Paper Pameran TVET

S. M. Rosdi et al. │ Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Sciences │ Vol. 16, Issue 1 (2022)

[15] M. Wei, S. Li, H. Xiao, and G. Guo, “Combustion performance and pollutant emissions analysis using diesel/gasoline/iso-
butanol blends in a diesel engine,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 149, pp. 381–391, 2017, doi:
10.1016/j.enconman.2017.07.038.

[16] A. K. Agarwal, “Biofuels (alcohols and biodiesel) applications as fuels for internal combustion engines,” Prog. Energy
Combust. Sci., vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 233–271, 2007, doi: 10.1016/j.pecs.2006.08.003.

[17] A. Jamrozik, “The effect of the alcohol content in the fuel mixture on the performance and emissions of a direct injection diesel
engine fueled with diesel-methanol and diesel-ethanol blends,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 148, pp. 461–476, 2017, doi:
10.1016/j.enconman.2017.06.030.

[18] A. Calam, Y. Içingür, H. Solmaz, and H. Yamk, “A comparison of engine performance and the emission of fusel oil and
gasoline mixtures at different ignition timings,” Int. J. Green Energy, vol. 12, no. 8, pp. 767–772, 2015, doi:
10.1080/15435075.2013.849256.

[19] O. C. Nwufo, C. F. Nwaiwu, C. Ononogbo, J. O. Igbokwe, O. M. I. Nwafor, and E. E. Anyanwu, “Performance, emission and
combustion characteristics of a single cylinder spark ignition engine using ethanol–petrol-blended fuels,” Int. J. Ambient
Energy, vol. 39, no. 8, pp. 792–801, 2018, doi: 10.1080/01430750.2017.1354318.

[20] A. N. Abdalla et al., “Prediction of emissions and performance of a gasoline engine running with fusel oil–gasoline blends
using response surface methodology,” Fuel, vol. 253, pp. 1–14, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2019.04.085.

[21] S. Simsek and B. Ozdalyan, “Improvements to the Composition of Fusel Oil and Analysis of the Effects of Fusel Oil–Gasoline
Blends on a Spark-Ignited (SI) Engine’s Performance and Emissions,” Energies, vol. 11, no. 3, p. 625, 2018, doi:
10.3390/en11030625.

[22] O. I. Awad et al., “Calorific value enhancement of fusel oil by moisture removal and its effect on the performance and
combustion of a spark ignition engine,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 137, pp. 86–96, 2017, doi:
10.1016/j.enconman.2017.01.009.

[23] A. Calam, H. Solmaz, A. Uyumaz, E. Yilmaz, and Y. Içingür, “Investigation of usability of the fusel oil in a single cylinder
spark ignition engine,” vol. 88, pp. 258–265, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.joei.2014.09.005.

[24] O. I. Awad et al., “Response surface methodology (RSM) based multi-objective optimization of fusel oil -gasoline blends at
different water content in SI engine,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 150, pp. 222–241, 2017, doi:
10.1016/j.enconman.2017.07.047.

[25] E. Yılmaz, “Investigation of the effects of diesel-fusel oil fuel blends on combustion, engine performance and exhaust
emissions in a single cylinder compression ignition engine,” Fuel, vol. 255, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2019.115741.

[26] O. I. Awad et al., “Using fusel oil as a blend in gasoline to improve SI engine e ffi ciencies : A comprehensive review,” vol.
69, no. October 2015, pp. 1232–1242, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.244.

[27] H. Solmaz, “Combustion , performance and emission characteristics of fusel oil in a spark ignition engine,” vol. 133, pp. 20–
28, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.fuproc.2015.01.010.

[28] D. Feng, H. Wei, M. Pan, L. Zhou, and J. Hua, “Combustion performance of dual-injection using n-butanol direct-injection
and gasoline port fuel-injection in a SI engine,” Energy, vol. 160, pp. 573–581, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2018.07.042.

[29] J. Wang, H. Chen, B. Liu, and Z. Huang, “Study of cycle-by-cycle variations of a spark ignition engine fueled with natural gas-
hydrogen blends,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, vol. 33, no. 18, pp. 4876–4883, 2008, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2008.06.062.

[30] A. O. Hasan, H. Al-Rawashdeh, A. H. Al-Muhtaseb, A. Abu-jrai, R. Ahmad, and J. Zeaiter, “Impact of changing combustion
chamber geometry on emissions, and combustion characteristics of a single cylinder SI (spark ignition) engine fueled with
ethanol/gasoline blends,” Fuel, vol. 231, pp. 197–203, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2018.05.045.

[31] Z. Chen, F. Yang, S. Xue, Z. Wu, and J. Liu, “Impact of higher n-butanol addition on combustion and performance of GDI
engine in stoichiometric combustion,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 106, pp. 385–392, 2015, doi:
10.1016/j.enconman.2015.09.051.

[32] H. SALEH, “Effect of variation in LPG composition on emissions and performance in a dual fuel diesel engine,” Fuel, vol. 87,
no. 13–14, pp. 3031–3039, 2008, doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2008.04.007.

[33] C. E. C. Alvarez, G. E. Couto, V. R. Roso, A. B. Thiriet, and R. M. Valle, “A review of prechamber ignition systems as lean
combustion technology for SI engines,” Appl. Therm. Eng., vol. 128, pp. 107–120, 2018, doi:
10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.08.118.

[34] D. Jesu Godwin et al., “Effect of hydroxyl (OH) group position in alcohol on performance, emission and combustion
characteristics of SI engine,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 189, no. November 2018, pp. 195–201, 2019, doi:
10.1016/j.enconman.2019.03.063.

[35] O. I. Awad, R. Mamat, T. K. Ibrahim, O. M. Ali, K. Kadirgama, and A. M. Leman, “Performance and combustion
characteristics of an SI engine fueled with fusel oil-gasoline at different water content,” Appl. Therm. Eng., vol. 123, pp. 1374–
1385, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.05.132.

[36] Y. Li, J. Gong, Y. Deng, W. Yuan, J. Fu, and B. Zhang, “Experimental comparative study on combustion, performance and
emissions characteristics of methanol, ethanol and butanol in a spark ignition engine,” Appl. Therm. Eng., vol. 115, pp. 53–63,
2017, doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.12.037.

[37] A. Elfasakhany, “Experimental study of dual n-butanol and iso-butanol additives on spark-ignition engine performance and
emissions,” Fuel, vol. 163, pp. 166–174, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2015.09.059.

[38] S. K. Thangavelu, A. S. Ahmed, and F. N. Ani, “Review on bioethanol as alternative fuel for spark ignition engines,” Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 56, pp. 820–835, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.11.089.

8799 journal.ump.edu.my/jmes ◄

S. M. Rosdi et al. │ Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Sciences │ Vol. 16, Issue 1 (2022)

[39] Z. Liu, P. Sun, Y. Du, X. Yu, W. Dong, and J. Zhou, “Improvement of combustion and emission by combined combustion of
ethanol premix and gasoline direct injection in SI engine,” Fuel, vol. 292, no. 120403, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2021.120403.

[40] H. Bendu, B. B. V. L. Deepak, and S. Murugan, “Application of GRNN for the prediction of performance and exhaust emissions
in HCCI engine using ethanol,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 122, pp. 165–173, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2016.05.061.

[41] X. Deng, Z. Chen, X. Wang, H. Zhen, and R. Xie, “Exhaust noise, performance and emission characteristics of spark ignition
engine fuelled with pure gasoline and hydrous ethanol gasoline blends,” Case Stud. Therm. Eng., vol. 12, pp. 55–63, 2018, doi:
10.1016/j.csite.2018.02.004.

[42] W. N. M. Wan Ghazali, R. Mamat, H. H. Masjuki, and G. Najafi, “Effects of biodiesel from different feedstocks on engine
performance and emissions: A review,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 51, pp. 585–602, 2015, doi:
10.1016/j.rser.2015.06.031.

[43] V. E. Geo, D. J. Godwin, S. Thiyagarajan, C. G. Saravanan, and F. Aloui, “Effect of higher and lower order alcohol blending
with gasoline on performance , emission and combustion characteristics of SI engine,” Fuel, vol. 256, no. 115806, 2019, doi:
10.1016/j.fuel.2019.115806.

[44] P. M. Shameer and K. Ramesh, “Experimental evaluation on performance, combustion behavior and influence of in-cylinder
temperature on NOx emission in a D.I diesel engine using thermal imager for various alternate fuel blends,” Energy, vol. 118,
pp. 1334–1344, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2016.11.017.

[45] D. Turner, H. Xu, R. F. Cracknell, V. Natarajan, and X. Chen, “Combustion performance of bio-ethanol at various blend ratios
in a gasoline direct injection engine,” Fuel, vol. 90, no. 5, pp. 1999–2006, 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2010.12.025.

[46] B. M. Masum, H. H. Masjuki, M. A. Kalam, I. M. Rizwanul Fattah, S. M. Palash, and M. J. Abedin, “Effect of ethanol–gasoline
blend on NOx emission in SI engine,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 24, pp. 209–222, 2013, doi:
10.1016/j.rser.2013.03.046.

[47] A. K. Hossain and P. A. Davies, “Pyrolysis liquids and gases as alternative fuels in internal combustion engines – A review,”
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 21, pp. 165–189, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2012.12.031.

[48] F. Jaliliantabar, B. Ghobadian, G. Najafi, and R. Mamat, “Evaluation of the performance and emissions of a single cylinder
diesel engine fueled by biodiesel and using exhaust gas recirculation,” Agric. Eng. Int. CIGR J., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 80–91, 2017.

[49] B. Prbakaran and D. Viswanathan, “Experimental investigation of effects of addition of ethanol to bio-diesel on performance,
combustion and emission characteristics in CI engine,” Alexandria Eng. J., vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 121–130, 2018, doi:
10.1016/j.aej.2016.09.009.

[50] P. Iodice, A. Senatore, G. Langella, and A. Amoresano, “Effect of ethanol–gasoline blends on CO and HC emissions in last
generation SI engines within the cold-start transient: An experimental investigation,” Appl. Energy, vol. 179, pp. 182–190,
2016, doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.06.144.

[51] M. İ. İlhak, R. Doğan, S. O. Akansu, and N. Kahraman, “Experimental study on an SI engine fueled by gasoline, ethanol and
acetylene at partial loads,” Fuel, vol. 261, no. 116148, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2019.116148.

8800 journal.ump.edu.my/jmes ◄

IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

Evaluation of properties on performance and - Reducing NOx emissions from tractor
emission to turbocharged SI engine using fusel oil engines by using the diesel fuel and
blend with gasoline rapeseed oil blend
G Coman, S M Burciu and M Lupchian
To cite this article: S M Rosdia et al 2019 IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 469 012113
- Experimental Investigation of Plastic Oil
View the article online for updates and enhancements. Blends on CRDi Engine for Various Fuel
Injection Pressures
G. Balaji, M. Karthik, G. Dinagaran et al.

- Experimental investigation on
Performance and Emission Characteristics
of J20, P20, N20 Biodiesel blends and
Sound Characteristics of P20 Biodiesel
blend Used in Single Cylinder Diesel
Engine
R. rajasekar, N. karthik and Goldwin
Xavier

This content was downloaded from IP address 122.129.121.230 on 13/06/2022 at 10:40

1st International Postgraduate Conference on Mechanical Engineering (IPCME2018) IOP Publishing

IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 469 (2019) 012113 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/469/1/012113

Evaluation of properties on performance and emission to
turbocharged SI engine using fusel oil blend with gasoline

SM Rosdia, R Mamata,c, A Azri a , K Sudhakar a,b,c, IM Yusri a
a Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, 26600 Pahang,
Malaysia
b Energy Centre, Maulana Azad National Institute of Technology Bhopal, M.P., India
c Automotive Engineering Center, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, 26600 Pekan, Pahang,
Malaysia
Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract. Biofuel has the potential to be used as an alternative fuel compared to petroleum gasoline
for the purpose increase performance and reducing emissions. The objective of the study is to
evaluate performance and emission on properties of 10–30% fusel oil blends with pure gasoline
(Ron 95) at 3000 rpm. In this experiment, three fuels were designed from fusel oil to test engine
performance and emission. The haltech ECU was an escalation to set ignition, injection timing and
injection mass when using fusel oil blends to reach stoichiometric level. In this study, pure gasoline
was set as a reference. The experiments were conducted on 1.8L turbocharged 4-cylinder, spark
ignition engine, port injection and coupled with 100 kW eddy current dynamometer. During engine
testing, the throttle position was applied to 10–40%. As a result, averaged BMEP increase at 11.9%,
17.8% and 21.3% for F10, F20 and F30 respectively compared to gasoline. The VE and BSFC
averaged increased 8.3% and 6.17% compared to pure gasoline for 10–40% engine load. The
emissions for CO and HC on these observations increased while the NOx decreased when fusel oil
blends were utilized. The recommendation used in study is low proportion blends to assess different
properties for engine test.

1. Introduction
Nowadays in order to reduce emissions and increase efficiency, engines are designed to downsize and use
supercharge/turbocharge. The main challenge for completing the desired fuel economy in optimizing the
design and control of the fuel system, engine boosting system, and engine component is the reduction of
compartment damage resulting from engine knocking [1]. In the review, gasoline engine downsizing and
turbocharging has shown to improve fuel economy by 10~20% in passenger vehicles [2]. Data from a wide
range of production vehicles also were compared to provide a comparison to demonstrate fuel consumption
reduction of 16–18% [3] using a turbocharger engine.

Biofuel has a higher octane number, an excessive content of oxygen in material as compared to pure
gasoline and their single boiling factor cause them to be appropriate for use in SI engine [4][5]. Blends
biofuel also lower HRR due to the single boiling. The main reason for this is due to having one type of
hydrocarbon [6][7]. The heating value or calorific value is believed to be one of the crucial parameters in
the combustion process of biofuel. The heating value of alternative fuel and mainly alcohols
is anticipated to be approximately 20-30% lower than that of fossil providing one of the big demanding
situations to making use of it in internal combustion engines [8]. The engine utilizes biofuel needs slight
modification injection timing and mass to maintain performance due to the oxygen and water content. Fuel

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution

of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.

Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1

1st International Postgraduate Conference on Mechanical Engineering (IPCME2018) IOP Publishing

IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 469 (2019) 012113 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/469/1/012113

with a better octane rating will preserve higher compression quantitative relation previous the
engine knocking, consequently giving the engine an potential to power in greater efficiently [9].

Recently, fusel oil is alcohol by-product of after fermentation at some stage in the distillation technique
[10]–[12]. Fusel has the imaginative and prescient of being an alternative fuel blend in internal combustion
engine [13]. The composition of the fusel oil depends on the type of carbon used in the alcohol fermentation,
the process of fermentation, the activity process, and decomposition process [14]–[16]. Moreover, biofuel
burns cleanser than crude oil and convey lesser CO and HC. The heat of vaporization in biofuel is great; as
a consequence, the peak temperature within the combustion chamber leading to decrease NOx emissions
and improved performance. However, the utilized 100% biofuel to the engine due to performance worsen
or rusty to component and part due to water content.

Calam et al. [17] was investigated low proportion blends, spark ignition engine, port injection, single
cylinder using gasoline and Fusel oil blends (F0, F10, F20 and F30). In general, the engine performance
increased when used the Fusel oil as additive or blends in gasoline engine. Calam et al. mention the oxygen
content was one of reason the performance increased due to lean combustion occur in cylinder combustion
when engine use Fusel oil blends. The engine performance shown increased by 4.8%, 1.8% and 1.5%
respectively for F10, F20 and F30 compared to the F0 (gasoline).

Thus, Solmaz [18] study 100% and 50% fusel oil blends and mention that water content and lower
heating value is another impediment of engine performance drop. The engine performance average reduce
6% and 2% for F100 and F50 when fusel oil were used. Solmaz conclude that fusel oil increase Flame
development and Flame propagation due to properties of Fusel oil. The emission of CO and HC increased
to 21% and 25% respectively. Then the NOx emission decreased about 31% cause the worse combustion
in engine cylinder.

In this study, pure gasoline as a reference has been blended with fusel oil at concentrations of 10%, 20%
and 30%. The objective of experiments that were carried out tested the engine performance and emission
of different fuel properties. In an experiment scoop , the engine speed was run at 3000 rpm and 10–40%
throttle position. Then the Haltech ECU was utilized to set the ignition and injection mass to calibrate
according to the physicochemical properties. The adjustment timing is gap in this research was used as
novel to avoid ignition delay, find optimization efficiency and repair aggravated combustion by water
content during engine testing. The novel procedure of using ECU programmable to retune the performance
and emission correlation between the timing of ignition and injection mass of fuel has been implemented.
The

2. Experimental Setup
The turbocharged engine was tested using the 1.8L single overhead cam, four cylinders and port injection.
Table 1 shows the engine specifications for this study. The engine using 81mm piston bore and 89mm
stroke length to produce 88 kW engine power and 159Nm maximum torque. The Haltech ECU was utilized
to manage ignition and injection mass at stoichiometric levels. Figure 1 shown the diagram and schematic
diagram for engine setup. The injector will trigger the signal at 70° BTDC in millisecond (ms) before the
intake valve opens during the end of the exhaust stroke and early suction stroke. Fuel consumption was
occupied using AIC fuel flow rate meter with accuracy of 1% reading. Table 2 shown the all fuels
properties. Table 3 shown matrix for engine spark timing and injection mass trigger time and spray.

2.1. Fuel
Initially the engine was tested using gasoline. It is used as guide and reference for performance and emission
of other fuel blends. The following three fuel blends were used is F10, F20 and F30 as 10%, 20% and 30%
respectively blends with gasoline. The blending fusel oil limit to 30% is due to this fuel has higher water
content and aggravated combustion. In the experiment setup, two tanks were used; One of tank uses gasoline
and another one uses blended fuel tank. The experimental test on each fuel was carried out for an hour.
Prior to using of new blends fuel, engine was flushed with gasoline for around 10-15 minute in pipe line to
fill up new fuel. A 12 volt inline pump was used to supply fuel from tank to delivery valve. The pressure

2

1st International Postgraduate Conference on Mechanical Engineering (IPCME2018) IOP Publishing

IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 469 (2019) 012113 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/469/1/012113

used in the delivery fuel system is around 35 Psi and was controlled by fuel regulator. The flexible pipe
line was use to deliver all kind of fuel to system fuel.

2.2. Dynamometer
The engine was coupled with an eddy-current 100 kW dynamometer to measure the torque and rated speed
of engine. Figure 1 shows the dynamometer used in the experiment coupled with engine. The tests were
performed on the dynamometer while running the engine at 3000 RPM and 10-40% engine throttle position.
The dynamometer also has water cooling tower to reduce high temperature by using adjustment valve to
regulate the water flow to stable at 70o-80o C. Two hose was connected at dynamometer and cooling tower:
1) Water inlet 2) Water outlet.

2.3. Emission
Engine emission is major part of this experimental study. Exhaust emission evaluated by KANE Autoplus
5-2 for measuring NOx, HC and CO emission. To precisely measure stoichiometric levels, every fuel
metering by the Dynojet brand wide band was utilized. The exhaust emissions of three blending fuel are
compared with gasoline at 3000 rpm engine speeds and 10-40% throttle position. All emission results were
taken from the tail end of exhaust pipe three time with average.

2.4.Cylinder pressure
Pressure in cylinder and the crank encoder data were recorded by using TFX combustion analyzer software.
An Optrand Auto PSI-S model fiber-optic and an optical shaft encoder were installed to monitor the cylinder
pressure and crank angle. The pressure sensor measures the pressure with a range of 0–200 bar and 1.12
mV-psi sensitivity. When engine rotation reaches 2000 RPM, the turbocharge increase the boost pressure
by supplying more air in the intake manifold. The air passing through the combustion chamber was metered
by air flow meter.

Figure 1. The test rig and schematic diagram gasoline engine in laboratory

3

1st International Postgraduate Conference on Mechanical Engineering (IPCME2018) IOP Publishing

IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 469 (2019) 012113 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/469/1/012113

Table 1. The 4G93 SOHC engine specifications.

Type In-line SOHC 16 V MPI

Number of cylinders 4
Combustion of Chambers Pentroof Type

Total displacement 1834 cc
Cylinder bore (mm) 81
Piston stroke (mm) 89
Compression ratio
9.5:1
Maximum output 88kW(120Ps;118bhp)
Maximum torque
159Nm (117 ft lbt)

Table 2. Properties pure gasoline and fusel oil blends [17]

Properties Gasoline Pure Fusel Fusel 10% Fusel 20% Fusel 30% Test method
Density (kg/m3) 754 847 755 761 768 D4052
Stoichiometry 14.7 9.65 14.19 13.69 13.18 Ratio
RON 95 106.85 97.85 97.89 98.3 D2699
Lower heating value 43.5 29.5 42.6 42.1 41.7 D 240
Freezing point (°C) -52 < -50 < -50 < -50 < -50 D 6749

Table 3. Matrix test of ignition timing and injection mass for fusel oil at engine speed 3000 rpm

10 Throttle Position 40
20 30
(7-15) (7-15)
Fuel 2% (7-15) (7-15) 2%
Gasoline (Timing of ignition as reference) BTDC 3% 2% 2% 3%
Fusel oil 10% 5% 3% 3% 5%
Fusel oil 20% 5% 5%
Fusel oil 30% 2-3 ms 6-7ms
Gasoline (Timing of injection mass) 700 BTDC 2% 3-5ms 5-6ms 2%
Fusel oil 10% 3% 2% 2% 3%
Fusel oil 20% 5% 3% 3% 6%
Fusel oil 30% 5.3% 5.5%

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Brake mean effective pressure (BMEP)
The BMEP is a parameter that reflects the engine power output. Figure 2 shows the variation of BMEP for
engine study with engine speed of 3000 rpm and throttle positions at 10–40% using pure gasoline and fusel
oil blends. At 10% throttle position, the BMEP reached average at 4.7-13.0% for all fuels and linearly
increased until at 40% throttle position. From the observation, the BMEP for all fuel blends increased when
fusel oil increased compared to pure gasoline. The BMEP increased as the ECU increased ignition at 2-5%
compared to gasoline and injection mass 2-6% compared to gasoline then the engine was quite stable during
the test. As the result, complete combustion shows in improving the BMEP when the energy of the fusel
oil was equivalent to that of the replaced gasoline fuel [19]. Similar results was founded by Solmaz [18]

4

1st International Postgraduate Conference on Mechanical Engineering (IPCME2018) IOP Publishing

IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 469 (2019) 012113 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/469/1/012113

mentioned that if the optimized ignition timing is determined for fusel oil, a better performance results may
achieved.

3.2. Volumetric efficiency (VE)

Figure 2. BMEP, VE and BSFC versus throttle position at 3000 rpm engine speed.

Figure 2 shows the VE versus throttle position 10–40% for all fuel tests at 3000 rpm engine speed. The
VE was increased when fusel oil blends was utilized. The test had shown VE blending of fusel oil increased
between 4-11% and 8-13.8% at 10% and 40% throttle position, respectively compared to the gasoline. Fusel
oil has higher octane number than gasoline thus it can lead to operation at higher compression ratios
therefore improvement in power output and efficiency [20]. Furthermore, it has high latent heat of
vaporization. To increase engine performance, the mass of fuel must increase more spray to achieve engine
power. As a consequence, effect of lower calorific value and high latent heat of vaporization, engine
volumetric efficiency may increase BSFC to maintain power of engine [19]. Again, the engine utilized
alcohol fuel allows more air into the cylinder, which increases the VE. The intake manifold decrease

5

1st International Postgraduate Conference on Mechanical Engineering (IPCME2018) IOP Publishing

IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 469 (2019) 012113 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/469/1/012113

temperature due to allow more fuel injection into the chamber. Hence, the maximum brake torque and
volumetric efficiency show increase trends [21].

3.3. Brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC)
The effect of BSFC on engine testing obtained with pure gasoline, and fusel oil blends labeled as F10, F20
and F30 at 3000 rpm are shown in Figure 2. More fuel must be sprayed into the same amount of air when
fusel oil is used compared to pure gasoline to maintain the engine performance. All fuel blends from fusel
oil lead to increase in specific fuel consumption due to the lower stoichiometry number compared to
gasoline [20]. The high viscosity and density of Fusel oil is due to the obstruction of vaporization and
atomization of fuel and deterioration of the combustion process leading to increase in fuel consumption at
all loads. Despite incrising the mass of fuel, it is promising that the specific fuel consumption decreased
with the increase of throttle position, for all test fuels. The lower calorific heat values of the test fuels
obtained by adding fusel oil into gasoline is lower than that of pure gasoline led to increased BSFC. The
lower calorific value of fusel oil is almost 30% that of pure gasoline and difference due to chemical
composition [13][15].

3.4. Emission

3.4.1. Carbon Monoxide (CO). Figure 3 shows the CO with concentrations of gasoline, F10, F20 and F30
versus throttle positions at 3000 rpm. CO is a product of incomplete combustion and is mainly produced in
flame quenching regions[24]. The CO increases when engine utilized fusel oil blends compared to pure
gasoline. The formation of the CO at low loads reaches between 0.3–0.5%. When utilizing engine at higher
loads, the formation of CO was between 0.8–1.0% due to cooling in-cylinder temperature that are very
close to each other. The rich combustion invariably higher CO and result incomplete combustion [25]. The
CO emission escalated despite engine running at stoichiometric conditions for all fuels due to in-cylinder
temperature that decreased at lower loads. CO emissions are extremely influenced by the combustion
temperature in the cylinder and the homogenization of AFR [24].

6

1st International Postgraduate Conference on Mechanical Engineering (IPCME2018) IOP Publishing

IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 469 (2019) 012113 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/469/1/012113

Figure 3. Carbon monoxide, Nitrogen oxide and Hydrocarbon versus throttle position at 3000 rpm.

3.4.2. Nitrogen Oxide (NOx). Figure 3 shows the NOx for blending fuel between pure gasoline, F10
F20 and F30 at 3000 rpm. The testing showed that the NOx decreased when concentration of blends
increased compared to pure gasoline. At low throttle positions, the NOx yielded 8.6-19.2% and are close to
each other due to ignition timing and injection timing and increment of only 2% mass. When engine reached
higher loads, the NOx reaches 8.3-25%. The higher heat of vaporization of the fusel oil causes the decrease
in combustion temperature. Similar results were found by Balki et al. [26] with NOx also reducing when
using alcohol fuel for their SI engine study. When engine use the alcohol fuel, the cylinder temperature
reduce will reduce the emission of NOx [27].

3.4.3. Hydrocarbon (HC). Figure 3 shows the variation of HC using gasoline blends with fusel oil of 10–
30% concentration at 3000 rpm. From observation, the emissions of HC increased linearly when using fusel
oil blends compared to pure gasoline. At low loads, the engine produced between 8.3-19.4% of HC while
at higher loads, the engine yields 5.5-11.9% of HC. The increase of HC is due to the higher oxygen content
of fusel oil, which leads to a more complete and cleaner combustion, thereby increasing HC emissions.

7

1st International Postgraduate Conference on Mechanical Engineering (IPCME2018) IOP Publishing

IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 469 (2019) 012113 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/469/1/012113

Another reason for higher HC is the engine running at slightly higher mixtures and richer conditions
(stoichiometry) to maintain engine performance with pure gasoline. In general, the hydrocarbons in the
exhaust are mainly affected by three mechanisms: (a) misfiring or incomplete combustion, which occurs in
highly rich or lean AFR, (b) flame quenching effects, which takes place near the combustion chamber
surface area or clearance and (c) deposits or oil membranes, which absorb fuel [28]. The higher emission
of HC is either low temperature or inadequate oxygen in cylinder combustion or fuel rich mixture [29].

4. Conclusion
In this study, the pure gasoline and fusel oil mixtures have been tested in four-cylinder SI engines
under stoichiometric conditions using programmable ECU to increase ignition, injection timing and
injection mass. The engine Mitsubishi 1.8L was utilized at 3000 rpm and 10–40% throttle positions.
Considering the experimental results, it is possible to draw the following conclusions:
1. The present work demonstrates that the use of fusel oil blends will marginally increase the BMEP
compared to pure gasoline due to an increased ignition and injection timing at 3–5% to reach stoichiometry.
2. The engine showed VE of all fusel oil blends increases in concentration compared to pure gasoline due
to calibration according the physicochemical properties of fusel oil blends and to preserve the engine
performance.
3. The BSFC increased at all engine loads in a wide range compared to pure gasoline due to higher density,
lower heating values and higher latent heat of evaporation of fusel oil.
4. The physicochemical properties of fusel oil blends such as the lower heating value, latent heat of
vaporization, water content, oxygen content, laminar flame velocity, etc. dominated the NOx, CO and HC
formation in the spark ignition engine.
5. The ignition timing average was increased 10-30% compared to gasoline and parallel increase the flame
development and flame propagation to increase the engine performance. While injection mass average was
increased to 6-10% compared to gasoline for maintain engine performance.
6.The engine emission average was increase for CO and HC at 60% and 20% respectively compared to
gasoline. While Nox reduce dramatically when engine used the Fusel oil due to higher water content and
reduce the cylinder temperature average at 19% compared to gasoline.

Acknowledgements
The financial support offered by the Universiti Malaysia Pahang under RDU150369, RDU180391 and

RDU150124 is gratefully acknowledged.

References
[1] M. Canova, M. Naddeo, Y. Liu, J. Zhou, and Y. Wang, “A Scalable Modeling Approach for the

Simulation and Design Optimization of Automotive Turbochargers,” pp. 1616–1628, 2015.
[2] S. M. Shahed and K.-H. Bauer, “Parametric Studies of the Impact of Turbocharging on Gasoline

Engine Downsizing,” SAE Int. J. Engines, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1347–1358, 2009.
[3] J. K. Woodard, G. E. Johnson, and R. L. Lott, “Minimum Fuel Consumption Design of a Turbo-

Charged V-6 Engine,” J. Mech. Transm. Autom. Des., vol. 111, no. 3, p. 389, 1989.
[4] M. K. Balki and C. Sayin, “The effect of compression ratio on the performance, emissions and

combustion of an SI (spark ignition) engine fueled with pure ethanol, methanol and unleaded
gasoline,” Energy, vol. 71, pp. 194–201, 2014.
[5] P. Whitaker, Y. Shen, C. Spanner, H. Fuchs, A. Agarwal, and K. Byrd, “Development of the
Combustion System for a Flexible Fuel Turbocharged Direct Injection Engine,” SAE 2010 World
Congr., vol. 3, no. 2010-1–585, pp. 326–354, 2010.
[6] A. Elfasakhany, “Investigations on the effects of ethanol–methanol–gasoline blends in a spark-
ignition engine: Performance and emissions analysis,” Eng. Sci. Technol. an Int. J., vol. 18, no. 4,
pp. 713–719, 2015.
[7] M. Eyidogan, A. N. Ozsezen, M. Canakci, and A. Turkcan, “Impact of alcohol–gasoline fuel
blends on the performance and combustion characteristics of an SI engine,” Fuel, vol. 89, no. 10,

8

1st International Postgraduate Conference on Mechanical Engineering (IPCME2018) IOP Publishing

IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 469 (2019) 012113 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/469/1/012113

pp. 2713–2720, Oct. 2010.
[8] Y. Li, L. Meng, K. Nithyanandan, T. H. Lee, Y. Lin, C. fon F. Lee, and S. Liao, “Combustion,

performance and emissions characteristics of a spark-ignition engine fueled with isopropanol-n-
butanol-ethanol and gasoline blends,” Fuel, vol. 184, pp. 864–872, 2016.
[9] A. M. Pourkhesalian, A. H. Shamekhi, and F. Salimi, “Alternative fuel and gasoline in an SI
engine: A comparative study of performance and emissions characteristics,” Fuel, vol. 89, no. 5,
pp. 1056–1063, May 2010.
[10] N. Dörmo, K. Bélafi-Bakó, L. Bartha, U. Ehrenstein, and L. Gubicza, “Manufacture of an
environmental-safe biolubricant from fusel oil by enzymatic esterification in solvent-free
system,” Biochem. Eng. J., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 229–234, 2004.
[11] A. Özgülsün, F. Karaosmanôglu, and M. Tüter, “Esterification reaction of oleic acid with a fusel
oil fraction for production of lubricating oil,” J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc., vol. 77, no. 1, pp. 105–109,
2000.
[12] Z. Küçük and K. Ceylan, “Potential utilization of fusel oil: A kinetic approach for production of
fusel oil esters through chemical reaction,” Turkish J. Chem., vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 289–300, 1998.
[13] H. Mlay, J. H. Y. Katima, and R. J. A. Minja, “Plant Oil / Fusel Oil Blends as Alternative Fuels in
Low- and Medium Speed Diesel Engines,” vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 9–16, 2015.
[14] A. G. Patil, S. M. Koolwal, and H. D. Butala, “Fusel oil: Composition, removal and potential
utilization.,” Int.Sugar J., vol. 104, no. 1238, pp. 51–58, 2002.
[15] P. Taylor, Fı̇ . Karaosmanoğlu, A. Işiğigür, and H. A. Aksoy, “Methanol-Unleaded Gasoline
Blends Containing Fusel Oil Fraction as Spark Ignition Engine Fuel Methanol-Unleaded Gasoline
Blends Containing Fuse1 Oil Fraction as Spark Ignition Engine Fuel,” no. July 2012, pp. 37–41,
2007.
[16] A. A. Andrizhievskii and V. A. Nemtsev, “composition of a typical grapebrandy fusel oil,” vol.
33, no. 6, pp. 1–4, 1977.
[17] A. Calam, H. Solmaz, A. Uyumaz, E. Yilmaz, and Y. Içingür, “Investigation of usability of the
fusel oil in a single cylinder spark ignition engine,” vol. 88, pp. 258–265, 2015.
[18] H. Solmaz, “Combustion , performance and emission characteristics of fusel oil in a spark ignition
engine,” vol. 133, pp. 20–28, 2015.
[19] Y. Zhuang and G. Hong, “Primary investigation to leveraging effect of using ethanol fuel on
reducing gasoline fuel consumption,” Fuel, vol. 105, pp. 425–431, Mar. 2013.
[20] S. Simsek and B. Ozdalyan, “Improvements to the Composition of Fusel Oil and Analysis of the
Effects of Fusel Oil–Gasoline Blends on a Spark-Ignited (SI) Engine’s Performance and
Emissions,” Energies, vol. 11, no. 3, p. 625, 2018.
[21] S. Phuangwongtrakul, W. Wechsatol, T. Sethaput, K. Suktang, and S. Wongwises, “Experimental
study on sparking ignition engine performance for optimal mixing ratio of ethanol-gasoline
blended fuels,” Appl. Therm. Eng., vol. 100, pp. 869–879, 2016.
[22] O. I. Awad, R. Bin Mamat, O. M. Ali, and I. M. Yusri, “Effect of fuel oil - gasoline fusel blends
on the performance and emission characteristics of spark ignition engine : A review,” vol. 3, no.
5, pp. 31–36, 2016.
[23] O. I. Awad, R. Mamat, O. M. Ali, W. H. Azmi, K. Kadirgama, I. M. Yusri, A. M. Leman, and T.
Yusaf, “Response surface methodology (RSM) based multi-objective optimization of fusel oil -
gasoline blends at different water content in SI engine,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 150, no.
June, pp. 222–241, 2017.
[24] X. Wang, Z. Chen, J. Ni, S. Liu, and H. Zhou, “The effects of hydrous ethanol gasoline on
combustion and emission characteristics of a port injection gasoline engine,” Case Stud. Therm.
Eng., vol. 6, pp. 147–154, Sep. 2015.
[25] C. Sayin, “The impact of varying spark timing at different octane numbers on the performance and
emission characteristics in a gasoline engine,” Fuel, vol. 97, pp. 856–861, Jul. 2012.
[26] M. K. Balki, C. Sayin, and M. Canakci, “The effect of different alcohol fuels on the performance,
emission and combustion characteristics of a gasoline engine,” Fuel, vol. 115, pp. 901–906, Jan.

9

1st International Postgraduate Conference on Mechanical Engineering (IPCME2018) IOP Publishing

IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 469 (2019) 012113 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/469/1/012113

2014.
[27] P. M. Shameer and K. Ramesh, “Experimental evaluation on performance, combustion behavior

and influence of in-cylinder temperature on NOx emission in a D.I diesel engine using thermal
imager for various alternate fuel blends,” Energy, vol. 118, pp. 1334–1344, 2017.
[28] C. Park, Y. Choi, C. Kim, S. Oh, G. Lim, and Y. Moriyoshi, “Performance and exhaust emission
characteristics of a spark ignition engine using ethanol and ethanol-reformed gas,” Fuel, vol. 89,
no. 8, pp. 2118–2125, Aug. 2010.
[29] A. Calam, Y. Içingür, H. Solmaz, and H. Yamk, “A comparison of engine performance and the
emission of fusel oil and gasoline mixtures at different ignition timings,” Int. J. Green Energy,
vol. 12, no. 8, pp. 767–772, 2015.

10