See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/286160846

Effect of Injection Timing on Performance, Emission and Combustion

Characteristics of a Common-Rail Diesel Engine Fuelled with Coconut Oil
Methyl Ester

Article  in  SAE Technical Papers · October 2013

DOI: 10.4271/2013-01-2663

CITATIONS READS

7 448

5 authors, including:

How Heoy Geok H.H. Masjuki

University of Malaya University of Malaya
39 PUBLICATIONS   381 CITATIONS    617 PUBLICATIONS   17,272 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

M. A. Kalam Yew Heng Teoh

University of Malaya University of Malaya
317 PUBLICATIONS   7,795 CITATIONS    41 PUBLICATIONS   321 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Clean Diesel Technology for Military and Civilian Transport Vehicle View project

Spanning the global North-South divide in research View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Yew Heng Teoh on 11 January 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

RSC Advances
PAPER

Effect of injection timing and EGR on engine-out-

responses of a common-rail diesel engine fueled
Cite this: RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 96080
with neat biodiesel
Y. H. Teoh,*ab H. H. Masjuki,*a M. A. Kalama and H. G. Howa

Received 26th July 2015
Accepted 22nd October 2015
DOI: 10.1039/c5ra14831f
www.rsc.org/advances
Nowadays, diesel-powered engines are becoming attractive worldwide due to their superior fuel economy,
higher efficiency and excellent reliability. Biodiesel can be considered as the most promising and in demand
alternative fuel because it is a non-toxic, biodegradable and renewable fuel. This work attempts to
simultaneously reduce the BSNOx and smoke from the levels of fossil diesel by using palm methyl ester
(PME) biodiesel. In addition, this paper describes the conversion of a common-rail injection system with
a custom-made electronic control system, focusing on hardware development, the engine control unit
and fuel delivery system development. Parametric studies dealing with injection timing and exhaust gas
recirculation (EGR) variation using neat palm biodiesel were performed and compared with baseline
diesel. The tests were performed at a constant speed and load of 1500 rpm and 0.4 MPa, respectively.
Firstly, the start of injection (SOI) timing was varied from TDC to
25 ATDC to demonstrate the flexible
control of the custom-made engine controller. Later, the SOI timing was kept at an optimum of
11
ATDC and the EGR rates were adjusted (i.e. 0–50%). The experimental results indicated that both the
injection timing and EGR variation had a prominent effect on the engine performance, emissions and
combustion characteristics for an engine operating with baseline diesel or neat biodiesel. Based on the
highest brake thermal efficiency (BTE) and a reasonable NOx level, the optimum injection timing is found
to be at
11 ATDC for both the baseline diesel and biodiesel operation. A wider range of EGR rates from
0% to 50% were investigated to bring down the NOx levels from the EURO II limit to meet with more
stringent EURO limits. It was found that with the PME fuel, engine operation at 30% EGR resulted in the
optimum trade-off between BSNOx and smoke emissions. In fact, simultaneous BSNOx and smoke
reduction from the levels of fossil diesel is possible with the use of PME biodiesels in parallel with the
implementation of late SOI timing or a higher EGR rate in diesel engines.

produced from straight vegetable oils, edible and non-edible

1. Introduction
Environmental protection, energy efficiency and conservation
have become important issues in recent decades because of the
rapid depletion of fossil fuel reserves, the rising price of crude
oil, and environmental degradation. This energy crisis has
triggered a revolution in the use of alternative fuels that are
environmentally acceptable, economically viable, domestically
available and technically feasible for internal combustion (IC)
engine applications. Among the various alternative fuels, bio-
diesel is a prominent fuel that has immense potential to meet
the world’s energy demands and facilitate the reduction of
harmful pollutant emissions. Biodiesel is a renewable,
nontoxic, biodegradable and oxygenated fuel. It can be
a
Centre for Energy Sciences, Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603,
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. E-mail: yewhengteoh@gmail.com; masjuki@um.edu.my;
Fax: +60 3 79674448; Tel: +60 3 79674448
b
School of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Engineering Campus,
14300 Nibong Tebal, Penang, Malaysia
plants, recycled waste cooking oils, and animal fat through
the transesterication process.1,2 Furthermore, biodiesel can be
exibly used in compression ignition (CI) engines without
modication of the engine or fueling process, thus greatly
simplifying the system integration and adoption of its use.3,4
However, biodiesel poses some variations in its physiochemical
properties than fossil diesel fuel, such as cetane number,
heating value, viscosity, density, cloud points, pour points, etc.
The combined effects of these properties strongly affect injec-
tion characteristics, air–fuel mixing and the atomization of
biodiesel fuel in diesel engines. Insufficient in-cylinder air
motion, poor atomization and low volatility of biodiesel lead to
the lower thermal efficiency, poorer combustion and higher
emissions of biodiesel-fueled diesel engines. In general,
engines fueled with biodiesel have reduced emissions such as
carbon monoxide (CO), smoke, unburned hydrocarbons (HC),
volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and the overall life cycle
emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2). However, despite the
potential merits of reducing these pollutants, numerous studies

