Downloaded from http://iranpaper.

ir
Downloaded from SAE International by Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Monday, June 27, 2016

SAE TECHNICAL
PAPER SERIES 2006-01-0430

A Critical Review of Experimental Research

on Hydrogen Fueled SI Engines
Sebastian Verhelst and Roger Sierens
Ghent University

Stefaan Verstraeten
Karel de Grote-Hogeschool

Reprinted From: Hydrogen IC Engines

(SP-2009)

2006 SAE World Congress

Detroit, Michigan
April 3-6, 2006

400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-5760 Web: www.sae.org
Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
Downloaded from SAE International by Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Monday, June 27, 2016

The Engineering Meetings Board has approved this paper for publication. It has successfully completed
SAE's peer review process under the supervision of the session organizer. This process requires a
minimum of three (3) reviews by industry experts.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,
without the prior written permission of SAE.

For permission and licensing requests contact:

SAE Permissions
400 Commonwealth Drive
Warrendale, PA 15096-0001-USA
Email: permissions@sae.org
Tel: 724-772-4028
Fax: 724-776-3036

For multiple print copies contact:

SAE Customer Service

Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada)
Tel: 724-776-4970 (outside USA)
Fax: 724-776-0790
Email: CustomerService@sae.org

ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright © 2006 SAE International
Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE.
The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper. A process is available by which discussions
will be printed with the paper if it is published in SAE Transactions.

Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication by SAE should send the
manuscript or a 300 word abstract to Secretary, Engineering Meetings Board, SAE.

