Fuel 253 (2019) 811–822

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Fuel
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fuel

Full Length Article

Influence of diglyme addition to diesel-biodiesel blends on notable T

reductions of particulate matter and number emissions
M.N. Nabia, , M.G. Rasulb, R.J. Brownc
⁎

a
School of Engineering and Technology, Central Queensland University, Perth, WA, Australia
b
School of Engineering and Technology, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, QLD, Australia
c
BERF, Queensland University of Technology, QLD, Australia

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Diethylene glycol dimethyl ether (DGM), also known as diglyme, has a very high cetane number with fuel-bound
Diesel engine oxygen of up to 36%, it has strong potential to reduce diesel emissions. This work is an investigation of the
Diglyme turbocharged diesel engine’s emissions and performance parameters using coconut biodiesel-diglyme-diesel
Coconut biodiesel blends. Coconut biodiesel was used as an oxygenated fuel, while DGM was utilised as an oxygenated additive for
Particulate mass
its excellent cetane number and higher fuel-bound oxygen. The reason for adding diglyme to coconut biodiesel
Particle number
blends is to study the influence of cetane number and fuel-bound oxygen on performance, combustion and
emission characteristics. There were five fuels tested in this study. To compare the performance, combustion and
emissions data, a regular diesel was used as a base fuel. The neat diesel (100% diesel) and the neat coconut
biodiesel (100% coconut biodiesel) were designated as diesel and Ox4 respectively. Blend of 70% diesel + 30%
coconut biodiesel is abbreviated as Ox1, 70% diesel + 20% coconut biodiesel + 10% diglyme blend is abbre-
viated as Ox2, and 70% diesel + 10% coconut biodiesel + 20% diglyme blend is labelled as Ox3. All blending
percentages were based on a volume basis. Engine experiments were performed with an unmodified Cummins 6-
cylinder common rail diesel engine. The engine was fitted with precision measuring instruments. Using GT-
Power, a one-dimensional (1-D) model was developed to examine some key performance parameters with those
of experimental data. Most of the performance results show the variations between experimental and simulation
data were within 10%.

1. Introduction CO and total unburned hydrocarbon (THC) emissions with coconut

The dramatic increase in motor vehicles globally has resulted in the
depletion of oil reserves at an alarming rate [1–3]. The excessive use of
fossil fuel causes an increase in global temperature [2]. Global warming
from the burning of fossil fuel is an intimidating issue of the present day
civilisation [4]. Currently, biodiesels are getting interest for their po-
tential to control emissions as well as to meet the energy demand [5].
These biodiesels can be treated as sustainable fuels as they are renew-
able and eco-friendly fuels for compression ignition engines. Silitonga
et al. [6] made an investigation with the mixture of biodiesel-bioe-
thanol and diesel in a diesel engine. Interesting to note that the authors
reported lower carbon monoxide and smoke missions with increased
thermal efficiency using biodiesel-bioethanol and diesel blends. Habi-
bullah et al. [7] carried out engine experiments in a compression ig-
nition engine fuelling with coconut oil biodiesel blends. They reported
an increase in NOx emissions with coconut biodiesel but realised lower
biodiesel blends. The oxygenated additive like diethylene glycol di-
methyl ether (DGM) can be mixed to diesel to suppress diesel emissions
[8–11]. An experimental study conducted by Miyamoto et al. [12] re-
ported low NOx, high thermal efficiency and smokeless diesel com-
bustion using DGM as a principal fuel. The authors reported that the
fuel-bound oxygen reduced all major diesel emissions including NOx
emission. Nabi et al. [11] reported ultra-low diesel emissions with ex-
haust gas recirculation (EGR), oxygenated fuels and a three-way cata-
lyst. Di-n-butyl ether (DBE) also has a higher cetane number (1 0 0)
than diesel can also be used as diesel additives [10]. It was reported
earlier that the mixing of methanol and ethanol to diesel was powerful
to abate diesel particle emissions. However, challenges still remain to
mix methanol and ethanol to diesel due to their poor solubility, ignit-
ability and lubricity [10]. Although significant studies [13–16] dealt
with regulated emissions using oxygenated fuels, however, Zhu et al.
[17] investigated polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), carbonyls and

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: m.nabi@cqu.edu.au (M.N. Nabi).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2019.05.072
Received 18 March 2019; Received in revised form 13 May 2019; Accepted 14 May 2019
Available online 20 May 2019
0016-2361/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M.N. Nabi, et al. Fuel 253 (2019) 811–822

Nomenclature SCR Selective catalytic reduction

RoHR Rate of heat release
BERF Biofuel engine research facility RPM Revolution per minute
BMEP Brake mean effective pressure THC Total unburnt hydrocarbon
BP Brake power 1-D One-dimensional
BTE Brake thermal efficiency A Cross-sectional area
CAD Crank angle degree B Cylinder bore
CAI California analytical instruments CE The fraction of fuel burned
CBD Coconut oil biodiesel Cf Fanning friction factor
CE Combustion efficiency (fraction of fuel burned) #CYL Number of cylinders
CLD Chemiluminescence detector D Equivalent diameter
CMD Count mean diameter dx Length of the mass element
CO Carbon monoxide dp Pressure loss coefficient
CoV Coefficient of variation dV
Change of volume against change of crank angle
dI¸
DBE Di-n-butyl ether dQ
Change of heat with respect to the crank angle (heat re-
DGM Diethylene glycol dimethyl ether dI¸

DI Direct injection lease rate)

