International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 1159 1173

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhydene

Review

Effect of water injection and spark timing on the nitric oxide emission and
combustion parameters of a hydrogen fuelled spark ignition engine
V. Subramanian, J.M. Mallikarjuna , A. Ramesh
Internal Combustion Engines Laboratory, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai - 600 036, India
Received 21 June 2006; received in revised form 31 July 2006; accepted 31 July 2006
Available online 26 September 2006

Abstract
One of the main problems with hydrogen fuelled internal combustion engines is the high NO level due to rapid combustion. Use of diluents
with the charge and retardation of the spark ignition timing can reduce NO levels in Hydrogen fuelled engines. In this work a single cylinder
hydrogen fuelled engine was run at different equivalence ratios at full throttle. NO levels were found to rise after an equivalence ratio of 0.55,
maximum value was about 7500 ppm. High reductions in NO emission were not possible without a signicant drop in thermal efciency with
retarded spark ignition timings. Drastic drop in NO levels to even as low as 2490 ppm were seen with water injection. In spite of the reduction
in heat release rate (HRR) no loss in brake thermal efciency (BTE) was observed. There was no signicant inuence on combustion stability
or HC levels.
2006 International Association for Hydrogen Energy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Hydrogen fuelled engine; NO emission control; Water injection; Hydrogen combustion

Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1159
Present work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1161
Experimental setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1161
Experiments conducted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1161
4.1. Evaluation of combustion parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1162
5. Results and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1162
5.1. Base engine performance characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1162
5.2. Base engine emission characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1162
5.3. Base engine combustion parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1164
5.4. Effect of spark timing on performance, emission characteristics and combustion parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1165
5.5. Effect of water injection on performance, emission characteristics and combustion parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1167
6. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1172
Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1172
Appendix A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1172
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1173

1. Introduction
The worldwide consumption of fossil fuels has almost doubled in the past three decades [1]. Hydrocarbon fuels are
Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 44 2257 4698; fax: +91 44 2257 4652.

E-mail address: jmmallik@iitm.ac.in (J.M. Mallikarjuna).

currently meeting more than 90% of the total energy demand.

The consumption is expected to increase at much faster rate
with the need to enhance human comfort and to meet dayto-day developments. An important issue with energy usage
is the associated undesirable emissions. A fossil fuel source
mainly emits CO2 , which is a primary green house gas. The
concentration of CO2 has increased by about one-third since

0360-3199/$ - see front matter 2006 International Association for Hydrogen Energy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2006.07.022

1160

V. Subramanian et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 1159 1173

Nomenclature
WOT
MBT
COV
IMEP
MRPR
HRR
bTDC
aTDC
EGT
EGR

wide open throttle

minimum advancing for best torque
coefcient of variation
indicated mean effective pressure
maximum rate of pressure rise
heat release rate
before top dead center
after top dead center
exhaust gas temperature
exhaust gas recirculation

industrialization began and the average surface temperature of

the earth is increasing because of the global warming phenomenon [2]. Other emissions like sulphur, carbon monoxide
and oxides of nitrogen are also a great threat to mankind. Use
of renewable alternatives comes rst while thinking about sustainable, long lasting energy sources, which also will have little
or no environmental impact on usage. Hydrogen is gaining lot
of attention at present, mainly due to its abundance and nonpolluting nature. The world has started moving towards fuels
that have higher hydrogen to carbon ratio.
Research on hydrogen is being carried out for the past three
decades as an alternative fuel for automobiles. It can either be
used to produce electricity via the fuel cell or it can be used
in internal combustion engine like any other fuel to power the
vehicles. However, the cost of the fuel cell is still prohibitive
to nd wide application. Using hydrogen in the internal combustion engine is found to be the simplest method as it is easy
to convert existing engines to work with hydrogen. It has been
reported that hydrogen has excellent properties as a SI engine
fuel [36]. Table 1 gives a comparative picture of important
properties of hydrogen, gasoline and methane. Wide ammability limits of hydrogen make the engine to work without a
throttle [4,6]. This leads to reduced pumping losses and increased the thermal efciency at part load operations. Higher
burning velocities of hydrogen lead to almost constant volume
combustion, which is good from the thermodynamic point of
view. The self-ignition temperature of hydrogen is quite high
and therefore it can be used with a moderately high compression ratio without auto ignition of the end charge, which leads
to improved power and efciency. Though the caloric value
of hydrogen on the mass basis is high, it is very low on the
volume basis and this poses problems during storage.
There are some limitations reported with hydrogen usage
in automotive engines. The lower ignition energy of hydrogen
makes the fuelair mixture in the inlet manifold to get ignited
by hotspots and this is called backre [7]. Timed manifold
injection has been found to be a good technique to avoid backring [8,9]. Another problem with hydrogen operation is the formation of NO at high loads. The peak cycle temperature shoots
up whenever the load is increased, which tends to accelerate
NO formation. Several techniques have been tried to inhibit NO
formation. Some of them are: use of EGR, Turbo-charging with

