Final thesis.pdf new

ADAMA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNVERSITY School of Mechanical, Chemical and Materials Engineering Thermodynamic Analysis and Performance Evaluation of EthanolGasoline Blend Fuel (E15) A thesis submitted to Adama Science and Technology University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Master of Science in Automotive Engineering by Tamiru Tesfaye Advisor: Melesse Haile (Asst. Professor) Mechanical Systems and Vehicle Engineering Department September, 2018 Adama, Ethiopia ADAMA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY School of Mechanical, Chemical and Materials Engineering Mechanical Systems and vehicle engineering Department Thermodynamic Analysis and Performance Evaluation of EthanolGasoline Blend Fuel (E15) by Tamiru Tesfaye APPROVED BY BOARD OF EXAMINERS -------------------------------Chairman, Department -------------------------------Advisor -------------------------------Internal Examiner -------------------------------- External Examiner ------------------ -------------- Signature ------------------ Date --------------- Signature ------------------ Date ---------------- Signature ………………. Signature Date ---------------- Date CANDIDATE'S DECLARATION I hereby declare that the work which is being presented in the thesis entitled “Thermodynamic Analysis and Performance Evaluation Of Ethanol- Gasoline Blend Fuel (E15)” in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Master of Science in Automotive Engineering is an authentic record of my own work carried out from November 2017 to ,)Ass.professor( supervision of Melesse Haile under September 2018Department of Mechanical systems and Vehicle Engineering department, Adama Science and Technology University, Ethiopia. The matter embodied in this thesis has not been submitted by me for the award of any other degree or diploma. All relevant resources of information used in this thesis have been duly acknowledged. Tamiru Tesfaye Student Name ---------------------Signature ---------------Date This is to certify that the above statement made by the candidate is correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. This thesis has been submitted for examination with my approval. Melesse Haile (Asst. Professor) ------------------------- ----------------- Advisor Name Signature I Date ACKNOWLEDGMENT The security of strength and success in all my life is God. So on the first place I would like to thanks my great God for all support in my life. The role of my family has significant meaning in the very beginning of my life so I would like to express my darling for them. Next, I would like to express my special gratitude for my adviser Melese Haile (Ass.professor) who are not only adviser on this thesis but also teach me and other students assigned on him computer c++ program starting from the beginning. I also thanks Idiris Ilmi the program head of Mechanical System and Vehicle Engineering for helping me by facilitating contact between different organizations. My gratefulness also extend to Metahra Sugar Factory which providing me ethanol that used in the experimental investigation. On the last my appreciation goes to Dilla University, Mechanical and Automotive Engineering Department for providing engine that used in experimental investigation and technical support. II TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTENTS PAGE CANDIDATE'S DECLARATION ............................................................................................. I ACKNOWLEDGMENT ............................................................................................................ II LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................. VIII ACRONYMS AND SYMBOLS .............................................................................................. X ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................ XII CHAPTER ONE ........................................................................................................................ 1 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background and Justification ...................................................................................... 1 1.2 Statement of problem .................................................................................................. 2 1.3 Objectives .................................................................................................................... 3 1.3.1 General objective ................................................................................................. 3 1.3.2 Specific objectives ............................................................................................... 4 1.4 Significance of the Study ............................................................................................ 4 1.5 Scope ........................................................................................................................... 4 CHAPTER TWO ....................................................................................................................... 5 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Biofuel ......................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Ethanol......................................................................................................................... 5 2.3 Gasoline ....................................................................................................................... 6 2.4 Chemical and Physical Characteristics of Ethanol and Hydrocarbon Fuels ............... 6 2.4.1 Characteristics of gasoline .................................................................................. 6 2.4.2 Characteristics of ethanol .................................................................................... 7 2.4.3 Comparison of gasoline and ethanol .................................................................... 8 III 2.4.4 2.5 Characteristics of ethanol-blended fuels .............................................................. 9 Summary of the Main Ethanol Blends Used Around the World ............................... 10 2.5.1 E10 or less .......................................................................................................... 11 2.5.2 E15 ..................................................................................................................... 11 2.5.3 hE15 ................................................................................................................... 12 2.5.4 E20, E25 ............................................................................................................. 12 2.5.5 E70, E75 ............................................................................................................. 13 2.5.6 E85 ..................................................................................................................... 14 2.5.7 ED95 .................................................................................................................. 14 2.5.8 E100 ................................................................................................................... 15 2.6 Summary of Related Works ...................................................................................... 16 CHAPTER THREE.................................................................................................................. 25 3 MATERIALS AND METHODS...................................................................................... 25 3.1 Experimental Site ...................................................................................................... 25 3.2 Collection of Required Data ...................................................................................... 25 3.2.1 Engine specifications ......................................................................................... 26 3.2.2 Technical Information of exhaust gas analyzer ................................................. 27 3.3 Mathematical Model for Actual Engine Cycle .......................................................... 29 3.4 Mathematical Model for Engine Performance .......................................................... 36 3.5 Mathematical Model For Incomplete Combustion Emission of Blend Fuel. ............ 36 3.6 Experimental Analysis for E0 and E15 ..................................................................... 38 3.7 Performing the experiment ........................................................................................ 39 CHAPTER FOUR .................................................................................................................... 40 4 RESULT AND DISCUSSION ......................................................................................... 40 4.1 Output of computer c++ program for E0................................................................... 40 IV 4.1.1 Temperature ....................................................................................................... 42 4.1.2 Pressure .............................................................................................................. 42 4.1.3 Volume ............................................................................................................... 43 4.1.4 Pressure vs volume diagram............................................................................... 44 4.1.5 Brake power ....................................................................................................... 44 4.1.6 Brake torque ....................................................................................................... 45 4.1.7 Brake specific fuel consumption ........................................................................ 46 4.1.8 Brake mean effective pressure ........................................................................... 47 4.2 Output of computer c++ program for E15................................................................. 48 4.2.1 Temperature ....................................................................................................... 49 4.2.2 Pressure .............................................................................................................. 50 4.2.3 Volume ............................................................................................................... 51 4.2.4 Pressure vs volume diagram............................................................................... 51 4.2.5 Brake power ....................................................................................................... 52 4.2.6 Brake torque ....................................................................................................... 53 4.2.7 Brake specific fuel consumption ........................................................................ 53 4.2.8 Brake mean effective pressure ........................................................................... 54 4.3 Summary of Computer C++ Program Output for E0 - E15 ...................................... 55 4.3.1 Combustion and thermal efficiency ................................................................... 55 4.3.2 Temperature ....................................................................................................... 56 4.3.3 Pressure .............................................................................................................. 56 4.3.4 Pressure vs volume diagram............................................................................... 56 4.3.5 Brake power ....................................................................................................... 58 4.3.6 Brake torque ....................................................................................................... 58 4.3.7 Brake specific fuel consumption ........................................................................ 60 V 4.3.8 Brake mean effective pressure ........................................................................... 60 4.3.9 Emissions ........................................................................................................... 61 4.4 Result from experimental analysis for E0 and E15 ................................................... 63 4.4.1 Result from experimental analysis for E0 .......................................................... 63 4.4.2 Result from experimental analysis for E15 ........................................................ 66 4.4.3 Summary from experimental analysis for E0 and E15 ...................................... 69 4.4.4 Emission result from experimental investigation of E0 and E15 ....................... 71 CHAPTER FIVE...................................................................................................................... 74 5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION................................................................ 74 5.1 Summary ................................................................................................................... 74 5.2 Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 74 5.3 Recommendation ....................................................................................................... 75 REFERENCES......................................................................................................................... 77 APPENDEICES ....................................................................................................................... 80 Appendix. 1 .......................................................................................................................... 80 Appendix. 2 .......................................................................................................................... 92 VI LIST OF TABLES TABLES PAGE Table 2.1 Compression of gasoline and ethanol ........................................................................ 8 Table 2.2 Tested properties of blend fuel................................................................................... 9 Table 3.1Selected engine specifications .................................................................................. 26 Table 3.2 Environmental requirements for exhaust gas analyzer ............................................ 28 Table 3.3 technical data of exhaust gas analyzer .................................................................... 28 Table 3.4 Functional requirements of exhaust gas analyzer .................................................... 29 Table 3.5 mass and molar fraction blend proportion .............................................................. 31 Table 4.1 “‘V’, 'p' and 'T' as a function of 'theta' "for E0 ....................................................... 40 Table 4.2 'V', 'p' and 'T' as a function of 'theta' “for E15 ......................................................... 48 Table 4.3 summary of Brake power result from computer c++ program ................................ 58 Table 4.4 summary of Brake torque result from computer c++ program ................................ 58 Table 4.5 summary of brake specific fuel consumption result from computer c++ program .. 60 Table 4.6 summary of Brake mean effective pressure result from computer c++ program .... 60 Table 4.7 molar fraction of emissions product........................................................................ 61 Table 4.8 output of experimental investigation for E0 ............................................................ 63 Table 4.9 output of experimental investigation for E15 .......................................................... 66 Table 4.10 Emission experimental investigation of E0 ........................................................... 71 Table 4.11 Emission experimental investigation of E15 ......................................................... 71 VII LIST OF FIGURES FIGURES PAGE Figure 3.1 engine used for experimental analysis ................................................................... 27 Figure 3.2 Infralyt Smart Exhaust Gas Analyzer ..................................................................... 27 Figure 3.3 Test stand for single cylinder air cooled engine 7.5 kW ........................................ 38 Figure 3.4 connection between CT110 test stand and CT 100.20 engine. ............................... 39 Figure 4.1 Temperature vs crank angle for E0 (pure gasoline)................................................ 42 Figure 4.2 Pressure vs crank angle for E0 (pure gasoline) ...................................................... 43 Figure 4.3 Volume vs crank angle for E0 (pure gasoline) ....................................................... 43 Figure 4.4 Volume vs crank angle for E0 (pure gasoline) ....................................................... 44 Figure 4.5 Brake power vs engine revolution per minute for E0 ............................................. 45 Figure 4.6 Brake torque vs engine revolution per minute for E0............................................. 46 Figure 4.7 Brake specific fuel consumption vs engine revolution per minute for E0 ............. 46 Figure 4.8 Brake mean effective pressure vs engine revolution per minute for E0 ................. 47 Figure 4.9 Temperature vs crank angle for E15 ....................................................................... 49 Figure 4.10 Pressure vs crank angle for E15............................................................................ 50 Figure 4.11 Volume vs crank angle for E15 ............................................................................ 51 Figure 4.12 Pressure vs volume diagram for E15 .................................................................... 51 Figure 4.13 Brake power vs engine speed for E15 .................................................................. 52 Figure 4.14 Brake torque vs engine revolution per minute for E15........................................ 53 Figure 4.15 Brake specific fuel consumption vs engine speed for E15 ................................... 54 Figure 4.16 Break mean effective pressure vs engine revolution per minute for E15 ............ 55 Figure 4.17 combustion efficiency VS blend proportions ....................................................... 55 Figure 4.18 thermal efficiency VS blend proportion ............................................................... 56 Figure 4.19 summary of maximum temperature result vs engine crank angle ........................ 57 Figure 4.20 summary of maximum pressure result vs engine crank angle .............................. 57 Figure 4.21 summary of maximum pressure volume diagram ................................................ 57 Figure 4.22 summary of brake power vs engine speed from computer c++ program ............. 59 Figure 4.23 summary brake torque vs engine speed ................................................................ 59 Figure 4.24 summary brake specific fuel consumption vs engine speed ................................. 59 Figure 4.25 summary brake mean effective pressure vs engine speed .................................... 59 VIII Figure 4.26 diagram of Co2 emission vs blend proportions ..................................................... 62 Figure 4.27 diagram of CO emission vs blend proportions ..................................................... 62 Figure 4.28 diagram of N2 emission vs blend proportion ........................................................ 62 Figure 4.29 diagram brake power vs engine speed of experimental investigation for E0 ...... 64 Figure 4.30 diagram brake toque vs engine speed of experimental investigation for E0 ........ 65 Figure 4.31 diagram bsfc vs engine speed of experimental investigation for E0 .................... 65 Figure 4.32 brake power vs engine speed experimental investigation for E15 ....................... 67 Figure 4.33 brake torque vs engine speed experimentally investigated for E15 ..................... 67 Figure 4.34 fuel consumption vs engine speed experimental investigation for E15 ............... 68 Figure 4.35 E0 and E15 brake power vs engine speed for experimental investigation for E0 and E15..................................................................................................................................... 70 Figure 4.36 summary of brake torque vs engine speed from experimental investigation for E0 and E15..................................................................................................................................... 