
investigation for performance, combustion and emission char-
acteristics of single cylinder DI CI engine fueled with various
jatropha biodiesel blends (B20, B40, B60, and B80). They found
that brake thermal efficiency decreases with increase in percen-
tage of JO biodiesel blends. However, the brake thermal efficiency
of B20 (32.22%) was nearly similar to that of diesel (32.71%),
However, the effect of injection timing and injection pressure on
performance, combustion and emission characteristics was not
clearly explained.
Sahoo and Das [25] had analyzed the combustion character-
istics such as peak cylinder pressure, time of occurrence of peak
pressure, heat release rate and ignition delay of biodiesel from JO,
KO and Polanga oil (PO) and their blends with diesel. They
recommended that results in maximum peak cylinder pressure
was the optimum fuel blend as far as the peak cylinder pressure
was concerned. Ignition delays were shortened for three biodiesel
blends when compared with diesel.
4.4. Karanja biodiesel and its blends
According to the combustion analysis of KO biodiesel as fuel in
a single cylinder diesel engine, ignition delay for KO biodiesel and
their blends showed the opposite trend with diesel [26]. The
increase in viscosity for petrodiesel leads to poor atomization,
slow mixing, increase in spray penetration and decrease in spray
angle. These result in longer ignition delay.
According to the comparative study of combustion, perfor-
mance, and emissions of JO and KO biodiesels in a direct injection
CI engine by Jindal et al. [27], KO biodiesel gave better thermal
efficiency and specific fuel consumption than JO biodiesel, but
both biodiesels performed poorer than diesel. Emissions of HC,
NOx and PM were found to be lower with both biodiesels, but CO
and CO2 emissions were higher with JO biodiesel and lower with
 B.S. Chauhan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 1358–1368
KO biodiesel when compared to diesel emission. This gave differ-
ent results with the consensus from most of the research. It was
widely known that biodiesel generally causes an increase in NOx
emission and a decrease in HC, CO and PM emissions when
compared to diesel fuel [28–30].
To determine the optimum fuel blend based on the BSEC, BTC
and exhaust emissions, Bajpai et al. [31] introduced various diesel
and KO fuel blends (5%, 10%, 15% and 20%) in a single cylinder
direct injection constant speed CI engine at varying loads (0%, 20%,
40%, 60%, 80%, and 100%) Their results showed that a fuel blend of
10% KO showed higher BTE at a 60% load. The overall emission
characteristics were found to be best for the case of KO10 over the
entire range of engine operation.
4.5. Mahua biodiesel and its blends
Puhan et al. [32] performed a test of MO biodiesel (mahua oil
methyl ester: MOME) with diesel fuel in a single cylinder direct
injection CI engine and showed decrease (13%) in thermal effi-
ciency. In the continuing work, Puhan et al. [33] tested MO bio-
diesel (mahua oil ethyl ester: MOEE) with diesel fuel in a same
engine with the previous study and showed the comparable
thermal efficiency with diesel fuel. They pointed out that this is
due to the chemical composition of MOEE, which promotes the
combustion process. It should be pointed out that the viscosity
of MOEE (6.2 mm2/s at 40 °C) is slightly higher than that of
MOME (5.2 mm2/s at 40 8 C). According to the works of Puhan
et al. [32,33], exhaust emissions of CO, HC, NOx and smoke number
were reduced around 58%, 63%, 12% and 70% respectively in case of
MOEE and 30, 35, 4 and 11% respectively in case of MOME, com-
pared to diesel. The amount of NOx produced for neat biodiesel of
mahua oil was 50 ppm as compared to 44 ppm for diesel. This
could be attributed to the increased gas temperature due to the
oxygen content within biodiesel. In the continued research, MO
biodiesel was tested on a single cylinder CI engine by Saravanan
et al. [34]. The performance tests showed that power loss was
around 13% combined with 20% increase in fuel consumption with
MO biodiesel at full load. Emissions such as CO and HC were lower
for MO biodiesel compared to diesel by 26% and 20% respectively.
However, it should be noted that NOx emission was lesser by 4%
for MO biodiesel compared to diesel.
The MO biodiesel (B100), diesel fuel and their blends (B20, B40,
B60, and B80) were used by Raheman and Ghadge [35] to test a
single cylinder four stroke diesel engine at a compression ratio of
18:1 and injection timing of 40° before TDC with a rated output of
9 kW at 1500 rpm. In the continuing study [36], they conducted
the experiment on the performance and exhaust emissions of
same fuels in the same engine with the previous work, but at
varying compression ratio (18:1–20:1), injection timing (35–
45°bTDC). They found that biodiesel could be blended with diesel
fuel up to 20% at any compression ratio and injection timing tested
for getting nearly same performance as that with diesel.
Raheman and Ghadge [36] found that the differences of brake
thermal efficiencies between diesel fuel and neat MO biodiesel
were not significant at engine settings of compression ratio of 20:1
and injection timing of 48 bTDC. At full load conditions, the mean
brake thermal efficiency of neat biodiesel of mahua oil was about
10.1% lower than that of diesel fuel while at lower loads, the var-
iation was as high as 17.1% which could be attributed to the sig-
nificantly lower efficiencies of neat biodiesel, especially at lower
loads [35].
Investigation of MO biodiesel as supplementary diesel fuel was
carried out by Bora et al. [37]. They found that the fuel properties
of MO biodiesel were within the limits specified by ASTMD6751-2
and IS 1448 standards. The addition of MO biodiesel to diesel fuel
had significantly reduced CO, HC and smoke emissions but
1363
increase NO emission slightly. The results showed that there is no
remarkable power reduction in the engine operation when oper-
ated with blends of MO biodiesel and diesel fuel. There is a slight
increase in BSFC and decrease in BTE for MO biodiesel and its
blends compared to the diesel fuel.
