2012-01-0384 Published 04/16/2012 Copyright 2012 SAE International doi:10.4271/2012-01-0384 saeeng.saejournals.

org

Full-Time Gasoline Direct-Injection Compression Ignition (GDCI) for High Efficiency and Low NOx and PM
Mark C. Sellnau, James Sinnamon, Kevin Hoyer and Harry Husted
Delphi Corp.
ABSTRACT A gasoline compression-ignition combustion system is being developed for full-time operation over the speed-load map. Low-temperature combustion was achieved using multiple late injection (MLI), intake boost, and moderate EGR for high efficiency, low NOx, and low particulate emissions. The relatively long ignition delay and high volatility of RON 91 pump gasoline combined with an advanced injection system and variable valve actuation provided controlled mixture stratification for low combustion noise. Tests were conducted on a single-cylinder research engine. Design of Experiments and response surface models were used to evaluate injection strategies, injector designs, and various valve lift profiles across the speed-load operating range. At light loads, an exhaust rebreathing strategy was used to promote autoignition and maintain exhaust temperatures. At medium loads, a triple injection strategy produced the best results with high thermal efficiency. Detailed heat release analysis indicated that heat losses were significantly reduced. At higher loads, a late-intake-valve-closing strategy was used to reduce the effective compression ratio. For all tests, intake air temperature was 50 C. 3D CFD simulations of fuel injection, mixing, and combustion were important to understand the emissions formation processes. With multiple late injections and low-to-moderate fuel pressure, spray penetration was low, mixing was fast, and wall wetting could be avoided. Fuel sprays were characterized in a spray chamber. Injection rate was measured using a rate tube. Results showed that ISFC was very low. Minimum ISFC of 181 g/kWh was measured at 2000 rpm-11 bar IMEP. For IMEP from 2 to 18 bar, engine-out NOx and PM emissions were below targets of 0.2 g/kWh and 0.1 FSN, respectively, indicating that aftertreatment for these species may be reduced or eliminated. It was found that combustion noise levels, characterized by several noise metrics, could be effectively controlled by the injection process. Measurements of exhaust particulate size distribution indicated very low particle count, especially for a preferred injector with low levels of incylinder swirl. Collectively, these results demonstrate the potential feasibility of full-time GDCI using RON 91 gasoline at low-tomoderate injection pressures with high fuel efficiency. While more development work is needed, there is good potential for a practical GDCI powertrain system based on these concepts. CITATION: Sellnau, M., Sinnamon, J., Hoyer, K. and Husted, H., "Full-Time Gasoline Direct-Injection Compression Ignition (GDCI) for High Efficiency and Low NOx and PM," SAE Int. J. Engines 5(2):2012, doi:10.4271/2012-01-0384. ____________________________________

INTRODUCTION
Low temperature combustion (LTC) is known to be a promising approach for simultaneous reduction of NOx and particulate matter (PM) emissions with high fuel efficiency. Extensive research has been conducted on various LTC combustion concepts for both light duty (LD) and heavy duty (HD) engines operating on diesel fuels, gasoline fuels, and alcohols [1,2]. LTC requires that fuel and air be sufficiently mixed prior to combustion to avoid soot formation in excessively rich pockets. Combustion temperatures must be low enough to avoid NOx emissions [3]. Dilution of the

mixture with burned gas is one way to reduce combustion temperatures but hydrocarbon (HC) and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions typically increase. Combustion noise, load limits, and combustion phasing control are other problems that have impeded the application of LTC in production engines. However, if LTC could be achieved over the engine operating range and if combustion noise can be controlled, diesel-like fuel efficiency and compliance with stringent emissions regulations might be possible without aftertreatment for NOx and particulate emissions.

Sellnau et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 5, Issue 2(May 2012)

Gasoline partially premixed compression ignition (PPCI) is a relatively new approach to LTC that was first published by Johansson circa 2005 [4]. A high octane fuel (cetane number of 21) was injected late on the compression stroke of a boosted diesel engine operating with 52% EGR. The injection process was complete prior to the start of combustion, which enabled mixing of the fuel and air prior to heat release. At a high load condition (IMEP=15.6 bar), low NOx and PM emissions were measured. Kalghatgi [5] showed that the best fuels for PPCI are gasoline-like fuels with high resistance to autoignition. These fuels have greater ignition delay relative to high cetane fuels, which gives them more time for mixing. The high volatility and diffusion rates of gasoline also aid in the mixing process. Risberg and Kalghatgi [6] tested a range of fuels with different autoignition quality and volatility on a production diesel engine. They showed that autoignition quality correlated well with cetane number of the fuels. Kalghatgi [7] performed critical engine tests for PPCI using single injection for gasoline and diesel fuels. It was shown that gasoline fuels produced a much longer ignition delay than diesel fuel, which facilitated premixed combustion and produced much lower NOx and PM. The fuel was said to be premixed enough but not fully mixed. Additional experiments were performed using double injection with gasoline [8,9]. It was shown that pilot injection helps reduce maximum heat release rate. The load range was increased to 16 bar IMEP with low NOx and PM emissions and with fuel consumption comparable to conventional diesel. This established that gasoline fuels are well suited for PPCI lowtemperature combustion processes. Researchers at Lund University [10,11,12,13] extensively tested gasoline fuels in diesel engines. They demonstrated high-load capability in both LD and HD engines. An injection strategy was developed similar to UNIBUS that utilizes two injections, high boost, and about 50% EGR. Using high fuel pressure with diesel injectors, they were able to achieve PPCI at 18 bar IMEP with soot levels of 1-2 FSN, NOx below 0.3 g/kW-hr, and maximum pressure rise rates below 15 bar/deg. While not all requirements, such as noise levels, were satisfied and results below 5 bar IMEP were not reported, results were very promising. Experiments were performed at Delphi [14] on a singlecylinder Hydra engine at part-load operating conditions. Designed experiments (DoE) and response surface models where used to find optimum injection timings and quantities for single, double and triple injection strategies. It was shown that triple injection provided the best results at the lowest injection pressure. Due to favourable mixture stratification, maximum heat release rate (MHRR) and heat losses were both reduced significantly for triple injection compared to single or double injection. This enabled more advanced combustion phasing (within noise constraints) and significantly improved fuel efficiency. Researchers at the University of Wisconsin have performed detailed CFD studies of PPCI combustion in a HD

diesel engine using KIVA-ERC-Chemkin [15,16]. Both single and double injection was studied with both gasoline and diesel fuels. They showed that injection timing influences HC, CO, and combustion noise levels, and that injection split ratio is an effective way to reduce CO and maximum pressure rise rates. Dempsey [17] extended this work using genetic algorithm optimization. For a medium load condition (11 bar IMEP), it was found that a double injection strategy produced the lowest NOx, PM, ISFC and ringing intensity (RI). NOx and PM emissions were below emissions regulations while maintaining low ringing intensity. For a high load condition (21 bar IMEP), a double injection strategy using 60% of the fuel in the 2nd injection gave greater than 50% thermal efficiency, but PM emissions and RI exceeded targets. KIVA simulations of gasoline PPCI were also performed for a LD diesel engine [18]. The purpose of this work was to establish feasibility of gasoline PPCI at a high load condition (2500 rpm-14 bar IMEP) and to guide subsequent engine experiments. Tests were conducted using a double injection strategy with diesel injectors at 860 to 1160 bar fuel pressure. It was found that both NOx and PM could be reduced to levels of about 0.1 g/kg-f, while achieving ISFC of about 180 g/kWh. Maximum pressure rise rate and peak pressure were below 10 bar/CAD and 160 bar, respectively. There was an optimal injection pressure that produced the best mixture stratification, while both over mixing and under mixing resulted in incomplete combustion. In the current work, tests were performed on a LD singlecylinder engine over the speed-load operating map using RON91 pump gasoline. One objective was to determine the best injection strategies for low NOx and PM using low-tomoderate injection pressures. Injector design and fuel spray characteristics play a strong role in controlling mixture stratification. Five injector designs were fabricated and tested. A second objective was to evaluate an engine concept for full-time operation over the speed-load map from idle to full load. If NOx and PM emissions are low enough, aftertreatment for these species may be reduced or eliminated. Use of variable valve lift profiles was instrumental in enabling full-time GDCI operation. Finally, combustion noise is an important constraint for LTC combustion strategies. Various combustion noise parameters were evaluated and correlations among them were explored.

EXPERIMENTAL METHODS
Experiments were performed on a Ricardo Hydra lightduty single-cylinder engine (Figure 1). The cylinder head has four-valves with double-overhead camshafts and central injection. The aluminum cylinder head is rated at 200 bar peak cylinder pressure (PCP). The engine is very flexible and camshafts and pistons can be interchanged. A removable injector sleeve enables testing of various injector types. An intake port throttle regulates the swirl ratio between 0.6 and 3.0. Engine specifications are listed in Table 1.

Sellnau et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 5, Issue 2(May 2012)

Two test fuels were used for experiments. Initial tests were conducted with regular unleaded RON91 gasoline that contained no oxygenates. Later tests were conducted using Shell regular unleaded gasoline with ethanol, as is representative of commercial fuel in the United States. Fuel property data are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Properties of Test Fuels

Figure 1. Hydra Test Engine Table 1. Engine Specifications

A schematic diagram of the engine test setup is shown in Figure 2. The intake and exhaust systems allowed simulated turbocharged operation. Air flow was controlled and measured by a Flow Systems FC-500 system using a 7-nozzle sonic array. Dry air was supplied from building compressed air and heated by an electric heater. An EGR valve and cooler were located between intake and exhaust surge tanks, which insured that EGR was well mixed prior to entering the engine. Fuel flow was measured with a high-precision Pierburg PLU103b fuel meter. The maximum total error of this instrument is 0.3 percent of reading down to 0.05 g/s fuel flow. All emissions were measured on a wet basis using heated sampling systems. Carbon species, nitrogen species, and some hydrocarbon species were measured with an AVL Sesam FTIR. Total hydrocarbon emissions were measured with a Horiba Fast FID. Exhaust oxygen and intake CO2 were measured with a Rosemount MLT-3. Smoke was measured with an AVL 415S smoke meter and particulate size distribution was measured with a TSI 3090 Engine Exhaust Particle Size Spectrometer (EEPS). Cylinder pressure was measured with a flush-mounted Kistler 6125CU20 pressure transducer. A Kistler 2613B crankshaft encoder provided crank position data and was dynamically aligned with engine TDC using a Kistler 2629B TDC probe. Pressure data was sampled every 0.5 CAD. A single-cylinder engine controller was developed with real-time heat release analysis capability. The controller is based on National Instruments hardware and Labview software [19], and was built by Drivven, Inc. [20]. Within the controller, a multiple-injection control utility [14] was developed to determine and control the fuel quantity, Q, for each injection. Q was determined using instantaneous rail pressure, cylinder pressure, and an embedded calibration map for the injector. Similarly, closed-loop PID control was used for intake and exhaust pressure, EGR, rail pressure, and intake air temperature.

