IRJET- Fabrication of Test Rig and Testing of Performance and Emission Parameters of Blended Ethanol and Gasoline

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 06 Issue: 07 | July 2019 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2019, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.211 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 2194
FABRICATION OF TEST RIG AND TESTING OF PERFORMANCE AND
EMISSION PARAMETERS OF BLENDED ETHANOL AND GASOLINE
Saroj Karki1, Prakash Chapagain2, Sanskriti Adhikari3, Astik Sunar4,Aashaya Regmi5, Ashok
Adhikari6 , Sobhit Pokhrel7, Roshan Bhattarai8, Shiva Shanker Pandey9, Sujan Dahal10
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9Students, Institute of Engineering-IOE Purwanchal Campus, Dharan-8 Tinkune, Nepal
10 Lecturer, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Institute of Engineering-IOE Purwanchal Campus,
Dharan-8 Tinkune, Nepal
----------------------------------------------------------------------***---------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract - The project is about studying the effect of using gasoline-ethanol (GE) blends onperformanceandexhaustemissionon
four stroke engine. The test was one done by fabricating the test rig which consists of four stroke single cylinder air cooled spark
ignition (SI) engine and using various ratios of GE blends. Each experiment were conducted at (1/4) th (7kg) of maximum load
and at different engine speeds ranging from 500 to 2000 rpm, without catalytic converter by varying Ethanol content from 5
percentages to 20 percentages by volume and different blends (E5, E10, E15, E20) were tested. Brake power, Brake specific fuel
consumption and Brake thermal efficiency were calculatedforvariousblends. TheresultshowedbyE15wasbestamongall ineach
of the four accelerator position due to increase in octane number causing complete combustion, lower stoichiometric ratio and
greater anti-knocking properties of ethanol.
Key Words: Fabrication, Blend, Emissions.
1. BACKGROUND
In many developing countries the increase in demand for agriculturally produced alcohol has increased dramatically overthe
past few years. This demand has been increasing day by day because the use of alcohol as a blending material with petrol has
significantly decreased the pricing of fuel. Also from the ecological point of view, it is very environmental friendly as it
facilitates complete burning of fuel and thus reduces carbon monoxide during burning. The practice of using ethanol blended
fuel came from Brazil. They have used up to 25% ethanol blended fuel with some modification in engine. In the context of
Nepal, ethanol hasn’t been used as fuel yet. If we went into some fact and try to reduce 14% of gasoline import, annual savings
of US$ 10 million could be achieved through the introduction of theblendedethanol [1]. Thiscoulddrawhugedifferenceinfuel
economy. The practice of using more than 20% ethanol may require slight engine modification.
1.1 OBJECTIVE
The main objectives of our project are:
 To fabricate the test rig and conduct the performance test of blended ethanol and gasoline.
 To investigate the emission parameters like CO, CO2, HC of various blends.
1.2 LITERATURE REVIEW
The concept of ethanol as a fuel is nothing new. Henry ford in 1896 designed his first car “Quardicycle” to run on pure ethanol
[2]. But at that context the ethanol fuel was not economical. However, increasing global concern due to air pollution has
generated much interest in the environmental friendly alternativefuels.Ethanol isgoodnomineesasalternativefuelssince itis
a liquid and has several physical and chemical properties similar to those of gasoline and diesel fuels.
N. Seshaiah et al tested the variable compression ratio spark ignition engine designed to run on gasoline blended withethanol
10%, 15%, 25% and 35% by volume. Also, the gasoline mixed with kerosene at 15%, 25% and 35% by volume without any
engine modifications has been tested and presented the result. Using ethanol as a fuel additive to the mineral gasoline, (up to
30% by volume) without any engine modification and without any loses of efficiency, it has been observed that the petrol
mixed with ethanol at 10% by volume is better at all loads and compression ratios.[3]
Juozas Grabys investigated experimentally and compare the engine performance and pollutant emission of a SI engine using
ethanol–gasoline blended fuel and pure gasoline. The results showed that when ethanol was added, the heating value of the
blended fuel decreases, while the octane number of the blended fuel increases. The results of the engine test indicated that

