Instantaneous Heat Transfer over the Piston of a Motored Direct injection Type Diesel Engine

1989 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cliff R. Mure ◽  
K. T. Rhee
Author(s):  
Y Rasihhan ◽  
F J Wallace

A simple, effective and computationally economical piston-liner thermal resistance model for diesel engine simulation is described. In the model, the detailed shape of the piston and its axial movement and interaction with liner nodes are all taken into account. An imaginary node within the piston provides the necessary temperature difference between the piston and the liner nodes for conductive heat transfer, which is expected to reverse its direction with liner insulation. In the liner, an axially symmetric two-dimensional heat-transfer model is used. Later the piston-liner model is tuned for the experimental single cylinder, direct injection, Petter PH 1W engine used at Bath University, against the experimental piston temperature and liner temperature distribution.


2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 345
Author(s):  
Mostafa Kiani Deh Kiani ◽  
Sajad Rostami ◽  
Gholamhassan Najafi ◽  
Mohamed Mazlan

Contrary to energy, exergy may be destroyed due to irreversibility. Exergy analysis can be used to reveal the location, and amount of energy losses of engines. Despite the importance of the exergy analysis, there is a lack of information in this area, especially when the engine is fueled with biodiesel–diesel fuel blends under various injection operating parameters. Thus, in this research, the exergy analysis of a direct-injection diesel engine using biodiesel–diesel fuel blends was performed. The fuel blends (B0, B20, B40, and B100) were injected into cylinders at pressures of 200 and 215 bars. Moreover, the simulation of exergy and energy analyses was done by homemade code. The simulation model was verified by compression of experimental and simulation in-cylinder pressure data. The results showed there was good agreement between simulation data and experimental ones. Results indicated that the highest level of in-cylinder pressure at injection pressure of 215 bars is more than that of 200 bars. Moreover, by increasing the percentage of biodiesel, the heat transfer exergy, irreversibility, burnt fuel, and exergy indicator decreased, but the ratio of these exergy parameters (except for heat transfer exergy) to fuel exergy increased. These ratios increased from 46 to 50.54% for work transfer exergy, 16.57 to 17.97% for irreversibility, and decreased from 16 to 15.49% for heat transfer exergy. In addition, these ratios at 215 bars are higher than at 200 bars for all fuels. However, with increasing the injection pressure and biodiesel concentration in fuel blends, the exergy and energy efficiencies increased.


2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 811-823 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pablo Olmeda ◽  
Jaime Martín ◽  
Ricardo Novella ◽  
Diego Blanco-Cavero

This work studies the optimum heat release law of a direct injection diesel engine under constrained conditions. For this purpose, a zero-dimensional predictive model of a diesel engine is coupled to an optimization tool used to shape the heat release law in order to optimize some outputs (maximize gross indicated efficiency and minimize NO x emissions) while keeping several restrictions (mechanical limits such as maximum peak pressure and maximum pressure rise rate). In a first step, this methodology is applied under different heat transfer scenarios without restrictions to evaluate the possible gain obtained through the thermal isolation of the combustion chamber. Results derived from this study show that heat transfer has a negative effect on gross indicated efficiency ranging from −4% of the fuel energy ( ṁfHv), at high engine speed and load, up to −8% ṁfHv, at low engine speed and load. In a second step, different mechanical limits are applied resulting in a gross indicated efficiency worsening from −1.4% ṁfHv up to −2.8% ṁfHv compared to the previous step when nominal constraints are applied. In these conditions, a temperature swing coating that covers the piston top and cylinder head is considered obtaining a maximum gross indicated efficiency improvement of +0.5% ṁfHv at low load and engine speed. Finally, NO x emissions are also included in the optimization obtaining the expected tradeoff between gross indicated efficiency and NO x. Under this optimization, cutting down the experimental emissions by 50% supposes a gross indicated efficiency penalty up to −8% ṁfHv when compared to the optimum combustion under nominal limits, while maintaining the experimental gross indicated efficiency allows to reduce the experimental emissions 30% at high load and 65% at low load and engine speed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document