Fuel 120 (2014) 91–97

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Fuel
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fuel

Nanofuels: Combustion, engine performance and emissions

Rakhi N. Mehta a,b, Mousumi Chakraborty b,⇑, Parimal A. Parikh b,⇑
a
Chemical Engineering Department, Sarvajanik College of Engineering and Technology, Surat 395 001, India
b
Chemical Engineering Department, S.V. National Institute of Technology, Surat 395 007, India

h i g h l i g h t s

 Stable suspensions of nano-particles of Al, Fe and B in diesel were used as fuels.

 These fuels showed reduced ignition delay, and longer flame sustenance.
 Specific fuel consumption reduced by 7% with nanoparticle modified fuels.
 Emissions of CO and hydrocarbons reduced, however NOx marginally increased.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Experimental investigation was carried out to study the burning characteristics, engine performance and
Received 7 March 2013 emission parameters of a single-cylinder Compression Ignition (CI) engine using nanofuels which were
Received in revised form 4 December 2013 formulated by sonicating nanoparticles of aluminum (A1), iron (F1) and boron (B1) in base diesel. These
Accepted 5 December 2013
fuels showed reduced ignition delay, longer flame sustenance and agglomerate ignition. Study of engine
Available online 18 December 2013
performance at higher loads revealed drop in peak cylinder pressures and reduction of 7% in specific fuel
consumption for A1 as compared to diesel. Improved combustion rates raised exhaust gas temperatures
Keywords:
by 8%, 7% and 5% leading to increased brake thermal efficiencies by 9%, 4%, and 2% for A1, F1, and B1
Nanofuel
Engine performance
respectively, as compared to diesel at maximum loading conditions. Volumetric reduction of 25–40%
Emissions in CO emission, 8% and 4% in hydrocarbon emission was measured when the engine was fueled with
Burning characteristics A1 and F1 respectively as compared to emissions from diesel. However, elevated temperatures resulted
Ignition delay into marginal rise in NOx emission.
Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction blended fuels is the disruption/microexplosion behavior of the fuel

Application of nanoscale energetic metal particle additives in li-
quid fuel is an interesting concept yet unexplored to its full poten-
tial. Such formulated nanofuels offer: shortened ignition delay,
decreased burn times and rapid oxidation which leads to complete
combustion [1–3]. Overall calorific value of the liquid fuel in-
creases due to higher energy density of metal particles, eventually
improving the performance of engine by boosting power output.
The study of evaporation rate and ignition probability plays an
important role in determining two critical properties: ignition de-
lay and ignition temperature which characterizes the performance
of a diesel engine and are also instrumental in curtailing emissions
[4]. Reports have shown that fuels blended with nanoparticles of
aluminum, boron or carbon particles enhance ignition probability
at lower temperatures as compared to diesel and initiate combus-
tion thereby reducing ignition delay [5–8]. A crucial phenomenon
involved in improving the combustion rate of the nanoparticle
⇑ Corresponding authors. Tel.: +91 2612201644; fax: +91
(P.A. Parikh).
E-mail address: parimal.svr@gmail.com (P.A. Parikh).
droplets and was first discovered by Takahashi et al. [9] for slurries
of boron/JP-10. This behavior was also evidenced by a few other
studies involving aluminum, boron, iron and carbon slurries [10–
13]. In order to ensure the feasibility of these derived fuels as com-
mercial substitutes of conventional fuels, they were tested in diesel
engine. Cited studies have shown reduced brake specific fuel con-
sumption, smoke and NOx formation with combustion of Al-nano-
fluid in Compression Ignition (CI) engine [14,15]. Aluminum
nanopowder when blended with water/diesel emulsion fuel reacts
with water at higher temperatures and generates hydrogen which
promotes combustion in engine chamber [16].
Present investigation is focused on incorporating energetic me-
tal nanoparticles of aluminum, iron and boron in petro-diesel as
additives to accelerate combustion rates, reduce ignition delay,
and boost calorific values. Engine performance, emissions and
combustion attributes of CI engine also have been studied. The
ensuing section aims to (i) determine the evaporation rates and
ignition probability of the formulated and stabilized nanofuels
2612227334
(ii) study different combustion stages to explore the burning
mechanism of the nanofuel droplets, (iii) study performance char-
acteristics of single-cylinder four-strokes Compression Ignition

0016-2361/$ - see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2013.12.008
92 R.N. Mehta et al. / Fuel 120 (2014) 91–97

engine with nanofuels and compare them with diesel and (iv)
examine emissions and soot produced to investigate their environ-
mental impact.
2. Experimental methods
2.1. Fuel formulation
Stable and homogeneous suspension of iron, aluminum and
boron (Nanoshel LLC, USA) in base diesel was made using ultrason-
ication (Sonics Vibra cell-USA, 750 W, 20 kHz) for 15 min, and
addition of the surfactant Span80™ (Qualigen Chemicals, Mumbai,
India). The most stable nanofuels with maximum particle loading
were selected on the basis of backscattering profiles (Turbiscan
classic MA 2000 (Formulaction, France). Compositions of the fuels
was nanoparticles (n-Fe, n-Al or n-B) 0.5 wt%, Span80 (0.1 wt%) and
rest diesel. Physical properties of nanoparticles (Nanoshel LLC,
USA) and nomenclature of selected stable nanofuels are given in
Table 1.
2.2. Droplet combustion experiment setup
Fig. 1 shows a schematic diagram of the droplet combustion
experiment. Experiments were performed in a Zahabi make muffle
furnace (microprocessor based temperature indicator cum control-
ler) with heating range up to 1000 °C. Droplet of formulated fuels
was made to fall with micropipette (dropper) on a small stainless
steel plate placed inside the furnace where droplets ignited in air
at atmospheric pressure. Sequence of droplet formation and its
burning process was captured with a high-speed digital camera
(NIKON D3X with a speed of ISO-600 at a resolution of 164–
164 dpi). The camera was kept just in front for imaging the flame
and droplet disruption. Front and side light arrangements were
made using halogen lamps. A computer was synchronized with
the high-speed digital camera to ensure the recording of droplet
disruption photographs.
2.3. Compression Ignition engine test setup
Engine performance was studied on a single-cylinder, four-
stroke, constant speed (1500 rpm) direct injection diesel engine
(Table 2). In order to determine the engine torque, test engine
was coupled to eddy current type dynamometer. Setup also com-
prised of necessary instruments for combustion pressure and
crank-angle measurements which were interpreted to generate
P–h diagrams. The stand-alone panel box of test setup consisted
of air box, fuel tank, manometer, fuel measuring unit, transmitters
for air and fuel flow measurements, process indicator and engine

Table 1
Physical properties of nano-particles and nomenclature of selected nanofuels.

Metal Particle size (nm)a Atomic mass (g/mol) Bulk density (g/cm3) Metal melting point (K) Oxide formed Oxide melting point (K) Nomenclature
of nanofuels
Fe 30–60 55.845 7.87 1811 Fe2O3 1839 F1
Al 5–150 26.981 2.7 933 Al2O3 2345 A1
B 80–100 10.811 2.34 2349 B2O3 723 B1
a
Data provided by the supplier.

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the droplet combustion experiment setup.

