**3. Results**

#### **3.1. Measurement of technical properties of tractors**

Measurement was carried out with the use of two fuels. First type was the diesel fuel, which was used as a reference sample for diesel RME comparisons. Measurements results were evaluated and compared reciprocally. Used measuring devices were connected according to the scheme shown in **Figure 2**. Processed measurement results are shown in **Figure 3**. We can see the appliance connection together with measured parameters. The measurements were repeated three times for both tractors, with each fuel, at full load in accordance to OECD Measurement of Limited and Unlimited Emissions during Burning of Alternative Fuels… http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.79705 71

**Figure 2.** View of test equipment (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess: Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART and SUA in Nitra).

Code2 test. Measure points were set at 1000 min−1 of PTO revolutions. Based on results curve at full load, the calculation of measure points for emission measurement was processed. These measure points comply with the ISO 8178–4 standard. According to this standard, each measure point lasts for 10 min. Emission test system AVL-SESAMFTIR uses two methods of calculation—diesel and biodiesel. These are set according to the fuel used. The value of smokiness is evaluated at 95% and 70% nominal evolutions and at maximal torque.

#### **3.2. Measurements of limited emission**

Measurement of CO, HC, NOx and particulate emissions on both tractors were done according to ISO 8178-4, C<sup>1</sup> - 8 points (**Figures 4** and **5**), [20]. The conversion from *ppm* to *g.kW*−1 *h*−1 was made by pattern (1) using the values from **Table 1**. In **Table 4**, there are figured standard deviations from three repetitions. The graphic description of limited emission is represented in **Figures 6**–**11**.

Based on measured values of limited emission, average value by the next pattern was calculated:

• the average value of sign in a subgroup [19]:

$$
\overline{X}\_l = \frac{1}{n} \tag{2}
$$

*clarity*: *i = 1,2,...., k* and *j = 1,2,....n.*

**3. Results**

**Table 2.** Technical data of the tractors.

70 Biofuels - Challenges and opportunities

**Table 3.** Used measured devices.

**3.1. Measurement of technical properties of tractors**

Fuel consumption AVL 733S

**Device name Device producer** Dynamometer Schenck W700

Emission testing system AVL—SESAM 4 (FTIR)

**Tractor 1 (turbocharged) Tractor 2**

**Table 1.** Needed data for conversion from ppm to g.kW−1 h−1.

Number of cylinders 4 Number of cylinders 4

**Substance,** *i* **Mass (kg.kmol−1) Note**

*Mm*vps Exhaust gases—dry 30.21/29.84 5% O<sup>2</sup>

*Mm*vpv Exhaust gases—moist 28.84/28.82 5% O<sup>2</sup>

CO 28.0104

SO<sup>2</sup> 64.0610

*M*mi NO<sup>2</sup> 46.0060 NOx process as NO<sup>2</sup>

HC 13.8760 HC 1

Capacity of cylinders 4.00 dm3 Capacity of cylinders 4.038 dm3 Cavil/stroke 105 mm/115.5 mm Cavil/stroke 101 mm/126 mm Rated revolution 2500 min−1 Rated revolution 2300 min−1 Power 65 kW Power 72.5 kW Emission class Stage I Emission class Stage III A

Measurement was carried out with the use of two fuels. First type was the diesel fuel, which was used as a reference sample for diesel RME comparisons. Measurements results were evaluated and compared reciprocally. Used measuring devices were connected according to the scheme shown in **Figure 2**. Processed measurement results are shown in **Figure 3**. We can see the appliance connection together with measured parameters. The measurements were repeated three times for both tractors, with each fuel, at full load in accordance to OECD

Engine S. L. H—H 100.4 WT Engine Deutz 2012, TCD 2012 L04 2 V

/9.6 O<sup>2</sup>

/9.6 O<sup>2</sup>

• the standard deviation in a subgroup [19]:

$$s\_i = \sqrt{\frac{1}{n-1} \sum\_{j=1}^{n} x\_{ij}} \tag{3}$$

*clarity*: *i = 1,2,...,k* and *j = 1,2,..., n; i*—marking of a subgroup; *j*—numerical order of measured value in a subgroup, *n*—range of subgroup, *X*ij—measured value in a *i*–subgroup.

