Fuel 183 (2016) 470–477

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Fuel
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fuel

Full Length Article

Performances and emissions of a 4-stroke motorcycle fuelled

with ethanol/gasoline blends
Maria Antonietta Costagliola a,⇑, Maria Vittoria Prati a, Salvatore Florio b, Pietro Scorletti b,
Daniele Terna b, Paolo Iodice c, Dario Buono c, Adolfo Senatore c
a
Istituto Motori, National Research Council, viale Marconi, 4, 80125 Napoli, Italy
b
ENI S.p.A. – R&M Division, via F. Maritano, 26, 20097 San Donato Milanese (MI), Italy
c
University of Naples Federico II, Department of Industrial Engineering, viale Claudio, 80125 Napoli, Italy

h i g h l i g h t s

 Bioethanol/gasoline blends, up to 30% v, increase the fuel injection time.

 The major oxygen content of bioethanol involves CO and PN emission reduction.
 THC and PM emissions are not influenced by bioethanol content in the fuel.
 Carcinogenic benzene covers 2–5% of total volatiles for all tested fuels.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The objective of this study is to investigate the effect of bioethanol–gasoline blends on the exhaust emis-
Received 30 July 2015 sions and engine combustion of a four-stroke motorcycle. Ethanol is known as an alternative fuel for
Received in revised form 21 June 2016 spark-ignition engines and is suitable for making blends with gasoline, increasing the oxygen content
Accepted 22 June 2016
and decreasing emission of incomplete combustion products. An experimental investigation was per-
Available online 30 June 2016
formed on a Euro 3 large-size motorcycle fuelled with commercial gasoline and bioethanol/gasoline
blends (range of bioethanol 5% v to 30% v). Regulated and unregulated emissions and fuel consumption
Keywords:
were quantified over the execution of chassis-dynamometer tests. The combustion analysis, realized by
Motorcycle emissions
Bioethanol/gasoline blends
acquiring the pressure cycle inside the cylinder, highlights the auto adjustment of the engine control unit
VOC and guarantees use within the same parameters of several tested fuels, with the except of fuel injection
Particulate time, which increases with increasing ethanol percentage. A significant reduction in carbon monoxide
and particle number is associated with the ethanol content of the fuel. Volatile organic compounds,
mainly alkanes and aromatics, are not substantially influenced by the bioethanol content of the fuel.
The contribution of carcinogenic benzene ranges between 2 and 5%.
Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction control European energy consumption and increase energy

In recent years, strict restrictions applied to emissions from
road transportation to achieve air quality levels that do not signif-
icantly raise negative impacts on human health and the environ-
ment, together with the promotion of energy supply security,
have encouraged research activity towards sustainable biofuels.
An increasing use of biofuels for transport is emerging as an
important policy strategy to replace petroleum-based fuels to
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: m.a.costagliola@im.cnr.it (M.A. Costagliola), m.v.prati@im.cnr.
it (M.V. Prati), Salvatore.Florio@eni.com (S. Florio), Pietro.Scorletti@eni.com
(P. Scorletti), Daniele.Terna@eni.com (D. Terna), paolo.iodice@unina.it (P. Iodice),
darbuono@unina.it (D. Buono), senatore@unina.it (A. Senatore).
efficiency. The European Union (EU) aimed at achieving a mini-
mum 10% share of renewable fuels in base transportation energy
consumption by 2020 in every Member State [1]. Among alterna-
tive and renewable fuels, the use of bioethanol as an automotive
fuel was accepted worldwide thanks to its chemical and physical
characteristics, which make it blend easily into gasoline. Actually,
EU legislation states that 10% v is the maximum content of
bioethanol in gasoline. At such a low percentage of bioethanol in
gasoline, SI engines do not need any modifications. Many advan-
tages are related to bioethanol use in SI engines. First, there is a
reduction of incomplete combustion products thanks to its oxygen
content, the lower vapour pressure, high laminar flame propaga-
tion speed and higher latent heat of evaporation [2,3]. Another