 R.N. Mehta et al. / Fuel 120 (2014) 91–97 93

Table 2 package ‘‘EnginesoftLV’’ was used for on line performance evalua-

Specifications of engine and exhaust gas analyzer. tion. More than three runs of tests were performed under the iden-
Engine Kirloskar TV1 tical conditions, and the repeatability of all result parameters was
General details Four-stroke, CI, vertical, water cooled, single-cylinder found to be within 3%. Emissions of CO, NOx and HC were mea-
Bore  stroke 87.5 mm  110 mm sured using an Exhaust Gas Analyzer AGS-688 (Table 2). Soot par-
Compression ratio 17.5:1 ticles in exhaust gas were collected on wet Whatman filter paper
Capacity 661 cc and analyzed for size through Digistar optical microscope (10,
Rated output 5.2 kW at 1500 rpm
Dynamo meter Eddy current, water cooled with loading unit
230 V Halogen lamp).
Piezo sensor Range 5000 PSI, with low noise cable
Crank angle sensor Resolution 1°, speed 5500 RPM with TDC pulse. 3. Results and discussions
Temperature sensor Type RTD, PT100 and thermocouple, Type K
Load indicator Digital, range 0–50 kg, supply 230 V AC
Software ‘‘EnginesoftLV’’ Engine performance analysis software 3.1. Droplet combustion mechanism
Exhaust gas analyzer AGS-688
When drops of diesel and nanofuels were made to fall onto the
Parameters Range Accuracy
heated steel plate, the diesel present in samples vaporized soon
Oxygen (O2) 0–25 vol.% 0.1–0.2%
Carbonmonoxide (CO) 0–9.99 vol.% ±5% of reading leaving behind oxide coated nanoparticles which were than ex-
Hydrocarbon (HC) 0–10,000 ppm ±20 ppm posed to higher chamber temperatures. It was noted that above
Carbondioxide (CO2) 0–19.9 vol.% ±0.3% 700 °C, the oxide layer onto the metal surface of nanoparticles van-
ished thereby exposing the same to higher temperatures which
lead to various sequential combustion stages. Fig. 2 depicts a se-
indicator. The engine tests were performed initially with pure die- quence of pure diesel droplet formation, disruption and ignition.
sel at fully throttled and no-load conditions and then nanofuels The drops first got segregated into smaller droplets, underwent
were fed one by one through a separate fuel feed line. Before run- slow evaporation and burning which gave clean flame after igni-
ning the engine to a new fuel, it was allowed to run for sufficient tion within 1.2 s. Droplet flame extincted within 1.5 s leaving be-
time to consume remaining fuel from the previous experiment. hind globule of combustion residue. Fig. 3 illustrates different
All the experiments were carried out by varying the loads at a con- combustion stages of A1 and F1 nanofuel droplets on the heated
stant speed of 1500 rpm to evaluate the performance characteris- (>700 °C) plate. Preheated drops first got vaporized into a vapor
tics such as specific fuel consumption (SFC), brake power (BP), cloud that ignited with clean flame. The nanoparticles that were
exhaust gas temperature, Air/Fuel ratios, brake thermal efficiency enveloped within diesel got exposed to flame temperatures after
(BTE), brake mean effective pressure (BMEP) and volumetric its evaporation and probably a small amount ignited along with
efficiency. Labview based Engine Performance Analysis software diesel which rose quickly forming multiple flares resulting into

(i) Drop formation, 0 s (ii) Segregation, 0.5 s

(iii) Droplet ruptures, 0.9 s (iii) Droplet vaporization, 1 s

(v) Ignition with clean flame, 1.2 s (vi) Droplet flame extinction, 1.5 s
Fig. 2. Diesel droplet formation and ignition mechanism.
94 R.N. Mehta et al. / Fuel 120 (2014) 91–97

(i) Droplet formation, 0 s (ii) Preheating and Ignition, 0.2 s

(iii) Flame disruption, 0.35 s (iv) Microexplosion, 1.2 s

(v) Steady flame, 1.55 (vi) Flame Extinction, 1.69 s (vii) n-Al agglomerate,1.73 s

(viii) n-Al/ n-Fe agglomerate ignition, 1.91 s (ix) Combustion residue, 2.3 s
Fig. 3. Stages of n-Al/ n-Fe-Diesel droplet combustion.

