Journal of the Energy Institute 88 (2015) 19e26

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of the Energy Institute

journal homepage: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-the-energyinstitute

Effect of compression ratio on the performance, combustion and

emission of DI diesel engine fueled with ethanol e Diesel blend
V. Gnanamoorthi a, *, G. Devaradjane b
a
b

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University College of Engineering Villupuram, Villupuram 605103, India
Department of Automobile Engineering, M.I.T, Anna University, Chennai 600 047, India

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 16 August 2013
Accepted 14 May 2014
Available online 18 June 2014

The present work investigates the inuence of compression ratio on the performance, combustion and
emission characteristics of a single cylinder four stroke direct injections naturally aspirated diesel engine.
Compression ratios such as 17.5:1, 18.5:1 and 19.5:1 were considered and varied by altering the dimensions of piston bowl by keeping the standard stroke volume. Tests were performed with ve
different blends of ethanol [E0, E10, E20, E30 and E40]. To maintain homogeneity and to prevent the
phase separation, 1% of Ethyl Acetate plus 1% diethyl carbonate are added to ethanol diesel blend. The
brake thermal efciency found to increase at full load with higher percentage of ethanol at maximum
compression ratio. The increase in compression ratio and ethanol blended fuel improves combustion and
improves the performance of engine. Further there is a signicant decrease in hydrocarbon (HC), Carbon
monoxide (CO) and smoke emissions however there is an increase in Nitrogen oxides (NOx).
2014 Energy Institute. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Compression ratio
Diesel engine
Ethanol
Emissions
Emulsion

1. Introduction
The engine operations are challenged by high prices of crude oil, with the stringent of emission norms and therefore nding an alternative fuel like ethanol is essential. It is expected to benet automobile users, sugar cane farmers, country's foreign exchange reserves and to
protect the issues like global warming. In our country ethanol fuel is comparatively less expensive than diesel. Therefore it can be considered
as economically viable and at the same time create research interest. Ethanol as engine fuel either the engine has to be modied or the fuel.
In the present work, both are considered. The solubility of ethanol in diesel is improver mainly by temperature, hydrocarbon composition of
diesel and water content in the blend this causes separation. The separation can be prevented by adding 2% emulsiers to ensure the
homogeneity, Nubia et al. [14]. The modication of engine compression ratio has effects on ignition timing, end temperature and pressure at
the end of compression process. Increased compression ratio has a similar effect as raising the inlet air temperature and boosting the intake
pressure as a result, Keith et al. [1].
The higher latent heat of vapourization, higher auto-ignition temperature and lower cetane number permit the engine to raise the
compression ratio up to 23:1, Avinash et al. [2] In general, increasing the compression ratio improves the efciency of the engine. The mean
BTE of Ricardo engine was increased by more than 33%, when the CR was raised from 18 to 20 which resulted in reduction of ignition delay,
Raheman et al. [3]. While using hydrous ethanol, the conversion efciency and mean effective pressure were improved with increasing
compression ratio up to the maximum value, thereafter, BTE and MEP were dropped further by increasing compression ratio, Amba Prasad
Rao et al. [4]. The ethanol blended fuel evaporates comparatively faster due to higher cylinder temperature which occurs when compression
ratio is increased and it results in better combustion, Lee et al. [5]. Ethanol is considered as renewable and sustainable fuel, as it can be
obtained from sugar cane and other renewable energy sources. Anhydrous ethanol and hydrous ethanol are two types of ethanol provided
for automotive application and the anhydrous ethanol contains a maximum of 0.7% water on weight basis, and hydrous ethanol is
constituted by up to 7.4% of water on weight basis, measured at 20  C. Pure ethanol normally requires a compression ratio of 23:1 for
unassisted auto ignition under stable operation. Isaias et al. [6]. Bio mass anhydrous ethanol emits less CO2 compared to hydrous ethanol.

