Optimization Study of Fuel Blends in an SI Engine Running with Gasoline/Isopropanol/Isoamyl Alcohol Blends

Abstract

In this study, was focused on determining the optimum alcohol mixtures of gasoline iso-propanol and isoamyl alcohol mixtures according to minimum exhaust emission and BSFC (Brake Specific Fuel Consumption) and maximum CGP (Cylinder Gas Pressure) parameters. In the optimization study, 3 different iso-propanol (vol. 10, 20 and 30) and 3 different iso-amyl (vol. 5, 10 and 20) rate were used as input parameters at maximum power and torque speed. The experimental study, it was performed in a single-cylinder air-cooled, spark-ignition engine (SI), at full throttle position, maximum power speed (3600 min-1) and maximum torque speed (2400 min-1). In the optimization study, ANOVA supported RSM (Response Surface Methodology) and CCD (Central Composite Design) were used as the experimental design. In the results obtained, it was determined as an effective parameter for BSFC of engine speed, and for CGP were effective also alcohol types along with engine speed. As a result of the optimization, as the optimum operating parameters were determined as 3600 min-1 engine speed, 27.7778% iso-propanol and 13.9394% iso-amyl alcohol. In the confirmation tests, the error rates were obtained as 3.36%, 3.45%, 9.81%, 4.76% and 4.67% for BSFC, CGP, HC, CO and NOX, respectively.

Keywords

• RSM
• Gasoline alcohol blends
• Propanol
• Isoamyl
• Emissions
• Optimization

References

1. L. A. Raman, B. Deepanraj, S. Rajakumar, and V. Sivasubramanian, “Experimental investigation on performance, combustion and emission analysis of a direct injection diesel engine fuelled with rapeseed oil biodiesel,” Fuel (Lond.), vol. 246, pp. 69–74, 2019.
2. D. B. Sivakumar, M. Arulmozhi, S. Sathyanarayanan, and M. Sridharan, “Optimization of gasoline engine operating parameters fueled with DIPE-gasoline blend: Comparative evaluation between response surface methodology and fuzzy logic expert system,” Process Saf. Environ. Prot., vol. 158, pp. 291–307, 2022.
3. E. Goh et al., “Prediction of minimum achievable NO levels for fuel-staged combustors,” Combust. Flame, vol. 200, pp. 276–285, 2019.
4. Y. S. H. Najjar, “Alternative Fuels for Spark Ignition Engines,” Open Fuels Energy Sci. J., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1–9, 2009.
5. Y. Qian, J. Guo, Y. Zhang, W. Tao, and X. Lu, “Combustion and emission behavior of N-propanol as partially alternative fuel in a direct injection spark ignition engine,” Appl. Therm. Eng., vol. 144, pp. 126–136, 2018.
6. D. Şimşek, F. Oral, and N. Y. Çolak, “The effect on engine performance and emissions of gasoline-propanol-hexane fuel blends on single cylinder spark-ignition engines,” Journal of Thermal Sciences and Technology, vol. 39, pp. 81–89, 2019.
7. M. Ghanbari, L. Vanani, and G. Najafi, “Investigating the effect of gasoline fuel filter lifetime on fuel pressure and ignition advance using the RSM method,” Fluid Mechanics & Aerodynamics Journal, vol. 9, pp. 135–150, 2020.
8. O. I. Awad et al., “Response surface methodology (RSM) based multi-objective optimization of fusel oil -gasoline blends at different water content in SI engine,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 150, pp. 222–241, 2017.

