Fuel Processing Technology 123 (2014) 8291

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Fuel Processing Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fuproc

Review

Effect of diesel from direct coal liquefactionbiodiesel blends on

combustion, performance and emission characteristics of a turbocharged
DI diesel engine
Jian Zhuang, Xinqi Qiao , Jinlong Bai, Zhen Hu
Key Laboratory for Power Machinery and Engineering, Ministry of Education, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China

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

Article history: In this study, the performance and exhaust emissions of diesel engine fueled with diesel from direct coal liquefaction
Received 22 October 2013 (DDCL)biodiesel blends consisting of 0%, 20% and 40% biodiesel are investigated. In order to decrease nitric oxides
Received in revised form 6 January 2014 (NOX) and soot emissions, retarded injection and cooled exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) strategies are introduced.
Accepted 28 January 2014
Experiments are conducted on a four-cylinder, four-stroke, direct injected diesel engine without any modication. It
Available online 26 February 2014
is found that compared with pure DDCL, DDCLbiodiesel blends can reduce maximum pressure rise rate and gain
Keywords:
lower combustion noise and mechanical load of diesel engine. In addition, there is hardly any difference for combus-
Diesel from direct coal liquefaction tion phase between test fuels. Both exhaust emissions and fuel consumption are reduced due to the improved com-
Biodiesel bustion by fuel properties of biodiesel, such as cetane number and fuel oxygen. When EGR rate is increased to 40%,
Diesel engine with an increment of biodiesel in blends, NOX, carbon monoxide (CO) and equivalent brake specic fuel consump-
Combustion tion (BSFC) are still decreased, and soot emission is increased. Anyway, both exhaust emissions and equivalent fuel
Exhaust emissions consumption are controlled to a quite low level under retarded injection for DDCLbiodiesel blends.
2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
2. Experimental method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
2.1. Apparatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
2.2. Fuels and experimental methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
3. Results and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
3.1. Combustion characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
3.2. Emission characteristics and brake specic fuel consumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
3.3. Effect of EGR on combustion and emission characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
4. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
Acknowledgment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

1. Introduction
Diesel engine is more attractive than gasoline engine due to its high
fuel efciency, but it produces more particular matter (PM) under
conventional diesel combustion mode. In order to diminish PM giving
consideration to nitric oxides (NOX), various technologies have been
investigated by the researchers in recent years. For example, high injec-
tion pressure and multiple-injection can improve fuel-air mixing and
Corresponding author. Tel./fax: +86 21 34206381.
E-mail addresses: 200472029@sjtu.edu.cn, qiaoxinqi@sjtu.edu.cn (X. Qiao).
reduce soot emission, but result in higher hydrocarbon (HC) and carbon
monoxide (CO) emissions [1,2]. Low compression ratio can also reduce
soot emission with penalty on brake thermal efciency (BTE) [3].
Exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) is a common strategy to enable premixed
low temperature combustion (LTC), which can defeat the trade-off rela-
tionship of NOX and soot [4]. It is important to note that soot is deteriorat-
ed under moderate EGR rate, and BTE is decreased under high EGR rate.
In addition to the above method, fuel properties can also inu-
ence combustion and emission characteristics [5]. For instance, low
cetane number fuels can increase ignition delay, and high volatility
fuels can improve fuelair mixing process [611]. Both of these

