Potentials for Efficiency Improvement of Gas Engines Dr. Shinsuke Murakami Development Engineer Commercial and Large Engines Engineering and Technology Powertrain Systems 1
Content Fuel Efficiency Are Improvements Possible? Examples of AVL Gas Engine Projects for Efficiency Improvement Potentials for Further Efficiency Improvement Summary and Conclusion 2
Examples of AVL Gas Engine Projects Example 1 High speed gas engine 1500 rpm Open chamber combustion concept with pre-chamber spark plug Targets Efficiency increase by 2.7 % points BMEP increase by 3.4 bar THC 1200 mg/nm 3 at 3 % O 2 NOx TA-Luft Tasks SCE testing (set-up and commissioning + 5.5 months testing) CFD simulations for optimization of charge motion and piston bowl geometry Results All targets achieved Efficiency increased by 2.8 % points 3
Efficiency [%] AVL Gas Engine Project - Example 1 Summary of development steps Reduction of dead volume Optimization of Miller timing and BMEP increase Swirl optimization Optimization of combustion chamber geometry and compression ratio Optimization of pre-chamber spark plug geometry Reduction of Dead Volume Miller Timing and BMEP 0.2 %pt knock limit IVC 20 adv. knock limit base IVC 1 bar BMEP [bar] 4
MN at knock limit [-] COV Pmax [%] THC [ppm] Efficiency [%] AVL Gas Engine Project - Example 1 Swirl Optimization SCE Test 5 different swirl ratio tested constant BMEP / 1500 rpm constant MFB50% location constant NOx at TA-Luft Conclusions Too high swirl ratio deteriorates knock margin significantly Too low swirl ratio deteriorates THC emission and COV Swirl ratio optimized 0.2 50 1 5-1.5-1 -0.5 Opt. 0 + 0.5 + 1 + 1.5 Swirl Ratio [-] 5
AVL Gas Engine Project - Example 1 Optimization of Piston Bowl Geometry Pre-optimization by CFD SCE Test 4 bowl shapes tested 4 compression ratios tested constant BMEP / 1500 rpm constant NOx at TA-Luft Conclusions Piston contour to be matched with the half-spherical flame propagation Minimize piston to head clearance to enhance squish flow effect Piston bowl design and compression ratio optimized CFD Piston C Piston A Piston B Piston C Piston D Piston E Measurement Piston A 6
ΔEfficiency, ΔCOV IMEP [%pt.] AVL Gas Engine Project - Example 1 Optimization of Pre-chamber Spark Plug SCE Test accompanied by CFD to understand the phenomena 10 variants tested Volume number of holes, diameter hole direction Velocity distribution (AVL CFD resutls) Residual gas distribution (AVL CFD results) constant BMEP / 1500 rpm constant NOx at TA-Luft 0.4 Measurement results Efficiency CoV IMEP 0.2 0-0.2 Conclusions Pre-chamber optimized for both efficiency and COV_IMEP -0.4-0.6-0.8 Base A B C D E F G H I Pre-chamber spark plug variants 7
Efficiency Improvement [%pt] AVL Gas Engine Project - Example 1 Summary of development steps Reduction of dead volume Optimization of Miller timing and BMEP increase Swirl optimization Optimization of combustion chamber geometry and compression ratio Optimization of pre-chamber spark plug geometry Summary of development results 3.0 2.0 1.0 Efficiency improvement of 2.8 %pt. achieved. 0.0 Dead volume reduction Miller timing optimization BMEP increase Swirl optimization Optimization piston bowl geometry Optimization Pre-chamber spark plug 8
Examples of AVL Gas Engine Projects Example 2 Medium Speed Gas Engine 750 rpm Fuel-fed pre-chamber with spark ignition Targets Efficiency increase by 2 % points COV_Pmax reduction from 5~6 % to 3 % NOx TA-Luft Tasks SCE and MCE testing support CFD simulations for optimization of piston bowl and pre-chamber geometries Results COV_Pmax significantly reduced Efficiency increase by 2.1 % points 9
AVL Gas Engine Project - Example 2 Summary of development steps Reduction of dead volume Optimization of combustion stability Optimization of Miller timing and compression ratio Optimization of piston bowl geometry Optimization of pre-chamber geometry Optimization of combustion stability SCE test result constant BMEP same ave. PFP Design PFP limit Higher ave. PFP possible Miller Timing and Compression Ratio SCE test result constant BMEP 0.2 %pt 10