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2016.06.105
0016-2361/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 M.A. Costagliola et al. / Fuel 183 (2016) 470–477 471

important aspect is the reduction of the greenhouse gases (GHG) for any comparison with bioethanol/gasoline blends. Blends,
emissions involved in the use of bioethanol fuel. The lower carbon instead, were prepared starting from an oxygen free gasoline
content per unit of volume and the type of source used during (G0). In this manner, a known ethanol content was obtained for
ethanol production causes, as a net effect, result in a lower emis- each blend. G0 composition allowed to the ethanol blends to com-
sion of carbon dioxide, which is the major GHG from transport ply with the vapour pressure limit stated by the 2009/30EC direc-
[4]. The main disadvantage is related to the lower vapour pressure tive. Bioethanol, obtained from grape pomace produced during
of bioethanol, which makes a cold start of the engine difficult. traditional wine processing, was provided by I.M.A. srl (Trapani,
Moreover, many studies have demonstrated an increase in Italy). The vehicle was fuelled with four blends: G5 (ethanol/G0
nitrogen oxide and carbonylic compound emissions coming from 5/95% v), G10 (ethanol/G0 10/90% v), G20 (ethanol/G0 20/80% v)
bioethanol/gasoline blend fuels [5–7]. and G30 (ethanol/G0 30/70% v). The main fuel properties are
Because such renewable fuels can reduce the emissions of pol- shown in Table 1 [21].
lutants and the depletion of fossil fuels at the same time, many
researchers have recently studied the influence of these fuels on the
2.3. Experimental apparatus
performances and pollutant emissions of internal combustion engines.
This paper is aimed at deepening the knowledge of the effects
The motorcycle was tested on a two-wheeler chassis
bioethanol/gasoline fuel blends have when used in a large dis-
dynamometer (AVL Zollner 20” - single roller), which simulated
placement motorcycle. This topic arises from the need to assess
vehicle inertia and road load resistance. A driver’s aid displayed a
the impact on the urban air quality of two-wheeler class vehicles
speed trace for the cycle to follow with a tolerance of ±1 km/h. A
when used as a means of transport in major cities of southern Eur-
variable speed blower, positioned in front of the two-wheeler vehi-
ope [8,9]. In Italy, the share of the two-wheelers among the total
cle, is used to cool the vehicle during the test. During the tests, the
passenger vehicle fleet is approximately 25% [10,11]. Previous
exhaust gases were diluted with ambient purified air by Constant
studies carried out on two-wheeler vehicles confirmed the reduc-
Volume Sampling with a Critical Flow Venturi (AVL CFV-CVS) unit.
tion in carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbon (HC) emissions
The diluted exhaust passed throughout a dilution tunnel to reach
[12] and the increase in nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions by adding
stable flow conditions. A part of the diluted exhaust was sampled
ethanol up to 20% v in gasoline [13,14]; furthermore, it was found
downstream of the dilution tunnel for a continuous measurement
that motorcycle engines fuelled with ethanol-gasoline had
of the concentration of carbon monoxide (CO), unburned hydrocar-
enhanced formation of ethylene and acetaldehyde emissions com-
bons (HC), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and carbon dioxide (CO2) by an
pared to unleaded gasoline [15–20].
exhaust gas analysis system (AVL AMA 4000); simultaneously,
Within this research field, experimental activities were jointly
the average values were measured in a sample bag filled during