Printed in USA
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
Downloaded from SAE International by Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Monday, June 27, 2016
A Critical Review of Experimental Research on
Hydrogen Fueled SI Engines
Copyright © 2006 SAE International
ABSTRACT
The literature on hydrogen fueled internal combustion
engines is surprisingly extensive and papers have been
published continuously from the 1930’s up to the present
day. Ghent University has been working on hydrogen
engines for more than a decade. A summary of the most
important findings, resulting from a literature study and the
experimental work at Ghent University, is given in the
present paper, to clarify some contradictory claims and
ultimately to provide a comprehensive overview of the
design features in which a dedicated hydrogen engine
differs from traditionally fueled engines.
Topics that are discussed include abnormal combustion
(backfire, pre-ignition and knock), mixture formation
techniques (carbureted, port injected, direct injection) and
load control strategies (power output versus NOx trade-
off). Attention is given to the most recent research by car
manufacturers BMW and Ford, reporting hybrid control
strategies (PFI+DI, lean burn + stoichiometric operation
using EGR) to obtain power outputs equivalent to gasoline
engines with extremely low emission levels. Recent
results from experiments with EGR on a hydrogen engine
at Ghent University are also given. Finally, a synthesis of
hydrogen engine design features is given, that make the
most of hydrogen’s advantages and counter its
disadvantages. Areas requiring further research are
highlighted.
INTRODUCTION
The incentives for a hydrogen economy are the absence of
harmful emissions, the sustainability (potentially CO2-
free) and the energy security. When considering hydrogen
as a fuel for transport applications, most people make the
link to fuel cells (FCs). However, the present paper
focuses on hydrogen-fueled internal combustion engines
(ICEs) for the following reasons.
2006-01-0430
Sebastian Verhelst and Roger Sierens
Ghent University
Stefaan Verstraeten
Karel de Grote-Hogeschool
The internal combustion engine has benefited from a
continuous development during more than a century and
is still showing potential for further optimization. Fuel cell
technology on the other hand is still in its infancy. This
also reflects in the price, with a prohibitive cost for fuel
cells. Naturally, the conversion of an ICE to hydrogen
increases its cost but this cost is very limited (not
counting the cost of the hydrogen storage and safety
devices, as these are needed regardless of the propulsion
unit, the only additional cost of hydrogen fueled ICEs is
the cost of additional H2 injectors, a modified engine
control unit and possibly some changes to the ignition
and crankcase ventilation system).
Using ICEs allows bi-fuel operation (e.g. the engine can
run on gasoline as well as on hydrogen), alleviating fuel
station density and autonomy requirements. This could
facilitate the start-up of a hydrogen economy, where the
experience gained with transport, fuelling and storage
directly translates to fuel cell vehicles. Fuel cells are
currently still handicapped by cold-start problems
(freezing of the fuel cell stack) and the necessity of very
pure hydrogen to avoid poisoning of the FC. The hydrogen
fueled ICE does not suffer from these problems.
The most frequently hailed advantage of fuel cells is their
high theoretical efficiency. However, not only do practical
fuel cells not (yet) reach these high efficiencies, the fuel
cell stack (of which the efficiency is mostly cited) is also
part of a fuel cell system and the overall efficiency is thus
lower. Furthermore, the efficiency decreases as the load
increases. This is not an important disadvantage for light-
duty applications as these are in part load most of the
time, but could become important for heavy duty. The
large difference between the theoretical efficiency of the
fuel cell stack and the effective efficiency of an ICE thus
mostly exists on paper and is much smaller in practice.
Furthermore, hydrogen fueled ICEs also have the potential
for an increased engine efficiency (see later), with a
demonstrated indicated efficiency of 52% for a hydrogen
fueled spark-ignition engine [1] and a power generation
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
Downloaded from SAE International by Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Monday, June 27, 2016
efficiency of 49% for a hydrogen fueled compression-
ignition engine [2].
Finally, the current number of motor vehicles worldwide is
estimated at about 800 million. To replace these in a
relatively short time by fuel cell vehicles is impossible.
In summary: the hydrogen fueled ICE and FC both have
their own advantages and both merit research to show
their full potential. The hydrogen fueled ICE can function
as a transition technology to fuel cells or might take up its
own share of the market next to fuel cells (and other
technologies).
EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH: LITERATURE
REVIEW
Papers on hydrogen fueled internal combustion engines
have been published continuously from the 1930’s up to
the present day, although most of them are concentrated
around a few points in time (e.g. during and in the years
following the oil crises). A summary of the most important
findings of these works is given in the next sections,
following Verhelst [3].
ABNORMAL COMBUSTION
The suppression of abnormal combustion in hydrogen
engines has proven to be quite a challenge and measures
taken to avoid abnormal combustion have important
implications for engine design, mixture formation and load
control. For spark-ignition engines, three regimes of
abnormal combustion exist: knock (auto-ignition of the
end gas region), preignition (uncontrolled ignition induced
by a hot spot, premature to the spark ignition) and
backfire (premature ignition during the intake stroke,
which could be seen as an early form of pre-ignition,
backfire is also referred to as backflash, flashback and
induction ignition). The effects knock and pre-ignition can
have are well known: in the best case increased noise and
vibration, in the worst case major engine damage. The
effects of backfire are a loud ‘bang’ in the best case, an
engine stop as the fuel is consumed before it can enter
the cylinders and deliver work, or a destruction of the
intake manifold in the worst case.
Backfire has been a particularly tenacious obstacle to the
development of hydrogen engines. Most, if not all, of the
early literature mentions causes of backfire and
countermeasures as it so frequently occurs in hydrogen
engines with external mixture formation (backfire can only
occur when a combustible charge is present in the intake
port). The causes cited for backfire are:
• Hot spots in the combustion chamber: deposits and
particulates [4,5], the spark plug [6,7], residual gas
[7-9], exhaust valves [9-12], etc. These hot spots are
cited to easily cause a backfire ‘because of the low
ignition energy of hydrogen’, which is an order of
magnitude smaller than for typical hydrocarbons, and
the wide flammability limits. Deposits and particulates
originate from the (partial) combustion of lubricating oil
and/or rust formation during an extended standstill
(older engines).
• Residual energy in the ignition circuit: due to the
lower ion concentration of a hydrogen/air flame
compared to a hydrocarbon/air flame, it is possible
that the ignition energy is not completely deposited in
the flame and remains in the ignition circuit until the
cylinder conditions are such that a second, unwanted,
