Post on 20-Apr-2018
2012‐05‐11
1
Which biofuel is more efficient in a vehicle engine?
Prof. Bengt JohanssonDiv. of Combustion Engines,
Dept. of Energy Sciences
Lund University
Department of Energy Sciences(80 persons)
Lund University40,000 students
Faculty of Engineering(Lund Institute of Technology)
5,000 students
Division of Thermal Power EngineeringProf.MohsenAssadi
Division of Heat transfer
Prof. Bengt Sundén
Division of Fluid dynamics
Prof.Lazlo Fuchs
Division of Combustion Engines
Prof. Bengt Johansson(32 persons)
Division of Energy economics and planningProf. L. Törnqvist
Department of Engineering Physics
Division of Combustion Physics
Prof. Marcus Aldén( 40 persons)
Department of Automatic ControlProf. Anders Rantzer(35 persons)
2012‐05‐11
2
Outline
• Defining the problem: What is an environmentally friendly vehicle?
• Fuels for future cars orfuture cars for future fuels?
• Advanced combustion engines
– Third type of engine: HCCI
– Mixed modes: SACI and PPC
Outline
• Defining the problem: What is an environmentally friendly vehicle?
• Fuels for future cars orfuture cars for future fuels?
• Advanced combustion engines
– Third type of engine: HCCI
– Mixed modes: SACI and PPC
2012‐05‐11
3
Clean combustion
5
What is it?
Why?
6
Clean Combustion
Local Emissions Global EmissionsCO2
NOx, PM, HC, CO
2012‐05‐11
4
Clean Combustion
Local Emissions Global Emissions
AftertreatmentLow temperature
combustionFuel
efficiency BiofuelCarbon
Capture and Storage, CCS
7
CO2NOx, PM, HC, CO
3. Store CO2
2. Reduce cycle time1. Release less
Is all wood biofuel?Giant Sequoia approx 3266 years old
Methusalah tree, Great Basin Bristlecone Pine, 4843 yearsold as of 2012
8
2012‐05‐11
5
Clean locally or globally?
Global emission(Greenhouse effect):
CO2 i.e. fuel consumption
Local emissions:
NOx
HC
CO
PM
9
Emission focus vs. time
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
10
2012‐05‐11
6
Environmentally friendly ≡ no CO2?
11
The CO2 neutral alternative…
12
2012‐05‐11
7
Some emission statisticsfrom New York by the turn of the century…
• 200 m3 liquid emissions per day
• 1000 ton solid emissions per day
• An army of tenths of thousands worked with transporting the emissions out from the city
The first IC engine driven car was thus welcomed as a significant enviromental improver
2012‐05‐11
8
100 years later ‐ Smog
A similar concept, Saab 1995
2012‐05‐11
9
Hondas version 1998; ZLEV
• Hydrocarbons absorbed during cold start
• Advanced control of catalyst
• Optimum combustion using variable valve timing
Honda ZLEV, Zero Emission Level Vehicle
2012‐05‐11
10
SI: Honda ZLEV
• 0.004 g/mile gives 40 g/year with 16000 km annually
• Compare with one litre of wind shield whiper fluid. This contains approx. 800 g of HC and thus we need to drive 20 years to emit the same amount with the ZLEV car.
• Gasoline cars can be clean enough!
Diesel?
2012‐05‐11
11
Diesel
Trade‐off between local and global emissions
22
Local emissions
Diesel engine
Gasoline engine
HCCI engine
00
Global emissions(CO2)
2012‐05‐11
12
Outline
• Defining the problem: What is an environmentally friendly vehicle?
• Fuels for future cars orfuture cars for future fuels?
• Advanced combustion engines
– Third type of engine: HCCI
– Mixed modes: SACI and PPC
Fuels for future cars
Adapted from at talk by Rolf Egnell
2006Combustion Engines Energy sciences
Lund Institute of Technology
2012‐05‐11
13
Production of fuels from different feedstock
Methane
Hydrogen
Alcohols
Electricity
LPG
DME
BioDiesel(RME)
Diesel oil
Gasoline
OilNatural
gasCoal
Biomass(waste)
SolarHydroWind
FischerTropsch
SynthesisGas
MTG
Production of fuels from different feedstock. No Oil!
