I M T

Sloan Automotive Laboratory Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MA, USA

Sloan Automotive Laboratory 31-153 Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02139-4307 Phone: (617) 253-4529 Fax: (617) 253-9453 http://engine.mit.edu

December, 2004

I M T

Sloan Automotive Laboratory Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MA, USA

Founded 1929 by Professor C.F. Taylor, with a grant from A. P. Sloan Established as a major laboratory for automotive research Extensive industrial and government funding Research areas: Internal combustion engine Fundamental combustion studies Engine/fuel interactions Engine and fuels technology assessment Objective: Contribute to future developments in automotive technology through fundamental and applied research on propulsion technology and fuels

I M T

Sloan Automotive Laboratory Faculty and Staff

Professor Wai K. Cheng, Associate Director Combustion, diagnostics, engine design Professor William H. Green, Jr. (Chem. Eng.) Combustion chemistry, fuels Professor John B. Heywood, Director Engine combustion, performance and emissions; engine design Professor James C. Keck (Emeritus) Combustion, thermodynamics, kinetics Dr. Tian Tian Analysis, lubrication, engine dynamics Dr. Victor W. Wong, Manager Lubrication, engine design and operating characteristics About 25 graduate students are involved in the research projects

I M T

Sloan Automotive Laboratory Facilities

12 Test Cells: Single cylinder Spark-Ignition engines Single cylinder HCCI engine with VVT Multi-cylinder Spark-Ignition engines Heavy Duty Multi-cylinder Diesel engine Optical-access engines with transparent cylinders for combustion and lubrication measurements Rapid compression machine

I M T

Sloan Automotive Laboratory Facilities: Special Equipment LIF imaging systems Fluorescence-based lubricant film diagnostic High-speed digital video camera (1000 frames/s) Particulate Spectrometer Gas chromatograph Fourier transform infrared analyzer Laser Phase Doppler anemometer Fast-response FID Hydrocarbon and NOx analyzers

I M

Current/Recent Research Projects

Engine and Fuels Research Consortium (DaimlerChrysler, Delphi, Ford, GM, Saudi Aramco) Lubrication Consortium (Dana, Mahle, PSA, Renault, Volvo Truck) Homogeneous-Charge-Compression-Ignition (HCCI) Engine (DOE) Control-Auto-Ignition (CAI) Engine (Ford) Plasmatron Enabled SI Engine Concepts (Ford, Arvin Meritor) Engine starting strategies (DaimlerChrysler) Robust Retarded Combustion (Nissan) Clean Diesel Fuels (DOE) Oil Aeration Study (Ford) Heavy Duty Natural Gas Engine Friction Reduction (DOE) Heavy Duty Diesel Engine Wear Reduction (DOD) High Speed Engine Lubrication (Ferrari) Assessment of Future Powertrain, Vehicle, and Fuels Technology (V. Kann Rasmussen Foundation, Energy Choices Consortium)

I M T

Industrial Consortium Operation

Multi-sponsor, multi-year program Pre-competitive research agenda Regular meetings (every 4 months) to set program agenda and discuss research findings Periodic visits to sponsor companies for discussion with staff Direct technology transfer through exchange of personal and use of facilities and computer codes

I M T Engine and Fuels Research Consortium

1982 - present

Current Focus: SI Engines

Members:

DaimlerChrysler Corp.,Delphi Corp., Ford Motor Co., General Motors Corp., Saudi Aramco

Current Research Program

Strategies to reduce engine start up emissions Fast catalyst light-off strategies Fundamental study of particulate matters formation Catalyst behavior: effects of sulfur and age on effectiveness

I M T Industrial Consortium on Lubrication in IC Engines

1989 - present

Current Focus: Piston/liner tribology

Members:

Dana Corp., Mahle Corp., Peugeot SA, Renault, Volvo Truck

Current Research Program

Characterization of lubricant behavior between piston and liner and its impacts on engine wear, friction and lubricant requirements Quantitative 2D LIF visualization of oil film dynamics in the piston/liner interface Modeling of oil transport/consumption and ring friction Application to ring designs (geometry and tension)

Research High Lights

Drivers for Emissions Research

1975 1977 1
1

1975 1977 1994 US 1994 TLEV 1997 TLEV 1997-2003 ULEV NOx(g/mile)

NMOG (g/mile)

1981 0.1

1981

1994 TLEV 1997-2003 ULEV

0.1

0.01

2004 SULEV2

2004 SULEV2
0.01 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Starting year of implementation

Starting year of implementation

Least square fit: Factor of 10 reduction in both HC and NOx every 15 years

1st peak Integrated HC emissions: 16 mg

2nd peak 55 mg

Total: 71 mg (SULEV: FTP total is < 110 mg)

Engine start up behavior

2.4 L, 4-cylinder engine Engine starts with Cyl#2 piston in mid stroke of compression Firing order 1-3-4-2 First fuel pulse ~90 mg/cylinder First firing: Cyl#2

First cycle in-cylinder J results (SAE 2002-01-2805)

4.5
R300 ( 40C, MAP 0.92 bar ) R600 ( 40C, MAP 0.8 bar )

First Cycle In-cylinder J

4 3.5 3

80C

R900 ( 40C, MAP 0.7 bar ) R300 ( 60C, MAP 0.92 bar ) R600 ( 60C, MAP 0.8 bar ) R900 ( 60C, MAP 0.7 bar ) R300 ( 80C, MAP 0.92 bar )

60C
2.5 2

R600 ( 80C, MAP 0.8 bar ) R900 ( 80C, MAP 0.7bar ) R200 ( 20C, Zetec Engine ) R200 ( 0C, Zetec Engine )

40C
1.5 1 0.5 0 0 50 100 150 200

RPM Tcoolant

20C 0C
250 300 350

Lean Limit of consistent firing

Injected Fuel Mass (mg)

First cycle fuel delivery efficiency results (SAE 2002-01-2805)

R300 ( 40C, MAP 0.92 bar ) R600 ( 40C, MAP 0.8 bar ) R900 ( 40C, MAP 0.7 bar ) R300 ( 60C, MAP 0.92 bar ) R600 ( 60C, MAP 0.8 bar ) R900 ( 60C, MAP 0.7 bar ) R300 ( 80C, MAP 0.92 bar ) R600 ( 80C, MAP 0.8 bar ) R900 ( 80C, MAP 0.7bar )

1 0.9

80C

Delivery Efficiency If

0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5

60C 40C

R200 ( 20C, Zetec Engine ) R200 ( 0C, Zetec Engine )

Tcoolant
RPM

0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0

20C 0C
0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Injected Fuel Mass(mg)

Effect of delaying IVO on 1st cycle fuel delivery

(SAE 2004-01-1852)
INCOMING MIXTURE INCREASINGLY LEAN AS PISTON DRAWS IN CHARGE LEAN
INTAKE FLOW

Fuel equivalence Ratio ( *)

1.2 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6

RICH

PISTON

PISTON DISPLACES MORE LEAN CHARGE AS IVC DELAYED

Pressure(bar) or HC mole fraction (%)

0.5 -20 -10 0 10 20 Intake Valve Opening (CAD from TDC Exhaust) 132.9 mg 199.3 mg 265.7 mg

35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 500 1000 Crank angle 1500 2000 HC Pressure In-cylinder HC value for * calculation

Injected mass:

Exhaust port/runner oxidation with retard spark timing

60

50

40

HC Emissions (g-HC/kg-fuel)

30

Cylinder Exit [Quenching] Port Exit [FFID: 7-cm from EV Runner [FFID: 37-cm from EV Exhaust Tank 120-cm from EV

20

10

0 15 0 -15 Spark Timing ( BTDC)

3.0 bar n-imep, 1500 RPM, P = 1.0, 20C

Secondary air injection

3.0 bar NIMEP, 1500 RPM, 20 C
1.4 1.2

Pexhaust = 0.85
Sp = 15 BTDC

HC/HCref

1.0 0.8 Sp = 0 BTDC 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.5 P = 0.85 P = 1.0 P = 1.1 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5

Sp = -15BTDC

PExhaust=1.4
3.0 3.5 4.0

 (mhs )catalyst Re f . value

Ref value: at condition of 15oBTDC spark and P = 1

NO/NO inlet

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0

4K miles aged 50K miles aged 150K miles aged

Catalyst performance
(SAE 2003-01-1874)

1 CO/CO inlet 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 1 HC/HC inlet 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
4K miles aged 50K miles aged 150K miles aged

4K miles aged 50K miles aged 150K miles aged

7 ppm fuel S 1600 rpm 0.5 bar Pintake Space vel. - 4.4x104/hr P modulation - 2 Hz - (P= 0.025

Fraction of cumulative catalyst volume

Time-resolved NO profiles along catalyst (SAE 2003-01-1874) Aged 4k-miles; 4.4x104/hr space vel.; l modulation: 1Hz, (P= 0.03
500 250 0 500 250 0 50 25 0 50 25 0 50 25 0 50 25 0 50 25 0 0 2 4 6 8 10

0% cumulative catalyst vol. 17% 33%

NO (ppm)

50% 67%

82% 100%

Time (s)

Fuel Sulfur Effect on Oxygen Storage Capacity: Age effect and fuel S effect are separable
Normalized O2 Storage
2

1
O storage capacity (g) 2 1

Slope:
in O2 storage capacity with every 150 ppm increase in fuel S

0.8 10% decrease

7ppmS 33ppmS 266ppmS 500ppmS Power law: O2 storagew age- 0.84 10 100

0.6 0

100

200

300

400

500

Fuel sulfur (ppm)

Catalyst age (k-miles)

Plasmatron Fuel Reformer

Developed at the MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center Ideal Partial Oxidation Reaction:

Cn H m 

n plasmatron O2  3.773N 2 p nCO  m H 2  n 3.773N 2 2 2 2

Fuel Air 1

Plasmatron

Products of the Ideal Reaction Species Mole Fraction

Air 2

1st Stage 2 Reactor Nozzle 3 Section

H2 CO N2

25% 26% 49%

Air 3

Fuel

2nd Stage 4 Reactor

Flow Direction

Effect of Plasmatron gas on lean operation

(1500 rpm, 3.5 bar NIMEP, SAE2003-01-0630)

33%

Overall Net Indicated Efficiency (%)

32% 31% 30% 29% 28% 27% 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 Synth. Plas. gas = 10% Synth. Plas. gas = 20% Synth. Plas. gas = 30%

(Assume ideal Plasmatron efficiency of 86%)

Indolene Only

Lambda 10000 NOx (PPM) 1000 100 10 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 Lambda 1.8 2 2.2
H2 Add = 10% Equiv H2 Add = 20% Equiv H2 Add = 30% Equiv Synth. Plas. gas = 10% Synth. Plas. gas = 20% Synth. Plas. gas = 30% Indolene Only

ONR Decrease with Plasmatron Reformate

(1500 rpm, 8.5 bar NIMEP, MBT spark timing; SAE 2004-01-0975)

100

90

ON of PRF into Engine at Audible Knock

80

70 PRF, 0% Plas Fraction 60 15% Plas Fraction 30% Plas Fraction 50 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8

Lambda

VVT Engine for HCCI operation

Geometric compression ratio = 8 to16

Spacer to change geometric compression ratio

Mode Transition Considerations: Drive Cycle

9 8 7 6 Bmep(bar) 5 4 3 2 1 0 -1 -2 0 500 1000 1500 2000 RPM 2500 3000 3500

SAE 2002-01-0420

Details of mode transition

60 50
MPH

40 30 20 10 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Time (s)
24 G Bmep p(b r RPM/100 e r, m a P Gear,a B e(bar),), R M h 19 g f 14 e Gear d c 4 b -1 440 a u v 450 460 470
Time (s)

40 p q r s 15 t 10 5 0 510 35 30 25 20 V h le p e (m h e Vehicle d p Average ic s e Speed)(mph) h2 i j k l m n 0

bmep(bar) RPM/100 Av_Velocity

480

490

500

Time (s)

Details of transition
8 7 6 5 Bmep (bar) 4 3 2 1 0 -1 -2 Speed (rpm) 0 500
m b

e d g h f h2 c

av t

k i l j

u s r

HCCI region

1000 q

1500

2000

2500

A non-robust SI-HCCI transition

80 Pressure (bar) 60 40 20 0

SI IVO 20 IVC 210 EVO 495 EVC 700

IV lift

HCCI 80 atdc-i 1st HCCI cycle 185 atdc-i 495 atdc-i SI assisted 650 atdc-i

cycles

All subsequent cycles were HCCI combustion

EV lift

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Crank angle (deg.)

(1500 rpm, 15oBTDC spark)

A Knocking transition
Pressure(bar) Pressure(bar) Pressure(bar)
61 62 63 64 65 66 70 60
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Pressure(bar)

50 40 30 20 10 0 -10 60

Cycle

A Robust SI-HCCI Transition

80 Pressure (bar) 60 40 20 0 0

SI HCCI IVO 20 95 atdc-i IVC 210 10 atdc-i EVO 495 495 atdc-i EVC 700 630 atdc-i
IV lift EV lift

1st HCCI cycle All subsequent cycles in HCCI combustion

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Crank angle (deg.)

(1500 rpm, 15oBTDC spark)

First HCCI cycle and 10 following ones 55 50 45 pressure (bar) 40 35 30 25 20 175 180 185 190 195 Crank angle (deg) 200 205 210
1st HCCI cycle 11th 8th 10th 9th 6th 4th 7th 5th 3rd 2nd

100 cycles after first HCCI cycle 55 50 45 pressure (bar) 40 35 30 25 20 160 170 180 190 200 Crank angle (deg) 210 220
1st HCCI cycle 3rd 2nd

Controlling transition using valve timing

GIMEP
6 5

IMEP(bar)

4 3 2 1 0

SI cycles with late IVC and late EVC

NIMEP
First HCCI cycle(60); early IVC

Valve timing(o atdc exhaust) Cycle IVC EVO EVC IVO 58 278 492 731 26 59 278 495 658 30 60 236 496 641 54 61 215 494 639 75 62, 219 493 644 78

Last SI cycle(59); early EVC

56

58

60

Cycle number

62

64

66

68

70

Relationship between IMEP and CA-50

5 4 .5 4 3 .5 IMEP(bar) 3 Gross 2 .5 2 1 .5 1 0 .5 0
10 12 14 16 10 20 22 24 26 28

Net Pumping

CA-50 location (o after TDC compression)

Valve timing scheduling in mode transition

E V C (A T D C -i) IV C (A T D C -i) 3 00 2 50 2 00 0 8 00 7 00 6 00 10 5 0 0 2 6 4 C ycle N u m b e r 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 2
IVC closer to BDC, increase of compression and trapped charge mass

10

N im e p (b ar)

SI/HCCI/SI Transitions

Nimep (bar)

SI

HCCI

SI

HCCI

Cycle#

Start with SI mode Transition into CAI mode in cycle# 60 Transition back to SI mode in cycle# 136 Transition into CAI mode in cycle# 177

Open loop control: Modulation period at 30 cycles

1500 rpm; modulation period of 30 cycles=2.4 sec

6
GIMEP

5 IMEP(bar),fuel mass per cycle(mg) 4 3 2 1 0 0

PMEP Fuel mass x 10 NIMEP

-1

50

100

150 Cycle no.

200

250

300

Open loop control: Modulation period at 14 cycles

1500 rpm; modulation period of 14 cycles=1.12 sec

6
GIMEP

5 IMEP(bar),fuel mass per cycle(mg) 4 3 2 1 0

PMEP Fuel mass x 10 NIMEP

-1

50

100

150 Cycle no.

200

250

300

Open-loop step response

NIMEP(bar)

4 2 0 0 50 100 150 200 250

Fuel mass (mg), *

1.6 1.4 1.2 * 1 0.8 0 100 50 100 150 200 250 Fuel massx0.1

Valve timing (oABDC)