96080 | RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 96080–96096 This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
Paper
revealed that the NOx emissions will be increased with the use
of biodiesel.5–8
1.1. Strategies to improve diesel engine pollutant emissions
In CI engines, the majority of studies on the comparisons
between diesel and biodiesel have been based on the standard
setting of an engine using fossil diesel fuel. Also, it is generally
agreed upon that the formulation of fuel composition can
enhance the biodiesel combustion performance and tailpipe
emissions. However, the experimental results indicated that it
was not easy to keep NOx emissions neutral while reducing
other pollutants simply through fuel reformulation.9–12 There-
fore, modication of the engine operating parameters such as
injection strategies and exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) may be
possible to optimize the engine emissions due to the difference
in combustion characteristics and chemical composition
between diesel and biodiesel. In a diesel engine, improvements
in the fuel injection parameters can be employed to reduce
engine emissions and improve the fuel economy. Injection
parameters such as injection pressure, injection duration,
injection timing, and fueling are the key injection parameters
which can signicantly affect the performance and emissions of
an engine. For instance, the combustion efficiency and ignition
delay will change as the injection timing is varied because of the
effect of mixture formation.13 Numerous studies revealed that
injection timing retardation reduces NOx emissions.14–16 With
late injection timing, the peak cylinder pressure decreases and
results in lower peak combustion temperatures and conse-
quently, NOx emissions diminish. Conversely, advancing the
injection timing decreases HC and CO emissions. In another
study,17 the effect of injection timing on the performance,
combustion and emission parameters was investigated in
a single cylinder, mechanical pump-line-nozzle injection
system using algal oil methyl ester (AOME) blended fuels (i.e. 5,
10, & 20% blend). The test result revealed that the advancement
in injection timing of 5 CAD from the rated static injection
timing of 345 CAD caused a reduction in brake specic fuel
consumption, HC, CO and smoke, and increase the combustion
pressure, heat release rate, brake mean effective pressure
(BMEP) and NOx emissions. In another related study, Gana-
pathy et al.18 have demonstrated an improvement in engine
performance and emission when the fuel injection pressure and
injection timing were optimized for Jatropha biodiesel opera-
tion. The experiment was conducted in a single-cylinder diesel
engine that was equipped with a mechanical pump-nozzle
injection system. The fuel injection timing was varied with a 5
degree crank angle on either side of the rated static injection
timing (345 CAD). Another effective approach to reduce the NOx
from a petrol–diesel engine is by means of the EGR technique
which is a pretreatment approach. However, using EGR alone
has some drawbacks in that it could reduce energy efficiency,
operational stability and a trade-off in terms of soot emissions.19
In this regard, others have investigated the effects of combining
biodiesel and EGR. The general outcome from these studies was
that combining EGR and biodiesel was an effective strategy to
reduce NOx and/or PM.12 Pradeep and Sharma20 adjusted the
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
RSC Advances
EGR levels (5–25%) and engine load on a single-cylinder engine
and found that biodiesel emitted more smoke at lower loads
and less smoke at higher loads when compared to diesel fuel.
Tsolakis et al.21 found that the use of biodiesel fuel could reduce
the smoke and NOx from a single-cylinder engine equipped with
EGR (i.e. 10% and 20%) under certain engine conditions when
compared to diesel. FOME (sh oil methyl ester) and its blends
have been tested in a diesel engine by Bhaskar et al.22 They show
that a blend fuel with 20% vol of FOME produces nearly the
same brake thermal efficiency with lower unburned hydro-
carbon, carbon monoxide and soot emissions, but higher NOx
emissions compared to diesel fuel. They found that NOx emis-
sions can be reduced with the use of EGR. EGR ow-rates of
10%, 20% and 30% were examined in their study. The authors
suggested that a 20% EGR ow rate is optimum for a 20% FOME
blend considering the emissions of NOx and soot.
1.2. Diesel engine modications
The conventional problems of the mechanical type pump-line-
nozzle injection system with xed injection timing is well-
known, with their low combustion efficiency and high exhaust
emissions. The conventional injection system leaves little room
for engine performance optimization to be tailored to biodiesel
fuels since the injection process, controlled by the camsha, is
dependent on the engine speed. In a CI diesel engine, the fuel
injection system (including the injection nozzles and pump)
plays a vital role because it directly affects the performance of
the engine. Several desired demands are: higher injection
pressure, optimized injection rate, higher precision of injection
timing control, and higher precision of injection quantity
control, which could signicantly affect the mixture formation
and combustion quality of the engine. In fact, all of these
injection system parameters must be controllable especially for
alternative fuel research studies. Generally, commercially
available single-cylinder engines are equipped with a mechan-
ical fuel injection system and most of the injection parameters
cannot be readily changed. Utilizing electronically controlled
fuel injection through a common-rail injection system instead
of the conventional mechanical injection permits the contin-
uous control of injection timing and injection quantity to a high
level of precision. This technology also offers the highest levels
of exibility for the control of both the injection timing and
injection amount, while still yielding signicantly better results
than any conventional injection system. For engines equipped
with common-rail injection technology, the fuel injectors are
typically ECU controlled. There are various studies focused on
the conversion of mechanically controlled fuel injection
systems to an electronic common-rail system and efforts are
being made for the design of the engine controller unit. In the
study of Ergenç et al.,23 the test engine which was initially
equipped with mechanical injection has been modied and
converted into a test engine with a common-rail injection
system. All injectors (LPG and diesel) in their study were also
controlled by programmable logic controllers (PLC) which
served as an ECU for control applications. Likewise, in another
study performed by Goldwine,24 a dedicated common-rail
RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 96080–96096 | 96081
RSC Advances
injection single-cylinder air-cooled diesel engine was converted
from a mechanical injection design, and most of the parts of the
injection system were adopted from regular diesel engine parts.
A piezoelectric type injector was employed in their study and
multiple data acquisition/control cards were used as an ECU for
the control of fuel injection, injection pressure and engine load.
The soware was written in Labview and the algorithm imple-
mented closed loop control for the engine speed (through load
regulation) and fuel pressure. The piezoelectric injector used in
their study has the ability to implement up to six injections per
cycle with various lengths and dwell times.
1.3. Objectives of the paper
As mentioned above, most of the previous studies into biodiesel
fuel have been performed with conventional mechanical pump-
line-nozzle fuel injection systems. The compressibility effects
due to the changes in the physical properties of biodiesel could
potentially affect the fuel injection timing and this can increase
NOx. Using a common-rail injection system could eliminate this
issue because the fuel injection pressurization is not dependent
on the injection timing.25 Aside from the challenge of fuel
injection technology, other considerations like the cost-
effectiveness of biodiesel production is the new topic for
debate. From an economic point of view, the use of the most
cost-effective biodiesel feedstock will pave the way for the large-
scale production of biodiesel. By far, the three most common
available biodiesel feedstocks are palm oil (from Malaysia),
soybean (from the US) and rapeseed (from the EU) and their
production cost are USD $ 684, $751 and $ 996 a tonne,
respectively.26 Apparently, the palm oil offers the most cost
competitiveness and it is a viable biodiesel feedstock. Further-
more, palm oil has been cited as a high-yield source of biodiesel
with an average yield of about 5950 litres per hectare, which is
nearly 13 times better than the yield of soybean oil.27 Consid-
ering the cost and the promising yield of the feedstocks for
biodiesel production, biodiesel derived from palm oil is clearly
the most viable substitute for petroleum diesel fuel. Thus far,
most of the research about biodiesel, including the study of its
effect on engine performance, emissions and combustion
characteristics, has been performed under relatively low EGR
levels (i.e. <30%) and with an engine equipped with a conven-
tional pump-line-nozzle injection system. The engine-out-
responses under higher EGR (>30%) conditions have not yet
been sufficiently investigated. In the case of palm biodiesel fuel,
it contains about 11.7% oxygen content in the fuel composition
and has a higher cetane number than petro-diesel,28 which gives
great opportunities to optimize the engine performance and
emissions under higher EGR levels. Consequently, there is
a strong motivation to investigate the impact of neat palm oil
methyl ester (PME) combustion in a diesel engine equipped
with a common-rail injection system with higher EGR rate.
Another motivation for this study is to develop a fully
controlled common-rail fuel injection single-cylinder diesel
engine for a wider range of renewable fuel research studies. As
discussed above, this system is able to provide exible control of
injection parameters such as injection timing, injection
96082 | RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 96080–96096
Paper
pressure, and number of injections in a cycle of operation,
which enables a more advanced combustion study. Usually, the
common-rail injection system can be found in multi-cylinder
diesel engines used in passenger cars and trucks. However,
they are too large and complicated, and it is almost impossible
to have full access to the stock ECU to recongure the injection
parameters. Besides, it is rare indeed that a commercially
available single-cylinder diesel engine is equipped with an
electronically controlled fuel injection system largely due to the
high cost of implementation. Considering that the major
advantages of the common-rail injection system are the
improvement in thermal efficiency, fuel economy, and cleaner
exhaust emissions compared to a conventional mechanical
system, its introduction in a single-cylinder diesel engine
should be an interesting idea. Therefore, a preliminary study on
injection timing optimization was carried out for both of the
baseline diesel and PME fuels on a modied single-cylinder
engine test rig equipped with a high-pressure common-rail
injection system.
2. Experimental apparatus and
procedure
2.1. Biodiesel production process
There are numerous ways to convert vegetable oil into biodiesel
fuel, such as pyrolysis, microemulsion, dilution, and trans-
esterication. Of these different conversion methods, the
transesterication process is the most popular way and has
been extensively used to reduce the viscosity of crude vegetable
oil and convert triglycerides into esters and glycerol. Fig. 1
shows the transesterication reaction of triglycerides. A catalyst
is typically employed to enhance the reaction rate and yield. As
the reaction is reversible, excess alcohol is used to shi the
equilibrium toward the product side (right side).
In the present study, crude palm oil was transferred into
a preheated reactor at a temperature of 60  C. The oil was
reacted with 25% (v/v oil) methanol and 1% by weight of alkali
catalyst (KOH). The reaction mixture was maintained at 60  C
for 2 hours with stirring at the constant speed of 800 rpm. Aer
the completion of the reaction, the produced methyl esters were
poured into a separation funnel for 24 hours to separate the
glycerol from the biodiesel. The lower layer, which consists of
impurities and glycerin, was drawn off. Then, the methyl ester
was washed with warm distilled water and evaporated with
a rotary evaporator at 65  C for 30 minutes to remove residual
methanol and water. Lastly, the methyl ester was dried using
Fig. 1 Transesterification of triglycerides with alcohol.
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
Paper RSC Advances

Na2SO4 and ltered using qualitative lter paper to collect the inuences the engine performance, emissions, and combus-
nal product. tion characteristics is the cetane number of fuel. It can be
observed that PME has a higher cetane index than petroleum
2.2. Biodiesel property test diesel fuels. Distillation characteristics also have important
effects on engine combustion and performance. Typically, the
Upon the completion of the transesterication process, the fuel
distillation temperature is used as a quality check for fuel and
properties of the produced methyl ester were comprehensively
the distribution range provides an insight into the volatility,
examined and compared with the biodiesel standards. Table 1
ash point and fatty acid composition. Biodiesel tends to shi
contains a description of the key physicochemical properties of
the distillation curve towards higher boiling points than
the converted neat PME in comparison with ASTM and EN
petrol–diesel, especially in the T50 region.29 In this study, the
standards. The important properties of the petroleum diesel are
full ranges of the distillation temperatures of the fuel samples
also listed in this table. It can be observed that the physico-
Tx, in which “x” stands for distillation temperatures corre-
chemical properties of the produced biodiesel were measured
sponding to x vol% of the distilled and condensed liquid fuel,
and benchmarked against the biodiesel standards based on
were measured by a distillation temperature analyzer (Anton
ASTM D6751 and EN14214. It appears that all of the physico-
Paar ADU 5, Anton Paar Strasse 10, 8054 Graz, Austria). The
chemical properties of PME are sufficient to meet the ASTM and
cetane index (CI) of the PME and diesel fuel was calculated
EN biodiesel standards. In particular, the kinematic viscosity of
from the density (D) and distillation temperature T50 using the
the transesteried palm oil was substantially improved, but it
following formula:30
was slightly higher than that of petroleum diesel. In addition,
the ash point for PME was relatively higher than that of CI ¼ 454.74
1641.416D + 774.74D2
0.554(T50)
petroleum diesel and was suitable for use as a transportation + 97.803(log T50)2 (1)
fuel. However, the caloric value of the PME was lower than that
of petroleum diesel. Another key property that signicantly