4.6. Linseed biodiesel and its blends
Beg et al. [38] reported that brake thermal efficiency decreases as
the proportion of diesel fuel decrease in the diesel fuel–linseed oil
blends. They also reported the results of exhaust gas temperature, NOx
emission level, CO emission level, smoke density in the semi-adiabatic
type of engine by using diesel fuel–linseed oil blends according to the
variation of piston coating thickness and compression ratio. Exhaust
gas temperature, CO emission and smoke density are increased but
NOx level is decreased in diesel fuel–linseed oil blends and biodiesel
compared to diesel fuel operation. Agarwal et al. [39] found that 50%
LSO blend showed maximum thermal efficiency and lowest brake
specific energy consumption (BSEC), but higher smoke density, com-
pared to all other LSO blends (10%, 20%, 30%, v/v).
In the test of single cylinder, DI CI engine that has a rated
output of 4.4 kW at 1500 rpm, the experimental results showed
that the optimum fuel injection pressure was 24 MPa with neat
LSO biodiesel [40]. At this optimum pressure the thermal effi-
ciency was similar to diesel and a reduction in CO, HC and PM with
an increase in NOx was noticed compared to diesel. In their con-
tinued work [41], they found that LSO biodiesel cannot be used as
a sole fuel due to higher NO formation and lower BTE than those of
JO biodiesel and coconut oil biodiesel. They focused on the effect of
biodiesel molecular weight, structure, and the number of double
bonds on diesel engine operation characteristics. They found that a
biodiesel with more unsaturated fatty acid composition has more
density and iodine number but less viscosity, heating value and
cetane number. In addition, a more unsaturated biodiesel emits
higher HC, CO and PM compared to highly saturated biodiesel fuel.
It should be pointed out that more NO was observed in the case of
highly unsaturated biodiesel (coconut oil biodiesel oJO
biodiesel oLSO biodiesel) due to higher ignition delay and
advancement in fuel injection timing.
4.7. Rubber seed biodiesel and its blends
Geo et al. [42] had studied the performance and emission
characteristics of a single cylinder diesel engine operated with
preheated rubber seed oil by exhaust gas and rubber seed oil (RSO)
without preheating and compared the results with those of diesel
fuel. Their results show that the brake thermal efficiency increases
from 26.56% to 27.89% when the fuel is preheated. However, lower
thermal efficiency is found in neat RSO and preheated RSO com-
pared to diesel fuel (29.93%). Specific fuel consumption of neat
RSO is more than that of diesel fuel. However, fuel preheating
leads to the improvement in specific fuel consumption. NOx
emission for neat RSO operation is 6.9 and 10.69 g/kWh with
diesel at full load. However, NOx emission increased with increase
in fuel inlet temperature, but the preheated RSO is still 20% lower
than that of diesel operation. Smoke emission for neat RSO
operation is much higher than that of diesel fuel. This may be due
to larger molecule of vegetable oil which will increase the eva-
poration time and poor fuel air mixing rate. Fuel preheating can
remarkably reduce the smoke level. However, smoke level for
preheated RSO operation was still higher than that of diesel fuel.
Neat RSO, diesel and RSO biodiesel were used as fuels in the CI
engine and the performance and emission characteristics of the
engine were compared and analyzed [43]. They found that the
lower blends of biodiesel increase the brake thermal efficiency and
reduce the fuel consumption. The exhaust gas emissions are
1364 B.S. Chauhan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 1358–1368
reduced with increase in biodiesel concentration. The investiga-
tion to analyze the engine performance and exhaust emissions of
CI engine fueled with neat RSO, RSO biodiesel was carried out by
Geo et al. [44]. The brake thermal efficiency is 26.53% with neat
RSO, 27.89% with RSO biodiesel and 29.93% with diesel at full load.
Smoke levels are higher with neat RSO and RSO biodiesel as
compared to diesel. However, smoke emission is lower with RSO
biodiesel than neat RSO due to the lower viscosity of RSO bio-
diesel. NOx emission for neat RSO operation is 6.9 and 9.6 g/kW h
with RSO biodiesel and 10.7 g/kW h with diesel at full load. The
performance, emission and combustion characteristics of a single
cylinder CI engine running on RSO biodiesel, and its blends with
diesel (B20, B60, B80) were evaluated and compared with diesel
operation by Pradeep and Sharma [45]. BTE with RSO biodiesel
was found to be inferior compared to petro-diesel at peak power.
However, its blends with diesel showed reasonable efficiencies,
lower smoke and comparable CO and HC emissions. RSO biodiesel
indicated higher smoke, CO, HC and lower NO emission at
peak power.
4.8. Neem biodiesel and its blends
Rao and Saravanan [46] compared the performance and emission
characteristics of neat NO and NO blends (25%) with diesel with
mineral No. 2 diesel fuel. They found that NO showed lower NOx
emissions when compared with diesel and NO blends. NO blends with
diesel showed slightly higher smoke intensities than diesel. CO and HC
emissions of NO blends are lower compared to their neat NO and
mineral diesel. The brake thermal efficiency of neat NO and its blends
were comparable with diesel fuel.
Nabi et al. [47] had reported the experimental result of combus-
tion and exhaust emissions with diesel fuel and diesel–neem oil
methyl ester (NOME) and castor oil methyl ester (0%, 5%, 10%, 15%,
and 20%). In their investigation, diesel–NOME blends showed lower
CO and smoke emissions compared with neat diesel fuel. With die-
sel–NOME blends, NOx was reduced at retarded injection timing but
increased at advanced injection timing. In the continued work, Nabi
et al. [48] had investigated the combustion and exhaust emissions
with diesel fuel and diesel–NOME blends (5%, 10%, and 15%). They
found that exhaust emissions including smoke and CO were reduced,
while NOx emission was increased with diesel–NOME blends for all
the injection timing, compared with conventional diesel fuel. They
argue that this result is identical with the result from diesel–edible
biodiesel blends. However, it is clear that this is different from their
former work [47]. Theoretical and experimental investigation to
evaluate the performance and exhaust characteristics of neat bio-
diesel of NO including JO and KO had been reported [49]. They found
that brake thermal efficiency for methyl esters of three non-edible
vegetable oils is nearly close to diesel. In addition, CO, NOx, HC and
smoke emission were reduced to 18%, 3%, 18% and 12% for NOME
when compared to diesel fuel.
