Performance test on IC

engine by using edible

oils blended with diesel
GUIDE: BATCH 11
Dr.Y.S.KANNAN K.NIKHIL
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR K.SHARATH BABU
CBIT P.HARISH
 ABSTRACT
• This study aims to investigate the effect of used cooking oil biodiesel blended
with diesel on performance and exhaust emissions of a diesel engine at
different engine loads. Blends of used cooking oil and diesel were prepared in
volume percentages of 10, 20, 30 and 40% as B10, B20, B30 and B40. Diesel
engine was run at different loads from zero to full load at a constant speed
(1500 rpm) separately on each blend and also on pure diesel. Break thermal
efficiencies for UCO biodiesel blends were lower than diesel. Brake specific
fuel consumptions of biodiesel blends were higher than diesel fuel. Higher
exhaust gas temperatures were recorded for biodiesel blends compared to
diesel. CO₂ emissions for biodiesel blends were higher than diesel. CO, smoke
opacity and HC emissions for biodiesel blends were lower than diesel fuel.
NOₓ emissions for biodiesel blends were higher than diesel.
 Methodology:
• Used cooking oil was selected for the present studies. A total of four different blends (10%, 20%,30% and
40%) with diesel were made. 
• Oil was esterified to obtain their butyl esters before blending. The main aim of transesterification is to
lower the viscosity of vegetable oils so as to obtain very close to diesel fuel.
• Transesterification is the process in which fat or oil reacts with an alcohol to form esters and glycerol.

properties Diesel UCO Biodiesel

Cetane number 45-55
Specific gravity 0.825 0.860
Viscosity mm2/sec 4.7 4.99
Calorific value (MJ/kg) 42 37 to 40
                        Carbon (%) 86
Hydrogen(%) 14
1. Prior to the beginning, room temperature in c and atmospheric pressure in mm Hg
are recorded. The engine was started and run for 10 minutes to warm up. The water
flow for the engine was checked.
2. The speed of the engine was checked with a tachometer and made sure that it was
1500 rpm throughout the experiment. Slight adjustments were made wherever
necessary with the help of pneumatic governor to maintain constant speed.
3. Densities of blended fuels were measured with hydrometer in g/cc.
4. Under no load condition, time taken for 10cc of fuel was noted down in seconds
with the help of a stop watch.
5. The difference in water level of U-tube manometer was noted down.
6. The Exhaust Gas Temperature (EGT) and water outlet temperature were noted down
from the thermocouple readings
7. Now load was gradually applied on the engine using the electrical dynamometer was
allowed to run for 5 minutes
8.Time taken for 10cc of fuel, U-tube manometer reading, load applied, EGT, and y
temperature were recorded.
9.The load was further increased in approximately equal steps and the readings were
made an in earlier steps.
10. The engine was then stopped by taking suitable precautions. The above procedure
was repeated and the values were recorded.
FORMULAE:
• 1. Mass of fuel consumed, mf
mf = Xcc x Specific gravity of the fuel ( kg/sec) / 1000 x t
Where, Specific gravity of Diesel is = 0.827
Xcc is the volume of fuel consumed = 10 cc
t is time taken in seconds
2. Heat Input, HI
HI = mf x Calorific Value of Fuel, Kw
Where, Calorific Value of Diesel = 44631.96 KJ/Kg
3. Output or Brake Power, BP
Engine output BP = 2Π NT /60000 kw
Where, N = speed in rpm
T = F x r x 9.81 N-m
• 4. Specific Fuel Consumption, SFC
• SFC = mf x 3600 /BP kg/kW – hr

• 5. Brake Thermal Efficiency, ηbth%

• ηbth = 3600 x 100 / SFC x CV

• Cost Analysis
Cost of the blend = ∑ 𝑛𝑦
Where,
n = Percentage of Fuel
y = Price of 1 liter of fuel
• Calorific value of blended fuel = (Calorific value of component 1 x percentage of component 1) +
(Calorific value of component 2 x percentage of component 2) + ... + (Calorific value of component
n x percentage of component n)
 EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
9
4 5 1 - Kirloskar Engine
7 2 - Electrical Dynamometer
3 - Load box
4 - Orifice meter
8 6 5 - Air box
6 - U tube manometer
7 - Fuel tank
10 3 8 - Three-way valve
11 9 - Burette
12 10 - Exhaust gas temperature
indicator
2 11 - Outlet jacket temperature
12 - Water flow meter

1
Technical specifications of the engine
S.NO DESCRIPTION SPECIFICATION
1 MAKE KIRLOSKAR
2 COOLING ARRANGEMENT WATER COOLED
3 NO OF CYLINDERS 1
4 APPLICATION AUTOMOTIVE(MULTI SPEED)
5 NUMBER OF STROKES 4

6 COMPRESSION RATIO 16:1

7 BORE 80 MM
8 STROKE LENGTH 110 MM
9 IGNITION COMPRESSION IGNITION
10 MAX POWER @RPM 9HP @3000RPM
11 MAX TORQUE@RPM 30NM @1800 RPM
12 NUMBER OF VALVES/CYLINDER 2
Represents the photographic view of experimental setup.
Engine test procedure:
• This study was conducted to investigate the performance and emission characteristics of a stationary
single cylinder diesel engine run on used cooking oil blended with diesel (10:90, 20:80, 30:70, and
40:60 by volume) and also on diesel fuel alone.  Before initiating the studies, the engine was started
and allowed to warm up for about 15 minutes. The engine was operated first on diesel fuel alone,
followed by the used cooking oil blends. Dynamometer was coupled to the engine to apply the load
on the engine for loading the engine. The fuel flow rate was measured by timing the consumption for
known quantity of fuel (10cc) from a burette.
• Following parameters were recorded:
• (i)Break power
• (ii) Total fuel consumption (TFC)
• (iii) Specific energy consumption (SEC)
• (iv) Specific fuel consumption (SFC)
• (v) Brake thermal efficiency (BTE)
• (vi) Smoke intensity
Sample Blends Measuring density of blend by Hydrometer

Smoke analyser
Observations on Engine by using pure diesel
Current Load(KW) T10cc seconds H1 (cm) H2 (cm) Temp Exhaust Temp water
(AMP) Te0 (0C) outlet(0C)

0 0 56.39 11 15 175 37.5

3.2 0.736 40.64 11 15 240 40.2
6.8 1.564 36.51 11 15 300 42.1
10.6 2.438 27.85 11 15 375 44.4
13.7 3.151 21.4 11 15 460 48

S No Break BMEP Mf BSFC Volumetric BTE Air fuel ratio

power(KW) (BAR) (Kg/hr) (Kg/Kw hr) efficiency(%) (%)

1 0 - 0.5266 - 76.652 - 40.13:1

2 0.92 1.311 0.7308 0.79434 76.652 10.79 28.92:1
3 1.955 2.8266 0.8111 0.41488 76.652 20.659 26.09:1
4 3.0475 4.4093 1.0664 0.3497 76.652 24.494 19.82:1
5 3.93875 5.698 1.3878 0.35241 76.652 25.01 15.23:1
Observations on Engine by using Diesel blended with 10% UCO Biodiesel
S.NO Current Load(Kw) T10cc (s) H1(cm) H2(cm) Temp Exhaust Te0 Temp water
(amp) (0c) outlet(0c)

1 0 60 11 15 180 36.7
2 3.2 0.736 46.36 11 15 265 41.5
3 6.8 1.564 36.23 11 15 355 45.2
4 10.6 2.438 28.24 11 15 450 49.4
5 13.7 3.151 22.95 11 15 500 51.8

S.NO Break BMEP(bar) Mf(kg/hr) BSFC Volumetric BTE Air-fuel ratio

Power (kg/kw hr) efficiency
1 0 - 0.495 - 76.652 - 42.649
2 0.92 1.311 0.64141 0.69718 76.652 12.44 32.954
3 1.955 2.8286 0.81 0.41432 76.652 20.93 26.4215
4 3.0475 4.4093 1.05297 0.34548 76.652 25.09 20.0738
5 3.93875 5.6988 1.2956 0.32894 76.652 26.37 16.314
Observations on Engine by using Diesel blended with 20% of UCO oil
S.NO Current(amp) Load(Kw) T10cc H1(cm) H2(cm) Temp Exhaust Te0 Temp water
Seconds (0c) outlet(0c)
1 0 0 65 11 15 200 49.5
2 3.2 0.736 49.1 11 15 260 53
3 6.8 1.564 37.9 11 15 350 59.8
4 10.6 2.438 27.54 11 15 450 61.3
5 13.7 3.151 22.95 11 15 500 64

S.NO Break BMEP(bar) Mf(kg/hr) BSFC Volumetric BTE Air - fuel ratio
Power (kg/kwhr) efficiency
1 0 - 0.46246 - 76.652 - 45.706
2 0.92 1.311 0.6122 0.6654 76.652 13.19 34.5266
3 1.955 2.8286 0.7931 0.40569 76.652 21.64 26.651
4 3.0475 4.4093 1.0915 0.35816 76.652 24.51 19.3652
5 3.93875 5.6988 1.3098 0.3325 76.652 26.4 16.1377
Observations on Engine by using Diesel blended with 30% UCO biodiesel
S.NO Current(amp) Load(Kw) T10cc H1(cm) H2(cm) Temp Exhaust Te0 Temp water
Seconds (0c) outlet(0c)
1 0 0 70 11 15 180 51
2 3.2 0.736 48 11 15 260 59.2
3 6.8 1.564 37.45 11 15 340 62.3
4 10.6 2.438 28.9 11 15 410 68.7
5 13.7 3.151 20.85 11 15 460 72.6

S.NO Break BMEP(bar) Mf(kg/hr) BSFC Volumetric BTE Air-fuel ratio

Power (kg/kw hr) efficiency
1 0 - 0.42994 - 76.652 - 49.163
2 0.92 1.311 0.627 0.68521 76.652 13.032 33.7116
3 1.955 2.8286 0.80363 0.411202 76.652 21.592 26.3021
4 3.0475 4.4093 1.04138 0.34171 76.652 25.9740 20.297297
5 3.93875 5.6988 1.43 0.3630 76.652 24.447 14.7812
Observations on Engine by using Diesel blended with 40% UCO biodiesel
S.NO Current(am Load(Kw) T10cc H1(cm) H2(cm) Temp Exhaust Te0 Temp water
p) Seconds (0c) outlet(0c)
1 0 0 70 11 15 180 51
2 3.2 0.736 48 11 15 260 59.2
3 6.8 1.564 37.45 11 15 340 62.3
4 10.6 2.438 28.9 11 15 410 68.7
5 13.7 3.151 20.85 11 15 460 72.6

S.NO Break BMEP(bar) Mf(kg/hr) BSFC Volumetric BTE Air-fuel ratio

Power (kg/kw hr) efficiency
1 0 - 0.43721 - 76.652 - 48.3456
2 0.92 1.311 0.6379 0.69281 76.652 12.964 33.1356
3 1.955 2.8286 0.81778 0.41830 76.652 21.47 25.8470
4 3.0475 4.4093 1.0938 0.35891 76.652 25.052 19.32455
5 3.93875 5.6988 1.4637 0.3716 76.652 24.1699 14.4409
 Diesel
0.7

0.647
0.6

0.5
BSFC (kg/KWH)

0.4
0.4

0.3 0.338
0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Load (KW)
 B10 B20
0.8 0.7
0.7 0.6 0.665

BSFC(kg/KWH)
0.697
BSFC (kg/KWH)

0.6 0.5
0.5 0.4
0.4 0.405
0.414 0.3 0.358
0.3 0.32
0.345 0.332 0.2
0.2
0.1 0.1
0 0
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Load (KW) Load(KW)

B30 B40
0.8 0.8
0.7 0.7

BSFC(kg/KWH)
0.6 0.692
BSFC(kg/KWH)

0.6 0.681
0.5 0.5
0.4 0.4
0.411 0.418
0.3 0.363 0.3 0.358 0.371
0.341
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0 0
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Load(KW) Load(KW)
 DIESEL
30

26.8 27.12
25

22.34
20
BTE(%)

15

13.34
10

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Load (KW)
 B10 B20
30 30
25 25
25.09 25.2 26.12 26.4
20 20 21.64
BTE (%)

BTE (%)
20.93
15 15
10 12.44 10 13.19
5 5
0 0
00 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 00 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Load (KW) Load (KW)

B30 B40
30
30
25
25 25.02
26.01 24.16
24.42 20

BTE (%)
20 21.62 21.47
BTE (%)

15 15
10 13.04 10 12.96

5 5
0 0
00 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 00 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Load (KW) Load (KW)

Results and Discussion:
Effect of used cooking oil blends on Break specific fuel consumption
• Break specific fuel consumptions for UCO biodiesel blends are higher than
that of diesel. BSFC of B20 blend has been found to be much nearer to pure
diesel as compared to other blends.
Load against Break Specific Fuel Consumption
0.8
0.7
0.6
BSFC(kg/KWH)

0.5
Diesel
0.4
B10
0.3 B20
0.2 B30
0.1 B40
0
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Load(KW)
Effect of used cooking oil biodiesel blends on Break thermal efficiency
• Break thermal efficiencies are slightly lower for biodiesel blends as compared to pure
diesel at all engine loads. BTE of B20 blend at full load condition has been found to be
much nearer to pure diesel as compared to other blends.

Load against Break Thermal Efficiency

30

25

20 Diesel
B10
BTE(%)

15 B20
B30
10 B40

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Load(KW)
Effect of used cooking oil biodiesel blends on exhaust gas temperature

• Exhaust gas temperature increased with increase of engine load for all fuels. Higher
exhaust gas temperatures are recorded for biodiesel blends as compared to pure
diesel for all the engine loads.

Exhaust Gas Temperature vs BMEP

600

500

400 Diesel
B10
Tₑ(℃)

300 B20
B30
200
B40
100

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
BMEP(bar)
Effect of used cooking oil biodiesel blends on air-fuel ratio

• Increase of engine load led to decrease of air-fuel ratio. Air-fuel ratios for UCO
biodiesel blends were lower than pure diesel. Air-fuel ratio has been decreased with
increase in percentage of biodiesel in biodiesel blends.

A-F ratio vs BMEP

60
50
Diesel
40
B10
A-F ratio

30 B20
20 B30
B40
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
BMEP(bar)
Effect of used cooking oil biodiesel blends on CO emissions

• CO emissions decreased with increase in engine brake power at lower loads and then
increased at higher loads for all the fuels. Decrease in carbon monoxide emission
was observed for biodiesel blends when compared to pure diesel.

0.06

0.05

0.04
CO emission(%)

B40
0.03
B30
0.02 B20
B10
0.01 Diesel

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Load(KW)
Effect of used cooking oil biodiesel blends on CO₂ emissions

• The rising trend of CO₂ emission with engine load was observed. CO₂ emission is
more for biodiesel and its blends than that for pure diesel and it is increased with the
increase in blend proportion.
4.5
4
3.5
CO₂ emission(%)

3
2.5 Diesel
2 B10
1.5 B20
B30
1
B40
0.5
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Load(KW)
Effect of used cooking oil biodiesel blends on HC emissions

• HC emission is lower at engine part load and increases with increase of engine load.
Biodiesel blends with diesel fuel produced lower HC emissions at all engine loads
compared to pure diesel. Increase of biodiesel percentage in biodiesel blends led to
HC emissions reductions.
18
16
14
HC emission(ppm)

12
10 B40
8 B30
6 B20
4 B10
2 Diesel
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Load(KW)
Effect of used cooking oil biodiesel blends on Nox emissions

• NOx emissions increased with the increase in engine load for all fuels. Increase in
NOx emission for biodiesel blends was higher compared to pure diesel. NOx
emissions for biodiesel blends increased with increase of biodiesel volume
percentage.
120

100
NOx emission(ppm)

80
B40
60
B30
B20
40
B10
Diesel
20

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Load(KW)
Effect of used cooking oil biodiesel blends on smoke percentage

• Smoke emission increased with engine power output for all fuels. Smoke emissions
of biodiesel blends were lower than diesel fuel under similar operating conditions.
Smoke emission decreased with increase in biodiesel percentage in biodiesel blends
and B30 blend has shown less smoke percentage at full load condition

% of smoke
92 90.6
90 88.2
88
85.4 Diesel
86
B10
84 82.3 B20
82
79.4 B30
80
B40
78
76
74
72
Full load condition
 Cost Analysis
120

100 97.8
93.4
89
84.6
Cost in rupees 80.2 Diesel
80
B10
B20
60 54 B30
B40
40 UCO Biodiesel

20

• Comparison of costs of diesel, UCO biodiesel and four different blends has been
shown in the above figure. It can be observed that cost of all the blends is less
than the cost of diesel.
 CONCLUSIONS
In this study the performance analysis of used cooking oil biodiesel was evaluated on a
Diesel engine and the following conclusions were drawn:
• B20 blend gave better BTE as compared to other blends and BSFC of B20 blend was
found to be nearer to that of pure diesel.
• Higher exhaust gas temperatures were recorded for UCO biodiesel blends compared
to that of pure diesel.
• Least smoke percentage was recorded at full load condition for B30 blend among all
the fuels.
• CO and HC emissions were lower for UCO biodiesel blends compared to that of pure
diesel.
• Noₓ and CO₂ emissions were increased with the increase in percentage of biodiesel in
the blends.
REFERENCES:
[1] R.B. Sharma, Amit Pal, Juhi Sharaf Production of bio-diesel from waste cooking-oil J. Eng. Res. Appl., 4 (6)
(2013), pp. 1629-1636.
[2]E.M. Shahid, Shah A.N. Jamal, N. Rumzan, M. Munsha,Effect of used cooking-oil methyl ester on
compression ignition engineJ. Quality Technol. Manage., VIII (II) (2012), pp. 91-104.
[3]Pedro Felizardo, M. Joana Neiva Correia, Idalina Raposo, Joao F. Mendes, Rui Berkemeier, Joao Moura
BordadoProduction, of biodiesel from waste frying oilsWaste Manage. J., 26 (3) (2006), pp. 487-494.
[4] S. Bari, C.W. Yu and T.H. Lim. 2002. Performance deterioration and durability issues while running a diesel engine
with crude palm oil. Proc. Instn.Mech.Engrs. Part-D J. Automobile Engineering.
[5] F. Ma and M.A. Hanna. 1999. Biodiesel production: a review. Bio-resource Technology.
[6] K.R. Kaufman and M. Ziejewski. 1984. Neem methyl-esters for direct injected diesel engines.
[7]M.S. Rahman, M.N. Nabi and M.R.A. Beg. 2004. Performance Study of a Diesel Engine with Diesel-Vegetable oil
Blends as Alternative Fuel. 2nd BSME-ASME International conference on Thermal Engineering, 2-4 January, Dhaka,
Bangladesh.
[8]Anbumani and A.P. Singh. 2009. Experimental investigations on the use of vegetable oils as biofuel for compression
ignition engine. Journal of ARISER.
[9]J.Connemann and J. Fischer. 1998. Biodiesel inEurope. International Liquid Biofuels Congress. Curitiba-Parana-Brazil,
July 19-22.
[10]J. Cognomen and J. Fischer. 1999. Biodiesel in Europe 2000. Symposium-Biodiesel fuel from vegetables oils for
compression-ignition engines