A/D
CDI
FID
NO
HC
BTE
CA
CO2
FFR
EVO


analog to digital converter

capacitive discharge ignition
ame ionization detector
nitric oxide
hydrocarbons
brake thermal efciency
degree Crank angle
carbon dioxide
fuel ow rate
exhaust valve opening
equivalence ratio

intercooling, addition of diluents or water injection along with

the intake charge etc. [913]. Injection of water into the intake
manifold has been found to be an effective way to reduce NO
emission in SI (spark ignition) and CI (compression ignition)
engines. About 50% reduction in NO has been reported with
water injection in a gasoline-fuelled engine [14]. Increasing the
intake charge humidity was also reported as an efcient technique to control NO emission [15]. Hot steam from a steam
generator was mixed with the intake charge at different proportions and the effect on performance, emission and combustion
parameters have been reported. A water/hydrogen mass ratio of
4:1 was reported as an optimum value for reducing NOx emissions. Extremely fast burning of hydrogen leads to very high
rate of pressure rise, which leads to violent combustion (hydrogen knocking) [16]. Hydrogen knocking creates extremely high
mechanical stresses and temperatures, which are also responsible for high NOx emissions. Inlet charge temperature, compression ratio and spark timing have a pronounced effect on
hydrogen knocking [17]. Adding diluents such as argon is also
a method for suppressing knocking. Supplying more hydrogen
and making the mixture richer also reduces the knocking tendency. However, the unburnt hydrogen can be trapped from the
exhaust and can be recycled [18]. The effect of spark timing on
hydrogen combustion was studied and it was found that spark
timing has a pronounced effect on the degree of constant volume combustion and thus affects thermal efciency [19]. Reduction of nitric oxide emissions by retarding the spark timing
with little sacrice in thermal efciency at an equivalence ratio of 0.43 in an in-cylinder injected hydrogen engine has been
reported [20].
On the whole the problem of knocking and high NOx emissions in hydrogen fuelled engines needs attention and use of
diluents is a potential method to control them. Though the
induction of hot steam into the manifold has been shown to
reduce NO emissions, injection of water in the liquid form
can lower charge temperatures signicantly as the heat for vaporization can be extracted from the mixture. The effect of
this method on performance, emissions and combustion has
to be studied under wide range of equivalence ratios. Since
retardation of spark timing can also reduce NO emissions,
combination of the two has potential to further reduce NO
emissions.

V. Subramanian et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 1159 1173

2. Present work
In the present work, a gasoline fuelled SI engine has been
converted to operate with neat hydrogen and its operating parameters have been varied to determine their inuences. An
electronically controlled manifold injection strategy has been
used to control and supply the hydrogen. An electronically controlled variable spark-timing system has been used for changing
the spark timing. The effect of spark timing on knocking and
NO emission at high loads (i.e. high equivalence ratios where
NO is pronounced) has been studied. Further, the manifold water injection technique has been tried to reduce the NO emission
at high equivalence ratios. Experiments have been conducted at
ve different equivalence ratios in the range of 0.650.82. At
every equivalence ratio, nely atomized water was injected at
different rates and the engine was run at the best ignition timing. Emission of NO with water injection rate was recorded.
Subsequently, the effect of water injection rate on suppressing
knock has been studied. Also, brake thermal efciency (BTE),
heat release rate (HRR), cyclic variation of cylinder pressure,
etc., with water injection rate have been studied and discussed
in the subsequent sections.
3. Experimental setup
A small single cylinder four stroke three wheeler automotive
SI (spark ignition) engine was used for the experimental work.
Table 2 gives the specications of engine and the schematic
diagram of experimental setup is shown in Fig. 1. The engine
was coupled to an eddy current dynamometer for the purpose
of loading. The manifold of the engine was modied to accommodate a hydrogen gas injector. An electronic fuel injection circuit was developed and used to control the start and

