Experimental Study of a Pre-Chamber Jet Igniter in

a Turbocharged Rotax 914 Aircraft Engine

2013-01-1629
Published
04/08/2013

Eric K. Anderson
Los Alamos National Laboratory

William P. Attard
Adam Brown
Innovative Scientific Solutions Inc.

Paul Litke
Air Force Research Laboratory

Keith Grinstead and John Hoke

Innovative Scientific Solutions Inc.
Copyright 2013 SAE International
doi:10.4271/2013-01-1629

ABSTRACT
An experimental study is performed to investigate the
possibility of relaxing the octane requirement of a Rotax 914
engine equipped with a pre-chamber jet ignition system. A
pre-chamber jet igniter with no auxiliary fuel addition is
designed to replace the spark plug in cylinder two of the test
engine and is evaluated across engine speeds ranging from
2500 to 5500 RPM. Experiments are performed across both
normally aspirated and boosted configurations using regular
87 AKI gasoline fuel. Normally aspirated results at 98 kPa
manifold absolute pressure show a 7-10 burn rate
improvement with the jet ignition combustion system. Tests
to determine the maximum load at optimal combustion
phasing (no spark retard) are then conducted by increasing
boost pressure up to maximum knock limits. Boosted jet
ignition results demonstrate that 17 bar IMEPn can be
achieved using 87 AKI gasoline fuel, which is the highest
documented load achieved with this combustion system at
stoichiometric conditions without dilution. A 3 bar IMEPn
increase over spark ignition combustion is also observed in
the same test engine, corresponding to a 25 kPa boost
pressure increase across the speed range. When comparing
the 87 AKI jet ignition results to those of the baseline spark
ignition OEM engine which requires 100 low lead (> 99.5

MON) aviation gasoline, experimental results highlight that

peak torque at 4500 RPM can be matched, however peak
power is slightly reduced by 9% at 5500 RPM. Hence, it is
estimated that this particular jet igniter offers a >10 octane
number improvement over the baseline spark ignition system.
This demonstrates that retrofitted pre-chamber jet igniter
technology offers the general aviation industry a potential
means of relaxing engine octane requirement. Experimental
burn rate results and visual evidence of the jet impingement
on the piston crown confirm that further pre-chamber nozzle
and jet optimization are required to achieve the full knock
limit benefits of this combustion system as demonstrated in
the literature. However, results thus far are very encouraging
for future lead free gasoline aviation engines as well as
boosted automotive powertrains as engine downsizing grows
in popularity.

INTRODUCTION
Currently small scale propulsion and power systems utilized
in U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) Unmanned Aircraft
Systems (UAS) typically use commercially available, off-theshelf, propulsion solutions. These propulsion systems may be
modified, but, by and large, they have not been optimized for
DoD performance requirements. There have been recent

trends for UAS propulsion to improve power density and

reduce specific fuel consumption for small UAS propulsion
systems (less than 750 kW) with the goal of extending
range/endurance. High power densities are achievable with
small, high overall pressure ratio turbine engines, but not
necessarily with the low specific fuel consumption possible
with Otto/Diesel cycle based internal combustion engines.
This point is magnified when operating at the part load,
cruise conditions that are typical of extended UAS missions.
In the 75 kW class UAS [1] engines can require a high octane
gasoline fuel, such as low lead aviation gasoline (Avgas), to
enable the high compression ratios or boost levels needed to
achieve the mission required range and power density,
especially at take-off. Worldwide such high octane fuel is not
readily available or cost effective. An engine that can operate
on low octane gasoline or kerosene based aviation fuel, while
maintaining power density and fuel efficiency, would
potentially reduce the costs of UAS operation world-wide.
While compression ignition piston engines can reliably use
low octane heavy fuels, their higher compression ratios and
pressure rise rates necessitate increased structural strength
and mass, which decreases power density relative to spark
ignition (SI) engines. SI engines offer more attractive power
densities, but typically only use high octane fuels due to the
tendency to suffer from destructive end-gas knock.
Combustion optimization for knock mitigation is seen as one
potential way forward to relax the high octane fuel
requirement for these SI engines, and hence use more widely
available unleaded pump gasoline or enable JP-8 operation at
the part load cruise.
The Rotax 914 was chosen as a test platform because it
powers one of the most prolific UAS in the DoD, and the
military version requires Avgas. Due to the aforementioned
drawbacks of using high octane fuel in theater, engine
technology modifications are being explored to expand the
engine knock limit and reduce fuel octane requirement. Table
1 summarizes already well known knock control techniques
[2], however many of these highlighted technologies are
difficult, expensive, heavy and time consuming to integrate
into an established aircraft SI engine without significant
modification or alterations of the engine design.
One promising knock mitigation technology that has been
largely neglected, which could be simply retrofitted to an
existing spark ignition platform, is a pre-chamber jet igniter.
Interest in pre-chamber combustion systems for spark
ignition engines dates back to the 1920's, with Ricardo's
proposal of a pre-chamber to ignite a lean or stratified mainchamber charge [3,4,5]. The system worked by delivering a
stoichiometric or slightly rich mixture to the pre-chamber and
igniting the pre-chamber mixture with a spark plug. Flame
development in the main-chamber would then occur rapidly
by increasing effective flame area early in combustion. In the
1970's and early 1980's there were numerous attempts to

bring pre-chamber torch ignition or stratified charge

engines to market [6,7,8,9,10], but only Honda sold
automobiles with gasoline pre-chamber systems in the US
market [10]. The fuel efficiency benefits of these early lean
burn systems were often compromised by losses due to high
surface to volume ratios associated with the additional large
pre-chamber surface area, and the additional poppet valve
and carburetor added mechanical complexity and cost. As a
result, gasoline pre-chamber ignition systems have not been
utilized for US automobiles since the early 1980's.
Table 1. Effect of various parameters on the octane
number requirement (ONR) of a spark ignition engine
[2].