Methane
Hydrogen
Alcohols
Electricity
LPG
DME
BioDiesel(RME)
Diesel oil
Gasoline
Naturalgas
CoalBiomass(waste)
SolarHydroWind
FischerTropsch
SynthesisGas
MTG
2012‐05‐11
14
Production of fuels from different feedstock. No Fossil
Biogas
Hydrogen
Alcohols
Electricity
LPG
DME
Bio-Diesel(RME)
Diesel oil
Gasoline
Biomass(waste)
FischerTropsch
SynthesisGas
MTG
First generation
Next Generation
SolarHydroWind
Cars for future fuels
28
2012‐05‐11
15
Payload vs. Vehicle size
29
Emty weight Payload (kg) Total (kg) Payload/total Total/payload
Scania truck 20 000 40 000 60 000 0,67 1,50
Boeing 747‐400 178 756 218 134 396 890 0,55 1,82
Bike 25 75 100 0,75 1,33
Motorcycle 150 75 225 0,33 3,00
Car 1 475 75 1 550 0,05 20,67
A‐B‐C of Fuel Consumption
A. Car size
B. Engine size
C. Engine efficiency in right operating conditions
30
2012‐05‐11
16
Porsche 911 performance with 100+ mpg?
31
• Two persons
• 100 liter of storage capacity
Porsche 911 data
32
M=1550 kgCr=0.012Av=1.96 m2Cd=0.33
Vd=3.8 literP=355 PS (hp)T=400 Nm
Performance 0-60: 4.6 sV,max=300 km/h ( 186.5 mph)Fuel consump.= 12.0 l/100 km (19.6 mpg)
2012‐05‐11
17
Power needed @300 km/h (186.5 mph)
33
hpkW
xxxxxxx
vvACmgCP vDaR
1.3268.239
6.3
300
6.3
30096.133.02.15.081.91550012.0
5.02
2
The ”Cigar”
2012‐05‐11
18
Two person capacity is often enough
35
UK National Office of Statistics:“The average car occupancy is 1.6 people per car and for commuting it's 1.2 “
A carpool in California is a car with ONE person if the car is fuelefficient…
The ”Cigar”
http://www.peraves.ch/
Existing large model use large BMW 1200 cc MC engine. With turbo a top speed of 315 km/h and fuel consumption of 3.5 l/100 km (67 mpg)
2012‐05‐11
19
Power needed @300 km/h (186.5 mph)
37
hpkW
xxxxxxx
vvACmgCP vDaR
7.492.37
6.3
300
6.3
3000.110.02.15.081.9250012.0
5.02
2
Cigar design specificationsCd=0.1Av=0.5-1 m2
m= 250 kgCr=0.012 (two wheels)
Power needed at 50 and 100 km/h (31‐ 62 mph)
Porsche 911 vs. cigar
38
Speed (km/h) 911 Cigar Unit Ratio
50 3.57 0.57 kW 6.28
100 13.4 2.1 kW 6.36
300 239.8 37.2 kW 6.45
50 4.86 0.77 hp 6.28
100 18.2 2.9 hp 6.36
300 326.1 49.7 hp 6.45
Acceleration proportional to power/mass ratio:Cigar: 250/49.7=5.03 kg/hp911: 1550/355=4.37 kg/hp
2012‐05‐11
20
A. Car size
• With more correct car size the engine size can be reduced a factor of 6 i.e. single cylinder version of 911 engine with 633 cc displacement is enough
• Porsche 911 has a fuel consumption of 12 l/100 km (19.6 mpg)
• Cigar would have 12/6=2 l/100 km (117.6 mpg) without any need of new engine technology. (Scaling both engine and car size)
39
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220Bilhast. [km/h]
B. Engine size
• A Porsche 911 does not operate at optimum load points in normal driving.
