Search Results

A systematic experimental investigation was undertaken to compare the fuel consumption and exhaust emissions of a production SI engine fueled by either gasoline or compressed natural gas (CNG). The investigation was carried out on a two-liter four-cylinder engine featuring a fast-burn pent-roof chamber, one centrally located spark plug, four valves per cylinder and variable intake-system geometry. The engine was originally designed at Fiat to operate with unleaded gasoline and was then converted at Politecnico di Torino to run on CNG. A Magneti Marelli IAW electronic module for injection-duration and spark-advance setting was used to obtain a carefully controlled multipoint sequential injection for both fuels.

An experimental investigation of fuel consumption, exhaust emissions and heat release was performed on a prototype 1.2 liter 4 cylinder turbocharged CNG engine, which has been specifically developed and optimized in order to fully exploit natural gas potential. More specifically, the combination of a high CR of 10.1:1 and a Garrett high-performance turbocharger featuring selectable levels of boost produced a favorable efficiency map, with peak values exceeding 35%. The experimental tests were carried out in order to assess the engine performance improvement attainable through turbocharging and to define the best control strategies for this latter. The investigation included ample variations of engine speed and load, RAFR as well as trade-offs between boost level and throttle position. At each test point, in-cylinder pressure, fuel consumption and ‘engine-out’ pollutant emissions, including methane unburned hydrocarbons concentration, were measured.

An experimental investigation was performed on a turbocharged spark-ignition 4-cylinder production engine fuelled with natural gas and with two blends of natural gas and hydrogen (15% and 25% in volume of H₂). The engine was purposely designed to give optimal performance when running on CNG. The first part of the experimental campaign was carried out at MBT timing under stoichiometric conditions: load sweeps at constant engine speed and speed sweeps at constant load were performed. Afterwards, spark advance sweeps and relative air/fuel ratio sweeps were acquired at constant engine speed and load. The three fuels were compared in terms of performance (fuel conversion efficiency, brake specific fuel consumption, brake specific energy consumption and indicated mean effective pressure) and brake specific emissions (THC, NOx, CO).

The burned-gas propagation process has been characterized in two bi-fuel engines by means of a combustion diagnostic tool resulting from the integration of an original multizone heat-release model with a CAD procedure for the burned-gas front geometry simulation. Burned-gas mean expansion speed ub, mean gas speed ug and burning velocity Sb were computed as functions of crank angle and burned-gas radius for a wide range of engine speeds (n = 2000-5500 rpm), loads (bmep = 200-790 kPa), relative air-fuel ratios (RAFR = 0.80-1.60) and spark advances (SA ranging from 8 deg retard to 8 deg advance from MBT), under both gasoline and CNG operations. Finally, the influence of intake runner and combustion chamber geometries on flame propagation process was investigated. Main results show that Sb is generally comparable for the engine running on both gasoline and CNG, at the same engine speed and load, under stoichiometric and MBT operations.