4.9. Miscellaneous blended fuels
Depend upon the geographical variation as per the economical
availability many more kinds of fuel were also tried by the
researchers. Another such fuel is cashew nut shell oil. Kasiraman
et al. [50] had reported that the usage of neat cashew nut shell oil
(CSNO) as a fuel in direct injection diesel engine suffers from the
problems of incomplete combustion and low brake thermal effi-
ciency due to high viscosity. To overcome this problem, the CSNO
was blended with camphor oil (CMPRO) which is less viscous and
burns readily, in various proportions by volume. In an experiment
by Kasiraman et al. [50], a single cylinder compression ignition
engine was operated successfully using neat cashew nut shell oil
(CSNO), and blends of CSNO with 10%, 20% and 30% camphor oil
(CMPRO 10, CMPRO20 and CMPRO 30, respectively). Fuel con-
sumption, air consumption brake power output, crank angle
cylinder pressure data and emissions such as CO, HC, NO and
smoke were measured at various loads. The performance and
combustion characteristics were calculated. The performance,
emission and combustion characteristics of the engine using these
fuels are compared with the diesel fuel operation at maximum
power output. Based on the experimental results the following
conclusions are drawn. The blending of camphor oil significantly
improves the performance of cashew nut shell oil as fuel in a DI
diesel engine. This is mainly due to lower viscosity of camphor
oil and its better ignition properties. Improved atomization vap-
orization and mixing are obtained with camphor oil addition
resulting in complete combustion. The cashew nut shell oil 70%
and camphor oil 30% blend (CMPRO 30) performs closer to diesel
with respect to performance, emission and combustion char-
acteristics. The brake thermal efficiency of CMPRO 30 blend is
29.1% at peak load compared to diesel brake thermal efficiency of
30.14% whereas it is 23.1% for neat CSNO.
As investigated by Nabi et al. [51], Marine gas oil (MGO) was
selected as base fuel for the engine experiments. Oxygenate, die-
thylene glycol dimethyl ether (DGM), and a biodiesel (BD) jatropha
oil methyl ester (JOME) with a volume of 10% were blended with
the MGO fuel. JOME was derived from inedible jatropha oil. The
neat MGO, MGO–DGM and MGO–JOME blends are termed as
MGO, Ox10 and B10 respectively. The oxygen content in Ox10 fuel
was 3.58 wt%, while 1.3 wt% for B10 Fuel.
All properties of MGO are close to those of diesel fuel. Cetane
number, which is one of the important properties for diesel fuel is
higher for the blended fuels (Ox10 and B10). The density, kinematic
viscosity and the calorific values of the blended fuels are closely
related to those of MGO or diesel fuel. In the study carried out by
Nabi et al. [51], it was found that Fine particle number and mass
emissions were significantly lower in B10 and Ox10 fuels compared
to MGO fuel for all engine loads. And also compared to MGO fuel, B10
and Ox10 fuels reduced CO emissions by 13% and 21% respectively. It
was also determined that the BSFC and engine thermal efficiency
were identical to all the fuels. Ultra-low sulfur diesel and two dif-
ferent kinds of biodiesel fuels blended with baseline diesel fuel in 5%
and 20% v/v were tested by Zhu et al. [52] in a Cummins 4BTA direct
injection diesel engine, with a turbocharger and an intercooler.
Experiments were conducted under five engine loads at two steady
speeds (1500 rpm and 2500 rpm). The study aimed at investigating
the engine performance, NOx emission, smoke opacity, PM compo-
sition, PM size distribution and comparing the impacts of low sulfur
content of biodiesel with ULSD on the particulate emission. The
results indicated that, compared to base diesel fuel, the increase of
biodiesel in blends could cause certain increase in both brake specific
fuel consumption and brake thermal efficiency. Compared with
baseline diesel fuel, the biodiesel blends bring about more NOx
emissions. With the proportion of biodiesel increase in blends, the
smoke opacity decreases, while total particle number concentration
increases. Meanwhile the ULSD gives lower NOx emissions, smoke
opacity and total number concentration than those of baseline diesel
fuel. In addition, the percentages of SOF and sulfate in particulates
increase with biodiesel in blends, while the dry soot friction
obviously decreases. Compared with baseline diesel fuel, the bio-
diesel blends increase the total nucleation number concentration,
while ULSD reduces the total nucleation number concentration
effectively, although they all have lower sulfur content. It means that,
for ULSD, the lower sulfur content is the dominant factor for sup-
pressing nucleation particles formation, while for biodiesel blends,
lower volatile, lower aromatic content and higher oxygen content of
biodiesel are key factors for improving the nucleation particles for-
mation. The results by Lei Zhu el al. [52] demonstrate that the higher
NOx emission and total nucleation number concentration are
 B.S. Chauhan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 1358–1368 1365

considered as the big obstacles of the application of biodiesel in
diesel engine.
Mrad et al. [53] carried out work in which the biofuel from fish
oil industrial residue is produced by catalytic cracking. From the
fish production, about 54% is transformed into waste i.e. offal,
bones, skin/scales, etc. The waste includes heads, bones, tail etc.
which extract fish oil. These wastes contain 54% water, 4% solid
and 42% fish oil (15% of total mass). The brake thermal efficiency is
higher when biofuel is used as a neat fuel (B100) compared to the
blends. It was found that the brake thermal efficiency is 32.4% with
neat biofuel of 80% of maximum load. This is mainly because good
hydrocarbon groups are present in biofuel compared to diesel
which increase the rate of combustion. Also, higher cetane number
of biofuel starts the combustion early, resulting in more energy

Table 4
Various fuel study and findings.

