Thermal barrier coated diesel engine running on biodiesel: a review

Figures & data

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the Plasma Spray Process.

Table 1. Comparison on thermal barrier coated materials, engine specifications  and coated engine running on various type of biodiesel.

Sl. No.	Investigators	Engine Specifications	Thermal barrier coating material	Biodiesel used
1	(Aydin, Sayin, and Aydin 2015).	3LD 510 model Lombardini CI engine	100 μm of NiCrAl as lining layer and 400 μm of the mixture that consists of 88% ZrO2, 4% MgO and 8% Al2O3	Residual frying oil and cottonseed oil
2	(Suresh, Kamath, and Banapurmath 2014)	5.2 kW constant speed engine. Rated speed: 1500 rpm	Partially stabilised zirconia (PSZ) and aluminium oxide (Al2O3)	Honne and cotton seed methyl ester
3	Prabhahar and Rajan (2013)	3.5 kW constant speed engine. Rated speed:1500 rpm	Piston crown was coated with ceramic material (TiO2) of about 500 μm thickness	Pongamia methyl ester
4	Srithar et al. (2013)	5.2 kW constant speed engine. Rated speed: 1500 rpm	The piston surface and cylinder head are coated with Aluminium Titanate	Mixture of pongamia oil ethyl esters 22.5%, and neem oil ethyl esters 2.5% by volume
5	Aydin (2013)	10 HP variable speed engine. maximum speed: 3600 rpm	Zirconium oxide (ZrO2)	Pure cottonseed oil and sunflower oil
6	Janardhan et al. (2013)	4.4 kW constant speed engine. Rated speed: 1500 rpm	PSZ (500 μm) for cylinder head and superni-90 (Nialloy) for piston and liner	Jatropha oil in crude form and biodiesel
7	Pradeep Kumar, Annamalai, and Premkartikkumar (2012)	5.2 kW constant speed engine with rated speed of 1500 rpm	400 μm thickness PSZ coating	Rice bran methyl ester
8	Modi and Gosai (2010)	7.5 kW Multi cylinder engine. Rated speed of the engine : 1500 rpm	PSZ + stabilizer agent bond coating of NiAl. Total thickness – 500 μm	palm biodiesel
9	Hazar and Ozturk (2010)	6.25 kW Lombardini 6LD400 model variable speed engine. Rated speed: 3600 rpm	Al2O3–TiO2 (250 μm) + Bond coating: NiAl (50 μm)	Corn oil Methyl ester
10	Reddy et al. (2012)	3.68 kW constant speed engine. Rated speed: 1500 rpm	PSZ (500 μm) for cylinder head and superni-90 (Ni alloy) for piston and liner	Mohr oil metyl ester
11	Mohamed Musthafa, Sivapirakasam, and Udayakumar (2012)	5.2 kW constant speed engine Rated speed of the engine : 1500 rpm	200 μm coated pure Al2O3	Rice bran and mahua methyl ester
12	Hasimoglu (2012)	66kW, 4 cylinder engine constant speed engine Rated speed: 2800 rpm	Y2O3-ZrO2 (yttria-stabilized zirconia) layer of 350 μm thickness over a NiCrAl bond coat of 150 μm	Sunflower oil methyl ester
12	Rajendra Prasath, Tamilporai, and Shabir (2010)	4.4 kW engine with rated speed 1500 rpm	PSZ coating (500 μm)	Jatropha methyl ester
14	Hazar (2011)	6.25 kW Lombardini 6LD 400 variable speed engine	250 μm thick molybdenum + NiAl (50 μm))	Cotton methyl Ester
		Rated speed: 3600 rpm
15	Mohamed Musthafa, Sivapirakasam, and Udayakumar (2011)	5.2 kW constant speed engine Rated speed: 1500 rpm	200 μm thick fly ash	Rice bran and pongamia methyl ester
16	Hazar (2009)	Lombardini 6LD 400 single cylinder 6.25 kW variable speed engine Rated speed :3600 rpm	MgO–ZrO2 (350 μm) + NiCrAl (150 μm) for cylinder head, exhaust and inlet valves For piston surface, ZrO2 was used	Canola methyl ester
17	Hasimoglu et al. (2008)	Mercedes-Benz/ OM364A: 4-cylinder 66 kW variable speed engine. Rated speed: 2800 rpm	YSZ (Y2O3ZrO2)- 350 μm + NiCrAl- 150 μm	Sunflower oil methyl ester
18	Banapurmath and Tewari (2008)	Single cylinder 5.2 kW constant speed engine. Rated speed: 1500 rpm	PSZ 400 μm)	Honge oil methyl ester

Table 2. Performance characteristics of different thermal barrier coated engine running on various type of biodiesel compared with uncoated engine diesel operation.

