Diesel Emission Characteristics Using High Injection Pressure with Converging Nozzles in a

Medium-Duty Engine
Author(s): Prashanth Karra and Song-Charng Kong
Source: SAE International Journal of Fuels and Lubricants , Vol. 1, No. 1 (2009), pp. 578-592
Published by: SAE International
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26272034

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26272034?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

SAE International is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to SAE
International Journal of Fuels and Lubricants

This content downloaded from

93.103.83.155 on Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:05:39 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 2008-01-1085

Diesel Emission Characteristics Using High Injection Pressure

with Converging Nozzles in a Medium-Duty Engine
Prashanth Karra and Song-Charng Kong
Iowa State University

Copyright © 2008 SAE International

ABSTRACT further compounded by the request in improving fuel economy

by customers.
Effects of high injection pressure and converging nozzles on
combustion and emissions of a multi-cylinder diesel engine Many approaches have been proposed to reduce emissions
were investigated. The engine uses a common-rail injection including both in-cylinder control and after-treatment.
system that allows a maximum injection pressure of 200 MPa. Methods for in-cylinder control encompass exhaust gas
Various injection pressures were tested to explore the benefits recirculation (EGR), air management and flexible fuel
of high injection pressure in achieving low exhaust emissions injection schemes. Particulate filters and NOx reduction
in diesel engines. Injectors used in this study include catalyst have also been tested as after-treatment devices. This
conventional straight-hole nozzles and converging nozzles study will focus on the use of high injection pressures and
with a K factor of 3. Parametric studies were performed novel fuel injection schemes with various levels of EGR for in-
including variations in injection timings, number of injection cylinder control.
pulses and EGR levels. It was found that low temperature
combustion can be achieved by using high EGR with 1) late EGR has been demonstrated to reduce NOx emissions by
single injection or 2) double injection with an early pilot and a lowering combustion temperatures. However, soot emissions
late main injection. Investigations revealed that high injection increase as the amount of EGR is increased to a moderate
pressures significantly reduced soot emissions with an increase level. It was found that soot emissions could be reduced if a
in NOx emissions under conventional injection timing ranges. high level of EGR was used [2]. The critical EGR levels
However, under late injection conditions (i.e., SOI=5 ATDC), beyond which soot starts to decrease depends on the engine
an increase in the injection pressure from 150 MPa to 200 configurations and fuel injection parameters. In other words,
MPa did not result in further soot reduction. The use of high EGR can be used as a means to reducing soot and NOx
injectors with converging nozzles allows achieving a higher simultaneously without the need of implementing after-
injection pressure due to better flow coefficients. However, the treatment devices.
effect on overall emission reduction was not significant for the
converging nozzle used in this study. Low temperature diesel combustion was achieved by using
high EGR (up to 60%) for various engine loads (up to 50%)
INTRODUCTION and injection timings [3]. Appropriate levels of EGR can be
used to achieve premixed charge compression ignition (PCCI)
Diesel engine manufacturers are facing challenges in exhaust combustion. Boyarski et al. demonstrated that EGR along with
emissions mandates. New standards require simultaneous well controlled intake temperatures could provide stable
reduction in various exhaust emissions including particulate steady state combustion [4]. Okude et al., using high levels of
matter (PM), nitrogen oxides (NOx), hydrocarbon (HC) and EGR and a reduced compression ratio, were able to achieve
carbon monoxides (CO). For example, the US EPA 2010 optimal spray targeting for rapid mixing before the start of
mandates for on-road heavy-duty diesels include a 0.268 combustion. The rapid mixing produced very low NOx and
g/kW-hr limit on NOx, a 0.0134 g/kW-hr limit in PM and a PM emissions [5].
0.188 g/kW-hr limit on non-methane hydrocarbons
(NMHC)[1]. For non-road diesel engines with a rated power Simultaneous soot and NOx reductions were also obtained by
between 56 and 130 kW, the Tier 4 emissions standards are using 55% EGR while fuel injection timings were adjusted
0.40 g/kW-hr for NOx, 0.02 g/kW-hr for soot, 5.0 g/kW-hr for such that combustion started at top-dead-center [6]. It was
CO, and 0.19 g/kW-hr for NMHC. The emissions challenge is proposed that sufficient mixing time (interval between the end

578 SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. | Volume 1 | Issue 1

This content downloaded from

93.103.83.155 on Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:05:39 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
of injection and the start of combustion) was needed to achieve
low soot and NOx emissions [7]. The above study also used
high EGR (70%) to properly phase combustion with very early
injection timings (60 BTDC). Various multiple injection
configurations were also used for high load and high speed
operations for a heavy-duty diesel engine [8].

Another important method of reducing emissions is by

enhancing the mixing by using high injection pressure [9,10].
High pressure injection combined with micro hole nozzle
increases turbulent mixing for better fuel vaporization and soot
reduction [11]. It appears that high fuel injection pressures,
small injector nozzle holes and reduced injection duration (due
to the high injection pressure) with appropriate spray targeting
were important in soot reduction. High levels of EGR with
appropriate equivalence ratios were important in NOx Figure 1 Schematic of the engine test facility.
reduction. Thus, using high injection pressures with high EGR
can potentially reduce the soot and NOx simultaneously. As shown in Figure 1, exhaust gas is re-circulated into the
intake using the back pressure created by a valve in the
There are many other studies that deal with diesel emissions exhaust pipe. The exhaust gas flows through a heat exchanger
reduction. Different strategies were studied including fuel before entering the intake. The mixture enters the turbocharger
effects [12,13], variable valve timing [14], near-stoichiometric and then goes through an intercooler for further cooling. The
combustion for the use of three-way catalyst [15]. charge entering the cylinder is maintained at 23˚C for all the
EGR levels. A probe placed just after the intercooler takes the
This study aims at using high EGR and high injection pressure sample of the intake charge to measure CO2 in the intake
in a multi-cylinder, turbocharged, production diesel engine for manifold (to measure EGR CO2 %). The present analyzer is
simultaneous PM and NOx reductions. EGR gas will be cooled capable of measuring both intake and exhaust CO2
and different injection strategies along with different injectors simultaneously using different probes. The following formula
will be investigated. is used to calculate the EGR percentage,

