EFFECT OF INJECTION TIMING AND INJECTION PRESSURE ON A SINGLE CYLINDER DIESEL ENGINE FOR BETTER PERFORMANCE AND EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS FOR JATROPA BIO DIESEL IN SINGLE AND DUAL FUEL MODE WITH CNG
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

EFFECT OF INJECTION TIMING AND INJECTION PRESSURE ON A SINGLE CYLINDER DIESEL ENGINE FOR BETTER PERFORMANCE AND EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS FOR JATROPA BIO DIESEL IN SINGLE AND DUAL FUEL MODE WITH CNG

on

  • 375 views

In the present investigation test were carried out to examine the performance and emissions of a direct injection diesel engine blended with Jatropa bio-diesel prepared with methanol to get jatropa ...

In the present investigation test were carried out to examine the performance and emissions of a direct injection diesel engine blended with Jatropa bio-diesel prepared with methanol to get jatropa oil methyl ester (JOME) . Experiments are conducted with JOME single and dual fuel mode with compressed natural gas (CNG) in a single cylinder 4 stroke diesel engine. Performance parameters such as brake thermal efficiency (BTE) and brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC), emissions such as CO, UBHC, smoke density and NOx are determined at three injection pressures of 180, 200 and 220 bar and two injection timings 27obtdc and 31obtdc. Parameters are compared with base line data of diesel fuel. It was found through experiments that CNG - JOME can be used as fuel with better performance at 220 bar pressure and advanced injection timing of 31obtdc. The harmful pollutants such as UBHC, CO and NOx are reduced in jatropa oil methyl ester with CNG in single and dual fuel mode compared to diesel fuel.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
375
Views on SlideShare
375
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
10
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

CC Attribution License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

EFFECT OF INJECTION TIMING AND INJECTION PRESSURE ON A SINGLE CYLINDER DIESEL ENGINE FOR BETTER PERFORMANCE AND EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS FOR JATROPA BIO DIESEL IN SINGLE AND DUAL FUEL MODE WITH CNG EFFECT OF INJECTION TIMING AND INJECTION PRESSURE ON A SINGLE CYLINDER DIESEL ENGINE FOR BETTER PERFORMANCE AND EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS FOR JATROPA BIO DIESEL IN SINGLE AND DUAL FUEL MODE WITH CNG Document Transcript

  • International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Mar. 2013.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 EFFECT OF INJECTION TIMING AND INJECTION PRESSURE ON A SINGLE CYLINDER DIESEL ENGINE FOR BETTER PERFORMANCE AND EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS FOR JATROPA BIO DIESEL IN SINGLE AND DUAL FUEL MODE WITH CNG Meyyappan Venkatesan Assistant Professor, Mechanical Engineering, Ethiopian Institute of Technology [EIT – M], Mekelle University, EthiopiaABSTRACTIn the present investigation test were carried out to examine the performance and emissions of a direct injectiondiesel engine blended with Jatropa bio-diesel prepared with methanol to get jatropa oil methyl ester (JOME) .Experiments are conducted with JOME single and dual fuel mode with compressed natural gas (CNG) in asingle cylinder 4 stroke diesel engine. Performance parameters such as brake thermal efficiency (BTE) andbrake specific fuel consumption (BSFC), emissions such as CO, UBHC, smoke density and NOx are determinedat three injection pressures of 180, 200 and 220 bar and two injection timings 27 obtdc and 31obtdc. Parametersare compared with base line data of diesel fuel. It was found through experiments that CNG - JOME can beused as fuel with better performance at 220 bar pressure and advanced injection timing of 31 obtdc. The harmfulpollutants such as UBHC, CO and NOx are reduced in jatropa oil methyl ester with CNG in single and dual fuelmode compared to diesel fuel.KEYWORDS: Jatropa oil methyl ester - performance – emission characteristics - dual fuel mode – CNG. I. INTRODUCTIONMotor vehicles contribute significantly to the air pollutions problems. Therefore use of alternativefuels can help in the promotion of environmental protection. Increased