Fuel 90 (2011) 795–802

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Fuel
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fuel

Physical and chemical properties of ethanol–diesel fuel blends

Eloisa Torres-Jimenez a, Marta Svoljšak Jerman b, Andreja Gregorc b, Irenca Lisec b, M. Pilar Dorado c,1,
Breda Kegl d,⇑,1
a
Dept. of Mechanics and Mining Engineering, University of Jaen, C/Alfonso X el Sabio, 23700 Linares (Jaen), Spain
b
Petrol d.d., Ljubljana, Dunajska 50, SI-1527 Ljubljana, Slovenia
c
Dept. of Chemical Physics and Applied Thermodynamics, EPS, Ed Leonardo da Vinci, Campus de Rabanales, Universidad de Cordoba, 14071 Cordoba, Spain
d
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Maribor, Smetanova 17, SI-2000 Maribor, Slovenia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper discusses the physical–chemical properties of ethanol–diesel fuel blends. The attention is
Received 29 September 2009 focused on the properties which influence the injection and engine characteristics significantly. Main
Received in revised form 16 September 2010 properties have been investigated experimentally. The analysis of experimentally obtained fuel proper-
Accepted 22 September 2010
ties of tested fuels and their influence on engine characteristics are presented. Physical and chemical
Available online 16 October 2010
properties of diesel fuel and ethanol–diesel fuel blends were measured according to requirements and
test methods for diesel fuel (EN590, 2003). The tested fuels were neat mineral diesel fuel (D100), 5%
Keywords:
(v/v) ethanol/diesel fuel blend (E05D95), 10% (v/v) ethanol–diesel fuel blend (E10D90) and 15% (v/v) eth-
Alternative fuels
Alcohol
anol–diesel fuel blend (E15D85). It has been proved that, for ethanol–diesel fuel blends, some additives
Cold behavior properties are necessary to keep stability under low temperature conditions. Also, cold weather properties test, such
Diesel engine as cloud point and pour point tests are negatively affected by phase separation. The rest of the properties,
Engine injection system excepting flash point, were within diesel fuel standard specifications. Based on this study, it can be con-
cluded that using additives to avoid phase separation and to raise flash point, blends of diesel fuel with
ethanol up to 15% can be used to fuel diesel engines if engine performance tests corroborate it.
Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Environmental concerns and the possible role of alternative
renewable fuels are leading the first actions towards the produc-
tion of a sustainable fuel supply. Biofuels for diesel engine com-
prise vegetable oils and biodiesel, neat or blended with mineral
diesel fuel [1,2]. But ethanol blended with diesel fuel, at different
concentrations, can also power a compression ignition engine [3].
Moreover, it was proven that, according to physical–chemical
properties, ethanol–biodiesel blends up to 15% ethanol can run a
diesel engine only by improving their flash point [4].
Many investigations are related to the influence of blending
ethanol with mineral diesel fuel on engine performance and ex-
haust emissions, showing an increase in brake thermal efficiency
and in specific fuel consumption [5], a slight decrease in engine
power and a more significant decrease in exhaust emissions com-
pared to the use of diesel fuel. With the use of ethanol–diesel fuel
blends with respect to that of neat mineral diesel fuel, the smoke
opacity and particulate matter (PM) are significantly reduced,
and slightly decrease was observed in NOx. The effect on CO and
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: breda.kegl@uni-mb.si (B. Kegl).
1
Authors who contributed to the project leadership.
THC are less clear although both were still well below the regu-
lated emissions limit [6–9].
Fuel injection characteristics depend on both the type of injec-
tion system and the fuel properties [10–14]. Researchers have
shown that physical and chemical properties of biofuels may vary
significantly depending on their chemical composition, thus affect-
ing engine performance and exhaust emissions. Therefore, when
considering a specific biofuel, a measurement of its properties is
required.
Fuel density, viscosity, sound velocity and bulk modulus of elas-
ticity influence the injection characteristics significantly [15,16]. At
low temperature, fuel viscosity and density increase, which influ-
ence the increase of both the pressure drop through the filter
and the flow resistance through the low pressure pump gallery.
The fuelling through individual injection assemblies can differ con-
siderably [17]. It is known that higher density, sound velocity and
bulk modulus of fuel cause advanced injection timing in mechani-
cally controlled in-line injection systems. This may be one of the
reasons for increased NOx emission [15,18]. The higher viscosity af-
fects the atomization of a fuel upon injection into the combustion
chamber and thereby ultimately increases the tendency of forma-
tion of engine deposits. When viscosity is low, the engine power is
reduced; however, increasing the fuel viscosity will affect nega-
tively atomization and will also cause power loss [19].