Sl. No.	Investigators	Engine performance
1	Aydin, Sayin, and Aydin (2015)	BTE increases & BSFC decrease
2	Suresh, Kamath, and Banapurmath (2014)	Better performance in PSZ coating compared to Al2O3 coating
3	Prabhahar and Rajan (2013)	Improvement in brake thermal efficiency (BTE) and SFC decreased by about 10% at full load
4	Srithar et al. (2013)	BSFC is 13.9% lower and BTE is 11.9% higher than baseline engine
5	Aydin (2013)	Power and torque were increased with simultaneous decrease in fuel consumption
6	Janardhan et al. (2013)	BTE increases and SFC decreases in all injection pressure
7	Pradeep Kumar, Annamalai, and Premkartikkumar (2012)	Increase in BTE and decrease in BSFC were observed in B20
8	Modi and Gosai (2010)	BTE Increases by 1.5%at full load
9	Hazar and Ozturk (2010)	SFC decreases by4.6% and BTE increases by 5% for B20
10	Reddy et al. (2012)	SFC decreases BTE increases by 7% at190 bar injection pressure
11	Mohamed Musthafa, Sivapirakasam, and Udayakumar (2012)	An increase in engine Power (6.3–11.4%) and decrease in specific fuel consumption (0.8–10.9%).
12	Hasimoglu (2012)	Brake-specific fuel consumption (BSFC) and brake thermal efficiency were improved at part load operations
12	Rajendra Prasath, Tamilporai, and Shabir (2010)	BTE increases
14	Hazar (2011)	SFC decrease by 6%
15	Mohamed Musthafa, Sivapirakasam, and Udayakumar (2011)	BTE increases by 6.8% and SFC decreases by 16.8% for B20
16	Hazar (2009)	SFC decreases by 8.0% and BTE increases by1.7% forB35
17	Hasimoglu et al. (2008)	SFC increases by 9% and BTE- increases by 6.5%
18	Banapurmath and Tewari (2008)	BTE increases by 0.5% at 80% power output

Table 3. Emission characteristics of different thermal barrier coated engine running on various type of biodiesel compared with uncoated engine diesel operation.

Sl. No.	Investigators	Engine emission
1	Aydin, Sayin, and Aydin (2015).	Partial reductions in CO, HC and smoke emissions. But increases in NOx emission
2	Suresh, Kamath, and Banapurmath (2014)	Increased nitric oxide emissions but reduced Smoke and HC emission
3	Prabhahar and Rajan (2013)	Carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbon (HC) emissions were decreased and the nitrogen oxide (NO) emission increased by 15%
4	Srithar et al. (2013)	Smoke opacity and hydrocarbon emission are lower However, nitrogen emissions are increased.
5	Aydin (2013)	CO, HC and Smoke opacity were decreased but NOx was increased
6	Janardhan et al. (2013)	Smoke decreases and at peak load NOx increases
7	Pradeep Kumar, Annamalai, and Premkartikkumar (2012)	HC and Smoke opacity were decreased but NOx was increased
8	Modi and Gosai (2010)	Smoke decreases by 45.74%. NOx increases and HC decreases
9	Hazar and Ozturk (2010)	Smoke decreases by 8.3%, NOx increases by 8.8% and HC decreases by15.0% for B20
10	Reddy et al. (2012)	Smoke decreases by 11% NOX increases at 190 bar injection pressure
11	Mohamed Musthafa, Sivapirakasam, and Udayakumar (2012).	Significant improvements in exhaust gas emissions (except NOx) and smoke opacity decreases (19.6–28.9%)
12	Hasimoglu (2012)	They have not discussed emission
12	Rajendra Prasath, Tamilporai, and Shabir (2010)	NOx is high
14	Hazar (2011)	CO decreases up to 18.0%, 8.0% decrease in smoke. NOx increase to 4.5%
15	Mohamed Musthafa, Sivapirakasam, and Udayakumar (2011)	Smoke decreases by 43.2% NOx increases by10.8% and HC decreases by 47% for B20
16	Hazar (2009)	Smoke decreases by 8.2%, NOx increases by7.3% and HC- decreases by 24% for B35
17	Hasimoglu et al. (2008)	They have not discussed emission characteristics
18	Banapurmath and Tewari (2008)	Smoke, NOx and HC decreases

Figure 2. Variations of brake thermal efficiency vs. engine speed (Hasimoglu 2012).

Figure 3. Variations of brake-specific fuel consumption vs. engine speed (Hasimoglu 2012).

Figure 4. Variation of  an exhaust gas temperature vs. engine speed (Hasimoglu 2012).

Figure 5. Variations of NOx emission at different engine speed (Aydin 2013).

Figure 6. Variations of HC emission at different engine speed (Aydin 2013).

Figure 7. Variations of CO emission at different engine speed (Aydin 2013).

Figure 8. Variations of smoke opacity at different engine speed (Aydin 2013).

Aydin, S., C. Sayin, and H. Aydin. 2015. “Investigation of the Usability of Biodiesel Obtained from Residual Frying Oil in a Diesel Engine with Thermal Barrier Coating.” Applied Thermal Engineering 80: 212–219. doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2015.01.061.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Suresh, G., H. C. Kamath, and N. R. Banapurmath. 2014. “Studies on the Use of Low-volatile Non-edible Oils in a Thermal Barrier-coated Diesel Engine.” International Journal of Sustainable Engineering 7: 341–351. doi:10.1080/19397038.2013.862581.

 Google Scholar

Prabhahar, M., and K. Rajan. 2013. “Performance and Combustion Characteristics of a Diesel Engine with Titanium Oxide Coated Piston Using Pongamia Methyl Ester.” Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 27: 1519–1526. doi:10.1007/s12206-013-0332-3.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Srithar, K., K. ArunBalasubramanian, M. Vivar, and I. Skryabin. 2013. “An Experimental Investigation on Diesel and Low Heat Rejection Engines with Dual Biodiesel Blends.” International Journal of Green Energy 10: 1041–1055. doi:10.1080/15435075.2012.738448.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Aydin, H. 2013. “Combined Effects of Thermal Barrier Coating and Blending with Diesel Fuel on Usability of Vegetable Oils in Diesel Engines.” Applied Thermal Engineering 51: 623–629. doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2012.10.030.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Janardhan, N., M. V. S. M. Krishna, P. Ushasri, and P. V. K. Murthy. 2013. “Control of Exhaust Emissions of Jatropha Oil in Crude Form and Biodiesel from High Grade Low Heat Rejection Diesel Engine.” International Journal of Mechanical and Production Engineering Research and Development 3: 199–212.

 Google Scholar

Pradeep Kumar, A., K. Annamalai, and S. Premkartikkumar. 2012. “Performance Comparison of DI Diesel Engine and LHR Engine with Bio Diesel as Fuel.” International Conference on Advances in Engineering, Science and Management (ICAESM). 312–316.

 Google Scholar

Modi, A., and D. Gosai. 2010. “Experimental Study on Thermal Barrier Coated Diesel Engine performance with Blends of Diesel and Palm Biodiesel.” SAE International Journal of Fuel Lubricants 3: 246–259. doi:10.4271/2010-01-1519.

 Google Scholar

Hazar, H., and U. Ozturk. 2010. “The Effects of Al2O3–TiO2 Coating in a Diesel Engine on Performance and Emission of Corn Oil Methyl Ester.” Renewable Energy 35: 2211–2216. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2010.02.028.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Reddy, T. R., M. M. Krishna, C. K. Reddy, and P. Murthy. 2012. “Performance Evaluation of a Low Heat Rejection Diesel Engine with Mohr Oil Based Biodiesel.” British Journal of Applied Science Technology 2 (2): 179–198.10.9734/BJAST

 Google Scholar

Mohamed Musthafa, M., S. P Sivapirakasam, and M. Udayakumar. 2012. “Comparative Study of Al2O3 Coated LHR Engine Characteristic Using Rice Bran and Mahua Methyl Ester as a Fuel.” International Journal of Vehicle Design 59 (2/3): 182–195.10.1504/IJVD.2012.048694

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hasimoglu, C. 2012. “The Effects of Biodiesel on Performance and Exhaust Emissions of a Low Heat Rejection Diesel Engine.” Energy Sources, Part a: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects 34: 570–580. doi:10.1080/15567031003627955.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Rajendra Prasath, B., P. Tamilporai, and M. F. Shabir. 2010. “Analysis of Combustion, Performance and Emission Characteristics of Low Heat Rejection Engine Using Biodiesel.” International Journal of Thermal Sciences 49: 2483–2490. doi:10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2010.07.010.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hazar, H. 2011. “Characterization and Effect of Using Cotton Methyl Ester as Fuel in a LHR Diesel Engine.” Energy Conversion and Management 52: 258–263. doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2010.06.066.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mohamed Musthafa, M., S. Sivapirakasam, and M. Udayakumar. 2011. “Comparative Studies on Fly Ash Coated Low Heat Rejection Diesel Engine on Performance and Emission Characteristics Fueled by Rice Bran and Pongamia Methyl Ester and Their Blend with Diesel.” Energy 36: 2343–2351. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2010.12.047.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hazar, H. 2009. “Effects of Biodiesel on a Low Heat Loss Diesel Engine.” Renewable Energy 34: 1533–1537. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2008.11.008.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hasimoglu, C., M. Ciniviz, I. Ozsert, Y. Icingur, A. Parlak, and M. Sahir Salman. 2008. “Performance Characteristics of a Low Heat Rejection Diesel Engine Operating with Biodiesel.” Renewable Energy 33: 1709–1715. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2007.08.002.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Banapurmath, N., and P. Tewari. 2008. “Performance of a Low Heat Rejection Engine Fuelled with Low Volatile Honge Oil and Its Methyl Ester (HOME).” Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part a: Journal of Power and Energy 222: 323–330. doi:10.1243/09576509JPE514.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar