Effect of Fuel Injection Pressure on a Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Nonvolatile Particle Emission

2011 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 2504-2509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tero Lähde ◽  
Topi Rönkkö ◽  
Matti Happonen ◽  
Christer Söderström ◽  
Annele Virtanen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diesel Engine ◽  
Fuel Injection ◽  
Injection Pressure ◽  
Particle Emission ◽  
Heavy Duty ◽  
Heavy Duty Diesel Engine ◽  
Heavy Duty Diesel ◽  
Fuel Injection Pressure

Modeling the Fuel Spray of a High Reactivity Gasoline Under Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Conditions

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuanjiang Pei ◽  
Roberto Torelli ◽  
Tom Tzanetakis ◽  
Yu Zhang ◽  
Michael Traver ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diesel Engine ◽  
Fuel Injection ◽  
Ambient Pressure ◽  
Injection Pressure ◽  
High Reactivity ◽  
Operating Conditions ◽  
Heavy Duty ◽  
Fuel Temperature ◽  
Heavy Duty Diesel Engine ◽  
Heavy Duty Diesel

Recent experimental studies on a production heavy-duty diesel engine have shown that gasoline compression ignition (GCI) can operate in both conventional mixing-controlled and low-temperature combustion modes with similar efficiency and lower soot emissions compared to diesel at a given engine-out NOx level. This is primarily due to the high volatility and low aromatic content of high reactivity, light-end fuels. In order to fully realize the potential of GCI in heavy-duty applications, accurate characterization of gasoline sprays for high-pressure fuel injection systems is needed to develop quantitative, three-dimensional computational fluid models that support simulation-led design efforts. In this work, the non-reacting fuel spray of a high reactivity gasoline (research octane number of ∼60, cetane number of ∼34) was modeled under typical heavy-duty diesel engine operating conditions, i.e., high temperature and pressure, in a constant-volume combustion chamber. The modeling results were compared to those of a diesel spray at the same conditions in order to understand their different behaviors due to fuel effects. The model was developed using a Lagrangian-Particle, Eulerian-Fluid approach. Predictions were validated against available experimental data generated at Michigan Technological University for a single-hole injector, and showed very good agreement across a wide range of operating conditions, including ambient pressure (3–10 MPa), temperature (800–1200 K), fuel injection pressure (100–250 MPa), and fuel temperature (327–408 K). Compared to a typical diesel spray, the gasoline spray evaporates much faster, exhibiting a much shorter liquid length and wider dispersion angle which promote gas entrainment and enhance air utilization. For gasoline, the liquid length is not sensitive to different ambient temperatures above 800 K, suggesting that the spray may have reached a “saturated” state where the transfer of energy from the hot gas to liquid has already been maximized. It was found that higher injection pressure is more effective at promoting the evaporation process for diesel than it is for gasoline. In addition, higher ambient pressure leads to a more compact spray and fuel temperature variation only has a minimal effect for both fuels.

An Evaluation of Combustion and Emissions Performance With Low Cetane Naphtha Fuels in a Multi-Cylinder Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Zhang ◽  
Alexander Voice ◽  
Tom Tzanetakis ◽  
Michael Traver ◽  
David Cleary
Keyword(s):  
High Temperature ◽  
Diesel Engine ◽  
Low Temperature ◽  
Compression Ratio ◽  
Fuel Injection ◽  
Fuel Efficiency ◽  
Injection Pressure ◽  
Heavy Duty ◽  
Heavy Duty Diesel Engine ◽  
Heavy Duty Diesel

Future projections in global transportation fuel use show a demand shift towards diesel and away from gasoline. At the same time greenhouse gas regulations will drive higher vehicle fuel efficiency and lower well-to-wheel CO2 production. Naphtha, a contributor to the gasoline stream and requiring less processing at the refinery level, is an attractive candidate to mitigate this demand shift while lowering the overall greenhouse gas impact. In this work, low cetane and high volatility gasoline-like fuels have shown potential to achieve high fuel efficiency with low engine-out emissions in a production commercial vehicle engine. This study investigates the combustion and emissions performance of two low cetane naphtha fuels (Naphtha 1: RON59; Naphtha 2: RON69) and one ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD) in a model year (MY) 2013, six-cylinder, heavy-duty diesel engine. The engine is equipped with a single-stage variable geometry turbocharger (VGT) and a fuel injection system that is capable of 2500 bar fuel injection pressure. The engine has a stock geometric compression ratio of 18.9. To date, most studies in this area have been conducted using single-cylinder research engines. Aramco aims to better understand the implications on hardware and software design in a multi-cylinder engine with a production engine air system. Engine testing was focused on the Heavy-Duty Supplemental Emissions Test (SET) “B” speed over a load sweep from 5 to 15 bar BMEP. At each operating point, NOx sweeps were conducted over wide ranges (e.g., 0.2 → 3 g/hp-hr) to understand the implications of fuel reactivity as well as other properties on combustion behavior under both high temperature mixing-controlled combustion and low temperature premixed combustion. At 10–15 bar BMEP, mixing-controlled combustion dominates the engine combustion process. Under a compression ratio of 18.9, cylinder pressure and temperature are sufficiently high to suppress the reactivity (cetane number) difference between ULSD and the low cetane naphtha fuels. As a result, the three test fuels showed similar ignition delay under high temperature and pressure conditions. Nevertheless, naphtha fuels still exhibited notable soot reduction compared to ULSD. Under mixing-controlled combustion, this is likely due to their lower aromatic content and higher volatility. At 10 bar BMEP, Naphtha 1 generated less soot than Naphtha 2 since it contains less aromatics and is more volatile. When operated at light load, in a less reactive thermal environment, the lower reactivity naphtha fuels led to longer ignition delays than ULSD. As a result, the soot benefit of naphtha fuels was enhanced. Overall, naphtha fuels and ULSD had similar fuel efficiency. Utilizing the soot benefit of the naphtha fuels, engine-out NOx was calibrated from the production level of 3–4 g/hp-hr down to 2–2.5 g/hp-hr over the twelve non-idle SET steady-state modes. At this reduced NOx level, naphtha fuels were still able to maintain a soot advantage over ULSD and remain “soot-free” (smoke ≤ 0.2 FSN) while achieving diesel-equivalent fuel efficiency. Finally, partially premixed compression ignition (PPCI) low temperature combustion (LTC) operation (NOx ≤ 0.2 g/hp-hr; smoke ≤ 0.2 FSN) was achieved with both of the naphtha fuels at 5 bar BMEP through a late injection approach with high injection pressure. Under high EGR dilution, Naphtha 2 showed an appreciably longer ignition delay than Naphtha 1, resulting in a soot reduction benefit. Early injection PPCI operation cannot be attained with the stock engine compression ratio due to excessive pressure rise rates. Although the late injection PPCI operation offered a significant NOx benefit over mixing-controlled combustion operation, it led to lower fuel efficiency with undesirably late combustion phasing. This points the research towards a lower engine compression ratio and an air system upgrade to promote high efficiency PPCI LTC operation.

Application of Common Rail Fuel Injection System to a Heavy Duty Diesel Engine

1994 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshihisa Yamaki ◽  
Kazutoshi Mori ◽  
Hiroshi Kamikubo ◽  
Susumu Kohketsu ◽  
Kohji Mori ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diesel Engine ◽  
Fuel Injection ◽  
Common Rail ◽  
Injection System ◽  
Fuel Injection System ◽  
Heavy Duty ◽  
Heavy Duty Diesel Engine ◽  
Heavy Duty Diesel

Fuel Property Effects on PCCI Combustion in a Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine

2012 ◽  
Vol 134 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cosmin E. Dumitrescu ◽  
W. Stuart Neill ◽  
Hongsheng Guo ◽  
Vahid Hosseini ◽  
Wallace L. Chippior
Keyword(s):  
Diesel Engine ◽  
Fuel Injection ◽  
Cetane Number ◽  
Injection System ◽  
Injection Timing ◽  
Heavy Duty ◽  
Fuel Property ◽  
Heavy Duty Diesel Engine ◽  
Soot Emissions ◽  
Heavy Duty Diesel

An experimental study was performed to investigate fuel property effects on premixed charge compression ignition (PCCI) combustion in a heavy-duty diesel engine. A matrix of research diesel fuels designed by the Coordinating Research Council, referred to as the Fuels for Advanced Combustion Engines (FACE), was used. The fuel matrix design covers a wide range of cetane numbers (30 to 55), 90% distillation temperatures (270 to 340 °C) and aromatics content (20 to 45%). The fuels were tested in a single-cylinder Caterpillar diesel engine equipped with a common-rail fuel injection system. The engine was operated at 900 rpm, a relative air/fuel ratio of 1.2 and 60% exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) for all fuels. The study was limited to a single fuel injection event starting between −30° and 0 °CA after top dead center (aTDC) with a rail pressure of 150 MPa. The brake mean effective pressure (BMEP) ranged from 2.6 to 3.1 bar depending on the fuel and its injection timing. The experimental results show that cetane number was the most important fuel property affecting PCCI combustion behavior. The low cetane number fuels had better brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC) due to more optimized combustion phasing and shorter combustion duration. They also had a longer ignition delay period available for premixing, which led to near-zero soot emissions. The two fuels with high cetane number and high 90% distillation temperature produced significant soot emissions. The two fuels with high cetane number and high aromatics produced the highest brake specific NOx emissions, although the absolute values were below 0.1 g/kW-h. Brake specific HC and CO emissions were primarily a function of the combustion phasing, but the low cetane number fuels had slightly higher HC and lower CO emissions than the high cetane number fuels.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document