Comparison of fuel properties and emission characteristics

of two- and three-phase emulsions prepared by ultrasonically

vibrating and mechanically homogenizing emulsication methods
Cherng-Yuan Lin
*
, Li-Wei Chen
Department of Marine Engineering, National Taiwan Ocean University, Keelung 20224, Taiwan, ROC
Received 4 April 2007; received in revised form 8 August 2007; accepted 24 December 2007
Available online 28 January 2008
Abstract
Emulsions have long been considered as an alternative fuel for combustion equipment in order to achieve better fuel economy and
pollution reduction. While a mechanical homogenizing method is frequently used to prepare emulsions, the use of an ultrasonic emul-
sication method to do so is still rather limited, and is mostly applied to two-phase emulsions only. Hence, two-phase W/O and three-
phase O/W/O emulsions, prepared by a mechanical homogenizer and an ultrasonic vibrator, respectively, were prepared and used as
engine fuel. The emulsion properties, engine performance, and engine emission characteristics between these two emulsication methods
were measured and compared. The potential of the ultrasonic emulsication method was also evaluated. The experimental results show
that the emulsions prepared by the ultrasonic vibrator appeared to have more favorable emulsication characteristics such as smaller
dispersed water droplets that were distributed more uniformly in the continuous oil phase, lower separation rate of water droplets from
the continuous phase of diesel fuel and thus a lower separating rate of the dispersed water droplets from the emulsion, larger emulsion
stability, and larger emulsion viscosity than the emulsions produced using a mechanical homogenizer. In addition, a larger content of
water was emulsied when the emulsion was prepared using the ultrasonic vibrator than the mechanical homogenizer. The emulsions
prepared by the ultrasonic vibrator also had a lower fuel consumption rate, lower bsfc, and signicantly lower CO emission while at
the same time having a larger black smoke opacity. When comparing the two-phase W/O and the three-phase O/W/O emulsions pre-
pared by either the ultrasonic vibrator or the mechanical homogenizer, the two-phase W/O emulsions appeared to have a lower fuel con-
sumption rate, bsfc, CO, and a lower black smoke opacity than the three-phase O/W/O emulsions, regardless of whether they were
prepared by ultrasonic vibrator or mechanical homogenizer.
2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Emulsication method; Ultrasonically vibrating; Fuel properties; Emulsion
1. Introduction
Water and oil are immiscible, but with the help of
mechanical stirring, magnetic or electrical force, these
two substances can be temporarily dissolved together.
The use of a suitable surfactant can further reduce the sur-
face tension between water and oil, leading to the forma-
tion of an emulsion. A water-in-oil emulsion with high
emulsication stability has been used in the past as an alter-
native fuel for combustion equipment such as diesel
engines, boilers, incinerators, etc., for fuel economy and
pollutant reduction. These goals were accomplished pri-
marily due to the occurrence of the phenomenon of
micro-explosions. An emulsion is atomized into many tiny
water-in-oil droplets by a fuel nozzle. Because the boiling
point of water is lower than that of oil, under the burning
condition of high temperature and high pressure, the water
droplets enveloped by the oil phase will absorb the
enthalpy of reaction to form water vapor with a volume
0016-2361/$ - see front matter 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2007.12.017
*
Corresponding author. Tel./fax: +886 2 24622307.
E-mail address: Lin7108@mail.ntou.edu.tw (C.-Y. Lin).
www.fuelrst.com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Fuel 87 (2008) 21542161
that is about 1000 times that of the liquid water. The water
vapor therefore expands and actually explodes through the
surrounding oil layers. Through this phenomenon of so-
called micro-explosion, the atomized water-in-oil droplets
are broken into much smaller droplets that increase the
surface to volume ratio of the oil, thereby enhancing the
contact area among the components of the reactant mix-
ture, and thus improving the burning eciency. As a result,
fuel saving and the reduction of particulate matter (PM),
NOx, CO and other emissions are achieved [1]. The fuel
type, water content, density variation between the continu-
ous and dispersed phases, size of the dispersed phase, as
well as surfactant type may aect the occurrence and
strength of the micro-emulsion phenomenon, and thus
the combustion and emission characteristics of the emul-
sions [2].
The dispersion technique is widely applied in emulsion
preparation. Powerful mechanical stirring is the major
external force that destroys the interfacial tension between
continuous and dispersed phases, breaks up bulky liquid
into small liquid droplets, and thus produces an emulsion.
However, regardless of how powerful the mechanical stir-
ring is, the dispersed droplets in an emulsion tend to assem-
ble and separate into two dierent phases of water and oil.
To stabilize an emulsion of oil and water phases, a suitable
surfactant is generally a necessary additive to settle down
the thermodynamic instability of the emulsion, reduce the
surface tension between oil and water, and curtail the incre-
ment of interfacial free energy. This results in a more stable
emulsion and a longer separation time. Moreover, a much
smaller amount of external force is needed to complete the
emulsication process when a very low interfacial surface
tension has been achieved between the oil and water phases
with the help of an adequate emulsier [3].
Mechanical homogenizing is the most commonly used
technique for emulsion preparation in the industry. A stir-
ring head with a set of blades or spiral mixers operated at
high speed is generally applied to violently agitate the
liquid mixture and to simultaneously generate a large
shearing and cutting force among the interfaces of the sur-
factant, oil and water phases in order to achieve emulsica-
tion. Although the method of ultrasonic vibration has been
widely applied in medical science, biochemistry, food and
pharmaceutical industries [4,5], the study and application
of the ultrasonic vibration method to prepare diesel emul-
sions is rather limited, and it is mostly only applied to two-
phase W/O or O/W emulsions. A previous study [6] found
that the average diameter of the droplets of the inner water
phase of the diesel emulsion produced by ultrasonic emul-
sication is rather small and evenly distributed in continu-
ous phase. Moreover, the technique of ultrasonic vibration
can be designed as a continuous process of emulsion prep-
aration. Ultrasonic emulsication is therefore recognized
as a fast, ecient technique for producing tiny and uni-
formly-sized droplets.
Because the technique of ultrasonic vibration is consid-
ered an eective method of preparing diesel emulsions, it is
of great interest to the researcher to compare the fuel prop-
erties, engine performance, and emission characteristics of
the emulsions prepared by the techniques of ultrasonic
vibration and mechanical homogenization. In this study,
two-phase W/O and three-phase O/W/O emulsions were
prepared, and their engine emission characteristics and
engine performance were analyzed and compared among
emulsions prepared using an ultrasonic vibrator and emul-
sions using a mechanical homogenizer, in order to evaluate
any possible advantages and the potential of using the
ultrasonic vibration technique for the preparation of diesel
emulsions over that of using a mechanical homogenizer.
2. Experimental details
For the emulsication method of ultrasonic vibration,
an ultrasonically vibrating tank with a capacity of 4.5 l
was used to prepare two-phase and three-phase emulsions.
The vibrating frequency and the input power of the ultra-
sonic waves were set at 40 kHz and 300 W, respectively.
Table 1 shows the specications of the ultrasonic vibrator
[7]. The water proportion was set at 15% by vol., and the
emulsier additive was 2% by vol. of the water and diesel
fuel mixture for the W/O and O/W/O emulsions. The prep-
aration procedure for the W/O emulsions was as follows.
Span 80, a kind of lipophilic emulsier, was added to the
diesel fuel and stirred well; the diesel fuel and emulsier
mixture was then poured into the ultrasonically vibrating
tank; the power to the ultrasonic vibrator was turned on
and the water then fed into the tank via a peristaltic pump
at a rate of 60 mL/min. After ve minutes of vibration, the
formation of the water-in-oil (W/O) emulsion was com-
plete. To prepare the O/W emulsions, Tween 80 a hydro-
philic emulsier was added to the water and stirred
thoroughly; then the water and emulsier mixture was
poured into the ultrasonically vibrating tank. The diesel
fuel was then fed into the tank by a peristaltic pump where
it was ultrasonically vibrated together with the water and
the emulsier mixture for 5 min to form the O/W emulsion.
For the preparation of the O/W/O three-phase emul-
sion, both Span 80 and Tween 80 were used as the emulsi-
ers. The proportion of Span 80 and Tween 80 was based
on the HLB value required for an O/W/O emulsion. The
two-stage emulsication technique was applied to produce
the O/W/O emulsions. In the rst stage of the preparation
Table 1
Specications of the ultrasonic vibrator [7]
Item Resonance frequency (kHz) Electrostatic capacity (PF) Resonance resistance (X) Dielectric resistance (MX) Chip material
Specications 40 0.5 4200 5% 15 5000 SL-3544C-W
C.-Y. Lin, L.-W. Chen / Fuel 87 (2008) 21542161 2155
of the O/W/O emulsion, the two-phase O/W emulsion was
produced rst. In the second stage, the diesel fuel was
mixed with lipophilic Span 80 emulsier additive and then
poured into the ultrasonically vibrating tank. The O/W
emulsion was then fed into the tank and ultrasonically
vibrated together with the mixture of diesel fuel and Span
80. This completed the preparation of the O/W/O three-
phase emulsion.
With the mechanically homogenizing preparation
method, a mechanical homogenizer was used instead of
the ultrasonically vibrating tank to produce the W/O and
O/W/O emulsions. The other preparation details such as
the water to oil ratio, the amount of emulsier additive,
and the energy input to prepare the emulsions all remained
the same in order to compare fuel properties and emission
characteristics of the emulsions prepared by the two meth-
ods. The speed of the mechanical homogenizer was set at
1000 rpm for 80 s when preparing the W/O emulsions.
For preparing the O/W/O emulsions, the mechanical
homogenizer was set at 10,000 rpm for 2 min in the rst
stage, and 5000 rpm for 1 min in the second stage.
A four-cylinder diesel engine was used to test engine per-
formance and emission characteristics in this study. The
specications of the engine were: four stroke, water-cooled,
direct injection, compression ratio = 17, a total displace-
ment volume of 3856 cc, and a maximum output horse-
power/engine speed of 88 ps/2800 rpm. A cam-actuated
fuel injection system was used in the test engine, with an
injection pressure of 18.1 MPa. There were four nozzle
holes, each of 0.32 mm in diameter. The fuel injection tim-
ing was 13 BTDC (i.e. before top-dead-center) and was
xed for various types of fuel [8]. The diesel engine was
attached to an electric eddy current dynamometer with
28.3 kgf m of maximum torque output and 150 hp of max-
imum rated horsepower to vary the engine loads. An
exhaust gas analyzer was applied to measure the composi-
tion of the exhaust gas emissions from the diesel engine,
such as nitrogen monoxide, carbon monoxide, carbon
dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and oxygen. A thermocouple was
used to measure the temperature of the exhaust gas. A
cyclone-type collector was used to collect particulate mat-
ter (PM) from the exhaust gas of the engine. The aspiration
ow rate of the vacuum pump of the PM collector was set
at 16.7 L/min. The particulate matter larger than 10 lm fell
into a quartz ber paper inside a PM container of the col-
lector for further analysis. A semi-automatic smoke meter
was installed to measure the opacity of the black smoke
of the exhaust gas from the diesel engine. A schematic dia-
gram of the experimental setup is shown in Fig. 1.
3. Results and discussion
The emulsication characteristics of the emulsions pre-
pared by the mechanical homogenizer and the ultrasonic
vibrator were analyzed and compared. Table 2 shows the
comparison of the fuel properties among neat diesel fuel,
W/O emulsion prepared by a mechanical homogenizer
(denoted as W/O emulsion A), and W/O emulsion by an
ultrasonic vibrator (denoted as W/O emulsion B). When
comparing the two methods, the emulsion prepared by
the ultrasonically vibrating method had a smaller mean
droplet size and a larger number of water droplets that
were distributed more uniformly in the continuous phase
Fig. 1. The experimental set-up of this study.