Diesel 100% Pure diesel
dP
Change of pressure against change of crank angle
dI¸
DGM Diethylene glycol dimethyl ether e Total specific internal energy
EGR Exhaust gas recirculation F/A Fuel to air ratio
HRR Heat release rate H Total specific enthalpy
kJ kilo Joule h heat transfer coefficient
KV Kinematic viscosity hP Enthalpy of the product
kW kilo Watt hR Enthalpy of the reactant
kWh Kilo Watt hour hc The convective heat transfer coefficient
IMEP Indicated mean effective pressure K1 Constant
IP Indicated power K2 Constant
ITE Indicated thermal efficiency Kp Pressure loss coefficient
LHV Lower heating value m Boundary mass flux
MPa Mega Pascal m Mass of the volume
MJ Mega Joule mDelivery Injector delivery rate
NDIR Non-dispersive infrared P Combustion pressure
NOx Oxides of nitrogen SOC Start of combustion
O2 Oxygen T Cylinder temperature
Ox1 Oxygenated blend 1 (70 vol% diesel + 30 vol% coconut Tfluid Fluid temperature
biodiesel) Twall Wall temperature
Ox2 Oxygenated blend 2 (70 vol% diesel + 20 vol% coconut u Velocity
biodiesel + 10 vol% DGM) V In-cylinder gas volume
Ox3 Oxygenated blend 3 (70 vol% diesel + 10 vol% coconut VD Displacement volume
biodiesel + 20 vol% DGM) w Average cylinder gas velocity
Ox4 Oxygenated blend 4 (100 vol% coconut oil biodiesel) WC Wiebe’s constant
PAH Polyaromatic hydrocarbon ηc Combustion efficiency
PM Particulate matter γ Specific heat ratio
PN Particle number ρ Density
PSD Particle size distribution ρref Reference density
PPM Parts per million ηV Volumetric efficiency
SOC Start of combustion θ Instantaneous crank angle
SOF soluble organic fraction

other volatile organic chemicals besides regulated emissions, and found novelty of this study is to reduce PN, PM and blow-by emissions with a
to be lower using DGM blended oxygenated fuels. Zhang et al. [18] did maximum of 20% diglyme addition to diesel-coconut biodiesel blends.
experiments with a series of oxygenated fuels including diglyme. They Validation of the engine experimental (performance) data with those of
found that oxygenated fuels were effective to reduce particle mass simulated data is the additional novelty of this study.
emissions.
Four oxygenates and neat diesel was used to examine their influence
2. Materials and methods
on performance, combustion and emission parameters in this study. The
target of this investigation is to reduce PN, PM and blow-by emissions
2.1. Test fuels
notably without significant deterioration of the engine performance by
adding diglyme to diesel-biodiesel blends. The study also targetted to
Five different fuels including neat diesel and neat biodiesel were
investigate the effect of cetane number and fuel oxygen on diesel engine
tested in this investigation. The percentage of diesel in three oxygenates
performance, combustion and emissions. DGM was selected as an
was kept constant to 70%. In the current study, the target is to blend a
oxygenated additive for its significantly higher cetane number (1 2 6) of
maximum of 30% oxygenated additives with 70% diesel. The reason for
∼three times higher than diesel and higher fuel bound oxygen, while
keeping diesel 70% is to vary fuel oxygen from about 4–14% by
coconut oil biodiesel was chosen for its abundant availability. The
changing the percentages of oxygenated additives. 100% diesel, known

812
M.N. Nabi, et al. Fuel 253 (2019) 811–822

as neat diesel is labelled as diesel, while 100% coconut biodiesel, Table 2

known as neat biodiesel is designated as Ox4. Ox1 was made with 70% Test engine.
diesel and 30% coconut biodiesel. Ox2 was prepared with 70% diesel, Model Cummins ISBe22031
20% coconut biodiesel and 10% diglyme. Ox3 was formulated with
70% diesel, 10% coconut biodiesel and 20% diglyme. The miscibility Cylinder 6
Bore [mm] × Stroke [mm] 102 × 120
test at room temperature for 48 h with diesel-diglyme-biodiesel blends
Engine capacity [cubic cm] 5900
showed a single homogeneous phase. Table 1 shows some key proper- Engine torque [Nm] 820 @1500 rpm
ties of the tested fuels. For properties of diglyme, diesel and Ox4, Power [kW] 162 @2500 rpm
readers refer to [10,19,20]. Compression ratio [−] 17.3:1
Fuel injection system High pressure common rail
Aspiration Turbocharged
2.2. Test engine Engine loading Electrical water brake dynamometer
Emission certification Euro III
All experiments were performed in a 6-cylinder turbocharged diesel
engine (ISBe22031). Table 2 lists some pertinent specifications of the
test engine. An electrical water brake dynamometer was used to apply
the load to the engine. For in-cylinder data recording, a Kistler trans-
ducer (Model 6053CC60) was fitted to the engine. A Kistler 2614 en-
coder was fitted to the engine to log the crank angle rotational speed
data. A blow-by sensor was used to record the blow-by data. The engine
was run at maximum torque speed of 1500 rpm at four loads including
quarter, half, three-quarter and full load. The experimental test ar-
rangement is displayed in Fig. 1. PN data was recorded with a high
precision particle analyser DMS 500 (Cambustion Ltd.).
The data for PM was computed from the fast particle sampler
(DMS500) using a re-inversion tool [21]. In the computation, a value of
2.2E−15 was used for the density factor, and a coefficient of power of
2.65 was used for the accumulation mode, and for the nucleation mode,
the values were taken as 5.2E−16 and 3 respectively [21]. A CLD NO/
NOx (CAI-600) was used for NOx data recording and an NDIR (CAI-
603) gas analyser was used for CO data measurement. For warming up, Fig. 1. Experimental test arrangement.
the engine was run for ∼30 min with diesel. Soon after the oil tem-
perature reaches at 90 °C, data recording was started. In order to avoid
2.4. Error analysis
fuel dilution, two separate fuel tanks were utilised. The engine was run
again for ∼20 min with the new fuel to ensure data integrity. The data
It is well-known that the uncertainty in the results could be asso-
were taken three times and the mean was taken for the interpretation.
ciated with the selection of the different sensors, error in data mea-
surement, the technique of measurement and calibration of equipment.
2.3. Heat release rate (HRR)
In order to data integrity and data repeatability, all measurements were
repeated three times and the mean was shown in the Figures. The re-
The HRR was estimated using Eq. (1) [22].
levant error bars were put in Fig. 2(a-b)-5, 8–19 and 22–25.
dQ dV 1 dP
= ×P + ×V
d 1 d 1 d (1) 2.5. 1-D model and governing equations
In the above equation,
dQ
represents HRR A 1-D model was created with GT-Power using the engine specifi-
dI¸ cation shown in Table 2. The model includes the conservation of en-
dP
is the combustion pressure change with change of crank angle ergy, momentum, and continuity equations. To develop the model, the
dI¸
P indicates the pressure engine was considered a system. The volume of the whole system was
V represents the volume and discretised into many volumes. Each discretised volume denotes each
γ is the specific heat ratio. flow split, and the individual pipe is separated into single or several

