This content is not included in
your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
The Effects of Fuel Composition, System Design, and Operating Conditions on In-System Vaporization and Hot Start of a Liquid-Phase LPG Injection System
Annotation ability available
Sector:
Language:
English
Abstract
A liquid-phase port injection system for liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) generally consists of a fuel storage tank with extended capability of operating up to 600 psi, a fuel pump, and suitable fuel lines to and from the LPG fuel injectors mounted in the fuel rail manifold. Port injection of LPG in the liquid phase is attractive due to engine emissions and performance benefits. However, maintaining the LPG in the liquid phase at under-hood conditions and re-starting after hot soak can be difficult. Multiphase behavior within a liquid-phase LPG injection system was investigated computationally and experimentally. A commercial chemical equilibrium code (ASPEN PLUS™) was used to model various LPG compositions under operating conditions. Fuels with varying amounts of methane, ethane, ethylene (or ethene), propane, and butane were modeled, and the thermodynamic processes that the fuel experiences in the fuel pump, fuel delivery system, and fuel rail were simulated to determine how changes in fuel composition and conditions affect the performance of the system. Results show that as tank temperature and/or volatility decrease more heat input to the fuel rail is possible without producing vapor. The results of a simplified heat transfer model indicate that there is a critical time period during the engine warm-up process when vaporization is most likely to occur. This tendency is reduced with additional pump boost pressure but is also dependent upon other factors. In low-pressure regions generated by suction at the pump inlet, the sensitivity to pressure drop and heat input is reduced for more volatile LPG mixtures and high tank temperature. These effects are opposite of those observed at the fuel rail and are explained by the effects of composition and tank temperature on system pressure. As the tank liquid fuel level decreases, the space above it allows volatile components to boil off. This results in a more pure liquid in the tank, and problems with vaporization decrease. Start delays after a hot soak of the engine can be reduced by decreasing the thermal mass of the fuel rail, temporarily increasing the flow of liquid fuel to the injectors, and/or raising the vaporization temperature by increasing boost pressure during start-up. A simple model indicates that increased flowrate is more important than increased boost pressure for reducing hot start delay.
Recommended Content
Authors
Citation
Lutz, B., Stanglmaier, R., Matthews, R., Cohen, J. et al., "The Effects of Fuel Composition, System Design, and Operating Conditions on In-System Vaporization and Hot Start of a Liquid-Phase LPG Injection System," SAE Technical Paper 981388, 1998, https://doi.org/10.4271/981388.Also In
Combustion Processes in Engines Utilizing Gaseous Fuels, 1998
Number: SP-1371; Published: 1998-05-04
Number: SP-1371; Published: 1998-05-04
References
- Fulcher, S. K. Gajdeczko B. F. Felton P. G. Bracco F. V. 1995 “The effects of fuel atomization, vaporization, and mixing on the cold-start HC emissions of a contemporary S.I. engine with intake manifold injection” SAE Paper 952482
- Matthews, R.D. Chiu J. Zheng J. Wu D.-Y. Dardalis D. Shen K. Roberts C. Hall M.J. Ellzey J.L. Mock C. Wicker R.B. Jaeger S. “The Texas Project: Part 1 - Emissions and fuel economy of aftermarket CNG and LPG conversions of light duty vehicles” SAE Paper 962098 Journal of Fuels and Lubricants 105 2186 1996
- Wu, D.-Y. Matthews R.D. Zheng J. Shen K. Chiu J.P. Mock C. 1996 “The Texas Project: Part 3 - Off-cycle emissions of light duty vehicles operating on CNG, LPG, Federal Phase 1 reformulated gasoline, and/or low sulfur certification gasoline” SAE Paper 962100 Topics of Alternative Fuels and Their Emissions, Society of Automotive Engineers Special Publication SP-1208 1996
- California Air Resources Board 1995 “Proposed California Exhaust Emissions Standards and Test Procedures for 1988 and Subsequent Model Year Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and Medium-Duty Vehicles” 10 20 95
- Chiu, J. Matthews R.D. 1996 “The Texas Project: Part 2 - Investigation of calibrations of aftermarket CNG and LPG conversion technologies” SAE Paper 962099 Journal of Fuels and Lubricants 105 2206 1996
- Cohen, J. 1995 “LPG vehicle fuel handling system terminology” Siemens/Motorbyte Newport News, Va
- Stanglmaier, R. H. Cohen J. 1996 “Development of a liquid phase propane (LPP) injected vehicle at The University of Texas - Austin” Propane Vehicle I 7 Sept. 1996
- Cohen, J. DeGrace L. Wright D. 1997 “Common rail flex-fuel and bi-fuel gasoline/LPG fuel injection systems” Siemens Automotive Newport News, Va
- Stanglmaier, R. H. Walls M. Dardalis D. Muhlert M. Mok J. Johnson S. Fernandez D. Lin M. Ramsey J. Minc K. Matthews R. Hall M. 1997 “Design and development of The University of Texas at Austin's 1996 Propane Vehicle Challenge entry” The 1996 Propane Vehicle Challenge, SAE Special Publication SP-1257 67 80
- Sierens, R. 1992 “An experimental and theoretical investigation of liquid LPG injection” SAE Paper 922363
- Stanglmaier, R. H. Strubhar J. Roberts C. E. Minc K. Lutz B. Wheeler L. Diller T. Wu D.-Y. Matthews R. D. Hall M. J. 1998 “Design and development of The University of Texas at Austin's 1997 Propane Vehicle Challenge entry” SAE 1998
- Perry, R.H. Green D.W. 1997 Perry's Chemical Engineers' Handbook Seventh McGraw Hill 1997
- Cohen, J. 1983 “Liquid/Vapor/Gas Injection” Motorbyte Newport News, Virginia
- Cohen, J. 1988-1998 “Deka II™ LPGx High Vapor Pressure Liquid Petroleum Injection, R&D excerpts from lab notes” Siemens Automotive AT-7