1161

duration of injection independently. Hydrogen was supplied

from a high-pressure cylinder at a pressure of around 140 bar. A
pressure regulator was used to maintain a pressure of 5 bar near
the injector. A 12 V DC capacitive discharge ignition (CDI) ignition system with an electronic control for varying the spark
timing was developed and used. The hydrogen ow rate was
measured using a thermal mass ow meter. Before being supplied to the engine, the hydrogen was allowed to pass through
a ame arrester for safety. Also, another water trap was also
connected in series with this ame arrester for an added safety.
A portable hydrogen leak sensor was used while conducting
experiments to nd out the leakage of hydrogen if any. A provision was made in the inlet manifold to inject water at almost the middle of the suction stroke. The quantity of water
injection was controlled electronically at a pressure of about
3 bar. The water injector was located slightly away from the
intake port to ensure good vaporization and mixing of water
with the charge. Airow rate was measured using a turbine
ow meter. A surge tank connected in the manifold eliminated
uctuations in the airow while measurement. Dry exhaust
trapped from the exhaust pipe was analyzed for NO concentration using a chemiluminescent analyzer. Exhaust HC content
was also recorded using a FID analyzer. A PC based digital
data acquisition system recorded the in-cylinder pressure data
along with crank angles for 100 consecutive cycles at every
point of operation. A program in MATLAB was developed and
used for post processing of the data for nding combustion
parameters.
4. Experiments conducted
All the experiments were conducted at a constant speed of
2500 rpm with wide open throttle (WOT). Power output of the

Fig. 1. Experimental setup: 1. Hydrogen cylinder; 2. Engine; 3. Dynamometer; 4. Mass ow meter; 5. Water trap; 6. Detonation arrester; 7. Water injection
circuit; 8. Air surge tank; 9. Charge amplier; 10. PC with A/D card; 11. NO/HC analyzer; 12. Hydrogen Injector; 13. Airow meter; 14. Electronic Spark
timing unit; 15. Intake valve sensor; 16. Water injector; 17. Electronic injection control system; 18. Oxygen analyzer; 19. Piezoelectric pressure pickup.

1162

V. Subramanian et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 1159 1173

engine was varied by changing the equivalence ratio (0.260.9)

by changing the fuel ow rate (FFR). At each operating condition, the spark timing was set at minimum advancing for best
torque (MBT). Performance, emission and combustion characteristics were then evaluated and analyzed.
Subsequently, experiments were carried out on the above engine with water injection in the intake manifold at different
ow rates to study its inuence on NO emissions and other parameters. This study was done at the equivalence ratio where
NO emission was the highest. The quantity of water injection was varied from 0 to 6 kg/h (up to water to fuel mass
ratio of 7.5).
4.1. Evaluation of combustion parameters
Important combustion parameters were calculated using incylinder-pressure-crack-angle data. The formulae used for the
calculation are given below. The formula used for the coefcient
of variation (COV) of IMEP is
STDimep
,
Meanimep

COVimep =


STDimep =

1 
[IMEP(i) Meanimep ]2
100
100

(1)
1/2
,

(2)

i=1

1 
IMEP(i),
100
100

Meanimep =

(3)

i=1

where, COVimep is the coefcient of variation of IMEP for 100

consecutive cycles, Meanimep the mean value of IMEP for 100
cycles, STDimep the standard deviation of IMEP for 100 cycles.
The HRR (Qc) is calculated as given below

 


1
Qc = P V
(4)
+
V P + Qht ,
1
1
where,  is the ratio of specic heats; Qht the wall heat
transfer.
This equation was modied to the form given below with the
polytropic index replacing the ratio of specic heats [21].

 

k
1
Qc = P V
+
V P ,
(5)
k1
k1
where, k = polytropic index and k value was assumed to be
constant as at an average value of 1.33 [21]. The ignition delay
is dened as the crank angle covered while releasing the rst
5% of total heat energy and combustion duration is the crank
angle covered for 590% of the total heat release.
5. Results and discussion
Initially, the performance, emission characteristics and combustion parameters of the standard hydrogen fuelled engine
at different equivalence ratios at MBT are presented and discussed. Then the same analysis is done for the above engine at a xed equivalence ratio with varying spark timing.