0016-2361/$ - see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2010.09.045
796 E. Torres-Jimenez et al. / Fuel 90 (2011) 795–802
A distillation curve represents the percent of light, medium and
heavy distillation compounds of a fuel. The distillation (volatility)
characteristics of fuels have an important effect on their safety
and performance. The boiling range gives important information
on composition and behavior during storage and use. Limiting val-
ues of specified distillation characteristics are added to most fuels
specifications in order to control end-use performance and to reg-
ulate the formation of vapors which, e.g., may form explosive mix-
tures with air.
The cloud point (CP) is defined as the temperature at which a
cloud of wax crystals first appear in a liquid when it is cooled under
controlled conditions during a standard test. The PP is defined as the
temperature at which the fuel can no longer be poured due to gel
formation [20]. The cold filter plugging point (CFPP) usually occurs
at a higher temperature than the pour point does. Solids and crystals
rapidly grow and agglomerate, clogging fuel lines and filters and
causing major operability problems. To avoid possible problems
when fuel passes through the filtration system, a low CFPP is recom-
mended. This is important in cold temperate countries; a high CFPP
will clog up vehicle engines more easily. CP, PP and CFPP properties
give information about cold weather behavior of the fuel.
The filter plugging tendency test method (FPT, also called pum-
pability) is intended for use in evaluating fuel cleanliness in those
applications that demand a high throughput per installed filter. FPT
is a calculated dimensionless value that defines the tendency of
particulates in a fuel to plug or block a filter, which the CFPP test
is unable to detect. A change in filtration performance after storage
or pretreatment can indicate changes in fuel conditions.
The flash point is the lowest temperature at which a fuel will
ignite when exposed to an ignition source. The flashpoint affects
the shipping and storage classification and the precautions that
should be used in handling and transporting the fuel [21].
Ethanol corrosion can be divided into three categories: general
corrosion (caused by ionic impurities), dry corrosion (attributed to
the ethanol molecule and its polarity) and wet corrosion (caused
by azeotropic water) [22]. Corrosiveness must be evaluated pro-
vided that many parts of the fuel injection system and fuel tank
can be damaged by the use of new fuels.
Lubricity is a potential problem that can appear when alterna-
tive fuels are used because fuel plays an important role in the
lubrication of the fuel system.
Fuel quality determines whether a fuel can be commercialized,
because the presence of contaminants can lead to several opera-
tional problems such as engine deposits. Fourier transformation
infrared analysis (FT-IR analysis) is used to determine if any unde-
sirable component is present in the sample (contaminants). It is
becoming a preferred method for quality control of biofuels [23],
due to its operational ease, rapidity of measurement and non-
destructiveness. FT-IR analysis is less sensitive than Gas Chroma-
tography (GC) because it can’t identify an unknown compound,
which is in contrast to Gas Chromatography (GC) technique, but
it is useful for identifying certain functional groups in molecules.
Consequently, by referring to known spectra, the region can be
used to identify a compound.
Finally, water content must be analyzed and controlled, because
excessive water concentration in the blends has several conse-
quences, such as phase separation, corrosion and aqueous microor-
ganisms growth.
In this paper, the most important physical and chemical proper-
ties of ethanol–diesel fuel blends are analyzed and compared to
those of diesel fuel. Fuel properties like fuel stability, density, vis-
cosity, distillation, cloud point (CP), pour point (PP), cold filter
plugging point (CFPP), filter plugging tendency (FPT), flash point,
corrosiveness, lubricity, FT-IR analysis, CHO content and water
content are tested. For some properties, their influence on engine
characteristics is presented.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Materials
Chemical and physical properties of four fuels were determined
according to international standards. The tested fuels were neat
mineral diesel fuel (D100), 5% (v/v) ethanol/ 95% (v/v) diesel fuel
blend (E05D95), 10% (v/v) ethanol/ 90% (v/v) diesel fuel blend
(E10D90) and 15% (v/v) ethanol/ 85% (v/v) diesel fuel blend
(E15D85). Anhydrous bioethanol (C2H5OH), ACS reagent grade,
99.8% absolute, was purchased from Carlo Erba S.A. Company
(Milano, Italy); it was produced from the fermentation of sugars
and its main properties are shown in Table 1.
Diesel fuel without flow improver additives was purchased
from gasoline station Petrol d.d. Ljubliana (Slovenia).
2.2. Fuel properties
2.2.1. Fuel stability
This qualitative test is performed in order to determine if addi-
tional mixing, additives or heating (in case low temperatures pro-
duce gel formation) are necessary. The samples were tested at
25 °C (ambient temperature), +30 °C (representative temperature
of summer), +8 °C (representative temperature of not critical win-
ter) and 18 °C (representative temperature of critical winter).
Each sample was checked once a week during a 5 weeks period;
we estimate that this is enough time to get to know its behavior
in long periods of storage.
2.2.2. Density
Density was measured according to EN ISO 12185. Following
this standard, density should be tested at the temperature refer-
ence of 15 or 20 °C. Density at different temperatures was calcu-
lated by interpolation [24]. The testing device used was an
APAAR Density meter DMA 48. To calculate the density value, a
small portion (less than 1 ml) of test is introduced into a tempera-
ture-controlled sample cell. The oscillation frequency (f) is noted
and the density of the test sample is calculated using the following
expression:
q ¼ A  p2  B; ð1Þ
where q = density (kg/m3), p = period (s) = 1/f, A, B = cell constants
determined by measuring the oscillation frequencies when the cell
is filled with calibration fluid of known density.
2.2.3. Viscosity
Kinematic viscosity was measured according to ISO 3104 which
defines this property as the resistance to flow of a fluid under grav-
ity at 40 °C. The testing device used was a Walter Herzog GmbH
MP-480, which measures kinematic viscosity within the limits of
precision given in the standard. The apparatus performs at least
two measurements to guarantee a correct result. This test consists
on measuring the time for a fixed volume of liquid to flow under
gravity through a capillary at a known and closely controlled tem-
perature. The kinematic viscosity is calculated as follows:
Table 1
Main characteristics of ethanol (C2H5OH).
Property Unit Result
Minimum assay (Purity) %(v/v) 99.8
Boiling point °C 78.8
Density 20°/4° kg/m3 790/793
Water content % =<0.2
 E. Torres-Jimenez et al. / Fuel 90 (2011) 795–802 797

t ¼ C  t; ð2Þ where, FTP is the pumpability (dimensionless), P is the pressure

2
where t is the kinematic viscosity (mm /s), C is the calibration
constant of the viscometer (mm2/s2) and t is the mean flow time
(s).
2.2.4. Distillation
Distillation was performed according to standard test method
EN 3405. The testing device used for the distillation process was
a HERZOG Atmospheric distillation HAD 627. For pure diesel fuel,
distillation results were enough to calculate cetane index accord-
ing to standard (EN ISO 4264).
2.2.5. Cloud point and pour point
Cloud point was measured according to ISO 3015. Following
this standard, to determine cloud point a 45 ml sample was cooled
at specified rate and examined periodically. The testing device
used was a Herzog CPP 97-2.
Pour point was measured according to ISO 3016. To determine
pour point a 45 ml sample initially at 45 °C is cooled at specified
rate and examined in intervals of 3 °C for flow characteristics
(the apparatus checks if the sample is still moving). PP is the tem-
perature of solid sample minus 3 °C. The testing device used was a
Herzog HCP852 Combi.
2.2.6. Cold filter plugging point and filter plugging tendency
CFPP was measured according to EN 116. This test provides an
estimate of the lowest temperature at which a fuel will give trou-
ble free flow in certain fuel systems. The testing device used to ob-
tain CFPP according to EN 116 was a Herzog CFPP Analyzer, model
MC 840.
FPT was measured according to ASTM D 2068. The testing de-
vice used was a Stanhope-Seta, model 91600-0, which automati-
cally determines FPT of distillate fuels according to standardized
test procedures. FPT was calculated considering the following
equations: (a) when a 300 ml sample could not reach the maxi-
mum test pressure of 105 kPa, Eq. (3) was used; (b) when
105 kPa was reached, FTP was calculated by Eq. (4).
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 2
P needed. The sample is lightened (beamed) through with IR light.
FTP ¼ 1 þ ; ð3Þ
105
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 2
300
FTP ¼ 1 þ ; ð4Þ
V cific molecule in the sample. A certain vibration zone at a specific
(kPa) when a 300 ml-sample pass through the filter and V is the vol-
ume of sample (ml) when 105 kPa is reached during the test.
2.2.7. Flash point
Flash point was measured according to ISO 2719. The testing
device used was a Walter Herzog MP-329, which automatically
determines empirical flash point of flammable liquids according
to standardized test procedures.
2.2.8. Corrosiveness
It was measured according to EN ISO 2160. Many parts of the
fuel injection system and fuel tank may be built from copper and
copper alloys. For this reason, to evaluate corrosion a polished cop-
per strip was immersed in a specified volume of sample and heated
at 50 °C during 3 h. At the end of the heating period, the strip was
removed, washed and the color assessed against corrosion
standards.
2.2.9. Lubricity
It was measured according to EN ISO 12156-1. The testing de-
vice used was a HFR2 D481 (Lubricity and Fretting Test System),
which automatically reproduces standardized test specifications.
To measure the wear scar diameter (MWSD) Eq. (5) was used:
xþy
MWSD ¼ ; ð5Þ
2
where, x is the scar dimension perpendicular to oscillation direction
(lm), y is the scar dimension parallel to oscillation direction (lm)
and MWSD is the wear scar diameter (lm).
According to the standard, the MWSD was corrected to the stan-
dardized water vapor pressure of 1.4 kPa, leading to the corrected
wear scar value (WS 1.4).
2.2.10. FT-IR and CHO content
The IR-Spectrum for each sample was obtained according to
DIN 51451. The testing device used was a PerkinElmer FT-IR spec-
troscopy device (Model MSP 9250 PE), which automatically deter-
mines IR-Spectrum of liquids according to standardized test
procedures. A sample analysis takes 75 s and 3.5 ml sample is
When the sample is hit by the light with the wavelength corre-
sponding to the energy needed to stimulate the oscillations of inter
atomic bonds, the light is absorbed. The absorption of the light in
IR specter is observed as an absorption zone characteristic for spe-

Table 2
Physical and chemical properties of diesel fuel and ethanol/diesel fuel blends.

Property Unit Limits Tested fuels

EN 590 (D100) Min./Max. D100 E05D95 E10D90 E15D85
Density at 15 °C kg/m3 820/845 837.3 834.3 831.7 829.4
Cloud point °C 3 3 19 21
Pour point °C  9 9 12 36
CFPP °C 8 8 7 8
Flash point °C >55 66.0 25.0 25.0 25.0
Lubricity WS 1.4 lm Max. 460 448.0 399.0 406.0 395.0
Cetane index – Min. 46 51.8 – – –
FPT – – 1.02 1.01 1.01 1.01
Pressure/volume kPa/ml 20/300 17/300 13/300 12/300
CHO content (%w/w) 86.13 C 84.55 C 82.94 C 81.31 C
13.87 H 13.84 H 13.80 H 13.76 H
0O 1.61 O 3.26 O 4.93 O
Kinematic viscosity (40 °C) mm2/s 2/4.5 2.78 2.53 2.31 2.19
Water content mg/kg Max. 200 50 100 130 140
Corrosion Cu, 3 h at 50 °C Rating Class 1 1a 1a 1a 1a
FT-IR analysis – – No undesirable components found
798 E. Torres-Jimenez et al. / Fuel 90 (2011) 795–802
wavelength corresponds to a specific functional group of the
molecule.
CHO content was calculated from density (Table 2), molecular
weight (211.7 g/mol for diesel fuel and 46.07 g/mol for ethanol),
and molecular formulas of ethanol (C2H5OH) and diesel fuel
(C15.18H29.13) [25].
2.2.11. Water content
It was measured according to EN ISO 12937, which describes
how to determine water content by Coulometric Karl Fisher titra-
tion method. The testing device used was a Metrohm 684 KF cou-
lometer, which automatically reproduces standards. Water content
was calculated using Eq. (6):
100 m2 m2
w¼ ¼ ; ð6Þ
106 m1 104 m1
where w is the water content given as the mass fraction in percent
(according to the standard, sample weight = 106 mg/kg = 100%), m1
is the mass of sample injected in the KF device (g), and m2 is the
mass of water obtained by the KF device (lg). Note that 104w is
the water content in mg/kg.
3. Results and discussion
Experimentally measured physical and chemical properties of
each blend are depicted in Table 2. Results are discussed below.
3.1. Fuel stability
Only at 30 °C all samples remain in one phase. At 25 °C and after
4 weeks; separation process stars for ethanol–diesel fuel blends
Fig. 1. Illustration of separation process. D85E15 blends.
Fig. 2. Fuel density vs. temperature.
(see Fig. 1). At 8 °C and after 1 week; E10D90 and E15D85 blends
separate in two phases. The low concentration of ethanol in
E05D95 delays the phase separation process at 8 °C, but it also oc-
curs after 4 weeks. At 18 °C and after 5 weeks pure diesel fuel
consisted in two layers and consequently in case of ethanol–diesel
fuel blends three layers appeared. At any temperature tested all
samples remained liquid, although in case of 18 °C they had the
consistence of a gel. For a period of time lower than 1 month, phase
separation started between 8 and 25 °C for all samples tested. Be-
cause ethanol–diesel fuel blends do not remain homogeneous (at
any conditions), the ethanol concentration in the fuel injected into
the cylinder may vary over the time, thus affecting fuel injection
and combustion processes.
Previous researches have shown that separation depends on
temperature, ethanol concentration and water content [7,26] and
how the situation can be improved by using different kind of addi-
tives [27,28]. These kinds of additives are increasing as long as en-
ergy sources become cleaner and renewable [29]. Nowadays the
addition of biodiesel, as blend stabilizer, is becoming a preferred
method [25,30–32] because it has the advantage of increasing
the biofuel concentration in diesel fuel, which is one of the targets
proposed by the European Community on Directive 2003/30/EC to
promote the use of biofuels for transport.
3.2. Density
According to Fig. 2, density decreases by increasing ethanol con-
tent or/and temperature. A density decrease leads to retarded
injection timing, which can cause an increase of pollutant emis-
sions as well as a significant deterioration of engine performance.
Previous studies have demonstrated that it is possible to solve this
 E. Torres-Jimenez et al. / Fuel 90 (2011) 795–802
problem by adjusting the injection timing [15]. For all samples
tested, density values are within the standard range at the refer-
ence temperature of 15 °C.
3.3. Viscosity
The average viscosity value for ethanol fuel is 1.1 mm2/s [19],
which is lower than the viscosity of conventional diesel fuel
(2.78 mm2/s, Table 1). Viscosities of diesel fuel and fuel blends
are given in Fig. 3. The expected decreasing tendency of viscosity
with ethanol addition is corroborated by the presented results.
Fig. 3 shows this tendency. Those results are in concordance with
previous works [25]. Due to the blends viscosity decreases by eth-
anol addition, the atomization will be not deteriorated; meanwhile
the engine power would be slightly reduced. Although fuel blends
viscosity values are lower than that for diesel fuel, all of them are
still within the standard range.
3.4. Distillation
The distillation curve for each sample is presented in Fig. 4.
When the distillation fraction is lower than 15%, the distillation
curve of D100 is quite different to those containing ethanol. This
difference shows the ethanol evaporation. From the graphics, it is
very easy to see how the evaporation process stops after reaching
the distillation fraction corresponding to ethanol concentration of
each sample. After that, all distillation curves are practically the
same, corresponding to that of pure diesel fuel.
Because ethanol is the first component to evaporate, tempera-
ture at which the first drop of condensate falls from the lower
end of the condenser tube (initial boiling point), of all blends con-
taining ethanol is around 76.5 °C, temperature which is close to the
boiling point given by the ethanol manufacturer (see Table 1). In
Fig. 3. Kinematic viscosity vs. type of fuel.
Fig. 4. Distillation curve for several fuels: temperature (°C) vs. distillation fraction
(%v/v).
799
case of D100, initial boiling point is 172.6 °C, it means that ethanol
begins to evaporate at about 100 °C before diesel fuel does. Due to
the high ethanol volatility, some problems may occur during stor-
age, and it can also influence significantly injection timing, ignition
and combustion characteristics. An increase in the ignition delay
and more fuel release at the beginning of the combustion, results
in high temperature and NOx formation [32].
The results obtained are in agreement with previous works, e.g.,
Chen et al. [33] presented the distillation curves for pure diesel,
10%, 20% and 30% ethanol in diesel fuel.
3.5. Element analysis
3.5.1. Cloud point, pour point and cold filter plugging point
Results are shown in Fig. 5. It can be seen that while the pour
point decreases significantly with respect to that of diesel fuel,
the cloud point increases, which is in concordance with previous
results [34]. This behavior is due to cloud point remains stable as
long as the blend remains in one phase. Phase separation temper-
ature for blends with a percentage of ethanol up to 5% is identical
to the cloud point of pure diesel fuel. Consequently, cloud point for
E05D95 is similar to that of neat diesel fuel (Table 1). Fig. 5 shows
that cloud point increases with ethanol concentration. In fact,
E10D90 and E15D85 show a great increase in cloud point values.
This increase is probably caused by phase separation in ethanol/
diesel fuel mixtures when temperature decreases, which leads
the automatic testing device to a wrong detection of the first cloud
of wax crystals. For ethanol–diesel fuel blends, phase separation
leads cloud point values out of standard specifications. However,
diesel fuel tested was purchased without flow improver additives,
so the influence of those additives has not been determined in the
present study.
Due to the very low pour point of ethanol (50°C) [19,35] rel-
ative to that of diesel fuel, it can be expected that ethanol–diesel
fuel blends will depict a lower value compared to that of diesel
fuel. This improvement is possible as long as ethanol remains sol-
uble in diesel fuel. Fig. 5 shows that pour point decreases when
ethanol concentration increases which means fuel flow improving
in the fuel injection system. However, E15D85 pour point shows an
unusual result that is caused by phase separation when tempera-
ture decreases, which leads the automatic testing device to display
ethanol pour point instead of blend pour point. Diesel fuel solidi-
fies at a higher temperature than ethanol, so the temperature at
which the fuel can no longer be poured due to gel formation is
not detected in the blend fuel but in the ethanol component. This
behavior becomes stronger due to the fact that the tested diesel
fuel was purchased without flow improver additives and it is
known that, at low temperatures, diesel fuel is usually blended
Fig. 5. CP, PP and CFPP vs. type of fuel.
800 E. Torres-Jimenez et al. / Fuel 90 (2011) 795–802

with No. 1 diesel fuel or low temperature-flow improving additives

to avoid fuel gelling [19]. Most likely, the solubility limit is ex-
ceeded at some point between 10% and 15% concentration of eth-
anol in diesel fuel at temperatures lower than 12 °C, which can
cause the very low pour point obtained for E15D85. The low con-
centration of ethanol in diesel fuel and rapid decrease in tempera-
ture reproduced by the device may have prevented the phase
separation in samples E05D95 and E10D90.
Fig. 5 shows that the influence of the addition of ethanol to die-
sel fuel in CFPP is not significant. The changes are all in the mea-
surement error - 1 °C (measurement uncertainty of test method
is 2 °C).

Fig. 7. Flash point vs. type of fuel.

3.5.2. Filter plugging tendency
It was found that fuel samples passed through the filter without
reaching the maximum pressure, so FPT was calculated by Eq. (3).
In all cases, FPT improves when ethanol concentration increases
(see Fig. 6). In this case, lower FPT means lower pressure needed
to filter the same volume.

3.5.3. Flash point

Results presented in Fig. 7 show that flash point values are sim-
ilar for the blends and very low compared to that of diesel fuel, in
consonance with the reduced value of ethanol flash point in com-
parison to neat diesel fuel. It was found that results depend on the
more volatile component, in this case ethanol. This finding is in
agreement with other works [7,21]. During the heating process,
ethanol evaporates firstly (25 °C), so ignition start is recorded at
this temperature for all blends containing ethanol. Various re-
searches have demonstrated that flash point decreases critically
by ethanol addition including for those blends containing biodiesel
or other kind of additive to avoid phase separation [4,28,30,32].
3.5.4. Lubricity
Fig. 8 shows that the addition of ethanol to diesel fuel slightly
improves lubricity, as the wear scar is lower. Those results are in
contrast to some authors who have shown that lubricity decreases
by ethanol addition [7,21], meanwhile Lapuerta et al. [36] pre-
sented an exhaustive work showing an improvement in lubricity
for high temperature when ethanol is added to diesel fuel. The
evaporation of ethanol from the lubricating layer plays an impor-
tant role at the test temperature (60 °C). The last mentioned study
explains this unusual behavior because the expected loss of lubric-
ity (due to the presence of ethanol) is compensated by the increase
of the evaporation losses of ethanol from the lubricating layer. So,
the presence of ethanol reverts the usual trend of lubricity with
temperature, leading to improved lubricities when the engine
operates under hot conditions. Lubricity of all blends tested is
within the limits of diesel fuel standard specifications.
Fig. 8. Lubricity (WS 1.4) vs. type of fuel.
3.5.5. Corrosiveness
All samples tested are classified as 1a, which is an appropriate
classification from the point of view of corrosion. Ethanol addition
does not provide higher corrosion compared to that of neat diesel
fuel. Previous works support these results [19,35].
3.5.6. FT-IR analysis
IR spectrums for D100 and diesel fuel blends are shown in Fig. 9.
Ethanol presence is detected by the peak portrayed at the range
around a wavelength value of 3400 cm1, which corresponds to
O–H bonds of alcohols and phenols. The spectrum has the various
C–H stretch bands that all hydrocarbons show near 3000 cm1 and
this peak also corresponds to C–H bonds absorption range present
in ethanol. C–O bond (present in ethanol) is detected at the range
around 1100 cm1. The spectrum shows another band near
1450 cm1 corresponding to the CH2 bend band. The rest of the
peaks show typical diesel components, so undesirable components
are not found.
The difference in the range 515–690 cm1 is because of interac-
tion between KBr glass used for scanning the sample and ethanol
humidity. KBr glasses are not suitable for water or water related
samples; thus a large amount of ethanol in the samples can lead
to darkening of the glass and consequently to variations in the
spectrum.

