Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering

https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-022-07349-5

RESEARCH ARTICLE-MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

Functional Investigation, Multiple Response Optimization,

and Economic Analysis of a VCR CI Engine Fired with Diesel,
Calophyllum Inophyllum Oil, and Waste Biomass-Derived Producer Gas
in Multi-fuel Mode
Sudhansu S. Mishra1 · Taraprasad Mohapatra2 · Sudhansu Sekhar Sahoo3

Received: 27 April 2022 / Accepted: 27 September 2022

© King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals 2022

Abstract
In this study, a variable compression ratio CI engine is tested to predict its performance and emission characteristics by varying
input criterions like engine load, CR, and fuel types. The brake thermal efficiency (BTE) is considered as the performance
characteristic and the emissions of carbon monoxide, hydrocarbon, nitrogen oxide, and smoke opacity are considered as the
emission characteristics for this study. The tests are conducted for variation in load from 4 to 12 kg and compression ratio
from 14 to 18 in the multi-fuel mode of operation with 0%, 50%, and 100% of Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend
and producer gas. The use of waste biomass like leaves, small tree branches, vegetable waste, and cow dung in producer gas
generation is attempted in this work toward better energy production and management of environmental waste. It has been
identified that load mostly influences the brake thermal efficiency, NOx emission, and opacity with a contribution of 58%,
67.5%, and 41.7%, respectively, whereas multi-fuel and compression ratio mostly affect CO emission and HC emission with
a contribution of 41.8% and 58.9%, respectively. The maximum BTE and minimum emissions of CO, HC, NOx, and opacity
are 15.49%, 0.525 ppm, 54.7 ppm, 125.032 ppm, and 37.99 HSU, respectively, are predicted as the optimum performance of
the test engine for composite desirability D of 0.910037. An economic study is conducted to determine the % relative cost
variation of the current sample fuel in comparison with diesel fuel. At optimum performance, the predicted fuel MF33.56
costing 10% more than MF0 has been observed.

Keywords Biofuels · Performance · Emission · Multiple response optimization · Economic analysis

1 Introduction the harmful substances inhaled. Several methods have been

Engine emissions are the major source of atmospheric pollu-
tion and have a large contribution to global warming. This has
become a serious issue in recent years as their numbers have
increased, negatively impacting our health and the environ-
ment. The air quality in most Indian cities is deteriorating by
the day, and people are being forced to wear masks to reduce
B Taraprasad Mohapatra
taraprasad1980@gmail.com
1 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Government College
of Engineering, Keonjhar, India
2 Department of Mechanical Engineering, C. V. Raman Global
University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
3 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Odisha University of
Technology and Research, Bhubaneswar, India
adopted to reduce these greenhouse gases emissions and the
use of biodiesel is one of them. More improved combustion
and reduced emission are experienced with biodiesel use as
the oxygen content in biodiesel is higher than common diesel
fuel. However, the heat content of biodiesel is slightly lower
than the diesel fuel, and more frequent replacement of oil
filter is experienced.
Dual-fuel diesel engines can run on two fuels: One is
called pilot fuel, and the other is called conventional fuel.
A small amount of diesel is used as a pilot fuel for ignition.
Natural gas and biofuels, or a mixture of the two, are used
as conventional fuels for dual-fuel diesel engines. As soon
as the engine starts, the diesel supply stops and the natural
gas or biofuel supply starts. For a detailed study, numerous
papers on dual- and multi-fuel modes have been studied as
follows.

123

Experimental work is carried out on the CI engine fuelled
with biogas. Results indicate that carbon monoxide (CO)
and hydrocarbon (HC) emissions increase linearly with
the increase in biogas flow, while the opacity of smoking
decreases [1]. The CMFIS system is employed in the opti-
mized 100C ATDC 600C duration SOI to use the METP and
hydrogen fuel mixture in the multiple injection method to
offer the dual-fuel engine with increased performance. Mul-
tiple injections resulted in a homogeneous air–hydrogen mix-
ture, which improved the dual-fuel engines performance by
increasing BTE and lowering smoke, HC, and CO emissions
[2]. The addition of nanoparticles (metal, nonmetal, oxi-
dized, organic, and fused) to emulsified diesel–biodiesel fuels
can improve engine performance, thermophysical properties,
heat transfer coefficient, and fuel mix balance, and reduc-
tion in emissions was observed in [3]. An experiment was
conducted on the improved stability of the ethanol/jatropha
biodiesel (JME) blend using N-butanol as the co-solvent.
The addition of ethanol can reduce BSFC compared to JME
fuel, and the production of CO, UHC, and NOx was signif-
icantly reduced by 40%, 40%, and 40%, respectively, with
the addition of ethanol [4]. Various biodiesel fuel additive
blends have been developed, and their lubrication proper-
ties, as well as the impact of these mixtures on lubricating
oil contamination and the impact of ternary fuel mixtures on
properties, were investigated. The WSD of B30 fuel, which
is a mixture of DMC fuel additive and TiO2 , is significantly
reduced compared to the pure B30 fuel mixture as result
[5]. The effect of Nigella biodiesel (NSME25) mixed with
diesel, n-butanol, and asymmetric graphene oxide nanopar-
ticles on the improved CRDI engine is summarized. The
NSME25B10GO90 brake thermal efficiency (BTE) is close
and compatible with diesel. The BTE change will increase
the EGT of the diesel–nanofuel mixture, resulting in faster
fuel combustion [6]. The effects of VCR, a mixture of zinc
oxide nanoparticles and soybean biodiesel, BTDC with an
IT of 230 °C, and a single-cylinder engine were investigated.
SBME25 biodiesel compared to the SBME25 fuel mixture
increased BTE by 20.59% and decreased BSFC by 20.37%
and emissions due to the improved catalytic activity of zinc
oxide nanoparticles [7]. The production of nanoadditives
for diesel and biodiesel fuels has been evaluated in detail.
Nanoparticles in liquid fuel can offer several benefits, includ-
ing improved performance and reduced emissions. They also
suggested that the study should focus on dose levels and the
long-term stability of nanoparticles and fuel mixtures [8].
The feasibility of using palm kernel oil methyl ester (PME)
and various aluminum oxide nanoparticles (ANOP) to fuel
a 4-stroke single-cylinder engine with direct injection and
compression ignition is being investigated. Both the heat
release rate and the cylinder pressure have increased signif-
icantly, and the ignition delay has decreased significantly.
By installing AONP, the thermal efficiency of the brake
123
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering
and the exhaust gas temperature have been improved [9].
Using a mixture of Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel with
TiO2 nanoadditions and exhaust gas recirculation, evaluate
the performance and emission characteristics of a single-
cylinder diesel engine (EGR). When compared to B20 fuel,
adding TiO2 nanoparticles to B20 fuel reduces CO and
HC emissions while increasing EGR [10]. Spray and mix
the future generation of alternative fuels with hazelnut oil
and diesel are investigated micro-emulsion process to make
diesel/n-butanol/hazelnut oil and diesel/1-pentanol/Hazelnut
oil mixtures. EHN can lower NOx and HC emissions while
raising CO emissions when added to DPnH. NOx and HC
emissions were reduced by 2.23% and 17.25%, respectively,
compared to DPnH, whereas CO emissions were increased
by 10.49% [11]. The BTE of a single-fuel operation is higher
than that of a dual-fuel operation. CNG/HCNG can be used
to partially replace fossil fuels in the home. The levels of
soot and NOx emissions from the dual-fuel operation were
found to be lower than those from pure liquid fuel operation.
Higher performance is provided by HCNG. HCNG allows
the engine to run on a lean mixture, reducing HC and CO
emissions but increasing NOx emissions [12]. The effects of
anti-corrosion additives such as 8% and 16% (vol. %) palm
olein (PO) and ordinary diesel (DO) on engine performance,
emission behavior, engine component wear, and lubrica-
tion properties are studied. POD8A and POD16A mixes had
greater brake-specific fuel consumption (BSFC) than ODF
by 1.8%t and 3.1%, respectively [13]. Experiments were con-
ducted on a single-cylinder 4-stroke CI engine using Honge
oil methyl ester and gas produced from biomass raw mate-
rials. Operating a household gas producer (OW) under ideal
operating conditions and 80% load leads to an increase in
BTE of 16.1% and 29.6% compared to operating household
gas from the northwest and HW. Comparing OW with NW
and HW, HC and CO emissions were decreased by 7.4% and
16.1%, respectively, and CO emissions were decreased by
19.1% and 26.1%, respectively [14]. The engine was tested
in single- and dual-fuel modes with diesel, K10 (10% pure
oil + 90% diesel), and K20 (20% pure oil + 80% diesel)
and employed the best production gas flow. Under a steady
load of 10 kW, the engine was tested in dual-fuel mode with
the same test fuel and varied gas flow rates [15]. The BSFC
and BTE of CI engines using B10 and B20 were enhanced
when compared to diesel engines, according to the experi-
mental results reported. In the dual-fuel mode, however, the
HC and CO emissions of KOME blended fuel were lower
than diesel. The NOx emissions of the three pilot fuels were
reduced in the dual-fuel mode, but as the KOME mixing per-
centage increased, the NOx emissions increased [16]. Pilot
quantity and injection timing have a substantial impact on
CNG/diesel dual-fuel engines investigated the emissions of
dual-fuel CNG/diesel engines with various volumes of pilot
fuel and adjusted pilot injection time. The unburned HC emis-
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering
sions from the dual-fuel natural gas engine were substantially
greater than those from the diesel engine [17]. It was found
that the SFC contained approximately 1 kg/kWh of biomass
and a 55 ml/kWh of diesel engine. This technology pack-
age emphasizes the feasibility and environmental benefits
of distributed generation. The use of biomass as fuel has
reduced the amount of fossil fuels used, resulting in a net
reduction in CO2 emissions [18]. The chicken fat biodiesel
including synthetic magnesium additions in a single-cylinder
direct injection diesel engine is used to see how it affected
engine performance and emissions. The results showed that
adding 10% chicken fat biodiesel did not significantly mod-
ify engine torque, but the specific fuel consumption was
increased by 5.2% due to the low calorific value of biodiesel
[19]. The performance and exhaust emission characteristics
of a single-cylinder commercial DI diesel engine that was air-
cooled and naturally aspirated. The goal of this project was to
identify performance parameters and study the possibilities
of lowering exhaust emissions. The performance parameters
were found to be comparable to the benchmark diesel oper-
ation [20]. The biodiesel of Mahua and Karanja does not
corrode the metals of pistons and piston bushings, whereas
the biodiesel of Salvadora had a significant corrosive effect
on both metals due to its high sulfur content (1600 ppm), indi-
cating that this oil was not suitable for biodiesel production,
especially when the Bharat III and Bharat IV standards were
implemented [21]. The CI engine runs on two fuels: turpen-
tine and diesel. With the exception of volumetric efficiency,
all other performance and emission metrics were found to be
superior to diesel fuel at 75% load. The levels of dangerous
chemicals such as CO and UBHC are slightly higher than
the diesel baseline (DBL). In DF mode, it produces about
40–45% less smoke [22]. Numerical work is carried out to
compare the effectiveness of blended fuels of diesel–ethanol,
diesel–biodiesel, and general diesel in high-speed DI diesel
engine. The result shows the lower value of ethanol blend
gives lower value of efficiency as well as a lower value of
CO2 and soot emission [23]. An investigation is done to know
the performance and emission characteristics of nine differ-
ent fuels (diesel, biodiesel–diesel blends, biodiesel–kerosene
blend, etc.) in a DI diesel engine running at constant speed
at different loading conditions. It is found that lower NOX
levels were found in the case of CK30 compared to diesel
[24].
After referring to several research papers, it has been found
that the performance and emission study of CI engines in
single- and dual-fuel modes with Calophyllum Inophyllum
oil biodiesel blend has been carried out; however, in multi-
fuel mode with Calophyllum Inophyllum oil, diesel fuel, and
producer gas, the combination found in the literature is rare.
The functional stability of the engine with specific combi-
nation of Calophyllum Inophyllum oil and producer gas is
tested and its possibility replacing the diesel fuel in future is
examined. The performance and emission behavior of a vari-
able compression single-cylinder CI engine are investigated
in multi-fuel mode related to variable load and compres-
sion ratio. Multiple objective optimizations are carried out
for maximum performance and minimum emissions from
the test engine using response surface methodology. An eco-
nomic analysis is also carried out for the test engine based on
brake-specific fuel consumption BSFC in percentage relative
to the recent cost of fuels available in the market. The follow-
ing section introduces performance research, optimization,
and economic analysis.
2 Materials and Methods
2.1 Fuel Preparation Method
2.1.1 Calophyllum Inophyllum Oil
Calophyllum Inophyllum oil is used in the current research
work to prepare biofuel as the test fuel due to its abundant
availability, higher production rate, restriction on the use of
edible oil, and cheaper production process. It is commonly
called Bitaog in India. It is an evergreen tree. It is a non-
edible oilseed from the Clusiacea family. It grows in the
coastal areas of India. The fruit (cone) of the Calophyllum
Inophyllum tree is round with a diameter of 24 cm. In the
mature stage, it contains about 71% unsaturated fatty acids
(oleic acid and linoleic acid). Polish trees bear fruit twice a
year. A fully grown tree can provide about 100 kg of fruit,
which is equivalent to 18 kg of oil. The three-stage production
process of biodiesel from Calophyllum Inophyllum seeds is
pre-treatment, alkali-catalyzed transesterification, and post-
treatment.
2.1.2 Extraction of the Calophyllum Inophyllum Oil
The Calophyllum Inophyllum seeds are separated from ripe
Calophyllum Inophyllum fruits. They are dried in open sun-
light for two days at an average temperature of 35 °C for
eliminating moisture from the seeds. The oil is mechanically
extracted from the seeds using an electrically operated oil
press machine (screw type) with specifications mentioned in
Table 1. The extraction oil is then filtered by a filter with a
mesh size of 5 microns. After filtering the oil color was dark
brown.
2.1.3 Refinement of Calophyllum Inophyllum Oil
The insoluble impurities have been mainly separated in the
filtration process, but it is not an easy task to separate solu-
ble impurities like natural wax, fatty acids, phosphatase, and
mucilaginous. In a chemical laboratory, 1250 ml of Calo-
123