flame disruption [12]. Due to building up of intense pressure inside
primary drops they swelled and eventually exploded into smaller
droplets and particle aggregates which ignited and burned forming
local flames (Fig. 3(iv)). This phenomenon of sudden fragmentation
of droplets was first explained as micro explosion by Law [17]
using the diffusion-limit model. Because of micro explosion the
drop surface becomes concentrated with less volatile, high boiling
component jacketing more volatile component and leads to the
homogenous nucleation with intense internal pressure build up
that causes fragmentation of the primary droplet [12]. This theory
explicates the disruption and micro explosion stages as could be
seen in Fig. 3(iii, iv). At the end of these stages, due to consumption
of entire liquid fuel, the flame dwindled and finally extincted leav-
ing behind agglomerates coated with un-burnt nanoparticles.
These agglomerate globules formed at the end of A1, F1 combus-
tion, reignited (Fig. 3(viii)) thereby signifying augmented combus-
tion process however residue from diesel had not shown such
reignition. On examining the burning mechanism of B1 it was
found that it followed all the initial burning stages as A1 and F1 ex-
cept microexplosion which further hindered reignition of residue
agglomerates. Experiments brought out the fact that the drops of
A1 and F1 not only ignited within 0.2 s but also the flame lasted
longer for 1.69 s. Vigorous flames underwent sudden collapsing
with multiple sparks like streaks emitted due to the burning of
nanoparticles. Nonetheless nanofuels showed shortened ignition
delay, longer flame sustenance, rapid oxidation and hence com-
plete combustion.
3.2. Combustion characteristics
Fig. 4 elucidates variation in cylinder pressure with change in
crank angle for different nanofuels and diesel. The peak cylinder
pressures at full load condition for A1, B1, F1 and diesel were 55,
59, 60 and 62 bars, respectively. Reduction in peak cylinder pres-
sures was observed with nanofuels as compared to diesel. Nanofu-
els reduce the chemical delay period that exerts a great influence
on the combustion phenomena of Compression Ignition engine as
well as on the rate of pressure rise, because the longer the delay,
more rapid and higher pressure rise occur [18]. Decline in the peak
pressure is attributed to the fact that both physical and chemical
delays decrease with addition of nanoparticles. Thus the improved
ignition properties of energetic Al, Fe and B nanoparticles initiate
early combustion and thereby reduce peak pressures.
3.3. Engine performance characteristics
A1 and B1 showed marginal increase in fuel consumption as
compared to diesel at lower loads due to preheating and ignition
stages whereas F1 showed almost same consumption as diesel.
Due to the slow burning mechanism as discussed earlier B1 showed
 R.N. Mehta et al. / Fuel 120 (2014) 91–97 95

θ Curve load conditions has been observed as 9%, 7% and 5% for A1, F1,
and B1 respectively as compared to diesel. Variation of brake ther-
mal efficiency with load is shown in Fig. 6(b). All three nanofuels
Cylinder Pressure (bar)

A1 exhibit better thermal efficiency throughout the load range how-

Diesel ever, A1 affords the best performance. These results could be ex-
F1 plained with the assistance of the burning characteristics and
B1 increase in combustion temperature of the nanofuels. Addition of
nanoparticles not only enhances the calorific values but also pro-
motes complete combustion due to higher evaporation rates, re-
duced ignition delay, higher flame temperatures and prolonged
flame sustenance. All these factors support the full release of ther-
mal energy thereby leading to higher brake thermal efficiencies.
This phenomenon could have led to catalytic combustion, and in
turn enhanced the thermal efficiency of the diesel engine [19,20].
Crank Angle (deg) Enhancement of 9%, 4%, and 2% in BTE has been observed at higher
Fig. 4. Variation of cylinder peak pressure for different nanofuels.
loads for A1, F1 and B1 nanofuels respectively, as compared to
diesel.

reduction in fuel consumption at lower loads but eventually in-

creased with load as illustrated in Fig. 5. A drop of 7% in specific 3.4. Emission studies
fuel consumption was registered at higher loads when the engine
was fueled with A1 as compared to diesel. Reduced ignition delay Exhaust gas from CI engine was tested for emissions of regu-
and high calorific values of nanofuels further generate same inten- lated parameters at varying load conditions. Fig. 7(a) shows the
sity of work with low consumption of fuel than diesel. concentration of the carbonmonoxide (CO, vol.%) as a function of
Fig. 6(a) shows the increase in exhaust gas temperatures (EGT) engine load. A1 and F1 nanofuels showed an average increase of
of engine with load. It could be inferred from the figure that EGT 30% as compared to diesel at lower loads. This may be due to
increases with load for both diesel as well as nanofuels, obviously fuel-rich operating conditions, where the amount of un-burnt
due to increase in the combustion temperature. EGT for A1 was gases becomes more substantial due to lower A/F ratio and insuffi-
found to be highest amongst all the nanofuels and diesel at higher cient oxygen, resulting in incomplete combustion [4]. Whereas at
loads. The fragments of nanofuel droplets which are formed due to higher loads mass of fuel injected is about 5% of the mass of air
microexplosion of primary droplet generate secondary local flames in the cylinder, hence promoting fuel-lean combustion and CO
which further increase chamber temperature. Rise in EGT at full emission reduces by 25–40% as compared to diesel. However B1
showed almost same trend in CO emission as that of diesel. Pro-
duction of hydrocarbons (HC) has been elucidated in Fig. 7(b). Dur-
ing the preheating stage at lower loads, atomized fuel vaporizes
SFC (kg/kwh)