70 Figure 4.37 fuel consumption vs engine speed experimental investigation for E0 and E15 ... 70 Figure 4.38 experimental investigation of CO2 vs engine speed for E0 and E15 .................... 73 Figure 4.39 experimental investigation HC vs engine speed for E0 and E15.......................... 73 Figure 4.40 experimental investigation of CO vs engine speed for E0 and E15 ..................... 73 Figure 4.41 experimental investigation of O2(% vol) vs engine speed(rpm) ........................... 73 IX ACRONYMS AND SYMBOLS ∆U change of internal energy AFR air fuel ratio BDC bottom dead center bsfc CAI brake specific fuel consumption controlled auto ignition CC Centimeter cube CO carbon monoxide CO2 carbon dioxide EC engine capacity EEV environmentally enhanced vehicle GEG gasoline equivalent gallon HC hydrocarbon imep indicated mean effective pressure LEL lower explosive limit LHV lower heating value ma mass of air mf mass of fuel mm mass of air fuel charged to cylinder MOWE ministry of water and energy Mres mass of residual NIOSH National institute for occupational safety and health X NOX nitrogen oxide NREL National renewable energy laboratory P pressure Pb brake power Pi indicated power Q heat added Rc compression ratio rpm revolution per minute T temperature Tb brake torque TDC top dead center TJ tera joules UEL upper explosive limit V volume Vcl clearance volume VD displacement volume W work done ZC number of cylinder XI ABSTRACT The main objective of the work is to study thermodynamic analysis and performance evaluation of spark ignition (SI) engines using gasoline-ethanol blend fuel (E15). In this work the thermodynamic analysis of actual engine cycle with ethanol gasoline blend fuel (E15) was done. Depending on the thermodynamic analysis which can be the mathematical model the computer c++ program was devoloped.so the performance parameter such as brake power, brake torque, thermal efficiency, break mean consumption effective and pressure, emission was combustion analyzed by efficiency, using brake developed specific fuel computer c++ program. This program is versatile that can be functional for every type of engine and any type of blend proportion.as a result the brake power, brake torque, combustion efficiency, thermal efficiency and break mean effective pressure are higher for E15 than E0.the brake specific fuel consumption is lower for E15 than E0.The molar fraction emission of CO2, CO and water vapor is less for E15 than E0 but molar fraction of N2 is higher for E15 than E0.Experimental investigation was done on the real engine and the computer c++ program was validated and proved. The deviation between result of developed computer c++ program and experimental investigation was less than 5% for all analyzed engine parameter. Depending on the real factor which may be didn’t consider in this work while preparing mathematical model and develop computer c++ program, the future researcher can reshuffle and come out with perfect result. Key Words: Ethanol gasoline blends, Alternative fuels, thermodynamic analysis, computer simulation of cycle-processes using C++. XII CHAPTER ONE 1 The prices of petroleum INTRODUCTION products are generally on an increasing trend and consequently affecting the general cost of living. This continuous increase has resulted in the prices of some products tripling in the last decade. In some communities, in the developing nations these products are not only expensive but they are not readily available because of the poor road infrastructure necessary for their distribution. The consumption of petroleum products also has other inconveniencies such as environmental pollution and the emission of greenhouse gasses generally believed to be responsible for global warming. The general trend all over the world now is to reduce the over dependence on petroleum products so as to help reduce the effects of global warming. Other possible advantages of abandoning petroleum products is the fact that alternative sources can be produced from renewable resources that are available almost everywhere that there is life. This avoids the employment of heavy infrastructure for long distance transportation and distribution. 1.1 Background and Justification Fuel additives are very important, since many of these additives can be added to fuel in order to improve its efficiency and its performance (Pandey and Gupta, 2016). Ethanol - gasoline blend with percentage volume of ethanol up to 15% can be used in SI engine without any modifications. The presence of oxygen and high octane number were significant features of using ethanol-gasoline blends. The fuel consumption and specific fuel consumption showed a marginal decreasing with the use of ethanol– gasoline blends (Mostafa et al., 2017).Adding ethanol to gasoline will lead to a leaner better combustion. It was experimentally demonstrated that adding 5-15% ethanol to the blends led to an increase in the engine brake power, torque and brake thermal efficiency, volumetric efficiency and decreases the brake specific fuel consumption (Yusuf et al., 2010). 1 When engine was fueled with methanol gasoline blend, engine performance parameters such as brake torque, brake power, brake thermal efficiency, volumetric efficiency increases with increasing methanol amount in the blended fuel while bsfc and equivalence air-fuel ratio decreased (Shayan et al., 2011). As the percentage of ethanol increases the emission characteristics improved. It is observed that the emission values of the HC and CO decreased when compared with that of pure gasoline. The brake thermal efficiency increases with the increase in the percentage of ethanol; E5 and E10 gave the best result for all measured parameters at a constant speed of 2000 rpm, thus ethanol may be used as an additive for gasoline. Brake thermal efficiency increased as the volume percentage of ethanol fuel is increased in the mixture (saikrishnm et al., 2016). CO, HC and NOx emissions decreased with ethanol blends due to leaner air fuel mixtures. Catalytic converter showed reduction in all three emissions .The reduction percentage increased with ethanol percentage in the blend. A small increase in NOx emissions was noticed with catalytic converter (Raja et al., 2015). 1.2 Statement of Problem The reserves of petroleum-based fuels are directly correlated with the increasing demands of humankind for energy production. With growing world populations, industries, vehicles, and equipment, energy demand leads to the search for a substitute for petroleum fuels which can accommodate to the need of people today. Considering the current global economic crisis, the curiosity in alternative fuels is extremely high. Alternative fuels used as substitute petroleum-based fuels must be produced from renewable sources, and should be devised to use this fuel without bringing any modifications in the geometry of the engine. Alcohols have provided an answer to this problem. Ethanol is thought to be the most fitting fuel for spark ignition engines. Researchers have generated a few alternative and cost-effectively viable fuels which are also environment friendly. 2 Ethiopia is also one of the country which totally import petroleum from other country and high demand of energy is observing from day to day. As a result the country’s economy highly depend on the fuel price and vulnerable to it which shocked by its fluctuation. According to the Ministry of Water and Energy, the country has a plan to top up an ethanol blended oil to the local market to reach E25 (a 25% ethanol content blended in Benzene and biodiesel) (Melas Teka.2007).Due this government formulate policy to blend locally produced biofuel with petrol and a number of researcher recommend this blend fuel to save hard currency and minimize the emissions of greenhouse gases. Since 2009, the country has been provided a 5% ethanol and 95% benzene blended (technically known as E5) for the market in which a Sudanese owned oil company, Nile Petrol, was a sole agent that was carrying out the blending process and distributing for all local oil station. But now the Ministry of Water and Energy (MoWE) declared that Oil Libya is awarded the task of blending the 10% ethanolBenzene blend. The way followed by the previous researcher to know the performance of engine and emissions of greenhouse is time consuming and need professional on the area. Despite a number of work is done on this area in other countries there is no common conclusion which is a basic route creating confusion to use the result of their experiment for practical operation and not easy to rely on it. But if the thermodynamic analysis of blend fuel is done and the computer program is developed for it, one can determine the engine performance and emissions rapidly and easily for every blend proportion.so this problem can be solved after completion of this thesis. 1.3 Objectives 1.3.1 General objective The main aim of the work is to conduct performance analysis of spark ignition (SI) engine using various blends of gasoline and ethanol. 3 1.3.2 Specific objectives The specific objectives of this work are listed as follow:  To develop computer C++ program that can rapidly and easily determine engine performance and emissions for every amount of blend proportion.  To validate the program using the practical data.  To determine Engine performance such as, brake power, brake thermal efficiency, volumetric efficiency, brake torque, brake mean effective pressure and brake specific fuel consumption on different proportions of blend.  To determine the amount of emission for all selected blend proportions by including combustion products like CO₂, H₂O, O₂, N₂, HC, CO, N2. 1.4 Significance of the Study This project can benefit the natural environment on the first place by determining harmful emissions components and differentiate which blend proportion of ethanol and gasoline affect it highly. This means all living things are beneficiary .Not only this the future researcher can also get benefit while determining the performance of engine and emissions on the actual or real engine by using the computer c++ program developed in this research. Generally the automobile companies, users and the country as a whole can be benefited from this thesis. 1.5 Scope This project was studied the thermodynamic analysis of engine performance and emissions of different proportions of blend fuel (ethanol-gasoline) by mathematical model and develop the computer c++ program. The experimental investigation was done on real engine to validate or prove the result of computer c++ program. All the combustion products were not considered while the emission analysis was done. This research work did not include the effect of different proportions of blend fuel on physical property of engine parts and accessories. 4 CHAPTER TWO 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Biofuel It is defined as liquid fuels produced from biomass; it excludes treatments of solid biomass as a source of energy. It focuses on ethanol and biodiesel based fuels on current available or near commercially developed technologies. The two most important biofuels are ethanol and biodiesel. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biofuel) 2.2 Ethanol Ethanol is manufactured from microbial conversion of biomass materials through fermentation. Ethanol contains 35 percent oxygen. The production process consists of conversion of biomass to fermentable sugars, fermentation of sugars to ethanol, and the separation and purification of the ethanol. Ethanol (ethyl alcohol, grain alcohol) is a clear, colorless liquid with a characteristic, agreeable odor. In dilute aqueous solution, it has a somewhat sweet flavor, but in more concentrated solutions it has a burning taste. Ethanol, CH3CH2OH, is an alcohol, a group of chemical compounds whose molecules contain a hydroxyl group, –OH, bonded to a carbon atom. Fermentation initially produces ethanol, and separation and purification of ethanol. Fermentation initial produces ethanol containing a substantial amount of water. Distillation removes the majority of water to yield about 95 percent purity ethanol, the balance being water. This mixture is called hydrous ethanol. If the remaining water is removed in a further process, the ethanol is called anhydrous ethanol and suitable for blending into gasoline. Ethanol is “denatured” prior to leaving the plant to make it unfit for human consumption by addition of small amount of products such as gasoline. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol) 5 2.3 Gasoline Gasoline or gas for short (American English), or petrol (British English), is a transparent, petroleum-derived liquid that is used primarily as a fuel in internal combustion engines. It consists mostly of organic compounds obtained by the fractional distillation of petroleum, enhanced with a variety of additives. On average, a 42-gallon barrel of crude oil (159 L) yields about 19 US gallons (72 L) of gasoline when processed in an oil refinery, though this varies based on the crude oil source's assay. The characteristic of a particular gasoline blend to resist igniting too early (which causes knocking and reduces efficiency in reciprocating engines) is measured by its octane rating. Gasoline is produced in several grades of octane rating. Tetra ethyl lead and other lead compounds are no longer used in most areas to regulate and increase octane-rating, but many other additives are put into gasoline to improve its chemical stability, control corrosiveness and provide fuel system 'cleaning,' and determine performance characteristics under intended use. Sometimes, gasoline also contains ethanol as an alternative fuel, for economic, political or environmental reasons. Gasoline used in internal combustion engines has a significant impact on the environment, both in local effects (e.g., smog) and in global effects (e.g., effect on the climate). Gasoline may also enter the environment un combusted, as liquid and as vapors, from leakage and handling during production, transport and delivery, from storage tanks, from spills, etc.( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline) 2.4 Chemical and Physical Characteristics of Ethanol and Hydrocarbon Fuels 2.4.1 Characteristics of gasoline (A Hydrocarbon) Hydrocarbon fuels (gasoline, diesel fuel, kerosene, jet fuel, etc.) generally have similar characteristics whether they are flammable liquids or combustible liquids. Gasoline is a hydrocarbon produced from crude oil by fractional distillation. It is non-water miscible and has a flash point of approximately -45°F, varying with 6 octane rating. Gasoline has a vapor density between 3 and 4. Therefore, as with all products with a vapor density greater than 1.0, gasoline vapors will seek low levels or remain close to ground level. Gasoline has a specific gravity of 0.72–0.76 which indicates it will float on top of water since it is non-water miscible or insoluble. Its auto-ignition temperature is between 536°F and 853°F, and it has a boiling point between 100°F and 400°F depending on fuel composition. Gasoline is not considered a poison but does have harmful effects after long-term and high-level exposure that can lead to respiratory failure. Smoke from burning gasoline is black and has toxic components. Gasoline’s greatest hazard is its flammability even though it has a fairly narrow flammability range (LEL is 1.4 percent and UEL is 7.6 percent). 2.4.2 Characteristics of ethanol (A Polar Solvent) Ethanol is a renewable fuel source that is produced by fermentation and distillation process. The most common source of ethanol in the United States in 2008 is corn. However, it can be produced from other products such as sugar cane, saw grass, and other natural products that will be conducive to the fermentation/distillation process. Ethanol is a polar solvent that is water-soluble and has a 55°F flash point. Ethanol has a vapor density of 1.59, which indicates that it is heavier than air. Consequently, ethanol vapors do not rise, similar to vapors from gasoline which seek lower altitudes. Ethanol’s specific gravity is 0.79, which indicates it is lighter than water but since it is water-soluble it will thoroughly mix with water. Ethanol has an autoignition temperature of 793°F and a boiling point of 173°F. Ethanol is less toxic than gasoline or methanol. Carcinogenic compounds are not present in pure ethanol; however, because gasoline is used in the blend, E-85 is considered potentially carcinogenic. Like gasoline, ethanol’s greatest hazard as a motor fuel component is its flammability. It has a wider flammable range than gasoline (LEL is 3.3 percent and UEL is 19 percent). In a pure form, ethanol does not produce visible smoke and has a hard-to-see blue flame. In a denatured form there is little to no smoke, but a slight orange flame may be visible. Interestingly, ethanol and some ethanol blends 7 can conduct electricity while gasoline does not and is considered an electrical insulator. The most striking difference between these two fuels is that unlike gasoline, ethanol mixes easily with water. While it is possible to dilute ethanol to a condition where it no longer supports combustion, this is not practical in the field as it requires copious amounts of water. Even at 5 parts water to 1 part ethanol, it will still burn. 2.4.3 Comparison of gasoline and ethanol Table 2.1 Compression of gasoline and ethanol Characteristics Gasoline Ethanol Molecular formula C4-C12 C2H5OH Molecular weight 95-120 46 Oxygen content (%) 0 34.8% Density (kg/m3) 740 785 LHV (MJ/kg) 44.3 26.7 Octane number >90 108 Auto-ignition temp. (C) 228-470 425 Stoichiometric A/F ratio 14.8 9.00 Latent heat of vapor. (kJ/kg) 305 840 Flash Point -45°F 55°F Specific Gravity 0.72–0.76 0.79 Vapor Density 3–4 1.49 Vapor Pressure 38–300 mmHg 44 mmHg Boiling Point 100–400°F 173°F Flammable Range (LEL–UEL) 1.4%–7.6% 3.3%–19% Conductivity None Yes Smoke Character Black Slight to none Toxicity Solubility Lower than gasoline None Source: Elfasakhan. (2015) and Zarihan et al., (2017) 8 Highly Table 2.2 Tested properties of blend fuel Fuel blend Density, kg/L@ 15.6 °C API gravity, dg. Kinematic viscosity mm2/s@ 30 °C Flash Point °C E0 0.74 59.53 0.4872 _ E10 0.7396 57.1 0.5383 E15 0.7495 57.09 E20 0.7541 E25 Fire Point , °C Cloud Point, °C Heat of Combustion , MJ/L Octane number 25 -22 34.84 93.2 _ 29 >8 33.19 97.1 0.5619 _ 29.1 >8 32.91 98.6 55.95 0.6007 29.2 30 >8 32.43 100.4 0.7571 55.21 0.638 30 32 >8 31.7 99.5 E30 0.7613 54.3 0.6614 29.2 30.2 >8 31.53 102.5 E35 0.7653 53.5 0.6914 31 32 >8 30.92 104.1 Source: Sharma, (2015) 2.4.4 Characteristics of Ethanol-Blended Fuels Blending ethanol with gasoline has multiple effects. Ethanol increases the heat output of the unleaded gasoline, which produces more complete combustion resulting in slightly lower emissions from unburned hydrocarbons. The higher the concentrations of ethanol, the more the fuel has polar solvent-type characteristics with corresponding effects on conducting fire suppression operations. However, even at high concentrations of ethanol, minimal amounts of water will draw the ethanol out of the blend away from the gasoline. Ethanol and gasoline are very similar in specific gravity. The two differing fuels mix readily with minimal agitation, but the blend is more of a suspension than a true solution. Ethanol has a greater affinity for water than it does for gasoline. Over time, without agitation, gasoline will be found floating on a layer of an ethanol/water solution. The resulting ethanol/water solution is still flammable since the concentration of ethanol is still fairly rich. Phase separation can occur in fuel storage systems where water is known to be present. Blending these fuels together alters the physical and chemical characteristics of the original fuels. However, the resulting changes may be unnoticeable to emergency responders. One of the noticeable differences in the blended fuel versus unblended gasoline is the visual difference of the smoke and 9 flame characteristics. The higher the content of ethanol, the less visible the black smoke content and orange flame production. These characteristics may be masked by other substrates that may also be burning such as vehicle tires. Another noticeable difference of ethanol-blended fuels under fire conditions is that when foam or water has been flowed on the burning product, the gasoline will tend to burn off first, eventually leaving the less volatile ethanol/water solution which may have no visible flame or smoke. Ethanol is a polar solvent that is simultaneously water-soluble and flammable. Creating a blend of gasoline and ethanol results in a chemical change that can easily go unnoticed by emergency responders. Knowing that the ethanol will be the last fuel to burn and that it may burn without visible smoke or flame is important in determining an approach to take in dealing with ethanol-involved incidents. 