Fuel 256 (2019) 115806

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

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

Full Length Article

Effect of higher and lower order alcohol blending with gasoline on T

performance, emission and combustion characteristics of SI engine
⁎
V. Edwin Geoa, , D. Jesu Godwina, S. Thiyagarajana, C.G. Saravananb, Fethi Alouic
a
Green Vehicle Technology Research Centre, Department of Automobile Engineering, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Kattankulathur, 603203 Tamilnadu, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Annamalai University, Chidambaram 608002, Tamilnadu, India
c
Polytechnic University Hauts-de-France, ENSIAME, Valenciennes LAMIH UMR CNRS 8201, Building Gromaire 1, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Campus Mont-
Houy, F-59313 Valenciennes Cedex 9, France

G R A P H I C A L A B S T R A C T

Gasoline Fuel

10% Benzyl
Alcohol + 90%
Gasoline
Performance,
20% Benzyl Spark Ignition emission and
Alcohol + Engine combustion
80% Gasoline parameters

10% Ethanol +
90% Gasoline

20% Ethanol +
80% Gasoline

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This investigation mainly focuses on the characteristic study on combustion, performance and emission of ga-
Dual fuel blend soline blended with lower order alcohol, i.e. ethanol and higher order alcohol, i.e. benzyl alcohol in the ratio of
Higher and lower order alcohol 10% and 20% by volume of the overall quantity. These two alcohols were blended with gasoline and investigated
Ethanol solely to find the comparison between higher and lower order alcohols and thus to identify the optimum blend
Benzyl alcohol and neat gasoline
based on the performance and emission characteristics. The blends were tested in a commercial two-cylinder
624 cc gasoline engine with multi-point fuel injection (MPFI) system and data acquisition capability. The fuel
blends were tested at different loads ranging from 20% to 100% with a step size of 20% in ascending sequence.
At full load, higher alcohol blend showed an improvement in brake thermal efficiency (BTE) of 32.8% and 33.2%
for Bn10 and Bn20, when compared to neat gasoline 29.77% and BTE of lower alcohol registered a slight
improvement in comparison to gasoline, i.e. 30.41% and 31.1% for E10 and E20 respectively. HC emissions were
reduced to 70 ppm and 57 ppm for lower and higher alcohol blends respectively, which is lower compared to
88 ppm for gasoline. CO and CO2 emissions were reduced with both lower and higher alcohol blends in com-
parison with neat gasoline. NOx emissions show a reduction nature with alcohol blends when compared to neat
gasoline at all the load conditions. It is perceived that based on the performance, emission and combustion
characteristics, higher alcohol namely benzyl alcohol blend with gasoline is optimum.