Diesel A1 B1 F1 and mixes with air, yet is not fully distributed hence the emission
of HC is higher. Second stage of combustion promotes microexplo-
sion of nanofuels droplets and leads to rise in cylinder pressure and
temperature. Such conditions accelerate oxidation reactions lead-
ing to controlled combustion when two third of fuel burns fol-
lowed by complete consumption during effective burning stage
leaving behind 2–3% of un-burnt HC [21]. Fuel-lean combustion
at maximum loads leads to a drop of 8% and 4% in hydrocarbon
emission with A1 and F1 nanofuels respectively, as compared to
Load (kg) diesel. Fig. 7(c) depicts NOx concentration as a function of load.
NOx emission increased at higher loads when engine was fueled
Fig. 5. Specific fuel consumption of nanofuels with reference to diesel.
with nanofuels. It could be argued that at the higher loads, burning

350 40

300
(a) 35 (b)
Brake Thermal Efficiency %
Exhaust gas temperature (oC)

30
250
25
200
20
Diesel Diesel
150
15 A1
A1
100 B1
F1 10
B1 F1
50 5

0 0
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
Load (kg) Load (kg)

Fig. 6. (a) Exhaust gas temperature (EGT) and (b) brake thermal efficiency vs. load.
96 R.N. Mehta et al. / Fuel 120 (2014) 91–97

Diesel A1 B1 F1 Diesel A1 B1 F1

0.05 30
0.045 (a) (b)
0.04 25
0.035
20
CO (vol %)

HC (ppm)
0.03
0.025 15
0.02
0.015 10

0.01
5
0.005
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
Load (kg) Load (kg)

Diesel A1 B1 F1
4.5
(c)
4

3.5

3
NOx (ppm)

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
0 5 10 15 20
Load (kg)

Fig. 7. (a) CO (vol.%).(b) HC (ppm).(c) NOx (ppm) in exhaust gas.

Fig. 8. Soot formation from (a) F1 (b) B1 (c) A1 (d) diesel.