consumption of conventionalbased fuel gives way for the exploration of several alternative fuels. Important requirement ofautomotive fuels such as high energy density safety in usage and handling, conveniences intransportation, storage and cost but not the least environmental acceptability make bio-dieselespecially jatropa oil a vegetable oil derived fuel and among the gaseous fuels Compressed naturalGas as the strongest contenders to replace the petroleum derived fuels.Major problems associated with direct use of vegetable oils are their viscosity, volatility and heatingvalue. Excessive carbon deposits and thickening of lubricating oil are the problems associated withdirect use of straight vegetable oils. Properties can be improved by preparing esters of jatropa withmethanol to form jatropa oil methyl ester (JOME).Among the various alternative fuels bio-diesel is one of the most promising liquid fuels for CIengines. Gaseous fuels such as compressed natural gas (CNG), biogas, hydrogen, liquefied petroleumgas have been tried. Gaseous fuels are promising because they are less polluting for environment.They form premixture very easily. Taking into consideration the availability and development in Indiaregarding bio-diesel and CNG the present work has concentrated on utilization of JOME bio-dieseland CNG as alternative fuel in CI engine. 21 Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 21-34
  • International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Mar. 2013.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963Notations used:BSFC: Brake specific fuel consumptionBTE: Brake thermal efficiencyBSEC: Brake specific energy consumptionUBHC: Un burnt hydrocarbonCO: Carbon monoxideNOx: Nitric oxidesII. PROCEDUREEngine TestEngine running tests were conducted on Kirloskar make, single cylinder,4-stroke-cycle, constantspeed (1500 rpm) vertical, water cooled, direct injection, 5hp (3.7 kW), bore 100 mm and stroke110mm, compression ratio 20:1 diesel engine. Tests were conducted at different loads, with diesel oil,transesterified oil (JOME) CNG-Diesel and CNG-JOME for comparative study. The experimentalsetup of the engine is shown in figure 1a. An eddy current dynamometer was used for loadmeasurement. The engine speed was sensed and indicated by an inductive pick up sensor facingmarks on flywheel with digital meter output. Chromel-alumel thermocouple was used for exhaust gastemperature measurement. Figure 1b shows AVL make smoke meter used for smoke measurement.Carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO2), hydrocarbon (HC), nitrous oxide (NOx) weremeasured by MRU air emission monitoring systems shown in figure 1c.Fuel consumption is measuredby a burette with two sensors placed apart two markings to measure 20cc accurately. Table – 1 Specification of the engine Make Kirloskar, single cylinder Type direct injection, water cooled Bore X Stroke (mm) 100 X 110 Compression ratio 20:1 Rated power 5hp (3.7 kW), Rates speed constant speed (1500 rpm) Start of injection 180 bar Table – 2 Range of operating parameter tried in the present testing % Load 20% 40% 60% 80% and 100% Speed constant speed (1500 rpm) Compression ratio 20:1 Injection Timing obTDC 27 o bTDC and 31 o bTDC Injection Pressure 180bar, 200bar and 220 bar Table.3 Properties of Biodiesel compared with neat diesel Properties Diesel Jatropha BioDiesel (Methyl Ester) Cetane No. 48 – 56 23 / 51 57 Density(kg/m 3 ) 821 920 892 Viscosity (cSt) 3.52 75,7 5.402 Calorific value (MJ/kg) 43 39,628 39.15 Flash point (°C) 48 340 156 22 Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 21-34
  • International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Mar. 2013.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 a. Engine Set up b. Smoke meter c. Exhaust Gas analyzer Figure 1- Equipment used in Conducting Tests2.1 Test ProcedureEngine tests were conducted at 27° btdc and 310 btdc injection timings and injection pressures of180bar, 200bar and 220 bar respectively. Engine was started on neat diesel and warmed up till coolingwater temperature was stabilized. Fuel consumption, exhaust temperature, exhaust emissions such asUBHC, NOX, CO2, CO and exhaust gas opacity were measured and recorded for different loads.Similar procedure was repeated for CNG-diesel for constant flow rate of CNG of 0.4kg per hour atconstant speed of 1500rpm.Since a governor is used in the engine to regulate the flow rate of diesel tokeep the engine speed constant, natural gas flow rate is maintained constant. Tests were repeated for20%, 40%, 60%and 80% loading conditions. Three readings were taken for each load and averagevalue is used for calculations.III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 3.1 Engine performanceBrake Specific fuel consumption (BSFC) Fig 2 – BSFC VS BP AT 180 BAR 27O BTDC 23 Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 21-34
  • International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Mar. 2013.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 Fig 3 - BSFC VS BP AT 200 BAR 27O BTDC BSFC VS Brake Power for 220 bar pressure 27O BTDC 1 0.8 DIESEL bsfc(Kg/Kw-hr) 0.6 0.4 CNG-DIESEL 0.2 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.675 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 4 - BSFC VS BP AT 220 BAR 27O BTDCFigure 2, 3 and 4 shows variation of brake specific fuel consumption with brake power curves fordiesel and CNG-Diesel operation of the engine at 27 deg btdc and 180bar, 200bar and 220barinjection pressures respectively. BSFC of diesel at standard injection pressure of 180 bar and injectiontiming of 27 deg btdc is 0.61Kg/Kw-hr at low loads of operation. At higher loads of operation BSFCis 0.30Kg/Kw-hr. The values for CNG-Diesel for low load and higher loads are 0.83 and 0.32Kg/Kw-hr For CNG-Diesel at all the three injection pressures at low loads it is 0.83Kg/Kw-hr with very littlevariations and it is nearly equal to that of diesel at higher loads. This is because of better mixing andatomization of fuel at higher injection pressures. BSFC VS Brake Power for 180 bar pressure 31O BTDC 0.8 0.6 bsfc(Kg/Kw-hr) DIESEL 0.4 CNG-DIESEL 0.2 hr) 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.675 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 5 - BSFC VS BP AT 180 BAR 31O BTD 24 Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 21-34
  • International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Mar. 2013.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 BSFC VS Brake Power for 200 bar pressure 31O BTDC 0.8 bsfc(Kg/Kw-hr) 0.6 DIESEL 0.4 CNG-DIESEL hr) 0.2 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.675 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 6 - BSFC VS BP AT 200 BAR 31O BTDC BSFC VS Brake Power for 220 bar pressure 31O BTDC 0.8 bsfc(Kg/Kw-hr) 0.6 DIESEL 0.4 CNG-DIESEL hr) 0.2 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.675 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 7 - BSFC VS BP AT 220 BAR 31O BTDCFigure 5,6 and 7 shows variation of brake specific fuel consumption with brake power curves fordiesel and CNG-Diesel operation of the engine at 31 deg btdc and 180bar,200bar and 220bar injectionpressures respectively For CNG-Diesel operation at low loads of operation for all injection pressuresis 10%. At higher loads it is 27.8%, 27.75% and 28.74% at 180bar, 200bar and 220bar pressuresrespectively. An increase of 1%in efficiency at higher pressures of 200bar and 220bar.Advancing theinjection timing improves the BTE due to longer time available for proper mixing and combustion BTE VS Brake Power for 180 bar pressure 27O BTDC 30 25 20 DIESEL BTE(%) 15 CNG-DIESEL 10 5 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.675 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 8 - BTE VS BP AT 180 BAR 27O BTDC 25 Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 21-34
  • International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Mar. 2013.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 BTE Vs Brake Power for 200 bar pressure 27O BTDC 30 20 BTE(%) DIESEL CNG-DIESEL 10 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.675 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 9 - BTE VS BP AT 200 BAR 27O BTDC BTE VS Brake Power for 220 bar pressure 27O BTDC 30 BTE(%) 20 DIESEL CNG-DIESEL 10 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.675 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 10 - BTE VS BP AT 220 BAR 27O BTDCFigure 8, 9 and 10 shows variation of brake thermal efficiency with brake power curves for diesel andCNG-Diesel operation of the engine at 27 deg btdc and 180bar,200bar and 220bar injection pressuresrespectively BTE for diesel baseline at 180bar pressure 27 deg btdc is 13.75% and 28% t low and highloads of operation respectively. For CNG-Diesel it is almost equal to 10% at all injection pressuresand at high loads it is 25.93%, 2.28% and 26.92% respectively at 180bar 200bar and 220bar pressures.At higher pressures efficiency approaches to that of diesel due to better mixing and combustion offuel BTE VS Brake Pow er for 180 bar pressure 31 deg btdc 30 25 BTE(%) 20 DIESEL 15 10 CNG-DIESEL 5 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.675 Brake Pow er(Kw ) Fig 11 - BTE VS BP AT 180 BAR 31O BTDC 26 Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 21-34
  • International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Mar. 2013.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 BTE VS Brake Power for 200 bar pressure 31O BTDC 40 30 DIESEL BTE(%) 20 CNG-DIESEL 10 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.675 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 12 - BTE VS BP AT 200 BAR 31O BTDC BTE VS Brake Power for 220 bar 31O BTDC 40 30 BTE(%) DIESEL 20 CNG-DIESEL 10 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.675 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 13- BTE VS BP AT 220 BAR 31O BTDCFigure 11, 12 and 13 shows variation of brake thermal efficiency with brake power curves for dieseland CNG-Diesel operation of the engine at 31 deg btdc and 180bar, 200bar and 220bar injectionpressures respectively. BSFC of CNG-Diesel at 180 bar pressure and 31 deg btdc is 0.70Kg/Kw-hr atlow loads of operation and at higher loads it is 0.25 Kg/Kw-hr.At higher loads of operation for 200barand 220 bar pressures it is 0.24 Kg/Kw-hr and 0.26 Kg/Kw-hr respectively. A very low bsfc of 0.24Kg/Kw-hr is achieved at 200 bar pressure and 31 deg btdc. Advancing the injection timing improvesthe bsfc due to better mixing and combustion process. 27 Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 21-34
  • International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Mar. 2013.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-19633.2. EMISSIONSUn Burnt Hydro Carbons UBHC VS Brake Power 180bar 31O BTDC 400 350 300 250 DIESEL 200 CNG-DIESEL 150 100 50 0 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.68 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 14 - UBHC VS BP AT 180 BAR 31O BTDC UBHC VS Brake Power for 200 bar 31O BTDC 400 350 300 250 200 150 DIESEL CNG-DIESEL 100 50 0 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.68 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 15 - UBHC VS BP AT 200 BAR 31O BTDC 28 Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 21-34
  • International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Mar. 2013.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 UBHC VS Brake Power for 220 bar 31O BTDC 350 300 250 200 DIESEL 150 CNG-DIESEL 100 50 0 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.68 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 16 - UBHC VS BP AT 220 BAR 31O BTDCFigure 14, 15 and 16 shows variation of unburnt hydrocarbons with brake power curves for dieseland CNG-diesel operation of the engine at 31 deg btdc and 180bar,200bar and 220bar injectionpressures respectively. A very high value of nearly 320ppm is obtained at all pressures at low loadsfor CNG-diesel operation when compared to very low value of 7ppm for diesel operation indicatingincomplete combustion due to improper mixing of liquid and gaseous fuels. It is nearly 65 ppm athigher loads of operation at all the three pressures due to better mixing and combustion CO VS Brake Power 180 bar 31O BTDC 0.25 0.2 0.15 DIESEL CNG-DIESEL 0.1 0.05 0 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.68 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 17 - CO VS BP AT 180 BAR 31O BTDC 29 Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 21-34
  • International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Mar. 2013.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 CO VS Brake Power for 200 bar 31O BTDC 0.3 0.25 0.2 DIESEL 0.15 CNG-DIESEL 0.1 0.05 0 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.68 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 18 - CO VS BP AT 200 BAR 31O BTDC CO VS Brake Power for 220bar 31O BTDC 0.25 0.2 0.15 DIESEL CNG-DIESEL 0.1 0.05 0 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.68 Brake Power (Kw) Fig19 - CO VS BP AT 220 BAR 31O BTDCFigure 17, 18 and 19 shows variation of carbon monoxide with brake power curves for diesel andCNG-Diesel operation of the engine at 31 deg btdc and 180bar, 200bar and 220bar injection pressuresrespectively. The values are nearly 0.15% atlow loads of operation at all the three pressures and 0.22at higher loads. The values for diesel are 0.01 at low loads and 0.07 at higher loads of operation. 30 Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 21-34
  • International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Mar. 2013.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 Smoke Density VS Brake Power 180bar 31O BTDC 80 70 60 50 DIESEL 40 CNG-DIESEL 30 20 10 0 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.68 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 20 - SMOKE DENSITY VS BP AT 180 BAR 31O BTDC Smoke Density VS Brake Power for 200bar 31O BTDC 120 100 80 DIESEL 60 CNG-DIESEL 40 20 0 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.68 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 21 - SMOKE DENSITY VS BP AT 200 BAR 31O BTDC Smoke Density VS Brake Power for 220 bar 31O BTDC 80 70 60 50 DIESEL 40 CNG-DIESEL 30 20 10 0 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.68 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 22 - SMOKE DENSITY VS BP AT 220 BAR 31O BTDCFigure 20, 21 and 22 shows variation of smoke density with brake power curves for diesel and CNG-Diesel operation of the engine at 31 deg btdc and 180bar,200bar and 220bar injection pressuresrespectively. The values 2 to 30ppm at low loads and 55 to 97 at higher load at three pressures whencompared to 1to 71 for diesel from low load to high loads indicating higher temperatures of runningwith CNG-diesel. 31 Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 21-34
  • International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Mar. 2013.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 NOx VS Brake Power 180 bar 31O BTDC 180 160 140 120 100 DIESEL 80 CNG-DIESEL 60 40 20 0 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.68 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 23 - Nox VS BP AT 180 BAR 31O BTDC NOx vs Brake Power for 200 bar 31O BTDC 160 140 120 100 DIESEL 80 CNG-DIESEL 60 40 20 0 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.68 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 24 - Nox VS BP AT 200 BAR 31O BTDC 160 NOx VS Brake Power for 220bar 31O BTDC 140 120 100 DIESEL 80 CNG-DIESEL 60 40 20 0 0 0.92 1.83 2.75 3.68 Brake Power (Kw) Fig 25 - Nox VS BP AT 220 BAR 31O BTDC 32 Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 21-34
  • International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Mar. 2013.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963Figure 23, 24 and 25 shows variation of oxides of nitrogen with brake power curves for diesel andCNG-Diesel operation of the engine at 31 deg btdc and 180bar,200bar and 220bar injection pressuresrespectively. At low loads it approaches to that of diesel with 22ppm and at higher loads it is 140ppmat all loads of operation due to higher temperatures of operation.IV. CONCLUSIONIn this investigation the diesel engine have been set to run at compression ratio 20:1, advancedinjection timing 31°bTDC and injector pressure 220bar to arrive at the optimum for jatropa oil methylesters (JOME). In CNG-JOME dual fuel operation of the engine at 31 deg btdc, BSFC of 0.87Kg/Kw-hr, 0.74 Kg/Kw-hr and 0.76 Kg/Kw-hr were obtained at low loads of operation at 180bar,200bar and 220bar pressures. At higher loads the values are 0.29Kg/Kw-hr,0.26Kg/Kw-hr and0.27Kg/Kw-hr for 180bar, 200bar and 220bar injection pressures respectively. BSFC at higher loadsis even less than diesel operation at all pressures with advanced injection timings due to slow flamevelocities and clean burning.The values for CNG-Diesel (single fuel) for low load and higher loads are 0.83 and 0.32Kg/Kw-hrFor CNG-Diesel at all the three injection pressures at low loads it is 0.83Kg/Kw-hr with very littlevariations and it is nearly equal to that of diesel at higher loads. This is because of better mixing andatomization of fuel at higher injection pressures. An increase in Brake thermal efficiency of 1.28% isobtained at higher loads when compared to base line diesel operation due to the advancement ininjection timing. At low loads the UBHC is high and it reduces at high load conditions. Pressurevariation does not have any effect on NOx and CO emissions but higher pressure causes higher valueof smoke density.Finally it can be concluded that CNG - JOME dual fuel mode could be used as alternative fuel foroperating CI engine at compression ratio of 20:1, higher injector operating pressure of 220 bar andadvanced injection timing of 31ºbTDC for optimum engine performance and lower emissions.REFERENCES [1]. Agarawal.A.K. & Das.L.M. “Biodiesel development and characterization for use as a fuel in compression ignition engines”, pp. 440-447, Transactions of ASME, Vol.123, April 2001. [2]. Avinash kumar Agarwal and Deepak Agarwal (2007) “Performance and emission characteristics of Jatropha oil (preheated and blends) in a direct injection compression ignition engine”Elsevier –Applied Thermal Engineering 2314-2323. [3]. G.H. Abd Alla, H.A. Soliman, O.A. Badr, M.F. Abd Rabbo,“effect of pilot fuel quantity on the performance of a dual fuel engine” pp269-277,Energy Conversion and Management, Vol 43, 2002. [4]. Karim G.A.(1983) “The dual fuel engine of compression ignition type –prospects, problems and solutions –A review” SAE Paper NO 831073, P3569. [5]. Karim G.A. An Examination of some Measures for Improving the Performance Gas fuelled diesel engines at light load SAE Paper No912366,1991, p966. [6]. Lakshminarayanarao G. and K.Rajagopal(2007) “Combustion Analysis of Diesel engine Fueled with jatropha oil methyl esters – Diesel blends ”Int Journal of Green Energy 2007. [7]. Liu.Z and Karim.G.A. ”The Ignition delay period in dual fuel engines.”SAE Paper No 950466, 1995, p356. [8]. Nwafor O.M.I “ Effect of Advanced Injection Timing on the performance of natural gas in Diesel Engine” Sadhana,Vol 25,part 1,2000,p11..Nwafor O.M.I,” Emission characteristics of Diesel engine operating on Rapeseed methyl ester”,Rewnewable Energy,vol.29,pp.119-129,2004. [9]. Papagiannakis R.G. and Houtalas D.T. “Combustion and exhaust emission characteristics of dual fuel compression ignition engine operated with pilot diesel fuel and natural gas.” Energy and management 45, 2004, P2971 [10]. Sahoo P.K. and L.M.Das “(2009) Combustion analysis of jatropha, Karanja and Polanga based biodiesel as fuel in a diesel engine”Elsevier-Fuel 994-999. [11]. Experimental investigation of performance and emission characteristics of oxygenated compounds in a DI diesel engine using split injection method “Indian Journal of Engineering and Material Science P.No 251-255 Vol17 (4) Aug 2010. 33 Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 21-34
  • International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Mar. 2013.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963AUTHOR PROFILE:M. Venkatesan received the Ph. D Award from the International University ofContemporary Studies, Washington DC in 2009, Masters in Thermal Engineering(2001) and Bachelor Degree in Mechanical Engineering (1997) from University ofMadras. He is currently working as Assistant Professor in Mekelle University –Ethiopia and he has also served as Vice Principal (Academics) in PMR EngineeringCollege, Chennai, TamilNadu, India. He has more than 14+ years of experience inTeaching, Research and Administration at National and International Levels. His fieldsof interests are various, viz., Alternative fuels, Heat Transfer, Aeronautics, Design, andSupply chain Management. He has more than 10 publications to his credit both inNational and International Journals and conferences and has authored 5 books onEngineering viz., Engineering Mechanics, Aero Engineering Thermodynamics, FluidMechanics and Fluid Machinery, Engineering Graphics and Workshop Practice as perAnna University Chennai regulation. He has dedicated his whole soul and life toresearch and education and he has been serving as Editorial Board Member, AdvisoryBoard Member and Editor-in-Chief for International Journals. 34 Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 21-34