Industrial Crops & Products 194 (2023) 116332

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Industrial Crops & Products

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

Impact of fuel injection pressure on the common rail direct fuel injection
engine powered by microalgae, kapok oil, and soybean biodiesel blend
Paras Gupta a, Upendra Rajak b, Tikendra Nath Verma a, *, Manoj Arya a,
Thokchom Subhaschandra Singh c
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Maulana Azad National Institute of Technology, Bhopal 462003, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Rajeev Gandhi Memorial College of Engineering and Technology, Nandyal, Andhra Pradesh, India
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Manipur 795004, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In this paper, the viability of microalgae as a viable replacement feedstock for compression ignition engines is
Edible biodiesel investigated. The characteristics of diesel fuel alternatives, including microalgae (MAME100), kapok oil
Non-edible biodiesel (KA100), and soybean (SME100), as well as their blends with diesel, were studied. The results were used to
Fuel injection pressure
compare the engine performance and emissions of D100, MAME100, MAME20, KA100, KA20D80, SME100, and
Particulate matter (PM) emission
SME20D80. The findings demonstrate that the addition of MAME20, KA20D80, and SME20D80 have been
NOx emission
employed to assess engine output and emission. At 200 bar, the brake thermal efficiency (BTE) decreases by 2.0
% for MAME20D80, 1.5 % for KA20D80, and 2.0 % for SME20D80 as compared to D100. Specific fuel con­
sumption (SFC) was shown to rise as KA20D80 levels rose by 3.8 %. The use of MAME20D80 and SME20D80
resulted in reductions of NOx emissions of 10.0 % and 14.2 % as well as soot emissions of 10 % and 4.0 % as
compared to D100. However, employing SME20D80, the blends produce greater carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions
of 11.4 %. In conclusion, a diesel engine can employ MAME20D80 and KA20D80.

Asokan et al. (2016) conducted experimental research on the com­

1. Introduction
The world population is expanding quickly, which is driving up en­
ergy demand significantly. The majority of the energy used in the world
today is produced from fossil fuels like coal, gasoline, etc. Developing
nations that heavily rely on non-renewable energy sources to provide all
of their home and industrial energy needs. Our current energy needs are
largely satisfied by non-renewable resources. Using fossil fuels despite
the fact that biofuels have a higher conversion efficiency for a very long
period. Some of the sources from which biofuels can be obtained include
forest debris, non-edible feedstock, and edible feedstock. Biofuels are a
renewable energy source that is derived from natural sources, therefore
it may be replenished in a matter of years rather than millions of years.
The majority of people view biofuels as a cheap, efficient, and very
useful source of energy. Using a range of edible and non-edible oils, such
as Kapok, Karanja, Microalgae, soybean, and Jatropha, to produce bio­
fuels. The physical and chemical characteristics of these alternative fuels
roughly contrast with diesel fuel (Arunkumar et al., 2019; Martin et al.,
2017; Cherng-Yuan et al., 2006).
bustion and performance characteristics of CI (compression ignition)
engines using kapok oil methyl ester as the propellant in 2016. It was
discovered that as the load changes, SFC (specific fuel consumption) and
EGT (exhaust gas temperature) rise while BTE (brake thermal effi­
ciency), CP (cylinder pressure), and HRR fall. The BTE, HC (unburned
hydrocarbons), and SE increased by 9.2 %, 31.25 %, and 20 %,
respectively, but the HRR (heat release rate), MRPR(maximum rate of
pressure rise), EGT, and NOx decreased by 2.58 %, 12.9 %, 1.5 %, and
4.85 %, respectively, at 240 b TDC and full load in comparison to an
engine fuelled with diesel, according to Gnanasekaran et al. (2016)a
study. In order to predict the engine characteristics, Khandal et al.
(2017) conducted an experimental examination of the effects of EGR
(exhaust gas recirculation), FIP (fuel injection pressure), and IT (injec­
tion timing) on variable compression ratio engines filled with honge
biodiesel. FIP shows maximum BTE and minimal carbon monoxide
(CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and hydrocarbon emission at 100 b TDC
and 900 bar.
The engine emission and performance characteristics of biodiesels
produced by the peroxidation process were experimentally studied by

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: tnverma@manit.ac.in, verma.tikks@gmail.com (T.N. Verma).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2023.116332
Received 30 March 2022; Received in revised form 15 December 2022; Accepted 17 January 2023
Available online 3 February 2023
0926-6690/© 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
P. Gupta et al.
Nomenclature
D100 100% Diesel.
MAME100 100% Microalgae methyl ester biodiesel.
SME100 100% Soybean methyl ester biodiesel.
KA100 100% Kapok oil biodiesel.
KA20D80 20% Kapok oil biodiesel and 80% diesel.
MAME20D80 20% Microalgae methyl ester biodiesel and 80%
diesel.
SME20D80 20% Soybean methyl ester biodiesel and 80% diesel.
FIP Fuel injection pressure.
IT Injection timing.
a TDC After top dead centre.
a BDC After bottom dead centre.
b TDC Before top dead centre.
b BDC Before bottom dead centre.
BSFC Brake specific fuel consumption.
MRPR Maximum rate of pressure rise.
EGT Exhaust gas temperature.
CP Cylinder pressure.
CT Cylinder temperature.
ID Ignition delay.
ITE Indicated thermal efficiency.
Lin in et al. (2006). BTE and EGT increased while SFC, CO2, CO, and NOx
decreased. Behçet et al. (2014) conducted an experimental investigation
to compare the performance and emission characteristics of waste
cooking oil and fish oil in diesel engines. They found that the perfor­
mance and emission characteristics of the fish oil were superior to those
of the waste cooking oil. Another experimental investigation on diesel
engines running on biodiesel n-butanol blends (KBB5, KBB10, KBB15
and KBB20) was conducted by Killol in et al. (2019) and discovered that
KBB15 exhibits good performance and lower emissions. Another
researcher, Perumal et al. (2017), used pongamia biodiesel as the pro­
pellant in CI engines to conduct an experimental examination of engine
characteristics. It was observed that when diesel was utilised as the fuel,
CO, HC, and thermal efficiency decreased by 8.2 %, 8.9 %, and 2.4 %,
respectively, but SFC increased by 4.2 %.
In an experimental study utilising castor biodiesel as the fuel,
Arunkumar et al. (2019) found that SFC was 4 % higher, CO, HC, and
thermal efficiency were 9 %, 8.8 %, and 2.2 % higher, respectively, than
with diesel. Islam et al. (2015), experiment on a CRDI (Common rail
direct injection) engine using microalgae methyl ester as the propellant;
instantaneous cylinder pressure and engine output torque decreased
while NOx emission increased for a 50 % blend in comparison to diesel.
The performance and exhaust emissions of a diesel engine running on
Ceiba pentandra biodiesel were experimentally examined by Silitonga
et al. (2013). It was found that a 10 % mix produced the best perfor­
mance at 1900 rpm and full throttle. Shrivastava and Verma (2020a)
conducted a study, according to research on the effects of FIP and load
on the characteristics of CI engines charged with roselle oil, ignition
delay, summary of emission (SE), brake thermal efficiency, and indi­
cated thermal efficiency scale down as FIP increases, whilst fuel con­
sumption, exhaust gas temperature, maximum pressure rise rate, CO2,
and NOx scale up.
The use of computational fluid dynamics (CDF) has shown to save
research costs and time while still producing reliable and accurate re­
sults from experimental models. Numerous solver packages, such as
Diesel-RK, Converge CFD, AVL-fire, Kiva code, and ANSYS ICE, are
capable of simulating CI engines. By adjusting injection timing, nozzle
diameter, and swirl ratio, Rajak et al. (2020) performed a numerical
analysis on the emission characteristics of diesel engines fueled with
diesel, spirulina microalgae, and ethanol mixes. The results
2
Industrial Crops & Products 194 (2023) 116332
BTE Brake thermal efficiency.
HRR Heat release rate.
CO2 Carbon dioxide.
CO Carbon monoxide.
NOx Oxides of nitrogen.
HC Hydrocarbon.
To Temperature (K).
Po In- cylinder pressure.
Eactivation Activation energy in the auto-ignition process.
dX
dτ o Heat release rate, 1/sec.
Ø0 ≈ ØI ≈ ØII ≈ ØIII Function characterising completeness the fuel
vapour combustion in the zone.
MF Cycle fuel mass.
A0, AI, AIII Empirical factor controlled by intensity of swirl and speed
of engine.
σUD Percentage of fuel evaporated in the present instant of
time.
σU Percentage of fuel evaporated in the course of ignition
delay period.
α Equivalence fraction of A/F in the cylinder.
X Burnt Fuel fraction.
τo Period of auto-ignition delay, sec.
demonstrated that the NOx emission, particulate matter discharge, and
SE scale-up with increasing injection timing, swirl ratio, and nozzle
diameter. Through the KIVA 4 CHEMKIN platform, Zhao et al. (2018)
report a computational investigation of the effect of fuel structure
(quad-component skeletal mechanism) on soot particle size and mass in
engines. The findings indicate that soot particle mass and number will
increase as unsaturated fatty acid methyl ester (FAME) concentration in
biodiesel fuel increases.
Using edible (soybean oil) and non-edible (kapok oil, microalgae
methyl ester) oils as a propellant in CI engines, the current work focuses
on the numerical analysis of engine characteristics. According to the
literature study, earlier research on engine characteristics has relied on
kapok oil, microalgae methyl ester, and soybean oil, however, to the
author’s knowledge, neither effort has taken into account changes in
both load and fuel injection pressure nor simultaneous application of the
same. Therefore, author has made an effort to close the information gap
by conducting a well-organised evaluation on the effects of different
loading conditions (25 %, 50 %, 75 %, and 100 %) and fuel injection
pressure (180, 200 and 220 bar) on diesel engine performance. Addi­
tionally, the author performed two experiment validations.
2. Material and methods
2.1. Alternative and alternative properties
The substitute was created by transesterification with methanol
using edible soybean oil, non-edible kapok oil, and microalgae species.
According to earlier studies, the soybean oil, microalgae, and kapok oils
were transformed into alternatives through the chemical reaction pro­
cedure of transesterification, in which the oils were shared with ethanol
or methanol in the attendance of a compound to produce fatty-acid-
esters and glycerine. Methanol is typically utilised in place of ethanol
because it lowers the cost of production for alternatives, increasing their
ability to compete in the marketplace for petroleum based diesel fuel.
Alternative energy that can be used to reduce reliance on fossil fuels.
Since the market for edible oils is becoming more competitive and more
expensive to produce alternative, there has been a lot of interest in the
use of non-edible oil (Geng et al., 2020; Mofijur M et al., 2013a; b).
The fuels employed in this analysis were diesel (D100), microalgae
P. Gupta et al. Industrial Crops & Products 194 (2023) 116332

methyl ester (MAME100), kapok oil (KA100) and soybean methyl ester
(SME100). First, 80 % of diesel fuel was blended with 20 % of micro­
algae methyl ester, 20 % kapok oil, and 20 % soybean methyl ester by
volume basis is called to MAME20D80, KA20D80 and SME20D80,
respectively as per investigations by Rajak et al. (2020). The alternative
fuel properties as shown in Table 1. As a result, Eq. (1) was applied to
determine the density of the mix (ρ), and Eq. (2) was used to get the
viscosity of the blend (v). The cetane number and carbon percentage of
blends were calculated using Eqs. (3) and (4). All of the propellant’s
characteristics come from earlier studies. Table 1 lists the characteristics
of the fuel and its mixtures (Silitonga et al. 2013, Islam et al. 2015,
Kuleshov and Mahkamov, 2008; Rajak et al., 2019b).
∑
n
ρB = X r ρr (1)
r=1
computer. The eddy current dynamometer was set to Zero(0) position to
signify the initial zero loading condition. The inbuilt fuel consumption
measurement system was initiated for taking the readings of fuel con­
sumption at different loading conditions. The DAQ system collected the
analog signals from the sensors and fed the same to the computer and the
same being translated to the GUI. The data is then exported from the GUI
during the experiment and the raw data is collected from the computer.
The experimental engine was tested in an air-fuel ratio of 15:1.
Although diesel engines in general operates between 14.7 and 18 and
above, a more rich-mixture based mixture is implemented in the present
study. This is to facilitate the engine to combust the fuel properly.
Numerically, the tool will exhibit results at any specified air: fuel ratio,
yet the authors have kept similar air: fuel ratio between experimental
and numerical works. The richer side of the ratio is to accelerate the
combustion phenomenon of the different fuels.

∑
n
lnνB = Xr lnυr (2) 2.3. Uncertainty assessment
r=1

An uncertainty analysis has been undertaken to establish the

∑
n
CNB = Xr CNr (3)
r=1
∑
n
CB = X r Cr (4)
r=1
2.2. Investigational system
A naturally aspirated, single cylinder, four-stroke, direct injection,
compression-ignition diesel-engine is used in the trials, along with an
eddy current dynamometer. Fig. 1 shows a schematic representation of
the diesel engine test arrangement. These kinds of engines are frequently
used for research. The type of fuel injector used for the present study is a
diesel solenoid injector (Make: BOSCH) with 3 holes and 120◦ spray
angle with injection pressure upto 1100 bar. Table 2 provides technical
information about the diesel engine. To measure engine performance
exhaust emissions under various operating situations, simple in­
struments are used. A computer system with ignition programming al­
lows for the study of tested samples engine presentation and ignition
data. With the help of this programme, estimates of variables like cyl­
inder pressure, heat release rate, fuel flow rate, air measurement, calo­
rimeter water flow rate, and others can be made. The TESTO-350 gas
analyser measures carbon-monoxide, carbon-dioxide, nitrogen-oxide,
and other gases at the engine tail pipe. For determining smoke opacity
repeatability of the investigations with the specific goal of identifying
and enumerating mistakes originating in the experimentations due to
estimating accuracy, instruments used and their calibration, and tech­
nique used in an ambient state. In this study, the combined uncertainty
for engine performance and exhaust fumes has been measured using the
root mean square method, where U is the overall uncertainty of a certain
quantity R, has been listed by employing Eq. (5). In this, R is defined as f
[y1, y2,., yn], where y1, y2,., yn are the independent variables of R and
each of them has its own individual error. Table 3 displays the sensors
and the measurement devices uncertainty (Bhowmik et al., 2018; Rav­
ikumar et al., 2022, 2022). The Eq. (5) has been used to calculate the
total uncertainty for the engine and exhaust emissions based on the
average values of five consecutive readings collected over a 2-minute
sample period. Additionally, a further standard deviation index has
been calculated in order to increase the reliability of the uncertainty
analysis.
[
ΔU = √ (dynamometer)2 + (smoke sensor)2 +
(pressure sensor)2 + (speed senor)2 +
(temperature sensor)2 + (crank angle encoder)2 + (5)
(load indicator)2 + (NOx sensor)2 + ]
(CO2 sensor)2 + (pressure experiment)2
[
ΔU = √ (0.15)2 + (1.0)2 + (0.5)2 +
(1.0) + (0.15)2 + (0.2)]2 + (0.2)2 +
2

(1.0)2 + (0.5)2 + (3.5)2 ΔU = 3.98%

concentration, an AVL smoke metre is used. Given the unpredictability
of all parameters, the equipment used in this experiment are periodically
tuned. The readings were taken after running the engine in diesel mode
for 30 min to acquire stabilised figures. The exhaust gas analyzer was
calibrated without gas before the experiment.
The experimental set-up was checked for any possible errors and
later the engine was set to run on diesel fuel for 10 h to stabilise before
commencement of the experiments. The throttle was set to fully open
position during the initial stage of operation. The engine was manually
cranked and the graphical user interface (GUI) was opened in the
2.4. Numerical model description
In the current study, Diesel-RK software has been utilised to
numerically analyse the performance, combustion, and emission char­
acteristics of a diesel engine using neat microalgae (MAME100), kapok
oil (KA100), and soybean (SME100), its 20 % blend with diesel. We
looked into the connections between crank angle and cylinder pressure,
temperature, heat release rate, pressure rise rate, and other important

Table 1
Characteristics of fuel.
Characteristics D100 MAME100 KA100 SME100 MAME20D80 KA20D80 SME20D80

C (%) 86.14 78.41 78 77.3 84.27 84.51 84.07

H (%) 13.86 11.12 12.5 11.8 13.31 13.58 13.44
O (%) 0.4 10.47 9.5 10.8 2.414 2.22 2.48
Flash point 64 95 156.5 120 70.2 82.5 75.2
Density (kg/m3) 830 912 876.9 885 846.24 839.38 841
Viscosity (mm2/s) 3.61 5.06 4.61 5.23 3.9 3.81 3.934
Heating value (MJ/kg) 42.5 37.42 40.825 36.2 41.484 42.165 41.24
Cetane Number 48 46.5 57.2 51.3 47.7 49.84 48.66

3
P. Gupta et al. Industrial Crops & Products 194 (2023) 116332

Fig. 1. (a) Experiment setup. (b). Picture of experimental system.

Table 2 Table 3
Specification of engine. Uncertainty assessment.
System specification Standards Tool Percentage of indecision

Engine type 1-cylinder, 4-stroke, CI engine Eddy current dynamometer ±0.15

Bore (mm)×Stroke (mm) 80 × 110 Smoke meter ±1.0
Compression ratio 17.5 Pressure sensor ±0.5
Rated power (KW) 3.7 Speed sensor ±1.0
Speed (rpm) 1500 Temperature sensor ±0.15
Method of cooling Water Encoder ±0.2
Fuel injection timing 230 b TDC Load indicator ±0.2
NOX ±0.5
CO2 ±1

4
P. Gupta et al. Industrial Crops & Products 194 (2023) 116332

parameters. From the diesel engine experiment, simulated data and

experimental data were contrasted. The Diesel-RK tool, which makes use
of the multi-zone concept, was used to simulate the combustion of an
artificial compression ignition engine. This model takes into account the
governing equations that Fiveland and Assanis specified using the
Diesel-RK programme. The Zeldovich Mechanism is utilised to produce
nitrogen oxide emissions, while the Alkidas Mechanism, and Mechanism
are used to predict ignition delay, soot, and particle matter. Diesel spray
zone characteristics are shown in Fig. 2, and vaporisation is shown in
Fig. 3.
Spray model:

(a) Earlier jet impingement

I. Firm conical core Fig. 3. Vaporisation of spray of CI engine (Kuleshov et al., 2010).
II. Dense progressive front
III. Attenuated outer sleeve d(mYi ) ∑ j
(b) Latterly spray impingement = mjY + Sg (8)
dt j
i

I. Conical axial core at near wall flow ∑(mj )( j ) Ωi Wmw

II. Dense core of near wall flow on piston bowl surface Yi = Y i − Y cyl
i + (9)
m ρ
III. Latterly front of near wall flow j

IV. Attenuated outer zone of near wall flow Conservation of energy.

According to Fiveland and Assanis, the energy equation for an open
Penetration spray tip thermodynamic system can be expressed as follows:
( )1.5 ( )
V1 L1 d(mu) dν dQht ∑
V0
= 1−
L2 =− p + + mj hj (10)
dt dt dt j

Where;L1 = prevailing distance between location of EFM & nozzle The rate at which energy changes within the system is indicated on
injectorL2 =penetration distance of EFMV0 = EFM initial velocity at the left hand side of the equation above. The displacement work rate,
nozzle of the injectorV1 = ddLτk ; EFM current velocity. heat transfer rate, and enthalpy flow are each represented by the first,
Heat release rate and ignition delay. second, and third terms on the right side of the equation.
The Diesel-RK software multi-zone combustion model divides the Modified Tolstov’s equation.
heat release process into four essential parts. Although they have Although their physical and chemical characteristics differ, each has
different physical and chemical properties, each one affects how quickly an impact on the pace at which heat is released. The first stage of the
heat is released. The ignition delay period, the initial phase of heat heat release is the ignition delay period, which is calculated using the
release, is computed using a modified form of Tolstov’s equation. modified Tolstov’s equation as follows:
The following equations describe the species conservation equation, The calculating of auto ignition delay period by:
which takes into account the evaluation and extinction of each species (
√̅̅̅̅̅ (
) To
)
Eactivation 70
on a mass fraction basis. τo = 3.8 × 10− 6 1 − 1.6 × 10− 4 × rpm exp −
Po 8.312To CN + 25
dm ∑ (11)
= mj (6)
dt j Heat release rate.
During premixed combustion phase
mi
Yi = (7) [ ( ) ] ( )
m dX MF dσUD
= ∅o A0 (σUD − x0 )(0.1σUD + Xo ) + ∅I (12)
dτo vI dτ

Fig. 2. Several of zones of fuel (diesel) spray (Kuleshov et al., 2010).

5
P. Gupta et al. Industrial Crops & Products 194 (2023) 116332

During the mixing-controlled combustion phase Table 4

( ) ( ) Validation conditions.
dX dσU MF
= ∅I + ∅II AII (σU − X)(α − X) (13) System specification Validation
dτo dτ vC
Engine type 4-stroke, one cylinder, CI engine
During the late combustion phase Bore (mm)×Stroke (mm) 80 × 110
Compression ratio 17.5
dX
= ØIII × AIII × Kt × {1 − X} × {ξB α − X} (14) Rated power (kW) 3.7
d τo Speed (rpm) 1500
Method of cooling Water
It is assumed in those equations that Φ0 = ΦI = ΦII = ΦIII which Fuel injection timing 23◦ b TDC
specifies the degree of fuel vapour combustion in the zones, is true. The
cylinder heat transfer is considered, and Woschni’s relationship is used
to get the corresponding heat transfer coefficients for each of its many
Table 5
zones.
Boundary condition for validation.
Specific fuel consumption.
Brake specific fuel consumption is the amount of gasoline consumed Parameter Validation 2 (Rajak and Verma, 2018b)

to produce one unit of braking power from an engine. Injection timing 230 b TDC
Fuel injection pressure 180–220 bar
MF Inlet valve opening 4.50 b TDC
SFC = (15)
PBrake Inlet valve closing 35.50 a BDC
Exhaust valve opening 35.50 b BDC
Brake thermal efficiency Exhaust valve closing 4.50 a TDC

PBrake
ηBrake = (16)
MF × CV analysed simultaneously, it was discovered that the peak cylinder
Equation calculates the thermal NO using the chain Zeldovich pressure at full load varied by 3.5 % of validation I and 4.64 % of
method and offers the following details: (17− 20). The full set of equa­ validation II, respectively. In the experiment, a diesel engine with a
tions consists of fourteen equilibrium equations, three equations for the 3.7 kW rated output was used. The analysis for the second validation-II
material balance, and the Dalton equation for partial pressure. Each of the experimental and numerical results is presented in Table 5. Cyl­
stage requires computing the equilibrium concentrations of eighteen inder pressure was examined for Rajak and Verma (2018b) as shown in
species. Fig. 5. On the basis of historical data for internal combustion engines,
reputable researchers are implementing the Diesel-RK programme.
O2 ↔ 2O Several researchers, including Kuleshov et al. (2010) and Kuleshov and
Mahkamov (2008), validated the DIESEL-RK SOFTWARE by comparing
N2 + O ↔ NO + O
actual and model results. Using engine parameters from Kuleshov et al.,
2008, the multi zone model was utilised to investigate the combustion
N + O2 ↔ NO + O (17)
characteristics of a compression ignition machine running in HCCI
38020
− 7 − T
{ ( / )2 } mode.
d[NO] P × 2.333 × 10 .e b [N2 ]e .[O]e . 1 − [NO] [NO]e 1
= ( ) . (18)
dθ R.Tb . 1 + 2365.e
2365
Tb [NO]
. ω 3. Result and discussions
Tb [NO]
e