0378-3820/$ see front matter 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2014.01.029
 J. Zhuang et al. / Fuel Processing Technology 123 (2014) 8291
effects can reduce fuel rich areas and diminish soot emission. Diesel
from direct coal liquefaction (DDCL), with low cetane number (about
38), high volatility, ultra-low sulfur content and poor lubrication,
was rstly researched in China in the late 1970s. At the end of
2008, in Inner Mongolia, China, the rst DDCL company with a pro-
duction capacity of 2800 t/day started to operate successfully and
commercially [12]. DDCL, as an alternative fuel for diesel, can be
used on the traditional direct-injection (DI) diesel engine without
any modication. The combustion and exhaust emissions of engine
fueled with DDCL and diesel were compared in [1315]. The results
indicated that when engine was fueled with DDCL instead of diesel,
soot emission is decreased obviously at low and medium loads under
the same injection strategy, NOX and fuel consumption are maintained
at a similar level, but CO and HC emissions increase.
In general soot formation mainly takes place in the fuel-rich zone at
high temperature, specically within the core region of fuel spray. It is
commonly assumed that oxygenated fuel can effectively deliver oxygen
to the pyrolysis zone of the burning spray resulting in reduced soot
generation. So biodiesel can also reduce soot emission due to fuel oxygen
besides DDCL [16]. Moreover, when diesel engine is fueled with biodiesel
instead of diesel fuel, the ignition delay is shorter, the peak heat release
rate and CO emission are lower, but NOX emissions and brake specic
fuel consumption (BMEP) are higher [17,18]. Although biodiesel has
been proven to be an alternative renewable, environmentally and
friendly fuel and it possesses similar combustion characteristics with
petroleum diesel, pure biodiesel is not widely used in diesel engine
due to its higher density and viscosity [19,20]. It is a pleasant surprise
to improve the viscosity and density of biodiesel as well as lubrication
of DDCL by the blend of DDCL and biodiesel.
In this study, in order to improve exhaust emissions of CI engine
fueled with DDCL, the effects of DDCLbiodiesel blends on performance
and exhaust emissions of diesel engine are evaluated. The reference fuel
is DDCL, and the results obtained with the rest of fuels are compared.
Then EGR strategy is utilized to further improve emissions. However,
so far, few relevant studies have been reported. It is crucial to evaluate
the proper DDCLbiodiesel blend ratio and different control strategies
to decrease NOX and soot emissions without signicant penalty in fuel
consumption and combustion noise on a diesel engine.
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of test engine.
83
2. Experimental method
2.1. Apparatus
Experiments were carried out on a four-cylinder, four-stroke, direct
injected diesel engine equipped with turbocharger and high-pressure
common rail injection system. The diesel engine, produced by Wuxi
Diesel, can meet China III emission standard of GB 17691-2005. Fig. 1
gives a schematic diagram of experimental setup. Table 1 lists main
engine specications. In the experiment, the engine load was controlled
by a 350 eddy current dynamometer. A Kistler 6125B piezoelectric
pressure transducer was used to acquire in-cylinder pressure with a
resolution of 0.5 CA. The pressure signals were amplied with a Kistler
charge amplier (Type 5015) and were averaged by 200 engine cycles
at each operating point. A hall sensor mounted on ywheel was used
as the clocking pluses to acquire the cylinder pressure data. The
common-rail injection system allowed for the variation of rail pressure
(up to 140 MPa) and timing of injections. CO and HC emissions were
measured by a non-dispersive infra-red analyzer (NDIR, CAI 300)
(error 1%) and a heated ame ionization detector (HFID, CAI 300)
(error 1%), respectively. NOX emissions were measured by a heated
chemiluminescent detector (HCLD, CAI 400) (error 1%). Before each
test, these analyzers were calibrated with standard gas and zero
gas. The smoke opacity was measured by an AVL DiSmoke 4000
(error 1%). The correlation between light absorbance and soot is
based on the BeerLambert law [21]. Hall sensors are mounted on
ywheel and camshaft to acquire clocking pluses, and the solenoid
valve of injector is controlled by ECU to adjust injection timing. The
whole process is operated on CANape software, which communicates
with ECU through CANcaseXL vector. Rail pressure sensor, oxygen
sensor, magnetic sensor and some other temperature and pressure
sensors were used to get various engine operating parameters. In this
study, exhaust gas was re-circulated into the air intake upstream of
the compressor from downstream of the turbine. Particular matters in
the exhaust gas were removed by Diesel Particular Filter (DPF) to
protect the compressor turbine. The exhaust gas was cooled before it
entered into the intake pipe. The EGR rate was held constant for differ-
ent loads by adjusting the EGR valve.
84 J. Zhuang et al. / Fuel Processing Technology 123 (2014) 8291

Table 1 3. Results and discussion

Engine main parameters.

Type Inline 4-cylinder, direct injection 3.1. Combustion characteristics

Bore stroke (mm mm) 110 125
Compression ratio 17.8:1 In this paper, the heat release rate (HRR) is calculated by the rst law
Number of holes 7 of thermodynamics (Eq. (2)) as well as the perfect gas equation of state
Nozzle hole diameter (mm) 0.16 (Eq. (3)) and is averaged with 200 cycles [22].
Emissions levels China III standard
Rated power/speed 96 kW/2500 rpm  
Q B 1 dV dP dV Q W
Maximum torque/speed 450 Nm/13001700 rpm P V P 2
k1 d d d

2.2. Fuels and experimental methods
DDCL, a reference fuel, diesel, and DDCLbiodiesel blends were used in
the engine testing. Biodiesel with 20% by volume was mixed homoge-
neously with DDCL with 80% by volume to prepare the D8 blend. Biodiesel
with 40% by volume was mixed homogeneously with DDCL with 60% by
volume to prepare the D6 blend. Detailed properties of test fuels are
described in Table 2. Fuel consumption of test fuels with different caloric
values was measured directly by fuel consumption meter. The factor of
caloric value was removed by equivalent fuel consumption (EFC) for
comparative purposes. The EFCs of different fuels were converted into
brake specic fuel consumption (BSFC) of diesel in accordance with
equal caloric value rules, which was calculated by Eq. (1). So BSFC of
test fuels in this study refer to equivalent fuel consumption.
Hblend
BSFC BSFCblend 
Hdiesel
The operating conditions were set at engine speed of 1450 rpm,
engine torque of 112 Nm (BMEP = 0.3 MPa) and 224 Nm (BMEP =
0.6 MPa). The single injection was used with injection pressure set at
100 MPa and the injection timing changed from 12.5 CA before top
dead center (BTDC) to 1 CA after top dead center (ATDC) to optimize
NOX and soot emissions. The temperatures of engine intake air, coolant
and lubricant oil were kept in a range of 40 3 C, 80 3 C and 85
3 C separately in order to ensure the repeatability and comparability of
the measurements. Moreover, for each operating condition, 200 samples
of each gaseous emission (HC, CO and NOX) were stored by a data acqui-
sition card (PCI-1710U) after test engine stabilized, at the same time soot
emission and fuel consumption were recorded three times by manual. So
the results given in this study were the average of 200 measured values.
The exciting current signal of the electronically controlled injector was
advanced by a period, between the starting time of exciting signal and
the opening time of needle, in the ECU to make the opening time of
needle accurately consistent with the set fuel injection timing. Therefore,
the indicated injection timing represented the moment of the actual fuel
injection timing in this study.
PV mRT 3
Fig. 2 shows in-cylinder pressure and HRR of various test fuels under
two loads. In Fig. 2a, compared with other test fuels, the maximum HRR
of DDCL is much higher. This is mainly because of lower cetane number
and viscosity for DDCL. A low cetane number retards the timings of low
temperature heat release (LTHR) and negative temperature coefcient
(NTC) and then prolongs the ignition delay [23]. A low viscosity is likely
to improve vaporization and mixing with the air [24]. As a result, the
longer ignition delay and better vaporization and mixing with the air
produce more premixed gas before combustion. The bigger fraction of
premixed combustion results in the higher peak of HRR. The maximum
HRR is reduced with the increase of biodiesel in blends. According to the
above analysis, the high cetane number and viscosity of biodiesel inter-
fere with premixed combustion and decrease combustion rate. For the
peak in-cylinder pressure, DDCL is slightly higher than other fuels. The
start of combustion for DDCL is the latest, the earliest for diesel, and
1 medium for D6 and D8 mainly due to cetane number. In fact, the injec-
tion and spray processes play signicant roles in the preparation of
combustion and then inuence the performance and emissions of the
engine. Lower viscosity may mean lower friction while the fuel travels
through the tube and through the nozzle, leading to advanced injection
timing. But according to the previous studies [25,26], different fuels
make no difference to start of injection based on a common rail injection
system. This is because the physical properties between test fuels are
too small to inuence the pressure-releasing process of the control vol-
ume and so do the needle-lifting process. When engine load is
increased, as shown in Fig. 2b, the effects of fuel properties on HRR
and in-cylinder pressure are weakened, and the maximum HRRs of
test fuels are close. This is mainly because the combustion of incremen-
tal fuel quantity per cycle increases the in-cylinder pressure and tem-
perature, which reduces the effect of fuel property on evaporating,
mixture formation and ignition.
Fig. 3 compares the combustion parameters, such as maximum
pressure rise rate (MPRR), CA10 and CA50, when engine is fueled
with four different test fuels separately. It should point out that the
crank angles of 10% and 50% accumulated heat release rate are
dened as CA10 and CA50 in this study, which are used to represent
the start of combustion per cycle and the combustion phase,

Table 2
Properties of test fuels.

Fuel property DDCL D8 D6 Biodiesel Diesel Analytical method

Sulfur (ppm) 22 b10 248 ASTM D2622

Cetane number () 38.1 40.68 43.26 51 53.8 ASTM D613
Density (20 C kg/m3) 860 865 870 885 830 ASTM D4052
Viscosity (20 C cst) 3.006 3.287 3.568 4.41 4.395 ASTM D445
Low heat value (MJ/kg) 45.55 44.29 43.03 39.25 45.7 ASTM D240
MS composition analysis (%) (m/m) ASTM D2425
Parafns 8.6 36.1
Naphthenes 87.2 34.8
Aromatics 4.2 29.1
 J. Zhuang et al. / Fuel Processing Technology 123 (2014) 8291 85

Fig. 2. In-cylinder pressure and HRR versus test fuels at different loads.

respectively. In Fig. 3a, the MPRR is reduced with the retard of injec-
tion timing for all test fuels. According to the above analysis in Fig. 2,
lower cetane number and higher volatility can increase the propor-
tion of premixed combustion, which inuences MPRR signicantly.
So MPRR of DDCL is higher than of D8 and D6, and the lowest one
is for diesel. That is to say that DDCLbiodiesel blends can reduce
MPRR and gain lower mechanical load of diesel engine. CA10 of
DDCL is later than other fuels especially under late injection strategy
as shown in Fig. 3b. The main factor affecting CA10 is cetane number.
If biodiesel is added into DDCL, CA10 will be advanced slightly. In Fig. 3c,
there is hardly any difference for CA50 between DDCL, D8 and D6, but
CA50s of the three fuels are all earlier than that of diesel. As known,
when the combustion phase, represented by CA50, is close to top
dead center (TDC), BTE increases and the brake specic fuel consump-
tion (BSFC) decreases.
3.2. Emission characteristics and brake specic fuel consumption
Fig. 4 displays NOX and soot emissions of test fuels at two engine
loads. In Fig. 4a, NOX emissions of DDCL are higher than those of diesel,
and are even higher than those of DDCLbiodiesel blends (D8 and D6).
It is certain that the different chemistries of test fuels can result in

Fig. 3. Combustion parameters versus test fuels.