• At 50 km/h the estimated load is only 2 bar BMEP or less
• Bsfc=400 g/kWh
(ηb=21 %)
40
2012‐05‐11
21
Engine downsizing
Three options
1. Turbo or supercharge a small engine
2. Cylinder deactivation of large engine
3. Variable displacement i.e. variable engine size
41
B.1. Mercedes CDI 250, 2.1 liter
42
Vd=2143 ccTorque= 500 Nm (369 lb-ft)
2012‐05‐11
22
43
Two stage turbo
Engine downsizing‐MB 250 CDI
44
Displacement of 2.1 liter giving 224 hp and 500 Nm of torque : 30 bar BMEP is now full load NOT 10 or 20 bar
Fuel consumption;C-class 5.1 l/100 km (46.1 mpg), E-class 5.3 l/100 km (44.4 mpg),S-class 5.9 l/100 km (39.9 mpg)
CO2:C-class 139 g/kmE-class 143 g/kmS-class 155 g/km
2012‐05‐11
23
B2: Dual engine concept
• Use one small and one large engine
• As an example:
– One 2 cylinder 1 liter engine
– One 4 cylinder 2 liter engine
• This gives us 1, 2 or 3 liter to choose from
45
Layout 4 +2 cyl
FAS
Transm.
46
Fiat 2-cylinder production engine
2012‐05‐11
24
Operation
• 2‐cyl at low loads
• 4‐cyl operation at higher load operation (Autobahn)
• 6‐cyl operation at highest loads
• 6‐cyl + FAS at transients (with FAS start of 4‐cyl)
• FAS for regenerative braking
• FAS for lowest speed operation ( < 5 km/h)
• Manual selection should be possible
47
B3: Variable displacement engine
• If we can change displacement, Vd, engine load, P, can be controlled without reducing BMEP!
48
td n
NVbmepP
2012‐05‐11
25
Atkinson Cycle
49
Displacement from 0.15 to 0.85 l per cylinder gives 0.6 to 3.4 l four cylinder engine at full load (@max BMEP)
Atkinson engine with variable displacement
50
2012‐05‐11
26
Atkinson engine efficiency
51
A‐B‐C of Fuel Consumption
A. Car size
B. Engine size
C. Engine efficiency in right operating conditions(Maximum engine efficiency)
52
2012‐05‐11
27
Summary /ABC of fuel consumption
A. Correct car size gives factor of 6 in fuel consumption
B. Correct load point gives factor 2 in fuel consumption (21%‐42% or 400‐200 g/kWh)
C. Partially Premixed Combustion have the potential to extend brake efficiency to 50% with US10/Euro emissions. With further optimization 55% could be reached
D. With waste heat recovery 60% should be possible giving a factor of 3 from today.
A total reduction potential of factor 18!
53
Outline
• Defining the problem: What is an environmentally friendly vehicle?
• Fuels for future cars orfuture cars for future fuels?
• Advanced combustion engines
– Third type of engine: HCCI
– Mixed modes: SACI and PPC
2012‐05‐11
28
55
Prof. Bengt Johansson
Division of Combustion EnginesDepartment of Energy Sciences
Lund University
SI HCCI PPC
Path to High Efficiency Gasoline Engine
Outline
• HCCI and fuel efficiency
– 50% thermal efficiency
• Partially premixed combustion, PPC
– Background
– Why gasoline is the best diesel engine fuel
– 56% thermal efficiency in car size engine
– 57% thermal efficiency in truck size engine
– Why 55% thermal efficiency is better than 57%
– How to reach 26 bar IMEP with US10 NOx, PM, HC and CO engine out
56
2012‐05‐11
29
Outline
• HCCI and fuel efficiency
– 50% thermal efficiency
• Partially premixed combustion, PPC
– Background
– Why gasoline is the best diesel engine fuel
– 56% thermal efficiency in car size engine
– 57% thermal efficiency in truck size engine
– Why 55% thermal efficiency is better than 57%
– How to reach 26 bar IMEP with US10 NOx, PM, HC and CO engine out
57
BackgroundCombustion concepts
Spark Ignition (SI) engine (Gasoline, Otto)
Compression Ignition (CI) engine (Diesel)
+ Clean with 3-way Catalyst
- Poor low & part load efficiency
+ High efficiency- Emissions of NOx and