More recently, an auxiliary fueled pre-chamber jet ignition

system was investigated in a modern four-valve automotive
spark ignition engine by Attard et al. for igniting lean air fuel
mixtures [11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19]. The work was a
further expansion of extensive hydrogen fueled pre-chamber
studies completed by Watson's group at the University of
Melbourne, with the hydrogen being replaced with more
conventional fuels. The need for a pre-chamber poppet valve
was eliminated by the use of a pre-chamber fuel direct
injector. Studies of jet ignition performance at stoichiometric
conditions for knock mitigation were also examined by
Watson et al. in a CFR engine [20, 21]. Their results showed
that a single orifice hydrogen fueled jet igniter enabled the
use of a two point higher compression ratio and maintained
optimum combustion phasing with approximately 7 degrees
less spark advance. The benefits of jet ignition combustion at
stoichiometric engine operation were also investigated by
Attard et al. in a modern four-valve engine up to 5500 RPM,
with results highlighting a >15 octane number improvement
[2]. The present study utilized a pre-chamber design similar
to that of Attard et al. in the Rotax 914 engine, but without
the provision for additional pre-chamber auxiliary fueling.
Hence, with this system, the pre-chamber was reliant on the
flow interaction between the two combustion cavities to feed
the pre-chamber a combustible air fuel mixture from the
main-chamber, which is typically near stoichiometric
conditions. This system enables main-chamber burn rate
enhancement due to distributed ignition sites provided by the
chemical, thermal, and turbulence effects of the propagating
jet. However, the system tested does not permit ultra lean
burn operation for part load fuel economy improvement.

OBJECTIVES
The specific objectives of this study were to:
Compare spark ignition and jet ignition combustion at
normally aspirated stoichiometric conditions with maximum
airflow (98 kPa MAP) across the full speed range up to
5500 RPM.
Quantify the burn rate enhancement with jet ignition
combustion at normally aspirated stoichiometric conditions
and compare it to that found in the literature.
Determine maximum load levels limited by knock of
boosted spark ignition and jet ignition combustion without
compromising the combustion phasing (no spark retard)
across the speed range up to 5500 RPM.
Quantify the intake air temperature effects on load for
boosted spark ignition and jet ignition combustion across the
speed range.

EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
Test Engine Configuration
Experiments were carried out at the Air Force Research
Laboratory's Small Engine Research Laboratory at Wright-

Patterson Air Force Base. Engine tests were conducted using

a Rotax 914F with just over 1000 hours of run-time. The
geometry of the engine is described in Table 2. The
combustion chamber is of the bathtub design with two
spark plug locations per cylinder. The combustion system has
two spark plugs per cylinder due to the redundant nature of
aircraft piston engine design. An image of the piston and
combustion chamber is provided in Figure 1.
The test cell configuration is shown in Figure 2. The test
engine is located in the center of the image. The engine
retained a speed reducing gearbox at the output end of the
crankshaft which provides a 2.43:1 speed reduction. The
gearbox output was coupled to a 190 kW eddy current
dynamometer via a conventional driveshaft with two
universal joints. For the tests described here, the engine
coolant temperature was maintained at 85 1C, and a
stoichiometric air fuel mixture was maintained (confirmed
via exhaust lambda sensor and fuel and air mass flow
measurements). All tests used locally sourced 87 AKI pump
grade gasoline with 10% ethanol.
The test engine was operated using port fuel injection
controlled by a PIC18F452 based programmable fuel
controller and a PIC32MX360F ignition controller. During
data acquisition the fuel system was set to maintain constant
injector pulse width (open loop). Ignition timing was held to
within 0.1 CA of reported values. The primary data
acquisition system was an AVL IndiSmart combustion
analyzer. All engine experiments were completed on Cylinder
2 of the test engine, with the other three cylinders being
operated with conservative (retarded) ignition timing to avoid
knock. It is noted that there was some load reduction from the
other cylinders due to the retarded ignition timing but this
was minimal due to the equivalent intake manifold pressure
and stoichiometric air fuel mixture. Intake and exhaust
systems were also not isolated for Cylinder 2; hence, the
exhaust scavenging and in-cylinder residual content were
representative of the typical four cylinder engine. The test
cylinder was instrumented with a Kistler type 6115B pressure
transducer, with TDC alignment achieved by interpreting
motored log pressure-volume data [22, 23]. Additionally, incylinder pressure acquisition (0.1 CA sampling, which
avoided aliasing of the knock signal) and analysis was
completed using the AVL IndiSmart system, which enabled
combustion parameters to be compared over 100 engine
cycles. For knock limit tests, a signal was generated by
subtracting the filtered pressure trace from the raw pressure
trace. Using this signal, the threshold for knock was chosen
as 1% of cycles having a rectified oscillation greater than 5
bar maximum amplitude.

Table 2. Rotax 914F base engine specifications.

Figure 2. Engine test cell at the Air Force Research

Laboratory's Small Engine Research Laboratory.

Pre-Chamber Jet Igniter Design

The pre-chamber jet igniter was designed to be flexible to
allow development, with the nozzle being interchangeable to
permit the use of different designs. The pre-chamber volume
was varied by altering the reach of the spark plug. Figure 3
displays a computer generated image of the flexible design.

Figure 3. Jet igniter CAD cross-section (dimensions in

mm).

Figure 1. Combustion chamber (top) with valves

removed and piston (bottom) of a Rotax 914.

The choice of configuration used in this study was influenced

from the literature [18] and viewed as a good starting point
for initial development, despite the different engine
configurations. Hence, the pre-chamber volume was set at
2% of the clearance volume (resulting in a calculated
compression ratio of 8.83 with the pre-chamber installed),

with six evenly spaced 1.25 mm diameter orifices connecting

the pre-chamber to the main-chamber at an inclined angle of
20 from the central axis of the igniter. Table 3 contains the
jet igniter dimensions used in this study. It should be noted
that one of the design objectives was to evaluate a jet igniter
that was symmetrical about the central axis to avoid indexing/
orientation upon installation of the jet igniter.
Table 3. Jet igniter design specifications.

The jet igniter that was constructed and evaluated in this

study is shown in Figure 4. This jet igniter features an
aluminum alloy main body that threads into a standard
14 mm spark plug bore. The main body is threaded to accept
a replaceable nozzle and a 10 mm NGK spark plug. Previous
jet ignition studies [24] have pointed out that aluminum is not
a suitable nozzle material because of orifice erosion concerns.
Additionally, initial in-house testing revealed that high
temperature resistant steel alloys (stainless steel) are not
suitable for the jet igniter nozzle due to the low thermal
conductivity of the material which leads to high surface
temperatures and consequently surface ignition (pre-ignition).
A mild steel nozzle was chosen as a compromise between
mechanical strength at high temperatures and thermal
conductivity for adequate heat transfer.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

For the sake of clarity, the actual ignition configuration used
for all of the experiments will be outlined before the results
are discussed. Figure 5 displays both the spark plug and prechamber jet igniter used in the experiments. It should be
noted that no ignition device was removed when each
combustion system was evaluated; hence the spark ignition
combustion tests were performed with the pre-chamber jet
igniter installed but not functioning and vice verse for the jet
ignition tests. The reason for completing tests in this manner
was to enable a back-to-back comparison without switching
off the engine and altering engine parameters (e.g., manifold
pressure, temperatures, and lambda). Furthermore, the
additional pre-chamber volume slightly increases the
clearance volume and reduces the CR, and keeping the prechamber in place eliminated these effects. The sequence of
experiments involved evaluating one combustion mode,
which was then switched several minutes later by means of a
software change. Since the ignition device is located on the
periphery of the bathtub combustion chamber, previous inhouse experimental results have shown no difference in
knock limits when using either spark plug position for
conventional spark ignition combustion [24]. Studies by
Attard et al [2] have shown that the additional pre-chamber
surface area, crevice volume, and higher rates of heat release
slightly reduce jet ignition IMEP by 0.2 bar at stoichiometric,
undiluted conditions in a direct comparison to spark ignition
combustion. This needs to be taken into account when
evaluating the experimental results presented in this paper.

Figure 5. Jet igniter and spark plug hardware and

locations used across all experiments.
Figure 4. Manufactured pre-chamber jet igniter
assembly.

Normally Aspirated Testing, 98 kPa

MAP
Figure 6, Figure 7, Figure 8, Figure 9, Figure 10 display
experimental comparisons of spark ignition and jet ignition
combustion at stoichiometric, normally aspirated conditions
(98 kPa MAP). The objective of the tests was to compare
combustion burn rate parameters, enabling the performance
of this jet igniter to be compared to that documented by
Attard et al. at equivalent conditions, albeit with a different
engine design. Tests were conducted at engine speeds ranging
from 2500 to 5500 RPM, with the intake air temperature
maintained at 38 1C. Figure 6 displays load comparisons
across the speed range for both combustion systems. The
results highlight significant improvements in load for a fixed
manifold pressure with speed changes from 3000 to 4000
RPM. This is due to increases in in-cylinder trapped mass and
reduced residual gas associated with intake manifold tuning
and valve timing/durations. When comparing combustion
modes, evident is the slight increase in IMEPn (0.2 bar)
achieved with the jet igniter at back-to-back operating
conditions. The increase in load is contrary to observations of
Attard et al. but can be explained by the fact that the jet
igniter was not removed for the spark ignition tests. Hence,
the negative effects of the additional pre-chamber surface
area on the heat transfer losses are constant across both
combustion systems. Additionally, the pre-chamber volume
has had a significant effect on the crevice volume for spark
ignition combustion and it is anticipated that the flame front
is unable to efficiently consume all of the charge inside the
pre-chamber cavity. Thus, the jet ignition system has slightly
higher load due to the higher consumed in-cylinder mass and
higher combustion efficiency.

Figure 6. Normally aspirated IMEPn and indicated

power for conventional spark ignition and jet ignition
combustion as a function of engine speed (98 kPa MAP,
=1.0).

Figure 7 displays the normally aspirated ignition timing and

mass fraction burn (MFB) angles for both systems. Evident is
the significant difference in ignition timing between the spark
ignition and jet ignition systems, with a 7-10 reduction in
ignition advance across the speed range up to 5500 RPM for
the jet igniter while maintaining equivalent combustion
phasing (CA50). It is noted that the two combustion systems
were compared at equivalent combustion phasing (CA50) for
these tests, which was maintained near 7 ATDC (maximum
brake torque combustion phasing) for engine speeds between
2500 and 4500 RPM. Above 4500 RPM, combustion phasing
was retarded slightly because of control limitations associated
with the engine controller. The controller limitations were
rectified for subsequent boosted tests. The significant
reduction in ignition advance for the jet igniter highlights the
improved burn rates associated with the pre-chamber ignition
system.
Figure 7. Normally aspirated MFB angles and spark
timing for spark ignition and jet ignition combustion as a
function of engine speed (98 kPa MAP, =1.0).

The 0-10% and 10-90% MFB durations are displayed in

Figure 8 and Figure 9, enabling comparisons with results
from previous studies by Attard et al. The 0-10% burn angles
correspond closely to the reduction in ignition timings, with
the jet ignition system recording a 7 reduction in the burn
angle across the entire engine speed. This improvement in the
0-10% MFB duration correlates closely to that of Attard et al.
[2, 14], who recorded similar normally aspirated findings at
stoichiometric conditions. The 0-10% MFB improvements
with jet ignition combustion are attributed to the more widely
distributed ignition in the main-chamber caused by the
turbulent jets, with faster flame initiation consuming the
charge more rapidly. This is unlike conventional spark
ignition, which takes longer to initiate and stabilize the flame
kernel after the spark discharge. Figure 9 displays the 10-90%
MFB durations for both spark ignition and jet ignition
combustion systems with comparisons highlighting near
identical burn rates and main-chamber energy release. This
result was somewhat unexpected, based on the previous
0-10% MFB data displayed in Figure 8, and contrary to
results documented by Attard et al., who demonstrated up to a
50% reduction in 10-90% MFB durations with a very similar
pre-chamber jet igniter design in a pent roof combustion
system [2, 14]. The similar main energy release burn data of
Figure 9 for the AFRL jet igniter can be explained by
viewing the piston crown (Figure 10 - left) after the jet
ignition experiments were completed. It is noted that the
heavy deposits are due to the in-service accumulation on low
lead aviation fuel prior to completing experiments.

Figure 8. Normally aspirated 0-10% MFB duration for

spark ignition and jet ignition combustion as a function
of engine speed (98 kPa MAP, =1.0).

Evident in the left images of Figure 10 is the close proximity

of the jet impingement on the piston crown from the prechamber. This explains the improved initial burn rate
enhancement with the pre-chamber and then the similar main
energy release as the effect of the propagating jets and
resulting widely distributed ignition has been diminished as a
result of the jet impingement on the crown. Consequently, the
combustion for the AFRL pre-chamber system involves
consuming the bulk of the main-chamber charge in a
spherical manner rather than a jet like pattern, as shown in the
right hand image of Figure 10 from Attard's work. The
difference between the spark ignition and jet ignition
combustion burn profiles in the AFRL study is that the jet
ignition system consumes the in-cylinder charge from a
central location in the combustion chamber as compared to
the side location of the spark ignition system. The right hand
diagram of Figure 10 displays the jet impingement on the
piston crown from Attard's work, which highlights an evenly
distributed jet profile and consequently fast main-chamber
combustion.
Figure 9. Normally aspirated 10-90% MFB duration for
spark ignition and jet ignition combustion as a function
of engine speed (98 kPa MAP, =1.0).

Figure 10. (Left) Jet impingement from the AFRL jet ignition system that is clearly visible on the piston crown, showing that
further burn rate and subsequent knock benefits are achievable with an optimized pre-chamber nozzle/orifice package for this
two-valve engine configuration. (Right) Evenly distributed jet penetration towards the end-gas from Attard's four-valve work.
It is well established that an effective method of mitigating
knock in gasoline engines involves burning the mixture
rapidly to reduce the time that the end-gas spends at elevated
pressure and temperature. The burn rate data presented in
Figure 7, Figure 8, Figure 9 indicates that the AFRL jet
igniter improves combustion burn rates, particularly early in
combustion, and thus has the potential to reduce the knock
propensity or octane requirement of the engine. However, the
potential benefit of further optimization of the nozzle to
minimize the jet impingement on the piston crown and hence
improve main-chamber combustion burn rates is evident from
the data available in the literature. Although the jet
impingement
previously
discussed
has
obvious
disadvantages, some benefits include modulated heat release
to limit the main-chamber in-cylinder charge consumption
and hence maximum pressure rise rates.

Figure 11 displays the maximum pressure rise rates for spark

ignition and jet ignition systems, demonstrating that the
maximum rise rates are solely dependent on the main energy
release (10-90% MFB) and consequently very similar for
both systems despite the varying main-chamber combustion
initiation location. Therefore, designing the nozzle in such a
way that the jets impinge on the piston crown in certain areas
is one technique which has not been explored to limit the
pressure rise rates at high load but also enable knock limit
extension by altering the main-chamber burn profile, (e.g. the
flame has to traverse less of the cylinder to consume the
charge due to changes in main-chamber combustion initiation
location).

AKI unleaded gasoline. This is the highest recorded IMEPn

for a pre-chamber jet ignition combustion system at
stoichiometric conditions without dilution. Across the 3500 to
5500 RPM range, the pre-chamber jet igniter is capable of
extending the load limit by 3 bar IMEPn due to the superior
knock resistance when compared to spark ignition
combustion using the same 87 AKI fuel. The load increase
with jet ignition is a result of the higher tolerable manifold
pressure, with a 0.25 bar boost pressure increase as
highlighted in Figure 12. At the lower engine speeds (2500 3000 RPM), the load was limited by the maximum delivered
airflow capacity of the turbocharger for both combustion
systems.

Figure 11. Normally aspirated maximum pressure rise

rates for spark ignition and jet ignition combustion as a
function of engine speed (98 kPa MAP, =1.0).

Boosted Testing (Maximum Load Limit)

The next phase of the research involved determining the
maximum load levels of boosted spark ignition and jet
ignition combustion without compromising the combustion
phasing (no spark retard). Consequently, tests to characterize
the potential of the AFRL jet igniter were conducted by
operating the engine at optimized MBT combustion phasing
(CA50 7 ATDC) and increasing the manifold pressure
until maximum airflow (turbocharger limited) or maximum
knock limits were reached. When compared to the normally
aspirated tests previously discussed, experiments were
completed at a higher intake air temperature of 49C, which
is representative of typical boosted applications. Figure 12
displays maximum load limits for varying engine speeds
across both spark ignition and jet ignition combustion using
87 AKI unleaded gasoline. Additionally, results from the
OEM engine operating on the certified 100 low lead aviation
gasoline (Avgas) are included to demonstrate a baseline
target for performance. It is noted that the 100 LL Avgas has
a regulated minimum MON of 99.5 with AKI values typically
above 100. Results from Figure 12 highlight that the jet
ignition combustion system operating on 87 AKI unleaded
gasoline can achieve performance that is similar to that of the
baseline OEM spark ignition system operating on 100 LL
Avgas. Results from Figure 12 also show that the spark
ignition OEM engine certified peak torque target of 17 bar
IMEPn, achieved with 100 LL Avgas, can be matched by the
jet ignition combustion system at 4500 RPM using regular 87

Figure 12. Boosted maximum load (IMEPn) and

resultant changes in boost pressure for spark ignition
(blue) and jet ignition (red) combustion operating on
unleaded 87 AKI gasoline. Results for the spark ignition
OEM engine operating on 100 LL Avgas (black) are also
shown as a baseline target for performance. (Load
limited by boost or knock limits at MBT combustion
phasing, 49C intake temperature, =1.0).
One downside of the jet igniter performance is the maximum
power recorded, as displayed in Figure 13. Jet ignition power
output on 87 AKI unleaded gasoline is near identical to the
spark ignition system on 100 LL Avgas, except at maximum
engine speed, where a 9% reduction was observed due to the
associated reduced manifold pressure, which was knock
limited. The reduced output of the jet igniter at high engine
speeds is presumed to be related to the increased in-cylinder
charge motion having a negative effect on the jet penetration
due to the very high swirl rates. Hence, the full effect of the

propagating jet is not realized at high engine speeds [2, 14]. It

is estimated that the AFRL jet igniter offers a >10 octane
number improvement over the baseline spark ignition system
when accounting for the octane rating of the 100 LL Avgas
which has a regulated minimum MON of 99.5.

charge very late and very rapidly as compared to the standard

spark ignition system [2]. At the jet ignition maximum load
of 17 bar IMEPn, a 0.6% CoV IMEPg is observed at 4500
RPM, demonstrating that higher loads are foreseeable with
this combustion system. Also, a less than 1% CoV IMEPg
combustion stability at the maximum engine speed of
5500 RPM corresponds to previous high speed results of
Attard et al. [14] and also demonstrates that higher speeds are
attainable for the jet ignition combustion system.
Figure 16 displays the maximum knock amplitudes recorded
for boosted conditions across the range of speeds tested for
both combustion systems. For the pre-chamber jet ignition
system, knock limits are not exceeded until 4000 RPM,
indicating that the combustion system could tolerate higher
levels of boost if the turbocharger system were able to deliver
higher air flow rates (increased MAP). For the spark ignition
system, knock limits are first exceeded at the lowest
operating speed of 2500 RPM, with knock levels then
decreasing as the engine speed increases to 3000 RPM
because of the reduced end-gas residence time at elevated
pressure and temperature as the engine speed increases.
Knock levels begin to increase once again above 3000 RPM
due to the manifold pressure increase and resultant increase
in load.

Figure 13. Boosted maximum indicated power for spark

ignition (blue) and jet ignition (red) combustion using 87
AKI gasoline. Results from the spark ignition OEM
engine operating on 100 LL Avgas (black) are also
shown as a baseline target for performance. (Load
limited by boost or knock limits at MBT combustion
phasing, 49C intake temperature, =1.0).
Figure 14 displays the CoV IMEPg for both spark ignition
and jet ignition combustion across the maximum boosted
loads (Figure 12) achieved at optimal combustion phasing,
which is also shown in Figure 15. Evident is the very stable
combustion associated with stoichiometric operation across
both combustion systems, with values of less than 1% CoV
IMEPg recorded across the speed range. Some slight
improvements in combustion stability are observed with the
pre-chamber jet igniter due to the improved flame initiation
associated with the propagating jets and hence the reduced
dependence on the flame kernel initiation and development as
in conventional spark ignition combustion. Combustion
stability results also highlight significant capability for
combustion phasing retard for further knock mitigation for
the pre-chamber system. This correlates to previous jet
ignition combustion results which highlighted the prechamber's ability to burn the main charge later in the cycle
while still maintaining adequate combustion stability due to
the increased ignition delay and the ability to burn the main

Figure 14. CoV IMEPg across maximum boosted loads

for spark ignition and jet ignition combustion using 87
AKI unleaded gasoline (49C intake temperature,
=1.0).

Figure 17 displays the maximum pressure rise rates for both

combustion systems, corresponding to the boosted loads
presented in Figure 12. It should be noted that this is not a
true comparison since the maximum load for jet ignition
combustion is approximately 3 bar IMEPn higher at engine
speeds above 3500 RPM. Nevertheless, at similar load levels
(below 3000 RPM), maximum pressure rise rates are heavily
dependent on the main-chamber energy release, which is
similar for both systems. The main difference in the energy
release is that the spark ignition system initiates combustion
on the periphery of the chamber and hence the flame front
has to traverse the majority of the combustion chamber to
consume the charge. For the pre-chamber system, the
outgoing jets from the pre-chamber impinge on a central
location of the piston crown, meaning that the flame must
traverse less of the cylinder to consume the main-chamber
charge due to the centralized combustion initiation.
Consequently, this is the main reason for the improved knock
resistance and resultant maximum load limit achieved with
the jet ignition system while retaining comparable maximum
pressure rise rates.

Figure 15. Combustion phasing across maximum

boosted loads for spark ignition and jet ignition
combustion using 87 AKI unleaded gasoline (49C
intake temperature, =1.0).

Figure 17. Maximum pressure rise rates across boosted

loads for spark ignition and jet ignition combustion
using 87 AKI unleaded gasoline (49C intake
temperature, =1.0).

Figure 16. Maximum knock amplitude across boosted

loads for spark ignition and jet ignition combustion
using 87 ON unleaded gasoline (49C intake
temperature, =1.0).

In addition to the boosted data previously presented at 49C,

studies varying the intake air temperature up to 82C were
completed for both spark ignition and jet ignition systems to
determine how the maximum load limits were affected by
intake air temperature changes. Figure 18 displays the
performance of the jet igniter compared to that of the spark

ignition system at 49, 66 and 82C intake temperatures thus

simulating varying levels of charge air cooling, which is
considered a very effective technology for knock mitigation.
Across all the data that is presented in Figure 18, the
experiments were conducted by operating the engine at
optimized MBT combustion phasing (no ignition retard) and
increasing the manifold pressure until maximum airflow
(turbocharger limited) or maximum knock limits were
exceeded. For both spark ignition and jet ignition modes,
MBT corresponded to a 50% mass fraction burn location of
7-8 ATDC. Results from Figure 18 show a 3 bar IMEPn
load increase above 3500 RPM across all equivalent intake
air temperatures, which were all knock limited. Below this
engine speed, the turbocharger cannot provide sufficient
boost to reach desired knock levels at some of the lower
intake air temperatures and hence true comparisons of
attainable load are not possible between both systems. To
quantify the effect of the jet igniter in terms of intake air
temperature improvement, the pre-chamber combustion
system can match spark ignition load with a 35C increase
in intake air temperature.

not considered to be a production viable solution and thus no

durability tests have been completed due to the nature of the
dynamometer setup and the initial purpose of the igniter
design. However, in previous work it was demonstrated that a
jet igniter was capable of >500 hours of engine operation at
speeds and loads reaching 5500 RPM and 13.2-bar IMEPn
[11]. Additionally, large bore natural gas engines have prechamber spark plug life exceeding 2000 hours; therefore, it is
reasonable to envision jet igniter longevity in a production
application. For this particular study, achieving jet igniter
longevity involved balancing the heat transfer and
mechanical properties of the selected materials to avoid
surface ignition (pre-ignition) and nozzle erosion. Figure 19
displays images of the jet igniter after 10 hours of
operation, including 3 hours of boosted operation up to 17 bar
IMEPn and engine speeds up to 5500 RPM without dilution.
As can be observed, the deposit buildup on the pre-chamber
external surfaces (nozzle and orifices) is similar to the
buildup that would be expected on a conventional spark plug.
The internal pre-chamber combustion surfaces also looked
similar to the external surfaces with minimal deposits,
although only minimal engine testing was completed.
Additionally, no erosion of the six orifices was observed after
initial development, with the pre-chamber spark plug
electrode wear appearing to be no different than that on a
conventional spark ignition combustion system. The OEM
spark plug used in the pre-chamber experiments is similar to
one that would be found in a conventional spark ignition
engine. However, one major unknown for this technology
still surrounds the pre-chamber jet igniter durability and
robustness that is expected over hundreds of hours of
operation.

Figure 18. IMEPn for spark ignition and jet ignition

combustion with varying intake-air temperature using 87
AKI unleaded gasoline (Load limited by boost or knock
limits at MBT combustion phasing, =1.0).

Jet Igniter Durability

The jet igniter developed for this research was designed and
developed to evaluate the technology; with this system the
pre-chamber volume can be varied and nozzle designs
interchanged. Hence, the jet igniter presented in this work is

Figure 19. (Left) Aluminum pre-chamber housing and

mild steel nozzle after 10 hours of engine operation up
to 17 bar IMEPn and 5500 RPM. (Right) OEM spark
plug removed from the pre-chamber housing after run
time.

FUTURE WORK
When compared with the baseline spark ignition system,
engine experimental results have shown further potential to
improve the main-chamber energy release (10-90% MFB) for
jet ignition combustion. Previous studies [2, 14] have
documented a 50% improvement in 10-90% MFB times with
jet ignition combustion, hence further burn rate enhancement
and consequently knock limit extension is expected. Several
fundamental combustion studies are underway to better
understand and analyze jet ignition combustion, including
optical bomb and rapid compression machine studies. It is
envisioned that a directional jet igniter (nozzle nonsymmetrical about the central axis) is a major step forward in
avoiding the jet impingement on the piston crown (displayed
in Figure 10) and hence enhance the combustion process.
Figure 20 displays some early conceptual work on the nozzle
design, with the drawback being that some indexing or
orientation is required when installing the jet igniter to
position the jets correctly in the combustion system.

be noted that the spark ignition and jet ignition heat release
profiles are actual experimental data from the literature. It is
expected that maximum pressure rise rate limitations (NVH
combustion noise) and the associated engine limitations (peak
cylinder pressure) will limit the practical application of these
fast burn combustion concepts at boosted, stoichiometric,
high load operating conditions without the use of dilution.
However, timing the initiation (staggering) of each
combustion mode to consume some of the in-cylinder charge
early may be one way forward to increase the burn duration
and hence limit the pressure rise rates while still enabling
knock limit benefits. Hence, the SAJI concept is considered
to be a very promising combustion mode concept for future
development. With this concept, some of the main-chamber
charge is consumed first using the conventional spark ignition
flame propagation process, with the remaining charge
consumed by the jet ignition process after some time delay.
The system would require varying spark timing between two
ignition sources (spark plug and jet igniter), and the jet igniter
would have to be fired before the spark ignition flame front
consumed the charge in the jet igniter region to ensure
adequate pre-chamber combustion. Depending on the
location of the spark plug for the conventional spark ignition
combustion system and the jet igniter, further knock limit
benefits would be realized with this concept but with
modulated heat release to fulfill engine durability and NVH
limitations. Additionally, the conventional spark plug will
enable robust cold start operation at subzero temperatures,
which is anticipated to be challenging for any pre-chamber
combustion system due to the increased combustion surface
area as demonstrated in the early pre-chamber developments
completed by Watson [25].

Figure 20. CAD model of directional pre-chamber jet

igniter with optimized orifice jets visualized in green.
Dual spark plug positions in the Rotax OEM cylinder head
also offer the unique opportunity to experimentally
investigate dual jet igniters or combined spark ignition-jet
ignition (Spark Assisted Jet Ignition, SAJI) combustion
strategies for further knock limit extension, as first described
in the literature by Attard [14]. Possible combustion modes
include:
Dual Jet Igniters
Single Jet Igniter
Spark Assisted Jet Ignition
Dual Spark Plugs
Single Spark Plug
Figure 21 displays some actual and expected heat release
profiles using these advanced combustion strategies. It should

Figure 21. Heat release profiles using advanced

combustion strategies involving jet ignition (actual),
spark ignition (actual), and spark assisted jet ignition
(anticipated) for further knock limit extension while
controlling pressure rise rates.

CONCLUSIONS
A pre-chamber jet ignition combustion system was developed
for a Rotax 914 aircraft engine and evaluated across engine
speeds ranging from 2500 - 5500 RPM. Experiments were
performed for both normally aspirated and boosted
configurations using regular 87 AKI gasoline fuel. Normally
aspirated results at 98 kPa manifold absolute pressure
highlighted a 7-10 burn-rate improvement with the jet
ignition combustion system. Tests to determine the maximum
load at optimal combustion phasing (no spark retard) were
then conducted by increasing boost pressure up to maximum
knock limits. Boosted jet ignition results demonstrated that
17 bar IMEPn could be achieved using 87 AKI gasoline fuel,
which is the highest documented load achieved with this
combustion system at stoichiometric conditions without
dilution. A 3 bar IMEPn increase over spark ignition
combustion was also observed in the same test engine as a
result of the knock limit extension associated with the prechamber, corresponding to a 25 kPa boost pressure increase
across the speed range. Varying boosted intake air
temperature up to 82C across the speed range also
highlighted that the jet igniter could match spark ignition load
with a 35C increase in intake air temperature due to the
knock limit extension.
When comparing the 87 AKI jet ignition results to the
baseline spark ignition OEM engine which requires 100 low
lead (> 99.5 MON) aviation gasoline, experimental results
showed that peak torque at 4500 RPM can be matched,
however peak power is slightly reduced by 9% at 5500 RPM.
Hence, it is estimated that this particular jet igniter offers a
>10 octane number improvement over the baseline spark
ignition system. This demonstrates that retrofitted prechamber jet igniter technology is one potential method of
eliminating the requirement for high octane leaded fuel for
the aviation industry. Experimental burn rate results and
visual images of the jet impingement on the piston crown
show that further pre-chamber nozzle and jet optimization is
required to achieve the full knock limit benefits of this
combustion system as demonstrated in the literature. It is
estimated that only half of the knock limit benefit has been
realized with this particular jet igniter and engine package.
However, results to date are very encouraging for future
work. Moreover, the recent research completed on prechamber jet ignition combustion systems highlights many
synergies for future boosted powertrains as engine
downsizing grows in popularity to meet global and
environmental concerns.

REFERENCES
1. Unmanned Systems Integrated Roadmap FY2011-2036,
Department of Defense, Editor 2011.
2. Attard, W., Blaxill, H., Anderson, E., and Litke, P.,
Knock Limit Extension with a Gasoline Fueled PreChamber Jet Igniter in a Modern Vehicle Powertrain, SAE

Int. J. Engines 5(3):1201-1215, 2012, doi:

10.4271/2012-01-1143.
3. Ricardo, H., Recent Research Work on the InternalCombustion Engine, SAE Technical Paper 220001, 1922,
doi: 10.4271/220001.
4. Turkish, M., 3 - Valve Stratified Charge Engines:
Evolvement, Analysis and Progression, SAE Technical
Paper 741163, 1974, doi: 10.4271/741163.
5. Toulson, E., Schock, H., and Attard, W., A Review of
Pre-Chamber Initiated Jet Ignition Combustion Systems,
SAE Technical Paper 2010-01-2263, 2010, doi:
10.4271/2010-01-2263.
6. Anderson, R. and Asik, J., Lean Air-Fuel Ignition System
Comparison in a Fast-Burn Engine, SAE Technical Paper
850076, 1985, doi: 10.4271/850076.
7. Edwards, C., Oppenheim, A., and Dale, J., A
Comparative Study of Plasma lgnition Systems, SAE
Technical Paper 830479, 1983, doi: 10.4271/830479.
8. Noguchi, M., Sanda, S., and Nakamura, N., Development
of Toyota Lean Burn Engine, SAE Technical Paper 760757,
1976, doi: 10.4271/760757.
9. Brandstetter, W., Decker, G., and Reichel, K., The
Water-Cooled Volkswagen PCI-Stratified Charge Engine,
SAE Technical Paper 750869, 1975, doi: 10.4271/750869.
10. Date, T., Yagi, S., Ishizuya, A., and Fujii, I., Research
and Development of the Honda CVCC Engine, SAE
Technical Paper 740605, 1974, doi: 10.4271/740605.
11. Attard, W., Bassett, M., Parsons, P., and Blaxill, H., A
New Combustion System Achieving High Drive Cycle Fuel
Economy Improvements in a Modern Vehicle Powertrain,
SAE Technical Paper 2011-01-0664, 2011, doi:
10.4271/2011-01-0664.
12. Attard, W. and Blaxill, H., A Single Fuel Pre-Chamber
Jet Ignition Powertrain Achieving High Load, High
Efficiency and Near Zero NOx Emissions, SAE Int. J.
Engines 5(3):734-746, 2012, doi: 10.4271/2011-01-2023.
13. Attard, W. and Blaxill, H., A Lean Burn Gasoline
Fueled Pre-Chamber Jet Ignition Combustion System
Achieving High Efficiency and Low NOx at Part Load, SAE
Technical Paper 2012-01-1146, 2012, doi:
10.4271/2012-01-1146.
14. Attard, W. and Blaxill, H., A Gasoline Fueled PreChamber Jet Ignition Combustion System at Unthrottled
Conditions, SAE Int. J. Engines 5(2):315-329, 2012, doi:
10.4271/2012-01-0386.
15. Attard, W., Kohn, J., and Parsons, P., Ignition Energy
Development for a Spark Initiated Combustion System
Capable of High Load, High Efficiency and Near Zero NOx
Emissions, SAE Int. J. Engines 3(2):481-496, 2010, doi:
10.4271/2010-32-0088.

16. Attard, W. and Parsons, P., A Normally Aspirated Spark

Initiated Combustion System Capable of High Load, High
Efficiency and Near Zero NOx Emissions in a Modern
Vehicle Powertrain, SAE Int. J. Engines 3(2):269-287, 2010,
doi: 10.4271/2010-01-2196.
17. Attard, W. and Parsons, P., Flame Kernel Development
for a Spark Initiated Pre-Chamber Combustion System
Capable of High Load, High Efficiency and Near Zero NOx
Emissions, SAE Int. J. Engines 3(2):408-427, 2010, doi:
10.4271/2010-01-2260.
18. Attard, W., Fraser, N., Parsons, P., and Toulson, E., A
Turbulent Jet Ignition Pre-Chamber Combustion System for
Large Fuel Economy Improvements in a Modern Vehicle
Powertrain, SAE Int. J. Engines 3(2):20-37, 2010, doi:
10.4271/2010-01-1457.
19. Attard, W., Toulson, E., Huisjen, A., Chen, X. et al.,
Spark Ignition and Pre-Chamber Turbulent Jet Ignition
Combustion Visualization, SAE Technical Paper
2012-01-0823, 2012, doi: 10.4271/2012-01-0823.
20. Watson, H.C. and Gledhill, M.P., Comparison of Knock
in a Jet Assisted Ignition and Normal SI Engine.
APAC15-225, 2008.
21. Gledhill, M., Using Hydrogen Assisted Jet Ignition to
Extend the Knock Limit. Thesis (M.Eng.Sc.), Department of
Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, University of
Melbourne, 2010.
22. Amann, C., Cylinder-Pressure Measurement and Its Use
in Engine Research, SAE Technical Paper 852067, 1985,
doi: 10.4271/852067.
23. Lancaster, D., Krieger, R., and Lienesch, J.,
Measurement and Analysis of Engine Pressure Data, SAE
Technical Paper 750026, 1975, doi: 10.4271/750026.
24. Hamori, F., Exploring the limits of Hydrogen Assisted Jet
Ignition. Thesis (Ph.D.), Department of Mechanical and
Manufacturing Engineering, University of Melbourne, 2006.
25. Watson, H.C., Milkins, E.E., and Goldsworthy, L.C.,
Optimising the S.I Engine Pre-Chamber Geomtery including
Spark Plug Configuration for Minimum NOx Emissions and
Maximum Efficiency. 19th Fisita Congress, Melbourne,
Australia, 1982.

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.
ISSN 0148-7191

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the Air
Force Office of Scientific Research and the Air Force
Research Laboratory, the technical support of David Burris
and Jacob Baranski, and the fabrication efforts of Richard E.
Ryman.

DEFINITIONS/ABBREVIATIONS
AFRL - Air Force Research Laboratory
AKI - anti-knock index
ATDC - after top dead center
Avgas - low lead aviation gasoline
CA - crankshaft angle
CA50 - crankshaft angle where 50% MFB occurs
CAD - computer aided design
CFR - cooperative fuels research
CoV - coefficient of variation
CR - compression ratio
DoD - Department of Defense
IMEPg - gross indicated mean effective pressure
IMEPn - net indicated mean effective pressure
MAP - manifold absolute pressure
MFB - mass fraction burn
NVH - noise, vibration, and harshness
OEM - original equipment manufacturer
RPM - revolutions per minute
SI - spark ignition
SAJI - spark-assisted jet ignition
TDC - top dead center
UAS - unmanned aerial systems
- equivalence ratio

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.
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
SAE Web Address: http://www.sae.org
Printed in USA