0
Research Papers: Internal Combustion Engines

An Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Spark Ignition Engine Operation on H2, CO, CH4, and Their Mixtures

[+] Author and Article Information
Hailin Li1

Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26506hailin.li@mail.wvu.edu

Ghazi A. Karim, A. Sohrabi

Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1N4, Canada

1

Corresponding author.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 132(3), 032804 (Nov 30, 2009) (8 pages) doi:10.1115/1.3155795 History: Received January 16, 2009; Revised April 06, 2009; Published November 30, 2009; Online November 30, 2009

The knock and combustion characteristics of CO, H2, CH4, and their mixtures were determined experimentally in a variable compression ratio spark ignition (SI) cooperative fuel research (CFR) engine. The significant effects of gaseous fuel mixtures containing H2 in enhancing the combustion and oxidation process of CH4 were examined. The unique combustion characteristics of CO in dry air and its distinct performance in mixtures with H-containing fuels were investigated. The addition of a simulated synthesis gas (2H2+CO) to CH4 was found to enhance the combustion process of the resulting mixture and lowers its knock resistance. The effectiveness of such an addition is slightly weaker than that of a comparable H2 addition but much stronger than that with CO addition only. A predictive model with detailed kinetic chemistry was used successfully to simulate SI engine operation fuelled with CH4, H2, CO, and their mixtures. The predicted engine performance and knock limits of CH4, H2, CO, and their mixtures agree well with experimental data with the exception around pure CO operation in dry air with the presence of small amounts of CH4 or H2. A remedial approach to improve the prediction of the knock limits of fuel mixtures containing mainly CO with a small amount of H-containing fuels such as H2 and CH4 was proposed and discussed.

Copyright © 2010 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Variation of spark timing employed with changes in compression ratio

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Variation of the knock limited equivalence ratios with changes in compression ratio while operating on gasoline (Octane No. 92), iso-octane, CO, CH4, and their mixtures (50%CH4+50%CO), Tin=38°C, spark timing as in Fig. 1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Variation of the knock limited equivalence ratio with changes in composition of the corresponding binary fuel mixtures of CO with CH4, H2, or H2O

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Variation of the combustion duration with changes in composition of the binary fuel mixture of CO with CH4 for stoichiometric and lean operations

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Variation of the combustion duration with changes in composition of the binary fuel mixture of CO with CH4 and CO with H2 at lean mixture operations

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Variation of the knock limited equivalence ratios with changes in composition of the fuel mixtures of CH4 with H2, CH4 with CO, and CH4 with H2-rich gas (2H2+CO)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Variation of the combustion durations with changes in composition of the fuel mixtures when adding H2, CO, and H2-rich gas (2H2+CO) to CH4

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Comparison of the predicted values of combustion duration with those derived experimentally for binary fuel mixture of H2 and CH4

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Comparison of the predicted knock limited equivalence ratios with those derived experimentally for binary mixtures of H2 and CH4

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Comparison of the predicted combustion duration with those determined experimentally for binary fuel mixtures of CO and CH4 at stoichiometric operation

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Comparison of the predicted indicated work production with those determined experimentally for binary mixtures of CO and CH4 for stoichiometric operation

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Comparison of the predicted indicated power output with those derived experimentally for fuel mixtures of CH4 with simulated synthesis gases (2H2+CO) under stoichiometric operation

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Comparison of the predicted knock limited equivalence ratio with those determined experimentally for fuel mixtures of CH4 and simulated synthesis gas (2H2+CO)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Comparison of the predicted knock limited equivalence ratio with those determined experimentally for binary fuel mixtures of H2 and CO

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Effect of adding a small amount of C3H8 to the intake fuels during modeling in improving the agreement of the predicted knock limited equivalence ratios with those determined experimentally for binary fuel mixtures of H2 and CO

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Effect of adding a small amount of C3H8 to the intake fuels during modeling in improving the agreements of the predicted knock limited equivalence ratios with those determined experimentally for binary fuel mixtures of CH4 and CO

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In