COV_Pmax [%] AVL Gas Engine Project - Example 2 Optimization of Combustion Stability Pre-optimization by CFD SCE Test MCE Test for confirmation Gas supply to pre-chamber Pre-chamber geometry constant BMEP / 750 rpm constant NOx at TA-Luft Base design Uneven combustion in PC Plug location Mixture distribution Optimized design Conclusions Even combustion in the prechamber to be targeted Flow separation at holes to be avoided Significant improvement of combustion stability confirmed by MCE testing 8 6 4 2 0 Base MCE test results AVL design 11
AVL Gas Engine Project - Example 2 Optimization of Piston Bowl Geometry Pre-optimization by CFD SCE Test MCE Test for confirmation 3 bowl shapes tested 5 compression ratios tested constant BMEP / 750 rpm constant NOx at TA-Luft Optimized Design CFD Measurement Optimum Cone Flat Conclusions Piston bowl contour to be matched with the flame propagation from the flame jet out of pre-chamber Piston bowl to be optimized together with pre-chamber nozzle configuration 12
Efficiency Improvement [%pt] AVL Gas Engine Project - Example 2 Summary of development steps Reduction of dead volume Optimization of combustion stability Optimization of Miller timing and compression ratio Optimization of piston bowl geometry Optimization of pre-chamber geometry Summary of development results 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 Efficiency improvement of 2.1 %pt. achieved. 0.0 Dead volume reduction Optimization of combustion stability Miller timing and CR optimization Optimization of piston bowl geometry Optimization of pre-chamber geometry 13
Content Examples of AVL Gas Engine Projects for Efficiency Improvement Potentials for Further Efficiency Improvement Summary and Conclusion 14
BMEP [bar] Generating Efficiency [%] Looking Back 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 Pre-Chamber spark ignited Open Chamber spark ignited 60 55 50 45 40 35 4 30 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Year Efficiency improvement coupled with BMEP increase. Higher BMEP for higher efficiency? 15
BMEP [bar] Required Compressor Pressure Ratio 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 Model-Based Analysis 1500 min -1 Pre-chamber Spark ignition NOx TA-Luft MN 80 const. ε of 12 16 480 490 500 510 520 530 Miller Timing [ ATDC] Key Technologies to achieve higher BMEP Aggressive Miller timing and Two-Stage Turbocharging 16
BMEP [bar] BMEP Miller BTE Matrix at const. ε 30 46.75 28 46.25 46.5 45.7 26 46.25 46 45.5 24 BTE 46 45.75 45.25 22 45.75 45.5 45.5 45 20 45.25 44.75 45 44.5 18 44.5 44.75 44.25 44 16 43.75 480 490 500 510 520 530 Miller Timing [ ATDC] Model-Based Analysis 1500 min -1 Pre-chamber Spark ignition NOx TA-Luft MN 80 const. ε of 12 The higher the BMEP, the higher the efficiency at constant ε. 17
Brake Thermal Efficiency [%] SCE Result BMEP Variation with two different ε 46.5 46.0 knock limit SCE Test Results 1500 min -1 Pre-chamber Spark ignition ε high NOx TA-Luft 45.5 MN80 ε low 45.0 21 22 23 24 25 26 BMEP [bar] The higher the BMEP the higher the knock limited efficiency. 18
BMEP [bar] BMEP Miller ε Matrix at Knock Limit 30 28 26 24 22 20 15 14 14.5 ε 13 13.5 12 12.5 10.5 11 11.5 10 14 13.5 13 12.5 11 11.5 12 Model-Based Analysis 1500 min -1 Pre-chamber Spark ignition NOx TA-Luft MN 80 ε at knock limit 18 14.5 15.5 15 16 480 490 500 510 520 530 Miller Timing [ ATDC] High BMEP with low ε or high ε with low BMEP? 19
BMEP [bar] BMEP Miller BTE Matrix at Knock Limit 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 45.2 45.4 45.6 45.8 46 45.8 45.6 45.4 45.4 45.2 45.2 46 BTE 46.2 44.8 46.3 45.2 46.2 45 46.3 45.3 44.8 45.2 45.3 16 480 490 500 510 520 530 Miller Timing [ ATDC] 45 Model-Based Analysis 1500 min -1 Pre-chamber Spark ignition NOx TA-Luft MN 80 ε at knock limit Optimum BMEP Target for the highest efficiency 24 26 bar Design PFP requirement of 250 bar 20
Content Examples of AVL Gas Engine Projects for Efficiency Improvement Potentials for Further Efficiency Improvement Summary and Conclusion 21
Summary Examples of AVL Gas Engine Projects for Efficiency Improvement were reviewed. Incremental development will result in Many a little makes a mickle. CFD Simulation and SCE Testing are effective for rapid development. Key Enablers for the further efficiency improvement are; High BMEP of 24 26 bar Aggressive Miller Timing Two-stage turbocharging High PFP capability 22
Conclusion Fuel Efficiency Are Improvements Possible? Where there is a will, there is a way! 23
Thank you for your attention! 24