Search Results

Engine dynamometer testing was performed comparing E10, E20, and E30 splash-blended fuels in a Ford 3.5L EcoBoost direct injection (DI) turbocharged engine. The engine was tested with compression ratios (CRs) of 10.0:1 (current production) and 11.9:1. In this engine, E20 (96 RON) fuel at 11.9:1 CR gave very similar knock performance to E10 (91 RON) fuel at 10:1 CR. Similarly, E30 (101 RON) fuel at 11.9:1 CR resulted in knock-limited performance equivalent to E20 at 10:1 CR, indicating that E30 could have been run at even higher CR with acceptable knock behavior. The data was used in a vehicle simulation of a 3.5L EcoBoost pickup truck, which showed that the E20 (96 RON) fuel at 11.9:1 CR offers 5% improvement in U.S. EPA Metro-Highway (M/H) and US06 Highway cycle tank-to-wheels CO₂ emissions over the E10 fuel, with comparable volumetric fuel economy (miles per gallon) and range before refueling.

Two oxygenated fuels were evaluated on a single-cylinder diesel engine and compared to three hydrocarbon diesel fuels. The oxygenated fuels included canola biodiesel (canola methyl esters, CME) and CME blended with dibutyl succinate (DBS), both of which are or have the potential to be bio-derived. DBS was added to improve the cold flow properties, but also reduced the cetane number and net heating value of the resulting blend. A 60-40 blend of the two (60% vol CME and 40% vol DBS) provided desirable cold flow benefits while staying above the U.S. minimum cetane number requirement. Contrary to prior vehicle test results and numerous literature reports, single-cylinder engine testing of both CME and the 60-40 blend showed no statistically discernable change in NOx emissions relative to diesel fuel, but only when constant intake oxygen was maintained.

The Leaner Lifted-Flame Combustion (LLFC) strategy offers a possible alternative to low temperature combustion or other globally lean, premixed operation strategies to reduce soot directly in the flame, while maintaining mixing-controlled combustion. Adjustments to fuel properties, especially fuel oxygenation, have been reported to have potentially beneficial effects for LLFC applications. Six fuels were selected or blended based on cetane number, oxygen content, molecular structure, and the presence of an aromatic hydrocarbon. The experiments compared different fuel blends made of n-hexadecane, n-dodecane, methyl decanoate, tri-propylene glycol monomethyl ether (TPGME), as well as m-xylene. Several optical diagnostics have been used simultaneously to monitor the ignition, combustion and soot formation/oxidation processes from spray flames in a constant-volume combustion vessel.

Ethanol and other high heat of vaporization (HoV) fuels result in substantial cooling of the fresh charge, especially in direct injection (DI) engines. The effect of charge cooling combined with the inherent high chemical octane of ethanol make it a very knock resistant fuel. Currently, the knock resistance of a fuel is characterized by the Research Octane Number (RON) and the Motor Octane Number (MON). However, the RON and MON tests use carburetion for fuel metering and thus likely do not replicate the effect of charge cooling for DI engines. The operating conditions of the RON and MON tests also do not replicate the very retarded combustion phasing encountered with modern boosted DI engines operating at low-speed high-load. In this study, the knock resistance of a matrix of ethanol-gasoline blends was determined in a state-of-the-art single cylinder engine equipped with three separate fuel systems: upstream, pre-vaporized fuel injection (UFI); port fuel injection (PFI); and DI.

Combustion in modern spark-ignition (SI) engines is increasingly knock-limited with the wide adoption of downsizing and turbocharging technologies. Fuel autoignition conditions are different in these engines compared to the standard Research Octane Number (RON) and Motor Octane Numbers (MON) tests. The Octane Index, OI = RON - K(RON-MON), has been proposed as a means to characterize the actual fuel anti-knock performance in modern engines. The K-factor, by definition equal to 0 and 1 for the RON and MON tests respectively, is intended to characterize the deviation of modern engine operation from these standard octane tests. Accurate knowledge of K is of central importance to the OI model; however, a single method for determining K has not been well accepted in the literature.

This paper provides an overview of the effects of blending ethanol with gasoline for use in spark ignition engines. The overview is written from the perspective of considering a future ethanol-gasoline blend for use in vehicles that have been designed to accommodate such a fuel. Therefore discussion of the effects of ethanol-gasoline blends on older legacy vehicles is not included. As background, highlights of future emissions regulations are discussed. The effects on fuel properties of blending ethanol and gasoline are described. The substantial increase in knock resistance and full load performance associated with the addition of ethanol to gasoline is illustrated with example data. Aspects of fuel efficiency enabled by increased ethanol content are reviewed, including downsizing and downspeeding opportunities, increased compression ratio, fundamental effects associated with ethanol combustion, and reduced enrichment requirement at high speed/high load conditions.

Modification of gasoline blendstock composition in preparing ethanol-gasoline blends has a significant impact on vehicle exhaust emissions. In “splash” blending the blendstock is fixed, ethanol-gasoline blend compositions are clearly defined, and effects on emissions are relatively straightforward to interpret. In “match” blending the blendstock composition is modified for each ethanol-gasoline blend to match one or more fuel properties. The effects on emissions depend on which fuel properties are matched and what modifications are made, making trends difficult to interpret. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate that exclusive use of a match blending approach has fundamental flaws. For typical gasolines without ethanol, the distillation profile is a smooth, roughly linear relationship of temperature vs. percent fuel distilled.

This paper presents a numerical study of trace knocking combustion of ethanol/gasoline blends in a modern, single cylinder SI engine. Results are compared to experimental data from a prior, published work [1]. The engine is modeled using GT-Power and a two-zone combustion model containing detailed kinetic models. The two zone model uses a gasoline surrogate model [2] combined with a sub-model for nitric oxide (NO) [3] to simulate end-gas autoignition. Upstream, pre-vaporized fuel injection (UFI) and direct injection (DI) are modeled and compared to characterize ethanol's low autoignition reactivity and high charge cooling effects. Three ethanol/gasoline blends are studied: E0, E20, and E50. The modeled and experimental results demonstrate some systematic differences in the spark timing for trace knock across all three fuels, but the relative trends with engine load and ethanol content are consistent. Possible reasons causing the differences are discussed.

A study and analysis of the relation of biodiesel chemical structures to the resulting soot characteristics and soot oxidative reactivity is presented. Soot samples generated from combustion of various methyl esters, alkanes, biodiesel and diesel fuels in laminar co-flow diffusion flames are analyzed to evaluate the impact of fuel-bound oxygen in fatty acid esters on soot oxidation behavior. Thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) of soot samples collected from diffusion flames show that chemical variations in biodiesel ester compounds have an impact on soot oxidative reactivity and soot characteristics in contrast to findings reported previously in the literature. Soot derived from methyl esters with shorter alkyl chains, such as methyl butyrate and methyl hexanoate, exhibit higher reactivity than those with longer carbon chain lengths, such as methyl oleate, which are more representative of biodiesel fuels.

The deionized water/ethylene glycol coolant used in the Ford Focus Fuel Cell Vehicle (FCV) requires very low conductivity (< 5 μS/cm) to avoid current leakage and short circuiting, presenting a unique water chemistry issue. The coolant's initially low conductivity increases as: 1) ions are released from system materials through leaching, degradation and/or corrosion, and 2) organic acids are produced by ethylene glycol degradation. Estimating the leaching potential of these ions is necessary for design and operation of fuel cell vehicles. An on-board mixed-bed, ion exchange resin filter is used to maintain low conductivity by removing leached or produced ions. Various candidate materials were evaluated for leaching potential by exposing them to coolant at the design operating temperature for several months and periodically analyzing the coolant for ions.