EXPERIMENT ON BIO-DIESEL:

DETERMINING VISCOSITYTEMPERATURE DEPENDENCY

OF BIO-DIESEL THROUGH
FATTY ACID PROFILE

Erond Perez & Luke Asgill

Acknowledgements
We would like to express our deepest gratitude to the people and institution which helped us and
guided us through the course of this project. This project was successful thanks to Professor Richard
Brown for his input and advice, particularly on deriving the predictive model, and to Professor
Dennis De Pellegrin for helping us during experimentation and sharing his extensive knowledge in
the field of Tribology. Extra gratitude must be made to research student Jahirul Islam for his
extensive support, advice and guidance during the course of the project and for providing the test
samples. Thank you very much for the time and effort you have given to us, for the project would
not have been a success without the help you gave us.
We would also like to give our thanks to Nathaniel Raup, who assisted us in the laboratory, for
setting up the Rheometer and for providing support whenever he could. Our thanks also goes to
QUT and David Kabelele for giving us this wonderful opportunity to work on this project.

Abstract
The ever increasing awareness of climate change is driving sectors of governments to pursue cleaner
sources of fuel. One of the most feasible alternatives is biodiesel fuels. Biodiesels are a sustainable
and renewable source of energy, derived from vegetable oils, a variety of fats and other organic
sources. These organic diesel fuels are produced through a transesterification process and due to
the process, possess features similar with the chemical composition of petrodiesel, but without any
sulphur, aromatic hydrocarbons and metals. However, other than being a sustainable, renewable
and relatively clean source of energy, the performance characteristic of biofuels must also be taken
into account. This report examined the viscosity of four different biofuels and nine different
manufactured methyl esters at different temperatures. From this experiment and knowledge of the
fatty acid composition of each sample, a mathematical model was developed in order to predict the
viscosity of any biodiesel at any temperature of interest. The predictive model attained in this report
showed a percentage error ranging from 0 to 8.1% when compared with the experimental results.
The importance of such a prediction is that if viscosity can be predicted accurately, there may be no
need for expensive testing in order to determine the performance of a particular fuel in an engine,
let alone determining the viscosity experimentally.

Table of Contents
List of Figures ........................................................................................................................................... i
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................ i
List of Equations ....................................................................................................................................... i
1.

2.

3.

Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1.

Biodiesel production ............................................................................................................... 1

1.2.

Biodiesel Quality Standards .................................................................................................... 2

Viscosity .......................................................................................................................................... 3
2.1.

Modelling ................................................................................................................................ 3

2.2.

Fuel Sample Fatty Acid Profiles ............................................................................................... 4

Experimental Machinery & Methodology ...................................................................................... 6

3.1.

Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 6

4.

Results and Data analysis ................................................................................................................ 8

5.

Discussion...................................................................................................................................... 13

6.

Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 14

7.

Reference List................................................................................................................................ 15

Appendices............................................................................................................................................ 16
Appendix i Biodiesel Quality Standards ......................................................................................... 16
Appendix ii Linear Trend Lines for the Relationship between the Logarithm of Viscosity to
Temperature ..................................................................................................................................... 18
Appendix iii Derivation for the General Equation Relating Temperature, Fatty Acid Composition
and Viscosity ..................................................................................................................................... 26
Appendix iv MatLab Procedure to Derive the Relationship between Gradient Values and Fatty
Acid Composition .............................................................................................................................. 27

List of Figures
Figure 1 - The transesterification reaction. R is a mixture of various carbon chains. Methanol is the
most commonly employed alcohol (R = CH3) ......................................................................................... 2
Figure 2 - Measured viscosity and calculated viscosity using the modified Grunberg-Nissan equation
(Equation 2)............................................................................................................................................. 4
Figure 3 - The Brookfield DV-III rheometer and temperature bath set-up............................................. 7
Figure 4 - User interface of the accompanying software for the Brookfield rheometer. ....................... 7
Figure 5 - Standard and Logarithmic Relationship between Viscosity and Temperature. ................... 10

List of Tables
Table 1 - The fatty acid composition of the test fluids. Note that on the table, pure 810, pure 1214
and pure 1875A are 100%. 810-1214, 810-1875A, 1214-1875A are 50-50 mixes. Main 1875A, Main
810 and Main 1214 are 23-16-16 mix where the 23 component is as indicated .............................. 5
Table 2 - Averaged viscosity results for the 13 different fluids. The viscosity is measured in mPas. ..... 9
Table 3 - Comparison of the calculated gradients, as determined from the relationship derived, to
the experimentally calculated gradients. ............................................................................................. 12

