I M T Sloan Automotive Laboratory Massachusetts Institute

I M T Sloan Automotive Laboratory Massachusetts Institute

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 T 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 1 1981 0.1 1994 US 1994 TLEV 1997 TLEV NOx (g/mile) NMOG (g/mile) 1 1975 1977 1977 1981 1994 TLEV 1997- 2003 ULEV

0.1 1997- 2003 ULEV 0.01 2004 SULEV2 2004 SULEV2 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Starting year of implementation 0.01 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 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 results (SAE 2002-01-2805) First Cycle In-cylinder 4.5 R300 ( 40C, MAP 0.92 bar ) R600 ( 40C, MAP 0.8 bar ) 4 80C R900 ( 40C, MAP 0.7 bar ) R300 ( 60C, MAP 0.92 bar ) 3.5 R600 ( 60C, MAP 0.8 bar ) R900 ( 60C, MAP 0.7 bar ) 3 R300 ( 80C, MAP 0.92 bar ) 60C R600 ( 80C, MAP 0.8 bar ) R900 ( 80C, MAP 0.7bar ) 2.5 R200 ( 20C, Zetec Engine ) R200 ( 0C, Zetec Engine ) 2 40C 1.5 RPM Tcoolant 20C

1 0.5 0C 0 0 50 100 Lean Limit of consistent firing 150 200 250 Injected Fuel Mass (mg) 300 350 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 ) 1 R300 ( 60C, MAP 0.92 bar ) Delivery Efficiency f 0.9 R600 ( 60C, MAP 0.8 bar ) 80C R900 ( 60C, MAP 0.7 bar )

R300 ( 80C, MAP 0.92 bar ) 0.8 R600 ( 80C, MAP 0.8 bar ) 0.7 R900 ( 80C, MAP 0.7bar ) R200 ( 20C, Zetec Engine ) 60C 0.6 0.5 R200 ( 0C, Zetec Engine ) Tcoolant 40C 0.4 RPM 0.3 20C 0.2 0.1 0 0C 0 50 100 150 Injected Fuel Mass(mg)

200 250 300 Effect of delaying IVO on 1st cycle fuel delivery INCOMING MIXTURE INCREASINGLY LEAN AS PISTON DRAWS IN CHARGE 1.2 1.1 1.0 INTAKE FLOW LEAN 0.9 0.8 RICH 0.7 0.6 0.5 -20 -10 0 10 20 Intake Valve Opening (CAD from TDC Exhaust) Injected mass: PISTON DISPLACES MORE LEAN

CHARGE AS IVC DELAYED PISTON 132.9 mg 199.3 mg 265.7 mg Pressure(bar) or HC mole fraction (%) Fuel equivalence Ratio ( ) (SAE 2004-01-1852) 35 HC 30 25 20 15 Pressure In-cylinder HC value for calculation 10 5 0 0 500 1000 Crank angle

1500 2000 Exhaust port/runner oxidation with retard spark timing 60 HC Emissions (g-HC/kg-fuel) 50 40 Cylinder Exit [Quenching] Port Exit [FFID: 7-cm from EV Runner [FFID: 37-cm from EV Exhaust Tank 120-cm from EV 30 20 10 0 15 0 -15 Spark Timing ( BTDC) 3.0 bar n-imep, 1500 RPM, = 1.0, 20C Secondary air injection 3.0 bar NIMEP, 1500 RPM, 20 C 1.4 HC/HCref 1.2

exhaust = 0.85 Sp = 15 BTDC 1.0 0.8 0.6 = 0.85 = 1.0 = 1.1 0.4 0.2 0.5 Sp = -15BTDC Sp = 0 BTDC 1.0 1.5 Exhaust=1.4 2.0 2.5 hs )catalyst (m Re f. value 3.0 3.5 4.0 Ref value: at condition of 15oBTDC spark and = 1

1 NO/NO inlet 0.8 Catalyst performance 4K miles aged 50K miles aged 0.6 150K miles aged 0.4 (SAE 2003-01-1874) 0.2 0 CO/CO inlet 1 0.8 4K miles aged 50K miles aged 150K miles aged 0.6 7 ppm fuel S 1600 rpm 0.5 bar Pintake Space vel. - 4.4x104/hr modulation - 2 Hz - = 0.025 0.4