Table 1 The fuel properties of petroleum diesel and PME biodiesel

Biodiesel
Diesel
Properties Unit fuel PME Limit (ASTM D6751) Test method

Kinematic viscosity @ 40  C mm2 s
1 3.34 4.4 1.9–6.0 ASTM D445

Density @ 15  C kg m
3 851.9 876.9 880 ASTM D127
Acid number mg KOH g
1 0.12 0.06 0.5 max ASTM D664
Caloric value MJ kg
1 45.31 39.98 — ASTM D240

Flash point C 71.5 165.5 130 min ASTM D93

Pour point C 1 9 Not specied ASTM D970

Cloud point C 8 10 Not specied ASTM D2500

Cold lter plugging point C
2 10 Not specied ASTM D6371
Oxidation stability @ 100  C hours >50 5 3 min EN14112
Cetane index — 51 58 — D976

Distillation C
IBP 182.7 297.8 Distillation temperature, 90% recovered ASTM D86
T5 212.4 325.2 (T90) ¼ 360  C max
T10 225.5 326.5
T15 236.6 326.5
T20 246.1 326.9
T25 254.2 327.5
T30 261.0 327.9
T35 268.1 328.5
T40 274.6 328.9
T45 280.4 329.2
T50 286.9 329.6
T55 293.0 330.2
T60 299.4 330.7
T65 305.9 331.3
T70 312.7 332.0
T75 320.3 333.0
T80 327.8 334.2
T85 336.1 335.9
T90 346.1 339.0
T95 361.3 343.1
FBP 366.0 344.3

This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015 RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 96080–96096 | 96083
RSC Advances Paper

where D ¼ density at 15  C and T50 ¼ mid-boiling temperature,  C. probability of the occurrence of knocking in diesel engines.31 In
As can be seen, the distillation temperatures of T50 for PME addition, the fatty acid composition of PME was measured by
and diesel fuel are 329.6  C and 286.9  C, respectively. A higher a gas chromatography/ame ionization detector (GC/FID). The
distillation temperature may shorten the ignition delay of the GC/FID operating conditions are given in Table 2. The analysis
fuel, thus increasing the cetane number and decreasing the of fatty acids was based on AOAC 996.06 official methods. The
results of the fatty acid composition of PME fuel in comparison
with another study are shown in Table 3. It was found that PME
contained a moderate level of saturated (44.87%) and unsatu-
Table 2 The GC/FID operating conditions
rated (55.14%) fatty acids, in which the level of saturated fatty
Property Specication acids is almost equal to that of the unsaturated fatty acids. In
fact, the distribution of fatty acid compositions is in very close
Carrier gas Hydrogen agreement with the other study.32
Flow rate of carrier gas 1 ml min
1
Column Agilent HP-88 (60 m  0.25 mm ID,
0.2 mm) 2.3. Engine operating conditions
Inlet temperature 250  C In this study, all experiments were conducted under a constant
Initial temperature 120  C
Initial holding time 1 minute
speed of 1500 rpm and an injection pressure of 600 bar.
Oven ramp conditions 1st ramp 10  C min
1 to 175  C (hold 10 min) Generally, the test program in the present experiment
2nd ramp 5  C min
1 to 210  C (hold 5 min) comprises two series of tests to assess the effects of biodiesel
3rd ramp 5  C min
1 to 230  C (hold 5 min) fuel on the engine performance, emissions, and combustion
Type of detector FID characteristics. Firstly, the effect of the fuel injection timing on
Split ratio 50 : 1
FID detector temperature 260  C performance, emissions and combustion characteristics of an
Injection volume 1 mL engine operating in conventional compression ignition mode
was investigated. At a constant BMEP of 0.4 MPa and without
EGR, the start-of-injection (SOI) timing was varied from
0 ATDC to
25 ATDC. In the later test series, the EGR rate was
Table 3 The fatty acid composition of neat PME fuel varied from 0% to 50% at a constant BMEP of 0.4 MPa and an
SOI of
11 ATDC. This SOI timing was conrmed based on the
Property Formula PME PME32
peak brake thermal efficiency as found in the previous test
Carbon chain length distribution (wt%) series. In each series of tests, diesel fuel was used as the base-
line fuel for the basis of comparison. When the engine was
Saturated fatty acid fueled with biodiesel fuel, the engine ran satisfactorily
C4:0 (butyric acid) C4H8O2 0.15 0 throughout the entire test, which was performed at room
C6:0 (caproic acid) C6H12O2 0.08 0
C8:0 (caprylic acid) C8H16O2 0.21 0
temperature, and had no starting difficulties. The tests were
C10:0 (capric acid) C10H20O2 0.18 0 performed under steady-state conditions with a sufficiently
C12:0 (lauric acid) C12H24O2 1.56 0.2 warmed exhaust gas and water coolant temperature. To
C14:0 (myristic acid) C14H28O2 1.4 0.9 enhance the accuracy of the study, each test point was repeated
C15:0 (pentadecanoic acid) C15H30O2 0.05 0 twice to produce average readings. The repeatability was
C16:0 (palmitic acid) C16H32O2 36.74 43.7
C17:0 (heptadecanoic acid) C17H34O2 0.1 0
matched over 95% for each test.
C18:0 (stearic acid) C18H36O2 4.23 4.5
C20:0 (arachidic acid) C20H40O2 0 0.3 2.4. Electronic fuel injection system
C21:0 (heneicosanoic acid) C21H42O2 0.07 0
C24:0 (lignoceric acid) C24H48O2 0.1 0 2.4.1. Hardware and fuel delivery system development. The
test engine used in the present study is based on a modied
Unsaturated fatty acid single-cylinder compression ignition diesel engine (YANMAR
C16:1n7 (palmitoleic acid) C16H30O2 0.19 0 TF-120E). Originally, the engine was equipped with a regular
C18:1n9t (elaidic acid) C18H34O2 0.7 0
C18:1n9c (oleic acid) C18H34O2 41.90 39.7
fuel injection system consisting of a mechanical type of pres-
C18:2n6c (linoleic acid) C18H32O2 10.03 10.0 sure fuel pump (200 bar) timed by the camsha, and
C18:2n6t (linolelaidic acid) C18H32O2 0.31 0 a mechanical fuel injector with an injection angle of 150 and
C18:3n6 (g-linoleic acid) C18H30O2 0.42 0 four 0.26 mm diameter holes. The engine is naturally aspirated
C18:3n3 (linolenic acid) C18H30O2 0.19 0 with a maximum output of 7.5 kW. The original fuel injection
C20:1 (cis-11-eicosenoic acid) C20H38O2 0.19 0
C20:2 (cis-11,14-eicosadienoic acid) C20H36O2 1.13 0
timing was constant and set to 17 BTDC. The engine was
C20:3n6 (cis-8,11,14-eicosatrienoic C20H34O2 0.08 0 originally equipped with a mechanical governor to control the
acid) engine speed. The specications of the test engine are listed in
Table 4 and a schematic diagram of the experimental setup is
Fatty acid saturation/unsaturation 44.87/55.14 49.6/49.7 shown in Fig. 2. Fig. 3 is a photo showing the common-rail
ratio (wt%/wt%)
injector mounted on the engine head. The original injection
system of the engine was disassembled and a new common-rail

96084 | RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 96080–96096 This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
Paper RSC Advances

Table 4 Characteristics of single-cylinder engine

Parameter Before modication Aer modication

Model YANMAR TF-120E

Displacement 638 cm3
Bore 92 mm
Stroke 96 mm
Compression ratio 17.7 : 1
Rated power 7.8 kW
Rated speed 2400 rpm
Fuel injection system
Mechanical cam driven Electronically
injection common-rail injection
Nozzle holes 4 5
Nozzle diameter 0.26 mm 0.134 mm
Fig. 4 Common-rail fuel delivery setup with pump driven by electric
Fuel pump mounting Engine mechanically Electrically driven
motor.
driven

injection system was retrotted as illustrated in Fig. 4. The

system was based on commercially available common-rail
diesel engine components. A second-generation, electronically
controlled common-rail high-pressure injection system (DENSO
HP3) was installed to replace the original mechanical type
pump-line-nozzle injection system. The fuel pump was exter-
nally driven using an electric motor running at 750 rpm to
maintain the required high-pressure levels in the fuel rail and to
ensure a stable line pressure with minimum uctuation. The
pressure level in the rail is fully controlled by PID closed-loop
regulation and it can be changed to a pressure between 0 and
1800 bar.
2.4.2. Engine controller unit (ECU). The ECU employed in
the present study was based on the open-source Arduino Mega
2560 microcontroller.33 The microcontroller uses three inter-
rupt service routines to pick up the incremental encoder and
engine camsha signals. The programming coding was written
Fig. 2 Schematic diagram of the experiment setup.
with the open-source Arduino Soware (IDE) and loaded to the
board via serial communication with the computer. For the real-
time control and monitoring of the injection parameters such
as engine speed, start of injection (SOI) timing and opening
pulse-width (PW) for the pilot, main and post injection, closed-
loop engine speed control mode selection and injection pres-
sure adjustment a LabVIEW based graphic user interface (GUI)
program was employed in this study. The interface programme
is shown in Fig. 5. The engine controller also featured
a programmable peak and hold pulse-width-modulation (PWM)
to effectively drive the solenoid injectors for common-rail direct

Fig. 3 Common-rail injector mounted on the engine cylinder head.

Fig. 5 Interface programme.

This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015 RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 96080–96096 | 96085
RSC Advances
injection. The control unit was designed to fully support and
control the engine parameters. The same controller system was
capable of simultaneously controlling the exhaust gas recircu-
lation (EGR) system. EGR was adopted to moderate the heat
release rate (HRR) and the combustion timing phasing. In
particular, this involved the installation of the EGR valve, EGR
cooler, EGR surge tank and two identical CO2 sensors. The EGR
rate can be exibly adjusted by controlling the EGR valve. Under
steady-state conditions, the EGR rate can be measured by
comparing the ratio of the CO2 in the intake to the exhaust and
as follows:
½intake CO2 
EGR ð%Þ ¼  100 (2)
½exhaust CO2 
2.5. Instrumentation
The engine load absorber is based on the 7.5 kW A.C.
synchronous dynamometer. It is used to provide loading to the
engine and to maintain the engine speed. An airow meter
turbine with a 2 to 70 litres per second (L s
1) measuring range
was installed to measure the intake airow rate. To monitor the
exhaust gas temperature, a type K thermocouple was used and
mounted in the exhaust stream. The fuel ow rate for the direct
injection system was measured with a positive displacement
gear wheel ow meter, which interfaced with a ow rate total-
izer. The test system was installed with the necessary sensors for
combustion analysis and fuel injection timing identication.
In-cylinder gas pressure was measured using a Kistler 6125B
type pressure sensor. The charge signal output of the pressure
sensor was converted to a low-impedance voltage signal using
a PCB model 422E53 in-line charge converter; this unit was
powered using a PCB model 480E09 signal conditioner. To
acquire the top dead centre (TDC) position and crank angle
signal for every engine rotation, an incremental quadrature
rotary sha angle encoder with 0.125 CA resolution (X4
encoding) was used. To determine and verify the SOI timing and
injection duration for the injector, the injector current signal
was measured with a hall effect current sensor. To simulta-
neously acquire the cylinder pressure signal, injector current
signal, and encoder signals, a computer equipped with a high-
speed simultaneous sampling data acquisition card, which
has 14 bits resolution, a 2 MS s
1 sampling rate, and four analog
input channels, was used. The acquired data were further pro-
cessed and analysed with Matlab soware. In each test, 100
consecutive combustion cycles of pressure data were collected
and an average was calculated. To reduce noise effects, smooth
data using SPAN as the number of points used to compute each
Table 5 Measuring components, ranges and resolution of the AVL DICOM 4000 gas analyzer and DiSmoke 4000 smoke analyzer
Measurement
Equipment principle Component
Gas analyzer Electrochemical Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
Calculation Excess air ratio (l)
Smoke opacimeter Photodiode detector Opacity (%)
96086 | RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 96080–96096
Paper
element was applied to the sampled cylinder pressure data.
Combustion parameters, such as peak pressure magnitude,
peak pressure location, heat release rate, peak heat release rate
location, and ID, were all computed using Matlab soware. For
the exhaust emission measurement, an AVL DICOM 4000 gas
analyser was used to measure the concentrations of NOx. The
opacity of smoke was measured using an AVL DiSmoke 4000. All
emissions were measured during steady-state engine operation.
The measurement range and resolution of both of the instru-
ments are provided in Table 5. The NOx emissions were con-
verted into brake specic emissions by using the following
equations according to SAE J177:
BSNOx(g kW
1 h
1) ¼ 0.0952  NOx(ppm)  exhaust mass flow
rate(kg min
1)/brake power(kW) (3)
3. Calculation methods
3.1. Engine performance
The engine performance in this work was evaluated based on
the BSFC and BTE. The BSFC and BTE were determined and
calculated according to the following equations:

fuel consumption
BSFC g kW
1 h
1 ¼ (4)
brake power
brake power  100
BTE ð%Þ ¼ (5)
calorific value  fuel consumption
3.2. Combustion analysis
HRR analysis is a useful approach to assess the effects of the
fuel injection system, fuel type, engine design changes, and
engine operating conditions on the combustion process and
engine performance.34 Given the plot of HRR versus crank angle,
it is easy to identify the start of combustion (SOC) timing, the
fraction of fuel burned in the premixed mode, and differences
in the combustion rates of fuels.35 In the present paper,
different fuels were used in an identical compression ignition
engine; hence, the HRR information is an important parameter
in interpreting the engine performance and exhaust emissions.
In this study, the averaged in-cylinder pressure data of 100
successive cycles, acquired with a 0.125 crank angle resolution,
dQ
were used to compute the HRR. The HRR, given by , at each
dq
crank angle was obtained from the rst law of thermodynamics,
and it can be calculated by the following formula:
Measurement range Resolution
0–5000 ppm 1 ppm
0–9999 0.001
0–100% 0.10%
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
Paper RSC Advances

Table 6 List of measurement accuracy and percentage uncertainties

Measurement Measurement range Accuracy Measurement techniques % uncertainty

Load 120 Nm 0.1 Nm Strain gauge type load cell 1

Speed 60–10 000 rpm 1 rpm Magnetic pick up type 0.1
Time — 0.1 s — 0.2
Fuel ow measurement 0.5–36 L h
1 0.01 L h
1 Positive displacement gear wheel ow meter 2
Air ow measurement 2–70 L s
1 0.04 L s
1 Turbine ow meter 0.5
NOx 0–5000 ppm 1 ppm Electrochemical 1.3
Smoke 0–100% 0.1% Photodiode detector 1
EGT sensor 0–1200  C 0.3  C Type K thermocouple 0.15
Pressure sensor 0–25 000 kPa 12.5 kPa Piezoelectric crystal type 1
Crank angle encoder 0–12 000 rpm 0.125 Incremental optical encoder 0.03

Computed
BSFC — 7.8 g kW
1 h
1 — 1.95
BTE — 0.5% — 1.74
BSNOx — 0.1 g kW
1 h
1 — 0.73

dQ g dV 1 dP biodiesel fuel and baseline diesel. Generally, the BSFC is

¼ P þ V
dq g
1 dq g
1 dq
where, g ¼ specic heat ratio, P ¼ instantaneous cylinder
pressure (Pa), and V ¼ instantaneous cylinder volume (m3).
3.3. Statistical and equipment uncertainty analysis
Experimental errors and uncertainties can arise from instru-
ment selection, condition, calibration, environment, observa-
tion, reading, and test procedures. The measurement range,
accuracy, and percentage uncertainties associated with the
instruments used in this experiment are listed in Table 6.
Uncertainty analysis is necessary to verify the accuracy of the
experiments. Percentage uncertainties of various parameters,
such as brake specic fuel consumption (BSFC), brake thermal
efficiency (BTE), and brake specic nitrogen oxide (BSNOx) were
determined using the percentage uncertainties of various
instruments employed in the experiment. To compute the
overall percentage uncertainty due to the combined effect of the
uncertainties of various variables, the principle of the propa-
gation of errors is considered and can be estimated as 3.7%.
The overall experimental uncertainty was computed as follows:
(6)
a measure of the amount of fuel required to generate one-
kilowatt of power per hour. From the results, it was observed
that the BSFC for PME biodiesel fuel is consistently higher than
that of baseline diesel across all SOI timings. The higher BSFC
of PME means that a greater amount of fuel was required to
attain the same amount of power. This was expected because of
the low caloric value of PME in comparison with diesel, which
was about 12% lower than that of baseline diesel fuel. Addi-
tionally, one can observe that the variation in injection timing
also has a signicant effect on the variation of the BSFC. As the
SOI timing was advanced from the top dead center (TDC) point,
the BSFC dropped for all fuels. This reduction in the BSFC can
be explained by the fact that as the SOI timing was advanced,
there was continuous enhancement in the combustion effi-
ciency and quality. With a constant amount of brake power
output, the decreased effect of the BSFC means less fuel is being
supplied to undergo a more efficient combustion process. This
is particularly for the case of advanced SOI timing. However, it is
observed that a further advance in SOI timing beyond
11
ATDC causes penalties in the BSFC as the combustion pressure
build up begins to resist the upward movement of the piston.