soot
2012‐05‐11
30
BackgroundCombustion concepts
Spark Ignition (SI) engine (Gasoline, Otto)
Compression Ignition (CI) engine (Diesel)
Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition
(HCCI)
Partially premixed combustion (PPC)
Diesel HCCI
Spark Assisted Compression Ignition
(SACI)Gasoline HCCI
+ High efficiency
+ Ultra low NOx
-Combustion control
-Power density
+ Injection controlled- Less emissions
advantage
+ Clean with 3-way Catalyst
- Poor low & part load efficiency
+ High efficiency- Emissions of NOx and
soot
The Heat Release in HCCI
HCCI process: 1. Mix fuel and air2. Compress the homogeneous charge3. Get auto ignition4. Expand the burned gas
2012‐05‐11
31
Normal flame propagation vs. HCCI
HCCI requirements
1. Temperture high enough for autoignition
2. Mixture diluted to prevent too fast combustion
2012‐05‐11
32
−10 −5 0 5 10 150
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Crank angle [CAD]
Q [J
]
SOC 1% HR
2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5850
900
950
1000
1050
1100
1150
1200
λ
Igni
tion
Tem
pera
ture
[K]
Natural gasIso−octane Ethanol Methanol
Ignition Temperature
NOx emission
2012‐05‐11
33
The Three Temperatures of HCCI1. Autoignition temperature, Tign= 1000 K
2. Minimum temperature for CO to CO2 = Tmin= 1500 K
3. Maximum temperture to prevent NOx Tmax= 2000 K
Maximum ∆T is 1000K and minimum ∆T is 500K
thus ratio of highest load to minimum load is 2:1
NOT enough with 2:1 for traditional diesel engine load control with constant air flow.
−10 −5 0 5 10 150
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Crank angle [CAD]
Q [J
]
SOC 1% HR
2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5850
900
950
1000
1050
1100
1150
1200
λ
Igni
tion
Tem
pera
ture
[K]
Natural gasIso−octane Ethanol Methanol
Ignition Temperature
2012‐05‐11
34
HCCI Emissions
HCCI
0,01
0,500,00
NOx
PM *
0,05
USA 2007
AutoTechnologyOct. 2002, p 54
Efficiencies?
68
2012‐05‐11
35
Energy flow in an IC engineFuelMEP
QhrMEP
IMEPgross
lMEPnet
BMEP
QemisMEP
QlossMEP
QhtMEP
QexhMEP
PMEP
FMEP
Combustion efficiency
Thermodynamic efficiency
Gas exchange efficiency
Mechanical efficiency
Net Indicated efficiency
Brake efficiency
Gross Indicated efficiency
FuelMEP
QhrMEP
IMEPgross
lMEPnet
BMEP
QemisMEP
QlossMEP
QhtMEP
QexhMEP
PMEP
FMEP
Combustion efficiency
Thermodynamic efficiency
Gas exchange efficiency
Mechanical efficiency
Net Indicated efficiency
Brake efficiency
Gross Indicated efficiency
MechanicaleGasExchangmicThermodynaCombustionBrake
***
70
Thermodynamic efficiencySaab SVC variable compression ratio, VCR, HCCI, Rc=10:1-30:1; General Motors L850 “World engine”, HCCI, Rc=18:1, SI, Rc=18:1, SI, Rc=9.5:1 (std) Scania D12 Heavy duty diesel engine, HCCI, Rc=18:1;
Fuel: US regular Gasoline
SAE2006-01-0205
2012‐05‐11
36
All four efficiencies
71
Problem with HCCI: Too fast combustion
72
Optimum
2012‐05‐11
37
Outline
• HCCI and fuel efficiency
– 50% thermal efficiency
• Partially premixed combustion, PPC
– Background
– Why gasoline is the best diesel engine fuel
– 56% thermal efficiency in car size engine
– 57% thermal efficiency in truck size engine
– Why 55% thermal efficiency is better than 57%
– How to reach 26 bar IMEP with US10 NOx, PM, HC and CO engine out
73
BackgroundCombustion concepts
Spark Ignition (SI) engine (Gasoline,
Otto)
Compression Ignition (CI) engine (Diesel)
Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition
(HCCI)
Partially premixed combustion (PPC)
Diesel HCCI
Spark Assisted Compression Ignition
(SACI)Gasoline HCCI
+ High efficiency
+ Ultra low NOx
-Combustion control
-Power density
+ Clean with 3-way Catalyst
- Poor low & part load efficiency
+ High efficiency- Emissions of NOx and
soot
+ Injection controlled- Less emissions
advantage
2012‐05‐11
38
Partially Premixed Combustion, PPC
75
-180 -160 -140 -120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
HC
[pp
m]
SOI [ATDC]-180 -160 -140 -120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
NO
x [p
pm]
Def: region between truly homogeneous combustion, HCCI, and diffusion controlled combustion, diesel
HCCI
PPC
CIPCCI
PPC: Effect of EGR with diesel fuel
76
Load 8 bar IMEP
Abs. Inlet Pressure 2.5 bar
Engine Speed 1090 rpm
Swirl Ratio 1.7
Compression Ratio 12.4:1 (Low)
DEER2005
Scania D12 single cylinder
2012‐05‐11
39
1
43
2
Outline
• HCCI and fuel efficiency
– 50% thermal efficiency
• Partially premixed combustion, PPC
– Background
– Why gasoline is the best diesel engine fuel
– 56% thermal efficiency in car size engine
– 57% thermal efficiency in truck size engine
– Why 55% thermal efficiency is better than 57%
– How to reach 26 bar IMEP with US10 NOx, PM, HC and CO engine out
78
2012‐05‐11
40
79
PPC with low cetane diesel
Lic. Thesis by Henrik Nordgren 2005 and presented at DEER2005
Outline
• HCCI and fuel efficiency
– 50% thermal efficiency
• Partially premixed combustion, PPC
– Background
– Why gasoline is the best diesel engine fuel
– 56% thermal efficiency in car size engine
– 57% thermal efficiency in truck size engine
– Why 55% thermal efficiency is better than 57%
– How to reach 26 bar IMEP with US10 NOx, PM, HC and CO engine out
80
2012‐05‐11
41
81
VOLVO D5 with Gasoline
-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 400
50
100
150
CAD [TDC]
Cyl Pressure [bar]Inj Signal [a.u.]RoHR [J/CAD]
N 2000 [rpm]
IMEPg 13.38 [bar]
Pin 2.57 [bar]
Tin 354 [K]
EGR 39 [%]
lambda 1.75 [-]
Injection SOI [TDC] Fuel MEP [bar] Percentage [%]
1 -64.00 10.88 41.28
2 -29.20 7.74 29.36
3 0.80 7.74 29.36
LoadNoise
Load & CA50
82
Efficiencies & Emissions
Indicated Gross Thermal Combustion/240
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
Effi
cie
ncy
[%]
91 %
NOx*100 [g/kWh] CO [g/kWh] HC [g/kWh] Soot [FSN]0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Em
issi
on
s
BelowDetectableLevel
13 ppm
0.46 %
4598 ppm
! D60 project goal
dPmax 7.20 [bar/CAD]
CA5 3.40 [TDC]
ID -1.00 [CAD]
CA50 11.35 [TDC]
CA90-10 13.00 [CAD]
2012‐05‐11
42
Burn rate and ηT
83
Optimum Thermodynamic efficiency
Premixedness
High heat losses
Low effective expansion ratio
-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 400
50
100
150
CAD [TDC]
Cyl Pressure [bar]Inj Signal [a.u.]RoHR [J/CAD]
Outline
• HCCI and fuel efficiency
– 50% thermal efficiency
• Partially premixed combustion, PPC
– Background
– Why gasoline is the best diesel engine fuel
– 56% thermal efficiency in car size engine
– 57% thermal efficiency in truck size engine
– Why 55% thermal efficiency is better than 57%
– How to reach 26 bar IMEP with US10 NOx, PM, HC and CO engine out
84
2012‐05‐11
43
858585
Experimental setup, Scania D12
Bosch Common Rail
Prailmax 1600 [bar]
Orifices 8 [-]
Orifice Diameter 0.18 [mm]
Umbrella Angle 120 [deg]
Engine / Dyno Spec
BMEPmax 15 [bar]
Vd 1951 [cm3]
Swirl ratio 2.9 [-]
Fuel: Gasoline or Ethanol
8686
rc: 17.1:1rc: 14.3:1
Low Compression Ratio PPC High Compression Ratio PPC
Two Test Series: High & Low Compression Ratio
2012‐05‐11
44
87878787
Fuel amount in the pilot is a function of:1.rc2.RON/MON3.EGR
-60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 100
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
CAD [TDC]
[a.u
.]
Load & CA50Const.
It must not react during compression
Injection Strategy
It consists of two injections. The first one is placed @ ‐60 TDC to create a homogeneous mixture while the second around TDC. The stratification created by the second injection triggers the combustion. The first injection must not react during the compression stroke, this is achieved by using EGR.
SAE 2009-01-0944
88
Running Conditions
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 131.5
1.75
2
2.25
2.5
Gross IMEP [bar]
[ba
r]
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 130
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
[C]Inlet Pressure
Exhaust Pressure
Inlet TemperatureExhaust Temperature
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 131.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2
Gross IMEP [bar]
[-
]
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1330
35
40
45
50
55
60
EG
R [%
]
2012‐05‐11
45
8989
Efficiencies 17.1:1
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1350
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
Gross IMEP [bar]
[%] Combustion Efficiency
Thermal EfficiencyGas Exchange EfficiencyMechanical Efficiency
902 4 6 8 10 12 14
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Gross IMEP [bar]
CO
[g/k
Wh
]
GrossNetBrakeEU VIUS 10
2 4 6 8 10 12 140
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Sm
oke
[FS
N]
Gross IMEP [bar]
902 4 6 8 10 12 14
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Gross IMEP [bar]
HC
[g/k
Wh
]
GrossNetBrakeEU VIUS 10
Emissions
Obsolete injection system
Not well tuned EGR-combination
2 4 6 8 10 12 140
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
Gross IMEP [bar]
NO
x [g
/kW
h]
GrossNetBrakeEU VIUS 10
2012‐05‐11
46
Outline
• HCCI and fuel efficiency
– 50% thermal efficiency
• Partially premixed combustion, PPC
– Background
– Why gasoline is the best diesel engine fuel
– 56% thermal efficiency in car size engine
– 57% thermal efficiency in truck size engine
– Why 55% thermal efficiency is better than 57%
– How to reach 26 bar IMEP with US10 NOx, PM, HC and CO engine out
91
9292
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 1850
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
Gross IMEP [bar]
[%] Combustion Efficiency
Thermal EfficiencyGas Exchange EfficiencyMechanical Efficiency
Efficiencies 14.3:1
2012‐05‐11
47
9393
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 180
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
Sm
oke
[FS
N]
Gross IMEP [bar]2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Gross IMEP [bar]
NO
x [g
/kW
h]
GrossNetBrakeEU VIUS 10
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 180
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Gross IMEP [bar]
CO
[g/k
Wh
]
GrossNetBrakeEU VIUS 10
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 180
0.3
0.6
0.9
1.2
1.5
Gross IMEP [bar]
HC
[g/k
Wh
]
GrossNetBrakeEU VIUS 10
Emissions
Better tuned EGR-combination
Outline
• HCCI and fuel efficiency
– 50% thermal efficiency
• Partially premixed combustion, PPC
– Background
– Why gasoline is the best diesel engine fuel
– 56% thermal efficiency in car size engine
– 57% thermal efficiency in truck size engine
– Why 55% thermal efficiency is better than 57%
– How to reach 26 bar IMEP with US10 NOx, PM, HC and CO engine out
94
2012‐05‐11
48
9595
Experimental Apparatus, Scania D13
XPI Common Rail
Orifices 8 [-]
Orifice Diameter 0.19 [mm]
Umbrella Angle 148 [deg]
Engine / Dyno Spec
BMEPmax 25 [bar]
Vd 2124 [cm3]
Swirl ratio 2.095 [-]
Standard piston bowl, rc: 17.3:1
9696
5 10 15 20 25 3020
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
Gross IMEP [bar]
[%]
brake
net
gross
Efficiency
50% brake efficiency seems viable!!!
2012‐05‐11
49
9797
5 10 15 20 25 300
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
Gross IMEP [bar]
So
ot [
FS
N]
Emissions
0 5 10 15 20 25 300
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
Gross IMEP [bar]
Bra
ke H
C [g
/kW
h]
Brake HCUS 10EU VI
0 5 10 15 20 25 300
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Gross IMEP [bar]
Bra
ke N
Ox
[g/k
Wh
]
Brake NOxUS10EU VI
0 5 10 15 20 25 300
5
10
15
20
25
Gross IMEP [bar]
Bra
ke C
O [g
/kW
h]
Brake COUS 10EU VI
Fuel Effects on High ON Fuels PPC
Prof. Bengt JohanssonDivision of Combustion EnginesDepartment of Energy Sciences
Lund University98
2012‐05‐11
50
9999
Fuel specification – Scania D12 tests
RON MON C H/C O/C LHV [MJ/kg] A/F stoich
Ethanol 107 89 2 3 0.5 26.9 9
FR47330CVX 87.1 80.5 7.2 1.92 0 43.5 14.6
FR47331CVX 92.9 84.7 6.9 1.99 0.03 41.6 14.02
FR47333CVX 80.0 75.0 7.16 1.97 0 43.7 14.65
FR47334CVX 69.4 66.1 7.11 1.98 0 43.8 14.68
FR47335CVX 99 96.9 7.04 2.28 0 44.3 15.1
FR47336CVX 70.3 65.9 7.1 2.08 0 43.8 14.83
FR47338CVX 88.6 79.5 7.21 1.88 0 43.5 14.53
99
100100
Inlet Conditions
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20300
320
340
360
380
400
420
440
Gross IMEP [bar]
Inle
t Tem
pe
ratu
re [K
]
EthanolFR47330CVXFR47331CVXFR47333CVXFR47334CVXFR47335CVXFR47336CVXFR47338CVX
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Gross IMEP [bar]
ab
s In
let P
ress
ure
[bar
]
EthanolFR47330CVXFR47331CVXFR47333CVXFR47334CVXFR47335CVXFR47336CVXFR47338CVX
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200
10
20
30
40
50
60
Gross IMEP [bar]
EG
R [%
] EthanolFR47330CVXFR47331CVXFR47333CVXFR47334CVXFR47335CVXFR47336CVXFR47338CVX
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 201
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Gross IMEP [bar]
[-
]
EthanolFR47330CVXFR47331CVXFR47333CVXFR47334CVXFR47335CVXFR47336CVXFR47338CVX
100
2012‐05‐11
51
101
Injection strategy
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Gross IMEP [bar]
Fu
el M
EP
ma
in [b
ar]
EthanolFR47330CVXFR47331CVXFR47333CVXFR47334CVXFR47335CVXFR47336CVXFR47338CVX
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Gross IMEP [bar]
Fu
el M
EP
pilo
t [b
ar]
EthanolFR47330CVXFR47331CVXFR47333CVXFR47334CVXFR47335CVXFR47336CVXFR47338CVX
-60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 100
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
CAD [TDC]
[a.u
.]
