International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 1, January 2015)
Experimental Evaluation of Diesel Engine Performance and
Emissions Using Diesel/Biodiesel/Ethanol Blend Fuel
Sulakshana S. Deshpande1, S. V. Channapattana2, Dr. A. A. Pawar3
1
PG Student, Assistant Professor, 3Professor and Head, Mechanical Engineering Department, JSPM’s Rajarshi Shahu College
2
of Engineering, Pune, India 411033
Abstract — this paper discusses and elaborates the effects
of different blends of diesel biodiesel and ethanol for same
diesel engine with comparative study of various parameters
like BP, bsfc and various emissions. This paper concludes with
identifying suitable blend. DB10,DBE10 ,DBE20 i.e. diesel
90%10 %biodiesel , diesel 80%-10 %biodiesel-10% ethanol ,
diesel 70%-10 %biodiesel-20% ethanol are the various blends
compared with 100 % lean diesel fuel. Finally by considering
all parameters DBE10 is best alternative fuel.
Keywords — Biodiesel, Blends, Diesel, Diesel engine,
Emissions, Ethanol.
I. INTRODUCTION
As a developing nation with high population India has
high requirement of fuel for various purposes. Demand and
supply do not match and at same time fuel cost is
increasing. Acknowledging that India is a largely
agriculture produce country availability of ethanol is
abundant and utilizing of it as alternate fuel is highly
recommended.
With this possibility and easy availability of resources
like a widely used engine and Biodiesel/Ethanol the author
of this paper undertook the experiment to study various
blends of Diesel/Biodiesel/Ethanol with the engine. Blends
were tested in lab and various properties were identified
and noted before using them with the engine. Blends were
mixed using magnetic stirring method.
Reading’s specification:
 8 mode cycles was used for taking reading sets.
 Load values are divided in eight points considering
maximum torque as 100%.
 Remaining load values found out by multiplying by
75%, 50%, and 10% for maximum torque as well as
maximum power.
 Readings are taken for 2400 rpm, 1600 rpm and idle
condition of engine.
II. LITERATURE SURVEY
To study different parameters of blends the author
researched and studied various renowned papers published
by renowned authors in this field. Below quoted are some
of the papers referred during this study.
263
II.I Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (bsfc)
According to D.C. Rokopoulos et.al for ethanol diesel
fuel blends, bsfc is a comparatively more than the diesel
fuel reason being lower calorific value of ethanol compared
to the 100 % diesel fuel at same load [1].
According to De-Gang Li et.al as load increases bsfc
decreases at load 2200 rpm increasing ethanol content in
blend fuel due to the fact that the low heat value of ethanol
is about 2/3 of that of diesel. Another reason is incomplete
combustion due to the ignition delay of ethanol–diesel
blend fuel [2].
Dattatray Bapu Hulwan et.al claimed that bsfc trend for
diesel and blends are similar in nature. Increasing ethanol
proportion in the fuel blend increases the bsfc. The reason
of higher fuel consumption is the low heating value per unit
mass of ethanol which is considerably lower than that of
the diesel fuel resulting in more consumption of ethanol
blend. These results match those found by other authors
[3].
According to M. Al. Hassan et.al as engine speed
increases up to 1400 rpm bsfc is considerable, but as load
increases after 1400 rpm bsfc increases. The minimum bsfc
lies within range of 1200 to 1400 rpm for all fuel tested.
The blends containing ethanol have comparatively higher
consumption because of its low calorific value. More fuel
is required to obtain the same engine brake power [4].
II.II Brake Power (BP)
According to M. Al. Hassan et.al blend containing 5%
ethanol shows same engine power as that of neat diesel. As
the percentage of ethanol increases the brake power
decreases reason being low heating value of biodiesel
ethanol blends .The variation of the engine brake power
obtained with different fuel blends at various engine speeds
shows that engine power increases with the increasing of
the engine speed for all fuels. It confirms that the presence
of 10% ethanol led to a little reduction in maximum power
(full load) of approximately 5% due to the loss of heat
content. The overconsumption of ethanol blends in relation
with diesel fuel alone is only 3 %. [5].
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 1, January 2015)
II.III Emissions
II.III.I CO Emissions:
D.C. Rokopoulos observed that the CO emitted by the
ethanol-diesel fuel blends is equal in two cases and in all
others is lower than the corresponding 100 % diesel fuel
case. The reduction being higher with the increase in
percentage of ethanol in the blend and in soot emissions
[1].
Dattatray Bapu Hulwan et.al observed that at lower
loads because of decrease in the cylinder gas temperature
and delayed combustion process the CO emissions
increased considerable and reduced slightly at higher loads
for the blends compared to diesel fuel. The lower
temperature and delayed combustion would have
intimidated the oxidation process even though enough
oxygen was available for combustion. Better mixing and
inbuilt fuel oxygen slight reduces the CO emissions, for
blends at high load [3].
Yilmaz et.al performed experiment on variations of CO
emissions as a function of blend ratios and engine loads for
all fuels, as the load increases CO emissions decrease the
reason is complete combustion as the load increases. As
compared to diesel, ethanol has a lower cetane number and
higher heat of vaporization requirements than diesel, it
result in higher CO emissions., which leads to incomplete
combustion in the cylinder and results in higher CO
emissions in the exhaust due to incomplete in-cylinder
combustion. No noticeable change at high loads in case of
CO emissions [6].
II.III.II HC Emissions:
D.C. Rokopoulos observed that blends congaing ethanol
shows high HC emission [1] the reason is unburned ethanol
exhausted from combustion chamber. Emission is total
unburned hydrocarbons (HC) emitted by the ethanol blends
are higher than those of the corresponding 100 % diesel
fuel. High HC emission means that there is some unburned
ethanol emitted in the exhaust due to the larger ethanol
dispersion region in the combustion chamber. Methyl
soyate has a higher cetane number than diesel, which will
result in more complete combustion in the cylinder. Thus,
B20 had less THC emissions than diesel fuel [7].
II.III.IV NOx Emissions:
D.C. Rokopoulos observed that NOx emission is same or
slightly lower than 100% diesel to the blends containing
ethanol. This may be because of the temperature lowering
effect of ethanol, almost counterbalancing the opposite
effect of the ethanol oxygen content and lower cetane
number [1].
264
Dattatray Bapu Hulwan et.al observed that higher latent
heat of vaporization of ethanol and increased ignition delay
due to lower Cetane index cause to reduction in NOx for
blends at low load (0.1 MPa BMEP) at both speeds and all
injection timings, at same load condition the considerable
reduction in peak cylinder pressure is also observed for
blends at this load indicating the reduction in-cylinder gas
temperature owing to higher latent heat of vaporization of
ethanol and increased ignition delay due to lower Cetane
index [3].
BE20 shows the he highest NOx emissions among the
fuels tested. NOx emissions with BE20 increased about
19% at Run 1 and increased about 30% at Run 2, compared
with diesel fuel [7].
Concluding Remark
Biodiesel is not a replacement for diesel with existing
engines specifically designed keeping in view the physical
and chemical properties of diesel. Hence modifications are
required to use Biodiesel. Physical and chemical properties
of fuel decide its use in engine applications hence from the
literature review we can confirm below points for any new
fuel:
Blends of diesel and biodiesel can be the alternative for
neat diesel. We can blend ethanol with diesel. Ethanol
blend is limited in diesel because of its poor
physiochemical properties but that can be overcome by
mixing biodiesel.
Blends of diesel-ethanol-biodiesel has approximately
same properties compared with base diesel fuel hence these
blends can be acceptable. Engine performance with diesel-
ethanol-biodiesel blends reduces brake power and increases
specific fuel consumption because of low calorific value of
ethanol and biodiesel.
Emission characteristics of diesel-ethanol-biodiesel
blends shows that
 CO emissions increased for all blends at low load
because of lower temperatures and incomplete
combustion but reduced at high load due to high
combustion temperatures and CO reduction in blends is
low due to inbuilt oxygen content in the blended fuels.
 HC emissions increased for all blends compared with
diesel fuel because of low cetane number of blends, high
fuel consumption and high latent heat of vaporization
which lowers combustion temperatures leading to
unburned hydrocarbons.
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 1, January 2015)
 NOx emissions increases at high loads for all fuels due TABLE II
ENGINE SPECIFICATIONS (COURTESY KOEL PUNE)
to high combustion temperatures but it is slightly lower
at light loads for blends compared with base diesel due Engine power rating 60 hp@2400 rpm
to temperature lowering effect of ethanol and lower
heating value of ethanol and biodiesel but it varies Engine Maximum Torque 215 Nm@1600 +/- 100 rpm
according to blend and load.
Bore 96 mm
III. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
Main components of the lab are engine, fuel supply unit, Stroke 112 mm
fuel conditioning unit, engine starting unit, dynamometer,
cooling tower, exhaust system, engine controller, emission Number of Cylinders 4
analyzer unit, air dryer, calibration gas cylinders.
TABLE 1 Engine displacement(lits) 3.24
DYNAMOMETER SPECIFICATIONS

Dynamometer Compression Ratio 17:1

EC 300
Model
Emission Compliance BS III (CEV)
Type Eddy Current Both directional
Fuel Diesel
300hp@3000 to 5000 rpm,
Capacity
700Nm@1500 rpm Type 4 Stroke

Dynamometer 3Mode-torque constant, Speed Application Agro, Industrial

Controller constant, Open loop

Coolant PID based digital controller, set point TABLE III

Conditioning +/- 2 ºC EMISSION GAS ANALYSER SPECIFICATIONS

Model EXSA 1500

Fuel PID based digital controller, set point
Conditioning +/- 1 ºC
Make Horiba , Japan
Torque
3.5” digit digital display, 700 Nm
Indicator Analyser for NOx CLD Chemiluminiscent Detector

Speed Indicator 4 digit digital display,0-9999 rpm

Analyser for O2 MPA-Magneto pneumatic
Fuel 50/100 CC, Volumetric type with real analyser
Consumption clock indicator
Analyser for CO NDIR-Non dispersive infrared
Pressure 12 ch, digital Display with selectable
Scanner ranges &CO2 analyser

Temperature 12 ch, Digital display,0200 c RTD Analyser for HC FID-flame ionisation detector
Scanner &0-1000º C Cr/Al

265
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 1, January 2015)
IV. ENGINE TESTING METHODOLOGY TABLE IV
FUEL TESTING RESULTS
Existing diesel engine is the off road vehicle engine
which is tested on 8 models for performance and emission Neat Sample Sample Sample
characteristics. Loading of the engine is done on constant Property
Diesel A* B** C#
speed 8 mode cycle. Initially engine is started and run at
idle for some time to stabilize the engine. After
stabilization engine is taken into full throttle position (FTP) Net Calorific
43.5 40.26 39.17 37.87
and again it is kept as it is for some time for stabilization. Value MJ/Kg
Then engine is loaded with eddy current dynamometer to
find out maximum torque and power for various speeds.
Rated power and rated torque is noted down. Load values Cetane Index 48 42.04 42.70 25.58
are dived in eight points considering maximum torque as
100%. Then remaining load values are found out by Density@ 820 to
multiplying by 75%, 50%, and 10% for maximum torque as 856.1 834.4 834
well as maximum power. 845
15 °C (Kg/m3)
For each load temperature, fuel consumption, speed
these parameters are noted down. Two three such readings
are taken and average readings are calculated. For new Kinematic
reading some time is given to stabilize the engine then the 2.0 to
Viscosity@40°C 2.867 2.650 2.687
readings are taken. 4.5
After taking readings for each blend the engine is run CSt
with pure diesel to get the accurate results of fuel samples.
Same procedure is repeated for each sample. Such four
observations of four blends are noted down. Where
* 90 % Diesel + 10 % Biodiesel,
V. FUEL TESTING RESULTS
** 80 % Diesel + 10 % Biodiesel+10 % Ethanol
Whenever we develop new fuels it is required test the
fuel for its chemical and physical properties of it. To check # 80 % Diesel + 10 % Biodiesel+20 % Ethanol
the compatibility of the new fuel its chemical and physical
Formulae to find out performance parameters
properties are compared with base standard petroleum fuel.
New fuel should satisfy the standard fuel properties to use Brake power (BP) (in kW) - P= 2NT П /60000
it in engines for trouble free performance of that engine. In
Brake specific fuel consumption (bsfc) in (gm/HP-hr)
this chapter fuel blends are tested and properties are
compared with base diesel fuel. Then these fuel blends are
tested on the engine for performance and emission
characteristics. Results are tabulated for different blends.
Fuel blends are tested according to IS 1448

266
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 1, January 2015)
VI. COMPARISON OF RESULTS AND DISCUSSION This trend is similar for all blends. Fuel consumption
As readings taken from the experimental set up we can increases as load increases. For 100 % diesel fuel
perform comparative analysis of different blends according maximum bsfc is 398.03 gms/hp-hr at 10 percent load. For
to their performances. Different performance parameters blend DB10 it is found to be 428.64 gms/hp-hr increase in
like brake power, specific fuel consumption, emission etc. bsfc of about 7.69 percent due to lower heating value of
the performance plots are plotted which gives blend DB10 compared with 100 % diesel fuel. For blend
characteristics of the engine under different load and speed DBE10 increase in bsfc is 7.82 percent. For blend DBE20
conditions. increase in bsfc is 33.62 percent which is largest amongst
all blends due to lower calorific value of that blend. For
VI.I Effect of Various Blends on Brake Power medium load there is slightly difference in bsfc for all
In case of diesel engine as load increases Brake power is blends due to part load efficiency of diesel engine is high in
increases this trend is similar for all blends. As shown in this range.
fig. 7 Brake power decreases slightly when blends are used
because of lower heating value of ethanol and biodiesel.
For 100 % diesel fuel maximum brake power is found to be
58.67 BHP. For blend DB10, it found to be 56.53.A drop of
3.64 percent is found using 10 percent biodiesel. For blend
DBE10, there is drop of about 5.4 percent compared with
100 % diesel fuel; this is high due to lower calorific value
of blend DBE10 than Blend DB10. For blend DBE20
reduction in brake power is found to be 7.61 percent, which
is again lower than remaining two blends. Blend DBE20
has minimum calorific value amongst the all blends.

Figure 2 - bsfc Vs Load

VI.III Effect of various blends on CO emissions

Figure 1 - Brake power Vs Load for various loads using different
blends
VI.II Effect of Various blends on bsfc
As shown in fig. 8 Specific fuel consumption decreases
as load increases to maximum at 10 percent full load.
As load increases CO emissions reduces for diesel fuel
for all loads at 2400 rpm and 1600 rpm as shown in fig. 9
but for idle it is lower compared with 50 % load at 1600
rpm due to incomplete combustion. For blend DB10, CO
emissions reduces by 13.53% at maximum power and
7.10% at maximum load compared with neat diesel fuel.
For remaining 6 modes it reduces slightly. It is due to
inbuilt oxygen content present in the biodiesel helps in
complete combustion. For blend DBE10, CO emissions are
increasing as load reduces compared with Blend A but it is
lower than neat diesel fuel for first two modes.

267
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 1, January 2015)
Figure 3 - CO Vs Loads for various loads using different blends
Similar is the case with other modes namely 5, 6, 7 and
8. For blend DBE20, CO emission are more compared with
blend DB10 but lower for first two modes compared with
neat diesel fuel. This happens due to temperature lowering
effect of ethanol in cylinder. This is dominant at light load
than high load. At high load mixing is better; this is reason
for CO emissions are high only at remaining two modes.
VI.IV Effect of various blends on CO2 emissions
Fig. 10 shows the effect of various fuel blends on CO2
emission at different loads. It is found that as load increases
CO2 emissions increases as more and more fuel burns at
high load and complete combustion is achieved at high
loads due to high temperature. This trend is similar for all
fuel blends. For blend DB10, CO2 emissions are higher at
all modes and maximum increase is found out to be 31.85
% at mode number 4. CO2 emissions are higher due to
more complete combustion and more fuel consumption due
to lower calorific value of biodiesel. For blend DBE10,
CO2 emissions are higher at all modes and maximum
increase was 66.37% at mode number 5. This blend has
more CO2 emissions amongst all blends. For blend
DBE20, CO2 emissions are lower at all modes except at
mode number 4 due to incomplete combustion caused by
high percentage of ethanol.
268
Figure 4 – CO2 Vs Loads for various loads using different blends
VI. V Effect of various blends on NOx emissions
NOx increases as load increases for diesel as well as for
all blends due to temperature (dominant factor) of
combustion and oxygen content in the combustion. As
shown in fig. 11 load increases combustion temperature
increases which leads to high NOx at high loads. For blend
DB10 NOx emissions increases at all modes except idle.
Maximum increment of NOx is found to be 46.07% at
mode number 2. The reason for increase in NOx is due to
oxygen content in the fuel blend. For Blend DBE10 NOx
emissions are seen to be reduced for all modes except mode
number 5 and 6. Maximum reduction of NOx is about
14.05 % at mode 1. For Blend DBE 20 NOx emissions are
reduced at all modes and maximum reduction is about 55.6
% compared with neat diesel fuel. It happened due to high
ethanol percentage in the blend causing temperature
lowering effect in the combustion. NOx emission is
complex phenomenon which depends on fuel as well as
loading conditions.
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 1, January 2015)

Figure 5 - NOx Vs Loads for various loads using different blends Figure 12- HC Vs Loads for various loads using different blends

VI.VI Effect of various blends on HC emissions

VII. PERCENTAGE VARIATION IN EMISSIONS COMPARED
HC emissions goes on reducing as load increases for WITH DIESEL FUEL
diesel as well as for all blends as shown in fig. 12 Trend for
diesel and fuel blends are similar in nature. For blend DB10
HC emissions are lower at all 8 modes. Maximum
reduction (by 52.34%) in HC is at seventh mode (50% load
@1600 rpm).For high loads it is slightly reduced.
Reduction in HC is due to high cetane number of biodiesel
and complete combustion. For blend DBE10 HC emissions
are slightly higher at all modes compared with neat diesel
and blend DB10. Maximum increment is 16.94% at 100%
load at 1600 rpm. For blend DBE20 HC emissions
increases at all modes compared with all blends. Maximum
increase in HC emission is found out to be 30.36 % at idle
condition. HC emissions are higher due to temperature
lowering effect of ethanol and higher ignition delay of
ethanol.

Figure 13- percentage variation Vs load for CO emission

269
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 1, January 2015)
VIII. CONCLUSION
Engine is tested for 8 modes cycle and effect of various
blends on maximum brake power and maximum bsfc is as
follows
 Maximum Brake power for blend DB10, DBE10,
DBE20 dropped by 3.65%, 6.17% and 7.58%
respectively compared with neat diesel fuel.
 Maximum bsfc for blend DB10, DBE10, DBE20
increased by 7.69%, 7.82%, and 33.62 % respectively
compared with neat diesel fuel.
Similarly emissions are measured for 8 modes for DB10,
DBE10, DBE20 blends and percentage increment and
reduction in emission with respect of diesel fuel are
calculated and obtained in tabular form for analysis as
follow
Figure 14- percentage variation Vs load for CO2 emission
TABLE V
PERCENTAGE INCREMENT AND REDUCTION IN EMISSION OF BENDS
WITH RESPECT OF DIESEL FUEL

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

-
- - - - - - -
HC 19.5
15.30 11.51 16.96 67.76 27.45 52.35 34.57
9

-
- -
CO 13.5 -7.51 -6.59 -7.37 -7.74 -2.01
12.30 11.28
3

DB10 CO2 7.91 1.33 2.36 3.54 5.67 15.21 19.46 0.73

NOx 7.94 46.01 3.91 5.10 16.39 44.97 1.28 1.84

HC 14.05 10.60 14.70 16.94 16.27 13.83 12.88 7.87

Figure 15- percentage variation Vs load for HC emission

CO -7.11 -6.93 11.28 11.43 -6.39 -6.48 10.52 10.97

DBE10 CO2 8.94 2.91 3.78 3.54 13.06 13.69 24.16 8.76

-
NOx -14.05 13.80 -17.46 -9.71 24.85 8.94 -1.06
37.17

HC 23.36 22.33 24.45 30.72 22.93 22.04 24.09 30.36

CO -12.33 -13.73 15.18 20.79 -8.20 -9.94 16.44 19.62

-
DBE20 CO2 -13.57 -10.05 -19.84 29.65 -2.03 -1.39 -3.36
23.36

- -
NOx -55.60 -41.72 -42.15 -36.94 -1.45 -29.39
41.14 42.13
Figure 16- percentage variation Vs load for NOX emission

270
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 5, Issue 1, January 2015)
Amongst the blends which are tested on the four
cylinders DI diesel engine, blend DBE10 is found the best
from performance and emission point of view because
 Blend DB10 has higher viscosity (856 kg/m3) which
do not satisfy the IS 1448 regulations. Because of
high viscosity fuel injector and filters can choke-up.
Power consumption increases as high power is
required to pump the fuel due to heavy oil. NOx
emissions regulations are in narrow range than other
emissions and biodiesel blend has high NOx emission
than other blends.
 Blend DBE10 has optimum viscosity and calorific
value which gives slightly less brake torque and brake
power. Slightly increase in bsfc is found. It has cetane
index 42.04 which is satisfactory. It has optimum
emission performance for HC, CO, NOx and CO2
emission.
 Blend DBE20 has lower calorific value amongst the
all blends. It has lower cetane index (25.58) which is
very low. It increases ignition delay and degrades
performance of the engine. Drop in brake torque and
brake power is high. Bsfc is high due to lower heating
value of blend.
In general it can be said that diesel-ethanol-biodiesel
blends reduces NOx, PM, Smoke with slight increment in
HC emissions while keeping CO emissions at same level
compared with diesel fuel.
271
REFERENCES
[1] D.C. Rakopoulos, C.D. Rakopoulos, E.C. Kakaras, E.G. Giakoumis
“Effects of ethanol–diesel fuel blends on the performance
and exhaust emissions of heavy duty DI diesel engine”Energy
Conversion and Management Volume 49, Issue 11, November 2008,
Pages 3155–3162.
[2] DE. Gang Li, Hung Zhen, Lu Xingcai, Zhang Wu-gao, Yang Jian-
guang., “Physico-chemical properties of ethanol-diesel blend fuel
and its effect on performance and emissions of diesel engines,”
Renewable Energy 30 (2005) 967-976.
[3] Dattatray Bapu Hulwan, Satishchandra V. Joshi “Performance,
emission and combustion characteristic of a multicylinder DI diesel
engine running on diesel–ethanol–biodiesel blends of high ethanol
content” Applied Energy Volume 88, Issue 12, December 2011,
Pages 5042–5055.
[4] M. Al-Hassan, H.Mujafet and M.Al-Shannag., “An Experimental
Study on the Solubility of a Diesel-Ethanol Blend and on the
Performance of a Diesel Engine Fueled with Diesel-Biodiesel–
Ethanol Blends,” 2012 Jordan Journal of Mechanical and Industrial
Engineering.
[5] P. Satage De Caro, Z. Mouloungui, G.Vaitilingom, J.Ch.Berge.,
“Interest of Combining an additive with diesel-ethanol blends for use
in diesel engines,” Fuel 80 (2001) 565-574.
[6] Nadir Yilmaz. “Comparative analysis of biodiesel-ethanol-diesel and
biodiesel-methanol-diesel blends in a diesel engine,” Energy
40(2012) 210-213.
[7] X. Shi, Y. Yu, H. He, S. Shuai, J. Wang, R. Li “Emission
characteristics using methyl soyate–ethanol–diesel fuel blends on a
diesel engine”fuel Volume 84, Issues 12–13, September 2005, Pages
1543–1549