Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

A comparative analysis of the engine performance, exhaust emissions

and combustion behaviors of a compression ignition engine fuelled
with biodiesel/diesel/1-butanol (C4 alcohol) and biodiesel/diesel/n-
pentanol (C5 alcohol) fuel blends
Murat Kadir Yesilyurt a, *, Tanzer Eryilmaz b, Mevlüt Arslan a
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering-Architecture, Yozgat Bozok University, Yozgat, 66200, Turkey
b
Department of Biosystems Engineering, Faculty of Engineering-Architecture, Yozgat Bozok University, Yozgat, 66200, Turkey

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

Article history: In this study, engine performance, exhaust emissions and combustion behaviors of a single-cylinder,
Received 18 June 2018 four-stroke, direct-injection diesel engine running on biodiesel/diesel/1-butanol and biodiesel/diesel/
Received in revised form n-pentanol fuel blends were investigated and compared with diesel fuel under different engine
5 September 2018
speeds and full load operating conditions. Test fuels were prepared with 5 and 10 vol% 1-butanol and n-
Accepted 16 October 2018
Available online 19 October 2018
pentanol. Engine test results indicated that brake powers and torques decreased as the amount of alcohol
increased, while BSFC increased between 0.77% and 8.07%. Alcohol blended fuels acquired lower EGT and
CO2, while observing higher O2 emission due to high oxygen content of alcohol compared to diesel fuel.
Keywords:
Biodiesel
Alcohol treated blends also diminished NOX by 0.56e2.65%, CO by 6.90e32.40%, and smoke by 10.47
Alcohol e44.43%. Moreover, n-pentanol blended fuels showed better performance and emission results than 1-
Combustion butanol blends. Maximum in-cylinder pressure of higher alcohol blended fuels found between 94.55 and
Emissions 95.82 bar at 371-372oCA for 1400 rpm, and between 78.19 and 82.19 bar at 375-376oCA for 2600 rpm.
Performance Alcohol addition into the blends increased maximum in-cylinder pressure up to 1.38% at low speed,
Ternary blend whereas it decreased up to 3.75% at high speed. Furthermore, higher HRR values up to 8.5% were
observed with the alcohol mixed fuels. Consequently, higher alcohols (n-pentanol and 1-butanol) can be
utilized as alternative additives in biodiesel/diesel blends for diesel engines to improve emissions,
although they adversely influence engine performance.
© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction to International Energy Outlook, it is predicted that the energy

Energy is a key factor in the economic and social developments
of countries and it is the most important source of life in society and
at every stage of life. Rapid population growth and industrialization
in developing countries have caused more increase in demand for
energy. Moreover, it plays important role in human health, comfort
and in the use of technology. For these reasons, it is among the
priority policies of the governments [1,2].
It is well known that the utilization of petroleum has the
greatest share of the all energy resources and it has been widely
used in the transportation sector, power plants, construction,
agricultural applications and industrial activities [3e5]. According
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: kadir.yesilyurt@bozok.edu.tr (M.K. Yesilyurt).
needs of the world will rise by 53% in 2030 compared to 2005.
Approximately 26e27% of this energy requirement will be obtained
from fossil-based fuels worldwide [5,6]. However, coal, petroleum
and natural gas reserves will come to an end for 218, 41 and 53
years, respectively according to the estimations [4]. Additionally,
the continual increase in the fossil-based fuel prices, decline of
known reserves over time, and environmental concerns related to
the soil, water and air pollution have intensified calls to the alter-
native fuels [7].
Most of the vehicles used in the transportation sector around
the world have diesel engines [8]. One of the most significant po-
tential candidate fuels for compression ignition engines is biodiesel
among the alternative fuels [9]. It has been reported that low
emission profile, high cetane number, low sulphur content, high
oxygen content, improving lubricity and biodegradability are the

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.10.100
0360-5442/© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351
Nomenclature
BSFC Brake specific fuel consumption
BTE Brake thermal efficiency
BMEP Brake mean effective pressure
EGT Exhaust gas temperature
CO Carbon monoxide
CO2 Carbon dioxide
CP Combustion period
NOX Nitrogen oxides
O2 Oxygen
HC Hydrocarbon
ED Euro diesel fuel
EOC End of combustion
most important properties of biodiesel fuels [10,11]. Biodiesel fuels
can be used in diesel engines with or without some minor modi-
fications [12,13]. Biodiesel can be produced from vegetable oils,
animal fats, waste cooking oils, and algae oils that are chemically
reacted with short chain alcohols (methanol, ethanol, etc.) and
catalysts (NaOH, KOH, etc.) [14]. In recent years, the production and
usage of biodiesel fuels has become increasingly widespread
throughout the world. The countries have generally preferred
edible vegetable oil sources grown in their countries. The most
common feedstocks to be able to obtain biodiesel fuel are rapeseed
and sunflower oils in Europe, soybean oil and waste vegetable oils
in the USA and Canada, soybean oil in South America, palm,
jatropha and coconut oils in Asia, palm and soybean oils in
Australia, waste vegetable oil and animal fat in New Zealand [15].
Alcohols are liquid fuels that can be used in the internal com-
bustion engines. Alcohols, served as a fuel additive, can be blended
with certain proportions of petroleum-based diesel, biodiesel and
diesel/biodiesel fuel blends [16,17]. At the same time, studies on the
application of alcohol/diesel/biodiesel fuel blends have been
included in the literature. It has been stated that the viscosity and
surface tension of the fuel blends with alcohol addition decrease
while the improvement of atomization and increasing oxygen
content [16e18]. Also, alcohols are renewable fuels that can be
acquired from biomass [19]. On the other hand, low heating value
and cetane number, poor ignition quality, miscibility and stability
issues of alcohols can restrict the usage in the diesel engine
application [20]. The utilization of the alcohols as an additive
component for the fuel blends is an important procedure in order to
solve the source problem related to the fuels [21]. In these days,
methanol and ethanol, which are lower carbon alcohols, have been
researched as an alternative fuel for the diesel engines in the
literature [22e29]. Butanol and pentanol are good fuel additives or
attractive alternative fuels for apply in diesel engines. They have
many advantages over lower carbon alcohols such as higher cetane
number and heating value, lower heat of vaporization. Therefore,
recent studies on the use of butanol and pentanol in diesel engines
have increased [30e32].
Butyl alcohol, also called as n-butanol, n-butyl alcohol or butan-
1-ol, is an alcohol that can be obtained from renewable resources. It
is colorless, clear, and water-immiscible. Butanol has a moderate
non-permanent odor. It has been used as a solvent in the plastic,
cosmetic, paint, food sectors and mainly in the production of iso-
butyl acetate. Also, it can be added to the materials used against
rust and wear. Butanol is a poisonous alcohol. It tends to burn.
Heating value of butanol is less than diesel fuel and it can be used
up to 40% in diesel fuel. Furthermore, the properties of butanol are
very close to the diesel fuel [33e35].
1333
ID _
Ignition delay
Bt 1-Butanol
P n-pentanol
CA, q Crank angle
g Specific heat ratio
P Cylinder pressure
V Cylinder volume
Q Energy amount
R The function of the independent variables
SOI Start of injection
SOC Start of combustion
x Independent variables
w Uncertainty
HRR Heat release rate
Pentanol is also named as n-pentanol, n-amyl alcohol or pentan-
1-ol. It can be produced from renewable raw materials. The cetane
number and energy content of pentanol are higher than other al-
cohols. It can be used up to 45% by adding to diesel fuel [33,36].
There are many investigations about the analyze of engine
performance, combustion, and exhaust emission characteristics of
diesel engines fuelled with different fuels such as biodiesel, diesel,
biodiesel/diesel fuel blends, alcohol/biodiesel blends, alcohol/diesel
fuel blends, and alcohol/biodiesel/diesel fuel blends, etc. On the
other hand, there have been limited numbers of studies on the use
of butanol and pentanol in the diesel engines. Some of these studies
were summarized as follows: Zhu et al. [17] analyzed the emission
and combustion behaviors of four-cylinder, four-stroke diesel en-
gine fuelled with waste cooking oil biodiesel-pentanol blends. They
detected that the beginning of the combustion and the crank angle
at which maximum heat release occurs were removed from the top
dead center, cylinder pressure and heat release rate were increased
with the increasing the proportion of pentanol in the fuel blends.
Although hydrocarbon (HC) and CO emissions of the fuel blends
improved, NOX emissions worsened. Atmanli et al. [19] utilized n-
butanol (as the common solvent) and crude canola, soybean, sun-
flower, corn, olive and hazelnut oils (as the vegetable oil compo-
nents) for making micro-emulsification of vegetable oil-diesel fuel
blends. 70% of diesel fuel, 20% of vegetable oil and 10% n-butanol
blends were tested in a four-cylinder, four-stroke, turbocharged,
direct-injection diesel engine at full load with various engine
speeds. The experimental results demonstrated that brake torque,
brake power, brake thermal efficiency (BTE), brake mean effective
pressure (BMEP), exhaust gas temperature (EGT), HC, and CO
decreased while brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC), NO, and
CO increased as compared to those of diesel fuel. Imdadul et al. [20]
added 10, 15 and 20% of tamanu oil biodiesel and pentanol into the
diesel fuel and examined the engine performance and exhaust
emissions of a single-cylinder, water cooled diesel engine running
on test fuels. According to B20 fuel, BSFC value, smoke opacity, CO,
HC and CO2 emissions of the alcohol blended fuels decreased by 8.7,
21.2, 33.1, 43.45 and 2.5%, respectively. However, the thermal effi-
ciency, brake power and NO emission increased by 15, 10.4 and
4.4%, respectively. Imdadul et al. [21] produced biodiesel from
tamanu oil via transesterification method and blended with con-
ventional diesel fuel volumetrically as 15 and 20%. Afterwards, the
butanol and pentanol with the ratios of 15 and 20% were added to
mixed fuels. All of the test fuels were performed in a single-
cylinder, four-stroke, direct injection diesel engine. They deter-
mined that the alcohol additions reduced BSFC values compared to
B15 and B20 fuels, increase brake power, NO and CO2 emissions,
and decrease CO and HC emissions. Ibrahim [30] investigated the
1334 M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351
impacts of the butanol addition at ratios of 10 and 20% in the
biodiesel-diesel fuel blends on the engine performance, exhaust
emissions and combustion characteristics of a single-cylinder
diesel engine. The research indicated that the addition of up to
20% butanol can lead to tolerable variations in terms of engine
performance, exhaust emissions and combustion characteristics.
On the other hand, they have found that the diesel engines for the
usage of butanol need to be optimized and the change of fuel type
did not have a significant effect on the combustion periods. Wei
et al. [31] exposed that pentanol addition in diesel fuel can
remarkably decrease particulate emissions and vaguely rise NOX
emissions. Mehta et al. [32] reported that HC emission rises by
adding n-butanol into the blends, while CO and smoke emissions
decrease. Kumar and Saravanan [33] comprehensively reviewed
the usage of higher alcohols (from 3-carbon propanol to 20-carbon
phytol) in diesel engine applications. They indicated that the whole
or partial replacement of diesel fuel with higher alcohols in the
compression ignition engines were found to be generally successful
due to the fact that higher alcohols decreased regulated emissions
with improved efficiency. Yilmaz et al. [34] studied the influences
of the butanol addition (5, 10 and 20%) in the waste cooking oil
biodiesel on the performance and emission characteristics of an
indirect injection diesel engine. It was determined that EGT and
NOX emissions decreased with the addition of the butanol in
comparison to biodiesel fuel, but CO and HC emissions increased.
Also this BSFC values of fuel blends was measured higher than that
of diesel fuel. Ozer [35] compared the engine performance and
exhaust emissions of a diesel engine operating with diesel fuel by
adding 3, 5, 8 and 10% butanol to the diesel fuel under different
engine loads. As a result it has been stated that BSFC was increased
due to the increase of the ratio of butanol in the fuel blends, while
the thermal efficiency and EGT were decreased. Also he found that
CO, NOX and smoke opacity reduced, although CO2 and HC emis-
sions increased. Li et al. [36] performed the influence of pentanol
addition to biodiesel and diesel fuels in different ratios on the
emission and combustion characteristics of a single-cylinder,
direct-injection diesel engine under various engine loads and
1600 rpm constant speed conditions. As a result of the experiments,
40% diesel-30% biodiesel-30% pentanol blend exhibited better
combustion and emission data as well as economy performance.
Keskin et al. [37] tested the diesel engine fuelled with two different
fuel blends (60% diesel fuelþ30% waste cooking oil biodieselþ5%
ethanolþ5% butanol and 40% diesel fuelþ50% waste cooking oil
biodieselþ5% ethanolþ5% butanol). It is indicated that the engine
torque and power values decreased with using fuel blends
compared to the conventional diesel fuel. Additionally, they
exhibited that NOX emissions slightly increased, however smoke
opacity, CO and HC emissions decreased as 87.5, 87.01 and 57.14%,
respectively. Sahin et al. [38] investigated the effects of n-butanol
injection into the intake air of a diesel engine on the engine per-
formance and exhaust emissions at different engine load. Conse-
quently, 2% n-butanol spraying would be the optimum mixture
ratio in terms of the engine characteristics and NOX emissions. At
the same injection quantity, BSFC, smoke, and NOX emissions
reduced as 0.58, 0.31 and 17.38%, respectively. On the other hand,
they indicated that the thermal efficiency increased at a ratio of
1.01%. Tosun et al. [39] carried out experiments by adding 20% al-
cohols (methanol, ethanol and butanol) volumetrically into the
biodiesel that was produced from groundnut oil. It was observed
that the engine power increased by 2.4, 10 and 12.8% compared to
the biodiesel in the experiments with methanol, ethanol and
butanol addition fuels, and decreased by 26.36%, 20.85% and 18.91%
respectively compared to diesel fuel. The engine torque values of
methanol, ethanol and butanol blended fuels increased as 1.2%,
3.4% and 6.1%, respectively compared to the biodiesel, and
decreased by 20.53%, 18.81% and 16.67%, respectively in compari-
son to the diesel fuel. In addition, CO emissions reduced with the
alcohol blends, while NOX emissions increased. Atmanli [40] pre-
pared fuel blends such as 50% dieselþ50% biodiesel, 40% die-
selþ40% biodieselþ20% different alcohols (propanol, butanol and
pentanol) and tested in a four-cylinder, naturally aspirated, indirect
injection diesel engine under constant 1800 rpm engine speed and
various engine loads (1, 3, 6 and 9 kW). The conclusion of the
experiment showed that propanol, butanol and pentanol addition
increased CO emission as 39.95, 38.83 and 12.60%, respectively,
however NOX emissions decreased. Nanthagopal et al. [41] evalu-
ated the effects of 1-pentanol and 1-butanol as additives with
Calophyllum inophyllum biodiesel on the diesel engine character-
istics at different engine loads. They indicated that higher alcohol-
biodiesel blends have shown lower BTE and higher BSFC. NOX
decreased due to the cooling impact of higher alcohols, at the same
time CO, HC and smoke emissions for all higher alcohol blended
fuels. Babu and Anand [42] analyzed the performance, combustion
and exhaust emission behaviors of diesel engine running on
biodiesel/diesel/n-pentanol or n-hexanol blends without engine
modification. They concluded that the performance and combus-
tion were improved by adding higher alcohol into the biodiesel/
diesel blends. Among the higher alcohol blended fuels, 85% bio-
diesel/5% diesel/10% pentanol fuel possessed the minimum CO, HC,
and filter smoke number. Dhanasekaran et al. [43] investigated the
effects of ternary blends of waste cooking oil biodiesel, diesel fuel
and n-pentanol on the combustion, performance and emission
characteristics in a stationary direct-injection diesel engine with
and without exhaust gas recirculation. It can be concluded that
ternary blends generated less NOX and smoke, however high HC
and CO emissions. Also, they improved BSFC with n-pentanol
addition according to B50 fuel. Atmanli et al. [44] suggested the
ternary blend which containing 10% n-butanol/20% cotton oil/70%
diesel fuel in order to satisfy the cold flow properties and it pre-
sented satisfactory engine performance and emission results. Cel-
ebi and Aydin [45] prepared binary blends of butanol/safflower oil
biodiesel and ternary blends of butanol/safflower oil biodiesel/
diesel fuel that were included 5%, 10, and 20% butanol in a volume
basis. Afterwards, they were tested on a four-cylinder, four-stroke,
direct-injection diesel engine generator under the half load and
constant speed of 1500 rpm. The ternary blends exhibited that the
reductions on emissions were observed, higher BTE and BSFC
compared to the diesel fuel were recorded up to 1.5% and 6%,
respectively.
The influences of the lower alcohols such as methanol and
ethanol addition into the diesel fuel, biodiesel fuel, and diesel-
biodiesel fuel blends on the engine performance, exhaust emis-
sions and combustion characteristics were investigated in detail by
many researchers. There is a limited number of investigations of a
diesel engine fuelled with butanol and pentanol addition into the
diesel, biodiesel or diesel-biodiesel fuel blends, especially on theirs
impacts on the combustion characteristics. Furthermore, as seen in
the literature survey, it has not been examined the comparison of
the engine performance, exhaust emissions, combustion charac-
teristics of the diesel engine fuelled with biodiesel/diesel/1-butanol
and biodiesel/diesel/n-pentanol fuel blends, in particular carried
out on the same engine. Moreover, the additives of yellow mustard
seed oil biodiesel in the ternary blends of diesel/biodiesel/alcohols
blends have not been performed in the literature to the best of the
author's knowledge. It is seen that yellow mustard seed oil bio-
diesel has not shown enough interest in all over the world. Further
researches on this subject and the appropriate oilseed crops for the
biodiesel industry are required. For these reasons, the present study
is conducted in order to fulfill this gap in the literature. The aim of
the present study is to perform the 1-butanol and n-pentanol
 M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351
addition into the biodiesel-diesel fuel blends and to investigate
elaborately and deeply the engine performance (such as torque,
power, BSFC, BTE, etc.), exhaust emissions (such as CO, CO2, NOX,
etc.) and combustion behaviors (such as in-cylinder pressure and
heat release rate) of a single cylinder, four-stroke, water cooled,
direct-injection diesel engine. Also, the experimental results of 1-
butanol and n-pentanol blended fuels were compared to the
diesel fuel's results and with each other.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Biodiesel production and preparation of test fuels
In this study, the biodiesel fuel was produced from yellow
mustard (Sinapis alba L.) seed oil via the single stage homogenous
catalyst transesterification process in the small-scale and PLC
controlled biodiesel production facility in the Biofuel Laboratory,
Bozok University, Yozgat, Turkey. Methanol (32.04 g/mol, 99.8% of
purity), which was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, Mis-
souri, USA), was used as an alcohol. NaOH (40 g/mol, 97% of pu-
rity), which was taken from Merck (Darmstadt, Germany), was
preferred as a catalyst. In the transesterification reaction, alcohol to
oil molar ratio, catalyst concentration, reaction temperature and
reaction time were selected as 7.407:1, 0.627%, 61.8  C, and
62.1 min, respectively. The reaction was realized under the opti-
mum reaction conditions [46]. The reaction procedure, steps and
biodiesel production facility were explained in our latest study by
Eryilmaz and Yesilyurt [47].
The conventional diesel fuel were procured from a local petrol
station in Yozgat, Turkey. 1-butanol (74.12 g/mol, 99% of purity)
and n-pentanol (88.15 g/mol, 99% of purity) used in the fuel
blends were supplied from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, Missouri, USA)
and Merck (Darmstadt, Germany), respectively.
The prepared samples were designated as ED (100% diesel fuel),
B (yellow mustard seed oil biodiesel), Bt (1-butanol), P (n-penta-
nol), B2Bt5 (93% EDþ2% Bþ5% Bt), B2B10 (88% EDþ2% Bþ10% Bt),
B20Bt5 (75% EDþ20% Bþ5% Bt), B20Bt10 (70% EDþ20% Bþ10% Bt),
B2P5 (93% EDþ2% Bþ5% P), B2P10 (88% EDþ2% Bþ10% P), B20P5
(75% EDþ20% Bþ5% P), and B20P10 (70% EDþ20% Bþ10% P). The
test fuels were stored in the in glass bottles with screw caps in the
dark medium in order to avoid phase separation. Also, the fuel
blends were homogenized prior to the experiments.
2.2. Fatty acid composition
The fatty acid composition of yellow mustard seed oil biodiesel
was measured by using Agilent 6890 N network gas chromatog-
raphy system combined with Agilent 5975C VL MSD network mass
selective detector and HP Innowax capillary column of
60.0 m  0.25 mm x 0.25 mm. The measuring procedure and
detailed properties of gas chromatography system was found in our
previous study [47].
2.3. Fuel characterization
The most important fuel specifications of the test fuels were
measured according to the standards in the Biofuel Laboratory,
Bozok University, Yozgat, Turkey. The technical properties of the
fuel characterization test devices were given in Table 1.
2.4. Experimental apparatus
Engine performance, exhaust emissions and combustion char-
acteristic tests were carried out on engine test bed in Automotive
1335
Laboratory, Technical Sciences Vocational School Automotive Pro-
gram, Aksaray University, Aksaray, Turkey. Technical specifications
of the test engine, hydraulic dynamometer and measuring devices,
and exhaust gas analyzers were presented in Table 2. Extech brand
HD600 model data logging sound level meter with a sensitivity of
±1.4 dBA and a measurement range of 30e130 dBA was used to
measure the noise values during engine operations. The sound level
meter was placed at a distance of about 1 m from the test engine
and measured at all engine speeds. Extech brand HD600 model
data logging sound level meter with a sensitivity of ±1.4 dBA and a
measurement range of 30e130 dBA was used to measure the noise
values during engine operations. The sound level meter was placed
at a distance of about 1 m from the test engine and measured at all
engine speeds. The technical characteristics of the measuring
equipment used in the combustion analysis were also given in
Table 2. The schematic view of the engine test bed were repre-
sented in Fig. 1.
2.5. Test methodology
The calibrations of the used apparatus were ensured before
beginning the tests and pre-tests were carried out to determine the
engine operating conditions. After the pre-tests, the engine stabi-
lization time was detected so that the engine was stabilized for all
of the test fuels. After all the deficiencies encountered in the pre-
tests were eliminated, the main testing process was realized. The
ambient temperature was found to be at 25  C during the tests.
Diesel fuel was tested as a reference fuel. The engine performance,
exhaust emissions and combustion characteristics of diesel engine
fuelled with test fuels were achieved under 1000e3200 rpm engine
speeds and full load operating conditions. The cylinder pressure
was measured in each work cycle up to 720oCA for each 1oCA in-
tervals at 1400 and 2600 rpm engine speeds. Because the
maximum engine torque and brake power were found to be at 1400
and 2600 rpm, respectively. Furthermore, the average cylinder
pressures of the test fuels were measured after applying Savitzky-
Golay filtering method for at least 50 cycles.
The increase in the internal energy during combustion and the
net heat release rate (HRR) that turns into mechanical work
depending on the crank angle were calculated using Eq. (1) with
respect to the first law of thermodynamics.
dQnet g dV 1 dP
¼ P þ V (1)
dq g  1 dq g  1 dq
where; dQnet (J) refers to the energy amount passing through the
cylinder wall and combustion chamber wall at the end of com-
bustion, q (o) is the crank angle, g denotes the specific heat ratio, P
(Pa) is the cylinder pressure and V (m3) refers to the cylinder
volume.
2.6. Error analysis
In the present study, the method which was proposed by Hol-
man [48] was applied to the engine test in order to determine the
uncertainties. The following equation was utilized for the error
analysis.
" 2  2  2 #1=2
vR vR vR
wR ¼ w þ w þ…þ wn (2)
vx1 1 vx2 2 vxn
where; R is the function of the independent variables of x1, x2, x3, …,
xn, wR shows the uncertainty, w1, w2, …, wn remark the
1336 M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351

Table 1
The technical properties of the fuel characterization test devices.

No Property Device Range Unit Accuracy Manufacturer Standard

1 Density/specific Kem Kyoto DA-645 Density: 0.00000e3.00000 g/ ±0.00005 Kem Kyoto Electronics, Japan EN ISO
gravity cm3 3675
o
Temperature: 0-93 C ±0.03 EN ISO
12185
o
2 Kinematic Polyscience 7306A12E Ambient temperature-150 C ±0.05 Polyscience, USA EN ISO
viscosity Measuring tube: 1.2e10 mm2/ ±0.5 3104
s
Measuring tube: 5-50 mm2/ ±1
s
Timekeeper: 0-2400 s ±0.01
o
3 Flash point Rapid Tester RT-1 30-þ300 C ±1 Paul N. Gardner Company, USA EN ISO
2719
EN ISO
3679
4 Water content Kem Kyoto MKC-520 Karl-Fischer moisture 10e300000 mg ±0.1 Kem Kyoto Electronics, Japan EN ISO
titrator 12937
5 Calorific value IKA C200 bomb calorimeter 0e40000 J ±0.1 IKA, UK DIN 51900
6 pH Labkits ELE-PHP3BW pH range: 0-14 pH ±0.01 Labkits, Hong Kong e
o
Temperature range: 0-100 C ±1
o
7 Copper strip Koehler K25330 Bath temperature range: Ambient C ±1 Koehler Instrument, USA EN ISO
corrosion temperature-190 2160
o
8 Cloud point, Labkits PT-SYD-510F1 multifunctional low 70-Ambient temperature C ±0.5 Labkits, Hong Kong GB/T510
Pour point, temperature tester GB/T3535
Cold filter GB/T6986
plugging point SH/T0248
9 Color Lovibond brand PFX 880 model digital 0.5e8 unit ±0.1 Lovibond, UK ASTM D
automatic color meter 1500
o
10 Ash content Nabertherm brand B180 model ash furnace 30e3000 C ±1 Nabertherm, Germany e
o
11 Distillation Labkits brand PT-SYD-255G distillation test 0e400 C ±1 Labkits, Hong Kong GB/T7534-
temperatures apparatus 2004
12 Sulphur content Sindie OTG 0.7 mg/kg-%10 mg/ e XOS, USA ASTM
kg D7039
ISO 20884
13 Cetane number Grabner Instruments IROX Diesel 25e75 e e Grabner Instruments ASTM
Messtechnik, Austria D613

Table 2
The technical specifications of the test engine, hydraulic dynamometer and measuring devices, exhaust gas analyzers and measuring equipment used in the combustion
analysis.

Test engine Hydraulic dynamometer and measuring devices Exhaust gas analyzers

Hydraulic dynamometer MRU Airfair optima 7

Brand Antor 3LD510 Brand-model Range of speed Accuracy Range of torque Emission Unit Range Accuracy
Injection Direct injection Net Fren-NF 150 0e6500 rpm 1% 0-450 Nm CO ppm 0e40000 5%
Number of cylinder 1 Load cell for torque CO2 % 0e20 5%
Number of stroke per cycle 4 Brand-model Range of weight Accuracy NO2 ppm 0e200 5%
Cylinder bore 85 mm CAS e SBA 200L 0e200 kg ±1 g NO ppm 0e5000 5%
Cylinder stroke 90 mm Load cell for fuel consumption O2 v/v% 0e21 0.2%
Cylinder volume 510 cm3 Brand-model Range of weight Accuracy EGT o
C 0e750 ±2
Compression ratio 17.5:1 CAS e BCL-1L 0e3 kg ±0.01 g Bosch BEA 350
Maximum power 9 kW Air consumption meter Emission Unit Range Accuracy
Maximum torque 32.8 Nm Orifice diameter Range of pressure Smoke opacity 1/m 0e10 1%
Maximum speed 3300 rpm 27.5 mm 0-80 mmH2O
Cooling system Water cooled
Injection pressure 190 bar

Pressure sensor Amplifier Encoder

Brand Kistler Brand Kistler Brand Kübler

Model 6052C Model 5018 A Model Sendix 5000
Type Piezoelectric Number of channel 1 Range of measurement, rpm 0e12000
Range of pressure, bar 0e250 Range of measurement, pC 2e2200000 Working temperature, oC (-40)-(þ85)
Working temperature, oC (-20)-(þ350) Output signal, V (-10)-(þ10)
Frequency, kHz 0e200
Working temperature, oC 0e50
 M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351 1337

Fig. 1. The schematic view of the engine test bed.

Table 3 of erucic acid is considered to be unsuitable for human consump-

The uncertainty results. tion. Wendlinger et al. [49] pointed out that the erucic acid has
Calculated values Unit Uncertainty (%) been linked to myocardial lipidosis and heart lesions in laboratory
rats. Therefore, most of the countries restricted the sale of the
Engine torque Nm ±0.88
Brake power kW ±0.56
mustard oil. For instance, European Union and Australia allowed
Brake power kW ±0.56 the maximum 5% and 2% of erucic acid in the fatty acid structure,
Fuel consumption g/s ±0.41 respectively. The sale of the mustard oil as a foodstuff has not been
BSFC g/kWh ±0.94 allowed by United States Food and Drug Administration [49]. On
Thermal efficiency % ±0.47
the other hand, Asian countries, especially India, mustard oil ac-
counts for 18% edible oil consumption [50]. In Turkey, there is no
information about the commercial production and sale of mustard
uncertainties of independent variables. oil.
The uncertainty results calculated by the Eq. (2) were presented The fatty acid structures influence the physicochemical prop-
in Table 3. erties of biodiesel as well as handling and storage processes. Fan
et al. [51] indicated that a controlled amount of saturated, high
3. Results and discussion percentage of monounsaturated, and low percentage of poly-
unsaturated fatty acids should be involved in the ideal oil to pro-
3.1. Fatty acid composition of yellow mustard seed oil biodiesel duce biodiesel. Giakoumis [52] found that saturated oils were
better in oxidation stability and cetane number, whereas unsatu-
Table 4 shows the fatty acid composition results of yellow rated oils showed lower viscosity and excellent low temperature
mustard seed oil biodiesel and comparison with the other bio- properties. Additionally, Ruhul et al. [53] stated hat increased the
diesels produced from edible and in-edible feedstocks. These data degree of saturation of oil caused to decrease the higher heating
revealed that the most dominant fatty acids of yellow mustard seed value. It should be highlighted at this point that the yellow mustard
oil biodiesel were found to be at erucic (34.328%), oleic (28.586%), seed oil used in the present study has not been suitable for human
linolenic (11.607%), and gondoic (11.226%) acids, respectively. It is consumption owing to the high content of erucic acid in the fatty
shown that yellow mustard seed oil biodiesel has high content of acid composition. Thus, it might be used as an alternative non-
monounsaturated fatty acids in the structure. edible feedstock in the biodiesel production.
When Table 4 was evaluated, the main difference in the fatty
acid profile of the yellow mustard seed oil biodiesel from others 3.2. Fuel specifications of test fuels
was the abundance of the erucic acid. Erucic acid is a long mono-
unsaturated chain fatty acid and its formula is The most important physical and chemical characteristics of the
CH3(CH2)7CH ¼ CH(CH2)11COOH. The oils which have high content test fuels were exhibited in Table 5. As can be seen in Table 5, some
1338 M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351

Table 4
The fatty acid composition results (wt.%) of biodiesels obtained from different edible and non-edible feedstocks.

No Fatty acid Molecular Structure Systematic Formula Yellow mustard seed Safflower Palm oil Jatropha Azadirachta Moringa Olive-
weight name oil biodiesel (present oil biodiesel curcas oil indica oil oleifera oil pomace oil
study) biodiesel [55] biodiesel [55] biodiesel [56] biodiesel [57] biodiesel
[54] [58]

1 Lauric 200 12:0 Dodecanoic C12H24O2 e e 0.3 e e e e

2 Myristic 228 14:0 Tetradecanoic C14H28O2 e e 1.0 0.1 e 0.1 e
3 Palmitic 256 16:0 Hexadecanoic C16H32O2 3.354 6.335 38.1 17.7 13.98 7.9 11
4 Palmitoleic 254 16:1 Hexadec-9- C16H30O2 0.116 e 0.2 0.8 0.39 1.7 0.8
enoic
5 Stearic 284 18:0 Octadecanoic C18H36O2 e 2.246 4.1 6.4 6.25 5.5 3
6 Oleic 282 18:1 cis-9- C18H34O2 28.586 18.690 44.2 41.8 45.00 74.1 75.2
Octadecenoic
7 Linoleic 280 18:2 cis-9-cis-12 C18H32O2 10.254 72.357 11.0 32.9 32.46 4.1 7.2
Octadecadienoic
8 Linolenic 278 18:3 cis-9-cis-12 C18H30O2 11.607 e 0.3 0.2 0.60 0.2 0.5
Octadecatrienoic
9 Arachidic 312 20:0 Eicosanoic C20H40O2 0.244 0.372 0.4 0.1 0.80 2.3 e
10 Gondoic 310 20:1 11- Eicosenoic C20H38O2 11.226 e 0.2 e e 1.3 e
11 Behenic 340 22:0 Docosanoic C22H44O2 e e 0.1 e 0.50 2.8 e
12 Erucic 339 22:1 cis-13 C22H42O2 34.328 e e e e e e
Docosenoic
13 Nervonic 367 24.0 cis-15- C24H46O2 e e 0.1 e e e e
Tetracosenoic

Saturated fatty acids 3.598 8.953 44.1 24.3 21.53 18.6 14

Monounsaturated fatty acids 74.256 18.690 44.6 42.6 45.39 77.1 76
Polyunsaturated fatty acids 21.861 72.357 11.3 33.1 33.06 4.3 7.7
Total 99.715 100 100 100 99.98 100 97.7

fuel properties such as kinematic viscosity, density and low tem-
perature properties of fuel blends were improved with blending
alcohols. On the other hand, cetane number, flash point, water
content, and heating value of the fuel blends were worsened with
alcohol addition. In general, n-pentanol showed better fuel prop-
erties than 1-butanol because of the difference of the carbon
amount in the structure.
main reason for this is the high heating value of n-pentanol than 1-
butanol. Candan et al. [61] also revealed similar results in their
experimental studies. They observed approximately 17.3% decay on
average in the torques with the increase of methanol concentration
(from 5 to 15%) in the blends.
3.4. Brake power

3.3. Engine torque
The engine torque values of biodiesel/diesel/1-butanol and
biodiesel/diesel/n-pentanol fuel blends were presented in Fig. 2.
The maximum torque values were found to be at 1400 rpm engine
speed for all of the test fuels. Furthermore, the maximum torques of
B2Bt5, B2Bt10, B20Bt5, and B20Bt10 were obtained as 34.08, 32.69,
32.73 and 32.53 Nm, respectively. The maximum torques of B2P5,
B2P10, B20P5, and B20P10 were determined to be at 34.29, 33.13,
32.99 and 32.63 Nm, respectively. The engine torque values of
B2Bt5, B2Bt10, B20Bt5, and B20Bt10 fuels in comparison to ED fuel
were reduced averagely by 1.26, 6.78, 6.13 and 7.62%, respectively.
At the same time, the engine torque values of B2P5, B2P10, B20P5,
and B20P10 fuels were decreased averagely by 0.59, 4.27, 5.19 and
7.13%, respectively. There was a decreasing trend in torque values
due to the increase in the ratio of alcohol in the blends. Similar
decay trend was found by Celik et al. [8], who obtained the
maximum reduction in engine torque by 5.98e9.59% at 1400 rpm,
and 9.93e14.89% at 3200 rpm with using bioethanol-biodiesel
blends. The lower cetane number of alcohols increases the igni-
tion delay and reduces the time required for controlled combustion
and occurs poor combustion [59]. Also, the heating value of the
alcohols caused to decrease the engine torque values [60]. As can be
noticed, 1-butanol and n-pentanol have quite low heating value
35033 and 36870 kJ/kg, respectively. Therefore, the heating values
of the alcohol blended fuels were found to be at lower values than
diesel fuel. It is expected that n-pentanol blends showed better
results than 1-butanol added fuels. Indeed, experimental results
shows that n-pentanol added fuels have better torque values. The
The brake power of the test fuels at different engine speeds were
given in Fig. 3. The maximum brake power values of fuel blends
were obtained under 2600 rpm of engine speed. The maximum
brake powers of B2Bt5, B2Bt10, B20Bt5, and B20Bt10 were 7.49,
7.03, 7.09 and 6.98 kW, respectively and the maximum brake
powers of B2P5, B2P10, B20P5, and B20P10 were determined as
7.50, 7.26, 7.23 and 7.03 kW, respectively. The brake power of ED
fuel was 7.51 kW. As a result, n-pentanol showed better results than
1-butanol. The brake power values were decreased when alcohol
proportion increased in the blends owing to the heating value and
cetane number of alcohols. Moreover, low viscosity and density
values of alcohols affected the viscosity and density of fuel blends
and caused to leakage in the fuel pump and injector of the test
engine [59]. Another reason for the power lost occurred in the
diesel engine when using alcohol is the latent heat of evaporation
which was explained by Rahimi et al. [60]. Rahimi and coworkers
indicated that a part of the energy was consumed for the vapor-
ization of the fuels throughout the fuel injection process because of
the higher latent heat of evaporation of alcohols. The compatible
results were also found from Celik et al. [8] and Candan et al. [61].
Some modifications might be done in the engine operating
conditions so as to avoid from power reductions in the engine
output. The injected fuel quantity by fuel pump could be increased
with minor modifications on the engine, particularly increasing
fuel injection pressure. So that the more fuel is sent inside the
cylinder and the more energy is obtained from the combustion
process. The other method is to enhance the fuel properties such as
cetane number, viscosity, density, etc. with various additives [59].
The compression ratio is another parameters that impacts the
Table 5
The physical and chemical properties of the test fuels.

Property Unit Diesel B2Bt5 B2Bt10 B20Bt5 B20Bt10 Bt B2P5 B2P10 B20P5 B20P10 P

Carbon % (m/m) 87.05 86.31 85.83 83.80 83.29 64.86 86.30 85.83 83.81 83.31 68.18
Hydrogen % (m/m) 12.95 12.93 12.94 12.66 12.66 13.51 12.94 12.95 12.67 12.67 13.64
Oxygen % (m/m) e 0.76 1.23 3.54 4.05 21.63 0.76 1.22 3.52 4.02 18.18
C/H e 6.722 6.675 6.633 6.619 6.679 4.801 6.669 6.628 6.615 6.575 4.632
Chemical formula e C14H25 C13.57H24.40O0.09 C13.07H23.65O0.14 C14.22H25.78O0.45 C13.72H25.03O0.5 C4H10O C13.62H24.50O0.09 C13.17H23.85O0.14 C14.27H25.88O0.45 C13.82H25.23O0.5 C5H12O
Manganese mg/kg 0.035 e e e e e e e e e e

M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351

Density (at 15  C) kg/m3 829.65 828.99 827.64 837.66 836.28 808.14 829.29 828.39 837.82 837.03 813.13
Kinematic viscosity 40  C mm2/s 2.554 2.415 2.340 2.765 2.678 2.253 2.481 2.425 2.808 2.769 2.889
70  C mm2/s 1.595 1.475 1.427 1.689 1.618 1.227 1.525 1.475 1.698 1.658 1.486
100  C mm2/s 1.117 1.028 1.002 1.157 1.124 0.752 1.081 1.028 1.181 1.139 0.887
o
Flash point C 60 37 36 39 38 35 49 48 52 50 47
Heating value kJ/kg 44565 44437 43236 43278 42857 35033 44838 43717 43421 43158 36870
Water content mg/kg 49.405 92.317 114.32 143.89 153.21 298.00 195.93 234.42 199.53 228.98 962.37
Color e 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.6 1.6 e 1.3 1.3 1.6 1.6 e
pH e 6.886 6.814 6.794 6.831 6.777 6.709 6.891 6.838 6.932 6.916 6.913
Copper strip corrosion Degree of corrosion 1a 1a 1a 1a 1a e 1a 1a 1a 1a e
(3 h at 50  C)
o
Cloud point C 4 3 4 0 1 e 3 4 1 2 e
o
Cold filter plugging point C 19 23 25 21 24 e 22 26 20 23 e
o
Pour point C 36 38 40 34 35 e 38 39 35 36 e
o
Freezing point C 39 40 41 35 36 e 39 41 37 38 e
Cetane number e 55.10 53.25 51.37 53.64 51.75 17.32 53.38 51.61 53.76 51.99 19.74
Acid value mg KOH/g 0.198 0.232 0.219 0.264 0.238 e 0.253 0.241 0.290 0.259 e
Ash content % (m/m) 0.0161 e e e e e e e e e e
Sulphur content mg/kg 6.7 5.9 5.3 4.7 4.5 e 6.2 5.0 5.3 4.7 e
o
Distillation (90% recovery) C 317 e e e e e e e e e e
Distillation
Recovered at 250  C % (v/v) 51.67 e e e e e e e e e e
Recovered at 350  C % (v/v) 97.14 e e e e e e e e e e
o
95% (v/v) recovered at C 335 e e e e e e e e e e
Latent heat of evaporationa (kJ/kg) 270e375 e e e e 581.4 e e e e 308.5
a
These values were supplied from Ref. [33].

1339
1340 M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351

Fig. 2. The engine torque values of biodiesel/diesel/1-butanol and biodiesel/diesel/n-pentanol fuel blends.

Fig. 3. The brake power of the test fuels at different engine speeds.

power performance of the engine. Fu et al. [62] showed that the
power values of liquefied methane engine was obviously increased
when the compression ratio increased. They also indicated the
direct factor as the higher compression ratio caused to the bigger
effective expansion ratio of liquefied methane engine and the larger
power ability of the gas in the cylinder.
3.5. Brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC)
The BSFC values of the test fuels depending on the engine speed
were demonstrated in Fig. 4. The minimum BSFC values were found
to be at the range of 2200e2600 rpm for test fuels. The minimum
BSFC was obtained to be at 250.51 g/kWh for diesel fuel, while it
was found to be at 252.15 g/kWh for B2P5 among other alcohol
blends. Compared to ED fuel, BSFC values of B2Bt5, B2Bt10, B20Bt5,
and B20Bt10 were increased averagely as 1.84, 8.04, 6.19, and 8.07%,
respectively. Therewithal, BSFC values of B2P5, B2P10, B20P5, and
B20P10 were risen averagely by 0.77, 4.97, 5.00, and 7.27%,
respectively. The results showed that BSFC values were increased
when the alcohol ratio increased in the blends. Because, the heating
value of alcohols was lower than both ED and biodiesel fuels [8].
Fuel consumption of n-pentanol-added fuels was lower because
the n-pentanol's heating value is higher than that of 1-butanol-
added fuels (as seen in Table 5). Additionally, the evaporation of
alcohols occurs slowly due to the fact that the latent evaporation
temperatures of the alcohols are higher than ED fuel [61]. The other
reasons were also explained by Rahimi et al. [60] as follows. First
one is cetane number of fuel blends is lower than that of diesel fuel
due to the alcohol addition. Secondly, the energy values of the fuel
blends were affected from the water content which were come
from nature of the alcohol. The experimental results have showed
the similar trends with the results of Yilmaz [63], who determined
as the methanol and ethanol fraction rises, BSFC of the blended
fuels also increases. He recommended some modifications to get
rid some of this problem a bit as follows. The better vaporization of
fuel blends could be ensured under the full or high load operating
conditions, and/or the air should be heated prior to the intake
process. Candan et al. [61] determined that BSFC values of methanol
blended with diesel fuels increased approximately 4.43e16.76% on
average. It is well known that heating value of methanol is lower
than both 1-butanol and n-pentanol. It is concluded that our study
were validated from above mentioned investigations.
3.6. In-cylinder pressure
The combustion analysis were performed for all of the test fuels
at 1400 and 2600 rpm. These engine speeds were significant
because the maximum engine torques and brake powers were
 M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351 1341

Fig. 4. The BSFC values of the test fuels depending on the engine speed.

Fig. 5. The variation of in-cylinder pressure depending on the crank angle (CA) of diesel engine operating with the test fuels under (a) 1400 and (b) 2600 rpm.

obtained. The variation of in-cylinder pressure depending on the
crank angle (CA) of diesel engine operating with the test fuels
under 1400 and 2600 rpm were represented in Fig. 5. As can be
seen in Fig. 5, the maximum in-cylinder pressure of ED, B2Bt5,
B2Bt10, B20Bt5, B20Bt10, B2P5, B2P10, B20P5, and B20P10 were
measured to be at 94.52, 95.82, 95.04, 94.55, 94.66, 95.23, 95.57,
94.73 and 95.41 bar, respectively under 1400 rpm. In-cylinder
pressure of test fuels were decreased when the engine speed
increased at different ratios. The maximum in-cylinder pressure of
ED, B2Bt5, B2Bt10, B20Bt5, B20Bt10, B2P5, B2P10, B20P5, and
B20P10 were observed as 81.24, 82.19, 79.58, 78.19, 78.91, 80.20,
79.26, 79.24, and 79.51 bar, respectively at 2600 rpm. The
maximum in-cylinder pressure of test fuels occurred at 371-372oCA
for 1400 rpm, and 373-376oCA for 2600 rpm.
1342 M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351
Generally, the maximum in-cylinder pressure was moved away
from top dead center with the addition of alcohol. This is because
the cetane number of the alcohols is lower than ED and biodiesel
fuel and therefore increases the ignition delay. Moreover, SOC was
postponed due to the lower cetane number of alcohols. So that,
more fuel was burned in the premixed phase, thus higher in-
cylinder pressure was observed with the fuel blends. One of the
important parameter that affects the in-cylinder pressure is latent
heat of evaporation. Another reason for increasing ignition delay
could be identified by the higher latent heat of evaporation values
of alcohols than conventional diesel fuel. It can cause to decrease
the in-cylinder temperature and thereby an increase in ignition
delay was obtained [64]. This statement were understood when
look at the section 3.10. The EGT were decreased since the alcohol
treated fuels were utilized in the diesel engine. Anbarasu et al. [64]
also stated another reason. Lower viscosity and density values of
alcohol could cause to enhance the spray characteristics. Therefore
better air-fuel mixture might be obtained in the combustion
chamber and the in-cylinder pressure was increased. Ors € et al. [65]
revealed that more fuel sample accumulated at the point of SOC
owing to the lower cetane number and it burned suddenly at the
end of ignition delay period. So in-cylinder pressure was increased
with the addition of alcohol to the blend fuels. Almost immediate
results were also found by Celik et al. [8], and Tse et al. [66].
3.7. Heat release rate (HRR)
Similar to the in-cylinder pressure, HRR was analyzed at 1400
and 2600 rpm engine speeds. The change of HRR values depending
on the engine CA of the diesel engine running on the test fuels
under 1400 and 2600 rpm were drawn in Fig. 6. A negative HRR was
occurred at the beginning of the combustion since the fuel evap-
oration accumulated throughout ignition delay period. However,
this got a positive when the combustion started [24]. When looking
at Fig. 6, the maximum HRR values of ED, B2Bt5, B2Bt10, B20Bt5,
B20Bt10, B2P5, B2P10, B20P5, and B20P10 were obtained to be at
16.11, 17.14, 17.01, 16.76, 17.48, 17.26, and 17.31 J/o, respectively under
1400 rpm. At the same time, under 2600 rpm engine speed con-
dition, the maximum HRR values of ED, B2Bt5, B2Bt10, B20Bt5,
B20Bt10, B2P5, B2P10, B20P5, and B20P10 were computed as 15.89,
16.47, 16.13, 15.80, 16.39, 16.45, 16.36, 16.30 and 16.38 J/o,
respectively.
When the maximum HRR values of the fuels subjected to
alcohol addition were evaluated, it was generally seen that the
increases occurred which is similar to the results of Ors € et al. [65].
The above observations show that the HRR values of the fuel blends
increased between 4.03 and 8.50% at 1400 rpm while between 1.38
and 3.65% at 2600 rpm. Only B20Bt5 fuel sample demonstrated
0.57% lower HRR value that diesel fuel. HRR values have risen due to
almost similar reasons mentioned in in-cylinder pressure section.
This can be explained as the effect of increasing the burning rate
of the alcohols and the decrease in the heat transfer rate. It also
causes the cetane numbers of the alcohols to be low and increases
the ignition delay, thereby increasing the amount of fuel in the
cylinder [26]. The addition of alcohol leads to increase latent heat of
evaporation of the fuel blends. Therefore in-cylinder temperature
was reduced because of increasing the ignition delay and it effected
heat release rate. Additionally, the diffusive combustion phase was
enhanced because of the higher oxygen content of fuel blends. At
the same time HRR values were increased and it also lead to reduce
the combustion period [64]. Zhu et al. [17] indicated that higher
HRR values was obtained with pentanol addition into the biodiesel
fuel because of lower viscosity. Pentanol addition caused to
improve the atomization in the cylinder and advanced the air-fuel
mixture. Tse et al. [66] reported that longer ignition delay, better
volatility property and lower viscosity of the alcohol blended fuel
samples might bring about more fuel accumulated in the ignition
delay period so as to combust in the premixed burning phase
thereby higher HRR was obtained.
3.8. Combustion parameters
The combustion process consists of ignition delay (ID), uncon-
trolled combustion, controlled combustion and after burning pe-
riods. During the ignition delay, fuel is injected into the combustion
chamber and evaporates by mixing with air. Ignition delay period is
the time span between commencement of fuel injection and the
start of fuel ignition. Ignition delay, in other words, the main rate at
which sudden pressure increase is observed. During this time, the
physical and chemical processes required to prepare the fuel for
combustion come into play. There is a temperature difference be-
tween the pressure of the fuel sprayed into the combustion
chamber and the temperature elevated at the time of temperature
compression with the temperature. During the vaporization of the
fuel, the temperature of the heat overflows this temperature dif-
ference. During this transfer extracted heat, slow to some extent on
the temperature and pressure increase in the cylinder [67]. Other
important parameters in the analysis of combustion in diesel en-
gines are start of injection (SOI), start of combustion (SOC), end of
combustion (EOC) and combustion period (CP). Injection timing or
SOI is the time when the injected fuel inside the combustion
chamber starts. On one hand, SOC is defined at which the net HRR
began to increase. On the other hand, EOC is described when the
net HRR gets zero at the end of combustion process. Combustion
duration or CP is identified to be at the time interval between SOC
and EOC [30].
ID, SOI, SOC, EOC and CP values of the test fuels obtained from
the combustion analysis were given in Table 6. SOI, SOC and EOC
values increased depending on the increases of engine speed, while
ID and CP values decreased. Similar trend was also found by Celik
and his team [8] who stated that the temperature of the inside
cylinder increased by means of increasing engine speed and hence,
ID occurred shorter. In another study conducted by Qi et al. [68], ID
period was decreased when the engine load was increased because
of the higher gas temperature in the cylinder. Unsurprisingly, the
engine speed caused to rise the EGT. For this reason, when Table 6
and Fig. 8 were evaluated together, the values obtained were
largely close to the expected results. Also, it can be seen that the
alcohol addition on the diesel/biodiesel blends increased the ID
values. One of the most influential features that affect the ID is the
cetane numbers of fuels. The results of the cetane number of bio-
diesel being slightly higher than ED fuel, whereas the cetane
number of the alcohols being low. Indeed, one of the most impor-
tant parameter that affects the biodiesel's cetane number is the
fatty acid composition of the sample. This subject was clearly dis-
cussed in Section 3.1. The cetane numbers of 1-butanol and n-
pentanol were also found to be at 17.32 and 19.74, respectively.
Although, the cetane number of biodiesel was higher than those of
diesel fuel, the cetane numbers of the fuel blends were decreased
owing to the alcohol addition. A low cetane number might cause to
evaporate more fuel in the combustion chamber and occur a higher
amount of heat. As a result, a longer ID is obtained.
Ozener et al. [69] stated that the poor atomization, slower
mixing process, higher penetration and lower cone angle became in
the engine because of the high fuel viscosity and occurred a longer
ID period. On the other hand, the viscosity and density values of the
alcohol blended fuels were lower values which enhance the air-fuel
mixture and thus higher amount of fuel are burned rapidly during
the premixed burning phase. The increasing alcohol concentration
in the fuel blends decreased the surface tension and density. This
 M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351 1343

Fig. 6. The change of HRR values depending on the engine CA of the diesel engine running on the test fuels under (a) 1400 and (b) 2600 rpm.

Table 6
The combustion parameters of the diesel engine running on the test fuels at 1400 and 2600 rpm.

Fuel 1400 rpm 2600 rpm

SOI SOC EOC ID CP SOI SOC EOC ID CP

o o o o o o o o o o
CA CA CA CA ms CA ms CA CA CA CA ms CA ms

ED 332 351 398 19 2.36 47 5.88 333 354 399 21 1.29 45 2.96
B20Bt5 334 352 399 18 2.23 47 5.82 336 355 401 19 1.22 46 2.97
B20Bt10 335 354 399 19 2.37 45 5.62 336 357 401 21 1.35 44 2.82
B20P5 334 353 399 19 2.35 46 5.74 336 356 401 20 1.29 45 2.89
B20P10 334 353 398 19 2.34 45 5.62 337 356 401 19 1.21 45 2.89
B2Bt5 334 353 398 19 2.19 45 5.18 335 354 400 19 1.21 46 2.94
B2Bt10 334 353 399 19 2.37 46 5.74 336 356 400 20 0.96 44 3.17
B2P5 334 353 399 19 2.36 46 5.75 336 358 400 22 1.40 42 2.68
B2P10 334 353 399 19 2.18 46 5.37 337 355 401 18 1.08 46 2.95
1344 M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351
indicates that the blended fuels well mixed with the air owing to
the alcohol's evaporation and atomization are enhanced in this way
[18]. Tse et al. [66] found that the increasing the ethanol concen-
tration (from 0 to 20%) in the fuel blends got a longer ID and hence
SOC was retarded. In this study, the increasing 1-butanol and n-
pentanol proportions in the blends were postponed SOC values in
comparison to the diesel fuel. Additionally, Alptekin et al. [70]
indicated that later SOI periods of alcohol blended fuels may bring
about retarding SOC period. The results obtained from the experi-
ments were largely similar to these explained works and done by
€ et al. [65].
other researchers such as Zhu et al. [17] and Ors
3.9. Brake thermal efficiency
The variation of the brake thermal efficiency (BTE) of test fuels
depending on the engine speed was demonstrated in Fig. 7. As can
be seen in Fig. 7, the BTEs of B2Bt5 and B2P5 fuel blends increased
averagely by 0.69 and 0.85%, respectively in comparison to ED fuel,
while the BTEs of B2Bt10 and B2P10 fuel blends decreased aver-
agely by 2.42 and 0.68%, respectively. The increase in BTE having
low concentration of biodiesel and alcohol in the blends is due to
the improvement of the combustion. Either biodiesel or alcohol
have much more oxygen content in the chemical structure. This
cause to increase oxygen in the cylinder and hence a more complete
combustion is achieved. The faster combustion might be a
contributor to the high BTE [64]. An et al. [71] pointed out that the
EGT and the viscosity effect of biodiesel became the predominant
parameters, resulting a poor combustion inside cylinder of the
engine. Compared to the ED fuel's results, the BTEs of B20Bt5,
B20Bt10, B20P5 and B20P10 were reduced averagely by 0.84, 1.59,
0.04, and 1.55%, respectively.
When the results were evaluated, it was seen that the BTEs
decreased generally with alcohol addition, which is similar to the
results of Candan et al. [61]. Ibrahim [30] found that the addition of
20% butanol into the B50 blend reduced the maximum thermal
efficiency from 30.7% to 29.4%. Meanwhile, no obvious difference
was monitored for the BTE with using n-pentanol/diesel fuel blends
by Wei et al. [31]. On the other hand, 1-butanol and n-pentanol
treated fuel blends showed tolerable variation in the BTE thus they
have great potentials to be applied as an additive fuel in the diesel
engines. Furthermore, it was determined that this ratio increased
due to the increase of alcohol ratio. It could be explained as the
heating values of the biodiesel and alcohol are lower than the diesel
fuel. Besides this, the BTE of n-pentanol added fuels were higher
Fig. 7. The variation of the BTE of test fuels depending on the engine speed.
than that of 1-butanol added fuels owing to the fact that the
heating value of 1-butanol is lower than the heating value of n-
pentanol. ID increases due to the lower cetane number and so it
causes to decrease the BTE. The BTE can be improved by applying
different ways on the engine. For instance, Fu et al. [62] represented
that both engine torque and thermal efficiency of liquefied
methane engine could be enhanced by increasing compression
ratio.
3.10. Exhaust gas temperature
The change of the exhaust gas temperature (EGT) depending on
the engine speed was represented in Fig. 8. The maximum EGT
values of the test fuels were happened at 2600 rpm. The maximum
EGTs of B2Bt5, B2Bt10, B20Bt5 and B20Bt10 were found to be at
652.0, 648.4, 654.8 and 651  C, respectively, while the maximum
EGTs of B2P5, B2P10, B20P5 and B20P10 were determined as 653.0,
644.1, 656.8 and 651.5  C, respectively. The highest EGT was
observed as 658.9  C in ED fuel. EGT is an important variable that
affects the exhaust emissions. EGT depends on the fuel specifica-
tions like cetane number, density, viscosity, heating value, etc. and
engine operating conditions such as compression ratio, injection
pressure, etc. [61]. There is not significant difference between the
experimental results, EGT of alcohol blended fuels were slightly
lower than ED fuel. The alcohols can withdraw the heat from the
medium due to the having high evaporation heat and EGT can
decreases slightly. Moreover, the combustion end temperature
decreases when the diesel engine operating with the fuel which is
the high oxygen content and low heating value. The high content of
oxygen in the alcohol structure causes to decrease EGT by
increasing the combustion rate [63,72].
3.11. CO emission
CO emission results of test fuels versus engine speed were
shown in Fig. 9. As can be seen in Fig. 9, CO emissions of B2Bt5,
B2Bt10, B20Bt5, and B20Bt10 were reduced averagely by 6.90, 11.02,
20.18, and 27.54%, respectively compared to ED fuel results.
Meanwhile similar trend was observed in the n-pentanol added
fuels. CO emissions of B2P5, B2P10, B20P5, and B20P10 were
decreased averagely by 19.23, 27.32, 24.80 and 32.40%, respectively.
It was observed that the alcohol addition decreased the CO emis-
sion. Also, n-pentanol added fuels showed better result than 1-
butanol added fuels owing to the oxygen content in the structure.
 M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351 1345

Fig. 8. The change of the EGT depending on the engine speed.

Fig. 9. CO emission results of test fuels versus engine speed.

CO emission, expresses the lost chemical energy, is an important
parameter through the exhaust gases. Also, CO emission in the
exhaust can identify the incomplete combustion because of the
inadequate amount of oxygen in the combustion chamber. There-
fore, the oxygen content in the medium is effective in order not to
form CO emission. Biodiesel fuel and alcohols include much more
oxygen in the structure than ED fuel. For this reason, it is predicted
that less CO emissions will be released as a result of these fuels.
However, the excess oxygen is attached with carbon atoms and
forms CO2 emission [61]. In addition to this, alcohols have less
carbon atoms in the bound, resulting less amount of CO emission
[59]. Another reason for decreasing the CO emission is cetane
number of the fuel, because the high cetane number can ensure a
near complete combustion in the chamber. Imdadul et al. [73]
remarked that pentanol evaporated easily in the cylinder owing to
the lower density value of pentanol than diesel fuel thereby the
length of the spray atomization was reduced. They also indicated
that pentanol added fuel samples lead to a leaning influence as
pentanol had low stoichiometric airefuel ratio. For that, CO emis-
sion was decreased. Ajav et al. [74] found that the percentage of CO
emissions were reduced from 36.8 to 62.5% with the use of 5e20%
ethanol-diesel blends compared to the diesel fuel. Choi et al. [75]
reported that split injection could be applied on the diesel engine
instead of single injection in order to obtain more decreasing CO
emission level. Li et al. [36] also obtained decreased CO emissions
with using diesel/biodiesel/pentanol blends and Akar [14] also
found that butanol addition to diesel/flax oil biodiesel decreased CO
emission in comparison to the diesel fuel.
The opposite outcome in CO emission was obtained by Wei et al.
[31], who indicated that diesel/pentanol blends showed higher CO
emission, and its influence was prominent under the lower engine
loads. Zhu et al. [17] concluded that CO emissions of waste cooking
oil biodiesel/n-pentanol blends were higher than both diesel and
biodiesel fuels, particularly low engine load from 0.08 to 0.24 MPa.
Randazzo and Sodre  [28] noticed that CO emission was increased
proportionally to ethanol concentration in B20 fuel blend.
3.12. CO2 emission
The change of CO2 emissions of the test fuels were exhibited in
Fig. 10. When the Fig. 10 was analyzed, the maximum results were
found to be at 2800 rpm that was near the engine speed of
maximum brake power. The maximum CO2 emissions of B2Bt5,
B2Bt10, B20Bt5, and B20Bt10 were found to be at 14.4, 14.2, 14.1 and
13.8%, respectively. At the same time, the maximum CO2 emissions
of B2P5, B2P10, B20P5, and B20P10 were measured at 14.5, 14.2,
14.5, and 14.0%, respectively. Almost the same results were ob-
tained in all test fuels. On the other hand, alcohol added fuels
formed less CO2 emissions than ED fuel. CO2 emission can give an
information about the complete combustion in the chamber. One of
1346 M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351
Fig. 10. The change of CO2 emissions of the test fuels.
the most important parameter is the oxygen content for generating
complete combustion. However, the opposite results were obtained
in the experiments. Alcohols and biodiesel fuel have much more
oxygen in the structure, but CO2 emissions decreased. The main
reason for this, alcohols have less carbon atoms in the structure
than ED and biodiesel fuels. It caused to less CO2 emissions. This
result is in agreement with that obtained by Randazzo and Sodre  chamber. O2 emissions increased with the increase of alcohol and
[28], who detected that increasing ethanol concentration in the B20
fuel blend lead to decrease CO2 emission because of low carbon to
hydrogen ratio in the ethanol molecule. It was seen that n-pentanol
added fuels formed more CO2 emission than 1-butanol added fuels
because one has 5 carbons and the other has 4 carbons. Another
reason can be that the alcohols prevent the homogeneous mixture
of fuel in the cylinder. The combustion speed and the reaction time
of the carbon and oxygen atoms can decreases. Thus, less CO2
emission can form in the exhaust gas after the combustion process
[61]. Alptekin et al. [70] presented that CO2 emission of fuel sample
(20% waste oil biodiesel þ 20% bioethanol þ 60% diesel fuel)
decreased up to 7.1% compared with diesel fuel at 600 Nm because
of the low carbon to hydrogen ratio of bioethanol. The reduction
trend of CO2 emission with butanol addition to the diesel/biodiesel
blends were verified from Akar [16]. It can be concluded that 1-
butanol and n-pentanol treated fuel blends may be conducted as
an important additives to struggle with the global warming.
An opposite trend in CO2 emission was also reported by different
authors. Hulwan and Joshi [18] stated that CO2 emission values of
fuel blends, which included 20 and 30% ethanol in the diesel-
biodiesel blend, were ascended at low load engine operating con-
ditions. Because, the fuel consumption was increased so as to obtain
same power since the poor combustion. They also found that CO2
emissions were not changed at all loads when the injection timing
were adjusted from 21 to 13 CA before top dead center. Another
study conducted by Babu and Anand [42], who found that the CO2
emission of used frying oil biodiesel/diesel/alcohol blends had
higher than diesel and biodiesel fuel because of complete com-
bustion. However, they observed maximum CO2 emission with
using B85D5P10 which was 1.1 and 0.85% vol. higher than that of
diesel fuel and biodiesel fuel, respectively.
3.13. O2 emission
Fig. 11 exhibits O2 emissions as a function of engine speed for ED,
biodiesel/ED/1-butanol and biodiesel/ED/n-pentanol blends. The
maximum O2 emissions of the test fuels were observed at 3200 rpm
engine speed. O2 emissions of B2Bt5, B2Bt10, B20Bt5, and B20Bt10
were increased averagely by 84.62, 93.45, 102.59 and 121.34%,
respectively in comparison to ED fuel results. And also, O2 emis-
sions of B2P5, B2P10, B20P5, and B20P10 were risen averagely by
52.74, 67.72, 62.82 and 78.38%, respectively. One of the most
important parameter in order to occur combustion in the internal
combustion engines is the amount of oxygen in combustion
biodiesel addition in the fuels. Because, the alcohols and biodiesel
fuel have oxygen content at different rates [76]. There has not been
previously reported study about oxygen emission of 1-butanol and
n-pentanol treated fuel samples to the best of the authors’
knowledge.
3.14. NOX emissions
Approximately 78% of the air is composed of N2 and it cannot
react in normal conditions. However, N2 reacts with O2 owing to the
high temperature in the combustion chamber. NOX is composed of
higher amount of NO and lesser amount of NO2. In general, the
other nitrogen oxides likewise N2O, N2O5, NO3 are not taken into
account. It is very important to understand NOX formation mech-
anism in terms of decreasing NOX emissions. The most common
mechanisms for NOX formation during the diesel combustion are
Zeldovich (thermal), Fenimore (prompt), N2O pathway, fuel-bound
nitrogen and the NNH. Zeldovich and Fenimore mechanisms are
dominant mechanisms in biodiesel combustion [77]. These mech-
anisms are summarized in the following paragraphs.
Zeldovich mechanism describes the oxidation of nitrogen and
NOX formation. It is believed that Zeldovich mechanism is the
predominant pathway for NOX formation in the exhaust during the
combustion of biodiesel and diesel fuel [78]. N2 and O2 react with a
series of chemical reactions because of combustion above 1700 K in
this mechanism. Saravanan et al. [79] indicated that the rate of the
thermal NO formation is dependent on the temperature of the
combustion gases. Furthermore, the concentration of oxygen and
nitrogen, and residence time have affected the production of
thermal NO [80]. The pathways including chemical reactions
(3)e(5) is known as Zeldovich mechanism [81].
N2 þ O4NO þ N (3)
N þ O2 4NO þ O (4)
N þ OH4NO þ H (5)
 M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351 1347

