it can be obviously seen the world's fossil fuel reserves are limited. It is well known those passenger vehicles are dependent on fossil fuels such as gasoline, diesel fuel, liquefied petroleum gas, and natural gas. The fossil fuel used in passenger vehicles induces the air pollution, acid rains, build-up of carbon dioxide and crude oil; petroleum product will become very scarce and costly. Hence, there is a progressively interest related with using non-fossil sources in vehicles. Especially, the alcohol fuels (methanol, ethanol etc.) have been showed good candidates as alternative fuels for the vehicles equipped with SI. In this experimental study, the effect of methanol (30% and 40%) with gasoline (70% and 60%) tested to measure the performance and emission of 4- cylinder spark ignition multi-port fuel injection (MPFI) engine. The tests with/without methanol blends and increase compression ratio 8.8:1 to 11:1 were performed on a rope belt dynamometer while running the engine at speed 1500 rpm at different varying engine load. In these tests measure engine performance parameters like engine torque, brake specific fuel consumption, brake thermal efficiency and exhaust emission. After experimental investigations to measure engine power increase 10.6%, brake specific fuel consumption decrease 4.2%, brake thermal efficiency increase and exhaust gas emission is decrease with use of methanol blend fuel with gasoline.

1. IJSRD - International Journal for Scientific Research & Development| Vol. 1, Issue 3, 2013 | ISSN (online): 2321-0613
All rights reserved by www.ijsrd.com 689
The use of blend methanol at High Compression Ratio in spark-ignition
engine
Manish B. Charola1
Dr. Pravin P. Rathod2
Prof. Arvind S. Sorathiya3
1
PG Student 2, 3
Associate Professor
1, 2
Mechanical Engineering Department
1, 2, 3
Government Engineering College, Bhuj-370 001 (Kutch-Gujarat-INDIA)
Abstract—it can be obviously seen the world’s fossil fuel
reserves are limited. It is well known those passenger
vehicles are dependent on fossil fuels such as gasoline,
diesel fuel, liquefied petroleum gas, and natural gas. The
fossil fuel used in passenger vehicles induces the air
pollution, acid rains, build-up of carbon dioxide and crude
oil; petroleum product will become very scarce and costly.
Hence, there is a progressively interest related with using
non-fossil sources in vehicles. Especially, the alcohol fuels
(methanol, ethanol etc.) have been showed good candidates
as alternative fuels for the vehicles equipped with SI. In this
experimental study, the effect of methanol (30% and 40%)
with gasoline (70% and 60%) tested to measure the
performance and emission of 4- cylinder spark ignition
multi-port fuel injection (MPFI) engine. The tests
with/without methanol blends and increase compression
ratio 8.8:1 to 11:1 were performed on a rope belt
dynamometer while running the engine at speed 1500 rpm at
different varying engine load. In these tests measure engine
performance parameters like engine torque, brake specific
fuel consumption, brake thermal efficiency and exhaust
emission. After experimental investigations to measure
engine power increase 10.6%, brake specific fuel
consumption decrease 4.2%, brake thermal efficiency
increase and exhaust gas emission is decrease with use of
methanol blend fuel with gasoline.
Keywords: High Compression Ratio, SI Engine, Methanol
Fuel, Multi Port Fuel Injection (MPFI) Engine
I. INTRODUCTION
Transportation is an extremely important element for the
day-to-day functioning of any country. Without
transportation the entire country would, literally, come to a
standstill. It is virtually impossible to imagine life without
some form or mode of transportation. Privately owned cars,
motorcycles, trucks, public buses and subways, trains,
planes and boats are all a daily part of our lives. However,
most of us know that transportation, though necessary, is
also causing harm to the environment and to our health. The
problem is that automobiles, buses, and trucks the most
commonly used forms of transportation require gasoline and
diesel for fuel. The danger in gasoline and diesel and other
fossil fuels is that they contain certain gases.[12]If we can
achieve complete combustion at every cycle of internal
combustion engine then fuel consumption and emission both
problems are easily curable. For complete combustion in
case of gasoline engine can be achieved by using proper
high octane rating fuel and increase compression ratio to
more power output.