Sellnau et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 5, Issue 2(May 2012)

INJECTION STRATEGIES
The injection process is critical to controlling mixture stratification for GDCI [14]. Fuel needs to be injected and partially mixed in the period before autoignition occurs. Complete mixing of all the fuel in a homogenous charge must be avoided since this would lead to rapid burning of the whole mixture (i.e., HCCI). A multiple-late injection (MLI) injection strategy [14] was hypothesized to be advantageous. The intent is to create combustible mixtures in distinct regions of the chamber. The characteristic air-fuel ratio, temperature-pressure history, and ignition delay time may be different for each region. The overall heat release characteristic may be fast enough for high efficiency but long enough for quiet combustion. Figure 4 shows an example of a triple injection process. The first injection typically occurs at mid-compression stroke and delivers fuel above the piston when cylinder pressure and temperature are relatively low. The second injection typically targets the lower outer bowl. The third injection occurs near top-dead-center (TDC) when cylinder pressure and temperature are higher. Spray penetration is low and this fuel occupies the inner bowl region.

Figure 2. Schematic Diagram of Test Setup Residual mass concentration in the cylinder was measured by a Delphi Residual Estimator Tool (RET) [21, 22]. The RET provides fast estimates of residuals in the test cell based on measured cylinder pressure, measured airflow, and average temperature and pressure at the intake and exhaust ports. GDCI combustion involves many design and operating variables with strong interactive effects. The injection quantities and timings for multiple injections need to be optimized, including other system level variables such as swirl ratio (SR), EGR, and boost pressure. A systematic approach is needed to minimize fuel consumption and emissions within constraints such as combustion noise. Low injection pressure is desired to keep cost of the injection system low and reduce fuel pump parasitics. Fuel injection parameters are defined in Figure 3, where SOI1 to SOI5, Q1 to Q5, and PW1 to PW5 are the start-of-injection, injection quantities, and injector driver logic pulse width.

Figure 4. KIVA Simulation of Triple Injection Process. The injection process can also lead to wall wetting of combustion chamber surfaces. Liquid films on cool cylinder walls may be slow to evaporate and lead to piston and ring lubrication problems. Fuel films including fuel transported into the piston topland crevice may not oxidize completely. This can be a significant source of HC, CO, and PM emissions and cause reduced engine efficiency. The injection process was initially examined in previous work [14]. Engine tests were conducted for single injection, double injection, and triple injection at 1500 rpm and 6 bar IMEP. DoE and RSM methods were used to optimize injection quantities, timings, and fuel pressure within constraints for emissions and combustion noise (FSN<0.5, Pinj500 bar, CNL85 dB). For these tests, intake air temperature was 50 C, water and oil temperatures were 90 C, EGR was 45%, and MAP was 1.8 bar. Results are shown in Figure 5. For single injection, no combination of injection pressure and timing could be found that met targets within constraints. For double injection, NOx near 0.2 g/kWh was measured with ISFC improved over the best single injection data. Injection pressure was reduced and a NOx-ISFC trade-off was apparent. For triple injection, ISFC improved further with 181 g/kWh at NOx of 0.7 g/

Figure 3. Definitions of Fuel Injection Parameters Due to the large number of design and operating variables, traditional parametric test methods are not suitable. Design of experiments (DoE), response surface modeling (RSM) and optimization methods were applied using the model-based control (MBC) toolbox from The Mathworks, Inc. [23]. Examples of this overall method can be found in prior work by the authors [14].

Sellnau et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 5, Issue 2(May 2012)

kWh. Injection pressure was further reduced. A 7 percent ISFC penalty was needed to achieve the NOx target of 0.2 g/ kWh.

Figure 7. Heat Loss as a Function of Crank Angle [from Ref 14] Figure 5. ISNOx vs. ISFC for Single, Double, Triple Injection (1500rpm-6 bar IMEP) [from ref 14] Heat release and injection timing events for optimum single, double, and triple injection are shown in Figure 6. Single injection exhibited the highest maximum heat release rate (MHRR) with the latest combustion phasing. Double injection had lower MHRR and more advanced phasing. Triple injection had still lower MHRR with near optimal phasing. It is notable that there was no visible heat release from the first injections until about TDC. Triple injection produced a very desirable HR characteristic with start of combustion (SOC) near TDC and a reasonably abrupt end of combustion (EOC). This provided greater expansion ratio for more of the burned fuel than either single or double injection strategies and contributed to improved fuel consumption for triple injection. Results from an energy balance analysis are shown in Figure 7. While heat losses during the compression stroke are similar for single, double, and triple injections, a large reduction in heat losses during the expansion stroke occurs for triple injection, and less so for double injection. This is attributed to a more favourable distribution of fuel during combustion, which results in less contact between hot combustion gases and the chamber walls. Reduced heat losses contribute to improved fuel consumption for triple injection. 3D CFD simulations were performed using KIVA-3 VERC-Chemkin for the test engine operating with the optimum triple injection settings. Phi (equivalence ratio) and temperature contours on the spray centreline at 6 degrees after TDC are shown in Figure 8. The simulation shows that combustion begins in the outer bowl and progresses in distinct regions of the chamber. The third injection has low penetration and burns in the inner bowl region.

Figure 8. Phi and T Contours on the Spray Axis for Triple Injection at 6 CAD aTDC Figure 6. Heat Release and Injection Logic [from Ref 14] The equivalence ratio-temperature (Phi-T) diagram for the optimum triple injection case is shown in Figure 9. Mixture stratification is evident based on separation in the vertical direction in the plot. The Phi-T diagram also shows that fuel

Sellnau et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 5, Issue 2(May 2012)

injection and mixing processes are fast enough to avoid rich pockets and PM formation.

were consistently at 250 degree C at this test condition. It is anticipated that further development of injector, piston, and combustion chamber will improve HC, CO, and combustion efficiency.

Figure 9. Phi-T Diagram for Triple Injection at 6 CAD aTDC

Figure 10. Engine Test Results for Injectors A, B, C, D and E (1500rpm-6 bar IMEP)

INJECTOR EVALUATION AT PART LOAD

The fuel injection system plays a key role in GDCI combustion. A practical injector is needed that operates at low injection pressure to minimize pump parasitics and cost. The injector must deliver fuel in the short time available for a multiple-late injection strategy. Low liquid spray penetration with fast breakup, evaporation, and mixing is important to avoid liquid wall wetting. To characterize injectors and fuel sprays, various bench tests, spray chamber tests, and simulations were performed. Five injectors were fabricated and tested on engine using a MLI triple injection strategy at 1500 rpm and 6 bar IMEP. DoE and RSM methods were used to optimize injection quantities, timings, and fuel pressure within constraints for emissions and combustion noise (FSN<0.5, Pinj500 bar, CNL85 dB). For these tests, intake air temperature was 50 C, water temperature was 80C, oil temperature was 90 C, and MAP was 1.8 bar. Geometric compression ratios (GCR) of 16.2 and 14.5 were used in testing. Test results comparing injectors A, B, C, D (GCR=16.2 with E00 fuel) and E (GCR=14.5 with E10 fuel) are shown in Figure 10 (combustion) and Figure 11 (emissions). Targets are shown by horizontal dashed lines in the figures. Injector A exhibited excessively high NOx. For injectors B, C, D and E, NOx and PM emissions, and combustion noise targets were realized. Injector E performed best with 4.5 percent lower ISFC and much lower smoke, even though the compression ratio was reduced from 16.2 to 14.5. For injector E, ISFC was not smoke-limited. Combustion efficiency for injectors B, C, D and E was 94 to 96 percent. HC and CO exceeded targets and an oxidation catalyst is expected to be needed. Exhaust port temperatures

Figure 11. Engine Test Results for Injectors A, B, C, D, and E (1500rpm-6 bar IMEP) Initial optimizations shown in Figures 10 and 11 were performed using a smoke constraint of 0.5 FSN. However, lower smoke levels were observed in testing. To examine injector performance at low smoke, optimizations were performed using response surface models for each injector. Figure 12 shows RSM results for smoke plotted against ISFC for injectors B, C, D and E. Injector D was able to meet the low smoke target (0.1 FSN) at a moderate swirl ratio (SR) of 2.1, and did so at lower injection pressure than injectors B and C. For injectors B, C, and D, there was a significant ISFC penalty to achieve lower smoke at this operating condition. As shown in Figure 12, injector D could also achieve FSN of 0.1 with low swirl (SR=.6) but with an additional 7 percent ISFC penalty. For low swirl, this is a relatively high ISFC penalty. Injector E, however, achieved the best ISFC with the lowest smoke and lowest swirl. It could be operated at the best-efficiency conditions with less than 0.1 FSN (i.e., not

Sellnau et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 5, Issue 2(May 2012)

smoke-limited). As will be shown in a following section, this injector also performed well at full load with low swirl.

Figure 13. Conceptual Model of Accumulation Mode Particles for LTC and Conventional Diesel [27]

Figure 12. RSM Results for Injectors B, C, D and E (FSN0.1, 1500 rpm-6 bar IMEP)

EXHAUST PARTICULATE SIZE DISTRIBUTION

Particulate emissions for GDCI combustion are expected to be significantly different than PM for spark-ignited engines [24] and for conventional diesel combustion [25, 26]. The type and character of particulate emissions may also depend on properties of the fuel and lube oil. For GDCI, characterization of PM emissions is needed to understand aftertreatment requirements. A conceptual model of accumulation mode particles for LTC and conventional diesel is shown in Figure 13 [27]. During engine tests at 1500 rpm-6bar IMEP, exhaust particulates were sampled from the exhaust runner using a heated sampling system. The sample probe was a radial aperture design, with the intent to sample gas across the exhaust runner. Sample plumbing reduced the pressure from engine backpressure to less than 120 kPa absolute. Sample plumbing was operated at about 191 degree C, and could be purged periodically with high pressure nitrogen gas. The sample was diluted using a TSI 379030 Rotating Disc Thermodiluter [28] and a volatile particle remover (VPR) to suppress volatile particle formation. The VPR effectively removed the center group of particles in Figure 13. Particulate size distribution was measured using a TSI 3090 Engine Exhaust Particle Size Spectrometer [29]. Figures 14 and 15 show a schematic and photo of the sampling system, respectively.

Normalized particulate size distribution data for injectors B, C, D and E are shown in Figure 16. The upper curves in Figure 16 show particle size distributions for injectors B, C, and D optimized for smoke 0.5 FSN. The peaks in these distributions were about 2E7 particles per cubic centimeter at 75 nm, and are attributed to carbonaceous agglomerates associated with accumulation mode. A second mode, the nucleation mode, is also evident in Figure 16 and is largely invariant for the three injectors tested. It has a peak at 10 to 20 nm and typically consists of solid particles such as ash, sulphur compounds, and residues from lubrication oil. By comparison, a conventional diesel at a similar load has peak of about 2E8 particles at 100 nm [30]. These two peaks correspond well with the core and solid particle peaks for the conceptual model shown in Figure 13. Reference levels for room air filtered through a HEPA filter are also shown in Figure 16. As shown in Figure 12, injector D was capable of smoke less than 0.1 FSN depending on in-cylinder swirl. To characterize particulate size distribution for this injector, EEPS measurements were made with various swirl levels. As shown in Figure 16, increasing swirl from 0.6 to 1.8 caused a significant drop in particulate number. Increasing swirl from 1.8 to 3.0 caused a further decrease, for a total decrease of almost 2 orders of magnitude. However, particulate size distribution data for injector E without swirl (SR=0.6) was comparable or lower than injector D with high swirl. These data show that, depending on injection characteristics, very low levels of particulate emissions are achievable with this combustion system.

Sellnau et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 5, Issue 2(May 2012)

TESTS OVER SPEED-LOAD OPERATING RANGE

One objective of this work is to determine feasibility of full-time GDCI operation over the speed-load map. This is important to maximize fuel efficiency on the drive cycle and eliminate the complexity and compromises associated with dual-mode combustion strategies. At low engine loads and speeds, gasoline has a long ignition delay making autoignition (AI) difficult to achieve. At high loads and speeds when boost pressure is higher, ignition delays are short and combustion may be aggressive. The approach to achieve full-time GDCI operation involves variable valve actuation. At low load, an exhaust rebreathing (RB) strategy was selected. Rebreathing of hot exhaust gases provides charge heating and may be controlled by a secondary exhaust lift event. A family of valve lift profiles was designed and camshafts fabricated. The rebreath valve lift profiles are shown in Figure 17. At higher loads, a late-intake-valve-closing (LIVC) strategy was selected. LIVC reduces the effective compression ratio (ECR), reduces compression pressures and temperatures, and thereby increases ignition delay. A family of LIVC intake valve profiles was designed and camshafts fabricated. The shortest of these profiles provides intake closing effectively at bottom-dead-center (called BDC cam) and provides the highest compression pressures and temperatures. The LIVC valve lift profiles and BDC profile are shown in Figure 18.

Figure 14. Schematic of Particulate Sampling System.

Figure 15. Photo of Particulate Sample System.

Figure 17. Secondary rebreath valve lift profiles used for engine tests.

Figure 16. Normalized Exhaust Particulate Size Distribution at 1500-6bar for Optimum Conditions for Injectors B, C, D, and E

Sellnau et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 5, Issue 2(May 2012)

Figure 18. Late-intake-valve closing valve lift profiles used for engine tests. Table 3. Operating Conditions for Tests Over the SpeedLoad Range

Figure 19. Engine Test Results with Injector B for 1500rpm-2bar IMEP, 1500 rpm-3bar IMEP, and 1500 rpm-6bar IMEP

Engine tests were performed at speeds and loads ranging from 1500 rpm-2 bar IMEP up to 3500 rpm-16 bar IMEP. Test conditions are summarized in Table 3. Constant intake air temperature of 50 C was used across the operating range.

LOW-LOAD ENGINE TESTS

To evaluate the exhaust rebreathing strategy, low-load engine tests were performed at 1500rpm-2bar IMEP and 1500rpm-3bar IMEP using injector B and a rebreathing exhaust cam. Exhaust backpressure was varied to adjust the level of rebreathing and hot residuals in the engine. DoE and RSM methods were used to determine optimum injection quantities, timings, and pressure; EGR, and residuals (RSG). Single injection was used at 2 bar IMEP, while double injection was used at 3 bar IMEP. Results are shown in Figures 19 and 20. Figure 20. Engine Test Results with Injector B for 1500rpm-2bar IMEP, 1500 rpm-3bar IMEP, and 1500 rpm-6bar IMEP It was found that high amounts of residuals enabled stable combustion with very low NOx (<0.2 g/kWh) and PM emissions (<0.1 FSN). For 2 bar IMEP, residuals were 67% of total charge mass, while ISFC and CNL were 231 g/kWh and 80 dB, respectively. For 3 bar IMEP, residuals were 23% of the total charge mass, while ISFC and CNL were 226 g/kWh and 80 dB, respectively. In both cases, rebreathing caused reduced airflow to the engine and increased exhaust port temperatures to about 250 C. This temperature is an approximate minimum to maintain a catalyst above light-off temperature. Simulation results for rebreathing can be found later in this section.

Sellnau et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 5, Issue 2(May 2012)

HIGHER-LOAD ENGINE TESTS

Higher-load engine tests were performed at 2000rpm-11bar, 1500rpm-18bar, 2500rpm-18bar, and 3500rpm-16bar IMEP using injector E with various EGR levels and the lowest swirl levels available on the engine (SR=0.6). Injection pressure was low to moderate. Late closing intake cam profiles were used. Because these tests were parametric over limited variable ranges (not DoE), the results are not considered optimized. Results for all test points are summarized in Figures 21 and 22. Very low NOx and smoke were achieved at all operating conditions including 3500rpm-16 bar IMEP, suggesting that aftertreatment for these species might be reduced or eliminated. Even high load, off-cycle emissions appear to be very low. An oxidation catalyst is expected to be needed to meet regulations for HC and CO emissions. Minimum ISFC of 181 g/kW-h was measured at 2000 rpm-11bar, 2500 rpm-18bar, and 3500 rpm-16bar IMEP. ISFC at the lower load conditions were in attractive ranges but may be improved with further development of combustion and injection systems.

cylinder pressures are in reasonable ranges. Additional noise parameters are discussed in the following section.

Figure 22. Test Results for Emissions Parameters.

HEAT RELEASE AND HEAT TRANSFER

Both heat release and heat transfer rate were calculated using the GT-Power engine simulation code [31]. Of the several heat transfer coefficient correlations available in GTPower, the flow option was used in combination with a piston geometry object. Piston, cylinder wall and cylinder head temperatures were calculated using a finite element procedure available within GT-Power. These GT-Power features have yielded good success in matching measured motoring cylinder pressure for engines with and without swirl. For stratified GDCI combustion, both the temperature of the gas in contact with the chamber walls and the surface area exposed to burned gases are affected by injector design, injection strategy, and the GDCI combustion process. These phenomena, which are not accounted for in the simulation, significantly affect heat transfer during combustion and expansion intervals. Therefore, as a postprocessing step, scaling of heat transfer rates was performed over the interval from start of combustion to exhaust valve opening to obtain energy balance. Calculated instantaneous heat release rate and heat transfer rate for tests over the operating range are shown in

Figure 21. Test Results for Combustion Parameters. Combustion noise is shown in Figure 21 and was measured for both firing conditions (bars) and motoring conditions (green lines). Preliminary noise targets are shown by dashed red lines. This shows the noise due to motoring alone is significant at high engine speed with boost. Figure 21 also shows that maximum pressure rise rates and peak

Sellnau et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 5, Issue 2(May 2012)

Figures 23 and 24, respectively. This shows the burning characteristics with typical start of combustion near TDC and end of combustion (EOC) depending on load. While the higher load results are not considered optimized, burn durations are sufficiently long for low noise, and end of combustion is also reasonably abrupt without a long tail indicative of diffusion burning. This provides high expansion ratio for most of the fuel burned for high thermal efficiency over the operating range. Reduced heat transfer through the head, piston, and liner is an important benefit of low temperature combustion. While baseline heat transfer data is not available from the test engine, cycle-integrated heat loss is shown in Table 4. At the lowest loads and lowest speeds, heat loss (as a percentage of fuel energy) is highest since there is a relatively long time for heat transfer and very little fuel is burned. In this case, heat loss due to gas compression alone is a significant portion of the total heat loss (Figure 24). At higher speeds and loads, the opposite is true and cycle-integrated heat loss drops to only 10.6 percent of the fuel energy.

Table 4. Cycle-integrated heat loss as a Percentage of Fuel Energy for various operating conditions.

REBREATHING ANALYSIS
Figure 21 shows that ISFC at the two lowest loads (2 bar and 3 bar IMEP), while quite good, are significantly higher than the other higher load points. Since low load operation requires exhaust rebreathing to raise compression temperature for auto-ignition, it was surmised that higher heat loss during combustion and expansion might explain a portion of the ISFC increase. A simulation study was performed in which the heat release profile was held constant while exhaust rebreath quantity was varied. Results are shown in Figures 25a and 25b. It was found that 60 percent rebreathing produced increased charge temperature of about 122 degree C at intake valve closing. Higher charge temperatures also raised average exhaust port temperature by about 90 degree C. However, because cycle heat transfer increased from 30 to 43 percent of total fuel energy (25b), ISFC also increased about 24 g/kW-h. While this is a significant fuel consumption penalty, the lowload ISFC measured on the test engine in the 220 to 230 g/kWh range is very attractive.

Figure 23. Instantaneous heat release rate for various operating conditions.

Figure 25a. Effect of exhaust rebreath on ISFC and temperatures at 1500 rpm-3bar IMEP. Figure 24. Instantaneous heat transfer rate for various operating conditions.

Sellnau et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 5, Issue 2(May 2012)

Figure 27. Ringing Intensity for Injector D at various operating conditions. Figure 25b. Effect of exhaust rebreath on heat transfer at 1500 rpm-3bar IMEP.

COMBUSTION NOISE EVALUATION

Combustion noise levels are an important factor in developing a compression-ignition combustion system. In this work, combustion noise levels (CNL) are measured using an AVL Combustion Noise meter. The cylinder pressure signal is filtered by a transfer function to simulate noise transmission through the engine structure and the frequency components are then A-weighted [32]. Two other common noise metrics are maximum pressure rise rate (MPRR) and ringing intensity (RI) [33]. Preliminary engine tests were conducted using injector D over the range of engine operating conditions. Both MPRR and RI are plotted in Figures 26 and 27, respectively, and are within acceptable limits of 10 bar/CAD and 5 MW/m2 used by other researchers.

Figure 28. Correlation between MPRR and CNL for various operating conditions.

Figure 26. Maximum Pressure Rise Rate for Injector D at various operating conditions.

Figure 29. Correlation between Ringing Intensity and CNL for various operating conditions. The three noise metrics (CNL, MPRR, and RI) are cross plotted against each other in Figures 28 and 29. The poor correlation over the speed-load range suggests that MPRR and RI may not be good indicators of noise perceived by the human ear. CNL is considered more reliable because of its closer connection to the physics of noise transmission. CNL

Sellnau et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 5, Issue 2(May 2012)

was therefore chosen as the constraint parameter for optimizations in this work. One objective for future work is to develop reliable noise targets for GDCI based on CNL.

6. 7.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

A gasoline direct-injection compression-ignition combustion system is being developed using RON 91 gasoline at low-to-moderate injection pressure. Fuel injection and valvetrain technologies are key enablers. Low temperature combustion was demonstrated from 2 to 18 bar IMEP with diesel-like efficiency, NOx less than 0.2 g/kWh, and PM emissions less than 0.1 FSN. Results suggest that aftertreatment for NOx and PM might be reduced or possibly eliminated, depending on legislated limits. At low load condition of 1500 rpm-2 bar IMEP; a secondary-exhaust-valve-lift event was used to rebreath hot exhaust gas and promote autoignition. A BDC intake cam was also used to maximize effective compression ratio. Even though heat losses increased somewhat due to rebreathing, good ISFC of about 230 g/kWh, stable combustion, and exhaust port temperatures of about 250 C were obtained. At medium load condition of 1500 rpm-6 bar IMEP, injector developments combined with a multiple-late injection strategy (triple) and low swirl produced the best ISFC and lowest smoke. The most advanced injector design, injector E, did not require swirl to achieve very low smoke and NOx levels. Measurements of exhaust particulate size distribution showed that very low PM emissions could be obtained with this combustion system. At higher loads, late intake valve closing was used to reduce cylinder pressure and temperature, and increase ignition delay. Minimum ISFC of 181 g/kWh was obtained. Combustion noise, maximum pressure rise rate, and ringing intensity were in acceptable ranges, however, the correlation among these noise parameters was poor. Combustion noise measured by an AVL Combustion Noise Meter was chosen for optimization studies. Overall, single-cylinder engine tests of a GDCI combustion system indicate good potential for a highefficiency, low-emissions powertrain. Additional testing and development on a multi-cylinder engine is needed, including cold-starting and transient operation.

8.

9.

10.

11. 12.

13.

14.

15.

16. 17. 18.

19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24.

REFERENCES
1. 2. Janssen, A., Jakob, M., Muether, M., Pischinger, S., and Klankermayer, J., Tailor-Made Fuels from Biomass for Partly Homogeneous Low Temperature Combustion Systems, 2011 Aachen Colloquium, 2011. Kokjohn, S., Hanson, R., Splitter, D., Kaddatz, J. et al., Fuel Reactivity Controlled Compression Ignition (RCCI) Combustion in Light- and Heavy-Duty Engines, SAE Int. J. Engines 4(1):360-374, 2011, doi: 10.4271/2011-01-0357. Akihama, K., Takatori, Y., Inagaki, K., Sasaki, S. et al., Mechanism of the Smokeless Rich Diesel Combustion by Reducing Temperature, SAE Technical Paper 2001-01-0655, 2001, doi:10.4271/2001-01-0655. Johansson, B., et al., High-Load Partially Premixed Combustion in a Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine, Diesel Engine Emissions Reduction (DEER) Conference, 2005, Chicago, IL. Kalghatgi, G., Auto-Ignition Quality of Practical Fuels and Implications for Fuel Requirements of Future SI and HCCI Engines, SAE Technical Paper 2005-01-0239, 2005, doi:10.4271/2005-01-0239.

25.

26.

27.

3. 4. 5.

28. 29. 30.

Risberg, P., Kalghatgi, G., ngstrom, H., and Whlin, F., AutoIgnition Quality of Diesel-like Fuels in HCCI Engines, SAE Technical Paper 2005-01-2127, 2005, doi:10.4271/2005-01-2127. Kalghatgi, G., Risberg, P., and ngstrm, H., Advantages of Fuels with High Resistance to Auto-ignition in Late-injection, Lowtemperature, Compression Ignition Combustion, SAE Technical Paper 2006-01-3385, 2006, doi:10.4271/2006-01-3385. Kalghatgi, G., Risberg, P., and ngstrm, H., Partially Pre-Mixed Auto-Ignition of Gasoline to Attain Low Smoke and Low NOx at High Load in a Compression Ignition Engine and Comparison with a Diesel Fuel, SAE Technical Paper 2007-01-0006, 2007, doi: 10.4271/2007-01-0006. Kalghatgi, G. et al., Low NOx and Low Smoke Operation of a Diesel Engine using Gasoline-Like Fuels, ASME 2009 International Combustion Engine Division Spring Technical Conference, ICES2009-76034, 2009. Manente, V., Johansson, B., and Tunestal, P., Partially Premixed Combustion at High Load using Gasoline and Ethanol, a Comparison with Diesel, SAE Technical Paper 2009-01-0944, 2009, doi: 10.4271/2009-01-0944. Manente, V., Johansson, B., and Tunestal, P., Half Load Partially Premixed Combustion, PPC, with High Octane Number Fuels. Gasoline and Ethanol Compared with Diesel, SIAT 2009 295, 2009. Manente, V., Johansson, B., and Tunestal, P., Characterization of Partially Premixed Combustion with Ethanol: EGR Sweeps, Low and Maximum Loads, ASME International Combustion Engine Division 2009 Technical Conference, ICES2009-76165, 2009. Manente, V., Tunestal, P., Johansson, B., and Cannella, W., Effects of Ethanol and Different Type of Gasoline Fuels on Partially Premixed Combustion from Low to High Load, SAE Technical Paper 2010-01-0871, 2010, doi:10.4271/2010-01-0871. Sellnau, M., Sinnamon, J., Hoyer, K., and Husted, H., Gasoline Direct Injection Compression Ignition (GDCI) - Diesel-like Efficiency with Low CO2 Emissions, SAE Int. J. Engines 4(1):2010-2022, 2011, doi: 10.4271/2011-01-1386. Ra, Y., Yun, J.E., and Reitz, R., Numerical Simulation of Diesel and Gasoline-fueled Compression Ignition Combustion with High-Pressure Late Direct Injection, Int. J. Vehicle Design, Vol. 50, Nos. 1,2,3,4. pp. 3-34, 2009. Ra, Y., Yun, J.E., and Reitz, R., Numerical Parametric Study of Diesel Engine Operation with Gasoline, Comb. Sci. and Tech., 181:350-378, 2009. Dempsey, A. and Reitz, R., Computational Optimization of a HeavyDuty Compression Ignition Engine Fueled with Conventional Gasoline, SAE Int. J. Engines 4(1):338-359, 2011, doi:10.4271/2011-01-0356. Ra, Y., Loeper, P., Reitz, R., Andrie, M. et al., Study of High Speed Gasoline Direct Injection Compression Ignition (GDICI) Engine Operation in the LTC Regime, SAE Int. J. Engines 4(1):1412-1430, 2011, doi:10.4271/2011-01-1182. LAB VIEW RT SOFTWARE, Release 2009, National Instruments, Austin TX DRIVVEN, INC., San Antonio, TX Sinnamon, J. and Sellnau, M., A New Technique for Residual Gas Estimation and Modeling in Engines, SAE Technical Paper 2008-01-0093, 2008, doi:10.4271/2008-01-0093. Sellnau, M., Sinnamon, J., Oberdier, L., Dase, C. et al., Development of a Practical Tool for Residual Gas Estimation in IC Engines, SAE Technical Paper 2009-01-0695, 2009, doi:10.4271/2009-01-0695. MODEL-BASED CALIBRATION TOOLBOX, Version 4.1, Mathworks Release 2010B, August 2010 Szybist, J., Szymkowicz, P., and Northrop, W., Fuel Effects on Combustion and Emissions of a Direct-Injection Diesel Engine Operating at Moderate to High Engine Speed and Load, SAE Technical Paper 2012-01-0863, 2012, doi:10.4271/2012-01-0863. Kolodziej, C., Wirojsakunchai, E., Foster, D., Schmidt, N. et al., Comprehensive Characterization of Particulate Emissions from Advanced Diesel Combustion, SAE Technical Paper 2007-01-1945, 2007, doi:10.4271/2007-01-1945. Payri, F., Benajes, J., Novella, R., and Kolodziej, C., Effect of Intake Oxygen Concentration on Particle Size Distribution Measurements from Diesel Low Temperature Combustion, SAE Int. J. Engines 4(1): 1888-1902, 2011, doi:10.4271/2011-01-1355. Montajir, R., Kawai, T., Goto, Y., and Odaka, M., Thermal Conditioning of Exhaust Gas: Potential for Stabilizing Diesel NanoParticles, SAE Technical Paper 2005-01-0187, 2005, doi: 10.4271/2005-01-0187. MODEL 379020 ROTATING DISK THERMODILUTER, Operation Manual, TSI Incorporated, June, 2009. MODEL 3090 ENGINE EXHAUST PARTICLE SIZE SPECTROMETER, Operation Manual, TSI Incorporated, October, 2010. Parks, J., Efficient Emissions Control for Multi-Mode Lean DI Engines, 2011 DOE Hydrogen and Vehicle Technologies Annual Merit Review, May 9-13, 2011.

Sellnau et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 5, Issue 2(May 2012) 31. GT Power Software, Version 7.2, Gamma Technologies, Inc., Westmont, Illinois 2011. 32. Herbert, A. J., and Russell, M., Measurement of Combustion Noise in Diesel Engines, Mechanical Engineering Technology, April 1982. 33. Eng, J., Characterization of Pressure Waves in HCCI Combustion, SAE Technical Paper 2002-01-2859, 2002, doi:10.4271/2002-01-2859.

FID FIS FSN FTIR GCR GDCI HC

Flame Ionization Detector Fuel injection system Filtered Smoke Number Fourier Transform Infrared Geometric Compression Ratio Gasoline Direct Injection Compression Ignition g/kW-h Hydrocarbon emissions Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition Heavy Duty Heat Release J/CAD bar Heat Release Rate Indicated Mean Effective Pressure

CONTACT INFORMATION
Mark Sellnau Engineering Manager Delphi Advanced Powertrain 3000 University Drive Auburn Hills, MI 48326 mark.sellnau@delphi.com

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work was supported by the US Dept of Energy, Office of Vehicle Technology, and administered by Gurpreet Singh under contract DOE DE-EE0003258. The authors gratefully acknowledge contributions to this work from Dan Trytko and Jeff Webb (Delphi test engineers); Philip Dingle and Erwann Topenot of Delphi Diesel Systems; Professor Rolf Reitz, Professor Chris Rutland, Harmit Juneja, Chris Wright, and Mark Huebler of Wisconsin Engine Research Consultants (WERC); Professor Jaal Ghandhi and Dr. Jason Oakley at Engine Research Center (ERC) University of Wisconsin-Madison.

HCCI HD HR HRR IMEP ISCO ISCO2 ISFC ISHC ISNOx IVC LD LIVC LTC MBC MHRR MLI NOx J/CAD

g/kW-h Indicated specific carbon monoxide emissions g/kW-h Indicated specific carbon dioxide emissions g/kW-h Indicated specific fuel consumption g/kW-h Indicated specific hydrocarbon emissions g/kW-h Indicated specific nitrous oxide emissions CAD Intake valve closing Light Duty Late Intake Valve Closing Low Temperature Combustion Model Based Control Max Heat Release Rate Multiple Late Injection Oxides of Nitrogen Emissions

ACRONYMS
aTDC crank deg BDC C CAD CE CFD CNL CO DoE EEPS EGR EOC percent by mass crank degrees dBA g/kW-h degrees degrees percent After Top Dead Center Bottom Dead Center Centigrade Crank angle degrees Combustion efficiency Computational Fluid Dynamics Combustion Noise Level Carbon monoxide emissions Design of Experiments Engine Exhaust Particle Size Spectrometer Exhaust gas recirculation End of Combustion

Sellnau et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 5, Issue 2(May 2012)

PCP PHI PID Pinj PM PPCI Prail PW Q Q% RB RI RON RPM RSM SI SOC SOI TDC VPR

bar

Peak cylinder pressure Equivalence Ratio Proportional, Integral, Derivative Controller

bar

Injection Pressure Particulate Matter Partially Premixed Compression Ignition

bar ms mm3 percent

Rail Pressure Pulse Width Quantity injected Quantity injected as percent of total fuel Rebreath

MW/m2 Ringing Intensity Research Octane Number rev/min Revolutions per minute Response Surface Modeling Spark ignited crank degrees Start of Combustion CAD btdc Start of Injection Top dead center Volatile Particle Remover