ignition can occur, namely during the expansion or
the intake stroke, when the pressure is low [7,13].
• Induction in the ignition cable: with multi-cylinder
engines, the (controlled) ignition in one cylinder can
cause an induced ignition in another cylinder when
the individual ignition cables are placed close to each
other [5].
• Combustion in the piston top land persisting up to
inlet valve opening time and igniting the fresh charge
[7,14-16]. This is caused by the smaller quenching
gap of hydrogen mixtures compared to typical
hydrocarbons, which enables a hydrogen flame to
propagate into the top land.
• Pre-ignition: pre-ignition is often encountered in
hydrogen engines because of the low ignition energy
and wide flammability limits of hydrogen. As a
premature ignition causes the mixture to burn mostly
during the compression stroke, the temperature in the
combustion chamber rises, which causes the hot
spot that led to the pre-ignition to increase in
temperature, resulting in another, earlier, pre-ignition
in the next cycle. This advancement of the pre-ignition
continues until it occurs during the intake stroke and
causes backfire [1,5,11,17]. The mechanism is
termed a runaway pre-ignition and can also result
from a knocking cycle, increasing the chamber
temperature and creating a hot spot [5].
In the present authors’ opinion, the low ignition energy is
often too easily pointed at as the main cause of backfire.
The ignition energy is defined by the minimal spark energy
needed to ignite the mixture [18], whereas the ignition by
thermal masses such as the valves and residual gases is
more related to the auto-ignition temperature of the
mixture, the temperature at which the mixture will
spontaneously ignite. As the auto-ignition temperature of
hydrogen is quite high (higher than for methane and
gasoline), it seems highly unlikely that these thermal
masses would induce backfire as they normally do not
reach the auto-ignition temperature if the engine is
properly set up. As hydrogen compression ignition
engines have been demonstrated to require very high
compression ratios in order to ensure self-ignition [2], it is
highly improbable that e.g. residual gases could initiate
ignition thermally (again: assuming normal working
conditions, with optimal spark timing etc.). Furthermore,
this cannot explain the occurrence of backfire at lean
conditions (low temperatures).
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
Downloaded from SAE International by Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Monday, June 27, 2016
Also, deposits and particulates are frequently cited
although (assuming an engine in good condition) the
concentration of these are extremely low for hydrogen
engines. The ‘inert dust in air’ has even been cited [8],
probably forgetting the function of the engine air filter.
Experiments have been conducted where all hot spots
were eliminated (careful cleaning of the engine, enhanced
oil control or even non-lubricated operation, scavenging of
the residual gases, cold spark plugs, cooled exhaust
valves, ...), as well as any uncontrolled spark-induced
ignition, and backfire still occurred [7,15]. This suggests
that the small quenching distance of hydrogen (together
with the wide flammability limits), allowing combustion in
the piston top land (when the piston rings and crevice
geometries are those as used for the traditional fuels), is a
parameter that has been overlooked by many workers.
Hydrogen engines have been demonstrated, running on
stoichiometric mixtures without any occurrence of
backfire, by careful selection of piston rings and crevice
volumes, without any need for timed injection (see later) or
cooled exhaust valves [14]. Workers that have paid
attention to increased cooling, enhanced ‘oil control’ by
mounting different piston rings, increased scavenging etc.,
attribute the resulting wider backfire-free operation region
to a reduction of hot spots but have simultaneously
(sometimes possibly without realizing it) taken measures
to suppress crevice combustion.
There is some ambiguity in the literature on the relation
backfire–compression ratio. Some authors mention a
decrease of the compression ratio to increase the
resistance to backfire [12,19] by lowering the combustion
chamber temperature; others state that an increase in
compression ratio is advi sed, resulting in an increased
combustion chamber area to volume ratio, thus increasing
the heat transfer and cooling residual gases [8,11,20]. An
increased compression ratio also lowers the amount of
residuals. Both are valid mechanisms and indicate the
existence of an optimum compression ratio: increasing it
results in higher power due to increased efficiency up to a
certain point, where the mixture has to be set leaner to
avoid pre-ignition and a power decrease is noted [9,21].
To conclude the discussion of the backfire phenomenon:
all causes itemized above can indeed result in backfire
and the design of a hydrogen engine should try to avoid
them, as engine conditions different from normal operation
are always a possibility. Even though backfire that is
stated to be the result of hot spots might have other
causes, hot spots still have to be avoided as they can
lead to pre-ignition which increases the engine’s thermal
loading and can have detrimental effects even without
leading to backfire (e.g. in an internal mixture formation
engine, see later).
The knocking behavior of hydrogen engines has been
misunderstood more than the backfire phenomenon. With
backfire, some causes have been mixed up or their effects
overestimated, but concerning knock there are completely
contradictory claims in the literature. To begin with, most
papers fail to point out that the knock resistance is a
property of the fuel/air mixture, stating octane numbers
without the corresponding equivalence ratio. Some claim
the octane number to be very low [22, 23], others claim it
to be very high [1,8,11]. One paper was even found that
stated both ‘hydrogen has a high effective octane number’
and ‘the equivalent octane number of hydrogen is rather
low’ [24]! Only very few papers mention octane numbers
as a function of the mixture richness1 [20,25].
Experiments have been reported that show hydrogen to
act as an anti-knock agent when added to unleaded iso-
octane [8,26]. To detect hydrogen knock, in-cylinder
pressure transducer traces are indispensable, as these
allow a distinction between pre-ignition and harsh
combustion. Conventional ‘knock’ meters will mistake
hydrogen pre-ignition for knocking combustion.
There is some evidence that the causes of hydrogen
engine knock could be different from gasoline knock,
being caused by excessive flame speeds rather than an
end-gas reaction [8,11]. Thus, reducing the rate of
pressure rise might be more effective to control knock
than limiting the combustion period (e.g. using a
quiescent combustion chamber, see later).
Reviewing the experimental literature on hydrogen SI
engines, pre-ignition seems to be the limiting factor
concerning compression ratios, spark timings and mixture
equivalence ratios, rather than knock. Measurements with
a compression ratio of 11:1 and a supercharging pressure
of 0.85 bar (gauge) on stoichiometric mixtures have been
reported [9], as well as measurements on lean mixtures
using compression ratios of 14:1 and higher [1,27], all
without any appearance of knock. It thus seems safe to
say that hydrogen has a higher effective octane number
than regular gasoline, although it would be interesting to
have quantitative data.
It is noteworthy that the experimental and theoretical work
of Karim and co-workers [23,28] reports very wide
knocking regions, where stoichiometric mixtures are
claimed to knock even at compression ratios as low as
6:1. As these results disagree with every other experiment
reported in the literature, they seem highly unlikely and
are probably affected by causes unknown to the authors.
MIXTURE FORMATION
A range of mixture formation methods has been tested for
hydrogen engines, mostly in the pursuit of backfire-free
operation:
• external mixture formation with a gas carburetor [7,
20]
1
Studies conducted by Ford and Mobil Oil in 1999 showed an
effective octane rating of about 140 for a hydrogen/air mixture
with an equivalence ratio φ of 0.4 (Reviewer comment).
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
Downloaded from SAE International by Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Monday, June 27, 2016
• external mixture formation with ‘parallel induction’,
that is: some means of delaying the introduction of
hydrogen, e.g. a fuel line closed by a separate valve
on top of the intake valve that only opens when the
intake valve has lifted enough [29]
• external mixture formation with a gas carburetor and
water injection [12,22], sometimes with additional
exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) [30]
• external mixture formation with timed manifold or port
fuel injection (PFI) [1,5,9,14,17,21,31], sometimes
also with some means of ‘parallel induction’ [25]
• internal mixture formation through direct injection (DI)
[32-35], a method that BMW in particular is exploring
extensively [9,36-39]
The injection of water, delayed introduction of hydrogen
and direct injection are all primarily intended to delay or
prevent backfire either by additional cooling or by avoiding
a combustible mixture during the intake phase. During the
last decade, only timed port injection and direct injection
(during the compression stroke or later) have been used,
as the other methods are less flexible and controllable.
External mixture formation by means of port fuel injection
has been demonstrated to result in higher engine
efficiencies, extended lean operation, lower cyclic
variation and lower NOx production compared to direct
injection [27,40]. This is the consequence of the higher
mixture homogeneity due to longer mixing times for PFI
as well as decreased mixing for DI as the intake
generated turbulence contributes less to the mixing. At
high loads, delaying the injection timing for DI can result
in significantly lowered NOx emissions [36,37,39]. DI also
enables a multi-phase injection strategy for decreased
NOx and NVH [37].
Additionally, the cost and complexity are significantly
lower for PFI than for DI [10] and retrofitting an existing
engine is possible. On the other hand, the power output of
an external mixture formation hydrogen engine is limited
because of the decrease in volumetric efficiency: due to
the low density of hydrogen and small air requirement for
stoichiometric mixtures, the cylinder volume taken up by
the hydrogen in a stoichiometric mixture amounts to
29.5%. This results in a volumetric energy content
decrease of some 18% for hydrogen compared to
gasoline. If direct injection is used to introduce the
hydrogen after the intake valve has closed, the maximum
power output can be 17% higher compared to gasoline.
An important advantage of DI over PFI is the impossibility
of backfire. This too increases the maximum power output
of DI compared to PFI as richer mixtures can be used
without fear of backfire. Pre-ignition can still occur though,
unless very late injection is used. External mixture
formation provides a greater degree of freedom concerning
storage methods: direct injection during the compression
stroke needs high pressure hydrogen and thus effectively
requires liquid hydrogen storage (metal hydrides can only
provide low pressure hydrogen, compressed hydrogen
could be used but this limits the effective tank contents as
the tank can only be emptied down to the fuel injection
pressure; compressing gaseous hydrogen on board would
mean an extra compressor and a substantial energy
demand).
Thus, both external and internal mixture formation have
their advantages and disadvantages. DI is better for full
load performance (maximum power output), PFI is better
at part load (maximum engine efficiency). Engine designs
have been proposed using both mixture formation
techniques [40-42]. Contemporary reviews of mixture
formation techniques for hydrogen engines can be found in
refs. [11,41]. Finally, it should be noted that whereas
hydrogen injectors for PFI are currently commercially
available, DI injectors are not and still require development
to obtain sufficiently high flow rates and attain the
robustness needed for the harsh combustion chamber
environment [38].
LOAD CONTROL STRATEGIES
Hydrogen is a very versatile fuel when it comes to load
control. The high flame speeds of hydrogen mixtures and
its wide flammability limits permit very lean operation and
substantial dilution. The engine efficiency and the
emission of NOx are the two main parameters used to
decide the load control strategy. Constant equivalence
ratio throttled operation has been used but mainly for
demonstration purposes [29,30], as it is fairly easy to run
a lean burn throttled hydrogen engine (accepting the
severe power output penalty). Where possible, wide open
throttle (WOT) operation is used to take advantage of the
associated increase in engine efficiency [25,27],
regulating load with mixture richness (qualitative control)
instead of volumetric efficiency (quantitative control) and
thus avoiding pumping losses. Limitations to WOT
operation are due to misfires, unburned hydrogen and
decreased stability at very low load (e.g. idling) and NOx
emissions at medium to full load. Thus, throttling is used
at very low loads to increase combustion stability and
decrease unburned hydrogen emissions [1,9,12,20,34].
Moreover, this increases the efficiency at these
conditions: the efficiency gain through decrease of
unburned hydrogen emissions offsets the efficiency loss
by throttling. The engine efficiency using throttled or WOT
operation is compared in refs. [1,21], the lean limit at
which throttling is introduced is engine dependent and
ranges from λ = 3 / φ = 0.33 [12] to λ = 4 / φ = 0.25 [1, 9].
For higher loads, flame temperatures quickly exceed the
NOx generation limit (see for instance Fig. 2). This results
in a NOx limit to WOT operation. One could restrict the
mixture richness and use sufficiently lean mixtures to
stay below a 10 or 100 ppm NOx limit, but this implies a
large decrease in maximum power output. Alternatively,
the engine can be throttled above this limit, using
stoichiometric mixtures and thus enabling the use of a
conventional three way catalyst for NOx reduction [9], with
an associated decrease in engine efficiency. Yet another
strategy is the use of EGR to control load: using
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
Downloaded from SAE International by Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Monday, June 27, 2016
stoichiometric mixtures but instead of throttling, recycling
exhaust gas in a proportion dependent on the power
demand [21,43]. This gives a better efficiency compared
to throttling. Water injection can also be used to decrease
NOx emissions from the richer mixtures [12], and is more
effective than EGR [30] but is impractical.
If a hydrogen engine is designed for single speed/power
operation, e.g. for stationary power generation or for a
series hybrid vehicle, very clean and highly efficient
operation is possible without any after treatment (of which
the effectiveness could deteriorate with time). NOx
emissions below 10 ppm or even 1 ppm, with indicated
efficiencies of perhaps 50% are possible [27,44,45].
Hydrogen is the only fuel with which this is possible (with
hydrocarbons, decreasing NOx emissions with lean burn
implies increased unburned hydrocarbon emissions).
Hybrid vehicles using a hydrogen fueled SI engine have
been demonstrated [46,47] and have the potential of a
driving cycle fuel economy approaching fuel cell vehicles
[47,48].
RESEARCH AT THE LABORATORY OF
TRANSPORT TECHNOLOGY, UGENT
ENGINE GENERATIONS
The laboratory of Transport Technology at Ghent
University has been working on the development and
optimization of hydrogen engines for 15 years. The
authors consider four generations in the development of
hydrogen fueled engines.
In the first generation a gas venturi was used. With a gas
carburettor a large volume of combustible mixture is
always present in the inlet manifold. To avoid backfire, the
engine has to run lean (λ = 2) which results in a low power
output.
For the second generation the same technologies were
used as for gasoline SI engines: multipoint sequential
(port) injection and electronic engine control. A possible
strategy is then to use a late injection so that the
admitted air will cool the inlet manifold and the
combustion chamber before the injection of hydrogen.
These injectors are now commercially available (after a
delay of introduction due to the high volume of a low
density gas to inject in a short time). Even with a late
injection a stoichiometric mixture (λ = 1) is not always
possible and the power output is lower than a
corresponding gasoline engine, see e.g. Ford’s results [1].
On third generation engines, currently under investigation,
the mixture is kept stoichiometric (λ = 1) at high loads. To
avoid backfire, exhaust gas recirculation or throttling is
used. At this stoichiometric mixture a three way catalyst
can be used to decrease the NOx emissions. With turbo
or supercharging and intercooling the same or a higher
power output can be obtained as for a gasoline engine, as
demonstrated by BMW obtaining an indicated mean
effective pressure (imep) of 18 bar [9], and Ford reaching
gasoline engine torque outputs with a (absolute) boost
pressure of 1.85 bar [21].
Finally for the upcoming fourth generation, research is
going on into advanced direct injection of hydrogen in SI
engines, e.g. by BMW [36-39,42]. These different engine
‘generations’ are illustrated in the following sections with a
brief discussion of the experimental findings at Ghent
University.
VALMET ENGINE
The very first work done was basically a proof of concept.
Simply put, a direct injection diesel engine was taken
(Valmet inline four, 4.4 litre), the diesel fuel injectors were
replaced by spark plugs, the compression ratio was
lowered (from 16:1 to 8.7:1) by installing different pistons
and a gas carburettor was mounted [49]. The influence of
engine parameters on the combustion of hydrogen was
studied using heat release analysis of cylinder pressure
measurements [50]. The study of the cylinder pressure
prior and during the occurrence of backfire showed a
runaway pre-ignition to lead to backfire [51]. The pre-
ignition was mostly accompanied by engine knock and a
knock detection algorithm based on cylinder pressure
data was proposed to avoid knock and backfire [52]. The
gas carburettor was eventually replaced by a sequential
injection system, involving the testing of gas injectors for
hydrogen (at the time not commercially available and
unreliable) [53].
These tests have proved that it is not difficult to run an
engine on hydrogen (under lean conditions), but they have
also shown that special attention is necessary for the
power output, the NOx emissions and the backfire
problem. The original Valmet diesel engine has a power
output of 64 kW, which can also be reached with methane
(CH4, major component of natural gas) but not at all with
hydrogen (due to the lean conditions necessary to avoid
backfire), see Fig. 1 [49,54]. Figure 2 shows the (raw,
engine-out) NOx emissions, again for natural gas and
hydrogen [49,54]. At a certain air to fuel ratio the NOx
emissions for hydrogen are higher than for natural gas
(and gasoline). Only at very lean mixtures (? = 2), the level
becomes acceptably low.
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
Downloaded from SAE International by Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Monday, June 27, 2016
Figure 1: Power output Pe,n of the Valmet engine as a function
of engine speed n, compression ratio ε and air/fuel
equivalence ratio λ, fueled with methane or hydrogen
Figure 2: NOx emissions of the Valmet engine as a function
of the air/fuel equivalence ratio λ, for varying compression
ratio ε, fueled with methane or hydrogen
The backfire phenomenon is shown in Fig. 3 [51].
Successive pressure cycles are shown, indicating the
runaway pre-ignition till finally the pre-ignition occurs
before the inlet valve closure (IVC) (cycle 32) resulting in
the explosion of the mixture in the inlet manifold.
This (extended) proof of concept on the Valmet engine
has indicated the focus of all further research on hydrogen
fueled internal combustion engines:
• backfire-safe operation
• increase of the power output
• decrease of the NOx emissions
Figure 3: Individual pressure curves of the
runaway pre-ignition
GENERAL MOTORS ENGINE
Next a General Motors type 454 engine (better known as
the Chevrolet “Big Block”) was adapted for gaseous fuels.
The 7.4l V8 engine was initially equipped with a gas
carburettor and experiments were carried out with natural
gas, mixtures of natural gas and hydrogen, and pure
hydrogen [55]. Then a multipoint sequential injection
system was installed with a programmable engine
management (second generation).
Attention was given to a qualitative control of the load
(variation of the richness of the hydrogen-air mixture),
beneficial for the engine efficiency compared to a
quantitative control using a throttle valve. Also injection
and ignition maps were optimized, a forced crankcase
ventilation system was mounted and supercharging was
applied [56,57]. The lubrication oil was analyzed revealing
a substantial decrease in its lubricating quality, caused by
the presence of hydrogen (from blowby) in the crankcase.
More specifically, the concentration of various additives
had decreased, esters appearing in the unused oil had
almost completely disappeared in the used oil and the
viscosity index had decreased. This is understandable
when one knows that hydrogen is used in the industry to
harden oils to fats (breaking open the double carbon to
carbon bonds).
CFR ENGINE
A single cylinder CFR engine (fixed speed of 600 rpm,
variable compression ratio) has been initially equipped
with a gas carburettor (first generation), then with a
sequential injector (second generation) and is now
working with a sequential injector (and MoTeC control
unit), exhaust gas recirculation and three way catalyst
(third generation).
Detailed studies were carried out:
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
Downloaded from SAE International by Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Monday, June 27, 2016
• pressure measurements in the combustion chamber
as a function of load (equivalence ratio), compression
ratio, ignition timing …
• influence of the position of the injector and injection
timing on the power output and efficiency [58,59]
• NOx reduction strategies
Exhaust gas recirculation is an effective means for NOx
reduction and an especially interesting option at
stoichiometric operation as the high NOx reduction
efficiency of a standard three way catalyst can then be
exploited. Furthermore, one could vary the engine power
output by changing the amount of recycled exhaust gas,
instead of throttling, thus avoiding engine efficiency
penalties.
A comparison was made between lean burn operation and
stoichiometric operation with EGR, in terms of efficiency,
power output, NOx emissions and backfire resistance
[60]. As an example, Figs. 4 and 5 compare the lean burn
with the EGR load control strategy. Fig. 4 shows the NOx
emissions before and after the TWC as a function of the
air to fuel equivalence ratio (here, the power output is
controlled by the equivalence ratio, the figure shows a
power range of about 90 to 75% of maximum power
output). Fig. 5 plots the NOx emissions before and after
the TWC as a function of the percentage of EGR (here,
the power output is controlled by the EGR percentage,
while maintaining a stoichiometric mixture, the figure
shows a power range of about 100 to 70% of maximum
power output).
These tests clearly indicate the advantage of the λ=1 +
EGR strategy over the lean burn strategy in terms of NOx
reduction potential. Only at stoichiometric or at rich
conditions, there is enough hydrogen present in the
exhaust to act as an active agent to reduce the NOx.
Figure 5 learns that the conversion efficiency of the TWC
decreases with the EGR percentage, which is probably
due to the exhaust temperature dropping below the light-
off temperature of the TWC.
Figure 4: NOX emissions before and after TWC, as a function
of the equivalence ratio
Figure 5: NOX emissions before and after TWC,
stoichiometric operation with variable EGR percentage
AUDI ENGINE
A single cylinder research engine of Audi origin (engine
speed 1000 – 4500 rpm) was equipped with a high
pressure transducer and two injectors in the inlet duct (for
one cylinder). The ignition- and injection timing are
controlled by a MoTeC M4 Pro engine control unit. Initial
results using methane and hydrogen are given by
Verstraeten et al. [61].
Recently, a study of backfire causes was started,
examining the influence of various parameters (ignition
timing, number of injectors, injection timing, injector
location, …) on the backfire phenomenon by looking for
the pre-ignition limited equivalence ratio. It was found that
on this engine, backfire is always caused by a runaway
pre-ignition.
Unfortunately, due to problems with excessive vibration on
the pressure transducer it was not possible to obtain
confirmation from pressure diagrams. However, runaway
pre-ignition is thought to be the most likely mechanism
based on previous experience and the engine behaviour. In
the following, the air to fuel equivalence ratio below which
pre-ignition and consequently backfire occurs is termed
the pre-ignition limit.
The ignition timing proved to be a very important
parameter, due to the high flame speeds of near to
stoichiometric hydrogen-air mixtures. Setting the ignition
timing one degree off can increase the thermal loading of
the engine enough for pre-ignition to occur, evolving in a
runaway pre-ignition and backfire. At near to
stoichiometric mixtures, optimal ignition timings are
mostly after TDC.
Cooling of the combustion chamber by using a late
injection strategy was found to be offset by the time
needed to ensure a homogeneous mixing. This is
illustrated in Fig. 6 showing the pre-ignition limit as a
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
Downloaded from SAE International by Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Monday, June 27, 2016
function of the end of injection (in °ca BTDC). It can
clearly be seen that the pre-ignition limit improves at first
with a later injection (going from 220 to 180 °ca BTDC) as
more time is available for cooling, but gets worse for very
late injections as mixing deteriorates (intake valve closes
at 114 °ca BTDC).
Figure 6: Influence of injection timing on pre-ignition limit
As a consequence, using 2 injectors to enable later
injection timings and a longer cooling period, did not prove
to be beneficial, with the pre-ignition limit being the same
when using 1 or 2 injectors (in this case, around λ=1.4),
there exists an optimum injection timing which is a
compromise between mixing and cooling time. Using the
same timing for the two injectors proved best. Using two
injectors is necessary at high engine speeds and loads for
delivering the required amount of fuel.
OVERVIEW OF DESIGN FEATURES OF
DEDICATED HYDROGEN SI ENGINES
This paper has indicated the advantages of hydrogen as a
fuel for spark ignited internal combustion engines and has
shown that the hydrogen engine is growing up. An
overview was given of the development by car
manufacturers, research centers and also of the research
at the laboratory of Transport Technology, Ghent
University. This can be synthesized in the following
overview of the design features in which a dedicated
hydrogen engine differs from traditionally fueled engines:
• Spark plugs: use cold rated spark plugs to avoid
spark plug electrode temperatures exceeding the
auto-ignition limit and causing backfire [6,13]. Cold
rated spark plugs can be used since there are hardly
any spark plug deposits to burn off. Do not use spark
plugs with platinum electrodes as this can be a
catalyst to hydrogen oxidation [8,10] (platinum has
been used in the exhaust to oxidize unburned
hydrogen [29]).
• Ignition system: avoid uncontrolled ignition due to
residual ignition energy by properly grounding the
ignition system or changing the ignition cable’s
electrical resistance [12,13]; avoid induction ignition in
an adjacent ignition cable, for instance by using a
coil-on-plug system; provide a high voltage output
ignition system as the ignition of hydrogen mixtures
asks for an increased secondary ignition voltage
[12,13,37] (probably because of the lower ion
concentration of a hydrogen flame, see above), coil-
on-plug systems also satisfy this condition.
Alternatively, the spark plug gap can be decreased to
lower the ignition voltage, this is no problem for
hydrogen engines as there will be almost no deposit
formation. Spark plug gaps as small as 0.25mm have
been used [7] (although the gap was subsequently
increased to 0.5mm because of cold start difficulties
due to water condensation at the spark plug tip).
• Injection system: provide a timed injection, either
using port injection and programming the injection
timing such that an initial air cooling period is created
in the initial phase of the intake stroke and the end of
injection is such that all hydrogen is inducted, leaving
no hydrogen in the manifold when the intake valve
closes; or using direct injection during the
compression stroke. High flow rate injectors are
needed in both cases, multiple injectors per cylinder
can alleviate this requirement. The timing described
here might not be necessary as work has been
reported where no relation between injection timing
and backfire or pre-ignition limited equivalence ratio
was found [1]. Timed injection also decreases the
amount of unburned fuel in the intake manifold at any
given time, limiting the severity of a backfire should it
occur.
• Hot spots: avoid hot spots in the combustion chamber
that could initiate pre-ignition or backfire, use cooled
exhaust valves; use multi-valve engine heads to further
lower the exhaust valve temperature [10-12]; ensure
proper oil control; provide additional engine coolant
passages around valves and other areas with high
thermal loads [14] (if possible); delay fuel introduction
to create a period of air cooling (using timed manifold
or direct injection); ensure adequate scavenging (e.g.
using variable valve timing [1,9]) to decrease residual
gas temperatures.
• Piston rings and crevi ce volumes: decrease the piston
top land clearance to prevent hydrogen flames from
propagating into the top land, Swain et al. [14] use a
clearance of 0.152mm to quench the hydrogen flame.
Change the crevice volumes and/or piston rings with
the aim of reducing the reflow of unburned mixture
from the second land to the top land [14-16]
(preventing ‘fuelling’ of a top land flame during exhaust
and intake).
• Valve seats and injectors: the very low lubricity of
hydrogen has to be taken into account, suitable valve
seat materials have to be chosen [10,12] and the
design of the injectors should take this into account.
This is the case with any dry gaseous fuel (such as
natural gas) but can be more critical for hydrogen
(compressed natural gas contains small amounts of
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
Downloaded from SAE International by Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Monday, June 27, 2016
oil originating from the oil mist in the compressor
whereas hydrogen compressors normally have tighter
clearances to limit the leak rate).
• Lubrication: an engine lubrication oil compatible with
increased water concentration in the crankcase has
to be chosen, the report on the hydrogen drive test in
Germany by TÜV [12] cites two options, a
demulsifying oil and a synthetic oil which forms a
solution with water. DeLuchi [62] claims a longer oil
lifetime as the oil is not diluted by hydrogen and there
is less formation of acids. An ashless oil is
recommended to avoid deposit formation (hot spots)
[6]. The effect of hydrogen on the oil composition and
chemical structure has been reported by two of the
authors [57].
• Crankcase ventilation: positive crankcase ventilation
is generally recommended due to unthrottled
operation (high manifold air pressures) and to
decrease hydrogen concentrations (from blowby) in
the crankcase [10,63].
• Compression ratio: the choice of the optimal
compression ratio is similar to that for any fuel, it
should be chosen as high as possible to increase
engine efficiency, with the limit given by increased
heat losses or appearance of abnormal combustion
(in the case of hydrogen primarily pre-ignition). The
choice may depend on the application, as the
optimum compression ratio for highest engine
efficiency might be different from the optimum for
highest power output [21]. In general, the
compression ratio of a hydrogen engine can be
chosen higher than that for a gasoline engine.
• In-cylinder turbulence: because of the high flame
speeds of hydrogen, low turbulence combustion
chambers (pancake or disk chamber and axially
aligned symmetric intake port) can be used which are
beneficial for the engine efficiency [11,14,44]. They
might even be necessary to avoid abnormal
combustion at stoichiometric operation [14].
• Electronic throttle: as stated above, hydrogen engines
should be operated at wide open throttle wherever
possible, but throttling is needed at very low loads to
maintain combustion stability and limit unburned
hydrogen emissions. At medium to high loads,
throttling might be necessary to limit NOx emissions.
This can only be realized with a drive-by-wire system.
CONCLUSION
This paper presents a comprehensive overview
hydrogen engine properties and design features.
• An important conclusion from the work described
above is that the hydrogen ICE is rapidly gaining on
traditionally fueled engines and is a serious
competitor for fuel cells. Hydrogen ICEs have a high
efficiency, are very clean and are considerably
cheaper than fuel cells.
• For further improvements in power output and
prevention of abnormal combustion, it would be
interesting to perform a systematic study of the
‘knocking’ behavior and crevice combustion to obtain
a better understanding of the mechanisms leading to
abnormal combustion phenomena such as backfire.
More specifically, data is needed of the knocking
behavior and the quenching distance as a function of
the equivalence ratio.
• Hydrogen PFI engines can be considered to be ready
for large scale demonstration purposes, be it as
dedicated hydrogen vehicles or bi-fuel vehicles with
gasoline engines retrofitted for hydrogen. Large scale
demonstration would permit to evaluate durability and
possible material and lube oil degradation.
• Hybrid powertrains using hydrogen ICEs, and DI
engines have a lot of potential that needs to be
explored further. Also, load control strategies that
take full advantage of today’s gasoline engine state-
of–the-art such as variable valve timing and/or lift
should be developed specifically for hydrogen
engines.
REFERENCES
1. Tang, X. et al. Ford P2000 hydrogen engine
dynamometer development. SAE, paper nr 2002-01-
0242, 2002.
2. Akagawa, H. et al. Development of hydrogen injection
clean engine. 15th World Hydrogen Energy
Conference, paper nr 28J-05, Yokohama, Japan, July
2004.
3. Verhelst, S. A study of the combustion in hydrogen-
fuelled internal combustion engines, PhD Thesis,
Ghent University - UGent, Gent, Belgium, 2005:
http://users.ugent.be/~sverhels/PhD_S_Verhelst.htm
4. Bardon, M.F. and Haycock, R.G. The hydrogen
research of R.O. King. 14th World Hydrogen Energy
Conference, invited paper, Montreal, Canada, 2002.
5. MacCarley, C.A. A study of factors influencing
thermally induced backfiring in hydrogen fuelled
engines, and methods for backfire control. 16th
IECEC conference, Atlanta, USA, 1981.
6. Das, L.M. Near-term introduction of hydrogen engines
for automotive and agricultural application. Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy, 27:479–487, 2002.
7. Lucas, G.G. and Morris, L.E. The backfire problem of
the hydrogen engine. Symposium organized by the
university’s internal combustion engine group, King’s
of College, London, UK, 1980.
8. Das, L.M. Hydrogen-oxygen reaction mechanism and
its implication to hydrogen engine combustion. Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy, 21:703–715, 1996.
9. Berckmüller, M. et al. Potentials of a charged SI-
hydrogen engine. SAE, paper nr 2003-01-3210, 2003.
10. Stockhausen, W.F. et al. Ford P2000 hydrogen
engine design and vehicle development program.
SAE, paper nr 2002-01-0240, 2002.
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
Downloaded from SAE International by Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Monday, June 27, 2016
11. Swain, M.R., Swain, M.N. and Adt, R.R.
Consideration in the design of an inexpensive
hydrogen-fueled engine. SAE, paper nr 881630, 1988.
12. Project Coordinator Motor Vehicles and Road
Transport, TÜV Rheinland e.V. for the Federal
Ministry for Research and Technology. Alternative
energy sources for road transport - hydrogen drive
test. Technical report, TÜV Rheinland, 1990.
13. Kondo, T., Iio, S. and Hiruma, M. A study on the
mechanism of backfire in external mixture formation
hydrogen engines –about backfire occurred by the
cause of the spark plug–. SAE, paper nr 971704,
1997.
14. Swain, M.R., Schade, G.J. and Swain, M.N. Design
and testing of a dedicated hydrogen fueled engine.
SAE, paper nr 961077, 1996.
15. Koyanagi, K., Hiruma, M. and Furuhama, S. Study on
mechanism of backfire in hydrogen engines. SAE,
paper nr 942035, 1994.
16. Lee, J.T., Kim, Y.Y., Lee, C.W. and Caton, J.A. An
investigation of a cause of backfire and its control due
to crevice volumes in a hydrogen fueled engine,
Proceedings, ASME Spring Technical Conference,
paper nr 2000-ICE-284, San Antonio, USA, 2000.
17. Lee, S.J., Yi, H.S. and Kim, E.S. Combustion
characteristics of intake port injection type hydrogen
fueled engine. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 20:317–322,
1995.
18. Heywood, J.B. Internal Combustion Engine
Fundamentals. McGraw-Hill, 1988.
19. Jorach, R.W. Low nitrogen oxide emission combined
with high power density by using the hydrogen
combustion method with advanced internal mixture
formation. MTZ Worldwide, 58-4:5–8, 1997.
20. Jing-Ding, L., Ying-Qing, L. and Tian-Shen, D.
Improvement on the combustion of a hydrogen fueled
engine, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 11:661–668, 1986.
21. Natkin, R.J. et al. Hydrogen IC engine boosting
performance and NOx study. SAE, paper nr 2003-01-
0631, 2003.
22. Binder, K. and Withalm, G. Mixture formation and
combustion in hydrogen engine using hydrogen
storage technology, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 7:651–
659, 1982.
23. Li, H. and Karim, G.A. Knock in spark ignition
hydrogen engines. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 29:859–
865, 2004.
24. Karim, G.A. Hydrogen as a spark ignition engine fuel.
Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 28:569–577, 2003.
25. Heffel, J.W., Johnson, D.C. and Shelby, C. Hydrogen
powered Shelby Cobra: vehicle conversion. SAE,
paper nr 2001-01-2530, 2001.
26. Shinagawa, T., Okumura, T., Furuno, S. and Kim, K-
O. Effects of hydrogen addition to SI engine on knock
behavior. SAE, paper nr 2004-01-1851, 2004.
27. Smith, J.R., Aceves, S. and Van Blarigan, P. Series
hybrid vehicle and optimized hydrogen engine design.
SAE, paper nr 951955, 1995.
28. Li, H. and Karim, G.A. Hydrogen fuelled spark ignition
engines: predictive and experimental performance.
ASME Spring Technical Conference, paper nr
ICES2003-548, Salzburg, Austria, 2003.
29. Olavson, L.G., Baker, N.R. and Lynch, F.E., and
Meija L.C. Hydrogen fuel for underground mining
machinery. SAE, paper nr 840233, 1984.
30. Davidson, D., Fairlie, M. and Stuart, A.E.
Development of a hydrogen-fuelled farm tractor. Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy, 11:39–42, 1986.
31. Heffel, J.W., McClanahan, M.N. and Norbeck, J.M.
Electronic fuel injection for hydrogen uf eled internal
combustion engines. SAE, paper nr 981924, 1998.
32. Meier, F. et al. Cycle-resolved hydrogen flame speed
measurement with high-speed Schlieren technique in
a hydrogen direct injection SI engine. SAE, paper nr
942036, 1994.
33. Furuhama S. Problems of forecasting the future of
advanced engines and engine characteristics of the
hydrogen injection with LH2 tank and pump. Journal of
Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, 119:227–
242, 1997.
34. Guo L.S., Lu H.B. and Li J.D. A hydrogen injection
system with solenoid valves for a four-cylinder
hydrogen-fuelled engine. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy,
24:377–382, 1999.
35. Kim J.M., Kim Y.T., Lee J.T. and Lee S.Y.
Performance characteristics of hydrogen fueled
engine with the direct injection and spark ignition
system. SAE, paper nr 952498, 1995.
36. Eichlseder H., Wallner T., Freymann R. and Ringler J.
The potential of hydrogen internal combustion engines
is a future mobility scenario. SAE, paper nr 2003-01-
2267, 2003.
37. Gerbig F. et al. Potentials of the hydrogen
combustion engine with innovative hydrogen-specific
combustion process. Fisita World Automotive
Congress, paper nr F2004V113, Barcelona, Spain,
2004.
38. Rottengruber H. et al. Direct-injection hydrogen SI-
engine – operation strategy and power density
potentials. SAE, paper nr 2004-01-2927, 2004.
39. Wimmer A., Wallner T., Ringler J. and Gerbig F. H2-
direct injection – a highly promising combustion
concept. SAE ,paper nr 2005-01-0108, 2005.
40. Yi H.S., Min K. and Kim E.S. The optimised mixture
formation for hydrogen fuelled engines. Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy, 25:685–690, 2000.
41. Peschka W. and Escher W.J.D. Germany’s
contribution to the demonstrated technical feasibility
of the liquid-hydrogen fueled passenger automobile.
SAE, paper nr 931812, 1993.
42. Rottengruber H. et al. A high-efficient combustion
concept for direct injection hydrogen internal
combustion engine. 15th World Hydrogen Energy
Conference, paper nr 28J-01, Yokohama, Japan,
2004.
43. Heffel J.W. NOx emission reduction in a hydrogen
fueled internal combustion engine at 3000 rpm using
exhaust gas recirculation. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy,
28:1285–1292, 2003.
 Downloaded from http://iranpaper.ir
Downloaded from SAE International by Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Monday, June 27, 2016
44. Van Blarigan P. Development of a hydrogen fueled
internal combustion engine designed for single
speed/power operation. SAE, paper nr 961690, 1996.
45. Aceves S.M. and Smith J.R. Hybrid and conventional
hydrogen engine vehicles that meet EZEV emissions.
SAE, paper nr 970290, 1997.
46. Jaura, A.K. et al. Ford’s H²RV: an industry first HEV
propelled with a H2 fueled engine – a fuel efficient and
clean solution for sustainable mobility. SAE, paper nr
2004-01-0058, 2004.
47. Geiss R. et al. Hydrogen-fueled hybrid: pathway to a
hydrogen economy. SAE, paper nr 2004-01-0060,
2004.
48. Keller J. and Lutz A. Hydrogen fueled engines in
hybrid vehicles. SAE, paper nr 2001-01-0546, 2001.
49. Sierens, R. Installation and first experimental results
of a hydrogen fuelled engine, Proceedings, 9th World
Hydrogen Energy Conference, pages 31–40
(Addendum), 1992.
50. Sierens, R. and Rosseel, E. The computation of the
apparent heat release for a hydrogen fuelled engine,
Proceedings, ASME Fall Technical Conference, ICE
27-3:99–108, 1996.
51. Sierens, R. and Rosseel, E. Backfire mechanism in a
carburetted hydrogen fuelled engine, Proceedings,
12th World Hydrogen Energy Conference, pp1537–
1546, Buenos Aires, 1998.
52. Rosseel, E. and Sierens, R. Knock detection in a
hydrogen engine. SAE, paper nr 970039, 1997.
53. Sierens, R. and Rosseel, E. Sequential injection of
gaseous fuels, Proceedings, 5th Int. EAEC Congress,
Strasbourg, paper n° SIA 9506A03, 1995.
54. Sierens, R. Comparative tests on a S.I. engine fuelled
with natural gas or hydrogen, Proceedings, ASME
Wintermeeting Houston '93 - ASME/ICE Engine
Symposium at the Energy-Sources Technology
Conference, paper n° 93-ICE-15, 1993.
55. Sierens, R. and Rosseel, E. Variable composition
hydrogen/natural gas mixtures for increased engine
efficiency and decreased emissions, ASME J. Eng.
Gas Turbines Power, 122:135–140, 2000.
56. Sierens, R. The development of a hydrogen fuelled V-
8 engine, Proceedings, EAEC European Automotive
Congress, Barcelona , paper nr STA 99 C435, 1999.
57. Sierens, R. and Verhelst, S. Experimental study of a
hydrogen-fueled engine, ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines
Power, 123:211-216, 2000.
58. Sierens R. and Verhelst S. Comparison between a
carburetted and a port injected hydrogen fuelled
single cylinder engine, Proceedings, EAEC European
Automotive Congress, Bratislava, paper SAITS 01009,
2001.
59. Sierens R. and Verhelst S. Influence of the injection
parameters on the efficiency and power output of a
hydrogen fueled engine, ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines
Power, 125:444-449, 2003.
60. Sierens R., Verhelst S. and Verstraeten S. EGR and
lean combustion strategies for a single cylinder
hydrogen fuelled IC engine, Proceedings, EAEC
European Automotive Congress, Belgrado, 2005.
61. Verstraeten S., Sierens R. and Verhelst S. A high
speed single cylinder hydrogen fuelled internal
combustion engine, Proceedings, Fisita World
Automotive Student Congress, Barcelona, 2004.
62. DeLuchi M.A. Hydrogen vehicles: an evaluation of fuel
storage, performance, safety, environmental impacts,
and cost. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 14:81–130, 1989.
63. Strebig K.C. and Waytulonis R.W. The bureau of
mines’ hydrogen powered mine vehicle. SAE, paper nr
871678, 1987.
CONTACT
Sebastian Verhelst
Transport Technology
Department of Flow, Heat and Combustion Mechanics
Ghent University
Sint-Pietersnieuwstraat 41, B-9000 Gent, Belgium
T: +32 9 264 3306, F: +32 9 264 3590
Sebastian.Verhelst@UGent.be
http://www.FloHeaCom.UGent.be