when ethanol–gasoline blended fuel was used, the engine power and specific fuel consumption of the engine slightlyincrease;
CO emission decreases dramatically as a result of the leaning effect caused by the ethanol addition; HC emission decreases in
some engine working conditions; and CO2 emission increases because of the improved combustion.[4]
Hakan Bayraktar studied the effects of ethanol addition to gasoline on an SI engine performance and exhaust emissions are
investigated experimentally and theoretically.Experimental applicationswerecarried outwiththeblendscontaining1.5,3,4.5,
6, 7.5, 9, 10.5 and 12 vol% ethanol. Numerical applications were performed up to 21% volume ethanol. Engine was operated
with each blend at 1500 rpm for compression ratios of 7.75 and 8.25 and at full throttle setting. Experimental results showed
that among the various blends, the blend of 7.5% ethanol was the most suitable one from the engine performance and CO
emissions points of view. However, theoretical comparisons showed that the blend containing 16.5% ethanol was the most
suited blend for SI engines.[5]
Yinn Lin investigated the influence of using ethanol-gasoline blends (E0, E3, E6 & E9) on energy efficiency and emission of a
small generator at different loads and at a constant speed. Test results showed that the E6 blend gave the best results of the
exhaust emissions, and the E9 blend gave the best results of engine performance and the particle emissions.[6]
Ravishankar and Kumar examined the performance of two wheelers (4-stroke, BAJAJ, SI) using ethanol- gasoline blends (E0,
E5, E8, E10, E12, E14, E16 and E18). They concluded that E8 and E16 blends showed a comparatively better engine
performance than pure gasoline. [10]
K.Kapil &N.Ashish observed that ethanol–gasoline blended fuel allows increasingcompressionratiowithoutknockingalsoCO
and HC concentrations were decreased while the concentrations ofCO2 and NOx were increasedwhen ethanol gasolineblends
are used. The SFC, CO, CO2, HC and NOx emissions were reduced by about 3%, 53%, 10%, 12% and 19%, respectively.[9]
Nallamothu evaluated performance and exhaust emission of a SI engine by using two blends of ethanol – gasoline (E0, E5 and
E10). Finally, they recommended using E10 at a compression ratio of 8:1. [7]
Elfasakhany tested The Ethanol/Gasoline Blends as Bio-fuel for 4 stoke single cylinder SI engine showed that blending
unleaded gasoline with ethanol increases the brake power,torque,volumetricefficiency,exhaustgastemperature andcylinder
pressure, while it decreases the brake specific fuel consumption. Also CO and UHC emissions concentrations in the engine
exhaust decrease, while the CO2 concentration increases. Finally concluded that 10% vol. ethanol in fuel blend gave the best
results for all measured parameters at all engine speeds. [8]
2. METHODOLOGY
2.1 Material Selection
Material selection is one of the most important processes during the construction of test-rig. Knowledge of material science
plays an important role in the selection of materials and the selection of material determines the outcome of the test-rig.
Selection of materials for test-rig depends on number of factors, which can be grouped into three main categories: economic
factors, operational factors, and design factors. While selecting a material we encountered many obstacles and we had
considered the following factors to get rid of those obstacles which are listed below:
 Functional requirements and constraints
 Material properties
 Manufacturing process considerations
 Fabricability
 Design configuration
 Available and alternate materials
 Corrosion and degradation in service
 Thermal stability
 And finally & importantly, Cost

The material for the test-rig, the metal selected must satisfy following properties:
 Weldability
 Strength & Versatility
All above factors needs to be considered before fabrication of the test-rig.
2.2 Fabrication of Test Rig
Fig -1: Schematic diagram of the Test Rig
For the fabrication process, zinc plated slotted angle and L-section rod were prepared using various machines and machining
processes. Engine, Panel board, Air box and other components were fabricated separately and were later mountedontheZinc
plate slot.
The various part of the Test-rig constructed are given below:-
2.1.1 Yamaha YBX four stroke engine
Table1: Engine specifications.
Fig -2: Four stroke Yamaha YBX engine
S.N. PARAMETERS SPECIFICATIONS
1. Engine Displacement 123.7 CC
2. Max Power 11.2 PS @8000 rpm
3. Max Torque 11.0 Nm @6500 rpm
4. Bore x Stroke 54.0 x 54.0 mm
5. Valves Per Cylinder 2
6. Fuel Type Petrol
7. Starter Kick
8. Number of Cylinders 1

2.1.2 Zinc Plated slotted angle
Zinc plated slotted angle is a system of reusable metal strips used to construct shelving, frames, work benches, equipment
stands and other structures.
Fig -3: Zinc platted slotted angle rod
2.1.3 Pulley
A pulley is a grooved wheel with a rope, chain or cable running along the groove.
Fig -4: pulley
2.1.4 Panel Board and Valves
A panel board is basically a distribution board containing multiple items such as fuel tank, different valves, burette, and scale
and U-tube manometer. Valves and glass burette were attached on the panel board.
Fig -5: Panel board with valves and burette

2.1.5 Spring Balance and Air Box
Spring balance was attached to the frame and connected to the pulley with the help of ropes. It measures the tension in the
ropes and thus load applied. An air box is an empty chamber on the inlet of most combustion engines. It collects air from
outside and feeds it to the intake hoses of each cylinder.
Fig -6: Spring Balance
Fig 7: Test Rig

3. Engine Performance analysis
The following observations was based on the performance test of blended gasoline and ethanol (99.99% pure) at various
blends E0, E5, E10, E15 and E20.the experiment was conducted on four stoke SI engine of YBX bike using rope brake
dynamometer.
All the test were carried out at constant load (1/4)th of the maximum load (7kg). For each blend, the four accelerator position
was marked. Initial position of the accelerator was marked as first position. Second, third and fourth accelerator positionsare
marked at 2.5, 2.75,3 turns from initial position respectively. For each position of the
Accelerator, time required to consume 10ml of fuel was recorded using stop watch. During the same time speed of the pulley
was measured by using tachometer and the exhaust temperature was also measuredatthemarkedpositionof exhaustpipe.At
the end of each experiment pollution test of blend was conducted separately at Transportation managementoffice atconstant
load of 7kg.
At first, the performance and emission parametersatI.P.O.A(initial positionoftheaccelerator)werecalculated.Forsecondand
third accelerator position i.e. at 2.75 and 3 turns from I.P.O.A. the performance parameters were calculated.
The parameters that have been evaluated are performance test and emission test of E0, E5, E10, E15, E20. Inperformancetest
brake power, brake specific fuel consumption, brakethermal efficiencyandexhaustpipetemperature weremeasured. Whereas
in emission test, Emission of CO, CO2 and HC were evaluated.
Before performing any calculation, the calorific value of each fuel mixtures was measured at Renewable Energy Test Station
(RETS), Kathmandu, Nepal. Then the density of the mixtures was determined specific gravity bottle and weighing machine.
Table 2: Density and calorific values of various fuel blends
3.1 Engine performance parameters at
Initial Position Of Accelerator (I.P.O.A)
i. Brake power = (w*π*DR*N)/60
= (mg*π*DR*N)/60
ii. Mass of fuel consumed per hour ( f)
= (Xcc*ρ*3600)/(1000*1000*T)
= (10*ρ*3600)/(1000*1000*T)
= 0.036*ρ/T (kg/hr)
iii. Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (B.S.F.C)
= ( f) /(B.P)*1000(kg/kwhr)
S.N. Composition Density(kg/m3) Calorific
Value
(MJ/Kg)
1. E0 717.7 45.428
2. E5 720.575 41.181
3. E10 723.45 41.773
4. E15 726.325 35.167
5. E20 729.20 24.167

