Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 55 (2024) 104192

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Case Studies in Thermal Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/csite

Effect of using gasoline and gasoline-ethanol fuel mixture on

performance and emissions in a hydrogen generator supported SI
engine
Faruk Oral
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Bitlis Eren University, 13000, Bitlis, Turkey

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Handling Editor: Huihe Qiu The study presents a gasoline engine's performance and emissions results using ethanol and a hy-
drogen-oxygen mixture as supplementary fuels. The experiment was carried out utilizing a SI en-
Keywords:
gine (single-cylinder), encompassing six different speeds (1500–4000 rpm). G100 (pure gaso-
Hydrogen-oxygen
line), G5E (volume 95% gasoline and 5% ethanol), and fuel blends obtained by adding H2/O2 to
Ethanol
Gasoline
these fuels were used in the experiment engine. A prototype hydrogen generator was used as the
Engine performance hydrogen and oxygen gas source in the experiments. As a result of the experiment, adding H2/O2
Exhaust emission to the G5E fuel blend improved engine torque, engine power, and SFC by an average of 5.8%,
Hydrogen generator 5.66%, and 2.82%, respectively, compared to the G5E fuel mixture. Blending H2/O2 with gaso-
line led to a 3.06% average increase in engine torque and a 3% increase in engine power com-
pared to adding ethanol. Additions of H2/O2 and ethanol to gasoline reduced CO and HC emis-
sions. Adding H2/O2 to the G5E fuel blend decreased CO and HC emissions by an average of
24.47% and 16.75% respectively compared to G100. However, adding H2/O2 to gasoline and
gasoline-ethanol fuel blend increased NOx emissions. Findings indicated that blending H2/O2
with G5E fuel enhances engine performance and decreases exhaust emissions.

Nomenclature

C carbon
CO carbon monoxide
C2H5OH ethanol
ES engine speed (rpm)
G100 pure gasoline
G5E 95% gasoline + 5% ethanol
H2 hydrogen
HC hydrocarbon
NOx oxides of nitrogen
O2 oxygen
SFC specific fuel consumption (g/kWh)

E-mail address: [email protected].

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2024.104192
Received 8 November 2023; Received in revised form 8 February 2024; Accepted 27 February 2024
Available online 29 February 2024
2214-157X/© 2024 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).
F. Oral Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 55 (2024) 104192

