Search Results

Blends of gasoline, diesel fuel and ethanol (“dieseline”) have shown promise in engine studies examining low temperature combustion using compression ignition. They offer the possibility of high efficiency combined with low emissions of oxides of nitrogen and soot. However, unlike gasoline or diesel fuel alone, such mixtures can be flammable in the headspace above the liquid in a vehicle fuel tank at common ambient temperatures. Quantifying their flammability characteristics is important if these fuels are to see commercial service. The parameter of most interest is the Upper Flammable Limit (UFL) temperature, below which the headspace vapour is flammable. In earlier work a mathematical model to predict the flammability of dieseline blends, including those containing ethanol, was developed and validated experimentally. It was then used to study the flammability of a wide variety of dieseline blends parametrically.

Gasoline Compression Ignition (GCI) has been identified as a technology which could give both high efficiency and relatively low engine-out emissions. The introduction of any new vehicle technology requires widespread availability of appropriate fuels. It would be ideal therefore if GCI vehicles were able to operate using the standard grade of gasoline that is available at the pump. However, in spite of recent progress, operation at idle and low loads still remains a formidable challenge, given the relatively low autoignition reactivity of conventional gasoline at these conditions. One conceivable solution would be to use both diesel and gasoline, either in separate tanks or blended as a single fuel (“dieseline”). However, with this latter option, a major concern for dieseline would be whether a flammable mixture could exist in the vapour space in the fuel tank.

In this study the fuel influence of several bio-fuel candidates on homogeneous engine combustion systems with direct injection is investigated. The results reveal Ethanol and 2-Butanol as the two most knock-resistant fuels. Hence these two fuels enable the highest efficiency improvements versus RON95 fuel ranging from 3.6% - 12.7% for Ethanol as a result of a compression ratio increase of 5 units. Tetrahydro-2-methylfuran has a worse knock resistance and a decreased thermal efficiency due to the required reduction in compression ratio by 1.5 units. The enleanment capability is similar among all fuels thus they pose no improvements for homogeneous lean burn combustion systems despite a significant reduction in NOX emissions for the alcohol fuels as a consequence of lower combustion temperatures.

A broad range of diesel, kerosene, and gasoline-like fuels has been tested in a single-cylinder diesel engine optimized for advanced combustion performance. These fuels were selected in order to better understand the effects of ignition quality, volatility, and molecular composition on engine-out emissions, performance, and noise levels. Low-level biofuel blends, both biodiesel (FAME) and ethanol, were included in the fuel set in order to test for short-term advantages or disadvantages. The diesel engine optimized in Part 1 of this study included cumulative engine hardware enhancements that are likely to be used to meet Euro 6 emissions limits and beyond, in part by operating under conditions of Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition (HCCI), at least over some portions of the speed and load map.

Within the Cluster of Excellence “Tailor-Made Fuels from Biomass” at RWTH Aachen University, the Institute for Combustion Engines carried out an investigation program to explore the potential of future biofuel components in Diesel blends. In this paper, thermodynamic single cylinder engine results of today's and future biofuel components are presented with respect to their engine-out emissions and engine efficiency. The investigations were divided into two phases: In the first phase, investigations were performed with rapeseed oil methyl ester (B100) and an Ethanol-Gasoline blend (E85). In order to analyze the impact of different fuel blends, mixtures with 10 vol-% of B100 or E85 and 90 vol-% of standardized EN590 Diesel were investigated. Due to the low cetane number of E85, it cannot be used purely in a Diesel engine.

The requirement of reducing worldwide CO₂ emissions and engine pollutants are demanding an increased use of bio-fuels. Ethanol with its established production technology can contribute to this goal. However, due to its resistive auto-ignition behavior the use of ethanol-based fuels is limited to the spark-ignited gasoline combustion process. For application to the compression-ignited diesel combustion process advanced ignition systems are required. In general, ethanol offers a significant potential to improve the soot emission behavior of the diesel engine due to its oxygen content and its enhanced evaporation behavior. In this contribution the ignition behavior of ethanol and mixtures with high ethanol content is investigated in combination with advanced ignition systems with ceramic glow-plugs under diesel engine relevant thermodynamic conditions in a high pressure and temperature vessel.

Low Temperature Combustion using compression ignition may provide high efficiency combined with low emissions of oxides of nitrogen and soot. This process is facilitated by fuels with lower cetane number than standard diesel fuel. Mixtures of gasoline and diesel (“dieseline”) may be one way of achieving this; however, a gasoline/diesel mixture in a fuel tank can result in a flammable headspace, particularly at very cold ambient temperatures. A mathematical model to predict the flammability of dieseline blends, including those containing ethanol, was previously validated. In this paper, that model is used to study the flammability of dieseline blends parametrically. Gasolines used in the simulations had Dry Vapour Pressure Equivalent (DVPE) values of 45, 60, 75, 90 and 110 kPa.

The performance aspect of gasoline combustion has traditionally been measured using Research Octane Number (RON) and Motor Octane Number (MON) which describe antiknock performance under different conditions. Recent literature suggests that MON is less important than RON in modern cars and a relaxation in the MON specification could improve vehicle performance, while also helping refiners in the production of gasoline. At the same time, for the same octane number change, increasing RON appears to provide more benefit to engine power and acceleration than reducing MON. It has also been suggested that there could be fuel efficiency benefits (on a tank to wheels basis) for specially adapted engines, for example, operating at higher compression ratio, on very high RON (100+). Other workers have advocated the use of an octane index (OI) which incorporates both RON and MON to give an indication of octane quality.