performed by Istituto Motori of the National Research Council
the test. Moreover, particulate matter (PM) and particle number
(IM-CNR) and the Department of Industrial Engineering of the
(PN) were measured in the diluted exhaust stream. PM was sam-
University of Naples Federico II, with the support of ENI Research
pled on a filter (Pall T60A20) and measured by gravimetric analy-
Centre San Donato Milanese, in order to study the influence of
sis, whereas total PN with a diameter between 20 nm and 1 lm
bioethanol addition to gasoline fuel on the combustion process of
was measured by a condensation particle counter (CPC - TSI P-
an Euro 3 motorcycle. The tested vehicle is representative of the
Truck). Some volatile organic compounds (VOC) were character-
new motorcycles sold, which mount increasingly sophisticated
ized within the experimental activity. In particular, a volume of
devices for improving combustion efficiency, and the abatement
diluted exhaust was analysed by GC-FID for measuring alkanes
of fuel consumption and exhaust pollutants.
from C1 to C6, alkenes and alkynes (from C2 to C4) and aromatics
The investigated fuels contain up to 30% v bioethanol to moni-
(benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes). Among the quanti-
tor the sensitivity of the Engine Control Unit to manage oxygen
fied compounds, benzene and 1,3-butadiene constitute a particular
content over the 10% v currently allowed by EN228. Attention is
concern due to their carcinogenic potential to humans [22].
focused on the influence of fuel composition on the combustion
To analyse the combustion process of the internal combustion
process inside the cylinder and on exhaust emissions of regulated
engine, a pressure transducer (AVL piezoelectric sensor) was used
and unregulated pollutants. Among these, volatile organics and
to measure pressure cycles at different steady-state conditions. It
particulate were measured through chassis dynamometer tests.
was mounted in a dedicated spark plug adapter (Z121U3CPRT by
AVL), and the signal was processed using the AVL Indimicro/
2. Material and methods
Indicom system. Moreover, the motorcycle was instrumented with
an ECU diagnosis tool (Navigator TXT by Texa) for the acquisition
2.1. Vehicle
of engine parameters such as injection time, engine speed, cooling
fluid temperature and spark advance.
The vehicle used in the tests is a four-stroke motorcycle that
complies with Euro 3 legislative emission standards. The engine
displacement is 999.6 cm3 (bore/stroke 78/52.3 mm and compres- Table 1
sion ratio 13:1) with a maximum power of 132.4 kW@12,500 rpm Main characteristics of the tested fuels.
and a maximum torque of 115 Nm@10,000 rpm. The equivalent E0 G0 G5 G10 G20 G30 Eth.
inertia is 280 kg, which corresponds to a rolling resistance of
Density, kg/m3 730.9 747.7 749.3 750.3 754.6 760.5 791.6
26.4 N and a coefficient of air resistance of 0.024 N/(km/h)2. For Research Octane 95.5 94.7 95.7 96.7 98.8 100.8 115
pollutant abatement, a three-way catalyst was used together with Number (RON)
a lambda sensor. A precise tuning of air/fuel ratio was reached Oxygen, %w/w 1.5 0 2.8 5.4 10.2 14.4 34.7
through an electronic fuel injector, allowing for the control of fuel Benzene, %v/v 0.67 0.83 0.79 0.75 0.66 0.58 0
Olefins, %v/v 8.8 7.8 7.41 7.02 6.24 5.46 0
feeding and also enhancing catalyst efficiency in cold transient.
Aromatics, %v/v 33.3 33.7 32.02 30.33 26.96 23.59 0
Sulfur, mg/kg <10 3.9 – – – – 0.8
2.2. Fuels Vapour pressure, 56 57.6 – – – – 15.9
kPa
Stoichiometric 14.3 14.6 14.1 13.5 12.6 11.7 7.5
Five test fuels were used in this study. First, the motorcycle was
air/fuel ratio
fuelled with a commercial gasoline (E0) considered as a base fuel
472 M.A. Costagliola et al. / Fuel 183 (2016) 470–477

