Search Results

The variability in gasoline energy content, though most frequently not a consumer concern, is an issue of concern for vehicle manufacturers in demonstrating compliance with regulatory requirements. Advancements in both vehicle technology, test methodology, and fuel formulations have increased the level of visibility and concern with regard to the energy content of fuels used for regulatory testing. The R factor was introduced into fuel economy calculations for vehicle certification in the late 1980s as a means of addressing batch-to-batch variations in the heating value of certification fuels and the resulting variations in fuel economy results. Although previous studies have investigated values of the R factor for modern vehicles through experimentation, subsequent engine studies have made clear that it is difficult to distinguish between the confounding factors that influence engine efficiency when R is being studied experimentally.

The low temperature conditions that occur during high efficiency clean combustion (HECC) often lead to the formation of partially oxidized HC species such as aldehydes, ketones and carboxylic acids. Using the diesel fuels specified by the Fuels for Advanced Combustion Engines (FACE) working group, carbonyl species were collected from the exhaust of a light duty diesel engine operating under HECC conditions. High pressure liquid chromatography - mass spectrometry (LC-MS) was used to speciate carbonyls as large as C 9 . A relationship between carbonyl species formed in the exhaust and fuel composition and properties was determined. Data were collected at the optimum fuel efficiency point for a typical road load condition. Results of the carbonyl analysis showed changes in formaldehyde and acetaldehyde formation, formation of higher molecular weight carbonyls and the formation of aromatic carbonyls.

During the 1980s, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) incorporated the R factor into fuel economy calculations in order to address concerns about the impacts of test fuel property variations on corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) compliance, which is determined using the Federal Test Procedure (FTP) and Highway Fuel Economy Test (HFET) cycles. The R factor is defined as the ratio of the percent change in fuel economy to the percent change in volumetric heating value for tests conducted using two differing fuels. At the time the R-factor was devised, tests using representative vehicles initially indicated that an appropriate value for the R factor was 0.6. Reassessing the R factor has recently come under renewed interest after EPA's March 2013 proposal to adjust the properties of certification gasoline to contain significant amounts of ethanol.

The recirculation of gases from the crankcase and valvetrain can potentially lead to the entrainment of lubricant in the form of aerosols or mists. As boost pressures increase, the blow-by flow through both the crankcase and the valve cover increases. The resulting lubricant can then become part of the intake charge, potentially leading to fouling of intake components such as the intercooler and the turbocharger. The entrained aerosol which can contain the lubricant and soot may or may not have the same composition as the bulk lubricant. The complex aerodynamic processes that lead to entrainment can strip out heavy components or volatilize light components. Similarly, the physical size and numbers of aerosol particles can be dependent upon the lubricant formulation and engine speed and load. For instance, high rpm and load may increase not only the flow of gases but the amount of lubricant aerosol.

Six blendstocks identified by the Co-Optimization of Fuels & Engines Program were used to prepare fuel blends using a fixed blendstock for oxygenate blending and a target RON of 97. The blendstocks included ethanol, n-propanol, isopropanol, isobutanol, diisobutylene, and a bioreformate surrogate. The blends were analyzed and used to establish interaction factors for a non-linear molar blending model that was used to predict RON and MON of volumetric blends of the blendstocks up to 35 vol%. Projections of efficiency increase, volumetric fuel economy increase, and tailpipe CO2 emissions decrease were produced using two different estimation techniques to evaluate the potential benefits of the blendstocks. Ethanol was projected to provide the greatest benefits in efficiency and tailpipe CO2 emissions, but at intermediate levels of volumetric fuel economy increase over a smaller range of blends than other blendstocks.

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.

Compression and leak-down tests are frequently used to identify and diagnose failed engine power cylinders. It is also often desirable in research and testing programs to use these tests to monitor incremental changes in cylinder leakage. This paper investigates whether these tests are adequate in their present form to monitor incremental changes in cylinder leakage. Results are presented from two vehicle fleets at two test sites. Compression and leak-down tests were conducted on these fleets periodically during a mileage accumulation study. The results were used to establish the variability inherent in the compression and leak-down test processes. Comparisons between the results at the initial mileage test for the study vehicles with those at the final mileage test are shown to be largely within the uncertainty established for repeat assessments.

Ethanol is a biofuel commonly used in gasoline blends to displace petroleum consumption; its utilization is on the rise in the United States, spurred by the biofuel utilization mandates put in place by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA). The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the statutory responsibility to implement the EISA mandates through the promulgation of the Renewable Fuel Standard. EPA has historically mandated an emissions certification fuel specification that calls for ethanol-free fuel, except for the certification of flex-fuel vehicles. However, since the U.S. gasoline marketplace is now virtually saturated with E10, some organizations have suggested that inclusion of ethanol in emissions certification fuels would be appropriate.

A prototype emissions control system consisting of a close-coupled lightoff catalyst, catalyzed diesel particle filter (CDPF), and a NOX adsorber was evaluated on a Mercedes A170 CDI. This laboratory experiment aimed to determine whether the benefits of these technologies could be utilized simultaneously to allow a light-duty diesel vehicle to achieve levels called out by U.S. Tier 2 emissions legislation. This research was carried out by driving the A170 through the U.S. Federal Test Procedure (FTP), US06, and highway fuel economy test (HFET) dynamometer driving schedules. The vehicle was fueled with a 3-ppm ultra-low sulfur fuel. Regeneration of the NOX adsorber/CDPF system was accomplished by using a laboratory in-pipe synthesis gas injection system to simulate the capabilities of advanced engine controls to produce suitable exhaust conditions. The results show that these technologies can be combined to provide high pollutant reduction efficiencies in excess of 90% for NOX and PM.