9. I. M. Yusri, R. Mamat, W. H. Azmi, G. Najafi, N. A. C. Sidik, and O. I. Awad, “Experimental investigation of combustion, emissions and thermal balance of secondary butyl alcohol-gasoline blends in a spark ignition engine,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 123, pp. 1–14, 2016.
10. Z. Zhang, T. Wang, M. Jia, Q. Wei, X. Meng, and G. Shu, “Combustion and particle number emissions of a direct injection spark ignition engine operating on ethanol/gasoline and n-butanol/gasoline blends with exhaust gas recirculation,” Fuel (Lond.), vol. 130, pp. 177–188, 2014.
11. M. Mourad and K. R. M. Mahmoud, “Performance investigation of passenger vehicle fueled by propanol/gasoline blend according to a city driving cycle,” Energy (Oxf.), vol. 149, pp. 741–749, 2018.
12. M.U. Kaisan, L.O. Yusuf, I.U. Ibrahim, S. Abubakar, S. Narayan, Effects of propanol and camphor blended with gasoline fuel on the performance and emissions of a spark ignition engine, ACS Omega. 5 (2020) 26454–26462.
13. S. Uslu and M. B. Celik, “Combustion and emission characteristics of isoamyl alcohol-gasoline blends in spark ignition engine,” Fuel (Lond.), vol. 262, no. 116496, p. 116496, 2020.
14. A. Atmanlı, B. Yüksel, E. İleri, and A. Deniz Karaoglan, “Response surface methodology based optimization of diesel–n-butanol –cotton oil ternary blend ratios to improve engine performance and exhaust emission characteristics,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 90, pp. 383–394, 2015.
15. J. Li, C. Guo, W. B. Wang, and Z. J. Wu, “Optimal Mixture Ratios of Biodiesel Ethanol Diesel for Diesel Engines,” Energy Power Eng., vol. 03, no. 05, pp. 625–629, 2011.
16. G. Khoobbakht, G. Najafi, M. Karimi, and A. Akram, “Optimization of operating factors and blended levels of diesel, biodiesel and ethanol fuels to minimize exhaust emissions of diesel engine using response surface methodology,” Appl. Therm. Eng., vol. 99, pp. 1006–1017, 2016.
17. S. Uslu and M. B. Celik, “Performance and exhaust emission prediction of a SI engine fueled with I-amyl alcohol-gasoline blends: An ANN coupled RSM based optimization,” Fuel (Lond.), vol. 265, no. 116922, p. 116922, 2020.
18. A. Asghar, A. A. Abdul Raman, and W. M. A. W. Daud, “A comparison of central composite design and Taguchi method for optimizing Fenton process,” ScientificWorldJournal, vol. 2014, p. 869120, 2014.
19. L. Ma, Y. Han, K. Sun, J. Lu, and J. Ding, “Optimization of acidified oil esterification catalyzed by sulfonated cation exchange resin using response surface methodology,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 98, pp. 46–53, 2015.
20. S. M. Safieddin Ardebili, H. Solmaz, and M. Mostafaei, “Optimization of fusel oil – Gasoline blend ratio to enhance the performance and reduce emissions,” Appl. Therm. Eng., vol. 148, pp. 1334–1345, 2019.
21. E. Ileri, A.D. Karaoglan, A. Atmanli, Response surface methodology based prediction of engine performance and exhaust emissions of a diesel engine fuelled with canola oil methyl ester, J. Renew. Sustain. Energy. 5 (2013).
22. S. Simsek and S. Uslu, “Investigation of the effects of biodiesel/2-ethylhexyl nitrate (EHN) fuel blends on diesel engine performance and emissions by response surface methodology (RSM),” Fuel (Lond.), vol. 275, no. 118005, p. 118005, 2020.
23. Y. Singh, A. Sharma, G. Kumar Singh, A. Singla, and N. Kumar Singh, “Optimization of performance and emission parameters of direct injection diesel engine fuelled with pongamia methyl esters-response surface methodology approach,” Ind. Crops Prod., vol. 126, pp. 218–226, 2018.
24. M. Krishnamoorthi, R. Malayalamurthi, and P. Mohamed Shameer, “RSM based optimization of performance and emission characteristics of DI compression ignition engine fuelled with diesel/aegle marmelos oil/diethyl ether blends at varying compression ratio, injection pressure and injection timing,” Fuel (Lond.), vol. 221, pp. 283–297, 2018.
25. M. Pandian, S. P. Sivapirakasam, and M. Udayakumar, “Investigation on the effect of injection system parameters on performance and emission characteristics of a twin cylinder compression ignition direct injection engine fuelled with pongamia biodiesel–diesel blend using response surface methodology,” Appl. Energy, vol. 88, no. 8, pp. 2663–2676, 2011.
26. J. B. Hirkude and A. S. Padalkar, “Performance optimization of CI engine fuelled with waste fried oil methyl ester-diesel blend using response surface methodology,” Fuel (Lond.), vol. 119, pp. 266–273, 2014.
27. P.M. Shameer, K. Ramesh, Influence of antioxidants on fuel stability of Calophyllum inophyllum biodiesel and RSM-based optimization of engine characteristics at varying injection timing and compression ratio, J. Brazilian Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. 39 (2017) 4251–4273.
28. R. K. Niven, “Ethanol in gasoline: environmental impacts and sustainability review article,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 535–555, 2005.
29. I. M. Yusri, R. Mamat, W. H. Azmi, A. I. Omar, M. A. Obed, and A. I. M. Shaiful, “Application of response surface methodology in optimization of performance and exhaust emissions of secondary butyl alcohol-gasoline blends in SI engine,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 133, pp. 178–195, 2017.
30. M. K. Balki, C. Sayin, and M. Canakci, “The effect of different alcohol fuels on the performance, emission and combustion characteristics of a gasoline engine,” Fuel (Lond.), vol. 115, pp. 901–906, 2014.
31. B. M. Masum, M. A. Kalam, H. H. Masjuki, S. M. Palash, and I. M. R. Fattah, “Performance and emission analysis of a multi cylinder gasoline engine operating at different alcohol–gasoline blends,” RSC Adv., vol. 4, no. 53, pp. 27898–27904, 2014.
32. M. B. Celik, “Experimental determination of suitable ethanol–gasoline blend rate at high compression ratio for gasoline engine,” Appl. Therm. Eng., vol. 28, no. 5–6, pp. 396–404, 2008.
33. A. I. Charalampos and K. N. Anastasios, “Panagiotis Gasoline-ethanol, methanol mixtures and a small four-stroke engine,” Heat and Technology, vol. 22, pp. 69–73, 2004.
34. M. N. A. M. Yusoff et al., “Performance and emission characteristics of a spark ignition engine fuelled with butanol isomer-gasoline blends,” Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ., vol. 57, pp. 23–38, 2017.
35. H. K. Imdadul et al., “Higher alcohol–biodiesel–diesel blends: An approach for improving the performance, emission, and combustion of a light-duty diesel engine,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 111, pp. 174–185, 2016.
36. B.-Q. He, J.-X. Wang, J.-M. Hao, X.-G. Yan, and J.-H. Xiao, “A study on emission characteristics of an EFI engine with ethanol blended gasoline fuels,” Atmos. Environ. (1994), vol. 37, no. 7, pp. 949–957, 2003.