Next Article in Journal
Recent Achievements in Research on Thermal Comfort and Ventilation in the Aspect of Providing People with Appropriate Conditions in Different Types of Buildings—Semi-Systematic Review
Next Article in Special Issue
Parametric Analysis and Optimization for Thermal Efficiency Improvement in a Turbocharged Diesel Engine with Peak Cylinder Pressure Constraints
Previous Article in Journal
Investigation of Underground Coal Gasification in Laboratory Conditions: A Review of Recent Research
Previous Article in Special Issue
Impact of Biofuel Blending on Hydrocarbon Speciation and Particulate Matter from a Medium-Duty Multimode Combustion Strategy
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Energies
Volume 16
Issue 17
10.3390/en16176251
energies-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Effects of Anhydrous and Hydrous Fusel Oil on Combustion and Emissions on a Heavy-Duty Compression-Ignition Engine

by
Dongzhi Gao
1,
Mubasher Ikram
2,
Chao Geng
3,
Yangyi Wu
2,*,
Xiaodan Li
4,5,
Chao Jin
4,5,
Zunqing Zheng
2,
Mengliang Li
1 and
Haifeng Liu
2,*
1
CATARC Automotive Test Center (Tianjin) Co., Ltd., Tianjin 300300, China
2
State Key Laboratory of Engines, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China
3
China North Engine Research Institute, Tianjin 300405, China
4
School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China
5
Tianjin Key Lab of Biomass/Wastes Utilization, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Energies 2023, 16(17), 6251; https://doi.org/10.3390/en16176251
Submission received: 28 July 2023 / Revised: 22 August 2023 / Accepted: 25 August 2023 / Published: 28 August 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advanced Research on Internal Combustion Engines and Engine Fuels—2nd Edition)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The efficient application of oxygen-containing clean fuels in engines has always been a research focus. With the increase in ethanol production, the output of fusel as a co-product is also increasing. The application of fusel is also an effective way to lessen the consumption of fossil fuels. Therefore, the influences of fusel on performance and emissions were investigated in the current study on a six-cylinder heavy-duty compression-ignition engine and revolved around the WHSC test cycle. The three test fuels were diesel, F20NW (the volume proportion of anhydrous fusel is 20%, and the rest is pure diesel), and F20WW (the volume proportion of hydrous fusel is 20%). The addition of fusel improved BTE, reduced NOx and soot emissions, and thermal efficiency and emissions were further improved in combination with EGR optimization. In terms of WHSC, the improvement effect of hydrous fusel was the best. The equivalent fuel consumption, NOx, soot, and CO2 emissions of F20WW were reduced by 1.77%, 37.49%, 17.38%, and 1.32%, respectively, with the optimization of EGR compared with pure diesel. The addition of 20% hydrous fusel combined with the introduction of EGR can be directly applied to existing diesel engines and achieve a simultaneous reduction in fuel consumption and emissions.