Table 1
Test fuels.
Diesel Ox1 Ox2 Ox3 Ox4

Diesel (vol%) 100 70 70 70 0

Biodiesel (vol%) 0 30 20 10 100
Diglyme (vol%) 0 0 10 20 0
C (%) 85.10 81.71 79.70 77.70 73.80
H (%) 14.80 14.08 13.88 13.69 12.40
O (%) 0.00 4.14 6.34 8.54 13.80
Density kg/m3 840.00 850.20 857.20 864.20 874.00
KV mm2/s 2.64 2.66 2.60 2.54 2.70
LCV kJ/kg 41,770 39,805 38,733 37,661 35,220
H/C 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.17
O/C 0.00 0.05 0.08 0.11 0.19
Cetane no 53.30 54.41 61.31 68.21 57.00
Stoichiometric A/F 15.01 14.19 13.79 13.40 12.27
Empirical formula C7.09H14.8 C6.81H14.08O0.26 C6.64H13.88O0.40 C6.48H13.69O0.53 C6.15H12.40O0.86

813
M.N. Nabi, et al. Fuel 253 (2019) 811–822

Fig. 2. Comparison of (a) BP and IP (Engine speed: 1500 rpm); (b) BMEP and IMEP (same legends as Fig. 2a) (Engine speed: 1500 rpm); and (c) Lower calorific values
between diesel and oxygenates.

volumes [23]. Boundaries unite the volumes. The momentum, energy compared to the diesel. The decreases in BP, IP, BMEP and IMEP with
and continuity equations are shown in (2)–(4) respectively [23]. the four oxygenates are due to their lower heating values (Fig. 2c).
Published literature reported lower power and mean effective pressure
dm
=
dpA + boundaries
(mu) 4Cf
u | u| dxA
2 D
Kp ( 1
2 )
u |u| A with oxygenated fuels [25,26].
dt dx (2)
3.1.2. Coefficient of variation of IMEP
d (me ) dV Fig. 3 shows the standard deviations of IMEP for the five fuels tested
= p + (mH ) hAs (Tfluid TWall )
dt dt boundaries (3) in this investigation. The standard deviations are small, less than 8 kPa
for diesel and all oxygenates. The coefficient of variation (CoV) for all
dm fuels at all four loads is shown in Fig. 4. The CoV was calculated from
= m
dt boundaries (4) the standard deviation and normalised by the mean. The CoV of the
indicated mean effective pressure is a characteristic measure of the
The delivery rate from the injector can be calculated by Eq. (5) [24].
cyclic variability in the engine. The high value of CoV can decrease
F 6 engine performance, lessen the comfort and rise the noise [27]. For all
mDelivery = NRPM VD
V ref
A (# CYL)(Pulse width) (5) fuels, less than 1% of CoVs are observed in Fig. 4. The lower CoVs with
all fuels at all four loads indicated insignificant variations of inter-cycle
Woschni’s equation (Eq. (6)) was used [24] for heat transfer cal-
variability [27].
culation.
K1p0.8w 0.8 3.1.3. Brake thermal efficiency (BTE) and indicated thermal efficiency
hc(Woschni)=
B0.2T K2 (6) (ITE)
The changes in BTE and ITE against indicated power at four engine
For burn rate computation, Wiebe’s function in Eq. (7) was used
loads with the same five tested fuels are depicted in Fig. 5. In the Y1
[24].
axis, the solid lines represent the BTE, while the dotted lines in the Y2
Combustion ( ) = (CE )[1 e( WC )( SOC )(E + 1)]
(7) axis indicate the ITE. In general, the BTE and ITE are less for the four
oxygenates compared to the diesel for all four loads. The BTE from
quarter to full load for diesel is in the range of 36.9%–39.7%, while for
3. Experimental results Ox1, Ox2, Ox3 and Ox4, the values are 36.5%–39%, 36.1%–38.9%,

3.1. Performance

3.1.1. Power and engine load

Fig. 2a displays the brake power (BP) and indicated power (IP)
variations concerning engine load for five different fuels including
diesel, Ox1, Ox2, Ox3 and Ox4. The Y1 axis of Fig. 2a shows the var-
iations of BP (solid lines), while the Y2 axis depicts the IP (dotted lines).
As anticipated, the IP for all fuels shows higher than BP. Both powers
show similar trends. However, all four oxygenates (Ox1–Ox4) realise a
slight decrease in BPs and IPs. The difference in BPs and IPs for the four
oxygenates are larger at high loads. Fig. 2b illustrates the brake and
indicated mean effective pressure (BMEP and IMEP respectively) for the
same five fuels as discussed in Fig. 2a. Both mean effective pressures
indicate similar trends to brake and indicated powers for all fuels at all Fig. 3. The standard deviations of indicated IMEP for five tested fuels (Engine
engine loads. All oxygenates show lower BP, IP, BMEP and IMEP speed: 1500 rpm).

814
M.N. Nabi, et al.
Fig. 4. CoV of indicated mean effective pressure for five tested fuels (Engine
speed: 1500 rpm).
Fig. 5. BTE and ITE profiles for five tested fuels (Engine speed: 1500 rpm).
36%–38.7%, and 34.6%–38.5% respectively. For diesel, the ITEs at four
loads, lie in the range of 40%–44.9%. However, the ITEs for the four
oxygenates at the same four loads appear to be in the range of
39.9%–44.5%, 39.2%–44.3%, 38.9%–44.7%, and 39%–43.99%
Fig. 6. Comparison of combustion pressure profile between diesel and oxygenated blends for (a) Quarter load, (b) half load, (c) three-quarter load and (d) Full load.
(For all four loads, engine speed: 1500 rpm).
815
Fuel 253 (2019) 811–822
respectively.
3.1.4. Combustion pressure
Fig. 6(a–d) display the changes of in-cylinder gas pressure with
respect to change in crank angle for five tested fuels from quarter load
to full load. For data integrity, consistency and avoiding cycle to cycle
variation, the average data of 720 cycles was used. It is evident that the
pressure increases as engine load increases for all five fuels and the
pressure peaks are moving to the right as engine load increases. Due to
higher energy content (heating value) in diesel, it shows higher pres-
sure peaks at all four loads than the four oxygenates. As can be seen
from Fig. 6(a–d), the maximum pressures for diesel at four different
loads (quarter to full) are found to be 55.82 bar, 68.44 bar, 88.78 bar
and 10.702 bar respectively. The maximum pressures for Ox1 for the
same four loads are observed to be 54.73 bar, 67.04 bar, 86.04 bar, and
10.325 bar respectively. At the same four loads, the three other oxy-
genates indicate the pressure peaks to be 54.23 bar, 65.93 bar,
83.01 bar, and 10.081 bar; 54.22 bar, 65.66 bar, 81.65 bar, and
98.91 bar; 53.72 bar, 64.11 bar, 80.90 bar, and 92.81 bar respectively.
3.1.5. Heat release rate (HRR)
Fig. 7(a and b) display the HRR diagrams for diesel and oxygenates
for a quarter and full load respectively. Heat release from fuel com-
bustion depends upon the air-fuel mixing rate, ignition lag, and the
fuel’s heating value [28]. The HRR were computed from the combus-
tion pressure data using Eq. (1). During the ignition delay, the tested
fuels indicate a negative HRR. It was reported [29] that ignition takes
place when the gradient of the HRR is positive and can be found at the
bottom troughs of Fig. 7(a and b), associated with heat loss due to fuel
injection. This is due to, at the combustion start, the fuel heat release is
less than the cooling/chemical reactions heat loss. As can be seen in
Fig. 7(a and b), all oxygenates show a shorter ignition delay than diesel.
M.N. Nabi, et al.
Fig. 7. HRR profiles for five tested fuels for (a) Quarter load and (b) Full load (For both cases, engine speed: 1500 rpm).
This is caused by the higher cetane number of oxygenates than diesel
(Table 1). Ox3 has the shortest ignition delay that could be the high
cetane number. For all fuels, Fig. 7b indicates higher HRRs at full load
than those of Fig. 7a at quarter load, as more fuel, is injected at full load
than at quarter load. For both loads, all oxygenates indicate lower HRR
peaks than those of diesel. This could be due to the lower heating value
of the four oxygenates. Asokan et al. [30] reported lower peaks of HRR
using biodiesel blends.
3.1.6. Boost pressure and maximum pressure rise
Figs. 8 and 9 show the maximum pressure rise rate and boost
pressure respectively against indicated power for the same fuels dis-
cussed before. As seen in Figs. 8 and 9, the maximum pressure rise rate
and boost pressure increase as indicated power increases. Minor var-
iations in the maximum pressure rise rate and boost pressure were
observed among the five fuels. At four indicated powers, the maximum
pressure rise rates for diesel range from 1.78 bar/degree to 3.44 bar/
degree. For the oxygenates (Ox1–Ox4), the pertinent values range from
1.71 bar/degree to 3.85 bar/degree, 1.70 bar/degree to 3.10 bar/de-
gree, 1.70 bar/degree to 3.14 bar/degree and 1.68 bar/degree to
2.99 bar/degree, respectively. The boost pressures, on the other hand,
for the diesel range from 1.27 bar to 2.43 bar. The boost pressures for
Ox1, Ox2, Ox3 and Ox4 are in the range of 1.25 bar–2.29 bar,
1.23 bar–2.20 bar, 1.21 bar–2.30 bar and 1.21 bar–2.10 bar, respec-
tively.
3.2. Exhaust emissions
3.2.1. Blow-by emissions
The changes in indicated specific blow-by emissions against in-
dicated power for diesel and four oxygenates are shown in Fig. 10. The
Fig. 8. Maximum pressure rise rate for five tested fuels (Engine speed:
1500 rpm).
816
Fuel 253 (2019) 811–822
dilution of blow-by emissions over time pollutes the lubricating oil that
worsens the viscosity of the oil [31]. Too much blow-by dilution can
cause troubles in the fuel pump, injector, seals or gaskets [32]. It is
obvious from Fig. 10 that blow-by emissions decrease as indicated
power increases for all five fuels. The highest blow-by emissions were
found to be at the lowest indicated power that corresponds to quarter
load, while the lowest blow-by emissions were found to be at the
highest indicated power which corresponds to the full load for all fuels.
The drops in blow-by emissions using four oxygenates are consistent at
all four loads compared to diesel. The drops are found to be higher for
higher fuel-bound oxygenates. It has been reported that reduced blow-
by emissions using oxygenated fuels are caused by their higher viscosity
[31]. However, irrespective of the fuels’ viscosity, all oxygenates re-
duced indicated blow-by emissions in this investigation. Fig. 11 spe-
cifies the relative changes in blow-by emissions with respect to diesel.
Compared to diesel, for the quarter to full load, the reduction in blow-
by emissions with Ox1 ranges from 4.7% to 13.25%. The reduction
range for Ox2 lies from 6.3% to 14.5%. The corresponding data for Ox3
and Ox4 are 8.5%–17.5% and 10.6%–17% respectively. Reduced blow-
by emissions have been reported [19,31] with fuels having fuel-bound
oxygen in their molecular structure.
3.2.2. NOx emissions
The changes in indicated specific NOx emissions for five fuels are
shown in Fig. 12. NOx emissions using oxygenates observed to be
higher at all loads compared to diesel. Gas temperature, the timing for
fuel injection, residence time, local oxygen, and fuel properties are the
key contributors to higher NOx emissions using the tested oxygenates
[33]. Increase in NOx emissions with biodiesels was reported in [2]. As
suggested by Uyumaz [2], the NOx emissions can be reduced by in-
troducing exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) technique. Fig. 13 indicates
the relative NOx variations against engine loads for the four oxygenated
fuels. The changes in relative NOx emissions were calculated based on
the NOx data from diesel and oxygenated fuels. The increase in NOx
emissions with oxygenates was found to be maximum at the full load
condition. As indicated in Fig. 13, a maximum of 2.47% NOx increase at
100% load was found with Ox1. At the same engine load, Ox2, Ox3 and
Ox4 increased a maximum of 7.8%, 16% and 16.7% respectively higher
NOx emissions. This could be due to the increase in oxygen con-
centration that augments complete combustion, which results in more
NOx emissions [34]. Increased adiabatic flame temperature, linked
with the double bonds [15] in the four oxygenates could cause higher
NOx emissions. Lower radiative heat transfer might be an added reason