List of Equations
Equation 1 - General Grunberg-Nissan Equation.................................................................................... 3
Equation 2 - Simplified Grunber-Nissan Equation. ................................................................................. 3
Equation 3 - General relationship between viscosity and temperature................................................. 8
Equation 4 - Relationship between viscosity and temperature with reference to the viscosity at 40 oC.
................................................................................................................................................................ 8
Equation 5 - Revised Grunberg-Nissan equation involving dependence on temperature. .................... 8
Equation 6 - General relationship between rate of change of the logarithm of viscosity and fatty acid
composition. ........................................................................................................................................... 9
Equation 7 - Relationship between the rate of change of the logarithm of viscosity and fatty acid
composition. ......................................................................................................................................... 12

1. Introduction
The primary issue with traditional petroleum based diesel (petrodiesel) is that it is not renewable.
According to statistics released by British Petroleum, global oil supplies will be exhausted in the next
40 years [1] or much sooner as the models used for the predictions cannot accurately account for
the increasing use of oil in developing countries [2]. As the oil supply decreases, it will reach a point
where the energy required, to find and extract one barrel worth of oil will be substantially greater
than the energy contained in one barrel of oil itself [2].
Aside from peak oil issues, concerns for the climate are also a problem due to petrodiesels high
emissions. The ever increasing awareness of the current, rapid climate change is driving sectors of
government to pursue cleaner sources of fuel to aid in mitigating our net effect on our local and thus
global climate. Biodiesels, organically based diesel fuels, are becoming one of the most feasible
alternatives to current technologies. Biodiesels are sustainable, renewable and typically have a lower
emissions profile than petrodiesel. Furthermore, biodiesel feedstocks operate on a closed carbon
cycle; that is, just as much or less carbon is emitted when burning the biodiesel fuels as the organic
feedstocks consume. It must be deliberated that these mentioned advantages of biodiesels are not
the only consideration to be taken into account. Performance characteristics and thus the actual
useability of different biodiesel fuels must also be considered. This report examines the viscosity, a
primary tribological property in fuel standards, of four different biodiesel fuels and nine different
manufactured fuels. The four biodiesel fuels tested are all considered as potential replacements or
supplements for traditional petrodiesel. Connections and a predictive model in relation to the fatty
acid composition and temperature on viscosity will also be made.

1.1.

Biodiesel production

Biodiesels are derived from vegetable oils, a variety of fats and other organic sources and consists of
alkyl esters, primarily methyl esters. Biodiesels possess features common with the chemical
composition of petrodiesel. Since biodiesels are made entirely from organic sources, unlike
petrodiesel, it does not contain any sulphur, aromatic hydrocarbons, metals or crude oil residue [3].
The raw material (the oils from organic sources) has a significantly higher viscosity then traditional
petrodiesel. There are four methods to reduce the viscosity of the raw oils to enable their use in
common diesel engines without operational problems. These methods are:
1)
2)
3)
4)

Blending with petrodiesel

Pyrolysis
Microemulsification (co-solvent blending)
Transesterification.

Transesterification is the most common method, as this method leads to the production of alkyl
esters and what is known as a biodiesel. This process is a chemical reaction between the
triacylglycerol compounds of the raw oils and alcohol molecules. This process separates the
triacylglycerol into an alkyl ester and a glycerol compound. This reaction can be seen schematically
in Figure 1 below [4].

Figure 1 - The transesterification reaction. R is a mixture of various carbon chains. Methanol is the most commonly
employed alcohol (R = CH3)

1.2.

Biodiesel Quality Standards

The primary criterion for biodiesel quality is adherence to the appropriate standard. Even when used
in low-level blends with petrodiesel fuel, biodiesels are expected to meet the standard before
blending. When specifications are met, the biodiesel can be used in most engines without
modifications, while also maintaining the engines durability and reliability [4]. The purpose of
quality standards is to ensure appropriate, sustainable use of current technologies. Presented below
are the ASTM standards for biodiesels. Furthermore, both the European and Australian standards
can be found in Appendix i.