1. Introduction

With the extensive application of engines in many fields of human society because of their high reliability and low cost [1,2,3], the engines consume large amounts of fossil fuels, which contributes to air pollution and energy shortages [4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11]. In the actual operation of an internal combustion engine, in addition to HC, CO, NOx, PM, and other harmful emissions, CO2 as a greenhouse gas, which will cause global warming, is also a focus of current attention [7,12].
The adoption of renewable energy is an important way to relieve the dependence on fossil energy and reduce harmful emissions, especially CO2 emissions, and the application of alcohol as an alternative oxygenated fuel to petroleum has become a hot topic and the focus of current research [13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26]. Among alcohols, ethanol has been widely researched and applied for its low production cost and nontoxic properties. As an additive to gasoline and diesel, ethanol can effectively reduce fossil fuel consumption and has the latent capacity to improve engine performance. Additionally, harmful emissions, such as NOx, soot, and carbon emissions in exhaust, are also reduced by the addition of ethanol in fuels [20,21,27,28,29,30,31]. Large-scale use of ethanol in engines has shown good feasibility and prospects. On the one hand, by 2020, many countries, such as Brazil, the United States, and the European Union, will have announced the compulsory use of ethanol as an oxygenated additive in gasoline. The Chinese government has also promoted the use of E10 as gasoline fuel in the market. On the other hand, the difficulties of ethanol as an additive to diesel, such as mutual solubility and cetane number, are also being gradually solved, which proves the feasibility of ethanol as an additive to diesel. It can be seen that there will be more room and potential for ethanol applications in the future.
So far, driven by the aim of reducing fossil fuel consumption and carbon emissions, the world’s ethanol production is also increasing year by year. From 2009 to 2019, world ethanol production increased from 1.29 MMb/d (million barrels per day) to 1.89 MMb/d, i.e., an increase of 46.51%. In 2019, ethanol production in the United States was 1.03 MMb/d, accounting for 54.50% of global ethanol production, while that in Brazil was 0.54 MMb/d, accounting for 28.57%. When ethanol is produced by fermentation using molasses as a raw material, which contains a high proportion of sucrose, fusel oil can be obtained by distilling the by-product of fermentation broth. In the process of ethanol production, the output of fusel oil is about 1/200 of that of ethanol [32]. Therefore, as a by-product of ethanol production, the output of fusel oil will rise with the increase in ethanol production. According to the above conversion ratio between ethanol and fusel oil, it can be estimated that by the end of 2019, the output of fusel oil all over the world will be 9.43 Mb/d (thousand barrels per day), or about 550 million liters. The United States and Brazil are also the world’s top two producers of fusel oil, accounting for 54.36% and 29.63%, respectively. Therefore, it is also of great significance to reduce oil consumption and CO2 emissions in engines if fusel oil can be used.
The main components of typical fusel are i-propanol, i-butanol, and i-amyl alcohol, as well as a small amount of ethanol and water. In these alcohols, the lower heat value, density, and cetane index of higher alcohols increase with the increase of carbons in their molecules, while the oxygen contents gradually decrease at the same time [33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41]. Aiming at these specific components in fusel, some previous work has been conducted. Pinzi et al. [34] researched the effects of diesel with the additives ethanol and propanol. Additive ethanol and propanol can substitute a certain proportion of diesel, reduce diesel consumption, and improve NOx and soot emissions. Compared with ethanol, propanol showed better improvements in exhaust emissions and noise. Chen et al. [36] researched the influence of a high proportion of n-butanol as a diesel additive combined with exhaust gas re-circulation. Compared with ethanol, butanol is better mixed with diesel. By adding a large proportion of n-butanol, NOx emissions rose while soot decreased. Simultaneous reductions of NOx and soot were realized compared with diesel with the application of exhaust gas recirculation. Javier et al. [41] researched the influence of pentanol. Compared with methanol and ethanol, the fuel characteristics of pentanol are more similar to diesel. Aditive pentanol can improve combustion and BTE. Blends of 25% pentanol and 75% diesel can be used as an alternative to diesel without obvious change.
Compared with ethanol, the fuel characteristics of higher alcohols are closer to diesel and easier to blend with diesel. It has little impact on the performance of the engine while improving combustion and reducing emissions. Predictably, as a mixture of higher alcohols, the application of fusel oil can substitute a certain proportion of traditional fossil fuels and diversify the application of fuels without any modifications to existing SI and CI engines [42]. In some literature on the blending of fusel and diesel fuels [43,44,45], it has been pointed out that blending fusel with diesel reduced the cylinder pressure and reduced NOx and soot emissions, but the trends in fuel consumption, thermal efficiency, CO, and CO2 emissions varied in different studies. Both a lower cetane number and a lower heating value had a negative impact on cylinder combustion and the output power of the engine.
As a coproduct of ethanol production, fusel usually contains a small amount of ethanol and water. According to a comparison of energy consumption, removing water from alcohols will consume a lot of energy, especially when the purity is increased to more than 90% [46,47]. Moreover, some studies show that the application of hydrous alcohols in diesel engines can improve performance. The main reason is that the addition of water can decrease the in-cylinder temperature and NOx emissions [20,48,49]. Correspondingly, the water contained in the fusel will reduce the cetane number of the blended fuel and affect combustion. The presence of water can also reduce the viscosity of the blended fuel and increase the wear of the fuel supply system. Considering that removing water from alcohol will consume a lot of energy and that the application of hydrous alcohol can improve the performance of engines and reduce emissions while reducing energy consumption in the fuel production process, the influences of water in fusel oil need to be evaluated to determine whether it is necessary to remove water from the fusel oil when it is used as engine fuel. In previous studies, it was rare to compare hydrous and anhydrous fusel blended with diesel fuel in the same experiment. The results of this comparison can provide a valuable reference for determining whether to remove water from the fusel. Therefore, the influences of diesel blended with hydrous and anhydrous fusel oil were compared by experiment in this research.
In addition, previous studies [20,36,50,51] showed that introducing EGR is an effective method to reduce combustion temperature, which results in a reduction of heat transfer loss and NOx emissions. By further combining EGR with oxygenated fuel, the BTE, NOx, and soot can be improved simultaneously. To improve BTE and reduce emissions, the EGR rate was varied in this experiment.
Therefore, the aim of the current research is to study the influences of hydrous and anhydrous fusel oil on diesel engines. The volume ratios of diesel in blends were set at 80%, while those of hydrous or anhydrous fusel oil were set at 20%. The volume proportion of water in hydrous fusel was 6.5%. The influence of additive hydrous and anhydrous fusel oil was analyzed based on diesel fuel. The influences of water in fusel oil were investigated as well. Moreover, weighted fuel consumption and emissions of the WHSC (World Harmonized Stationary Cycle) for the different test fuels with optimized EGR rates were also investigated.
Compared with previous studies, the effects of hydrous and anhydrous fusel on combustion and emissions were compared and analyzed in this study, and it has the potential to improve both engine economy and emissions with the introduction of EGR. This provides an effective reference for whether to remove moisture before using fusel as a fuel. A valuable reference for the efficient and clean application of fusel oil in compression-ignition internal combustion engines can be afforded.

2. Test Apparatus and Methods

2.1. Test Facility

A six-cylinder compression-ignition internal combustion engine equipped with electronically controlled high-pressure common rail fuel injection system was used as the experimental setup. The engine parameters are shown in Table 1, and the experimental device diagram is shown in Figure 1. The uncertainties of the measuring devices are shown in Table 2.
A pressure sensor (Kistler 6125C, Kistler, Winterthur, Switzerland) was used to measure the cylinder pressure together with a matching charge amplifier and data gathering system. At each measuring site, the pressure data of 100 consecutive cycles was continually recorded with an increase of 0.5 °CA (crank angle degree). To ensure the stability of the engine’s operating state, the COVIMEP of the engine did not exceed 2% when saving data. Then, the cylinder pressure data were examined using a single zone heat release model and the assumption that the temperature and air/fuel ratio were constant across the whole cylinder capacity. The Woschni correlation was used to determine the heat transfer coefficient. Previous research has used the heat release rate (HRR) values computed by this model [19,24,25].

2.2. Test Fuels

Three test fuels were used, i.e., diesel, F20WW (the blends of 20% hydrous fusel oil and 80% diesel in volume fraction), and F20NW (the blends of 20% anhydrous fusel oil and 80% diesel in volume fraction). The volume proportion of water in hydrous fusel was 6.5%. The main properties of diesel, fusel oil, and test fuels are shown in Table 3. The lower heating value, cetane number, and density of fusel oil are closer to those of diesel than those of low-carbon alcohols, and the viscosity of fusel oil is higher, which is beneficial for reducing the wear of engine components such as the oil pump and pistons [52,53,54,55,56,57]. According to the fuel properties, it can be predicted that when anhydrous fusel oil is added to diesel, the density, lower heating value, and cetane number of the blended fuel decrease, while the latent heat of evaporation and oxygen content increase. Compared with anhydrous fusel oil, the latent heat of evaporation of the hydrous fusel oil-diesel blended fuel is further increased due to the existence of water in fusel oil, which will increase the auto-ignition resistance. As can be seen, it is necessary to investigate the effects of fusel oil and the existence of water in fusel oil on diesel engines. It can also be a more reliable measure of whether it is worth consuming energy to remove water from fusel oil.