Table 1 Oil extraction press specification
Sl. No Properties Value
1 Operating type Automatic
2 Mechanical Type Cold Press
3 I/P voltage 220–240 Volt
4 Motor power 0.25 HP
5 RPM 60
6 Capacity 3 kg/hr
7 Weight 13 kg
8 Size 20(length) × 8(width) × 10(height) inch
phyllum Inophyllum oil is put in a round-bottomed flask and
was mixed with 1.25 ml of H3 PO4 . The mixture is stirred up
to 2 h continuously at a temperature of 60 °C. Then after set-
tling down the mixture, pure oil is collected from the upper
layer.
2.1.4 Esterification of Calophyllum Inophyllum Oil
Esterification is a chemical process that results in forming a
product of ester. The process gives an ester and water. So,
the process needs external heat to evaporate water evolved
during the process. The refined Calophyllum Inophyllum oil
is mixed along with 24 volume percentage of CH3 OH and 1
volume percentage of H2 SO4 as the catalyst. The mixture is
subjected to continuous stirring and heats up to 70 °C for the
removal of water particles and extra CH3 OH.
2.1.5 Transesterification of Calophyllum Inophyllum Oil
To make the Calophyllum Inophyllum oil into usable
biodiesel and lower its viscosity, the transesterification pro-
cess is used. Esterified 1250 ml of Calophyllum Inophyllum
oil is put in a 2-L round-bottomed flask fitted with a sep-
aration valve at the bottom. The total unit is called the
transesterification unit. Then the oil was heated up to 70 °C,
so that extra ester and KOH is removed from the oil.
2.1.6 Characterization of Fuel Properties
Before using the Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel in the CI
engine, characterization is done for knowing the fuel prop-
erties like calorific value, viscosity, density, cetane number,
fire point, etc. Many types of ASTM methods are used to
determine the above-said properties. A comparison between
Calophyllum Inophyllum oil and diesel is given in Table 2.
123
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering
Table 2 Comparison between the properties of Calophyllum Inophyl-
lum oil and the diesel available in market
Properties Calophyllum Inophyllum oil Diesel
Density (kg/m3 ) 858 826
Viscosity at 40 °C 3.9 3.1
Flash point 138 °C 48 °C
Cetane number 59 52
Heating value 41,300 MJ/kg 42,500 MJ/kg
2.1.7 Generation of Producer Gas
Producer gas is generally produced by the gasification of
solid/liquid fuels. Biomass gasification is one of the technolo-
gies used to convert biomass into combustible gas mixtures,
called producer gas. Producer gas is the gas produced when
wood, charcoal, or coal is gasified with air and comprises
about 40% combustible gas, primarily carbon monoxide,
hydrogen, and some methane. The rest is nonflammable,
mainly composed of nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and water
vapor. The gas also contains condensable tar, acid, and dust.
The main component of gasification is the gasifier, which
is a chemical reactor in which many physical and chemical
processes such as drying, heating, pyrolysis, partial oxida-
tion, and final reduction occur. Gasifiers can be roughly
divided into three categories according to the direction of gas
flow: They are draft, downdraft, and cross airflow. Generating
the producer gas for this experiment, a downdraft gasifier as
shown in Fig. 1 is used with the specifications as mentioned
in Table 3. A fixed bed gasifier with a neck is known as
a downdraft gasifier. Waste biomass like leaves, small tree
branches, vegetable waste, and cow dung was fed to the top
of the gasifier. The detailed properties of waste biomasses
are given in Table 4. A blower is fitted with the gasifier;
whose prime objective was to supply forcefully atmospheric
air into the gasifier. Before starting the blower, 200 ml of
kerosene is sprinkled on the waste biomasses. It is easy to
catch fire due to the presence of kerosene. At around 850 °C,
the hot producer gas is gathered at the bottom. The producer
gas is then transferred through a counterflow heat exchanger,
where it exchanged heat with normal water. The temperature
of the producing gas has to be lowered for at least 30 min.
After that, the gas is kept in a steel container. The ingredients
of producer gas and calorific value of producer gas are mea-
sured by biogas analyzer and bomb calorimeter, respectively.
The technical specification of the biogas analyzer and bomb
calorimeter are given in Tables 5 and 6. The properties of
producer gas available at the end of the cotton filter are given
in Table 7.
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering

Fig. 1 Downdraft gasifier used for generation of producer gas

Table 3 Technical specification of gasifier Table 5 Technical specification of biogas analyzer

Sl. No Particulars Specifications Sl. No Particulars Specifications

1 Make Ankur Scientific Pvt. Ltd 1 Make Aaru engineers

2 Model WBG-10 2 Model EX 300
3 Type Down draft 3 Accuracy ± 1%
4 Gas flow 25 Nm3 /h 4 Response time 10–120 s
5 Avg. caloric value 1000 kCal/Nm3 5 Power supply Ni–Cd battery
6 Temperature of 750–1150 °C 6 Working temperature − 5–50 °C
gasifications 7 Dimensions 225 × 150 × 100 mm
7 Ash removal Manual 8 Weight 800 g
8 Fuel type Solid 9 Gases can be measured HC, CO2 , CO, O2 & CH4
9 Moisture 20% (weight basis) max 10 Maximum limit HC: 0–10,000 ppm, CO2 :
10 Consumption 6 kg/h (max.) 0–100% V/V, CO: 0–10%
11 Rated gas composition CO: 19% ± 3%, H2 : V/V, O2 : 0–25% V/V,
18% ± 2%, CO2 : CH4 : 0–10% V/V
10% ± 3%, N2 : 50%,
CH4 : 3%
Table 6 Technical specification of bomb calorimeter
Sl. No. Particulars Specifications
Table 4 Properties of waste biomasses used in gasifier
1 Make Toshniwal Technologies
Particulars Value Pvt. Ltd
Higher heating value 10.1 MJ/kg 2 Model CC01/M2A
Moisture content 13% 3 Working principle Isothermal
Volatile matter 70% 4 Standard BS 1016: part 5: 1967
Carbon 15% 5 Measuring time 15 min (max.)
Ash content 2.20% 6 Combustion bomb make SS 316
7 Oxygen filling Automatic
8 Temperature revolution 0.01 °C
2.2 Experimental Investigation 9 Bomb firing Switch Press
10 Data storage facility Available
2.2.1 Experimental Setup 11 Firing voltage 12 V AC
12 Supply 230 V AC
Electric generators are supplemental energy sources that use 13 Weight 12 kg
an internal combustion engine to convert fossil fuel supplies,
primarily, into electrical energy. In the Indian market, com-

123
 Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering

Table 7 Properties of producer gas obtained from the gasifier Table 8 Specification of diesel engine
Properties Values Sl. No. Particulars Specification

Methane (% by vol.) 4.1% 1 Make Kirloskar VCR

Carbon monoxide (% by vol.) 21% TV1(Institutional
Experimental Test Rig)
Carbon dioxide (% by vol.) 14.2%
2 Speed 5.72 kW @ 1500 RPM
Nitrogen (% by vol.) 43%
3 No. of cylinder 1
Hydrogen (% by vol.) 18.15%
4 Bore 0.0875 m
Heating value (kJ/kg) 4680
5 Stroke 0.110 m
Density (kg/m3 ) 1.34
6 Cooling type Water cooled
7 Rotameter 50–200 L/h
panies such as Kirloskar, Mahindra, Jackson, Cummins, and 8 Air box Steel tank corporate with
orifice meter and U-tube
Ashok Leyland are developing generators that run on gaso- manometer
line, diesel, liquid propane, natural gas, or some other hybrid 9 Manometric fluid water
fuel in the 5–75 kVA and 75–375 KVA ranges. Some other 10 Types of dynamometer Eddy current water-cooled
Indian companies like Sarthak International (engine: Kir- dynamometer
loskar, model number: QSK50, power: 7.5 kVA), Goodwill 11 Air drum orifice diameter 20 mm
Power Generators (engine: Kirloskar, power: 2 kW, air- 12 Swept volume 661 CC
cooled), Advance Technics & Electronics (engine: Kirloskar, 13 Peak pressure 77 kg/cm2
power: 2 kW, water-cooled), Next Step Lights India Private 14 Load indicator AX-271, 230v AC
Limited (Bharat Open DG Set 3 Kva, oil–cooled), Mittal 15 Dynamometer arm length 185 mm
diesel (engine: Kirloskar, model: MD Bharat, 5 kW, air-
16 Connecting rod length 231 mm
cooled), Indo Engineering Works (model: Vidyut/Mbharat
17 Oil tank capacity 12 Lt
(1983), 7.5 kVA, water-cooled), Shree Agency (Topland
18 Data logger software Enginesoft LV1
5–7.5 kVA diesel Generator, water-cooled, 5 hp, Gravis 7.5
kVA, water-cooled), Jaga Kalia Enterprises (engine—Bharat,
3 kVA, air-cooled), and Arihant Enterprises (engine—G- Table 9 Technical specification of eddy current dynamometer
reaves, 2–20 kVA, water-cooled) are manufacturing low-
Sl. No. Particulars Specifications
power rating generators. Similar to these mentioned gen-
erators, in this study, a stationary low-power-rated VCR CI 1 Make SAJ Test Plant Pvt. Ltd
engine of KIRLOSKAR make for production of nearly 7 kVA 2 Model SE/AG 20
of electrical power is considered as the test engine and numer- 3 Working principle Bidirectional
ous test runs are performed to evaluate its performance and 4 Standard IS:10,000
emission characteristics with respect to variation in load, 5 Maximum power 20 kW
compression ratio, and type of fuel in mixed fuel mode of 6 Maximum torque 80 Nm
operation. The detailed specifications of the test engine are 7 Maximum speed 10,000 rpm
mentioned in Table 8. 8 Dimension 1000 mm × 1000 mm ×
Primarily the single-cylinder VCR CI engine is fitted on 300 mm
the experimental setup as shown in Fig. 2 along with a suit- 9 Coil resistance 15 Ohm
able water cooling, and lubrication system. During mixed 10 Accuracy ± 0.1%
fuel mode of operation, diesel, Calophyllum Inophyllum oil, 11 Minimum power 1 kW
producer gas, and air are supplied from individual tanks to the absorption
engine is rated quantity. Various sensors and instruments are 12 Universal Strain gauge load 100 kg (max)
integrated with the computerized data acquisition system for supply
automatic measurement of airflow and fuel flow rate, current,
cylinder pressure, exhaust emissions, and smoke opacity.
This experimental test rig has a facility to change its com- engine performance analysis software EnginesoftLV1 is used
pression ratio by tilting the cylinder block. Brake power, in performance evaluation. The load and speed of the engine
brake mean effective pressure, brake thermal efficiency, were controlled by an eddy current dynamometer with
volumetric efficiency, brake-specific fuel consumption, and detailed specifications mentioned in Table 9. Exhaust emis-
exhaust gas temperature are some of the performance char- sions are measured with a Crypton 290 EN2 five gas analyzer
acteristics for this experiment. The commercially available with detailed specifications as mentioned in Table 10. The

123
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering

Fig. 2 Schematic diagram of the test engine setup

Table 10 Specification of exhaust gas analyzer Table 11 Specification of opacity meter

SI. No Particulars Specification SI. No. Particulars Specification

1 Make KAR Scanning Centre Pvt. 1 Make Land

Ltd 2 Model 4500 MK III
2 Model Crypton 290 EN2 five gas 3 Weight 6 kg
analyzer
4 Range 0–100 HSU
3 Operating pressure 750,000–100,000 Pascal
5 Measuring area (20 × 30) mm2
4 Storage temperature − 10–60 °C
6 Power 1 amp @ 24v DC
5 Response time 10 s
7 Maximum exhaust gas temperature 6000 C
6 Operating temperature 4–45 °C
7 Operating voltage 230 V (AC)

The inlet and outlet temperatures are determined by type

constituents of flue gas readings are CO (ppm), HC (ppm),
and NOx (ppm). Smoke emissions are measured (HSU Unit)
with the Land 4500 Mark III opacity meter with detailed
specifications as mentioned in Table 11.
Producer gas collected by the gasifier was passed through
a cotton column to absorb moisture and suspended particles.
A valve was provided at the end of the cotton column to
control the flow rate. An orifice meter was installed to mea-
sure the production gas flow rate. The producer gas and air
were mixed in the intake tube, and the mixture was fed to the
engine cylinder through the intake valve. Performance and
emission parameters were observed under various loading
conditions.
Omega K-type thermocouples. The biodiesel and diesel flows
are measured with a flow meter installed on the engine test
bench. The diesel engine intake system was converted to a
mixed fuel engine. A U-tube manometer is connected to read
the gas level.
2.2.2 Experimental Procedure
The experiments are conducted for three different fuel com-
binations of diesel fuel, Calophyllum Inophyllum oil, and
producer gas in multi-fuel mode of operation on the test
engine as follows.

123

Multi-fuel mode I (MF0) [blend of 100% diesel fuel and
0% Calophyllum Inophyllum + 50% Producer gas in air]
The engine intake manifold was divided with two pas-
sages: one for atmospheric air and another for producer gas.
The intake manifold was controlled by two regulating flow
control valves. Diesel was used to start the engine. It is
allowed to run for 15–20 min in order to reach a steady con-
dition. Then 50% of producer gas was introduced to the air
line once the engine runs smoothly. Readings were taken
after reaching a steady state. Gradually sized tubes that were
installed in the fuel line to the engine were used to record fuel
consumption rates at various loads. Engine was only running
on diesel and 50% of producer gas in air during this time, not
Calophyllum Inophyllum oil. An emission recorder captured
data on exhaust emissions. An eddy brake dynamometer was
used to record NOX , CO, CO2 , and N2 at various loads.
Multi-fuel mode II (MF50) [Blend of 50% diesel fuel and
50% Calophyllum Inophyllum + 50% Producer gas in air]
Once the engine was running smoothly with diesel for
10–15 min, the blend of 50% diesel and 50% Calophyllum
Inophyllum oil was introduced in the cylinder after closing
the flow line of diesel in running condition. It is allowed
to run the engine for about 20 min to attain a steady state.
The intake manifold of the engine was allowing both air and
producer gas in equal percentage. Then follow the same pro-
cedure for recording the engine performance and emission
characteristics.
Multi-fuel mode III (MF100) [Blend of 0% diesel fuel and
100% Calophyllum Inophyllum + 50% Producer gas in air]
Initially the engine was started with diesel and allowed
to run for 10–15 min. Then in running condition, flow line
of diesel was cut off and 100% Calophyllum Inophyllum
oil was introduced in the engine. It is allowed to run the
engine for about 10 min to attain a steady state. After attaining
a steady state, 50% producer gas was introduced with the
atmospheric air through intake manifold of the engine. After
running smoothly, all required readings were recorded.
2.2.3 Experimental Error Analysis
In experimental work, uncertainty or error analysis is very
much essential for the prediction of precise results, as mea-
suring instruments are always associated with a certain error.
In this work, several parameters like load, temperature, pres-
sure, flow, and emissions are measured by eddy current
dynamometer, thermocouple wire, manometers, flow meter,
exhaust gas analyzer, and opacity meter, respectively. So, for
getting accurate results from the instruments, it is needed
to evaluate the effect of error on output from the mentioned
instruments for the present study. The uncertainties involved
in several output parameters like brake power, BSFC, CO,
HC, and NOx emissions as well as opacity are measured and
presented in Table 12.
123
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering
Table 12 Uncertainty of measurement during experiment
Measurement particular Accuracy
Brake thermal efficiency ± 2.5%
BSFC ± 2.9%
CO ± 0.001%
HC ± 1 ppm
NOX ± 1 ppm
Opacity ± 2 HSU
2.3 Response Surface Methodology
The performance of CI engines has been enhanced through
the application of numerous techniques. A CI engine’s per-
formance is influenced by a number of variables, including
the load, compression ratio, injection pressure, temperature
of the cooling water, fuel type, and engine cylinder temper-
ature. Implementing the right optimization techniques can
significantly improve the performance of the CI engine.
RSM is a potent optimization tool mostly used for model-
ing and analyzing different engineering challenges. It is a set
of mathematical and statistical techniques that can be applied
to any test design in which several input variables have the
potential to affect the performance measure or quality of the
product or process.
RSM is essential in the creation, formulation, and testing
of new scientific research and products. It can also be used to
improve existing research and products. The most common
RSM applications are found in industrial science, biological
science, clinical science, social science, food science, phys-
ical science, and engineering science.
The response surface methodology, RSM, technique is
mostly used for developing polynomial model using input
design data in order to find the optimal solution. The main
purpose of RSM technique is to determine the optimized
results for multiple responses; specifically, it finds the best
compromise among the responses rather than optimizing
individual ones. Secondly, it investigates the impact of vari-
ous design parameters on output responses.
In the RSM, the functional relationship between indepen-
dent variables and the output responses is predicted using the
following equation.
y  f (x1 , x2 , x3 . . .) ± e (1)
where y is the response, x1 , x2 , x3 . . . are independent
variables and e is the error or noise factor associated with
the experiment.
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering
The function f is denoted by a second-order polynomial
in RSM of independent variables as

k 
k 
k 
k out in this study.
y  β0 + βi xi + βii xi2 + βi j xi x j + e
i1 i1 i i
where β is the unknown regression coefficient of the
second-order model.
This response data used in the equations is to calcu-
late the regression coefficients for the RSM model (β). To
improve the accuracy of the model equations, the least-
squares method with the least residual error is used. ANOVA
is used to check the fitting of the model that how efficiently it
can predict output responses related to the input parameters.
Design-Expert version 11 software is used for instigating the
RSM in the current research. In the current study, the RSM
technique is employed to determine the VCR CI engine’s
optimal performance by altering the engine load, CR, and
fuel blend. References [25–28] provide additional informa-
tion on the RSM.
Box–Behnken design is employed in the present RSM
analysis because it aids in determining the best performances
by choosing the fewest number of test runs. The following
points are taken into account in the Box–Behnken design:
• Each independent variable or factor is assigned one of the
three evenly distributed values, usually encoded as 1, 0, or
+ 1.
• The design must be able to fit a quadratic model that
includes quadratic terms, two-element products, linear
terms, and intercepts.
• The total number of runs, N  2k(k − 1) + cp to be exe-
cuted during the experiment should be reasonable relative
to the number of coefficients in the quadratic model. The
total number of experiments (N) and central points (cp)
required for various factors (k) should be reasonable.
2.4 Economic Analysis
Economic concerns are a major promoter for the devel-
opment of low-cost feedstock and process technology for
biodiesel production. Although the total cost of biodiesel pro-
duction is heavily influenced by feedstock costs, some other
factors like the total capital investment cost, total manufac-
turing cost, and biodiesel break-even price are considered as
the main economic criteria. To evaluate the biodiesel produc-
tion processes, different researchers used different economic
criteria emphasizing different points of view. In the present
paper, economic analysis of using diesel, Calophyllum ino-
phyllum oil, and producer gas blend in multi-fuel mode of
operation is carried out using formula derived in [29] and
[30] and Eq. (3) based on the test engine’s brake-specific fuel
consumption BSFC in relation to the most recent market fuel
prices. Since producer gas is made from waste materials and
is available for free during the experiment, its cost is zeroed
(2)  
C Cblend − Cdiesel
× 100 %  × 100
Cdiesel Cdiesel
 Pblend   
xdiesel + xblend Pdiesel BSFC
 1+ − 1 × 100 (3)
xdiesel + xblend ρρdiesel
blend
BSFCdiesel
where C  Cblend − Cdiesel is the difference in spe-
cific fuel price between fuel blend price and diesel price.
Cblend and Cdiesel are the specific fuel price of fuel blend
and diesel, respectively, in Indian Rupees per kilo Watt-hour
(Rs/kWh). xdiesel and xblend are the volumetric ratio of diesel
and fuel blend, respectively. Pblend and Pdiesel are the price of
fuel blend and diesel per liter (Rs/lt), respectively. ρblend and
ρdiesel are the densities of blended fuel and diesel (kg/m3 ),
respectively. BSFC  BSFCblend − BSFCdiesel is the differ-
ence in BSFC between fuel blend and diesel fuel.
3 Result and Discussion
In this section, the engine performance and emission char-
acteristics of the VCR CI engine are investigated concern-
ing various input parameters, and the optimum values for
these parameters are determined for maximum engine per-
formance and minimum emissions. It includes statistical
analysis, ANOVA, engine performance, emission character-
istics study, and multiple response optimization (MRO) are
described in the following section in detail.
3.1 Statistical Analysis
In statistical analysis, the engine performance like BTE and
emission characteristics like CO, HC, NOX, and opacity
are studied and analyzed by response surface methodology
(RSM) regarding compression ratio, load, and multi-fuel
mode of operation.
Table 13 represents the design of experiments (DOE)
generated by RSM in coded format for analyzing output
responses concerning 3 input parameters as shown in Table
12. A quadratic model is prepared using the Box–Behnken
design of response surface methodology for three control
factors and 15 test runs are performed as mentioned in Table
14. An ANOVA test is performed as part of the statistical
response analysis to check the model suitability for estimat-
ing the output responses.
The ANOVA table predicts R2 -value, R2 -pred, R2 -adj, p-
value, F-value, and adequate precision for validation of the
model effectiveness for predicting output responses.
Using analytical software, coefficients of various model
terms of the quadratic polynomial regression equations are
123
 Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering

Table 13 Coded and actual

values of different input Factor Name Type Coded Actual Mean
variables Low High Low High

A Load (L), kg Numeric −1 1 4 12 8

B Compression ratio (CR) Numeric −1 1 14 18 16
C Multi-fuel (MF), (%) Numeric −1 1 0 100 50

Table 14 Design layout and output responses

Run order Coded Actual values Response
values

A B C Load (L) Comp. Ratio (CR) MF BTE CO emission HC emission NOx emission Opacity

1 1 3 2 4 18 50 14.46 0.54 53 109 34

2 2 3 3 8 18 100 16.2 0.54 61 190 35
3 2 2 2 8 16 50 16 0.535 71 129 47
4 2 1 3 8 14 100 13.7 0.56 72 147 32
5 3 2 3 12 16 100 16.31 0.59 73 221 44
6 1 2 1 4 16 0 15 0.54 74 113 42
7 2 1 1 8 14 0 15.9 0.515 85 133 43
8 1 2 3 4 16 100 13.27 0.56 74 117 37
9 1 1 2 4 14 50 13.31 0.548 80 82 31
10 2 2 2 8 16 50 15.8 0.535 71 130 49
11 3 2 1 12 16 0 18.1 0.545 81 206 60
12 2 2 2 8 16 50 15.9 0.536 69 128 50
13 3 1 2 12 14 50 15.67 0.57 71 150 48
14 2 3 1 8 18 0 16.88 0.515 61 183 41
15 3 3 2 12 18 50 17.48 0.56 66 217 46

Table 15 Analysis of variance

(ANOVA) result—BTE Source Sum of squares df Mean square F-value p-Value

Model 28.44 9 3.16 89.16 < 0.0001 Significant

A—Load 16.59 1 16.59 468.08 < 0.0001
B—Comp. Ratio 5.18 1 5.18 146.28 < 0.0001
C—MF 5.12 1 5.12 144.47 < 0.0001
AB 0.1089 1 0.1089 3.07 0.1400
AC 0.0009 1 0.0009 0.0254 0.8796
BC 0.5776 1 0.5776 16.30 0.0100
A2 0.4144 1 0.4144 11.69 0.0189
B2 0.4144 1 0.4144 11.69 0.0189
C2 0.0407 1 0.0407 1.15 0.3328
Residual 0.1772 5 0.0354
Lack of fit 0.1572 3 0.0524 5.24 0.1644 Not significant
Pure error 0.0200 2 0.0100
Cor total 28.61 14
R2  99.38%, R2 -adj  98.27%, R2 -pred  91.05%

123
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering

Table 16 Analysis of variance

(ANOVA) result—CO emission Source Sum of squares df Mean square F-value p-Value

Model 0.0055 9 0.0006 291.55 < 0.0001 Significant

A—Load 0.0007 1 0.0007 355.74 < 0.0001
B—Comp. Ratio 0.0002 1 0.0002 86.64 0.0002
C—MF 0.0023 1 0.0023 1093.50 < 0.0001
AB 1.000E−06 1 1.000E−06 0.4800 0.5193
AC 0.0002 1 0.0002 75.00 0.0003
BC 0.0001 1 0.0001 48.00 0.0010
A2 0.0019 1 0.0019 913.92 < 0.0001
B2 0.0000 1 0.0000 22.23 0.0053
C2 1.853E−06 1 1.853E−06 0.8892 0.3890
Residual 0.0000 5 2.083E−06
Lack of fit 9.750E−06 3 3.250E−06 9.75 0.0944 Not significant
Pure error 6.667E−07 2 3.333E−07
Cor total 0.0055 14
R2  99.81%, R2 -adj  99.47%, R2 -pred  97.12%

Table 17 Analysis of variance

(ANOVA) result—HC emission Source Sum of squares df Mean square F-value p-Value

Model 944.98 9 105.00 70.79 < 0.0001 Significant

A—Load 12.50 1 12.50 8.43 0.0337
B—Comp. ratio 561.13 1 561.13 378.29 < 0.0001
C—MF 55.13 1 55.13 37.16 0.0017
AB 121.00 1 121.00 81.57 0.0003
AC 16.00 1 16.00 10.79 0.0219
BC 42.25 1 42.25 28.48 0.0031
A2 7.85 1 7.85 5.29 0.0697
B2 68.01 1 68.01 45.85 0.0011
C2 50.78 1 50.78 34.23 0.0021
Residual 7.42 5 1.48
Lack of fit 4.75 3 1.58 1.19 0.4875 Not significant
Pure error 2.67 2 1.33
Cor total 952.40 14
R2  99.22%, R2 -adj  97.82%, R2 -pred  91.39%

being determined and results of the present statistical analysis
are presented in Tables 15, 16, 17, 18, 19.
In Tables 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, the R2 value for BTE,
CO emission, HC emission, NOx emission, and opacity is
99.38%, 99.81%, 99.22%, 99.78%, and 99.01%, respec-
tively, which indicates that the RSM model is well fit and
competent in calculating engine performance and emission
parameters.
For the responses BTE, CO emission, HC emission, NOx
emission, and opacity in Tables 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, there
is a fair agreement between the predicted R2 value and the
adjusted R2 value as the difference between these values is
less than 0.2.
The signal-to-noise ratio (S/N), which is a measure of
adequate precision in RSM, should always be larger than
4. In this study, the values of adequate precision for BTE,
CO emission, HC emission, NOX emission, and opacity are
31.065, 64.594, 31.802, 50.452, and 55.44, respectively, indi-
cating the good adequacy of all RSM models in predicting
the output parameters.
In statistical ANOVA, the p-value and F-value have impor-
tance in determining the significance of the RSM model and
different model terms. The p-value is the probability value
less than 0.05 indicates the RSM model or model terms are
significant. The lower the p-value, the higher is the statis-
tical significance of the predicted RSM model and model
terms. For the current study, 95% confidence, 5% error, and
0.05 level of significance (α) were used. F-distribution or
F-statistical formula is used for finding out the F-value. The
F-value can be calculated by dividing the two mean squares

123
 Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering

Table 18 Analysis of variance

(ANOVA) result—NOX Source Sum of squares df Mean square F-value p-Value
emission
Model 25,681.58 9 2853.51 247.06 < 0.0001 Significant
A—Load 17,391.13 1 17,391.13 1505.73 < 0.0001
B—Comp. Ratio 4371.13 1 4371.13 378.45 < 0.0001
C—MF 200.00 1 200.00 17.32 0.0088
AB 400.00 1 400.00 34.63 0.0020
AC 30.25 1 30.25 2.62 0.1665
BC 12.25 1 12.25 1.06 0.3503
A2 122.08 1 122.08 10.57 0.0227
B2 83.31 1 83.31 7.21 0.0435
C2 3213.23 1 3213.23 278.20 < 0.0001
Residual 57.75 5 11.55
Lack of fit 55.75 3 18.58 18.58 0.0515 Not significant
Pure error 2.00 2 1.0000
Cor total 25,739.33 14
R2  99.78%, R2 -adj  99.37%, R2 -pred  96.52%

Table 19 Analysis of variance

(ANOVA) result—opacity Source Sum of squares df Mean square F-value p-Value

Model 864.93 9 96.10 55.44 0.0002 Significant

A—Load 364.50 1 364.50 210.29 < 0.0001
B—Comp. Ratio 0.5000 1 0.5000 0.2885 0.6142
C—MF 180.50 1 180.50 104.13 0.0002
AB 6.25 1 6.25 3.61 0.1160
AC 30.25 1 30.25 17.45 0.0087
BC 6.25 1 6.25 3.61 0.1160
A2 0.7756 1 0.7756 0.4475 0.5332
B2 264.16 1 264.16 152.40 < 0.0001
C2 22.31 1 22.31 12.87 0.0157
Residual 8.67 5 1.73
Lack of fit 4.00 3 1.33 0.5714 0.6864 Not significant
Pure error 4.67 2 2.33
Cor total 873.60 14
R2  99.01%, R2 -adj  97.22%, R2 -pred  91.47%

as mentioned in Eq. (4). The formula gives the ratio of the where α  significance level, k  sample number, and N
explained and unexplained variances. During statistical anal-  number of numerical data.
ysis, the F-value greater than one and P-value is less than 0.05 The model is significant when the value of F-statistical is
are required, else the predicted model is treated as insignifi- greater than F-critical. The Design-Expert version 11 ana-
cant. lytical software has calculated the value of F-critical for all
models is 1. The calculated F-values for BTE, CO emis-
MST sion, HC emission, NOX emission, and opacity are 89.16,
FStatistical or FDistribution  (4)
MSE 291.55, 70.79, 247.06, and 55.44, respectively, are observed
greater than one, which indicates the formulated models are
where MST is mean square treatment and MSE is mean significant. The probability value or p-value of formulated
square error. RSM models for predicting BTE, CO emission, HC emis-
The value of F-critical is found from the F-distribution sion, and NOX emission is less than 0.0001, and for opacity,
table by using the following relation it is equal to 0.0002. In this statistical analysis, the calculated
F-values are greater than 1 and p-values are less than 0.05,
FCritical  Fα(k−1,N −k) (5) so the models formulated by response surface methodology,

123
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering

RSM, are significant and proficient enough to determine the Table 20 Estimated coefficients of various output responses
performance and emission parameters for the test engine. Coefficient of HC Coefficient of NOx Coefficient of
emission emission opacity

3.2 ANOVA 70.33 129 48.67

1.25 46.62 6.75
In this study, analysis of variance (ANOVA) is conducted − 8.38 23.37 0.25
to evaluate the statistical significance of the quadratic − 2.63 5 − 4.75
model obtained using data from input variables and model 5.5 10 − 1.25
responses. In this analysis, Design-Expert version 11 soft- −2 2.75 − 2.75
ware is used to analyze these data with ANOVA and generate 3.25 − 1.75 1.25
the following diagnostic plots as shown in Figs. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 1.46 5.75 − 0.4583
7. − 4.29 4.75 − 8.46
Figures 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 show the normal probability plots
3.71 29.5 − 2.46
of residuals for the output responses (BTE, CO emission,
HC emission, NOx emission, and opacity) and represents
the normal distribution of errors and straight-line dispersion value > 0.1000 and omitted from Eqs. 6 and 7 as well as
of residuals. The plots of residuals vs. predicted response for represented in Eqs. (8)–(12).
the output responses (BTE, CO emission, HC emission, NOx
emission, and opacity) are also shown in Figs. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, BTE  15.9 + 1.44L + 0.805CR − 0.8MF
indicating the models’ absolute adequacy and dependency.
+ 0.38(CR.MF) − 0.335L 2 − 0.335CR2 (8)
The predicted versus actual value plots for the output
responses are also shown in Figs. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, indicat-
ing that the predicted BTE, CO emission, HC emission, NOx CO Emission  0.535 + 0.0096L − 0.0048CR + 0.0169MF
emission, and opacity data are nearly normally distributed + 0.0062(L.CR) − 0.005(CR.MF)
with little deviation and that the formulated quadratic model + 0.0227L 2 − 0.0035CR2
is capable to represent the actual problem adequately.
The model formulated by the analytical software concern- (9)
ing input test parameters with output responses is represented
in Eqs. (5) and (9) as follows. HC Emission  70.33 + 1.25L − 8.38CR
In coded form: − 2.63MF + 5.5(l.cr) − 2(L.MF)
+ 3.25(CR.MF) − 4.29CR2 + 3.79MF2
OutputResponse  Const. + a.A + b.B + c.C (10)
+ d.( A.B) + e.( A.C) + f .(B.C)
+ g.( A2 ) + h.(B 2 ) + i.(C 2 ) (6) NOx Emission  129 + 46.62L + 23.37CR + 5MF
+ 10(L.CR) + 5.75L 2 + 4.75CR2 + 29.5MF2
In uncoded form: (11)

Output Response  Const. + a.Load + b.Comp Ratio

+ c.MF + d.(Load.Comp Ratio)
+ e.(Load.MF)
+ f .(Comp Ratio.MF) + g.(Load2 )
2
+ h.(Comp Ratio ) + i.(MF )
Opacity  48.67 + 6.75L − 4.75MF
− 2.75(L.MF) − 8.46CR2 − 2.46MF2 (12)
In Eqs. (8)–(12), L, CR, and MF represent load, compres-
2
(7) sion ratio, and multi-fuel blend, respectively.

3.3 Effect of Input Parameters on Performance

The coefficients mentioned in Eqs. 5 and 6 regarding and Emission Characteristics
different output responses, i.e., BTE, CO emission, HC emis-
sion, NOx emission, and opacity, are calculated and presented
in Table 20. It is noticed that Eqs. 5 and 6 contain both
significant and insignificant model terms as well as their
coefficients. Insignificant model terms are identified for p-

123
 Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering

Fig. 3 Diagnostic plots for BTE

Fig. 4 Diagnostic plots for CO Emission

Fig. 5 Diagnostic plots for HC emission

The effect of input parameters on BTE, CO emission, HC in certain combination of control factors of L-CR, L-MF, and
emission, NOx emission, and opacity are shown in Figs. 8 and CR-MF by 3D surface graphs as shown in Figs. 8, 9, 10, 11,
13, respectively. The results of the current study are presented 12.

123
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering

Fig. 6 Diagnostic plots for NOx emission

Fig. 7 Diagnostic plots for Smoke Opacity

Fig. 8 Effect of input design parameters on BTE

The highlights of the following results are listed below:
1. The effect of load L and compression ratio CR on brake
thermal efficiency BTE is illustrated in Fig. 8a for the
hold value 50% of multi-fuel, MF. Figure 8a shows that
the highest value of BTE is attained at the highest level
(+ 1) of L, i.e., 12 kg, and the highest level (+ 1) of CR
i.e., 18 at 50% Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend
and producer gas mixture.

123

Fig. 9 Effect of input design parameters on CO emission
Fig. 10 Effect of input design parameters on HC emission
Fig. 11 Effect of input design parameters on NOX emission
Similarly, the effect of load L and multi-fuel MF on brake
thermal efficiency BTE is illustrated in Fig. 8b for the
hold value 16 of compression ratio, CR. Figure 8b shows
that the highest value of BTE is attained at the highest
level (+ 1) of L, i.e., 12 kg, and the lowest level (-1) of
MF, i.e., 0% Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend
and producer gas mixture at 16 compression ratio.
Similarly, the effect of compression ratio CR and multi-
fuel MF on brake thermal efficiency BTE is illustrated
in Fig. 8c for the hold value 8 kg of load, L. Figure 8c
shows that the maximum value of BTE is attained at the
123
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering
highest level (+ 1) of CR, i.e., 18, and the lowest level
(− 1) of MF, i.e., 0% Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel
blend and producer gas mixture at 8 kg load.
From ANOVA Table 14, it has been calculated that load
has the highest contribution of 58% followed by the com-
pression ratio of 18.1% and multi-fuel of 17.89% on BTE.
2. The effect of load L and compression ratio CR on CO
emission is illustrated in Fig. 9a for the hold value 50%
of multi-fuel, MF. Figure 9a shows that the lowest CO
emission is achieved nearly at the mid-level (0) of L, i.e.,
8 kg, and the highest level (+ 1) of CR, i.e., 18 at 50%
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering
Fig. 12 Effect of input design parameters on Opacity
Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend and producer
gas mixture.
Similarly, the influence of load, L, and multi-fuel MF on
CO emission is illustrated in Fig. 9b for the hold value
16 of compression ratio, CR. Figure 9b shows that the
lowest CO emission is attained at the mid-level (0) of
L, i.e., 8 kg, and the lowest level (− 1) of MF, i.e., 0%
Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend and producer
gas mixture at 16 compression ratio.
Similarly, the influence of compression ratio CR and
multi-fuel MF on CO emission is illustrated in Fig. 9c
for the hold value 8 kg of load, L. Figure 9c shows that
the lowest CO emission is achieved at the highest level
(+ 1) of CR, i.e., 18, and the lowest level (− 1) of MF,
i.e., 0% Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend and
producer gas mixture at 8 kg load.
From ANOVA Table 15, it has been calculated that multi-
fuel has the highest contribution of 41.8% followed by a
load of 12.72% and a compression ratio of 3.63% on CO
emission.
3. The effect of load L and compression ratio CR on HC
emission is illustrated in Fig. 10a for the hold value 50%
of multi-fuel, MF. Figure 10a shows that the lowest HC
emission is attained at the lowest level (− 1) of L, i.e.,
4 kg, and the highest level (+ 1) of CR, i.e., 18 at 50%
Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend and producer
gas mixture.
Similarly, the influence of load, L, and multi-fuel MF on
HC emission is illustrated in Fig. 10b for the hold value
16 of compression ratio CR. Figure 10b shows that the
lowest HC emission is achieved nearly at the mid-level
(0) of L, i.e., 8 kg, and the mid-level (0) of MF, i.e., 50%
Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend and producer
gas mixture at 16 compression ratio.
Similarly, the influence of compression ratio CR and
multi-fuel MF on HC emission is illustrated in Fig. 10c
for the hold value 8 kg of load, L. Figure 10c shows that
the lowest HC emission is achieved at the highest level (+
1) of CR, i.e., 18, and the mid-level (0) of MF, i.e., 50%
Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend and producer
gas mixture at 8 kg load.
From ANOVA Table 16, it has been calculated that com-
pression ratio has the highest contribution of 58.9%
followed by % multi-fuel blend of 5.78% and the load
of 1.31% on HC emission.
4. The effect of load L and compression ratio CR on NOx
emission is illustrated in Fig. 11a for the hold value 50%
of multi-fuel MF. Figure 11a shows that the lowest NOx
emission is attained at the lowest level (− 1) of L, i.e.,
4 kg, and the lowest level (− 1) of CR, i.e., 14 at 50%
Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend and producer
gas mixture.
Similarly, the effect of load, L, and multi-fuel MF on NOx
emission is illustrated in Fig. 11b for the hold value 16 of
compression ratio CR. Figure 11b shows that the lowest
NOx emission is achieved nearly at the lowest level (−
1) of L, i.e., 4 kg, and the mid-level (0) of MF, i.e., 50%
Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend and producer
gas mixture at 16 compression ratio.
Similarly, the effect of compression ratio CR and multi-
fuel MF on NOx emission is illustrated in Fig. 11c for
the hold value 8 kg of load, L. Figure 11c shows that the
lowest NOx emission is achieved at the lowest level (−
1) of CR, i.e., 14, and the mid-level (0) of MF, i.e., 50%
Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend and producer
gas mixture at 8 kg load.
From ANOVA Table 17, it has been calculated that load
has the highest contribution of 67.5% followed by the
compression ratio of 17% and % multi-fuel blend of
0.78% on NOx emission.
5. The effect of load L and compression ratio CR on smoke
opacity is illustrated in Fig. 12a for the hold value of
50% of multi-fuel, MF. Figure 12a shows that the lowest
opacity is attained at the lowest level (− 1) of L, i.e.,
4 kg, and the lowest level (− 1) of CR, i.e., 14 at 50%
Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend and producer
gas mixture.
123
 Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering

Similarly, the effect of load, L, and multi-fuel MF on

opacity is illustrated in Fig. 12b for the hold value 16 of com-
pression ratio, CR. Figure 12b shows that the lowest opacity
is achieved nearly at the lowest level (− 1) of L, i.e., 4 kg,
and the highest level (+ 1) of MF, i.e., 100% Calophyllum
Inophyllum biodiesel blend and producer gas mixture at 16
compression ratio.
Similarly, the effect of compression ratio CR and multi-
fuel MF on opacity is illustrated in Fig. 12 (c) for the hold
value 8 kg of load, L. Figure 12c shows that the lowest opac-
ity is achieved at the lowest level (− 1) of CR, i.e., 14, and
the highest level (+ 1) of MF, i.e., 100% Calophyllum Ino-
phyllum biodiesel blend and producer gas mixture at 8 kg
load.
From ANOVA Table 18, it has been calculated that load
has the highest contribution of 41.7% followed by % multi-
fuel blend of 20.66% and a compression ratio of 0.05% on
opacity.

3.4 Multiple Response

A test engine has several operational characteristics generally

measured in terms of performance, emission, combustion,
etc. Higher performance and lower emissions the two dif-
ferent quality responses are always expected from the test
engine. So, overall optimization of these quality responses is
required to be conducted as both are opposing in nature. A
multiple responses optimization technique essentially helps
in performing this synchronized overall optimization for
maximum engine performance and minimum emission con-
cerning the optimum value of input parameters. Several
methods have been adopted [26, 31] by researchers to per-
form the same; however, the method adopted in the literature
[25, 31] using desirability function D is used in the current
work for overall optimization of the test engine.
A: Load (kg)  5.72, B: Comp. Ratio  17.94, C: MF (%)
 33.56. Fig. 13 Multiple Response Optimization for the test engine
Responses
Desirability  0.910037, BTE (%)  15.49, CO emission
(ppm)  0.525, HC emission (ppm)  54.7, NOx emission CO emission, HC emission, NOx emission, and opacity
(ppm)  125.032, opacity (HSU)  37.99. using composite desirability (D). The result of overall opti-
The desirability function approach (DFA) is frequently mization and the optimal input parameters for the test
used for simultaneous optimization of several output engine using the function of desirability is illustrated in
responses toward determining the optimum input design Fig. 13.
parameters. In this approach, the values of all existing In Fig. 13, the maximum BTE of 15.49%, as well as
output responses are assigned a value between 0 and 1 minimum CO emission, HC emission, NOx emission, and
and named as individual desirability (d i ). Then, compos- opacity of 0.525 ppm, 54.7 ppm, 125.032 ppm and 37.99
ite desirability (D) for an individual objective is calcu- HSU, respectively, are determined as the optimum perfor-
lated from a combination of individual desirability (d i ) mance of the test engine for composite desirability D of
through geometric mean. The optimum condition of out- 0.910037. It indicates that the whole process is well opti-
put performance is predicted from the highest D value mized as the D value is nearer to 1. The optimal value of
and in the present work, the optimal input parameters the input control parameters, i.e., load, L  5.72 kg, com-
are calculated for maximum BTE as well as minimum pression ratio, CR  017.94, and multi-fuel MF of 33.56%

123
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering
Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend, and producer gas
mixture are calculated for the overall optimized performance
of the test engine.
3.5 Evaluation of % Relative Cost Variation
In the present study, an economic analysis is carried out for
the test engine in multi-fuel mode of operation with diesel,
Calophyllum inophyllum oil, and producer gas. The result of
the analysis is presented in Fig. 14 in percentage variation
in relative cost for different multi-fuel blend combination
with respect to variation in load and compression ratio. As
previously stated, the cost of consuming producer gas is con-
sidered in this study is zero, so the percentage increase in cost
is presented in Fig. 14 relative to diesel fuel. In Fig. 14, it
is shown that the cost increases by up to 12.5% and 50%
when the compression ratio of the fuel varies from MF0 to
MF50 and MF100. Similarly, cost increases of nearly 15%
and 100% are observed for variations in fuel blend from MF0
to MF50 and MF100 at compression ratio 14. This could be
because biodiesel is more expensive than diesel fuel on the
market. Figure 14 also shows that the percentage variation
in cost negligibly changes relative to variation in load. How-
ever, appreciable decrement in cost is noticed for increment
in compression ratio, as BSFC decreases with increment in
compression ratio which affects the cost.
The optimum performance of the test engine is predicted
by multiple response performance optimization analysis at
MF33.56 fuel blend combination. For fuel blend MF33.56,
the economic analysis is performed and the optimum cost is
shown in Fig. 14. A 10% cost increase compared to MF0 is
estimated for the optimal cost condition, and this additional
money can be used to get the best engine performance.
Fig. 14 Relative cost variation (%) in multi-Fuel mode of operation
4 Conclusion
The approach of using biodiesel in compression ignition
engines to reduce vehicular emissions is tested experimen-
tally in the present work. A variable ratio CI engine is
engaged as the test engine and numerous test runs are
performed to predict its performance and emission character-
istics, i.e., BTE, CO emission, HC emission, NOx emission,
and opacity, respectively, with respect to input parame-
ters namely load, compression ratio, and % Calophyllum
Inophyllum biodiesel blend and producer gas mixture in
multi-fuel mode of operation. 15 test runs have been per-
formed in the test engine as per the DOE provided by
Box–Behnken design of response surface methodology. Mul-
tiple engine output responses have been optimized, and the
optimum value of control parameters was determined using
the RSM technique and DF approach. The following results
have been drawn from the experimental investigation and
multiple response optimization.
i. The increment in brake thermal efficiency BTE is
observed for increment in load L and compression
ratio, CR, whereas decreases with an increase in %
Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend in multi-fuel
mode of operation. The highest value of BTE is attained
at 12 kg load, 18 compression ratio, and 0% Calo-
phyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend and producer gas
mixture in multi-fuel mode of operation. Load has been
calculated to have the major contribution on BTE of
58%, followed by compression ratio of 18.1% and
multi-fuel blend of 17.89% of contribution, respec-
tively.
ii. The CO emission increases with an increase in %
Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend in multi-fuel
mode of operation; however, decreasing and increas-
ing trend for the increment in load and little variation
with the increase in compression ratio are observed.
The lowest value of CO emission is attained at 8 kg
load, 18 compression ratio, and 0% Calophyllum Ino-
phyllum biodiesel blend and producer gas mixture in
multi-fuel mode of operation. Multi-fuel has been cal-
culated to have the major contribution on CO emission
of 41.8%, followed by load of 12.72% and compression
ratio of 3.63% of contribution, respectively.
iii. The HC emission increases with the increase in load
and decreases with the increase in compression ratio,
whereas it varies little with the increase in % Calophyl-
lum Inophyllum biodiesel blend in multi-fuel mode
of operation. The lowermost value of HC emission is
attained at 4 kg load, 18 compression ratio, and 50%
Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend and producer
gas mixture in multi-fuel mode of operation. Com-
pression ratio has been calculated to have the major
123

contribution on HC emission of 58.9%, followed by
multi-fuel of 5.78% and load of 1.31% of contribution,
respectively.
iv. The NOx emission increases with an increase in
load and compression ratio, whereas decreasing and
increasing trend is observed for the increment in %
Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend in multi-fuel
mode of operation. The lowermost value of NOx emis-
sion is attained at 4 kg load, 14 compression ratio,
and 50% Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blend and
producer gas mixture in multi-fuel mode of operation.
Load has been calculated to have the major contribution
on NOx emission of 67.5%, followed by compression
ratio of 17% and multi-fuel blend of 0.78% of contri-
bution, respectively.
v. The smoke opacity increases with an increase in load
and decreases with an increment in % Calophyllum
Inophyllum biodiesel blend in multi-fuel mode of
operation, and an increasing and decreasing trend is
observed for the increment in compression ratio. The
lowest value of opacity is attained at 4 kg load, 14
compression ratio, and 100% Calophyllum Inophyllum
biodiesel blend and producer gas mixture in multi-fuel
mode of operation. Load has been calculated to have the
major contribution on opacity of 41.7%, followed by
multi-fuel of 20.66% and compression ratio of 0.05%
of contribution, respectively
vi. From multiple response optimization analysis, the
maximum value of BTE and minimum value of CO
emission, HC emission, NOx emission, and opacity
were determined as 15.49%, 0.525 ppm, 54.7 ppm,
125.032 ppm, and 37.99 HSU, respectively, as the opti-
mum performance of the test engine for composite
desirability D of 0.910037.
vii. The optimum value of input parameters was predicted
for the optimum performance of the test engine: load, L
 5.72 kg, compression ratio, CR  017.94, and multi-
fuel MF of 33.56% Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel
blend, and producer gas mixture.
viii. From economic analysis, the % increment in cost is
found to be 12.5% and 50%, when fuel blend varies
from MF0 to MF50 and MF100 at compression ratio
18. Similarly, nearly 15% and 100% increment in cost
is observed for variation in fuel blend from MF0 to
MF50 and MF100 at compression ratio 14. This may be
due to the higher cost of biodiesel in comparison with
diesel fuel available in market. At optimum condition,
an increment in 10% of the cost is observed with respect
to MF0.
ix. The CI engine used in this study is stationary type and
generates electricity at a constant speed of 1500 rpm.
However, in reality engine speed varies with respect
to various factors like load, resistance, engine power,
123
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering
fuel calorific value, and more. As a result, the torque,
power, brake-specific fuel consumption, and emissions
CO, HC, and NOx associated with the engine vary.
However, real aspect of speed variation has not been
tested in this work, limiting its scope. So, the impact
of variation in engine speed on performance, emission,
and economic characteristics of a VCR CI engine may
be tested as the future scope of the current research
work.
References
1. Mandal, A.; Cho, H.; Chauhan, B.S.: Ann prediction of perfor-
mance and emissions of ci engine using biogas flow variation.
Energies (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/en14102910
2. Marikatti, M.; Banapurmath, N.R.; Yaliwal, V.S.; Basavarajappa,
Y.H.; Soudagar, M.E.M.; Márquez, F.P.G.; Mujtaba, M.A.; Fayaz,
H.; Naik, B.; Yunus Khan, T.M.; Afzal, A.; EL-Seesy, A.I.: Hydro-
gen injection in a dual fuel engine fueled with low-pressure
injection of methyl ester of thevetia peruviana (metp) for diesel
engine maintenance application. Energies (2020). https://doi.org/
10.3390/en13215663
3. Soudagar, M.E.M.; Nik-Ghazali, N.N.; Akram, N.; Al-Rashid,
M.A.; Badruddin, I.A.; Khan, H.; Kallannavar, V.; Shahpurkar, K.;
Afzal, A.; Farade, R.; Taqui, S.N.; Ukkund, S.J.: The potential of
nanoparticle additives in biodiesel: a fundamental outset. In: AIP
Conference Proceedings. American Institute of Physics Inc. (2020)
4. El-Seesy, A.I.; Hassan, H.; Ibraheem, L.; He, Z.; Soudagar,
M.E.M.: Combustion, emission, and phase stability features of a
diesel engine fueled by Jatropha/ethanol blends and n-butanol as
co-solvent. Int. J. Green Energy. 17, 793–804 (2020). https://doi.
org/10.1080/15435075.2020.1798770
5. Mujtaba, M.A.; Masjuki, H.H.; Kalam, M.A.; Noor, F.; Farooq, M.;
Ong, H.C.; Gul, M.; Soudagar, M.E.M.; Bashir, S.; Fattah, I.M.R.;
Razzaq, L.: Effect of additivized biodiesel blends on diesel engine
performance, emission, tribological characteristics, and lubricant
tribology. Energies (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/en13133375
6. Khan, H.; Soudagar, M.E.M.; Kumar, R.H.; Safaei, M.R.; Farooq,
M.; Khidmatgar, A.; Banapurmath, N.R.; Farade, R.A.; Abbas,
M.M.; Afzal, A.; Ahmed, W.; Goodarzi, M.; Taqui, S.N.: Effect
of nano-graphene oxide and n-butanol fuel additives blended with
diesel-Nigella sativa biodiesel fuel emulsion on diesel engine
characteristics. Symmetry (Basel) (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/
SYM12060961
7. Gavhane, R.S.; Kate, A.M.; Pawar, A.; Safaei, M.R.; Soudagar,
M.E.M.; Abbas, M.M.; Ali, H.M.; Banapurmath, N.R.; Goodarzi,
M.; Badruddin, I.A.; Ahmed, W.; Shahapurkar, K.: Effect of zinc
oxide nano-additives and soybean biodiesel at varying loads and
compression ratios on vcr diesel engine characteristics. Symmetry
(Basel) 12, 1–31 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12061042
8. Soudagar, M.E.M.; Nik-Ghazali, N.N.; Abul Kalam, M.; Badrud-
din, I.A.; Banapurmath, N.R.; Akram, N.: The effect of nano-
additives in diesel-biodiesel fuel blends: a comprehensive review
on stability, engine performance and emission characteristics.
Energy Convers Manag 178, 146–177 (2018)
9. Hariram, V.; Seralathan, S.; Rajasekaran, M.; Dinesh Kumar, M.;
Padmanabhan, S.: Effect of metallic nano-additives on combustion
performance and emissions of DI CI engine fuelled with palmker-
nel methyl ester. Int. J. Veh. Struct. Syst. 9, 103–109 (2017). https://
doi.org/10.4273/ijvss.9.2.08
10. Praveen, A.; Lakshmi Narayana Rao, G.; Balakrishna, B.: Per-
formance and emission characteristics of a diesel engine using
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering
Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel blends with TiO2 nanoaddi-
tives and EGR. Egypt. J. Pet. 27, 731–738 (2018). https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ejpe.2017.10.008
11. Atmanli, A.: Effects of a cetane improver on fuel properties and
engine characteristics of a diesel engine fueled with the blends of
diesel, hazelnut oil and higher carbon alcohol. Fuel 172, 209–217
(2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2016.01.013
12. Banapurmath, N.R.; Gireesh, N.M.; Basavarajappa, Y.H.; Hos-
math, R.S.; Yaliwal, V.S.; Pai, A.; Gopal Navale, K.; Jog, P.; Tewari,
P.G.: Effect of hydrogen addition to CNG in a biodiesel-operated
dual-fuel engine. Int. J. Sustain. Eng. 8, 332–340 (2015). https://
doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2014.963001
13. Ashraful, A.M.; Masjuki, H.H.; Kalam, M.A.; Rashedul, H.K.;
Sajjad, H.; Abedin, M.J.: Influence of anti-corrosion additive on
the performance, emission and engine component wear char-
acteristics of an IDI diesel engine fueled with palm biodiesel.
Energy Convers. Manag. 87, 48–57 (2014). https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.enconman.2014.06.093
14. Yaliwal, V.S.; Banapurmath, N.R.; Tewari, P.G.: Performance,
combustion and emission characteristics of a single-cylinder, four-
stroke, direct injection diesel engine operated on a dual-fuel mode
using Honge oil methyl ester and producer gas derived from
biomass feedstock of different origin. Int. J. Sustain. Eng. 7,
253–268 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2013.834395
15. Nayak, C.; Achrya, S.K.; Swain, R.K.: Performance of a twin cylin-
der dual-fuel diesel engine using blends of neat Karanja oil and
producer gas. Int. J. Ambient Energy. 37, 36–45 (2016). https://
doi.org/10.1080/01430750.2013.874370
16. Acharya, S.K.; Jena, S.P.: Performance and emission analysis of
a CI engine in dual mode with LPG and Karanja oil methyl ester.
ISRN Renew. Energy. 2013, 1–7 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1155/
2013/540589
17. Liu, J.; Yang, F.; Wang, H.; Ouyang, M.; Hao, S.: Effects of pilot
fuel quantity on the emissions characteristics of a CNG/diesel dual
fuel engine with optimized pilot injection timing. Appl. Energy.
110, 201–206 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.03.
024
18. Dasappa, S.; Sridhar, H.V.: Performance of a diesel engine in a dual
fuel mode using producer gas for electricity power generation. Int.
J. Sustain. Energy. 32, 153–168 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1080/
14786451.2011.605945
19. Gürü, M.; Koca, A.; Can, Ö.; Çinar, C.; Şahin, F.: Biodiesel pro-
duction from waste chicken fat based sources and evaluation with
Mg based additive in a diesel engine. Renew. Energy. 35, 637–643
(2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2009.08.011
20. Mahla, S.K.; Das, L.M.; Babu, M.K.G.: Effect of EGR on per-
formance and emission characteristics of natural gas fueled diesel
engine. Jordan J. Mech. Ind. Eng. 4, 523–530 (2010)
21. Patel, D.V.; Patel, T.M.; Rathod, G.P.: Parametric optimization of
single cylinder diesel engine for jatropha biodiesel and diesel blend
for brake specific fuel consumption using taguchi method. IOSR
J. Mech. Civ. Eng. IOSR-JMCE. 12, 66–72 (2015). https://doi.org/
10.9790/1684-12266672
22. Karthikeyan, R.; Mahalakshmi, N.V.: Performance and emission
characteristics of a turpentine-diesel dual fuel engine. Energy 32,
1202–1209 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2006.07.021
23. Taghavifar, H.; Anvari, S.: An insight into diesel-ethanol and
diesel-biodiesel blends spraying and co-combustion in HSDI diesel
engine. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 45, 5075–5085 (2020). https://doi.org/
10.1007/s13369-020-04343-7
24. Elsharkawy, E.A.; Abou Al-sood, M.M.; El-Fakharany, M.K.;
Ahmed, M.: Assessing and comparing the characteristics of ci
engine powered by biodiesel-diesel and biodiesel-kerosene blends.
Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 46, 11771–11782 (2021). https://doi.org/10.
1007/s13369-021-05703-7
25. Das, A.K.; Mohapatra, T.; Panda, A.K.; Sahoo, S.S.: Study on the
performance and emission characteristics of pyrolytic waste plas-
tic oil operated CI engine using response surface methodology. J.
Clean. Prod. 328, 129646 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.
2021.129646
26. Ghanbari, M.; Mozafari-Vanani, L.; Dehghani-Soufi, M.; Jahan-
bakhshi, A.: Effect of alumina nanoparticles as additive with
diesel-biodiesel blends on performance and emission characteristic
of a six-cylinder diesel engine using response surface methodology
(RSM). Energy Convers. Manag. X, 100091 (2021)
27. Mohapatra, T.; Sahoo, S.S.; Padhi, B.N.: Analysis, prediction and
multi-response optimization of heat transfer characteristics of a
three fluid heat exchanger using response surface methodology and
desirability function approach. Appl. Therm. Eng. 151, 536–555
(2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2019.02.001
28. Ganji, P.R.; Raju, V.R.K.; Rao, S.S.: Computational optimiza-
tion of biodiesel combustion using response surface methodol-
ogy. Therm. Sci. 21, 465–473 (2017). https://doi.org/10.2298/
TSCI161229031G
29. Çakmak, A.; Bilgin, A.: Exergy and energy analysis with economic
aspects of a diesel engine running on biodiesel-diesel fuel blends.
Int. J. Exergy. 24, 151–172 (2017)
30. Durgun, O.; Ayvaz, Y.: The use of diesel fuel--gasoline blends in
diesel engines. In: Proceedings of the first international energy and
environment symposium, pp. 9–20 (1996)
31. Agrawal, B.N.; Sinha, S.; Kuzmin, A.V.; Pinchuk, V.A.: Effect
of vegetable oil share on combustion characteristics and thermal
efficiency of diesel engine fueled with different blends. Therm. Sci.
Eng. Prog. 14, 100404 (2019)
Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article
under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s);
author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article
is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and appli-
cable law.
123