This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Performance of Bi-Fuel Ethanol-Methane SI-Engine for Stage V Non-Road Applications
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Published September 15, 2020 by SAE International in United States
This content contains downloadable datasetsAnnotation ability available
Due to agricultural engines’ high average workload and operation in rural areas, substituting internal combustion engines in non-road sector is still a challenge. Utilizing sustainable solutions are therefore in key position for decarbonizing the non-road sector. To this day, the diesel engines dominate the markets because of their high efficiency. However, the simplicity and cost effectiveness of the spark-ignited engines together with renewable fuels are suggested to bring several advantages compared to the diesel engine. E.g. ethanol and bio methane are relatively simple to produce from agricultural residuals and wastes, and the raw materials are easily available around the world. Additionally, stoichiometric engines would only require a three-way catalyst (TWC) to fulfil Stage V emission regulations. A bi-fuel (BF) and dual-fuel (DF) engine operating on both ethanol and biogas could potentially offer a flexible option for e.g. farmers, as they could produce the fuels locally and simultaneously increase the sources of income.
The largest technical challenges concerning spark-ignited (SI) engines compared to its diesel counterparts are mainly related to lower engine efficiency. Furthermore, the differences in SI fuels characteristics set limitations on regular SI engines for flexible fuel operation. The main focus of this paper was therefore to study possible methods for developing a flexible spark-ignited non-road engine fulfilling Stage V emission requirements. The studied test engine was a port fuel injected (PFI) SI-conversion based on a commonly used non-road diesel engine for agricultural applications. The engine was equipped with two injectors per cylinder, one directed into the swirl port, the other to the tangential flow port. Additionally, a single gas injection mixer was added to distribute gaseous fuel for all cylinders at once. Four different injection methods were studied: Single liquid fuel injection separately in both swirl and tangential ports, dual port liquid injection and dual-fuel mode, utilizing simultaneously ethanol and methane. The results are compared against Stage V requirements.
- Rasmus Pettinen - VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland
- Petri Soderena - VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland
- Mårten Westerholm - VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland
- Sami Nyyssönen - VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland
- Christer Söderström - VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland
- Jarno Martikainen - VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland
CitationPettinen, R., Soderena, P., Westerholm, M., Nyyssönen, S. et al., "Performance of Bi-Fuel Ethanol-Methane SI-Engine for Stage V Non-Road Applications," SAE Technical Paper 2020-01-2043, 2020, https://doi.org/10.4271/2020-01-2043.
Data Sets - Support Documents
|[Unnamed Dataset 1]|
|[Unnamed Dataset 2]|
|[Unnamed Dataset 3]|
|[Unnamed Dataset 4]|
|[Unnamed Dataset 5]|
|[Unnamed Dataset 6]|
|[Unnamed Dataset 7]|
- IEA (2019), “Renewables 2019,” 2019, https://www.iea.org/reports/renewables-2019/transport#abstract (accessed Apr. 30, 2020).
- Vohra, M., Manwar, J., Manmode, R., Padgilwar, S., and Patil, S. , “Bioethanol Production: Feedstock and Current Technologies,” J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2(1):573-584, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2013.10.013.
- Uusitalo, V., Havukainen, J., Kapustina, V., Soukka, R., and Horttanainen, M. , “Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Biomethane for Transport: Uncertainties and Allocation Methods,” Energy and Fuels 28(3):1901-1910, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1021/ef4021685.
- Stichnothe, H., and Azapagic, A. , “Bioethanol from Waste: Life Cycle Estimation of the Greenhouse Gas Saving Potential,” Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 53(11):624-630, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2009.04.012.
- Johnson, T., and Joshi, A. , “Review of Vehicle Engine Efficiency and Emissions,” SAE Int. J. Engines 11(6):1307-1330, 2018, https://doi.org/10.4271/2018-01-0329.
- C. Report, “City Bus Performance Evaluation,” 1, 26, 1-27, 2019.
- Nils-Olof Nylund, T.A., Söderena, Petri, Mäkinen, Reijo , “On Route to Clean Bus Services,” 2020, [Online]. Available: https://cris.vtt.fi/ws/portalfiles/portal/27710314/On_route_to_clean.pdf.
- Heywood, J.B. , Internal Combustion Engine Fundamentals (New York: McGraw Hill, 1988).
- Lee, Y., Oh, S., Kim, C., Lee, J. et al. , “The Dual-Port Fuel Injection System for Fuel Economy Improvement in an Automotive Spark-Ignition Gasoline Engine,” Appl. Therm. Eng. 138(February):300-306, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.04.027.
- Yao, D.W., Ling, X.C., and Wu, F. , “Evaporate Prediction and Compensation of Intake Port Wall-Wetting Fuel Film for Spark Ignition Engines Fueled with Ethanol-Gasoline Blends,” J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. A 13(8):610-619, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.A1200068.
- Lee, K., Bae, C., and Kang, K. , “The Effects of Tumble and Swirl Flows on Flame Propagation in a Four-Valve S.I. Engine,” Appl. Therm. Eng. 27(11-12):2122-2130, 2007, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2006.11.011.
- Spivey, J.J. , Special Periodical Reports, Catalysis: Volume 14 (North Yorkshire, UK: The Royal Society of Chemistry, 1999).
- Sullivan, J.L. et al. , “Co2 Emission Benefit of Diesel (Versus Gasoline) Powered Vehicles,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 38(12):3217-3223, 2004, https://doi.org/10.1021/es034928d.
- Aleiferis, P.G., Serras-Pereira, J., and Richardson, D. , “Characterisation of Flame Development with Ethanol, Butanol, Iso-Octane, Gasoline and Methane in a Direct-Injection Spark-Ignition Engine,” Fuel 109:256-278, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2012.12.088.
- Catapano, F., Di Iorio, S., Magno, A., Sementa, P., and Vaglieco, B.M. , “A Comprehensive Analysis of the Effect of Ethanol, Methane and Methane-Hydrogen Blend on the Combustion Process in a PFI (Port Fuel Injection) Engine,” Energy 88:101-110, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.02.051.
- Gong, C., Liu, F., Sun, J., and Wang, K. , “Effect of Compression Ratio on Performance and Emissions of a Stratified-Charge DISI (Direct Injection Spark Ignition) Methanol Engine,” Energy 96(X):166-175, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.12.062.
- Wang, Z., Liu, H., Long, Y., Wang, J., and He, X. , “Comparative Study on Alcohols-Gasoline and Gasoline-Alcohols Dual-Fuel Spark Ignition (DFSI) Combustion for High Load Extension and High Fuel Efficiency,” Energy 82:395-405, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.01.049.
- Liu, H., Wang, Z., Long, Y., Xiang, S. et al. , “Methanol-Gasoline Dual-Fuel Spark Ignition (DFSI) Combustion with Dual-Injection for Engine Particle Number (PN) Reduction and Fuel Economy Improvement,” Energy 89:1010-1017, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.06.051.
- Gu, X., Huang, Z., Cai, J., Gong, J. et al. , “Emission Characteristics of a Spark-Ignition Engine Fuelled with Gasoline-N-Butanol Blends in Combination with EGR,” Fuel 93(x):611-617, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2011.11.040.
- THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION , “REGULATION (EU) 2016/1628,” The European Union, 2016.
- Edwards, R. et al. , “Well-to-Wheels Analysis of Future Automotive Fuels and Powertrains in the European Context WELL-TO-TANK (WTT) Report. Version 4,” Jt. Res. Cent. EU Ispra, Italy 1-133, 2013, https://doi.org/10.2790/95629.