2. Viscosity
Viscosity is defined as the measure of resistance to flow of a liquid due to internal friction of one
part of a fluid moving over another. Viscosity affects the atomization of a fuel upon injection into the
combustion chamber and as the viscosity becomes higher, the tendency for incomplete combustion
and in consequence, coking becomes greater. For this reason, viscosity is an important consideration
for biodiesels which generally possess higher viscosities. There are two different measurements of
viscosity, dynamic and kinematic. Dynamic or absolute viscosity is the measurement of resistance to
shear flow, whereas kinematic viscosity is the ratio of the dynamic viscosity to the density of the
fluid; kinematic viscosity is equal to dynamic viscosity divided by density, which results in a quantity
that does not depend on the force applied. Kinematic viscosity is one of the primary specifications in
biodiesel standards [5].

2.1.

Modelling

There are numerous pieces of literature regarding the prediction of viscosity from fatty acid
compositions. The importance of such an investigation is that if the viscosity of any given biodiesel
fuel can be predicted from its chemical composition, there may be no need for expensive testing in
order to determine the performance of the fuel in an engine, let alone determining the viscosity
experimentally [6].
A paper presented by C.A.W. Allen et.al. presents one such method for predicting the viscosity of
biodiesel fuels from the knowledge of their fatty acid composition. This model uses a logarithmic
relationship between the components of the fluid to determine the dynamic viscosity. The
Grunberg-Nissan equation (shown in equation 1)
Equation 1 - General Grunberg-Nissan Equation.

ln = +

where is the mean viscosity of mixture (Pa s), is the viscosity of pure th component (Pa s), and is the mole
fractions of the th and th components, is the interaction parameter (Pa s), is the number of components.

has been identified to be the most accurate equation for computing the viscosity of liquid mixtures.
This equation was developed for binary mixtures and works best with non-associate liquids.
Biodiesel fuels are non-associated liquids that are comprised of mixtures of fatty acids with similar
chemical structures and due to this, the components in such a mixture do not interact with one
another. With this reasoning, the second term which comprises the interaction parameter can be
neglected. Mass fraction is used in preference of mole fraction as well, thus yielding equation 2
which C.A.W. Allen et.al used to predict viscosity, based on the fatty acid composition.
Equation 2 - Simplified Grunber-Nissan Equation.

ln =
=1

4
where is the mass fraction.

Some results of their investigation are presented in Figure 2 below. As seen from their results and as
discussed in the original paper, viscosity increases with the methyl ester chain length (number of
carbon atoms), as well as with an increasing degree of saturation (number of double or triple bonds
between the carbon atoms). This also holds for the alcohol moiety because the viscosity of ethyl
esters is slightly higher than that of methyl esters. Factors such as double-bond configurations, also
influence viscosity, where cis double-bond configurations give a lower viscosity than trans
configurations; however, the double-bond position has a lesser effect on viscosity, while branching
in the ester moiety has little or no influence on viscosity (unpublished results) [5][6].
It should be noted that both the model presented and those presented in other papers do not
incorporate the effect of temperature upon viscosity as well as the fatty acid composition.

Figure 2 - Measured viscosity and calculated viscosity using the modified Grunberg-Nissan equation (Equation 2).

2.2.

Fuel Sample Fatty Acid Profiles

Table 1, seen on the ensuing page, contains the fatty acid compositions of the thirteen different
fluids tested. As can be seen, the varying mixtures of the manufactured methyl esters provide a
comprehensive range of fatty acid profiles.

5
Table 1 - The fatty acid composition of the test fluids. Note that on the table, pure 810, pure 1214 and pure 1875A are 100%. 810-1214, 810-1875A, 1214-1875A are 50-50 mixes. Main
1875A, Main 810 and Main 1214 are 23-16-16 mix where the 23 component is as indicated

Fatty acid content

C16
C16:1
C18

C6

C8

C10

C12

C14

C18:1

C18:2

C18:3

C20

C20:1

Pure 810

0.043

0.541

0.406

0.01

Pure 1214

0.003

0.006

0.7

0.236

0.05

0.005

Pure 1875A

0.002

0.01

0.21

0.77

0.008

810-1214

0.021

0.272

0.206

0.355

0.118

0.025

0.003

810-1875A

0.021

0.271

0.203

0.006

0.005

0.105

0.385

0.004

1214-1875A

0.001

0.003

0.351

0.123

0.13

0.388

0.004

Main 1875A

0.007

0.09

0.069

0.12

0.046

0.148

0.515

0.005

Main 810

0.029

0.361

0.272

0.124

0.041

0.043

0.129

0.001

Main 1214

0.007

0.092

0.072

0.469

0.159

0.068

0.132

0.001

Canola

0.037

0.017

0.594

0.235

0.102

0.015

Cottonseed

0.008

0.2445

0.007

0.0235

0.171

0.542

0.0035

0.0005

Tallow

0.02

0.305

0.03

0.215

0.39

0.03

0.01

Cooking oil

0.096

0.012

0.035

0.58

0.179

0.063

0.008

0.027

The fatty acid compositions of the pure esters were obtained from the supplier while for the ester mixtures, the presented values were calculated according
to their mixing proportions. It should be noted that all the fatty acid compositions obtained from the ester supplier and pieces of literature consist of a
range of values and were thus averaged to yield a single value as presented in Table 1. The full range of fatty acid compositions for each of the fluids can be
found in Appendix i.

3. Experimental Machinery & Methodology

Determining the viscosity of biodiesels is an essential part in identifying and understanding how it
will perform in engines. In the experiment conducted, a Brookfield DV-III Programmable Rheometer
was used to measure the viscosity of biodiesel samples and observe the change in viscosity in
relation to changes in temperature.
The principle of operation of the DV-III is to drive a spindle (which is immersed in the test fluid)
through a calibrated spring. The viscous drag of the fluid against the spindle is measured by the
spring deflection. The resulting deflection is measured with a rotary transducer. The temperature of
the test sample is controlled externally by an oil bath connected to the device [7].

3.1.

Methodology

The tests were conducted according to ASTM D445, however, the starting temperature for the
sample was at room temperature (about 25-27 C). The procedure carried out is listed below. The
Brookfield rheometer was controlled externally via accompanying software on a computer. The CP41 spindle was used since it provided the most accurate measurements for low viscosity fluids.

Preparation:
1. The cup and spindle were removed from the rheometer and cleaned with acetone. During
this time, the rheometer was calibrated by zeroing the machine.
2. The CP-41 spindle was reattached to the rheometer. Gloves were worn to avoid
contamination from the hands.
3. The cup was attached and the distance between the cup and spindle was set; the rheometer
set-up during this step is displayed in Figure 3. This was done by turning the flicker switch at
the front which sends a current through the cup and spindle. When the two parts come into
contact the light flicks to red. The correct spacing is one unit away from the point of contact.
4. The cup was removed once again and 2 mL of an oil sample was placed in the cup. The cup
was then reattached to the rheometer.

Figure 3 - The Brookfield DV-III rheometer and temperature bath set-up.

Test:
1. On the dashboard of the accompanying software (see below), the shear rate was set to 20
per second, the temperature of the cup at room temperature was recorded and the test was
engaged by pressing the
icon. After a few moments the spindle would reach the
designated shear rate and the viscosity measurement would settle.
2. The shear rate was increased by 20 per second four times, recording the result each time.
3. The temperature was then increased using the oil bath. Steps 5 and 6 were repeated once
the temperature of the cup reached the desired level (temperature of the cup was
measured with a thermocouple and displayed on the accompanying software). The
temperature was set to 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 60, 70, 80 and 90 oC. At 60 oC, the shear rate was
initially set to 100 per second (instead of 20 per second) to increase the sensitivity and
hence limit noise and variation in results.

Figure 4 - User interface of the accompanying software for the Brookfield rheometer.

4. Results and Data analysis

Table 2, shown on the following page, consists the averaged results obtained through viscosity
measurements of the four biodiesels, three pure methyl esters and six mixed methyl esters. From
Table 2 the relationship between chain length and degree of saturation outlined in Section 2.1 in
clearly evident. Methyl Octanoate and Decanoate (810) has a significantly lower viscosity than
Methyl Stearate (1875A) due to its much shorter chain lengths. Evidence of the effect of saturation
can be seen by comparing Methyl Stearate (1875A) to Canola biodiesel. Both methyl esters comprise
primarily of chain lengths of 18 carbon atoms, however Canola has a large degree of saturation
whereas Methyl Stearate is entirely un-saturated. Consequently, Canola biodiesel has a higher
viscosity.
Below, Figure 5 graphically illustrates the relationship between viscosity and temperature. As seen,
there is a clear, logarithmic relationship between the viscosity and temperature. Due to this, the yaxis has been made logarithmic in second graph of Figure 5 to generate a linear relationship of the
form:
Equation 3 - General relationship between viscosity and temperature.

ln = +
As the Grunberg-Nissan equation models the viscosity at the reference temperature of 40 oC, a
relationship between the viscosity at any temperature, relative to the same reference temperature
can be seen below.
Equation 4 - Relationship between viscosity and temperature with reference to the viscosity at 40 oC.