2.5 Summary of the Main Ethanol Blends Used Around the World Several common ethanol fuel mixtures are in use around the world. The use of pure hydrous or anhydrous ethanol in internal combustion engines (ICEs) is only possible if the engines are designed or modified for that purpose, and used only in automobiles, light-duty trucks and motorcycles. Anhydrous ethanol can be blended with gasoline (petrol) for use in gasoline engines, but with high ethanol content only after minor engine modifications. Ethanol fuel mixtures have "E" numbers which describe the percentage of ethanol fuel in the mixture by volume, for example, E85 is 85% anhydrous ethanol and 15% gasoline. Low-ethanol blends, from E5 to E25, are also known as gasohol, though internationally the most common use of the term refers to the E10 blend. Blends of E10 or less are used in more than 20 countries around the world, led by the United States, where ethanol represented 10% of the U.S. gasoline fuel supply in 2011. Blends from E20 to E25 have been used in Brazil since the late 1970s. E85 is commonly used in the U.S. and Europe for flexible-fuel vehicles. Hydrous ethanol or E100 is used in Brazilian neat ethanol vehicles and flex-fuel light vehicles and hydrous E15 called hE15 for modern petrol cars in the Netherlands. 10 2.5.1 E10 or less E10, a fuel mixture of 10% anhydrous ethanol and 90% gasoline sometimes called gasohol, can be used in the internal combustion engines of most modern automobiles and light-duty vehicles without need for any modification on the engine or fuel system. E10 blends are typically rated as being 2 to 3 octane numbers higher than regular gasoline and are approved for use in all new U.S. automobiles, and mandated in some areas for emissions and other reasons. The E10 blend and lower ethanol content mixtures have been used in several countries, and its use has been primarily driven by the several world energy shortages that have taken place since the 1973 oil crisis. 2.5.2 E15 Typical manufacturer's statement in the car owner's manual regarding the vehicle's capability of using up to E10. E15 contains 15% ethanol and 85% gasoline. This is generally the highest ratio of ethanol to gasoline that is possible to use in vehicles recommended by some auto manufacturers to run on E10 in the US. This is due to ethanol's hydro philia and solvent power. As a result of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, which mandates an increase in renewable fuels for the transport sector, the U.S. Department of Energy began assessments for the feasibility of using intermediate ethanol blends in the existing vehicle fleet as a way to allow higher consumption of ethanol fuel. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) conducted tests to evaluate the potential impacts of intermediate ethanol blends on legacy vehicles and other engines. In a preliminary report released in October 2008, the NREL presented the results of the first evaluations of the effects of E10, E15 and E20 gasoline blends on tailpipe and evaporative emissions, catalyst and engine durability, vehicle drive ability, engine operability, and vehicle and engine materials. This preliminary report found none of the vehicles displayed a malfunction indicator light as a result of the ethanol blend used; no fuel filter plugging symptoms were observed; no cold start 11 problems were observed at 24 °C (75 °F) and 10 °C (50 °F) laboratory conditions; and as expected, computer technology available in newer model vehicles adapts to the higher octane causing lower emissions with greater horsepower and in some cases greater fuel economy seen in aircraft. 2.5.3 hE15 A 15% hydrous ethanol and 85% gasoline blend, hE15, has been introduced at public gas stations in the Netherlands since 2008. Ethanol fuel specifications worldwide traditionally dictate use of anhydrous ethanol (less than 1% water) for gasoline blending. This results in additional costs, energy usage and environmental impacts associated with the extra processing step required to dehydrate the hydrous ethanol produced via distillation (3.5-4.9 vol. % water) to meet the current anhydrous ethanol specifications. A patented discovery reveals hydrous ethanol can be effectively used in most ethanol/gasoline blending applications. According to the Brazilian ANP specification, hydrous ethanol contains up to 4.9 vol. % water. In hE15, this would be up to 0.74 vol. % water in the overall mixture. Japanese and German scientific evidence revealed the water is an inhibitor for corrosion by ethanol. 2.5.4 E20, E25 E20 contains 20% ethanol and 80% gasoline, while E25 contains 25% ethanol. These blends have been widely used in Brazil since the late 1970s. As a response to the 1973 oil crisis, the Brazilian government made mandatory the blend of ethanol fuel with gasoline, fluctuating between 10% to 22% from 1976 until 1992. Due to this mandatory minimum gasoline blend, pure gasoline (E0) is no longer sold in Brazil. A federal law was passed in October 1993 establishing a mandatory blend of 22% anhydrous ethanol (E22) in the entire country. This law also authorized the Executive to set different percentages of ethanol within pre-established boundaries, and since 2003, these limits were fixed at a maximum of 25% (E25) and a minimum of 20% (E20) by volume. Since then, the government has set the percentage on the 12 ethanol blend according to the results of the sugarcane harvest and ethanol production from sugarcane, resulting in blend variations even within the same year. Since July 1, 2007, the mandatory blend was set at 25% of anhydrous ethanol (E25) by executive decree, and this has been the standard gasoline blend sold throughout Brazil most of the time as of 2011. However, as a result of a supply shortage and the resulting high ethanol fuel prices, in 2010, the government mandated a temporary 90-day blend reduction from E25 to E20 beginning February 1, 2010. As prices rose abruptly again due to supply shortages that took place again between the 2010 and 2011 harvest seasons, some ethanol had to be imported from the United States, and in April 2011, the government reduced the minimum mandatory blend to 18%, leaving the mandatory blend range between E18 and E25. 2.5.5 E70, E75 When the vapor pressure in the ethanol blend drops below 45 kPa, fuel ignition cannot be guaranteed on cold winter days, limiting the maximum ethanol blend percentage during the winter months to E75. E70 contains 70% ethanol and 30% gasoline, while E75 contains 75% ethanol. These winter blends are used in the United States and Sweden for E85 flexible-fuel vehicles during the cold weather, but still sold at the pump labeled as E85. The seasonal reduction of the ethanol content to an E85 winter blend is mandated to avoid cold starting problems at low temperatures. In the US, this seasonal reduction of the ethanol content to E70 applies only in cold regions, where temperatures fall below 32 °F (0 °C) during the winter. In Wyoming for example, E70 is sold as E85 from October to May. In Sweden, all E85 flexiblefuel vehicles use an E75 winter blend. This blend was introduced since the winter 2006-07 and E75 is used from November until March. For temperatures below −15 °C (5 °F), all E85 flex vehicles require an engine block heater to avoid cold starting problems. The use of this device is also recommended for gasoline vehicles when temperatures drop below −23 °C (−9 °F). Another option when extreme cold weather is expected is to add more pure gasoline in the tank, thus 13 reducing the ethanol content below the E70 winter blend, or simply not to use E85 during extreme low temperature spells. 2.5.6 E85 E85, a mixture of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline, is generally the highest ethanol fuel mixture found in the United States and several European countries, particularly in Sweden, as this blend is the standard fuel for flexible-fuel vehicles. This mixture has an octane rating of 94-97, which is significantly lower than pure ethanol, but still higher than normal gasoline (87-93 octane, depending on country). The 85% limit in the ethanol content was set to reduce ethanol emissions at low temperatures and to avoid cold starting problems during cold weather, at temperatures lower than 11 °C (52 °F). A further reduction in the ethanol content is used during the winter in regions where temperatures fall below 0 °C (32 °F) and this blend is called Winter E85, as the fuel is still sold under the E85 label. A winter blend of E70 is mandated in some regions in the US, while Sweden mandates E75. Some regions in the United States now allow E51 (51% ethanol, 49% gasoline) to be sold as E85 in the winter months. As of October 2010, nearly 3,000 E85 fuel pumps were in Europe, led by Sweden with 1,699 filling stations. The United States had 3,354 public E85 fuel pumps located in 2,154 cities by August 2014, mostly concentrated in the Midwest. Thailand introduced E85 fuel by the end of 2008, and by mid-2010, only four E85 filling stations were available, with plans to expand to 15 stations by 2012. 2.5.7 ED95 ED95 designates a blend of 95% ethanol and 5% ignition improver; it is used in modified diesel engines where high compression is used to ignite the fuel, as opposed to the operation of gasoline engines, where spark plugs are used. This fuel was developed by Swedish ethanol producer SEKAB. Because of the high ignition temperatures of pure ethanol, the addition of ignition improver is necessary for successful diesel engine operation. A diesel engine running on ethanol also has a higher compression ratio and an adapted fuel system. 14 This fuel has been used with success in many Swedish Scania buses since 1985, which has produced around 700 ethanol buses, more than 600 of them to Swedish cities, and more recently has also delivered ethanol buses for commercial service in Great Britain, Spain, Italy, Belgium, and Norway. As of June 2010 Stockholm has the largest ethanol ED95 bus fleet in the world. As of 2010, the Swedish ED95 engine is in its third generation and already has complied with Euro 5 emission standards, without any kind of post-treatment of the exhaust gases. The ethanol-powered engine is also being certified as environmentally enhanced vehicle (EEV) in the Stockholm municipality. Standard. 2.5.8 E100 E100 is pure fuel, straight hydrous ethanol as an automotive fuel has been widely used in Brazil since the late 1970s for neat ethanol vehicles and more recently for flexible-fuel vehicles. The ethanol fuel used in Brazil is distilled close to the azeotrope mixture of 95.63% ethanol and 4.37% water (by weight) which is approximately 3.5% water by volume. The azeotrope is the highest concentration of ethanol that can be achieved by simple fractional distillation. The maximum water concentration according to the ANP specification is 4.9 vol. % (approximately 6.1 weight %). The E nomenclature is not adopted in Brazil, but hydrated ethanol can be tagged as E100, meaning it does not have any gasoline, because the water content is not an additive, but rather a residue from the distillation process. However, straight hydrous ethanol is also called E95 by some authors. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_ethanol_fuel_mixtures) 15 2.6 Summary of Related Works Mostafa et al., (2017) this study led to some conclusions, which could be deduced as follow: 1 burning ethanol-gasoline blend in SI engine improves the engine-generator set performance characteristics.2. Ethanol - gasoline blend with percentage volume of ethanol up to 15% can be used in SI engine without any modifications.3. The presence of oxygen and high octane number were significant features of using ethanol-gasoline blends.4. The fuel consumption and specific fuel consumption showed a marginal decreasing with the use of ethanol–gasoline blends.5. Ethanol addition to gasoline resulted in an increase in overall efficiency of the engine generator set and exhaust gas temperature. For E15 blend, the overall efficiency and exhaust gas temperature at maximum load were increased by 14.88% and 3.85% respectively as compared to base gasoline. Pikūnas et al., (2003) the engine performance and pollutant emission of a SI engine have been investigated by using ethanol–gasoline blended fuel E10 and pure gasoline. Experimental results indicated that when ethanol–gasoline blend is used, the engine power and fuel consumption of the engine slightly increase; CO emission decreases dramatically as a result of the leaning effect caused by the ethanol addition; HC emission decreases only in some engine working conditions; and CO2 emission increases because of the improved combustion. In this study, we found that using ethanol–gasoline blend, CO emission may be reduced by 10–30%, while CO2 emission increases by 5–10% depending on engine conditions. The engine power and specific fuel consumption increase approximately by 5% and 2–3%, respectively, in all working conditions. Gaurav Sharma* and Harvinder Lal. (2015) Ethanol’s physical and chemical properties show that it can be used as an alternative fuel or additive in SI engine. Ethanol-gasoline blends show very effective results. In this study, four different blends E5, E10, E15 and E20 were run on SI engine for analyzing performances and emissions. It was found that E5 and E10 blend was most effective blend they 16 improved performance and reduced emissions. It was concluded that E5 and E10 blend improved brake thermal efficiency, brake torque reduced brake specific fuel consumption as compared to gasoline. Further both blends also reduced emissions like CO2, CO, HC and NOx as compared to gasoline. Joshi et al. (2015) among the various blends tested, E20 blend was found to have least exhaust and greenhouse gases emissions, also not compromising on engine or vehicle performance. E20 offers the following property:  Mechanical efficiency: 92.77%  Thermal efficiency: 34%  Mass of fuel consumed: 0.035 Kg  Heat supplied by the fuel: 1415.05 KJ/min  CO%: 4.22%  HC%: 78 ppm  Materials compatibility: There is no discernible corrosion in fuel-wetted metal parts such as fuel tanks, lines, pressure regulators, etc.  Engine wear: There is no additional or unusual wear to that normally expected and there is no additional increase in wear metals or decrease in total base number (TBN) of the lubricating oil.  Water tolerance: Quality of ethanol produced and stored should be extremely pure and the water content should be less than 1.25%. An ethanol compatible water detecting paste must be used to establish the water content of underground storage tanks (standard paste is not suitable) and the water content must be kept to a minimum and, older vehicles are more prone to suffer from phase separation when first fueled with ethanol–petrol blend; however, subsequent continuous use of ethanol–petrol blend prevents water accumulation within the fuel tank. Kheiralla et al., (2014) the following conclusions could be drawn from this study: Ethanol-gasoline blends can be used as an alternative fuel for variable speed spark 17 ignition up to 35% blends without engine modification. − Fuel properties of the tested ethanol-gasoline blends such as density and viscosity increased continuously and linearly with increasing percentage of ethanol while API gravity and heat value decreased with decreasing percentage of ethanol increase. Furthermore, cloud point, flash and fire points were found to be higher than pure gasoline fuel, while distillation curves proved to be lower. − The tested blends Octane rating based Research Octane Number (RON) increased continuously and linearly with the increasing percentage of ethanol. Based on the results obtained during this study work it can be suggested that: Comprehensive and extensive testing on fuel properties, engine performance, combustion, and emissions characteristics of ethanol-gasoline blends on SI engines should be conducted for long time. Research collaboration should be undertaken with sugarcane industry, and GIAD Automotive Group regarding using ethanol as bio-fuel for SI engines. Thakur et al., (2017) this study reveals a clear view of the progress made to improve the performance parameters of spark ignition engines using blends of gasolineethanol, gasoline with all other alcohol derivatives, and subsequent alternative fuels. Some key findings of this study are as follows:  Ethanol blends in lower proportions showed improvement in engine torque and brake power as observed during study. Using E5, E10, E20 an increment of 2.31, 2.77 and 4.16% in engine brake power and 0.29, 0.59 and 4.77% in torque was noted.  Brake specific fuel consumption increased for higher volume of ethanol content as observed. Brake specific fuel consumption increased by 5.17, 10, 20, 37, and 56% using E20, E25, E30, E75, and E100 respectively.  Varying the compression ratio and operating the engine at various speed also affected the performance parameters of the spark ignition engine. Using E50 and E85 as fuel at compression ratio 10:1 and 11:1; increment of 20.3 and 45.6% and 16.15 and 36.4%, respectively, was observed for brake specific fuel consumption. 18  Brake thermal efficiency was slightly on the high side when an ethanolgasoline blend was used. Maximum brake thermal efficiency of 3.5% for E20, 2.5% for E10, and 6% for E40 was concluded. Raja et al., operation of (2015) Gasoline-ethanol motorcycle engine, blends without were experimented modifying compression at part-throttle ratio, intake system, fuel system and ignition timing, without and with catalytic converter. The following conclusions are derived from the results. Blends up to E15 showed smooth and satisfactory engine operation and E20 blend resulted in choking and stalling at higher engine speeds. Brake specific fuel consumption was higher for blends due to lower heating value of the blends compared to neat gasoline and correspondingly there was reduction in brake thermal efficiency. Among the blends, E5 and E10 were closer to neat gasoline. Volumetric efficiency and excess air factor increased with ethanol percentage in the blend due to higher heat of vaporization and oxygen in ethanol. Exhaust temperature decreased with blends. This is because of lower engine temperature and higher excess air in the air-fuel mixture. CO, HC and NOx emissions decreased with ethanol blends due to leaner air fuel mixtures. Catalytic converter showed reduction in all three emissions. The reduction percentage increased with ethanol percentage in the blend. A small increase in NOx emissions was noticed with catalytic converter. performance characteristics and As E5 and E10 blends show equivalent superior emission behavior compared to neat gasoline in part-throttle conditions, they can be used as substitute fuels for neat gasoline in motorcycle engine with no modifications. HuuTruyen et al., (2012) the performance and pollutant emission of the in-use carbureted and fuel injected cars fueled by ethanol/gasoline blends were studied. The results indicated that effects of the ethanol/gasoline fuels on cars were not the same if the cars equipped with different fuel systems. For the carbureted car, using E10, E15 and E20 could increase power, reduce fuel consumption, and decrease significantly HC and CO emissions, whereas increase NOx emissions. For the fuel 19 injected car, these blends nearly did not affect power and fuel consumption. HC and CO emissions were reduced for E10 but increased for E15 and E20, while NOx was higher for E10 and E15 but lower for E20 as compared to base gasoline RON92. In this study, it found that utilization of E10 possibly gave benefit for both of the cars. Ozsezen et al.,(2012) In this study, it was seen that the wheel power with the use of alcohol- gasoline blends slightly increased compared to pure gasoline. When the vehicle was fueled with alcohol-gasoline blends, more fuel was consumed to achieve the same wheel power with pure gasoline, and it caused an increase in the fuel consumption. Generally, the alcohol-gasoline blends at all vehicle speeds provided slightly higher combustion efficiency relative to pure gasoline. The best combustion efficiency was obtained with the use of M5 at 40 km h1 and 80 km h1 vehicle speeds, with the use of E10 at 60 km h1 and 100 km h1 vehicle speeds. The combustion efficiency and the equivalence ratio increased with increasing vehicle speed. The best combustion efficiency for all test fuels was obtained at stoichiometric region (100 km h1 test speed).For all test fuels, a decreasing in HC emission and an increasing in CO emission took place with the increasing vehicle speed. Generally, a slightly increasing in CO emissions and a decreasing in HC emissions occurred when using alcohol-gasoline blends. The decreases in unburned HC emission levels with use of the alcohol-gasoline blends led to increase in the combustion efficiency. A table trend in CO2 emissions was not observed, but an increase and a decrease in NOx emissions was measured at the vehicle speed of 40 km h1 and 100 km h1, respectively, with the use of alcohol-gasoline blends. Tangka et al., (2011) Bio-ethanol production from the chosen crops was feasible. Bio-ethanol production is highest after three days of fermentation using natural methods. The highest bio-ethanol production came from maize although the values got were lower than those obtained in the United States. Addition of ethanol to gasoline reduces the energy density of the volume. Engine speed increases and engine torque decreases. However overall break power increases. There is loss of 20 fuel economy and consequently mileage with blended rations of bio-ethanol gasoline because the alcohol has a lower energy value than gasoline. Blended fuel is not yet a good option for less developed countries that are not manufacturing resistant parts. Anti-fuel properties of bio-ethanol blended fuels calls for serious engine modifications to avoid knock and unwanted emissions. These modifications include the advancing of engine timing, provision of airtight conduit lines, increasing the compression ratio and roughening of the piston head. Yusuf et al., (2014) adding ethanol to gasoline will lead to a leaner better combustion. It was experimentally demonstrated that adding 5-15% ethanol to the blends led to an increase in the engine brake power, torque and brake thermal efficiency, volumetric efficiency and decreases the brake specific fuel consumption. The lean combustion improves the completeness of combustion and therefore the CO emission is expected to be decreased. The oxygen enrichment generated from ethanol increased the oxygen ratio in the charge and lead to lean combustion. The CO2 emission increased because of the improvement of the combustion and the chemical properties of Ethanol. Unburned HC is a product of incomplete combustion which is related to A/F ratio. It can be concluded that that adding ethanol to the blends will reduces the HC emission because of oxygen enhancement. When the combustion process is closer to stoichiometric, flame temperature increases, therefore, NOx formation is expected to be increased. The results obtained with presented theoretical model are in acceptable agreement with those experimental ones. An agreement of 11% was determined between experimental and theoretical results. Kumar et al. (2016) in this study, the effect of unleaded gasoline and unleaded gasoline blended with 5%, 10 % and 15% of ethanol on the performance of a sparkignition engine were experimentally investigated. Performance tests were conducted for fuel consumption, engine torque, brake power, brake thermal efficiency and brake specific fuel consumption, using 21 unleaded gasoline-ethanol blends with different percentage of fuel at wide open throttle opening position and variable engine speed ranging from 900 to 3000 rpm. The results showed that blending unleaded gasoline with ethanol increase the brake power, torque, brake thermal efficiency and fuel consumption, while it decreases the brake specific fuel consumption. The 15 vol% ethanol in the fuel blend gave the best results for all measured parameters at all engine speed. Nallamothu1 et al., (2013) In this research work, procedures of measuring fuels have been used to blend the ethanol produced from sugar cane with gasoline and base fuels used for the experiment. Properties of ethanol-gasoline blended and base fuel were first examined by the standard ASTM test methods D86, D130, ES626:2008 (ANNEXB), ES640:2001 (ANNEXA), D323, D1298 and fuel was blended in different volume rates E0, E5and E10. Moreover, the experimental comparative performance evaluation are tested and evaluated at 8:1 compression ratios. The performance and exhaust emission were carried out on gasoline engines by using TD43F variable compression engine test rig and Exhaust gas analyzer 5000 and the following test results were summarized. Best performance with maximum reduction is 2.9% Pb is obtained for all samples for the compression ratio of 8:1 at speed of2000 rpm. Blending increases ηb for compression ratio of 8:1. Compression ratio of 8:1 is recommended to use E10. Shayan et al.,(2011) In this study, it was seen that when engine was fueled with methanol–gasoline blend, brake power, brake engine thermal performance efficiency, parameters volumetric such as efficiency brake increases torque, with increasing methanol amount in the blended fuel while bsfc and equivalence air-fuel ratio decreased. Since the latent heat of evaporation of ethanol is higher than that of gasoline, during compression process, the fuels containing methanol will absorb more heat from combustion chamber and eventually, the pressure of the combustion chamber will be decreased accordingly. Relying on above statements, during the 22 compression process, the pressure of such combustion chamber will be decreased compared with when pure gasoline is used in combustion. On the other hand, due to presence of oxygen entered the combustion chamber during expansion process and after combustion of fuel and upon improvement of combustion, the pressure of the expansion process will be increased as well. Hence, the work of compression process, which is a negative work, will be decreased and that of the expansion process that is a positive work, will be increased for that reason. Consequently, upon increase of enclosed area in the pressure-volume curve, the work done by the engine will be increased in case of use of the fuel containing methanol and finally, the indicated mean effective pressure will be increased as well. Therefore, brake power will be increased. Using methanol– gasoline blends lead to a significant reduction in exhaust emissions by about 24.9% and 23.7% of the mean average values of HC and CO emissions, respectively, for all engine speeds. On the other hand CO2 and NOx emissions increases by about 7.5% and17.5% respectively. Zhang et al., (2013) in this paper, CAI combustion has been demonstrated on a poppet valve DI gasoline engine operating in the 2-stroke cycle. Gasoline and its mixture with ethanol, E15 and E85, were used and their ranges of CAI operations were determined as a function of the engine speed and load. Their combustion and heat release characteristics, emissions, and their combustion and thermodynamic efficiencies were determined and analyzed. The results show that:  2-stroke CAI combustion operation can be achieved over a wide range of engine speed and load conditions, including idle operation that could not be achieved with 4- stroke operations.  The presence extended to of higher ethanol load allowed conditions. CAI In the combustion case of to be E85 the maximum IMEP of 8.4 bar was obtained at 800 rpm, significantly higher than the 4stroke equivalent. Further improvement in the high load range at higher engine speeds can be achieved with a faster camless system or mechanical cam shafts. 23  CO, HC and NOx emissions are significantly reduced by injecting ethanol blended fuels. E85 has greater effect on the emission reduction than E15.  . Both combustion efficiency and thermodynamic efficiency are improved by the presence of ethanol because of the optimum combustion phasing and ower heat loss.E85 improved indicate fuel conversion efficiency by over 5% at 2000 rpm.  The fuel above ratio improvement results to were stoichiometric in the fuel obtained in the injector by keeping engine and the exhaust. In combustion relative air addition, chamber to future design are expected to further reduce the HC and CO emissions and improve the thermal efficiency and indicated fuel conversion efficiency, making the 2-stroke poppet valve engine a viable low emission and high efficiency IC engine for automotive applications. Wang et al., (2015) the focus of this study was to evaluate the effects of hydrous ethanol gasoline on the combustion and emission characteristics on a port injection gasoline engine. Based on the experimental results, the conclusions are as follows:  Compared with E0, E10W showed higher peak in-cylinder pressure at high load. Increases in peak heat rise rates were observed for E10W fuel at all the operating conditions. Besides, the usage of E10W increased NOX emissions at a wide load range. However, at low load conditions, E10W reduced HC, missions, while CO2 emissions were not significantly affected at higher operating points.  Compared with E10, E10W showed higher peak in-cylinder pressures and peak heat release rates at the tested operating conditions. In addition, decreases in NOX emissions were observed for E10W from 5 Nm to 100 Nm, while HC, CO and CO2 emissions were slightly higher at low and medium load conditions.  The practical consequence of burning E10W fuel showed a better combustion process, especially at higher loads. In addition, E10W fuel had lower NOX emissions than E10 at all operating conditions and lower HC, CO and CO2 emissions significantly and simultaneously than E0 at low load conditions. From the above, it can be concluded that E10W fuel can be regarded as a potential alternative fuel for gasoline engine applications. 24 CHAPTER THREE 3 MATERIALS AND METHODS In this chapter the required data was collected, the theoretical thermodynamic analysis of real engine cycle was done, depending on the thermodynamic analysis and mathematical model computer c++ program was written and the written computer program is compiled and run. To validate the written computer c++ program experimental analysis conducted on the selected real engine. 3.1 Experimental Site The experimental analysis was conducted at Dilla University. Dilla is a market town and separate woreda in southern Ethiopia. The administrative center of the Gedeo Zone in the Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples Region (SNNPR), it is located on the main road from Addis Ababa to Nairobi. The town has a longitude and latitude of 6°24′30″N 38°18′30″ECoordinates: 6°24′30″N 38°18′30″E, with an elevation of 1570 meters above sea level. It was part of Wenagoworeda and is currently surrounded by DilaZuriaworeda. 3.2 Collection of Required Data To validate the output of c++ computer program written in this work one engines was selected and its specification is summarized as follow.in addition to engine specifications the both fuel means gasoline and ethanol physical and chemical characteristics was collected and summarized in chapter 2(two) of this paper. Not only each characteristic’s the blend’s characteristics also summarized in chapter 2(two) of this paper. 25 3.2.1 Engine specifications Table 3.1Selected engine specifications Engine Specification Engine type: - Dimensions: - Air-cooled 1 cylinder, 4-stroke petrol engine L x W x H: 500 x 345 x 410 mm Weight: approx. 34 kg Compression: - 8.5:1 Bore: - 89 mm Stroke: - 63 mm Connecting rod length: - 110mm Crank throw: - 31.5 mm Max. Power: - 8.2 kW Max. Speed: - 3600 rpm Max. Torque: - 24.6 Nm at 2200 rpm Oil capacity: - 1.4 liters Ignition: - Magneto ignition Sound level(distanc)- 96dB(A) Intake valve open bTDC 15o Intake valve close aBDC 50o Start of combustion bTDC 15o Duration of combustion 55o exhaust valve open bBDC 50o exhaust valve close aTDC 15o 26 Figure 3.1 engine used for experimental analysis 3.2.2 Technical Information of exhaust gas analyzer Figure 3.2 Infralyt Smart Exhaust Gas Analyzer 3.2.2.1 Measuring Principle The measuring principle of CO, CO2 and HC is based up on the interference correlation filter principle. Infrared light is radiated through the measuring chamber and is detected by sensor 27 that operates an interference correlation filter. The Sensor signals are processed by microcontroller directly. Oxygen and optional nitrogen monoxide is measured using chemical sensors. 3.2.2.2 Technical Data Table 3.2 Environmental requirements for exhaust gas analyzer Environment parameters Ambient temperature Ambient air pressure Max. temperature/humidity ratio requirements 5...45°C 860...1060 hPa 35/95 Table 3.3 technical data of exhaust gas analyzer Gas concentration resolution 4 Digits Device Status Errors will be displayed Warming up time 30 s Automatic zero point check Every 60 min, 3,2°C temperature change or negative measuring values Zero Gas Fresh air, free of HC, CO and CO2. Response time IR-Components:T95<15sO2: T95 <60 s @ Flow rate >90 dm3/h Position of use horizontal, required because of the operation of the condensate separator; Slope <8 deg Dimensions Width 258mm,Depth 330mm,Heigh 203 mm (including foots + printer) Mass ca. 6,5 kg Degree of protection IP 20 28 Table 3.4 Functional requirements of exhaust gas analyzer Measuring components und ranges CO 0-10.00%vol, CO2 0-20.00% vol, HC 0-2500ppmvol(C6H14),O2 0-22.00%vol NO 0-5000 ppm vol (available as an option) NOx 0-5000 ppm vol (available as an option) Measuring components absolute tolerances CO ± 0.03 % vol, CO2 ± 0,5 % vol HC ± 10 ppmvol(C6H14),O2 ± 0.1 % vol NO ± 2 ppm vol (available as an option) NOx ±25 ppm vol (available as an option) Measuring components relative tolerances ±5% 3.3 Mathematical Model for Actual Engine Cycle For one cylinder: ( Willard W. Pulkrabek) and (AKolchin and R Demidw) Displacement volume (VD): VD=EC/ZC.................................................................................................................................3-1 Where, EC= engine capacity Zc=number of cylinder VD= 392cm3 Clearance volume (VC) RC= V1/V2 = (VD+ VC) / VC ………………………………………………...……………..3-2 V1=volume of cylinder above BDC V2=volume of cylinder above TDC 8.5 = (392cm3 + VC) / VC VC = 52.26cm3 VT = VD+VC = 392 + 52.26 = 444.26cm3 29 State1 The intake stroke of the Otto cycle starts with the piston at TDC and is a constant pressure process at an inlet pressure of one atmosphere. The temperature of the air during the inlet stroke is increased as the air passes through the hot intake manifold. The temperature at point TDC will generally be on the order of 25°to 35°Chotter than the surrounding air temperature. (22) T1 = 50oc = 323k P1 = 100kpa = 1atm = 1bar V1 = VD+ VC = 392 + 52.26 = 444.26cm3 Mass of gas mixture in cylinder can be calculated at state 1.the mass with in the cylinder will then remain the same for the entire cycle. In air-standard cycles, air is considered an ideal gas such that the following ideal gas relationships can be used: PV =Z mRT ………………………………………………………………………………. 3-3 Where Z= 0.99 for intake and 0.98 for exhaust. P1V1 = ZmmmRT1 mm = P1V1/ RT1 = (100kpa)* (0.000444 m3)/Zm (0.287KJ/Kg-k) *(323k) = 0.000478Kg/0.99 = 0.000483kg Where, P1 is atmospheric pressure R is universal gas constant T1 is ambient temperature mm is fresh mass charged to cylinder V1 is total volume There is residual mass in cylinder (Mres) which is from 2% to 8% of mm. Let take 5% residual mass which is the average. Mres= 5/100* mm = 0.05*0.000483Kg = 0.000024kg 30 State 2 The compression stroke is isentropic. The following ideal gas relationships can be used to find pressure and temperature. The compression stroke in the real engine is different from ideal one. This means the intake valve is not close at BDC rather after the BDC.so compression can be classified to two. 1. Polytropic compression This is the stage from BDC to the point intake valve close after BDC. 2. Polytropic effective compression This is the stage from intake valve close after BDC to the point at start of combustion. P2 = p1 (Rc) k …………………………………………………………………...…………. 3-4 = 100kpa (8.5)1.35 = 1797.69kpa T2= T1 (Rc) k-1 …………………………………………………………………………...…..3-5 = 323k (8.5)1.35-1 = 683.12k Mm1= mm+ Mres …………………………………………….………………………………. 3-6 = 0.000483kg +0.000024kg = 0.00051kg Where, k is compression index and Rc is compression ratio. The type of fuel used in this work is blend of alcohol-gasoline (E15). Table 3.5 mass and molar fraction blend proportion Fuel Mass, Molecular Moles Mole fraction m(kg) weight, M N = m/M C2H5OH 0.15 46 0.00326 0.299 C8H15 0.85 111 0.00765 0.701 summation 1 157 0.01091 1 Mole fraction = Ni/sumNi 0.299C2H5OH + 0.701C8H15 + 9.13(O2 + 3.76N2) = 6.206CO2 + 6.156H2O + 33.49N2 AFR = ma/mf = [9.13(32 + 3.76*28)]/[0.3*46 + 0.7*111] =13.69 31 The mass of gas mixture mm in the cylinder made up of air ma, fuel mf (mass of ethanol + mass of gasoline). Mass of air ma = (AFR/ (AFR+1))* (1-XR)* (Mm1) ……………………………………3-7 Where, XR is percentage of residual = (13.69/14.69)*(1-0.05)*(0.00051kg) = 0.00045kg Mass of fuel mf = (1/ (AFR+1))* (1-XR)* (Mm1 )……………………………...………3-8 = (1/14.69) *0.95*(0.00051kg) = 0.000033kg State 3 Heat addition from hydrocarbon fuel. Qin = mf QLHVղc ……………………………………………………………………………..3-9 Where, mf = 0.000033kg ղc= 90% QLHV blend fuel= 0.15 (QLHV alcohol) + 0.85(QLHV gasoline)…………………………….………..3-10 = 0.15(27MJ/kg) + 0.85(44MJ/kg) = (4.05+37.4)MJ/kg = 41.45MJ/kg Where, QLHV blend fuel is lower heating value of blend fuel QLHV alcohol is lower heating value of alcohol QLHV gasoline is lower heating value of gasoline ղc is combustion efficiency Qin = mf QLHV*ղc = (0.000033kg) (41.45MJ/kg) (0.9) = 0.0015MJ = 1.5KJ Heat release rate Q1=Qin*xb…………………………………………………………….......………………. 3-11 the heat addition for spark ignition engines may be a prescribed function of crank angle. 32 Where, 𝑥𝑏 = 0.5(1 − 𝑐𝑜𝑠 ( ө− ө𝑠𝑐𝑏𝑇𝐷𝐶 ө𝑑𝑐 ∗ 𝜋))…………………………………………………...…..3-12 xb = is the fraction of the heat release, theta refers to crank angle ө𝑠𝑐𝑏𝑇𝐷𝐶 = is theta (degree) start of combustion before top dead center ө𝑑𝑐 = is theta duration of combustion The above equation is applied only during the time of heat release; Q1=Qin*xb………………………………………...…………………….………..3-13 ө− ө𝑠𝑐𝑏𝑇𝐷𝐶 = ( mf QLHV*ղc* 𝑥𝑏 = 0.5(1 − 𝑐𝑜𝑠 ( = (1.5KJ)*(0.99) ө𝑑𝑐 ∗ 𝜋)) = 1.504KJ W1 = PV …………………………………………………………………………3-14 Where, P= P2 that means pressure at the end of compression V= VD is the swept volume W1 = work done W1 = PV = (1797.69kpa)*( 0.000444m3) = 0.798KJ FROM: Q - W = ∆U………………………………………………………………………………... 3-15 Where, Q is heat added W is work done ∆U is change of internal energy Q1-W1 = Mm1*CV* (T3-T2) ……………………………………..……………………. 3-16 Where, CV = 0.821KJ/Kg-k Q1-0.798KJ = (0.00076kg)*(0.821KJ/Kg-k)*(T3-T2) T3 = [(1.504J -0.798KJ)/ (0.00051kg)*(0.821KJ/Kg-k)] +T2 = 1474.5+668.78k = 2369(this is maximum temperature) P3 = P2 (T3/T2)………………………………………………………………………………3-17 33 = 1797.69kpa (2369/683.12) = 6234.89kpa = Pmax (maximum pressure) State 4 Power stroke. The following ideal gas relationships can be used to find pressure and temperature. P4 = p3 (1/Rc) k ……………………………………………………………...………………3-18 = 6234.89kpa (1/8.5)1.35 = 346.82Kpa T4 = T3 (1/Rc) k-1 ………………………………………………...…….……………………3-19 = 2369 (1/8.5)1.35-1 = 1120.13k Work produced in isentropic power stroke for one cylinder during one cycle: WPower = [ Mm1R (T4-T3)]/1-k………………………………..……………………………3-20 = [(0.00051Kg) (0.287KJ/Kg-k) (1120.13k – 2369K)]/-0.35 = 0.52KJ Where, WPower is work of power stroke Work absorbed during isentropic compression stroke for one cylinder during one cycle. WCompression = [ Mm1R (T2-T1)]/1-k…………………………………………..……………3-21 = [(0.00051Kg) (0.287KJ/Kg-k) (683.12k - 323K)]/-0.35 = -0.15KJ Where, WCompression is work of compression stroke Work of the intake stroke is canceled by work of the exhaust stroke. Net indicated work for one cylinder during one cycle is: Wnet= Wpower + Wcompression = 0.52KJ – 0.15KJ = 0.37KJ Where,Wnet work net From this indicated thermal efficiency can be calculated as follow: Ղt = Wnet/ Qin = 0.37KJ/1.504J = 0.246 34 = 24.6% Where, Ղt is thermal efficiency Indicated mean effective pressure (Imep) can be calculated from the following: Imep = Wnet /V1- V2…………………………………………………………...……………3-22 = 0.37KJ/ (0.000392m3) = 943.87kpa From this: Pi = Wnet N/n ………………………………………………………………………………..3-23 = [0.37KJ/cylinder-cycle (3000/60 rev/sec)/ (2rev/cycle)] 1cylinder = 9.25kw Where, Pi is indicate power N is engine speed (rpm) n is number of stroke Pb= ղm Pi……………………………………………………………………………………3-24 Where, mechanical efficiency (ղm) is 85% = 0.85 *9.25kw = 7.86kw Tb  η m  imep  Vs  z bmep  E c 60 Pb   4π 4π 2π N …………………………….……………3-25 = 60 x 7.86/2*3.14*3000 = 25N-m bsfc = mf / Pb………………………………………………………...……………………..3-26 = [0.000033kg/cylin-cycle) *(50rev/sec)*(0.5 cycle /rev)*1cyli]/ 7.86kw = 0.0001kg/sec/kw = 0.38kg/kWh Where, Pb is brake power Tb is brake torque bsfc is brake specific fuel consumption 35 3.4 Mathematical Model for Engine Performance The following ‘Empirical Relations’ are obtained from experimental data of ‘engine performance test’ using a ‘curve fitting method’.  for SI (Carburetion) Engines: Pb  Pb_max  x 3  x 2  x  where, x  N min  500  1000 rpm ΔN  Tb  Pb ω N max  N min IN .......... .. in ' Nm '  Pb E c  n cps  .......... . ' N ' in ' rpm ' ; ' Pb ' in ' kW ' N @Pb _max and N max  ( 1.05 to 1.15 )  N @Pb-max ;  I N  10 bscf  bscf @Pb_max x 2  1.2 x  1.2 bmep  N wher e, ω   in ' bar ' 2π  N 60 .......... .. where, n cps  in ' kg/kWh ' N Z rpc  60 Note: Using a computer Programming Language (C++,) in appendix 1 and Application Software’s (MS-Excel,), the expected ‘Engine Performance Curves’ can be plotted. 3.5 Mathematical Model For Incomplete Combustion Emission of Blend Fuel. The chemical reaction of blend fuel for not stoichiometric reaction is as follows.in this reaction there is additional oxygen and carbon monoxide. But since it is rich fuel type mixture there is no oxygen in product part. If there is dissociation reaction in the combustion chamber the product part element is not limited to five rather ten (10) products. To calculate the molar fraction of all combustion product the very complex numerical mathematical model is needed. For this reason this work is limited to only five combustion products. MFA (CnHmOHm) +MFG (CaHb) +atha (O2+3.76N2) =n1CO2+n2H20+n3N2+n4O2+n5CO Where, MFA is molar fraction of alcohol MFG is molar fraction of gasoline atha is molar fraction of air for stoichiometric air fuel ratio. 36 ath = λ*atha Where, ath is molar fraction of air for not stoichiometric reaction. λ is equivalence ratio of air fuel The equilibrium of reactants and product parts are done as follow. C: (n*MFA) + (a*MFG) = n1 + n5 H: (m*MFA) + (b*MFG) = 2n2 O: MFA + 2*ath = 2n1 + n2 + n5 N: 2*ath*3.76 = 2n3 n1 = (MFA + 2*ath) – (((m*MFA)-(b*MFG))/2) – (n*MFA) – (a*MFG) n2 = ((m*MFA) + (b*MFG))/2 n3 = (2*ath*3.76)/2 n4 = 0.because the mixture is rich type and O2 not expected. n5 = ((n*MFA) + (a*MFG)) – n1 nt = n1+n2+n3+n4+n5 y1 = n1/nt, y2 = n2/nt, y3 = n3/nt, y4= n4/nt, y5= n5/nt 37 3.6 Experimental Analysis for E0 and E15 To Plot a power curve and the torque curve at full load the following procedures are under taken. 1. Setting up Figure 3.3 Test stand for single cylinder air cooled engine 7.5 kW 1. Installing and connecting the engine  The engine and base plate are installed in the CT 110 Test Stand for Small Combustion Engines up to 7.5kW.  The engine is aligned with the braking device such that after inserting the center piece of the coupling, the inserts for the two halves of the coupling are aligned (see also the instructions for the CT 110)  ATTENTION! Imprecise alignment of the halves of the coupling can result in irreparable damage to the plastic inserts, particularly at high speeds!  After alignment the fixing bolts for the engine are tightened.  The safety cover for the coupling is fitted.  The fuel line to the engine is connected to the supply connection on the CT 110 test stand.  The other lines on the engine (ignition, vacuum hose and temperature sensor) should be connected to the connections on the test stand as shown below.  The air hose and the exhaust gas hose from the test stand are connected to the engine. 38 Figure 3.4 connection between CT110 test stand and CT 100.20 engine. 3.7 Performing the experiment  Once the engine has warmed up, operate it at full throttle.  Apply a load to the engine:  To do this, set the torque adjusting knob on the CT 110 to a maximum value of “10".  Set the speed adjusting knob so that the maximum speed in the engine’s speed range is reached.  Operate the “Starter/Brake” button.  Record the measured values (speed, torque and fuel consumption), i.e. read off the speed and torque on the displays. Calculate the fuel consumption using the scale on the measuring tube and a stopwatch.  To move to the next measuring point, reduce the speed with the adjusting know on the CT 110.  Record the measured values.  Repeat the procedure until a speed of around 2200 rpm is reached or the engine comes to a stop. 39 CHAPTER FOUR 4 RESULT AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Output of computer c++ program for E0 Table 4.1 “‘V’, 'p' and 'T' as a function of 'theta' "for E0 theta V p T theta V p T (deg.) (cc) (bar) (K) (deg.) (cc) (bar) (K) 20 68.43 0.9 313 360 52.27 31.67 1.22E+03 30 87.88 0.9 313 370 56.36 49.18 2.03E+03 40 113.77 0.9 313 380 68.43 55.67 2.80E+03 50 144.87 0.9 313 390 87.88 49.26 3.18E+03 60 179.78 0.9 313 400 113.77 37.48 3.13E+03 70 217 0.9 313 410 144.87 27.04 2.88E+03 80 255.05 0.9 313 420 179.78 20.21 2.67E+03 90 292.53 0.9 313 430 217 15.67 2.50E+03 100 328.24 0.9 313 440 255.05 12.6 2.36E+03 110 361.17 0.9 313 450 292.54 10.47 2.25E+03 120 390.54 0.9 313 460 328.24 8.96 2.16E+03 130 415.82 0.9 313 470 361.17 7.88 2.09E+03 140 436.67 0.9 313 480 390.54 7.09 2.03E+03 150 452.93 0.9 313 490 415.82 6.51 1.99E+03 160 464.53 0.9 313 500 436.67 6.1 1.95E+03 170 471.47 0.9 313 510 452.93 5.8 1.93E+03 180 473.79 0.9 313 520 464.53 5.61 1.91E+03 190 471.47 0.91 313.54 530 471.47 5.5 1.90E+03 200 464.53 0.92 315.17 540 473.79 5.46 1.90E+03 210 452.92 0.96 317.97 550 471.47 1.07 327.63 220 436.67 1 322.07 560 464.53 1.07 327.63 230 415.81 1.07 327.63 570 452.92 1.07 327.63 240 390.53 1.17 334.9 580 436.67 1.07 327.63 250 361.16 1.3 344.19 590 415.81 1.07 327.63 260 328.24 1.48 355.9 600 390.53 1.07 327.63 270 292.53 1.73 370.54 610 361.16 1.07 327.63 280 255.04 2.08 388.76 620 328.24 1.07 327.63 290 216.99 2.58 411.38 630 292.53 1.07 327.63 300 179.77 3.33 439.38 640 255.04 1.07 327.63 310 144.87 4.46 473.87 650 216.99 1.07 327.63 320 113.76 6.18 515.7 660 179.77 1.07 327.63 330 87.88 8.75 564.47 670 144.86 1.07 327.63 340 68.43 12.27 616.12 680 113.76 1.07 327.63 350 56.36 16.4 678.53 690 87.88 1.07 327.63 700 68.43 1.07 327.63 40 The table 4.1 is the result of computer c++ program developed which taken from appendix 1. This program can easily calculate volume, pressure, temperature, the input amount of mass charged to cylinder, the mole and molar fraction of emissions, the brake power, brake torque, brake specific fuel consumption, thermal efficiency, and brake mean effective pressure. Most of the result was summarized and analyzed as follow:  Engine Size Ec = 392 cc, Vs = 392 cc, Vcl = 52.27 cc, VT = 444.27 cc Where, Ec is engine capacity Vcl is clearance volume Vs is swept volume VT is total volume  The input amount in the combustion reaction atha =11.75, LAMBDA (λ) =0.8, ath =9.4,xAl=0, xG =1,yAl =0 ,yG =1 AF = 11.63; ETA_c = 75.54 %; yAl_per = 0 % mm = 0.00045 kg, ma = 0.000393 kg, mf = 3.383015e-05 kg, Mres = 2.247992e-05 kg  The output amount in the combustion reaction Wnet = 0.34 kJ; Qin = 1.21 kJ; ETA_ith = 27.65 %; imep = 8.55 bar Pb = 7.13 kW, Tb = 22.69 NM; bsfc = 0.46 kg/kWh Where, atha is mole of air for xG is mole of gasoline stoichiometric reaction yAl is molar fraction of alcohol mm is total mass charged to engine yG is molar fraction of gasoline ma is mass of air yAl_per is percentage of alcohol mf is mass of fuel Wnet is work net Mres is mass residual Qin is heat added to combustion AF is air fuel ratio ETA_ith is thermal efficiency ETA_c is combustion efficiency Imep λ is equivalence air fuel ratio pressure ath is mole of air for not indicated mean effective Pb is brake power stoichiometric reaction Tb is brake torque xAl is mole of alcohol bsfc is brake specific fuel consumption 41 4.1.1 Temperature The maximum temperature is created at 390o of crank angle which can be adjusted initially on the engine. This temperature can be affected by ambient temperature of environment.so it depends initially on the environmental temperature. The angle at which combustion started before TDC and the duration of combustion determine the crank angle at which maximum temperature occurred. This temperature (Tmax) can affect the work net from the engine which has direct relation with brake power and other engine performance parameter. The computer c++ program written for actual engine cycle virtually consider all factors like in real engine. For this specific engine and environment the maximum temperature created in engine was 3180k . 3500 Temperature(k) 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 20 60 100 140 180 220 260 300 340 380 420 460 500 540 580 620 660 700 0 Crank angle(degree) Figure 4.1 Temperature vs crank angle for E0 (pure gasoline) 4.1.2 Pressure Temperature developed in engine and pressure created in engine are interdependent. The maximum pressure is created at 380o of crank angle which can be adjusted on the engine and not constant for all engine. The angle at which combustion started before TDC and the duration of combustion determine the crank angle at which maximum pressure occurred. Like that of temperature the maximum pressure also depends on the environmental pressure. For this specific engine and environment the maximum pressure created in engine was 55.67 bar. 42 60 Pressure(bar) 50 40 30 20 10 20 60 100 140 180 220 260 300 340 380 420 460 500 540 580 620 660 700 0 Crank angle(degree)) Figure 4.2 Pressure vs crank angle for E0 (pure gasoline) 4.1.3 Volume The volume created in the engine depends on the compression ratio, bore, stroke and the length of connecting rod. Due to positive and negative displacement in the cylinder, the volume created changes between total volume of cylinder and clearance volume of cylinder. This computer c++ program can calculate the volume at every 720o of crank angle. If compression is the same for pure gasoline and blend fuel the same volume can be created in the engine cylinder. 500 300 200 100 0 20 60 100 140 180 220 260 300 340 380 420 460 500 540 580 620 660 700 Volume(cc) 400 Crank angle(degree) Figure 4.3 Volume vs crank angle for E0 (pure gasoline) 43 4.1.4 Pressure vs volume diagram The pressure vs volume diagram is very important for the design of every engine. The peak pressure is one of the determinant factor for brake power and other engine performance parameter. This peak pressure depends on compression ratio, environmental pressure and the nature of fuel used. The value of this peak pressure is the same with maximum pressure (55.67 bar) developed in engine. This peak pressure mostly depends on the type of fuel used and ignition timing. 60 Pressure(bar) 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 100 200 300 Volume(cc) 400 500 Figure 4.4 Volume vs crank angle for E0 (pure gasoline) 4.1.5 Brake power Brake power is the function of brake mean effective pressure, engine capacity, and engine revolution per minute and mechanical efficiency. There is two possible ways of calculating brake power. The first one is analytical method which can be used to calculate the maximum power for thermodynamic analysis of actual engine cycle and by using only this method one cannot draw the following diagram. 44 The second one is empirical method which can be used to calculate the maximum brake power by observing engine specification. This method is used for drawing the following diagram which is almost the same with the output of computer simulator of dynamometer. As a result the maximum brake power for selected engine by using pure gasoline was 7.13kW at 3000rpm. 8 Brake power(kw) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 1000 2000 3000 Engine speed(rpm) 4000 Figure 4.5 Brake power vs engine revolution per minute for E0 4.1.6 Brake torque Brake torque is the function of brake power, engine capacity, and engine rpm. The factor which affect the brake power has significant role on brake torque. Both of them has directly proportional to each other. The two possible way used to calculate brake power is also functional for brake torque. The maximum brake torque created was 27.75NM at 2000rpm. But this maximum brake torque is greater than the engine maximum brake torque. For this reason running the engine at lower speed is impossible and can damage engine.so computer c++ program can indicate at which speed engine can run safely. As shown on the following diagram running the engine above broken line area can possibly damage it. 45 Like that of the graph of brake power the following diagram is drawn by using empirical relation of maximum power, speed at maximum power and speed which is the result of experimental analysis. Brake torque(Nm) 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Engine rpm Figure 4.6 Brake torque vs engine revolution per minute for E0 4.1.7 Brake specific fuel consumption 0.7 bsfc (kg/kwh) 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 1000 2000 Engine rpm 3000 4000 Figure 4.7 Brake specific fuel consumption vs engine revolution per minute for E0 46 Brake specific fuel consumption is the function of mass of fuel flow rate charged to combustion chamber, speed of engine, number of cylinder, number of stroke and brake power of engine. This parameter has also related to the pressure and temperature of the environment. The type of engine and fuel can affect the amount of brake specific fuel consumption. Brake specific fuel consumption is high at lower speed and decreasing as speed increase and become optimum at the medium and increase as speed increase. As that of brake power and torque brake specific fuel consumption diagram is drawn by using empirical method.as result the minimum fuel consumption is 0.39kg/kWh at speed between 2000rpm. 4.1.8 Brake mean effective pressure Brake mean effective pressure is the function of brake power, engine capacity and engine revelation per minute. Brake mean effective pressure is directly proportional to brake power and brake torque. So all factors which affect brake power can directly affect brake mean effective pressure. This pressure is crucial point for designer of engine and as other performance engine parameter graph brake mean effective pressure is also drawn by using empirical method. So as shown on the graph the maximum brake mean effective pressure is 8.89bar at 1000rpm. 12 bmep(bar) 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 1000 2000 Engine rpm 3000 4000 Figure 4.8 Brake mean effective pressure vs engine revolution per minute for E0 47 4.2 Output of computer c++ program for E15 Table 4.2 'V', 'p' and 'T' as a function of 'theta' “for E15 theta V p T theta V p T (deg.) (cc) (bar) (K) (deg.) (cc) (bar) (K) 20 68.43 0.9 313 360 52.27 31.88 1.22E+03 30 87.88 0.9 313 370 56.36 49.67 2.05E+03 40 113.77 0.9 313 380 68.43 56.32 2.83E+03 50 144.87 0.9 313 390 87.88 49.86 3.22E+03 60 179.78 0.9 313 400 113.77 37.95 3.17E+03 70 217 0.9 313 410 144.87 27.38 2.91E+03 80 255.05 0.9 313 420 179.78 20.46 2.70E+03 90 292.53 0.9 313 430 217 15.87 2.53E+03 100 328.24 0.9 313 440 255.05 12.76 2.39E+03 110 361.17 0.9 313 450 292.54 10.6 2.28E+03 120 390.54 0.9 313 460 328.24 9.08 2.19E+03 130 415.82 0.9 313 470 361.17 7.98 2.12E+03 140 436.67 0.9 313 480 390.54 7.18 2.06E+03 150 452.93 0.9 313 490 415.82 6.6 2.01E+03 160 464.53 0.9 313 500 436.67 6.17 1.98E+03 170 471.47 0.9 313 510 452.93 5.88 1.95E+03 180 473.79 0.9 313 520 464.53 5.68 1.94E+03 190 471.47 0.91 313.54 530 471.47 5.57 1.93E+03 200 464.53 0.92 315.17 540 473.79 5.53 1.92E+03 210 452.92 0.96 317.97 550 471.47 1.07 327.63 220 436.67 1 322.07 560 464.53 1.07 327.63 230 415.81 1.07 327.63 570 452.92 1.07 327.63 240 390.53 1.17 334.9 580 436.67 1.07 327.63 250 361.16 1.3 344.19 590 415.81 1.07 327.63 260 328.24 1.48 355.9 600 390.53 1.07 327.63 270 292.53 1.73 370.54 610 361.16 1.07 327.63 280 255.04 2.08 388.76 620 328.24 1.07 327.63 290 216.99 2.58 411.38 630 292.53 1.07 327.63 300 179.77 3.33 439.38 640 255.04 1.07 327.63 310 144.87 4.46 473.87 650 216.99 1.07 327.63 320 113.76 6.18 515.7 660 179.77 1.07 327.63 330 87.88 8.75 564.47 670 144.86 1.07 327.63 340 68.43 12.27 616.12 680 113.76 1.07 327.63 350 56.36 16.42 679.46 690 87.88 1.07 327.63 700 68.43 1.07 327.63 48  Engine Size Ec = 392 cc, Vs = 392 cc , Vcl = 52.27 cc, VT = 444.27 cc  The input amount in the combustion reaction atha =9.14, LAMBDA =0.86, ath =7.86, xAl=0.15, xG =0.85, yAl =0.3 yG =0.7; AF = 11.78; ETA_c = 82.46 %; yAl_per = 29.87 % mm = 0.00045 kg, ma = 0.000394 kg, mf = 3.342708e-05 kg mres = 2.247992e-05 kg, mm = 0.00045 kg  The output amount in the combustion reaction Wnet = 0.34 kJ; Qin = 1.23 kJ; ETA_ith = 27.7 %; imep = 8.7 bar Pb = 7.24 kW Tb = 23.07 NM; bsfc = 0.44 kg/kwh 4.2.1 Temperature The maximum temperature created by E15 (15% ethanol and 85% of gasoline) was 3220k at 390o crank angle. This show that the angle at which maximum temperature created is not depends on the type fuel rather ignition timing. 3500 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 20 60 100 140 180 220 260 300 340 380 420 460 500 540 580 620 660 700 Temperature(k) 3000 Crank angle(degree) Figure 4.9 Temperature vs crank angle for E15 49 All factors which listed in pure gasoline can affect the value of maximum temperature in E15.Due to higher air-fuel equivalence ration or λ (LAMBDA) value in ethanol, the thermal efficiency of blend fuel is higher than pure gasoline, as result the combustion efficiency of blend fuel is higher than pure gasoline. Due to this the maximum temperature created in engine by blend fuel is higher than pure gasoline. 4.2.2 Pressure The maximum pressure created by this blend fuel means E15 is 56.32 bar. This pressure is created at the same crank angle 380o with E0 (pure gasoline).Due to high thermal efficiency of oxygenated fuel the blend fuel has higher maximum pressure than pure gasoline. The maximum temperature created in the engine is directly proportional to maximum pressure created in engine.so the all factors which can affect the amount of temperature while combustion can directly affect the pressure created in engine. This maximum pressure is very important design point of new engine and it is crucial for the operation of engine. 60 40 30 20 10 0 20 60 100 140 180 220 260 300 340 380 420 460 500 540 580 620 660 700 Pressure(bar) 50 Crank angle(degree) Figure 4.10 Pressure vs crank angle for E15 50 4.2.3 Volume In this specific study only one compression ratio is taken as input from the engine specification.one of the determinant factor for the value of swept and clearance volume is compression ratio. Theoretically the compression of oxygenated fuel is higher than hydrocarbon fuel but for this work the compression ratio for both blend and pure gasoline is the same. Due to this there is no the variation of swept volume and clearance volume created in both blend and pure gasoline. Despite this variation can highly affect engine performance practically, the compression ratio for both blend and pure gasoline is not the same. Volume(cc) 500 400 300 200 100 20 60 100 140 180 220 260 300 340 380 420 460 500 540 580 620 660 700 0 Crank angle(degree) Figure 4.11 Volume vs crank angle for E15 4.2.4 Pressure vs volume diagram 60 Pressure(bar) 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 100 200 300 400 Volume(cc) Figure 4.12 Pressure vs volume diagram for E15 51 500 The pressure vs volume diagram is very important for the design of every engine. The peak pressure is one of the determinant factor for brake power and other engine performance parameter. This peak pressure depends on compression ratio, environmental pressure and the nature of fuel used. Due to this the maximum pressure created by blend fuel is higher than pure gasoline. The value of this peak pressure is the same with maximum pressure in E15 (56.32 bar).for this reason the type of fuel used in producing power has significant role in affecting the brake power of engine. 4.2.5 Brake power The brake power produced by E15 is higher than E0.this increment is also for E5 and E10 and as a result the power produced by E15>E10>E5>E0. This is due to high thermal efficiency of oxygenated fuel. This thermal efficiency is dependent on equivalence ratio of air-fuel (λ value). There is no oxygen in hydrocarbon fuel but in alcohol. Due to this ethanol has higher equivalence ratio of air fuel than pure gasoline. For this reason the brake power produced by E15 is greater than E0. So the maximum brake power produced by E15 in this specific engine is 7.24kw at 3000rpm.This graph is drawn by using empirical method which is the result of experimental Brake power(kw) result. 