The performance of an internal combustion engine is affected when renewable biofuels are used instead of fossil fuels in an unmodified engine. Various engine modifications were experimented by the researchers to optimise the biofuels operated engine performance. Thermal barrier coating is one of the techniques used to improve the biofuels operated engine performance and combustion characteristics by reducing the heat loss from the combustion chamber. In this study, engine tests results on performance, combustion and exhaust emission characteristics of the biofuels operated thermal barrier coated engines were collated and reviewed. The results found in the literature were reviewed in three scenarios: (i) uncoated versus coated engine for fossil diesel fuel application, (ii) uncoated versus coated engine for biofuels (and blends) application, and (iii) fossil diesel use on uncoated engine versus biofuel (and blends) use on coated engine. Effects of injection timing, injection pressure and fuel properties on thermal barrier coatings were also discussed. The material type, thickness and properties of the coating materials used by the research community were presented. The effectiveness and durability of the coating layer depends on two key properties: low thermal conductivity and high thermal expansion coefficient. The current study showed that thermal barrier coatings could potentially offset the performance drop due to use of biofuels in the compression ignition engines. Improvements of up to 4.6% in torque, 7.8% in power output, 13.4% in brake specific fuel consumption, 15.4% in brake specific energy consumption and 10.7% in brake thermal efficiency were reported when biofuels or biofuel blends were used in the thermal barrier coated engines as compared to the uncoated engines. In coated engines, peak cylinder pressure and exhaust gas temperature were increased by up to 16.3 bar and 14% respectively as compared to uncoated condition. However, changes in the heat release rates were reported to be between-27% and +13.8% as compared to uncoated standard engine. Reductions of CO, CO2, HC and smoke emissions were reported by up to 3.8%, 11.1%, 90.9% and 63% respectively as compared to uncoated engines. Significant decreases in the PM emissions were also reported due to use of thermal barrier coatings in the combustion chamber. In contrast, at high speed and at high load operation, increase in the CO and CO2 emissions were also reported in coated engines. Coated engines gave higher NOx emissions by about 4-62.9% as compared to uncoated engines. Combined effects of thermal barrier coatings and optimisation of fuel properties and injection parameters produced further performance and emissions advantages compared to only thermal barrier coated engines. Overall, current review study showed that application of thermal barrier coatings in compression ignition engines could be beneficial when biofuels or biofuel blends are used instead of standard fossil diesel. However, more research is needed combining coatings, types of bio...

No abstract

Biodiesel is considered as one of the attractive alternatives to fossil diesel fuel. Although biodiesels reduces most of the harmful gas emissions, they normally releases higher NOx emissions compared to fossil diesel. The Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) is a wellknown technique used in the OEM industry to mitigate NOx emission. However, this technique may not be suitable for application in low power density engines due to back pressure and clogging issues. On the other hand, Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (SNCR) is used in relatively large combustion operations ie. boilers and incinerators. The main disadvantage of SNCR technique is the high temperature window for diesel engine exhaust temperature. This study introduces a new design concept, which is a combination of SCR and SNCR systems, for low power density diesel engines. The developed after-treatment system composed of two main parts, injection-expansion pipe and swirl chamber. The working principle is providing maximum mixing of the injected fluid and exhaust gas in the expansion chamber, then creating a maximum turbulence in the swirl chamber. In this regard, NOx emission can be reduced at relatively lower exhaust temperatures without using any catalyst. The CFD models of three design candidates were examined in terms of velocity magnitudes, turbulence intensity and particle residence time to select the optimum physical dimensions. The selected design was manufactured and installed to exhaust system of a 1.3 litre diesel engine. Two fluids distilled water and urea-water solution were injected separately at the same flow rate of 375 ml/min. Exhaust gas emissions of fossil diesel, sheep fat biodieselwaste cooking oil biodiesel blend and chicken fat -cottonseed biodiesel blend were tested. No significant changes in CO2 and HC emissions were observed. However, it was found that distilled water injection reduced CO and NO emissions by about 10% and 6% for fossil diesel; and by about 9% and 7% for biodiesels operation respectively. The urea-water injection led to reductions in CO and NO emissions by about 60% and 13% for fossil diesel; and by about 45% and 15% for biodiesels respectively.

Although waste animal fats such as chicken fat are promising alternative energy sources, biodiesels produced from these type of feedstocks hardly satisfies the EN14214 biodiesel standards. In this study, biomixtures were prepared by blending cottonseed biodiesel and chicken rendering fat biodiesel which were produced via transesterification method. Biodiesels were blended with each other at 60/40, 50/50 and 30/70 volume ratios to produce CO60CH40, CO50CH50 and CO30CH70 fuels. First, fuel properties of the neat biodiesels and novel biomixtures were measured and compared to European biodiesel standards and diesel. Then, the engine performance, combustion characteristics and exhaust emissions of these novel biomixture fuels were measured in a three-cylinder indirect injection diesel engine under various engine loads and at constant speed of 1500 rpm. The fuel characterisation showed that CO60CH40 and CO50CH50 biomixtures met the European standards. The Brake Specific Energy Consumption (BSEC) and Brake Thermal Efficiency (BTE) of all biomixtures were comparable with CO100, CH100 and diesel at the full engine load. The combustion results revealed that the maximum in-cylinder pressure and energy release values of the CO50CH50 were 4.2% and 4.4% higher than the diesel at full engine load because of optimised fuel properties of biomixture such as molecular structure, viscosity, cetane number and iodine value. CO50CH50 had 2.9% reduced CO2 and comparable CO emission compared to diesel, which were also 5.6% and 13% lower than cottonseed biodiesel respectively. However, NO emission of CO50CH50 was found 3.8% and 5.8% higher than diesel and cottonseed biodiesel. A 6.5% reduction on NO emission was observed when CO60CH40 biomixture fuel was used instead of diesel. To conclude, this research showed that blending of cottonseed and chicken fat biodiesels is a promising approach to meet the EN14214 standards, improve in-cylinder pressure, optimise energy release and reduce exhaust emissions. Blending of different biodiesels will be tested as a future work. Definitions/Abbreviations aTDC After top dead centre BSEC Brake specific energy consumption BS EN 14214 British & European biodiesel standards BSFC Brake specific fuel consumption BTE Brake thermal efficiency CA Crank angle CD Combustion duration CH100 Chicken biodiesel CN Cetane number CO Carbon monoxide CO2 Carbon dioxide CO100 Cottonseed biodiesel CO80CH20 80% cottonseed biodiesel blended with 20% chicken