Overall experimental uncertainty ¼ square root of [(uncertainty of

fuel flow rate)2 + (uncertainty of BSFC)2 + (uncertainty of
BTE)2 + (uncertainty of BSNOx)2 + (uncertainty of exhaust gas
temperature (EGT))2 + (uncertainty of smoke)2 + (uncertainty of
pressure sensor)2 + (uncertainty of crank angle encoder)2]

¼ square root of [(2)2 + (1.95)2 + (1.74)2 + (0.73)2

+ (0.15)2 + (1)2 + (1)2 + (0.03)2]

¼ 3.7%

4. Results and discussion

4.1. Effect of injection timing
4.1.1. Performance analysis. Fig. 6 illustrates the resulting Fig. 6 BSFC with the PME compared with diesel fuel at various SOI
effect of SOI timing on the BSFC of the engine fueled with PME timing.

This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015 RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 96080–96096 | 96087
RSC Advances
Based on the BSFC results, the optimum SOI timing for the PME
and diesel operations is found to be
11 ATDC and this setting
will be used for the following test series.
Engine BTE is commonly used to express the efficiency of an
engine to convert fuel chemical energy to mechanical energy.
BTE can be calculated by dividing the brake power output by the
total energy input delivered to the system. Fig. 7 illustrates the
variations in BTE with different SOI timings of the engine fueled
with PME biodiesel fuel and baseline diesel. The BTE of base-
line diesel is found to be consistently higher than that of PME
across all SOI timing. In fact, it can be observed that the peak
BTE for baseline diesel and PME are 29.5% and 28.6% respec-
tively, at an SOI timing of
11 ATDC. In addition, the results
also indicate that the BTE is signicantly affected by the varia-
tion in SOI timing. There is an improvement in the BTE for all
the test fuels with advanced SOI timings, except for in the case
of SOI timings beyond
11 ATDC. The incremental effect is
due to the longer ignition delay (physical delay) leading to better
mixing, which results in better combustion and a higher BTE.
Another reason is that at advanced injection timing, the engine
reaches the peak pressure closer to TDC and is therefore able to
produce higher effective pressure to perform useful work.36
However, there is a continuous deterioration of the BTE in the
case of further advances in SOI timing beyond
11 ATDC for
Fig. 7 Brake thermal efficiency under different SOI timing conditions.
Fig. 8 BSNOx emissions under different SOI timing conditions.
96088 | RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 96080–96096
Paper
both fuels operations. It may be due to the decrease in the delay
period, which reduces the power output because a larger
amount of fuel burns during expansion and the cylinder pres-
sure rises only when the cylinder volume is expanding rapidly,
and as a result lower effective pressure is produced.36,37
4.1.2. Emissions analysis. NOx is a hazardous and unde-
sirable emission product that has a wide variety of human
health and environmental impacts. Literature studies indicate
that there is no absolute trend in NOx emissions when biodiesel
fuels are operated in CI engines. Researchers from all over the
world have reported higher NOx emissions with biodiesel-fueled
engines,38–40 and others found lower NOx emissions when using
methyl ester fuels.41,42 Typically, the NOx formation depends on
the fuel properties, fuel type, type of engine and engine opera-
tion conditions.43,44 The variation of BSNOx emissions of the test
fuels at various SOI timings is illustrated in Fig. 8. The result
shows that advancement of the SOI timing resulted in increased
BSNOx emissions for all the test fuels. The increasing trend in
BSNOx emissions suggested that with advanced SOI timing, the
mixture ignites and burns earlier, hence resulting in early
occurrence of peak pressure near TDC. This leads to a higher
combustion temperature and promotes the thermal or Zeldo-
vich NOx formation mechanism. The results also show that PME
fuel tends to lower the BSNOx emissions across all the SOI
timings. This can be attributed to the relatively higher cetane
number and lower heating value of the PME compared with
baseline diesel, which consequently lowers the heat release rate
at the premix combustion stage and reduces the peak
combustion temperature. This nding is further reinforced by
the similar trend of the in-cylinder mean gas temperature, as
shown in Fig. 9.
The smoke formation results from the incomplete combus-
tion of the hydrocarbon fuel and partial reaction of the carbon
content in the liquid fuel. The variation of smoke emissions of
Fig. 9 In-cylinder mean gas temperature curves for (a) baseline diesel
and (b) PME at various SOI timings.
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
Paper
Fig. 10 Smoke emissions under different SOI timing conditions.
the test fuels at various SOI timings is presented in Fig. 10.
Generally, it can be seen that the smoke emission level
decreased with the PME at all SOI timings. Lower smoke
emissions were observed than in diesel fuel across all SOI
timings, largely because of higher fuel-borne oxygen, lower
carbon content, and the absence or lower amount of aromatics
in PME fuel.45 The results also indicate that smoke emissions
were reduced with advanced SOI timings. This is due to cylinder
operating temperatures being higher for advanced SOI timings,
which improved the reaction between fuel and oxygen and
resulted in lower smoke emissions.37 Another reason may be
due to the availability of sufficient time for the fuel to evaporate
and mix with the air, leading to better mixing and combustion.18
Due to the overall lean operation and higher expansion ratio
of the compression ignition diesel engine, the exhaust gas
temperature (EGT) is typically lower than that of the gasoline
engine. A higher EGT is unfavorable as this will deteriorate the
engine fuel economy by discharging some of the useful energy
into waste exhaust thermal energy, and may also cause thermal
damage to piston components. The variation of exhaust gas
temperature of the test fuels at various SOI timings is shown in
Fig. 11. Generally, it can be seen that the variation in exhaust
gas temperature follows a similar trend to the BSFC with
Fig. 11 Exhaust gas temperature variation under different SOI timing
conditions.
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
RSC Advances
advanced SOI timing. In fact, running on PME fuel exhibits
a higher EGT when compared to diesel fuel across all SOI
timing. The increment may be due to the lower caloric value of
PME fuel. Thus, the increased fuel quantity injected for
attaining the same amount of power has caused an increase of
the in-cylinder bulk-gas-averaged temperatures. On average,
EGT for PME fuel across all SOI timings were increased by 11.5

C compared to baseline diesel. The highest increment of EGT
is 15  C for SOI of
5 ATDC with respect to baseline diesel.
Another interesting observation is that as the SOI timing was
advanced, EGT reduced for all fuels. This happened due to
greater heat release occurring closer to TDC in the expansion
stroke, which offered sufficient time for the hot combustion
product to expand and cool down prior to the exhaust valve
being opened. This enhances the heat utilization and allows
better cooling of combustion gases, thus lowering the exhaust
gas temperature. Further advances in SOI timing to beyond

13 ATDC has caused the increases in EGT because of the
increase in the BSFC.
4.1.3. Combustion analysis. To study the effect of biodiesel
fuel on combustion, the cylinder pressures for 100 consecutive
combustion cycles were recorded, averaged, and compared.
Fig. 12 shows the plot of combustion pressure, HRR and
injector current prole of the engine operated with baseline
diesel and PME fuels at optimum SOI timing of
11 ATDC. As
can be observed, the engine operated with PME fuel had little
effect on the combustion characteristics, and the pattern is
comparable with the baseline diesel. The pressure peak was
shied later toward the expansion stroke with PME fuel
although the location of SOC timing for PME occurred 0.25 CA
earlier than those of baseline diesel. In addition, a small
reduction in the pressure peak in the range of 0.6 bar was
observed for the PME fuel operation. Two prominent peaks of
HRR were observed for both fuels. The rst and second peak of
HRR correspond to the premixed and mixing controlled
combustion phases respectively. Also, it can be clearly observed
that the location of occurrence for the rst and second peak of
HRR for the PME fuel was shied earlier (by 0.25 CA) and later
(by 0.875 CA) from the TDC point, respectively, compared to
baseline diesel. The primary reason for the early occurrence of
the rst HRR peak can be attributed to the advance in SOC
timing, which caused the earlier rise of the HRR. On the other
hand, slow burning rate and thus longer combustion duration
of PME fuel has caused the second HRR peak to occur later in
the expansion stroke as compared to those of baseline diesel.
The total burning angles for PME fuel with respect to baseline
diesel are shown in Fig. 13. The total burning angle in this study
is dened as the period between 10% and 90% mass burnt. The
longer combustion duration of PME fuel means that it has
a slower burn rate than baseline diesel, especially during the
mixing controlled combustion phase. This was postulated to be
due to the slightly higher viscosity of PME fuel compared to
baseline diesel, hence delaying the mixing time required for
diffusive burning. Another explanation may be due to the lower
caloric value of the PME fuel, thus resulting in an increase of
fuel quantity injected for attaining the same amount of power.
As more fuel is being injected, a richer mixture is thus formed
RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 96080–96096 | 96089
RSC Advances
inside the cylinder chamber, which burns more rapidly in the
early stages of combustion (premixed combustion phase) and
the remaining fuel burns in the later stages (mixing controlled
combustion phase) and requires a longer duration.
Fig. 14 shows the variation of combustion pressure and HRR
with respect to the crank angle at different SOI timings for the
engine operated with baseline diesel and PME fuel. Generally,
the combustion pressure peak consistently increases and shif-
ted earlier toward the TDC position with advancing SOI timing
for both of the fuels. The resultant higher and more effective
pressure was utilized to perform useful work and thus improve
the BSFC and BTE. However, further advance in SOI timing
beyond
11 ATDC caused combustion pressure to build up
rapidly in the compression stroke, thus beginning to oppose the
upward movement of the piston and causing deterioration of
the BSFC. On average, it is found that PME produces a 0.77 bar
lower maximum combustion pressure compared to baseline
Fig. 12 Combustion pressure, heat release rate and injector current profiles for diesel and PME fuel at SOI of
11 ATDC.
Fig. 13 Total burning angle as a function of SOI timing for diesel and PME fuel.
96090 | RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 96080–96096
Paper
diesel at all SOI timings. The HRR curves have similar patterns,
as the combustion pressure trend where the HRR peak that is
associated with premixed combustion was shied earlier
toward the compression stroke with advanced SOI timing, for
both of the tested fuels. When SOI was advanced toward the
TDC in the expansion stroke, the maximum HRR associated
with the premixed combustion became initially lower and
remained unchanged. However, further advances in SOI timing
beyond
15 ATDC have led to signicant increases in the
maximum HRR. This was due to a longer ignition delay, which
tends to promote more premixed combustion and increase both
the maximum combustion pressure and HRR. With the PME
fuel, the HRR was similar to baseline diesel, however one can
notice that a higher fuel fraction was burned in the mixing
controlled combustion phase (i.e. a wider plateau region aer
the rst HRR peak). This phenomenon was clearly visible for the
retarded SOI cases (i.e. SOI ¼ 0 ATDC) as compared to earlier
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
Paper
Fig. 14 Combustion pressure curves for (a) baseline diesel and (b) PME
at various SOI timings.
SOI conditions. This was mainly due to a higher cetane number
of PME fuel compared to baseline diesel, thereby resulting in
a shorter ignition delay and a lower pressure peak. In fact, the
peak of the pressure curve also shied away from the TDC point
in the expansion stroke as compared to baseline diesel for the
corresponding SOI timing. On average, it is found that PME
produces 5.7 J/ CA lower in maximum HRR compared to base-
line diesel across all SOI timing.
4.2. Effect of EGR
EGR is one of the most promising strategies to reduce NOx
emissions in diesel engines by controlling the oxygen density
and combustion peak temperature.46,47 However, the trade-off
between NOx and soot emissions must be analyzed carefully
with the addition of EGR and the biodiesel fueled engine. In
this section, the effect of using EGR on the performance,
emissions and combustion of the baseline diesel and PME
fueled engines will be discussed. The SOI timing was kept at an
optimum of
11 ATDC as found in the previous test series and
adjustments were made in the EGR rates (i.e. 0 to 50%).
4.2.1. Performance analysis. The variations in the BSFC
with respect to the EGR rate for the engine operated with PME
biodiesel fuel and baseline diesel is shown in Fig. 15. Generally,
it can be seen that the BSFC for PME biodiesel fuel is consis-
tently higher than that of baseline diesel across all EGR rates.
This was mainly due to the lower caloric value of PME, thus the
BSFC is higher than that of baseline diesel at all EGR rates. One
can also observe that the variation in the EGR rate also has
a small effect on the BSFC. As the EGR rate increased, the BSFC
dropped for all fuels, compared to without EGR. However, at an
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
RSC Advances
Fig. 15 BSFC with the PME compared with diesel fuel at various EGR
rates.
EGR rate higher than 30% and 35% for baseline diesel and PME
fuel, respectively, the BSFC begins to increase gradually. At
higher EGR rates, the oxygen available for combustion is
reduced. Thus, the air–fuel ratio is altered and this raises the
BSFC. This is evident by the decrease in excess oxygen available
in the exhaust tailpipe as shown in Fig. 16.
Fig. 17 shows the comparison of the BTE for the engine
operated with PME biodiesel and baseline diesel. It is evident
that the BTE for PME fuel is always lower than that of baseline
diesel regardless of the EGR rate. The lower caloric value of the
PME fuel could be the reason behind this. Subsequently, the
BTE is found to have slightly increased with a moderate EGR
rate for both of the tested fuels. At moderate EGR rates, the
burned gas temperature is decreased signicantly, thus
reducing heat loss via the combustion chamber surfaces,
leaving more available for conversion to mechanical work
during the expansion stroke. Another possible improvement
reason may be due to the reduced pumping work as the EGR
rate is increased at a constant brake load. On the other hand,
lower oxygen exhaust gas feeds into the intake at higher EGR
rates, thus resulting in poor air utilization and this leads to
a reduction of BTE. Also, the decrease in BTE for the PME at an
EGR rate of more than 35% was less prominent compared to
baseline diesel. This can be credited to the higher oxygen
content in PME fuel which aids the better combustion
efficiency.
4.2.2. Emissions analysis. Fig. 18 shows the variation of
BSNOx emission and smoke of the PME and baseline diesel with
various EGR rates. The overall trend indicates that the BSNOx
emissions for both of the tested fuels tend to decrease as the
EGR rate increases. The BSNOx emission is reduced with an
increasing EGR rate due to the lowered burned gas temperature
with dilution. Compared to baseline diesel, the BSNOx emis-
sions of PME are lower across all EGR rates. It is observed that
for both of the fuels, a drastic BSNOx reduction in the range of
23.8–97% at a 10–50% EGR rate was obtained compared with
the corresponding engine operation without EGR. In fact, on
average the addition of EGR in reducing BSNOx emissions for
PME was about 0.5% more effective than baseline diesel. As
RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 96080–96096 | 96091
RSC Advances
Fig. 16 Exhaust gas O2 concentration with the PME compared with
diesel fuel at various EGR rates.
Fig. 17 BTE with the PME compared with diesel fuel at various EGR
rates.
Fig. 18 BSNOx and smoke emission with various rates of EGR.
discussed above, a lower heat release rate during the premixed
combustion phase and a lower peak combustion temperature
for PME results in lower BSNOx emissions. In addition to this,
re-entering more water vapor and CO2 into the combustion
chamber due to the increase in the specic fuel consumption of
PME fuel compared with the operation of baseline diesel also
96092 | RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 96080–96096