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: cvgnana@gmail.com (V. Gnanamoorthi), deva@mitindia.edu (G. Devaradjane).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joei.2014.06.001
1743-9671/ 2014 Energy Institute. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

20

V. Gnanamoorthi, G. Devaradjane / Journal of the Energy Institute 88 (2015) 19e26

The previous research on the use of ethanol in diesel engines follows three techniques (i) the ethanol ediesel fuel blend or emulsion, (ii)
ethanol fumigation and (iii) dual fuel injection, Kent Ekholm et al. [7] By fumigation NOx emission reduces compared to pure diesel
operation. However, drop in BTE is observed and dramatically HC and CO emissions are increased. Under ethanol-diesel blend or emulsion,
ethanol is not blend with diesel without the additives for longer period. The thermal efciency of the engine depends on the stability of the
ethanol diesel blend compared to pure diesel. When varied up to E35 the NOx is decreased, but HC and CO are increased, Jincheng Huang
et al. [8]. Dual fuel direct injection is a method by which the main injection of ethanol is supplemented with a small amount of diesel.
Drawbacks of this method are separate fuel tank, line, pumps, difculty in controlling the total systems and expensive cost of systems
Alberto Borettiet al. [9]. Ethanol addition to diesel fuel results in different physical and chemical changes in diesel fuel properties. Particularly (i) heating value of ethanol is 33% lesser than diesel. This increase more amount of blended fuel to be sent in to obtain same power
from diesel. (ii) Less viscosity causes injector leakage, reduces the fuel delivery, wear issues with sensitive fuel pump, affecting the injector
performance, (iii) Less cetane number causes poor stability, more cold starting emission, peak cylinder pressure, temperature and high
noise, (iv) Low ash point causes fuel affecting transportation and storage, (v) surface tension causes change spray character, increase
atomization of fuel, combustion efciency and high laminar ame speed, (vi) low boiling point causes increase of vapor lock and high
cooling effect, (vii) low stoichiometric ratio causes decrease air fuel ratio, (viii) high latent heat of vaporization causes increase in ignition
delay, reduced the peak temperature inside the cylinder, hence reduced NOx emission. (ix) high auto ignition temperature (x) Lower C/H
mass ratio (xi) Increase of H/C and O/C ratio from basic physiochemical properties Nadir Yilmaz et al. [13]. The objective of this work is to nd
the maximum possible and optimum replacement of diesel fuel by ethanol and compare the performance of diesel engine fuel led with
ethanol-diesel blend for various compression ratios (17.5:11, 18.5:1, 19.5:1) and study the effect of compression ratio and using the best
emulsied technique to achieve acceptable range of efciency up to E40.
2. Experimental setup and procedure
The schematic diagram of the experimental setup is shown in Fig. 1. In this a Kirloskar SV1 model single cylinder, water cooled four
stroke direct injection diesel engine is used. The engine develops 5.2 kW power at rated speed of 1500 rpm and was directly coupled with
AG 250 model water cooled Eddy Current dynamometer. The setup is instrumented for combustion pressure and crank e angle measurements. These signals are interfaced with computer through engine indicator for Peq and PeV diagrams. The necessaries provisions
are made for interfacing fuel ow, airow, temperature, speed and load measurements. The setup has a standealone panel box consisting
of air box, fuel tank, manometer, fuel measurements unit, speed indicator, load indicator, temperature indicator, Rota meters (provided for
cooling water measurements) and calorimeter (water ow measurements). This setup enables the study of engine performance for
indicated power, brake power, frictional power, IMEP, BMEP, Indicated thermal efciency, brake thermal efciency, specic fuel consumption, volumetric efciency and air fuel ratio. The engine performance analysis software package named Engine soft is provided for
online performance and combustion evaluation. PCB a piezo-electric pressure transducer (PCB piezotronics) is used for recording the
cylinder pressure for 20 consecutive cycles for combustion variability studies. The experiments are conducted under compression ratio
17.5:1, 18.5:1 and 19.5:1 using various proportions of ethanol diesel blends (E0-neat diesel, E10, E20, E30 and E40) and the injection
pressure used is 255 bars. The compression ratio is varied by altering the dimensions of the piston bowl by keeping the standard stroke
volume available in the engine cylinder as constant. The Combustion and performance parameters are measured by computerized systems. The initial arrangements of the system are properly checked and test fuel is lled in the fuel tank. The engine is operated at different
loads (Zero load, 3 Kg, 6 Kg, 9 Kg, 12 Kg, 15 Kg, and 18 Kg). For every load, air ow, fuel ow, temperatures at water inlet and exhaust, Rota
meters values are noted. The smoke level of the engine is measured by using AVL 437C smoke analyzer and values of exhaust gases like
CO, HC, CO2, NOx and O2 are noted by using AVL Di Gas 444 gas analyzer. The above values are noted for different compression ratios and
the same procedure is repeated for every different blends of ethanol. For every blend the performance and emission values are tabulated
and compared with each other.

Fig. 1. Experimental setup.

V. Gnanamoorthi, G. Devaradjane / Journal of the Energy Institute 88 (2015) 19e26

21

3. Result and discussion

3.1. Performance
3.1.1. Brake thermal efciency (BTE)
The effect of blends ratio at different compression ratio are shown in the Fig. 2. At lower compression ratio, incomplete combustion
occurs with higher ethanol concentration due to the longer ignition delay. The increase in compression ratio and increase in load reduces the
ignition delay and combustion duration for E20 to E40. There is an increase of 10e15% of BTE at higher load. This increasing of BTE is due to
higher resistance to knock by increasing the percentage of ethanol blends at higher compression ratio. Usually increasing the percentage of
ethanol decreases the BTE due to lower caloric value of ethanol. It requires additional fuel to produce the same power and also poor auto
ignition combustion due to lower cetane number and high quenching effect decrease the combustion temperature which is responsible for a
decrease in the BTE, shown in Fig. 2. At high compression ratio and high load, the rich mixture under the high combustion temperature
oxidation reaction enhances the reaction kinetics of oxygen present in the ethanol under these conditions. Hence BTE increases for E20 upto
E40. The improvement of power is more evident at higher compression ratio, owing to increasing knock resistance of blended fuel with
increasing amount of ethanol blend. It is also found that above 40% ethanol increases the noise on the engine and decreases the speed of the
engine due to the abnormal combustion which was clearly noted. This may be caused by very longer ignition delay and combustion
deterioration [10]. BTE of neat diesel and E10 are decreased despite of higher compression ratio (19.5:1) by 20% and 10% respectively. BTE of
E20, E30 and E40 increases at higher compression ratio by 15%, 20% and 35% respectively. BTE of E40 drops considerably when compared to
neat diesel.
3.2. Combustion
3.2.1. Cylinder pressure
The combustion of diesel engine was partially premixed and partially diffusive. These phenomena were very complex mechanisms to
identify and it depends on fuel, engine design variables like compression ratio, fuel injection timing, and intake boosting the pressure,
temperature and engine load. The major part of the combustion of ethanol blend occurs at the premixed stage and only a minor part of the
combustion occurs in diffusive stage. This is due to increase of compression ratio. Fig. 3 shows cylinder pressure with compression ratio of
17.5:1, 18.5:1, 19.5:1 with E10, E20, E30 and E40. An increase in compression ratio results in better mixing of fuel and higher temperature
during the compression stroke. The increase in the compression ratio is expected to result in rise in cylinder pressure. This leads to reduced
ignition delay and the combustion occurs near the TDC. During this period, the fuel reaction rate is faster and causes a rapid increase in
pressure in the engine cylinder. As the compression ratio is higher than the normal range of the diesel fuel engine misred, high knocking
occurs with high pressure oscillation. This adversely affects and narrows the expected rise in fuel conversion efciency. As ethanol has lower
cetane value, longer ignition delay and high auto ignition temperature, the fuel conversion efciency will be effective at a high compression
ratio. This leads to reduced ignition delay. The lower boiling point of ethanol makes it to evaporate as the diesel gets ignited. As a result of the
vaporized ethanol, the mixture burns more rapidly than diesel. This reaction is possible up to E40 resulting in better engine performance.
The longer ignition delay of E40 results in diffusive end burning and drops in cylinder pressure. Even if the ethanol percentage is increased,
an unstable operation is noted. While increasing of CR at 19.5 and higher loads, the charge temperature and peak pressure of E0, E10, E20,
E30 and E40 are (71.69, 71.03, 71.99, 71.99 and 70.19 bar). Even though the ethanol has low caloric value, it meets out almost the same
pressure at the high compression ratio compared to diesel.

Fig. 2. Variation of BTE for various EthanoleDiesel blends at various compression ratios.

22

V. Gnanamoorthi, G. Devaradjane / Journal of the Energy Institute 88 (2015) 19e26

Fig. 3. Variation of cylinder pressure for various EthanoleDiesel blends at various compression ratios.

3.2.2. Heat release rate

Fig. 4 shows the net heat release rate for varied compression ratio at various percentage of ethanol and diesel blend. From the gure it is
observed that the ignition timing changes with respect to compression ratio and increasing with respect to the ethanol percentage of the
blend. Increasing the ethanol percentage increases ignition delay period, the more fuel that can premix with air to form the combustible
mixture of ethanol heat-release peak will be higher and the corresponding cylinder pressure raises steeper. The lower boiling point of

Fig. 4. Variation of HRR for various EthanoleDiesel blends at various compression ratios.

V. Gnanamoorthi, G. Devaradjane / Journal of the Energy Institute 88 (2015) 19e26

23

ethanol helps to evaporate the mixture relatively shorter than the neat diesel fuel evaporation. This phenomenon helps to auto-ignite the
mixture relatively quicker and enables homogeneous combustion. The initial kinetic combustion peak is clearly increased, thus more fuel
can be burned during this period compared to neat diesel with ethanol blend. Increased peak heat release rate can be seen at CR 19.5 with
the ethanol blend E0, E10, E20, E30 and E40 which have the net peak heat release rate 40.85, 51.54, 84.7, 83.58, 87.39 and 54.02 respectively.
Also it can be seen from the heat release rate curve that combustion duration of CR 19.5 is relatively short at higher ethanol blend. The
prickly heat release rate starts earlier and the net heat release rate value is closer to the TDC. This appears closer to the adiabatic ame
temperature. The short combustion duration increases the cycle efciency. Hence, the increase of compression ratio and ethanol proportion
increases heat release in the premixed phase of combustion. The higher volatility and lower cetane number are also contributes considerably for raising the heat release in the rst phase of combustion. This causes OH radicals which are accelerated and buildup of OH and HO2
continuously [11]. The result may be assumed that ethanol is an intermediate that converts active OH at the temperatures more than 1000 K
achieved at high compression ratio. Oxidation reaction enhances the reaction chemical kinetics of oxygen present in the ethanol to increase
the heat release rate and carbon dioxide formation.
3.3. Emissions
3.3.1. CO emission
The variation of carbon monoxide emissions of diesel, E10, E20, E30 and E40 with the three compression ratio are shown in the Fig. 5. It is
observed that with increase in compression ratio and ethanol blend, the carbon monoxide emission are decreased due to source of high
temperature at the end of compression and more oxygen availability of ethanol to change the chemical kinetics. Higher percentage of
ethanol blends result in high emission of CO at part load due to lower combustion temperature caused by high latent heat of vapourization
of ethanol. At higher load and a higher compression ratio, the combustion temperature increases [16].This results in higher afnity of carbon
with oxygen. The effect of oxygen atom in the ethanol oxidation reaction will be enhanced. Under this condition, CO is converted into CO2.
The formation of CO is decreased. From the graph, it is observed that the CR 17.5 is worse in engine behavior for E40. CO-emission was
greater than CR 18.5 &19.5. This is caused by partial oxidation which causes low combustion temperature and much increased ignition delay.
As the compression ratio is increased, it is natural that the temperature and pressure are higher near TDC. At high load, temperatures
generally increase the speed of the chemical kinetics so reducing the maximum amount of CO at 19.5:1 for all ethanol blends. But at higher
CR and lower load, the sufcient oxygen in the mixture would be very less due to lower temperature, which weakens the oxidation reaction
at partial load. So CO-emission increases comparatively with all ethanol blends compared to diesel. At higher compression ratio (19.5) and at
higher load when compared with neat diesel, the CO emission reduces by 10%, 30%, 15% and 5% for E10, E20, E30 and E40 respectively. When
the compression ratio 18.5, at higher load, similar trend is followed but CO emission is higher when compared to higher compression ratio.
3.3.2. HC emission
The variation of hydrocarbon emissions of diesel, for E10, E20, E30 and E40 with the three compression ratio are shown in the Fig. 6.
There are different mechanisms that can affect hydrocarbon emissions in the compression chamber design. It can be observed that the HC
emission is remarkably increased under lower engine load. This phenomenon indicates that lowering the cetane number result in excessive
suppression of ignitability causing an increase in HC emission up to the part load conditions. HC emission generally increases compared to
neat diesel fuel due to high latent heat of vaporization of ethanol leaving unburnt ethanol in the exhaust. But with higher compression ratio,
the engine HC emission decreases, increasing the engine cycle efciency [12]. This makes the ame propagation faster and shortening the
combustion process. This increases charge temperature reducing the exhaust HC by almost above 65% at part load and 80% at the fuel load at
higher compression ratio. The increased compression ratios and load results in increase of temperature at the end of the compression. The

Fig. 5. Variation of CO emission for various EthanoleDiesel blends at various compression ratios.

24

V. Gnanamoorthi, G. Devaradjane / Journal of the Energy Institute 88 (2015) 19e26

Fig. 6. Variation of HC emission for various EthanoleDiesel blends at various compression ratios.

result reduces the quenching of the ame which caused decreasing the hydro carbon emissions. At higher compression ratio compared to
the ethanol blends, the HC drastically decreased for E30 and E40. But for E10 and E20, the HC emission is higher than the diesel. But,
compared to the compression ratios CR 17.5 and CR 18.5, the CR 19.5 suppresses the HC emission more.
3.3.3. NOx emission
In combustion theory, there are three NOx formation mechanisms. They are (i) Thermal NOx formation (Zeldovich mechanism), (ii)
Prompt NOx formation (Fenimore mechanism) and (iii) NOx formation due to nitrogen in the fuel. Thermal NOx formation and Prompt NOx
formation occur when there is an increase in ethanol blends and compression ratio. Fig. 7 shows the NOx emission being increased with
increase in the engine load and compression ratio. While using ethanol blends in CI engine NOx emission decreases due to the higher latent
heat of vapourization and lower heating value. The low cetane number leads the ethanol blend to increase the ignition delay. As a result
greater rate of pressure rise causing higher peak cylinder pressure and high peak combustion temperatures [9,11]. With the increase of
ethanol blend H/C ratio increases due to hydrocarbon air ames at an earlier phase results from an attack of carbon and hydrogen radicals to
form NOx at higher compression ratio. The neat diesel and 10% ethanol have decreased the NOx while increasing compression ratio due to
primary barrier of combustion of engine knock at higher load. At higher compression ratio, the NOx emission increases for E20, E30, and E40

Fig. 7. Variation of NOx emission for various EthanoleDiesel blends at various compression ratios.

V. Gnanamoorthi, G. Devaradjane / Journal of the Energy Institute 88 (2015) 19e26

25

Fig. 8. Variation of smoke emission for various EthanoleDiesel blends at various compression ratios.

by 10%, 12% and 40% respectively. This is because ethanol blend has a much better volatility which results in rapid combustion due to the
large amount of premixed fuel at a high compression ratio. Increase in ethanol blend at high compression ratio causes higher steep heat
release rate which increases the adiabatic ame temperature. Thus the NOx formation is increased.
3.3.4. Smoke emission
The variation in the smoke of the engine with the compression ratio, percentage of ethanol blend and the load is shown in Fig. 8.
Generally the ethanol blend emits lower smoke compared to neat diesel. This is the result of the higher oxygen content on the molecular
structure of the ethanol. This causes rapid oxidation in the engine cylinder resulting in complete burning. As ethanol blend ratio increases,
cetane number decreases compared to diesel. This results in a longer ignition delay. Therefore the fuel burns during the diffusive phase.
Addition of ethanol to diesel reduces aromatic ame formed and increases the formation of aliphatic ame to reduce the smoke. This
exhausts ethylene and water. Using the ethanol blend soluble organic formation is low due to increase in OH radicals and inactive H2O2
[15,11]. There is a possibility of forming poly cyclic aromatic hydrocarbons during this process. The smoke increases with the increase in load
which is a general concept. But the increase in ethanol percentage at higher load predominantly reduces the smoke at higher compression
ratio up to E20. Further increase of ethanol ratio at the lower load increases the smoke due to too longer ignition delay and combustion
occurring at late diffusive stage. At higher compression ratio the smoke reduces at higher load due to decrease in latent heat of vapourization, decrease in the ignition delay. Therefore results in auto ignition. At higher compression ratio, smoke reduces at higher load for E10,
E20, E30 and E40 by 20%, 15%, 16% and 10% respectively.

4. Conclusion
This work reports the performance, combustion and emission characteristics of ethanol by varying its percentage and compression ratio.
At high compression ratio 19.5:1 gave the highest brake thermal efciency.
Desired combustion phasing takes place very rapidly due to the premixed charge and advances the combustion. There is a steep rise in
the pressure and knocking is prevented in the higher ethanol blends.
The lower cetane number of ethanol and higher enthalpy of varpourisation of ethanol will reach the auto ignition state only if we increase
the compression ratio at 19.5:1. This leads to better fuel conversion efciency up to E40 compared to diesel.
Besides its low caloric value, ethanol almost reaches the peak pressure of diesel due to combustion starting at early stage and complete
burning of the fuel at high compression ratio.
Increase in ethanol blend at high compression ratio causes higher steep heat release rate which increases the adiabatic ame temperature compared to neat diesel.
Carbon Monoxide and Hydrocarbon emission decreases with high compression ratio. This is achieved by faster mixing rate of ethanol
and enhances the presence of oxygen at higher compression ratio.
With the increase of ethanol blend H/C ratio increases due to hydrocarbon air ames at earlier phase results from an attack of carbon and
hydrogen radicals to form NOx at higher compression ratio.
Increase in ethanol blend at high compression ratio causes higher steep heat release rate which increases the adiabatic ame
temperature.
Too longer ignition delay, the combustion occurring at late diffusive stage increases the smoke with increase in ethanol ratio at the lower
load. The smoke reduces at higher load due to decrease in latent heat of vapourization and decrease in the ignition delay at higher
compression ratio.

26

V. Gnanamoorthi, G. Devaradjane / Journal of the Energy Institute 88 (2015) 19e26

References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]

Keith C, Corkwell, Mitchell M, Jackson and Daniel TDaly: SAE, 2003-01-3283.

Avinash Kumar Agarwal, Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 33 (2007) 233e271.
H. Rahemanand, S.V. Ghadge, Fuel 87 (2008) 2659e2666.
G. Amba Prasad Rao, S. Kaleemuddin, Appl. Energy 88 (2011) 2653e2662.
C.H. Lee, K.H. Lee, Energy Fuels 21 (2007) 1901e1907.
Isaias C. Macedo, Joaquim E.A. Seabraand, Joao E.A.R. Silva, Bio Mass Bio Energy 32 (2008) 582e595.
Kent Ekholm, Maria Karlsson, Per Tunestal, Rolf Johansson and Bengt Johansson: SAE, 2008-01-0033.
Jincheng Huang, Yadong Wang, Shuangding Li, Anthony P. Roskilly, Hongdong Yu, Huifen Li, Appl. Therm. Eng. 29 (2009) 2484e2490.
Alberto, Boretti, Appl. Therm. Eng. 47 (2012) 1e9.
Zhili Chen and Konno Mitsuru: SAE, 2003-01-1832.
David A. Blank: SAE, 2004-01-1677.
Thomas W. Ryan, Timothy J. Callahan and Darius Mehta: SAE, 2004-01-1971.
Nadir Yilmaz, A. Burl Donaldson and Andy Johns: SAE, 2005-01-3135.
Nubia M. Ribeiro, Angelo C. Pinto, Cristina M. Quintella ande.ta, Energy Fuels 21 (2007) 2433e2445.
Maurin Salamanca, Maurico Velasquez, Fanor Mondragon, Alexander Santamaria, Energy Fuels 26 (2012) 6602e6611.
M. Lida, T. Aroonsrisopon, M. Hayashi, D. Foster and J. Martin: SAE 2001, 01e1880.