SI spark ignition

1. Introduction
Emissions arising from the increasing number of vehicles increase air pollution, causing negative effects on the environment and
human health. Increasing environmental problems have increased support for reducing emissions from fossil fuels used in motor vehi-
cles [1]. Technological improvements made in gasoline engines cannot meet the global limitations in emission standards due to in-
creasing environmental awareness. Changing the composition of gasoline fuel is suggested by some researchers as a solution to im-
prove emission values [2,3]. As another solution, it is suggested to use biofuels produced from biomass [4–8]. In recent years, there
has been an increase in the use of alternative fuels such as hydrogen and alcohol in reducing the increasing emission values of vehicles
[9]. Hydrogen is considered to be one of the important fuels in the short term to solve the problems mentioned above [10].
Biochemically produced alcohol is considered an optimal renewable fuel for SI engines due to its high octane rating and high evap-
oration speed [7,8,11,12]. The higher heat of vaporization, flame rate, oxygen content, and ignition temperature compared to gaso-
line, along with the ability to produce ethanol from non-oil-dependent agricultural sources, makes it a desirable renewable fuel op-
tion [6,13,14]. Researchers suggest ethanol as the optimal alcohol alternative fuel for SI engines [15–18]. Ethanol's high latent heat,
low energy density, and low diffusion rate constrain its use in gasoline engines [18–21]. In a study, it was stated that the addition of
ethanol to gasoline fuel reduces engine emission values [22].
Hydrogen's wider flammability limit for air-fuel mixture ratios, high ignition temperature, fast flame speed, and greater diffusion
coefficient compared to gasoline make it a favorable choice as a supplementary fuel in SI engines [23–27]. The fact that the ignition
limit of hydrogen is much wider in air-fuel mixtures compared to gasoline helps combustion in poor conditions and provides lower
emissions of the exhaust [23–25]. Hydrogen's faster flame speed relative to gasoline results in better combustion, thereby boosting
the thermal efficiency of the engine [24,25,28]. Hydrogen, which has a high diffusion coefficient and low density compared to gaso-
line, improves combustion by providing a homogeneous fuel-air mixture [23–25]. In addition, hydrogen has a higher ignition temper-
ature than gasoline, which reduces knocking in the engine [29]. Hydrogen has excellent properties that can be used to eliminate com-
bustion instability and improve combustion and emissions performance in gasoline engines [23,29]. In a scientific study, it was stated
that hydrogen-benzene-fueled SI engines have good thermal efficiency at low and partial loads, but performance decreases at high
loads [10]. Adding hydrogen to gasoline-ethanol fuel mixtures can alleviate the drawbacks of ethanol utilization [1]. The addition of
hydrogen can bring about an improvement in the combustion properties of ethanol fuel [30]. Therefore, this study aimed to investi-
gate the effect of hydrogen/oxygen addition to gasoline and gasoline-ethanol fuel mixture on engine performance and emissions.
Several researchers have examined how the introduction of H2 into gasoline and gasoline-ethanol blends affects the performance
and emissions of SI engines. The emissions of a spark-ignition engine running on a hydrogen-ethanol fuel mixture were evaluated by
Al-Baghdadi [31]. The research demonstrated that supplementing the ethanol-air mixture with hydrogen resulted in increased com-
bustion efficiency and a decrease in the release of toxic emissions. In his study, Batmaz examined the effects of adding H2 to gasoline
on the operating efficiency and emission levels of an SI engine [32]. The test engine remained unchanged and experiments were per-
formed under constant stoichiometric ratio and full-throttle conditions. The addition of H2 has been noted to improve SFC, CO, and
HC but reduce engine torque and power. The effect of using H2 as an additional fuel in a four-cylinder SI engine on operating effi-
ciency and emission levels was investigated by Ji and Wang [25]. It was stated that the addition of H2 provided an improvement in
thermal efficiency, HC and CO2 emissions, but worsened NOx emissions. Karagöz et al. [33] explored the influence of adding an
H2/O2 mixture to gasoline on the operating efficiency and emission levels of an SI engine. The inclusion of the H2/O2 mixture is re-
ported to increase braking power, torque, and NOx while reducing CO, HC, and brake-specific energy consumption. Elsemary et al.
[34] looked into the impact of gasoline-hydrogen blends on engine efficiency and emission levels. It has been reported that the addi-
tion of H2 reduces HC and CO and improves thermal efficiency. Brayek et al. [35] examined the effects of H2–O2 addition on the oper-
ating efficiency and emission levels of an SI engine. As a result, it was stated that H2–O2 addition reduced HC, CO, and CO2 emissions
at whole engine loading, but NOx emissions rose with increasing engine loads. Kim et al. [23] researched the impacts of H2 addition
on the operating efficiency and emission levels in an SI engine with various air/fuel ratios. It was expressed that the addition of H2
raised the thermal efficiency and reduced the emissions except for NOx. Akansu et al. [13] researched the impacts of gasoline-ethanol
and gasoline-ethanol-hydrogen fuel mixtures on the operating efficiency and emission levels in an SI engine. It has been reported that
H2 addition reduces emissions other than NOx and increases thermal efficiency. Rimkus et al. [36] investigated the effect of hydrogen-
oxygen gas additives on engine characteristics under the influence of lean blends of gasoline and bioethanol. They reported that a
higher ethanol concentration and H2/O2 addition to the fuel increased engine torque for all air/fuel ratios evaluated. As a result, it
was reported that the use of H2/O2 increased NOx emissions, but the increase in CO, HC, and CO2 emissions remained lower. Ganesan
et al. [37] conducted an optimization study to determine the appropriate gasohol/hydrogen blend and engine speed to determine the
efficient performance and lower emissions of a gasohol/hydrogen fuel blend SI engine. Response Surface Methodology was used for
optimization in the study. As a result, the optimum gasohol/hydrogen blend ratio and engine speed were determined according to the
desirability criterion.
In scientific studies on the use of hydrogen gas in gasoline and gasoline-ethanol fuel blends, it has been observed that there is a sig-
nificant gap in the literature on the use of hydrogen generators as a hydrogen source. In this study, the effects of supplementing gaso-
line and gasoline-ethanol fuel blend with a hydrogen generator on engine performance and emissions in a gasoline engine were inves-
tigated. A patent-pending original design was used to supplement the fuel system with hydrogen. Engine performance and emissions

2
F. Oral Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 55 (2024) 104192

of hydrogen generator-supported gasoline and gasoline-ethanol fuel blends were examined in detail. By incorporating the hydrogen
generator into the fuel system, successful results were achieved in engine performance and emissions.

2. Experimental design and methodology

Among the fuels used in the experiments, gasoline was obtained commercially from the market, and ethanol (C2H5OH) was pro-
vided by Sigma-Aldrich company with 96.4% purity. The hydrogen and oxygen gas (H2/O2) source was obtained from the prototype
hydrogen generator belonging to patent number 2018/10513, which was applied to the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office. In the
experiments, G100 (pure gasoline), G5E (volume 95% gasoline and 5% ethanol), and fuel blends (G100+H2/O2 and G5E + H2/O2)
created by adding H2/O2 gas mixture obtained from the prototype hydrogen generator to these fuels were used. The features of the fu-
els used in the experiments are given in Table 1 [4,9,13,16,23,38–43].
The experiments were carried out at Bitlis Eren University, Vocational School of Technical Sciences, automotive laboratory. The
experimental setup; consists of four main elements: engine, electric dynamometer, hydrogen generator, and emission analyzer. The
experimental design is given in Fig. 1. A single-cylinder, air-cooled Atimax engine with SI was employed in the research experiments.
Information on the engine used is given in Table 2.
In the experiments, the experimental motor was loaded with an electric dynamometer to determine the motor torque and motor
power values at different speeds. An electric dynamometer with 26 kW power, 80 NM torque, and a maximum engine speed of
5000 rpm was used for this process. In the test system, fuel consumption, engine torque, and engine power data were recorded instan-
taneously in the digital environment with the interface program used.

Table 1
Features of the fuels being tested.

Property Gasoline Ethanol Hydrogen

Chemical formula – C2H5OH H2

Molecular weight (kg/kmol) 114.18 46.07 2.015
3
Density (kg/m ) 720–775 805.8 0.0838
C (mass %) 85–88 52.2 –
H2 (mass %) 12–15 13.1 100
O2 (mass %) 2.7 34.7 –
Research octane number 95 108.6 >130
Motor octane number 85 90 –
Stoichiometric air-fuel ratio 14.6 9 34.3
Lower heating value (MJ/kg) 44 26.7 120
3
Lower heating value (MJ/m ) 31.4–34.3 15.84 9.6
Auto-ignition temperature (°C) 257 425 585
Latent heat of vaporization (kJ/kg) 349 923 –
Flammability limit (volume %) 1.4–7.6 3.3–19 4–74.5
Minimum ignition energy (MJ) 0.24 0.22 0.02
Flame speed (m/s) 0.57 0.61 3.5
Quenching distance (cm) 0.2 0.165 0.06
2
Diffusion coefficient (cm /s) 0.05 0.12 0.61
2
Kinematic viscosity (mm /s) 0.5–0.6 1.2–1.5 0.009

Fig. 1. Experimental setup.

3
F. Oral Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 55 (2024) 104192

Table 2
Features of the test engine.

Manufacturer & model Atimax AG 210 E

Engine type Four-stroke, Single cylinder

3
Engine volume 196 cm
Bore 68 mm
Stroke 54 mm
Compression ratio 8.5/1
Maximum speed 4200 rpm
Maximum power 5 kW at 3600 rpm
Fuel and ignition system Carburetor, Transistorized coil
Cooling system Air cooling

The experimental study utilized the Mobydic-5000 brand emission analyzer to establish emission values. The features of the de-
vice are given in Table 3. Emission values of fuel blends were measured and recorded at specified ESs.
The engine was equipped with a prototype hydrogen generator for H2/O2 production in the experiment. Installation of the hydro-
gen generator on the engine; It is provided with a 12 V electrical input and a hose used to transport the generated H2/O2 mixture to
the air filter. Hydrogen generator; It can produce an H2/O2 mixture at a flux rate of 1000 mL/min (700 mL/min hydrogen, 300 mL/
min oxygen) with 12-V operating voltage and 10 amp circuit current.
In the experimental study, G5E, G100+H2/O2, and G5E + H2/O2 fuel mixtures were used along with gasoline fuel (G100). Before
the start of the experiments, the air filter oil was canceled and the engine oil was changed. Before measurements were made in the ex-
periments, the engine was run with the relevant fuel for each test until it became stable. In the experiments, the engine was started
with G100 fuel and after the engine reached a stable operating regime, measurements were first taken for G100 fuel under the speci-
fied conditions. Then, measurements were taken under the same conditions for the blended fuels. Experimental measurements were
taken under stable engine operating conditions, the experiments were repeated twice and the results were averaged and evaluated. In
the experimental study, measurements were taken by running the engine at full throttle and 1500, 2000, 2500, 3000, 3500, and
4000 rpm. The obtained performance (engine torque, engine power, and SFC) and emission (CO, HC, and NOx) results were analyzed
by comparing them graphically.

3. Experimental results and discussion

In Fig. 2, the effect of different test fuels on torque is given.

Table 3
Technical features of the emission analyzer.

Manufacturer & Model Mobydic 5000

CO (volume %) 0–10
CO2 (volume %) 0–20
HC (ppm volume) 0–20000
O2 (volume %) 0–21
NOx (ppm) 0–5000
Lambda 0–5

Fig. 2. Variation of engine torque with engine speed for different fuel blends.

4
F. Oral Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 55 (2024) 104192

When Fig. 2 is investigated, it is understood that the torque change of blended fuels shows similar characteristics compared to
G100, there is a rise in engine torque up to 3000 rpm ES for all fuel types and a significant decrease after that. The average engine
torque values of all test fuels were lower than G100. Peak engine torque was recorded at 15.28 NM at 3000 rpm using G100. The low-
est torque was found to be 7.80 Nm at 4000 rpm in the G5E fuel blend. The engine torque value of the G5E fuel blend was determined
to be 6.58% lower on average than G100. The cause of this is ethanol's lower calorific value compared to G100 [44,45]. Adding H2/O2
to G100 reduced torque by an average of 3.73% compared to G100. The inclusion of H2 resulted in a reduction in both the quantity of
G100 in the fuel mixture and the volumetric efficiency [32]. It was determined that adding H2/O2 to the G5E fuel blend increased the
torque values at all ESs compared to the G5E fuel, and the increase was 5.8% on average. This may be the result of H2 addition in-
creasing the combustion efficiency of the fuel mixture [13]. In Fig. 3, the effect of different test fuels on power is given.
Upon analyzing Fig. 3, it can be observed that the highest engine power was achieved at 3500 rpm. The engine power values of
test fuels at all speeds are lower than G100. Maximum engine power was 4.82 kW with G100 fuel, 4.63 kW with G100+H2/O2 fuel
mixture, 4.53 kW with G5E fuel blend, and 4.76 kW with G5E + H2/O2 fuel mixture. It has been observed that the supplement of
H2/O2 to G100 gives rise to a decrease in engine power compared to G100, at all ESs, and the decrease is realized as 3.74% on aver-
age. It is thought that the decrease in the heat-generating capacity of the fuel mixture together with the increase in the amount of H2,
which has a low calorific value per unit volume at increasing ESs may be effective in the decrease in engine power (Table 1) [32]. En-
gine power experienced an average decrease of 6.54% when utilizing the G5E fuel blend in comparison to G100 fuel. The reason be-
hind the decline in engine power is the lower heating value of ethanol, leading to a decrease in the overall heating value of the fuel
mixture [44,45]. It was determined that adding H2/O2 to the G5E fuel blend increased the engine power at all speeds compared to the
G5E fuel, and the increase was 5.66% on average. H2 exhibits a higher flame speed compared to both G100 and ethanol (Table 1). The
increase in engine power is thought to be a result of increased combustion efficiency due to the addition of H2 [13]. In Fig. 4, the ef-
fect of different test fuels on SFC is given.
When examined Fig. 4 reveals a decrease in SFC with increasing ES. The lowest SFC value in all test fuels was observed at
3000 rpm, where the greatest torque occurred. The lowest SFC was obtained as 138.880 gr/kWh with G100 fuel, 135.437 gr/kWh
with G100+H2/O2 fuel mixture, 140.149 gr/kWh with G5E fuel blend, and 136.845 gr/kWh with G5E + H2/O2 fuel mixture. Adding

Fig. 3. Variation of engine power with engine speed for different fuel blends.

Fig. 4. Variation of SFC with engine speed for different fuel blends.

5
F. Oral Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 55 (2024) 104192

H2/O2 to G100 fuel decreased SFC across all revs compared to G100. This decrease was realized as 2.76% on average. The lowest av-
erage SFC among all test fuels was obtained from the G100+H2/O2 fuel mixture. Hydrogen is more flammable than G100 and burns
faster (Table 1). For this reason, the use of a G100-H2 mixture, which has a shorter burning time and wider flammability range than
G100, leads to an improvement in combustion efficiency [33,46]. As a result, the addition of H2 increases the flame speed of the fuel
mixture, resulting in an improvement in SFC [29,47]. In a similar study, it was expressed that adding H2/O2 to G100 reduces SFC
[33]. G100 with added ethanol showed a higher SFC than G100 without ethanol at all ESs. Compared to G100, the average SFC value
was raised by 1.83% when employing G5E fuel. Adding ethanol lowers the heating value of the mixture and results in a higher SFC
[11,48,49]. The addition of H2/O2 to the G5E fuel mixture produced an average of 2.82% reduction in SFC compared to the G5E fuel.
The flame and diffusion speeds of hydrogen are higher when compared to those of G100 and ethanol (Table 1). This could be a possi-
ble consequence of hydrogen increasing thermal efficiency [13,50]. In Fig. 5, the effect of test fuels on carbon monoxide (CO) is given.
According to Fig. 5, it was observed that CO emissions were higher at low speeds at the beginning and decreased with increasing
speed. G100 fuel has higher CO emissions than test fuels at all ESs. At all ESs, the highest value of CO emission was obtained from
G100, and the lowest value was obtained from G5E + H2/O2. The lowest CO emissions for whole test fuels were acquired at the high-
est ES (4000 rpm). At 4000 rpm ES, CO emissions were 2.56% with G100 fuel, 2.25% with G100+H2/O2 fuel mixture, 2.06% with
G5E fuel blend, and 1.89% with G5E + H2/O2 fuel mixture. It was seen that adding H2/O2 to G100 caused a decrease in CO at whole
ESs contrasted to pure G100, and the decrease was 17.56% on average. The reduction in CO may be the result of the addition of H2/O2
improving combustion [33,46]. Brayek et al. [35] stated in their study that adding H2/O2 to G100 reduces CO emissions by 31.8%.
They explained this situation with the intensification of the reaction of the rising of CO to CO2 due to the increased in-cylinder tem-
perature. The CO emission value of the G5E fuel blend was determined to be 19.9% lower on average than G100. Ethanol has more
oxygen and less carbon in its chemical structure than G100, which ensures efficient combustion of the fuel mixture and reduces CO
emissions [51,52]. In a study, it was stated that the addition of 10% ethanol to gasoline reduces CO emissions [22]. Another study re-
ported that adding 5% ethanol by volume to the G100 resulted in an average 18% reduction in CO emissions at different wheel speeds
(80 km/h vehicle speed). The high oxygen content of ethanol was shown as the reason [11]. The addition of H2/O2 to the G5E fuel
mixture reduced CO emissions at whole ESs compared to the G5E fuel. Among the test fuels, the lowest CO emission was obtained
from the G5E + H2/O2 fuel mixture at all ESs. With the use of the G5E + H2/O2, a mean of 5.71% improvement in CO compared to
G5E fuel and an average of 24.47% compared to G100 has been achieved. The fact that hydrogen with a high flame speed creates a
more efficient combustion and does not contain carbon in its chemical structure causes a decrease in the formation of CO emission
[13,50]. In Fig. 6, the effect of test fuels on hydrocarbon (HC) is given.
When Fig. 6 is examined, while HC emission values are at high rates at low ESs, they decrease as the speed increases. At all ESs,
fuel mixture HC emissions are less than those of G100. The highest HC was obtained from G100 fuel, and the lowest HC was obtained
from the G5E + H2/O2 fuel mixture. It was observed that adding H2/O2 to G100 caused a reduction in HC emission at whole ESs com-
pared to G100, and the decrease was 6.4% on average. Adding H2 increases the rate of OH formation, resulting in more efficient com-
bustion of the fuel mixture and consequently reducing HC emissions [25,29]. In some studies, the reduction in HC was explained as
the H2/O2 mixture being carbon-free and hydrogen having a shorter quenching time than G100 [33,35,53]. In the G5E fuel blend, HC
emission was obtained on average 9.85% lower than G100. The fact that ethanol contains more oxygen in its chemical structure com-
pared to G100, has a low boiling point, and has a high latent heat of evaporation, increases the combustion efficiency of the fuel mix-
ture and causes a decrease in HC emissions [54,55]. In a similar study on a carbureted SI engine, it was reported that the addition of
10% ethanol to gasoline reduced HC emissions [22]. In a study, it was expressed that the supplement of 5% by volume ethanol to
G100 provides an average of 27% and 12% reduction in HC emission values, respectively, at different wheel powers (at speeds of 80
and 100 km/h). For this reason, it has been shown that ethanol with high oxygen content provides more efficient combustion [11].
Adding H2/O2 to the G5E fuel mixture reduced HC emissions at whole ESs compared to the G5E. By using the G5E + H2/O2 fuel mix-
ture, HC emission decreased by 7.65% on average compared to the G5E fuel blend and 16.75% compared to the G100 fuel. It is

Fig. 5. Variation of CO emissions with engine speed for different fuel blends.

6
F. Oral Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 55 (2024) 104192

Fig. 6. Variation of HC emissions with engine speed for different fuel blends.

thought that hydrogen, which has a higher flame rate than G100, provides efficient combustion and the H2/O2 mixture does not con-
tain carbon, which reduces HC emissions [13,50]. In Fig. 7, the effect of test fuels on nitrogen oxide (NOx) is given.
The rise in engine speed led to elevated NOx emission values across all test fuels, as depicted in Fig. 7. The highest average NOx
emission was in the G5E + H2/O2 fuel mixture, and the lowest was in the G5E fuel blend. Adding H2/O2 to G100 resulted in an aver-
age increase of 2.23% in NOx emission. Hydrogen addition creates higher flame temperature and combustion speed, resulting in
higher local in-cylinder temperatures and greater NOx emissions [56]. The oxygen content in the mixture rises due to the addition of
H2/O2, causing an increase in NOx emissions [57]. In another study, it has been shown that hydrogen increases the in-cylinder tem-
perature and pressure as a reason for this [33]. Compared to G100, the G5E fuel mixture reduced NOx emissions at ESs, resulting in an
average of 2.34% reduction. When compared to G100, ethanol's lower adiabatic flame temperature and higher latent heat of evapora-
tion contribute to reduced NOx emissions [13,58,59]. Canakci et al. [11] stated that the use of a G100-ethanol fuel blend (5% ethanol
by volume) reduced NOx emission values at different wheel powers by an average of 11% and 10.5%, respectively (at speeds of 80 and
100 km/h). This has been reported to be due to the lower calorific value and combustion temperature of ethanol and higher latent
heat and oxygen content relative to G100. In a similar study, it was reported that 10% ethanol addition to gasoline reduced NOx emis-
sions. It was stated that increasing the ethanol content in the fuel mixture increased the reduction in NOx emissions [22]. The inclu-
sion of H2/O2 in the G5E fuel blend led to higher levels of NOx emissions across all speeds when compared to the G5E mixture. NOx
emission in the G5E + H2/O2 fuel mixture increased by 6.3% on average compared to G5E and 3.81% compared to G100. Hydrogen's
higher flame temperature compared to alcohol fuels leads to a rise in NOx emissions [13,50].

4. Conclusions
In this study, the effect of adding a gas mixture of H2/O2 generated from a hydrogen generator to a gasoline engine operating with
G100 and G5E fuels was investigated in terms of performance and emissions. Obtained results are given below.
• All test fuels showed a decrease in torque and power values compared to G100 fuel. Among the test fuels, the lowest reduction in
torque and power values compared to G100 occurred for the G5E + H2/O2 fuel blend. The addition of H2/O2 to G100 fuel

Fig. 7. Variation of NOx emissions with engine speed for different fuel blends.

7
F. Oral Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 55 (2024) 104192

resulted in an average 3% increase in engine power and torque compared to ethanol addition. It was found that the addition of
H2/O2 contributed positively to the improvement of engine power and torque values of the G5E fuel blend.
• Adding H2/O2 to the G100 and G5E fuel blend lowered the SFC at all ESs. Adding H2/O2 to G100 reduced the SFC by an average
of 4.51% compared to G5E fuel. The addition of H2O2 to G100 and G5E fuels contributed positively to the reduction of SFC values.
• The test fuels exhibited lower average CO emissions compared to the G100 fuel. Adding H2/O2 to the G5E fuel blend provided an
average of 8.38% improvement in CO emissions compared to adding H2/O2 to G100. It has been determined that adding H2/O2 to
both G100 fuel and G100-ethanol fuel blend improves CO emission values.
• HC emission values of all test fuels were obtained lower than G100 fuel at all ESs. Adding H2/O2 to the G5E provided an
average of 11.05% improvement in CO emissions compared to adding H2/O2 to G100. It was determined that the addition of
H2/O2 gave positive results in reducing HC emissions from G100 and G5E fuels.
• The addition of H2/O2 to G100 and G5E worsened NOx emissions, while the addition of ethanol to G100 improved NOx
emissions. Adding 5% ethanol to G100 reduced NOx emission by an average of 4.48% compared to adding H2/O2. The results
showed that the addition of H2/O2 to the test fuels increased NOx emissions.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Faruk Oral: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Software, Validation, Vi-
sualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

Data availability
Data will be made available on request.

References
[1] S.M.M.E. Ayad, C.R.P. Belchior, G.L.R. da Silva, R.S. Lucena, E.S. Carreira, P.E.V. de Miranda, Analysis of performance parameters of an ethanol fueled spark
ignition engine operating with hydrogen enrichment, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 45 (2020) 5588–5606, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.05.151.
[2] A. Çakmak, H. Özcan, Oxygenated fuel additives to gasoline, J. Polytech. 21 (2018) 831–840, https://doi.org/10.2339/politeknik.457956.
[3] Y. Shen, S. Shuai, J. Wang, J. Xiao, Optimization of gasoline hydrocarbon compositions for reducing exhaust emissions, J Environ Sci 21 (2009) 1208–1213,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-0742(08)62405-5.
[4] A.K. Thakur, A.K. Kaviti, R. Mehra, K.K.S. Mer, Progress in performance analysis of ethanol-gasoline blends on SI engine, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 69 (2017)
324–340, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.056.
[5] D.H. Qi, C.F. Lee, Combustion and emissions behaviour for ethanol–gasoline-blended fuels in a multipoint electronic fuel injection engine, Int. J. Sustain. Energy
35 (2016) 323–338, https://doi.org/10.1080/14786451.2014.895004.
[6] V. Thangavel, S.Y. Momula, D.B. Gosala, R. Asvathanarayanan, Experimental studies on simultaneous injection of ethanol–gasoline and n-butanol–gasoline in
the intake port of a four stroke SI engine, Renew. Energy 91 (2016) 347–360, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.01.074.
[7] D. Şimșek, F. Oral, N.Y. Çolak, The effect on engine performance and emissions of gasoline-propanol-hexane fuel blends on single cylinder spark-ignition
engines, J of Thermal Science and Technology 39 (2019) 81–89.
[8] M.B. Celik, Experimental determination of suitable ethanol–gasoline blend rate at high compression ratio for gasoline engine, Appl. Therm. Eng. 28 (2008)
396–404, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2007.10.028.
[9] X. Zhen, X. Li, Y. Wang, D. Liu, Z. Tian, Comparative study on combustion and emission characteristics of methanol/hydrogen, ethanol/hydrogen and methane/
hydrogen blends in high compression ratio SI engine, Fuel 267 (2020) 117193, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.117193.
[10] S.T.P. Purayil, M.O. Hamdan, S.A.B. Al-Omari, M.Y.E. Selim, E. Elnajjar, Review of hydrogen–gasoline SI dual fuel engines: engine performance and emission,
Energy Rep. 9 (2023) 4547–4573, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2023.03.054.
[11] M. Canakci, A.N. Ozsezen, E. Alptekin, M. Eyidogan, Impact of alcohol–gasoline fuel blends on the exhaust emission of an SI engine, Renew. Energy 52 (2013)
111–117, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2012.09.062.
[12] G. Dhamodaran, G.S. Esakkimuthu, T. Palani, A. Sundaraganesan, Reducing gasoline engine emissions using novel bio-based oxygenates: a review, Emergent
Materials 6 (2023) 1393–1413, https://doi.org/10.1007/s42247-023-00470-7.
[13] S.O. Akansu, S. Tangöz, N. Kahraman, M.İ. İlhak, S. Açıkgöz, Experimental study of gasoline-ethanol-hydrogen blends combustion in an SI engine, Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy 42 (2017) 25781–25790, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.07.014.
[14] M. Balat, Current alternative engine fuels, Energy Sources 27 (2005) 569–577, https://doi.org/10.1080/00908310490450458.
[15] M.B. Çelik, A. Çolak, The use of pure ethanol as alternative fuel in a spark ignition engine, J Fac Eng Arch Gazi Üniv 23 (2008) 619–626.
[16] F. Catapano, S. Di Iorio, A. Magno, P. Sementa, B.M. Vaglieco, A comprehensive analysis of the effect of ethanol, methane and methane-hydrogen blend on the
combustion process in a PFI (port fuel injection) engine, Energy 88 (2015) 101–110, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.02.051.
[17] Y.-C. Yao, J.-H. Tsai, I.-T. Wang, Emissions of gaseous pollutant from motorcycle powered by ethanol–gasoline blend, Appl. Energy 102 (2013) 93–100, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.07.041.
[18] M.K. Deh Kiani, B. Ghobadian, T. Tavakoli, A.M. Nikbakht, G. Najafi, Application of artificial neural networks for the prediction of performance and exhaust
emissions in SI engine using ethanol- gasoline blends, Energy 35 (2010) 65–69, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2009.08.034.
[19] J.D. Ulmer, R.L. Huhnke, D.D. Bellmer, D. Dwayne Cartmell, Acceptance of ethanol-blended gasoline in Oklahoma, Biomass Bioenergy 27 (2004) 437–444,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2004.04.005.
[20] C. Ji, X. Liu, S. Wang, B. Gao, J. Yang, A laminar burning velocity correlation for combustion simulation of hydrogen-enriched ethanol engines, Fuel 133 (2014)
139–142, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.05.013.
[21] L.C. Monteiro Sales, J.R. Sodré, Cold start characteristics of an ethanol-fuelled engine with heated intake air and fuel, Appl. Therm. Eng. 40 (2012) 198–201,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2012.01.057.
[22] M.K. Mohammed, H.H. Balla, Z.M.H. Al-Dulaimi, Z.S. Kareem, M.S. Al-Zuhairy, Effect of ethanol-gasoline blends on SI engine performance and emissions, Case
Stud. Therm. Eng. 25 (2021) 100891, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2021.100891.
[23] J. Kim, K.M. Chun, S. Song, H.-K. Baek, S.W. Lee, Hydrogen effects on the combustion stability, performance and emissions of a turbo gasoline direct injection
engine in various air/fuel ratios, Appl. Energy 228 (2018) 1353–1361, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.06.129.

8
F. Oral Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 55 (2024) 104192

[24] M. Akif Ceviz, A.K. Sen, A.K. Küleri, İ. Volkan Öner, Engine performance, exhaust emissions, and cyclic variations in a lean-burn SI engine fueled by
gasoline–hydrogen blends, Appl. Therm. Eng. 36 (2012) 314–324, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2011.10.039.
[25] C. Ji, S. Wang, Effect of hydrogen addition on combustion and emissions performance of a spark ignition gasoline engine at lean conditions, Int. J. Hydrogen
Energy 34 (2009) 7823–7834, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.06.082.
[26] S. Yousufuddin, S.N. Mehdi, M. Masood, Performance and combustion characteristics of a hydrogen−ethanol-fuelled Engine, Energy Fuels 22 (2008)
3355–3362, https://doi.org/10.1021/ef800309b.
[27] E. Kahraman, S. Cihangir Ozcanlı, B. Ozerdem, An experimental study on performance and emission characteristics of a hydrogen fuelled spark ignition engine,
Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 2066–2072, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2006.08.023.
[28] L. Jingding, Formation and restraint of toxic emissions in hydrogen-gasoline mixture fueled engines, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 23 (1998) 971–975, https://
doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3199(97)00141-9.
[29] C. Ji, S. Wang, Effect of hydrogen addition on the idle performance of a spark ignited gasoline engine at stoichiometric condition, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 34
(2009) 3546–3556, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.02.052.
[30] B. Zhang, C. Ji, S. Wang, Performance of a hydrogen-enriched ethanol engine at unthrottled and lean conditions, Energ Convers Manage 114 (2016) 68–74,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2016.01.073.
[31] M.A.S. Al-Baghdadi, Hydrogen–ethanol blending as an alternative fuel of spark ignition engines, Renew. Energy 28 (2003) 1471–1478, https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0960-1481(02)00188-X.
[32] İ. Batmaz, Experimental analysis of the effect of hydrogen addition to the fuel on performance and exhaust emissions in spark ignition engines, J Fac Eng Arch
Gazi Üniv 22 (2007) 137–147.
[33] Y. Karagoz, E. Orak, L. Yuksek, T. Sandalci, Effect of hydrogen addition on exhaust emissions and performance of a spark ignition engine, Environ Eng Manag J
14 (2015) 665–672, https://doi.org/10.30638/eemj.2015.074.
[34] I.M.M. Elsemary, A.A.A. Attia, K.H. Elnagar, A.A.M. Elaraqy, Experimental investigation on performance of single cylinder spark ignition engine fueled with
hydrogen-gasoline mixture, Appl. Therm. Eng. 106 (2016) 850–854, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.05.177.
[35] M. Brayek, M.A. Jemni, G. Kantchev, M.S. Abid, Effect of hydrogen–oxygen mixture addition on exhaust emissions and performance of a spark Ignition engine,
Arab J Sci Eng 41 (2016) 4635–4642, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-016-2228-x.
[36] A. Rimkus, G. Mejeras, J. Matijošius, The influence of hydrogen and oxygen (HHO) gas on engine characteristics under the effect of the lean mixtures of gasoline
and bioethanol, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 48 (2023) 39612–39624, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.07.167.
[37] N. Ganesan, Ishan Sahni, O.D. Samuel, C.C. Enweremadu, I. Veza, D. Chandran, Optimization and sustainability of gasohol/hydrogen blends for operative spark
ignition engine utilization and green environment, Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 39 (2022) 102381, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2022.102381.
[38] Sigma-Aldrich, Safety Data Sheet, https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/TR/en/sds/sial/493511 (accessed January 6, 2022).
[39] GSI Environmental, https://www.gsi-net.com/en/publications/gsi-chemical-database/single/259-ethanol.html (accessed July 6, 2021).
[40] Opet, Product Specification, https://opetwebcdn.azureedge.net/medium/document-file-1104.vsf (accessed January 6, 2022).
[41] O.I. Awad, R. Mamat, O.M. Ali, N.A.C. Sidik, T. Yusaf, K. Kadirgama, et al., Alcohol and ether as alternative fuels in spark ignition engine: a review, Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 82 (2018) 2586–2605, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.09.074.
[42] T. Palani, G.S. Esakkimuthu, G. Dhamodaran, A. Sundaraganesan, Performance optimization of gasoline engine fueled with ethanol/n-butanol/gasoline blends
using response surface methodology, Biofuels (2023) 1–13, https://doi.org/10.1080/17597269.2023.2215631.
[43] T. Palani, G.S. Esakkimuthu, G. Dhamodaran, S. Seetharaman, Experimental study on dual oxygenates (ethanol, n-butanol) with gasoline on MPFI engine
performance and emission characteristics, Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 21 (2024) 245–254, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-023-04852-6.
[44] F. Yüksel, B. Yüksel, The use of ethanol–gasoline blend as a fuel in an SI engine, Renew. Energy 29 (2004) 1181–1191, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2003.11.012.
[45] C. Ilkilic, Performance and emissions characteristics of biofuel blend in a CI engine, Energy Educ Sci Tech-A (2011) 369–378.
[46] F. Ma, Y. Wang, H. Liu, Y. Li, J. Wang, S. Ding, Effects of hydrogen addition on cycle-by-cycle variations in a lean burn natural gas spark-ignition engine, Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy 33 (2008) 823–831, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2007.10.043.
[47] C. Ji, S. Wang, Combustion and emissions performance of a hybrid hydrogen–gasoline engine at idle and lean conditions, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 35 (2010)
346–355, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.10.074.
[48] M.K. Balki, C. Sayin, M. Canakci, The effect of different alcohol fuels on the performance, emission and combustion characteristics of a gasoline engine, Fuel 115
(2014) 901–906, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2012.09.020.
[49] M. Koç, Y. Sekmen, T. Topgül, H.S. Yücesu, The effects of ethanol–unleaded gasoline blends on engine performance and exhaust emissions in a spark-ignition
engine, Renew. Energy 34 (2009) 2101–2106, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2009.01.018.
[50] İ. Yilmaz, M. Taştan, Investigation of hydrogen addition to methanol-gasoline blends in an SI engine, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 43 (2018) 20252–20261, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.07.088.
[51] G. Najafi, B. Ghobadian, T. Yusaf, S.M. Safieddin Ardebili, R. Mamat, Optimization of performance and exhaust emission parameters of a SI (spark ignition)
engine with gasoline–ethanol blended fuels using response surface methodology, Energy 90 (2015) 1815–1829, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.07.004.
[52] M. Eyidogan, A.N. Ozsezen, M. Canakci, A. Turkcan, Impact of alcohol–gasoline fuel blends on the performance and combustion characteristics of an SI engine,
Fuel 89 (2010) 2713–2720, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2010.01.032.
[53] C. Ji, S. Wang, Experimental study on combustion and emissions performance of a hybrid hydrogen–gasoline engine at lean burn limits, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy
35 (2010) 1453–1462, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.11.051.
[54] G. Najafi, B. Ghobadian, T. Tavakoli, D.R. Buttsworth, T.F. Yusaf, M. Faizollahnejad, Performance and exhaust emissions of a gasoline engine with ethanol
blended gasoline fuels using artificial neural network, Appl. Energy 86 (2009) 630–639, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2008.09.017.
[55] A. Elfasakhany, Investigations on performance and pollutant emissions of spark-ignition engines fueled with n-butanol–, isobutanol–, ethanol–, methanol–, and
acetone–gasoline blends: a comparative study, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 71 (2017) 404–413, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.12.070.
[56] C. Ji, S. Wang, B. Zhang, Performance of a hybrid hydrogen–gasoline engine under various operating conditions, Appl. Energy 97 (2012) 584–589, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.11.056.
[57] J.B. Heywood, Internal Combustion Engine Fundamentals, 2 nd Edition, McGraw-Hill Education, New York, 2018.
[58] B. Doğan, D. Erol, H. Yaman, E. Kodanli, The effect of ethanol-gasoline blends on performance and exhaust emissions of a spark ignition engine through exergy
analysis, Appl. Therm. Eng. 120 (2017) 433–443, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.04.012.
[59] A.O. Hasan, H. Al-Rawashdeh, A.H. Al-Muhtaseb, A. Abu-jrai, R. Ahmad, J. Zeaiter, Impact of changing combustion chamber geometry on emissions, and
combustion characteristics of a single cylinder SI (spark ignition) engine fueled with ethanol/gasoline blends, Fuel 231 (2018) 197–203, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.fuel.2018.05.045.