Table 2
Kinematic properties of driving cycles.

Duration, s Length, km Maximum speed, km/h Mean speed, km/h Idle time, % Accel. time, % m_(v⁄apos), m2/s3
European type approval driving cycle
ECE_a 390 2 50 18.4 32.3 21.5 3.66
ECE_b 780 4 50 18.4 32.3 21.5 3.66
EUDC 400 6.9 120 62.6 10.2 25.7 6.38
World-wide motorcycle emissions test cycle
WMTC_1 600 4.1 60 24.3 18.5 28.7 5.1
WMTC_2 600 9.1 95 54.6 7.8 35.7 8.4
WMTC_3 600 15.8 125 94.7 2.3 29.7 10
Artemis Urban Cold 945 5 44 19 16.4 35 4.9

Constant speed test (10–120, stepwise 10 km/h).

2.4. Driving cycles

For each fuel, the motorcycle was tested over the following
transient and steady-state driving cycles (DCs):

 European type-approval driving cycle (ECE + EUDC).

 World-wide Motorcycle Emissions Test Cycle (WMTC).
 Artemis Urban Cold.
 Constant speed between 20 and 120 km/h (stepwise increase of
10 km/h).

Transient DCs were carried out from a cold start (engine off for
at least 6 h before DC starting). ECE + EUDC is composed of an
urban (ECE) and an extra urban part (EUDC). The urban part is
divided into two phases: cold (ECE_a including two base modules)
and hot (ECE_b including four base modules). The WMTC regula-
tion 2006/72/EC directive states that for motorcycles with a max-
imum speed higher than 140 km/h, the execution of three phases
(cold WMTC_1, WMTC_2 and WMTC_3) must be performed. Arte-
mis Urban Cold was proposed within an EU Artemis framework in
order to study the influence of cold starts on the exhaust emissions
[23]. It includes 15 repetitions of a base module. During this exper-
iment, measurements relating to Artemis Urban Cold were per- Fig. 1. Indicating diagram during 120 km/s steady state test with E0, G5, G10, G20
formed in three parts, each including five base modules. Main and G30.
kinematic characteristics are reported in Table 2.
the pressure gradient during the compression and combustion
3. Results and discussion phases.
From the analysis of some on-board diagnostic (OBD) parame-
3.1. Combustion analysis and engine behaviour ters, it was observed that the use of bioethanol in the fuel strongly
influenced the injection time. It rises as the ethanol percentage
A deep analysis of the combustion process was carried out by increases (Fig. 2). The increases in the injection time with the
analysing the in-cylinder pressure behaviour and the main engine ethanol percentage of the blends is due to the reduced specific
parameters. The in-cylinder pressure was studied to understand heat, which is also responsible of an increment of fuel consumption
the combustion when varying the fuel blends, while the engine [24].
parameters were analysed to investigate how a commercial ECU, Regarding spark advance, no trend could be found, reflecting
optimized to work with commercial gasoline, adapts the various the fact that the engine ECU did not modify this parameter when
parameters when the fuel is changed.
To obtain comparable data among the tested fuels, this analysis
was performed during the ‘‘constant speed cycle”. In the following
figures, only the 120 km/h results are reported, but the same anal-
ysis could be performed for all vehicle speeds.
Fig. 1 reports the pressure signal as a function of crank-angle
degree, measured during the 120 km/h steady-state tests per-
formed with E0, G5, G10, G20 and G30. The indicating diagrams
were obtained by taking the average of 100 consecutive cycles,
and as a trigger and a source clock, it was used as the signal of
the original motorcycle pick-up, which was allowed to acquire
72 points per engine cycle.
The pressure behaviour is very similar among the different
fuels: only a slightly decrease in the maximum pressure peak can
be appreciably seen, but there are no significant differences in Fig. 2. Injection times for all tested fuels during 120 km/h steady-state test.
 M.A. Costagliola et al. / Fuel 183 (2016) 470–477 473

the fuel changed. In other words, the ethanol could be used in a

high percentage (<30%) blend with gasoline without any engine
and ECU parameter modifications.

3.2. Carbon monoxide and unburned hydrocarbons

In Figs. 3 and 4, CO and HC emissions measured throughout the

ECE + EUDC and WMTC driving cycles are reported for E0, G10, G20
and G30. The mean emissions with relative standard deviations,
expressed as mass emitted per kilometre travelled, are presented
for all of the phases and for the whole driving cycle.
A substantial difference exists between cold and hot emissions.
During the cold start, the engine and catalytic converter are not at
their optimal operating conditions: given the rich gasoline content
in the air–fuel mixture, with the catalytic converter failing to reach
the light-off temperature, the motorcycle emits higher concentra-
tions of CO and unburned fuel.
CO emissions are influenced by the ethanol percentage in the
fuel. A decrease is observed when moving from G10 to G30 as
the amount of oxygen in the ethanol molecules eases the oxidation
of carbon monoxide (Fig. 3). CO reduction is significant in the case
of G20 and G30 due to improvement of the combustion process
under the fuel-lean conditions in these ethanol-gasoline mixtures.
It is interesting to note that as the average speed of the driving
cycle increases, CO emissions decrease with all tested fuels. The
lowest emissions are, in fact, recorded over the high speed phases
of the driving cycles (EUDC and WMTC_3).

Fig. 4. HC emission factors in ECE + EUDC and WMTC driving cycles.

For HC measured with blended fuels (G10, G20, G30), it is

Fig. 3. CO emission factors in ECE + EUDC and WMTC driving cycles.
important to stress that when alcohols are used as blending com-
ponents in gasoline, measurement by the FID of all ‘‘hydrocarbons”
emitted may include those alcohols, even though, by definition,
they are not hydrocarbons; there is consequently a hazard that
the FID reading is overestimated. HC emission factors decrease
with increasing ethanol percentage in the fuels for two reasons.
First, a substantial oxygen content is released during the combus-
tion process. Second, with an increasing ethanol content, the RVP
of the blend fuels increases to reach a maximum at approximately
15% v/v of ethanol addition and then decreases at higher percent-
ages [25]; the high volatility of the G20 blend fuel improves fuel
vaporization, thus reducing the formation of unburned fuel. As a
consequence, HC formation from post-flame oxidation of unburned
ethanol-gasoline mixture is also reduced [26]. G30 exhibits HC
emission levels not much lower than those of G10 and G20 due
to its lower volatility, which decreases at higher ethanol percent-
ages (>20% v). Moreover, incomplete combustion can occur in the
combustion chamber when an engine operates over a definite lean
limit: misfires can become more frequent with unburned fuel lead-
ing to increased HC emissions [27]. Probably, in spite of the fact
that the tested vehicle is characterized by an accurate mixture con-
trol fuel injection system, with the high ethanol content of the
blend, the level of the fuel supply could not be adjusted immedi-
ately according to the combustion conditions; this also results in
a partial combustion and in higher HC emissions in the G30 blend
fuel [28].
474 M.A. Costagliola et al. / Fuel 183 (2016) 470–477

3.3. Carbon dioxide and fuel consumption

In Fig. 5, mean CO2 emission factors are reported.

The variation of CO2 emission factors should be opposite that of
the CO emissions because the higher oxygen content in the
blended fuels improves the combustion process and should then
increase CO2 emissions; to the contrary, because gasoline-ethanol
blends contain fewer carbon atoms than the unleaded gasoline,
E0, it results in lower CO2 emissions. The two effects compete,
and the results show that CO2 emissions are slightly lower com-
pared to unleaded gasoline E0, and they are not substantially cor-
related to CO emissions; in fact, the decrease of CO2 was not as
high as that of CO.
The variance of the mean emission factors for CO2 are very sat-
isfactory compared to reference fuels; it implies that the combus-
tion stability of the tested motorcycle is good, still using ethanol-
gasoline as fuel.
From the experimental results, fuel and energetic consumption
of all of the tested fuels in the motorcycle was calculated (reported
as l/100 km and as kJ/km in Fig. 6).
Due to the lower heating value of ethanol with respect to gaso-
line, more fuel should be introduced into the engine cylinder as
ethanol is fuelled. Conversely, it is important to stress that the fuel
injection strategy tends to operate the engine in a fuel-rich condi-
tion, but the ethanol addition produces a leaning effect, which
enhances fuel combustion. This aspect compensates for the previ-
ous consideration and makes no great difference on the fuel con-
sumption between using pure gasoline and using bioethanol–
gasoline blended fuels; rather, energetic consumption decreases
slightly with increasing ethanol percentage in the fuels.

Fig. 6. Fuel and energetic consumption in ECE + EUDC driving cycle.

3.4. Volatile organic compounds

Volatile organic compounds (VOC) from C1 to C8 were mea-

sured over transient driving cycles executed with four fuels: E0,
G5, G10 and G20. The sum of quantified VOC for all of the tested
fuels is almost 75% of the total HC measured by FID. The execution
of cold start ECE and Artemis Urban driving cycles allowed assess-
ment of a cold start’s contribution to VOC emissions. The extra
emissions deriving from a cold start is almost independent from
fuel type. The results, in fact, showed that cold VOC emissions
are almost 60% higher than hot ones. A small difference exists

Fig. 5. CO2 emission factors in ECE + EUDC and WMTC driving cycles. Fig. 7. VOC sum as a function of mean speed of driving cycles.
 M.A. Costagliola et al. / Fuel 183 (2016) 470–477 475

between the two driving cycles. In particular, ECE cold start extra
emissions are higher than those evaluated over Artemis Urban,
probably due to the shorter duration of the driving cycle, which
did not allow a stable thermal condition to be reached for pollutant
emissions control. Fig. 7 reports the VOC sum measured with E0,
G5, G10 and G20 during the hot driving cycles. Data are presented
as a function of mean speed of the driving cycles. A significant dif-
ference exists between emissions of several ethanol blends and the
reference gasoline E0. VOC emissions as a function of the mean
speed of driving cycles follows a quadratic trend. The R2 of second
order polynomial curves plotted in Fig. 7 are above 0.93. VOC emis-
sions measured over the ECE and Urban driving cycles, both char-
acterized by a mean speed of almost 20 km/h, are 3–4 times higher
than those measured over the other tests.
To identify the contribution of single compounds, Fig. 8 reports
the percentage of main organic compounds evaluated in the VOC

Fig. 8. VOC speciation.