The NO concentration in a cylinder is given by: 3.1. Combustion characteristics

rNOc = rNO (19)

3.1.1. Cylinder pressure
And the specific NO in g/kWh is expressed as Cylinder pressure determines a fuels capacity to mix uniformly with
air and burn effectively. According to Nautiyal et al. (2020), the com­
30 × rNO × Mbg
eNO = (20) bustion properties of DI engines are significantly influenced by the
L C × ηM
chemical and physical qualities of the fuel used. The variance in cylinder
Soot formation. pressure for the D100, MAME 100, SME 100, KA100, KA20D80, MAME
The Hatridge smoke level, which is represented as given in equation, 20D80, and SME 20D80 engines is shown in Fig. 6 as a function of crank
can be used to calculate the level of soot generation (21− 22). The angle. The cylinder pressure for the D100 was 90.986 bar at full load,
calculation determines how much soot will form in the burning zone. compared to 81.885, 80.694, 86.03, 90.105, 88.77, and 88.506 bar for
( ) the MAME 100, SME 100, KA100, KA20D80, MAME20D80, and SME
d[C] q dx
= 0.004 c (21) 20D80, respectively. The MAME100 may have had the lowest cylinder
dt K V dt pressure of all the biodiesels tested due to its high viscosity and low
calorific value. Diesel has a somewhat higher cylinder pressure than
Hartridge = 100{1 − 0.9545exp( − 2.4226[C])} (22)
both pure biodiesel and its mixes. A shorter ignition delay is also asso­
ciated with lower cylinder pressure. As more fuel is charged into the
combustion chamber, cylinder pressure rises. From Fig. 6, it was
2.5. Diesel-RK authentication
observed that the in-cylinder pressure of all fuels combusted inside the
cylinder was similar in-nature. This is not the case and hence the peak
The Diesel-RK simulation programme has been validated using the
value at the corresponding crank angle has been taken out for all the
various engine appearances of a diesel-powered CI engine. The bound­
fuels under study and plotted as “peak cylinder pressure” variation at
ary conditions that were first used in numerical simulation and experi­
different loading and fuel injection pressure in Fig. 7. In Fig. 7, the
mental results are shown in Tables 4 and 5. The study of the
variation in peak cylinder pressure corresponding to the load and fuel
experimental and numerical data for cylinder-pressure is shown in Fig. 4
injection pressure is shown. The D100 cylinder pressure decreases by
(validation-I for present investigation). Fig. 5 illustrates a further vali­
4.66 % and 9.74 %, respectively, when comparing 220 bar fuel injection
dation for the cylinder pressure using the same operating conditions and
pressure to 200 bar and 180 bar fuel injection pressure. Similar to this,
prior data. When the numerical and experimental findings were

6
P. Gupta et al. Industrial Crops & Products 194 (2023) 116332

Fig. 4. Validation of cylinder pressure.

Fig. 5. Validation of a) cylinder pressure.

the reductions for MAME 100, SME 100, KA 100, KA20D80, MAME
20D80, and SME 20D80 at 200 bar fuel injection pressure are 4.40 %,
4.46 %, 5.07 %, 4.55 %, 4.58 %, and 4.58 %, respectively, while at
180 bar fuel injection pressure, the reductions are 9.74 %, 9.83 %, 10.1
%, 11.1 %, 10.9 %, and 9.6 %, as shown in figure (Shrivastava and
Verma, 2020a; Dunga et al., 2022).
Due to dissimilar nature of the fuel characteristics under test (diesel,
biodiesel blends), they exhibit different combustion characteristics. One
such factor is the variation of calorific value of the different fuel blends.
The peculiar significance of Fig. 7 is to show the difference of the peak
cylinder pressure values upon combustion in the cylinder. In most of the
cases, diesel was observed to have higher values compared to other fuel.
This is due to the fact that higher calorific fuel exhibit better combus­
tibility and hence higher cylinder pressure.
3.1.2. Heat release rate
The chart clearly shows that the rate of heat release increases as the
percentage of biodiesel in the mixed fuel increases and happens further
from top dead centre, which is also a sign of ignition delay. The greater
ignition delay and delayed start of combustion may be to blame for the
higher rate of heat release. This type of behaviour is also caused by the
greater cetane number and latent heat of evaporation of biodiesel. More
fuel is burnt during the premixed phase of combustion as a result of the
prolonged ignition delay and fuel accumulation. Additionally, the bio­
diesel molecular structure contains oxygen, which enhances the diffu­
sion stage of combustion. A higher instantaneous heat release rate
results from the higher volatility, which also causes a bigger volume of
fuel to accumulate during the premixed phase combustion. Additionally,
the findings demonstrate that the biodiesel blended fuel exhibits a larger

7
P. Gupta et al.
Fig. 6. Cylinder pressure with crank angle.
Fig. 7. Peak cylinder pressure with load, FIP and biodiesel blends.
neat heat release rate compared to diesel fuel. This is because biodiesel
has a larger mass proportion of oxygen and a higher latent heat of
evaporation than diesel fuel (Datta et al., 2016; Goodrum, 2002).
The quantity of heat emitted during a combustion process at a
particular crank angle is referred to as the heat release rate. A CI engine
goes through multiple stages of combustion, such as premixed, rapid,
regulated combustion, and the afterburning phase (Rajak et al., 2019a).
At full load, Fig. 8 displays the change in heat release rate versus crank
angle for the D100, MAME 100, SME 100, KA100, KA20D80, MAME
20D80, and SME 20D80. At full load, the heat release rates were 44.668,
35.37, 31.42, 32.92, 42.99, 42.33, and 41.7 J/deg for D100, MAME 100,
SME 100, KA20D80, MAME20D80, and SME20D80, respectively. The
law of thermodynamics is used to calculate the rate of heat emission. It
was shown that the heat release rate of biodiesel and its blends is lower
than that of pure diesel. The rate of fuel-air mixing during the premixed
combustion phase, the fuel’s calorific value, and the ignition delay all
affect how much heat is generated (Rajak and Verma, 2018; Agarwal,
8
Industrial Crops & Products 194 (2023) 116332
2007). Fig. 9 illustrates the divergence of the heat release rate as a
function of load and fuel injection pressure. It demonstrated that the
heat release rate for D100 decreases by 11.12 % and 26.12 %, respec­
tively, at 200 and 180 bar fuel injection pressures compared to 220 bar
fuel injection pressure. For MAME 100, SME 100, KA 100, KA 20D80,
MAME 20D80, and SME 20D80, the fuel injection pressure is lowered by
13.7 %, 15.1 %, 11.9 %, 12.77 %, 11.4 % and 12.2 %, respectively, at
200 bar, while it is reduced by 22.5 %, 30.3 %, 24.1 %, 28.8 %, 27.12 %,
and 27.8 %, respectively, at 180 bar.
3.1.3. Ignition delay
The time interval between the beginning of fuel injection and the
beginning of fuel combustion is known as the ignition delay. Ignition
delay includes both a physical delay as well as a chemical delay (thanks
to the pre-combustion process) (accredit of disintegration, vaporisation
and blending of air-fuel occur) Lakshminarayanan et al. (2022). The
physical and chemical delays manifest at the same time. It is a key
P. Gupta et al.
Fig. 8. Heat release rate with crank angle.
Fig. 9. Heat release rate with load, fuel injection pressure.
consideration when analysing the likelihood of knocking as well as the
fuel’s ability to ignite. Fig. 10 depicts how the ignition delay varies with
load; it was found that for D100, it was 12.903. While it decreases for
SME100, KA100, KA20D80, and SME20D80, respectively, it increases
for MAME100 and MAME20D80, respectively, by 7.564 % and 1.108 %.
This may be the result of MAME100 and MAME20D80’s biodiesels
having a lower cetane number than diesel whereas other biodiesels and
blends have a greater cetane number. The engine speed, oxygen content,
and cetane number all affect how quickly the ignition starts (Shrivastava
and Verma 2020b). The cylinder surface and continued gas temperature
cause the ignition delay to rise as load decreases (Rajak et al., 2019b).
For diesel, biodiesel, and their blends, the variation of ignition delay
versus load versus fuel injection pressure is shown in Fig. 10. In com­
parison to ignition delay at 220 bar fuel injection pressure, it was found
that for D100, ignition delay increased by 0.1395 % & 0.658 % for 200 &
180 bar. It rises for MAME100, KA100, MAME20D80, and SME20D80
9
Industrial Crops & Products 194 (2023) 116332
by 0.766 %, 1.182 %, 0.0613 %, and 10.8 %, respectively, while falling
for SME100 and KA20D80 at 200 bar in comparison to its value at
220 bar fuel injection pressure at full load. Again, at 180 bar for
MAME100, SME100, KA100, KA20D80, MAME20D80, and SME20D80,
it was seen that it increases by 1.35 %, 0.208 %, 1.714 %, 0.565 %,
0.5135 % and 10.82 % accordingly as it compares at 220 bar fuel in­
jection pressure. With an improved delay period, charges that accu­
mulate in the combustion chamber burn quickly, cutting the time it
takes for combustion to occur. The environment’s pressure and tem­
perature have a significant impact on the ignition delay.
3.1.4. Cylinder temperature
The findings show that for all of the tested fuels, the in-cylinder
temperature rises as the load situation increases. The temperature in­
side the cylinder rises as the load is larger because more fuel is
consumed. The in-cylinder temperature for biodiesel is greater during
P. Gupta et al.
Fig. 10. Variation of ignition delay with FIP.
the entire test condition. The primary cause of the decrease in maximum
in-cylinder temperature is the higher latent heat of evaporation of bio­
diesel compared to the biodiesel blends. The equivalent temperatures of
evaporation for neat SME100 biodiesel, SME20D80 blend, and diesel
fuel are 325 kJ/kg, 265 kJ/kg, and 250 kJ/kg, respectively. The varia­
tion of cylinder temperature vs load at 220 bar fuel injection pressure is
shown in Fig. 11. As observed from the figure, the lowest values of
cylinder temperature are for the fuel- MAME100 & SME100, followed by
KA 100. This is due to the fact that the fuels under test were not blended
with diesel at any proportion and they are subjected as it is inside the
cylinder. Since calorific value of the fuels are low, they will naturally
exhibit lower heat dissipation during combustion. This is observed as
“cylinder temperature”. Yet, upon blending with diesel at 20:80 bio­
diesel: diesel ratio, the calorific values of the blend fuels significantly
increased and therefore exhibit higher cylinder temperature upon
combustion. The result may also vary depending upon the operating
conditions of the engine. At full loading condition, cylinder temperature
values for D100, MAME 100, SME100, KA100, KA20D80, MAME20D80,
Fig. 11. Cylinder temperature variation with load, FIP and biodiesel blends.
10
Industrial Crops & Products 194 (2023) 116332
and SME20D80 were observed to be 1939.7, 1755.3, 1735.6, 1730.9,
1790.7, 1896.7, and 1893 K. With the increase in load, cylinder tem­
perature increased. The temperature of the combustion cylinder has a
significant impact on engine knocking and pollutants. The amount of
NOx released is significantly increased by higher cylinder temperature.
The researcher noticed the same pattern as well (Rajak et al., 2018a).
For diesel, biodiesel, and their blends, it was shown that as fuel injection
pressure is increased, cylinder temperature rises. At full load, the fuel
injection pressure for D100, MAME100, SME100, KA100, KA20D80,
MAME20D80, and SME20D80 decreased by 3.07 %, 3.23 %, 3.29 %,
2.91 %, 3.079 %, and 3.074 % at 200 bar, respectively, while it
decreased by 6.61 %, 7.54 %, 7.58 %, 7.314 %, 7.09 %, 6.606 %, and
6.62 % at 180 bar.
3.2. Performance characteristics
3.2.1. Specific fuel consumption
One kilowatt of output power is produced in one hour using a specific
P. Gupta et al.
amount of fuel, which is the fuel consumption. In particular, it measures
how well an engine can convert the chemical energy of fuel into useful
work output. Flaming the fuel and producing the necessary work output
is a crucial factor in determining the CI engine efficiency. The specific
fuel fluctuation with load at 220 bar fuel injection pressure is shown in
Fig. 12. For D100, MAME100, SME100, KA100, KA20D80,
MAME20D80, and SME20D80 biodiesel and blends, the BSFC values
under full load condition are notable to be 0.257, 0.298, 0.311, 0.270,
0.259, 0.264, and 0.266 kg/kWh, respectively. The lowest BSFC value
for diesel is 0.257 kg/kWh, and the second-lowest figure for KA100 is
0.259 kg/kWh. The variations in the energy content (calorific value) of
the blended fuels are the primary cause of this type of behaviour. Lower
fuel energy content means higher fuel consumption to produce one unit
of braking power (Datta and Mandal, 2017). This chart makes it evident
that, in comparison to diesel under operational conditions, its value rises
when the blend ratio is increased. The calorific value, density, air fuel
ratio, and viscosity all play a role. Higher viscosity and density cause a
higher specific fuel consumption despite a lower calorific value. Blended
fuel has a higher density and a lower heating value than diesel since
biodiesel is an oxygenated fuel, which aids in improved combustion
(Rajak et al., 2019b, 2020).
3.2.2. Brake thermal efficiency
Brake thermal efficiency is the proportion of produced braking
power to heat input. Fig. 13 shows how the tested fuels brake thermal
efficiency changes as a function of engine load and injection pressure.
The graphic shows that with increased load, brake thermal efficiency
rises due to enhanced combustion. The fuel calorific value, viscosity,
lower heating value, and density affect the brake thermal efficiency
according to Muralidharan and Vasudevan (2011). It was found that
when the 20 % blend ratio uses, the value of brake thermal efficiency
decreases as per investigation. Low calorific value, high viscosity, and
density result in the fuel spray qualities, which in turn impact how the
fuel and air combine and burn, as well as the fuel, low thermal efficiency
when used as a brake. It was discovered that the brake thermal efficiency
increases as the fuel injection pressure increased. The biodiesel high
oxygen content, which causes apodictic combustion of the fuel inside the
combustion chamber. For D100, MAME 100, SME 100, KA100,
KA20D80, MAME 20D80, and SME 20D80, the value of brake thermal
efficiency waste was determined to be 32.72 %, 31.76 %, 31.48 %, 32.2
Fig. 12. Specific fuel consumption variation with load, FIP and biodiesel blends.
11
Industrial Crops & Products 194 (2023) 116332
%, 32.6 %, 32.4 %, and 32.3 % at 220 bar with full load conditions. The
findings show that for all of the tested fuels, the brake thermal efficiency
rises as engine load or injection pressure rises.
3.2.3. Exhaust gas temperature
Fig. 14 shows how the tested fuels exhaust gas temperature changes
as a function of engine load and injection pressure. The highest exhaust
gas temperature is depicted, the values of 926, 889.2, 868.1, 925.7,
923.2, 920, and 916.2 K for D100, MAME100, SME100, KA100,
KA20D80, MAME20D80, and SME20D80, respectively. In comparison to
diesel, the temperature of the exhaust gas is lower for biodiesel and its
blend. Due to the premixed and diffusion combustion processes, it relies
on the combustion process and the calorific value of the fuel. Due to
improved combustion, exhaust gas temperature improves when engine
load increases Karthickeyan (2019). The amount of oxygen in the pro­
pellant also plays a role. Increased compression ratio also results in a
decrease in exhaust gas temperature (Rajak et al., 2019c). According to
research, fuel injection pressure decreases and load increases are
accompanied by an increase in exhaust gas temperature. Another
important factor in determining the temperature of the exhaust gas is the
latent heat of propellant vaporisation. The NOx emission can be mini­
mised by lowering the exhaust gas temperature (Nanthagopal et al.,
2018).
3.3. Discharge characteristics
3.3.1. CO2 discharge
Fuel combustion produces carbon dioxide (CO2), which builds up
and has a negative impact on the environment. Today, CO2 emissions are
a big concern for the entire world, and several international agreements
make it a top priority to reduce them. Fig. 15 shows how the tested fuels
carbon dioxide changes as a function of engine load and injection
pressure. With increasing load, CO2 emissions are dropping. At 220 bar
fuel injection pressure and full load operating conditions, it was revealed
that 828.81, 866.4, 892.5, 841.2, 831, 830, and 830.94 g/KWh for
D100, MAME 100, SME100, KA100, KA20D80, MAME20D80, and
SME20D80. Due to its higher oxygen content than diesel, biodiesel has
an excessively high CO2 value (Karthickeyan et al., 2019). Complete
combustion occurred with a high oxygen concentration, resulting in
higher emissions than diesel. Additionally, as the compression ratio
P. Gupta et al. Industrial Crops & Products 194 (2023) 116332

Fig. 13. BTE variation with load, FIP and biodiesel blends.

Fig. 14. EGT variation with load, FIP and biodiesel blends.

rises, carbon dioxide emissions climb as well because the fuel combi­
nation is more combustible (Rajak et al., 2019c). It was observed that,
with the exception of KA100 and KA20D80, for which it declines, the
value increased with a drop in fuel injection pressure for D100, MAME
100, SME100, MAME20D80, and SME20D80. For D100, MAME 100,
SME100, MAME20D80, and SME20D80, the value increased by 1.87 %,
4.4 %, 4.14 %, 1.848 %, and 2.148 % at 180 bar compared to 220 bar
fuel injection pressure at full load, and by 0.6925 %, 1.518 %, 1.319 %,
0.4578 %, and 0.876 % at 200 bar. At 180 bar and 200 bar fuel injection
pressure as compared to 220 bar pressure, CO2 emission drops by 4.6 %,
6.3 % for KA100 and 2.29 %, 3.89 % for KA20D80. This KA100 and
KA20D80 anomaly could be caused by a greater equivalency ratio. The
burning of a hydrocarbon propellant should only produce CO2 and water
(H2O), which depends on the carbon hydrogen ratio in the propellant.
This is also affected by the carbon-hydrogen ratio in the fuel. However,
some research has found that CO2 emissions from biodiesel are lower
than those from diesel (Shrivastava and Verma, 2020a; Labeckas and
Slavinskas, 2006), despite the fact that it has a higher CO2 content than
diesel.
3.3.2. SO2 discharge
Fig. 16 shows how the tested fuels fluctuation of SO2 emission
changes as a function of engine load and injection pressure. It shows that
under operating conditions, SO2 emission decreases as load increases.

12
P. Gupta et al. Industrial Crops & Products 194 (2023) 116332

Fig. 15. CO2 variation with load, FIP and biodiesel blends.

Fig. 16. SO2 variation with load, FIP and biodiesel blends.

For D100, MAME100, SME100, KA100, KA20D80, MAME20D80, and
SME20D80, it was discovered that 0.01029, 0.00597, 0.00624, 0.00541,
0.00935, 0.00953, and 0.00961 g/KWh. The sulphur content of the
gasoline is what drives SO2 emissions. When compared to biodiesel, SO2
emissions are high. It was discovered that as fuel injection pressure is
reduced, SO2 emissions rise. At 180 bar fuel injection pressure, it de­
creases for D100, MAME 100, SME 100, KA100, KA20D80, MAME
20D80, and SME 20D80 by 1.846 %, 4.61 %, 4.17 %, 2.52 %, 2.21 %,
2.26 %, and 2.15 %, while at 200 bar fuel injection pressure, it decreases
by 1.85 %, 1.50 %, 1.28 %, 0.92 %, 0.64 %, 0.94 %, and 0.83 % as
opposed to 220 bar fuel injection pressure, as. The SO2 emission is
declining in the rich fuel combination because less additional air is
required for SO2 generation. In addition, compared to conventional
fuels, the biodiesels have a relatively low sulphur concentration.

13
P. Gupta et al. Industrial Crops & Products 194 (2023) 116332

Fig. 17. NOX variation with load, FIP and biodiesel blends.

3.3.3. NOX discharge
Fig. 17 shows how the tested fuels fluctuation of nitrogen oxides
(NOx) emission changes as a function of engine load and injection
pressure. NOx emission was estimated to be 2361.2, 2487, 2126, 2967,
2504.4, 2120.1, and 2047.6 ppm for D100, MAME100, SME100, KA100,
KA20D80, MAME20D80, and SME20D80, respectively, at full load and
220 bar fuel injection pressure. The amount of nitrogen oxide that is
released depends on the engine’s torque, load, cylinder pressure,
ignition delay, and fuel properties like oxygen content, viscosity, and
calorific value. The temperature of the exhaust gases has an impact as
well. Heat release rate and cylinder temperature in an engine also
control NOx generation (Singh et al., 2018). It was found that NOx
emission for KA100, KA20D80, MAME100, and MAME20D80 are higher
than D100. A researcher also made a similar finding (Silitonga et al.,
2013; Islam et al., 2015, 2019). The higher iodine value of the charge is
the cause of the increased NOx emission. NOx emissions with long-chain

Fig. 18. PM variation with load, FIP and biodiesel blends.

14
P. Gupta et al.
unsaturated fatty acids side by side (Rahman et al., 2014). The pro­
duction of NOx emissions is also governed by the air-fuel ratio. Ac­
cording to figure, the NOx emission rises as the fuel injection pressure
rises and load.
3.3.4. PM discharge
PM release occurs when propellant burns in inadequate air, which is
a prominent source of pollution from CI engines. The fluctuation in PM
discharge with load and fuel injection pressure is shown in Fig. 18. The
graph clearly shows that fuel injection pressure has a negative impact on
PM discharge, which means that as fuel injection pressure rises, PM
discharge falls. At full load, the values are 0.905, 1.220, 1.289, 0.989,
0.936, 0.980, and 0.990 g/kWh at 180 bar for D100, MAME100,
SME100, KA100, KA20D80, MAME20D80, and SME20D80. At 200 bar,
these values are: 0.758, 0.985, 1.047, 0.812, 0.756, 0.831, and 0.840 g/
kWh; at 220 bar, they are: 0.638, 0.819, 0.874, 0.665, 0.641, 0.700, and
0.709 g/kWh. When there is not enough air, the propellant molecules
thermally crack, causing oxygen to split in the presence of acetylene and
then polymerise into carbon-rich macromolecules that clump together
to form particles (Lakshminarayanan and Aghav, 2010). It relies on the
oxygen content, aromatic content, and heat release rate during the
premixed combustion phase. The length of the biodiesel’s carbon chain
also affects PM discharge (Rajak et al., 2019c; Wei, 2017).
Table 6 displays a revision of the evaluation. The updated evaluation
document explains how biodiesel-diesel test fuels affect emission
Table 6
An overview of the test fuels’ performance and emission characteristics with biodiesel-diesel blends.
15
Industrial Crops & Products 194 (2023) 116332
appearances in diesel engines.
4. Conclusion
Using both edible and non-edible oil, the impact of fuel injection
pressure and load on the engine parameters of a CI engine was investi­
gated. The following findings are drawn from the current investigation.
• As fuel injection pressure rises, in-cylinder pressure rises as well. For
the KA20D80, the peak cylinder pressure at 220 bar is 90.01 bar as
opposed to 85.9 bar at 200 bar. Diesel has slightly greater cylinder
pressure than KA20D80 mix at 180 bar. Fuel injection pressure led to
an increase in HRR as well.
• The value of SFC drops when fuel injection pressure rises from
180 bar to 220 bar; however, the KA20D80, MAME20D80, and
SME20D80 mix exhibits somewhat greater BSFC when compared to
diesel at 220 bar.
• In comparison to neat diesel, the BTE of the KA20D80, MAME20D80,
and SME20D80 blends is lower at 220 bar. For all of the tested fuel,
BTE rises as fuel injection pressure rises, reaching a maximum at
220 bar. When compared to its BTE at 200 bar, the BTE of the
KA20D80 blend at 220 bar injection pressure rises by 1.6 % and 0.73
% at low and high load conditions, respectively.
P. Gupta et al.
• The CO2 and SO2 emission reduces with increase in injection pres­
sure. KA100 has lowest SO2 emission than another biodiesel and
diesel.
• As injection pressure and load increases, NOx discharge also rises.
When the load is 180, 200, or 220 bar for the KA100, the NOx
discharge rises by 57.4 %, 63.76 %, and 66.98 %, respectively. The
minimal NOx discharge for SME20D80 gasoline.
• As injection pressure rises, PM discharge falls. As load increases, PM
discharge decreases by 47.2 %, 46.1 %, and 48.2 % for SME100
gasoline at 180, 200, and 220 bar injection pressure, respectively.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Paras Gupta: Methodology, Resources, Writing – original draft.
Upendra Rajak: Resources, Writing - Review & Editing. Tikendra Nath
Verma: Supervision. Manoj Arya: Resources, Writing - Review &
Editing. Thokchom Subhaschandra Singh: Resources, Writing - Re­
view & Editing.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
References
Agarwal, Avinash Kumar, 2007. Biofuels (alcohols and biodiesel) applications as fuels for
internal combustion engines. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 33 (3), 233–271. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2006.08.003.
Arunkumar, M., Kannan, M., Murali, G., 2019. Experimental studies on engine
performance and emission characteristics using Castor biodiesel as fuel in CI engine.
Renew. Energy 131, 737–744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.07.096.
Asokan, M.A., Vijayan, R., Senthur Prabu, S., Venkatesan, N., 2016. Experimental studies
on the combustion characteristics and performance of a DI diesel engine. Int. J. Oil
Gas Coal Technol. 12, 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJOGCT.2016.075843.
Behçet, Rasim, Yumrutaş, Recep, Oktay, Hasan, 2014. Effects of fuels produced from fish
and cooking oils on performance and emissions of a diesel engine. Energy 71,
645–655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.05.003.
Bellappu, Venkat Jayanth, Victor Depoures, Melvin, Kaliyaperumal, Gopal,
Dillikannan, Damodharan, Jawahar, Dilipsingh, Palani, Kumaran, Meravanigee
Shivappa, Ganesha Prasad, 2021. A comprehensive study on the effects of multiple
injection strategies and exhaust gas recirculation on diesel engine characteristics that
utilize waste high density polyethylene oil. Energy Sources Part A Recovery, Util.
Environ. Eff. https://doi.org/10.1080/15567036.2021.1924313.
Bhowmik, S., Paul, A., Panua, S., Ghosh, S.K., Debroy, D., 2018. Performance-exhaust
emission prediction of diesosenol fueled diesel engine: an ANN coupled MORSM
based optimization. Energy 153, 212–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2018.04.053.
Cherng-Yuan, Lin, Hsiu-An, Lin, 2006. Diesel engine performance and emission
characteristics of biodiesel produced by the peroxidation process. Fuel 85 (3),
298–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2005.05.018.
Datta, A., Mandal, B.K., 2017. Engine performance, combustion and emission
characteristics of a compression ignition engine operating on different biodiesel-
alcohol blends. Energy 125, 470–483.
Dunga, Simhana Devi, Kumar, Ravinder, Rajak, Upendra, 2022. Experimental
investigation of performance, emission and combustion characteristics of a CI engine
fuelled by blends of waste plastic oil with diesel. Energy Sources, Part A Recovery
Util. Environ. Eff. 44 (3), 7693–7708. https://doi.org/10.1080/
15567036.2022.2115582.
Geng, L., Yanjuan, Wang, Yueying, Wang, Huimei, Li, 2020. Effect of the injection
pressure and orifice diameter on the spray characteristics of biodiesel. J. Traffic
Transp. Eng. (Engl. Ed. ) 7 (3), 331–339. 〈https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtte.2018
.12.004〉.
Gnanasekaran, Sakthivel, Saravanan, N., Ilangkumaran, M., 2016. Influence of injection
timing on performance, emission and combustion characteristics of a DI diesel
engine running on fish oil biodiesel. Energy 116, 1218–1229. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.energy.2016.10.039.
Goodrum, J.W., 2002. Volatility and boiling points of biodiesel from vegetable oils and
tallow. Biomass Bioenergy 22 (3), 205–211. 〈https://doi.org/10.1016/S0961-9534
(01)00074-5〉.
Imtenan, S.M., Varman, H.H., Masjuki, M.A., Kalam, H., Sajjad, M.I., Arbab, I.M.
Rizwanul Fattah, 2014. Impact of low temperature combustion attaining strategies
16
Industrial Crops & Products 194 (2023) 116332
on diesel engine emissions for diesel and biodiesels: a review. Energy Convers.
Manag. 80, 329–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2014.01.020.
Islam, Muhammad Aminul, Rahman, M.M., Heimann, Kirsten, Nabi, Md. Nurun,
Ristovski, Z.D., Dowell, Ashley, Thomas, George, Feng, Bo, Alvensleben, Nicolas von,
Brown, Richard J., 2015. Combustion analysis of microalgae methyl ester in a
common rail direct injection diesel engine. Fuel 143, 351–360. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.fuel.2014.11.063.
Karthickeyan, V., 2019a. Effect of cetane enhancer on Moringa oleifera biodiesel in a
thermal coated direct injection diesel engine. Fuel 235, 538–550. https://doi.org/
10.1016/J.FUEL.2018.08.030.
Karthickeyan, V., Ashok, B., Nanthagopal, K., Thiyagarajan, S., Edwin Geo, V., 2019b.
Investigation of novel Pistacia Khinjuk biodiesel in DI diesel engine with post
combustion capture system. Appl. Therm. Eng. 159, 113969 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2019.113969.
Khandal, S.V., Banapurmath, N.R., Gaitonde, V.N., 2017. Effect of exhaust gas
recirculation, fuel injection pressure and injection timing on the performance of
common rail direct injection engine powered with honge biodiesel (BHO. Energy
139, 828–841. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.08.035.
Killol, Abhijeet, Niklesh Reddy, Santosh Paruvada, Murugan, S., 2019. Experimental
studies of a diesel engine run on biodiesel n-butanol blends. Renew. Energy 135,
687–700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.12.011.
Kuleshov, A., Mahkamov, Khamid, 2008. Multi-Zone diesel fuel spray combustion model
for the simulation of a diesel engine running on biofuel. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part A
J. Power Energy 222 (3), 309–321. https://doi.org/10.1243/09576509JPE530.
Kuleshov, Andrey, Kozlov, A. v, Mahkamov, Khamid, 2010. Self-Ignition delay prediction
in PCCI direct injection diesel engines using multi-zone spray combustion model and
detailed chemistry (2010-01-1960). SAE Tech. Pap. https://doi.org/10.4271/2010-
01-1960.
Labeckas, Gvidonas, Slavinskas, Stasys, 2006. The effect of rapeseed oil methyl ester on
direct injection diesel engine performance and exhaust emissions. Energy Convers.
Manag. 47 (13–14), 1954–1967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2005.09.003.
Lakshminarayanan, P.A., Aghav, Y.V., 2010. Particulate matter from direct injection
diesel engines. In: Modelling Diesel Combustion. In: Mechanical Engineering Series.
Springer, Dordrecht. 〈https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3885-2_14〉.
Lakshminarayanan, P.A., Yoghesh v Aghav, 2022. Modelling Diesel Combustion,
Springer Nature, Singapore, ISBN: 9811667411, 9789811667411.
Lin, Cherng Yuan, Hsiu An Lin, 2006a. Diesel engine performance and emission
characteristics of biodiesel produced by the peroxidation process. Fuel 85 (3),
298–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2005.05.018.
Martin, M., Leenus Jesu, V., Edwin, Geo, Nagalingam, B., 2017. Effect of fuel inlet
temperature on cottonseed oil–diesel mixture composition and performance in a di
diesel engine. J. Energy Inst. 90 (4), 563–573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
joei.2016.05.005.
Mofijur, H.H., Masjuki, M.A., Kalam, A.E.Atabani, 2013b. Evaluation of biodiesel
blending, engine performance and emissions characteristics of Jatropha curcas
methyl ester: Malaysian perspective. Energy 55, 879–887. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.energy.2013.02.059.
Mofijur M, A.E., Atabani, H.H., Masjuki, M.A., Kalam, B.M.Masum, 2013a. A study on the
effects of promising edible and non-edible biodiesel feedstocks on engine
performance and emissions production: a comparative evaluation. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 23, 391–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.03.009.
Muralidharan, K., Vasudevan, D., 2011. Performance, emission and combustion
characteristics of a variable compression ratio engine using methyl esters of waste
cooking oil and diesel blends. Appl. Energy 88 (11), 3959–3968. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.04.014.
Nanthagopal, K., Ashok, B., Saravanan, B., Korah, Shane Mathew, Chandra, Snehith,
2018. “Effect of next generation higher alcohols and Calophyllum inophyllum
methyl ester blends in diesel engine. J. Clean. Prod. 180, 50–63. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.167.
Nautiyal, Piyushi, K. A. Subramanian, M.G. Dastidar, Kumar, Ashok, 2020. Experimental
assessment of performance, combustion and emissions of a compression ignition
engine fuelled with spirulina platensis biodiesel. Energy 193. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.energy.2019.116861.
Perumal, Varatharaju, Ilangkumaran, M., 2017. Experimental analysis of engine
performance, combustion and emission using pongamia biodiesel as fuel in CI
engine. Energy 129, 228–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.04.120.
Rahman, M.M., Pourkhesalian, A.M., Jahirul, M.I., Stevanovic, S., Pham, P.X., Wang, H.,
Masri, A.R., Brown, R.J., Ristovski, Z.D., 2014. Particle emissions from biodiesels
with different physical properties and chemical composition. Fuel 134, 201–208.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.05.053.
Rajak, U., Verma, T.N., 2018b. Spirulina Microalgae Biodiesel – A novel renewable
alternative energy source for compression ignition engine. J. Clean. Prod. 201,
343–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.057.
Rajak, U., Prerana, N., Verma, T.N., Pugazhendhi, A., 2019b. Alternating the
environmental benefits of aegle-diesel blends used in compression ignition. Fuel 256.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2019.115835.
Rajak, Upendra, Nashine, Prerana, Singh, Thokchom Subhaschandra, Verma, Tikendra
Nath, 2018. Numerical investigation of performance, combustion and emission
characteristics of various biofuels. Energy Convers. Manag. 156, 235–252. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.11.017.
Rajak, Upendra, Nashine, Prerana, Verma, Tikendra Nath, 2019. Assessment of diesel
engine performance using spirulina microalgae biodiesel. Energy 166, 1025–1036.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.10.098.
Rajak, Upendra, Prerana, Nashine, Verma, Tikendra Nath, Pugazhendhi, Arivalagan,
2019a. Performance, combustion and emission analysis of microalgae spirulina in a
P. Gupta et al.
common rail direct injection diesel engine. Fuel 255, 115855. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.fuel.2019.115855.
Rajak, Upendra, Prerana, Nashine, Verma, Tikendra Nath, 2020. Numerical study on
emission characteristics of a diesel engine fuelled with diesel-spirulina microalgae-
ethanol blends at various operating conditions. Fuel 262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
fuel.2019.116519.
Rajak, Upendra, Verma, Tikendra Nath, 2018a. Effect of emission from ethylic biodiesel
of edible and non-edible vegetable oil, animal fats, waste oil and alcohol in ci engine.
Energy Convers. Manag. 166, 704–718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enconman.2018.04.070.
Rajasekaran, Shanmugam, Dillikannan, Damodharan, Kaliyaperumal, Gopal,
Poures, Melvin Victor De, Babu, Rajesh Kumar, 2021. A comprehensive study on the
effects of 1-decanol, compression ratio and exhaust gas recirculation on diesel engine
characteristics powered with low density polyethylene oil. Energy Sources, Part A:
Recovery, Util., Environ. Eff. 43 (23), 3064–3081. https://doi.org/10.1080/
15567036.2020.1833112.
Rajesh, Adhinarayanan, Ramakrishnan, Aravindh, Kaliyaperumal, Gopal, De
Poures, MelvinV.íctor, Babu, Rajesh Kumar, Dillikannan, Damodharan, 2020.
Comparative analysis on the effect of 1-decanol and di-n-butyl ether as additive with
diesel/LDPE blends in compression ignition engine. Energy Sources, Part A:
Recovery, Util., Environ. Eff. https://doi.org/10.1080/15567036.2020.1773967.
Ravikumar, Jayabal, Subramani, Sekar, Dillikannan, Damodharan,
Devarajan, Yuvarajan, Thangavelu, Lakshmanan, Nedunchezhiyan, Mukilarasan,
Kaliyaperumal, Gopal, Poures, Melvin Victor De, 2022. Multi-objective optimization
of performance and emission characteristics of a CRDI diesel engine fueled with
sapota methyl ester/diesel blends. Energy 250, 123709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2022.123709.
Seeniappan, K., Venkatesan, B., Krishnan, N.N., et al., 2022. A comparative assessment of
performance and emission characteristics of a DI diesel engine fuelled with ternary
17
Industrial Crops & Products 194 (2023) 116332
blends of two higher alcohols with lemongrass oil biodiesel and diesel fuel. Energy
Environ. 33 (6), 1134–1159 https://doi: 10.1177/0958305×211051323.
Shrivastava, Pankaj, Verma, Tikendra Nath, 2020a. Effect of fuel injection pressure on
the characteristics of ci engine fuelled with biodiesel from Roselle oil. Fuel 265,
117005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2019.117005.
Shrivastava, Pankaj, Verma, Tikendra Nath, 2020b. Effect of fuel injection pressure on
the characteristics of CI engine fuelled with biodiesel from Roselle oil. Fuel 265,
117005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2019.117005.
Silitonga, A.S., Masjuki, H.H., Mahlia, T.M.I., Hwai Chyuan, Ong, Chong, W.T., 2013.
Experimental study on performance and exhaust emissions of a diesel engine fuelled
with Ceiba pentandra biodiesel blends. Energy Convers. Manag. 76, 828–836.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2013.08.032.
Singh, T.S., Verma, T.N., Nashine, P., Shijagurumayum, C., 2018. BS-III diesel vehicles in
Imphal, India: An emission perspective. In: Sharma, N., Agarwal, A., Eastwood, P.,
Gupta, T., Singh, A. (Eds.), Air Pollution and Control, Energy, Environment, and
Sustainability. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7185-0_5.
Sun, Xiuxiu, Xingyu, Liang, Gequn, Shu, Yuesen, Wang, Yong, Chen, 2019. Effect of
toluene content on the combustion and emissions of large two-stroke marine diesel
engine. Appl. Therm. Eng. 159, 113909 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2019.113909.
Wei, L., Cheung, C.S., Ning, Z., 2017. Influence of waste cooking oil biodiesel on
combustion, unregulated gaseous emissions and particulate emissions of a direct-
injection diesel engine. Energy 127, 175–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2017.03.117.
Zhao, Feiyang, Wenming Yang, Wenbin Yu, Han Li, Yu Yun Sim, Teng Liu, and Kun Lin
Tay. (2018). Numerical study of soot particles from low temperature combustion of
engine fueled with diesel fuel and unsaturation biodiesel fuels. Applied Energy. 211:
187–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.11.056.