[15] for higher NOx emissions using oxygenates. Higher NOx emissions
with oxygenated biodiesels are reported in [14–16,19,34].
3.2.3. The specific PM and PN emissions
Fig. 14 presents the changes in PM emissions against indicated
M.N. Nabi, et al.
Fig. 9. Boost pressure for five tested fuels (Engine speed: 1500 rpm).
Fig. 10. Blow-by emissions for five tested fuels (Engine speed: 1500 rpm).
Fig. 11. Relative changes in blow-by emissions with oxygenates (Engine speed:
1500 rpm).
Fig. 12. NOx emissions for five fuels (Engine speed: 1500 rpm).
power for diesel and four oxygenates. It is well-known that the PM
formation occurs in the fuel rich region. The molecular oxygen subdues
the soot formation [12]. For complete combustion, the combustion
process is enhanced by fuel-oxygen [34]. Fig. 14 indicates that all
oxygenates reduced PM emissions significantly compared to diesel fuel.
This is associated with the fuel oxygen that helps to reduce soot emis-
sions results in reduced PM emissions. Higher cetane number in the
oxygenates could be another contributor to lower PM formation [21].
An additional explanation for lower PM emission with higher cetane
817
Fuel 253 (2019) 811–822
Fig. 13. Relative changes in NOx emissions with oxygenates (Engine speed:
1500 rpm).
Fig. 14. PM emissions for five tested fuels (Engine speed: 1500 rpm).
Fig. 15. Changes in PM emissions with oxygenates (Engine speed: 1500 rpm).
number oxygenates could be prolonged residence time which might
again oxidise the soot emissions [35]. Fig. 15 shows the relative
changes in PM emissions using oxygenates compared to diesel for four
different engine loads. Relative to diesel fuel, PM reductions with Ox1
at four different loads were observed to be 37.2%, 33.6%, 20% and 19%
respectively. At the same four loads, the Ox2, reduced PM by 48%,
49%, 45% and 33% respectively. Higher reductions in PM emissions
experience when fuel oxygen increases. Ox3, which has a higher oxygen
content than those of Ox1 and Ox2, reduced the PM emissions by 59%,
63%, 65% and 55% at four loads respectively. Ox4 has the highest
oxygen content (13.8%) and reduced PM notably by 90%, 91%, 91.5%
and 95% for the same four loads respectively. Concerning total PN
emissions in Fig. 16, qualitatively, similar trends to PM emissions were
observed with all fuels. However, the reductions in PN formations for
the four oxygenates are different. At four loads, Ox1 reduces PN
emissions by 2%–27% (Fig. 17), while the PN reduction for Ox2, Ox3
and Ox4 were found to be 24%–42%, 43%–57% and 67%–80% re-
spectively. Current study PM and PN reductions are supported by the
published literature [19,34,36]. Concerning the accumulation mode
(AM) particle emissions (Figs. 18 and 19), similar trends were observed
to total PN emissions (Figs. 16 and 17).
Fig. 20(a–d) show the variations in particle size distribution (PSD)
at four indicated powers (engine loads) for the five tested fuels. There
are two categories of particles in the diesel exhaust, nucleation and
M.N. Nabi, et al.
Fig. 16. PN emissions for tested fuels (Engine speed: 1500 rpm).
Fig. 17. Changes in PN emissions with oxygenates (Engine speed: 1500 rpm).
Fig. 18. AM PN emissions for five tested fuels (Engine speed: 1500 rpm).
Fig. 19. Changes in AM PN emissions with oxygenates (Engine speed:
1500 rpm).
accumulation mode particles (NM, AM respectively) [37]. Generally,
particles in size range of 3–30 nm are known as NM particles that pri-
marily consisted of the soluble organic fraction (SOF). On the other
hand, particles in the size range of 30–1000 nm fall into the category of
818
Fuel 253 (2019) 811–822
AM particles, which largely composed of agglomerated soot and ad-
sorbed materials [37]. It is seen from Fig. 20(a–d), diesel indicates the
largest particle count mean diameter (CMD) compared to those of the
four oxygenates. The CMDs for diesel at four different loads (25%, 50%,
75% and 100%) are observed to be 64.94 nm, 64.94 nm, 74.99 nm and
74.94 nm, respectively. At the same loads, Ox1 shows lower CMDs of
56.23 nm, 56.23 nm, 64.94 nm and 64.94 nm, respectively. The other
two oxygenates Ox2 and Ox3 also show the same CMDs of 56.23 nm,
56.23 nm, 64.94 nm and 64.94 nm, where the PN peaks were observed.
However, Ox4, which has the highest oxygen content shows different
CMDs. The peaks of the PN with Ox4 were found to be at 42.17 nm,
48.7 nm, 48.7 nm and 42.17 nm respectively. The fuel-bound oxygen
could suppress the peak in AM since it can assist combustion in the fuel
rich zone. Furthermore, the absence of aromatic hydrocarbon in the
oxygenates could decrease AM particle size [14]. Moreover, by in-
creasing the fuel oxygen, the AM CMDs shift towards smaller particle
sizes [14] for all engine loads. From Fig. 20d, for 100% engine load, the
CMDs for 0%, 4.14%, 6.34%, 8.54% and 13.8% fuel oxygen are found
to be 74.99 nm, 64.94 nm, 64.94 nm, 64.94 nm, and 42.17 nm, respec-
tively. Previous reports [19,38] indicated decreased PN emissions at the
AM with increased fuel oxygen.
3.2.4. Specific PM vs. Specific PN emissions
Fig. 21 presents PM vs. PN emissions for diesel and four oxygenates
at all four engine loads. The Figure shows that the higher oxygen
content blends decrease both PM and PN simultaneously. The arrow-
head in the downward direction indicates the reduction of both PM and
PN emissions. Remarkable reductions for both PM and PN emissions
were realised for the fuel having the highest oxygen content, Ox4 in this
case. The regression analysis shows a reasonably good correlation be-
tween PM and PN with R2 values of 0.85 for diesel, 0.75 for Ox1, 0.79
for Ox2, 0.92 for Ox3 and 0.98 for Ox4.
3.2.5. Specific PM vs specific NOx and specific PN vs specific NOx
Fig. 22(a and b) show trade-off between PM and NOx as well as PN
and NOx, respectively for neat diesel and four oxygenates at all four
loads. Both Figures indicate notable reductions in PM and PN emissions
with increased NOx emissions and warrant further investigation for
reduction. The reductions in NOx emissions using oxygenates could be
achieved with the introduction of selective catalytic reduction (SCR)
catalyst, or exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) technique or fine tuning of
injection timing.
3.2.6. Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions
The changes in CO2 emissions from quarter load to full load for all
five fuels is depicted in Fig. 23. As can be seen from Fig. 23, the CO2
emissions for diesel fuel increase with the increase in indicated power.
The similar trends were observed for all 4 oxygenated blends. A close
look at Fig. 23 reveals that there are no significant variations in CO2
emissions among the five fuels. For all fuels, the CO2 emissions from
quarter load to full load range from ∼5.8% to ∼10.30%.
3.2.7. Relative changes in different performance parameters
The comparative changes in different performance parameters are
shown Figs. 24 and 25 respectively for quarter load and full load. The
comparative changes in performance and emission parameters for the
four oxygenates including Ox1, Ox2, Ox3 and Ox4 with the oxygen
content of 4.14%, 6.34%, 8.54% and 13.80% respectively, were com-
puted with respect to reference diesel. For quarter load condition
(Fig. 24), a maximum of 12.8% reduction in BP and a 12.1% reduction
in IP were observed with the Ox4 blend, which contains 13.80% fuel-
bound oxygen. For the same blend, a maximum of 6.2% reduction in
BTE and 3.2% reduction in ITE were realised. A 17.5% blow-by
M.N. Nabi, et al. Fuel 253 (2019) 811–822

Fig. 20. PSD profiles for five tested fuels for (a) Quarter load, (b) Half load, (c) Three-quarter load and (d) Full load (For all four loads, engine speed: 1500 rpm).

Fig. 23. CO2 emissions for five fuels (Engine speed: 1500 rpm).

Fig. 21. Specific PM vs. specific PN emissions for five tested fuels (Engine
speed: 1500 rpm).

Fig. 22. (a) PM – NOx and (b) PN – NOx trade-off (For both cases, engine speed: 1500 rpm).

819
M.N. Nabi, et al. Fuel 253 (2019) 811–822

Fig. 24. Comparative changes in performance and emission parameters with four oxygenates (quarter load) (Engine speed: 1500 rpm).

Fig. 25. Comparative changes in performance and emission parameters with four oxygenates (full load) (Engine speed: 1500 rpm).

Table 3 3.3. 1-D model data validation

Fuel properties for model [40].
Phase Properties
Liquid Density @ 298 K
Liquid enthalpy
Vaporization heat @ 298 K
Liquid viscosity
Liquid thermal conductivity
Phase Properties
Vapour Lower calorific value
Critical pressure
Critical temperature
Viscosity
Thermal conductivity
Vapour enthalpy
Oxygen atom number
Hydrogen atoms number
Carbon atom number
To validate some key simulated engine performance data including
brake and indicated powers, brake and indicated mean effective pres-
sures, brake and indicated thermal efficiencies, a 1-D model was de-
veloped using GT-Power. For execution, the model needs fuel’s liquid-
phased and vapour-phased properties. The diesel properties are avail-
able in the GT-Power fuel library. However, for neat biodiesel, fuel
properties were taken from [39]. In the current study, only neat bio-
diesel (Ox4) was considered for simulation as the transport properties
for other oxygenates (Ox1, Ox2 and Ox3) were not determined or found
in the literature. Table 3 properties are needed to give input to the
model [40].

3.3.1. Engine performance data validation

Fig. 26. Experimental and simulation data for BP using diesel and Ox4 (Engine
speed: 1500 rpm).
emission was reduced with Ox4. A 7.5% NOx was increased while a
maximum of 90% PM and 73% PN were reduced with the same blend.
On the other hand, for full load condition (Fig. 25), compared to diesel,
the maximum changes in performance and emission parameters with
Ox4 are as follows: BP: −14.2%; IP: −13.1%; BTE: −5%; ITE: −2.2%;
Blow-by: −14%; NOx: +16%; PN: −79.6%; PM: −95%.
The variations in experimental and simulated data for diesel and
Ox4 for BP are displayed in Fig. 26 for four different engine loads in-
cluding quarter, half, three-quarter and full load. From the Figure, the
deviations between experimental and simulation data for BP using
diesel fuel for the four loads (quarter – full load) were observed to be
4.17%, 5.34%, 1.57, 1.54% respectively. Similarly, for the same four
loads, the variations of experimental and simulation data for BP using
Ox4 were found to be 12.55%, 9.12%, 5.54% and 3.46% respectively.
From Fig. 27, the corresponding values of IP for diesel were noted to be
8.86%, 10.94%, 8.15% and 7.5% respectively. For the same operating
condition, the values for Ox4 were realised to be 6.36%, 6.12%, 8.46%
and 6.41% respectively.
The highest variation between experimental and simulation data for
BMEP using diesel was found to be 5.29%, while that for Ox4 was
observed to be 2.83% (Fig. 28). Similarly, from Fig. 29, the corre-
sponding values for IMEP using diesel and Ox4 were observed to be
7.54% and 6.36% respectively. As can be seen from Fig. 30, the

820
M.N. Nabi, et al. Fuel 253 (2019) 811–822

Fig. 27. Experimental and simulation data for IP using diesel and Ox4 (Engine Fig. 31. Experimental and simulation data for ITE using diesel and Ox4 (Engine
speed: 1500 rpm). speed: 1500 rpm).

- Slightly lower power, mean effective pressure, thermal efficiency

Fig. 28. Experimental and simulation data for BMEP using diesel and Ox4
(Engine speed: 1500 rpm).
were realised with the four oxygenates compared to diesel.
- Relative to diesel, the in-cylinder pressure was lower for the four
oxygenates. This was associated with their lower energy content. All
four oxygenates showed faster combustion compared to diesel.
- The maximum reductions in blow-by emissions with Ox1, Ox2, Ox3
and Ox4 were observed to be 13.25%, 14.5%, 17.5% and 17%, re-
spectively.
- The maximum increase in NOx for Ox1, Ox2, Ox3 and Ox4 were
observed to be 2.47%, 7.8%, 16% and 16.7%, respectively when
compared to diesel.
- Both PM and PN were reduced remarkably with the higher fuel-
bound oxygenates. At full load, Ox4 has the highest fuel-bound
oxygen (13.8%), reduced 95% PM and 80% PN. Ox3 with 8.54%
oxygen reduced ∼60% PM and 50% PN.
- A one-dimensional model was developed for diesel as well as bio-
diesel for different engine performance parameters. The variations
between simulated and experimental data were ∼10%.

Although Ox4 (the neat biodiesel) shows the highest benefit re-
garding emission reductions (particularly PM and PN reduction),
however, even the lower percentage of diglyme blends, the Ox2 (10%
diglyme blend) and Ox3 (20% diglyme blend) show potential emission
reduction trends and could be the candidates for the compression ig-
nition engine's fuel.
Fig. 29. Experimental and simulation data for IMEP using diesel and Ox4
(Engine speed: 1500 rpm).
Acknowledgements

Merit Grant from the Central Queensland University (RSH/4578)

supports the present investigation. Authors thank Prof Z. D. Ristovski,
Dr M.S.A. Rahman of QUT for their help in this investigation. Authors
also thank Dr T. A. Bodisco, Deakin University, Mr N. Hartnett and A.
Venn of BERF, QUT for their assistance in this study. Authors are
thankful to Dr Doug Stewart of Sunshine Coast Renewables for sup-
plying coconut biodiesel. The biodiesel transport and viscosity data
have been taken from the published thesis of Dr Junnian Zheng and the
authors want to express their sincere appreciations to Dr Junnian
Zheng.

Fig. 30. Experimental and simulation data for BTE using diesel and Ox4 References
(Engine speed: 1500 rpm).
[1] Sanjid A, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA, Rahman SMA, Abedin MJ, Palash SM. Production
of palm and jatropha based biodiesel and investigation of palm-jatropha combined
maximum variations between experimental and simulation data for blend properties, performance, exhaust emission and noise in an unmodified diesel
engine. J Cleaner Prod 2014;65:295–303.
BTE for both diesel and Ox4 were observed to be ∼1%, and that for ITE [2] Uyumaz A. Combustion, performance and emission characteristics of a DI diesel
were found to be 4.94% and 5.18% respectively (Fig. 31). engine fueled with mustard oil biodiesel fuel blends at different engine loads. Fuel
2018;212:256–67.
[3] Uyumaz A. An experimental investigation into combustion and performance char-
4. Conclusions
acteristics of an HCCI gasoline engine fueled with n-heptane, isopropanol and n-
butanol fuel blends at different inlet air temperatures. Energy Convers Manage
The study examined different performance, combustion and emis- 2015;98:199–207.
[4] Datta A, Mandal BK. A comprehensive review of biodiesel as an alternative fuel for
sion parameters with three blends of coconut oil
compression ignition engine. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;57:799–821.
biodiesel + DGM + diesel, neat coconut oil biodiesel and neat diesel. [5] Imdadul HK, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA, Zulkifli NWM, Alabdulkarem A, Rashed MM,
The outcomes of this study are as follows: et al. Higher alcohol–biodiesel–diesel blends: an approach for improving the

821
M.N. Nabi, et al.
performance, emission, and combustion of a light-duty diesel engine. Energy
Convers Manage 2016;111:174–85.
[6] Silitonga AS, Masjuki HH, Ong HC, Sebayang AH, Dharma S, Kusumo F, et al.
Evaluation of the engine performance and exhaust emissions of biodiesel-bioe-
thanol-diesel blends using kernel-based extreme learning machine. Energy
2018;159:1075–87.
[7] Habibullah M, Rizwanul Fattah IM, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA. Effects of palm-coconut
biodiesel blends on the performance and emission of a single-cylinder diesel engine.
Energy Fuels 2015;29(2):734–43.
[8] Di Y, Cheung CS, Huang Z. Experimental investigation of particulate emissions from
a diesel engine fueled with ultralow-sulfur diesel fuel blended with diglyme. Atmos
Environ 2010;44(1):55–63.
[9] Nabi MN, Minami M, Ogawa H, Miyamoto N. Ultra low emission and high perfor-
mance diesel combustion with highly oxygenated fuel. SAE Technical Paper Series
Series # 2000-01-0231 2000.
[10] Miyamoto N, Ogawa H, Nabi MN. Approaches to extremely low emissions and ef-
ficient diesel combustion with oxygenated fuels. Int J Engine Res 2000;1(1):71–85.
[11] Nabi MN, Chowdhury MW. Improvement of engine performance using diethylene
glycol dimethyl ether (DGM) as additive. Jurnal Teknologi. Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia 2006;44(A):1–12.
[12] Miyamoto N, Ogawa H, Nabi MN, Obata K, Smokeless Arima T. Low NOx, high
thermal efficiency, and low noise diesel combustion with oxygenated agents as
main fuel. SAE technical paper series # 980506 1998.
[13] Nabi MN, Rahman MM, Islam MA, Hossain FM, Brooks P, Rowlands WN, et al. Fuel
characterisation, engine performance, combustion and exhaust emissions with a
new renewable Licella biofuel. Energy Convers Manage 2015;96:588–98.
[14] Zare A, Bodisco TA, Nabi MN, Hossain FM, Rahman MM, Ristovski ZD, et al. The
influence of oxygenated fuels on transient and steady-state engine emissions.
Energy 2017;121:841–53.
[15] Zare A, Nabi MN, Bodisco TA, Hossain FM, Rahman MM, Chu Van T, et al. Diesel
engine emissions with oxygenated fuels: a comparative study into cold-start and
hot-start operation. J Cleaner Prod 2017;162:997–1008.
[16] Nabi MN, Zare A, Hossain FM, Rahman MM, Stuart D, Ristovski Z, et al.
Formulation of new oxygenated fuels and their influence on engine performance
and exhaust emissions. The University of Melbourne; 2015.
[17] Zhu J, Cao X-L, Pigeon R, Mitchell K. Comparison of vehicle exhaust emissions from
modified diesel fuels. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 2012;53(1):67–76.
[18] Zhang Z-H, Balasubramanian R. Effects of oxygenated fuel blends on carbonaceous
particulate composition and particle size distributions from a stationary diesel en-
gine. Fuel 2015;141:1–8.
[19] Nabi MN, Zare A, Hossain FM, Ristovski ZD, Brown RJ. Reductions in diesel
emissions including PM and PN emissions with diesel-biodiesel blends. J Cleaner
Prod 2017;166:860–8.
[20] Kinoshita E, Itakura A, Otaka T, Koide K, Yoshimoto Y, Diesel Myo T. Combustion
characteristics of coconut oil ester fuels. SAE Technical Paper Series #2014-32-
0084 2014.
[21] Nabi MN, Rahman SMA, Bodisco TA, Rasul MG, Ristovski ZD, Brown RJ.
Assessment of the use of a novel series of oxygenated fuels for a turbocharged diesel
engine. J Cleaner Prod 2019;217:549–58.
[22] Ferguson CR, Kirkpatrick AT. Internal Combustion Engines Applied
Thermosciences. Second Ed New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 2001.
822
Fuel 253 (2019) 811–822
[23] GammaTechnologies. Flow Theory User Manual Version. 2017.
[24] GammaTechnologies. Engine Performance Application User Manual Version 2017.
[25] Özkan M. Comparative study of the effect of biodiesel and diesel fuel on a com-
pression ignition Engine’s performance, emissions, and its cycle by cycle variations.
Energy Fuels 2007;21:3627–36.
[26] Islam MA, Rahman MM, Heimann K, Nabi MN, Ristovski ZD, Dowell A, et al.
Combustion analysis of microalgae methyl ester in a common rail direct injection
diesel engine. Fuel 2015;143:351–60.
[27] Pham PX, Bodisco TA, Stevanovic S, Rahman MD, Wang H, Ristovski ZD, et al.
Engine performance characteristics for biodiesels of different degrees of saturation
and carbon chain lengths. SAE Int J Fuels Lubr 2013;6(1):188–98.
[28] Dhamodaran G, Krishnan R, Pochareddy YK, Pyarelal HM, Sivasubramanian H,
Ganeshram AK. A comparative study of combustion, emission, and performance
characteristics of rice-bran-, neem-, and cottonseed-oil biodiesels with varying de-
gree of unsaturation. Fuel 2017;187:296–305.
[29] Bodisco T, Low Choy S, Brown RJ. A Bayesian approach to the determination of
ignition delay. Appl Therm Eng 2013;60(1–2):79–87.
[30] Asokan MA, Senthur Prabu S, Kamesh S, Khan W. Performance, combustion and
emission characteristics of diesel engine fuelled with papaya and watermelon seed
oil bio-diesel/diesel blends. Energy 2018;145:238–45.
[31] Zare A, Nabi MN, Bodisco TA, Hossain FM, Rahman MM, Ristovski ZD, et al. The
effect of triacetin as a fuel additive to waste cooking biodiesel on engine perfor-
mance and exhaust emissions. Fuel 2016;182:640–9.
[32] Arumugam S, Sriram G, Ellappan R. Bio-lubricant-biodiesel combination of rape-
seed oil: an experimental investigation on engine oil tribology, performance, and
emissions of variable compression engine. Energy 2014;72:618–27.
[33] Giakoumis EG, Rakopoulos CD, Dimaratos AM, Rakopoulos DC. Exhaust emissions
of diesel engines operating under transient conditions with biodiesel fuel blends.
Prog Energy Combust Sci 2012;38(5):691–715.
[34] Nabi MN, Rasul MG. Influence of second generation biodiesel on engine perfor-
mance, emissions, energy and exergy parameters. Energy Convers Manage
2018;169:326–33.
[35] Rahman MM, Stevanovic S, Islam MA, Heimann K, Nabi MN, Thomas G, et al.
Particle emissions from microalgae biodiesel combustion and their relative oxida-
tive potential. Environ Sci Process Impacts 2015;17(9):1601–10.
[36] Nabi MN, Zare A, Hossain FM, Bodisco TA, Ristovski ZD, Brown RJ. A parametric
study on engine performance and emissions with neat diesel and diesel-butanol
blends in the 13-Mode European Stationary Cycle. Energy Convers Manage
2017;148:251–9.
[37] Hossain FM, Nabi MN, Brown RJ. Investigation of diesel engine performance and
exhaust emissions of microalgae fuel components in a turbocharged diesel engine.
Energy Convers Manage 2019;186:220–8.
[38] Liang Y, Shu G, Wei H, Zhang W. Effect of oxygen enriched combustion and wa-
ter–diesel emulsion on the performance and emissions of turbocharged diesel en-
gine. Energy Convers Manage 2013;73:69–77.
[39] Zheng J. Use of an engine cycle simulation to study a biodiesel fueled engine.
Master of Science Thesis. Texas: A&M University; 2009.
[40] Ruan DF, Cheng WL, Lee CF. Comparison of performance and combustion char-
acteristics of diesel fuel and vegetable oils in DI diesel engine. SAE Technical Paper
Series #2008-01-1639 2008.