Paper
Fig. 19 Intake and exhaust air CO2 concentration with the PME
compared with diesel fuel at various EGR rates.
may lead to a greater BSNOx reduction. This is evident by the
increase in the CO2 concentration in intake air as shown in
Fig. 19. The plots also indicate that PME fuel emitted a higher
exhaust CO2 than baseline diesel across all EGR rates. This may
be due to the combined effects of lower caloric value and the
extra oxygen content of PME fuel altering the combustion
process which eventually results in higher exhaust CO2. At over
45% EGR, the BSNOx emission is below 0.4 g kW
1 h
1 for both
fuels, which is the EURO VI emission standard. On the other
hand, the effects of EGR on the smoke emission for baseline
diesel and PME revealed an increasing trend with higher EGR
rates. It is evident that as compared to baseline diesel, the
smoke emissions are lower for PME fuel and tend to increase at
a much slower rate with higher EGR rates. It is the oxygen
content in the PME fuel that plays a vital part in the combustion
process which eventually causes a reduction in the smoke
emissions. Moreover, the smoke formation rate increased
sharply as the EGR rate rose over 35% for both fuels. When the
engine was fueled with PME, an increase of the smoke emis-
sions of 186% was observed using 35% EGR. Further increases
in the EGR rate to 50% rapidly increased the smoke emission by
620% when compared with the engine operation without EGR.
Under high EGR conditions, the exhaust gases re-circulated into
the intake result in a reduction of the oxygen available for
combustion. The in-cylinder soot formation and oxidation
processes are strongly governed by the engine operation on
gradually richer mixtures due to the reduction in oxygen
content by EGR. Hence, the reduction in oxygen availability for
fuel combustion and lower combustion temperature reduces
the soot oxidation process which leads to higher smoke emis-
sions. Another interesting topic that can be further discussed is
the trade-off between BSNOx, smoke and the EGR rates. From
the results of the EGR effect on BSNOx and the smoke emissions
of the PME, an optimal trade-off between BSNOx and smoke
emissions can be achieved with EGR in the range of 10–30%,
without a signicant adverse effect on engine performance. It
was realized that with PME fuel, an engine operating at 30%
EGR resulted in an optimal trade-off between BSNOx and smoke
emissions. At this EGR rate, the BSNOx emissions have effec-
tively decreased by 80.7%, but the smoke emissions have
increased by 167.3% compared to the engine operation in the
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
Paper
absence of EGR. However, compared to diesel operation at 30%
EGR, the PME fuel effectively reduced smoke emissions by 50%.
Therefore, by considering both the positive effect of the reduc-
tion in BSNOx and the smoke emissions, it is acceptable to
operate an engine using PME at 30% EGR.
4.2.3. Combustion analysis. To evaluate the effect of the
EGR variation using PME and baseline diesel on the combus-
tion characteristics, the in-cylinder combustion pressures for
100 consecutive combustion cycles were recorded and
compared at various EGR rates (0–50%) and at a xed engine
speed of 1500 rpm and a BMEP of 0.4 MPa. The in-cylinder
pressure, HRR and injector current proles for the engine
using PME and baseline diesel are both illustrated in Fig. 20. As
can be seen, the variation of EGR rate had the greatest effect on
the combustion characteristics for both of the tested fuels.
According to the HRR results, both fuels produced double peaks
of HRR: the rst peak reects the premixed combustion
process, and the second peak corresponds to the mixing
controlled combustion phase. However, the transition from
premixed combustion into mixing controlled combustion
became less explicit with an increasing EGR rate for both fuels.
In addition, the HRR results indicate that an increasing EGR
rate caused a progressive increase in the peak HRR during the
Fig. 20 In-cylinder pressure, HRR and injector current signal versus crank angle for engine operation with PME (top) and baseline diesel (bottom)
at various EGR rates.
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
RSC Advances
premixed burn fraction and shied the location of the occur-
rence later toward the expansion stroke. This shi in heat
release revealed a delay of the combustion processes due to the
prolonged ignition delay. In the present study, the timing
difference between the SOI and start of combustion was dened
as the ignition delay. The SOI was conrmed from the injector
current signal trace and the start of combustion by analyzing
the rst appearance of positive heat release. As can be seen in
Fig. 21, the plot of ignition delay versus EGR rate evidently
shows that the increase in the EGR rate caused a progressive
increase in the ignition delay for both fuels. In fact, in
comparison with the corresponding baseline diesel, the use of
the PME fuel resulted in a shorter ignition delay by an average of
0.3 CA. This is credited to the higher cetane number of the
PME fuel compared to baseline diesel, thereby resulting in
better ignition quality. Subsequently, the effect of prolonging
the ignition delay also caused a progressive increase in the peak
HRR with a higher EGR rate. As the EGR increases, the in-
cylinder fuel air mixture becomes more homogeneous due to
a longer ignition delay, which could have allowed a larger
fraction of fuel air mixture to burn during the premixed
combustion phase. This effect also explained the phenomenon
of the premixed combustion process dominating at a high EGR
RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 96080–96096 | 96093
RSC Advances
Fig. 21 Ignition delay at various EGR rates for engine operation with
baseline diesel and PME fuels.
setting. Related to the EGR effects on NOx emissions, the pro-
longed ignition delay retards the combustion events toward the
expansion stroke, thus promoting more combustible mixtures
to burn at a lower temperature. As a result, NOx formation via
the thermal or Zeldovich mechanism can be greatly reduced.
Compared to baseline diesel, the peak HRR at the premix
combustion stage is found to be consistently lower with PME
fuel across all EGR rates. This scenario explained the lower
BSNOx emissions of the PME fuel with respect to baseline diesel
at all EGR rates. In addition, the steepness of the HRR curves
during the premixed combustion phase decreased with
increasing EGR. Again, this gave evidence of reduced reaction
rates and decreased BSNOx with increasing EGR for baseline
diesel and the PME fuels.
Another important aspect is related to in-cylinder combus-
tion pressure traces. A pronounced change in peak combustion
pressure was observed with increasing EGR for both fuels. As
shown in Fig. 22, it was found that, in general, regardless of the
EGR setting, the PME fuel exhibited a lower peak pressure than
baseline diesel owing to the marginal decreases in the HRR
during the premixed combustion phase. On average, it is found
that PME produced 1.2 bar lower maximum combustion pres-
sure compared to baseline diesel across all EGR rates. The
results also indicated that a higher EGR rate tends to lower the
maximum cylinder pressure during the expansion stroke. This
may be due to the combined effect of greater heat capacity,
Fig. 22 Maximum combustion pressure at various EGR rates for
engine operation with baseline diesel and PME fuels.
96094 | RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 96080–96096
Paper
chemical and thermal effects, with the most signicant effect
being the dilution effect, which extends the ignition delay
duration and thus enhances the in-cylinder charge mixing.48
Consequently, the premixed phase of combustion occurred late
in the expansion stroke, thereby lowering the peak pressure and
reducing BSNOx.
4.3. Strategy for simultaneous BSNOx–smoke reduction
A vast amount of studies have been carried out to reduce the
emissions of pollutants from diesel engines and the attempts
are still in progress.36,49–51 Specically, the simultaneous reduc-
tion of NOx and smoke is the most challenging aspect in the
reduction of diesel emissions. Emission controls at the source
level are the most effective techniques in reducing the pollut-
ants of a diesel engine since they are economical when
compared to the treatment of exhaust gases.52 Injection timing
is a key parameter that directly affects the combustion and
exhaust emissions. Using EGR for NOx reduction is another
promising approach in diesel engines, but there could be an
increase in smoke emissions. Simultaneous reduction of both
emission species from the levels of fossil diesel is possible with
the use of biodiesels.32 Hence, a comparative analysis of the
exhaust BSNOx and smoke opacity levels between the engine
fueled with neat PME biodiesel and that with fossil diesel is
discussed in this section to observe the effect of injection timing
and EGR variation on BSNOx and smoke level.
Fig. 23 shows the BSNOx–smoke plot for PME and baseline
diesel with various EGR rates and SOI timings. Generally, the
overall trend shows that the BSNOx emissions for both of the
tested fuels reduced with a higher EGR rate and later SOI
timing. A substantially lower level of BSNOx below the EURO V
and EURO VI emission standard can be achieved by the late SOI
timing of 0 ATDC and at over 45% EGR, respectively. The
maximum BSNOx reduction for diesel operation is achieved
with the variation of injection timing and addition of EGR, with
a reduction of 72.6% and 97%, respectively. However, both
techniques show a penalty on smoke emission as compared to
the baseline engine operation without EGR and with an SOI of