= ( )
Where x is the viscosity at any temperature, r is the viscosity at the reference temperature and T x and Tr are
the temperature at the desired point and at the reference point, respectively.

Equation 4 was then integrated with the Grunberg-Nissan equation to yield Equation 5 below. This
model is capable of predicting the viscosity at any temperature, with the knowledge of the fatty acid
composition. The derivation for reaching this model can be seen in Appendix iii.
Equation 5 - Revised Grunberg-Nissan equation involving dependence on temperature.

ln = ln + ( )
=1

Thus, as can be seen from the above equation, the only variable unknown is m. The m value
depicts the slope of the relationship seen in Equation 3. As seen by the trend lines in Appendix ii and
Figure 5 below, there is a direct correlation between the slope of the line and the fatty acid
composition. As such, this correlation was modeled as seen below.

9
Equation 6 - General relationship between rate of change of the logarithm of viscosity and fatty acid composition.

= [%6] + [%8] + [%10] + [%12] + [%14] + [%16] + [%16: 1]

+ [%18] + [%18: 1] + [%18: 2] + [%18: 3] + [%20] + [%20: 1]
Where are coefficients to be calculated.
Table 2 - Averaged viscosity results for the 13 different fluids. The viscosity is measured in mPas.

10

Figure 5 - Relationship between Viscosity and Temperature.

Relationship Between Viscosity and Temperature

9

Pure 810
Pure 1214

Viscosity (mPas)

Pure 1875A
810|1214

810|1875A
1214|1875A
Main 810

Main 1214
Main 1875A

Canola
Cotton Seed

Beef Tallow
Cooking Oil

0
0

10

20

30

40

50
Temperature

60
(oC)

70

80

90

100

11
Figure 6 - Logarithm of Viscosity plotted against temperature.

Logarithm of Viscosity Against Temperature

2.5

2
Pure 810
Pure 1214
Pure 1875-A

Log of Viscosity (mPas)

1.5

810|1214
810|1875-A
1214|1875-A
1

Main 810
Main 1214
Main 1875-A
Canola Biodiesel

0.5

Cotton Seed
Beef Tallow
Cooking Oil
0
0

-0.5

10

20

30

40

50

Temperature (oC)

60

70

80

90

100

12
MATLAB was used to solve the equation based on the known fatty acid compositions and the
equations of the trend lines in Appendix ii. The input codes for this procedure are shown in Appendix
iv. The derived equation can be seen below. The gradient values attained with Equation 6 are shown
below, in Table 3 and are compared to those determined experimentally. As can be seen, there is
little error in the model and the errors present can be accounted for by the range of composition
values and the usage of averaged values to derive the equation.
Equation 7 - Relationship between the rate of change of the logarithm of viscosity and fatty acid composition.

= 13.9[%6] + 2.86[%8] 2.38[%10] + 0.79[%12] 2.45[%14] + 0.005[%16]

1.03[%16: 1] + 0.2[%18] 0.014[%18: 1] + 0.004[%18: 2]
+ 2.41[%18: 3] 17.41[%20] 0.69[%20: 1]
The above equation can be used in unison with Equation 3 to determine the viscosity at any
temperature. As the viscosity of pure saturated methyl esters as well as for chain lengths greater
than 18 are not known, the above equation cannot be used to model the methyl esters tested.

Table 3 - Comparison of the calculated gradients, as determined from the relationship derived, to the experimentally
calculated gradients.

Sample Fluid

Actual Gradients

Calculated Gradients

Error (%)

pure 810

-0.011

-0.0116

5.454545

pure 1214

-0.0147

-0.0145

-1.36054

pure 1875

-0.0185

-0.0188

1.621622

810|1214

-0.0118

-0.0117

-0.84746

810|1875

-0.0148

-0.0136

-8.10811

1214|1875

-0.0166

-0.0172

3.614458

main 810

-0.012

-0.0121

0.833333

main 1214

-0.0157

-0.0156

-0.63694

main 1875

-0.0163

-0.0163

canola

-0.0192

-0.0192

cotton seed

-0.0118

-0.0118

beef tallow

-0.0169

-0.0169

cooking oil

-0.0184

-0.0184

13

5. Discussion
The results produced clearly reinforce previous findings on viscous behavior, particularly the
correlation between fatty acid composition and degree of saturation. The study has also identified a
direct correlation between the logarithmic decrease in viscosity with an increase in temperature and
the fatty acid composition.
From the results section, a predictive model, based off the Grunberg-Nissan equation was derived.
This model can be used to predict the viscosity of fluids at any temperature with knowledge of the
fluids fatty acid composition. This equation however, has a maximum error of approximately 8%.
This error margin is likely due to lack of information upon the exact fatty acid composition of the
different fluids tested. Furthermore, the equation does not take into account the configuration of
saturated carbon chains which have also been noted to affect the viscosity.
In regards to the four biodiesel fuels tested and compared to used petrodiesel fuel, which has a
viscosity between 2-6 mPas around 40 oC, all four fuels possess viscosities fairly similar. The highest
viscosity at 40 oC is 5.448 mPas from Canola biodiesel. The lowest viscosity at this temperature was
achieved by Beef Tallow (4.274 mPas). These values are within the higher part of the range of
petrodiesel quantities. Although, in order to compare these fuels to various standards, the kinematic
viscosities of the fuels must be known, this requires knowledge of their density. The density of these
fuels was found to vary by a significant degree and was thus deemed un-useable. Nevertheless,
considering methyl esters possess similar chemical compositions to petrodiesel the densities of
biodiesel fuels can be expected to also be similar. Based off this consideration, all four biodiesel fuels
tested can be considered as safe to use in standard compression ignition engines.

14

6. Conclusion
The experiment conducted examined the temperature dependence of viscosity of four biodiesel
fuels and nine manufactured methyl esters. The results clearly demonstrate the logarithmic
relationship between viscosity and temperature. Furthermore, the effect of fatty acid chain length as
well as the degree of saturation upon viscosity is also characterized. Pure methyl ester stearate
demonstrated a much higher viscosity than methyl ester octanoate/decanoate. Canola biodiesel, is
around 80-90% saturated and consequently had a higher viscosity than the methyl ester stearate;
both have chain lengths of 18 carbon atoms. From the relationship observed, an equation, based off
the Grunberg-Nissan equation, was derived, modeling the dependence of viscosity on temperature
and fatty acid composition. Subsequently, if the fatty acid composition of potential biodiesel fuels
can be approximated, research and testing can be significantly reduced and viable biodiesel fuels can
be identified efficiently.
From the four biodiesel fuels tested, their dynamic viscosity at 40 oC was compared to that of
traditional ultra-low-sulphur-diesel (ULSD). From this comparison, it was seen that the biodiesel fuels
possess similar viscosities to ULSD.

15

7. Reference List
[1]

European Union, World: Oil Supplies will be Exhausted in 40 Years, Czech Republic Business
Bulletin, Sep-2004.

[2]

T. Trainer, The Death of the Oil Economy, Earth Island Journal, vol. 12, no. 2, p. 25, 1997.

[3]

A. Rashid and et al., Biodiesel A Renewable Alternate Clean and Environment Friendly Fuel
For Petrodiesel Engines: A review, International Journal of Engineering Science and
Technology, vol. 3, no. 10, pp. 7707-7713, 2011.

[4]

J. V. Gerpen and G. Knothe, Biodiesel Production, in Biodiesel Handbook, 2nd ed., J. V.

Gerpen, G. Knothe, and J. Krahl, Eds. Illinois: AOCS Press, 2005.

[5]

J. V. Gerpen and G. Knothe, Fuel Properties, in Biodiesel Handbook, 2nd ed., J. V. Gerpen, G.
Knothe, and J. Khral, Eds. Illinois: AOCS Press, 2005.

[6]

C. A. W. Allen, K. C. Watts, R. G. Ackman, and M. J. Pegg, Predicting the viscosity of biodiesel

fuels from thein fatty acid ester composition, Fuel, vol. 7, no. 8, pp. 1319-1326, 1999.

[7]

Brookfield Digital Rheometer MODEL DV-III Operating Instructions. .

16

Appendices
Appendix i Biodiesel Quality Standards

17

18

Appendix ii Linear Trend Lines for the Relationship between the

Logarithm of Viscosity to Temperature
See next page.

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

Appendix iii Derivation for the General Equation Relating Temperature,

Fatty Acid Composition and Viscosity
ln = +
= +
As the goal is to determine viscosity at any temperature, with reference to the viscosity at 40 oC as
the Grunberg-Nissan equation is referenced at this temperature, the viscosity can be determined as
the reference viscosity multiplied by the ratio between the viscosity at the desired temperature and
the viscosity at the reference temperature

= ( )

= ( + )
= ( )
In order to combine the above result with the Grunberg-Nissan equation, the r term must be
manipulated to yield ln r
ln = ln ( )
= ln + ln ( )

ln = ln + ( )
=1

27

Appendix iv MatLab Procedure to Derive the Relationship between

Gradient Values and Fatty Acid Composition
0.043
0
0
0.021
0.021
0
0.007
0.029
0.007
0
0
0
[ 0

0.541
0.003
0
0.272
0.271
0.001
0.090
0.361
0.092
0
0
0
0

0.406
0.006
0
0.206
0.203
0.003
0.069
0.272
0.072
0
0
0
0

0.010
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.700 0.236 0.050
0
0.005
0
0
0
0
0
0.002 0.010 0.210
0
0.770
0
0
0
0.008
0
0
0.003
0
0
0
0
0
0.355 0.118 0.025
0
0.385
0
0
0
0.004
0
0.006 0.005 0.105
0
0.388
0
0
0
0.004
0
0.351 0.123 0.13
0.120 0.046 0.148
0
0
0.514
0
0
0
0.005
0.124 0.041 0.043
0
0
0.129
0
0
0
0.001
0.469 0.159 0.068
0
0
0.132
0
0
0
0.001
0
0
0.037
0
0
0.017 0.594 0.235 0.102 0.015
0
0.008 0.245 0.007 0.024 0.171 0.542 0.004 0.001
0
0
0.02 0.305 0.03 0.215 0.39 0.03
0
0.01
0
0
0
0.096 0.012 0.035 0.580 0.179 0.063 0.008 0.027 ]

Matrix A Fatty acid compositions. Each row is a different fuel and columns are the percentages of C6 to C20:1

0.011
0.014
0.019
0.012
0.013
0.017
0.016
0.012
0.016
0.019
0.013
0.017
[0.018]
Matrix B The experimentally determined gradients

28
The input for matrix A
>> A=[0.043,0.541,0.406,0.01,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0;
0,0.003,0.006,0.70,0.236,0.05,0,0.005,0,0,0,0,0;
0,0,0,0.002,0.01,0.21,0,0.77,0,0,0,0.008,0;
0.021,0.272,0.206,0.355,0.118,0.025,0,0.003,0,0,0,0,0;
0.021,0.271,0.203,0.006,0.005,0.105,0,0.385,0,0,0,0.004,0;
0,0.001,0.003,0.351,0.123,0.13,0,0.388,0,0,0,0.004,0;
0.007,0.09,0.069,0.12,0.046,0.148,0,0.514,0,0,0,0.005,0;
0.029,0.361,0.272,0.124,0.041,0.043,0,0.129,0,0,0,0.001,0;
0.007,0.092,0.072,0.469,0.159,0.068,0,0.132,0,0,0,0.001,0;
0,0,0,0,0,0.037,0,0.017,0.594,0.235,0.102,0.015,0;
0,0,0,0,0.008,0.2445,0.007,0.0235,0.171,0.542,0.0035,0.0005,0;
0,0,0,0,0.02,0.305,0.03,0.215,0.39,0.03,0.01,0,0;
0,0,0,0,0,0.096,0.012,0.035,0.58,0.179,0.063,0.008,0.027];
Input for matrix B
>> m=[-0.011;-0.014;-0.019;-0.012;-0.013;-0.017;-0.016-0.012;-0.016;-0.019;-0.013;-0.017;-0.018];
This command was used to solve for constants A-M for
>> x = pinv (A)*m