0.2 0 HC/HC inlet 1 4K miles aged 0.8 50K miles aged 0.6 150K miles aged 0.4 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Fraction of cumulative catalyst volume 1 Time-resolved NO profiles along catalyst (SAE 2003-01-1874) Aged 4k-miles; 4.4x104/hr space vel.; l modulation: 1Hz, = 0.03 500 0% cumulative catalyst vol. NO (ppm) 250

0 500 250 0 50 17% 25 0 50 33% 25 0 50 50% 25 67% 0 50 25 82% 0 50 100% 25 0 0 2 4

Time (s) 6 8 10 2 1 O storage capacity (g) 2 Normalized O2 Storage Fuel Sulfur Effect on Oxygen Storage Capacity: Age effect and fuel S effect are separable 1 Slope: 0.8 10% decrease 0.6 0 in O2 storage capacity with every 150 ppm increase in fuel S 100 200 300 400 Fuel sulfur (ppm)

500 7ppmS 33ppmS 266ppmS 500ppmS Power law: O2 storage age- 0.84 10 100 Catalyst age (k-miles) Plasmatron Fuel Reformer Developed at the MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center Ideal Partial Oxidation Reaction: Cn H m n m n plasmatron O2 3.773N 2 nCO H 2 3.773N 2 2 2 2 Fuel Air 1 1 Plasmatron Products of the Ideal Reaction Species Mole Fraction 1st Stage 2 Reactor

Air 2 Nozzle 3 Section Fuel Air 3 24nd Stage Reactor Flow Direction H2 25% CO 26% N2 49% Effect of Plasmatron gas on lean operation (1500 rpm, 3.5 bar NIMEP, SAE2003-01-0630) Overall Net Indicated Efficiency (%) 33% 32% Synth. Plas. gas = 10% 31% Synth. Plas. gas = 20% 30% Synth. Plas. gas = 30%

(Assume ideal Plasmatron efficiency of 86%) 29% 28% Indolene Only 27% 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 Lambda H2 Add = 10% Equiv NOx (PPM) 10000 H2 Add = 20% Equiv 1000 H2 Add = 30% Equiv Synth. Plas. gas = 10% 100 10 Synth. Plas. gas = 20% Synth. Plas. gas = 30%

1 1.2 1.4 1.6 Lambda 1.8 2 2.2 Indolene Only ONR Decrease with Plasmatron Reformate (1500 rpm, 8.5 bar NIMEP, MBT spark timing; SAE 2004-01-0975) ON of PRF into Engine at Audible Knock 100 90 80 70 PRF, 0% Plas Fraction 60 15% Plas Fraction 30% Plas Fraction 50 1 1.1 1.2

1.3 1.4 Lambda 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 VVT Engine for HCCI operation Geometric compression ratio = 8 to16 Spacer to change geometric compression ratio Mode Transition Considerations: Drive Cycle 9 8 7 Bmep(bar) 6 5 SAE 2002-01-0420 4 3 2 1 0 -1 -2

0 500 1000 1500 2000 RPM 2500 3000 3500 Details of mode transition MPH 60 50 40 30 20 10 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Time (s) 24 h

h2 i j k l m 40 n 0 g 19 e bm e p(ba r) d 25 r Gear 9 30 q f 14 35 p

20 s 15 R P M /1 0 0 c t A v _ V e lo c it y 10 4 b -1 440 a 450 u 460 470 480 T im e (s ) Time (s) 490 500 5 v 510

0 Average V e hVehicle i c l e sSpeed p e e d(mph) (m p h ) Gear, G eBmep a r , B (bar), m e p RPM/100 (b a r), R P M 0 0 Details of transition 8 e 7 d 6 g Bmep (bar) 5 f 4 b c h2 3 m

2 av 1 u n k o i t s 0 -1 h 0 500 l r 1000 q p 1500 -2 Speed (rpm) HCCI region

j 2000 2500 A non-robust SI-HCCI transition Pressure (bar) 80 60 40 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 EV lift All subsequent cycles were HCCI combustion 20 0 0 1000

2000 3000 4000 5000 Crank angle (deg.) (1500 rpm, 15oBTDC spark) 50 40 Pressure(bar) Pressure(bar) 60 Pressure(bar) 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Pressure(bar) A Knocking transition 60 50

40 30 20 10 0 30 20 10 0 -10 60 61 62 63 Cycle 64 65 66 A Robust SI-HCCI Transition Pressure (bar) 80 60 40 SI HCCI IVO 20 95 atdc-i IVC 210 10 atdc-i EVO 495 495 atdc-i EVC 700 630 atdc-i IV lift

1st HCCI cycle All subsequent cycles in HCCI combustion EV lift 20 0 0 1000 2000 3000 Crank angle (deg.) 4000 5000 (1500 rpm, 15oBTDC spark) First HCCI cycle and 10 following ones 55 50 pressure (bar) 45 40 11th 1st HCCI cycle 8 th 9th 6th

10th 35 4th 7th 5th 3rd 30 2nd 25 20 175 180 185 190 195 200 Crank angle (deg) 205 210 100 cycles after first HCCI cycle 55 50 pressure (bar) 45 1st HCCI cycle 40 35 3rd

30 2nd 25 20 160 170 180 190 200 Crank angle (deg) 210 220 Controlling transition using valve timing 7 GIMEP 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 6 IMEP(bar) 5 4 3 2

1 0 56 NIMEP SI cycles with late IVC and late EVC 58 First HCCI cycle(60); early IVC Last SI cycle(59); early EVC 60 62 64 Cycle number 66 68 70 Relationship between IMEP and CA-50 5 4.5 4 IMEP(bar) 3.5

3 2.5 2 Gross Net Pumping 1.5 1 0.5 0 10 12 14 16 10 20 22 24 CA-50 location (o after TDC compression) 26 28 Nimep (bar) EVC (ATDC-i) IVC (ATDC-i) Valve timing scheduling in mode transition IVC closer to BDC, increase of compression and trapped charge mass

300 250 200 800 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 Cycle Number 8 10 700 600 10

5 0 Nimep (bar) SI/HCCI/SI Transitions SI HCCI SI 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 HCCI Open loop control: Modulation period at 30 cycles 1500 rpm; modulation period of 30 cycles=2.4 sec IMEP(bar),fuel mass per cycle(mg) 6 GIMEP 5 4 3 2 Fuel mass x 10 NIMEP 1 0 -1 0

PMEP 50 100 150 200 Cycle no. 250 300 Open loop control: Modulation period at 14 cycles 1500 rpm; modulation period of 14 cycles=1.12 sec IMEP(bar),fuel mass per cycle(mg) 6 GIMEP 5 4 3 2 Fuel mass x 10 NIMEP 1 0 PMEP -1 0 50 100 150 200

Cycle no. 250 300 Fuel mass (mg), NIMEP(bar) Open-loop step response 4 2 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 150 200 250 100 150 Cycle number 200 250 1.6 Fuel massx0.1

1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0 50 100 Valve timing (oABDC) 100 EVC 50 IVC 0 0 50 Closed-loop load controller i+1th cycle target r i+1 Lookuptable Rate limiter u f,i ui

Engine ui wi K Integrator ei Z-2I r i-1 + - y i -1 Z-2I y i+1 Open-loop behavior NIMEP (bar) 1.3 NIMEP 4.5 T(oC) 130 120 110 100

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

4 120 3.5 110 3 T RPM RPM 1.1 1700 1600 1 100 2.5 2 0 0.9 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Engine Cycle 1500 1400 1300 LIF Oil Distribution Image No load (1 N.m) - Coolant 50 C - Oil 50 C Expansion stroke 7 mm 20 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 Top Ring Scraper Ring Break up into mist by high velocity gas flow (liquid entrainment) Liquid oil Ring Land 1 PCV 3. gas ~ 2 Qoil Qgas h oil 2 h gas . oil Ring Land 2 Width of the gas flow B. Thirouard 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.

