Search Results

The government of India has decided to implement Bharat Stage VI (BS-VI) emissions standards from April 2020. This requires OEMs to equip their diesel engines with costly after-treatment, EGR systems and higher rail pressure fuel systems. By one estimate, BS-VI engines are expected to be 15 to 20% more expensive than BS-IV engines, while also suffering with 2 to 3 % lower fuel economy. OEMs are looking for solutions to meet the BS-VI emissions standards while still keeping the upfront and operating costs low enough for their products to attract customers; however traditional engine technologies seem to have exhausted the possibilities. Fuel economy improvement technologies applied to traditional 4-stroke engines bring small benefits with large cost penalties. One promising solution to meet both current, and future, emissions standards with much improved fuel economy at lower cost is the Opposed Piston (OP) engine.

A supercritical organic Rankine cycle (ORC) system for recovery of waste heat from heavy-duty diesel engines is proposed. In this system, an organic, medium-boiling-point fluid is selected as the working fluid, which also serves as the coolant for the charge air cooler and the EGR coolers. Because the exhaust temperature can be as high as 650 °C during the DPF regeneration, an exhaust cooler is included in the system to recover some of the high level exhaust energy. In the present ORC system, the expansion work is conducted by a uniflow reciprocating expander, which simplifies the waste-heat-recovery (WHR) system significantly. This reciprocating Rankine engine is more appropriate for on-road-vehicle applications where the condition for waste heat is variable. The energy level of waste heat from a heavy-duty diesel engine is evaluated by the analyses of the first and second law of thermodynamics.

Opposed-piston (OP) engines have attracted the interest of the automotive industry in recent years because of their potential for significantly improved fuel economy. Opposed-piston, two-stroke (OP2S) engine technology amplifies this fuel efficiency advantage and offers lower cost and weight due to fewer parts. While OP engines can help automotive manufacturers comply with current, and future, efficiency standards, there is still work required to prepare the engines for production. This work is mainly related to packaging and durability. At Achates Power, the OP2S technology is being developed for various applications such as commercial vehicles (heavy-and medium-duty), SUVs, pick-up trucks and passenger cars (i.e. light-duty), military vehicles, large ships and stationary power (generator sets). Included in this paper is a review of the previously published OP engine efficiency advantages (thermodynamics, combustion and air system) as well as the architecture's historical challenges.

Historically, the opposed-piston two-stroke diesel engine set combined records for fuel efficiency and power density that have yet to be met by any other engine type. In the latter half of the twentieth century, the advent of modern emissions regulations stopped the wide-spread development of two-stroke engine for on-highway use. At Achates Power, modern analytical tools, materials, and engineering methods have been applied to the development process of an opposed-piston two-stroke engine, resulting in an engine design that has demonstrated a 15.5% fuel consumption improvement compared to a state-of-the-art 2010 medium-duty diesel engine at similar engine-out emissions levels. Furthermore, oil consumption has been measured to be less than 0.1% of fuel over the majority of the operating range. Additional benefits of the opposed-piston two-stroke diesel engine over a conventional four-stroke design are a reduced parts count and lower cost.

A detailed thermodynamic analysis was performed to demonstrate the fundamental efficiency advantage of an opposed-piston two-stroke engine over a standard four-stroke engine. Three engine configurations were considered: a baseline six-cylinder four-stroke engine, a hypothetical three-cylinder opposed-piston four-stroke engine, and a three-cylinder opposed-piston two-stroke engine. The bore and stroke per piston were held constant for all engine configurations to minimize any potential differences in friction. The closed-cycle performance of the engine configurations were compared using a custom analysis tool that allowed the sources of thermal efficiency differences to be identified and quantified.