Energy Reports 7 (2021) 904–915

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Reports
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/egyr

Experimental study on spray characteristics, combustion stability, and

emission performance of a CRDI diesel engine operated with
biodiesel–ethanol blends
∗
Limin Geng a , , Leichao Bi b , Qi Li c , Hao Chen a , Yuantao Xie a
a
Key Laboratory of Shaanxi Province for Development and Application of New Transportation Energy, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China
b
AVIC Jonhon Optronic Technology Co., Ltd., Luoyang 471003, China
c
Geely Automobile Research Institute Co., Ningbo 311228, China

article info a b s t r a c t

Article history: Biodiesel is a promising alternative fuel for diesel engines, but its high viscosity and low volatility
Received 18 June 2020 have limitations in decreasing emissions. As a renewable alternative fuel with a high oxygen content,
Received in revised form 14 August 2020 ethanol blended with biodiesel can decrease kinematic viscosity and improve fuel evaporation. In this
Accepted 23 January 2021
study, the effects of the ethanol addition ratio on the spray, combustion, and emission performances of
Available online 8 February 2021
a diesel engine fuelled with biodiesel were investigated. The spray characteristics were measured using
Keywords: a high-speed camera and Malvern laser analysis, whereas the combustion and emission performances
Biofuel were tested on a turbocharged common rail direct injection (CRDI) diesel engine. The results show
Diesel engine that adding ethanol to biodiesel enlarges the spray cone angle (SCA) and shortens spray tip penetration
Spray characteristics (STP). In addition, the curves of the size–volume distribution (SVD) of the atomized fuel droplets move
Combustion stability toward a smaller diameter, and the Sauter mean diameter (SMD) of the biodiesel–ethanol (BE) blends
Exhaust emissions gradually decreases with increasing ethanol proportion. At low loads, the fuel injection strategy is
multi-injection, and the peak cylinder pressures (PCPs) of BE blends are 0.77–1.96% higher than that of
diesel at different ethanol blending ratios. However, the peak heat release rates (PHRRs) of BE blends
are 9.3–11.5% higher than that of diesel owing to a faster combustion rate, longer main-injection
duration, and more hydroxyl radicals generated in the pilot-injection stage. At medium–high loads,
the injection strategy changes to single injection, the PCPs of BE blends are roughly equivalent to that
of diesel, and the PHRRs of BE blends for different ethanol blending ratios are 9.76–11.91% lower than
that of diesel. This is because of the lower diffusion combustion ratio, lower heat value, and change of
injection duration corresponding to the variation in fuel properties. In addition, the results of the peak
pressure rise rate and the cyclic variation indicate that the higher ethanol addition ratio increases the
combustion noise and decreases the combustion stability. In terms of exhaust emissions, compared
with biodiesel, with increasing ethanol blending ratio, the soot emissions for different BE blends
decrease by 11.28–47.23%, the NOx emissions increase by 2.68–7.04%, and the HC emissions increase
by 9.99–21.47%. Considering the engine performance comprehensively, a 20% ethanol blending ratio
in biodiesel is recommended.
© 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction promote the diversification of transportation energy sources and

alleviate the fossil fuel energy crisis (Shahira et al., 2015; Zhang
Fossil energy is becoming increasingly scarce because it is non- et al., 2020). Biodiesel is a renewable source of energy. There
renewable and has been overexploited by humans (Chen et al., are many raw materials used in biodiesel production, such as
2020; Geng et al., 2020a). Uncontrolled large-scale application of vegetable oil (Aldara et al., 2019), animal fat (Roberto et al., 2018),
fossil fuels has caused serious environmental problems in urban waste cooking oil (Yesilyurt, 2019a; Yesilyurt and Arslan, 2019b),
areas. Therefore, it is crucial to find clean renewable energy and microalgae oil (Maceiras et al., 2011). It is a promising alter-
sources to solve these problems (Aldhaidhawi et al., 2017; Chen native fuel and has attracted widespread attention from different
et al., 2019a). The application of biofuels in automobiles can countries (Shamun et al., 2018; Zaglinskis et al., 2016). How-
ever, the compositions and properties of biodiesel are different
∗ Corresponding author. from those of petrodiesel (Geng et al., 2020b), and they have
E-mail address: [email protected] (L. Geng). some inherent defects, including high density, high viscosity, low

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2021.01.043
2352-4847/© 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
L. Geng, L. Bi, Q. Li et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 904–915

volatility, and poor low-temperature fluidity (Yesilyurt, 2018). increased HC emissions. However, at an engine load of more than
These factors limit the application of pure biodiesel and a high 50%, ethanol reduced HC emissions for all concentrations (Klajn
proportion of biodiesel in diesel engines (Chauhan et al., 2013). et al., 2020; Yilmaz et al., 2014). The combustion characteristics
Ethanol is also a biofuel that is gaining extensive attention from and particulate emissions of a diesel engine fuelled with DBE
researchers (Tutak et al., 2017). It can be blended with biodiesel at blends were investigated, and 0, 5, 10, and 20% ethanol was
various percentages, and adding ethanol to biodiesel can reduce blended with diesel–biodiesel. The results showed that the peak
fuel density, viscosity, the cold filter plugging point, and the cylinder pressures (PCPs) and peak heat release rate (PHRR) of
freezing point. A study showed that ethanol as an additive by DBE blends are higher than those of diesel and biodiesel. DBE
5% volume can be added to blends of diesel and biodiesel, such blends could effectively decrease brake specific particulate mass
as Jatropha, palm, and soybean biodiesel, which could reduce the and brake specific number concentrations and improve the trade-
kinematic viscosity, cloud point, and pour point of the fuel blends off relationship among PM–PN–NOX (Tse et al., 2015). Jia et al.
(Madiwale et al., 2018). Moreover, blending oxygenates into the studied the compatibility and stability of the DBE blends and
fuel is considered an effective approach to reduce particulate their effects on the engine performance and pollutant emissions.
matter (PM) emission of a diesel engine, and alcohol fuels can The results showed that biodiesel, ethanol, and diesel can remain
provide a higher oxygen content for decreasing PM emissions (He soluble when the volume ratio of the biodiesel is approximately
et al., 2017; Nayyar et al., 2019; Zare et al., 2017). between 25%–55% of the DBE fuels. The NOx emissions of the DBE
Several studies have compared the influences of methanol, blends are lower than that of diesel at low loads but become
ethanol, and n-butanol blended with biodiesel on engine per- higher at high loads. The THC emission decreases when the
formance and exhaust emissions. The test results showed that biodiesel proportion increases and increases when the ethanol
biodiesel–methanol (BM) and biodiesel–ethanol (BE) fuel blends proportion increases (Jia et al., 2019).
decrease NOx emissions while increasing CO and hydrocarbon Tutak et al. evaluated the influence of adding hydrated ethanol
(HC) emissions compared with diesel at less than 70% engine to diesel or biodiesel on the performance, combustion, and emis-
loads. Furthermore, BE is more effective than BM for reducing sions of a naturally aspirated diesel engine. Their results indi-
emissions and improving overall engine performance (Yilmaz and cated that, for the diesel–ethanol and BE powering, ITE increased
Sanchez, 2012). Zheng and Wei et al. compared the effects of with the increase of ethanol proportion in the blends. The igni-
BE blends and biodiesel-n-butanol (BBu) blends on engine per- tion delay period was prolonged and combustion duration short-
formances and pollutant emissions. The results showed that the ened with ethanol addition (Tutak et al., 2017). The usability of
cottonseed-based biodiesel was studied by blending it with ultra-
indicated thermal efficiencies (ITEs) of biodiesel, BE blends, and
low-sulphur diesel or ethanol. The experimental results revealed
BBu blends were lower than that of diesel at low engine loads.
that, compared with diesel, the PHRR was 10% higher for biodiesel
With increasing engine load, biodiesel and two blended fuels ex-
and BE blends, NOx emissions were 48% lower on average for
hibited higher ITEs than that of diesel. Meanwhile, the BE blended
BE blends, and HC emissions were approximately 75% lower for
fuel was more effective in decreasing NOx and soot emissions.
biodiesel–diesel blends (Karakaya, 2020). Soot, particle number,
The ability to decrease soot emission can be sequenced as BE20
and particle size distribution were studied at conventional and
> BBu20 > biodiesel. NOx emissions of biodiesel and BBu20 are
low-temperature combustion (LTC) modes with diesel, biodiesel,
higher than that of diesel, whereas BE20 NOx emissions are lower
and BE blends. The results showed that BE blends (BE20) generate
than that of diesel. Therefore, ethanol is more suitable to be used
the lowest soot and total particulate number concentration, both
as a biodiesel additive than methanol and n-butanol in terms of
in conventional and premixed LTC modes, exhibiting its potential
reducing the soot and NOx emissions of diesel engines (Wei et al.,
as an alternative fuel for diesel engines (Su et al., 2013). Gad
2018; Zheng et al., 2016).
et al. investigated the effects of adding gasoline as additives with
Some researchers have investigated the effects of different waste cooking oil (WCO) biodiesel on the combustion, emission,
proportions of diesel–biodiesel–ethanol (DBE) ternary fuel blends and exergy characteristics of a diesel engine. The test results
on the engine performance, emissions characteristics, engine indicated that with the addition of gasoline, the cylinder pressure
durability, and compatibility of a diesel engine. The results showed and HRR are enlarged, and fuel exergy rate and exergy efficiency
that the effects on engine performance and emission depend on are heightened. Engine emissions of CO, UHC, NOx, and smoke
biofuel properties, the engine performance and emission can be opacity are pointedly diminished by 25%, 30%, 20%, and 30%
improved, and the biofuel can ensure the long term engine dura- for WCO–gasoline blends compared to that of pure WCO (Gad
bility of diesel engine (Silitonga et al., 2018; Dharma et al., 2016). et al., 2020). Bandbafha et al. investigated the effect of water
Two oxygenated blended fuels consisting of diesel, biodiesel, and (3 wt.%) and aqueous carbon nanoparticles (38, 75, and 150 µM)
ethanol in ratios of 68:17:15 and 58:14:30 were investigated in a on combustion and exhaust emissions of a diesel engine. They ob-
single-cylinder diesel engine. The experimental results revealed served that the brake thermal efficiency increased and the brake
that the tradeoff between soot and NOX improved significantly specific fuel consumption decreased by incorporating the aque-
when the fuel with the highest proportion of ethanol was used ous carbon nanoparticles. The addition of carbon nanoparticles
(Shahira et al., 2015). The combustion and emission performances to the water-emulsified fuel blends adversely affected unburned
of DBE blends were studied in three different blended propor- hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide emissions at full load condi-
tions: B3E5, B7E5, and B10E10. The test results showed that tions but it lowered nitrogen oxides emissions (Bandbafha et al.,
engine power and torque reduced with increasing ethanol pro- 2019). EL-Seesy et al. investigated the combustion and exhaust
portion. The pilot combustion of the blended fuels was moderated emission characteristics of the fuel blends of n-heptanol and
and retarded, the heat release rate (HRR) increased owing to a methyl oleate biodiesel in a rapid compression–expansion ma-
long ignition delay, and HC and NOx emission increased with chine (RCEM). The results showed that the blending of n-heptanol
increasing ethanol proportion (Tongroon et al., 2019). The effect with methyl oleate fuel results in a reduction in the soot emission
of ethanol concentration on the emissions of diesel engines was by about 75% and the NOx emission is reduced by 6% compared
investigated in some studies. The results showed that, compared to pure methyl oleate; Additionally, the combustion process is
with diesel, the CO emission of the DBE blended fuel increased, retarded with increasing the blending ratio of n-heptanol in the
and the NOx emission decreased for all operating conditions. fuel blends, and the recommended blending ratio of n-heptanol
HC emission depended not only on ethanol concentration but and methyl oleate fuel is H20B based on the combustion and
also on the operating condition. A high concentration of ethanol emission performance (EL-Seesy et al., 2020).
905
L. Geng, L. Bi, Q. Li et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 904–915

Most of the reports from the available literature have focused Table 1
on the influence of different kinds of alcohol on the combustion Compositions of soybean biodiesel.

and emission performances, as well as the overall engine perfor- Type of fatty acid esters Carbon chain (By mass)/%

mance of DBE ternary blends, and the ethanol blending ratio was Dodecanoic C12:0 0.21
Myristic C14:0 0.71
mostly less than 20%. There have been relatively few studies on
Palmitic C16:0 15.26
the effects of adding a high proportion of ethanol (30% v/v) to Palmitoleic C16:1 0.80
biodiesel on the spray characteristics, combustion stability, and Heptadecanoic C17:0 8.90
emission performances. Moreover, there has been no clear and Stearic C18:0 3.92
uniform conclusion about the effects of ethanol addition ratio Oleic C18:1 17.83
Linoleic C18:2 34.45
on NOx emission. The spray quality is a basis for analysing the
Linolenic C18:3 4.67
combustion characteristics and pollutant emissions. An attempt Arachidic C20:0 0.35
was made to replace petrol–diesel with pure biofuel. The spray Eicosenoic C20:1 0.38
quality, combustion characteristics, and exhaust emissions of BE Behenic C22:0 0.65
fuel blends with higher ethanol concentration were compared Docosadienoic C22:1 0.22
Lignoceric C24:0 0.26
with diesel and biodiesel by an experimental method. Further- Tetracosenoic C24:1 1.16
more, the effects of the ethanol addition ratio on the combustion Others 10.23
stability and NOx emissions were analysed in detail, and an Total 100
optimized ethanol addition ratio in biodiesel is proposed in view
of overall engine performances.
by the Malvern laser PSA. The Malvern laser PSA was based on
2. Experimental setup and methods
the theory of Fraunhofer diffraction, and the measuring range for
the diameter of atomized droplets was from 0.02 to 2000 µm
2.1. Test fuels
(Geng et al., 2019b). The SMDs of the atomized fuel droplets
were measured and calculated by the energy distribution of laser
In this study, biodiesel was derived from soybean oil by trans-
diffraction. In addition, the high-speed camera was used to record
esterification with methanol. Its compositions were determined
the spray images at a resolution of 1632 × 1000 pixels. Based on
by gas chromatography, as listed in Table 1. It contained 30.26%
a MATLAB/GUI platform, a segmentation algorithm for the target
saturated fatty acid esters and 59.51% unsaturated fatty acid
image was used to extract the spray boundary from the black
esters. Linoleic acid esters, oleic acid esters, and palmitic acid
background, and the SCA and STP were measured automatically.
esters were the essential components of the biodiesel. Anhydrous
In Fig. 1, the definition of the STP is L, the SCA is θ , and the
ethanol was blended with pure biodiesel by volume percentages
angle of the equilateral triangular nozzle tip and two points on
of 10, 20, and 30%: BD90E10 (90% biodiesel and 10% ethanol),
the spray periphery located at L/2 was used to measure the SCA.
BD80E20 (80% biodiesel and 20% ethanol), and BD70E30 (70%
A single-hole nozzle with a hole diameter of 0.366 mm was
biodiesel and 30% ethanol). The preparation of biodiesel–ethanol
used in the spray test system. Under the conditions of an injection
fuel blends is very simple, we only need to add ethanol to the
pressure of 30 MPa, ambient temperature of 293 K, and ambient
biodiesel, oscillate or agitate slightly to realize good mutual sol-
pressure of 0.1 MPa, the STP and SCA of the BE blends at different
ubility with biodiesel. Because the freezing point of biodiesel is
injection times were measured by the high-speed camera, and
-1 ◦ C, we select 0 ◦ C as the test temperature for testing the low-
the size distribution and SMD of the atomized fuel droplets were
temperature mutual solubility of fuel blends. We put the three
fuel blends in the refrigerator at a constant temperature of 0◦ C measured by the Malvern laser PSA. The effects of the ethanol
for 7 days and observe them once a day. The results show that blending ratio on the spray characteristics of the BE blends were
three biodiesel–ethanol fuel blends have good mutual solubility examined in detail.
under the low temperature condition of 0◦ C, and there is not any
phase separation in fuel blends. Most of the fuel properties were 2.3. Engine test system and test method
measured by Chinese standard methods, whereas the biodiesel
composition was measured by the European standard method The combustion characteristics, cyclic variation and exhaust
(EN 14103). The surface tension was obtained from previous re- emissions of the BE blends were tested in a turbocharged com-
search (Sun et al., 2015; Shao et al., 2014). The fuel properties, the mon rail direct injection (CRDI) diesel engine. Table 3 lists the
test methods, and the technical specifications of the test devices test engine specifications. Fig. 2 shows the test engine system.
were shown in Table 2. With the increase of ethanol blending The engine speed and torque were regulated by an eddy current
ratio, the density and other properties for the biodiesel–ethanol dynamometer (CW260, CAMA). The in-cylinder pressure (ICP)
blends, such as kinematic viscosity, boiling point, surface tension, was examined by a piezoelectric pressure sensor (6052 A, Kistler)
cetane number, and low heating value, decreased gradually, and installed at the first cylinder head. The signal is filtered and am-
the vapour pressure and oxygen content of the fuel blends in- plified by a charge amplifier (5019B, Kistler) and then transmitted
creased obviously. The improvement of evaporation performance to a combustion analyser (KIBOX, Kistler). The crank angle (CA)
and the increase of oxygen content are beneficial to promoting position is recorded by a CA encoder (2619, Kistler), which can
fuel atomization and reducing exhaust emissions. export a CA signal by a magnetoelectric sensor at a resolution of
0.1◦ CA (Geng et al., 2019a). Under different conditions, ICPs were
2.2. Spray test system and test method collected and averaged over 100 continuous cycles. The emission
test system consisted of an exhaust gas analyser (Digas4000, AVL)
The spray test system consisted of a fuel tank, an injection and an opacity smoke metre (Dismoke 4000, AVL). HC, CO, and
pump, high-pressure fuel lines, an injector, a light source, a Phan- NOx emissions were collected by volume concentration, and soot
tomV9.1 high-speed camera, a Malvern laser particle size analyser emission was recorded by the light absorption coefficient (K).
(PSA), and two computers. The SCA and STP of the BE blends The injection timing and injection pressure were regulated
were recorded by the high-speed camera, whereas the size dis- by a Bosch fuel injection system. The fuel injection strategies
tributions and SMD of the atomized fuel droplets were measured under the test conditions are shown in Table 4. The fuel injection
906
L. Geng, L. Bi, Q. Li et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 904–915

Table 2
Fuel properties, test methods and test devices.
Fuel properties BD0 BD100 BD90E10 BD80E20 BD70E30 Test methods Test devices
Density (g/cm3 ) 0.837 0.878 0.866 0.861 0.856 GB/T 1884 SY-II petroleum densimeter
Kinematic viscosity at 40 ◦ C (mm2 /s) 3.58 5.47 4.15 3.57 3.28 GB/T 265 SYD-265C kinematic viscosity tester
for petroleum products
Boiling point (◦ C) 198–350 310–360 78–360 78–360 78–360 GB/T 616 Home-made boiling point tester
Surface tension at 20◦ C (10−3 N/m) 26.55 28.63 <28.63 <28.63 <28.63 / /
Cetane number 45.4 50.8 <50.8 <50.8 <50.8 GB/T 386 DW600X cetane number tester
Low heating value (MJ/kg) 42.52 38.43 37.52 36.28 35.20 GB/T 384 XRY-1B microcomputer oxygen
bomb calorimeter
Carbon content (wt%) 87.05 76.59 74.38 72.14 69.80 EN 14103 Agilent 6890N gas chromatograph
Hydrogen content (wt%) 12.95 12.06 12.15 12.24 12.33 EN 14103 Agilent 6890N gas chromatograph
Oxygen content (wt%) 0 11.35 13.47 15.62 17.87 EN 14103 Agilent 6890N gas chromatograph

Note: BD0 is a diesel fuel, and BD100 is a biodiesel fuel, the same as below.

Fig. 1. Spray boundary extraction.

Fig. 2. Test engine system.

strategy was multi-injection (pre + main) per cycle at medium– lubrication oil pressure remained at 2.2 bar. For changing another
low loads (engine loads of <40% at 1600 r/min), whereas a single fuel, the engine operated more than 10 min to ensure that the
injection per cycle was employed at medium–high loads. The previous fuel left in the fuel line was consumed. The AVL gas
injection pressure and the injection duration changed with the analyser was calibrated before each test using the corresponding
engine speeds and loads. standard gas to ensure the accuracy of the emissions measure-
The engine was started and warmed up for more than 20 ments (Geng et al., 2020c). The test conditions were selected at
min until the coolant temperature remained stable. The coolant a fixed speed of 1600 r/min and different loads. The load was
temperature changed with engine loads from 73 to 75 ◦ C, and the defined by the brake mean effective pressure (BMEP), and the test
907
L. Geng, L. Bi, Q. Li et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 904–915

Table 3 The in-cylinder pressure was averaged by 100 continuous cycles

Test engine specifications. in each condition. Peak cylinder pressure was selected for cal-
Items Specifications culating the uncertainty, and the variation coefficients of peak
Engine type In-line 6-cylinder DI cylinder pressure (COVpmax ) were used to evaluate the measuring
Fuel injection system Common rail
uncertainty and combustion stability of each working cycle. In the
Intake mode Turbocharged intercool
Bore×Stroke (mm) 112×132
followed results and discussions of the combustion characteris-
Compression ratio 17.5 tics, the calculation method of the cyclic variation coefficient was
Displacement (L) 7.8 introduced in detail, and the maximum of COVpmax for the five
Rated power (kW@r min−1 ) 199@2200 test fuels was 0.92%. For emissions, the steady state tests were
Rated torque (N m@r min−1 ) 1080@1400∼1600
repeated three times and the results were found to agree with
each other within the 95% confidence level. The measuring range,
accuracy and uncertainty were indicated in Table 5.
loads were regulated to BMEP = 0.16, 0.32, 0.48, 0.64, 0.81, and
0.96 MPa. 3. Results and discussions