iv. Brake Thermal Efficiency (ηb.th)
= (BP*3600)/ (( f) *CV)*100
v. swept volume (m3/hr) = π/4*d2*L*N/2*60
w = weight applied on rope brake dynamometer = mg
m = mass applied at rope brake dynamometer = 7kg
g = acceleration due to gravity = 9.81m/s2
DR= diameter of pulley + diameter of rope = 0.0709126m
d = bore diameter of cylinder
L = length of stoke
N = speed of pulley (Rpm)
XCC=volume of fuel consumed
ρ = density of petrol = 717.7kg/m3
T = time in second
m f = mass of fuel consumed per hour
Table 3: Engine performance parameters at I.P.O.A
3.2 Engine performance parameters at 2.5 turns from I.P.O.A
Table 4: Engine Performance parameters at 2.5 turns from I.P.O.A
S.N. Com-position Time (s) T.A.E after each test(0C) Swept volume (m3/hr)
1. E0 238 70 1.706
2. E5 194 74 1.78
3. E10 200 80 1.966
4. E15 218 130 2.04
5. E20 243 76 1.743
Mass of fuel consumed(kg/hr) B.P (watt) B.S.F.C (kh/kwhr) B.T.E (%)
0.10886 119.85 0.908 8.691
0.1335 122.4 1.091 7.9845
0.1296 135.15 0.9585 8.95647
0.11885 140.25 0.8474 12.034
0.2019 119.85 0.901126 16.48

3.3 Engine performance parameters at 2.75 turns from I.P.O.
Table 5: Engine Performance parameters at 2.75 turns From I.P.O.A
3.4 Engine performance parameters at 3 turns from I.P.O.A
Table 6 : Engine Performance parameters at 3 turns From I.P.O.A

3.5 Mass of Fuel Consumption
The effect of ethanol blend on gasoline on fuel consumption is shown in figure 8. As the C. V of ethanol is lower than that of
gasoline the fuel consumption increases with increase in ethanol blend for low speed (initial position of accelerator) but the
phenomena just reverse at higher speed (final position of accelerator) due to more dominant effect of complete combustion of
fuel due to higher octane number of ethanol. Thus, it can be estimatedthatatlowspeedthelowerC.Vdominatesoverincreasein
octane number and vice- versa.
Fig 8: Fuel consumption at 0, 2.5, 2.75 and 3 turns from I.P.O.A.
3.6 Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (B.S.F.C)
The effect of ethanol blend on gasoline is shown in figure 9. With increase in ethanol blend on gasoline the B.S.F.C decreases
because the octane number of ethanol is higher than that of gasoline resulting in complete combustion of blended fuel. Thus,
B.S.F.C decreases with increase in ethanol fuel blend.
Fig 9: B.S.F.C. at 0, 2.5, 2.75 and 3 turns from I.P.O.A.

3.7 Brake Power
Figure 10 shows the effect of ethanol blend on brake power.
Fig 10: B.P. at at 0, 2.5, 2.75 and 3 turns from I.P.O.A.
3.8 Brake Thermal Efficiency (B.T.E)
The effect of ethanol blends on gasoline on brake thermal efficiency is shown in figure 11, Which shows slightdecreaseinbrake
thermal efficient at E5 and then increasing brake thermalefficiencywithincreaseinethanolblend.Hereinthetestthemaximum
B.T.E is obtained at 15% ethanol.
Fig 11: B.T.E at 0, 2.5, 2.75, 3 turns from I.P.O.A
3.9 Air Fuel Volumetric Flow Rate
The effect of ethanol blend on gasoline on Air Fuel Volumetric Flow Rate is shown in figure 4.5., with increase in ethanol blend
increases the Air Fuel Volumetric Flow Rate. This is due to increase in speed with increase in blend resulting from complete
combustion. After E15 there is decrease in swept volume which is due to reduction of speed.
Fig 12: A.F.V.F.R at 0, 2.5, 2.75, 3 turns from I.P.O.A

3.11 Exhaust Pipe Temperature (E.P.T)
The effect of ethanol and gasoline blend on exhaustpipetemperatureisshowninfigure.Theexhaustpipetemperatureincreases
with increase in ethanol blend because of complete combustion of blended fuel as the amount of air required for combustion is
lower for ethanol than gasoline. The maximum temperature at exhaust pipe is obtained at E20.
Fig 12: E.P.T. at I.P.O.A
Fig 13: E.P.T at I.P.O.A and at 2.5 turns from I.P.O.A
4. Engine Emission Analysis
In emission test, the data for emission of CO, HCand CO2 were recorded. ThetestwascarriedoutatTransportationmanagement
department of Itahari, Nepal using a digital pollution test device. The data obtained during emission test are shown below in
various graphs indicating the details of emission of CO, CO2 and HC for each blend respectively.
4.1: Exhaust Emissions (E.E)
The effect of ethanol and gasoline blend on E.E is shown in tables below. The table shows the decrease in CO, HC and increase in
CO2 emission with increase in ethanol blend on gasoline up to E10 relatively. Also, there was reductionofCO2alongwithCOand
HC at E15.After E15 the phenomenon reverse. The maximum reduction of emissions was obtained at E15.
The emission of the CO, CO2, HC were measured keeping constant load.
Table 7: CO, HC, CO2 emissions at I.P.O.A
S.N. Compos
ition
Load
(Kg)
CO
(%
Volume)
CO2
(%
Volume)
HC
(Ppm
Volume)
1. E0 7 0.85 1.44 56
2. E5 7 0.53 1.85 36
3. E10 7 0.27 2.82 33
4. E15 7 0.10 1.5 27
5. E20 7 0.15 1.98 30

The above obtained results are also represented in following graphs.
Fig 14: CO, HC, CO2 emissions at I.P.O.A
Table 8: CO, HC, CO2 emissions at 2.5 turns from I.P.O.A
Fig 15: HC, CO2 at 2.5 turns from I.P.O.A
S.N. Composition Load(Kg) CO(%Volume) CO2(%Volume) HC (Ppm Volume)
1. E0 7 1.44 1.58 86
2. E5 7 1.06 1.76 39
3. E10 7 0.74 2.08 32
4. E15 7 0.59 0.84 28
5. E20 7 0.70 0.9 39

4.2: B.P. vs Carbon monoxide (CO)
Figure below shows the effect of various blends on B.P and CO emissions. Brake power increases the CO emission goes on
decreasing for all blends .but with increase in brake power the emission from E15 is lower than all blends. There is 88% and
59% reduction of CO emission from E15 as compared to gasoline at 0, 2.5 turns from I.P.O.A.
Fig 16: B.P Vs CO emissions
4.3 B.P Vs Unburnt Hydrocarbons (HC)
It is observed that as brake power increases the HC emission goes on decreasing for all blends. However, with the increase in
brake power, the emission from E15 is lower than all blends. There is 57.7% and 67.44% reduction of HC emission from E15 as
compared to gasoline at 0, 2.5 turns from I.P.O.A.
Fig 16: B.P Vs Unburnt Hydrocarbons (HC)
4.4 B.P. vs CO2 Emission
Figure below shows the effect of various blends on B.P and CO2 emissions. From figure it is clear that as brake power increases
the CO2 emission goes on increasing forall blends this is because of completecombustion that take place inside the combustion
chamber due to increase in octane number of ethanol.
Fig 17: B.P Vs CO2

The reduction of CO and HC emissions with the ethanol blends on gasoline is also shown in tables below. Percentage reduction
on emission of CO, HC compared to emission from gasoline at initial accelerator position.
Table 9: Emission reduction at I.P.O.A.
Table 10: Emission reduction at 2.5 turns from I.P.O.A
5. CONCLUSIONS
The main objective of this project is to carryout performance test and emission test of blended ethanol and gasoline. The
experiment was conducted on four stoke SI engine of YBX bike using rope brake dynamometer. For the testthefuels thatwere
investigated are E0(petrol), E5, E10, E15, E20.the performance of all the blended fuels were measured based on the brake
power, brake specific fuel consumption, brakethermal efficiency.Also,the emissionof variousblendwasdeterminedincontext
of emission of CO, CO2, HC.
5.1 Performance Test
i. The use of E15 gave best result in both accelerator positions for brake power, Brake specific fuel consumption, brake
thermal efficiency due to increase in octane number causing complete combustion, lower stoichiometric ratio and
greater anti-knocking properties of ethanol. B.P of E15 is 17%, 27%, 3.6% and 4.5%higherthangasolineat0(I.P.O.A),
2.5, 2.75, 3 turns from I.P.O.A.
ii. With ethanol blend on gasoline, there was increase in speed. Due to increase in speed there was increase in swept
volume as swept volume depends on the speed foe constant bore diameter and length of stoke. The maximum swept
volume was obtained at E15. For E15 swept volume is 19.87%, 26.98%, 3.6%, 4.48% higher than gasoline at 0, 2.5,
2.75, 3 turns from I.P.O.A.
iii. Regarding the B.T.E, maximum BrakeThermal EfficiencywasobtainedwithE20atalmostall acceleratorpositions.But
the B.T.E was in decreasing trend as the speed increase whereas the B.T.E of E15 was in increasing trend. B.T.EofE15
is 38.46%, 58%, 17% and 71% higher than gasoline at 0, 2.5, 2.75, 3 turns from I.P.O.A.
5.2 Emission test
i. E15 gave the lowest emission of CO, CO2 and HC at both accelerator position (0 and 2.5 turns from I.P.O. A) as
compared to other blends this is because of complete combustion of fuel due to dominant effect of increase in octane
number. There was 88% and 59% reduction of CO emission from E15 as compared to gasoline at 0, 2.5 turns from
I.P.O.A. and there was 57.7% and 67.44% reduction of HC emission from E15 as compared to gasoline at 0, 2.5 turns
from I.P.O.A.
REFERENCES
[1] Silveira, S., & Khatiwada, D. (2010). Ethanol production and fuel substitution in Nepal—Opportunity to promote
sustainable development and climate change mitigation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,14,1644–1652
S.N. Composition CO(%
reduced)
HC(%
reduced)
1. E5 37.64 35.7
2. E10 68.23 41
3. E15 88 51.70
4. E20 82 46
S.N. Composition CO(%
reduced)
HC(%
reduced)
1. E5 26.38 54.65
2. E10 48.61 62.79
3. E15 59 67.44
4. E20 51.38 54.65

[2] Doeden, M (2007). Crazy Cars. Lerner Publications. ISBN 978-0-8225-6565-9.
[3] Seshaiah,N.(2010).Efficiency and exhaust gas analysis of variable compression ratio spark ignition engine fueled with
alternative fuels. International journal of energy and environment 1(5), 861-870
[4] Pikunas,A.Pukalskas,S.&Grabys,J.(2003).Influence of composition of Gasoline-ethanol blends on parameters of internal
combustion engines. Journal of KONES Internal Combustion Engines, 10, 3-4.
[5] Bayraktar,H.(2005).Experimental and theoretical investigationofusinggasoline–ethanol blendsinspark-ignitionengines.
Renewable Energy, Elsevier. 30(11),1733-1747.
[6] Yusaf,T.,Najafi,G.,&Buttsworth,D.(2009).Theoretical and experimental investigationofSIengineperformanceand exhaust
emissions using ethanolgasoline blended fuels. International. Conference on Energy &environment.
[7] Nallamothu,R.B., Fekadu,G.,& Prof Appa Rao,B.V.(2013).Comparative performance evaluation of gasoline and its blends
with ethanol in gasoline engine,2(4) ,100-106.
[8] Elfasakhany,A.( March2014).The EffectsofEthanol-GasolineBlendsonPerformanceandExhaustEmissionCharacteristics
of Spark Ignition Engines. International Journal of Automotive Engineering.4(1),609-620.
[9] Karadia,K.,&Nayya,A.( Jan -2017). Effects of Ethanol-Gasoline blends on Performance and Emissions of Gasoline Engines.
International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET).4(01),1092-1100.
[10] Ravishankar,M.K.,&Premkumar,B.G.(2012).Comparative study of performance of two wheeler using ethanol-gasoline
blends, International Journal of Science and Research, 3( 10),1696-1699.

IRJET- Fabrication of Test Rig and Testing of Performance and Emission Parameters of Blended Ethanol and Gasoline

More Related Content

What's hot (16)

Similar to IRJET- Fabrication of Test Rig and Testing of Performance and Emission Parameters of Blended Ethanol and Gasoline (20)

More from IRJET Journal (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

IRJET- Fabrication of Test Rig and Testing of Performance and Emission Parameters of Blended Ethanol and Gasoline