⁎
Corresponding author.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2019.115806
Received 16 February 2019; Received in revised form 10 June 2019; Accepted 12 July 2019
0016-2361/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
V. Edwin Geo, et al.
Nomenclature
Bn10 10% Benzyl Alcohol + 90% Gasoline
Bn20 20% Benzyl Alcohol + 80% Gasoline
E10 10% Ethanol + 90% Gasoline
E20 20% Ethanol + 80% Gasoline
BP Brake Power
ppm Parts Per Million
HC Hydrocarbon
1. Introduction
Air pollution is one of the serious issues faced by humanity over the
years and continues to be [1]. India has become the topmost emitter of
atmospheric pollutants majorly contributed by industries and trans-
portation. The concern about air pollution reduction is increasing and
the world is keenly focussing on reducing these emissions from auto-
mobiles by imparting stringent emission norms. India is one of the
leading emitter of PM 2.5 pollution rate as per the monitoring report
released by WHO [2]. Currently, the regulations legislated around the
world are more stringent against the use of fossil fuel based fuels as it
harms the environment. Hence, the search for an alternate source of
energy to replace petroleum-based fuel is increasing [3]. Over the
decades, out of the many proposed solutions to reduce air pollution,
usage of alternative fuels replacing conventional petroleum based fuels.
The Indian government looked into this issue by taking initiatives in the
year 2001 and introduced the Ethanol blending program (EBP) which
directed a blend of 95% gasoline and 5% ethanol, paving the way to
lower the dependency rate of crude oil and thus to reduce the en-
vironmental pollution to a greater extent. This program is being active
in 4 union territories and 9 states in India aiding reduction in HC, CO,
CO2 emissions.
Alcohols and gasoline blends have been used in SI engines for a long
while now, the interest in alcohol usage with hydrocarbons goes back to
the early seventies of this century. This is due to the massive demand
for hydrocarbons, which leads to the exploitation of crude resources
around the world. The tetraethyl lead content of gasoline, is an additive
to promote octane rating, which is one of the primary toxic air pollu-
tant, a threat to humans [4]. In the current scenario, the chase to build
an energy efficient and pollution free environment is still progressing as
the alternative fuel technologies are lined up in the proving grounds
now. Trials were also made on mixing gasoline with benzene, butadiene
and few other compounds which comes under the class of aromatics
[6]. Some of the additives are carcinogens and prone to smoke emis-
sions. In internal combustion engine research, the possibilities of opti-
mizing the compression ratios and performance improvement are
swiftly progressing around the globe and improvements are upcoming
every day [8]. Alcohols are widely suitable fuel for SI engine applica-
tion replacing gasoline. This is because of favourable properties like
oxygen content, latent heat of vaporization, flame speed, and complete
combustion [9].
However, there are still challenges in mixing alcohols and gasoline
at lower temperatures as it leads to stratification and knocking [10].
Elfasakhany et al. [11] studied the combustion, emission and perfor-
mance characteristics with ternary gasoline-alcohol blends and arrived
at favouring results in volumetric efficiency, and brake power. How-
ever, the emission results were not very favourable for gasoline-alcohol
ternary blends. Though stabilizers addition is practiced in alcohol-ga-
soline blend mixtures, the alcohol content was limited to 10% in low-
temperature conditions.
Ethanol is one of the best suitable alcohols used as an additive to
hydrocarbon fuels these days, as it is highly resistance to knock and has
high latent heat of evaporation. Ethanol is low molecular weight al-
cohol, which has mostly replaces the other octane boosters added to
2
Fuel 256 (2019) 115806
CA Crank Angle
EGT Exhaust Gas Temperature
Nox Oxides of Nitrogen
CO Carbon Monoxide
CO2 CO2 - Carbon- di- oxide
BSEC Brake specific Energy Consumption
BTE Brake Thermal Efficiency
MPFI Multi-Point Fuel Injection
gasoline [7]. Ethanol can be blended with gasoline to achieve complete
combustion, due to the presence of oxygen molecules, which con-
tributes to better combustion efficiency. On the other hand, ethanol
blending also would lead to lower air pollution due to absence of sul-
phur content [12]. Elfasakhany et al. [13] studied the performance and
emissions characteristics of gasoline and hybrid methanol–gasoline fuel
in SI engine. Al-Hassan [14] investigated the use of unleaded gasoline
blend and found that equivalence air–fuel ratio was decreasing along
with brake specific fuel consumption. Ozsezen et al. [15] stated that
corrosion issues are one important factor to note, which could be re-
duced to a greater extent by using advanced injection techniques.
Turner et al. [16] investigated on ethanol blends with gasoline and
found there is a considerable reduction in CO2 and NOx emissions at all
loading conditions. Rui Kang et al. [5] investigated the dual fuel
ethanol- gasoline engine and found that with increase in ethanol ratio
improved the combustion phasing, which promotes combustion leading
to better thermal efficiency. Yücesu [17] compared the mathematical