3.5.7. CHO content

Fig. 6. Pumpability (FPT-Pressure) vs. type of fuel.
An increase in ethanol concentration reduces fuel carbon and
hydrogen content. Oxygen, which is not present in diesel fuel, in-
creases by ethanol addition. This is due to the higher oxygen pres-
ence in ethanol. Nitrogen is absent in the tested blends. Lower C
(carbon) and H (hydrogen) concentration means lower specific en-
ergy content. Excess of oxygen (in blends with ethanol) is expected
to have a beneficial effect on the emissions profile compared with
the use of direct diesel fuel [37] and to enhance combustion effi-
ciency of the fuel [32]. Some minor components (like S) of diesel
 E. Torres-Jimenez et al. / Fuel 90 (2011) 795–802
Fig. 9. D100 and ethanol–diesel fuel blends fingerprints. Transmission (T) vs. wavelength (cm1).
Fig. 10. Water content vs. type of fuel.
fuel will be also in the blends, but the presence of ethanol will re-
duce them, providing the extra advantage of producing lower sul-
fur dioxide emissions and hence, reducing the potential for acid
rain production.
3.5.8. Water content
Fig. 10 shows that water content increases with ethanol con-
centration. Water content increases because ethanol is very hygro-
scopic, consequently ethanol–diesel fuel blends are more
hydrophilic than diesel fuel. Some problems may occur during
storage if the tank is not adequately sealed, because the blend will
absorb water from ambient humidity, leading to deteriorate some
blends properties. It has been demonstrated that excessive water
concentration in the blends have several consequences, such as
phase separation [28], corrosion and aqueous microorganisms
growth [38]. According to Kwanchareon et al. [32] anhydrous eth-
anol (99.5% purity) was completely soluble in diesel fuel, mean-
while hydrous ethanol (95% purity) separated into two phases for
any ethanol concentration, so instability of ethanol–diesel fuel
blends depends strongly in blend water content.
4. Conclusions
In the present work, it has been shown that physical and
chemical properties of ethanol–diesel fuel blends provide relevant
801
information about their behavior as diesel engine fuels. It has
been proved that some additives are necessary to keep stability
of tested ethanol–diesel fuel blends under low temperature
conditions.
In general terms, it can be concluded that tested ethanol–diesel
fuel blends present similar properties values compared to those of
pure diesel fuel, because all properties tested, excepting flash
point, were within the diesel fuel standard limits. Density and vis-
cosity decreases by ethanol addition, thus indicating retarded
injection timing and not problems related to atomization, respec-
tively. Due to the high ethanol volatility, some problems may occur
during storage, and it can also influence significantly injection tim-
ing, ignition and combustion characteristics.
While the pour point decreases significantly with respect to
that of diesel fuel the cloud point increases. Concentrations of eth-
anol above 5% (v/v) present abnormal behavior in terms of cloud
point test. It was shown how the phase separation modifies criti-
cally CP and PP tests. It might be due to a significant alteration in
fuel composition (phase separation may occur) during the testing
conditions, thus indicating more research is needed to determine
the most suitable testing device to both check fuel properties
and to understand the influence of higher concentrations of etha-
nol in the fuel properties. The addition of ethanol to diesel fuel
does not modify substantially CFPP. For cold flow purposes, CP
may not be a useful test for ethanol–diesel fuel blends, meanwhile
CFPP would be more so. FPT improves by ethanol addition, pro-
vided that lower pressure is needed to filter the same volume of
fuel.
It is important to notice that flash point will show the value of
the more volatile of the components, i.e. ethanol. Ethanol addition
improved lubricity of diesel fuel, contrary to what occurs in case of
pure components and does not provide higher corrosion compared
to that of neat diesel fuel.
Only ethanol and diesel chemical bonds were found by FT-IR
analysis, which means that there were no contaminants in the
samples tested. Carbon and hydrogen components decrease by
ethanol addition, leading to a slightly reduction in lower specific
energy content meanwhile the increase in oxygen content (in
blends with ethanol) is expected to have a beneficial effect on
the emissions profile compared with the use of direct diesel fuel
and to enhance combustion efficiency of the fuel.
802 E. Torres-Jimenez et al. / Fuel 90 (2011) 795–802
Owing to the hygroscopic nature of ethanol, water content in-
creased by ethanol addition, so special attention must be paid to
avoid the absorption of water from the ambient humidity, if not,
it can deteriorate ever more blend stability, and causes corrosion
and aqueous microorganisms growth.
Based on this field trial, up to 15% (v/v) ethanol/85% (v/v) diesel
fuel blends can be recommended as fuel for diesel engines once
flash point and blend stability are improved by the use of additives
and provided that engine performance tests corroborate this
conclusion.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the European Community’s
Sixth Framework Programme in the scope of the Civitas II Mobilis
project. Authors are also grateful for the provision of a Research
Mobility Grant to E. Torres-Jimenez from the ‘‘Junta de Andalucía”,
Spain IAC09-II-5387.
References
[1] Pischinger GH, Siekmann RW, Falcon AM, Fernandes FR. Methylesters of plant
oils as diesel fuels, either straight or in blends. In: Proceedings of the
International Conference on Plant and Vegetable Oils as Fuels, 1982 August 2–
4. USA: ASAE Publ.
[2] Dorado MP, Arnal JM, Gómez J, Gil A, Lopez FJ. The effect of a waste vegetable
oil blend with diesel fuel on engine performance. Trans ASAE 2002;45(3):
519–23.
[3] Ribeiro SK, Younes-Ibrahim PS. Global warming and transport in Brazil-ethanol
alternative. Int J Veh Des 2001;27(1):118–28.
[4] Torres-Jimenez E, Svoljsak-Jerman M, Gregorc A, Lisec I, Dorado MP, Kegl B.
