Isobaric Combustion for High Efficiency in an Optical Diesel Engine

Self Cite

In a previous study, it was shown that isobaric combustion cycle, achieved by multiple injection strategy, is more favorable than conventional diesel cycle for the double compression expansion engine (DCEE) concept. In spite of lower effective expansion ratio, the indicated efficiencies of isobaric cycles were approximately equal to those of a conventional diesel cycle. Isobaric cycles had lower heat transfer losses and higher exhaust losses which are advantageous for DCEE since additional exhaust energy can be converted into useful work in the expander. In this study, the performance of low-pressure isobaric combustion (IsoL) and high-pressure isobaric combustion (IsoH) in terms of gross indicated efficiency, energy flow distribution and engine-out emissions is compared to the conventional diesel combustion (CDC) but at a relatively lower compression ratio of 11.5. The experiments are conducted in a Volvo D13C500 single-cylinder heavy-duty engine using standard EU diesel fuel. The current study consists of two sets of experiments. In the first set, the effect of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) is studied at different combustion modes using the same air-fuel ratio obtained from the preceding work. In the second set of experiments, different injection strategies are investigated for IsoL and IsoH combustion at constant and varying load conditions. From the results, it is found that isobaric combustion has similar or higher gross indicated efficiency than those of CDC. The exhaust losses are higher while the heat transfer losses are lower than CDC, which could be beneficial for DCEE concept. For isobaric cases, the NOx emissions were lower with higher uHC/CO/Soot emissions compared to CDC. From the injection strategy study, it was found that the gross indicated efficiency is highest with three injections i.e. at medium load. The efficiency is lower for both low and high load conditions due to increased exhaust and heat transfer losses, respectively. Also, the gross indicated efficiency is largely unchanged when more than one injection event is executed; however the IsoL yields higher overall emissions as compared to IsoH combustion.

Section: Energy Distributionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Isobaric Combustion at a Low Compression Ratio

Dyuisenakhmetov

Goyal

Houidi

et al. 2020

Self Cite

“…Table 4 also shows that the simulated IMEPgross differs by 1.3% compared to the experimental one, mainly due to the late unwanted fuel addition presented in the experimental in-cylinder pressure trace. The second hump in the experimental RoHR is attributed to a possible injector dribbling observed previously at the end of injection in optical engine experiments [20], which has a minor effect on the validation.…”

Section: Cfd Models Validationsupporting

confidence: 51%

Effects of Multiple Injectors on Spray Characteristics and Efficiency in Internal Combustion Engines

Jiménez

Nyrenstedt

Goyal

et al. 2021

Self Cite

High-pressure internal combustion engines promise high efficiency, but a proper injection strategy to minimize heat losses and pollutant emissions remain a challenge. Previous studies have concluded that two injectors, placed at the piston bowl's rim, simultaneously improve the mixing and reduce the heat losses. The two-injector configuration further improves air utilization while keeping hot zones away from the cylinder walls. This study investigates how the two-injector concept delivers even higher efficiency by providing additional control of spray -and injection angles. Three-dimensional Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes simulations examined several umbrella angles, sprayto-spray angles, and injection orientations by comparing the twoinjector cases with a reference one-injector case. The study focused on heat transfer reduction, where the two-injector approach reduces the heat transfer losses by up to 14.3 % compared to the reference case. Finally, this study connected the two-injector approach to a waste-heat recovery system through GT-Power 1-D simulations, increasing the importance of heat transfer reduction. The final two-injector system then delivered a 54.4% brake thermal efficiency compared to 53% of the one-injector reference case.

“…Previous optical studies on isobaric combustion have employed multiple injections from a central injector [20,21] only and very few experimental studies have been conducted using multiple injectors [13,18]. Besides, flow-field structures and their influence on engine performance and emissions are not addressed in previous studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flow-Field Analysis of Isobaric Combustion Using Multiple Injectors in an Optical Accessible Diesel Engine

Panthi¹,

Goyal²,

Houidi³

et al. 2021

Self Cite

Isobaric combustion has shown the potential of improving engine efficiency by lowering the heat transfer losses. Previous studies have achieved isobaric combustion through multiple injections from a single central injector, controlling injection timing and duration of the injection. In this study, we employed three injectors, i.e. one centrally mounted (C) on the cylinder head and two side-injectors (S), slantmounted on cylinder head protruding their nozzle tip near piston-bowl to achieve the isobaric combustion. This study visualized the flame development of isobaric combustion, linking flow-field details to the observed trends in engine efficiency and soot emissions. The experiments were conducted in an optically accessible single-cylinder heavy-duty diesel engine using n-heptane as fuel. Isobaric combustion, with a 50 bar peak pressure, was achieved with three different injection strategies, i.e. (C+S), (S+C), and (S+S). Bottom-view high-speed soot luminosity images were recorded at a frame rate of 20 kHz for all cases, together with pressure traces. Flame image velocimetry (FIV) analysis was performed on the high-speed soot luminosity images to obtain a qualitative description of the flow-field obtained for the three injection strategies. Distinctive vortex structures were evident from the FIV analysis and that can be attributed to strong flame-wall and flameflame interactions. For the C+S and S+S injection strategies, the distinct large vortex structures were found near the bowl-wall while for the S+C case, vortex structures are less prominent. The large vortex structures close to the cylinder walls contribute to lower gross indicated efficiency and higher soot level intensity of the C+S and S+S cases, compared to the S+C configuration.