11 ATDC. With the PME fuel operation, it is possible to
Fig. 23 BSNOx–smoke opacity plot for the tested fuels.
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015
Paper RSC Advances

reduce the smoke emission while maintaining a similar CO2 Carbon dioxide
reduction in BSNOx. The results indicate that about 50% and DI Direct injection
46% reduction in smoke emission can be attained when the ECU Electronic control unit
PME biodiesel is coupled with the strategies of late SOI timing EGR Exhaust gas recirculation
and a high EGR level, respectively. Hence, simultaneous BSNOx EGT Exhaust gas temperature
and smoke reduction from the levels of fossil diesel is possible FAME Fatty acid methyl ester
with the use of PME biodiesels in parallel with the imple- HC Hydrocarbon
mentation of late SOI timing or a higher EGR rate in a diesel HRR Heat release rate
engine. IC Internal combustion
NOx Nitrogen oxide
PFI Port fuel injection
5. Conclusions PM Particulate matter
PME Palm methyl ester
In this study, the performance, emission and combustion
PWM Pulse-width-modulation
characteristics of PME have been experimentally investigated in
Rpm Revolution per minute
a high-pressure common-rail DI diesel engine. The effect of SOI
SOC Start of combustion
timing and EGR were investigated at a constant speed of 1500
SOI Start of injection
rpm and a BMEP of 0.4 MPa. The following main conclusions
TDC Top dead centre
can be drawn from the present study. VOCs Volatile organic compounds
1. The physico-chemical properties of the produced PME l Relative air–fuel ratio (lambda)
biodiesel meet the ASTM D6751 standard.
2. The single-cylinder diesel engine had been successfully
converted to run with an electronically common-rail fuel
injection system using the Arduino microcontroller as an
engine ECU. This system was able to offer full control over all Acknowledgements
injection parameters.
3. Based on the highest BTE and the reasonable NOx level, The authors would like to acknowledge the Ministry of Higher
the optimum injection timing is found to be at
11 ATDC for Education (MOHE) of Malaysia and University of Malaya for
both of the baseline diesel and biodiesel operations. nancial support through a HIR grant (UM.C/HIR/MOHE/ENG/
4. The engine-out-responses under higher EGR (>30%) 07) and a Postgraduate Research Grant (PPP) (grant number
conditions have been investigated in the present study using PG035-2012B).
PME biodiesel and compared with baseline diesel. A substan-
tially lower level of BSNOx, below the EURO VI emission stan- References
dard, can be achieved at over 45% EGR.
5. With PME fuel operation, it is possible to reduce the 1 A. K. Agarwal, Prog. Energy Combust. Sci., 2007, 33, 233–271.
smoke emission while maintaining a similar reduction in 2 M. Mojur, H. H. Masjuki, M. A. Kalam, M. A. Hazrat,
BSNOx. The results indicate that about 46% reduction in smoke A. M. Liaquat, M. Shahabuddin and M. Varman, Renewable
emission can be attained when the PME biodiesel is operated Sustainable Energy Rev., 2012, 16, 5007–5020.
under high EGR conditions. 3 P. K. Sahoo and L. M. Das, Fuel, 2009, 88, 994–999.
6. Simultaneous BSNOx and smoke reduction from the levels 4 H. G. How, H. H. Masjuki, M. A. Kalam, Y. H. Teoh and
of fossil diesel is possible with the use of PME biodiesels in M. A. Abdullah, Effect of Injection Timing on Performance,
parallel with the implementation of late SOI timing or higher Emission and Combustion Characteristics of a Common-Rail
EGR rate in diesel engine. Diesel Engine Fuelled with Coconut Oil Methyl Ester, SAE
International, 2013-01-2663, 2013.
5 B.-F. Lin, J.-H. Huang and D.-Y. Huang, Fuel, 2009, 88, 1779–
Nomenclature and symbol 1785.
6 C. He, Y. Ge, J. Tan, K. You, X. Han, J. Wang, Q. You and
AOME Algal oil methyl ester A. N. Shah, Atmos. Environ., 2009, 43, 3657–3661.
ASTM American society for testing and materials 7 P. K. Sahoo, L. M. Das, M. K. G. Babu, P. Arora, V. P. Singh,
ATDC Aer top dead centre N. R. Kumar and T. S. Varyani, Fuel, 2009, 88, 1698–1707.
BMEP Brake mean effective pressure 8 A. N. Ozsezen, M. Canakci, A. Turkcan and C. Sayin, Fuel,
BSCO Brake specic carbon monoxide 2009, 88, 629–636.
BSFC Brake specic fuel consumption 9 D. H. Qi, H. Chen, C. F. Lee, L. M. Geng and Y. Z. Bian, Energy
BSNOx Brake specic nitrogen oxide Fuels, 2009, 24, 652–663.
BTE Brake thermal efficiency 10 D. Qi, H. Chen, R. Matthews and Y. Z. Bian, Fuel, 2010, 89,
CA Crank angle 958–964.
CI Compression ignition 11 A. Keskin, M. Gürü and D. Altıparmak, Fuel, 2007, 86, 1139–
CO Carbon monoxide 1143.

This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015 RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 96080–96096 | 96095
RSC Advances
12 D. Qi, M. Leick, Y. Liu and C.-F. F. Lee, Fuel, 2011, 90, 1884–
1891.
13 C. Sayin, M. Ilhan, M. Canakci and M. Gumus, Renewable
Energy, 2009, 34, 1261–1269.
14 S. H. Park, I. M. Youn and C. S. Lee, Fuel, 2011, 90, 748–755.
15 R. Zhu, H. Miao, X. Wang and Z. Huang, Proc. Combust. Inst.,
2013, 34, 3013–3020.
16 C. Sayin, K. Uslu and M. Canakci, Renewable Energy, 2008,
33, 1314–1323.
17 V. Hariram and G. Mohan Kumar, Eur. J. Sci. Res., 2012, 79,
653–665.
18 T. Ganapathy, R. P. Gakkhar and K. Murugesan, Appl. Energy,
2011, 88, 4376–4386.
19 V. K. Shahir, C. P. Jawahar and P. R. Suresh, Renewable
Sustainable Energy Rev., 2015, 45, 686–697.
20 V. Pradeep and R. P. Sharma, Renewable Energy, 2007, 32,
1136–1154.
21 A. Tsolakis, A. Megaritis, M. L. Wyszynski and K. Theinnoi,
Energy, 2007, 32, 2072–2080.
22 K. Bhaskar, G. Nagarajan and S. Sampath, Energy, 2013, 62,
224–234.
23 A. T. Ergenç and D. Ö. Koca, Fuel, 2014, 130, 273–278.
24 G. Goldwine, The Effect of Fuel Injection Prole on Diesel
Engine Performance, PhD thesis, Ben-Gurion University of
the Negev, 2008.
25 D. M. Leahey, B. C. Jones, J. W. Gilligan, L. P. Brown,
L. J. Hamilton, C. E. Gutteridge, J. S. Cowart and
P. A. Caton, Combustion of Biodiesel– and Ethanol–Diesel
Mixtures with Intake Injection, SAE International, 2007-01-
4011, 2007.
26 M. K. Lam, K. T. Tan, K. T. Lee and A. R. Mohamed,
Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev., 2009, 13, 1456–1464.
27 H. C. Ong, T. M. I. Mahlia, H. H. Masjuki and
R. S. Norhasyima, Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev., 2011,
15, 3501–3515.
28 C. T. Chong, J.-H. Ng, S. Ahmad and S. Rajoo, Energy Convers.
Manage., 2015, 101, 317–325.
29 E. Alptekin and M. Canakci, Fuel, 2009, 88, 75–80.
30 ASTM D976-06(2011), Standard Test Method for Calculated
Cetane Index of Distillate Fuels, ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA, 2011.
96096 | RSC Adv., 2015, 5, 96080–96096
View publication stats
Paper
31 C.-Y. Lin and R.-J. Li, Fuel Process. Technol., 2009, 90, 130–
136.
32 J.-H. Ng, H. K. Ng and S. Gan, Fuel, 2011, 90, 2700–2709.
33 Arduino MEGA 2560, https://www.arduino.cc/en/Main/
ArduinoBoardMega2560, accessed October 2015.
34 J. Ghojel and D. Honnery, Appl. Therm. Eng., 2005, 25, 2072–
2085.
35 M. Canakci, A. N. Ozsezen and A. Turkcan, Biomass
Bioenergy, 2009, 33, 760–767.
36 S. Bari, C. W. Yu and T. H. Lim, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part D,
2004, 218, 93–104.
37 Shivakumar, P. Srinivasa Pai and B. R. Shrinivasa Rao, Appl.
Energy, 2011, 88, 2344–2354.
38 P.-Q. Tan, Z.-Y. Hu, D.-M. Lou and Z.-J. Li, Energy, 2012, 39,
356–362.
39 F. Wu, J. Wang, W. Chen and S. Shuai, Atmos. Environ., 2009,
43, 1481–1485.
40 G. Karavalakis, G. Fontaras, E. Bakeas and S. Stournas, Effect
of biodiesel origin on the regulated and PAH emissions from
a modern passenger car, SAE Technical Paper, 2011.
41 S. Choudhury and P. Bose, Jatropha derived biodiesel–its
suitability as CI engine fuel, SAE Technical Paper, 2008.
42 J. Huang, Y. Wang, J.-B. Qin and A. P. Roskilly, Fuel Process.
Technol., 2010, 91, 1761–1767.
43 J. P. Szybist, A. L. Boehman, J. D. Taylor and
R. L. McCormick, Fuel Process. Technol., 2005, 86, 1109–1126.
44 J. Xue, T. E. Gri and A. C. Hansen, Renewable Sustainable
Energy Rev., 2011, 15, 1098–1116.
45 M. Gumus, C. Sayin and M. Canakci, Fuel, 2012, 95, 486–494.
46 M. Gomaa, A. Alimin and K. Kamarudin, Int. J. Energy
Environ., 2011, 2, 477–490.
47 D. Agarwal, S. K. Singh and A. K. Agarwal, Appl. Energy, 2011,
88, 2900–2907.
48 N. Ladommatos, S. Abdelhalim and H. Zhao, Int. J. Engine
Res., 2000, 1, 107–126.
49 D. Agarwal, S. Sinha and A. K. Agarwal, Renewable Energy,
2006, 31, 2356–2369.
50 S. H. Park and S. H. Yoon, Appl. Energy, 2015, 143, 262–270.
51 R. Verschaeren, W. Schaepdryver, T. Serruys, M. Bastiaen,
L. Vervaeke and S. Verhelst, Energy, 2014, 76, 614–621.
52 N. A. Henein, Prog. Energy Combust. Sci., 1976, 1, 165–207.
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015