Physical and chemical properties of ethanol – biodiesel blends for diesel
engines. Energy Fuels 2010;24(3):2002–9.
[5] Xu BY, Qi YL, Zhang WB, Cai SL. Fuel properties and emissions characteristics of
ethanol–diesel blend on small diesel engine. Int J Auto Tech Kor 2007;8(1):
9–18.
[6] Rakopoulos CD, Antonopoulos KA, Rakopoulos DC. Experimental heat release
analysis and emissions of a HSDI diesel engine fueled with ethanol–diesel fuel
blends. Energy 2007;32(10):1791–808.
[7] Hansen AC, Zhang Q, Lyne PWL. Ethanol–diesel fuel blends – a review.
Bioresour Technol 2005;96:277–85.
[8] Lapuerta M, Armas O, Herreros JM. Emissions from a diesel–bioethanol blend
in an automotive diesel engine. Fuel 2008;87(1):25–31.
[9] Kass MD, Thomas JF, Storey JM, Domingo N, Wade J, Kenreck G. Emissions from
a 5.9-liter diesel engine fueled with ethanol diesel blends. SAE technical paper
2001-01-2018 2001.
[10] Yamane K, Ueta A, Shimamoto Y. Influence of physical and chemical properties
of biodiesel fuels on injection, combustion and exhaust emission
characteristics in a direct injection compression ignition engine. Int J Engine
Res 2001;2(4):249–61.
[11] Bannikov MG, Tyrlovoy SI, Vasilev IP, Chattha JA. Investigation of the
characteristics of the fuel injection pump of a diesel engine fuelled with
viscous vegetable oil–diesel oil blends. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part D-J Automob
Eng 2006;220(6):787–92.
[12] Canakci M. Combustion characteristics of a turbocharged DI compression
ignition engine fueled with petroleum diesel fuels and biodiesel. Bioresour
Technol 2007;98(6):1167–75.
[13] Zhang GD, Liu H, Xia XX, Yang QL. Study on the injection process of a direct-
injection diesel engine fuelled with dimethyl ether. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part D-
J Automob Eng 2004;218(11):1341–7.
[14] Wallace FJ, Hawley JG. Analysis of the effect of variations in fuel line pressure
in high-speed direct injection diesel engines, with high-pressure common rail
fuel injection systems on heat release, cylinder pressure, performance, and
NOx emissions. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part D-J Automob Eng 2005;219(3):
413–22.
[15] Kegl B. Experimental investigation of optimal timing of the diesel engine
injection pump using biodiesel fuel. Energy Fuels 2006;20(4):1460–70.
[16] Boehman AL, Morris D, Szybist J, Esen E. The impact of the bulk modulus of
diesel fuels on fuel injection timing. Energy Fuels 2004;18(6):1877–82.
[17] Kegl B. Biodiesel usage at low temperature. Fuel 2008;87(7):1306–17.
[18] Kegl B, Kegl M, Pehan S. Optimization of a fuel injection system for diesel and
biodiesel usage. Energy Fuels 2008;22(2):1046–54.
[19] Ghobadian B, Rahimi H, Hashjin TT, Khatamifar M. Production of bioethanol
and sunflower methyl ester and investigation of fuel blend properties. J Agric
Sci 2008;10:225–32.
[20] Joshi RM, Pegg MJ. Flow properties of biodiesel fuel blends at low
temperatures. Fuel 2007;86(1–2):143–51.
[21] Li D, Zhen H, Xingcai L, Wu-gao Z, Jian-guang Y. Physico-chemical properties of
ethanol–diesel blend fuel and its effect on performance and emissions of diesel
engines. Renew Energy 2005;30(6):967–76.
[22] Hansen AC, Zhang Q, Lyne PWL. Ethanol–diesel fuel blends – a review.
Bioresour Technol 2005;96(3):277–85.
[23] Knothe G. Rapid monitoring of transesterification and assessing biodiesel fuel
quality by near-infrared spectroscopy using a fiber-optic probe. J Am Oil Chem
Soc 1999;76(7):795–800.
[24] Institute of Petroleum (IP), American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM),
and American Petroleum Institute (API). Petroleum measurement tables –
Table 53B generalized products, correction of observed density to density at
15 °C, vol. 8. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM; 1980.
[25] Lapuerta M, Armas O, García-Contreras R. Effect of ethanol on blending stability
and diesel engine emissions. Energy Fuels 2009;23(9): 4343–54.
[26] Lapuerta M, Armas O, García-Contreras R. Stability of diesel–bioethanol blends
for use in diesel engines. Fuel 2007;86(10–11):1351–7.
[27] Weber de Menezes E, da Silva R, Cataluña R, Ortega RJC. Effect of ethers and
ether/ethanol additives on the physicochemical properties of diesel fuel and
on engine tests. Fuel 2006;85(5–6):815–22.
[28] Reyes Y, Aranda DAG, Santander LAM, Cavado A, Belchior CRP. Action
principles of cosolvent additives in ethanoldiesel blends: stability studies.
Energy Fuels 2009;23(5):2731–5.
[29] Ribeiro NM, Pinto AC, Quintella CM, da Rocha GO, Teixeira LSG, Guarieiro LLN,
et al. The role of additives for diesel and diesel blended (ethanol or biodiesel)
fuels: a review. Energy Fuels 2007;21(4):2433–45.
[30] Chotwichien A, Luengnaruemitchai A, Jai-In S. Utilization of palm oil alkyl
esters as an additive in ethanol–diesel and butanol–diesel blends. Fuel
2009;88(9):1618–24.
[31] Lebedevas S, Lebedeva G, Makareviciene V, Janulis P, Sendzikiene E. Usage of
fuel mixtures containing ethanol and rapeseed oil methyl esters in a diesel
engine. Energy Fuels 2009;23(1):217–23.
[32] Kwanchareon P, Luengnaruemitchai A, Jai-In S. Solubility of a diesel–
biodiesel–ethanol blend, its fuel properties, and its emission characteristics
from diesel engine. Fuel 2007;86(7–8):1053–61.
[33] Chen ZQ, Ma XX, Yu ST, Guo YN, Liu JS. Physical–chemical properties of
ethanol–diesel blend fuel and its effect on the performance and emissions of a
turbocharged diesel engine. Int J Auto Tech Kor 2009;10(3):297–303.
[34] McCormick RL, Parish R. Advanced petroleum based fuels program and
renewable diesel program. NREL/MP 2001:540-32674.
[35] Rahimi H, Ghobadian B, Yusaf T, Najafi G, Khatamifar M. Diesterol: an
environment-friendly IC engine fuel. Renew Energy 2009;34(1):335–42.
[36] Lapuerta M, García-Contreras R, Agudelo JR. Lubricity of ethanol–biodiesel–
diesel fuel blends. Energy Fuels 2010;24(2):1374–9.
[37] McDonnell K, Ward S, Leahy JJ, McNulty P. Properties of rapeseed oil for use as
a diesel fuel extender. J Am Oil Chem Soc 1999;76(5):539–43.
[38] Schleicher T, Werkmeister R, Russ W, Meyer-Pittroff R. Microbiological
stability of biodiesel–diesel-mixtures. Bioresour Technol 2009;100(2):724–30.