Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 18 November 2010
Received in revised form 11 April 2011
Accepted 12 April 2011
Available online 4 May 2011
Keywords:
CNG
Methane enriched biogas
Biogas
CI engine
SI engine
a b s t r a c t
This paper presents the performance results of a 5.9 kW stationary diesel engine which was converted
into spark ignition mode and run on compressed natural gas (CNG), methane enriched biogas (BioCNG) and biogas produced from biomethanation of jatropha and pongamia oil seed cakes. The performance of the engine with 12.65 compression ratio was evaluated at 30, 35 and 40 ignition advance
of TDC. The maximum brake power produced by the engine was found at ignition advance of 35 TDC
for all the tested fuels. In comparison to diesel as original fuel, the power deteriorations of the engine
was observed to be 31.8%, 35.6% and 46.3% on compressed natural gas, methane enriched biogas and
raw biogas, respectively, due to its conversion from CI to SI mode. The methane enriched biogas showed
almost similar engine performance as compared to compressed natural gas in terms of brake power output, specic gas consumption and thermal efciency.
2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Gaseous fuels like natural gas, biogas and producer gas have
been explored as alternative to petrol and diesel to reduce the
petroleum import burden. Natural gas is a fossil fuel that has been
used and investigated extensively for use in spark ignition (SI) and
compression ignition (CI) engines [1]. Natural gas in compressed
form is already being used successfully as vehicle fuel in many
European countries, Argentina, Pakistan, India, etc. The natural
gas gaining popularity of as vehicle fuel due to following important
factors (i) CNG has higher octane number and lower cetane number which makes it superior fuel than gasoline, (ii) it is more economical as compared to petrol or diesel due to its low production
cost, (iii) operating and maintenance costs of natural gas based
vehicle are much lower than the diesel/gasoline fuelled vehicles,
(iv) natural gas vehicles reduces air pollution signicantly lower
than conventional fuel running vehicle, (v) CNG does not contain
lead or benzene, thus eliminates lead fouling of spark plugs and
lead or benzene pollution, and (vi) greenhouse gases emission from
combustion of CNG is about 25% lower than that of gasoline.
Natural gas contains 7598% methane with small percentages
of ethane, propane, butane. However, biogas primarily consists of
methane and carbon dioxide (about 60% methane and 40% carbon
dioxide) and has lower caloric value than natural gas. Methane in
biogas mixes readily with air and has high octane rating, making it
a suitable fuel for spark ignition engines. The energy utilization of
biogas is maximized when it is converted into electricity, which is
easy to use and transfer via a biogas generator and a small gas engine at a farm, which makes the process eco-friendly and energy
efcient [2]. The experimental results of operating a diesel engine
on dual fuel CNGdiesel revealed better engine performance in
terms of brake thermal efciency and lower emissions [3].
Methane and biogas are very stable against knocking and can
therefore be used in engines of higher compression ratios than petrol engines and thus, gains higher brake thermal efciency and
power [4]. Spark ignition engines using natural gas instead of gasoline can run at higher compression ratios and thus produces higher thermal efciencies. However, it increases nitrogen oxide
emissions, lowers emissions of carbon dioxide, unburned hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide [1]. The exhaust emissions from various kinds of operating fuels in internal combustion engines can be
controlled and the engine performance parameters can be signicantly improved by proper control of injection/ignition advance
timings and compression ratios [5]. It has also been reported that
the addition of up to 5% syngas to the landll gas reduces pollutant
emissions and improves engine efciency due to the presence of H2
and CO in syngas that allow complete combustion in the engine
cylinder [6].
Numerous research result data suggest that it is possible to increase the compression ratio as an effective means of improving
3970
Nomenclature
C
A/F
BSGC
C2H6
C3H8
CH4
CI
cm
CNG
CO
CO2
CR
g
h
HC
I
IA
degree Celsius
airfuel ratio
brake specic gas consumption
ethane
propane
methane
compression ignition
centimeter
compressed natural gas
carbon monoxide
carbon dioxide
compression ratio
gram
hour
hydrocarbon
current
ignition advance
kg
kJ
kW
kWh
LHV
m3
MJ
MPa
N2
NOx
rpm
s
SI
SOx
TDC
V
k
kilo gram
kilo joule
kilo watt
kilo watt hour
lower heating value
cubic meter
mega joule
mega pascal
nitrogen
nitrogen oxides
revolution per minute
second
spark ignition
sulphur oxides
top dead centre
volt
relative air/fuel ratio
Compressed
natural gas
Methane
enriched
biogas
Biogas
Composition (% v/v)
CH4 85%
C2H6 7%
C3H8 2%
N2 1%
CO2 5%
48 MJ/kg
0.78
34
14.5
CH4 95%
CO2 3%
Other gases 2%
CH4 65%
CO2 32%
Other gases 3%
40 MJ/kg
0.75
25 MJ/kg
1.11
540
650
3971
Air Inflow
Orifice
OrificeMeter
Meter
Air Flow Measurement
Air Flow Measurement
Air Control Valve
DC Resistive Loading
(Measurement of V & I) Venturi Mixer
DC Dynamometer
Test Engine
Fig. 2. A view of experimental test rig setup of 5.9 kW diesel engine converted to SI
mode.
q
2gqw =qa sin hH Ho
qa 3600
3972
BSGC
2.2.5. Engine speed measurement
An Enercon make digital panel tachometer with proxy-methyl
photo reective sensor, model No. DT2006 was used to measure
the engine speed in rpm. The instrument has measurement range
of 19999 rpm with a sampling time of one second. For measurements, a photo-reective tape was mounted on the ywheel face
and the photo-reective sensor was mounted on a bracket near
the ywheel in such a way that the detecting distance was less
than 5 mm.
M
P
gth
P 3600
100
M LHV
V I
1000
A relative air/fuel ratio less than 1.0 is called rich mixture and
more than 1.0 is called lean mixture.
2.3.5. Errors in measurements
Three (four if variation among three was found more than 5%)
basic observational data were recorded for each selected parameter of engine testing. Statistical analysis using one way analysis
of variance (ANOVA) of the observed data has showed that, there
is no signicant variation in the recorded data at 95% condence
level (a = 5%).
3. Results and discussion
The parameters of engine performance on CNG, methane enriched biogas as well as raw biogas were determined for no load
and varying load conditions at three selected ignition advance
(IA) of 30, 35 and 40 from TDC. The average values of each engine performance parameters results are presented below in detail.
3.1. Brake power
Fig. 4 shows the correlation between the brake load (%) and
brake power (kW) developed by the engine while operating on
compressed natural gas, methane enriched biogas and raw biogas.
The brake power developed by the engine was found increasing
with increase in brake load for the selected fuels at all three
selected ignition advances.
The maximum brake power output of the engine operated on
compressed natural gas at ignition advance of 30, 35 and 40
TDC were observed as 3.548, 3.914 and 3.763 kW and with maximum brake load development of 59.7%, 68.2% and 67.9% , respectively. Similarly, the engine operated on methane enriched biogas
at ignition advance of 30, 35 and 40 TDC were observed maximum brake power of 3.500, 3.800 and 3.650 kW, with maximum
brake load development of 59.2%, 66.6% and 66.2%, respectively.
However, the combustion of raw biogas produced from anaerobic
digestion of jatropha and pongamia oil seed cakes containing 65%
methane (v/v) used as fuel in the engine at ignition advance of
30, 35 and 40 TDC had resulted into maximum brake power
3973
3974
Fig. 6. Variation of specic gas consumption rate of the engine on selected fuels.
biogas has higher percentage of methane which improves the heating and had reduced the gas consumption rate.
3.4. Brake thermal efciency
Fig. 7 presents the variations in brake thermal efciency with
respect to % brake load when engine was operated on CNG, methane enriched biogas and raw biogas. Maximum brake thermal efciency attained in case of engine running on CNG at 30, 35 and
40 of ignition advances were found as 18.8%, 22.2% and 19.4%,
respectively. The maximum brake thermal efciency of the engine
running on compressed natural gas was found as 22.2% at a brake
load of 59.5% and the corresponding brake power observed was
3.548 kW. Further, the maximum brake thermal efciency was
obtained at ignition advance of 35 TDC.
The maximum brake thermal efciency obtained in case of engine running on methane enriched biogas at 30, 35 and 40 of
3975
ignition advances were found as 21.8%, 26.2% and 20.9%, respectively. Similar to CNG, the maximum brake thermal efciency of
the engine operating on methane enriched biogas was found at
35 TDC ignition advance. The maximum value was found as
26.2% at a brake load of 59.0% and the corresponding brake power
was 3.500 kW.
The observed maximum brake thermal efciency of the engine
running on raw biogas at 30, 35 and 40 of ignition advances
were as 22.5%, 23.3% and 23.3%, respectively. The maximum value
of brake thermal efciency was found as 23.3% at a brake load of
53.5% at IA of 35 and 51.9% at IA of 40.
3.5. Relative air/fuel ratio
Fig. 8 illustrates the correlation between % brake load and relative air/fuel ratio of the engine run on CNG, methane enriched biogas and raw biogas. The operating range of relative air/fuel ratio of
3976
Table 2
Summary of the results.
Sl. no.
35
40
3.548 kW (CNG)
3.500 kW (enriched biogas)
2.581 kW (biogas)
3.914 kW (CNG)
3.800 kW (enriched biogas)
2.661 kW (biogas)
3.763 kW (CNG)
3.650 kW (enriched biogas)
2.661 kW (biogas)
4651550 (CNG)
4711667 (enriched biogas)
6513524 (biogas)
4091240 (CNG)
4211304 (enriched biogas)
6253550 (biogas)
5351240 (CNG)
5481391 (enriched biogas)
6263674 (biogas)
18.8 (CNG)
21.8 (enriched biogas)
22.5 (biogas)
22.2 (CNG)
26.2 (enriched biogas)
23.3 (biogas)
19.4 (CNG)
20.9 (enriched biogas)
23.3 (biogas)
1.11.5 (CNG)
1.01.9 (enriched biogas)
0.50.7 (biogas)
0.61.1 (CNG)
0.41.1 (enriched biogas)
0.50.8 (biogas)
0.61.8 (CNG)
0.81.5 (enriched biogas)
0.50.9 (biogas)
59.7 (CNG)
59.2 (enriched biogas)
53.4 (biogas)
68.2 (CNG)
66.6 (enriched biogas)
53.5 (biogas)
67.9 (CNG)
66.2 (enriched biogas)
51.9 (biogas)
3977
[12] Pohare J, Pandey KC, Mahalle DM. Improve the operation of IC engine with
100% biogas as fuel. Eng Technol India 2010;1(2):5660.
[13] Demirbas A. Political, economic and environmental impacts of biofuels: a
review. Appl Energy 2009;86:S108117.
[14] IS: 10000 [P:5]. Methods of tests for petroleum and its products. Preparation
for tests and measurements for wear; 1980.
[15] Pedro M, Giovani P, Renato C, Rosangela da S. Evaluation of the maximum
horsepower of vehicles converted for use with natural gas fuel. Fuel
2006;85:21806.
[16] Kapdi SS. Development of biogas enrichment and compression system for rural
energy supply. PhD thesis, Centre for Rural Development and Technology,
Indian Institute of Technology Delhi; 2005.
[17] Sen AK, Zheng J, Huang Z. Dynamics of cycle-to-cycle variations in a natural
gas direct-injection spark-ignition engine. Appl Energy; 2011. doi:10.1016/
j.apenergy.2011.01.009.
[18] Porpatham E, Ramesh A, Nagalingam B. Investigation on the effect of
concentration of methane in biogas when used as a fuel for a spark ignition
engine. Fuel 2008;87:16519.