Search Results

Conventional diesel fuel has been in the market for decades and used successfully to run diesel engines of all sizes in many applications. In order to reduce emissions and to foster energy source diversity, new fuels such as alternative and renewable, as well as new fuel formulations have entered the market. These include biodiesel, gas-to-liquid, and alternative formulations by states such as California. Performance variations in fuel economy, emissions, and compatibility for these fuels have been evaluated and debated. In some cases contradictory views have surfaced. “Sustainable”, “Renewable”, and “Clean” designations have been interchanged. Adding to the confusion, results from one fuel in one type of engine such as an older heavy-duty engine, is at times compared to that of another type such as a modern light-duty. This study was an attempt to compare the performance of several fuels in an identical environment, using the same engine, for direct comparison.

A prototype 2007 ISL Cummins diesel engine equipped with a diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC), diesel particle filter (DPF), variable geometry turbocharger (VGT), and cooled exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) was tested at Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) under a high-load accelerated durability cycle for 1000 hours with B20 soy-based biodiesel blends and ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD) fuel to determine the impact of B20 on engine durability, performance, emissions, and fuel consumption. At the completion of the 1000-hour test, a thorough engine teardown evaluation of the overhead, power transfer, cylinder, cooling, lube, air handling, gaskets, aftertreatment, and fuel system parts was performed. The engine operated successfully with no biodiesel-related failures. Results indicate that engine performance was essentially the same when tested at 125 and 1000 hours of accumulated durability operation.

Experiments were performed on a small displacement (< 2 L), high compression ratio, 4 cylinder, port injected gasoline engine equipped with Dedicated EGR® (D-EGR®) technology using fuels with varying anti-knock properties. Gasolines with anti-knock indices of 84, 89 and 93 anti-knock index (AKI) were tested. The engine was operated at a constant nominal EGR rate of ∼25% while varying the reformation ratio in the dedicated cylinder from a ϕD-EGR = 1.0 - 1.4. Testing was conducted at selected engine speeds and constant torque while operating at knock limited spark advance on the three fuels. The change in combustion phasing as a function of the level of overfuelling in the dedicated cylinder was documented for all three fuels to determine the tradeoff between the reformation ratio required to achieve a certain knock resistance and the fuel octane rating.

An investigation was performed to identify the benefits of cooled exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) when applied to a potential ethanol flexible fuelled vehicle (eFFV) engine. The fuels investigated in this study represented the range a flex-fuel engine may be exposed to in the United States; from 85% ethanol/gasoline blend (E85) to regular gasoline. The test engine was a 2.0-L in-line 4 cylinder that was turbocharged and port fuel injected (PFI). Ethanol blended fuels, including E85, have a higher octane rating and produce lower exhaust temperatures compared to gasoline. EGR has also been shown to decrease engine knock tendency and decrease exhaust temperatures. A natural progression was to take advantage of the superior combustion characteristics of E85 (i.e. increase compression ratio), and then employ EGR to maintain performance with gasoline. When EGR alone could not provide the necessary knock margin, hydrogen (H2) was added to simulate an onboard fuel reformer.

The use of fuel additives is one possible approach to reduce wear and corrosion in methanol fueled automobile engines. One hundred and six compounds added to M100 fuel in modest concentrations (1%) were tested in a Ball on Cylinder Machine (BOCM) for their ability to improve lubricity. The most promising candidates were then tested in an engine using a modified ASTM Sequence V-D wear screening test. Additive performance was measured by comparing the buildup of wear metals in the oil to that obtained from an engine fueled with neat M100. The BOCM method of evaluating the additive candidates proved inadequate in predicting abrasive engine wear under the test conditions utilized for this research program.

The primary focus of this investigation was to determine the hydrogen reformation, efficiency and knock mitigation benefits of methanol-fueled Dedicated EGR (D-EGR®) operation, when compared to other EGR types. A 2.0 L turbocharged port fuel injected engine was operated with internal EGR, high-pressure loop (HPL) EGR and D-EGR configurations. The internal, HPL-EGR, and D-EGR configurations were operated on neat methanol to demonstrate the relative benefit of D-EGR over other EGR types. The D-EGR configuration was also tested on high octane gasoline to highlight the differences to methanol. An additional sub-task of the work was to investigate the combustion response of these configurations. Methanol did not increase its H2 yield for a given D-EGR cylinder equivalence ratio, even though the H:C ratio of methanol is over twice typical gasoline.

Pure biodiesel fuel (B100) is typically made of fatty acid methyl esters (FAME). FAME has different physical properties as compared to mineral diesel such as higher surface tension, lower volatility and higher specific gravity. These differences lead to a larger droplet size and thus more wall impingement of the fuel during injection in the combustion chamber. This results in higher levels of fuel dilution as the oil is scraped down into the crankcase by the scraper ring. The lower volatility also makes biodiesel more difficult to evaporate once it enters the crankcase. For these reasons, levels of fuel dilution in biodiesel fueled engines are likely to be higher compared to mineral diesel fueled engines. When in-cylinder dosing is applied to raise the exhaust temperature required for the regeneration of Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF's), biodiesel dilution in the engine oil may be elevated to high levels.

Forty-five cars were entered from 37 universities across the U.S. and Canada in the ninth annual Formula SAE Student Design Competition held on May 25, 26 and 27 at the University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA). Thirty-six cars from 31 schools actually competed, but only 22 cars finished. The event included many firsts in Formula SAE. The SAE South Texas Section set a precedent by co-hosting the competition with the UTSA. The GM Sunraycer display and demonstration exhibited high technology and corporate support of Formula SAE. Total award funds (from various sponsors) exceeded those of previous events. New awards were given by new sponsors in 1989.

The Tank-Automotive RD&E Center periodically conducts foreign materiel evaluations to assess the current state of the art for ground vehicle technologies. The Propulsion Laboratory is conducting performance evaluations of an opposed-piston two-stroke diesel tank engine produced by the Kharkov Design Bureau in Ukraine. A key factor in the performance of all two-stroke engines is the scavenging process, which determines how well the cylinders are emptied of exhaust and filled with fresh air. The overall air flow rate is not sufficient to determine this, as a significant amount of air may be lost through the exhaust ports during the scavenging process. The inlet tracer gas method was employed to provide the additional data required. With methane as the tracer, it produced reasonable and consistent data over a wide range of engine speeds and loads. The inlet tracer gas method was found to be an effective tool for measuring the scavenging performance of a running two-stroke diesel engine.

The objective of this study was to quantify engine-out emissions of potentially toxic compounds from a modern diesel engine operated with different fuels including 15% v/v dimethoxy methane in a low sulfur diesel fuel. Five diesel fuels were examined: a low-sulfur, low-aromatic hydrocracked (∼1 ppm) fuel, the same low sulfur fuel containing 15% v/v dimethoxy methane, a Fischer-Tropsch fuel, a CARB fuel, and an EPA number 2 certification fuel. A DaimlerChrysler OM611 CIDI engine was controlled with a SwRI Rapid Prototyping Electronic Control system. The engine was operated over 4 speed-load modes. Each operating mode and fuel combination was run in triplicate. Thirty three potentially toxic compounds were measured for each fuel and mode.

The objective of this study was to quantify the effect of pilot fuel injection on engine-out emissions of potentially toxic compounds from a modern diesel engine operated with different fuels including 15% v/v dimethoxy methane in a low-sulfur diesel fuel. Five diesel fuels were examined: a low-sulfur (∼1 ppm), low aromatic, hydrocracked fuel, the same low-sulfur fuel containing 15% v/v dimethoxy methane, a Fischer-Tropsch fuel, a California reformulated fuel, and a EPA number 2 certification fuel. A DaimlerChrysler OM611 CIDI engine was controlled with a SwRI Rapid Prototyping Electronic Control system. The pilot fuel injection was either turned off or turned on with engine control by either Location of Peak Pressure (LPP) of combustion or the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) calibration strategy. These three control strategies were compared over 2 speed-load modes run in triplicate. Thirty-three potentially toxic compounds were measured.

A weighted composite of four engine-operating modes, representative of typical operating modes found in the US FTP driving schedule, were used to compare engine-out emissions of toxic compounds using five diesel fuels. The fuels examined were: a low-sulfur low-aromatic hydrocracked diesel fuel, the same low-sulfur fuel containing 15% v/v dimethoxy methane, a Fischer-Tropsch fuel, a CARB fuel, and a EPA number 2 diesel certification fuel. A DaimlerChrysler OM611 CIDI engine was operated over 4 speed-load modes: mode 5, 2600 RPM, 8.8 BMEP; mode 6, 2300 RPM, 4.2 BMEP; mode 10, 2000 RPM, 2.0 BMEP; mode 11, 1500 RPM, 2.6 BMEP. The four engine operating modes were weighted as follows: mode 5, 25/1200; mode 6, 200/1200; mode 10, 375/1200; and mode 11, 600/1200. Each operating mode and fuel combination was run in triplicate.

Heating neat (100 percent) methanol fuel (M100) is shown to improve dramatically the atomization of the fuel from a production, automotive, port fuel injector of pintle design. This improvement is particularly noticeable and important when compared with atomization at low fuel temperatures, corresponding to those conditions where cold-start is a significant problem with neat methanol-fueled (M100) vehicles. The improved atomization is demonstrated with photographs and laser-diffraction measurements of the drop-size distributions. Fuel temperatures were varied from -34°C (-29°F to 117°C (243°F), while the boiling point of methanol is 64.7°C (148.5°F). Air temperatures were ambient at about 24°C (75°F). For temperatures above the boiling point, some flash boiling and vaporization were presumably occurring, and these may have contributed to the atomization, but the trends for drop size did not shown any discontinuity near the boiling point.

A turbocharged 2.0 L PFI engine was modified to operate in a low-pressure loop and Dedicated EGR (D-EGR®) engine configuration. Both engine architectures were operated with a low and high octane gasoline as well as three ethanol blends. The core of this study focused on examining combustion differences at part and high loads between the selected fuels and also the different engine configurations. Specifically, the impact of the fuels on combustion stability, burn rates, knock mitigation, required ignition energy, and efficiency were evaluated. The results showed that the knock resistance generally followed the octane rating of the fuel. At part loads, the burn rates, combustion stability, and EGR tolerance was marginally improved with the high ethanol blends. When combustion was not knock or stability limited, the efficiency differences between the fuels were negligible. The D-EGR engine was much less sensitive to fuel changes in terms of burn rates than the LPL EGR setup.

Exhaust emissions of non-methane hydrocarbon (NMHC) and methane were measured from a Tier 3 dual-fuel demonstration locomotive running diesel-natural gas blend. Measurements were performed with the typical flame ionization detector (FID) method in accordance with EPA CFR Title 40 Part 1065 and with an alternative Fourier-Transform Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy method. Measurements were performed with and without oxidation catalyst exhaust aftertreatment. FTIR may have potential for improved accuracy over the FID when NMHC is dominated by light hydrocarbons. In the dual fuel tests, the FTIR measurement was 1-4% higher than the FID measurement of. NMHC results between the two methods differed considerably, in some cases reporting concentrations as much as four times those of the FID. However, in comparing these data it is important to note that the FTIR method has several advantages over the FID method, so the differences do not necessarily represent error in the FTIR.

Conventional diesel fuel has been in the market for decades and used successfully to run diesel engines of all sizes in many applications. In order to reduce emissions and to foster energy source diversity, new fuels such as alternative and renewable, as well as new fuel formulations have entered the market. These include biodiesel, gas-to-liquid, and alternative formulations by states such as California. Performance variations in fuel economy, emissions, and compatibility for these fuels have been evaluated and debated. In some cases contradictory views have surfaced. “Sustainable”, “Renewable”, and “Clean” designations have been interchanged. Adding to the confusion, results from one fuel in one type of engine such as an older heavy-duty engine, is at times compared to that of another fuel in another type such as a modern light-duty engine. This study was an attempt to compare the performance of several fuels in identical environments, using the same engine, for direct comparison.

The CO2 advantage coupled with the low NOX and PM potential of natural gas (NG) makes it well-suited for meeting future greenhouse gas (GHG) and NOX regulations for on-road medium and heavy-duty engines. However, because NG is mostly methane, reduced combustion efficiency associated with traditional NG fueling strategies can result in significant levels of methane emissions which offset the CO2 advantage due to reduced efficiency and the high global warming potential of methane. To address this issue, the unique co-direct injection capability of the Westport HPDI fuel system was leveraged to obtain a partially-premixed fuel charge by injecting NG during the compression stroke followed by diesel injection for ignition timing control. This combustion strategy, referred to as DI2, was found to improve thermal and combustion efficiencies over fumigated dual-fuel combustion modes.

Dual fuel engines have shown significant potential as high efficiency powerplants. In one example, SwRI® has run a high EGR, dual-fuel engine using gasoline as the main fuel and diesel as the ignition source, achieving high thermal efficiencies with near zero NOx and smoke emissions. However, assuming a tank size that could be reasonably packaged, the diesel fuel tank would need to be refilled often due to the relatively high fraction of diesel required. To reduce the refill interval, SwRI investigated various alternative fluids as potential ignition sources. The fluids included: Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD), Biodiesel, NORPAR (a commercially available mixture of normal paraffins: n-pentadecane (normal C15H32), and n-hexadecane (normal C16H34)) and ashless lubrication oil. Lubrication oil was considered due to its high cetane number (CN) and high viscosity, hence high ignitability.

The objective of this project was to assess the effects of various blends of biodiesel on locomotive engine exhaust emissions. Systematic, credible, and carefully designed and executed locomotive fuel effect studies produce statistically significant conclusions are very scarce, and only cover a very limited number of locomotive models. Most locomotive biodiesel work has been limited to cursory demonstration programs. Of primary concern to railroads and regulators is understanding any exhaust emission associated with biodiesel use, especially NOX emissions. In this study, emissions tests were conducted on two locomotive models, a Tier 2 EMD SD70ACe and a Tier 1+ GE Dash9-44CW with two baseline fuels, conventional EPA ASTM No. 2-D S15 (commonly referred to as ultra-low sulfur diesel - ULSD) certification diesel fuel, and commercially available California Air Resource Board (CARB) ULSD fuel.

Regulated and unregulated emissions (individual hydrocarbons, ethanol, aldehydes and ketones, polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), nitro-PAH, and soluble organic fraction of particulate matter) were characterized in engines utilizing duplicate ISO 8178-C1 eight-mode tests and FTP smoke tests. Certification No. 2 diesel (400 ppm sulfur) and three ethanol/diesel blends, containing 7.7 percent, 10 percent, and 15 percent ethanol, respectively, were used. The three, Tier II, off-road engines were 6.8-L, 8.1-L, and 12.5-L in displacement and each had differing fuel injection system designs. It was found that smoke and particulate matter emissions decreased with increasing ethanol content. Changes to the emissions of carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrogen varied with engine design, with some increases and some decreases. As expected, increasing ethanol concentration led to higher emissions of acetaldehyde (increases ranging from 27 to 139 percent).