Ring Pack simulation code structure GAS FLOW and RING DYNAMICS PISTON SECONDARY MOTION RING - LINER LUBRICATION OIL TRANSPORT and OIL CONSUMPTION Ring/Groove Interface Gas Flows asperity contact Major Elements of the Existing Ring Pack Models RING oil Through gaps Through groove GROOVE area in direct asperity contact oil squeezing pgas oil [1] Rail/Expander Interaction Forces and pressures from the Expander/Spacer

CG [2] Ring/Liner Interface Mixed Lubrication Three Lubrication Modes Outlet conditions Flow continuity Through waviness Through bore Dynamics of the Rings Oil Consumption Analysis Package Fundamental Models RINGPACK-OC FRICTION-OFT TLOCR TPOCR PISTON2nd Individual Oil Transport Processes and models Zone Analysis 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 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 1000 4200 rpm; 0 % - WOT 900 60 Blow-By [l/min], Air Flow[l/s] 800 Oil Cons. 700 Blow-By 600 Air flow 400 300 10 40 500

0 -360 -300 -240 -180 -120 -60 0 60 CA [degrees] 120 180 240 300 360 20 200 100 0 40 80 120 160 Time [s] 200 0 240

Normalized Lift [1=top position] Oil Cons. [g/cyc] Pres. 1 Pres. 2 Cylinder 2nd Land [pred.] 3rd Land [pred.] 100 % Load Pressure [bar] 0% 20 1 0.9 Top Ring 0.8 2nd Ring 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 180 CA [degrees] 360

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • PowerPoint-Präsentation - inIPF

    PowerPoint-Präsentation - inIPF

    Recent clinical trials that served as a basis for the approval of two new medications for IPF differed regarding their inclusion criteria. The ASCEND study enrolled patients without a surgical biopsy only if they showed a definite UIP pattern on...
  • Lecture 1 for Chapter 5, Analysis - Florida State University

    Lecture 1 for Chapter 5, Analysis - Florida State University

    Or a serious and a sad one. Point out that there are no two objects: If you decide on a serious face, cover the serious face and show what is left over. It is clear now, that the remains are...
  • Random Writer - Stanford University

    Random Writer - Stanford University

    "Shand tucthiney m?" le ollds mind Theybooure He, he s whit Pereg lenigabo Jodind alllld ashanthe ainofevids tre lin--p asto oun Let s be the previously produced character. The probability that c is the next character to be produced equals...
  • Chapter 2

    Chapter 2

    Chapter 1 Introduction: Themes in the Study of Life ... Replacing bulb will fix problem Test of prediction Test of prediction Test falsifies hypothesis Test does not falsify hypothesis Prediction: Replacing batteries will fix problem Forming and Testing Hypotheses Observations...
  • Coaching for Math GAINS Professional Learning

    Coaching for Math GAINS Professional Learning

    Grade 8 Classroom Video Debrief Discuss observations from the video Role play how you, as the coach, would debrief with this teacher. Grade 9 Classroom Video Materials DI- Professional Learning Series Insert pic of session outline for day on Questioning...
  • Conservation of Mass in Chemical Changes

    Conservation of Mass in Chemical Changes

    The Law of Conservation of Mass: The total mass of the reactants must equal the total mass of the products Total mass of reactants = Total mass of products ... H2, N2, F2, Cl2, Br2, I2 and O2 (Remember "HOFBrINCl")...
  • CS434/534: introduction - Yale University

    CS434/534: introduction - Yale University

    Spine. Leaf. TCP/IP. Receiver masks packet reordering due to . multipathing. below transport layer. Sender breaks data into . flowcells. Set up multiple paths. This kind of fine-grained load balancing scheme can cause packet reordering at the receiver side, therefore,...
  • Wastewater Treatment Wastewater Treatment Purpose: To manage water

    Wastewater Treatment Wastewater Treatment Purpose: To manage water

    Wastewater Treatment Wastewater Treatment Purpose: To manage water discharged from homes, businesses, and industries to reduce the threat of water pollution.