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 Engine rpm Figure 4.13 Brake power vs engine speed for E15 52 4.2.6 Brake torque The brake torque is directly proportional to brake power.as a result the increment of brake power increase the brake torque. This increment is due to the increase of thermal efficiency and break mean effective pressure. The basic cause for this change is equivalence ratio of air- fuel (λ value) and this means the λ value of blend fuel is greater than pure gasoline because of oxygen content of alcohol. On this specific study the maximum brake torque as the result of computer c++ program is 28.18 NM at 2000rpm.But this maximum brake torque is greater than the engine maximum brake torque. For this reason running the engine at lower speed is impossible that can damage engine.so computer c++ program can indicate at which speed engine can run safely. As shown on the following diagram running the engine above dash line area can possibly damage it. The following diagram computer gram is drawn by using empirical method which is the result of experimental analysis. Brake torque(Nm) 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 1000 2000 Engine rpm 3000 4000 Figure 4.14 Brake torque vs engine revolution per minute for E15. 4.2.7 Brake specific fuel consumption Brake specific fuel consumption is the function of mass of fuel delivered to engine and brake power produced by the engine. 53 The brake specific fuel consumption is inversely proportional to brake power. According to computer c++ program that written depending on the empirical relation between fuel consumption and speed, the following diagram is drawn. As shown on the graph the minimum fuel consumption is 0.37kg/kWh which less if compared with pure gasoline. The shape diagram for both blend fuel and pure gasoline is the same but brake specific fuel consumption is less for E15 at all speed if compared with E0 (pure gasoline). 0.7 bsfc(kg/kwh) 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 1000 2000 Engine rpm 3000 4000 Figure 4.15 Brake specific fuel consumption vs engine speed for E15 4.2.8 Brake mean effective pressure Break mean effective parameter is one of the important parameter used to determine the brake power and other parameter which is used for perform evaluation. As break mean effective increase brake power and torque increase. This means they are directly proportional to each other. As shown on the following diagram the maximum brake mean effective is 9.03 bar at 1000rpm.Due to higher thermal efficiency and λ value of blend fuel than pure gasoline the break mean effective pressure of blend fuel is higher than pure gasoline. 54 12 bmep(bar) 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 1000 2000 Engine rpm 3000 4000 Figure 4.16 Break mean effective pressure vs engine revolution per minute for E15 4.3 Summary of Computer C++ Program Output for E0 - E15 4.3.1 Combustion and thermal efficiency As shown on the graph below combustion and thermal efficiency increase as the amount of ethanol increase in blend proportion. But according to this computer c++ program it continuously increase only up to E85 and then commence to decrease. Combustion efficiency 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 E0 E5 E10 E15 E50 Blend proportios E85 E100 Figure 4.17 combustion efficiency VS blend proportions 55 Themal efficiency 36.4 36.3 36.2 36.1 36 35.9 35.8 35.7 E0 E5 E10 E15 E50 Blend proportios E85 E100 Figure 4.18 thermal efficiency VS blend proportion Combustion and thermal efficiency are interdependent to each other. Due to this thermal efficiency also follow the path of combustion efficiency. 4.3.2 Temperature Because of the high equivalence air-fuel ratio (λ value) of alcohol, the thermal efficiency of blend fuel is greater than pure gasoline. As shown on the figure 4.19 the maximum temperature created by E0, E5, E10 and E15 is 3180k, 3200k, 3110k and 3220k respectively. 4.3.3 Pressure As the amount of ethanol in gasoline increase the maximum pressure created also increase. As shown on the figure 4.20 the maximum pressure created by E0, E5, E10 and E15 are 55.67bar, 55.99bar, 56bar and 56.32bar respectively. 4.3.4 Pressure vs volume diagram The pressure volume diagram which depends on the value of peak pressure for E0, E5, E10 and E15 are summarized as fig 4.21. 56 3500 60 E0 E5 3000 2500 E5 50 E10 E10 E15 Pressure(bar) Temperature(k) E0 2000 1500 E15 40 30 20 1000 10 0 20 80 140 200 260 320 380 440 500 560 620 680 0 20 60 100 140 180 220 260 300 340 380 420 460 500 540 580 620 660 700 500 Crank angle(degree) Crank angle(degree) Figure 4.19 summary of maximum temperature result vs engine crank angle Figure 4.20 summary of maximum pressure result vs engine crank angle 60 E0 E5 50 Pressure(bar) E10 40 E15 30 20 10 0 0 100 200 300 Figure 4.21 summary 400 Volume(cc) 500 600 700 of maximum pressure volume diagram 57 800 4.3.5 Brake power According to computer c++ program developed, as the amount of ethanol proportion increase in gasoline the brake power increase. As a result the brake power produced by E0, E5, E10 and E15 are 7.13kw, 7.18kw, 7.22kw and 7.24kw at 3000rpm respectively. One of the factor affecting brake power is the thermal efficiency of the fuel, due to this the increment of the brake power follow the path of it. Table 4.3 summary of Brake power result from computer c++ program Speed (N) Brake power(Pb) E0 E5 E10 E15 0 0 0 0 0 1000 2.9 2.93 2.94 2.95 2000 5.81 5.85 5.88 5.9 3000 7.13 7.18 7.22 7.24 4000 5.28 5.32 5.35 5.36 4.3.6 Brake torque The brake torque and brake power are directly proportional to each other and they are interdependent. As a result the brake torque produced by E0, E5, E10 and E15 are 27.75NM, 27.95NM, 28.1NMand 28.18NM at 2000rpm respectively which are above the engine maximum brake toque.so this indicate that the selected engine for test cannot run to lower engine speed. Table 4.4 summary of Brake torque result from computer c++ program Speed(N) Brake torque (Tb) E0 E5 E10 E15 0 0 0 0 0 1000 27.75 27.95 28.1 28.14 2000 27.75 27.95 28.1 28.18 3000 22.71 22.87 22.99 23.06 4000 12.62 12.7 12.77 12.81 58 8 35 E0 E0 7 E10 5 E15 4 3 2 Brake torque(Nm) Brake power(kw) E5 6 30 E5 25 E10 E15 20 15 10 5 1 0 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 1000 Engine rpm 2000 3000 4000 5000 Engine speed( rpm) Figure 4.22 summary of brake power vs engine speed from computer c++ program Figure 4.23 summary brake torque vs engine speed 12 E0 0.7 E0 E5 10 E5 0.6 E10 E10 E15 0.4 0.3 E15 8 bmep(bar) bsfc(kg/kwh) 0.5 6 4 0.2 2 0.1 0 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Engine speed( rpm) Figure 4.24 summary brake specific fuel consumption vs engine speed 59 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 engine speed( rpm) Figure 4.25 summary brake mean effective pressure vs engine speed 4.3.7 Brake specific fuel consumption According to the output of this computer c++ program the brake specific fuel consumption decrease if ethanol is blended to gasoline. But this continuous only up to E40 and then increase after it. The minimum brake specific fuel consumption of E0 is 0.39kg/kWh and E5, E10 and E15 are 0.37kg/kWh. Table 4.5 summary of brake specific fuel consumption result from computer c++ program Speed(N) 0 Brake specific fuel consumption(bsfc) E0 E5 E10 0.55 0.54 0.54 E15 0.53 1000 0.42 0.41 0.41 0.4 2000 0.39 0.38 0.38 0.37 3000 0.46 0.45 0.45 0.44 4000 0.63 0.62 0.62 0.61 4.3.8 Brake mean effective pressure The break mean effective pressure increase as the amount of ethanol increase in blend proportion. Brake mean effective pressure also follow path of the thermal efficiency. As a result the brake mean effective pressure produced by E0, E5, E10 and E15 are 8.89bar, 8.95bar, 9bar, 9.03bar and at 2000rpm respectively. Table 4.6 summary of Brake mean effective pressure result from computer c++ program Speed(N) Brake mean effective pressure(bmep) E0 E5 E10 E15 0 0 0 0 0 1000 8.89 8.95 9 9.03 2000 8.89 8.95 9 9.03 3000 7.28 7.33 7.37 7.39 4000 4.04 4.07 4.09 4.1 60 4.3.9 Emissions In this work five incomplete combustion product was considered even though there is ten product which emitted from internal combustion engine. Considering all combustion product is good, but it needs very complex numerical method. So by using simple simultaneous equation one cannot find the amount of all combustion products. Due to this in this paper only five combustion products are like CO2, CO, H2O, N2 and O2 are considered. Due to this the mathematical model and the computer c++ is developed for the only five combustion products listed above.As the amount of ethanol increase in blend proportion, the molar fraction emission of CO2 decrease. This emission depends on the λ value of fuel used.As shown on the figure 4.26 CO2 emission deceased because of the improvement of the chemical properties of blend fuel. One of the most dangerous emission from internal combustion engine is carbon monoxide (CO) which is very harmful gas for living things. This gas is not only harmful but also plays great role in global warming. According to this computer c++ program the emission of carbon monoxide decrease as the amount of ethanol in blend proportion increase. This is due to the change of λ value as blend proportion increases. Carbon monoxide is a product of incomplete combustion due to insufficient amount of air in the air–fuel mixture. Table 4.7 molar fraction of emissions product blend amount λ molar fraction of emission CO2 NOX CO O2 E0 0.19 0.82 0.11 0 0.8 E5 0.18 0.83 0.1 0 0.82 E10 0.18 0.83 0.08 0 0.84 E15 0.17 0.83 0.07 0 rich 0.86 E50 0.08 0.84 0 0 stoichiometric 1 E85 0.11 0.71 0 0.04 E100 0.1 0.71 0 0.14 61 type of mixture value 1.12 lean 1.2 When oxygen ethanol containing is mixed with gasoline, the combustion of the engine becomes better, and therefore CO emission is reduced. As shown on the fig 4.27 the concentration of CO decreased as the volume percentage of ethanol fuel is CO2 emission(molar fraction) increased in the fuel mixture. 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 E0 E5 E10 E15 E50 Engine speed(rpm) E85 E100 Figure 4.26 diagram of Co2 emission vs blend proportions CO emission (molar fraction) 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 -0.02 E0 E5 E10 E15 E50 E85 E100 Blend proportions) N2 emission(molar fraction) Figure 4.27 diagram of CO emission vs blend proportions Blend proportions Figure 4.28 diagram of N2 emission vs blend proportion 62 One of the advantage of blend fuel is minimizing positive emission to the environment and promising to keep natural environment. The molar fraction of N2 is increased if the type of reaction is rich and deceased if the type of reaction is lean.as shown on the fig 4.28 when the combustion process is closer to stoichiometric, flame temperature increases, therefore, NO2 formation is expected to be increased. 4.4 Result from experimental analysis for E0 and E15 4.4.1 Result from experimental analysis for E0 Table 4.8 output of experimental investigation for E0 Worksheet for data acquisition on CT 100.20 Name of tech: Tamiru Tesfaye Date: 22.08.18 Ambient temperature: 24°C Experiment: Plotting the full load characteristic curve load Full 3/4, 1/2, 1/4 Full Load Speed Torque Power Fuel consumption In rpm In Nm In kW in kg/h 2200 23.27 5.4 0.6957 2308 24.51 5.8 0.6573 2420 25.32 6.1 0.7457 2560 25.1 6.4 0.7537 2640 24.16 6.5 0.7645 2780 23.59 6.6 0.7268 2908 23.48 7 0.8499 2950 22.31 7.1 0.8501 3100 22.12 6.9 0.8657 3220 21.1 6.3 0.7832 3360 16.39 4.6 0.8324 3400 13.56 2.4 0.8858 3420 12.62 1.7 0.9092 3440 12.21 1.2 1.2882 63 4.4.1.1 Brake power The maximum brake power recorded by using pure gasoline is 7.1kw.This value was the result of experimental investigation and directly taken from the engine test stand. This maximum brake power was obtained at the 2950rpm.staterting from 2200rpm the brake power increase up to 2950rpm which is the speed at maximum brake power recorded and then decreases up to maximum speed of the engine. 8 Brake power(kw) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 3440 3420 3400 3360 3220 3100 2950 2908 2780 2640 2560 2420 2308 2200 0 Engine speed(rpm) Figure 4.29 diagram brake power vs engine speed of experimental investigation for E0 4.4.1.2 Brake torque The brake torque is one of the engine performance parameter that can directly measure from engine dynamometer. Experimental analysis was conducted on the selected engine by using pure gasoline fuel type. As a result the maximum brake torque recorded is 25.32NM at 2420rpm.This value is somewhat greater than the engine rated brake torque, and happens since engine run at lower engine revolution per minute which is not recommended by manufacturer. 64 30 Brake torque(Nm) 25 20 15 10 5 3440 3420 3400 3360 3220 3100 2950 2908 2780 2640 2560 2420 2308 2200 0 Engine speed(rpm) Figure 4.30 diagram brake toque vs engine speed of experimental investigation for E0 4.4.1.3 Brake specific Fuel consumption As shown on the figure 4.31 the amount of fuel consumption fluctuate unlike the expected theoretical value. So to get the value which related true, doing a number of times and recording the result by using the same fuel type on selected engine is the 3440 3420 3400 3360 3220 3100 2950 2908 2780 2640 2560 2420 2308 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 2200 bsfc(kg/kwh) best way. Egine speed(rpm) Figure 4.31 diagram bsfc vs engine speed of experimental investigation for E0 65 4.4.2 Result from experimental analysis for E15 Table 4.9 output of experimental investigation for E15 Worksheet for data acquisition on CT 100.20 Name of tech: Tamiru Tesfaye 22.08.18 Ambient temperature: 24°C Date: Experiment: Plotting the full load characteristic curve with Ethanol Blend 15% load Full throttle, Full Load Speed Torque Power Fuel consumption In rpm In Nm In kW in kg/h 2200 23.57 5.87 0.6832 2308 24.62 6.1 0.6487 2420 25 6.21 0.7238 2560 25.51 6.68 0.7485 2640 24.34 7.08 0.7632 2780 23.9 7.21 0.7686 2908 23.45 7.34 0.8573 2950 22.28 7.41 0.865 3100 22.23 7.3 0.873 3220 21 6.89 0.8768 3360 16.79 4.98 0.882 3400 14.11 3.35 0.8998 3420 13.32 1.62 1.1992 3440 12.47 1.28 1.322 4.4.2.1 Brake power As shown fig 4.32 the maximum brake power recorded by using pure gasoline is 7.41kw.This value was investigated experimentally, performance of a single cylinder four-stroke spark-ignition engine fueled with ethanol-gasoline blends. The tests was conducted at thirteen different engine speeds ranging from 2200 to 3440 66 rpm at same compression ratio (8.5:1) and maximum brake power was obtained at the 2950rpm. 8 Brake power(kw) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 3440 3420 3400 3360 3220 3100 2950 2908 2780 2640 2560 2420 2308 2200 0 Engine speed(rpm) Figure 4.32 brake power vs engine speed experimental investigation for E15 4.4.2.2 Brake torque 30 Brake torque(Nm) 25 20 15 10 3440 3420 3400 3360 3220 3100 2950 2908 2780 2640 2560 2420 2308 0 2200 5 Engine speed(rpm) Figure 4.33 brake torque vs engine speed experimentally investigated for E15 67 Like that of pure gasoline the brake torque for blend fuel was experimentally investigated. The maximum brake torque created on this selected engine by using E15 (15% ethanol and 85% gasoline) was 25.51NM at 2560rpm.Due to higher thermal efficiency for blend fuel the brake power of E15 is higher than E0.This brake torque is directly recorded from engine test stand and investigated at all engine speed tested for E0.The fig 4.33 shows the relation between brake torque and engine speed experimentally investigated for E15. 4.4.2.3 Fuel consumption As shown on the figure 4.34 the fuel consumption for E15 was experimentally investigated and recorded for all speed. The minimum fuel consumption recorded was 0.64kg/h at 2308 rpm. 1.4 1.2 bsfc(kg/kwh) 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 3440 3420 3400 3360 3220 3100 2950 2908 2780 2640 2560 2420 2308 2200 0 Engine speed(rpm) Figure 4.34 fuel consumption vs engine speed experimental investigation for E15 68 4.4.3 Summary from experimental analysis for E0 and E15 4.4.3.1 Brake power When the ethanol content in the blend fuel is increased, the engine brake power is somewhat increased for all engine speeds (Fig.4.35). The improvement of the engine power was due to the rise of the indicated mean effective pressure and the in cylinder pressure due to the higher ethanol content in the blends. The heat of evaporation of ethanol is higher than that of gasoline, this provides fuel air charge cooling and increases the density of the charge, and thus higher power output is obtained. The maximum brake power for both blend fuel and pure petrol occurred at the same engine rpm. 4.4.3.2 Brake torque The raise of ethanol content will increase the torque of the engine. Added ethanol will produce lean mixture that increases the relative air-fuel ratio (λ) to a higher value and makes the burning more efficient. The improved anti-knock behavior (due to the addition ethanol, which raised the octane number) allowed a more advanced timing that result in higher combustion pressure and thus higher torques .As shown on fig 4.36 the maximum brake torque of E15 blend fuel is higher than pure gasoline at all engine speed. 4.4.3.3 Fuel consumption The effects of ethanol–gasoline blends on fuel consumption vs. engine speed are shown in Figure 4.37.As shown in this figure, the fuel consumption decreases as the ethanol content increase from E0 to E15. This is due to the increase in brake thermal efficiency and decreases in equivalence air fuel ratio (φ). Further, increase in engine speed results in increasing FC (fuel consumption), since the brake thermal efficiency decreases and air fuel ratio (φ) increases. It is clear from figure 4.37 that in case of E0 and E15, the lower FC was observed on E15 69 30 8 E0 E0 25 E15 E15 6 Brake torque(kw) Brake power(kw) 7 5 4 3 2 20 15 10 1 5 3420 3420 3360 3100 2908 2640 Engine speed(rpm) 2420 0 2200 3360 3100 2908 2640 2420 2200 0 Engine speed(rpm) Figure 4.36 summary of brake torque vs engine speed from experimental investigation for E0 and E15 Figure 4.35 E0 and E15 brake power vs engine speed for experimental investigation for E0 and E15 1.4 E0 1.2 E15 bsfc(kg/kwh) 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 2200 2308 2420 2560 2640 2780 2908 2950 3100 3220 3360 3400 3420 3440 0 Engine speed (rpm) Figure 4.37 fuel consumption vs engine speed experimental investigation for E0 and E15 70 4.4.4 Emission result from experimental investigation of E0 and E15 The experimental investigation on emission was conducted on both E0 and E15 and the result is tabulated in table 4.6 and 4.7 as follows. Table 4.10 Emission experimental investigation of E0 Exhaust Emission (%) Fuel Sample Engine Speed (rpm) E-0 3450 3200 3000 2800 2600 2400 2200 CO 0.132 0.099 0.092 0.082 0.073 0.065 0.053 CO2 1.58 1.52 1.45 1.37 1.44 1.23 1.22 HC(ppm) 17 15 13 13 13 13 15 O2 16.99 17.20 17.25 17.34 17.44 17.57 17.68 Blending ethanol to gasoline is the best way to minimize the amount of green house and harmful gases emission to the environment. According to experimental investigation and shown on the figure 4.38 and 4.39, emission of CO and CO2 increase with speed. But emission of HC is higher at lower and higher speed while lower at the medium speed. Table 4.11 Emission experimental investigation of E15 Exhaust Emission (%) Fuel Sample Engine Speed (rpm) 3450 3200 3000 2800 2600 2400 2200 CO 0.112 0.093 0.087 0.070 0.071 0.059 0.052 E-15 CO2 1.45 1.37 1.30 1.28 1.22 1.23 1.16 71 HC 16 15 13 12 12 13 14 O2 16.88 16.98 17.15 17.29 17.37 17.51 17.70 CO: The most important parameter that affects CO emission is the air fuel equivalence ratios. With air fuel equivalence ratio approaching unity, CO emission diminishes, and even becomes zero in lean condition.CO emissions are likely to be reduced for various blends due to the oxygen enrichment coming from ethanol. CO2: Figure 4.39 represents the variation of carbon dioxide vs. engine speed. It is clear from figure that the CO2 concentration decreases as the ethanol percentage increased. CO2 emissions depend on relative air-fuel ratio. HC: Figure 4.40 represents the hydrocarbon vs. Engine speed. It is clear from the figure that HC emission was reduced with increasing speed. Further, with increasing percentage of ethanol in gasoline results reduced HC emissions. The concentration of HC emission decreases with the increase of the relative air fuel ratio. The air–fuel mixing in case of ethanol blend enhances the combustion and complete combustion take place which result lower HC concentration. O2 : The emission of O2 decreases with increasing engine speed. This imply that as the engine speed increase the equivalence air fuel ratio decrease due to this the emission of O2 also decrease. generally according to experimental investigation the emission of CO, CO2, HC and O2 is lower for E15 than E0. 72 18 1.6 16 HC emission(ppm vol) CO2 emission(%vol) 1.8 1.4 1.2 1 E0 0.8 E15 0.6 0.4 14 12 10 8 E0 6 E15 4 2 0.2 0 0 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000 3200 3450 Engine speed (rpm) Egine speed (rpm) Figure 4.39 experimental investigation HC vs engine speed for E0 and E15 0.14 17.8 0.12 17.6 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 E0 E15 0.02 0 O2 emission(% vol) CO emission(%vol) Figure 4.38 experimental investigation of CO2 vs engine speed for E0 and E15 17.4 17.2 17 16.8 E0 16.6 E15 16.4 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000 3200 3450 Engine speed (rpm) Figure 4.40 experimental investigation of CO vs engine speed for E0 and E15 73 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000 3200 3450 Engine speed (rpm) Figure 4.41 experimental investigation O2(% vol) vs engine speed(rpm) of CHAPTER FIVE 5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION Under this chapter summary of the all work in this paper, conclusion of the result and discussion and the recommendation for the future researcher are explained. 5.1 Summary After the title was identified depending on the existing gap or problem the objective of research means general and specific objective of research was identified. The benefit and scope of this work was also recognized. Different literature which has relation with selected title was reviewed and summarized.to accomplish the objective of research, different methods such as preparing mathematical model, developing computer c++ program and executing experimental investigation are used. Depending on the result from both computer c++ program and experimental investigation enough discussion was done on each topic. Finally the result was concluded and the recommendation was listed for the future researcher. 5.2 Conclusion In this work the thermodynamic analysis of actual engine cycle with ethanol gasoline blend fuel (E15) is done. Depending on the thermodynamic analysis which can be the mathematical model, the computer c++ program was developed and performance parameter such as brake power, brake torque, thermal efficiency, break mean effective pressure, combustion efficiency, brake specific fuel consumption and emission was analyzed by using developed computer c++ program. This program is versatile that can be functional for every type of engine and any type of blend proportions. As a result the brake power, brake torque, combustion efficiency, thermal efficiency and break mean effective pressure are higher for E15 than E0 and the brake specific fuel consumption is lower for E15 than E0. The molar fraction emission of CO2, CO and water vapor is less for E15 than E0 but molar fraction of N2 is higher for E15 than E0. 74 To validate and prove the result of computer c++ program the experimental investigation was done on selected engine. The motivation of performance parameter gained by computer c++ program is also proper for experimental investigation. According to the experimental investigation the brake power and brake torque for E15 is higher than that of E0, but the fuel consumption of E15 is less than E0. The emission value which gained by computer c++ program and experimental investigation was almost similar. According to experimental investigation the emission of CO, CO2, HC and O2 is lower for E15 than E0.the emission of CO, CO2, HC increase with increase of engine speed and O2 emission decreases. The deviation between result of developed computer c++ program and experimental investigation was less than 5% for all analyzed engine parameter. 5.3 Recommendation After conclusion of this work the following listed points are very important that can enhance the trustworthiness of the outcome of research.  For the future work I recommend the researcher to investigate further on this topic because there is no common conclusion between researchers executed work concerning the topic.  Computer c++ program developed in this work can easily identify the performance parameter, calculate the value of material charged to combustion and identify the amount of emission so before testing on real engine using computer c++ program is cost efficient and highly support the exponential investigation process.  Depending on the real factor which may be didn’t consider in this work while preparing mathematical model and develop computer c++ program, the future researcher can reshuffle and come out with perfect result. 75  Using the engine of higher torque is better to experimentally investigate at lower engine rpm.  At one test time one cannot get the precise value so testing a number of time is very important.  Before experimental investigation calibrating the engine and knowing the physical and chemical characteristic of fuel (for both ethanol and gasoline) can support for the correct reasoning of result.  Studying all factor affecting engine performance parameter is very important to identify crucial one and optimize the result.  The emission is not limited to only five combustion product so studying all of them are enhance the reliability of emission amount. 76 REFERENCES A.Samuel Raja , A. Valan Arasu, T. Sornakumar (2015). Effect of gasoline ethanol blends on performance and emission characteristics of a single Cylinder Air Cooled Motor bike si engine. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology , Vol. 10(No.12), 1540 - 1552. Ahmed Mostafa Ahmed, Ismail Youssef, Mohamed Mourad. (2017). The Influence of Ethanol– Gasoline Blends on Performance Characteristics of Engine Generator Set. American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER), Volume-6( Issue-9), p-ISSN : 2320-0936. Ahmet Necati Ozsezen et al . (2012). Performance and combustion characteristics of alcoholgasoline blends at wide-open throttle. AKolchin and R Demidw. (n.d.). Design Of Automotive Engines. Alvydas Pikūnas, Saugirdas Pukalskas, Juozas Grabys. (2003). Nfluence Of Composition Of Gasoline – Ethanol Blends On Parameters Of Internal Combustion Engines. Journal of KONES Internal Combustion Engines, vol. 10(3-4). Amit Kumar Thakur et al . (2017). Performance analysis of ethanol–gasoline blends on a spark ignition engine. http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tbfu20, ISSN: 1759-7269. Asad, Islam. (2016). Simulation of Four Stroke Internal Combustion Engine. International Journal of Scientific& Engineering Research, ISSN 2229-5518. Ashraf Elfasakhany. (2015). Investigations on the effects of ethanol-methanol-gasoline blends in a spark-ignition engine: international jouranal of science and technology,no 18,pp 713-719. Deepak Kumar et al. (December-2016 ). Experimental Investigation of SI Engine Performance using Ethanol-Gasoline Blended Fuels. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 7(Issue 12), ISSN 2229-5518. F. Kheiralla, Mohamed El-Awad, Mathani Y. Hassan, M. A. Hussen, and Hind I. Osman.(October2011)). Effect of Ethanol−Gasoline Blends on Fuel Properties Characteristics of Spark Ignition Engines. UofKEJ, Vol. 1(ssue 2), I pp. 22-28. 77 Gaurav Sharma* and Harvinder lal. (2015). International Journal on Emerging Technologies. Effects of Ethanol-Gasoline Blends on Engine Performance and Exhaust Emissions in a Spark Ignition, 6(2), 184-188. Pham Huu Truyen, Pham Huu Truyen, Pham Huu Tuyen, Pham Minh Tuan, Le Anh Tuan .(2012). Influence Of E10, E15 And E20 Fuels Onperformance And Emissions Of In-Use Gasoline Passenger Cars. ASEAN Engineering Journal Part C, Vol 4(No 2), ISSN 2286-8150. Willard W. Pulkrabek. (n.d.). Engineering Fundamentals of the Internal Combustion. M. S. M. Zaharin, N. R. Abdullah, M. Imran Dahalan, Hazim Sharudin, A.R. Asiah, M. Beriache. ( 2017). Experimental Study on the Effects of Methanol and Ethanol on Gasoline Engine Performance and Exhaust Emissions. Journal of Mechanical Engineering, Vol 2(SI), 27-44. Juan Miguel, Diego Alexande, Carlos Humberto. (2015). Multivariate analysis of performance and emissions for internal combustion engines running with gasoline-ethanol blends. Ingeniería Energética, XXXVI(3), p.232-242 ISSN 1815 - 5901. K., T. J. (March 2011). Physico-chemical properties of bio-ethanol/gasoline blends and the qualitative effect of different blends on gasoline quality and engine performance. Journal of Petroleum Technology and Alternative Fuels, Vol. 2(3), pp. 35-44. Melis Teka . (2007). Biofuel Strategy of Ethiopia. East African Power Industry Convention . Addis Ababa. Pham Huu Truyen et al. (2012). Influence Of E10 ,E15 And E20 Fuels On Performance And Emissionsof In-Use Gasoline Passenger Cars. ASEAN Engineering Journal Part C, Vol 4(No 2), ISSN 2286-8150 p.33. Ramachandran, S. (2009). Rapid Thermodynamic Simulation Model of an Internal Combustion Engine on Alternate Fuels. International Multi Conference of Engineers and Computer Scientists. Hong Kong. Ramesh Babu Nallamothu,Geleta Fekadu, & Prof B.V. Appa Rao. (2013). Comparative Performance Evaluation Of Gasoline And Its Blends With Ethanol In Gasoline Engine. Global Jornal Of Biology, Agriculture,And Health Science,, ISSN: 2319 – 5584. S. Babazadeh Shayan, M. Seyedpour, F. Ommi, S. H. Moosavy and M. Alizadeh. (2011). Impact of Methanol–Gasoline Fuel Blends on the Performance and Exhaust Emissions of a SI Engine. International Journal of Automotive Engineering, Vol. 1,(Number 3,). 78 Sandeep M. Joshi1, Raahul Krishna, Balagouda A. Patil, Aneesh C. Gangal,Performance.(2014) Evaluation of Petrol-Ethanol Blends and Testing on Multi cylinder 4-Stroke SI Engine ,Journal of Alternate Energy Sources and Technologies Volume 6, Issue 1ISSN: 2230-7982(online), ISSN: 2321-5186 TalalYusaf, G Najafi, and David Buttsworth. (2014). Theoretical and experimental investigation of SI engine performance and exhaust emissions using ethanol-gasoline bend. (http://www.research gate). V. Saikrishnan, A. Karthikeyan & J. Jayaprabakar. (2018) Analysis of ethanol blends on spark ignition engines, International Journal of Ambient Energy,39:2,103107,DOI:10.1080/01430750.2016.1269678 Viral K Pandya, Shailesh N Chaudhary, Bakul T Patel, Parth D Patel. (Nov 2011). Experimental Study On The Effect Of Methanol Gasoline ,Ethano-Lgasoline and N-Butanolgasoline Blends On The Performance Of 2-Stroke Petrol Engine. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology. Vivek Pandey and V.K.Gupta. (2016). Experimental analysis of performance characteristics of an SI engine on ethanol-gasoline blended fuel. International Journal of Engineering Development and Research, Volume 4, Issue 3 | ISSN: 232. Xiaochen Wang , Zhenbin Chen , Jimin Ni , Saiwu Liu , Haijie Zhou .(2015) The effects of hydrous ethanol gasoline on combustion and emission characteristics of a port injection gasoline engine. case study in thermal engineering ,vol 6,pp 147-154. Yan Zhang , Hua Zhao, Mohammed Ojapah, Alasdair Cairns.(2013) .CAI combustion of gasoline and its mixture with ethanol in a 2-stroke poppet valve DI gasoline engine, Fuel 109 ,pp 661–668 79 APPENDEICES Appendix. 1 Developed computer c++ program for calculating temperature, pressure and volume // Actual Engine Cycle - SI Engine (AEC-SI1). #include<iostream.h> #include<iomanip.h> #include<conio.h> #include<math.h> #include<fstream.h> void main() { float Ec_cc,Zc,Rsd,Rrl,a,b,RHO_kgplit,QLHV,ZC,ZH,ZO,RHO_Alkgplit,QLHV_Al; float xAl_per,xR_per,LAMBDA,pim,p1,T1,Rc,N,ETA_mper,theta_ivobTDC; float theta_ivcaBDC,theta_scbTDC,theta_dc,theta_evobBDC,theta_evcaTDC; float Zs,Z_rpc,ETA_m,xR,theta_a,theta_b,theta_ivc,theta_1,theta_sc; float theta_2,theta_ec,theta_3 = theta_ec,theta_evo,theta_4,theta_5; float theta_6,theta_0,Ec_liter,Ec,Vs,Vcl,Vt,Vs_cc,Vcl_cc,Vt_cc,d,d_mm; float powd,s,s_mm,r,r_mm,lcon,lcon_mm,Ap,g,Ru,mA,mF,mres,Tim,theta_c; float a1O2r,a2O2r,a3O2r,a4O2r,cpO2,cvO2,a1N2r,a2N2r,a3N2r,a4N2r,cpN2; float cvN2,cpA6b,cvA6b,MmA,cp6b,cv6b,R6b,n6b,RHO6b,v6b,Z6b,Z1,V1,R1; float mm,MmO,MmN,MmC,MmH,yO2,yN2,MmO2,MmN2,xAl,xG,xF,MmG,MmAl,QLHV_G; float nAl,nG,nAlG,yAl,yG,yF,yAl_per,MmF,n1th,n2th,atha,ath,n3th; float n10,n3,n1r,n1,n2,nt,y1,y2,y3,y10,MmAth,MmFth,nO2,nN2,nA,AFth,AF,QLHV _F; float RHO_Fkgplit,RHO_F,ETA_cmax,ETA_c,ETA_cper,T6bi,RHO_Gkgplit; float Rm,Zm,Vm,n4,n5,y4,y5,yAL,Mm1,Mm2,Mm3,Mm4,Mm5,nF,Tb_NM; const float PI = 3.1416; g = 9.81; Ru = 8.314; // process 0-b (constant pressure intake process). float V0bi,p0bi,T0bi,m0bi,R0bi,rad,Z0b,xp0b,Vs0b,V0b,p0b,T0b,R0b,m0b; float Vb,pb,Tb,mb,thetab,deltheta,theta,mb1i; // process b-1 (polytropic compression): float Vb1i,pb1i,Tb1i,Rb1i,xpb1,Vsb1,Vb1,delmb1,VbVb1,nb1,nb1T,Rb1; float Zb1,pb1,Tb1,mb1,theta1; // process 1-2 (polytropic effective compression): float m12i,V12i,p12i,T12i,xp12,Vs12,V12,V1V12,n12,n12T,R12,Z12; float p12,T12,m12,V2,p2,T2,theta2; 80 // process 2-3 (polytropic combustion): float V23i,p23i,T23i,T23,W23i,xp23,Vs23,V23,m23,theta2dc,rad2dc; float xb,Qin,Q1,Q23,cpO2o2,R23; float cpN2o2,cpFo2,cpr2,cvr2,Mmr2,cp2,cv2,R2,m2,RHO2; float v2,hfoF,hfoO2,hfoN2,delhFo2,delhO2o2,delhN2o2,UrFo2,UrO2o2,UrN2o2; float Ur2,Ur,a1CO2p,a2CO2p,a3CO2p,a4CO2p,cpCO2,cvCO2,cp123,a1H2Op,a2H2Op; float a3H2Op,a4H2Op,cpH2O,cvH2O,cp223,a1N2p,a2N2p,a3N2p,a4N2p; float cp323,a1O2p,a2O2p,a3O2p,a4O2p,cp423,a1COp,a2COp,a3COp; float a4COp,cpCO,cvCO,cp523,cp23_kmol,cv23_kmol,Mm23,n23,cp23,cv23; float delh1o23,delh2o23,delh3o23,delh5o23,hfo1,hfo2,hfo3,hfo4,hfo5,U123; float U223,U323,U423,U523,U23,Up,Qin23,mF23,nF23,delUpr,error23,T3; float p23,delV23,delW23,W23,V3,p3,m3,theta3,To,Qin1,QW23; // process 3-4 (polytropic expansion): float V34i,p34i,T34i,m34i,xp34,Vs34,V34,V3V34,n34,n34T,R34,Z34,p34,T34; float delm34,m34,V4,p4,T4,theta4; // process 4-5 (polytropic exhaust blowdown): float V45i,p45i,T45i,m45i,xp45,Vs45,V45,V4V45,n45,n45T,R45,Z45,p45,T45; float delm45,m45,V5,p5,T5,theta5; // process 5-6 (polytropic exhaust): float xp56,Vs56,V56,V5V6,m56,V6,theta6,p6,T6; // engine parameters float Wnet,ETA_ith,ETA_ithper,imep_bar,W12,W2,W3,Q3,W4,W34,W45,W5; float Wi,n_cps,Pi,Pb_kW,mF_kgps,mF_kgph,bsfc,LAMBDAMAX,LAMBDAMIN; float na,ng,nag,na1,n5r,na2; clrscr (); ofstream outfile ("EAEC-SI3.dat"); cout << "\n\n\t\t Adama Science and Technology University (ASTU) "; outfile << "\n\n\t\t Adama Science and Technology University (ASTU) "; cout << " \n\t Department of Mechanical and Vehicle Engineering "; outfile << " \n\t Department of Mechanical and Vehicle Engineering "; cout << " \n\t\t Tamiru Tesfaye (Asst. lecturer) "; outfile << " \n\t\t Tamiru Tesfaye (Asst. lecturer) "; cout << "\n................................................................. ............... \n"; outfile << "\n................................................................. ..... \n"; cout <<"\n Enter the 'Engine capacity (Ec_cc)' in 'cc' = "; 81 cin >> Ec_cc; cout <<"\n Enter the 'Number of cyliders (Zc)' = "; cin >> Zc; cout <<"\n Enter the 'Ratio of stroke-to-bore (Rsd)' = "; cin >> Rsd; cout <<"\n Enter the 'Ratio of crank-to-con rod legnth (Rrl)' = "; cin >> Rrl; cout <<"\n Enter the 'number of Carbon atoms in Gasoline (a)' = "; cin >> a; cout <<"\n Enter the 'number of Hydrogen atoms in Gasoline (b)' = "; cin >> b; cout <<"\n Enter the 'density of Gasoline (RHO_G)' in 'kg/liter' = "; cin >> RHO_kgplit; cout <<"\n Enter the 'Lower Heating Value of Gasoline (QLHV_G)' in 'MJ/kg' = "; cin >> QLHV_G; cout <<"\n Enter the 'number of Carbon atoms in Alcohol (ZC)' = "; cin >> ZC; cout <<"\n Enter the 'number of Hydrogen atoms in Alcohol (ZH)' = "; cin >> ZH; cout <<"\n Enter the 'number of Oxygen atoms in Alcohol (ZO)' = "; cin >> ZO; cout <<"\n Enter the 'density of Alcohol (RHO_Al)' in 'kg/liter' = "; cin >> RHO_Alkgplit; cout <<"\n Enter the 'Lower Heating Value of Alcohol (QLHV_AL)' in 'MJ/kg' = "; cin >> QLHV_Al; cout <<"\n Enter the 'percentage of Alcohol by mass' = "; cin >> xAl_per; cout <<"\n Enter the 'residual mass fraction (xres) in '%' = "; cin >> xR_per; cout <<"\n Enter the 'engine Load (pim)' in 'bar' = "; cin >> pim; cout <<"\n Enter the 'pressure (p1)' in 'bar' = "; cin >> p1; cout <<"\n Enter the 'Temperature (T1)' in 'K' = "; cin >> T1; cout <<"\n Enter the 'compression Ratio (Rc)' = "; cin >> Rc; cout <<"\n Enter the 'required engine speed (N)' in 'rpm' = "; cin >> N; cout <<"\n Enter the 'mechanical Efficiency (ETA_m)' in '%' = "; cin >> ETA_mper; cout <<"\n Enter 'theta_ivobTDC' in 'deg.' = "; cin >> theta_ivobTDC; cout <<"\n Enter 'theta_ivcaBDC' in 'deg.' = "; cin >> theta_ivcaBDC; cout <<"\n Enter 'theta_scbTDC' in 'deg.' = "; 82 cin >> theta_scbTDC; cout <<"\n Enter 'theta_dc' in 'deg.' = "; cin >> theta_dc; cout <<"\n Enter 'theta_evobBDC' in 'deg.' = "; cin >> theta_evobBDC; cout <<"\n Enter 'theta_evcaTDC' in 'deg.' = "; cin >> theta_evcaTDC; Zs = 4.0; Z_rpc = Zs/2.0; Tim = T1-10.0; To = 293.0; ETA_m = ETA_mper/100.0; xR = xR_per/100.0; theta_a = 0.0; theta_0 = theta_evcaTDC; theta_b = 180.0; theta_ivc = 180.0+theta_ivcaBDC; theta_1 = theta_ivc; theta_sc = 360.0-theta_scbTDC; theta_2 = theta_sc; theta_c = 360.0; theta_ec = (theta_dc-theta_scbTDC)+360.0; theta_3 = theta_ec; theta_evo = 540.0-theta_evobBDC; theta_4 = theta_evo; theta_5 = 540.0; theta_6 = 720.0-theta_ivobTDC; Ec_liter = Ec_cc*1.0e-3; Ec = Ec_liter*1.0e-3; Vs = Ec/Zc; Vcl = Vs/(Rc-1.0); Vt = Vcl+Vs; Vs_cc = Vs*1.0e6; Vcl_cc = Vcl*1.0e6; Vt_cc = Vt*1.0e6; powd = (4.0*Vs)/(PI*Rsd); d = pow(powd,0.33); d_mm = d*1.0e3; s = d*Rsd; s_mm = s*1.0e3; r = s/2.0; r_mm = r*1.0e-3; lcon = r/Rrl; lcon_mm = lcon*1.0e3; Ap = (PI*d*d)/4.0; cout << "\n\n\t\t Press 'enter' twice to proceed ... "; getch(); getch(); clrscr (); cout << "\n\n\t\t Adama Science and Technology University (ASTU) "; outfile << "\n\n\t\t Adama Science and Technology University (ASTU) "; cout << " \n\t\t Tamiru Tesfaye (Asst. lecturer) "; outfile << " \n\t\t Tamiru Tesfaye (Asst. lecturer) "; cout << "\n................................................................. ............... \n"; outfile << "\n................................................................. ..... \n"; cout << "\n Engine Size "; outfile << "\n Engine Size "; cout << "\n -------------- "; outfile << "\n ------------- "; cout <<setprecision(3)<<"\n Ec = "<<Ec_cc<<" cc "; outfile<<setprecision(3)<<"\n Ec = "<<Ec_cc<<" cc "; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\n Vs = "<<Vs_cc<<" cc "; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n Vs = "<<Vs_cc<<" cc "; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\n Vcl = "<<Vcl_cc<<" cc "; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n Vcl = "<<Vcl_cc<<" cc "; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\n Vt = "<<Vt_cc<<" cc "; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n Vt = "<<Vt_cc<<" cc "; 83 cout << "\n\n\t\t Press 'enter' twice to proceed ... "; getch(); getch(); MmO = 16.0; MmN = 14.0; MmC = 12.0; MmH = 1.0; yO2 = 0.21; yN2 = 0.79; MmO2 = 2.0*MmO; MmN2 = 2.0*MmN; xAl = xAl_per/100.0; xG = 1.0-xAl; xF = xAl+xG; MmG = (a*MmC)+(b*MmH); MmAl = (ZC*MmC)+(ZH*MmH)+(ZO*MmO); nAl = xAl/MmAl; nG = xG/MmG; nAlG = nAl+nG; yAl = nAl/nAlG; yG = 1.0-yAl; yF = yAl+yG; yAl_per = yAl*100.0; MmA = (yO2*MmO2)+(yN2*MmN2); MmF = (yG*MmG)+(yAl*MmAl); n1th = (ZC*yAl)+(a*yG); n2th = ((ZH*yAl)+(b*yG))/2.0; LAMBDAMAX = 1.2; LAMBDAMIN = 0.8; LAMBDA = (LAMBDAMAX*xAl)+(LAMBDAMIN*xG); atha = ((2.0*n1th)+n2th-(ZO*yAl))/2; ath = atha*LAMBDA; getch(); clrscr(); cout<<"\n\t The input amount in the combustion reaction"; outfile<<"\n\t The input amount in the combustion reaction"; cout<<"\n\t **************************************************"; outfile<<"\n\t **************************************************"; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n atha ="<<atha; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n atha ="<<atha; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n LAMBDA ="<<LAMBDA; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n LAMBDA ="<<LAMBDA; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n ath ="<<ath; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n ath ="<<ath; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n xAl="<<xAl; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n xAl="<<xAl; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n xG ="<<xG; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n