This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Fuel Economy and CO 2 Emissions of Ethanol-Gasoline Blends in a Turbocharged DI Engine
ISSN: 1946-3936, e-ISSN: 1946-3944
Published April 08, 2013 by SAE International in United States
Citation: Jung, H., Leone, T., Shelby, M., Anderson, J. et al., "Fuel Economy and CO2 Emissions of Ethanol-Gasoline Blends in a Turbocharged DI Engine," SAE Int. J. Engines 6(1):422-434, 2013, https://doi.org/10.4271/2013-01-1321.
Engine dynamometer testing was performed comparing E10, E20, and E30 splash-blended fuels in a Ford 3.5L EcoBoost direct injection (DI) turbocharged engine. The engine was tested with compression ratios (CRs) of 10.0:1 (current production) and 11.9:1. In this engine, E20 (96 RON) fuel at 11.9:1 CR gave very similar knock performance to E10 (91 RON) fuel at 10:1 CR. Similarly, E30 (101 RON) fuel at 11.9:1 CR resulted in knock-limited performance equivalent to E20 at 10:1 CR, indicating that E30 could have been run at even higher CR with acceptable knock behavior.
The data was used in a vehicle simulation of a 3.5L EcoBoost pickup truck, which showed that the E20 (96 RON) fuel at 11.9:1 CR offers 5% improvement in U.S. EPA Metro-Highway (M/H) and US06 Highway cycle tank-to-wheels CO₂ emissions over the E10 fuel, with comparable volumetric fuel economy (miles per gallon) and range before refueling. The results also indicated that the E30 (101 RON) fuel at 11.9:1 CR provides improvements in CO₂ emissions of 5% on the EPA M/H cycle and 7.5% on the US06 Highway cycle, while volumetric fuel economy was 3% lower on the M/H cycle and approximately equal on the US06 Highway cycle, compared to the baseline E10 fuel at 10:1 CR.
|Journal Article||Effect of Ethanol on Part Load Thermal Efficiency and CO 2 Emissions of SI Engines|
|Journal Article||An Overview of the Effects of Ethanol-Gasoline Blends on SI Engine Performance, Fuel Efficiency, and Emissions|