Methanol is an attractive alternative fuel because
they can be obtained from both nature and manufactured
sources. It is a high octane fuel with anti-knock index
number and also in methanol have low sulphur content in
the fuel. Methanol can be used in blends with gasoline based
engine fuels. The smaller the methanol percentage addition,
the easier typical blending problems of phase separation,
corrosion, changed Vapour pressure; changed air
requirement can be solved. Methanol has a high octane
number; consequently their addition to gasoline enhances
the octane number of the fuel, therefore reducing the knock
problem in the engine. However, increasing alcohol content
of the blend results in increasing fuel consumption caused
by its lower energy content. Spark-ignition engine with
methanol was reported that performance improved and
exhaust emissions reduced with methanol operation. Carbon
monoxide (CO) and un-burnt hydrocarbons (UBHC), major
exhaust emissions formed due to incomplete combustion of
fuel, cause many human health disorders.
Increase compression ratio is to effect on
performance and emission on methanol blend with gasoline,
normally gasoline spark ignition engine have low
compression ratio and low ignition temperature because
increase compression ratio, to increase engine temperature
and chance of knowing. But using methanol with gasoline in
engine fuel to increase anti-knowing property and also
increase octane number of fuel. Achieve benefit of using
methanol blend to require increase compression ratio to
increase engine power and performance, however the actual
engine has may effect when changing the compression ratio
for combustion rate, stability, friction and heat produce.
Also engine power, efficiency and exhaust emission are
various testing on real engine can be to effect of changing
compression ratio in gasoline engine with methanol
blend.[1]
II. EXPERIMENTAL SET UP AND PROCEDURE:
In this experimental study, the results are obtained from
running a 1.0 Litter, 4- cylinder spark ignition multi-port
fuel injection (MPFI) engine. Fuel used in experiment is
gasoline (70% and 60%) with methanol (30% and 40%).
Performance and emissions results were recorded under
steady state operating conditions. A comparative evaluation
of the performance and emission characteristics of
with/without methanol fuel and increase compression ratio
had been performed on the same engine. There was no

2. The use of blend methanol at High Compression Ratio in spark-ignition engine
(IJSRD/Vol. 1/Issue 3/2013/0074)
All rights reserved by www.ijsrd.com
690
major modification done on engine. The engine was
operated at constant 1500 rpm speed with a variable throttle
position to evaluate the effect of load on performance and
exhaust emission. [2]
Test Rig:For the experiment and testing work, the
engine is installed in a suitable foundation to sustain the
vibration load. The output of engine shaft is coupled to the
rope belt pulley, and various loads apply on engine by using
rope to connected pulley with load cell. The engine is
furnished with the necessary services such as fuel and
lubricating oil supplies, cooling water circulation, ignition
systems and exhaust systems so that prolonged running of
the engine under load is possible.[3] It is also equipped with
the suitable measuring instruments for the measurements of
required parameters and means for adjustments of operating
loads. Such an arrangement is referred to as an engine test
ring. In this experiment, 4 stroke 4 cylinder 1.0L petrol
engine test rig with rope belt dynamometer is used.
1. Engine 2.Universal joint 3.Engine shaft 4.Weight 5.Rope
belt pulley6.Spring weight 7. Support bearing8 Exhaust gas
analyzer 9 Three-way valve 10Fuel beret11Fuel line 12.Fuel
tank 13.Exhaust gas temperature
Fig.1: layout of 4 stroke 4 cylinder MPFI engine test rig
Combination of methanol fuel and high compression ratio
used for Experiment:
Engine performance and emission reading measure at
different following pair.
 At gasoline fuel with normal CR
 At 70% gasoline with 30% methanol with normal CR
 At 60% gasoline with 40% methanol with normal CR
 At 70% gasoline with 30% methanol with high CR
 At 60% gasoline with 40% methanol with high CR
Total five combinations of methanol fuel and high
compression ratiowith gasoline fuel are made for experiment
and analysis of experimental data.
Experimental Procedure:
Total five combinations of methanol fuel and high
compression ratio with gasoline fuel are made for
experiment and analysis of experimental data.
 The engine was started by the starter motor. The speed
was adjusted exactly to 1500 rpm through throttle or
accelerator wire attached to a screw and measure using
tachometer.
 Before starting of the test, the engine was run for 20
minutes to get stabilization and thereafter stabilization
period of 20 minutes was allowed in subsequent testing.
At first, the tests were conducted using methanol blend
fuel and high compression ratio of engine.
 Load was varied from 1 kg to 7 kg and engine speed
was kept constant about 1500 rpm.
 At each load engine speed, time for 30 cc fuel
consumption, difference in U-tube manometer, time
measure in stop- watch, HC Emission and Co Emission
are recorded.
 Same procedure is followed for testing on each five
combinations of methanol fuel and high compression
ratio and data are recorded.
 Results of all five set of testing are compared for engine
performance and emission characteristics.[4]
III. RESULT AND DISCUSSION.
Performance AnalysisA.
Engine Load (kg)
0 2 4 6 8
BrakePower(kw)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
Gasoline
M30 with CR 8.8:1
M40 with CR 8.8:1
M30 with CR 11:1
M40 with CR 11:1
Fig. 2: Effect of Engine Load on Brake Power at 1500 rpm
effect of engine load on brake power:1)
At same compression ratio the methanol content in the
blended fuel is increased, the engine brake power slightly
reduces for constant engine speeds. Methanol calorific value
is three times lower than gasoline it affects to same
compression ratio at time engine power is decreasing so in
fig .2. In methanol property some also advantage, octane
number of methanol is higher than gasoline to increase
compression ratio with methanol gasoline blend fuel engine
power is increase than gasoline at 1500 constant engine
speed. Here result for 1500 rpm, M40 with CR 11:1 is
giving best and increasing power, brake power increase
9.1% and 5.4% at M30 with CR 11:1, brake power decrease
3% and 9.2% at M40 with CR 8.8:1 and M30 with CR 8.8:1
compare to gasoline fuel.[5]
effect of brake power on brake thermal efficiency:2)
The brake thermal efficiency of the engine is one of the
most important parameter for evaluating the performance of
the engine. It indicates the combustion behavior of the
engine to a greater extent. The variations of brake thermal
efficiency with brake power of the engine with various
methanol blend ratio with both normal and high
compression ratio are shown in Figure .3 and compared with
the brake thermal efficiency observed with base line
gasoline fuel. It is noticed that the BTE of the engine

3. The use of blend methanol at High Compression Ratio in spark-ignition engine
(IJSRD/Vol. 1/Issue 3/2013/0074)
All rights reserved by www.ijsrd.com
691
increased with increasing loads. From the test results it is
observed that with increasing brake power, the BTE of the
petrol engine increases with varying methanol gasoline
blend of engine with both normal and high compression
ratio.[6]
Here result for 1500 rpm, brake thermal efficiency increase
4.3%, 6.1%, 7.8%, 10.6% and 14.2% at M30 with CR 8.8:1,
M40 with CR 8.8:1, M30 with CR 11:1, M40 with CR 11:1.
Brake Power (kw)
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6
BrakeThermalEfficiency(%)
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Gasoline
M5 with CR 8.8:1
M10 with CR 8.8:1
M5 with CR 11:1
M10 with CR 11.1
Fig. 3: Effect of Brake Power on Brake Thermal Efficiency
at 1500 rpm
effect of brake power on specific fuel consumption3)
Comparison of corrected specific fuel consumption with
corrected brake power shown in figure 4. Specific fuel
consumption increases with increase methanol blend,
methanol calorific value is lower than gasoline it effect to
require increase carburetor jet to more fuel supply compare
with gasoline. Specific fuel consumption depend on time
require for consumption of fuel, methanol blend fuel fast
fuel consumption than gasoline fuel, all methanol blend ratio
to increase fuel consumption than gasoline fuel.
