Energy 55 (2013) 330e339

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

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

Combined impact of injection pressure and combustion chamber

geometry on the performance of a biodiesel fueled diesel engine
S. Jaichandar a, *, K. Annamalai b
a
Dept. of Automobile Engineering, Sree Sastha Institute of Engineering and Technology, Chennai 600 123, Tamilnadu, India
b
Dept. of Automobile Engineering, Madras Institute of Technology, Anna University, Chennai, Tamilnadu, India

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

Article history: Improved thermal efficiency, reduction in fuel consumption and pollutant emissions from biodiesel
Received 14 September 2012 fueled diesel engines are important issues in engine research. To achieve these, rapid and perfect air-fuel
Received in revised form mixing are the most important requirements. The mixing quality of biodiesel spray with air can be
17 February 2013
improved by selecting the best injection parameters and better design of the combustion chamber.
Accepted 13 April 2013
Available online 15 May 2013
Experiments were performed using a DI (direct injection) diesel engine equipped with a conventional
jerk type injection system and pistons having HCC (hemispherical combustion chamber) and TRCC
(toroidal re-entrant combustion chamber) geometries. The combined effect of varying, injection pressure
Keywords:
Biodiesel
and combustion chamber geometries, on the combustion, performance and exhaust emissions, using a
Diesel engine blend of 20% POME (pongamia oil methyl ester) by volume in diesel were evaluated. The test results
Combustion chamber showed that improvement in terms of brake thermal efficiency and specific fuel consumption for TRCC
Injection pressure operated at higher injection pressure. Substantial improvements in reduction of emissions levels were
Performance also observed for TRCC operated at higher injection pressure. However improved combustion, due to
Emissions better air motion inside the cylinder and high pressure injection, increased the oxides of nitrogen (NOx).
Increasing injection pressure decreased ignition delay, and increased peak in-cylinder pressure and
maximum heat release rate.
Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction biodiesel fuel in diesel engines without any modification to the diesel
engine. These investigations have reported that the use of biodiesel
Internal combustion engines, particularly diesel engines play an blends and neat biodiesel in the diesel engine, decreased exhaust
important role in automotive, industrial and agricultural sectors. emissions levels, except oxides of nitrogen (NOx) compared to Ultra
Although, more fuel efficient, reliable and durable than their spark Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD) [4e7]. Further, increased brake specific fuel
ignited counterpart, they have relatively higher emissions and consumption [8,9] and decreased brake thermal efficiency, and brake
noise level. The increasing requirement of energy in the form of fuel mean effective pressure have been reported [10e12].
and growing concern over environmental pollution caused by the The performance and emission characteristics of CI (compres-
extensive use of conventional fossil fuels have led to the search for sion ignition) engines mainly depend upon the combustion process
alternative, but more environment friendly and renewable fuels. [13]. Combustion of the fuel inside the cylinder, in turn depends on
Among various options available as an alternative for diesel fuel, various factors like, fuel injection timing, fuel injection pressure,
biodiesel has been reported to be one of the strong contenders for engine design such as shape of combustion chamber and position
reductions in environmental pollution [1e3]. Therefore, it is of in- of injector, fuel properties, number and size of injection nozzle
terest to investigate the use of biodiesel in the diesel engine, aiming hole, fuel spray pattern, air swirl, fuel quantity injected, etc. [14].
to increase efficiency of operations and to reduce the emissions of When compared with ULSD, biodiesel has different physical and
pollutants. A number of experimental investigations were carried out chemical properties, which affect the nature of the combustion
on the performance, emission and combustion characteristics of process [15e17]. High viscosity and surface tension of vegetable oil
affect atomization by increasing the droplet size which in turn in-
creases the spray tip penetration [18,19]. Injection pressure of the
* Corresponding author.
injected fuel has a significance effect on the performance and for-
E-mail addresses: jaisriram18@yahoo.com, jcdhanesh@gmail.com mation of pollutants inside the DI (direct injection) diesel engine
(S. Jaichandar). combustion chamber [20,21]. Combustion of fuel in diesel engines

0360-5442/$ e see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.04.019
 S. Jaichandar, K. Annamalai / Energy 55 (2013) 330e339 331

depends on the efficient atomization, to increase the surface area of Table 2

the fuel in order to attain improved air-fuel mixing and increased Standard engine specifications.

evaporation rates [22,23]. The reduction in the average droplet Make Kirloskar TV1
diameter increases the heat release rates, facilitates ignition, pro- Type Vertical diesel engine, 4 stroke, water cooled,
vides excellent vaporization and thereby improves combustion single cylinder
efficiency and reduces the pollutant emissions. Higher injection Displacement 661 cc
pressure generally contributes to decreased fuel droplet size, Bore & stroke 87.5 mm & 110 mm
Compression ratio 17.5:1
improved combustion and results in reduction of smoke emissions
Fuel Diesel
[24e27]. Rated brake power 5.2 kW @ 1500 rpm
Once the operating injection parameters are optimally matched Ignition system Compression ignition
to each other with combustion chamber geometry generated tur- Injection timing 23 bTDC (rated)
Injection pressure 200 bar
bulence, they typically result in a fuel spray with small droplet size
Combustion chamber Hemispherical combustion chamber
(good atomization), long tip penetration, narrow spray angle, better
air-biodiesel mixing and the vaporization process. These injection
and air-fuel mixing characteristics play an important role in
improving combustion phenomenon of biodiesel in a DI diesel point, cloud point and pour point were comparable with those of
engine which in turn improve engine performance and harmful ULSD. Even though properties of POME were comparable with
emissions. Hence, an experimental investigation was carried out, to ULSD the viscosity of POME20 was found to be about 14.5% higher
study the combined effect of varying injection pressure and com- and calorific value was 2.3% lower, when compared to ULSD.
bustion chamber geometry on the performance of a biodiesel
fueled diesel engine.
2.2. Experimental setup

2. Materials and methods The test engine used was the Kirloskar, single cylinder, four-
stroke, water cooled, diesel engine developing 5.2 kW at
2.1. Biodiesel production and properties 1500 rpm. The detailed technical specifications of the standard
engine are given in Table 2. Fig. 1 shows the schematic diagram of
In this study, biodiesel was produced from Pongamia seeds the experimental setup. The engine used was a constant speed
obtained from the tree Pongamia Pinnata. Pongamia is a medium engine operated at a speed of 1500 rpm. The standard engine had a
sized glabrous tree grown in many parts of Asia and Australia. hemispherical combustion chamber. It had overhead valves, oper-
Pongamia is popularly known as Karanja in India. Pongamia be- ated by push rods. The standard engine was equipped with a con-
longs to the family Leguminaceae. Among the oilseed plants, Pon- ventional jerk type MICO in-line injection pump, which pressurizes
gamia is the promising one for sustained availability of feedstock the fuel and injects at a pressure of 200 bar. A three-hole injector
for the production of biodiesel. POME (pongamia oil methyl ester) was used, which injects the fuel in the form of fine spray to ensure
was prepared by the transesterification process from raw Pongamia good fuel atomization. The fuel was injected into the centrally
oil. Transesterification is a chemical process of transforming large, positioned combustion chamber made in the piston crown. This
branched, triglyceride molecules of vegetable oils into smaller, engine was coupled to an eddy current dynamometer with a con-
straight chain molecules, almost similar to ULSD. The process takes trol system.
place by the reaction of raw pongamia oil with methyl alcohol in The cylinder pressure was measured by a piezoelectric pressure
the presence of alkaline catalyst. The properties of the raw pon- transducer fitted on the engine cylinder head and a crank angle
gamia oil and POME were experimentally evaluated. The properties encoder fitted on the flywheel. Both the pressure transducer and
of raw pongamia oil, POME and its 20% by volume blend with diesel encoder signal were connected to the charge amplifier to condition
(POME20) are compared with the ULSD in Table 1. Most of the the signals for combustion analysis using SeS combustion analyzer.
properties of biodiesel like calorific value, viscosity, density, flash The engine combustion analyzer, was used to evaluate and

Table 1
Properties of diesel, raw pongamia oil, biodiesel from pongamia and its blend.

Properties Pongamia oil POME POME20 ULSD IS 15607:2005 Test methods IS1448/ASTM

Density (kg/m3) 912 898 862 850 860e890 P16

Kinematic viscosity (cSt) 27.84 5.46 3.49 2.9 2.5e6.0 P 25/D 445
Calorific value (MJ/kg) 34 39.15 43.126 44.12 D5865
Flash Pt ( C) 242 196 91 76 120 P 21/D93
Cloud Pt ( C) 14.6 10.2 7.1 6.5 e D2500
Pour Pt ( C) e 4.2 3.6 3.1 e D2500
Cetane no 46 57.9 51 49 51 P 9/D613
Sulfur, mg/kg 0.007 0.005 21 29 50 P 83/D 5453
Carbon residue, % mass 1.2 0.0035 0.015 0.1 0.05 ASTM 4530
Sulfated ash, % mass 0.014 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.02 P 4/D874
Water content, mg/kg e 340 90 52 500 P 40/D2709
Acid value, mg KOH/g 5.06 0.42 0.15 0.10 0.5 P 1/D 664
Methanol, % mass e 0.09 0.02 e 0.20 EN 14110
Ester content, % mass e 98 e e 96.5 EN 14103
Free glycerol, %mass e 0.01 e e 0.02 ASTM D6584
Total glycerol, % mass e 0.19 e e 0.25 ASTM D6584
Phosphorous, mg/kg e 3.2 e e 10 ASTM D4951
Iodine value, g I2/100 gm 96 86.5 e 38.3 120 EN 14104
Oxidation stability, at 110  C, h e 11.6 e e 6 EN 14112
332 S. Jaichandar, K. Annamalai / Energy 55 (2013) 330e339

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of experimental setup.

determine combustion characteristics such as ignition delay, start Combustion Chamber (TRCC) from the standard Hemispherical
of combustion, estimated end of combustion, mass fraction burnt, open type Combustion Chamber (HCC). For both the combustion
heat release rate and pressure variations with respect to crank chamber configurations, bowl volume was kept constant so that
angle and volume. UBHC (unburnt hydrocarbon) and CO were compression ratio was the same for the investigated engine. The
measured using a CRYPTON 5 gas analyzer. The instrument mea- photographic and sectional view of pistons having the Hemi-
sures CO, CO2 and UBHC based on Non-Dispersive lnfra-Red (NDIR) spherical and Toroidal Re-entrant shapes of combustion chambers
principle. NOx emissions were measured using a chemiluminescent employed for this study is shown in Fig. 2.
type SIGNAL heated vacuum NOx analyzer. The smoke intensity was The shape of the combustion chamber and the fluid dynamics
measured with the help of the AVL 437C smoke meter. It works on inside the chamber are important in diesel combustion. As the
the principle of extinction of light between light source and piston moves upward, the gas is pushed into the piston bowl. The
receiver. geometry of the piston bowl can be designed to produce a squish
and swirling action which can improve the fuel/air mixture for-
2.3. Engine modifications mation before ignition takes place. The main goals desired from the
design of chamber geometry are to optimize the mixing of the fuel
In the present investigation, to investigate the effects of com- and air, before and during ignition, and to improve the flow of the
bustion chamber geometry on performance, combustion and exhaust products once combustion is complete. T. Saito et al. [28]
emission characteristics of biodiesel fueled DI diesel engine the compared conventional combustion chambers and re-entrant
piston bowl geometry was modified to have Toroidal Re-entrant combustion chambers in terms of the combustion process, engine

Fig. 2. Photographic and sectional view of different combustion chambers employed.

 S. Jaichandar, K. Annamalai / Energy 55 (2013) 330e339 333

performance, and NOx and smoke emissions for ULSD operated DI Table 3
diesel engine. It was reported that re-entrant combustion chamber, Uncertainties in the measured parameters.

enhanced combustion because of the higher in-cylinder velocity Parameters Percent uncertainty
accompanied by increased turbulence. Montajir R et al. [29] studied Speed 1.0%
the effect of combustion chamber geometry on fuel spray behavior Load 0.5%
in a small DI diesel engine. It was found that a re-entrant type Time 0.3%
combustion chamber with round lip and round bottom corners Temperature 0.3%
Brake power 0.4%
provided better air and fuel distribution than a simple cylindrical
BSFC 0.8%
combustion chamber. The injector opening pressure was varied by BTE 0.5%
adjusting the spring tension of the injector by screwing or CO 0.3%
unscrewing the screw provided on the top of the injector. Then the UBHC 0.3%
NOx 0.2%
experiments were carried out at different injection opening pres-
Smoke opacity 0.8%
sures of 185, 200, 210, 220, and 230 bar. Pressure 1.0%

2.4. Test method

uncertainties in the measured parameters were estimated based on
Experiments were carried out using, ULSD and POME20. To start analytical methods. The uncertainties computed for the measured
with, the performance, emissions and combustion tests were car- quantities are given in Table 3.
ried out using POME20 and ULSD at various loads for the standard
engine having HCC with manufacturer recommended fuel injection
pressure and fuel injection timing of 200 bar and 23 bTDC 3. Results and discussion
respectively. This performance, combustion and emissions values
were considered as baseline values throughout the experimenta- The performance, emissions and combustion characteristics of
tion for comparison with the results obtained from the modified the base engine with HCC and modified engine with TRCC and at
engine having TRCC with POME20 and ULSD. Then the perfor- different injection pressures were determined, compared and
mance, emissions and combustion tests were conducted for the analyzed in terms of brake specific fuel consumption, brake ther-
modified engine using POME20 and ULSD at previously optimized mal efficiency, unburnt hydrocarbon, carbon monoxide, oxides of
fuel injection timing of 21 bTDC [30]. The engine tests were carried nitrogen, smoke emissions and combustion parameters such as
out at 0%, 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% load. Tests were also performed ignition delay, cylinder peak pressure, exhaust gas temperature and
at different injection pressures of 185, 210, 220 and 230 bar and heat release rate.
their results were compared and analyzed with standard injection
pressure of 200 bar. In order to have a meaningful comparison of 3.1. Combustion analysis
emissions and engine performance, tests were performed at same
operating conditions, i.e. engine speed, torque and peak conditions The variation of peak pressures with respect to brake power for
were maintained. In the experimental investigations, different modified engine and standard engine with ULSD and POME20 at
equipments and instruments were used for measurement of different injection pressures is shown Fig. 3. It can be seen that the
different parameters. These instruments and equipments are made peak pressure was slightly lower for POME20 when compared to
by different manufacturers using different technologies. The accu- that of ULSD in the standard engine. This may be attributed to
racy of measurement and their performance may vary depending improper mixing of POME20 with air due to higher viscosity and
on the operating conditions and experimental environment. Hence lower calorific value for POME20. However, the peak pressure for
the uncertainty occurs due to fixed or random errors. The TRCC was higher than that for HCC with ULSD and POME20

Fig. 3. Variations of peak pressures.

334 S. Jaichandar, K. Annamalai / Energy 55 (2013) 330e339

pressure increase with lowering the injection pressure to 185 bar

from 200 bar. This may be reasoned to poor combustion of POME20
due to poor atomization, vaporization and air fuel mixing. However,
cylinder pressure variations and peak cylinder pressure of the
modified engine operated with POME20 at 220 bar was lower than
the same engine operated with ULSD at all loads of operation. This
may be attributed to the lower calorific value of biodiesel fuel.
Another reason may be due to the higher viscosity, which results in
slightly poorer atomization and poorer combustion.
Fig. 5 shows the variations of ignition delay for unmodified and
modified engine with ULSD and POME20 at different injection
pressures. It was observed that the ignition delay period of POME20
was significantly lower than that of ULSD when tested in the
standard engine. This may be due to the higher cetane number of
biodiesel blend compared to ULSD. It was also observed that for re-
entrant combustion chambers, the ignition delay periods were
Fig. 4. Comparisons of cylinder pressure at full load.
lower compared to open type combustion chambers at all loads of
operation. For all test fuels and combustion chamber geometries,
operation. This may be due to better combustion as a result of the reduction in ignition delay increased with the increase in load.
better air fuel mixing. The in-cylinder peak pressure for TRCC This may be due to higher combustion chamber wall temperature
increased with higher injection pressure due to a larger amount of and reduced exhaust gas dilution at higher loads. At high injection
heat release in the premixed combustion phase as a result of better pressures, the ignition delay further decreased as a result of
atomization, air-fuel mixing and enhanced combustion. increased in cylinder temperature due to improved air-fuel mixing
The cylinder pressure (P) variation with crank angle for standard and premixed combustion.
engine and modified engine with POME20 and ULSD at different Fig. 6 shows the variations of exhaust gas temperature for
injection pressures is shown in Fig. 4. The pressure variations of the standard engine and modified engine with ULSD and POME20 at
modified engine operated with POME20 followed the similar different injection pressures. Exhaust gas temperature increased
pattern of the pressure rise as that of the standard engine operated with engine load for all test fuels and for both the combustion
at the standard injection pressure of 200 bar. However, the values of chambers used. It was observed that the exhaust gas temperature
pressure data were higher at all operating conditions. This may be of the POME20 blend was higher than that of ULSD and exhaust gas
attributed to better combustion due to enhanced air fuel mixing in temperature for re-entrant combustion chambers was higher than
the modified engine. The results also indicated that cylinder pres- open combustion chambers. This may be due to more complete
sure variations increased while increasing the fuel injection pres- combustion as a result of better air fuel mixing and the presence of
sure initially from standard injection pressure, i.e. increasing the oxygen in the POME. The exhaust gas temperature increased with
injection pressure from 200 bar to 210 bar and 220 bar and then the increase in injection pressure due to predominant premixed
decreased with a further increase in pressure to 230 bar. It was also combustion and diffusion combustion. This may be attributed to
observed that the best results were associated with an injection better atomization, air-fuel mixing and vaporization of the fuel
pressure of 220 bar for the modified engine with POME20. This droplets.
performance can be reasoned to better combustion due to better The comparison of the heat release rate (HRR) curves for stan-
atomization, vaporization of the fuel and air-fuel mixing. It was also dard engine and modified engine with ULSD and POME20 at
noticed that the cylinder pressure variations and peak cylinder different injection pressures is shown in Fig. 7. It can be seen from

Fig. 5. Variations of ignition delay.

 S. Jaichandar, K. Annamalai / Energy 55 (2013) 330e339 335

Fig. 6. Comparisons of exhaust gas temperature.

Fig. 7 that the maximum heat release rate of POME20 blend was
lower than that of ULSD in the standard engine. This may be
attributed to shorter ignition delay for POME20 compared with that
of ULSD. In addition, the poor spray atomization characteristics of
biodiesel due to higher viscosity and surface tension may be
responsible for the lower heat release rate. Further it was noticed
that heat release rate during diffusion combustion phase of
POME20 was slightly higher than that of ULSD. However, the heat
release rate curve for re-entrant combustion chambers fueled with
POME20 demonstrated similar but slightly better than the standard
engine fueled with ULSD, and POME20. This may be attributed to
improved air fuel mixing, evaporation and better combustion. In
addition, with the increase in injection pressure maximum heat
release rate further increased due to improved premixed combus-
tion phase. This may be attributed to better atomization and
Fig. 7. Comparisons of heat release rate at full load.
improved air fuel mixing.

Fig. 8. Variations of BSFC.

336 S. Jaichandar, K. Annamalai / Energy 55 (2013) 330e339

Table 4
Comparison of brake specific fuel consumption.

Brake power Brake specific fuel consumption in kg/kW-hr

(kW)
HCC-200 TRCC-200 TRCC-185 TRCC-210 TRCC-220 TRCC-230 HCC-200 bar TRCC-220 bar
bar bar bar bar bar bar (diesel) (diesel)

1.256 0.5760 0.5282 0.6064 0.5261 0.5205 0.5471 0.5343 0.5023

2.512 0.3780 0.3183 0.4036 0.3165 0.3078 0.3364 0.3551 0.2971
3.768 0.3360 0.2706 0.3420 0.2700 0.2639 0.2963 0.2870 0.2554
5.024 0.2880 0.2489 0.3017 0.2472 0.2433 0.2630 0.2603 0.2361

Fig. 9. Comparisons of BTE.

Fig. 10. Variations of UBHC emissions.

 S. Jaichandar, K. Annamalai / Energy 55 (2013) 330e339 337

Fig. 11. Variations of CO emissions.

3.2. Performance analysis Fig. 9 shows the comparison of Brake Thermal Efficiency (BTE) of
standard engine and modified engine with ULSD and POME20 at
The Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (BSFC) variations for different injection pressures. It shows that the BTE increased with
standard engine and modified engine with ULSD and POME20 at the increase in brake power for all fuel and all types of combustion
different injection pressures are shown in Fig. 8. Table 4 presents chambers. BTE of POME20 was lower (28.93%) compared to that of
the comparison of BSFC for standard engine and modified engine ULSD (31.7%) with the standard engine having HCC. On the other
with ULSD and POME20 at different injection pressures and loads. hand, BTE for TRCC (33.07% at full load) was higher when compared
The specific fuel consumption for TRCC (0.243 kg/kW-hr) was to the open type combustion chamber at all loads when operated
lower than the standard engine having HCC (0.288 kg/kW-hr) with POME20. This may be due to better mixture formation of
with biodiesel operation. This may be attributed to better com- POME and air, as a result of better air motion in TRCC. This led to
bustion of POME20 due to better air fuel mixing. The BSFC for better combustion of the biodiesel and thus increased the BTE. In
TRCC further decreased with increasing injection pressure. This addition, at high injection pressure of 220 bar the BTE further
behaviour can be attributed to improved air-fuel mixing due to increased (34.31%) due to better air fuel mixing and complete
better atomization and vaporization of the fuel that led to better combustion. It was also observed that increasing the injection
combustion. However, it was noticed that the BSFC increased pressure above 220 bar decreased BTE. This may be due to decrease
when the injection pressure was increased beyond 220 bar. This in the droplet size of the fuel. A smaller fuel droplet will have lesser
outcome could be attributed to poor combustion due to oxygen momentum that will affect fuel distribution in air. The decrease in
starvation due to lower penetration, poor dispersion of the fuel relative velocity of fuel corresponding to air resulted in poor air
and weak air entrainment. entrainment leading to incomplete combustion.

Fig. 12. Comparisons of NOx emissions.

338 S. Jaichandar, K. Annamalai / Energy 55 (2013) 330e339

Table 5
Variations of oxides of nitrogen emissions.

Brake power Oxides of nitrogen in ppm

(kW)
HCC- TRCC- TRCC- TRCC- TRCC- TRCC- HCC-200 bar TRCC-220 bar
200 200 185 210 220 230 (Diesel) (Diesel)
bar bar bar bar bar bar

0 86 89 85 92 96 94 72 82
1.256 172 177 168 184 192 174 138 159
2.512 284 293 288 298 310 290 232 276
3.768 516 521 508 542 558 512 432 472
5.024 712 722 702 736 745 716 648 694

3.3. Emission analysis proportion of oxygen in POME promotes further oxidation of CO

during the engine exhaust process. Reduction in CO emissions was
The comparisons of Unburnt Hydrocarbon (UBHC) emissions for observed with the increased injection pressure operation, mainly
both TRCC and HCC with POME20 and ULSD at different injection due to better atomization, evaporation and complete combustion.
pressures are shown in Fig. 10. UBHC emissions were reduced over There was a reduction of 44.5% CO emissions for the TRCC com-
the entire range of loads for all types of combustion chambers pared to the standard engine when tests were carried out with
fueled with POME20 when compared to ULSD operation. It was also POME20.
noticed that re-entrant combustion chambers emit lesser levels of Fig. 12 shows the variations of oxides of nitrogen emissions for
UBHC compared to open type combustion chamber. This may be standard engine and modified engine with ULSD and POME20 at
due to better combustion of POME as a result of improved swirl and different injection pressures. Table 5 presents the comparison of
squish motion of air in re-entrant combustion chambers and NOx emissions for standard engine and modified engine with ULSD
presence of oxygen in POME. There was a reduction of 20.7% HC and POME20 at different injection pressures and loads. The NOx
emissions for the TRCC compared to the standard engine when emissions were higher for TRCC than the standard engine. The
tests were carried out with POME20 and 30% reduction with ULSD reason for the increase in NOx may be attributed to higher com-
oil at full load operation. Further the increased injection pressure bustion temperatures arising from improved combustion due to
decreased the formation of UBHC due to better combustion and better mixture formation in TRCC and availability of oxygen in
reduction in quench layer, due to increased cylinder wall POME. Another reason for increased NOx emissions may be at-
temperature. tributed to that, a larger part of the combustion was completed
Fig. 11 shows the comparison of CO emissions with brake power before TDC for POME, and its blends compared to ULSD due to
for the two types of combustion chambers at different injection their lower ignition delay [31]. So it is highly possible that higher
pressures. CO emissions for all types of combustion chambers peak cycle temperatures were reached for POME20 compared to
fueled with biodiesel blend decreased significantly when compared ULSD. For the same reason, it was also observed that the high
with those of ULSD at all loads. This shows that CO emissions were injection pressure further increased the NOx emissions. At full load
greatly reduced with the addition of POME to ULSD. It decreased for POME20 with the TRCC at 220 bar, the NOx emissions were
with the re-entrant combustion chamber than the open type. 745 ppm compared to 648 ppm for the standard engine operated
Higher air movement in re-entrant combustion chamber and with ULSD.
presence of oxygen in POME, led to better combustion of fuel The smoke intensity comparison for two types of combustion
resulting in the decreased CO emissions. Secondly increase in the chambers with ULSD and POME20 at different injection pressures is

Fig. 13. Comparisons of smoke emissions.

 S. Jaichandar, K. Annamalai / Energy 55 (2013) 330e339 339

shown in Fig. 13. At all loads and for all combustion chambers, [2] Piqiang T, Zhiyuan H, Diming L, Zhijun L. Exhaust emissions from a light-duty
diesel engine with Jatropha biodiesel fuel. Energy 2012;39(1):356e62.
smoke emissions for the blend decreased significantly when
[3] Song H, Tompkins BT, Bittle JA, Jacobs TJ. Comparisons of NO emissions and soot
compared with that of ULSD. The reduction in smoke emissions concentrations from biodiesel-fueled diesel engine. Fuel 2012;96:446e53.
may be due to the presence of oxygen in biodiesel blend. It was [4] Tsolakis A, Megaritis A, Wyszynski ML, Theinnoi K. Engine performance and
observed that, smoke emissions from the re-entrant combustion emissions of a diesel engine operating on diesel-RME (rapeseed methyl ester)
blends with EGR (exhaust gas recirculation). Energy 2007;32(11):2072e80.
chamber were lower than the open combustion chamber. This may [5] Canakci M, Erdil A, Arcaklioglu E. Performance and exhaust emissions of a
be due to more complete combustion due to better air fuel mixing biodiesel engine. Applied Energy 2006;83(6):594e605.
and the presence of oxygen in the POME. It was also observed that [6] Yuan CL, Kuo HH, Chung BC. Experimental investigation of the performance
and emissions of a heavy-duty diesel engine fueled with waste cooking oil
the lower injection pressure operation resulted in higher smoke biodiesel/ultra-low sulfur diesel blends. Energy 2011;36(1):241e8.
emissions than high injection pressure. At lower injection pressure, [7] Muralidharan K, Vasudevan D, Sheeba KN. Performance, emission and com-
the atomization process was very poor. This resulted in bigger bustion characteristics of biodiesel fueled variable compression ratio engine.
Energy 2011;36(8):5385e93.
droplets and hence bigger core. It was found that smoke emissions [8] Bhupendra SC, Naveen K, Haeng MC. A study on the performance and emis-
were formed in the core region [32]. Hence, at lower injection sion of a diesel engine fueled with Jatropha biodiesel oil and its blends. Energy
pressure, higher smoke emissions were formed due to bigger 2012;37(1):616e22.
[9] Saravanan S, Nagarajan G, Lakshmi Narayana RG, Sampath S. Combustion
droplet. However, at a higher injection pressure of 220 bar, it was characteristics of a stationary diesel engine fueled with a blend of crude rice
observed that lower smoke emissions were formed due to small bran oil methyl ester and diesel. Energy 2010;35(1):94e100.
size fuel droplets, better air-fuel mixing and complete combustion. [10] Jaichandar S, Annamalai K. Influences of re-entrant combustion chamber
geometry on the performance of Pongamia biodiesel in a DI diesel engine.
TRCC with 220 bar provided 28% reduction of smoke opacity when
Energy 2012;44(1):633e40.
compared with the standard engine fueled with ULSD. [11] Ozsezen AN, Canakci M. Determination of performance and combustion
characteristics of a diesel engine fueled with canola and waste palm oil
methyl esters. Energy Conversion and Management 2011;52(1):108e16.
4. Conclusion [12] Shehata MS, Abdel Razek SM. Experimental investigation of diesel engine
performance and emission characteristics using jojoba/diesel blend and
The combined effect of injection pressure and combustion sunflower oil. Fuel 2011;90(2):886e97.
[13] Challen B, Barnescu R. Diesel engine reference book. England: society of
chamber geometry on the performance, emission and combustion automotive engineer. Bath Press; 1999.
characteristics of a naturally aspirated single cylinder four-stroke DI [14] Kouremenos DA, Hountalas DT, Kouremenos AD. Experimental investigation
diesel engine using pongamia oil methyl ester blend, was studied of the effect of fuel composition on the formation of pollutants in direct in-
jection diesel engines. SAE paper 1999. 1999-01-0189.
and the conclusions of the test results are given below. [15] Kowalewicz A, Wojtyniak M. Alternative fuels and their application to com-
bustion engines. Proceedings of IMechE, Part D; Journal of Automobile Engi-
 The brake specific fuel consumption decreased and the brake neering 2005;219(1):103e25.
[16] Bhattacharyya S, Reddy CS. Vegetable oils as fuels for internal combustion engines:
thermal efficiency increased for modified engine having a review;. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 1994;57(3):157e66.
Toroidal re-entrant combustion chamber operated at increased [17] Barsic NJ, Humke AL. Performance and emission characteristics of a naturally
injection pressure of 220 bar compared to baseline engine aspirated diesel engine with vegetable oils: part 1. SAE Paper 1981810262.
[18] Lee CS, Park SW, Kwon SI. An experimental study on the atomization and
having Hemispherical combustion chamber operated at injec-
combustion characteristics of biodiesel-blended fuels. Energy and Fuels
tion pressure of 200 bar due to better air movement, charge 2005;19(5):2201e8.
mixing and improved combustion. [19] Ejim CE, Fleck BA, Amirfazli A. Analytical study for atomization of biodiesels
and their blends in a typical injector: surface tension and viscosity effects.
 CO, UBHC and smoke intensity were reduced significantly for
Fuel 2007;86(10e11):1534e44.
modified engine with increased injection pressure due to [20] Nishimura T, Satoh K, Takahashi S, Yokota K. Effect of fuel injection rate on
improved combustion. combustion and emission in a DI diesel engine. SAE paper 1998981929.
 NOx emissions were increased for modified engine operated [21] Alriksson M, Gjirja S, Denbratt I. The effect of charge air and fuel injection
parameters on combustion with high levels of EGR in a HDDI single cylinder
with higher injection pressure because of improved combustion diesel engine. SAE paper 2007. 2007-1-914.
due to better air-fuel mixing and higher oxygen content in the [22] Arai M, Tabata M, Hiroyasu H, Shimizu M. Disintegration process and spray
POME20 and, increased the combustion chamber temperature. characterization of fuel jet injected by a diesel nozzle. SAE paper 1984840275.
[23] Kamimoto T, Matsuoka S. Prediction of spray evaporation in reciprocating
 The ignition delay of POME20 blend was found to be lesser and engines. SAE paper 1977770413.
exhaust gas temperatures were higher for modified engine [24] Hountalas D, Kouremenos D, Binder K, Schwarz V, Mavropoulos GC. Effect of
operated with higher injection pressure compared to baseline injection pressure on the performance and exhaust emissions of a heavy duty
DI diesel engine. SAE paper 2003. 2003-01-0340.
engine. The improved air motion and better mixing in the re- [25] Yamane K, Uetam A, Shimamoto Y. Influence of physical and chemical prop-
entrant combustion chamber further decreased ignition delay erties of biodiesel fuels on injection, combustion and exhaust emission
and increased the exhaust gas temperatures when compared to characteristics in a direct injection compression ignition engine. International
Journal of Engine Research 2001;2(4):249e61.
the open combustion chambers.
[26] Celikten I. An experimental investigation of the effect of the injection pressure
 TRCC with POME20 at higher injection pressure had shown on the engine performance and exhaust emission in indirect injection diesel
maximum peak pressure and maximum heat release rate engines. Applied Thermal Engineering 2003;23(16):2051e60.
[27] Cingur Y, Altiparmak D. Effect of cetane number and injection pressure on a DI
compared to the standard engine operated with ULSD.
diesel engine performance and emissions. Energy Conversion and Manage-
ment 2003;44(3):389e97.
The present investigation reveals that biodiesel from pongamia [28] Saito T, Daisho Y, Uchida N, Ikeya N. Effects of combustion chamber geometry
oil is quite suitable as an alternative to ULSD and modified engine, on diesel combustion. SAE Paper No. 861186 1986.
[29] Montajir R, Tsunemoto H, Ishitani H, Minami T. Fuel spray behavior in a small
particularly the engine with the Toroidal re-entrant type combus- DI diesel engine: effect of combustion chamber geometry. SAE Paper No.
tion chamber operated with the increased injection pressure 2000-01-0946 2000.
(220 bar from 200 bar) improves the performance, combustion and [30] Jaichandar S, Annamalai K. Combined effect of injection timing and combus-
tion chamber geometry on the performance of a biodiesel fuelled diesel en-
emissions characteristics due to better air-fuel mixing and gine. Energy 2012;vol. 47(No. 1):388e94.
improved combustion. [31] Jaichandar S, Annamalai K. Emission and combustion characteristics of pon-
gamia oil methyl ester and its diesel blend in a CI engine, energy sources part
A: recovery, utilization, and environmental effects, Article ID 631090, doi:10.
References 1080/15567036.2011.631090.
[32] Greeves G, Meehan JO. Measurement of instantaneous soot concentration in a
[1] Demirbas A. Importance of biodiesel as transportation fuel. Energy Policy diesel combustion chamber. In: Institution of mechanical engineers confer-
2007;35(9):4661e70. ence on combustion in engines, Paper C88/75 1975. p. 73e82.