Post on 01-Jan-2017
transcript
State of the art ofPartially Premixed Combustion (PPC)Partially Premixed Combustion (PPC)
Martin Tunér
Division of Combustion EnginesDepartment of Energy Sciences
Lund University
Conclusion
• It is impossiblep
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014
I have good news!• Engine research is successful!
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014
O tliOutline
PPC• Fuel flexibility• Efficiency• Challenges
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014
Research groups into PPC
A loved child has many names• Gautam Kalghatgi - Saudi Aramco – PPCI, GCI• Lund – PPC• Delphi – GDCI
Eindhoven PPC• Eindhoven - PPC• Wisconsin Madison – PPCI, GCI• Sandia – PPCI, LTGC,• ...• ...
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014
PPC in production?
"achieve diesel levels of fuel efficiency with conventional gasoline," according to Nayan
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014
Engineer (yes, his last name is Engineer), one of Hyundai's powertrain gurus. What's more, Engineer says the GDCI engine will offer "equal to better performance than conventional gasoline engines" and will have a "lower system cost [than] diesel engines."
P ti ll P i d C b ti PPCPartially Premixed Combustion, PPC
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014 7
Burn rate and ηT
Optimum Thermodynamic efficiency
150
C l P [b ]
High heat losses
Low effective expansion ratio
100
Cyl Pressure [bar]Inj Signal [a.u.]RoHR [J/CAD]
50
-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 400
CAD [TDC]
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014
Premixedness8
Emissions
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0 4
0.5
0.6
h]
Brake NOxUS10EU VI
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
Soo
t [FS
N]
0.2
0.3
0.4
Bra
ke N
Ox
[g/k
Wh
5 10 15 20 25 300
0.05
0.1
Gross IMEP [bar]0 5 10 15 20 25 30
0
0.1
Gross IMEP [bar]
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
]
Brake HCUS 10EU VI
20
25
]
Brake COUS 10EU VI
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
Bra
ke H
C [g
/kW
h]
10
15B
rake
CO
[g/k
Wh]
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 20149
0 5 10 15 20 25 300
0.2
0.4
Gross IMEP [bar]0 5 10 15 20 25 30
0
5
Gross IMEP [bar]
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 201410
F l fl ibilit PPCFuel flexibility - PPC
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014 11
Tested Load Area
25
Stable operational load vs. fuel type
20
25
15
gros
s [b
ar]
5
10
IME
P g
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1000
5
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014
RON [-]
12
Fuel flexibility:New opportunity for WTW efficient fossil&biofuels?Choice of the cheapest fuel of the day?Local fuel availability?
ONDiesel Gasoline?FAME EthanolMethanol
ButanolDME
B10…E85E5
?E85E5…
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014
Fuel compositionLTR as a function of n-heptaneLTR as a function of n heptane
4.5
5
R2=0.98
3.5
4
R [%
]
2 5
3
actio
n LT
R
PRF70
2
2.5
Fra TRF
TERFcpERFTERF
28 30 32 34 36 38 40 421
1.5
H t [%]
TERFcriticalDataExper
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014 14
n-Heptane [%]
NOx, HC & CO emissions 15
3 15 35
%]
10
uel]2.4
2.6
2.8
3
%]
10
el]
33.5
34
34.5
35
HC
Tolu
ene
[%
5
HC
[g/k
g Fu
1.8
2
2.2
Tolu
ene
[%
5
CO
[g/k
g Fu
31.5
32
32.5
33
CO
150.18
Ethanol [%]
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
01.4
1.6
Ethanol [%]
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
030.5
31CO
e [%
]
10
Fue
l]
0.14
0.15
0.16
0.17
NO
Tolu
ene
5
NO
x [g/k
g
0.1
0.11
0.12
0.13 NOx
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 201415
Ethanol [%]
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
0.09
Smoke emissions
0.9
PRF60
0 6
0.7
0.8 InjP 800 barIjnP 1000 barInjP 1200 bar
TRFERF
0.4
0.5
0.6
mok
e [F
SN]
0.2
0.3
Sm
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 160
0.1
CA50 [deg]
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014 16
CA50 [deg]
EGR Effect -Soot
(FuelMEP ~20.5bar)MK1 Gasoline Ethanol
8
EGR~48%EGR~38% 8
EGR~48%EGR~38% 8
EGR~48%EGR~38%
6
FSN
] 6FS
N] 6
FSN
]
4
Soo
t[F
4
Soo
t[F
4
Soo
t[F0
2
0
2
0
2
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014
1 1.5 20
[-]
1 1.5 2
0
[-]1 1.5 2
0
[-]17
Peak Pressure Rise Rate
30
20
25
CA
D]
15
20
RR
[bar
/C
48%EGR
10
MP
R
MK1G li
48%EGR38%EGR
1.5 2 2.5 35
Intake Pressure [bar]
GasolineEthanol
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014 182013-01-2702
Intake Pressure [bar]
Engine Emissions
10 MK1
48%EGR
2.5 MK1G li
48%EGR38%EGR
6
8
FSN
]
GasolineEthanol
38%EGR30%EGR
1.5
2
/kW
h]
GasolineEthanol
38%EGR30%EGR
2
4
Soo
t [F
0.5
1
NO
x [g
/1.5 2 2.5 3
0
Intake Pressure [bar]
1.5 2 2.5 3
0
Intake Pressure [bar]
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014 192013-01-2702
Effi i PPCEfficiency - PPC
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014 20
System model (Std Scania components unless mentioned)
Experimental combustion, HT and flowFrom SCE
CAC 60% more pipes
than std unitthan std unit
Piping slightly increased in
size
BorgWarneroff-the-shelfTwo-stage
Turbo
EATS Low Pressure EGR route
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014 21
B k ffi iBrake efficiency
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014 22
E h t T b f EATSExhaust T before EATS
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014 23
Loss comparison CDC versus PPC @A75
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014 24
We must understand in-cylinder processes!!!
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014 25
In-cylinder temperature distribution
CDC
Fridriksson et al, SAE 2011-01-1838, 2011
PPC5.4% F.E.
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014 26 26
Ch ll PPCChallenges - PPC
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014 27
PPC Pros.• Simple and rugged
Challenges• Show don’t tell...
• Fuel flexible• High efficiency
Hi h l d
• Idle – low load (High RON)• Transient emissions
C b ti i• High load • Low emissions
• Combustion noise• Difference LD - HD• WHAT IS PPC?• WHAT IS PPC?
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014 28
I iti t tIgnition zone structuresFlame propagation
T HO2
Premixed charge ignitionPremixed charge ignition
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014
5 CAD bTDC
Conclusions• PPC uses fairly simple hardware and is very fuel flexible. Can the fuel
flexibility be exploited for use of less processed and more WTW efficient fuels – aka naphtha, raw-methanol ...?
EURO VI / US 10 li t ti b hi d i b f• EURO VI / US 10 compliant operation can be achieved in a number of ways depending on fuel, for instance with stoichiometric ethanol PPC. Which is the best way forward?
• PPC has very high GIE and system analysis indicate that a “real” PPC engine can have above 48% BTE. Boosting – EGR routing – HT are key factors. Can high BTE be achieved in a real engine?g g
• Low load operation is challenging with high RON fuels. Can a SI system be avoided?
• DNS indicate that PPC is a combination of premixed ignition and flame front combustion. Can this be proved with optical investigations and how d diff t f l i fl th d f b ti ?
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014
does different fuels influence the modes of combustion?
30
Lund University, Sweden
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014 31
Lund University47000 students
Faculty of Engineering(Lund Institute of Technology)
9600 students
Department of Energy Sciences(Staff 90 persons)
9600 students
Department of Engineering Department
Division of Division of Division of Division ofDivision of
Physics
Division of
pof Automatic Control
Prof. Anders RantzerDivision of
Thermal Power Engineering
Prof.Mohsen Assadi
Division ofHeat transfer
Prof. Bengt Sundén
Division ofFluid dynamics
Prof.Lazlo Fuchs
Division ofCombustion Engines
Prof. Bengt Johansson
Division ofEnergy economics and planningProf.
i
Division ofCombustion Physics
Prof. Marcus Aldén
(staff 35 persons)
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 201432
Mohsen Assadi Bengt Sundén Lazlo Fuchs Bengt Johansson(staff 32 persons)
L. Törnqvist Marcus Aldén(staff 40 persons)
Refurbished and extended lab
Lund University / Combustion engines / Martin Tunér / CRC 2014 33