Finally, the effect of rate of water injection on performance,

emission characteristics and combustion parameters has been
analyzed.
5.1. Base engine performance characteristics
The variation of brake power and BTE with increasing equivalence ratio is shown in Fig. 2. The lowest equivalence ratio
at which the engine could run was 0.26, which was limited
by misring. The brake power output almost linearly increases
with increase in equivalence ratio. The maximum brake power
obtained was 7.5 kW at an equivalence ratio of around 0.9.
Near this equivalence ratio power remains almost constant. An
attempt to allow more hydrogen to increase the equivalence
ratio leads to a drop in power and BTE. A similar trend was
observed by Lee et al. [9] also. The main reason for this may
be attributed to the fact that considerable amount of hydrogen
goes unburned after this equivalence ratio as it was mentioned
by Lee et al. [9]. Hence, the experiments were not done after
the equivalence ratio of maximum power. The BTE is nearly
constant at a value of about 28% in the equivalence ratio range
of 0.7 to 0.9 (power output of 6.37.5 kW). It was found that
the BTE begins to drop after an equivalence ratio of 0.9.
Fig. 3 shows the variation of volumetric efciency (based on
air consumption) and exhaust gas temperature (EGT) with increase of equivalence ratio. From Fig. 3, it can be observed that
the volumetric efciency based on air decreases as the equivalence ratio is increased. This is mainly due to the fact that as the
amount of hydrogen induction increases, it displaces the equivalent amount of air intake. The EGT increases with increase
in equivalence ratio because the peak temperature goes up.
5.2. Base engine emission characteristics
As far as hydrogen operation is concerned, NO is the only
major pollutant expected. However, some traces of hydrocarbons (HC) were also noticed. This is mainly because of the vaporization of the lubricating oil. The variations of HC and NO
emission with increase in equivalence ratio are shown in Fig. 4.
Up to an equivalence ratio of around 0.5 (around 60% of maximum power output), the NO emission was negligible. After this
equivalence ratio, NO emission shoots up and reaches a maximum value of around 7420 ppm at an equivalence ratio of 0.82.
This is because higher equivalence ratio results in faster ame
speeds leading to higher pressure and temperatures. Also, the
due to lean mixtures NO formation is more. When the mixture
becomes stoichiometric NO drops down because of the lack of
availability of oxygen.
For the hydrogen engine, peak NO level occurs at a lean
mixture (low equivalence ratio) compared to that of gasoline
engines where peak NO occurs at slightly leaner than stoichiometric mixtures (equivalence ratio of about 0.95). This is
mainly because of the dissociation of NO formed due to very
high temperatures after the equivalence ratio of 0.8 resulting
in the drastic reduction of NO near stoichiometric equivalence
ratio [22]. It is found that HC emission increases with increase
in equivalence ratio. However, the amount of HC emission is
in the range 100150 ppm which is much lesser compared to

V. Subramanian et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 1159 1173

30

10

25

Brake power (kW)

8
7

20

6
15

5
4

Speed : 2500 rpm

Throttle : WOT
Spark timing : MBT

10

Brake Power

Brake thermal efficiency (%)

BTE

0
0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0
1.00

0.90

Equivalence ratio ( )
Fig. 2. Power and thermal efciency variation with equivalence ratio.

100

Volumetric efficiency (%)

90
500

80
70

400

60
50

300
Speed : 2500 rpm
Throttle : WOT
Spark timing : MBT

40
30

200

20

Volumetric efficiency

10

Exhaust gas temperature

0
0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

100

Exhaust gas temperature (C)

600

0
1.00

Equivalence ratio ( )
Fig. 3. Variation of volumetric efciency and exhaust gas temperature with equivalence ratio.

160

10000
NO

Nitric oxide (ppm)

8000
7000

140

HC
Speed : 2500 rpm
Throttle : WOT
Spark timing : MBT

120

6000

100

5000

80

4000

60

3000

40

2000
20

1000
0
0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50
0.60
0.70
Equivalence ratio ( )

0.80

0.90

Fig. 4. Variation of HC and NO emissions with equivalence ratio.

0
1.00

Hydrocarbons (ppm)

9000

1163

V. Subramanian et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 1159 1173

any gasoline engine. As mentioned earlier, the lubricating oil

vaporization is the main source of HC emission in the hydrogen engine. Increasing equivalence ratio leads to increase the
gas temperatures thereby enhancing lubricating oil vaporization
and results in higher HC emissions.
5.3. Base engine combustion parameters
Fig. 5 shows the variation of ignition delay and combustion
duration in terms of degree of crank angles with increase in
equivalence ratio. From the Fig. 5, it is observed that, both ignition delay and combustion duration are reducing with increase
in equivalence ratio. This is because of the rise in the ame
speed with increase in equivalence ratio for the hydrogen-air
mixture. The combustion duration has become 14 CA at the
equivalence ratio of 0.9. This is due to high HRR which leads to
a high rate of pressure rise and knocking. It has been reported