EXPERIMENTAL SETUP [CO 2]intake − [CO 2]atm

EGR % = (1)
[CO 2]Exhaust − [CO 2]atm
Experiments were performed using a John Deere 4045HF475
off-road 4-cylinder 4.5 L engine. The engine is rated at 129 The gaseous emissions were measured using a HORIBA
kW at 2400 rpm. Detailed engine parameters are given in MEXA 7100DEGR emissions analyzer. The emission data
Table 1. recorded were CO, CO2, NOx, THC, O2 and EGR CO2. The
smoke number was measured using an AVL 415S soot meter.
Table 1 Engine specifications
Engine John Deere 4045 The cylinder pressure was measured using a Kistler 6125B
HF475 4-cylinder 4- piezo-electric transducer. The signal was amplified using a
valve direct injection Kistler 5010 charge amplifier. The cylinder pressure was
Bore and Stroke (mm) 106 x 127 measured every 0.1 crank angle.
Total engine displacement (L) 4.5
Compression Ratio 17.0:1 EXPERIMENTAL CONDITIONS
Valves per Cylinder 2/2
Intake/Exhaust Emissions tests were performed at 1400 rpm which is the
Firing Order 1-3-4-2 engine speed that produces the peak torque. The injectors were
Combustion System Direct Injection manufactured by Denso. The injectors tested include
Engine Type In-line, 4-stroke 6X133X1200, 6X133X800 and 6X133X800 with a K-factor
Aspiration Turbocharged of 3. In the above notation, the first number defines the
(located on engine) number of holes on the injector tip. The second number
Injection System Common Rail indicates the included spray angle. The third number indicates
Piston Bowl-in-piston the flow number which has the units of cc/min. Here, K factor
is defined as 100(Din-Dout)/L with L=0.8 mm.

Table 2 gives detailed descriptions of the variables that were

tested. Most, but not all, combinations were tested, as either
combustion did not sustain at certain cases or it was not

SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. | Volume 1 | Issue 1 579

This content downloaded from

93.103.83.155 on Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:05:39 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 200
necessary to test certain conditions due to apparently high
emissions. Among the conditions that were not tested were:
150 MPa
1. 5 ATDC for single injection at high EGR and/or low 150
200 MPa
injection pressures such as 100 MPa due to combustion
instability.

NOx (g/kgf)
100 MPa
2. Zero percent EGR conditions were not tested for nozzles 100
with k-factor 3 as those conditions would yield very high
NOx emissions.
50
A fuel mass of 50 mg/injection was injected. The engine was
controlled and monitored using DevX software provided by
John Deere.
0
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10
Table 2 Test matrix in this study Main SOI (ATDC)

Main SOI -20 to 5 ATDC Figure 2 NOx Emissions at different injection pressures for
single injection with 0% EGR.
Pilot SOI -40 to -15 ATDC
EGR 0% to 30% Soot emissions shown in Figure 3 were found to be the lowest
Injection pressure 100 to 200 MPa for the 200 MPa injection pressure. As mentioned earlier, high
Injectors 6X133X1200 (d = 181μm) injection pressures can help attain better combustion of fuel
which will result in low soot emissions. With this type of
6X133X800 (d = 148 μm)
injectors, only the cases with start of injection at 5 ATDC for
6X133X800 K= 3 injection pressures 200 MPa and 150 MPa were able to
Pilot fuel 15%, 25%, 40% achieve the Tier 4 soot emission standard.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS Figures 4 and 5 show the emissions and BSFC data in g/kW-
hr. In general, a high injection pressure will reduce soot
The emission results will be presented in the unit of g/kW-hr emissions with an increase in NOx emissions, as expected.
or g/kgf. The latter is used such that the experimental results However, the effect of using a 200 MPa injection pressure for
can be readily used for model validations. The Tier 4 SOI 5 ATDC in soot reduction is found to be insignificant.
standards for the present engine are 0.4 g/kW-hr for NOx and The effects of ultra-high injection pressure in soot reduction in
0.02 g/kW-hr for soot that are approximately equivalent to 2.0 the low-temperature combustion regimes will require further
g/kgf for NOx and 0.1 g/kgf for soot. Note that this study will investigations.
emphasize on soot and NOx emissions although CO and HC
emissions were also measured in the experiments. Effects of
1
CO and HC emissions are reflected in the BSFC data that will
also be shown.
0.8 100 MPa
6X133X1200 INJECTORS
Soot (g/kgf)

Effects of Injection Pressure 0.6

150 MPa

Results of using the “6X133X1200” injectors will be presented

0.4
in this section. Figure 2 shows the NOx emissions at different
injection pressures for single injection with 0% EGR. The 200 MPa

increase in injection pressure from 100 MPa to 150 MPa and 0.2
200 MPa increased NOx emissions. This can be attributed to
the increase in spray velocity at higher injection pressures
leading to better atomization. Higher injection velocities 0
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10
(because of higher injection pressure) will lead to more rapid Main SOI (ATDC)
premixed burn and a higher local temperature which will Figure 3 Soot emissions at different injection pressures for
increase NOx emissions. single injection with 0% EGR.

580 SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. | Volume 1 | Issue 1

This content downloaded from

93.103.83.155 on Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:05:39 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 0.25 temperature zone explained by Kitamura et al. [16] thus
reducing the amount of soot produced.
200
0.2 100 MPa
Soot (g/kW-hr)

0
0.15
150
-20
150 MPa
0.1 200 MPa 0% EGR

NOx (g/kgf)
0
100
150 MPa 0% EGR
-20
0.05 200 MPa
-20
+5
+5 50
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
200 MPa 15% EGR
NOx (g/kW-hr)
200 MPa 30% EGR
Figure 4 Soot vs NOx emissions at different injection
0
pressures (single injection, 0% EGR). Numbers at the data -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15
points represent the injection timing. Main SOI (ATDC)
Figure 6 Comparisons of NOx emissions using different EGR
levels.
320 -20 5

300
4
BSFC (g/kW-hr)

280 200 MPa

3
Soot (g/kgf)

260 -20 200 MPa 30% EGR

150 MPa 2
240
-20
220 1
100 MPa 150 MPa 0% EGR 200 MPa 15% EGR
200
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 200 MPa 0% EGR
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15
NOx (g/kW-hr) Main SOI (ATDC)
Figure 5 BSFC vs NOx at different injection pressures (single Figure 7 Comparisons of soot emissions using different EGR
injection and 0% EGR). levels.

Effects of EGR Effects of Double Injections

Figures 6 and 7 show the comparisons of NOx and soot The double injection cases presented here used 25% pilot fuel.
emissions between different EGR levels for 200 MPa injection The SOI of the main injection was fixed at 0 ATDC which was
pressure. As expected, EGR reduces NOx emissions but found to result in the lowest soot and NOx emissions. The
increases soot emissions. It can be seen that the low pilot SOI was varied between -40 and -15 ATDC, as shown in
temperature combustion can be achieved by using high EGR Figures 8 and 9.
with a late SOI (e.g., 5ATDC) for simultaneous soot and NOx
reductions. NOx emissions were around 50 g/kgf for double injections for
both injection pressures. Soot and NOx emissions are not very
Among the tested cases, NOx emissions were the lowest when sensitive to the pilot SOI. It is thought that a majority of
30% of EGR was used. Among the cases studied using a 200 emissions may be produced by main combustion since the
MPa injection pressure, SOI of 0 ATDC produced the least main SOI was not varied. The effects of high injection
NOx emissions (5.4 g/kgf). For soot emissions, 0% EGR cases pressure on soot and NOx emissions using double injections
performed the best. Although the cases with 30% EGR are the same as those using single injections. Introduction of
produced the highest amount of soot, at retarded SOI (e.g., 0 pilot injection does not seem to change the NOx levels
ATDC), soot emissions were relatively low. It is thought that significantly but does change soot levels. The soot levels
the combustion temperature was not in the soot formation changed with pilot injection especially when soot is compared
at high injection pressures for single and double injections.

SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. | Volume 1 | Issue 1 581

This content downloaded from

93.103.83.155 on Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:05:39 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 200 12

200 MPa Single Inj.

150 MPa -15 ATDC
10
200 MPa -15 ATDC

150 150 MPa Single Inj.

Cylinder Pressure (MPa)

8

200 MPa 5 ATDC

NOx (g/kgf)

150 MPa 5 ATDC

6
100

200 MPa Double Inj.

50 2

150 MPa Double Inj.

0
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
0 CAD (ATDC)
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 Figure 10 Comparisons of cylinder pressure at two injection
SOI (ATDC)
pressures of 150 and 200 MPa at -15 ATDC and 5 ATDC SOI
Figure 8 NOx emissions for 150 and 200 MPa injection (30% EGR)
pressures with single and double injections with 0% EGR. The
double injection cases used 25% pilot fuel. 1000

200 MPa 5 ATDC

0.7
800
150 MPa Single Inj. 200 MPa -15 ATDC

Heat Release Rate (J/deg)

0.6 150 MPa 5 ATDC
600
0.5 150 MPa -15 ATDC
150 double Inj.
400
Soot (g/kgf)

0.4

0.3
200
200 MPa double Inj.
0.2
0
200 MPa Single Inj.
0.1
-20 -10 0 10 20 30
CAD (ATDC)
0 Figure 11 Comparisons of heat release rate data at two
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10
SOI (ATDC)
injection pressures of 150 and 200 MPa at -15 ATDC and 5
ATDC SOI. (30% EGR)
Figure 9 Soot emissions for 150 and 200 MPa injection
pressures with single and double injections using 25% pilot
fuel with 0% EGR. Cylinder pressures and heat release rate data for double
injection cases using 200 MPa injection pressure with 0%
EGR are shown in Figures 12 and 13, respectively. It can be
Cylinder Pressure and Heat Release Rate seen that low temperature heat release (i.e. cool flame) is very
noticeable for pilot SOI at -40 ATDC, for both 25% and 40%
Figures 10 and 11 show the cylinder pressure and heat release pilot conditions. Such low temperature heat release is due to
rate data for two injection pressures of 150 and 200 MPa for the long ignition delay during which cool flame chemistry
SOI = -15 and 5 ATDC with 30% EGR. It can be seen that releases a small amount of energy leading to ignition. By
higher injection pressures result in slightly earlier ignition and comparing results of pilot SOI at -40 ATDC and -20 ATDC, it
higher cylinder pressures. Figure 11 shows that 200 MPa can be seen that the case with pilot SOI at -20 ATDC produces
injection pressure also results in a higher heat release rate a more stratified mixture resulting in rapid combustion and
spike. This is believed to be due to better fuel atomization higher cylinder pressures. For the cases with pilot SOI at -40
which, in turn, produces rapid combustion and reduces soot ATDC, the mixture tends to be smoothed out due to the long
emissions. ignition delay.

582 SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. | Volume 1 | Issue 1

This content downloaded from

93.103.83.155 on Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:05:39 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 10 cases presented in the following sections, the main SOI was
-20 ATDC Pilot (40% P)
fixed at 5 ATDC and the pilot SOI was varied.
-40 ATDC Pilot (40% P)
8
Figure 14 shows the comparison of NOx emissions at 150
MPa injection pressure using double injections. Two different
Cylinder Pressure (MPa)

pilot fuel quantities were tested including 15% and 25%. In the
6
following figures, P stands for pilot injection, E for EGR %
-20 ATDC Pilot (25% P) and S for single injection. It is clearly evident from Figures 14
4
and 15 that 15% pilot performed better compared to 25% pilot,
-40 ATDC Pilot (25% P)
especially at the retarded pilot timings of -20 and -15 ATDC.
Both NOx and soot emissions results show the same trend that
2 the 15% pilot case results in lower emissions. It should be
noted that data for 25PE30 are not present in Figure 15 (but
are present in Figure 14) as the soot values were beyond the
0 scale that was chosen (a smaller scale was chosen to present
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
CAD (ATDC) the data more clearly). The NOx and Soot emissions in Figures
Figure 12 Comparisons of cylinder pressures at two pilot 14 and 15 are lower for retarded pilot SOI at 15% Pilot. This
injection levels (25% and 40%) with pilot SOI at -40 ATDC is likely due to temperature of combustion being in low
and -20 ATDC for 200 MPa injection pressure (0% EGR). sooting region (explained by Kitamura et al. [16]) and lower
temperatures which reduced the NOx formation.
50

800
25P E 0
700 40

15P E 0
600
Heat Release Rate (J/deg)

30
NOx (g/kgf)
500 -20 ATDC
40% Pilot
25P E 15
400 20
-40 ATDC 25% Pilot

300 -20 ATDC 25% Pilot

15P E 15

10
25P E 20
200
-40 ATDC
40% Pilot 25P E 30
100 15P E 30
0
-45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10
0 SOI (ATDC)
Figure 14 NOx vs pilot SOI at 150 MPa injection pressure
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30
CAD (ATDC) (main SOI = 5 ATDC) for different pilot fuel quantities and
Figure 13 Comparisons of heat release rate data at two pilot EGR.
injection levels (25% and 40%) with pilot SOI at -40 ATDC
and -20 ATDC for of 200 MPa injection pressure (0% EGR). 1.4

1.2
6X133X800 INJECTORS
1
Results of using the “6X133X800” injectors will be shown
Soot (g/kgf)

here. These injectors will be regarded as the “baseline 15P E 30

0.8
injectors” in the following discussions. These injectors have a
smaller nozzle diameters compared to the 1200 flow number 0.6
injectors. The reduction in the flow number increases the 25P E 20
duration of injection for injecting the same amount of fuel. 0.4

With the same injection system, the maximum amount of 25P E 15

0.2 15P E 15
injection pressure that could be achieved was 180 MPa as 25P E 0
compared to 200 MPa for the 1200 flow number injectors. 15P E 0
0
-45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10
Various combinations of injection pressures, EGR rates, SOI (ATDC)
injection timings, and fuel allocations were tested. A Figure 15 Soot vs pilot SOI at 150 MPa injection pressure
parametric study indicated that a main SOI of 5 ATDC would (main SOI = 5 ATDC) for different pilot fuel quantities and
result in emissions reduction. Thus, for the double injection EGR.

SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. | Volume 1 | Issue 1 583

This content downloaded from

93.103.83.155 on Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:05:39 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
On the other hand, BSFC was relatively low for the 25% pilot
1.2
cases compared to that of 15% pilot as shown in Figure 16.
The 15% pilot with 30% EGR had the highest BSFC. Though
1
BSFC was relatively high for 15% pilot cases, NOx and soot
emissions were relatively low leading to further testing of 15%
pilot injection which will be presented. 0.8 S E 30

Soot (g/kgf)
0.6
260 S E 15

0.4
255 15P E 30 15P E 30
SE0
0.2
250
BSFC (g/KW-hr)

15P E 15 15P E 0
25P E 30
0
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10
245 15P E 15 SOI (ATDC)

25P E 0
Figure 18 Soot emissions vs SOI at 150 MPa injection
240 15P E 0
pressure.

25P E 20 Figure 19 shows BSFC versus injection timings for both single
235
injection and double injection cases. It can be seen that BSFC
25P E 15
increases as the EGR rate increases. The reason is thought to
230 be due to the lower combustion temperature in the high EGR
-45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10
SOI (ATDC) cases that result in poor fuel oxidation. BSFC was low for SOI
of -10 ATDC for single injection cases at all EGR percentages.
Figure 16 BSFC vs pilot SOI at 150 MPa Injection pressure
(main SOI = 5 ATDC).

Figure 17 shows NOx emissions comparison of the single

injection and double injection (15% pilot) cases for different 260

EGR rates. It was found that 15% pilot with 30% EGR S E 30
15P E 30
performed best in reducing NOx emissions. However, soot
emissions (Figure 18) for 15% pilot with 30% EGR case were 250
BSFC (g/KW-hr)

relatively high except for pilot SOI = -30 ATDC. It can be

seen that a high EGR rate is required for NOx reduction. For 15P E 15
double injection conditions, an early pilot SOI (e.g., -30 SE0
240
ATDC) is required for soot reduction under high EGR 15P E 0
conditions.
230
200
S E 15

SE0 220
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10
150
SOI (ATDC)
Figure 19 BSFC vs SOI at 150 MPa injection pressure.
NOx (g/kgf)

S E 15
100
Effects of High Injection Pressure

50
Figure 20 compares the effect of the injection pressure on NOx
15P E 0
emissions. The two injection pressures tested were 150 MPa
15P E 15 and 180 MPa. It can be seen that NOx emissions were not
15P E 30
S E 30 significantly different for the two injection pressures at 15% or
0
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 30% EGR. As the EGR nears zero, the difference in NOx
SOI (ATDC) emissions for the two injection pressures is clearly visible. As
the EGR is increased, the influence of injection pressure on
Figure 17 NOx emissions vs main SOI (for single injection) or
NOx is relatively small since NOx emissions are more
pilot SOI (for double injection) at 150 MPa injection pressure.
sensitive to temperature which is the main effect of EGR.
Because the NOx emissions levels are already low at 30%
EGR, the quantitative difference between two injection
pressures is not visible on the figure.

584 SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. | Volume 1 | Issue 1

This content downloaded from

93.103.83.155 on Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:05:39 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 280
The NOx emissions increased slightly at late SOI for all cases.
This is due to a larger premixed burn at late SOI’s. The same 180 S E 0
phenomena can also be observed in Figures 2 and 8. Soot 270

emissions for the two injection pressures are shown in Figure

21. The injection pressure did not affect the soot emissions 260
180 S E 30
considerably. As expected, soot emissions increases with 150 S E 30

BSFC (g/kW-hr)
increased EGR. Results of BSFC with respect to SOI for
250
different conditions are also shown in Figure 22. The BSFC
180 S E 15
increased as the injection pressure is increased to 200 MPa. 150 S E 0
This can also be observed in Figure 5. This is thought to be 240
due to the increase in pump losses as fuel pump needed to
increase the rail pressure. 230

150 S E 15
200 220
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10
Main SOI (ATDC)
150 S E 0 Figure 22 BSFC for different injection pressures and EGR
150 levels for single injection conditions.
180 S E 0
180 S E 15
NOx (g/kgf)

0.1
100
150 S E 15 150M-D-15p 150M-S
0.08
50 Soot (g/kW-hr)

180 S E 30
0.06 0
150 S E 30 180M-S
0
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10
Main SOI (ATDC) (-30, +5) (-30, +5) 0
0.04
Figure 20 NOx emissions for different injection pressures and
EGR levels for single injection conditions. 180M-D-15p
0.02

3
(-40, +5) +3

150 S E 30 0
2.5 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
NOx (g/kW-hr)
Figure 23 NOx vs soot emissions for 150 and 180 MPa
2
180 S E 30 injection pressures at 30% EGR for both single and double
Soot (g/kgf)

injection conditions.
1.5

Double injection conditions using a 180 MPa injection

1 pressure were also tested. It should be noted that the main SOI
timing was fixed at 5 ATDC and a 15% pilot fuel was used for
150 S E 15 all the double injection conditions. Extensive tests were
0.5
performed but only the conditions that produced low levels of
180 S E 0 soot and NOx emissions will be discussed here.
180 S E 15
0 150 S E 0
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10
Main SOI (ATDC)
Figure 23 shows low emissions data of NOx and soot at 30%
EGR, 150 MPa and 180 MPa injection pressures. The box at
Figure 21 Soot emissions for different injection pressures and
bottom left corner shows the Tier 4 emissions standard for
EGR levels for single injection conditions.
non-road diesel engines of the present engine category. It can
be noted that at 180 MPa injection pressure with 15% pilot
injection at -40 ATDC (main SOI = 5 ATDC), soot emissions
was 0.0057 g/kW-hr. This is well below the Tier 4 standard.
However, NOx emission was 0.561 g/kW-hr which did not
meet the standard. During experiments, further advancing pilot
SOI would produce high HC emissions to a point that the

SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. | Volume 1 | Issue 1 585

This content downloaded from

93.103.83.155 on Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:05:39 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 7
combustion inside the cylinder was not able to sustain and
150 MPa 0 ATDC main
hence the engine failed to produce power. It should also be
6
noted that by increasing the injection pressure from 150 MPa
to 180 MPa, the pilot SOI can be advanced from -30 ATDC to

Cylinder Pressure (MPa)

-40 ATDC for further soot reduction. However, BSFC was 5

increased from 258 to 310 g/kW-hr.

4

Table 3 lists emissions and BSFC results of selected cases

shown in Figure 23. For low soot and NOx emissions, the 3 180 MPa -40 ATDC Pilot
favorable operating conditions are using the single injection at
a late SOI or using the double injection with early pilot and 2

late main SOI. However, it can be seen that CO and HC

emissions are relatively high by using 30% EGR. Further 1
investigations are required for simultaneous emissions -40 -30 -20 -10 0
CAD (ATDC)
10 20 30 40

reductions. Figure 24 Comparison of cylinder pressures for 150 MPa

single injection (main SOI at 0 ATDC) and 180 MPa double
Table 3 List of emissions and BSFC results for selected cases injection (15% pilot at -40 ATDC, main SOI at 5 ATDC).
shown in Figure 23. The EGR level was 30% for all the cases
tested.
500
P_i SOI NO Soot BSFC CO HC
nj (ATDC (g/kW- (g/kW (g/kW (g/kW (g/kW 150 MPa 0 ATDC main

) hr) -hr) -hr) -hr) -hr) 400

150 0 0.826 0.056 240 6.06 0.318

Heat Release Rate (J/deg)

150 +3 0.914 0.012 262 13.5 2.21
180 0 0.911 0.047 248 4.99 0.268 300

150 -30/+5 0.559 0.037 258 11.4 0.88

180 MPa -40 ATDC Pilot
180 -30/+5 0.649 0.051 269 10.5 0.672 200
180 -40/+5 0.561 0.005 310 20.19 3.95
100

Cylinder Pressure and Heat Release Rate

0
The cylinder pressure and heat release rate data are shown in
Figures 24 and 25, respectively. For 150 MPa single injection -40 -30 -20 -10 0
CAD (ATDC)
10 20 30 40

with main SOI at 0 ATDC, a long ignition delay is observed Figure 25 Comparison of heat release rate data for 150 MPa
which results in a large premixed burn. For 180 MPa double single injection (main SOI at 0 ATDC) and 180 MPa double
injection with 15% pilot fuel, the pilot fuel combustion results injection (15% pilot at -40 ATDC, main SOI at 5 ATDC).
in a small low-temperature heat release at -20 ATDC. Note
that the main SOI is 5 ATDC. The majority of heat release
does not occur until 10 ATDC. There is a sudden increase in
EFFECT OF CONVERGING NOZZLES
the heat release rate at 10 ATDC. It could be due to the fact
that the main fuel ignites the premixed mixture created by the
pilot fuel. The heat release rate curve after 20 ATDC exhibits Injectors with a K-factor of 3 were also used in this study.
a typical diffusion burn by the main fuel. In any case, the Figure 26 shows soot and NOx emissions for single injection
above operating conditions exhibit the characteristics of low with 15% and 30% EGR. As with the previous set of injectors,
temperature combustion. 15% EGR was not effective in reducing NOx emissions. It
should be noted that, for 15% EGR at retarded timings
between 0 ATDC and 5 ATDC, soot emissions varied between
0.007 g/kW-hr and 0.05 g/kW-hr. When EGR was increased to
30%, as in the case of previous injectors, soot emissions
increased initially by retarding SOI timings with a peak at -5
ATDC. Further retarding SOI to 0 and 5 ATDC would reduce
soot emissions to reach the Tier 4 standard.

586 SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. | Volume 1 | Issue 1

This content downloaded from

93.103.83.155 on Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:05:39 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 0.8
320

150 MPa 30% EGR

0.7

300 200 MPa 15% EGR

0.6
180 MPa 30% EGR
200 MPa 30% EGR

BSFC (g/KW-hr)
Soot (g/kW-hr)

0.5 280

0.4 180 MPa 15% EGR

150 MPa 30% EGR (K=0)
260
180 MPa 30% EGR
0.3 Retarding SOI
150 MPa 30% EGR
0.2 150 MPa 15% EGR 240 150 MPa 15% EGR

200 MPa 15% EGR

150 MPa
0.1
30% EGR (K=0)
220
180 MPa 15% EGR 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
0 200 MPa 30% EGR
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 NOx (g/kW-hr)
NOx (g/kW-hr) Figure 28 BSFC vs NOx for the converging nozzles (K=3) in
Figure 26 Soot and NOx emissions using the K=3 nozzle at comparison with the baseline nozzle (K = 0).
different conditions.
6X133X800 K=3 (15% pilot fuel)
0.5
0.1

0.4
0.08
180 MPa
150 MPa 30% EGR
Soot (g/kW-hr)

30% EGR
Soot (g/kW-hr)

150 MPa 0.3

0.06 30% EGR 150 MPa 30% EGR (K=0)
0
Advancing
150 MPa 30% EGR 0.2
0 pilot SOI
0.04 baseline (K=0)
0
0 200 MPa 30% EGR
0.1

0.02 180 MPa 180 MPa 15% EGR

+3
30% EGR 150 MPa 15% EGR
+2 200 MPa 30% EGR 200 MPa 15% EGR
+5 0
0 1 2 3 4 5
0 NOx (g/kW-hr)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
NOx (g/kW-hr) Figure 29 Soot vs NOx emissions for the converging nozzles
Figure 27 Soot vs NOx for baseline nozzle (K=0) and the under different double injection conditions.
converging nozzle at different conditions.
Figures 29 and 30 show the comparisons of NOx and soot
Figure 27 shows the comparisons between baseline 800 flow emissions for double injection cases. These tests were
number injectors (K=0) and the injectors with K= 3.0. It can performed at 15% pilot fuel with main injection at 5 ATDC. A
be seen that the injectors with K=3.0 was not significantly pilot sweep was performed from -30 ATDC till -15 ATDC. It
different from the baseline injectors in reducing soot can be seen that as the pilot SOI is advanced, soot emissions is
emissions. The baseline injectors performed better in reducing reduced rapidly for both the baseline and the converging
NOx emissions compared to the injectors with K=3.0. This nozzles while NOx emissions remain unchanged in most cases.
could have been due to high injection velocity in the case of Though soot emissions is within the limits for Tier 4 standards
converging nozzles. Figure 28 indicates that BSFC of the for an advanced pilot SOI of -30 ATDC, NOx emissions varies
converging nozzles is also similar to that of the baseline between 0.6 g/kW-hr and 1 g/kW-hr which is higher than the
injectors. standard of 0.4 g/kW-hr.

SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. | Volume 1 | Issue 1 587

This content downloaded from

93.103.83.155 on Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:05:39 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 0.1 and 4, generally speaking, the emissions are similar. However,
the use of the present converging nozzles (K=3) offers a slight
150 MPa 30% EGR
(-20,+5)
advantage in soot reductions under the same injection
0.08 conditions. The potential of using a converging nozzle needs
to be further explored.
Soot (g/kW-hr)

150 MPa
0.06 The cylinder pressure history and the heat release rate data are
30% EGR (-25,+5)
(K=0) shown in Figures 31 and 32, respectively. The conditions are
(-25,+5)
single injections with an injection pressure of 200 MPa using
0.04
30% EGR. Due to the high EGR level, a long ignition delay
(-30,+5) and a large single heat release rate spike are seen. As the
200 MPa
30% EGR injection timing is retarded, the low temperature (cool flame)
180 MPa
30% EGR (-30,+5) heat release is more visible prior to the main ignition.
0.02
(-30,+5) 12

0 10 -15 ATDC
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
NOx (g/kW-hr)

Cylinder Pressure (MPa)

Figure 30 A close up plot of figure 29 with the comparison 8 -5 ATDC

between the baseline nozzles (K=0) and the converging

nozzles. 6

During the double injection tests, it was observed that the 4 2 ATDC
converging nozzle did not allow to use a pilot SOI as early as
the one used with the baseline nozzle. For instance, by 2
comparing results in Figures 30 and 23, for 180 MPa injection,
a pilot SOI of -40 ATDC can be used in the baseline injectors.
0
However, engine combustion was not stable for using the -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
CAD (ATDC)
converging nozzles under the same conditions. It is speculated
Figure 31 Cylinder pressure data of using converging nozzles
that the fuel spray has a higher velocity by using the
at 200 MPa, single injection with 30% EGR.
converging nozzles that could result in rapid atomization and 800
vaporization such that the mixture leans out and ignition fails.
The other possibility is that the high velocity fuel jet could 700
-15 ATDC
escape the piston bowl (it could have also passed through
600
piston liners into the oil pan) and result in poor combustion.
Heat Release Rate (J/deg)

2 ATDC
Nonetheless, for the same injection conditions, e.g., 180 MPa 500
-5 ATDC
injection pressure with pilot SOI = -30 ATDC, the converging
400
nozzles result in lower soot emissions (see Figure 30) as
compared to the baseline nozzles (see Figure 23). The same is 300

true for 150 MPa injection pressure whose soot emissions was
200
0.122 g/kW-hr for pilot SOI = -20 ATDC (beyond the pilot
range). 100

Table 4 List of emissions and BSFC results for selected cases 0

shown in Figure 30 using the converging nozzles. EGR level -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
CAD (ATDC)
was 30% for all the cases tested.
P_inj SOI NOx Soot BSFC CO HC Figure 32 Heat release rate data of using converging nozzles at
(ATDC) (g/kW- (g/kW- (g/kW- (g/kW- (g/kW- 200 MPa, single injection with 30% EGR.
hr) hr) hr) hr) hr)
150 0 1.08 0.043 241 5.19 0.29 CONCLUSIONS
180 0 1.12 0.031 245 4.60 0.27
180 +2 0.86 0.009 269 11.9 1.61 This study investigates diesel emissions characteristics under
200 0 1.27 0.026 258 4.77 0.28 various injection conditions with different nozzle geometries.
200 +5 0.90 0.010 290 13.0 2.27 It was found that high EGR (≥ 30%) is necessary for NOx
180 -30/+5 0.64 0.015 277 12.2 1.91 reduction to a level that is comparable to the Tier 4 standard.
200 -30/+5 0.688 0.023 290 12.5 1.13 With high EGR, low temperature combustion for simultaneous
soot and NOx reductions can be achieved by two different
The emission data of selected cases were shown in Table 4 by injection strategies, namely 1) single injection with a late SOI,
using the converging nozzles. By comparing data in Tables 3 and 2) double injection using an early pilot SOI with a late
main SOI.

588 SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. | Volume 1 | Issue 1

This content downloaded from

93.103.83.155 on Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:05:39 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
For single injection with 30% EGR, when the injection 5. Okude, K., Mori, K., Shiino, S., and Moriya, T.,
pressure is increased from 100 to 150 MPa, the late SOI limit “Premixed Compression Ignition (PCI) Combustion for
can be extended from 0 to 5 ATDC. However, an injection Simultaneous Reduction of NOx and Soot in Diesel
pressure of 200 MPa does not further extend the late SOI limit Engine,” SAE Paper 2004-01-1907, 2004.
beyond 5 ATDC. A high injection pressure can reduce soot
emissions under the conventional SOI range (e.g., –20 to –5 6. Ogawa, H., Miyamoto, N., Shimizu, H.., and Kido, S.,
ATDC), but does not provide further soot reduction for SOI=5 “Characteristics of Diesel Combustion in Low Oxygen
ATDC. Mixtures with Ultra-High EGR,” SAE Paper 2006-01-
1147, 2006.
For double injection conditions with 30% EGR, favorable soot
and NOx emissions can be obtained by injecting 15% pilot 7. Hardy, W.L. and Reitz, R.D., “A Study of the Effects of
fuel at an early timing (e.g., –30 ATDC) with a main SOI of 5 High EGR, High Equivalence Ratio, and Mixing Time on
ATDC under the present load conditions. When the injection Emissions Levels in a Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine for
pressure is increased from 150 to 180 MPa, the pilot SOI can PCCI Combustion,” SAE Paper 2006-01-0026, 2006.
be advanced to –40 ATDC for further soot reduction while
maintaining a stable engine operation. 8. Hardy, W.L. and Reitz, R.D., “An Experimental
Investigation of Partially Premixed Combustion Strategies
It was found that the present 1200 flow number injectors were Using Multiple Injections in a Heavy-Duty Diesel
not able to reach an emission level comparable to Tier 4 Engine,” SAE Paper 2006-01-0917, 2006.
standards. On the other hand, the 800 flow number injectors
used in this study seem to have the potential of achieving the 9. Shimazaki, N., Tsurushima, T. and Nishimura, T., “Dual
Tier 4 standards under appropriate EGR and high injection Mode Combustion Concept with Premixed Diesel
pressure conditions. Combustion by Direct Injection near Top Dead Center,”
SAE Paper 2003-01-0742, 2003.
A converging nozzle with a K-factor of 3 allows the use of
higher injection pressures due to a better flow coefficient. 10. Minato, A., Tanaka, T., and Nishimura, T., “Investigation
However, the benefits in overall emission reduction by using of Premixed Lean Diesel Combustion with Ultra High
the present converging nozzles were not significant under the Pressure Injection,” SAE Paper 2005-01-0914, 2005.
conditions tested in this study.
11. Pickett, L.M., and Siebers, D.L., “Non-Sooting, Low
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Flame Temperature Mixing-Controlled DI Diesel
Combustion,” SAE Paper 2004-01-1399, 2004.
The authors acknowledge the financial and equipment support
of John Deere. 12. Musculus, M.P., Dec, J.E. and Tree, D.R., “Effects of
Fuel Parameters and Diffusion Flame Lift-Off on Soot
Formation in a Heavy-Duty DI Diesel Engine,” SAE
REFERENCES Paper 2002-01-0889, 2002.

1. US EPA, “Emission Standards and Supplemental 13. Upatnieks, A., and Mueller, C., “Clean, Controlled DI
Requirements for 2007 and Later Model Year Diesel Diesel Combustion Using Dilute, Cool Charge Gas and a
Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles,” 40 CFR – Chapter I – Short-Ignition-Delay, Oxygenated Fuel,” SAE Paper
Part 86, 40CFR86.007, US EPA, March 2002. 2005-01-0363, 2005.

2. Miles, P.C., Choi, D., Pickett, L.M., Singh, I.P., Henein, 14. Nevin, R., Sun, Y., Gonzalez, M., Reitz, R.., “PCCI
N., RempelEwert, B.A., Yun, H. and Reitz, R.D., “Rate- Investigation Using Variable Intake Valve Closing in a
Limiting Processes in Late-Injection, Low-Temperature Heavy Duty Diesel Engine,”, SAE Paper 2007-01-0903,
Diesel Combustion Regimes,” Proc. THIESEL 2004 2007.
Conference, pp.429—447, 2004.
15. Lee, S., Gonzalez, M., and Reitz, R.D., “Effects of Engine
3. Alriksson, M., and Denbratt, I., “Low Temperature Operating Parameters on Near Stoichiometric Diesel
Combustion in a Heavy Duty Diesel Engine Using High Combustion Characteristics,” SAE Paper 2007-01-0121,
Levels of EGR,” SAE Paper 2006-01-0075, 2006. 2007.

4. Boyarski, N. J., and Reitz, R.D., “Premixed Compression 16. Kitamura, T., Ito, T., and Fujimoto, H., “Mechanism of
Ignition (PCI) Combustion with Modelling-Generated smokeless diesel combustion with oxygenated fuels based
Piston Bowl Geometry in a Diesel Engine,” SAE Paper on the dependence of the equivalence ratio and
2006-01-0198, 2006. temperature on soot particle formation” Int J Engine
Research Vol 3, No 4, pp.223-248, 2002.

SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. | Volume 1 | Issue 1 589

This content downloaded from

93.103.83.155 on Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:05:39 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 25

CONTACT

Song-Charng Kong (kong@iastate.edu) 20

Department of Mechanical Engineering 200 MPa 30% EGR

Iowa State University

CO (g/kgf)
15 150 MPa 0% EGR

APPENDIX A
200 MPa 0% EGR
10

18
200 MPa 15% EGR

5
16 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15
Main SOI (ATDC)
150 MPa Figure A-3 Comparisons of CO emissions using different EGR
14
levels (6X133X1200 injectors).
100 MPa
CO (g/kgf)

12 200 MPa 2.5

10

2 200 MPa 0% EGR

HC (g/kgf)
6 1.5 200 MPa 30% EGR
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10
200 MPa 15% EGR
Main SOI (ATDC)
150 MPa 0% EGR
Figure A-1 CO Emissions at different injection pressures for
single injection with 0% EGR (6X133X1200 injectors). 1

2.5

0.5
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15
2 Main SOI (ATDC)
100 MPa Figure A-4 Comparisons of HC emissions using different EGR
levels (6X133X1200 injectors).
HC (g/kgf)

1.5
45

150 MPa 40
1
35
150 MPa Double Inj.
200 MPa
30
200 MPa Double Inj.
CO (g/kgf)

0.5
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10
25
Main SOI (ATDC)
Figure A-2 HC Emissions at different injection pressures for 20
single injection with 0% EGR (6X133X1200 injectors). 150 MPa Single Inj.
15

200 MPa Single Inj.

10

5
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10
SOI (ATDC)
Figure A-5 CO emissions for 150 and 200 MPa injection
pressures with single and double injections with 0% EGR. The
double injection cases used 25% pilot fuel (6X133X1200
injectors).

590 SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. | Volume 1 | Issue 1

This content downloaded from

93.103.83.155 on Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:05:39 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 3 60
200 MPa Double Inj.

2.5
50
S E 30

40 15P E 30
2

CO (g/kgf)
HC (g/kgf)

200 MPa Single Inj. 30

1.5 15P E 15
150 MPa Double Inj.
20
150 MPa Single Inj.
15P E 0
1 S E 15
10
SE0

0.5 0
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10
SOI (ATDC)
SOI (ATDC)
Figure A-6 HC emissions for 150 and 200 MPa injection
pressures with single and double injections with 0% EGR. The Figure A-9 CO emissions vs main SOI (for single injection) or
double injection cases used 25% pilot fuel (6X133X1200 pilot SOI (for double injection) at 150 MPa injection pressure
injectors). (6X133X800 injectors).

10
70

60 8

50
6 S E 30

HC (g/kgf)
CO (g/kgf)

40
15P E 30
30 4
15P E 0
25 P E 30
15P E 30
20
15P E 15 2
15P E 15 S E 15
10 25P E 20
25P E 0 25P E 15
15P E 0 SE0
0
0 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10
-45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 SOI (ATDC)
SOI (ATDC)
Figure A-7 CO vs pilot SOI at 150 MPa injection pressure Figure A-10 HC emissions vs main SOI (for single injection)
(main SOI = 5 ATDC) for different pilot fuel quantities and or pilot SOI (for double injection) at 150 MPa injection
EGR (6X133X800 injectors). pressure (6X133X800 injectors).

60
5

25P E 30
50
4
150 S E 30
40
15P E 30
3
HC (g/kgf)

CO (g/kgf)

30
25P E 20
2 180 S E 30
25P E 0 20 180 S E 15
15P E 15
150 S E 0
1 150 S E 15
15P E 0 25P E 15 10
180 S E 0

0 0
-45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10
SOI (ATDC) Main SOI (ATDC)
Figure A-8 HC vs pilot SOI at 150 MPa injection pressure Figure A-11 CO emissions for different injection pressures and
(main SOI = 5 ATDC) for different pilot fuel quantities and EGR levels for single injection conditions (6X133X800
EGR (6X133X800 injectors). injectors).

SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. | Volume 1 | Issue 1 591

This content downloaded from

93.103.83.155 on Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:05:39 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 3

2.5

150 S E 30

2
HC (g/kgf)

1.5
150 S E 15

150 S E 0
1
180 S E 0
180 S E 15

180 S E 30
0.5
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10
Main SOI (ATDC)
Figure A-12 HC emissions for different injection pressures and
EGR levels for single injection conditions (6X133X800
injectors).

14
200 MPa 30% EGR

12
150 MPa 30% EGR (K=0)
10
CO (g/KW-hr)

150 MPa 30% EGR

6

4
180 MPa 30% EGR

180 MPa 15% EGR

2 200 MPa 15% EGR
150 MPa 15% EGR
0
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10
SOI (ATDC)
Figure A-13 CO emissions using the 6X133X800 K=3 nozzle
at different conditions.

0.5
200 MPa 30% EGR
0.45
180 MPa 30% EGR

0.4
150 MPa 15% EGR
HC (g/KW-hr)

0.35

0.3
200 MPa 15% EGR

0.25
150 MPa 30% EGR (K=0)

0.2

150 MPa 15% EGR

0.15

180 MPa 15% EGR

0.1
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10
SOI (ATDC)
Figure A-14 HC emissions using the 6X133X800 K=3 nozzle
at different conditions.

592 SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. | Volume 1 | Issue 1

This content downloaded from

93.103.83.155 on Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:05:39 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms