0
Research Papers: Internal Combustion Engines

Low NOx and Low Smoke Operation of a Diesel Engine Using Gasolinelike Fuels

[+] Author and Article Information
Gautam Kalghatgi

 Shell Global Solutions UK, P.O. Box 1, Chester CH1 3SH, UKgautam.kalghatgi@shell.com

Leif Hildingsson

Department of Energy Sciences, Division of Combustion Engines, Lund University, P.O. Box 118, 221 00 Lund, Sweden; Shell Global Solutions UK, P.O. Box 1, Chester CH1 3SH, UKleif.hildingsson@energy.lth.se

Bengt Johansson

Department of Energy Sciences, Division of Combustion Engines, Lund University, P.O. Box 118, 221 00 Lund, Swedenbengt.johansson@energy.lth.se

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 132(9), 092803 (Jun 18, 2010) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4000602 History: Received May 21, 2009; Revised July 09, 2009; Published June 18, 2010; Online June 18, 2010

Much of the technology in advanced diesel engines, such as high injection pressures, is aimed at overcoming the short ignition delay of conventional diesel fuels to promote premixed combustion in order to reduce NOx and smoke. Previous work in a 2 l single-cylinder diesel engine with a compression ratio of 14 has demonstrated that gasoline fuel, because of its high ignition delay, is very beneficial for premixed compression-ignition compared with a conventional diesel fuel. We have now done similar studies in a smaller—0.537 l—single-cylinder diesel engine with a compression ratio of 15.8. The engine was run on three fuels of very different auto-ignition quality—a typical European diesel fuel with a cetane number (CN) of 56, a typical European gasoline of 95 RON and 85 MON with an estimated CN of 16 and another gasoline of 84 RON and 78 MON (estimated CN of 21). The previous results with gasoline were obtained only at 1200 rpm—here we compare the fuels also at 2000 rpm and 3000 rpm. At 1200 rpm, at low loads (4bars indicated mean effective pressure (IMEP)) when smoke is negligible, NOx levels below 0.4 g/kWh can be easily attained with gasoline without using exhaust gas recirculation (EGR), while this is not possible with the 56 CN European diesel. At these loads, the maximum pressure-rise rate is also significantly lower for gasoline. At 2000 rpm, with 2 bars absolute intake pressure, NOx can be reduced below 0.4g/kWh with negligible smoke (FSN<0.1) with gasoline between 10 bars and 12 bars IMEP using sufficient EGR, while this is not possible with the diesel fuel. At 3000 rpm, with the intake pressure at 2.4 bars absolute, NOx of 0.4g/kWh with negligible smoke was attainable with gasoline at 13 bars IMEP. Hydrocarbon and CO emissions are higher for gasoline and will require after-treatment. High peak heat release rates can be alleviated using multiple injections. Large amounts of gasoline, unlike diesel, can be injected very early in the cycle without causing heat release during the compression stroke and this enables the heat release profile to be shaped.

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

The ASTM boiling curves of the fuels used

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Effect of varying start of injection timing on combustion phasing. 1200 rpm. No EGR, 650 bars inj.pr

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

CA50 versus combustion delay (CA50-SOI) for cases in Fig. 2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

ISNOx versus combustion delay for cases in Fig. 2. Also comparing with data from Ref. 10.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

ISNOx versus IMEP for cases considered in Fig. 4

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Maximum pressure-rise rate versus mean IMEP for cases in Fig. 2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Pressure and heat release rates at 3.95 bar IMEP for diesel and 84 RON gasoline

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Indicated specific fuel consumption versus mean IMEP

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Indicated specific HC versus mean IMEP for cases in Fig. 2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Indicated specific CO versus mean IMEP for cases in Fig. 2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

ISNOx versus IMEP for 2000 rpm (inj. pressure 900 bars) and 3000 rpm (inj. pressure 1100 bars). Intake pressure 2 bars abs. except for the case indicated.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Smoke versus IMEP for cases in Fig. 1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Combustion delay versus IMEP for cases considered in Fig. 1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Ignition dwell versus IMEP for cases considered in Fig. 1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Smoke versus ignition dwell

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Smoke versus estimated intake O2 concentration for conditions considered in Fig. 1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

ISFC versus IMEP for cases considered in Fig. 1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 18

ISHC versus IMEP for cases considered in Fig. 1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 19

ISCO versus IMEP for cases considered in Fig. 1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 20

Exhaust gas temperature versus IMEP for all the cases considered in this paper

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 21

Max PRR versus IMEP for cases considered in Fig. 1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 22

Effect of increasing CA50, to reduce max PRR, on other engine parameters. Data normalized by appropriate values for base case. Base case −95 RON gasoline, 2000 rpm, ∼40% EGR, 900 bars injection pressure, and other data, as in Case A in Table 3.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 23

Pressure and heat release rate for Case B (single injection) and Case C (triple injection) in the table. 84 RON gasoline, 2000 rpm, ∼40% EGR, and 900 bars injection pressure.

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