86 J. Zhuang et al. / Fuel Processing Technology 123 (2014) 8291
Fig. 4. NOX and soot emissions versus different test fuels.
changes in the combustion process. Compared with diesel, a signicant
parameter for DDCL is cetane number. DDCL has a cetane number of
38.1, whereas diesel has a cetane number of 53.8. Decreasing the cetane
number will result in a longer ignition delay, will improve airfuel
mixing process and will lead to an increase of DDCL which is burned
in the premixed combustion phase [27,28]. This phenomenon causes a
rapid heat release in the beginning of the combustion, resulting in
high temperature and high NOX formation [29].
When biodiesel is added into DDCL, NOX emissions are reduced, and
with the increase of biodiesel in the blends, it is further reduced. There
are several different conclusions about the effect of biodiesel on NOX
according to the previous studies. Some authors thought that oxygen
content in biodiesel enhances formation of NOX emissions [3034],
another authors thought that oxygen content in biodiesel has no obvi-
ous inuence on NOX emissions increase [35,36]. In general, increases
in NOX emissions have often been attributed to the oxygen content of
biodiesel molecule, either through the thermal or through the prompt
mechanisms. However, according to Refs. [35,36], the oxygen/fuel
mass ratio remains a low level in spite of oxygenated fuel. This meant
that the oxygenated nature of biodiesel has little to no effect on NOX.
Maximum combustion temperature and its duration are still the key
factors for NOX formation. Some study even indicated that when injec-
tion timing is retarded, compared with diesel, NOX emissions of diesel
biodiesel blends are reduced [37]. Therefore it is the result of a set of
properties whose effects may counteract or promote each other. The
other properties of biodiesel besides oxygen content and their effects
on combustion process besides of oxygen content should be considered
to give better explanations about NOX emissions [38]. For example, pen-
etration distance, droplet size, droplet momentum, degree of mixing
with air and vaporization rate will affect the spray characteristics, and
Fig. 5. CO and HC emissions versus different test fuels.
thus affect combustion and NOX production [39]. Compared with
DDCL, the higher cetane number of DDCLbiodiesel blends results in
the shorter ignition delay and the reduction in the premix burn fraction.
Moreover, the increased viscosity causes deteriorations of the quality of
atomization and combustion, leading to burning rate decreasing [40].
These reasons are conducive to reducing NOX emissions. From Fig. 2
we can also see that although the start of combustion for blend is
advanced than DDCL, the corresponding peak heat release rate is
decreased obviously. Therefore, the maximum combustion pressure of
blend is lower than that of DDCL. That is to say that the advanced ignition
caused by biodiesel barely leads to the higher maximum combustion
temperature under test condition. In additional, the effect of oxygen in
blend on NOX is not distinct than pure biodiesel. According to Ref. [41],
the blend percentage for biodiesel also affects NOX. The increases in
NOX emissions are observed for 100% biodiesel but not for the 20%
biodiesel. The results of NOX for test fuels may be engine-specic because
previous study has noted that the correlation between premixed com-
bustion and NOX decreases for highly turbocharged engines [42].
Soot emission is another main pollution for diesel engine. In Fig. 4a,
compared with DDCL, soot emission of diesel is increased, especially
under retarded injection strategy. The fact that diesel contains more
sulfur and aromatic compounds (soot precursors) is a reason why soot
increases [43,44]. Moreover, the ignition delay of DDCL is much later
than diesel under retarded injection, which causes more premixed gas
and then reduces soot formation. It is worth noting that DDCLbiodiesel
blends can achieve lower soot emission than DDCL. This behavior is con-
sistent with the previous studies [16,44]. This is because the fuel oxygen
in biodiesel may provide additional oxygen during the combustion,
which can reduce the local equivalence ratio and promote soot oxida-
tion process [29,4446]. Another reason is that biodiesel is a sulfur-
 J. Zhuang et al. / Fuel Processing Technology 123 (2014) 8291 87

Fig. 6. Brake specic fuel consumption and thermal efciency versus different test fuels.

and-aromatics-free fuel. When BMEP is increased from 0.3 MPa to
0.6 MPa as shown in Fig. 4b, there is the same trend of NOX and soot
between different test fuels. But the more combustion of fuels per
cycle results in more NOX and soot emissions with the increment of
engine load.
Fig. 5 depicts CO and HC emissions of different test fuels at two
engine loads. In Fig. 5a, the two emissions of all test fuels increase grad-
ually with the retard of injection timing. When injection timing is set at
1 CA ATDC, the two emissions of DDCL are higher than other fuels. This
is because the lower distillation temperature and cetane number of
DDCL are favorable to mixture formation. The increased region with
small local equivalence ratio leads to more incomplete combustion
products (CO and HC). But when biodiesel is added into DDCL, CO and
HC emissions decrease gradually. Although high viscosity and worse
volatility of biodiesel may impact on atomization and combustion,
resulting in CO increase [32], the proportion of biodiesel in blends is
low. The decreases of CO and HC are mainly attributed to an increase
in oxygen coming from the biodiesel, which supports more complete
combustion [8,47]. Another reason for decreased CO and HC is an
increase in cetane number of biodiesel, which also can improve com-
bustion regime. When engine load is increased, as shown in Fig. 5b,
CO rises rstly and then falls slightly with the retard of injection timing,
at the same time HC emission increases gradually. CO emission is
increased when mixture concentration is too lean or too rich. The
retarded combustion phase due to late injection leads to more incom-
plete combustion, CO emission and exhaust energy. So rotation speed
of turbine and intake pressure increase. It is helpful to decrease rich-
mixture region and CO emission. It should point out that the values of
CO and HC emissions for all test fuels are reduced at high load.
Fig. 6 shows the BSFC and BTE of test fuels at two engine loads.
According to the experiment results, the BSFCs of all test fuels, refer to
equivalent fuel consumption in this study, are increased and the

Fig. 7. In-cylinder pressure and HRR versus different test fuels under EGR strategy.
88 J. Zhuang et al. / Fuel Processing Technology 123 (2014) 8291
Fig. 8. Exhaust emissions versus different test fuels under low load and 20% EGR strategy.
corresponding BTEs are decreased with the retard of injection, but there
is no obvious difference between test fuels. It is noteworthy that BTE re-
lies on fuel consumption and caloric value of test fuels. Lower caloric
value results in more fuel consumption for a constant engine load. As
mentioned above in Fig. 3, the close combustion phases of all test fuels
result in the similar BTE and then similar equivalent fuel consumption,
which can be supported by Ref. [48].
3.3. Effect of EGR on combustion and emission characteristics
Depending on the above study, compared with DDCL, a conclusion is
drew that DDCLbiodiesel blends can further reduce soot emission, and
improve the weaknesses of high HC and CO emissions. Then, cooled EGR
strategy is introduced to change combustion mode of diesel engine
fueled with DDCLbiodiesel blends in order to achieve lower NOX and
soot emissions. EGR rate is calculated from the ratio of intake and
exhaust carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations, as shown in Eq. (4).
EGR rate Intake CO2 concentration=Exhaust CO2 concentration  100%
4
Fig. 7 indicates in-cylinder pressure and HRR of blends with 20% and
40% EGR. In Fig. 7a, when EGR rate is controlled at 20% by EGR valve and
injection timing is set at 1 CA ATDC, the phase of maximum HRR of
DDCL is much later than that of two blends. So the corresponding
in-cylinder pressure is also lower than blends. Under 40% EGR
and 2.5 CA ATDC injection strategy as shown in Fig. 7b, the differ-
ences of phase of HRR and in-cylinder pressure between test fuels are
reduced. But in general, the maximum HRR of DDCL is higher than
Fig. 9. Exhaust emissions versus different test fuels under medium load and 20% EGR strategy.
that of blends. The intake oxygen concentration is decreased due to di-
lution effect of EGR, which results in a later ignition timing for DDCL
under late injection. But the condition can be improved by oxygenated
biodiesel. So the difference of ignition delay between DDCL and blends
is more obvious than the situation without EGR. In Fig. 7c and d, it is
obvious that the differences of maximum HRR and peak pressure for
test fuels are decreased with the increase of engine load, and the reason
is the same with analysis in Fig. 2. However, the effect of fuel properties
on combustion showed the similar trend with low engine load.
Fig. 8 compares exhaust emissions of different test fuels with 20%
EGR and 0.3 MPa BMEP. In Fig. 8a, with the retard of injection timing,
NOX emissions of three fuels are reduced gradually, and soot emission
rises rstly and then falls. The reason for NOX decrease is that the max-
imum combustion temperature is reduced when combustion phase is
retarded due to late injection. And according to the previous study
[49], ignition delay is slightly shortened rst, and then is prolonged
gradually with the retard of injection. That is to say the effect of retarded
injection on reduction of soot formation is not effective enough, but soot
oxidation is inuenced. So soot increases rstly. Premixed combustion
increases when ignition delay is prolonged, which can reduce soot for-
mation. So soot decreases later. When EGR is introduced, NOX produced
by DDCL is still higher than blends. But NOX emissions of D6 are higher
than those of D8, which is different from the case without EGR, as
shown in Fig. 4. The reason may be that the reduced intake oxygen con-
centration due to EGR deteriorates combustion process. Then the inu-
ence of biodiesel on NOX may be similar with the above analysis for
Fig. 4 when oxygen content in blend is kept at a lower level, such as
D8. But the incremental biodiesel proportion of D6 further increases
oxygen content and cetane number, which improves combustion
more signicantly than the case without EGR strategy. So NOX emissions
 J. Zhuang et al. / Fuel Processing Technology 123 (2014) 8291
Fig. 10. Exhaust emissions versus different test fuels under low load and 40% EGR strategy.
increase again. When injection timing is set at 1 CA ATDC, compared
with DDCL, NOX of D8 decreases insignicantly from 84.4 [ppm] to 57
[ppm], resulting in a decrease of 32.3%. From Fig. 8b we can see that
DDCLbiodiesel blends can reduce CO emission and BSFC, especially at
retarded injection. For example, when injection timing is set at 1 CA
ATDC, compared with DDCL, CO emission and BSFC are decreased by
68.5% and 8.5% separately for D6 fuel. It is attributed to the improved
combustion by oxygen in biodiesel.
Fig. 9 shows exhaust emissions of different test fuels with 20% EGR
and 0.6 MPa BMEP. Compared with the case of 0.3 MPa BMEP, the effect
of biodiesel on exhaust emissions and BSFC is similar, however the
decrease of soot emission by biodiesel is more obvious under 0.6 MPa
BMEP. In general, when biodiesel is added into DDCL with some propor-
tion, both exhaust emissions and fuel consumption of diesel engine are
reduced due to the improved combustion by fuel properties, such as
cetane number and fuel oxygen.
Fig. 10 shows exhaust emissions of different test fuels with 40% EGR
and 0.3 MPa BMEP. In Fig. 10a, NOX emissions are controlled at about 20
[ppm] with retarded injection and 40% EGR regardless of fuel properties.
The effect of fuel properties on NOX is becoming more and more obvious
with the advance of injection timing. Soot emission is decreased to a
quite low level under retarded injection strategy, but it is increased
with an increment of biodiesel in blends. This phenomenon is different
from the case with no EGR or 20% EGR rate. The main reason is that
when biodiesel is added into DDCL, the reduced proportion of premixed
combustion due to higher cetane number, higher viscosity and worse
volatility of biodiesel contributes to soot formation. Their effects on soot
formation are remarkable with 40% EGR and the extra soot produced
Fig. 11. Exhaust emissions versus different test fuels under medium load and 40% EGR strategy.
89
due to biodiesel property cannot be oxidized completely. So soot
increases rather than decreases. In this case, compared with cetane num-
ber, viscosity and volatility, the effect of fuel oxygen in biodiesel on soot
oxidation is a minor factor.
In Fig. 10b, CO emission and BSFC are increased dramatically with
retarded injection for DDCL. For example, as injection timing is retarded
from 12.5 CA ATDC to 1 CA ATDC, CO and BSFC of DDCL are
increased by 579.3% and 19.1%, respectively. But when biodiesel is
added into DDCL, such as D6 fuel, CO and BSFC are decreased from
3000 [ppm] to 963 [ppm], and 318.5 [g/kWh] to 282.2 [g/kWh],
resulting in a decrease of 67.9% and 11.4% separately under retarded
injection.
Fig. 11 shows exhaust emissions of different test fuels with 40% EGR
and 0.6 MPa BMEP. From experiment results we can see that compared
with Fig. 10, the effects of injection timing and fuel properties on
exhaust emissions and BSFC are similar with low load. The difference
is that the effect of fuel properties is weakened by increased engine
load. So when large EGR (40% EGR rate) and retarded injection are intro-
duced, DDCLbiodiesel blends can decrease NOX, CO and BSFC, but
increase soot slightly regardless of engine load.
Fig. 12 depicts BTE of test fuels with different EGR rates and engine
loads. When injection timing is retarded, BTEs of all test fuels decrease
regardless of EGR rate and engine load. That is to say the engine econo-
my becomes bad with the retard of injection. But BTE increases when
biodiesel is added into DDCL. Compared with DDCL, higher viscosity of
biodiesel may affect vaporization, and lower caloric value of biodiesel
may affect fuel consumption. But higher cetane number and oxygen
content for biodiesel can improve combustion especially under late
90 J. Zhuang et al. / Fuel Processing Technology 123 (2014) 8291

Fig. 12. Brake thermal efciency versus different test fuels under EGR strategy.

injection, whose positive effects on BTE are more signicant with lower
intake oxygen concentration under EGR strategy. The increased BTE
behavior could be the result of the interaction of viscosity, caloric
value, cetane number and oxygen content of biodiesel. Furthermore,
BTE is increased with increase in engine load due to reduction in heat
losses.
In order to present the relationship between NOX and soot more
clearly under test condition, Fig. 13 indicates the trade-off of the two
emissions for different injection timings and EGR rates. The labeling
scheme in Fig. 13 gives the injection timing. For instance, 1 represents
that the injection timing is xed at 12.5 CA BTDC. In the same way, 2,
3, 4 and 5 represent that the injection timing is 9.5 CA, 6.5 CA,
2.5 CA and 1 CA BTDC, respectively. In Fig. 13, it is clear that NOX
reduction and soot hump are presented with the retard of injection
timing. It is clear that late injection, such as 1 CA BTDC, is benecial
to reduce both NOX and soot under EGR strategy. In addition, compared
with pure DDCL under late injection, DDCLbiodiesel blends can further
improve NOX in all test conditions, and can decrease soot except for a
case of 0.6 MPa BMEP and 40% EGR.
4. Conclusions
In this paper, the combustion and exhaust emissions of diesel engine
fueled with diesel from direct coal liquefaction (DDCL)biodiesel blends
are compared. In order to decrease NOX and soot emissions, retarded
injection and cooled EGR strategies are introduced. Experiments are
conducted on a four-cylinder, four-stroke, direct injected diesel engine
without any modication. Some of the conclusions are drawn from
this study.
Compared with pure DDCL, DDCLbiodiesel blends can reduce
maximum pressure rise rate and gain lower combustion noise and
mechanical load of diesel engine. In addition, there is hardly any

Fig. 13. Trade-off relationship of NOX and soot emissions.

 J. Zhuang et al. / Fuel Processing Technology 123 (2014) 8291
difference for combustion phase between test fuels. When diesel engine
is fueled with DDCLbiodiesel blends instead of pure DDCL, NOX emis-
sions are reduced slightly, and the products of incomplete combustion
(CO and HC) are decreased obviously. Compared with diesel fuel, soot
emission of DDCL is decreased, especially under retarded injection
strategy. Furthermore, DDCLbiodiesel blends can further reduce soot
emission. When brake mean effective pressure (BMEP) is increased
from 0.3 MPa to 0.6 MPa, there is the same trend of NOX and soot emis-
sions between different test fuels.
When EGR rate is set at 20% and biodiesel is added into DDCL with
some proportion, both exhaust emissions and fuel consumption of diesel
engine are reduced due to the improved combustion by fuel properties,
such as cetane number and fuel oxygen. However, when EGR rate is
increased to 40%, NOX, CO and BSFC are decreased, but soot emission is
increased with an increment of biodiesel in blends. Anyway, exhaust
emissions and fuel consumption can be controlled to a quite low level
under retarded injection strategy for DDCLbiodiesel blends.
Acknowledgment
This work is supported by the Shanghai Pujiang Program (Grant No.
11PJD014) and the State Key Laboratory of Engines, Tianjin University
(K2013-4). The authors would like to also thank the Centre for
Combustion and Environmental Technology of Shanghai Jiao Tong
University for the nancial and technical support.
References
[1] U. Asad, Y. Han, M. Zheng, An empirical study to extend engine load in diesel low
temperature combustion. SAE Paper 2011-01-1814, 2011.
[2] P. Anselmi, J. Kashdan, G. Bression, E. Ferrero-Lesur, B. Thirouard, B. Walter, Improv-
ing emissions, noise and fuel economy trade-off by using multiple injection strate-
gies in diesel low temperature combustion (LTC) mode. SAE Paper 2010-01-2162,
2010.
[3] H. Ogawa, T. Li, N. Miyamoto, S. Kido, H. Shimizu, Dependence of ultra-high EGR and
low temperature diesel combustion on fuel injection conditions and compression
ratio. SAE Paper 2006-01-3386, 2006.
[4] J. Dec, Advanced compressionignition engines understanding the in-cylinder
processes, Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 32 (2009) 27272742.
[5] X. Lu, D. Han, Z. Huang, Fuel design and management for the control of advanced
compressionignition combustion modes, Progress in Energy and Combustion 37
(2011) 741783.
[6] K. Yoshiyuki, Y. Changlin, K. Ryoji, M. Kei, Effects of fuel cetane number and aromatics
on combustion process and emissions of a direct-injection diesel engine, JSAE Review
21 (2000) 469475.
[7] T. Li, Y. Okabe, H. Izumi, T. Shudo, H. Ogawa, Dependence of ultra-high EGR low tem-
perature diesel combustion on fuel properties. SAE Paper 2006-01-3387, 2006.
[8] R. Casper, Particle Characteristics-PAH and Gaseous Emission from Light Duty CI En-
gines Fueled with Biodiesel and Biodiesel Blends. SAE Paper 2010-01-1277, 2010.
[9] Y. Icingur, D. Altiparmak, Effect of fuel cetane number and injection pressure on a DI
diesel engine performance and emissions, Energy Conversion and Management 44
(2003) 389397.
[10] A. Cheng, B. Fisher, G. Martin, C. Mueller, Effects of fuel volatility on early direct-
injection, low-temperature combustion in an optical diesel engine, Energy & Fuels
24 (2010) 15381551.
[11] R. Butts, D. Foster, R. Krieger, M. Andrie, Y. Ra, Investigation of the effects of cetane
number, volatility, and total aromatic content on highly-dilute low temperature die-
sel combustion. SAE Paper 2010-01-0337, 2010.
[12] Z. Liu, S. Shi, Y. Li, Coal liquefaction technologies development in China and challenges
in chemical reaction engineering, Chemical Engineering Science 65 (2010) 1217.
[13] J. Zhuang, X. Qiao, Z. Wang, J. Bai, Comparison of the combustion and exhaust emissions
of a compression ignition engine fuelled with diesel from direct coal liquefaction and
diesel blends, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part C: Journal
of Mechanical Engineering Science 227 (2013) 986996.
[14] Y. Hu, H. Jin, K. Li, H. Ma, Y. Shi, Properties, engine combustion and emission of diesel
from direct coal liquefaction, Acta Petrolei Sinica (Petroleum Processing Section) S1
(2010) 246252.
[15] Z. Wang, Y. Shi, X. Qiao, J. Zhuang, H. Jin, Combustion and emission characteristics of a
common-rail diesel engine fuelled with synthetic diesel from direct coal liquefaction,
Transactions CSICE 30 (2012) 201206.
[16] US EPA, A Comprehensive Analysis of Biodiesel Impacts on Exhaust Emissions, EPA
420-P-02-001, October 2002.
[17] X. Wang, Y. Ge, L. Yu, X. Feng, Comparison of combustion characteristics and brake
thermal efciency of a heavy-duty diesel engine fueled with diesel and biodiesel at
high altitude, Fuel 107 (2013) 852858.
91
[18] B. Ekrem, Effects of biodiesel on a DI diesel engine performance, emission and
combustion characteristics, Fuel 89 (2010) 30993105.
[19] M. Yasin, T. Yusaf, R. Mamat, A. Yusop, Characterization of a diesel engine operating
with a small proportion of methanol as a fuel additive in biodiesel blend, Applied
Energy 114 (2014) 865873.
[20] S. James, S. John, D. Matthew, A. Khalid, B. Andr, S. Alan, Potential Methods for NOx
Reduction from Biodiesel. SAE Paper 2003-01-3205, 2003.
[21] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BeerLambert_law.
[22] J.B. Heywood, International Combustion Engine Fundamentals, Wiley, New York,
1986.
[23] H. Vahid, W. Neill, G. Hongsheng, D. Cosmin Emil, C. Wallace, F. Craig, M. Ken, Effects
of Cetane Number, Aromatic Content and 90% Distillation Temperature on HCCI
Combustion of Diesel Fuels. SAE Paper 2010-01-2168, 2010.
[24] R. Vallinayagam, S. Vedharaj, W. Yang, P. Lee, K. Chua, S. Chou, Combustion
performance and emission characteristics study of pine oil in a diesel engine, Energy
57 (2013) 344351.
[25] Y. Zhang, A. Boehman, Impact of biodiesel on NOX emissions in a common rail direct
injection diesel engine, Energy & Fuels 21 (2007) 20032012.
[26] J. Bai, X. Qiao, Z. Wang, J. Zhuang, Z. Huang, Injection and spray characteristics of
blends of diesel from direct coal liquefaction and petrodiesel, Atomization and
Sprays 23 (2013) 677695.
[27] N. Zhang, Z. Huang, X. Wang, B. Zheng, A Comparative Study of Two Kinds of
Biodiesels and Biodiesel-DEE Blends in a Common Rail Diesel Engine. SAE Paper
2011-01-0640, 2011.
[28] K. Daisuke, I. Hajime, G. Yuichi, Effect of biodiesel blending on emission characteris-
tics of modern diesel engine. SAE Paper 2008-01-2384, 2008.
[29] A. Huseyin, Effect of ethanol blending with biodiesel on engine performance and
exhaust emissions in a CI engine, Applied Thermal Engineering 30 (2010)
11991204.
[30] A. Ozsezen, M. Canakci, A. Turkcan, C. Sayin, Performance and combustion
characteristics of a DI diesel engine fueled with waste palm oil and canola oil methyl
esters, Fuel 88 (2009) 629636.
[31] G. Rao, S. Sampath, K. Rajagopal, Experimental studies on the combustion and emission
characteristics of a diesel engine fuelled with used cooking oil methyl ester and its
diesel blends, Journal of Engineering and Applied Science 4 (2008) 6470.
[32] M. Canakci, A. Ozsezen, E. Arcaklioglu, A. Erdil, Prediction of performance
and exhaust emissions of a diesel engine fueled with biodiesel produced
from waste frying palm oil, Expert Systems with Applications 36 (2009)
92689280.
[33] C. Lin, R. Li, Engine performance and emission characteristics of marine sh-oil
biodiesel produced from the discarded parts of marine sh, Fuel Processing
Technology 90 (2009) 883888.
[34] G. Karavalakis, E. Tzirakis, S. Stournas, F. Zannikos, D. Karonis, Biodiesel emis-
sions from a diesel vehicle operated on a non-legislative driving cycle, Energy
Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects 32 (2010)
376383.
[35] J. Ng, K. Ng, S. Gan, Development of emissions predictor equations for a light-duty
diesel engine using biodiesel fuel properties, Fuel 95 (2012) 544552.
[36] M. Lapuerta, O. Armas, R. Ballesteros, J. Fernandez, Diesel emissions from biofuels
derived from Spanish potential vegetable oils, Fuel 84 (2005) 773780.
[37] A. Monyem, G. Van, M. Canakci, The effect of timing and oxidation on emissions
from biodiesel fueled engines, Transactions of ASAE 44 (2001) 3542.
[38] L. Turrio-Baldassarri, C. Battistelli, L. Conti, R. Crebelli, B. De Berardis, A. Iamiceli,
Emission comparison of urban bus engine fuelled with diesel oil and biodiesel
blend, The Science of the Total Environment 327 (2004) 147162.
[39] C. Enweremadu, H. Rutto, Combustion, emission and engine performance
characteristics of used cooking oil biodiesel a review, Renewable & Sustainable
Energy 14 (2010) 28632873.
[40] D. Yao, D. Lou, Z. Hu, P. Tan, H. Shen, Laboratory Investigation on Emission Charac-
teristics of a Diesel Car Fuelled with Biodiesel Blends. SAE Paper 2012-01-1063,
2012.
[41] D. Thomas, N. Joseph, Effects of biodiesel blends and arco EC-diesel on emissions
from light heavy-duty diesel vehicles, Environmental Science & Technology 36
(2002) 16861691.
[42] D. Ronald, B. Gary, B. Glenn, Cylinder-Averaged Histories of Nitrogen Oxide in a D.I.
Diesel with Simulated Turbocharging. SAE Paper. 942046, 2010.
[43] M. Veltman, P. Karra, S. Kong, Effects of Biodiesel Blends on Emissions in Low Tem-
perature Diesel Combustion. SAE Paper 2009-01-0485, 2009.
[44] A. Torregrosa, A. Broatch, B. Pla , L. Mo n
ico, Impact of FischerTropsch and biodiesel
fuels on trade-offs between pollutant emissions and combustion noise in diesel
engines, Biomass and Bioenergy 52 (2013) 2233.
[45] D. Siebers, B. Higgins, L. Pickett, Flame Lift-Off on Direct-Injection Diesel Fuel Jets:
Oxygen Concentration Effects. SAE Paper 2002-01-0890, 2002.
[46] D. Siebers, B. Higgins, Flame Lift-Off on Direct-Injection Diesel Sprays Under Quies-
cent Conditions. SAE Paper 2001-01-0530, 2001.
[47] B. Mazumdar, A. Agarwal, Performance, Emission and Combustion Characteristics of
Biodiesel (Waste Cooking Oil Methyl Ester) Fueled IDI Diesel Engine. SEA Paper
2008-01-1384, 2008.
[48] J.M. Luja n , B. Tormos, F.J. Salvador, K. Gargar, Comparative analysis of a DI diesel
engine fuelled with biodiesel blends during the European MVEG a cycle:
preliminary study (I), Biomass Bioenergy 33 (2009) 941947.
[49] J. Zhuang, X. Qiao, J. Bai, Z. Hu, Effect of injection-strategy on combustion, perfor-
mance and emission characteristics in a DI-diesel engine fueled with diesel from di-
rect coal liquefaction, Fuel 121 (2014) 141148.