Table 2
Comparisons of W/O diesel emulsion properties prepared by a mechanical
homogenizer (denoted as W/O emulsion A) and an ultrasonic vibrator
(denoted as W/O emulsion B)
Item Neat
diesel fuel
W/O
emulsion A
W/O
emulsion B
Viscosity (cst) 3.17 4.60 4.73
Specic gravity 0.83 0.84 0.84
Mean particle size of water
phase (lm)
2.6 2.1
Separating rate (remain
motionless for 7 days)
12.0% 10.7%
2156 C.-Y. Lin, L.-W. Chen / Fuel 87 (2008) 21542161
of diesel fuel of the emulsion. These phenomena caused a
larger friction force and static electric attracting force
among the water droplets, resulting in an increased viscos-
ity of the emulsion, and consequently lower sedimentation
rates of those water droplets from the emulsion. Hence, the
emulsion prepared by ultrasonic vibration obtained a bet-
ter emulsication stability and thus a lower separation rate
than that obtained by the mechanically homogenizing
method, as shown in Table 2. Wilhelm et al. [6] also found
that an ultrasonically emulsifying machine not only pro-
duced smaller granules, provided a higher emulsication
stability, but also required less energy consumption for
the emulsion preparation. It is thought that the smaller
the water droplets in a W/O emulsion, the more violent
the extent of the micro-explosion phenomenon, which
incurs a more complete combustion reaction and a larger
burning eciency [9]. Kadota et al. [10] found that the
occurrence of micro-explosion of the primarily droplets
causes secondary atomization, leading to the production
of a large number of ne droplets. The periods of both
the evaporation and thereafter the pyrolytic reaction of
the liquid fuel are considerably shortened. The formation
of carbonaceous residue is also suppressed. In the present
study, the more violent extents of both the micro-explosion
and the disintegration of the secondary droplets produced
larger droplet surface to volume ratios and a larger
momentum to agitate the reactant mixture for the W/O
emulsion. This led to higher combustion eciency and less
formation of unburned hydrocarbon and soot. Conse-
quently, the emulsion prepared by ultrasonic vibration
resulted in smaller mean droplet size and a larger number
of water droplets, as shown in Fig. 3. This result was sim-
ilar to the result obtained by Kimoto et al. [11]. The larger
specic gravity of both W/O emulsions compared to that of
the neat diesel fuel, as shown in Table 2, is primarily due to
the water content in the emulsions.
The emulsions with the initial 15 vol.% water content
and 2 vol.% surfactant Span 80 were prepared by an ultra-
sonic vibrator and a mechanical homogenizer. Immediately
after the emulsions were ready, the fractions of water sep-
aration (vol.%) from these W/O emulsions, after having
remained motionless in test tubes for various periods, were
observed. The fraction of water separation was calculated
based on the following formula: volume of water content
separated from the emulsion after a period of being kept
motionless/initial volume of water content in the emulsion.
The fraction of water emulsied was dened as the fraction
of water content kept in the emulsion after a period (in hrs)
of being kept motionless in the test tube, which could be
calculated as: fraction of water emulsied = 1 fraction
of water separation. Most of the water content was kept
emulsied in the W/O emulsions after the rst hour of
having remained motionless, as shown in Fig. 2, with
97.2 vol.% and 96 vol.% of the initial water content remain-
ing in the emulsions prepared by the ultrasonic vibrator
and mechanical homogenizer, respectively. After having
remained motionless for 7 h, the % by vol. of water that
remained emulsied with the diesel fuel was 92.9 vol.%
for when the ultrasonic vibrator was used, and 90.7 vol.%
for when the mechanical homogenizer was used. There
was obvious variation of the fraction of water separation
in relation to the remaining motionless time for the two
kinds of emulsions, particularly for the emulsions prepared
Fig. 3. Microscopic photographs of W/O emulsions with an initial 15 vol.% water content and 2 vol.% surfactant Span 80 prepared by (a) an ultrasonic
vibrator, and (b) a mechanical homogenizer, at a magnication of 500.
Fig. 2. Separation fractions of water from W/O emulsion with an initial
15 vol.% water content and 2 vol.% surfactant Span 80 prepared by a
mechanical homogenizer and an ultrasonic vibrator, respectively.
C.-Y. Lin, L.-W. Chen / Fuel 87 (2008) 21542161 2157
by the mechanical homogenizer. This clearly implies that
an ultrasonic vibrator is more capable of producing a more
uniform emulsion than a mechanical homogenizer. The
water-in-oil structures of these two emulsions were
observed by an electronic microscope and photographed
at a magnication of 500, as shown in Fig. 3. A much lar-
ger number of tiny water droplets were produced using the
ultrasonically vibrating method than by using the mechan-
ical homogenizer. Fig. 3 clearly agrees with Fig. 2 and con-
rms that the ultrasonically vibrating method is much
better suited to producing emulsions than the mechanically
homogenizing method.
The diesel engine performance and the exhaust emission
characteristics among the W/O and O/W/O emulsions pre-
pared by the ultrasonic vibrator and the mechanical
homogenizer, respectively, were experimentally analyzed
and compared. These emulsions contained 15% by vol.
water and 2% by vol. emulsier of the total quantity of
oil and water. The diesel engine was set at a constant
engine speed of 1600 rpm and the varied engine torques
ranged from 0 kgf m to 15 kgf m. The water content in
the diesel emulsion was deducted when the fuel consump-
tion rate was calculated. The use of O/W/O emulsions pre-
pared by the mechanical homogenizer had the largest fuel
consumption rate among the alternative fuels for achieving
the same engine torque output, as demonstrated in Fig. 4.
In contrast, the neat diesel fuel appeared to have the lowest
fuel consumption rate among the ve fuels investigated, as
shown in Fig. 4. The three-phase O/W/O emulsions had a
higher fuel consumption rate than the W/O emulsions,
regardless of whether the emulsions were prepared by the
mechanically homogenizing method or the ultrasonically
vibrating method. The W/O emulsion prepared by the
ultrasonically vibrating method appeared to have the low-
est fuel consumption rate among the emulsions for the
engine torque larger than 12 kgf m. In particular, the W/
O emulsion with 15 vol.% water content prepared by the
mechanical homogenizer was shown to a have lower fuel
consumption rate at an engine torque of larger than
15 kgf m in Fig. 4. This can probably be attributed to the
occurrence of a more violent micro-explosion and thus lar-
ger combustion eciency for this W/O emulsion at larger
engine torque.
The inuences of the emulsifying method and engine
torque on the brake specic fuel consumption (bsfc) for
the four kinds of emulsions and neat diesel fuel are shown
in Fig. 5. The calculation of the bsfc for the four emulsions
in this gure has their water content excluded, in order to
compare them with the neat diesel fuel. Brake specic fuel
consumption is dened as the fuel mass ow rate divided
by the brake horsepower output [12]. A higher bsfc value,
indicating inferior combustion characteristics, may be pro-
duced in case of a higher fuel consumption rate under
lower engine torque. The W/O and O/W/O emulsions pre-
pared by the mechanical homogenizer appeared to have
higher bsfc values than those prepared by the ultrasonic
vibrator. In addition, the neat diesel fuel required the low-
est bsfc among these ve fuels. This implies that the emul-
sions prepared by ultrasonic vibration have higher fuel
combustion eciency than those prepared by mechanical
homogenizer. That is probably due to the fact that the
ultrasonic vibration method can be used to prepare emul-
sions with smaller water droplets in the dispersed phase,
which are distributed more uniformly in the continuous
phase of diesel fuel. The extent of the violent micro-explo-
sions is thus enhanced, resulting in an improved burning
process and a resultant reduction of the fuel consumption
rate. This experimental nding agrees well with that of
Lin and Wang [13]. Moreover, the two-phase W/O emul-
sions either by the ultrasonic vibrator or the mechanical
homogenizer were observed to have smaller bsfc values
than the three-phase O/W/O emulsions. That is primarily
due to the smaller size of water droplets in the dispersed
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 15
Torque (kgf-m)
f
u
e
l

c
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n

r
a
t
e

(
m
l
/
m
i
n
)
W/O, W=15%by ultrasonic vibrator
O/W/O, W=15%by ultrasonic vibrator
W/O, W=15%by mechanical homogenizer
O/W/O, W=15%by mechanical homogenizer
neat diesel
Fig. 4. Fuel consumption rates for W/O and O/W/O emulsions prepared
by a mechanical homogenizer and an ultrasonic vibrator, respectively,
under varied engine torques and constant engine speed at 1600 rpm.
150
250
350
450
550
650
750
2 4 6 8 10 12 15
Torque (kgf-m)
B
S
F
C

(
g
/
k
w
h
)
W/O, W=15% by ultrasonic vibrator
O/W/O, W=15% by ultrasonic vibrator
W/O, W=15% by mechanical homogenizer
O/W/O, W=15% by mechanical homogenizer
neat diesel
Fig. 5. Brake specic fuel consumption (bsfc) for W/O and O/W/O
emulsions prepared by a mechanical homogenizer and an ultrasonic
vibrator, respectively, under varied engine torques and constant engine
speed at 1600 rpm.
2158 C.-Y. Lin, L.-W. Chen / Fuel 87 (2008) 21542161
phase and the more even water-droplet distribution in the
emulsions. This implies that burning the two-phase W/O
emulsions incurs a higher degree of violent micro-explosion
and thus higher fuel combustion eciency than those of the
three-phase O/W/O emulsions. In addition, the W/O emul-
sion prepared by the mechanical homogenizer was shown
to have the lowest bsfc among these four emulsions for
engine torque of larger than 12 kgf m. Moreover, the bsfc
of the emulsions decreased while the bsfc of the neat diesel
remained nearly constant with the increase of engine tor-
que to larger than 12 kgf m. A lower bsfc implies a lower
fuel consumption rate under larger engine torque. The
W/O emulsion with 15 vol.% water prepared by the
mechanical homogenizer was shown to have a lower bsfc
and thus a higher thermal eciency than those of the neat
diesel at engine torque larger than 15 kgf m in Fig. 5. This
is primarily due to its lowest fuel consumption rate, as
shown in Fig. 4. It is obvious that the results of Fig. 5 agree
with those of Fig. 4.
Fig. 6 presents a comparison of the nitrogen monoxide
(NO) in the exhaust gas emission from burning the four
emulsions and the neat diesel fuel under the operating con-
dition of varied engine torques and constant engine speed.
It shows that the concentrations of NO emission increased
with the increase in engine torque. This can be attributed
to the fact that a higher fuel feeding rate was required at
higher engine torques, which caused a higher burning gas
temperature in the combustion chamber of the diesel
engine. This facilitated the oxidization of nitrogen, which
in turn created higher NO emissions according to the
extended Zeldovich thermal NO mechanism [14]. The use
of neat diesel fuel as engine fuel emitted the largest NO con-
centration and the highest burning gas temperature among
these ve fuels. Although all four emulsions have the same
incremental trend of NO emission with the engine torque,
the burning of W/O emulsions prepared by ultrasonic
vibrator was observed to have a slightly higher NO emis-
sion, while the O/W/O emulsions by mechanical homoge-
nizer had a relatively lower NO emission. This occurred
because the W/O emulsions prepared by the ultrasonically
vibrating machine had smaller and more evenly distributed
water droplets in the oil layer, resulting in a higher degree of
violent micro-explosions and thereby incurring a more com-
plete burning process. A higher burning gas temperature
inside the engine cylinder thus expedited the oxidization
of nitrogen, leading to the formation of a larger amount
of NO for the W/O emulsions by ultrasonic vibrator com-
pared to the other emulsions.
Fig. 7 is a comparison of CO emissions from the diesel
engine when the four kinds of emulsions and neat diesel
fuel were used as the tested fuels, respectively. The burning
gas temperature in the engine cylinder signicantly inu-
enced the oxidization rate of CO emission. A higher burn-
ing gas temperature accelerated the oxidization rate of CO
to form CO
2
and thus emitted less CO in the exhaust gases
of the engine. The burning of the emulsions prepared by
ultrasonic vibrator, which contained smaller dispersed
phase water-droplets and a larger amount of micro-explo-
sions, caused a higher burning gas temperature in the
engine cylinder and consequently lowered the CO emis-
sions compared to the emulsions prepared by the mechan-
ical homogenizer. When comparing the CO emissions of
the W/O and O/W/O emulsions, prepared by either ultra-
sonically vibrating or mechanically homogenizing meth-
ods, the two-phase W/O emulsions produced less CO
emission than the O/W/O emulsions. This was primarily
because of the more intense heat release rate and thus a
higher burning gas temperature. The CO
2
emissions from
burning the neat diesel fuel and the four emulsions in the
diesel engine, respectively, are shown in Fig. 8. The ve
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 15
Torque (kgf-m)
N
O
x

(
p
p
m
)
W/O, W=15% by ultrasonic vibrator
O/W/O, W=15% by ultrasonic vibrator
W/O, W=15% by mechanical homegenizer
O/W/O, W=15% by mechanical homogenizer
neat diesel
Fig. 6. NO emission for W/O and O/W/O emulsions prepared by a
mechanical homogenizer and an ultrasonic vibrator, respectively, under
varied engine torques and constant engine speed at 1600 rpm.
150
250
350
450
550
650
750
850
950
1050
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 15
Torque (kgf-m)
C
O

(
p
p
m
)
W/O, W=15% by ultrasonic vibrator
O/W/O, W=15% by ultrasonic vibrator
W/O, W=15% by mechanical homogenizer
O/W/O, W=15% mechanical homogenizer
neat diesel
Fig. 7. CO emission for W/O and O/W/O emulsions prepared by a
mechanical homogenizer and an ultrasonic vibrator, respectively, under
varied engine torques and constant engine speed at 1600 rpm.
C.-Y. Lin, L.-W. Chen / Fuel 87 (2008) 21542161 2159
dierent kinds of fuel have a similar trend when it comes to
their CO
2
emissions. The fuel/air equivalent ratio increased
with the increase of the engine torque for the diesel engine.
This led to an increase in CO
2
emissions when the engine
torque increased. On the other hand, the air to fuel ratio
decreased with the increase in engine torque, resulting in
a decrease in O
2
emissions, as shown in Fig. 9. Partial reac-
tion enthalpy of the diesel emulsion was absorbed by water
vaporization. A lower gas temperature was produced in the
burning of the emulsion, leading to a lower NOx formation
than that of the neat diesel, as shown in Fig. 6. However,
water vapor that formed during the evaporation of the
water content in the diesel emulsion diluted the excess oxy-
gen concentration in the exhaust gas. These two adverse
eects made no obvious dierence to the excess oxygen of
the emulsions and neat diesel, as shown in Fig. 9.
The black smoke opacities for burning the ve tested
fuels appeared to increase with the engine torque under
the same engine speed at 1600 rpm, as shown in Fig. 10.
This was probably because the increase in the engine tor-
que required a higher fuel consumption rate: there was
not enough time to combust more feeding fuel as the tor-
que increased. It follows that the black smoke opacity
increased with the increase of engine torque, as shown in
Fig. 10. The burning of neat diesel fuel produced the high-
est black smoke opacity, whereas the emulsions emitted a
much lower black smoke opacity. The water addition from
the burning process of the emulsions caused signicant
increase of spray volume and thus considerable air entrain-
ment into emulsion spray. Hence, an obvious decrease of
black smoke opacity from burning the emulsion was found
in comparison to the neat diesel fuel. In addition, the emul-
sions prepared by the mechanical homogenizer reduced the
black smoke to a higher degree than the emulsions pre-
pared by the ultrasonic vibrator. The W/O emulsions pre-
pared by the mechanical homogenizer produced the least
black smoke of the ve fuels, which implies that this kind
of emulsion was the most eective for black smoke reduc-
tion. In particular, the O/W/O emulsion with 15 vol.%
water content prepared by the mechanical homogenizer
was shown to have minimum black smoke opacity under
engine torque of lower than 2 kgf m. The formation of
black smoke is a series of chemical processes of particle
assembling, growing, and congealing [15]. It is inferred that
because of the formation of a larger number of smaller dis-
persed-phase droplets for the emulsions prepared by ultra-
sonic vibrator, the occurrence of the micro-explosion
phenomenon was more intense and thus of a shorter dura-
tion. This resulted in an earlier slow-down of the peak
engine cylinder temperature and consequently a moderate
thermal release rate, so that there was a longer time for
the soot particles to assemble and grow [16]. Therefore,
the black smoke opacity for the emulsions prepared by
the ultrasonic vibrator was higher than of the emulsions
prepared by the mechanical homogenizer.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 8 10 12 15
Torque (kgf-m)
C
O
2

(
%
)
W/O, W=15% by ultrasonic vibrator
O/W/O, W=15% by ultrasonic vibrator
W/O, W=15% mechanical homogenizer
O/W/O, W=15% by mechanical homogenizer
neat diesel
2 4 6
Fig. 8. CO
2
emission for W/O and O/W/O emulsions prepared by a
mechanical homogenizer and an ultrasonic vibrator, respectively, under
varied engine torques and constant engine speed at 1600 rpm.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 15
Torque (kgf-m)
O
2

(
%
)
W/O, W=15% by ultrasonic vibrator
O/W/O, W=15% by ultrasonic vibrator
W/O, W=15% by mechanical homogenizer
O/W/O, W=15% by mechanical homogenizer
neat diesel
Fig. 9. O
2
emission for W/O and O/W/O emulsions prepared by a
mechanical homogenizer and an ultrasonic vibrator, respectively, under
varied engine torques and constant engine speed at 1600 rpm.
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 15
Torque (kgf-m)
b
l
a
c
k

s
m
o
k
e

o
p
a
c
i
t
y

(
%
)
W/O, W=15% by ultrasonic vibrator
O/W/O, W=15% by ultrasonic vibrator
W/O, W=15% by mechanical homogenizer
O/W/O, W=15% by mechanical homogenizer
neat diesel
Fig. 10. Black smoke opacity for W/O and O/W/O emulsions prepared by
a mechanical homogenizer and an ultrasonic vibrator, respectively, under
varied engine torques and constant engine speed at 1600 rpm.
2160 C.-Y. Lin, L.-W. Chen / Fuel 87 (2008) 21542161
4. Conclusions
The W/O and O/W/O emulsions prepared by the ultra-
sonic vibrator were shown to have a larger number of
smaller dispersed-phase droplets that were more evenly dis-
tributed in the outer oil phase, larger emulsion viscosity,
and lower separating rates of the water droplets from the
emulsions than those emulsions prepared by the mechani-
cal homogenizer. The ultrasonically vibrating method is
thus considered to be more eective for the preparation
of both two-phase W/O and three-phase O/W/O emulsions
than the mechanically homogenizing method.
The W/O and O/W/O emulsions prepared by the ultra-
sonic vibrator were found to cause a more intensive micro-
explosion phenomenon, resulting in higher burning e-
ciency, lower fuel consumption rate and lower bsfc than
those prepared by the mechanical homogenizer. The O/W/
O emulsions were found to have a higher fuel consumption
rate, brake specic fuel consumption, CO emission, and
black smoke opacity than the W/O emulsions prepared by
either the ultrasonic vibrator or the mechanical homogenizer.
With regards to the inuences of the emulsion prepara-
tion methods on the engine emission characteristics, the
emulsions prepared by the ultrasonic vibrator produced
lower CO emission with a higher black smoke opacity than
those prepared by the mechanical homogenizer. The burn-
ing of the W/O emulsion prepared by ultrasonic vibration
had a slightly higher NO emission, while the burning of the
O/W/O emulsion prepared by the mechanical homogenizer
had a relatively lower NO emission.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank the National Science
Council of Taiwan, ROC for its nancial support under
Contract No. NSC 89-2212-E-019-017.
References
[1] Lin CY. Inuences of vanadium compound on burning characteris-
tics of emulsied fuel oil C. Ocean Eng 2000;27(6):589601.
[2] Lin CY, Pan JY. Emission of burning emulsied diesel oil with
sodium sulfate in salty atmospheric air. J Environ Sci Heal
2003;A38(12):294354.
[3] Chen G, Tao D. An experimental study of stability of oil-water
emulsion. Fuel Process Technol 2005;86:499508.
[4] Benedito J, Carcel JA, Gonzalez R, Mulet A. Application of low
intensity ultrasonics to cheese manufacturing processes. J Ultrasonics
2000;38:72730.
[5] Soo KO, Simon B. Ultrasonic initiation of polystyrene latex
synthesis. Ultrason Sonochem 1998;7:12533.
[6] Wilhelm AM, Delmas H, Gourdon C. Emulsication by ultrasound:
drop size distribution and stability. Ultrason Sonochem 1999;6:
7583.
[7] Li-Horn Supersonic Corp., Operation and Maintenance Manual,
Taiwan, 2002.
[8] Isuzu Motors Japan Inc., Operation and Maintenance Manual,
Japan, 1993.
[9] Lin CY, Wang KH. Eects of diesel engine speed and water content
on emission characteristics of three-phase emulsions. J Environ Sci
Heal 2004;A39(5):134559.
[10] Kadota T, Tanaka H, Segawa D, Nakaya S, Yamasaki H. Microex-
plosion of an emulsion droplet during Leidenfrost burning. Proc
Combust Inst 2007;31:212531.
[11] Kimoto K, Namba K, Owashi Y. Observation of combustion
behavior for single droplets of water-in-oil emulsied fuels. Proc
Jpn Mech Soc 1995;61(582):73843.
[12] Ferguson CR, Kirkpatrick AT. Internal Combustion Engines. 2nd
ed. Singapore: Wiley; 2001. p. 78.
[13] Lin CY, Wang KH. Diesel engine performance and emission
characteristics using three-phase emulsions as fuel. Fuel 2004;
83(45):53745.
[14] Nishioka M, Nakagawa S, Ishijawa Y, Takeno T. NO emission
characteristics of methane-air double ame. Combust Flame
1994;98:12738.
[15] Wagner HG. Soot formation an overview. In: Siegla C, Smith GW,
editors. Particulate carbon formation during combustion. New
York: Plenum Press Co.; 1981. p. 129.
[16] Dec JE. A conceptual model of DI diesel combustion based on laser
sheet imaging. SAE Tech. Paper No. 970873, 1997.
C.-Y. Lin, L.-W. Chen / Fuel 87 (2008) 21542161 2161