Brake Power (kw)
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6
SpecificFuelConsumption(kg/hr)
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
0.55
0.60
0.65
Gasoline
M5 with CR 8.8:1
M10 with CR 8.8:1
M5 with CR 11:1
M10 with CR 11:1
Fig.1.4: Effect of Brake Power on Specific Fuel
Consumption at 1500 rpm
Specific fuel consumption for 1500 rpm, increase
3.4%, 6.65%, 1.8% and 1.4% at M30 with CR 8.8:1, M40
with CR 8.8:1, M30 with CR 11:1 and M40 with CR 11:1.
effect of brake power on brake specific fuel4)
consumption:
The relationship between brake specific fuel consumption
and different methanol blends shown in Fig.5. As shown in
this figure, the BSFC decreases as the methanol blend
percentage increases at high compression ratio.[11] This is
due to the increase in brake thermal efficiency. It is
observed that brake specific fuel consumption for methanol
blends of different proportions is less when compared with
gasoline. This is due to the lower calorific values of the
blends of additives when compared with gasoline. effect of
brake specific fuel consumption in engine 1500 rpm,
increase 4.46% and 6.68% at M30 with CR 8.8:1 and M40
with CR 8.8:1, specific fuel consumption decrease 3% and
4.2% at M30 with CR 11:1 and M40 with CR 11:1.
Brake Power (kw)
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6
BrakeSpecificFuelConsumption(kg/kwhr)
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
Gasoline
M5 with CR 8.8:1
M10 with CR 8.8:1
M5 with CR 11:1
M10 with CR 11:1
Fig. 5: Effect of Brake Power on Brake Specific Fuel
Consumption at 1500 rpm
Exhaust EmissionB.
effect of brake power on hydro carbon emission:1)
There are two major reasons of HC formation and emissions
from gasoline engines under normal operating conditions.
Over leaning of the fuel supply during the ignition delay
period is a significant source of hydrocarbon emission,
especially under conditions when the ignition delay is
long.[7] The second source is the excess fuel that enters the
cylinder under over fuelling conditions.
Brake Power (kw)
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6
HydroCarbon(ppm)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Gasoline
M5 with CR 8.8:1
M10 with CR 8.8:1
M5 with CR 11:1
M10 with CR 11:1
Fig. 6: Effect of Brake Power on Hydro Carbon at 1500 rpm

4. The use of blend methanol at High Compression Ratio in spark-ignition engine
(IJSRD/Vol. 1/Issue 3/2013/0074)
All rights reserved by www.ijsrd.com
692
Under idling or light load operation, the engine produces
higher amounts of HC than under full load conditions. But
when the engine is over fueled, HC emissions also increase.
HC is a function of over-mixing (mixture is too lean), under-
mixing (mixture is too rich), and cylinder wall temperature,
which suggests that wall quenching is important.[8]
Fig. 6 shows the HC emission concentration for
neat gasoline and various percentages of methanol blends in
gasoline fuel. As percentage of methanol increased in
gasoline fuel HC PPM is decreased for different methanol
blend compare neat gasoline. HC decrease 8.2%, 13.34%,
18.84%, 29.01% and 36.24% for M30 with CR 8.8:1, M40
with CR 8.8:1, M30 with CR 11:1, M40 with CR 11:1.
effect of brake power on carbon monoxide:2)
Carbon monoxide (CO) is a product of incomplete
combustion and occurs when carbon in the fuel is partially
oxidized rather than fully oxidized to carbon dioxide (CO).
Carbon monoxide (CO) emissions from IC Engines are a
concern because of its toxicological. Carbon monoxide
emissions from internal combustion engines are controlled
mainly by the fuel/air equivalence ratio. Usually gasoline
engines work with lean mixtures, but local conditions may
be rich and lead to the formation of CO. Some of the
reactions of combustion create CO, which is usually
consumed by oxidation reaction with OH radical.[9]
So in figure 7 it is also observed from the graphs
that the optimized amount of CO about 36.4% is observed at
10% methanol blend with gasoline at high compression
ratio.
Brake Power (kw)
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6
CarbonMonoxide(%)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Gasoline
M5 with CR 8.8:1
M10 with CR 8.8:1
M5 with CR 11:1
M10 with CR 11:1
Fig. 7: Effect of Brake Power on Carbon Monoxide at 1500
rpm
IV. CONCLUSION
Three different methanol blend and high compression ratio
were tested on 1.0 liter spark ignition gasoline fuelled MPFI
engine to determine the effect of different type of methanol
blend and high compression ratio on performance
parameters and emission.[10]
The results obtained for optimized performance and
emission in M40 methanol blend with gasoline at high
compression ratio 11:1.
 Brake thermal efficiency with M10 with CR 11:1 with
coating is 14.2% increase respectively compare with
gasoline. In case of all methanol’s blend ratio brake
thermal efficiency increase compare with gasoline.
 From methanol blend with and without increase
compression ratio, it is observed that there is about
6.65% increase in corrected SFC at 30% methanol at
low compression ratio and SFC decrease with 40%
methanol with high compression ratio.
 Engine CO emission is reduce using methanol blend
fuel, observed optimum reading of carbon monoxide
36.9% decrease compare to gasoline reading.
 hydro carbon emission is reduce using methanol blend,
is optimum reading obtain for 40% methanol blend at
high compression ratio is 35.2% compare to gasoline
fuel at low compression ratio.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to sincerely acknowledge the en-courageous
efforts of Mechanical Engineering Department of
Government Engineering College, Bhuj and L.D. College of
Engineering, Ahmedabad
REFERANCES
[1] Ahmet Necati Ozsezen, “Performance and combustion
characteristics of alcohol- gasoline blends at wide-
open throttle” Energy, vol. 36, pp. 2747-2752, 2011.
[2] Abu-Zaid M, “Effect of methanol addition on the
performance of spark ignition engines”. Energy &
Fuels, vol.18, pp. 312–5, 2004.
[3] Chang-Ming Gong, “Effect of ambient temperature on
firing on behaviour and unregulated emission of spark-
ignition methanol and liquefied gas/methanol engine
during cold start” Fuel, vol.90, pp. 19-25, 2011.
[4] Hong Zhao, “Effect of different mixing ratios on
emissions from passenger cars fuelled with
methanol/gasoline blends” Journal of Environmental
Sciences, vol.23 (11), pp.1831-1838, 2011.
[5] Domkundwar, “A course in internal combustion
engines”, Dhanpatray publication, page no.22.12.
[6] Jun li, “Effect of injection and ignition timings on
performance and emissions from a spark-ignition
engine fuelled with methanol” Fuel, vol. 89, pp.
3919-3925, 2010.
[7] M. Bahattincelik, “The use of pure methanol as fuel at
high compression ratio in a single cylinder gasoline
engine”Fuel, vol. 90, pp. 1591-1598, 2011.
[8] Mustafa Kemal Balki, “The effect of different alcohol
fuels on the performance, emission and combustion
characteristics of a gasoline engine” fuel, 2012.
[9] M.V.S. Murali Krishna, “Comparative studies on
Performance evaluation of a two stroke copper coated
spark ignition engine with alcohols with catalytic
converter ” Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, vol.16, pp. 6333-6339, 2012.
[10]Eyidogan M, “Investigation of the effect, of ethanol–
gasoline and methanol-gasoline blends on the
combustion parameters and exhaust emissions of a
spark ignition engine” J FacEng Arch GaziUniv, vol.
26, pp. 499–507, 2011.
[11]Wei Yanju, “Effects of methanol/gasoline blends on a
spark ignition engine performance and emissions”
Energy & Fuels, vol.22, pp. 1254-1259, 2008.
[12]Willard W. Pulkrabek, “Engineering fundamental of
the internal combustion engine”, page no 218.