and experimental analysis of spark ignition engine performance using
ethanol–gasoline blend as fuel.
However, higher order alcohols are gaining attention recently as
they have good octane rating and calorific value. Various higher order
alcohols namely butanol, pentanol and propanol were used along with
gasoline in SI engine. Dhamodaran et al. [18] investigated the effect of
n-butanol blending with gasoline and tested in four-cylinder SI engine
at various speeds and constant load condition. Alcohol was blended 10,
20 and 30% by volume with gasoline and tests were conducted. They
observed that the addition of n-butanol reduced HC and CO emissions
with a slight increase in NOx emission. Liu et al. [19] conducted ex-
perimental research in SI engine at high speed with n-butanol addition
to gasoline in the ratio of 0, 30 and 35% by volume. They observed that
the addition of butanol could achieve knock resistance, which allows
early ignition timing. Cylinder pressure and heat release rate were
improved with an increase in butanol blend ratio after optimized ig-
nition timing. The occurrence of peak of pressure and heat release rate
was advanced, which leads to more heat converted to useful work
leading to improvement in thermal efficiency. Li et al. [20] blended
isopropanol-n-butanol-ethanol (IBE) with gasoline and tested in port
fuel injection SI engine. IBE were blended at various ratios of 0–60% by
volume. Based on the experimental results, IBE30 was better in terms of
engine performance and emission characteristics. IBE30 showed im-
provement in thermal efficiency with lower CO and NOx emissions in
comparison to gasoline. Dhamodharan et al. [21] conducted experi-
ments in SI engine with the blending of the di-isopropyl ether with
gasoline in the ratio of 10, 20 and 30% by volume to assess the per-
formance, emission and combustion characteristics. Experiments were
conducted in a four-cylinder MPFI system at a speed of 1400 rpm and
2800 rpm under two load conditions 20 Nm and 25 Nm. The addition of
alcohol improved the brake thermal efficiency, cylinder pressure and
heat release rate in comparison to gasoline. Also, HC and CO emissions
were lower with a slight increase in CO2 emission.
The classification still narrows down to aliphatic alcohol and aro-
matic alcohol. In this study, benzyl alcohol, which falls under the
aromatic family is subjected to investigation. The possible production of
benzyl alcohol is through the hydraulic process of Lignin [22]. Also,
V. Edwin Geo, et al.
benzyl alcohol can be seen in aromatic oils like hyacinth and Jasmine
[23]. Extensive research is ongoing in recent years on studying the
performance output, combustion and emission characteristics of spark
ignition engine subjected to alcohol-gasoline blends in various modes.
The major technological changes would deliver significant emission
reductions and performance improvement. The authors of the present
study have done experimental investigations previously using alcohols,
namely iso-butanol, n-butanol and benzyl alcohol with gasoline at
lower blending ratio. It was observed that among the blends, benzyl
alcohol was best in comparison to other blends and gasoline in terms of
better performance [24].
Based on the literature review, it is observed that numerous studies
were done using lower alcohol in SI engine with limited studies on
higher alcohol, especially with benzyl alcohol. While there are few
studies on using benzyl alcohol in CI engine [25,26], works related to
use of benzyl alcohol in SI engine was not reported by anyone other
than the previous work of the authors.
This paper mainly investigates the combustion, performance and
emission characteristics of SI engine fuelled with gasoline and alcohol
blends. Higher and lower order alcohols namely benzyl alcohol and
ethanol were blended 10% and 20% by volume of the overall quantity.
Table 1 shows the physical properties of test fuels.
2. Experimental setup and procedure
The experimental trials were conducted on a four-stroke gasoline
two-cylinder engine shown in Fig. 1. The engine has the MPFI cap-
ability for injection and electronic ignition enabled. The engine has a
capacity of 624 cc, two valve per cylinder with a power output of 12.54
KW. The engine is electronic fuel injection enabled and controlled by
closed-loop system with lambda sensor on the exhaust. An eddy current
dynamometer is shaft coupled with the engine, which has the capability
of loading the engine. The test setup also includes a high-speed data
acquisition (AVL make) and storage system for gathering data. The
gaseous emission was measured using AVL five gas analyser, which uses
the non-dispersive infrared (NDIR) principle to measure the emissions
from the engine. The emissions mainly focussed were HC, CO, CO2,
NOx. The main sensor data collected were pressure sensor for in-cy-
linder pressure, encoder for crank and cam position measurement
which in turn gives the rpm of the engine, thermocouple for tempera-
ture measurement. The setup was used to measure all the data for 100
consecutive cycles and the collected data were consolidated and refined
for effectively avoiding the non-linearity in every cycle. The uncertainty
range of instruments and equipment used can be seen in Table 2. The
experimental trials were performed by restricting the engine at a con-
stant speed of 2500 rpm. The engine was loaded from 0% to 100% ie no
load to full load condition. The experiments were done with steady
state condition for all the test specimens without altering any physical
parameter of the engine. For warming up before the trials the engine
was allowed to run for 10 min and the readings were noted for number
of trials for various loading condition.
3. Results and discussion
This section gives the discussion on the performance, emission and
combustion characteristics for the blends at various loads 20%, 40%,
60%, 80% and 100% at 2500 rpm.
Fig. 2 shows the brake thermal efficiency (BTE) of all the test blends
compared to gasoline under various load conditions. An increase in BTE
was noted for all the test fuels with increase in load due to low friction
and reduction in other losses at higher load conditions. BTE for Gaso-
line, Bn10, Bn20, E10 and E20 at 100% load condition were recorded as
29.77%, 32.8%, 33.2%, 30.41% and 31.1% respectively. Addition of
the alcohols to gasoline improved the BTE considerably at all loading
conditions. It was clearly identified that the increase in concentration of
the benzyl alcohol and ethanol blends increase the BTE. The key factors
3
Fuel 256 (2019) 115806
behind BTE improvement were accelerated mixing and proper atomi-
zation. The quality of the vapour produced and the presence of oxygen
molecules in dual fuel blends contributed to the process of combustion
enhancement. It was clearly inferred from Fig. 2 that the benzyl alcohol
blend showed better performance characteristics compared to ethanol
blend and gasoline in both 10% and 20% blend specimens subjected for
testing. This is because benzyl alcohol is a special type of aromatic al-
cohol. The aromatic benzene ring of benzyl alcohol bonds indirectly in
the OH group, resulting in faster rate of hydrogen abstraction [23,24].
The indirect bonding also contributes to the pace of isomerism resulting
in radical propagation and less activation energy required for breaking
the bond. Thus the favourable outcome given by benzyl alcohol is
mainly because of indirect bonding of OH group and free radical pro-
pagation. Also, the calorific value of benzyl alcohol is higher compared
to ethanol which would have reduced the fuel consumption and sub-
sequently improving the brake thermal efficiency. It is also observed
that, Bn20 blend exhibited better heat release rate in comparison to
gasoline as discussed in the later parts. This is also another reason for
improvement in BTE for Bn20. Godwin et al. [24] observed that benzyl
alcohol showed better performance compared to other higher alcohol
blends namely n-pentanol, n-butanol and iso-butanol.
Fig. 3 shows the variation of exhaust gas temperature (EGT) for the
alcohol blends in comparison to gasoline at variable load. It is observed
that EGT for all the fuels shows an increasing trend with increase in
load. At full load condition the EGT for gasoline, Bn10, Bn20, E10 and
E20 were recorded to be 654 °C, 601 °C, 591 °C, 692 °C and 672 °C re-
spectively. EGT was reduced with benzyl alcohol and ethanol addition
to gasoline due to combustion enhancement and significant with in-
crease in percentage of alcohol in the blend. It is to be noted that higher
latent heat of vaporization leads to reduction in temperature inside the
combustion chamber mainly during the finishing stage of induction.
This significantly impacts the in cylinder temperature during final stage
of compression leading to a considerable reduction in exhaust gas
temperature. Even though the alcohol fuels exhibits considerable igni-
tion delay, benzyl alcohol due to the arrangement of the benzene ring
and oxygen molecule ie the improved physical properties leads to a
much reduced combustion phasing than the ethanol blends E10, E20
and neat gasoline. Thus, benzyl alcohol efficiently leads the other dual
fuel blends and neat gasoline in wastage of heat at the exhaust. It was
inferred from the test result that a marginal reduction of 5 to 6% of EGT
with benzyl alcohol blends Bn10 and Bn20 in comparison to gasoline at
full load condition. From the heat release rate, it is evident that, com-
bustion of Bn20 started early in comparison to gasoline. This leads to
reduced combustion phasing and subsequently reducing the amount of
energy wasted through exhaust heat. This is also indicated in im-
provement of BTE. It was also noted that there is a reduction in the
duration of combustion due to the higher and accelerated laminar flame
speed, which in turn reduces the exhaust gas temperature [12,24].
Fig. 4 shows the variation of NOx emissions for gasoline and alcohol
blends at variable loads. It is observed that increase in load increases
NOx emissions due to higher in-cylinder-temperature. NOx emissions
Table 1
Properties of gasoline, ethanol, benzyl alcohol.
Property Gasoline Ethanol Benzyl Alcohol
Chemical Formula C8H15 C2H6O C7H8O
Lower Heating Value(MJ/kg) 45.8 26.9 34.5
Heat of evaporation(kJ/kg) 223.2 842 448
Stoichiometric A/F Ratio 14.6 9 10.83
Oxygen Content, mass% 0 34.7 14.8
Saturation Pressure @38⁰C (kPa) 31 2.1
Flash Point (⁰C) −45 to −38 12.20 96
Auto-Ignition temperature (⁰C) 420 320 436
Boiling Point (⁰C) 25–215 78.4 205.3
Specific Gravity 0.739 0.789 1.044
V. Edwin Geo, et al. Fuel 256 (2019) 115806

Fig. 1. Schematic Layout of Experimental Setup.

Table 2
700
Uncertainty of instruments and parameters. Gasoline
Measurement Accuracy % Uncertainty Measurement technique Bn10
600
Bn20
Load ± 0.1 kg ± 0.2 Electrical load cell E10
Exhaust gas temperature ( C)

Speed ± 10 rpm ± 0.1 Magnetic pickup type 500 E20

o

Burette Fuel ± 0.1 cc ±1 Volumetric measurement

measurement
Time ± 0.1 sec ± 0.2 Manual stop watch 400
Manometer ± 1 mm ±1 Principle of balancing
column of liquid
300
CO ± 0.02% ± 0.2 NDIR principle
HC ± 20 ppm ± 0.2 NDIR principle
CO2 ± 0.03% ± 0.15 NDIR principle 200
NO ± 10 ppm ±1 Electro chemical
measurement
EGT indicator ± 1 °C ± 0.15 K-type thermocouple 100

0
20 40 60 80 100
35 Gasoline
Load (%)
Bn10
Bn20 Fig. 3. Variation of EGT at Various Loads.
E10
30
E20
Brake thermal efficiency (%)

are influenced by excess oxygen and in-cylinder temperature. The ni-

trogen bonds disintegrates and mixes with oxygen molecules in
25 monotonic form at high temperature. Also, NOx formation was mainly
influenced by the reaction rates of nitrogen molecules during bonding
at higher temperatures. Nitrogen stays as N2 at lower temperature ie in
20 diatonic form. NOx emissions values at 100% load for gasoline Bn10,
Bn20, E10, E20 were recorded to be 142 ppm, 137 ppm, 141 ppm,
106 ppm and 102 ppm respectively. NOx value of gasoline (142 ppm)
15 was the highest observed value of all the fuel specimens. Minimum NOx
emissions were observed with ethanol blend in comparison to benzyl
alcohol blend. The higher latent heat of vaporization with ethanol re-
10 duces the in-cylinder temperature masking the formation of NOx
20 40 60 80 100 emissions inspite of the excess oxygen presence in the fuel [27]. NOx
Load (%) emissions reduced with increase in alcohol content in the blend. Higher
NOx emissions with Bn10 and Bn20 is attributed to improved com-
Fig. 2. Variation of BTE at Various Loads.
bustion and slightly less latent heat in comparison to E10 and E20 [24].
However, latent heat is higher with benzyl alcohol in comparison to
gasoline and hence NOx for Bn10 and Bn20 is less in comparison to

4
V. Edwin Geo, et al. Fuel 256 (2019) 115806

10
Gasoline
140 Bn10 Gasoline
Bn20 Bn10
E10 Bn20
120
E20 E10
8
E20
NOx emission (ppm)

CO2 emission (% vol)

100

80
6

60

40
4

20
20 40 60 80 100
20 40 60 80 100
Load (%)
Load (%)
Fig. 4. Variation of NOx at Various Loads.
Fig. 7. Variation of CO2 at Various Loads.

35
120
Gasoline
Bn10 Gasoline
Bn20 30 Bn20
E10 E20
100
E20 25
In-cylinder pressure (bar)
HC emissions (ppm)

20

80
15

10
60
5

0
40
20 40 60 80 100
-100 -50 0 50 100
Load (%) Crank angle (deg)
Fig. 5. Variation of HC at Various Loads.
Fig. 8. Variation of in-cylinder pressure versus crank angle at maximum load.

1.4 30
Gasoline
Bn10 25
Gasoline
1.2 Bn20 Bn20
E10 E20
E20 20
Heat release rate (J/ CA)

1.0
CO emission (% vol)

15

0.8
10

0.6 5

0
0.4

-5
0.2
20 40 60 80 100 -20 0 20 40 60
Crank angle (deg)
Load (%)
Fig. 9. Variation of heat release rate versus crank angle at maximum load.
Fig. 6. Variation of CO at Various Loads.

5
V. Edwin Geo, et al.
gasoline at all the loads.
Fig. 5 displays the variation of HC emissions of all the test fuels with
reference to the progressive load conditions from 20% to 100% re-
spectively. It is clearly inferred that, a comparatively higher amount of
HC emissions were recorded for all the test fuels at 20% load conditions
namely 113 ppm, 88 ppm, 74 ppm, 99 ppm and 95 ppm for gasoline,
Bn10, Bn20, E10 and E20. This is due to the inlet air fuel mixture
concentration and premixing nature of the test fuels at low tempera-
ture. At lower loads, when compared to gasoline the alcohol blends
gives out low HC emissions because of the enhanced combustion pro-
cess which oxidises the unburnt hydrocarbon emissions.
It was also noted that the oxygen concentration in the blends pro-
mote combustion rates leading to lower HC emissions than neat gaso-
line test fuel. Thus the concentration of air–fuel mixture at full load
lowers the HC emissions and increases the combustion temperature at
100% load condition. The trend shows 88%, 62%, 57%, 74% and 70%
for gasoline, Bn10, Bn20, E10, E20 respectively. It was inferred from
the above values that the benzyl alcohol blends Bn10 and Bn20 leads
over the other test fuels (ie) gasoline, E10 and E20 the HC emissions for
benzyl alcohol blends showed favourable results because of its low la-
tent heat of vaporization and faster combustion rate when compared to
ethanol blends and gasoline. When compared to E10, E20 and gasoline.
Bn20 at 20% load has the lowest HC emissions as it has the maximum
oxygen concentration in all the test fuels used in this research. The
gasoline and ethanol blends where influenced by comparatively higher
latent heat of vaporization which masks the oxidation process leading
to increase in HC emissions. Thus during the exhaust stroke more
amount of unburnt gases escape out of the cylinder in the case of
ethanol blends E10, E20. As observed in Fig. 2, increase in BTE in-
dicates better combustion which aids in oxidation of HC emissions with
benzyl alcohol.
Fig. 6 displays the CO emission for neat gasoline and other test
blend fuels. At the 20%, 40%, 60%, 80% and 100% load conditions. It
was noted that the CO emission has steadily decreased and then in-
creased over all the fuel blends from 20% to full load condition. At 20%
load, the combustion temperature will be less which masks the for-
mation of CO emission. On a contrary note, in the case of 100% load,
increase in fuel consumption and less resident time leads to higher CO
emission levels. Fig. 6 also shows the considerable reduction of CO in
the blends Bn10, Bn20, E10 and E20. When compared to gasoline.at full
load the CO concentration were recorded to be 0.77, 0.62, 0.5, 0.92 and
0.83% for gasoline, Bn10, Bn20, E10 and E20 respectively. The reason
behind this reduction in emissions was the presence of oxygen mole-
cules in the blends which actively enhanced the oxidation of CO during
combustion. Thus it was inferred from the graph that the key factors for
CO emissions namely poor mixing of fuel and air, localized high con-
centration fuel regions inside combustion chamber and incomplete
combustion were clearly avoided to some extent in the dual fuel blends
due to the presence of oxygen molecules present which in turn accel-
erates the fuel mixing and resist the CO causing factors mentioned
above. When comparing the ethanol and benzyl alcohol blends, benzyl
alcohol emitted minimum CO. On a precise note the least value for CO
was recorded to be 0.42 for Bn20 which was at 60% load. Similar re-
sults were observed in the previous experimental research conducted by
the authors [24].
Fig. 7 shows the increasing trend on CO2 emission for all the alcohol
blends and gasoline with reference to different loading conditions (ie)
lower to higher loads. The CO2 emission at 100% load were recorded as
8.5%, 8.3%, 7.7%, 7.3% and 7% for gasoline, Bn10, Bn20, E10, E20
respectively. CO2 emission is influenced by the carbon content in the
fuel and the fuel consumption [28]. Minimum CO2 emission was ob-
served with ethanol blend about 14% and 18% less in comparison to
gasoline. The reduced carbon content with ethanol aided in the re-
duction of CO2 emission. CO2 emission was also less with benzyl alcohol
blend due to reduced carbon content and lower fuel consumption in
comparison to gasoline.
6
Fuel 256 (2019) 115806
Fig. 8 shows the variation of in-cylinder pressure with respect to
crank angle for the gasoline, Bn20 and E20 blends at maximum load. It
is observed that peak pressure was higher for Bn20 and E20 blends in
comparison to gasoline. Peak pressure for gasoline, Bn20 and E20 is
29.4 bar, 32.4 bar and 30 bar respectively at maximum load. Peak
pressure for Bn20 is maximum in comparison to gasoline and E20
blend. This is due to position of OH radical in the Bn20. This influences
the combustion process as less energy is required for breaking the bonds
and also more radicals take part in the combustion process. This leads
to early occurrence of peak pressure and maximum among E20 and
gasoline. Also, the presence of oxygen enhances the combustion process
once the radicals are formed during combustion. The presence of excess
oxygen accelerates the combustion process by aiding in improved
combustion process.
Fig. 9 displays the variation of heat release rate versus crank angle
for gasoline, Bn20 and E20 blends at maximum load. Heat release rate
was calculated based on the first law of thermodynamics from the
corresponding in-cylinder pressure values. The hydrogen abstraction
rate and radical formation during combustion as influenced by the ac-
tivation energy required to break the bond. Bn20 requires less activa-
tion energy for breaking the bond influenced by position of OH group.
This leads to increased hydrogen abstraction rate and radical formation
leading to earlier start of combustion and reduced combustion phasing.
Heat release rate for gasoline, Bn20 and E20 is 23.7 J/oCA, 26.4 J/oCA
and 24.8 J/oCA respectively. The presence of excess oxygen along with
improved hydrogen abstraction rate leads to more fuel taking part in
combustion process leading to higher heat release rate with Bn20 in
comparison to gasoline and E20.
4. Conclusions
This experimental work mainly focussed on the effect of adding
alcohol to gasoline upto 20% in a two cylinder commercial gasoline
engine. The blend comparison was done on the basis of the order of
alcohol i.e. higher and lower order. Benzyl alcohol and Ethanol were
blended in 10% and 20% by volume with gasoline. The observations
from the study are as follows:
1. All the four oxygenated alcohol blends showed superior perfor-
mance characteristics over neat gasoline.
2. At 100% load, BTE of Bn20 was recorded to be the highest followed
by Bn10, oxygenate ethanol blends and gasoline. The BTE of Bn20
was recorded to be 10% higher than of neat gasoline.
3. EGT for the higher order alcohol blends were less in comparison to
gasoline because of early start of combustion and reduced com-
bustion phasing. The oxygenated blends of ethanol showed almost
equal EGT range like neat gasoline for all loads.
4. The emission parameters of the higher and lower alcohol – gasoline
blends were less in comparison with gasoline at higher load condi-
tions. It was found that the presence of more number of oxygen
atoms and lower C–H ratio of benzyl alcohol enabled low emission
rates over the other subjected test fuels.
5. NOx emissions were also found to be recorded low for benzyl al-
cohol as the high latent heat of vaporization of benzyl alcohol re-
duced the NOx. E20 showed the lowest NOx in all of the fuels
subjected for test.
6. The in-cylinder pressure and heat release rate of the higher order
alcohol were superior in comparison to gasoline and other blends.
The position of OH in the molecular structure plays a major role
during combustion.
Based on the arrived results through this experimental study, it is
concluded that the higher order alcohol i.e. Benzyl Alcohol addition to
gasoline in a blend form improves the combustion, performance and
emission characteristics of the gasoline engine.
V. Edwin Geo, et al.
References
[1] Baidya S, Borken-Kleefeld J. Atmospheric emissions from road transportation in
India. Energy Policy 2009;37(10):3812–22.
[2] Guttikunda SK, Nishadh KA, Jawahar P. Air pollution knowledge assessments
(APnA) for 20 Indian cities. Urban Clim 2019;27:124–41.
[3] Covert T, Greenstone M, Knittel CR. Will we ever stop using fossil fuels? J Econ
Perspect 2016;30(1):117–38.
[4] Entenberg RD, Menard Jr AL. Future octane number requirements for future market
demand. J Market 1966;30(1):28–32.
[5] Kang R, Zhou L, Hua J, Feng D, Wei H, Chen R. Experimental investigation on
combustion characteristics in dual-fuel dual-injection engine. Energy Convers
Manage 2019;181:15–25.
[6] Marin A, Kodjak D, Brown D, Rao H. Relative cancer risk of reformulated gasoline
and conventional gasoline sold in the Northeast. Northeast States for Coordinated
Air Use Management; 1998.
[7] Surisetty VR, Dalai AK, Kozinski J. Alcohols as alternative fuels: an overview. Appl
Catal A 2011;404(1–2). 1-1.
[8] Masum BM, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA, Palash SM, Habibullah M. Effect of alco-
hol–gasoline blends optimization on fuel properties, performance and emissions of a
SI engine. J Cleaner Prod 2015;86:230–7.
[9] Demirbas A. Progress and recent trends in biofuels. Prog Energy Combust Sci
2007;33(1):1–8.
[10] Agarwal AK, Singh AP, Maurya RK. Evolution, challenges and path forward for low
temperature combustion engines. Prog Energy Combust Sci 2017;61:1–56.
[11] Elfasakhany A. Performance and emissions of spark-ignition engine using etha-
nol–methanol–gasoline, n-butanol–iso-butanol–gasoline and iso-butanol–etha-
nol–gasoline blends: a comparative study. Eng Sci Technol Int J 2016;19(4):2053–9.
[12] Elfasakhany A. The effects of ethanol–gasoline blends on performance and exhaust
emission characteristics of spark ignition engines. Int J Automot Eng
2014;4(1):608–20.
[13] Elfasakhany A. Investigation on performance and emissions characteristics of an
internal combustion engine fuelled with petroleum gasoline and a hybrid metha-
nol–gasoline fuel. Int J Eng Technol 2013;13:24–43.
[14] Al-Hasan M. Effect of ethanol-unleaded gasoline blends on engine performance and
exhaust emission. Energy Convers Manage 2003;44(9):1547–61.
[15] Ozsezen AN, Canakci M. Performance and combustion characteristics of alco-
hol–gasoline blends at wide-open throttle. Energy 2011;36(5):2747–52.
Fuel 256 (2019) 115806
[16] Turner JW, Pearson RJ, Dekker E, Iosefa B, Johansson K, Ac Bergström K. Extending
the role of alcohols as transport fuels using iso-stoichiometric ternary blends of
gasoline, ethanol and methanol. Appl Energy 2013;102:72–86.
[17] Yücesu HS, Sozen A, Topgül T, Arcaklioğlu E. Comparative study of mathematical
and experimental analysis of spark ignition engine performance used ethanol–ga-
soline blend fuel. Appl Therm Eng 2007;27(2–3):358–68.
[18] Dhamodaran G, Esakkimuthu GS, Pochareddy YK, Sivasubramanian H.
Investigation of n-butanol as fuel in a four-cylinder MPFI SI engine. Energy
2017;125:726–35.
[19] Liu K, Li Y, Yang J, Deng B, Feng R, Huang Y. Comprehensive study of key operating
parameters on combustion characteristics of butanol-gasoline blends in a high
speed SI engine. Appl Energy 2018;212:13–32.
[20] Li Y, Meng L, Nithyanandan K, Lee TH, Lin Y, Chia-fon FL, et al. Combustion,
performance and emissions characteristics of a spark-ignition engine fueled with
isopropanol-n-butanol-ethanol and gasoline blends. Fuel 2016;184:864–72.
[21] Dhamodaran G, Esakkimuthu GS, Pochareddy YK. Experimental study on perfor-
mance, combustion, and emission behaviour of diisopropyl ether blends in MPFI SI
engine. Fuel 2016;173:37–44.
[22] Yücesu HS, Topgül T, Cinar C, Okur M. Effect of ethanol-gasoline blends on engine
performance and exhaust emissions in different compression ratios. Appl Therm
Eng 2006;26(17–18):2272–8.
[23] Zhou L, Boot MD, Johansson BH, Reijnders JJ. Performance of lignin derived aro-
matic oxygenates in a heavy-duty diesel engine. Fuel 2014;115:469–78.
[24] Godwin DJ, Geo VE, Thiyagarajan S, Martin ML, Maiyalagan T, Saravanan CG, et al.
Effect of hydroxyl (OH) group position in alcohol on performance, emission and
combustion characteristics of SI engine. Energy Convers Manage
2019;189:195–201.
[25] Raj VM, Subramanian LG, Thiyagarajan S, Geo VE. Effects of minor addition of
aliphatic (1-pentanol) and aromatic (benzyl alcohol) alcohols in Simarouba Glauca-
diesel blend fuelled CI engine. Fuel 2018;234:934–43.
[26] Wang S, Zhu X, Somers LM, De Goey LP. Combustion and emission characteristics of
a heavy duty engine fueled with two ternary blends of n-heptane/iso-octane and
toluene or benzaldehyde. SAE Technical Paper; 2016.
[27] Thakur AK, Kaviti AK, Mehra R, Mer KK. Progress in performance analysis of
ethanol-gasoline blends on SI engine. Renew Sust Energy Rev 2017;69:324–40.
[28] Thiyagarajan S, Varuvel EG, Martin LJ, Beddhannan N. Mitigation of carbon foot-
prints through a blend of biofuels and oxygenates, combined with post-combustion
capture system in a single cylinder CI engine. Renew Energy 2019;130:1067–81.