Fuel Author Configuration of engines used Findings

Diethyl ether Rakopoulos et al. [13]
Ethyl-tert-butyl ether Górski et al. [16]
Jatropha oil biodiesel Chauhan et al. [26];
Subramiun et al. [22]
Karanja oil biodiesel Jindal et al. [14]
Mahua oil biodiesel Puhan et al. [33]; Rahe-
man and Ghadge [35]
Linseed oil biodiesel Beg et al. [38]
Agarwal et al. [39]
Rubber seed oil Geo et al. [42]; Ramad-
biodiesel has et al. [43]
Neem oil biodiesel Rao and Saravanan [46]
Nabi et al. [47]
Cashew nut shell oil Kasiraman et al. [50]
Marine gas oil Nabi et al. [51]
Ultra-low sulfur diesel Zhu et al. [52]
Biofuel from fish oil Mrad et al. [53]
industrial residue
Single-cylinder, four-stroke, high-speed direct
injection (HSDI)
4-Stroke, 4-cylinder, water-cooled, turbocharged
direct-injection unit equipped with a BOSCH
common rail fuel injection system
Low heat rejection diesel engine
IDI diesel engine with EGR
Direct injection CI engine
Single cylinder direct injection CI engine a single Decrease (13%) in thermal efficiency as compared to diesel fuel
cylinder four stroke diesel engine at a compres-
sion ratio of 18:1 to 20:1
Diesel engine running on vegetable oil
Single cylinder diesel engine
Diesel engine Using blended fuel
Direct injection diesel engine
Scania DC 1102 (EURO II) 6 cylinder
Cummins 4BTA direct injection diesel engine, with The higher NOx emission and total nucleation number con-
a turbocharger and an intercooler
Lister Petter single cylinder air cooled
Can be used safely and advantageously up to high blending
ratios with the diesel fuel in the diesel engine, both from the
point of view of thermal efficiency and exhaust emissions, with
no stability problems of engine operation
Small amounts of ETBE can be used effectively as an oxygenated
additive to diesel oil in a diesel engine reducing PM and smoke
emissions while altering the physicochemical properties within
acceptable limits
JO biodiesel was found to be an effective substitute for use in CI
engine, except for higher smoke levels
Best fuel economy was observed with 10% biodiesel blended
fuel NOx emissions increased while smoke emission was
reduced at all speed ranges in two test modes
KO biodiesel gave better thermal efficiency but performed
poorer than diesel. Emissions of HC, NOx and PM were found to
be lower but CO and CO2 emissions were lower with KO bio-
diesel when compared to diesel emission
biodiesel could be blended with diesel fuel up to 20% at any
compression ratio and injection timing tested for getting nearly
same performance as that with diesel.
Brake thermal efficiency decreases as the proportion of diesel
fuel decrease in the diesel fuel–linseed oil blends
Exhaust gas temperature, CO emission and smoke density are
increased but NOx level is decreased by 20%; LSO biodiesel
blend showed maximum thermal efficiency, maximum BSEC,
and lowest smoke density compared to all the other LSO bio-
diesel blends (10%, 30%, 50% and 100%, v/v)
The brake thermal efficiency increases from 26.56% to 27.89%
when the fuel is preheated. The brake thermal efficiency
increases from 26.56% to 27.89% when the fuel is preheated.
However, lower thermal efficiency is found in neat RSO and
preheated RSO compared to diesel fuel (29.93%) lower blends of
biodiesel increase the brake thermal efficiency and reduce the
fuel consumption
NO showed lower NOx emissions when compared with diesel
and NO blends. NO blends with diesel showed slightly higher
smoke intensities than diesel. CO and HC emissions of NO
blends are lower compared to their neat NO and mineral diesel.
The brake thermal efficiency of neat NO and its blends were
comparable diesel fuel
Diesel–NOME blends showed lower CO and smoke emissions
compared with neat diesel fuel
With diesel–NOME blends, NOx was reduced at retarded
injection timing but increased at advanced injection timing
The usage of neat cashew nut shell oil (CSNO) suffers from the
problems of incomplete combustion and low brake thermal
efficiency due to high viscosity. To overcome this problem, the
CSNO was blended with camphor oil (CMPRO). It improved the
performance of cashew nut shell oil as fuel due to lower visc-
osity of camphor oil and its better ignition properties. Improved
atomization vaporization and mixing are obtained with cam-
phor oil addition resulting in complete combustion
Fine particle number and mass emissions were significantly
lower with fuel blended with DGM & JOME compared to MGO
fuel for all engine loads
centration are considered as the big obstacles of the application
of biodiesel in diesel engine
The engine was running very smoothly with biofuel derived
from fish oil industrial residue and its blends. The particulate
emissions reduced for blends than diesel. But there is a slight
increase in NOx emissions with biofuel and its blends than
diesel
1366 B.S. Chauhan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 1358–1368
release at the beginning of expansion stroke that reflects higher
mechanical output. The brake thermal efficiency increases with
the blend of biofuel with diesel. The brake thermal efficiency is
31.1% with B40, 30.6% with B20 and 29.98% with neat diesel at 80%
of maximum load. From experimental work by Mrad et al. [53] it
was observed that the engine was running very smoothly with
biofuel derived from fish oil industrial residue and its blends. The
particulate emissions reduced for blends than diesel. But there is a
slight increase in NOx emissions with biofuel and its blends than
diesel. The summary of various authors across the globe and their
findings are summarized in Table 4.
4.10. Higher alcohols as mixed fuel
Butanol, on the other hand, has a higher heating value, higher
cetane number, and lower vapor pressure. It is also less hydrophilic
and has a higher miscibility factor in diesel than ethanol. The energy
content of n-butanol fuel is 28.4 MJ/L and ethanol energy content is
21.2 MJ/L only. Because n-butanol is more hydrophobic than ethanol,
it allows the use of currently existing fuel distribution infrastructure
[54]. Moreover ethanol is unsuitable for combustion in compression
ignition engines, because of its insufficient auto-ignition quality [55].
Due to high carbon content in alcohol molecules and good inter-
solubility with diesel without addition of any co-solvents or emulsi-
fiers, n-butanol makes it easier to blend with diesel.
Siwale et al. [57] carried out burning of 5%, 10%, and 20% shared
volume of n-butanol (B05, B10, and B20, where B05 represents 5%
shared volume of n-butanol with 95% diesel fuel) with diesel fuel
(DF) in a high load, light duty, turbo-charged diesel engine. The
aim was to compare the effects of the blends on the engine
combustion characteristics and regulated emissions namely
nitrogen oxides (NOx), unburned hydrocarbon (UHC), carbon
monoxide (CO) and soot results from this study with a similar past
study: (30% rapeseed oil methyl esters (RMEs) shared volume with
similar diesel fuel admixed to 5% or 7.5% bioethanol). Using n-
butanol shared volume, B05, B10 and B20 significantly improved
the reduction of regulated emissions compared to the other stu-
dies. In this study the reduction or increase percentage relative to
DF was as follows at 75% load at 1500 rpm for B5, B10, B20 mix-
tures: soot reduction was 55.5%, 77.8%, and 85.1% respectively; CO
reduction was 35.7%, 57.1% and 71.4%; increase in NOx was 10.3%,
32.3% and 54.4%; increase in UHC was 21.4%, 71.4%, 214% respec-
tively. The premixed phase combustion was amplified and distin-
guishable with increase of shared volume of n-butanol in DF. The
combustion cycles of the blends were more stable than the
cycles of DF.
Methanol-to-diesel (MTD) means a synthetic diesel fuel, its raw
material is methanol. And it is a liquid alcohol ether mixture with
appropriate amount of additives, which can be blended with diesel
fuel at various levels. It was synthesized [56,57] by methanol with
1,2-epoxypropane and epoxyethane using modified calcined Mg/
Al hydroxides as catalysts. The test and study on the physical
properties of MTD and the fuel consumption and emissions of
diesel engine using the mixed MTD and diesel fuel was performed
by Guo et al. [56]. The results indicated that there was no sig-
nificant difference in the power values of diesel and the blend
fuels while fuel consumption increased around 14%, and there
were much lower emissions of the exhaust. When using the diesel
fuel mixed with 20–30% of MTD, the conclusion made was that
MTD is a cheap and clean low power loss additive fuel for diesel
engines. Studies on an increase in the diesel fuel quality by adding
additives have been conducted [58,59]. However, oxygenated
additive was one that has been extensively discussed earlier due to
its high oxygen content. Shi [60] found that some essential oils as
bio-additive could improve engine performance by reducing fuel
consumption. This observation was supported by the finding of
Butkus et al. [61] who reported that addition of 5% of turpentine
oil on diesel fuel had a positive influence on the engine perfor-
mance and exhaust emission. Pramanik [62] discovered that fuel
blend containing 50% of jatropha oil could enhance thermal effi-
ciency of the engine. Further research by Forson et al. [63] con-
cluded that jatropha oil could be used as an ignition-accelerator
additive for diesel fuel in proportion of 97.4%/2.6% by volume due
to its ability to produce maximum values of the brake power and
brake thermal efficiency as well as minimum value of the specific
fuel consumption.
Extending the previous work, Kadarohman et al. [64] compared
turpentine oil and clove oil as the most potential bioadditives, and
the result pointed out that clove oil bio-additive had a better
performance than turpentine oil in increasing the process of fuel
combustion reactivity. In further investigation, the research
focused on clove oil. Clove oil is essential oil largely composed of
eugenol as the main component [65]. Eugenol has a bulky struc-
ture and two oxygen atoms. It can also form eugenyl acetate by
ester reaction. The study on clove oil, eugenol, and eugenyl acetate
as diesel fuel bio-additives and their performance on one cylinder
engine had been evaluated, and the finding displayed that at 0.2%
of bio-additive, three of the fuel blends could decrease break
specific fuel consumption (BSFC) and reduce exhaust emissions of
the engine as well as oxygen enrichment to eugenol by ester-
ification that helped in reaching optimal fuel combustion [66,67].
This research showed that at low percentage of bio-additive, per-
formance test did not indicate a significant decrease in BSFC. It
means that these bio-additives could not save fuel consumption.
Nevertheless, the decrease of BSFC in every formula exhibited that
clove oil, eugenol, and eugenyl acetate had a great potential to
reduce fuel consumption rate in a larger composition.
Fully paraffinic diesel fuel produced from hydro treated vege-
table oils (HVOs) is one alternative to increase the share of
renewable energy in the transport sector as shown by Matti et al.
[68]. HVO fuel has also been shown to reduce exhaust emissions
but, as the fuel contains no oxygen, even higher emissions
reductions are possible by blending the HVO fuel with suitable
oxygenate. From a large number of oxygenates, di-n-pentyl ether
(DNPE) was chosen due to its favorable fuel properties (e.g. high
cetane number and good solubility to diesel). In this paper, it was
studied how fuel blend containing 2 wt% oxygen (80 wt% HVO and
20 wt% DNPE) affects particulate and NOx emissions of a single-
cylinder research engine. It was observed that the blend reduced
emitted particulate mass 25–30% depending on load while the
NOx emissions was changed under 5%. Thus, PM and NOx can
possibly be reduced, e.g., by utilizing EGR. In addition to emission
reductions, the effects of the blend on the hygroscopic properties
of produced exhaust particles were studied using a hygroscopic
tandem differential mobility analyzer (HTDMA). The addition of
oxygen into fuel led to a small increase in the hygroscopic of
exhaust particles.
Sorenson and Mikkelsen [69], Wang and Zhou [70] found that
diesel engines fueled with DME can achieve ultra-low emissions,
however, there are some drawbacks to use DME as fuel, including
the reduced viscosity and lubricity, as well as the vapor block for
its low boiling temperature. Huang et al. [71] studied the com-
bustion and emission characteristics of a diesel engine fueled with
diesel-DMC blends and found that the engine's thermal efficiency
increases and the emissions of PM and CO decrease. Bai et al. [72]
found that DMC can reduce PM and NOx simultaneously when
EGR was adopted. Matti Maricq and Chase et al. [73] carried out
investigations on DMM and their studies showed that the addition
of DMM causes a shift in the PM size distribution to smaller dia-
meters and substantial PM reduction. There is no change in NOx
emissions. As a very volatile component, DMM will cause to froth
easily when added in diesel.
 B.S. Chauhan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 1358–1368
According to Yanfeng et al. [74] 2-methoxyethyl acetate (MEA) can
be used to decrease exhaust smoke as a new oxygenated additive
of diesel. Several fuel blends which contain 10%, 15% and 20% MEA
were prepared. The effects of MEA on engine's power, fuel economy,
emissions and combustion characteristics were studied on a single
cylinder DI diesel engine. It was concluded that the cylinder pressure,
the rate of rise in pressure and the ignition delay change little when
the engine runs on diesel-MEA blends. While the combustion dura-
tion becomes shorter, the engine thermal efficiency increases with the
increase of MEA in the blends. The emissions of CO and HC decrease
with the increase of MEA in the blends. However, the blends have
almost no effects on the NOx emissions.
5. Conclusion
The present study was carried out to find the suitability of
blended fuels from various origins as a substitute for diesel in
existing diesel engine without any major modification in the
engine hardware, considering that the emissions from blended
fuel are environment friendly and are biodegradable. To meet
growing energy requirement, use of blended fuel is a viable
solution. In all cases the engine performance was inferior and
combustion characteristics were not similar. But the performance
lies in close resemblance with diesel fuel for biodiesel blends and
combustion characteristics were fair as compared to alcohol and
ethers blend in diesel engine. Biodiesel blended fuel shows lower
brake thermal efficiency and slight increase in its brake specific
fuel consumption compared to conventional diesel for the same
energy output. Emission characteristics of biodiesel fuel blend
were in close resemblance with that of diesel except NOx emis-
sion. The increased NOx can be controlled in near future using
auxiliary technologies. It is clear from this review that all the
blends studied generally cause an increase in NOx emission and a
decrease in HC, CO and PM emissions compared to diesel. The
results from the review suggest that bio fuels from different origin
and its blends with diesel fuel could be a potential fuel for diesel
engine and play a vital role in the near future especially for small
and medium energy production. However, 10% and up to 20%
blend of biodiesel is favorable with long term use of diesel engine.
Acknowledgments
The authors are thankful to Kongju National University, South
Korea for providing the necessary support. This work was sup-
ported by the Human Resources Development program (No.
20134030200290) of the Korea Institute of Energy Technology
Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) grant funded by the Korea gov-
ernment Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy. The authors are
thankful to James PP from Department of Physics, Delhi Techno-
logical University-Delhi, India.
References
[1] Chauhan BS, Kumar N, Jun YD, Lee KB. Performance and emission study of
preheated Jatropha oil on medium capacity diesel engine. Energy
2010;35:2484–92.
[2] Chauhan BS, Kumar N, Cho HM, Lim Hee Chang. A study on the performance
and emission of a diesel engine fuelled with Karanja biodiesel and its blends.
Energy 2013;56:1–7.
[3] Chauhan BS, Kumar N, Pal SS, Jun YD. Experimental studies on fumigation of
ethanol in a small capacity diesel engine. Energy 2011;36:1030–8.
[4] Yuan Zhen-Zhong, Chauhan BS, Lim HC. Study of a wave absorber in various
distance placed in a sinusoidal propagate wave. Appl Mech Mater
2013;302:326–31.
1367
[5] Chauhan BS, Kumar N. HM Cho performance and emission studies on an
agriculture engine on neat Jatropha oil. J Mech Sci Technol 2010;24(2):529–35.
[6] 〈http://lifeseedcapital.eu/condiciones/extdoc/PERFORMANCE%20AND%
20EMISSION%20STUDIES%20JATROPHA.pdf〉.
[7] Cho HM, Rai AK, Chauhan BS, Pandey A. Experimental study of linseed oil as an
alternative fuel for diesel engine. Int J Adv Res Innov 2013;2:1–5.
[8] Rai AK, Chauhan, BS, Cho HM, Kumar N. A study on the performance and
emission characteristics of a diesel engine fuelled with linseed oil and diesel
blends. In: Proceedings of international mechanical engineering congress and
exposition,. ASME; 2013. doi: 10.1115/IMECE2013-6593.
[9] Sharma AK, Das LM, Naik SN, Chauhan BS, Cho HM. Emission analysis of a
medium capacity diesel engine using mahua biodiesel. J Energy Eng 2013;22
(2):136–47.
[10] Rai AK, Chauhan BS, Kumar N, Cho HM, Pandey A. Physico-chemical analysis of
linseed oil and its blends as a potential fuel for diesel engine. Adv Mater Res
2013;724–725:405–8.
[11] Misra C, Kumar N, Chauhan BS, Lim HC. Some experimental investigation on
use of methanol and diesel blend in a single cylinder diesel engine. Int J Renew
Energy Technol Res 2013;2(1):1–16.
[12] No SY. Inedible vegetable oils and their derivatives for alternative diesel fuels
in CI engines: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2011;15(1):131–49.
[13] Rakopoulos Dimitrios C, Rakopoulos Constantine D, Giakoumis Evangelos G,
Dimaratos Athanasios M. Characteristics of performance and emissions in
high-speed direct injection diesel engine fueled with diethyl ether/diesel fuel
blends. Energy 2012;43(1):214–24.
[14] Cho HM, Chauhan BS. The study on performance and emission of CNG as a
potential fuel in Korea. J Korean Inst Gas (KIGAS) 2009;13(6):39–43.
[15] Chauhan BS, Cho HM. A study on experiment of CNG as a clean fuel for
automobile in Korea. J Korean Soc Atmos Environ 2010;26(5):469–74.
[16] Górski Krzysztof, Sen Asok K, Lotko Wincenty, Swat Marek. Effects of ethyl-
tert-butyl ether (ETBE) addition on the physicochemical properties of diesel
oil and particulate matter and smoke emissions from diesel engines. Fuel
2013;103:1138–43.
[17] Gómez-Cuenca F, Gómez-Marín M, Folgueras-Díaz MB. Effects of ethylene
glycol ethers on diesel fuel properties and emissions in a diesel engine. Energy
Convers Manag 2011;52(8):3027–33.