476 M.A. Costagliola et al. / Fuel 183 (2016) 470–477
sum. Data are grouped into three classes, each corresponding to a
different average speed of the driving cycle (low, medium and
high). The low average speed group includes ECE and Urban, the
medium group includes EUDC and WMTC_2, and the high group
includes WMTC_3.
It is evident that the highest contribution derives from the alka-
nes group. These compounds cover 60–80% of the total. Methane
and 2-methylbutane are the main compounds belonging to this
class (percentage higher than 10%), followed by i-butane, 2,2-
dimethylbutane and 2-methylpentane (percentage higher than
5%). The aromatic groups are second in order of abundance
(between 12 and 22% of total), and toluene is the main constituent
(between 6 and 9%) of this group. Benzene percentage in the VOC
sum ranges between 2 and 5%. Alkenes constitute almost 3–9% of
VOC sum during low and medium speed driving cycles. This per-
centage increases to 15% for the high speed driving cycle. The main
alkene constituent found is ethylene. It is interesting to note that at
high speeds, both alkenes and aromatics increase and alkanes
decrease. Acetylene is the only constituent of the alkynes group
that has a concentration higher than the limit of detection.
3.5. Particulate
Particulate matter (PM) and particle number (PN) emissions
were measured over hot start driving cycles. Fig. 9 reports PM
and PN emissions (expressed as mg/km and particles/km, respec-
tively) as a function of the alcohol content in the fuel. The plot
shows the minimum and maximum values (extremes as bars),
the upper and lower quartiles (box) and the median measured
for each fuel. It appears evident that there is a discrepancy between
the two plots: PM emissions are not influenced by fuel type, unlike
PN. In fact, even though the dispersion of PN data is not negligible,
a dependence on fuel characteristics is visible. In particular, when
moving from G5 to G20, PN generally decreases. The median
Fig. 9. PM and PN emissions during hot driving cycles as a function of fuel.
relative to G20 is almost one order of magnitude lower than that
relative to G5 (reduction of almost 80%). It has to be noted that
the PN measured for E0 does not follow the emission trend of
blends because the base gasoline inside the blend is different from
E0. This involves a different emissive behaviour of particulates. The
effect of a leaner combustion mixture, a consequence of the
bioethanol addition to gasoline, is not visible on PM emissions.
The reason probably lies in the adsorbed volatile fraction collected
on the PM filter. This volatile fraction, which is not visible by PN
measurement techniques, does not decrease when moving from
G5 to G20, negatively affecting the PM emissions.
Fig. 10 reports PM and PN emissions as a function of the driving
cycle average speed. Data are grouped according fuel type. PM
emissions follow a quadratic trend with the minimum positioned
around the mid average speed. Concerning PN, the highest values
are measured over low speed driving cycles (approximately
20 km/h) corresponding to the dynamic Artemis Urban cycles. In
addition to the urban part, the type of the approved driving cycle
(ECE) has the same average speed of Artemis Urban (19 km/h),
but PN emissions are much lower (lower than 3 ⁄ 1011 pt/km).
The presence of a higher percentage of cruising causes lower par-
ticulate emissions. G20 differs from the other fuels because its data
from Artemis Urban are missing. The results obtained about the
influence of driving conditions on particulate emissions agree with
Lee et al. [29].
Fig. 10. PM and PN emissions during hot driving cycles as a function of average
speed.
 M.A. Costagliola et al. / Fuel 183 (2016) 470–477
4. Conclusions
A deep characterization of emissive behaviour of a large
displacement Euro 3 motorcycle was carried out through the
execution of chassis-dynamometer tests. The main objective of this
experimental study was to analyse the effects the addition of
5–10–20–30% v bioethanol into gasoline fuel would have on com-
bustion efficiency and exhaust pollutant emissions. The results
indicate that for up to 30% bioethanol, the engine does not need
of any adjustment of the control unit. The unique parameter that
increases is the injection time due to the lower heating value of
ethanol with respect to gasoline. This property also implies an
increase in the volumetric fuel consumption of ethanol blends.
Concerning exhaust emissions, the main improvements resulting
from the use of bioethanol are relative to carbon monoxide and
particle number emissions. Reduction of both pollutant emissions
could be explained by the leaner combustion due to the major oxy-
gen content of bioethanol molecules. The same benefits are not
measured for unburned hydrocarbons and particulate matter. By
increasing bioethanol content, in fact, a greater production of oxy-
genated hydrocarbons is promoted. Among volatiles, carcinogenic
benzene is between 2 and 5% of total, not depending on fuel type.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Dr. Giuseppe Perretta and
Dr. Annalisa Cozzolino for the chemical analysis.
References
[1] Directive 2009/28/EC of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy
from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives
2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC.
[2] Jia LW, Shen MQ, Wang J, Lin MQ. Influence of ethanol–gasoline blended fuel
