Search Results

The focus of the present study was to characterize Reactivity Controlled Compression Ignition (RCCI) using a single-fuel approach of gasoline and gasoline mixed with a commercially available cetane improver on a multi-cylinder engine. RCCI was achieved by port-injecting a certification grade 96 research octane gasoline and direct-injecting the same gasoline mixed with various levels of a cetane improver, 2-ethylhexyl nitrate (EHN). The EHN volume percentages investigated in the direct-injected fuel were 10, 5, and 2.5%. The combustion phasing controllability and emissions of the different fueling combinations were characterized at 2300 rpm and 4.2 bar brake mean effective pressure over a variety of parametric investigations including direct injection timing, premixed gasoline percentage, and intake temperature. Comparisons were made to gasoline/diesel RCCI operation on the same engine platform at nominally the same operating condition.

A novel 2-zone combustion system was examined at medium load operation consistent with loads in the light duty vehicle drive cycle (7.6 bar BMEP and 2600 rev/min). Pressure rise rate and noise can limit the part of the engine map where pre-mixed combustion strategies such as HCCI or RCCI can be used. The present 2-zone pistons have an axial projection that divides the near TDC volume into two regions (inner and outer) joined by a narrow communication channel defined by the squish height. Dividing the near TDC volume provides a means to prepare two fuel-air mixtures with different ignition characteristics. Depending on the fuel injection timing, the reactivity of the inner or outer volume can be raised to provide an ignition source for the fuel-air mixture in the other, less reactive volume. Multi-dimensional CFD modeling was used to design the 2-zone piston geometry examined in this study.

Reactivity Controlled Compression Ignition (RCCI) is an engine combustion strategy that utilizes in-cylinder fuel blending to produce low NOx and PM emissions while maintaining high thermal efficiency. Previous RCCI research has been investigated in single-cylinder heavy-duty engines [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]. The current study investigates RCCI operation in a light-duty multi-cylinder engine over a wide number of operating points representing vehicle operation over the US EPA FTP test. Similarly, previous RCCI engine experiments have used petroleum based fuels such as ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel (ULSD) and gasoline, with some work done using high percentages of biofuels, namely E85 [7]. The current study was conducted to examine RCCI performance with moderate biofuel blends, such as E20 and B20, as compared to conventional gasoline and ULSD.

In-cylinder blending of gasoline and diesel to achieve Reactivity Controlled Compression Ignition (RCCI) has been shown to reduce NOX and particulate matter (PM) emissions while maintaining or improving brake thermal efficiency as compared to conventional diesel combustion (CDC). The RCCI concept has an advantage over many advanced combustion strategies in that the fuel reactivity can be tailored to the engine speed and load allowing stable low-temperature combustion to be extended over more of the light-duty drive cycle load range. Varying the premixed gasoline fraction changes the fuel reactivity stratification in the cylinder providing further control of combustion phasing and pressure rise rate than the use of EGR alone. This added control over the combustion process has been shown to allow rapid engine operating point exploration without direct modeling guidance.

In-cylinder fuel blending of gasoline with diesel fuel is investigated on a multi-cylinder light-duty diesel engine as a strategy to control in-cylinder fuel reactivity for improved efficiency and lowest possible emissions. This approach was developed and demonstrated at the University of Wisconsin through modeling and single-cylinder engine experiments. The objective of this study is to better understand the potential and challenges of this method on a multi-cylinder engine. More specifically, the effect of cylinder-to-cylinder imbalances and in-cylinder charge motion as well as the potential limitations imposed by real-world turbo-machinery were investigated on a 1.9-liter four-cylinder engine. This investigation focused on one engine condition, 2300 rpm, 5.5 bar net mean effective pressure (NMEP). Gasoline was introduced with a port-fuel-injection system.

In the present study a reduced chemical reaction mechanism for biodiesel surrogate fuel was developed and validated for multi-dimensional engine combustion simulations. An existing detailed methyl butanoate mechanism that contained 264 species and 1219 reactions was chosen to represent the oxygenated portion of the fuel. The reduction process included flux analysis, ignition sensitivity analysis, and optimization of reaction rate constants under constant volume conditions. The current reduced mechanism consists of 41 species and 150 reactions and gives predictions in excellent agreement with those of the comprehensive mechanism. In order to validate the mechanism under biodiesel-fueled engine conditions, it was combined with another skeletal mechanism for n-heptane oxidation. This combined reaction mechanism can be used to adjust the energy content of the fuel, and account for diesel/biodiesel blend engine simulations.

In this study we identify components of a typical biodiesel fuel and estimate both their individual and mixed thermo-physical and transport properties. We then use the estimated mixture properties in computational simulations to gauge the extent to which combustion is modified when biodiesel is substituted for conventional diesel fuel. Our simulation studies included both conventional diesel combustion (DI) and premixed charge compression ignition (PCCI). Preliminary results indicate that biodiesel ignition is significantly delayed due to slower liquid evaporation, with the effects being more pronounced for DI than PCCI. The lower vapor pressure and higher liquid heat capacity of biodiesel are two key contributors to this slower rate of evaporation. Other physical properties are more similar between the two fuels, and their impacts are not clearly evident in the present study.