This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Improving the Efficiency of Conventional Spark-Ignition Engines Using Octane-on-Demand Combustion - Part II: Vehicle Studies and Life Cycle Assessment
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Published April 05, 2016 by SAE International in United States
Annotation ability available
This paper is the second of a two part study which investigates the use of advanced combustion modes as a means of improving the efficiency and environmental impact of conventional light-duty vehicles. This second study focuses on drive cycle simulations and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for vehicles equipped with Octane-on-Demand combustion. Methanol is utilized as the high octane fuel, while three alternative petroleum-derived fuels with Research octane numbers (RONs) ranging from 61 to 90 are examined as candidates for the lower octane fuel.
The experimental engine calibration maps developed in the previous study are first provided as inputs to a drive cycle simulation tool. This is used to quantify the total fuel consumption, octane requirement and tank-to-wheel CO2 emissions for a light-duty vehicle equipped with two alternative powertrain configurations. The properties of the lower octane fuel are shown to affect the vehicle fuel consumption and CO2 emissions significantly. In particular, the lower octane fuel indirectly defines the evolution of several key fuel properties with engine load. This synergistic relationship ultimately presents a trade-off between minimizing the vehicle fuel consumption and CO2 emissions.
Finally, the well-to-tank CO2 emissions arising from the production and distribution of each fuel were estimated for several common feedstocks and production routes. This data was combined with the tank-to-wheel CO2 emissions to estimate the overall carbon intensity of each dual-fuel combination using a Life Cycle Assessment. This enables the broader benefits and practical challenges to be analyzed from the perspective of a range of stakeholders. Overall, this work suggests that Octane-on-Demand can provide considerable fuel economy and well-to-wheel CO2 emissions benefits in comparison with conventional light-duty vehicles operated on standard gasolines.
CitationMorganti, K., Alzubail, A., Abdullah, M., Viollet, Y. et al., "Improving the Efficiency of Conventional Spark-Ignition Engines Using Octane-on-Demand Combustion - Part II: Vehicle Studies and Life Cycle Assessment," SAE Technical Paper 2016-01-0683, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4271/2016-01-0683.
- Kalghatgi, G., “The outlook for fuels for internal combustion engines,” Int. J. Engine Res. 15(4):383-398, 2014, doi:10.1177/1468087414526189.
- Kuruppu, C., Pesiridis, A., and Rajoo, S., "Investigation of Cylinder Deactivation and Variable Valve Actuation on Gasoline Engine Performance," SAE Technical Paper 2014-01-1170, 2014, doi:10.4271/2014-01-1170.
- Leone, T., Anderson, J., Davis, R., Iqbal, A. et al., “The Effect of Compression Ratio, Fuel Octane Rating, and Ethanol Content on Spark-Ignition Engine Efficiency,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 49(18):10778-10789, 2015, doi:10.1021/acs.est.5b01420.
- Chow, E., Heywood, J., and Speth, R., "Benefits of a Higher Octane Standard Gasoline for the U.S. Light-Duty Vehicle Fleet," SAE Technical Paper 2014-01-1961, 2014, doi:10.4271/2014-01-1961.
- Anderson, J., DiCicco, D., Ginder, J., Kramer, U. et al., “High octane number ethanol-gasoline blends: Quantifying the potential benefits in the United States,” Fuel 97:585-594, 2012, doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2012.03.017.
- McCarthy, J. and Tiemann, M., “MTBE in Gasoline: Clean Air and Drinking Water Issues,” Congressional Research Service Reports, Paper 26, 2006. URL: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/crsdocs/26.
- United States Environmental Protection Agency, “Renewable Fuel Standard Program,” Retrieved 25 August 2015. URL: www2.epa.gov/renewable-fuel-standard-program/regulations-and-volume-standards-under-renewable-fuel-standard.
- Yang, C. and Jackson, R., “China’s growing methanol economy and its implication for energy and the environment,” Energ. Policy 41:878-884, 2012, doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2011.11.037.
- Stratas Advisors, “China Expected to Expand Use of Automotive Methanol Blends,” Global Alternative Fuels Research Report, 9 September, 2015, Retrieved 11 November 2015. URL: https://stratasadvisors.com/Insights/China-Methanol-Blends.
- Smith, P., Heywood, J., and Cheng, W., "Effects of Compression Ratio on Spark-Ignited Engine Efficiency," SAE Technical Paper 2014-01-2599, 2014, doi:10.4271/2014-01-2599.