on emission characteristics from a four-stroke motorcycle engine. J Hazard
Mater 2005;123:29–34.
[3] Hsieh WD, Chen RH, Wu TL, Lin TH. Engine performance and pollutant
emission of an SI engine using ethanol–gasoline blended fuels. Atmos Environ
2002;36:403–10.
[4] Yan X, Inderwildi OR, King DA, Boies AM. Effects of ethanol on vehicle energy
efficiency and implications on ethanol life-cycle greenhouse gas analysis.
Environ Sci Technol 2013;47:5535–44.
[5] Masumn BM, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA, Rizwanul Fattah IM, Palash SM, Abedin
MJ. Effect of ethanol–gasoline blend on NOx emission in SI engine. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2013;24:209–22.
[6] Costagliola MA, De Simio L, Iannaccone S, Prati MV. Combustion efficiency and
engine out emissions of a S.I. engine fuelled with alcohol/gasoline blends. Appl
Energy 2013;111:1162–71.
[7] Gravalos I, Moshou D, Gialamas T, Xyradakis P, Kateris D, Tsiropoulos Z.
Emissions characteristics of spark ignition engine operating on lower–higher
molecular mass alcohol blended gasoline fuels. Renew Energy 2013;50:27–32.
[8] Iodice P, Senatore A. Exhaust emissions of new high-performance motorcycles
in hot and cold conditions. Int J Environ Sci Technol 2015;12:3133–44.
477
[9] Vasic AM, Weilemann M. Comparison of real-world emissions from two-
wheelers and passenger cars. Environ Sci Technol 2006;40:149–54.
[10] European Commission. EU transport in figures e Statistical
pocketbookAvailable from: <http://ec.europa.eu/transport/facts-fundings/
statistics/doc/2013/pocketbook2013.pdf>2013.
[11] Iodice P, Senatore A. Appraisal of pollutant emissions and air quality state in a
critical Italian region: methods and results. Environ Prog Sustain Energy
2015;34:1497–505.
[12] Yao YC, Tsai JH, Chiang HL. Effects of ethanol-blended gasoline on air pollutant
emissions from motorcycle. Sci Total Environ 2009;407:5257–62.
[13] Tuan LA, Khanh ND, Tuan PM, Truyen PH. Investigation of motorcycle engine’s
characteristics fueled with ethanol-gasoline blends. In: The 4th AUN/SEED-Net
regional conference on new and renewable energy.
[14] Li L, Ge Y, Wang M, Peng Z, Song Y, Zhang L, et al. Exhaust and evaporative
emissions from motorcycles fueled with ethanol gasoline blends. Sci Total
Environ 2015;502:627–31.
[15] Yang HH, Liu TA, Chang CF, Lee E. Effects of ethanol-blended gasoline on
emissions of regulated air pollutants and carbonyls from motorcycles. Appl
Energy 2012;89:281–6.
[16] Yao YC, Tsai JH, Wang IT. Emissions of gaseous pollutant from motorcycle
powered by ethanol–gasoline blend. Appl Energy 2013;102:93–100.
[17] Manzetti S, Andersen O. Characterization of the molecular interaction between
acetaldehyde and phenanthrene: a molecular simulation study of nanoparticle
formation dynamics from bioethanol blends. In: P4TA-CERTAM international
workshop: characterization of complex nanoaerosol emissions: metrology,
health and environmental issues. Rouen, France.
[18] Manzetti S, Andersen O. A review of emission products from bioethanol and its
blends with gasoline. Background for new guidelines for emission control. Fuel
2015;140:293–301.
[19] Andersen O, Manzetti S, Hung C, Czerwinskiet J, Ste˛pień Z, Oleksiak S, et al.
Environmental impacts connected with the use of ethanol-gasoline blends.
Alcohol fuels for transport – background, research and development. Krakow,
Poland: Oil and Gas Institute Krakow; 2015. p. 54–67.
[20] Andersen O, Hung C, Czerwinski J, Oleksiak S, Andrae A. Well-to-wheel
environmental assessment of bioethanol-gasoline blends – the effect of
detergent additives and feedstock. In: 15th EuCheMS international
conference on chemistry and the environment. Leipzig.
[21] Heywood JB. Internal combustion engine fundamentals. 1st ed. New
York: McGraw-Hill Book Company; 1988.
[22] IARC – International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC monographs on the
evaluation on the carcinogenic risks to humans, vols. 1–108, 2013. Available
from: <http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Classification/index.php>.
[23] André M. The ARTEMIS European driving cycles for measuring car pollutant
emissions. Sci Total Environ 2004;334–335:73–84.
[24] Schifter I, Diaz L, Rodriguez R, Gómez JP, Gonzalez U. Combustion and
emissions behavior for ethanol–gasoline blends in a single cylinder engine.
Fuel 2011;90:3586–92.
[25] Aulich TR, He XM, Grisanti AA, Knudson CL. Gasoline evaporation-ethanol and
nonethanol blends. J Air Waste Manage Assoc 1994;44:1004–9.
[26] Monteiro Sales LC, Sodré JR. Cold start emissions of an ethanol-fuelled engine
with heated intake air and fuel. Fuel 2012;95:122–5.
[27] Prati MV, Costagliola MA, Tommasino C, Della Ragione L, Meccariello G. Road
grade influence on the exhaust emissions of a scooter fuelled with
bioethanol/gasoline blends. Transp Res Proc 2014;3:790–9. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.trpro.2014.10.059.
[28] Iodice P, Senatore A. Influence of ethanol-gasoline blended fuels on cold start
emissions of a four-stroke motorcycle. Methodology and results. SAE technical
paper 2013-24-0117; 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.4271/2013-24-0117, ISSN:
0148-7191, ISBN: 978-88-907870-3-4.
[29] Lee H, Myung CL, Park S. Time-resolved particle emission and size distribution
characteristics during dynamic engine operation conditions with ethanol-
blended fuels. Fuel 2009;88:1680–6.