[18] Rakopoulos DC. Combustion and emissions of cottonseed oil and its bio-diesel
in blends with either n-butanol or diethyl ether in HSDI diesel engine. Int J
Veh Des 〈doi:10.1504/IJVD.2007.013677〉.
[19] Li Tie, Suzuki Masaru, Ogawa Hideyuki. Effects of ethyl tert-butyl ether addi-
tion to diesel fuel on characteristics of combustion and exhaust emissions of
diesel engines. Fuel 2009;88(10):2017–24.
[20] Babu AK, Devaradjane G. Vegetable oils and their derivatives as fuels for CI
engines: an overview. SAE paper 2003-01-0767.
[21] No SY. Non-edible vegetable oils for alternative fuel in compression ignition
engines. J ILASS Kor 2009;14(2):49–58.
[22] Subramanian M, Malhotra RK, Kanal PC. Performance evaluation of biodiesel
diesel blends in passenger car. SAE paper 2004-28-0088.
[23] Sundaresan M, Chandrasekaran S, Poral PT. Analysis of combustion, perfor-
mance and emission characteristics of blends of methyl esters of Jatropha Oil
(MEJ) in DI diesel engine. SAE paper 2007-32-0066.
[24] Manieniyan V, Sivaprakasam S. Investigation of diesel engine using bio-diesel
(methyl ester of Jatropha oil) for various injection timing and injection pres-
sure. SAE paper 2008-01-1577.
[25] Sahoo PK, Das LM. Combustion analysis of Jatropha, Karanja and Polanga
based biodiesel as fuel in a diesel engine. Fuel 2009;88:994–9.
[26] Chauhan BS, Kumar N, Cho HM. A study on the performance and emission of a
diesel engine fuelled with Jatropha biodiesel oil and its blends. Energy
2012;37(1):616–22.
[27] Jindal S, Nandwana BP, Rathore NS. Comparative evaluation of combustion,
performance, and emissions of Jatropha methyl ester and Karanj methyl ester
in a direct injection diesel engine. Energy Fuels 2010;24:1565–72.
[28] Graboski MS, McCormick RL. Combustion of fat and vegetable oil derived fuels
in diesel engines. Prog Energy Combust Sci 2008;24:125–64.
[29] No SY. Non-edible vegetable oils for alternative fuel in compression ignition
engines. J ILASS Kor 2009;14(2):49–58.
[30] Knothe G, Sharp CA, Ryan TW. Exhaust emissions of biodiesel, petrodiesel,
neat methyl esters, and alkanes in a new technology engine. Energy Fuels
2006;20:403–8.
[31] Bajpai S, Sahoo PK, Das LM. Feasibility of blending karanja vegetable oil in
petro-diesel and utilization in a direct injection diesel engine. Fuel
2009;88:705–11.
[32] Puhan S, Vedaraman N, Ram BVB, Sankaranarayanan G, Jeychandran K. Mahua
oil (Madhuca indica seed oil) methyl ester as biodiesel-preparation and
emission characteristics. Biomass Bioenergy 2005;28:87–93.
[33] Puhan S, Vedaraman N, Sankaranarayanan S, Ram BVB. Performance and
emission study of Mahua oil (Madhuca indica oil) ethyl ether in a 4-stroke
natural aspirated direct injection diesel engine. Renew Energy 2005;30:269–
78.
[34] Saravanan N, Nagarajan G, Puhan S. Experimental investigation on a DI diesel
engine fuelled with Madhuca indica ester and diesel blend. Biomass Bioenergy
2010;34(6):838–43.
[35] Raheman H, Ghadge SV. Performance of compression ignition engine with
mahua (Madhuca indica) biodiesel. Fuel 2007;86:2568–73.
[36] Raheman H, Ghadge SV. Performance of diesel engine with biodiesel at
varying compression ratio and ignition timing. Fuel 2008;87:2659–66.
1368 B.S. Chauhan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 59 (2016) 1358–1368
[37] Bora DK, Das LM, Babu MKG. Experimental evaluation of Mahua based bio-
diesel as supplementary diesel fuel. SAE paper 2009-01-0479.
[38] Beg RA, Rahman MS, Bose PK, Ghosh BB. Performance studies on a semi
adiabatic diesel engine using vegetable oil as fuel. SAE paper 2002-01-2692.
[39] Agarwal D, Kumar L, Agarwal AK. Performance evaluation of a vegetable oil
fuelled compression ignition engine. Renew Energy 2008;33:1147–56.
[40] Puhan S, Jegan R, Balasubbramanian K, Nagarajan G. Effect of injection pres-
sure on performance, emission and combustion characteristics of high lino-
lenic linseed oil methyl ester in a DI diesel engine. Renew Energy
2009;34:1227–33.
[41] Puhan S, Saravanan N, Nagarajan G, Vedaraman N. Effect of biodiesel unsa-
turated fatty acid on combustion characteristics of a DI compression engine.
Biomass Bioenergy 2010;34(8):1079–88.
[42] Geo VE, Nagarajan G, Nagalingam B. Experimental investigations to improve
the performance of rubber seed oil by exhaust gas preheating. SAE paper
2008-28-0049.
[43] Ramadhas AS, Muraleedharan C, Jayaraj S. Performance and emission eva-
luation of a diesel engine fueled with methyl esters of rubber seed oil. Renew
Energy 2005;30:1789–800.
[44] Geo VE, Nagarajan G, Nagalingam B. A comparative combustion analysis of
rubber seed oil and its methyl ester in a DI diesel engine. SAE paper 2008-01-
1386.
[45] Pradeep V, Sharma RP. Evaluation of performance, emission and combustion
parameters of a CI engine euelled with bio-diesel from rubber seed oil and its
blends. SAE paper 2005-26-353.
[46] Rao GLN, Saravanan S. Role of biofuels in a sustainable environment—a
technical study. Clean 2008;36(10–11):830–4.