2.3. Test Conditions

First, for analysis of the effects of fusel oil and the existence of water in fusel oil in Section 3.1, the three operating points, i.e., 25% load, 100% load of 1144 r/min, and 100% load of 1765 r/min, were selected from the WHSC, and the BMEP of the three operating conditions are 0.51, 2.04, and 2.01 MPa, respectively. The reason for selecting these three operating points is to visually analyze combustion at different speeds and loads, and the operating points in the WHSC are representative of the operating points that vehicles frequently operate at. The single injection strategy (i.e., only the main injection) was used in this experiment. The injection parameters for the three working points are shown in Table 4. The effects of fusel oil and the existence of water in fusel oil can be shown by the analysis of cylinder pressures and the heat release rate curves.
Then, 10%, 25%, 50%, 70%, and 100% loads of 1144 r/min were selected in Section 3.2. The effects of fusel oil and the existence of water in fusel oil on BSFC, BTE, and emissions were investigated at different loads.
In Section 3.3, the EGR rates were varied at 25%, 50%, and 100% loads of 1144 r/min, and the effects of EGR on BSFC, BTE, and emissions were investigated for different test fuels.
Finally, WHSC test cycle was conducted in Section 3.4 using the initial fuel injection MAP (China VI Emissions Standard) of the test engine, and the EGR rates were adjusted as well. The weighted BSFC and emissions, such as NOx, soot, and CO2, of diesel and the blended fuels with or without EGR optimization were compared. The specific working points of WHSC have been shown in Table 5 [58].
The engine’s working conditions were stabilized for a short while at each test operating point before the data were collected. The test was repeated for each operating point three times, and the average value was recorded.

3. Results and Discussions

3.1. Effect of Fusel Oil and the Existence of Water in Fusel Oil on Combustion

The effects of fusel oil and the existence of water in fusel oil on combustion are shown in Figure 2. The injection strategies for different fuels remained consistent. The combustion duration is defined as the interval between the crank angle where 10% of the total heat is released (CA10) and the crank angle where 90% of the total heat is released (CA90).
Figure 2a shows that under low load and low speed, the ignition delay periods of F20NW and F20WW were slightly longer than those of pure diesel; this is attributed to the lower cetane number and higher latent heat of evaporation of fusel oil. Therefore, after the addition of fusel oil, the ignition delay of the blended fuel was prolonged, the premixed combustion proportion was increased, and the combustion was more concentrated. In addition, because of the high oxygen content in fusel oil, the heat release rate (HRR) at the initial stage of combustion and peak HRR of the blended fuel were higher than those of pure diesel fuel. Since F20WW contains water, which absorbs heat during evaporation, the peak value of HRR for F20WW was slightly lower than that of F20NW.
It can be seen from Figure 2b that under high load and low speed, the ignition delay periods of the three fuels were basically the same, mainly due to the higher cylinder temperature, and the cetane number has little effect on in-cylinder combustion, which has been pointed out in the previous study [59]. Therefore, under high load conditions, the latent heat of evaporation and a small change in cetane number had little effect on the ignition delay. In contrast to low-load conditions, the quantity of fuel injected per cycle was large under high load. Because the lower heating value of fusel oil was lower than that of pure diesel, the fuel injection duration of the blended fuel was extended. Therefore, the combustion duration of the blended fuel was prolonged. Due to the high oxygen content and high volatile components (propanol and butanol) in fusel oil, although the combustion duration was prolonged, the peak HRR of F20NW was higher than that of pure diesel. Due to the water content in F20WW, the peak HRR decreased.
It can be seen from Figure 2c that under high load and high speed, the combustion duration of the blended fuel was still prolonged compared with the diesel. At high speeds, the peak HRR of blended fuel was lower than that of pure diesel. This is mainly because at high speed, the reaction time per cycle was shortened, and the longer fuel injection duration became the main influencing factor. But in general, the difference in HRR between the three fuels was small at high loads and speeds. Under these three operating conditions, there was no significant difference in the cylinder pressures of the three fuels. It may be due to the small volume proportion of fusel oil (20%), which would not influence combustion or cylinder pressure largely.

3.2. Effect of the Fusel Oil and the Existence of Water in Fusel Oil at Different BMEP

Figure 3a–g show the BTE, BSFC, and emissions at different BMEPs; the EGR rate was 0%. As can be seen from Figure 3a,b, with the increase in BMEP, BSFC gradually decreased, while BTE showed the opposite trend, which was mainly due to the change in mechanical efficiency under different loads. Since the lower heating value of fusel oil was lower than that of pure diesel, the BSFC of the blended fuel was higher than that of pure diesel. On the one hand, the addition of fusel oil reduced the lower heating value, prolonged the fuel injection duration, and then prolonged the combustion duration, which may lead to a decrease in thermal efficiency. On the other hand, the addition of fusel oil increased the volatility and oxygen content of the blended fuel and improved the mixing of fuel and air, which is beneficial for efficient combustion. Under the combined effects of the above factors, the BTE of F20NW was equivalent to that of pure diesel. For the three fuels, the BTE of F20WW was the highest because the water in the fuel absorbs heat during evaporation, which reduces the temperature in the cylinder and reduces the heat transfer loss to some extent. With the increase in BMEP, the improvement in BTE of F20WW relative to pure diesel gradually decreased from 1.71% to 0.64%. This was because under high load, the temperature in the cylinder was high and the influence of water was decreased.
It can be seen from Figure 3c that with the increase in load, NOx emissions of the three fuels showed a trend of first decreasing, then increasing, and then decreasing again. This was mainly due to the effect of the cylinder temperature and different injection strategies under different loads. There is no obvious rule for the change in NOx emissions for the three fuels with the change of load. Compared with pure diesel, on the one hand, the addition of fusel oil increased the oxygen content, which was conducive to the generation of NOx. On the other hand, it increased the latent heat of vaporization, which reduced the temperature in the cylinder and consequently decreased the generation of NOx. The combined effects of these two aspects made the NOx emissions of F20NW slightly higher than those of pure diesel.
However, when hydrous fusel was added to diesel, the water had a great impact on the cylinder temperature, so the NOx emissions of F20WW were significantly lower than those of pure diesel. According to Figure 3d–f, with the increase in BMEP, the soot, CO, and HC emissions of the three fuels gradually decreased, mainly due to the increase in cylinder temperature promoting complete combustion. The soot emissions of the blended fuels were significantly lower than those of pure diesel due to the higher oxygen content and better volatility of the blended fuel, which improved the fuel-air mixing and combustion process, reduced soot generation, and promoted soot oxidation. Among them, the oxygen content was the main factor. Other emissions of HC and CO were similar to those of soot. Only under low loads were the CO emissions of the blended fuels higher than those of pure diesel. This was mainly because the cylinder temperature was low under 10% load, and the addition of fusel oil and water further reduced the cylinder temperature so that the CO emissions were not completely oxidized. For CO2 emissions, the CO2 emissions of F20NW were equivalent to those of pure diesel. The CO2 emissions of F20WW were lower than those of pure diesel except for the operating condition of 10% load, with a maximum decrease of 1.67%. In general, the error lines of the CO2 emissions of the three fuels showed that there was little difference between the CO2 emissions of the three fuels.

3.3. Effect of the EGR on Fuel Consumption and Emissions of Different Test Fuels at Different BMEP

Figure 4a–l show the BTE, BSFC, and emissions under different EGR rates when BMEP was 0.51, 1.02, and 2.04 MPa, respectively. In the experiment, while adjusting different EGR rates under a certain operating condition, the engine speed and output torque remained unchanged. It can be seen that no matter the BSFC, BTE, or emissions, the trends of different fuels with EGR rates were consistent.
From Figure 4a–f, it can be seen that with the increase in the EGR rate, the change ranges of BSFC and BTE were all about 1%, which was relatively small. This was mainly because, with the increase in the EGR rate, although the pumping loss and heat transfer loss were reduced, the combustion efficiency might be reduced. Rakopoulos et al. [60] noted in the study pertaining to the exergy perspective that when the EGR rate rose, the heat transfer and working transfer exergy terms somewhat reduced, but the equivalent terms for irreversibility and net exhaust transfer (flow out) slightly increased. Therefore, the BSFC and BTE were basically unchanged.
Under different EGR rates, the BTE of F20WW was always higher than that of pure diesel and F20NW. In terms of emissions, with the increase in the EGR rate, the NOx emissions of the three fuels gradually decreased and the soot emissions gradually increased under all operating conditions. It can be seen that the variation range of BSFC, BTE, and NOx emissions of the three fuels with EGR rates was basically the same, while the variation range of soot emissions of the blended fuel was smaller than that of pure diesel, mainly because the oxygen content of the blended fuel was higher and the EGR rate had less influence on the soot emissions of both fuels with fusel addition. It can also be seen from the test results that the BTE of F20WW was improved by increasing the EGR rate, and compared with pure diesel, the NOx and soot emissions were reduced at the same time.

3.4. Experiment of WHSC Test Cycle

The tests on the three fuels over the WHSC cycle were performed. The WHSC test cycle differs from the European Stationary Cycle (ESC). Compared with ESC, the WHSC test cycle focuses on medium and low speeds, and medium and small loads, which is more consistent with urban operating conditions.
All changes in percentages in Figure 5 were compared with those of pure diesel. It can be seen that compared with pure diesel, the equivalent BSFC of F20NW was increased by 1.07%, and the equivalent BSFC after EGR optimization was slightly reduced, but it was still 0.36% higher than that of pure diesel. The equivalent BSFC of F20WW was reduced by 0.95% compared with pure diesel. After EGR optimization, the equivalent BSFC was further reduced by 1.77% compared with pure diesel. In terms of CO2 emissions, the CO2 emissions of F20NW were higher than those of pure diesel. The CO2 emissions of F20WW were reduced by 0.65% compared with those of pure diesel. After adjusting the EGR rate, the CO2 emissions of F20WW were further reduced due to the improvement of BTE. In terms of NOx and soot emissions, the NOx emissions of F20NW were equivalent to those of pure diesel, and the NOx emissions of F20WW were reduced by 8.20% compared with those of pure diesel. After EGR optimization, the NOx emissions of blended fuels were significantly reduced, and the NOx emissions of F20WW were 37.49% lower than those of pure diesel. The soot emissions of blended fuels were significantly lower than those of pure diesel, and the soot emissions increased slightly as EGR was introduced.
In conclusion, with the application of F20NW, the equivalent fuel consumption increased by 0.36%. NOx and soot emissions were reduced by 30.05% and 19.08%, respectively, with the optimization of EGR compared with pure diesel. There was no significant difference in CO2 emissions between pure diesel and F20NW. And with the application of F20WW, the equivalent BSFC was reduced by 1.77%. NOx, soot, and CO2 emissions were reduced by 37.49%, 17.38%, and 1.32%, respectively, with the optimization of EGR compared with pure diesel. That means improved thermal efficiency and emissions can be achieved by adding hydrous fusel oil and combustion optimization. However, it should be noted that the impact of adding water to fuels on engine reliability and not removing water from fuel preparation costs should also be considered in future applications.

4. Conclusions

Due to the increasing production of fusels as by-products in the preparation of ethanol, the application of fusel is an effective way to lessen the consumption of fossil fuels. The effects of fusel oil and the existence of water in fusel oil on combustion, performance, and emissions at different loads were investigated on a heavy-duty diesel engine. EGR optimization was also carried out for the test cycle of WHSC. The main conclusions are as follows:
(1)
The addition of fusel oil prolonged the ignition delay period, increased the peak value of heat release rates at low speed, and prolonged the combustion duration under high load.
(2)
Under different engine loads, the addition of hydrous fusel improved the break thermal efficiency and reduced NOx and soot emissions, and it could be further improved in combination with EGR optimization.
(3)
In terms of the WHSC test cycle, with the application of F20NW, the equivalent fuel consumption was increased by 0.36%. NOx and soot emissions were reduced by 30.05% and 19.08%, respectively, with the optimization of EGR compared with pure diesel. There was no significant difference in CO2 emissions between pure diesel and F20NW. And with the application of F20WW, the equivalent fuel consumption was reduced by 1.77%. NOx, soot, and CO2 emissions were reduced by 37.49%, 17.38%, and 1.32%, respectively, with the optimization of EGR compared with pure diesel.
Therefore, reasonably adding 20% hydrous fusel oil combined with combustion optimization is an effective way to improve the thermal efficiency and emissions of the engine. This provides an effective reference for whether to remove moisture before using fusel as a fuel. A valuable reference for the efficient and clean application of fusel oil in compression-ignition internal combustion engines can be afforded.

Author Contributions

Data curation, M.I. and C.G.; Investigation, M.I., C.G. and Y.W.; Methodology, Y.W., X.L., C.J., Z.Z., M.L. and H.L.; Validation, X.L.; Writing—Original Draft, D.G.; Writing—Review and Editing, D.G., Y.W., C.J., Z.Z., M.L. and H.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) through its Project of 52176125 and 51976134.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to restrictions e.g., privacy or ethical.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support provided by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) through its projects 52176125 and 51976134.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References