• the average value X:

$$
\overline{X} = \frac{1}{k} \tag{4}
$$

• the average of standard deviations of individual subgroups [19]:

$$
\overline{s} \quad \text{= } \frac{1}{k} \tag{5}
$$

are demonstrated in **Figures 6–11**. In **Figures 6–11**, reciprocally compared standard devia-

The values of CO and HC and also particle emission are lower for RME as in **Table 4**, but the

are lower for diesel oil. It is evident that the newer engine of Tractor 1 decreases

**CO NOx HC Particles**

Measurement of Limited and Unlimited Emissions during Burning of Alternative Fuels…

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.79705

73

**(g.kW−1.h−1) (Number. kW−1.h−1)**

tions of limited emission measured using diesel oil and RME are given [20].

Diesel 1.80 11.13 0.77 3.93E + 14 RME 1.61 12.42 0.60 3.33E + 14

Diesel 1.05 5.90 0.19 4.31E + 14 RME 0.91 5.92 0.13 2.66 + E14

.

**Figure 4.** Values of limited emission for Tractor 1 (turbocharged).

**Figure 5.** Values of limited emission for Tractor 2.

values of NO<sup>x</sup>

**Tractor 1 (turbocharged)**

Average value, based on PTO power.

**Table 4.** Values of limited emission\*

**Tractor 2**

\*

Based on the patterns above, the standard deviations of limited emission measured on Tractor 1 with turbo and Tractor 2 were determined. The standard deviations of individual emissions

**Figure 3.** Engine-speed map of Tractor 1 (turbocharged) with fuels—diesel and biofuel RME (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess: Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART and SUA in Nitra).

Measurement of Limited and Unlimited Emissions during Burning of Alternative Fuels… http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.79705 73

**Figure 4.** Values of limited emission for Tractor 1 (turbocharged).

• the standard deviation in a subgroup [19]:

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_1 *<sup>n</sup>* <sup>−</sup> <sup>1</sup> ∑*<sup>j</sup>*=1

*clarity*: *i = 1,2,...,k* and *j = 1,2,..., n; i*—marking of a subgroup; *j*—numerical order of measured

*<sup>x</sup>*¯ <sup>=</sup> \_\_1

¯ <sup>=</sup> \_\_1

Based on the patterns above, the standard deviations of limited emission measured on Tractor 1 with turbo and Tractor 2 were determined. The standard deviations of individual emissions

**Figure 3.** Engine-speed map of Tractor 1 (turbocharged) with fuels—diesel and biofuel RME (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess:

Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART and SUA in Nitra).

*<sup>n</sup> xij* (3)

*<sup>k</sup>* (4)

*<sup>k</sup>* (5)

—measured value in a *i*–subgroup.

*si* <sup>=</sup> <sup>√</sup>

value in a subgroup, *n*—range of subgroup, *X*ij

¯

*s*

• the average of standard deviations of individual subgroups [19]:

• the average value X:

72 Biofuels - Challenges and opportunities

**Figure 5.** Values of limited emission for Tractor 2.


**Table 4.** Values of limited emission\* .

are demonstrated in **Figures 6–11**. In **Figures 6–11**, reciprocally compared standard deviations of limited emission measured using diesel oil and RME are given [20].

The values of CO and HC and also particle emission are lower for RME as in **Table 4**, but the values of NO<sup>x</sup> are lower for diesel oil. It is evident that the newer engine of Tractor 1 decreases

**Figure 6.** Standard deviation values of limited emission—CO for Tractor 1 (turbocharged) (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess,: Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART and SUA in Nitra).

**Figure 9.** Standard deviation values of limited emission—CO for Tractor 2 (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess: Agroscope

Measurement of Limited and Unlimited Emissions during Burning of Alternative Fuels…

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.79705

75

**Figure 10.** Standard deviation values of limited emission—NOx for Tractor 2 (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess: Agroscope

**Figure 11.** Standard deviation values of limited emission—HC for Tractor 2 (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess: Agroscope

Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART and SUA in Nitra).

Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART and SUA in Nitra).

Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART and SUA in Nitra).

**Figure 7.** Standard deviation values of limited emission—NOx for Tractor 1 (turbocharged) (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess: Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART and SUA in Nitra).

**Figure 8.** Standard deviation values of limited emission—HC for Tractor 1 (turbocharged) (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess: Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART and SUA in Nitra).

Measurement of Limited and Unlimited Emissions during Burning of Alternative Fuels… http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.79705 75

**Figure 9.** Standard deviation values of limited emission—CO for Tractor 2 (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess: Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART and SUA in Nitra).

**Figure 6.** Standard deviation values of limited emission—CO for Tractor 1 (turbocharged) (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess,:

**Figure 7.** Standard deviation values of limited emission—NOx for Tractor 1 (turbocharged) (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess:

**Figure 8.** Standard deviation values of limited emission—HC for Tractor 1 (turbocharged) (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess:

Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART and SUA in Nitra).

74 Biofuels - Challenges and opportunities

Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART and SUA in Nitra).

Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART and SUA in Nitra).

**Figure 10.** Standard deviation values of limited emission—NOx for Tractor 2 (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess: Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART and SUA in Nitra).

**Figure 11.** Standard deviation values of limited emission—HC for Tractor 2 (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess: Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART and SUA in Nitra).


Tractor 2. Nevertheless, the values of unlimited emission are negligible, except carbon dioxide

**Figure 12.** Measurement of smoke (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess: Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART

Measurement of Limited and Unlimited Emissions during Burning of Alternative Fuels…

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.79705

77

The values of smoke in exhaust gases are usually a lot lower with RME than diesel oil. For Tractor 1 (turbocharged), the value of smoke was more than 50% lower with RME than diesel oil. From **Figure 12**, it is evident that Tractor 2 had much lower value of smoke. These values

At present, when our environment is overburdened with emissions of all kinds, the idea of using fuels with minimal impact on the environment is of great importance. Fuel produced from methyl ester of vegetable oils can be considered advantageous in that almost every diesel engine is in principle capable of combusting such fuels. Taking into account the fact that up to 90% of the transport of passenger and cargo transport is provided by diesel fuel vehicles (trucks, buses, locomotives, ships, tractors) at the present, fuels made from methyl ester of vegetable oils represent a huge potential for their use in the diesel combustion engines. Very often, the emphasis is on the contribution of fuels of plant origin in terms of creating a carbon balance in nature. The production of carbon dioxide during combustion corresponds to its consumption during photosynthesis. Biodegradability, for example, rapeseed oil methyl ester

In this chapter, the results reached from application of biofuel to the machinery working in condition that are sensitive to environment contamination are presented. At present, our environment is excessively overloaded with all kinds of emission and the idea of using fuel with marginal impact on environment is very important. It is possible to state that the differences of these two tractors are peculiar to their engines' construction, the year of production and specification (Tractor 2 is specified as 100% biodiesel). By evaluation of emission (GHG,

were near zero and it did not matter whether RME or diesel oil was used.

after its release into the environment, is approximately 95%.

whose values were higher with RME for both tractors.

Values of unlimited emission are shown in **Table 5**.

**3.4. Measurements of emitted smoke**

**4. Conclusion**

and SPU Nitra).

**Table 5.** Values of unlimited emission (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess,: Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART and SUA in Nitra).

emission significantly. Measured values are based on PTO power, so cannot be evaluated by emission standards for off-road vehicles. If these measurements were done on engine, both tractors will meet the emission norm for CO and HC of RME and diesel. The values of NO<sup>x</sup> are higher about 21% for both fuels tested in agricultural Tractor 1 (turbocharged) and about 25% for fuels tested in agricultural Tractor 2.

#### **3.3. Measurements of unlimited emission**

Measurements of unlimited emission were also done, which are possible to measure by AVL SESAM FTIR 4—CO<sup>2</sup> , NO, NO<sup>2</sup> , N2 O, NH<sup>3</sup> , CH4 , C4 H6, HCN, AHC, SO<sup>2</sup> , HCHO and MECHO. In **Table 3**, average values from three repetitions for each fuel (diesel oil, RME) are figured. The tractor that used RME had not only higher values of NO<sup>x</sup> (NO, NO<sup>2</sup> and N2 O) but also almost 50% higher values of ammonia, methane and 1.3-butadiene, which are considered to be dangerous substances. The newer engine of Tractor 2 had higher values of NO<sup>x</sup> , acetaldehyde and 1.3-butadiene for RME but the difference was not so big.