50

EVC IVC

0 0 50 100 150 Cycle number 200 250

Closed-loop load controller

i+1th cycle target

r i+1

Rate limiter

Lookuptable

u f,i

ui
(ui

Engine

y i+1

wi ei
Z-2I

Integrator + Z-2I

r i-1

y i -1

Open-loop behavior
NIMEP (bar) 4.5 T(oC) 130 120 110 100 4 3.5 T 3 1 2.5 * 2 0 0.9 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Engine Cycle RPM 1.2 RPM 1700 1.1 1600 1500 1400 1300 NIMEP * 1.3

Closed-loop behavior
NIMEP (bar) 4.5 T(oC) 130 120 110 100 4 3.5 3 1 2.5 * 2 0 0.9 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Engine Cycle T RPM 1.2 RPM 1.1 1700 1600 1500 1400 1300 NIMEP * 1.3

LIF Oil Distribution Image

No load (1 N.m) - Coolant 50 C - Oil 50 C

Expansion stroke
20 mm 7 mm

Fluorescence intensity profile

Ring Pack Geometry crown land skirt

Top Ring Up-Scraping Effect (1)

1700 rpm - No load (1 N.m), Coolant 50 C - Oil 50 C

Compression stroke

Late compression stroke

Ring Twist + Piston Tilt

Anti-Thrust Side

Transport on the land: INERTIA

INERTIA

Early Upward Stroke Exhaust & Compression Stroke

Exhaust stroke

INERTIA

Compression stroke

1200 rpm - No load (1 N.m) - Coolant 50 C - Oil 50 C

Transport on the land in CIRCUMFERENTIAL DIRECTION

1200 rpm - No load (1 N.m) - Coolant 50 C - Oil 50 C

Compression stroke t=0s

3 mm
t=1s (10 cycles)

t=2s (20 cycles)

6 mm

Circumferential Oil Flow

Oil Transport through the Ring Gaps and Mist generation

Break up into mist by high velocity gas flow (liquid entrainment)

Liquid oil

Scraper Ring

Top Ring

PCV

Ring Land 1

~2 h oil Qoil ! Qgas h 2gas .Q oil

Oil dragged from the piston may be entrained into mist. Oil mist is carried by gas flow going to crankcase or back to the combustion Chamber.

3.Q gas

Ring Land 2

Width of the gas flow

B. Thirouard

Ring Pack simulation code structure

GAS FLOW and RING DYNAMICS

PISTON SECONDARY MOTION

RING - LINER LUBRICATION

OIL TRANSPORT and OIL CONSUMPTION

Ring/Groove Interface asperity contact

Gas Flows

Major Elements of the Existing Ring Pack Models

RING oil GROOVE area in direct asperity contact Through gaps Through groove

oil squeezing
pgas

oil [1] [2]

Through waviness Through bore

Rail/Expander Interaction Forces and pressures from the Expander/Spacer

Ring/Liner Interface Mixed Lubrication Three Lubrication Modes Outlet conditions Flow continuity

Dynamics of the Rings

CG

Oil Consumption Analysis Package

Zone Analysis RINGPACK-OC Individual Oil Transport Processes and models Ring/Liner Scraping Redistribution Ring/groove Pumping out Gas flow dragging Piston lands Gas flow driven Inertia driven Vaporization On liner On piston Gap Gap position Mist

Fundamental Models

FRICTION-OFT

TLOCR

TPOCR

PISTON2nd

Research highlights: Integration of modeling and the Experiments on production and single-cylinder engines

Transient oil consumption and Mechanism

Modeling Measurements from the Production Engine
0%
1000 900 60 800

20

100 % Load
Pressure [bar]

4200 rpm; 0 % - WOT

Oil Cons. Blow-By Air flow 40

10

Pres. 1 Pres. 2 Cylinder 2nd Land [pred.] 3rd Land [pred.]

Oil Cons. [Qg/cyc]

700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 40 80 120 160

Blow-By [l/min], Air Flow[l/s]

0 -360

-300

-240 -180

-120

-60 0 60 CA [degrees]

120

180

240

300

360

20

Normalized Lift [1=top position]

1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 180 CA [degrees] 360 Top Ring 2nd Ring

200

0 240

Time [s]