101
102
Efficiencies
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 2095
95.5
96
96.5
97
97.5
98
98.5
99
99.5
100
Gross IMEP [bar]
Co
mb
ustio
n E
ffici
enc
y [%
]
EthanolFR47330CVXFR47331CVXFR47333CVXFR47334CVXFR47335CVXFR47336CVXFR47338CVX
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 2040
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
Gross IMEP [bar]
Gro
ss In
dic
ate
d E
ffici
en
cy [%
]
EthanolFR47330CVXFR47331CVXFR47333CVXFR47334CVXFR47335CVXFR47336CVXFR47338CVX
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 2040
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
Gross IMEP [bar]
The
rmal
Effi
cien
cy [%
]
EthanolFR47330CVXFR47331CVXFR47333CVXFR47334CVXFR47335CVXFR47336CVXFR47338CVX
102
2012‐05‐11
52
103
Emissions – different fuels
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
Gross IMEP [bar]
So
ot [
FS
N]
EthanolFR47330CVXFR47331CVXFR47333CVXFR47334CVXFR47335CVXFR47336CVXFR47338CVX
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
Gross IMEP [bar]
NO
x [g
/kW
h]
EthanolFR47330CVXFR47331CVXFR47333CVXFR47334CVXFR47335CVXFR47336CVXFR47338CVX
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200
2
4
6
8
10
12
Gross IMEP [bar]
CO
[g/k
Wh
]
EthanolFR47330CVXFR47331CVXFR47333CVXFR47334CVXFR47335CVXFR47336CVXFR47338CVX
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Gross IMEP [bar]
HC
[g/k
Wh
]
EthanolFR47330CVXFR47331CVXFR47333CVXFR47334CVXFR47335CVXFR47336CVXFR47338CVX
104104104
RON MON C H/C O/C LHV [MJ/kg] A/F stoich
Group 1 FR47335CVX 99.0 96.9 7.04 2.28 0.00 44.30 15.10
FR47332CVX 97.7 87.5 6.61 2.06 0.07 39.70 13.44
FR47337CVX 96.5 86.1 7.53 1.53 0.00 42.10 14.03
Group 2 FR47338CVX 88.6 79.5 7.21 1.88 0.00 43.50 14.53
FR47330CVX 87.1 80.5 7.20 1.92 0.00 43.50 14.60
FR47331CVX 92.9 84.7 6.90 1.99 0.03 41.60 14.02
Group 3 FR47336CVX 70.3 65.9 7.10 2.08 0.00 43.80 14.83
FR47334CVX 69.4 66.1 7.11 1.98 0.00 43.80 14.68
FR47333CVX 80.0 75.0 7.16 1.97 0.00 43.70 14.65
Group 4 PRF20 20 20 7.2 2.28 0 44.51 15.07
MK1 n.a. 20 16 1.87 0 43.15 14.9
Fuel Matrix ‐ Scania D13
2012‐05‐11
53
105105105
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1000
5
10
15
20
25
RON [-]
IME
P g
ross
[ba
r]
Stable operational load vs. fuel type
Tested Load Area
106106106
Soot Emissions
0 5 10 15 20 25 300
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Gross IMEP [bar]
Soo
t [F
SN
]
G. ON 99/97G. ON 98/88G. ON 97/86G. ON 93/85G. ON 89/80G. ON 87/81G. ON 80/75G. ON 70/66G. ON 69/66D. CN 52PRF20
Diesel vs. Gasoline
2012‐05‐11
54
107
D13 Running on Diesel & Gasoline
5 10 15 20 25 3034
36
38
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
Gross IMEP [bar]
Bra
ke E
ffici
en
cy [%
]
D13 GasolineD13 Diesel
D13 Diesel was calibrated by Scania and the calibration was done to meet EU V legislation.
Average improvement of 16.6% points @ high load!!!
108
Engine combustion ‐ direction
Spark Ignition (SI) engine (Gasoline,
Otto)
Compression Ignition (CI) engine
(Diesel)
Homogeneous Charge
Compression Ignition (HCCI)
Diesel PPC
+ High Efficiency
+ Ultralow NOx & soot
- Combustion control
- Power density
+ Clean with 3-way Catalyst
- Poor low & part load efficiency
+ High efficiency- Emissions of NOx
and soot
+ Injection controlled- Efficiency at high load
Gasoline PPC
+ High Efficiency+ Low NOx & soot
1900‐1995
1995‐2005
2005‐2010
2010‐
2012‐05‐11
55
The End
Thank you
109