On the other side, lower values with RME for sulfur dioxide and acetaldehyde were obtained for Tractor 1 (turbocharged) and for sulfur dioxide, hydrogen cyanide and formaldehyde for Measurement of Limited and Unlimited Emissions during Burning of Alternative Fuels… http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.79705 77

**Figure 12.** Measurement of smoke (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess: Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART and SPU Nitra).

Tractor 2. Nevertheless, the values of unlimited emission are negligible, except carbon dioxide whose values were higher with RME for both tractors.

Values of unlimited emission are shown in **Table 5**.

#### **3.4. Measurements of emitted smoke**

The values of smoke in exhaust gases are usually a lot lower with RME than diesel oil. For Tractor 1 (turbocharged), the value of smoke was more than 50% lower with RME than diesel oil. From **Figure 12**, it is evident that Tractor 2 had much lower value of smoke. These values were near zero and it did not matter whether RME or diesel oil was used.

## **4. Conclusion**

emission significantly. Measured values are based on PTO power, so cannot be evaluated by emission standards for off-road vehicles. If these measurements were done on engine, both tractors will meet the emission norm for CO and HC of RME and diesel. The values of NO<sup>x</sup> are higher about 21% for both fuels tested in agricultural Tractor 1 (turbocharged) and about

**Table 5.** Values of unlimited emission (Müllerová, Landis, Schiess,: Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station

**CO2 NO NO2 N2O NH3 CH4**

**C4H6 HCN AHC SO2 HCHO MECHO**

**Aromatic HC Sulfur** 

**C4H6 HCN AHC SO2 HCHO MECHO**

**Aromatic HC Sulfur** 

**dioxide**

**dioxide**

**dioxide**

Diesel 55,867 845 40 0.5 0.13 0.52 RME 56,769 890 43 0.66 0.21 1.27

Diesel 0.97 0.57 2.1 4.6 8.1 2.7 RME 1.98 0.57 1.19 1.40 9.95 0.57 **Tractor 2 CO2 NO NO2 N2O NH3 CH4**

**dioxide**

Diesel 64,426 378 16.9 0.43 0.12 0.1 RME 66,040 431 16.8 0.57 0.13 0.1

Diesel 0.44 0.59 0.77 5.0 2.23 0.49 RME 0.90 0.45 1.19 2.9 2.08 0.73

Measurements of unlimited emission were also done, which are possible to measure by

MECHO. In **Table 3**, average values from three repetitions for each fuel (diesel oil, RME) are

also almost 50% higher values of ammonia, methane and 1.3-butadiene, which are considered

On the other side, lower values with RME for sulfur dioxide and acetaldehyde were obtained for Tractor 1 (turbocharged) and for sulfur dioxide, hydrogen cyanide and formaldehyde for

to be dangerous substances. The newer engine of Tractor 2 had higher values of NO<sup>x</sup>

, CH4 , C4

H6, HCN, AHC, SO<sup>2</sup>

**Nitrous oxide Ammonia Methane**

**Nitrous oxide Ammonia Methane**

**Formaldehyde Acetaldehyde**

**Formaldehyde Acetaldehyde**

(NO, NO<sup>2</sup>

, HCHO and

O) but

, acetal-

and N2

O, NH<sup>3</sup>

25% for fuels tested in agricultural Tractor 2.

**ppm Carbon dioxide Nitric oxide Nitrogen** 

**1,3 Butadiene Hydrogen** 

**ppm Carbon dioxide Nitric oxide Nitrogen** 

**1,3 Butadiene Hydrogen** 

**cyanide**

**cyanide**

**3.3. Measurements of unlimited emission**

, NO, NO<sup>2</sup>

figured. The tractor that used RME had not only higher values of NO<sup>x</sup>

dehyde and 1.3-butadiene for RME but the difference was not so big.

, N2

AVL SESAM FTIR 4—CO<sup>2</sup>

ART and SUA in Nitra).

**Tractor 1 turbocharged**

76 Biofuels - Challenges and opportunities

At present, when our environment is overburdened with emissions of all kinds, the idea of using fuels with minimal impact on the environment is of great importance. Fuel produced from methyl ester of vegetable oils can be considered advantageous in that almost every diesel engine is in principle capable of combusting such fuels. Taking into account the fact that up to 90% of the transport of passenger and cargo transport is provided by diesel fuel vehicles (trucks, buses, locomotives, ships, tractors) at the present, fuels made from methyl ester of vegetable oils represent a huge potential for their use in the diesel combustion engines. Very often, the emphasis is on the contribution of fuels of plant origin in terms of creating a carbon balance in nature. The production of carbon dioxide during combustion corresponds to its consumption during photosynthesis. Biodegradability, for example, rapeseed oil methyl ester after its release into the environment, is approximately 95%.

In this chapter, the results reached from application of biofuel to the machinery working in condition that are sensitive to environment contamination are presented. At present, our environment is excessively overloaded with all kinds of emission and the idea of using fuel with marginal impact on environment is very important. It is possible to state that the differences of these two tractors are peculiar to their engines' construction, the year of production and specification (Tractor 2 is specified as 100% biodiesel). By evaluation of emission (GHG, dangerous exhaust gases and carcinogens) it can be declared that it is very important to study not just limited but also unlimited emissions, which can be very dangerous, although in this work it was discovered that values of unlimited emission do not exceed lethal limits.

[6] Tauzia X, Maiboom A, Shah SR. Experimental study of inlet manifold water injection on combustion and emissions of an automotive direct injection diesel engine. Energy.

Measurement of Limited and Unlimited Emissions during Burning of Alternative Fuels…

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.79705

79

[7] Vlk F. Automotive Combustion Engines. Brno: Nakladatelství a vydavatelství VLK;

[8] Ulusoy Y, Arslan R, Kaplan C. Emission characteristics of sunflower oil methyl ester. Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects. 2009;**31**(11):

[9] Hammond GP, Kallu S, McManus MC. Development of biofuels for the UK automotive

[10] Regulation no. 24 of the Economic Commission for Europe of the United Nations (UN/ ECE). Uniform provisions concerning: I. The approval of compression ignition (C.I.) engines with regard to the emission of visible pollutants; II. The approval of motor vehicles with regard to the installation of C.I. engines of an approved type; III. The approval of motor vehicles equipped with C.I. engines with regard to the emission of visible pollutants by the engine; IV. The measurement of power of C.I. engines. 2018. http://eur-lex.

[11] Dorado MP, Ballesteros E, Arnal JM, Gómez J, López FJ. Exhaust emissions from a diesel engine fueled with transesterified waste olive oil. Fuel. 2003;**82**(11):1311-1315

[12] Cvíčela P, Drabant Š, Majdan R. Sledovanie prevádzkového zaťaženia hydrogenerátora UD 25 (Observation of operating loading of the hydrostatic pump UD 25). In: International Student Scientific Conference. Nitra: Slovak University of Agriculture in

[13] Gábriš Ľ. Ochrana a tvorba životného prostredia v poľnohospodárstve [Protection and Creation of Environment in Agriculture]. Nitra: Slovak University of Agriculture in

[14] Majdan R, Cvíčela P, Bohát M, Ivanišová K. The observation of hydrostatic pump deterioration during the durability test according to hydraulic fluids contamination. In: X. International Conference of Young Scientists 2008: Conference Proceedings, Czech

[15] Semetko J, Janoško I, Pernis P. Increase of driving pulls of the tractor by trailer. In: Actual Tasks on Agricultural Engineering: Proceedings of the 31st International Symposium on Agricultural Engineering, Opatija Croatia. Zagreb: Sveučilište u Zagrebu; 2003. pp. 59-64

[16] Tkáč Z et al. Alternatívne palivá pre motory [Alternative Fuels for Engines]. Nitra:

[17] Vlk F. Alternativní pohony motorových vozidel [Alternative Drives of Motor Vehicles]. Prof. Ing. Frantisek Vlk, DrSc., nakladetlství a vydavatelství.Brno; 2004. ISBN:80-239-1602-5

Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra; 2008

Republic. Prague: Czech University of Life Sciences Prague; 2008. pp. 147-153

europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A42008X0222%2801%29

2010;**35**(9):3628-3639

906-910

Nitra; 2008

Nitra; 1998

2003. ISBN: 80-238-8756-4

market. Applied Energy. 2008;**85**(6):506-515