xG ="<<xG; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n yAl ="<<yAl; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n yAl ="<<yAl; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n yG ="<<yG; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n yG ="<<yG; getch(); clrscr(); cout<<"\n\t The emission amount in the combustion reaction"; outfile<<"\n\t The emission amount in the combustion reaction"; cout<<"\n\t **************************************************"; outfile<<"\n\t **************************************************"; if (LAMBDA == 1.0) { // Considering 'one Kilo mole (nF = 1 kmol)' of HydroCarbon Fuel (CaHb)', // the 'theoretical combustion equation (LAMBDA = 1)'is: // nF*Ca+Hb+LAMBDA*ath*(O2+3.76*N2) - n1*CO2+n2*H2O+n3*N2 yO2 = 0.21; yN2 = 0.79; MmO2 = 2.0*MmO; MmN2 = 2.0*MmN; xAl = xAl_per/100.0; xG = 1.0-xAl; xF = xAl+xG; MmG = (a*MmC)+(b*MmH); MmAl = (ZC*MmC)+(ZH*MmH)+(ZO*MmO); nAl = xAl/MmAl; nG = xG/MmG; nAlG = nAl+nG; 84 yAl = nAl/nAlG; yG = 1.0-yAl; yF = yAl+yG; yAl_per = yAl*100.0; MmA = (yO2*MmO2)+(yN2*MmN2); MmF = (yG*MmG)+(yAl*MmAl); n1th = (ZC*yAl)+(a*yG); n2th = ((ZH*yAl)+(b*yG))/2.0; atha = (2.0*n1th)+n2th-(ZO*yAl); ath = atha*LAMBDA; n3 = (2.0*3.76*LAMBDA*atha)/2.0; n1 = n1th; n2 = n2th; n3th = n3th; n4 = 0.0; n5 = 0.0; nt = n1+n2+n3+n4+n5; y1 = n1/nt; y2 = n2/nt; y3 = n3/nt; y4 = n4/nt; y5 = n5/nt; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n1= "<<n1; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n1= "<<n1; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n2= "<<n2; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n2= "<<n2; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n3= "<<n3; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n3= "<<n3; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n4= "<<n4; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n4= "<<n4; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n5= "<<n5; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n5= "<<n5; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y1= "<<y1; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y1= "<<y1; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y2= "<<y2; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y2= "<<y2; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y3= "<<y3; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y3= "<<y3; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y5 "<<y5; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y5= "<<y5; } if (LAMBDA > 1.0) { // Considering 'one Kilo mole (nF = 1 kmol)' of HydroCarbon Fuel (CaHb)', // the 'theoretical combustion equation (LAMBDA < 1)'is: // nF*Ca+Hb+LAMBDA*ath*(O2+3.76*N2) - n1*CO2+n2*H2O+n3*N2+n4*O2 yO2 = 0.21; yN2 = 0.79; MmO2 = 2.0*MmO; MmN2 = 2.0*MmN; xAl = xAl_per/100.0; xG = 1.0-xAl; xF = xAl+xG; MmG = (a*MmC)+(b*MmH); MmAl = (ZC*MmC)+(ZH*MmH)+(ZO*MmO); nAl = xAl/MmAl; nG = xG/MmG; nAlG = nAl+nG; yAl = nAl/nAlG; yG = 1.0-yAl; yF = yAl+yG; yAl_per = yAl*100.0; MmA = (yO2*MmO2)+(yN2*MmN2); MmF = (yG*MmG)+(yAl*MmAl); n2 = ((ZH*yAl)+(b*yG))/2.0; n3 = (2.0*3.76*LAMBDA*atha)/2.0; n1r = (yAl+(2.0*ath)); n4 =((yAl+(2.0*ath))-(2*n1)-n2)/2; n5 = ((ZC*yAl)+(a*yG))-n1r; nt = n1+n2+n3+n4+n5r; n1= ((ZC*yAl)+(a*yG)); na1 = ZC;na2=(yAl+(2.0*ath))-((ZH*yAl)+(b*yG))/22*((ZC*yAl)+(a*yG)); na= ZC*yAl;ng=a*yG;nag =na+ng; n5r= 0; y1 = n1/nt; y2 = n2/nt; y3 = n3/nt; y4 = n4/nt; y5 = n5r/nt; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n1= "<<n1; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n1= "<<n1; 85 cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n na2= "<<na2; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n1r= "<<n1r; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n2= "<<n2; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n2= "<<n2; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n3= "<<n3; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n3= "<<n3; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n4= "<<n4; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n4= "<<n4; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n5= "<<n5r; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n5= "<<n5r; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y1= "<<y1; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y1= "<<y1; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y2= "<<y2; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y2= "<<y2; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y3= "<<y3; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y3= "<<y3; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y4= "<<y4; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y4= "<<y4; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y5 "<<y5; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y5= "<<y5; } if (LAMBDA < 1.0) { // Considering 'one Kilo mole (nF = 1 kmol)' of HydroCarbon Fuel (CaHb)', // the 'theoretical combustion equation (LAMBDA < 1)'is: // nF*Ca+Hb+LAMBDA*ath*(O2+3.76*N2) n1*CO2+n2*H2O+n3*N2+n4*O2+n5*CO yO2 = 0.21; yN2 = 0.79; MmO2 = 2.0*MmO; MmN2 = 2.0*MmN; xAl = xAl_per/100.0; xG = 1.0-xAl; xF = xAl+xG; MmG = (a*MmC)+(b*MmH); MmAl = (ZC*MmC)+(ZH*MmH)+(ZO*MmO); nAl = xAl/MmAl; nG = xG/MmG; nAlG = nAl+nG; yAl = nAl/nAlG; yG = 1.0-yAl; yF = yAl+yG; yAl_per = yAl*100.0; MmA = (yO2*MmO2)+(yN2*MmN2); MmF = (yG*MmG)+(yAl*MmAl); n2 = ((ZH*yAl)+(b*yG))/2.0; n3 = (2.0*3.76*LAMBDA*atha)/2.0; n1r = (yAl+(2.0*ath)); n4 = 0.0; n5 = ((ZC*yAl)+(a*yG))-n1r; nt = n1+n2+n3+n4+n5r; n1= ((ZC*yAl)+(a*yG)); na1 = ZC;na2=(yAl+(2.0*ath))-((ZH*yAl)+(b*yG))/2((ZC*yAl)+(a*yG)); na= ZC*yAl;ng=a*yG;nag =na+ng; n5r= n1-na2; y1 = n1/nt; y2 = n2/nt; y3 = n3/nt; y4 = n4/nt; y5 = n5r/nt; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n1= "<<n1; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n1= "<<n1; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n na2= "<<na2; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n1r= "<<n1r; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n2= "<<n2; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n2= "<<n2; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n3= "<<n3; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n3= "<<n3; 86 cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n4= "<<n4; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n4= "<<n4; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n5= "<<n5r; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n n5= "<<n5r; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y1= "<<y1; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y1= "<<y1; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y2= "<<y2; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y2= "<<y2; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y3= "<<y3; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y3= "<<y3; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y5 "<<y5; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n y5= "<<y5; getch(); clrscr(); } MmAth = MmA; MmFth = MmF; nO2 = atha; nN2 = atha*3.76; nA = nO2+nN2; AFth = (nA*MmAth)/MmFth; AF = LAMBDA*AFth; QLHV_F = (QLHV_Al*xAl)+(QLHV_G*xG); RHO_Fkgplit = (RHO_Alkgplit*yAl)+(RHO_Gkgplit*yG); RHO_F = RHO_Fkgplit*1.0e3; ETA_cmax = 0.95; ETA_c = ETA_cmax*(-1.6+(4.65*LAMBDA)-(2.07*LAMBDA*LAMBDA)); ETA_cper = ETA_c*100.0; Rm = 0.287; Zm = 0.99; Vm = Vt; mm = (pim*1.0e5*Vm)/(Zm*Rm*1.0e3*Tim); mA = (AF/(AF+1.0))*(1.0-xR)*mm; mF = (1.0/(AF+1.0))*(1.0-xR)*mm; mres = xR*mm; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n ath = "<<ath<<" ; AF = "<<AF; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n ath = "<<ath<<" ; AF = "<<AF; cout <<setprecision(2)<<" ; ETA_c = "<<ETA_cper<<" % "; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<" ; ETA_c = "<<ETA_cper<<" % "; cout <<setprecision(2)<<" ; yAl_per = "<<yAl_per<<" % "; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<" ; yAl_per = "<<yAl_per<<" % "; cout <<setprecision(6)<<"\n\n mm = "<<mm<<" kg "; outfile<<setprecision(6)<<"\n\n mm = "<<mm<<" kg "; cout <<setprecision(6)<<"\n mA = "<<mA<<" kg "; outfile<<setprecision(6)<<"\n mA = "<<mA<<" kg "; cout <<setprecision(6)<<"\n mF = "<<mF<<" kg "; outfile<<setprecision(6)<<"\n mF = "<<mF<<" kg "; cout <<setprecision(6)<<"\n mres = "<<mres<<" kg "; outfile<<setprecision(6)<<"\n mres = "<<mres<<" kg "; cout << "\n\n\t\t Press 'enter' twice to proceed ... "; getch(); getch(); clrscr(); cout << "\n\n\t\t Adama Science and Technology University (ASTU) "; cout << " \n\t Department of Mechanical and Vehicle Engineering "; cout << " \n\t\t Tamiru Tesfaye (Asst. lecturer) "; 87 cout << "\n................................................................. ............... \n"; cout << "\n\n 'V', 'p' and 'T' as a function of 'theta' "; outfile << "\n\n 'V', 'p' and 'T' as a function of 'theta' "; cout << "\n -------------------------------------------- \n"; outfile << "\n\t---------------------------------------------------- "; cout <<"\n\ttheta\t V\t p\t T "; cout <<"\n\t(deg.)\t (cc)\t (bar)\t (K) \n"; outfile <<"\n\t theta\t V\t p\t T "; outfile <<"\n\t (deg.)\t (cc)\t (bar)\t (K) \n "; deltheta = 10.0; for (theta = 0.0; theta <= 720.0; theta = theta+deltheta) { V0bi = Vcl; p0bi = pim; T0bi = Tim; m0bi = mres; R0bi = R6b; if (theta >= theta_0 && theta <= theta_b) { // process a-7 (constant pressure intake process). rad = theta*(PI/180.0); Z0b = 0.99; xp0b = r*((1.0-cos(rad))+((Rrl*sin(rad)*sin(rad))/2.0)); Vs0b = Ap*xp0b; V0b = Vcl+Vs0b; p0b = p0bi; T0b = T0bi; R0b = 0.287; m0b = m0bi+((pim*1.0e5*V0b)/(Z0b*R0b*1.0e3*T0b)); Vb = V0b*1.0e6; pb = p0b; Tb = T0b; mb = m0b; thetab = theta; cout << setprecision(2)<<"\n\t"<<thetab; outfile << setprecision(2)<<"\n " <<thetab; cout << setprecision(2)<<"\t "<<Vb; outfile << setprecision(2)<<"\t"<< Vb; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\t "<<pb; outfile <<setprecision(2)<<"\t " << pb; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\t"<<Tb; outfile <<setprecision(2)<<"\t " << Tb; getch(); } Vb1i = Vb*1.0e-6; pb1i = pb; Tb1i = Tb; mb1i = mb; if (theta > theta_b && theta <= theta_1) { // process b-1 (polytropic compression): rad = theta*(PI/180.0); xpb1 = r*((1.0-cos(rad))+((Rrl*sin(rad)*sin(rad))/2.0)); Vsb1 = Ap*xpb1; Vb1 = Vcl+Vsb1; VbVb1 = Vb1i/Vb1; nb1 = 1.35; nb1T = nb1-1.0; Rb1 = 0.287; Zb1 = 0.99; pb1 = pb1i*pow(VbVb1,nb1); Tb1 = Tb1i*pow(VbVb1,nb1T); delmb1 = mb1i-((pb1*1.0e5*Vb1)/(Zb1*Tb1*Rb1*1.0e3)); mb1 = mb1i-delmb1; V1 = Vb1*1.0e6; p1 = pb1; T1 = Tb1; theta1 = theta; cout << setprecision(2)<<"\n\t"<<theta1; outfile << setprecision(2)<<"\n " <<theta1; cout << setprecision(2)<<"\t "<<V1; outfile << setprecision(2)<<"\t"<< V1; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\t "<<p1; 88 outfile <<setprecision(2)<<"\t " << p1; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\t"<<T1; outfile <<setprecision(2)<<"\t " << T1; getch(); } m12i = mb1; V12i = V1*1.0e-6; p12i = p1; T12i = T1; m12i = mb1; if (theta > theta_1 && theta <= theta_2) { // process 1-2 (polytropic effective compression): rad = theta*(PI/180.0); xp12 = r*((1.0-cos(rad))+((Rrl*sin(rad)*sin(rad))/2.0)); Vs12 = Ap*xp12; V12 = Vcl+Vs12; V1V12 = V12i/V12; n12 = 1.35; n12T = n12-1.0; R12 = 0.287; Z12 = 0.99; m12 = m12i; p12 = p12i*pow(V1V12,n12); T12 = T12i*pow(V1V12,n12T); W12 = (m12*R12*(T12-T12i))/(1.0-n12); W2 = W12; V2 = V12*1.0e6; p2 = p12; T2 = T12; theta2 = theta; cout << setprecision(2)<<"\n\t"<<theta2; outfile << setprecision(2)<<"\n " <<theta2; cout << setprecision(2)<<"\t "<<V2; outfile << setprecision(2)<<"\t"<< V2; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\t "<<p2; outfile <<setprecision(2)<<"\t " << p2; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\t"<<T2; outfile <<setprecision(2)<<"\t " << T2; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\t " << W12; getch(); } W12 = W2; V23i = V2*1.0e-6; p23i = p2; T23i = T2; T23 = T2+5.0; if (theta > theta_2 && theta <= theta_3) { rad = theta*(PI/180.0); p23 = p3; xp23 = r*((1.0-cos(rad))+((Rrl*sin(rad)*sin(rad))/2.0)); Vs23 = Ap*xp23; V23 = Vcl+Vs23; m23 = m12i; theta2dc = ((theta-theta_2)/theta_dc)*PI; rad2dc = theta2dc; cv23 = 0.821; R23 = 0.287; n23 = 1.3; // Z23 = 0.98; xF = 1.0/(AF+1.0); mF = (xF*(1.0-xR))*m23; xb = 0.5*(1.0cos(rad2dc)); Qin = (mF*QLHV_F*1.0e6)*ETA_c; Q1 = Qin*xb; Q23 = Q1; W23 = (p23*1.0e5)*(V23-V23i); QW23 = (Q23-W23)/(m23*cv23*1.0e3); T23 = QW23+T23i; p23 = ((T23/T23i)*(V23i/V23))*p23i; W3 = W23/1000.0; Q3 = Q23/1000.0; V3 = V23*1.0e6; p3 = p23; T3 = T23; T23 = T3; m3 = m23; theta3 = theta; cout << setprecision(2)<<"\n\t"<<theta3; outfile << setprecision(2)<<"\n " <<theta3; cout << setprecision(2)<<"\t "<<V3; outfile << setprecision(2)<<"\t"<< V3; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\t "<<p3; 89 outfile <<setprecision(2)<<"\t " << p3; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\t"<<T3; outfile <<setprecision(2)<<"\t " << T3; getch(); } W23 = W3; Q23 = Q3; V34i = V3*1.0e-6; p34i = p3; T34i = T3; m34i = m3; if (theta > theta_3 && theta <= theta_4) { // process 3-4 (polytropic expansion): rad = theta*(PI/180.0); xp34 = r*((1.0-cos(rad))+((Rrl*sin(rad)*sin(rad))/2.0)); Vs34 = Ap*xp34; V34 = Vcl+Vs34; V3V34 = V34i/V34; m34 = m12i; n34 = 1.35; n34T = n34-1.0; R34 = 0.287; Z34 = 0.99; p34 = p34i*pow(V3V34,n34); T34 = T34i*pow(V3V34,n34T); delm34 = m34i-((p34*1.0e5*V34)/(Z34*T34*R34*1.0e3)); m34 = m34i-delm34; W34 = (m34*R34*(T34-T34i))/(1.0-n34); W4 = W34; V4 = V34*1.0e6; p4 = p34; T4 = T34; theta4 = theta; cout << setprecision(2)<<"\n\t"<<theta4; outfile << setprecision(2)<<"\n " <<theta4; cout << setprecision(2)<<"\t "<<V4; outfile << setprecision(2)<<"\t"<< V4; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\t "<<p4; outfile <<setprecision(2)<<"\t " << p4; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\t"<<T4; outfile <<setprecision(2)<<"\t " << T4; cout<<setprecision(2)<<"\t " << W34; getch(); } W34 = W4; V45i = V4*1.0e-6; p45i = p4; T45i = T4; m45i = m12i; if (theta > theta_4 && theta <= theta_5) { // process 4-5 (polytropic exhaust blowdown): rad = theta*(PI/180.0); xp45 = r*((1.0-cos(rad))+((Rrl*sin(rad)*sin(rad))/2.0)); Vs45 = Ap*xp45; V45 = Vcl+Vs45; V4V45 = V45i/V45; m45 = m12i; n45 = 1.35; n45T = n45-1.0; R45 = 0.287; Z45 = 0.99; p45 = p45i*pow(V4V45,n45); T45 = T45i*pow(V4V45,n45T); delm45 = m45i-((p45*1.0e5*V45)/(Z45*T45*R45*1.0e3)); m45 = m45i-delm45; W45 = (m45*R45*1.0e3*(T45-T45i))/(1.0n45); W5 = W45/100.0; V5 = V45*1.0e6; p5 = p45; T5 = T45; theta5 = theta; cout << setprecision(2)<<"\n\t"<<theta5; outfile << setprecision(2)<<"\n " <<theta5; cout << setprecision(2)<<"\t "<<V5; outfile << setprecision(2)<<"\t"<< V5; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\t "<<p5; outfile <<setprecision(2)<<"\t " << p5; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\t"<<T5; 90 outfile <<setprecision(2)<<"\t " << T5; getch(); } W45 = W5; V45i = V4*1.0e-6; p45i = p4; T45i = T4; m45i = m12i; if (theta > theta_5 && theta <= theta_6) { // process 4-5 (polytropic exhaust blowdown): rad = theta*(PI/180.0); xp56 = r*((1.0-cos(rad))+((Rrl*sin(rad)*sin(rad))/2.0)); Vs56 = Ap*xp56; V56 = Vcl+Vs56; V5V6 = V45i/V56; m56 = m12i; n45 = 1.35; n45T = n45-1.0; R45 = 0.287; Z45 = 0.99; p45 = p45i*pow(V4V45,n45); T45 = T45i*pow(V4V45,n45T); delm45 = m45i-((p45*1.0e5*V45)/(Z45*T45*R45*1.0e3)); m45 = m45i-delm45; W45 = (m45*R45*1.0e3*(T45-T45i))/(1.0n45); W5 = W45/100.0; V6 = V56*1.0e6; p6 = p1; T6 = T1; theta6 = theta; cout << setprecision(2)<<"\n\t"<<theta6; outfile << setprecision(2)<<"\n " <<theta6; cout << setprecision(2)<<"\t "<<V6; outfile << setprecision(2)<<"\t"<< V6; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\t "<<p6; outfile <<setprecision(2)<<"\t " << p6; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\t"<<T6; outfile <<setprecision(2)<<"\t " << T6; getch(); } } Wnet = W12+W34; Qin = Q23; ETA_ith = Wnet/Qin; ETA_ithper = ETA_ith*100.0; imep_bar = ((Wnet*1.0e3)/Vs)*1.0e-5; Wi = Wnet*Zc; n_cps = N/(60.0*Z_rpc); Pi = Wi*n_cps; Pb_kW = Pi*ETA_m; mF_kgps = mF*Zc*n_cps; mF_kgph = mF_kgps*3600.0; bsfc = mF_kgph/Pb_kW; Tb_NM = (Pb_kW*60*1000)/(2*3.14*N); cout <<setprecision(6)<<"\n\n mm = "<<mm<<" kg "; outfile<<setprecision(6)<<"\n\n mm = "<<mm<<" kg "; cout <<setprecision(6)<<"\n mb1i = "<<mb1i<<" kg "; outfile<<setprecision(6)<<"\n mb1i = "<<mb1i<<" kg "; cout <<setprecision(6)<<"\n m12i = "<<m12i<<" kg "; outfile<<setprecision(6)<<"\n m12i = "<<m12i<<" kg "; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n Wnet = "<<Wnet<<" kJ "; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n Wnet = "<<Wnet<<" kJ "; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"; Qin = "<<Qin<<" kJ "; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"; Qin = "<<Qin<<" kJ "; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"; ETA_ith = "<<ETA_ithper<<" % "; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"; ETA_ith = "<<ETA_ithper<<" % "; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"; imep = "<<imep_bar<<" bar "; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"; imep = "<<imep_bar<<" bar "; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n Pb = "<<Pb_kW<<" kW "; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n Pb = "<<Pb_kW<<" kW "; 91 cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n Tb= "<<Tb_NM<<" NM "; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"\n\n Tb = "<<Tb_NM<<" NM "; cout <<setprecision(2)<<"; bsfc = "<<bsfc<<" kg/kWh "; outfile<<setprecision(2)<<"; bsfc = "<<bsfc<<" kg/kWh "; cout << "\n\n\n\t\t Press 'enter' twice to exit ! "; getch(); getch(); getche(); Appendix. 2 For drawing engine performance parameter curve #include<iostream.h> #include<iomanip.h> #include<conio.h> #include<math.h> #include<fstream.h> void main() { float Pb,Pb_max,x,N,Tb,NaPb_max,pi,bsfc,bsfcaPb_max,Ec,bmep; float OMEGA,n_cps,del; clrscr (); ofstream outfile ("per.dat"); cout << "\n\n\t\t Adama Science and Technology University (ASTU) "; outfile << "\n\n\t\t Adama Science and Technology University (ASTU) "; cout << " \n\t Department of Mechanical and Vehicle Engineering "; outfile << " \n\t Department of Mechanical and Vehicle Engineering "; cout << " \n\t\t outfile << " \n\t\t Tamiru Tesfaye (Asst. lecturer) "; Tamiru Tesfaye (Asst. lecturer) "; cout << "\n................................................................. ............... \n"; outfile << "\n.............................................................."; 92 cout <<"\n Enter engine capacity(Ec) in cc = "; cin >>Ec; cout <<"\n Enter maximum brake power(Pb_max)in kw = "; cin >>Pb_max; cout << "\n Enter speed at maximum brake power(NaPb_max)in rpm = "; cin >>NaPb_max; cout << "\n Enter bsfc at maximum brake power(bsfcaPb_max)in kg/kwh = "; cin >>bsfcaPb_max; del = 1000; getch(); getch(); clrscr(); for (N =0; N<= 8000; N = N+del) { pi=3.14; x = N/NaPb_max; n_cps = N/(60.0*2); OMEGA = (2.0*pi*N)/60.0; Pb = Pb_max*(-(x*x*x)+(x*x)+x); Tb = (Pb*1.0e3)/OMEGA; bsfc = bsfcaPb_max*((x*x)-(1.2*x)+1.2); bmep = ((Pb*1.0e3)/(Ec*n_cps))*1.0e6; getch();clrscr(); cout << "\n\n\t\t Adama Science and Technology University (ASTU) "; outfile << "\n\n\t\t Adama Science and Technology University (ASTU) "; cout << " \n\t\t outfile << " \n\t\t Tamiru Tesfaye (Asst. lecturer) "; Tamiru Tesfaye(Asst. lecturer) "; cout << "\n................................................................. ............... \n"; outfile << "\n................................................................. ..... \n"; cout <<"\n\n Major 'Performance Parameters':"; 93 cout <<"\n --------------------------------"; cout <<"\n N"; outfile <<"\n N"; cout <<"\t Pb"; outfile <<"\t Pb"; cout <<"\t Tb"; outfile <<"\t Tb"; cout <<"\t bsfc"; outfile <<"\t bsfc"; cout <<"\t bmep"; outfile <<"\t bmep"; cout <<"\n (rpm)"; outfile <<"\n (rpm)"; cout <<"\t (kw)"; outfile <<"\t (kw)"; cout <<"\t (NM)"; outfile <<"\t (NM)"; cout <<"\t (kg/kwh)"; outfile <<"\t (kg/kwh)"; cout <<"\t\t (bar)"; outfile <<"\t (bar)"; cout <<setprecision(3)<<"\n N = "<<N<<" rpm "; outfile <<setprecision(3)<<"\n cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\t N = "<<N<<" rpm "; Pb = "<<Pb<<" kW "; outfile <<setprecision(2)<<"\t cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\t outfile Tb = "<<Tb<<" Nm "; <<setprecision(2)<<"\t cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\t outfile Pb = "<<Pb<<" kW "; Tb = "<<Tb<<" Nm "; bsfc = "<<bsfc<<" kg/kWh "; <<setprecision(2)<<"\t cout <<setprecision(2)<<"\t bsfc = "<<bsfc<<" kg/kWh "; bmep = "<<bmep<<" bar "; outfile <<setprecision(2)<<"\t bmep = "<<bmep<<" bar "; getch(); getche(); } cout <<"\n press any key twice to 'proceed'"; getch(); getch(); getche(); } 94