Fig. 11. O2 emissions as a function of engine speed for ED, biodiesel/ED/1-butanol and biodiesel/ED/n-pentanol blends.

Another significant NOX formation pathway is firstly identified
by Fenimore and was labeled as prompt NOX. Fenimore indicated
that NO emission was begun by means of molecular nitrogen and
hydrocarbon radicals likewise CH, CH2, C2, C, and C2H [82]. The
prompt NOX is formed through the following reactions between (6)
and (10) [77].
CH þ N2 4HCN þ N
CH2 þ N2 4HCN þ NH
N þ O2 4NO þ O
HCN þ OH4CN þ H2 O
CN þ O2 4NO þ CO
It is noted that the most important contributors are CH and CH2
demonstrated in Equations (6) and (7) to form prompt NOX [77].
NOX formation rate from non-thermal pathway such as prompt and
fuel-bound nitrogen are remarked as less important than thermal
NOX formation [79]. On the other hand, thermal mechanism is
necessary for considering in this study according to the excess air
ratio is bigger than 1.0.
As mentioned above in the first paragraph, NOX calculated as the
sum of NO and NO2 without regard to other nitrogen oxides. NO
and NO2 emission values were presented in Table 1s which is given
in the supplementary material document for better understanding.
NOX emissions as a function of engine speed for ED, biodiesel/ED/1-
butanol and biodiesel/ED/n-pentanol blends were drawn in Fig. 12,
and as seen in Fig. 12, the maximum NOX emissions of the test fuels
were measured at 1400 rpm that was the maximum engine tor-
(6) ques. Generally, NOX emissions increases with the increase of bio-
diesel fuel proportion in the blends. This point was explained by
(7) many researchers [83e86]. However, NOX emissions decreased
with the addition of alcohols in the fuels. In the present study, NOX
emissions could decrease this way. While NOX emission of ED fuel
(8) was measured at 1244 ppm, NOX emission of B2Bt5, B2Bt10,
B20Bt5, and B20Bt10 were found to be at 1214, 1169, 1283, and
(9) 1239 ppm, respectively and NOX emission of B2P5, B2P10, B20P5,
and B20P10 were determined to be at 1211, 1167, 1279, and
(10) 1237 ppm, respectively.
The in-cylinder pressure and temperature, ID and CP are the
most significant parameters for the formation of NOX emissions in
the exhaust gas. Yilmaz et al. [34,63] indicated that the overall
oxygen contents of blends were increased by adding alcohol and
leading to better combustion in the cylinder, while decreasing the
cetane number. These changes can occur a cooling effect in the
cylinder. The oxygen content of 1-butanol was calculated to be at
21.63%, while the oxygen content of n-pentanol was 18.18%.

Fig. 12. NOX emissions as a function of engine speed for ED, biodiesel/ED/1-butanol and biodiesel/ED/n-pentanol blends.
1348 M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351
Anbarasu et al. [64] noted that alcohol blended fuels decreased the
cetane number, which expresses a longer ID and more quantity of
fuel combusted in the premixed mode. They also presented that the
key factors which influence the NOX formation are combustion
temperature, local oxygen concentration, and residence time in the
high temperature zone based on the thermal NOX formation
mechanism. Although this situation might emit the higher NOX
emissions, the cetane numbers and also ID values of fuel blends in
this study were very close to each other (51.37e53.76). For this
reason, NOX emissions are not adversely affected. Celik et al. [8] and
Sayin [87] highlighted that the alcohols’ cooling effect can cause to
reduce the combustion temperature in the cylinder owing to the
latent heat of evaporation and thus NOX emission decreased. The
latent heat of evaporation of 1-butanol, n-pentanol and diesel fuel
were given as 581.4 kJ/kg, 308. kJ/kg, and 270e375 kJ/kg, respec-
tively by Kumar and Saravanan [33]. Huang et al. [88] pointed out
that 1-butanol and n-pentanol have lower heating value and for
that combustion temperature were reduced. In the present study,
the heating value of 1-butanol and n-pentanol were found to be at
35033 kJ/kg and 36870 kJ/kg, respectively. So that, the nitrogen and
oxygen atoms cannot react properly with each other and reduce the
NOX emissions by decreasing the temperature of residual gases
inside the combustion chamber. In addition, since the density and
viscosity of alcohols are lower than the biodiesel and diesel fuel, the
combustion temperature in the cylinder directly affects the final
temperature. Above mentioned reasons were evaluated, n-penta-
nol added fuels showed better results than 1-butanol blended fuels.
Tse et al. [66], and Aydin and Ogut [76] also revealed similar results
in their experimental studies. Shu et al. [89] recommended that the
retarding of the pilot injection degree could be an effective way to
decease NOX emissions of diesel engine fuelled with natural gas/
diesel fuel blend.
3.15. Smoke opacity
The variation of smoke opacity of test fuels under different en-
gine speeds were shown in Fig. 13. The maximum smoke opacity
values were measured at the engine speed of 1800 rpm. Compared
to ED fuel, the smoke opacity of B2Bt5, B2Bt10, B2P5, and B20Bt5
were decreased averagely by 21.20, 35.43, 30.94 and 44.43%,
respectively. Meanwhile, the smoke opacities of B2P5, B2P10,
B20P5, and B20P10 fuel blends were reduced averagely by 10.47,
16.39, 15.86, and 25.81%, respectively. First of all, smoke occurs due
to the incomplete combustion process. Biodiesel fuels have more
oxygen content in the chemical structure. Biodiesel-diesel blends
Fig. 13. The variation of smoke opacity of test fuels under different engine speeds.
showed less smoke emission than diesel fuel [69]. However, the
opposite result was given by Subbabiah and Gopal [29]. They found
that the smoke opacity of biodiesel increase by 27.93% than diesel
fuel. The experimental results showed that the alcohol addition
also decreased the smoke opacity of the diesel engine. Further-
more, the increasing the alcohol ratio in the blends lead to the more
decreasing smoke emissions. The results are also comparable to
those reported by Subbabiah and Gopal and Huang et al. [88]. The
smoke opacity values of the alcohol added fuels decreased owing to
the oxygen content of the alcohol in the bond. Celik et al. [8] ob-
tained the maximum reduction of 33.11% with using 20%
bioethanol-80% biodiesel blends compared to the neat biodiesel
fuels. Can et al. [59] also stated that the smoke emission were
reduced with addition ethanol to the diesel fuel under the original
injection pressure. They also tested the engine at various injection
pressure such as 200 and 250 bars, and thus even more decreasing
smoke emissions were observed in all engine speeds. Lei et al. [27]
showed that the atmospheric pressure has an important impact on
the smoke emission if it's lower than 90 kPa, otherwise the impacts
were declined. Candan et al. [61] noticed that cetane improver
addition into the methanol-diesel fuel blends increased the cetane
number, whereas smoke opacity also increased approximately 5%
on average on account for extended combustion period, though
methanol blends showed the decay in smoke emission by 29.6% on
average. Imdadul et al. [73] noted that an average decrement 21.2%
in smoke for pentanol added fuels in contrast to B20 biodiesel fuel.
Sayin [87] found that methanol blended fuels generated less smoke
rather than ethanol blended fuels because of higher oxygen content
of methanol. The compatible results were observed in the present
study. 1-butanol has higher amount of oxygen than n-pentanol and
hence even lower smoke emissions were occurred in the exhaust.
Fang et al. [90] concluded that ethanol/biodiesel/diesel fuel blends
were an efficient way to decrease both NOX and smoke emissions in
premixed low temperature combustion process.
3.16. Engine noise
The engine noise variation of the test fuels at different engine
speeds were given in Fig. 14. The engine noise results fluctuates at
different rations for the test fuels. The maximum engine noise were
measured at 3000e3200 rpm, while the minimum engine noise
values were found to be at 1000e1200 rpm. Generally, the graph
was examined, the engine noises were decreased with using
alcohol added fuels. It can be explained that the alcohols have much
more oxygen amount than ED fuel and it improves the combustion.
 M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351
Fig. 14. The engine noise variation of the test fuels at different engine speeds.
Although, the alcohol addition increased oxygen content of the fuel
blends, it causes to decrease viscosity, density and heating value.
On the other hand, biodiesel can slightly improve the viscosity and
density of the fuel blends. Moreover, the cetane number was
increased by means of biodiesel addition. Also, biodiesel proportion
in the fuel blends positively impacts the noise level because of lu-
bricity properties of biodiesel. So that, the engine noise values
decrease slightly.
One of the most important parameters that affects the vehicle
comfort is noise. Also, engine noise adversely influences human
health. In spite of the fact that many researches have been carried
out by automotive manufacturers in order to reduce the noise of
diesel engine, the engines have still too noisy. Approximately 20% of
the European Union population have been exposed to inadmissible
noise level [91]. For these reason, further investigation should be
conducted in order to decrease the noise level.
There are few studies previously published considering noise
impact of the diesel engine fuelled with various fuels. Uludamar
et al. [92] tested the noise level of the diesel engine run on
hydrogen as well as biodiesel blends. They determined that these
fuels improved the engine noise. In another study conducted by
Uludamar et al. [93], they applied regression analysis to investigate
the effects of biodiesel on the diesel engine noise level and
observed that noise level was decreased with biodiesel usage.
Celebi et al. [94] found that the engine noise level was decreased
with natural gas addition into intake air as well as biodiesel blend
utilization. In an interesting study conducted by Mondal et al. [95],
they investigated the impact of vehicle noise on the bus and truck
drivers health and clearly presented that engine noise negatively
affects the cardiovascular health of both bus and truck drivers.
Literature survey indicated that a study of the noise values of the
diesel engine using ternary blends of diesel, biodiesel, and alcohol
has not been found within the knowledge of the authors.
4. Conclusions
Recently, alternative fuels have gotten to the foreground
because of rapid declining of fossil-based fuel reserves, increasing
petroleum prices, more stringent emission regulations, rising
environmental pollution from conventional fuels and concerns
over security of energy. These anxieties direct scientists to conduct
research on alternative fuels. One of the most significant alternative
fuel sources for internal combustion engines are higher alcohols on
account of their environmental and economic advantages. 1-
butanol and n-pentanol, which are higher alcohols and can be
1349
produced from renewable feedstocks, have four and five carbons in
molecular structure, respectively. In this study, ternary blends of
diesel/biodiesel/1-butanol and diesel/biodiesel/n-pentanol were
performed in a single cylinder, four stroke, water cooled, direct
injection diesel engine and the following findings were outlined
point by point.
 The fuel properties showed that the alcohol treatments slightly
decreased the kinematic viscosities, densities, heating values,
flash points, and cetane numbers. However, addition of alcohol
into the biodiesel/diesel fuel blends reasonably improved the
low temperature properties.
 1-butanol blended fuels decreased by 1.26e7.62%, while n-
pentanol blended fuels had 0.59e7.13% lower engine torque
than diesel fuel. The maximum brake powers of 1-butanol
blends were found to be at between 6.98 kW and 7.49 kW,
while n-pentanol blends showed closer values to diesel fuel,
which were obtained as between 7.03 kW and 7.50 kW.
 BSFC values of 1-butanol and n-pentanol treated fuels were up
to 8.07% and 7.27% on average higher than that of diesel fuel,
respectively. Indeed, these results were predicted due to the
heating values of fuel samples. BTEof most ternary blends was
lower than diesel fuel except from B2Bt5 and B2P5. Neverthe-
less, no obvious difference was monitored for the BTE.
 The maximum in-cylinder pressure of higher alcohol blended
fuels found to be as between 94.55 bar and 95.82 bar at 371-
372oCA for 1400 rpm, and as between 78.19 bar and 82.19 bar at
375-376oCA for 2600 rpm. The maximum HRR values of 1-
butanol and n-pentanol treated fuels were higher than diesel
fuel under 1400 rpm and 2600 rpm. Solely B20Bt5 fuel showed a
negligible reduction level by 0.57% from diesel fuel.
 When compared with diesel fuel, SOI timing for alcohol blended
fuels extended 2-3oCA at low engine speed and 2-4oCA at high
engine speed. Furthermore, the alcohol addition on the diesel/
biodiesel blends increased the ID values.
 It was observed that the maximum EGT reduction of fuel blends
were obtained to be at 2.25% for B2P10 blend when compared to
diesel fuel.
 In comparison that of diesel fuel, n-pentanol and 1-butanol
added fuels drastically reduced CO emissions up to the
average of 32.40% and 27.54%, respectively compared to diesel
fuel. At the same time, CO2 emissions of fuel blends were
observed between 13.8% and 14.5%.
 Although the biodiesel fuel showed a negative effect on the NOX
emission formation, higher alcohols, especially n-pentanol,
1350 M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351
could be an effective additives to decrease NOX emissions by
considering the results. Furthermore, the smoke opacity of the
alcohol treated fuel blends decreased up to 44.43% on average as
compared to diesel fuel.
 The engine noises were generally decreased with using alcohol
added fuels. The influence of the engine noise on the drivers'
health should be deeply investigated by researchers.
It can be concluded that n-pentanol and 1-butanol are prom-
ising alternative additives for use in compression ignition engines.
In further studies, the other higher alcohols can be applied in the
diesel engine. Similar experiments can be conducted with different
test engines and vehicle engines to generalize the results. Also, the
engine operating conditions such as injection pressure, engine load,
compression ratio, etc. can be changed and the results were
compared. Moreover, thermodynamic, environmental and eco-
nomic analyzes will be applied to the diesel engine fuelled with the
alcohol blended fuels.
Acknowledgement
The authors acknowledge the financial support provided by
Scientific Research Projects Unit of Bozok University (Project No:
2015FBE/T158). This study is prepared as a part of Murat Kadir
YESILYURT's Ph.D. thesis.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.10.100.
References
[1] Kok B, Benli H. Energy diversity and nuclear energy for sustainable develop-
ment in Turkey. Renew Energy 2017;111:870e7.
[2] Hasan MM, Rahman MM. Performance and emission characteristics of
biodieselediesel blend and environmental and economic impacts of biodiesel
production: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;74:938e48.
[3] Efe Ş, Ceviz MA, Temur H. Comparative engine characteristics of biodiesels
from hazelnut, corn, soybean, canola and sunflower oils on DI diesel engine.
Renew Energy 2018;119:142e51.
[4] Kalam MA, Masjuki HH, Jayed MH, Liaquat AM. Emission and performance
characteristics of an indirect ignition diesel engine fuelled with waste cooking
oil. Energy 2011;36(1):397e402.
[5] Melo-Espinosa EA, Piloto-Rodríguez R, Goyos-Pe rez L, Sierens R, Verhelst S.
Emulsification of animal fats and vegetable oils for their use as a diesel engine
fuel: an overview. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;47:623e33.
€ o
[6] Çelik M, Ozg € The determination of effects of soybean and hazelnut
€ ren YO.
methyl ester addition to the diesel fuel on the engine performance and
exhaust emissions. Appl Therm Eng 2017;124:124e35.
[7] Gülüm M, Bilgin A. Two-term power models for estimating kinematic vis-
cosities of different biodiesel-diesel fuel blends. Fuel Process Technol
2016;149:121e30.
€ I,
[8] Çelik M, Ors _ Bayindirli C, Demiralp M. Experimental investigation of impact
of addition of bioethanol in different biodiesels, on performance, combustion
and emission characteristics. J Mech Sci Technol 2017;31(11):5581e92.
[9] Palash SM, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA, Atabani AE, Fattah IR, Sanjid A. Biodiesel
production, characterization, diesel engine performance, and emission char-
acteristics of methyl esters from Aphanamixis polystachya oil of Bangladesh.
Energy Convers Manag 2015;91:149e57.
[10] Prasad TH, Reddy KHC, Rao MM. Performance and exhaust emissions analysis
of a diesel engine using methyl ester of oil with artificial neural network aid.
Int J Eng Technol 2010;2(1):23e7.
[11] Igbokwe JO, Nwafor OMI. Performance characteristics of palm kernel biodiesel
and its blend in a CI engine. Int J Ambient Energy 2016;37(1):103e6.
[12] Kahraman A, Og € I,
uz H, Ors _ Solmaz O.€ Effect of cottonseed oil methyl ester on
the performance and exhaust emissions of a vehicle. Int J Adv Eng Technol
2013;2(4):104e10.
[13] Prabakaran B, Udhoji A. Experimental investigation into effects of addition of
zinc oxide on performance, combustion and emission characteristics of diesel-
biodiesel-ethanol blends in CI engine. Alexand Eng J 2016;55(4):3355e62.
[14] Akar MA. Performance and emission characteristics of compression ignition
engine operating with false flax biodiesel and butanol blends. Adv Mech Eng
2016;8(2):1e7.
[15] Barabas I, Todorut IA. In: Gisela Montero, editor. Biodiesel quality, standards
and properties, biodiesel-quality, emissions and by-products. InTech; 2013,
ISBN 978-953-307-784-0. Available from: http://www.intechopen.com/
books/biodiesel-quality-emissions-and-by-products/biodiesel-
qualitystandards-and-properties.
[16] Yasin MM, Yusaf T, Mamat R, Yusop AF. Characterization of a diesel engine
operating with a small proportion of methanol as a fuel additive in biodiesel
blend. Appl Energy 2014;114:865e73.
[17] Zhu L, Xiao Y, Cheung CS, Guan C, Huang Z. Combustion, gaseous and par-
ticulate emission of a diesel engine fueled with n-pentanol (C5 alcohol)
blended with waste cooking oil biodiesel. Appl Therm Eng 2016;102:73e9.
[18] Hulwan DB, Joshi SV. Performance, emission and combustion characteristic of
a multicylinder DI diesel engine running on dieseleethanolebiodiesel blends
of high ethanol content. Appl Energy 2011;88(12):5042e55.
[19] Atmanli A, Ileri E, Yuksel B, Yilmaz N. Extensive analyses of dieselevegetable
oilen-butanol ternary blends in a diesel engine. Appl Energy 2015;145:
155e62.
[20] Imdadul HK, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA, Zulkifli NWM, Alabdulkarem A,
Rashed MM, Ashraful AM. Influences of ignition improver additive on ternary
(diesel-biodiesel-higher alcohol) blends thermal stability and diesel engine
performance. Energy Convers Manag 2016;123:252e64.
[21] Imdadul HK, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA, Zulkifli NWM, Alabdulkarem A,
Kamruzzaman M, Rashed MM. A comparative study of C4 and C5 alcohol
treated diesel-biodiesel blends in terms of diesel engine performance and
exhaust emission. Fuel 2016;179:281e8.
[22] Labeckas G, Slavinskas S, Ma zeika M. The effect of ethanoledieselebiodiesel
blends on combustion, performance and emissions of a direct injection diesel
engine. Energy Convers Manag 2014;79:698e720.
[23] Tse H, Leung CW, Cheung CS. Investigation on the combustion characteristics
and particulate emissions from a diesel engine fueled with diesel-biodiesel-
ethanol blends. Energy 2015;83:343e50.
[24] Qi DH, Chen H, Geng LM, Bian YZ, Ren XC. Performance and combustion
characteristics of biodieseledieselemethanol blend fuelled engine. Appl En-
ergy 2010;87(5):1679e86.
[25] Shi X, Yu Y, He H, Shuai S, Wang J, Li R. Emission characteristics using methyl
soyate-ethanol-diesel fuel blends on a diesel engine. Fuel 2005;84(12e13):
1543e9.
[26] Chen H, Shi-Jin S, Jian-Xin W. Study on combustion characteristics and PM
emission of diesel engines using ester-ethanol-diesel blended fuels. Proc
Combust Inst 2007;31(2):2981e9.
[27] Lei J, Bi Y, Shen L. Performance and emission characteristics of diesel engine
fueled with ethanol-diesel blends in different altitude regions. BioMed Res Int
2011:10. 2011-417421.
[28] Randazzo ML, Sodre  JR. Exhaust emissions from a diesel powered vehicle
fuelled by soybean biodiesel blends (B3eB20) with ethanol as an additive
(B20E2eB20E5). Fuel 2011;90(1):98e103.
[29] Subbaiah GV, Gopal KR. An experimental investigation on the performance
and emission characteristics of a diesel engine fuelled with rice bran biodiesel
and ethanol blends. Int J Sustain Energy 2011;8:197e208.
[30] Ibrahim A. Performance and combustion characteristics of a diesel engine
fuelled by butanolebiodieselediesel blends. Appl Therm Eng 2016;103:
651e9.
[31] Wei LJ, Cheung CS, Huang ZH. Effect of n-pentanol addition on the combustion
performance and emission characteristics of a direct-injection diesel engine.
Energy 2014;70:172e80.
[32] Mehta RN, Chakraborty M, Mahanta P, Parikh PA. Evaluation of fuel properties
of butanol biodieseldiesel blends and their impact on engine performance
and emissions. Ind Eng Chem Res 2010;49(16):7660e5.
[33] Kumar BR, Saravanan S. Use of higher alcohol biofuels in diesel engines: a
review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;60:84e115.
[34] Yilmaz N, Vigil FM, Benalil K, Davis SM, Calva A. Effect of biodiesel-butanol
fuel blends on emissions and performance characteristics of a diesel engine.
Fuel 2014;135:46e50.
[35] €
Ozer S. Experimental investigation of the effects of using butanol on diesel
engine performance and exhaust emissions. MSc Thesis. Karabük, Turkey:
Karabük University; 2010.
[36] Li L, Wang J, Wang Z, Xiao J. Combustion and emission characteristics of diesel
engine fueled with diesel/biodiesel/pentanol fuel blends. Fuel 2015;156:
211e8.
[37] Keskin A, Yaşar A, Reşitog _ Akar MA, Sugo
lu I, _ The influence of diesel fuel-
€ zü I.
biodiesel-ethanol-butanol blends on the performance and emission charac-
teristics of a diesel engine. Energy Sources, Part A 2013;35(19):1873e81.
[38] Şahin Z, Aksu ON, Durgun O. Experimental investigation of the effects of n-
butanol fumigation on engine performance and exhaust emissions in a
turbocharged DI diesel engine. GMO-SHIPMAR 2017;210:5e20.
[39] Tosun E, Yilmaz AC, Ozcanli M, Aydin K. Determination of effects of various
alcohol additions into peanut methyl ester on performance and emission
characteristics of a compression ignition engine. Fuel 2014;126:38e43.
[40] Atmanli A. Comparative analyses of diesel-waste oil biodiesel and propanol,
n-butanol or 1-pentanol blends in a diesel engine. Fuel 2016;176:209e15.
[41] Nanthagopal K, Ashok B, Saravanan B, Patel D, Sudarshan B, Ramasamy RA. An
assessment on the effects of 1-pentanol and 1-butanol as additives with
Calophyllum Inophyllum biodiesel. Energy Convers Manag 2018;158:70e80.
[42] Babu D, Anand R. Effect of biodiesel-diesel-n-pentanol and biodiesel-diesel-n-
hexanol blends on diesel engine emission and combustion characteristics.
Energy 2017;133:761e76.
 M.K. Yesilyurt et al. / Energy 165 (2018) 1332e1351
[43] Dhanasekaran R, Krishnamoorthy V, Rana D, Saravanan S, Nagendran A,
Kumar BR. A sustainable and eco-friendly fueling approach for direct-injection
diesel engines using restaurant yellow grease and n-pentanol in blends with
diesel fuel. Fuel 2017;193:419e31.
[44] Atmanli A, Yüksel B, Ileri E. Experimental investigation of the effect of
dieselecotton oilen-butanol ternary blends on phase stability, engine per-
formance and exhaust emission parameters in a diesel engine. Fuel 2013;109:
503e11.
[45] Çelebi Y, Aydın H. Investigation of the effects of butanol addition on safflower
biodiesel usage as fuel in a generator diesel engine. Fuel 2018;222:385e93.
[46] Yesilyurt MK. Investigating the effects of different alcohol additives in
biodiesel-diesel fuel blends on performance, combustion and emission char-
acteristics of the diesel engines. PhD Thesis. Yozgat, Turkey: Department of
Mechanical Engineering, Bozok University; 2017.
[47] Eryilmaz T, Yesilyurt MK. Influence of blending ratio on the physicochemical
properties of safflower oil methyl ester-safflower oil, safflower oil methyl
ester-diesel and safflower oil-diesel. Renew Energy 2016;95:233e47.
[48] Holman P. Experimental methods for engineers. eighth ed. New York, USA:
McGraw-Hill; 2012.
[49] Wendlinger C, Hammann S, Vetter W. Various concentrations of erucic acid in
mustard oil and mustard. Food Chem 2014;153:393e7.
[50] Sehwag S, Das M. A brief overview: present status on utilization of mustard oil
and cake. Ind J Trad Knowl 2015;14(2):244e50.
[51] Fan S, Liang T, Yu H, Bi Q, Li G, Wang L. Kernel characteristics, oil contents,
fatty acid compositions and biodiesel properties in developing Siberian
apricot (Prunus sibirica L.) seeds. Ind Crop Prod 2016;89:195e9.
[52] Giakoumis EG. Analysis of 22 vegetable oils' physico-chemical properties and
fatty acid composition on a statistical basis, and correlation with the degree of
unsaturation. Renew Energy 2018;126:403e19.
[53] Ruhul MA, Abedin MJ, Rahman SA, Masjuki BHH, Alabdulkarem A, Kalam MA,
Shancita I. Impact of fatty acid composition and physicochemical properties of
Jatropha and Alexandrian laurel biodiesel blends: an analysis of performance
and emission characteristics. J Clean Prod 2016;133:1181e9.
[54] Al-Samaraae RR, Atabani AE, Uguz G, Kumar G, Arpa O, Ayanoglu A,
Mohammed MN, Farouk H. Perspective of safflower (Carthamus tinctorius) as a
potential biodiesel feedstock in Turkey: characterization, engine performance
and emissions analyses of butanolebiodieselediesel blends. Biofuels 2017:
1e17. https://doi.org/10.1080/17597269.2017.1398956.
[55] Ruhul MA, Abedin MJ, Rahman SA, Masjuki BHH, Alabdulkarem A, Kalam MA,
Shancita I. Impact of fatty acid composition and physicochemical properties of
Jatropha and Alexandrian laurel biodiesel blends: an analysis of performance
and emission characteristics. J Clean Prod 2016;133:1181e9.
[56] Betiku E, Omilakin OR, Ajala SO, Okeleye AA, Taiwo AE, Solomon BO. Math-
ematical modeling and process parameters optimization studies by artificial
neural network and response surface methodology: a case of non-edible
neem (Azadirachta indica) seed oil biodiesel synthesis. Energy 2014;72:
266e73.
[57] Mofijur M, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA, Atabani AE, Arbab MI, Cheng SF, Gouk SW.
Properties and use of Moringa oleifera biodiesel and diesel fuel blends in a
multi-cylinder diesel engine. Energy Convers Manag 2014;82:169e76.
pez I, Quintana CE, Ruiz JJ, Cruz-Perago
[58] Lo  n F, Dorado MP. Effect of the use of
oliveepomace oil biodiesel/diesel fuel blends in a compression ignition en-
gine: preliminary exergy analysis. Energy Convers Manag 2014;85:227e33.
[59] Can O,€ Celikten I, Usta N. Effects of ethanol addition on performance and
emissions of a turbocharged indirect injection Diesel engine running at
different injection pressures. Energy Convers Manag 2004;45(15e16):
2429e40.
[60] Rahimi H, Ghobadian B, Yusaf T, Najafi G, Khatamifar M. Diesterol: an
environment-friendly IC engine fuel. Renew Energy 2009;34(1):335e42.
€ I. Effect of cetane improver addition into diesel fuel-
[61] Candan F, Ciniviz M, Ors
methanol mixtures on performance and emissions at different injection
pressures. Therm Sci 2017;21(1B):555e66.
[62] Fu J, Shu J, Zhou F, Liu J, Xu Z, Zeng D. Experimental investigation on the ef-
fects of compression ratio on in-cylinder combustion process and perfor-
mance improvement of liquefied methane engine. Appl Therm Eng 2017;113:
1208e18.
[63] Yilmaz N. Comparative analysis of biodieseleethanolediesel and bio-
dieselemethanolediesel blends in a diesel engine. Energy 2012;40(1):210e3.
[64] Anbarasu A, Saravanan M, Loganathan M. The effect of ethanol addition in a
biodiesel operated DI diesel engine on combustion, performance, and emis-
sion characteristics. Int J Green Energy 2013;10(1):90e102.
€ I,
[65] Ors _ Kahraman A, Ciniviz M. Performance, emission, and combustion analysis
of a compression ignition engine using biofuel blends. Therm Sci 2017;21(1b):
511e22.
[66] Tse H, Leung CW, Cheung CS. Investigation on the combustion characteristics
and particulate emissions from a diesel engine fueled with diesel-biodiesel-
ethanol blends. Energy 2015;83:343e50.
[67] Yardım MH. Engine technology. Ostim, Ankara, Turkey: Nobel Publishing;
2008 [In Turkish].
[68] Qi DH, Chen H, Geng LM, Bian YZH. Experimental studies on the combustion
characteristics and performance of a direct injection engine fueled with bio-
diesel/diesel blends. Energy Convers Manag 2010;51:2985e92.
1351
[69] Ozener O, Yuksek L, Ergenc AT, Ozkan M. Effects of soybean biodiesel on a DI
diesel engine performance, emission and combustion characteristics. Fuel
2014;115:875e83.
[70] Alptekin E, Canakci M, Ozsezen AN, Turkcan A, Sanli H. Using waste animal fat
based biodieselsebioethanolediesel fuel blends in a DI diesel engine. Fuel
2015;157:245e54.
[71] An H, Yang WM, Chou SK, Chua KJ. Combustion and emissions characteristics
of diesel engine fueled by biodiesel at partial load conditions. Appl Energy
2012;99:363e71.
[72] Rakopoulos CD, Antonopoulos KA, Rakopoulos DC. Experimental heat release
analysis and emissions of a HSDI diesel engine fueled with ethanol-diesel fuel
blends. Energy 2007;32:1791e808.
[73] Imdadul HK, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA, Zulkifli NWM, Alabdulkarem A,
Rashed MM, Teoh YH, How HG. Higher alcoholebiodieselediesel blends: an
approach for improving the performance, emission, and combustion of a
light-duty diesel engine. Energy Convers Manag 2016;111:174e85.
[74] Ajav EA, Singh B, Bhattacharya TK. Experimental study of some performance
parameters of a constant speed stationary diesel engine using ethanol-diesel
blends as fuel. Biomass Bioenergy 1999;17(4):357e65.
[75] Choi CY, Reitz RD. An experimental study on the effects of oxygenated fuel
blends and multiple injection strategies on DI diesel engine emissions. Fuel
1999;78(11):1303e17.
[76] Aydın F, O€g
üt H. Effects of using ethanol-biodiesel-diesel fuel in single cyl-
inder diesel engine to engine performance and emissions. Renew Energy
2017;103:688e94.
[77] Palash SM, Kalam MA, Masjuki HH, Masum BM, Fattah IR, Mofijur M. Impacts
of biodiesel combustion on NOx emissions and their reduction approaches.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013;23:473e90.
[78] Moser BR, Williams A, Haas MJ, McCormick RL. Exhaust emissions and fuel
properties of partially hydrogenated soybean oil methyl esters blended with
ultra low sulfur diesel fuel. Fuel Process Technol 2009;90(9):1122e8.
[79] Saravanan S, Nagarajan G, Anand S, Sampath S. Correlation for thermal NOx
formation in compression ignition (CI) engine fuelled with diesel and bio-
diesel. Energy 2012;42(1):401e41.
[80] Varatharajan K, Cheralathan M. Influence of fuel properties and composition
on NOx emissions from biodiesel powered diesel engines: a review. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2012;16(6):3702e10.
[81] Thangaraja J, Anand K, Mehta PS. Biodiesel NOx penalty and control
measures-a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;61:1e24.
[82] Varatharajan K, Cheralathan M. Effect of aromatic amine antioxidants on NOx
emissions from a soybean biodiesel powered DI diesel engine. Fuel Process
Technol 2013;106:526e32.
[83] Mofijur M, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA, Atabani AE, Arbab MI, Cheng SF, Gouk SW.
Properties and use of Moringa oleifera biodiesel and diesel fuel blends in a
multi-cylinder diesel engine. Energy Convers Manag 2014;82:169e76.
[84] How HG, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA, Teoh YH, Chuah HG. Effect of Calophyllum
Inophyllum biodiesel-diesel blends on combustion, performance, exhaust
particulate matter and gaseous emissions in a multi-cylinder diesel engine.
Fuel 2018;227:154e64.
€
[85] Ozçelik AE, Aydog an H, Acaroglu M. Determining the performance, emission
and combustion properties of camelina biodiesel blends. Energy Convers
Manag 2015;96:47e57.
[86] Cheikh K, Sary A, Khaled L, Abdelkrim L, Mohand T. Experimental assessment
of performance and emissions maps for biodiesel fueled compression ignition
engine. Appl Energy 2016;161:320e9.
[87] Sayin C. Engine performance and exhaust gas emissions of methanol and
ethanolediesel blends. Fuel 2010;89(11):3410e5.
[88] Huang J, Wang Y, Li S, Roskilly AP, Yu H, Li H. Experimental investigation on
the performance and emissions of a diesel engine fuelled with ethanolediesel
blends. Appl Therm Eng 2009;29(11e12):2484e90.
[89] Shu J, Fu JQ, Liu JP, Zhang L, Zhao ZC. Experimental and computational study
on the effects of injection timing on thermodynamics, combustion and
emission characteristics of a natural gas (NG)-diesel dual fuel engine at low
speed and low load. Energy Convers Manag 2018;160:426e38.
[90] Fang Q, Fang J, Zhuang J, Huang Z. Effects of ethanoledieselebiodiesel blends
on combustion and emissions in premixed low temperature combustion. Appl
Therm Eng 2013;54(2):541e8.
[91] Oltean-Dumbrava C, Watts G, Miah A. Transport infrastructure: making more
sustainable decisions for noise reduction. J Clean Prod 2013;42:58e68.
€
[92] Uludamar E, Yıldızhan Ş, Aydın K, Ozcanlı M. Vibration, noise and exhaust
emissions analyses of an unmodified compression ignition engine fuelled
with low sulphur diesel and biodiesel blends with hydrogen addition. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2016;41(26):11481e90.
[93] Uludamar E, Tosun E, Aydın K. Experimental and regression analysis of noise
and vibration of a compression ignition engine fuelled with various biodiesels.
Fuel 2016;177:326e33.
€
[94] Çelebi K, Uludamar E, Tosun E, Yıldızhan Ş, Aydın K, Ozcanlı M. Experimental
and artificial neural network approach of noise and vibration characteristic of
an unmodified diesel engine fuelled with conventional diesel, and biodiesel
blends with natural gas addition. Fuel 2017;197:159e73.
[95] Mondal NK, Dey M, Datta JK. Vulnerability of bus and truck drivers affected
from vehicle engine noise. Int J Sustain Built Environ 2014;3(2):199e206.