- Hsieh, W., Chen, R., Wu, T. and Lin, T., “Engine performance and pollutant emission of an SI engine using ethanol-gasoline blended fuels,” Atmos. Environ. 36:403-410, 2002, doi:10.1016/S1352-2310(01)00508-8.
- Speth, R., Chow, E., Malina, R., Barrett, S. et al., “Economic and Environmental Benefits of Higher-Octane Gasoline,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 48(12):6561-6568, 2014, doi:10.1021/es405557p.
- Splitter, D. and Szybist, J., "Intermediate Alcohol-Gasoline Blends, Fuels for Enabling Increased Engine Efficiency and Powertrain Possibilities," SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. 7(1):29-47, 2014, doi:10.4271/2014-01-1231.
- 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, doi:10.4271/2013-01-1321.
- Stein, R., Polovina, D., Roth, K., Foster, M. et al., "Effect of Heat of Vaporization, Chemical Octane, and Sensitivity on Knock Limit for Ethanol - Gasoline Blends," SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. 5(2):823-843, 2012, doi:10.4271/2012-01-1277.
- Koc, M., Sekmen, Y., Topgul, T. and Yucesu, H., “The effects of ethanol-unleaded gasoline blends on engine performance and exhaust emissions in a spark-ignition engine,” Renew. Energ. 34:2101-2106, 2009, doi:10.1016/j.renene.2009.01.018.
- Abdel-Rahman, A. and Osman, M., “Experimental investigation on varying the compression ratio of SI engine working under different ethanol-gasoline fuel blends,” Int. J. Energ. Res. 21:31-40, 1997, doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-114X(199701)21:1<31::AID-ER235>3.0.CO;2-5.
- Russ, S., "A Review of the Effect of Engine Operating Conditions on Borderline Knock," SAE Technical Paper 960497, 1996, doi:10.4271/960497.
- Partridge, R., Weissman, W., Ueda, T., Iwashita, Y. et al., "Onboard Gasoline Separation for Improved Vehicle Efficiency," SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. 7(2):366-378, 2014, doi:10.4271/2014-01-1200.
- Windsor, H., “One Car-Two Gas Tanks,” Popular Mechanics Magazine 90(1):116-236, 1948.
- Wang, Z., Liu, H., Long, Y., Wang, J. et al., “Comparative study on alcohols-gasoline and gasoline-alcohols dual-fuel spark ignition (DFSI) combustion for high load extension and high fuel efficiency,” Energy J. 82:395-405, 2015, doi:10.1016/j.energy.2015.01.049.
- Chang, J., Viollet, Y., Alzubail, A., Abdul-Manan, A. et al., "Octane-on-Demand as an Enabler for Highly Efficient Spark Ignition Engines and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Improvement," SAE Technical Paper 2015-01-1264, 2015, doi:10.4271/2015-01-1264.
- Viollet, Y., Abdullah, M., Alhajhouje, A., and Chang, J., "Characterization of High Efficiency Octane-On-Demand Fuels Requirement in a Modern Spark Ignition Engine with Dual Injection System," SAE Technical Paper 2015-01-1265, 2015, doi:10.4271/2015-01-1265.
- Liu, H., Wang, Z. and Wang, J., “Methanol-gasoline DFSI (dual-fuel spark ignition) combustion with dual-injection for engine knock suppression,” Energy J. 73:686-693, 2014, doi:10.1016/j.energy.2014.06.072.
- Zhuang, Y. and Hong, G., "Investigation to Leveraging Effect of Ethanol Direct Injection (EDI) in a Gasoline Port Injection (GPI) Engine," SAE Technical Paper 2013-01-1322, 2013, doi:10.4271/2013-01-1322.
- Zhuang, Y. and Hong, G., "The Effect of Direct Injection Timing and Pressure on Engine Performance in an Ethanol Direct Injection Plus Gasoline Port Injection (EDI+GPI) SI Engine," SAE Technical Paper 2013-01-0892, 2013, doi:10.4271/2013-01-0892.
- Daniel, R., Wang, C., Xu, H., Tian, G. et al., "Dual-Injection as a Knock Mitigation Strategy Using Pure Ethanol and Methanol," SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. 5(2):772-784, 2012, doi:10.4271/2012-01-1152.
- Wu, X., Daniel, R., Tian, G., Xu, H. et al., “Dual-injection: The flexible, bi-fuel concept for spark-ignition engines fuelled with various gasoline and biofuel blends,” Appl. Energy 88(7):2305-2314, 2011, doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.01.025.
- Stein, R., House, C., and Leone, T., "Optimal Use of E85 in a Turbocharged Direct Injection Engine," SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. 2(1):670-682, 2009, doi:10.4271/2009-01-1490.
- Zhu, G., Stuecken, T., Schock, H., Yang, X. et al., "Combustion Characteristics of a Single-Cylinder Engine Equipped with Gasoline and Ethanol Dual-Fuel Systems," SAE Technical Paper 2008-01-1767, 2008, doi:10.4271/2008-01-1767.
- Kuzuoka, K., Kurotani, T., Chishima, H., and Kudo, H., "Study of High-Compression-Ratio Engine Combined with an Ethanol-Gasoline Fuel Separation System," SAE Int. J. Engines 7(4):1773-1780, 2014, doi:10.4271/2014-01-2614.
- Leone, T. and Anderson, J., “Fuel separation via fuel vapor management systems,” US Patent 20150114370 A1, April 30, 2015. URL: www.google.com/patents/US20150114370
- Leone, T. and Anderson, J., “Fuel separation system for reducing parasitic losses,” US Patent 20150114359 A1, April 30, 2015. URL: www.google.com/patents/US20150114359
- Morganti, K., Abdullah, M., Alzubail, A., Viollet, Y. et al., "Improving the Efficiency of Conventional Spark-Ignition Engines using Octane-on-Demand Combustion. Part I: Engine Studies," SAE Technical Paper 2016-01-0679, 2016, doi:10.4271/2016-01-0679.
- Markel, T., Brooker, A., Hendricks, T., Johnson, V. et al., “ADVISOR: a systems analysis tool for advanced vehicle modeling,” J. Power Sources 110(2):255-266, 2002, doi:10.1016/S0378-7753(02)00189-1.
- United States Department of Energy, Office of Transportation & Air Quality, “EPA Vehicle Fuel Economy Ratings,” Retrieved 24 August 2015. URL: www.fueleconomy.gov.
- Porter, B., Blaxill, H., and Jariri, N., "A Study of Potential Fuel Economy Technologies to Achieve CAFE 2025 Regulations using Fleet Simulation Modeling Software," SAE Int. J. Alt. Power. 4(2):352-362, 2015, doi:10.4271/2015-01-1683.
- Turner, J., Popplewell, A., Patel, R., Johnson, T. et al., "Ultra Boost for Economy: Extending the Limits of Extreme Engine Downsizing," SAE Int. J. Engines 7(1):387-417, 2014, doi:10.4271/2014-01-1185.
- Warth, M., Freeland, P. and Mahr, B., “Efficient downsizing engine technologies for real world driving,” Internationaler Motorenkongress, Springer Fachmedien, Wiesbaden, Germany, 2014.
- Shahed, S. and Bauer, K., "Parametric Studies of the Impact of Turbocharging on Gasoline Engine Downsizing," SAE Int. J. Engines 2(1):1347-1358, 2009, doi:10.4271/2009-01-1472.
- Foong, T., Morganti, K., Brear, M., da Silva, G. et al., "The Effect of Charge Cooling on the RON of Ethanol/Gasoline Blends," SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. 6(1):34-43, 2013, doi:10.4271/2013-01-0886.
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), Technical Report, Geneva, Switzerland, 2007.
- Elgowainy, A., Dieffenthaler, D., Sokolov, V., Sabbisetti, R. et al., “The Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET.net) Model v188.8.131.5225,” Transportation Technology R&D Center, Argonne National Laboratory, IL, USA, 2014.
- Mustafizur Rahman, M., Canter, C. and Kumar, A., “Well-towheel life cycle assessment of transportation fuels derived from different North American conventional crudes,” Appl. Energy 156:159-173, 2015, doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.07.004.
- Methanex Corporation, Methanex Regional Contract Prices for North America, Europe and Asia: July 1 - September 20 2015, Retrieved 12 September 2015. URL: www.methanex.com/our-business/pricing.
- Lee, S. and Bae, C., “The application of an exhaust heat exchanger to protect the catalyst and improve the fuel economy in a spark-ignition engine,” P. I. Mech. Eng. D- J. Aut. 221(5):621-628, 2007, doi:10.1243/09544070JAUTO19