Fig. (2) Daytronic and AW sensors wiring diagram. Kinematic viscosity trends of the same tested biodiesels were not totally in harmony; while biodiesel trends originated from Palm and Fried oil were adjacent, Castor oil was quite higher than them. These mixed viscosity trends of the tested biodiesels resulted in significant Kinematic viscosity differences among biodiesel fuels as confirmed by their ANOVA in Table (3). But this case of existing viscosity significant differences didn't reflect any particular difference in the complete common sources behavior shown by the engine performance characteristic BP, BSFC, and AFR (Figs(11,12,&13)), which also didn't contain any significant differences among biodiesel fuels. Table (3): Analysis of Kinematic Viscosity Variance - mm//s. 1.1.2 — Flashpoint, Calorific or Heat value, and pour point (properties subject to single factor ANOVA): Among all of the above analyzed biodiesels operational properties, only Kinematic viscosity and Pour point showed significant differences among biodiesel fuels; while the effect within the majority or the rest of the tested properties didn't result any significant differences among biodiesel fuels, and this can strongly participate in supporting the common graphical behavior of all of the evaluated engine performance characteristics BP, BSFC, and AFR, (Figs(11,12,&13)), which also didn't contain any significant differences among biodiesel fuels. Table (5) Analvsis of Flashpoint variance °C Table (4): Av. values of biodiesels operational properties subject to single factor ANOVA. Table (5) Analysis of Flashpoint variance °C Figs.(8&9) present the variation in CO2 and CO emission resp. with load increase for all tested biodiesels and diesel fuel, their content in diesel fuel always exceeded which of biodiesels especially at low loading levels. All tested biodiesels were subjected to a common trend, this is due o the absence of significant COz emission differences among biodiesel fuels as confirmed by their ANOVA in Table (9); biodiesels trends of heir CO emission were not in complete harmony which are justified by he presence of their significant differences among biodiesel fuels as shown by their ANOVA in Table (10). This is discussed and justified in he above introduction by Gumus et al. (2012) and Heywood (1988). Table (12) Analysis of Engine Brake Power variance - kW 2. Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (BSFC) Fig.(12) Brake Specific Fuel Consumption BSFC ariation with engine rotation speed, for all tested fuels. In Fig.(11) the Brake Power increases with the increase of engine speed due to mass increase of burning fuel; the highest power values were obtained at 1900-2000 rpm engine speed. Conventional diesel fuel was of the highest output power (53 kW) because of its higher heat value than those of the tested biodiesels; power levels obtained from the tested biodiesel fuels were close to each other (around 45 kW). The higher values of viscosity and density of biodiesels can partially explain this result as above explained by Buyukkaya (2010). The common BP trends of the tested biodiesels explain the absence of significant BP differences among biodiesel fuels as shown by their ANOVA in Table (12).
Connect with 287M+ leading minds in your field
Discover breakthrough research and expand your academic network