2.4. Error and uncertainty analysis

3.1. Spray characteristics

The errors and uncertainties mainly result from the test instru-
ments, test environment, operating conditions, results analysis Fuel spray quality has a direct impact on engine power, com-
tools and analysis methods. The errors and uncertainties from bustion efficiency, and emissions control. Better atomization qual-
the testing environment and operating conditions could be neg- ity can promote the mixing of fuel and air and accelerate the
combustion rate, which is conducive to increasing the thermal
ligible because the test environment and operating conditions
efficiency and decreasing the particulate emissions of a diesel
were aligned in the course of experiment. The errors and uncer-
engine. Therefore, it is important to evaluate the spray quality of
tainties of the macroscopic spray characteristics mainly resulted
fuel. In this work, the evaluation indicators of macro and micro
from data analysis methods and analysis tools, the measure-
spray characteristics were tested and analysed, including the STP,
ment of SCA and STP were based on MATLAB/GUI tools and a
SCA, SMD, and SVD of the atomized droplets.
segmentation algorithm for the spray images, which has higher
The STPs of various fuels at different injection times are shown
measurement accuracy and better repeatability. The error bars of
in Fig. 3. The STPs of five fuels gradually increased with the
the macroscopic spray characteristics represented 5 repeated test
injection time, and the STP rapidly increased at first, followed by a
results, and only the averaged values were used for comparison,
slow rate of increase. When the fuel was injected from the nozzle,
discussion and analysis. In addition, the errors and uncertain-
the initial velocity was fast, so the STP increased rapidly at first.
ties of the size–volume distribution of atomized droplets and
As the fuel spray moved forward, the air resistance to the fuel
the Sauter mean diameter originated from the test instruments
spray increased gradually under the influence of air disturbance
(Malvern laser analyser). For the atomized droplet size analyser,
and entrainment effects, and the increase rate of the STP was
the measurement accuracy is ±0.02µm and the repeat error
slower during the later period. In addition, the STP of pure diesel
is 3%, the results of the microscopic spray characteristics were
was the shortest, the STP of pure biodiesel was the longest, and
obtained from the Malvern analysis software, and the errors and
the STP of BE fuel blends gradually decreased with increasing
uncertainties were also supplied by the software.
ethanol addition ratios. When the ethanol addition ratio reached
The measurement accuracy of engine speed is 1%. The accuracy
30% volume fraction, the STP of the BD70E30 fuel blends was al-
of load sensor is 0.2% and that of load indicator is 0.1%. As a result,
most equivalent to that of diesel. First, the density, viscosity, and
the accuracy of torque measuring is calculated by Eq. (1) and the
surface tension for biodiesel are higher than that of petrodiesel,
result is 0.22% (Chen et al., 2019b).
and its evaporating property is inferior to that of diesel (Geng
√ et al., 2019b). Consequently, it is difficult for biodiesel to break up
Accuracytorque measurement = Accuracy2load sensor + Accuracy2load indicator into many fine droplets. The radial extension of fuel spray from
biodiesel is slower due to inferior atomization, the spray front
(1)
is narrower, and the fuel spray encounters less air resistance;
The KIBOX combustion analyser was used to record the change thus, the STP of biodiesel was the longest among the five fuels.
of the in-cylinder pressure with the crank angle. The measuring In addition, with increasing ethanol ratio, the fuel density and
range of in-cylinder pressure sensor is 0–25 MPa, and its mea- kinematic viscosity of the BE blends gradually decreased, the
suring accuracy is 0.1 Pa. Uncertainties of measurements were number of finer atomized droplets increased on the periphery of
determined by the method in Ref. (Chen et al., 2019b). In each the fuel spray, and the entrainment effect between the atomized
operating condition, the engine speed was stabilized at 1600 droplets and the ambient gas was intensified. Therefore, the STP
r/min and the real speed was recorded every 5 s in each condition. of the BE fuel blends gradually decreased with increasing ethanol
Similar method was used for uncertainty of torque measurement. ratio.

Table 4
Test conditions and fuel injection strategies.
Fuel injection strategy Original strategy of diesel engine
Multi-injection (<40%load)
Engine speed (r/min) 1600
BMEP (MPa) 0.16 0.32 0.48 0.64 0.81 0.96
Intake pressure (MPa) 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16
Intake temperature (◦ C) 25 28 32 40 51 59
Injection pressure (MPa) 85 90 94 98 102 105
Pre-injection timing (◦ CA ATDC) −17.5 −17.5 −17.5 −17.5 / /
Main-injection timing (◦ CA ATDC) −5.6 −5.7 −5.8 −5.9 −6.0 −6.1

908
L. Geng, L. Bi, Q. Li et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 904–915

Table 5
Range, accuracy and uncertainty of test instruments.
Instruments Measured parameters Range Accuracy Uncertainty
Torque 1–1500 N m 0.22% 2.3%
Eddy current dynamometer
Speed 0–7500 r/min 1% 1.7%
Pressure sensor In-cylinder pressure 0-25 MPa 0.1Pa 0.92%
NOX emission 0–5000 ppm vol. ±1 ppm 3.7%
AVL Digas4000 HC emission 0–20000 ppm vol. ± 1ppm 4.9%
CO emission 1%–10% vol. 0.01% 4.3%
AVL DISMOKE 4000 Opacity smoke 0–9.99 m−1 ±0.1 m−1 4.6%
Malvern laser analyser Spray droplets size 0.02-2000 µm 0.02 µm 3%

Fig. 3. The spray tip penetration of various fuels at different injection times.
Fig. 4. The spray cone angles of the different fuels.

The SCAs of the five fuels at different times are shown in

Fig. 4. The SCA of the five fuels decreased first and then increased
with the injection time. At the initial stage of fuel injection, the
fuel spray was not broken completely, and the SCA was mainly
affected by the injection pressure. The fuel injector was connected
to a fuel pump through a short high-pressure pipe in the test
system, so the SCA reduced with the decrease in the injection
pressure. At the later stage of fuel injection, the fuel spray broke
up into a large number of fine droplets, and it radially expanded
because of the ambient gas disturbance and the peripheral en-
trainment effect. As a result, the SCA increased gradually. In
addition, at different times, the SCA of BD0 was the largest, the
SCA of BD100 was the smallest, and the SCA of the BE fuel blends
increased with increasing ethanol proportion. Considering the
effects of the fuel properties, the higher viscosity and surface ten-
sion make evaporation of biodiesel difficult and result in a smaller
SCA. However, the BE fuel blends are more likely to evaporate
than biodiesel because of the lower viscosity and surface tension,
which are conducive to promoting the mixing of the fuel droplets
with the ambient air, thereby, increasing the SCA. Fig. 5. The SVD curves of the atomized droplets.

The SVD of atomized droplets is defined as a percentage of the

volume of a specific-diameter droplet to the total volume of all
droplets, represented in PDFV (%). The SVD curves of the atomized of 65 µm, and the curve of BD0 had the smallest peak diameter of
droplets are depicted in Fig. 5. The SVD curves of the five fuels ex- 40 µm. With increasing ethanol blending ratio, the SVD curves of
hibited a normal distribution which was first increasing and then BE blends gradually shifted to the smaller diameter, and the peak
decreasing, and the sizes of the atomized droplets were mainly diameter corresponding to the maximum PDFV of the blended
concentrated around the peak diameters. The volume fractions fuels gradually decreased. The diameters of the atomized droplets
of the atomized droplets with diameters of less than 20 µm or of biodiesel are larger owing to the higher cohesive surface ten-
larger than 130 µm were lower than 2.5%, and the maximum sion force resulting from the higher kinematic viscosity, whereas
diameter of all fuel atomized droplets was less than 200 µm. In ethanol has a lower kinematic viscosity, lower surface tension,
addition, the SVD curve of BD100 had the largest peak diameter and better evaporability (Geng et al., 2019b). Consequently, the

909
L. Geng, L. Bi, Q. Li et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 904–915

Table 6
SMDs of the atomized droplets of the different fuels.
Fuel BD0 BD100 BD90E10 BD80E20 BD70E30
D32 (µm) 29.81 43.93 39.00 36.00 30.73

SVD curves of the BE fuel blends moved toward the smaller

diameter, and the spray quality of the BE blends was improved
with increasing ethanol proportion.
∫ Dmax
D
D3 dN
D32 = ∫ Dmin (2)
max
Dmin
D2 dN

The SMD of the atomized droplets is defined as shown in Eq. (2),

and is denoted as D32 . Here, N is the number of fuel droplets of
D diameter, Dmin is the minimum diameter of the droplets, and
Dmax is the maximum diameter of the droplets. Note that D32 is
often used to evaluate the spray quality, and it is also one of the
critical parameters in the process of combustion calculation.
The SMDs of the five test fuels are shown in Table 6. The SMD Fig. 6. Ignition delay period of the five test fuels at different engine loads.
of BD0 was 29.81 µm, and the SMD of BD100 was 43.93 µm,
whereas the SMD of the BE fuel blends gradually decreased with
increasing ethanol proportions. Because of the action of aerody- in Eq. (4).
namic force, it is more difficult for biodiesel to overcome the
dQ k dV 1 dp
cohesive surface tension to break up into smaller droplets ow- p V (4)
ing to the higher kinematic viscosity. Compared with biodiesel, dϕ k − 1 dϕ k − 1 dϕ
ethanol has a lower kinematic viscosity, lower surface tension, where k is the specific heat ratio, dV
represents the instantaneous
dϕ
and higher evaporability. Consequently, the BE fuel blends are dp
more easily broken into fine droplets, and the SMD of the fuel volume change of the cylinder per CA, and dϕ is the pressure
blends of BD70E30 is roughly equivalent to that of diesel. change per CA.
The ICPs and HRRs of the five fuels were analysed at a constant
speed of 1600 r/min and two different loads, as shown in Fig. 7.
3.2. Combustion characteristics
At low loads of BMEP = 0.32 MPa, the fuel injection strategy
was the multi-injection one, the pre-injection timing was −17.5◦
The ignition delay period (IDP) is defined as the interval CA CA, and the main injection timing was −5.7◦ CA. The PCPs of
between the start of injection and the start of combustion. Fig. 6 the BE blends for different ethanol blending ratios were 0.77–
shows the IDPs of the five test fuels. The IDPs of the BE blends 1.96% higher than that of diesel. This was because the oxygen
were prolonged with increasing ethanol ratio, especially at low content in ethanol improved the combustion process, and the
loads of BMEP of 0.32 MPa. In-cylinder pressure and combustion main-injection durations of the BE blends with lower calorific
temperature were lower at low loads. Ethanol had a stronger value were longer than that of diesel, resulting in more heat
inhibition effect on the IDP because the cetane number of ethanol release in the main combustion stage. In terms of the heat release
is eight, and it was far lower than that of diesel or biodiesel. rate, at the combustion stage of pre-injection, the PHRRs of the
A previous study has shown that, when the range of ethanol BE fuel blends gradually decreased with increasing ethanol pro-
fraction varied from 5% (v/v) to 25% (v/v), for every increase in the portion because the pre-injection durations of the five fuels were
fraction of ethanol by 5% (v/v), the derived cetane number of the 2◦ CA, and the low heating value (LHV) of ethanol was lower.
BE blends decreased by an average of 3.4 units (Kuszewski, 2019). Meanwhile, the corresponding CAs of the PHRRs for the BE blends
In addition, with the increase in engine loads, the in-cylinder were delayed because the lower cetane number resulted in longer
pressure and temperature improve, and many activated OH radi- IDPs. At the combustion stage of main injection, the PHRRs of the
cals are generated because of the addition of ethanol, which play BE blends with different ethanol addition ratios were 9.3–11.5%
a critical role for the fuel ignition stage. The inhibition effects of higher than that of diesel owing to the higher oxygen content,
a lower cetane number on ignition weaken. Consequently, the longer main-injection duration, and more hydroxyl radicals gen-
difference of IDP between the biodiesel and the BE fuel blends erated in the initial combustion stage. They resulted in a faster
decreases at high loads. combustion rate and more-concentrated heat release for the BE
The ICP is the most basic parameter for evaluating the com- fuel blends.
bustion characteristics of an engine. The ICP data were recorded At BMEP = 0.96 MPa, single injection was employed. The
continuously over 100 cycles, and the data were averaged using injection timing was −6.1◦ CA, the PCPs of the BE blends varied
the moving average method to smooth the irregular combustion. little with increasing ethanol addition ratios, and similar results
The pressure rise rate (PRR) is defined as the change in the cylin- were also observed in the literature. This was because the BE
der pressure per CA, which can reflect the combustion roughness fuel blends resulted in stronger premixed combustion, which
of engine operation. The PRR was calculated using Eq. (3). contributed to the higher PCPs; however, the BE fuel blends also
dp ∆p Pi+1 − pi prolonged the IDPs, which can move the combustion process
= = (3) away from the top dead centre and, thus, decreases the PCPs.
dϕ ∆ϕ ϕi+1 − ϕi
These two conflicting factors led to a small change in PCPs with
where dϕ is the PRR, p represents the ICP, and ϕ is the CA.
dp
increasing ethanol proportion. In addition, the BE fuel blends had
The HRR was calculated by a simplified apparent heat release two evident PHRRs. The first PHRRs were higher than that of
model based on the ICP (Salvà and Gallo, 2013), and it is shown diesel, whereas the second were 9.76–11.91% lower than that of
910
L. Geng, L. Bi, Q. Li et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 904–915

Fig. 7. In-cylinder pressure and heat release rate at different engine loads.

diesel. The higher first PHRRs of the BE blends were attributed to The cyclic variations have great effects on engine performance
the longer IDPs and larger amount of premixed gas, whereas the and exhaust emissions. The increment of cyclic variations not
lower second PHRRs were caused by the lower LHV of ethanol only causes the engine emissions to deteriorate, but it also de-
and the change of injection duration in response to the variation creases the thermal efficiency and the power output of the en-
in fuel properties (Chen et al., 2019b). gine. The coefficient of variation (COV) is a parameter to rep-
Analysis of the combustion process parameters of the BE resent the combustion stability between each working cycle of
blends showed that adding ethanol to biodiesel can prolong the engine. In this study, the COV of the peak cylinder pressure
the ignition delay, increase the premixed combustion ratio, and (COVpmax ) is used to evaluate the combustion stability of the test
accelerate the combustion velocity, which result in the earlier fuels. The COVpmax is defined in Eq. (5).
CA50 and the shorter combustion duration for the BE blends. At
the low load of BMEP = 0.32MPa, compared with pure biodiesel,
σpmax
COVpmax = × 100% (5)
the CA50 of the three blended fuels BD90E10, BD80E20, and pmax
BD70E30 are advanced by 0.3◦ CA, 0.5◦ CA, and 0.9◦ CA, respec-
where σpmax is the standard deviation of the peak cylinder pres-
tively; whereas their combustion durations are shortened 0.5◦ CA,
sures for 100 continuous cycles, and pmax is the average value of
0.6◦ CA, and 0.9◦ CA, respectively. Additionally, at the high load of
the peak cylinder pressures for 100 continuous cycles.
BMEP=0.96MPa, the CA50 of the three blended fuels are advanced
At the two different loads, the cylinder pressure signals of 100
by 0.2◦ CA, 0.4◦ CA, and 0.7◦ CA, respectively; whereas their
continuous cycles were recorded. The variation of the PCPs and
combustion durations are shortened 0.2◦ CA, 0.7◦ CA, and 1.1◦ CA,
the distribution of the CA corresponding to the PCPs were statis-
respectively.
tically analysed, as shown in Figs. 9 and 10. The COVpmax is shown
Combustion noise is closely related to the combustion process,
in Table 7. The factors affecting the cyclic variations mainly are
and it is mainly concentrated in the rapid combustion period. In
the airflow motion in the cylinder, the combustible mixture com-
the period, fuel burns rapidly and the ICP rises rapidly, which
position, in-cylinder temperature distributions, the variations of
directly affects the engine vibration and noise. The effects can
airflow and wall temperature of multi-cylinder engines, etc. The
be evaluated by the PRR. The rapid increase in ICP results in an
test results of cyclic variation show that blending a volumetric
increase in the impact load of engine parts and the shock wave
percentage of 10 or 20% ethanol in biodiesel has little effect on
of in-cylinder gas, thereby increasing the structural vibration and
the COVpmax . However, when the volume percentage of ethanol
radiated noise of the diesel engine—that is, the higher the PRR,
reaches as much as 30%, the COVpmax increases significantly, and
the greater the combustion noise. In Fig. 8a, the fuel injection
the combustion stability of BD70E30 fuel blends is inferior to
strategy was the multi-injection (pre + main), and the injection
that of diesel. Meanwhile, with increasing ethanol proportion, the
duration of each fuel was the same in the stage of pre-injection,
CAs corresponding to the PCPs at each cycle are more dispersed,
whereas the injection duration for the BE blends was longer than
indicating less repeatable combustion for the BE blends with a
that of diesel or biodiesel in the main-injection stage to achieve
high ethanol proportion.
the same power output. Consequently, with increasing ethanol
The higher cyclic variation of BD70E30 fuel blends was caused
proportion, the PPRR of the BE blends in the pre-injection stage
by the following factors. First, with increasing ethanol proportion,
gradually decreased because of the lower LHV, whereas the PPRR
the ignition delay of the BE blends was prolonged, and more
in the main-injection stage gradually increased because of longer
fuel was burnt in the stage of premixed combustion. The OH
injection duration and faster combustion rate. In Fig. 8b, the
active radicals generated from ethanol combustion contributed
engine load was higher, and the fuel injection strategy had been
to a faster combustion velocity of the fuel blends, resulting in
transferred to single injection. With increasing ethanol propor-
less-repeatable combustion (Rakopoulos et al., 2016; Wei et al.,
tion, the PPRR of the BE blends gradually increased because more
2018). Second, the better evaporability and higher oxygen content
fuel accumulated during the longer ignition delay period, and the
of ethanol decreased the local equivalence ratio, resulting in less-
faster combustion rate resulted from better atomization quality
repeatable combustion and more dispersed distribution of CAs
and higher premixed combustion ratio.
corresponding to the PCPs (Dong et al., 2016); (Anand et al.,
2010). Third, in-cylinder temperatures were influenced by the
911
L. Geng, L. Bi, Q. Li et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 904–915

Fig. 8. Pressure rise rate of the test fuels at different engine loads.

Fig. 9. Peak cylinder pressures and the corresponding CAs at the 0.32-MPa BMEP.

Fig. 10. Peak cylinder pressures and the corresponding CAs at the 0.96-MPa BMEP.

912
L. Geng, L. Bi, Q. Li et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 904–915

Fig. 11. Exhaust emissions of the test fuels at different engine loads.

Table 7 emissions increase owing to the richer combustible mixture. In

COVpmax of the test fuels at the different engine loads. addition, the soot emissions of biodiesel are lower than those
Fuels COVpmax (%) of diesel, and the soot emissions of the BE blends reduce with
BEMP = 0.32 MPa BEMP = 0.96 MPa increasing ethanol proportion, especially at medium and high
BD0 0.64 0.53 loads. First, the higher intramolecular oxygen concentration in
BD100 0.75 0.65 biodiesel and ethanol can control the nucleation process of soot
BD90E10 0.68 0.62
particulates in the diffusion combustion phase. Second, the IDP
BD80E20 0.65 0.64
BD70E30 0.90 0.92 of the BE blends is longer, and the atomization quality is bet-
ter than that of biodiesel, which could promote the formation
of homogeneous fuel–air mixtures and decrease soot emissions.
Third, the active radicals of OH and HO2 derived from ethanol
higher latent heat of evaporation (LHE) of ethanol, causing the combustion could reduce the generation of polycyclic aromatic
combustion condition to deteriorate and resulting in a higher hydrocarbons (PAHs) that are the soot precursors, resulting in the
probability of local misfire in the cylinder. Consequently, the nucleation and coalescence of soot particles. Therefore, inhibiting
combustion stability of the BD70E30 fuel blends was inferior. the generation of PAHs can effectively reduce soot emissions of
With increasing engine loads, the COVpmax of diesel, biodiesel, diesel engines.
BD90E10, and BD80E20 decreased, as shown in Table 7. This The brake specific NOx emission of the five test fuels de-
is because the in-cylinder temperature increased with increas- creased with increasing engine loads. This is because, when the
ing engine loads, the combustion condition in the cylinder was emission in terms of parts per million is converted into grams
improved, the heat release was more concentrated, and the in- per kilowatt–hour, the rate of power increase is greater than
fluence between the continuous cycles weakened. Therefore, the the rate of parts per million increase with loads (Sidhu et al.,
cyclic variation decreased, the stability of the power output in- 2018; Yeom et al., 2019). In addition, NOx emissions of biodiesel
creased, and the combustion noise was reduced. However, at were higher than those of diesel, and NOx emissions of the
0.96-MPa BMEP, the COVpmax of BD70E30 was still higher owing BE blends increased with increasing ethanol addition ratio. NOx
to the differences in fuel properties. emissions were mainly affected by combustion temperature, lo-
cal oxygen content, and residence time in the high-temperature
3.3. Emission characteristics reaction. Biodiesel and ethanol provide more oxygen for NOx for-
mation. With increasing ethanol proportion, the peak combustion
The CO, HC, NOx, and soot emissions of the five test fuels are pressure and peak combustion temperature rise because of the
shown in Fig. 11 at different loads. The soot emission increases improved atomization quality, resulting in more NOx formation
with increasing engine loads. This is because, with increasing (Chen et al., 2018).
engine loads, the cyclic injection quantity increases, whereas The brake specific CO and HC emissions at various loads are
the inlet air quantity remains invariable. Consequently, the soot shown in Fig. 11. The CO and HC emissions from the five test fuels

913
L. Geng, L. Bi, Q. Li et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 904–915

decreased with increasing engine loads owing to more-complete LHV: low heating value
combustion. Compared with diesel, biodiesel has lower HC and BM: biodiesel–methanol
CO emissions owing to the higher oxygen content. Low tem- BBu: biodiesel/n-butanol
perature reaction process has significant effects for auto-ignition ITE: indicated thermal efficiency
diesel spray and emissions with ambient temperature reducing BTE: brake thermal efficiency
(Lee et al., 2019; Shi et al., 2019; Wu et al., 2020). At low loads, DBE: diesel–biodiesel–ethanol
the HC and CO emissions of the BE blends increase significantly ULSD: ultra low sulphur diesel
with increasing ethanol proportion because of the higher LHE LTC: low temperature combustion
and larger quench zone (An et al., 2015). At high loads, the PSA: particle size analyser
combustion temperature is higher, which weakens the cooling ICP: in-cylinder pressure
effect of ethanol (Wei et al., 2018) and results in a negligible HRRs: heat release rate
difference in HC and CO emissions between the biodiesel and BE COV: coefficient of variation
blends. IDP: ignition delay period
PRR: pressure rise rate
4. Conclusions PAH: polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
BMEP: brake mean effective pressures
In this work, the influence of the ethanol addition ratio on the CA: crank angle
spray, combustion, and emission performances of a CRDI diesel LHE: latent heat of evaporation
engine fuelled with biodiesel was investigated. The test results NOX : nitrogen oxide
show that, with increasing ethanol proportion, the SCA of the HC: hydrocarbons
BE blends increases gradually, the STP and SMD decrease grad- CO: carbon monoxide
ually, and the SVD curves of the atomized droplets move toward PM: particulate matter
smaller sizes. At low loads, the PHRRs of the BE blends with
different ethanol blending ratios are 9.3–11.5% higher than that CRediT authorship contribution statement
of diesel owing to the longer main-injection duration and a larger
number of hydroxyl radicals generated in the pre-injection stage. Limin Geng: Conceptualization, Writing - original draft, Writ-
At medium–high loads, the PHRRs of the different BE blends are ing - review & editing. Leichao Bi: Data curation, Validation,
9.76–11.91% lower than that of diesel owing to the lower LHV Formal analysis. Qi Li: Visualization, Investigation. Hao Chen:
of ethanol and the change of injection duration in response to Supervision, Funding acquisition. Yuantao Xie: Methodology, In-
the variation in fuel properties. In addition, the results of the vestigation.
PPRR and the cyclic variation indicate that the higher ethanol
addition ratio increases the combustion noise and decreases the Declaration of competing interest
combustion stability. Blending a volume percentage of 10% or 20%
ethanol with biodiesel has little effect on the COVpmax , whereas The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
the COVpmax of the BE blends significantly increases when the cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
blending ratio of ethanol reaches 30%. In terms of exhaust emis- to influence the work reported in this paper.
sions, with increasing ethanol proportion, the soot emissions for
Acknowledgements
the different BE blends decreased by 11.28–47.23% compared
with that of biodiesel, the NOx emissions increased by 2.68–
This research was funded by the Key Research and Develop-
7.04%, and the HC emissions increased by 9.99–21.47%. Taking
ment Program of Shaanxi Province (2019ZDLGY15-07), the Youth
full account of the effects of ethanol addition ratio on the spray,
Innovation Team of Shaanxi Universities (Energy Saving and New
combustion, and emission performances of engines fuelled with
Energy Automobile), and the Key Laboratory of Shaanxi Province
biodiesel, it is believed that care should be taken to ensure that
for Development and Application of New Transportation Energy,
the blending ratio of ethanol in biodiesel is not too high. The
Chang’an University (No. 300102221508).
30% ethanol addition ratio causes an excessively high PRR and
COVpmax , which result in higher combustion noise and inferior
References
combustion stability. In addition, higher ethanol addition ratios
cause a significant increase in HC and NOx emissions. Conse- Aldara, S.C., Marco, A.C., Eliene, C.B., Mário, O.B., 2019. Competitiveness analysis
quently, it is proposed that the optimal blending ratio of BE fuel of social soybeans in biodiesel production in Brazil. Renew. Energy 133,
blends applied in CRDI diesel engines is BD80E20. Future work 1147–1157.
Aldhaidhawi, M., Chiriac, R., Badescu, V., 2017. Ignition delay, combustion and
will focus on the application investigation of various raw materi-
emission characteristics of diesel engine fueled with rapeseed biodiesel—A
als biodiesel, such as microalgae oil and non-edible vegetable oil; literature review. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 73, 178–186.
Furthermore, the unconventional pollutants emissions from high An, H., Yang, W.M., Li, J., 2015. Effects of ethanol addition on biodiesel
oxygenated fuels should be investigated and controlled further. combustion: A modeling study. Appl. Energy 143, 176–188.
Anand, B.P., Saravanan, C.G., Srinivasan, C.A., 2010. Performance and exhaust
emission of turpentine oil powered direct injection diesel engine. Renew.
Abbreviations Energy 35, 1179–1184.
Bandbafha, H.H., Khalife, E., Tabatabaei, M., Aghbashlo, M., Khanali, M., Mo-
CRDI: common rail direct injection hammadi, P., Shojaei, T.R., Soltanian, S., 2019. Effects of aqueous carbon
SCA: spray cone angle nanoparticles as a novel nanoadditive in water-emulsified diesel/biodiesel
blends on performance and emissions parameters of a diesel engine. Energy
STP: spray tip penetration Convers. Manage. 196, 1153–1166.
SVD: size–volume distribution Chauhan, B.S., Kumar, N., Cho, H.M., Lim, H.C., 2013. A study on the performance
SMD: Sauter mean diameter and emission of a diesel engine fueled with Karanja biodiesel and its blends.
BE: biodiesel–ethanol Energy 56, 1–7.
Chen, Z.M., Chen, H., Wang, L., Geng, L.M., Zeng, K., 2020. Parametric study on
PCPs: peak cylinder pressures effects of excess air/fuel ratio, spark timing, and methanol injection timing
PHRRs: peak heat release rates on combustion characteristics and performance of natural gas/methanol
PPRR: peak pressure rise rate dual-fuel engine at low loads. Energy Conver. Manage. 210, 112742.

914
L. Geng, L. Bi, Q. Li et al. Energy Reports 7 (2021) 904–915

Chen, H., He, J.J., Zhong, X.L., 2019a. Engine combustion and emission fuelled Salvà, .E.P., Gallo, W.L.R., 2013. Determination of the apparent heat release for
with natural gas: A review. J. Energy Inst. 92, 1123–1136. diesel engines. COBEM.
Chen, H., Su, X., He, J.J., Xie, B., 2019b. Investigation on combustion and Shahira, V.K., Jawaharb, C.P., Sureshc, P.R., 2015. Comparative study of diesel
emission characteristics of a common rail diesel engine fueled with and biodiesel on CI engine with emphasis to emissions—A review. Renew.
diesel/n-pentanol/methanol blends. Energy 167, 297–311. Sustain. Energy Rev. 45, 686–697.
Chen, H., Xie, B., Ma, J.Q., Chen, Y.S., 2018. NOx emission of biodiesel compared Shamun, S., Belgiorno, G., Blasio, G.D., Beatrice, C., Tunér, M., Tunestal, P., 2018.
to diesel: Higher or lower? Appl. Therm. Eng. 137, 584–593. Performance and emissions of diesel-biodiesel-ethanol blends in a light duty
Dharma, S., Ong, H.C., Masjuki, H.H., Sebayang, A.H., Silitonga, A.S., 2016. An compression ignition engine. Appl. Therm. Eng. 145, 444–452.
overview of engine durability and compatibility using biodiesel-bioethanol- Shao, Z., He, Z.X., Zhong, W.J., Chen, Y.H., Tao, X.C., 2014. Visualization experi-
diesel blends in compression-ignition engines. Energy Convers. Manage. 128, ment on cavitating flow of different length-diameter ratios using diesel and
66–81. biodiesel in diesel engine nozzles. Trans. of CSICE 32 (4), 322–327.
Dong, S.J., Cheng, X.B., Ou, B., Liu, T.J., Wang, Z.W., 2016. Experimental and nu- Shi, Z., Lee, C.F., Wu, Y., Zhang, L., Liu, F.S., 2019. Optical diagnostics of
merical investigations on the cyclic variability of an ethanol/diesel dual-fuel low-temperature ignition and combustion characteristics of diesel/kerosene
engine. Fuel 186, 665–673. blends under cold-start conditions. Appl. Energy 251, 113307.
EL-Seesy, A.I., Kayatas, Z., Hawi, M., Kosaka, H., He, Z.X., 2020. Combustion Sidhu, M.S., Roy, M.M., Wang, W., 2018. Glycerine emulsions of diesel-biodiesel
and emission characteristics of a rapid compression-expansion machine blends and their performance and emissions in a diesel engine. Appl. Energy
operated with N-heptanol-methyl oleate biodiesel blends. Renew. Energy 230, 148–159.
147, 2064–2076. Silitonga, A.S., Masjuki, H.H., Ong, H.C., Sebayang, A.H., Dharma, S., Kusumo, F.,
Gad, M.S., EL-Seesy, A.I., Radwan, A., He, Z.X., 2020. Enhancing the combustion Siswantoro, J., Milano, J., Daud, K., Mahlia, T.M.I., Chen, W.H., Sugiyanto, B.,
and emission parameters of a diesel engine fueled by waste cooking oil 2018. Evaluation of the engine performance and exhaust emissions of
biodiesel and gasoline additives. Fuel 269, 117466. biodiesel-bioethanol-diesel blends using kernel-based extreme learning
Geng, L.M., Chen, Y., Chen, X.B., Lee, C.F., 2019a. Study on combustion character- machine. Energy 159, 1075–1087.
istics and particulate emissions of a common-rail diesel engine fueled with Su, J.Y., Zhu, H.Y., Bohac, S.V., 2013. Particulate matter emission comparison
n-butanol and waste cooking oil blends. J. Energy Inst. 92, 438–449. from conventional and premixed low temperature combustion with diesel,
Geng, L.M., Li, S.J., Xiao, Y.G., Xie, Y.T., Chen, H., Chen, X.B., 2020a. Effects of biodiesel and biodiesel-ethanol fuels. Fuel 113, 221–227.
injection timing and rail pressure on combustion characteristics and cyclic Sun, D.K., Fan, X.S., Li, J.G., Wang, J.S., Wang, X.B., 2015. Experimental study and
variations of a common rail DI engine fuelled with F-T diesel synthesized numerical simulation of spray characteristics of ethanol-fatty acid methyl
from coal. J. Energy Inst. Available online 6 July 2020. ester (FAME) blends. Trans. of CSICE 33 (2), 144–153.
Geng, L.M., Wang, Y.J., Wang, Y.Y., Li, H.M., 2019b. Effect of the injection pressure Tongroon, M., Saisirirat, P., Suebwong, A., Aunchaisri, J., Kananont, M., Chol-
and orifice diameter on the spray characteristics of biodiesel. J. Traffic Trans. lacoop, N., 2019. Combustion and emission characteristics investigation of
Eng. Available online. diesel-ethanol-biodiesel blended fuels in a compression-ignition engine and
Geng, L.M., Wang, Y.J., Wang, J., Wei, Y.T., Lee, C.F., 2020b. Numerical simulation benefit analysis. Fuel 255, 115728.
of the influence of fuel temperature and injection parameters on biodiesel Tse, H., Leung, C.W., Cheung, C.S., 2015. Investigation on the combustion
spray characteristics. Energy Sci. Eng. 8, 312–326. characteristics and particulate emissions from a diesel engine fueled with
Geng, L.M., Xiao, Y.G., Li, S.J., Chen, H., Chen, X.B., 2020c. Effects of injection diesel-biodiesel-ethanol blends. Energy 83, 343–350.
timing and rail pressure on particulate size-number distribution of a com- Tutak, W., Jamrozik, A., Pyrc, M., Sobiepanski, M., 2017. A comparative study of
mon rail DI engine fueled with fischer-tropsch diesel synthesized from coal. co-combustion process of diesel-ethanol and biodiesel-ethanol blends in the
J. Energy Inst. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joei.2020.08.008, In press. direct injection diesel engine. Appl. Therm. Eng. 117, 155–163.
He, C., Li, J.Q., Wang, Y.Y., Tan, J.W., Song, G.F., Jia, D.W., Zhao, L.Q., 2017. Size- Wei, L., Cheung, C.S., Ning, Z., 2018. Effects of biodiesel-ethanol and biodiesel-
segregated particulate matter emission characteristics of a heavy-duty diesel butanol blends on the combustion, performance and emissions of a diesel
engine with oxygenated fuels. Appl. Therm. Eng. 125, 1173–1180. engine. Energy 155, 957–970.
Jia, D.W., Deng, X.W., Lei, J.L., 2019. Analysis on the impact of biodiesel-ethanol- Wu, H., Zhang, L., Li, H.Y., Ma, Y.P., Liu, F.S., 2020. The optical investigation
diesel fuel on the performance and emissions of a diesel engine. Energy on initial flame developing characteristics of diesel jet under cold start
Sources Part A 41, 3013–3025. conditions. Combust. Sci. Technol. 1, 1–22.
Karakaya, H., 2020. Effects of ethanol addition to biodiesel fuels derived from Yeom, J.K., Jung, S.H., Yoon, J.H., 2019. An experimental study on the application
cottonseed oil and its cooking waste as fuel in a generator diesel engine. of oxygenated fuel to diesel engines. Fuel 248, 262–277.
Energy Sources Part A 42, 1359–1374. Yesilyurt, M.K., 2018. The evaluation of a direct injection diesel engine oper-
Klajn, F.F., Gurgacz, F., Lenz, A.M., Iacono, G.E.P., Souza, S.N.M., Ferruzzi, Y., ating with waste cooking oil biodiesel in point of the environmental and
2020. Comparison of the emissions and performance of ethanol-added diesel- enviro-economic aspects. Energy Sources Part A 40, 654–661.
biodiesel blends in a compression ignition engine with those of pure diesel. Yesilyurt, M.K., 2019a. The effects of the fuel injection pressure on the perfor-
Environ. Technol. 41, 511–520. mance and emission characteristics of a diesel engine fuelled with waste
Kuszewski, H., 2019. Experimental investigation of the autoignition properties cooking oil biodiesel-diesel blends. Renew. Energy 132, 649–666.
of ethanol–biodiesel fuel blends. Fuel 235, 1301–1308. Yesilyurt, M.K., Arslan, M., 2019b. Analysis of the fuel injection pressure effects
Lee, C.F., Wu, Y., Wu, H., Shi, Z.C., Zhang, L., Liu, F.S., 2019. The experimental on energy and exergy efficiencies of a diesel engine operating with biodiesel.
investigation on the impact of toluene addition on low-temperature ignition Biofuels 10, 643–655.
characteristics of diesel spray. Fuel 254, 115580. Yilmaz, N., Sanchez, T.M., 2012. Analysis of operating a diesel engine on
Maceiras, R., Rodrı’guez, M., Cancela, A., Urréjola, S., Sánchez, A., 2011. biodiesel-ethanol and biodiesel-methanol blends. Energy 46, 126–129.
Macroalgae: Raw material for biodiesel production. Appl. Energy 88, Yilmaz, N., Vigil, F.M., Donaldson, A.B., Darabseh, T., 2014. Investigation of CI
3318–3323. engine emissions in biodiesel–ethanol–diesel blends as a function of ethanol
Madiwale, S., Karthikeyan, A., Bhojwani, V., 2018. Properties investigation and concentration. Fuel 115, 790–793.
performance analysis of a diesel engine fuelled with jatropha, soybean, palm Zaglinskis, J., Lukács, K., Bereczky, Á., 2016. Comparison of properties of a com-
and cottonseed biodiesel using ethanol as an additive. Mater. Today Proc. 5, pression ignition engine operating on diesel–biodiesel blend with methanol
657–664. additive. Fuel 170, 245–253.
Nayyar, A., Sharma, D., Soni, S.L., Bhardwaj, B., Augustine, M., 2019. Modeling Zare, A., Bodisco, T.A., Nabi, M.N., Hossain, F.M., Rahman, M.M., Ristovski, Z.D.,
and experimental investigation for performance and emissions on a diesel Brown, R.J., 2017. The influence of oxygenated fuels on transient and
engine using bio-oxygenated ternary fuel blends. Energy 168, 136–150. steady-state engine emissions. Energy 121, 841–853.
Rakopoulos, D.C., Rakopoulos, C.D., Kyritsis, D.C., 2016. Butanol or DEE blends Zhang, P., He, J.J., Chen, H., Geng, L.M., 2020. Improved combustion and emission
with either straight vegetable oil or biodiesel excluding fossil fuel: compar- characteristics of ethylene glycol/diesel dual-fuel engine by port injection
ative effects on diesel engine combustion attributes, cyclic variability and timing and direct injection timing. Fuel Process. Technol. 199, 106289.
regulated emissions trade-off. Energy 115, 314–325. Zheng, Z.Q., Wang, X.F., Zhong, X.F., Hu, B., Liu, H.F., Yao, M.F., 2016. Experi-
Roberto, G.G., Fernando, I.G., Araceli, G.R., Eric, Z.O., Claudia, G.A., 2018. Design mental study on the combustion and emissions fueling biodiesel/n-butanol,
of a low-cost process for the production of biodiesel using waste oil as raw biodiesel/ethanol and biodiesel/2, 5-dimethylfuran on a diesel engine. Energy
material. Comp. Aided Chem. Eng. 43, 1529–1534. 115, 539–549.

915