[47] Nabi N, Shahadat Z, Rahman S, Beg RA. Behavior of diesel combustion and
exhaust emission with neat diesel fuel and diesel–biodiesel blends. SAE paper
2004-01-3034.
[48] Nabi MN, Akhter MS, Shahadat MMZ. Improvement of engine emissions with
conventional diesel fuel and diesel–biodiesel blends. Bioresour Technol
2006;97:372–8.
[49] Sundraapandian S, Devaradjane G. Theoretical and experimental investigation
of the performance of vegetable-oil-operated CI engine. SAE paper 2007-32-
0067.
[50] Kasiraman G, Nagalingam B, Balakrishnan M. Performance, emission and
combustion improvements in a direct injection diesel engine using cashew
nut shell oil as fuel with camphor oil blending. Energy 2012;47:116–24.
[51] Nabi Md Nurun, Hustad Johan Einar. Experimental investigation of engine
emissions with marine gas oil-oxygenate blends. Sci Total Environ
2010;408:3231–9.
[52] Zhu Lei, Zhang Wugao, Liu Wei, Huang Zhen. Experimental study on parti-
culate and NOx emissions of a diesel engine fueled with ultra-low sulfur
diesel, RME-diesel blends and PME-diesel blends. Sci Total Environ
2010;408:1050–8.
[53] Mrad Nadia, Varuvel Edwin Geo, Tazerout Mohand, Aloui Fethi. Effects of
biofuel from fish oil industrial residue e Diesel blends in diesel engine. Energy
2012;44:955–63.
[54] Bryan W, et al. Autoignition of n-butanol at elevated pressure and low-to-
intermediate temperature. Combust Flame 2011;158:809–19.
[55] Murat C, Yuksel F, Hus H. Emission characteristics of a converted diesel engine
using ethanol as fuel. Energy Sustain Dev 2009;13:250–4.
[56] Guo ZQ, Xie HM, Liu BC, Pan B, Chen PW, Zhang QM, Huang FL. Digital image
correlation study on micro-crystal of poly-crystal aluminum specimen under
tensile load through SEM. Key Eng Mater 2006;326:155–8.
[57] Siwale Lennox, Kristóf Lukács, Adam Torok, Bereczky Akos, Mbarawa Makame,
Penninger Antal, Kolesnikov Andrei. Combustion and emission characteristics
of n-butanol/diesel fuel blend in a turbo-charged compression ignition engine.
J Power Energy Eng 2013;1:77–83.
[58] Gürü M, Karakaya U, Altıparmak D, Alıcılar A. Improvement of diesel fuel
properties by using additives. Energy Convers Manag 2002;43:1021–5.
[59] Tracy NI, Chen D, Crunkleton DW, Price GL. Hydrogenated mono-terpenes as
diesel fuel additives. Fuel 2009;88:2238–40.
[60] Shi X, Yu Y, He H, Shuai S, Wang J, Li R. Emission characteristics using methyl
soyate–ethanol–diesel fuel blends on a diesel engine. Fuel 2001;84:1543–9.
[61] Butkus A, Pukalskas S, Bogdanovicius Z. The influence of turpentine additive
on the ecological parameters of diesel engines. Transport 2007;22:80–2.
[62] Pramanik K. Properties and use of Jatropha curcas oil and diesel fuel blends in
compression ignition engine. Renew Energy 2003;28:39–48.
[63] Forson FK, Oduro EK, Hammond-Donkoh E. Performance of Jatropha oil blends
in a diesel engine. Renew Energy 2004;29:135–45.
[64] Kadarohman A, Hernani Khoerunisa F, Astuti RM. Potency of clove oil and
turpentine oil as a diesel fuel bioadditives and their performance on one
cylinder engine. Proc Int Semin Chem 2008.
[65] Kadarohman A, Hernani, Rohman I, Kusrini R, Astut RM. Combustion char-
acteristics of diesel fuel on one cylinder diesel engine using clove oil, eugenol,
and eugenyl acetate as fuel bio-additives. Fuel 2012;98:73–9.
[66] Kadarohman A, Hernani, Khoerunisa F, Astuti RM. A potential study on clove
oil, eugenol and eugenyl acetate as diesel fuel bio-additives and their per-
formance on one cylinder engine. Transport 2010;25:66–76.
[67] Ali Y, Hanna MA. Alternative diesel fuels from vegetable oils. Bioresour
Technol 1994;50:153–63.
[68] Happonen Matti, Heikkilä Juha, Päivi Aakko-Saksa, Murtonen Timo, Lehto
Kalle, Rostedt Antti, Sarjovaara Teemu, Larmi Martti, Keskinen Jorma, Virtanen
Annele. Diesel exhaust emissions and particle hygroscopicity with HVO fuel–
oxygenate blend. Fuel 2013;103:380–6.
[69] Sorenson SC, Mikkelsen SE. Performance and emissions of a 0.273 l direct
injection diesel engine fueled with neat dimethyl ether. SAE Trans 1995;104
(4):80–90.
[70] Wang Hw, Zhou LB, et al. Study on emission characteristics of direct injection
diesel engine fueled with dimethyl ether. Trans CSICE 2000;1(18):6–10.
[71] Huang ZH, Jiang DM, Zeng K, et al. Combustion characteristics and heat
release analysis of a direct injection compression ignition engine fuelled with
diesel-dimethyl carbonate blends. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part D: J Autom Eng
2003;217:595–605.
[72] Bai FQ, Zhou LB, Wang HW. Simultaneous reductions of smoke and NOx
emission from light duty DI diesel engine with oxygenate fuel and EGR. J
Combust Sci Technol 2002;8:515–9.
[73] Matti M, Maricq RE, Chase DH, Podsiadlik, et al. The effect of dimethoxy
methane additive on diesel vehicle particulate emissions. SAE paper, 982572.
[74] Yanfeng Gong, Shenghua Liu, Hejun Guo, Tiegang Hu, Longbao Zhou. A new
diesel oxygenate additive and its effects on engine combustion and emissions.
Appl Therm Eng 2007;27:202–7.