  1. Hoseini, S.S.; Najafi, G.; Ghobadian, B.; Mamat, R.; Sidik, N.A.C.; Azmi, W.H. The effect of combustion management on diesel engine emissions fueled with biodiesel-diesel blends. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 73, 307–331. [Google Scholar]
  2. Pereira, P.A.P.; de Andrade, J.B.; Miguel, A.H. Measurements of semivolatile and particulate polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in a bus station and an urban tunnel in Salvador, Brazil. J. Environ. Monit. 2020, 4, 558–561. [Google Scholar]
  3. Reitz, R.D. Directions in internal combustion engine research. Combust. Flame 2013, 160, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  4. Huang, H.; Liu, Q.; Teng, W.; Wang, Q. The potentials for improving combustion performance and emissions in diesel engines by fueling n-butanol/diesel/PODE3-4 blends. Energy Procedia 2017, 105, 914–920. [Google Scholar]
  5. Huang, J.; Wang, Y.; Li, S.; Roskilly, A.P.; Yu, H.; Li, H. Experimental investigation on the performance and emissions of a diesel engine fuelled with ethanol–diesel blends. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2009, 29, 2484–2490. [Google Scholar]
  6. Hung, D.; Chen, H.; Xu, M.; Yang, J.; Zhuang, H. Experimental investigation of the variations of early flame development in a spark-ignition direct-injection optical engine. J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 2014, 136, 101503. [Google Scholar]
  7. Laha, P.; Chakraborty, B. Energy model—A tool for preventing energy dysfunction. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 73, 95–114. [Google Scholar]
  8. Li, Y.; Jia, M.; Liu, Y.; Xie, M. Numerical study on the combustion and emission characteristics of a methanol/diesel reactivity controlled compression ignition (RCCI) engine. Appl. Energy 2013, 106, 184–197. [Google Scholar]
  9. Li, Y.; Jia, M.; Chang, Y.; Liu, Y.; Xie, M.; Wang, T.; Zhou, L. Parametric study and optimization of a RCCI (reactivity controlled compression ignition) engine fueled with methanol and diesel. Energy 2014, 65, 319–332. [Google Scholar]
  10. Liu, H.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, Z.; Wu, Y.; Wang, C.; Chang, W.; Zheng, Z.; Yao, M. Effects of 2-ethylhexyl nitrate (EHN) on combustion and emissions on a compression ignition engine fueling high-pressure direct-injection pure methanol fuel. Fuel 2023, 341, 127684. [Google Scholar]
  11. Soudagar, M.E.M.; Nik-Ghazali, N.N.; Kalam, M.A.; Badruddin, I.A.; Banapurmath, N.R.; Akram, N. The effect of nano-additives in diesel-biodiesel fuel blends: A comprehensive review on stability, engine performance and emission characteristics. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 178, 146–177. [Google Scholar]
  12. İlhak, M.I.; Doğan, R.; Akansu, S.O.; Kahraman, N. Experimental study on an SI engine fueled by gasoline, ethanol and acetylene at partial loads. Fuel 2020, 261, 116148. [Google Scholar]
  13. Chen, Z.; Yang, F.; Xue, S.; Wu, Z.; Liu, J. Impact of higher n-butanol addition on combustion and performance of GDI engine in stoichiometric combustion. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 106, 385–392. [Google Scholar]
  14. Chen, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Wei, X.; Zhang, Q.; Wu, Z.; Liu, J. Thermodynamic process and performance of high n-butanol/gasoline blends fired in a GDI production engine running wide-open throttle (WOT). Energy Convers. Manag. 2017, 152, 57–64. [Google Scholar]
  15. Geng, P.; Yao, C.; Wang, S.; Zheng, L.; Zang, R.; Tang, C. Effects of Methanol-Gasoline Improved Fuel on the Performance of Gasoline Engine. J. Eng. Thermophys. 2013, 34, 183–188. [Google Scholar]
  16. Geng, P.; Yao, C.; Wei, L.; Liu, J.; Wang, Q.; Pan, W.; Wang, J. Reduction of PM emissions from a heavy-duty diesel engine with diesel/methanol dual fuel. Fuel 2014, 123, 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  17. Geng, P.; Zhang, H.; Yang, S.; Yao, C. Comparative study on measurements of formaldehyde emission of methanol/gasoline fueled SI engine. Fuel 2015, 148, 9–15. [Google Scholar]
  18. Rakopoulos, D.C.; Rakopoulos, C.D.; Giakoumis, E.G.; Papagiannakis, R.G. Evaluating oxygenated fuel’s influence on combustion and emissions in diesel engines using a two-zone combustion model. J. Energy Eng. 2018, 144, 04018046. [Google Scholar]
  19. Liu, H.; Li, S.; Zheng, Z.; Xu, J.; Yao, M. Effects of n-butanol, 2-butanol, and methyl octynoate addition to diesel fuel on combustion and emissions over a wide range of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) rates. Appl. Energy 2013, 112, 246–256. [Google Scholar]
  20. Liu, H.; Ma, G.; Hu, B.; Zheng, Z.; Yao, M. Effects of port injection of hydrous ethanol on combustion and emission characteristics in dual-fuel reactivity controlled compression ignition (RCCI) mode. Energy 2018, 145, 592–602. [Google Scholar]
  21. Liu, H.; Wang, X.; Wu, Y.; Zhang, X.; Jin, C.; Zheng, Z. Effect of diesel/PODE/ethanol blends on combustion and emissions of a heavy duty diesel engine. Fuel 2019, 257, 116064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Nanthagopal, K.; Kishna, R.S.; Atabani, A.; Al-Muhtaseb, A.H.; Kumar, G.; Ashok, B. A compressive review on the effects of alcohols and nanoparticles as an oxygenated enhancer in compression ignition engine. Energy Convers. Manag. 2020, 203, 112244. [Google Scholar]
  23. Nour, M.; Attia, A.M.A.; Nada, S.A. Combustion, performance and emission analysis of diesel engine fuelled by higher alcohols (butanol, octanol and heptanol)/diesel blends. Energy Convers. Manag. 2019, 185, 313–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Zheng, Z.; Yue, L.; Liu, H.; Zhu, Y.; Zhong, X.; Yao, M. Effect of two-stage injection on combustion and emissions under high EGR rate on a diesel engine by fueling blends of diesel/gasoline, diesel/n-butanol, diesel/gasoline/n-butanol and pure diesel. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 90, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Zheng, Z.; Li, C.; Liu, H.; Zhang, Y.; Zhong, X.; Yao, M. Experimental study on diesel conventional and low temperature combustion by fueling four isomers of butanol. Fuel 2015, 141, 109–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Zhuang, H.; Hung, D.; Xu, M.; Chen, H.; Li, T.; Zhang, Y.; Yang, J.; Men, Y. Flame Area Correlations with Heat Release at Early Flame Development of Combustion Process in a Spark-Ignition Direct-Injection Engine Using Gasoline, Ethanol and Butanol; SAE Technical Paper 2013-01-2637; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  27. Rakopoulos, C.D.; Antonopoulos, K.A.; Rakopoulos, D.C. Experimental heat release analysis and emissions of a HSDI diesel engine fueled with ethanol–diesel fuel blends. Energy 2007, 32, 1791–1808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Rakopoulos, D.; Rakopoulos, C.; Kakaras, E.; Giakoumis, E. Effects of ethanol–diesel fuel blends on the performance and exhaust emissions of heavy duty DI diesel engine. Energy Convers. Manag. 2008, 49, 3155–3162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Rakopoulos, C.D.; Rakopoulos, D.C.; Kosmadakis, G.M.; Papagiannakis, R.G. Experimental comparative assessment of butanol or ethanol diesel-fuel extenders impact on combustion features, cyclic irregularity, and regulated emissions balance in heavy-duty diesel engine. Energy 2019, 174, 1145–1157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Wu, Y.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, Z.; Wang, X.; Geng, Z.; Jin, C.; Liu, H.; Yao, M. Effects of diesel-ethanol-THF blend fuel on the performance and exhaust emissions on a heavy-duty diesel engine. Fuel 2020, 271, 117633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Xing, Y.; Yao, M.; Zhang, F.; Zheng, Z. Experimental investigation on combustion and emission characteristics of engine fuelled with ethanol-diesel blends. Trans. CSICE 2007, 25, 24–29. [Google Scholar]
  32. Awad, O.I.; Ali, O.M.; Mamat, R.; Abdullah, A.; Najafi, G.; Kamarulzaman, M.; Yusri, I.; Noor, M. Using fusel oil as a blend in gasoline to improve SI engine efficiencies: A comprehensive review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 69, 1232–1242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Muthaiyan, P.; Gomathinayagam, S. Combustion Characteristics of a Diesel Engine Using Propanol Diesel Fuel Blends. J. Inst. Eng. 2016, 97, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Pinzi, S.; Macías, R.; Leiva-Candia, D.; Soriano, J.; Dorado, M. Influence of ethanol/diesel fuel and propanol/diesel fuel blends over exhaust and noise emissions. Energy Procedia 2017, 142, 849–854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Rakopoulos, D.; Rakopoulos, C.; Hountalas, D.; Kakaras, E.; Giakoumis, E.; Papagiannakis, R. Investigation of the performance and emissions of bus engine operating on butanol/diesel fuel blends. Fuel 2010, 89, 2781–2790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Chen, Z.; Wu, Z.; Liu, J.; Lee, C. Combustion and emissions characteristics of high n-butanol/diesel ratio blend in a heavy-duty diesel engine and EGR impact. Energy Convers. Manag. 2014, 78, 787–795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Yao, M.; Wang, H.; Zheng, Z.; Yue, Y. Experimental study of n-butanol additive and multi-injection on HD diesel engine performance and emissions. Fuel 2010, 89, 2191–2201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Kumar, R.B.; Saravanan, S. Use of higher alcohol biofuels in diesel engines: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 60, 84–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Yılmaz, E. Investigation of the effects of diesel-fusel oil fuel blends on combustion, engine performance and exhaust emissions in a single cylinder compression ignition engine. Fuel 2019, 255, 115741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Atmanli, A. Comparative analyses of diesel–waste oil biodiesel and propanol, n-butanol or 1-pentanol blends in a diesel engine. Fuel 2016, 176, 209–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Campos-Fernandez, J.; Arnal, J.M.; Gomez, J.; Lacalle, N.; Dorado, M.P. Performance tests of a diesel engine fueled with pentanol/diesel fuel blends. Fuel 2013, 107, 866–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Pour, A.H.; Ardebili, S.M.S.; Sheikhdavoodi, M.J. Multi-objective optimization of diesel engine performance and emissions fueled with diesel-biodiesel-fusel oil blends using response surface method. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25, 35429–35439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Kryshtopa, S.; Kryshtopa, L.; Melnyk, V.; Dolishnii, B.; Prunko, I.; Demianchuk, Y. Experimental research on diesel engine working on a mixture of diesel fuel and fusel oils. Transp. Probl. 2017, 12, 53–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Akcay, M.; Ozer, S. Experimental investigation on performance and emission characteristics of a CI diesel engine fueled with fusel oil/diesel fuel blends. Energy Sources Part A Recovery Util. Environ. Eff. 2019, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Awad, O.I.; Mamat, R.; Ali, O.M.; Yusri, I.M.; Abdullah, A.A.; Yusop, A.F.; Noor, M.M. The effect of adding fusel oil to diesel on the performance and the emissions characteristics in a single cylinder CI engine. J. Energy Inst. 2017, 90, 382–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Flowers, D.L.; Aceves, S.M.; Frias, J.M. Improving Ethanol Life Cycle Energy Efficiency by Direct Utilization of Wet Ethanol in HCCI Engines; SAE Technical Paper 2007-01-1867; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  47. Shapouri, H.; Duffield, J.A.; Wang, M. The energy balance of corn ethanol revisited. Trans. ASAE 2003, 46, 959–968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Fang, W.; Kittelson, D.B.; Northrop, W.F. Optimization of reactivity-controlled compression ignition combustion fueled with diesel and hydrous ethanol using response surface methodology. Fuel 2015, 160, 446–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Fang, W.; Fang, J.; Kittelson, D.B.; Northrop, W.F. An experimental investigation of reactivity-controlled compression ignition combustion in a single-cylinder diesel engine using hydrous ethanol. J. Energy Resour. Technol.-Trans. ASME 2015, 137, 0311013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Zhang, Q.; Yao, M.; Zheng, Z.; Liu, H.; Xu, J. Experimental study of n-butanol addition on performance and emissions with diesel low temperature combustion. Energy 2012, 47, 515–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Liu, H.; Wang, X.; Zheng, Z.; Gu, J.; Wang, H.; Yao, M. Experimental and simulation investigation of the combustion characteristics and emissions using n-butanol/biodiesel dual-fuel injection on a diesel engine. Energy 2014, 74, 741–752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Jin, C.; Pang, X.; Zhang, X.; Wu, S.; Ma, M.; Xiang, Y.; Ma, J.; Ji, J.; Wang, G.; Liu, H. Effects of C3–C5 alcohols on solubility of alcohols/diesel blends. Fuel 2019, 236, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Tong, L.; Wang, H.; Zheng, Z.; Reitz, R.; Yao, M. Experimental study of RCCI combustion and load extension in a compression ignition engine fueled with gasoline and PODE. Fuel 2016, 181, 878–886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Sarathy, S.M.; Oßwald, P.; Hansen, N.; Kohse-Höinghaus, K. Alcohol combustion chemistry. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 2014, 44, 40–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Julis, J.; Leitner, W. Synthesis of 1-Octanol and 1,1-Dioctyl Ether from Biomass-Derived Platform Chemicals. Angew. Chem.-Int. Ed. 2012, 51, 8615–8619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Kessler, T.; Sacia, E.R.; Bell, A.T.; Mack, J.H. Artificial neural network based predictions of cetane number for furanic biofuel additives. Fuel 2017, 206, 171–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Ardebili, S.M.S.; Solmaz, H.; İpci, D.; Calam, A.; Mostafaei, M. A review on higher alcohol of fusel oil as a renewable fuel for internal combustion engines: Applications, challenges, and global potential. Fuel 2020, 279, 118516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. DieselNet. The Internet Knowledge Base for Technical and Business Information on Diesel Engines, Fuels, Emissions and Technologies. 1997. Available online: https://dieselnet.com/standards/cycles/whsc.php/ (accessed on 24 August 2023).
  59. Liu, H.; Ma, J.; Dong, F.; Yang, Y.; Liu, X.; Ma, G.; Zheng, Z.; Yao, M. Experimental investigation of the effects of diesel fuel properties on combustion and emissions on a multi-cylinder heavy-duty diesel engine. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 171, 1787–1800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Rakopoulos, D.C.; Rakopoulos, C.D.; Kosmadakis, G.M.; Giakoumis, E.G. Exergy assessment of combustion and EGR and load effects in DI diesel engine using comprehensive two-zone modeling. Energy 2020, 202, 117685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Energies 16 06251 g001
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of experiment setup.
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of experiment setup.
Energies 16 06251 g001
Energies 16 06251 g002
Figure 2. Combustion analysis at different operating conditions. (a) Combustion under 25% load of 1144 r/min; (b) Combustion under 100% load of 1144 r/min; (c) Combustion under 100% load of 1765 r/min
Figure 2. Combustion analysis at different operating conditions. (a) Combustion under 25% load of 1144 r/min; (b) Combustion under 100% load of 1144 r/min; (c) Combustion under 100% load of 1765 r/min
Energies 16 06251 g002
Energies 16 06251 g003
Figure 3. BSFC, BTE, and emissions of the test fuels at different BMEP. (a) BSFC at different BMEP; (b) BTE at different BMEP; (c) NOx emissions at different BMEP; (d) Soot emissions at different BMEP; (e) CO emissions at different BMEP; (f) HC emissions at different BMEP; (g) CO2 emissions at different BMEP.
Figure 3. BSFC, BTE, and emissions of the test fuels at different BMEP. (a) BSFC at different BMEP; (b) BTE at different BMEP; (c) NOx emissions at different BMEP; (d) Soot emissions at different BMEP; (e) CO emissions at different BMEP; (f) HC emissions at different BMEP; (g) CO2 emissions at different BMEP.
Energies 16 06251 g003
Energies 16 06251 g004aEnergies 16 06251 g004b
Figure 4. BSFC, BTE and emissions of the test fuels under different EGR rates. (a) BSFC at 0.51 MPa; (b) BSFC at 1.02 MPa; (c) BSFC at 2.04 MPa; (d) BTE at 0.51 MPa; (e) BTE at 1.02 MPa; (f) BTE at 2.04 MPa; (g) NOx emissions at 0.51 MPa; (h) NOx emissions at 1.02 MPa; (i) NOx emissions at 2.04 MPa; (j) Soot emissions at 0.51 MPa; (k) Soot emissions at 1.02 MPa; (l) Soot emissions at 2.04 MPa.
Figure 4. BSFC, BTE and emissions of the test fuels under different EGR rates. (a) BSFC at 0.51 MPa; (b) BSFC at 1.02 MPa; (c) BSFC at 2.04 MPa; (d) BTE at 0.51 MPa; (e) BTE at 1.02 MPa; (f) BTE at 2.04 MPa; (g) NOx emissions at 0.51 MPa; (h) NOx emissions at 1.02 MPa; (i) NOx emissions at 2.04 MPa; (j) Soot emissions at 0.51 MPa; (k) Soot emissions at 1.02 MPa; (l) Soot emissions at 2.04 MPa.
Energies 16 06251 g004aEnergies 16 06251 g004b
Energies 16 06251 g005
Figure 5. Weighted equivalent BSFC and emissions. (a) Weighted equivalent BSFC versus pure diesel; (b) Weighted CO2 emissions versus pure diesel; (c) Weighted NOx emissions versus pure diesel; (d) Weighted soot emissions versus pure diesel.
Figure 5. Weighted equivalent BSFC and emissions. (a) Weighted equivalent BSFC versus pure diesel; (b) Weighted CO2 emissions versus pure diesel; (c) Weighted NOx emissions versus pure diesel; (d) Weighted soot emissions versus pure diesel.
Energies 16 06251 g005
Table 1. Engine Parameters.
Table 1. Engine Parameters.
PARAMETERSVALUES
Engine type6 cylinders, 4 valves, water-cooled, Turbocharger with air intercooler
Bore × stroke110 × 135 mm
Connection rod length215 mm
Displacement7.7 L
Compression ratio17.5:1
Combustion chamber shapeReentrant
Number of nozzle holes8
Diameter of nozzle hole0.153 mm
Included spray angle147°
Fuel injection systemCommon rail
Max torque @ speed1350 N·m @ 1200–1700 rpm
Rated power @ speed230 kW @ 2200 rpm
Table 2. Uncertainties of the measurement instruments.
Table 2. Uncertainties of the measurement instruments.
InstrumentUncertaintiesResolution/Sensitivity
Gaseous analyzer0.5% full scale1 × 10−6
(HORIBA 7100DEGR, Kyoto, Japan)
Smoke meter (AVL 415S, Graz, Austria)0.005 FSN + 3% of measured value0.001 FSN
In-cylinder pressure sensor<±1%−16 pC/bar
(Kistler 6125C, Winterthur, Switzerland)
Air flow meter<±1%0.1 m3/h
(vortex-shedding flow meter)
Fuel flow meter<±1%0.01 kg/h
(AVL 733S, AVL, Graz, Austria)
Intake pressure±1 kPa0.1 kPa
(pressure transmitter)
Intake temperature±1 °C0.1 °C
(K-type thermocouple)
Table 3. Main properties of fuels.
Table 3. Main properties of fuels.
DieselFusel OilF20NWF20WW
Cetane number514249.248.65
Oxygen content (wt.%)--18%3.6%4.52%
Density (kg/L) at 20 °C0.8340.8000.8270.830
Lower heating value (MJ/kg)43.5035.3241.8641.40
Latent heat of evaporation (kJ/kg) at 25 °C232874360.4380.93
Viscosity (mm2/s) at 40 °C3.84.1623.873.83
Stoichiometric air-fuel ratio14.311.3813.7213.57
Table 4. Working points and injection parameters.
Table 4. Working points and injection parameters.
Working PointsInjection Parameters
1144 r/min, 25% loadMain injection timing = −5 °CA ATDC
Injection pressure = 90 MPa
BMEP = 0.51 MPaEGR = 0%
1144 r/min, 100% loadMain injection timing = −7.5 °CA ATDC
Injection pressure = 105 MPa
BMEP = 2.04 MPaEGR = 0%
1765 r/min, 100% loadMain injection timing = −10.5 °CA ATDC
Injection pressure = 169 MPa
BMEP = 2.01 MPaEGR = 0%
Table 5. The working points for the WHSC cycle.
Table 5. The working points for the WHSC cycle.
Speed (rpm)Load (N·m)Weight (%)
0Motoring24
1 (cold idle)65028.5
2145412502
3145431310
414548753
5114412502
69882968
712998753
812993136
914546255
10176512302
1111446258
12114431310
13 (hot idle)60028.5
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Gao, D.; Ikram, M.; Geng, C.; Wu, Y.; Li, X.; Jin, C.; Zheng, Z.; Li, M.; Liu, H. Effects of Anhydrous and Hydrous Fusel Oil on Combustion and Emissions on a Heavy-Duty Compression-Ignition Engine. Energies 2023, 16, 6251. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16176251

AMA Style

Gao D, Ikram M, Geng C, Wu Y, Li X, Jin C, Zheng Z, Li M, Liu H. Effects of Anhydrous and Hydrous Fusel Oil on Combustion and Emissions on a Heavy-Duty Compression-Ignition Engine. Energies. 2023; 16(17):6251. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16176251

Chicago/Turabian Style

Gao, Dongzhi, Mubasher Ikram, Chao Geng, Yangyi Wu, Xiaodan Li, Chao Jin, Zunqing Zheng, Mengliang Li, and Haifeng Liu. 2023. "Effects of Anhydrous and Hydrous Fusel Oil on Combustion and Emissions on a Heavy-Duty Compression-Ignition Engine" Energies 16, no. 17: 6251. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16176251

APA Style

Gao, D., Ikram, M., Geng, C., Wu, Y., Li, X., Jin, C., Zheng, Z., Li, M., & Liu, H. (2023). Effects of Anhydrous and Hydrous Fusel Oil on Combustion and Emissions on a Heavy-Duty Compression-Ignition Engine. Energies, 16(17), 6251. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16176251

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop