306 Int. J. Renewable Energy Technology, Vol. 2, No.

3, 2011

Experimental study on the performance, emission

and combustion characteristics of rubber seed
oil-diesel blends in a DI diesel engine

V. Edwin Geo*
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
GKM College of Engineering and Technology,
Chennai 600063, India
Fax: 0091-44-2279-0012 E-mail: ve_geo@yahoo.com
*Corresponding author

G. Nagarajan
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Anna University,
Chennai, 600025, India
E-mail: nagarajan1963@annauniv.edu

B. Nagalingam
Department of Automobile Engineering,
SRM University, Chennai 603203, Tamil Nadu, India
E-mail: bnagsiit@yahoo.com

Abstract: In the present work, experiments have been carried out to assess the
suitability of rubber seed oil and its blends with diesel in a diesel engine. Tests
were conducted with different blends of R80-D20 (80% of rubber seed oil and
20% of diesel by volume) and R70-D30 (70% of rubber seed oil and 30% of
diesel by volume). Experimental results indicate that the brake thermal
efficiency increases from 26.5% to 27.7% with the optimum blend of R70-D30.
There is a reduction in emissions is also observed except NOx level at all loads.
Smoke emission reduces drastically from 6.1 to 4.7 BSU. Combustion
parameters indicated a decrease in ignition delay and combustion duration
compared with neat RSO. This will also contribute to higher heat release rate in
the premixed combustion phase. Current investigations reveal that the
performance of R70-D30 blend is closer to diesel.

Keywords: blending; combustion; diesel engine; blending; emission;

performance; rubber seed oil; RSO.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Geo, V.E., Nagarajan, G.

and Nagalingam, B. (2011) ‘Experimental study on the performance, emission
and combustion characteristics of rubber seed oil-diesel blends in a DI diesel
engine’, Int. J. Renewable Energy Technology, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp.306–323.

Biographical notes: V. Edwin Geo is a graduate of Mechanical Engineering

from Noorul Islam College of Engineering, Kanyakumari. He did his
postgraduate studies in Thermal Power Engineering in Annamalai University.

Copyright © 2011 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

 Experimental study on the performance, emission and combustion 307

Immediately after his postgraduation, he joined as a Lecturer in Bharathiyar

College of Engineering and Technology, Karaikal. After having a short stint
there, he completed his Doctoral in Internal Combustion Engineering at the
College of Engineering, Guindy, Anna University. During research period, he
worked as Assistant Professor in KCG College of Technology. Currently, he is
working as a Professor in GKM College of Engineering and Technology. He
has published more than 20 scientific research papers of which seven papers
have been published in international journals, two papers in national journals
and six papers each in international and national conference proceedings. He
got as research fund of Rs 7 lakhs from AICTE under RPS scheme to develop
an electronically controlled hydrogen engine.

G. Nagarajan is a graduate of Mechanical Engineering from the Faculty of

Engineering, Bangalore University and obtained his Masters in Internal
Combustion Engineering from Anna University Chennai, India. He obtained
his PhD from Anna University Chennai in the area of use of ethanol in CI
engines. He is working as a Professor in the Department of Mechanical
Engineering, College of Engineering, Anna University Chennai. He has
16 years of teaching and research experience in Anna University Chennai. His
scientific interests are in the fields of new and renewable energy sources for
automobiles, electronic engine management and engine pollution and control.
He has contributed more than 200 technical papers in international and national
journals.

B. Nagalingam is a graduate of Mechanical Engineering from PSG College of

Technology, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu and obtained his Masters in Automobile
Engineering from Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India. His major
research area is alternate fuels for automobiles. He has experience in
automobile pollution control. He has keen interest in hydrogen and biomass
conversion technologies. He has about 38 years of teaching and research
experience in IIT Madras. He got research awards of Alexander von Humboldt
Research Fellow, Aachen Technical University, Germany and TNO Research
Fellowship at TNO Organization for Applied Scientific Research, Road
Vehicles Research Institute, Delft, Holland. He has published more than 225
scientific papers in international and national levels. He has completed more
than 35 sponsored and industrial consultancy projects. He has organised seven
summer school and seminal programme. Currently, he is working as a
Professor in SRM University, Chennai.

1 Introduction

The world is confronted with the twin crises of fossil fuel depletion and environmental
degradation. Indiscriminate extraction and increased consumption of fossil fuels have led
to the reduction in carbon-based resources. Alternative fuels promise to harmonise
sustainable development, energy conservation, management efficiency and
environmental preservation. Due to the shortage of petroleum products and its increasing
cost, efforts are on to develop alternative fuels especially to diesel oil for full or partial
replacement. It has been found that vegetable oils are promising fuels because their
properties are similar to that of diesel and are produced easily from the crop which is a
renewable source (Babu and Devaradjane, 2003; Senthil Kumar et al., 2001; Swain and
Shaheed, 2000; Subramanian et al., 2005; Sapuan et al., 1996). None other than Rudolph
308 V.E. Geo et al.

Diesel, the father of diesel engine, demonstrated the first use of vegetable oil in
compression ignition engine. He used peanut oil as fuel for his experimental engine.
The ideal diesel fuel molecule is a saturated non-branched hydrocarbon molecule
with carbon atoms varying from 12 to 18, whereas vegetable oil molecules are
triglycerides generally with non-branched chain of different lengths and different degree
of saturation. They have molecules up to four times larger than that of typical diesel
fuels. Vegetable oils contain substantial amount of oxygen in their structure. Figures 1
and 2 show the typical structure of diesel and vegetable oil. The carbon cycle of
vegetable oils consists of release and absorption of carbon dioxide. Combustion process
releases carbon dioxide and crops for their photosynthesis process absorb the carbon
dioxide. Thus, the accumulation of carbon dioxide in atmosphere balances. In exhaust
fumes sulphur dioxide emissions are eliminated (vegetable oil contains no sulphur).
There are a wide variety of vegetable oils available and their properties fall within a
narrow band and are close to diesel fuel.

Figure 1 Typical structure of diesel

H H H H H H H H H H H H
H C C C C C C C C C C C C H
H H H H H H H H H H H H

Figure 2 Typical structure of vegetable oil

H O H H H H H H H H H H H
H C O C C C C C C C C C C C H
H H H H H H H H H H H
n

O H H H H H H H H H H H
H C O C C C C C C C C C C C H
H H H H H H H H H
n

O H H H H H H H H H H H
H C O C C C C C C C C C C C H
H H H H H H H H
n

Vegetable oils have 10% less heating value than diesel oil due to the oxygen content in
their molecules. The kinematic viscosity is several times higher than diesel fuel. The
viscosity of diesel fuel is about 4.0 mm2/sec where as vegetable oils have more than
40 mm2/sec. This high viscosity leads to pumping and atomisation problems. The high
carbon residue of vegetable oil causes heavy smoke emissions from the engine. The
density of vegetable oil is also higher than diesel fuel. Volatility is lower than diesel fuel.
This causes lower evaporation rates when injected into the cylinder. Hence, they are not
 Experimental study on the performance, emission and combustion 309

suitable for spark ignition engines. Flash and fire points are much higher than diesel and
hence they are much safer to store. Their cloud point is higher which indicates the
problem of thickening or even freezing at low ambient temperatures. The cetane number
of most of the vegetable oils is in the range of 32–40, which is slightly lower than that of
diesel. They mix very easily with diesel oils and form very stable blends. This makes it
possible to use them blended with diesel fuels. By their properties, vegetable oils are
suitable only for compression ignition engines. The properties of some of the vegetable
oils are compared with diesel in Table 1.
Table 1 Properties of some vegetable oils in comparison with diesel

Rubber Sunflower Rapeseed Cotton Soybean

Property Diesel
seed oil oil oil seed oil oil
Specific gravity 0.92 0.918 0.914 0.912 0.92 0.835
Viscosity (mm2/sec) at 33.91 58 39.5 50 65 3.8
40°C
Flash point (°C) 198 220 280 210 230 45
Calorific value (MJ/kg) 37.5 39.5 37.6 39.6 39.6 42.5
Acid value 25.8 0.15 1.14 0.11 0.2 0.062

In recent years, systematic efforts were undertaken by many researchers to determine the
suitability of vegetable oil as fuel in diesel engines. The high viscosity is due to the large
molecular mass and complex chemical structure of vegetable oils that in turn leads to
problems related to pumping, atomisation and combustion in a diesel engine. Due to the
high viscosity, the long-term operation of the engine with vegetable oils resulted in the
development of gumming, the formation of injector deposits, ring sticking and problems
related to the lubricating oils (Bandel and Heinrich, 1982; Ziejewski and Goettier, 1986;
Kalam and Masjuki, 2004; Humke and Barsic, 1981; Bari et al., 2002). Therefore, the
reduction of viscosity of vegetable oils is of prime importance to make it a suitable
alternative fuel for diesel engines. The problem of high viscosity of vegetable oils can be
reduced in several ways, such as transesterification (Usta, 2005; Geo et al., 2006;
Sukumar et al., 2005), microemulsification (Bora et al., 2004), preheating the oils
(Senthil Kumar et al., 2004; Geo et al., 2008) and blending with other fuels (Nwafor and
Rice, 1996; Lotko et al., 2001; Herchel et al., 2001; Raheman and Phadatare, 2004; Choi
et al., 1997). Operation of a diesel engine with various percentage blends of vegetable oil
and diesel offered a net reduction in HC, CO and smoke emissions with improvement in
brake thermal efficiency.

1.1 Rubber seed oil

The rubber seed production potential in India is about 150 kg/ha per annum. The
estimated availability of rubber seed is about 30,000 MT/year. Rubber seed kernels
(50–60% of seed) contain 40–50% of pale yellow oil (Pradeep and Sharma, 2005;
Ramadhas et al., 2005b). At present, rubber seed oil (RSO) has not found any major
application and hence the natural production of seeds remains underutilised. The free
fatty acid content of RSO is about 12.91%. If the FFA content is more than 3%, two step
transesterification processes (consisting of acid and alkaline process) is needed to convert
310 V.E. Geo et al.

the raw vegetable oil to its esters, which will reduce the yield of the esterification process
(Ramadhas et al., 2005a; Ikwuagwu et al., 2000).
In the present investigation, RSO, a non-edible type of vegetable oil has been
considered as a potential alternative for compression ignition engines to find out its
suitability for use as fuel oil. The properties of RSO compares well against other
vegetable oils and more importantly to diesel itself in terms of its fuel rating. However,
the greatest difference between RSO and diesel oil is its viscosity. The high viscosity of
RSO may contribute to the formation of carbon deposits in the engines, incomplete
combustion and increased emission from the engine.
In this study, the RSO is blended with diesel to increase the efficiency and reducing
the exhaust gas emissions of the diesel engine without any engine modifications. RSO
mixes easily with diesel in any proportion and can be used to partially substitute diesel.
The main objective the present study is to use the maximum utilisation of RSO in diesel
engine. Therefore, diesel and RSO blends of R60:D40, R70:D30, R80:D20 and R90:D10
by volume were prepared and tried in the diesel engine at the rated speed of 1,500 rpm.

2 Materials and methods

Experiments were conducted on Kirloskar TAF1, four stroke, single cylinder, air cooled,
CI engine. The rated power of the engine was 4.4 kW at 1,500 rpm. The engine was
operated at a constant speed of 1,500 rpm. The specifications of the engine are given in
Table 2. The engine was coupled to an electrical dynamometer which was used for
loading the engine. The fuel system was modified by adding a three-way, hand operated,
two-position directional control valve, which allowed rapid switching between the diesel
used as a standard fuel and the test fuel. An orifice metre connected to an air surge tank
was attached to inlet manifold of the engine to measure airflow. The fuel flow rate was
measured on volume basis using a burette and a stop watch. K-type thermocouple and a
digital display were employed to note the exhaust gas temperature.
Table 2 Specifications of test engine

1 Make Kirloskar
2 No of cylinders One
3 Type of cooling Air cooled
4 Bore 87.5 mm
5 Stroke 110 mm
6 Compression ratio 17.5:1
7 Piston bowl Hemispherical
8 Rated power 4.4 kW @1,500 rpm
9 Lubrication oil SAE 40

Bosch smoke metre was used for measurement of smoke. A QROTECH, QRO-401
exhaust gas analyser was used to measure the hydrocarbon (HC), oxides of nitrogen
(NOx) and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions. This analyser was configured to perform a
measurement by applying non-dispersive infrared (NDIR) method for analysing CO and
HC and electrochemical method for analysing NOx. A digital data acquisition system in
conjunction with a piezoelectic pressure transducer was used for the measurement of
 Experimental study on the performance, emission and combustion 311

engine cylinder pressure at every one-degree crank angle. An optical shaft position
encoder was used to give signal at TDC. The pressure signal and the TDC position signal
was also acquired by the A/D converter installed in the personal computer. These voltage
signals were stored in two columns in a file at uniform time intervals. The schematic
diagram of the experimental set up is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3 Schematic diagram of the experimental set up

10 9

11

12
8
14 13
6

3 7

4 5

Notes: 1 = engine; 2 = dynamometer; 3 = pressure sensor; 4 = charge amplifier;

5 = data acquisition system; 6 = exhaust gas analyser; 7 = smoke metre;
8 = diesel/RSO injector; 9 = diesel tank; 10 = RSO tank; 11 = surge tank;
12 = U-tube manometer; 13 = exhaust manifold; 14 = inlet manifold
Initially the experiments were conducted on the engine using diesel and RSO as fuels.
Then the engine was run with different blends of R90:D10, R80:D20, R70:D30 and
R60:D40. Increase in efficiency for lower concentration of diesel (R90:D10) is very
minimum. High concentration of diesel (R60:D40) shows higher emissions compared to
other blends. So the results are given for the remaining blends. Readings were taken,
when the engine was operated at a constant speed of 1,500 rpm for all loads. The injector
opening pressure was maintained at 200 bar. Parameters like torque, engine speed, fuel
flow time and the emission characteristics like CO, HC, NOx and smoke were recorded.
The sensitivity of measuring devices is given in Appendix. The performance of the
engine was evaluated in terms of brake thermal efficiency, brake power, brake specific
energy consumption from the above parameters. Combustion parameters like ignition
delay, combustion duration, peak cylinder pressure and maximum rate of pressure rise
312 V.E. Geo et al.

from the pressure-crank angle data have been calculated. This experimental procedure
was repeated for different RSO-diesel blends.

3 Results and discussion

3.1 Brake thermal efficiency

The variation of brake thermal efficiency for R70-D30 (70% of RSO and 30% of diesel),
R80-D20 (80% of RSO and 20% of diesel), R100 (100% of RSO or neat RSO) and diesel
is shown in Figure 4. The RSO is a poor quality fuel compared to the diesel. This is due
to poor atomisation and mixture formation of RSO during injection. However, by
increasing the concentration of diesel in RSO-diesel blend, the brake thermal efficiency
increases. This is due to the reduction in the viscosity, improved atomisation and better
combustion. The brake thermal efficiency with diesel and RSO at full load is 29.93% and
26.56% and with R70-D30 blend it is 27.68%. R80-D20 blend does not show big
difference in brake thermal efficiency.

Figure 4 Variation of brake thermal efficiency with different blends of RSO and diesel

35
Brake thermal efficiency (%)

30

25
R70:D30
20 R80:D20
15 RSO100
Diesel
10

0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Brake power (kW)

3.2 Brake specific energy consumption

Figure 5 represents the comparison of brake specific energy consumption. At the
maximum load, the brake specific energy consumption of RSO is 13.55 MJ/kWh. The
specific energy consumption for engine operated with diesel fuel is 12.02 MJ/kWh at full
load. When operating with R70-D30 blend, the brake specific fuel consumption is
13 MJ/kWh at the same load. Higher viscosity and density of neat RSO cause higher
brake specific energy consumption. When increasing the concentration of diesel with
RSO, the viscosity and density decreases, which improve mixture formation, resulting in
good combustion and hence lower energy consumption.
 Experimental study on the performance, emission and combustion 313

Figure 5 Variation of BSEC with different blends of RSO and diesel

30

25
BSEC (MJ/kWh)

20 R70:D30
R80:D20
15
RSO100
10 Diesel

0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Brake power (kW)

Figure 6 Variation of exhaust gas temperature with different blends of RSO and diesel

450
Exhaust gas temp. (deg.C)

400

350
R70:D30
300 R80:D20
250 RSO100
Diesel
200

150

100
0 1 2 3 4 5
Brake power (kW)

3.3 Exhaust gas temperature

The variation of exhaust gas temperature with brake power for various fuels is shown in
Figure 6. Exhaust gas temperature of RSO is higher than diesel at all loads. Due to
incomplete combustion of the injected fuel and part of the combustion extending into the
exhaust stroke there is an increase in exhaust gas temperature with RSO. The maximum
temperature of exhaust gas at peak load is 410°C for RSO and 364°C for diesel. As the
diesel concentration increases in the RSO-diesel blend, there is a reduction in exhaust gas
temperature. With R70-D30 blend, the exhaust gas temperature is 380°C at full load. The
314 V.E. Geo et al.

decrease in exhaust gas temperature with RSO-diesel blend is due to higher combustion
rate on account of better mixture formation.

3.4 NOx emissions

The variation in NOx emissions with brake power for different blends is presented in
Figure 7. NOx emissions for the RSO operation is 6.9 g/kWh and 10.7 g/kWh with diesel
at full load. This reduction in specific NOx with RSO operation is due to the less
intensity of premixed combustion compared with diesel. NOx concentration decreases as
the amount of RSO in the blend goes up. The NOx emission is 9.3 g/kWh at optimised
RSO-diesel blend, i.e., at R70-D30. The increase in NOx is due to good mixing rate of
fuel and air which leads to an increase in the premixed combustion.
Figure 7 Variation of NOx emissions with different blends of RSO and diesel

16
14
12
R70:D30
NOx (g/kWh)

10
R80:D20
8
RSO100
6
Diesel
4
2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Brake power (kW)

Figure 8 Variation of CO emission with different blends of RSO and diesel

16
14
12
R70:D30
CO (g/kWh)

10
R80:D20
8
RSO100
6
Diesel
4
2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Brake power (kW)
 Experimental study on the performance, emission and combustion 315

3.5 CO emission
The variation of CO emission is given in Figure 8. The RSO gives higher CO emission
compared to diesel. The CO emission with RSO and diesel is 6.7 g/kWh and 4.6 g/kWh,
respectively. This may be due to poor spray characteristics of RSO and hence improper
mixing, resulting in poor combustion. There is a reduction in the CO emission with the
increase in the concentration of diesel with RSO. The CO level is reduced from
6.7 g/kWh for RSO to 5.8 g/kWh for R70-D30 blend. However R80-D20 blend results in
6 g/kWh of CO emission. This may be because of the oxygen content in the added RSO.
Too high RSO blends deteriorate performance due to poor mixture formation.

3.6 HC emissions
The variation of HC emissions with different fuels is shown in Figure 9. RSO results in
higher HC emission compared to diesel. At full load the HC level varies from 1.3 g/kWh
at 25% load to 0.62 g/kWh at full load and from 1 g/kWh to 0.55 g/kWh with RSO and
diesel respectively. High viscosity leads to bigger fuel droplets and hence a non-uniform
distribution with air. Non-uniform distribution will lead to too rich pockets that can result
in higher HC. This higher viscosity of RSO can be reduced by blending with diesel. The
R70-D30 blend results in an acceptable drop in HC emissions of 0.6 g/kWh at full load,
which is lower compared to neat RSO. This indicates better mixture preparation and
combustion with the blend.

Figure 9 Variation of HC emission with different blends of RSO and diesel

1.4

1.2

1
R70:D30
HC (g/kWh)

0.8 R80:D20
0.6 RSO100
Diesel
0.4

0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Brake power (kW)

3.7 Smoke emissions

Figure 10 shows the variation of smoke emissions with brake power. Vegetable oils emit
considerable smoke emissions due to their high viscosity. This is true in the case of RSO
also. At full load, the smoke density is 6.1 BSU with RSO and 3.4 BSU with diesel. Due
to the heavier molecular structure and higher viscosity, atomisation becomes poor and
316 V.E. Geo et al.

this leads to larger droplet sizes, consequently sluggish combustion which results in
higher smoke emission in neat RSO. Smoke level decreases by increasing the percentage
of diesel with RSO. The R70-D30 blend drastically reduces the smoke level from
6.1 BSU to 4.7 BSU at full load. This is because of the better mixture formation in the
case of blend.

Figure 10 Variation of smoke density with different blends of RSO and diesel

6
Smoke density (BSU)

5
R70:D30
4 R80:D20
3 RSO100
Diesel
2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Brake power (kW)

Figure 11 Variation of peak pressure with different blends of RSO and diesel

80

75
Peak pressure (bar)

70 R70:D30
R80:D20
65
RSO100
60 Diesel

55

50
0 1 2 3 4 5
Brake power (kW)

3.8 Cylinder peak pressure and maximum rate of pressure rise

The cylinder peak pressure and maximum rate of pressure rise for diesel, RSO and
various blends are shown in Figures 11 and 12. The highest value of peak pressure and
 Experimental study on the performance, emission and combustion 317

maximum rate of pressure rise is noticed with diesel. In compression ignition engines, the
peak pressure depends on the combustion rate in the initial combustion period, which in
turn depends on the amount of fuel taking part in the premixed combustion phase. Peak
pressure and the rate of pressure rise increases slightly with blends of RSO-diesel.
R70-D30 blend results in higher values of maximum rate of pressure rise and peak
pressure compared to other blends and neat RSO, which indicates faster combustion due
to high concentration of diesel. An increase of two bar is observed with the R70-D30
blend compared to neat RSO. The peak pressure with RSO is about 72 bar and for
R70-D30 it is 74 bar at maximum power. However, with diesel it is 75 bar. An almost
similar trend is noticed with rate of pressure rise. The rate of pressure rise with diesel,
R70-D30 and RSO is 4.5, 4 and 3.6 bar/°CA respectively at full load.

Figure 12 Variation of maximum rate of pressure rise with different blends of RSO and diesel

5
4.5
Max. rate of pressure rise

4
3.5
(bar/deg. CA)

R70:D30
3
R80:D20
2.5
RSO100
2
1.5 Diesel
1
0.5
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Brake power (kW)

3.9 Heat release rate

The heat release rate at full load condition is plotted in Figure 13. It can be observed that
the premixed or uncontrolled combustion phase is associated with a high heat release rate
of diesel. The diffusion combustion phase indicated in the second peak is greater for
RSO. This is due to the high viscosity of fuel spray leading to a reduction of air
entrainment and fuel air mixing rates. This leads to less fuel being prepared for rapid
combustion with RSO and after ignition delay. Therefore more burning occurs in the
diffusion phase rather than in the premixed phase with RSO. The significantly higher
combustion rates during the later stages with RSO leads to high exhaust temperature and
lower brake thermal efficiency. A significant rise in the premixed combustion phase is
noticed with blending of oils. This indicates more rapid combustion as the viscosity is
lowered. The result of the high heat release rate is seen as a rise in the peak pressure, rate
of pressure rise and also a reduction in the smoke and increase in the NOx levels. It is
clear from the heat release pattern; the spikes of heat release curves are lower for
R80-D20 blend due to reduced premixed combustion. Diffusion combustion is more
318 V.E. Geo et al.

dominant with this blend and RSO. Blending of diesel with RSO reduces the delay period
and hence combustion starts earlier than RSO.

Figure 13 Heat rate release rate diagram for diesel and RSO at full load

80
Heat release rate (J/deg.CA)

70
60
50
40 R70:D30
30 R80:D20
20 RSO 100
10 Diesel
0
-10330 345 360 375 390 405 420
-20
Crank angle (deg.)

Figure 14 Variation of ignition delay with different blends of RSO and diesel

16
14
Ignition delay (deg.CA)

12
R70:D30
10
R80:D20
8
RSO100
6
Diesel
4
2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Brake power (kW)

3.10 Ignition delay

The variation in ignition delay is seen in Figure 14 which indicates that the value is
highest with RSO. It is 8°CA with RSO where as for diesel it is 6°CA. The higher
viscosity and lower volatility of the RSO which lead to poor atomisation and mixture
preparation with air will increase the ignition delay. It is observed that there is a decrease
 Experimental study on the performance, emission and combustion 319

in the ignition delay as the amount of diesel in the blend is raised. This is mainly due to
the shortening of the physical delay at high loads. At high outputs probably due to the
drop in viscosity of various blends and thus the physical delay, the ignition delay is lower
than RSO. The ignition delay for R70-D30 blend is 7°CA. By increasing the percentage
of RSO the physical delay of the blend increases. This in turn will increase the ignition
delay.

3.11 Combustion duration

Figure 15 shows the combustion duration of various blends of RSO and diesel.
Combustion duration is mainly affected by the slow diffusion phase. It is highest for the
RSO that has the poor spray formation characteristics. Diesel indicates the lowest
combustion duration. The combustion duration for RSO and diesel is 47°CA and 41°CA,
respectively. In the case of blends, it decreases with increase of percentage of diesel in
the blend. The combustion duration for R70-D30 is very close to diesel. This is due to
increased premixed combustion rate as a result of better mixing of fuel and air with the
blend. It is clear from the heat release rate curve as seen in Figure 13. This will also lead
to higher brake thermal efficiencies with the R70-D30 blend.

Figure 15 Variation of combustion duration with different blends of RSO and diesel

50
Combustion duration (deg.CA)

45

R70:D30
40
R80:D20
RSO100
35
Diesel
30

25
0 1 2 3 4 5
Brake power (kW)

4 Estimation of uncertainty

In measuring any quantity, the results will always differ from the true value even with
careful experimentation. This error in measurement may be either random or systematic.
By adding a correction value, the systematic error can be removed. Random error can
only be estimated statistically and cannot be predicted in advance. Its presence only can
be detected when the same quantity is measured again and again under the same
conditions. The estimated uncertainty values at typical operating conditions are:
320 V.E. Geo et al.

Speed + 1.5%
Brake power + 1.5%
HC + 3%
CO + 3%
NOx + 4%
Exhaust temperature + 0.6%
Smoke (BSU) + 3.5%

5 Conclusions

The following conclusions are drawn based on the experimental study of RSO and diesel
blend:
• The use of the raw RSO results in inferior performance and high emissions as
compared to diesel because of its high viscosity, poor atomisation and mixing.
• Engine operation with the blend of RSO and diesel results in better performance than
neat RSO. At full load, the brake thermal efficiency with neat RSO is 26.56% and
for the optimum blend of R70-D30 it is 27.68% while that of diesel is 29.93%.
• Exhaust gas temperature is higher with the RSO as compared to diesel due to slow
combustion. The exhaust temperature decreases with increase in quantity of diesel in
the RSO-diesel blend.
• NOx emissions for the RSO operation is 6.9 g/kWh and 10.7 g/kWh with diesel at
full load. With an increase in percentage of diesel in the RSO-diesel blend
(R70-D30) NOx increases to 9.3 g/kWh.
• Both HC and CO emission are found to be high for RSO under normal operating
conditions. The RSO-diesel blend results in lower CO and HC emissions at high
load. This may be because of its reduced viscosity at high operating temperatures.
The HC and CO emission for the optimum blend quantity of R70-D30 is 0.6 g/kWh
and 5.8 g/kWh, respectively.
• There is a reduction in smoke level with RSO-diesel blend in comparison to neat
RSO due to better mixture formation with the blend resulting in improved
combustion. The smoke level with R70-D30 blend is 4.7 BSU, for neat RSO it is
6.1 BSU and for diesel it is 3.4 BSU.
• Peak pressure and maximum rate of pressure rise are higher with the RSO-diesel
blends due to improved premixed combustion.
• Heat release with neat RSO indicates higher diffusion burning and lower premixed
burning rates as compared to diesel. Blending of diesel with RSO increases the
premixed combustion phase which leads to increase in the brake thermal efficiency.
It is concluded that the blending of diesel with RSO will increase the performance and
decrease the CO, HC and smoke emissions. Among the various blends, R70-D30 blend
shows improved performance and reduced emissions.
 Experimental study on the performance, emission and combustion 321

References
Babu, A.K. and Devaradjane, G. (2003) ‘Vegetable oils and their derivatives as fuels for CI
engines: an overview’, pp.406–419, SAE 2003-01-0767.
Bandel and Heinrich (1982) ‘Vegetable oil derived fuels and problems related to their use in diesel
engines’, International Conference on Plant and Vegetable Oils as Fuels, North Dakota, USA,
pp.234–240.
Bari, S., Lim, T.H. and Yu, C.W. (2002) ‘Effects of preheating of crude palm oil (CPO) on
injection system, performance and emission of a diesel engine’, International Journal of
Renewable Energy, Vol. 27, pp.339–351.
Bora, D.K., Polly, M., Sanduja, V. And Das, L.M. (2004) ‘Performance evaluation and emission
charecteristics of a diesel engine mahua oil methyl ester (MOME)’, SAE Technical Paper
Series, Paper No. 2004-28-0034.
Choi, C.Y., Bower, G.R. and Reitz, R.D. (1997) ‘Effect of biodiesel blended fuels and multiple
injections on D.I. diesel engines’, Society of Automotive Engineers, USA, Paper No. 970218.
Geo, V.E,, Nagarajan, G. and Nagalingam, B. (2008) ‘Experimental investigations to improve the
performance of rubber seed oil by exhaust gas preheating’, SAE Technical Paper Series, Paper
No. 2008-28-0049.
Geo, V.E., Chithirailingam, P. and Nagarajan, G. (2006) ‘Investigations on esterified rubber seed
oil fuelled diesel engine with ignition improver’, Proceedings of International Conference on
Advances in Mechanical Engineering, SRM University, India, pp.341–345.
Herchel, T.C., Machacon, Shiga, S., Karasawa, T. and Nakamura, H. (2001) ‘Performance and
emission characteristics of a diesel engine fueled with coconut oil-diesel fuel blend’,
International Journal of Biomass and Bio Energy, Vol. 20, pp.63–69.
Humke, A.L. and Barsic, N.J. (1981) ‘Performance and emissions characteristics of a naturally
aspirated diesel engine with vegetable oils-(part 2)’, Society of Automotive Engineers, Paper
No. 810955, USA, pp.22–30.
Ikwuagwu, O.E., Ononogbu, I.C. and Njoku, O.U. (2000) ‘Production of biodiesel using rubber
[Hevea brasiliensis (Kunth. Muell.)] seed oil’, International Journal of Industrial Crops and
Products, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp.57–62.
Kalam, M.A. and Masjuki, H.H. (2004) ‘Emissions and deposit characteristics of a small diesel
engine when operated on preheated crude palm oil’, International Journal of Biomass and
Bioenergy, Vol. 27, pp.289–297.
Lotko, W., Longwic, R. and Swat, M. (2001) ‘The effect of rape oil – diesel oil mixture
composition on particulate matter emission level in diesel engine’, SAE Technical Paper
Series, Paper No. 2001-01-3388.
Nwafor, O.M.I. and Rice, G. (1996) ‘Performance of rapeseed oil blends in a diesel engine’,
International Journal of Applied Energy, Vol. 54, No. 4, pp.345–354.
Pradeep, V. and Sharma, R.P. (2005) ‘Evaluation of performance, emission and combustion
parameters of a CI engine fuelled with bio-diesel from rubber seed oil and its blends’, SAE
Paper No. 2005-26-353, USA.
Raheman, H. and Phadatare, A.G. (2004) ‘Diesel engine emissions and performance from blends of
karanja methyl ester and diesel’, International Journal of Biomass and Bioenergy, Vol. 27,
pp.393–397.
Ramadhas, A.S., Jayaraj, S. and Muraleedharan, C. (2005a) ‘Biodiesel production from high FFA
rubber seed oil’, International Journal of Fuel, Vol. 84, pp.335–340.
Ramadhas, A.S., Jayaraj, S. and Muraleedharan, C. (2005b) ‘Characterization and effect of using
rubber seed oil as fuel in the compression ignition engines’, International Journal of
Renewable Energy, Vol. 30, pp.795–803.
Sapuan, S.M., Masjuki, H.H. and Azlan, A. (1996) ‘The use of palm oil as diesel fuel substitute’,
Proc. Instn. Mech. Engnrs., Vol. 210, pp.47–53.
322 V.E. Geo et al.

Senthil Kumar, M., Kerihuel, A., Bellettre, J. and Tazerout, M. (2004) ‘Experimental investigations
on the use of preheated animal fat as fuel in a compression ignition engine’, International
Journal of Renewable Energy, Vol. 30, pp.1443–1456.
Senthil Kumar, M., Ramesh, A. and Nagalingam, B. (2001) ‘Complete vegetable oil fueled
compression ignition engine’, SAE Paper No. 2001-28-0067.
Subramanian, K.A, Singal, S.K., Saxena, M. and Singhal, S. (2005) ‘Utilization of liquid biofuels
in automotive diesel engines: an Indian perspective’, International Journal of Biomass and
Bioenergy, Vol. 29, pp.65–72.
Sukumar, P., Vedaraman, N., Boppana V.B.R., Sankarnarayanan, G. and Jeychandran, K. (2005)
‘Mahua oil (Madhuca Indica seed oil) methyl ester as biodiesel – preparation and emission
characteristics’, International Journal of Biomass and Bioenergy, Vol. 28, pp.87–93.
Swain, E. and Shaheed, A. (2000) ‘An experimental study to evaluate the use of coconut based
fuels as alternatives to diesel oil’, Journal of the Institute of Energy, Vol. 73, pp.100–105.
Usta, N. (2005) ‘Use of tobacco seed oil methyl ester in a turbocharged indirect injection diesel
engine’, International Journal of Biomass and Bioenergy, Vol. 28, pp.77–86.
Ziejewski, M. and Goettier, H. (1986) ‘Goettier influence of vegetable oil based alternate fuels on
residue deposits and components wear in a diesel engine’, Society of Automotive Engineers,
Paper No. 860302, USA.

Appendix

Exhaust gas analyser

Measuring parameter CO, HC, CO2, O2, λ, AFR, NOx
Measuring method CO, HC, CO2 – NDIR method
O2- Electrochemical
Repeatability Less than ± 2%
Measuring range and resolution CO – 0 to 9.95% and 0.01%
HC – 0 to 9999 ppm and 1%
CO2 – 0 to 20% and 0.1%
O2 – 0 to 25% and 0.01%
λ – 0 to 2 and 0.001%
AFR – 0 to 99 and 0.1
Response time within ten seconds

Pressure pick-up
Measurement range 0 – 250 bar
Resolution 0.0004
Rise time 6 μs
Sensitivity ≈ –14.80 pC/bar
 Experimental study on the performance, emission and combustion 323

Linearity 0.1 < ±%FSO

Acceleration sensitivity <0.001 bar/g

Charge amplifier
Output voltage +10 V
Output current +50 mA
Output impedance 100 Ω
Insulation resistance at input 1,014 Ω
Frequency range 0 – 180 kHz
Linearity +0.05%
Accuracy range +1%

Analogue to digital converter

Number of channels 16
Internal clock 1 MHz or 10 MHz jumper selectable
Maximum sampling speed 100 kHz
Data transfer DMA, interrupt and software
On boar memory 1 k (FIFO)
Resolution 12 – bits
Input range +5 V, +10 V
Accuracy +2 bit