 R.N. Mehta et al. / Fuel 120 (2014) 91–97
temperatures in the combustion chamber increases with load and
facilitates NOx emissions according to Zeldovich thermal mecha-
nism [22]. An increase of 5% and 3% was observed in NOx emission
with A1 and F1 as compared to diesel and B1 nanofuels. In order to
check the amount of soot produced at the end of combustion, a wet
Whatman (grade 44, 3 lm) filter paper was held in front of the ex-
haust pipe at maximum load for 1 min to collect the soot particles
and was observed under the microscope. Though particle numbers
were not counted, an approximate increase in weight by 12%, 9%,
and 8% was observed for F1, B1 and A1 nanofuels, respectively as
compared to diesel (Fig. 8). Some un-burnt metal particles might
have contributed in increasing the weight of Whatman paper used
to capture the soot particles.
4. Conclusions
Nanofuels A1, B1 and F1 showed increased evaporation rates
with early ignition at 0.2 s as compared to diesel (1.2 s), suggesting
reduced ignition delay. On ignition of A1 and F1 droplets, flame sus-
tained for longer period of time followed by ignition of agglomer-
ates coated with un-burnt nanoparticles which was not observed
during the burning of diesel and B1 droplets. Peak cylinder pres-
sures decreased at full load conditions and were registered as 55,
59, 60 and 62 bars for A1, B1, F1 and diesel respectively. Engine per-
formance parameter study revealed a noticeable reduction of 7% in
specific fuel consumption with A1 in comparison to diesel for gen-
erating equivalent brake power. Exhaust gas temperatures of A1, F1,
and B1 rose by 9%, 7% and 5% respectively, resulting into increase in
brake thermal efficiencies by 9%, 4%, and 2% as compared to diesel
at higher loads. At same loads, the emission study showed a de-
cline of 25–40% in CO (vol.%), along with a drop of 8% and 4% in
hydrocarbon emissions for A1 and F1 nanofuels respectively. Due
to elevated temperatures a hike of 5% and 3% was observed in
NOx emission with A1 and F1.
Acknowledgements
Authors thank Dr. P.V. Bhale, Mechanical Engineering Depart-
ment, SVNIT, Surat for kindly extending their facilities for some
of the tests and meaningful discussions.
97
References
[1] Yetter RA, Risha GA, Son SF. Metal particle combustion and nanotechnology.
Proc Combust Inst 2009;32:1819–38.
[2] Dreizin EL. Metal-based reactive nanomaterials. Prog Energy Combust Sci
2009;35:141–67.
[3] Granier JJ, Pantoya ML. Probability density function study. Combust Flame
2004;138:373–83.
[4] Heywood JB. Internal combustion engine fundamentals. New York: McGraw-
Hill; 1988.
[5] Lee A, Law CK. Gasification and shell characteristics in slurry droplet burning.
Combust Flame 1991;85:77–93.
[6] Turns SR, Wong SC, Ryba E. Combustion of aluminum-based slurry
agglomerates. Combust Sci Technol 1987;54:299–318.
[7] Szekely GA, Faeth GM. Combustion properties of carbon slurry drops. AIAA J
1982;20:422–9.
[8] Sakai T, Saito M. Single-droplet combustion of coal slurry fuels. Combust Flame
1983;51:141–54.
[9] Takahashi F, Heilweil IJ, Dryer FL. Disruptive burning mechanism of free slurry
droplets. Combust Sci Technol 1989;65:151–65.
[10] Byun DY, Baek SW, Cho JH. Microexplosion of aluminum slurry droplets. Int J
Heat Mass Transfer 1999;42:4475–86.
[11] Wong SC, Lin AC. Microexplosion mechanisms of aluminum/carbon slurry
droplets. Combust Flame 1992;89:64–76.
[12] Gan Y, Qiao L. Combustion characteristics of fuel droplets with addition of
nano and micron-sized aluminum particles. Combust Flame
2011;158:354–68.
[13] Gan Y, Lim YS, Qiao L. Combustion of nanofluid fuels with the addition of
boron and iron particles at dilute and dense concentrations. Combust Flame
2012;159:1732–40.
[14] Tsukahara M, Yoshimoto Y. Reduction of NOx, smoke, BSFC, and maximum
combustion pressure by low compression ratio in a diesel engine fueled by
emulsion fuel. Detroit: International Congress and Exposition; 1992. p. 71–7.
[15] Law CK. A model for the combustion of oil/water emulsion droplets. Combust
Sci Technol 1977;17:29–38.
[16] Kao MJ, Ting CC, Lin BF, Tsung TT. Aqueous aluminum nanofluid combustion in
diesel fuel. J Test Eval 2008;36:186–90.
[17] Law CK. Recent advances in droplet vaporization and combustion. Prog Energy
Combust Sci. 1982;8:171–201.
[18] Rajput RK. A textbook of automobile engineering. New Delhi: Laxmi
Publications; 2007. p. 88–89.
[19] Sadhik Basha J, Anand RB. An experimental study in a CI engine using
nanoadditive blended water–diesel emulsion fuel. Int J Green Energy
2011;8:332–48.
[20] Sajith V, Sobhan CB, Peterson GP. Experimental investigations on the effects of
cerium oxide nanoparticle fuel additives on biodiesel. Adv Mech Eng 2010:ID
581407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2010/58140.
[21] Ganeshan V. IC engine. 3rd ed. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill; 2007. p. 390–
392.
[22] Liu B, Huang Z, Miao H, Di Y, Jiang D, Zeng K. Combustion and emissions of a DI
diesel engine fueled with dieseloxygenate blends. Fuel 2008;87:2691–7.