in the literature that knocking in hydrogen engine is mainly due

to very high rate of pressure rise [16]. The variation of maximum rate of pressure rise (MRPR) is shown in Fig. 6. From
the Fig. 6, it is observed that the MRPR increases rapidly after
an equivalence ratio of around 0.6 and reaches a peak value of
around 4 bar/ CA, while approaching the stoichiometric ratio.
The cycle by cycle variation of IMEP is very low for hydrogen operation even when with very lean mixtures. Variation of
IMEP was around 4% at the lowest equivalence ratio and has
decreased when the mixture becomes rich. It was around 1.4%
at higher outputs. This is mainly due to the wide ammability
limit and fast combustion rate with hydrogen. Fig. 7 shows the
HRR at the maximum brake power output. The sharp increase
in the HRR shows the rapidness of hydrogen combustion at
higher equivalence ratios. The HRR reaches a maximum value
of around 100 J/ CA which is much above that of gasoline
engine. The pressure crank angle diagram at maximum brake

70
Delay
Combustion duration

60

Speed : 2500 rpm

Throttle : WOT
Spark timing : MBT

Crank angle

50
40
30
20
10
0
0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50
0.60
0.70
Equivalence ratio ( )

0.80

1.00

0.90

Fig. 5. Variation of ignition delay and combustion duration with equivalence ratio.

Max. rate of pressure rise (bar/CA)

5
MRPP
COV of IMEP

Speed : 2500 rpm

Throttle : WOT
Spark timing : MBT

0
0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5
0.6
0.7
Equivalence ratio ( )

0.8

0.9

Fig. 6. Variation of MRPP and IMEP with equivalence ratio.

1.0

COV of IMEP (%)

1164

V. Subramanian et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 1159 1173

120

1165

Speed : 2500 rpm

Throttle : WOT

100

Spark timing : MBT

Heat release rate (J/CA)

Power : 7.5 kW

80
60
40
20
0
355

360

365

370

375

380

-20
Crank angle (CA)
Fig. 7. Heat release rate at peak power.

60
Speed : 2500 rpm
Throttle : WOT
Spark timing : MBT
Power : 7.5 kW

Cylinder pressure (bar)

50

40

30

20

10

0
0

90

180

270
360
450
Crank angle (CA)

540

630

720

Fig. 8. Pressure crank angle diagram at peak power.

power output is shown in Fig. 8 which shows the rapid combustion rate for hydrogen engine.
5.4. Effect of spark timing on performance, emission
characteristics and combustion parameters
It is evident from the previous discussion that hydrogen produces near zero emissions while operating within the equivalence ratio of 0.55. This corresponds to about 60% of the
rated power. Beyond this equivalence ratio, the NO emission
shoots up drastically and also leads to knocking. Reducing the
combustion rate by retarding the spark timing could solve this
problem. Therefore, an attempt was made study the effect of
retarding spark timing on performance, emission and combustion parameters.
Figs. 911 show the variation of brake thermal efciency,
nitric oxide emission and MRPR, respectively, with respect to

spark timings. Experiments were conducted for two different

FFR (0.68 and 0.76 kg/h) which correspond to equivalence ratios of 0.7 and 0.81, respectively. This region of equivalence
ratios corresponds to the zone where NO emissions are high.
From Fig. 9, it can be observed that maximum BTE occurs
at 9 and 6 CA bTDC for the FFRs 0.68 and 0.76 kg/h, respectively, which correspond to MBT spark timing. Also, from
Fig. 9, it is observed that BTE is not affected much at the higher
equivalence ratio compared to the lower equivalence ratio when
the spark timing is retarded from MBT. This is an advantage
because greater amount of retardation is needed at higher equivalence ratio to control NO and rate of pressure rise. The MBT
timing is 6 CA bTDC at the FFR of 0.76 kg/h. Upto the spark
timing of 2 CA bTDC i.e. a retardation of 4 CA from MBT,
it was found that the drop in BTE is only about 0.72%.
However, it was observed that a given retardation of the spark
at lower FFRs resulted in more deterioration of BTE than at

V. Subramanian et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 1159 1173

29
MBT

Brake thermal efficiency (%)

28
27
26
25
24
23

Speed : 2500 rpm

Throttle : WOT

22

FFR : 0.68 kg/h

21

FFR : 0.76 kg/h

Before TDC

20
-20

-18

-16

-14

-12

TDC

-10 -8
-6
-4
-2
0
Spark timing (CA fromTDC)

After TDC

Fig. 9. Effect of spark timing on brake thermal efciency.

9000
Speed : 2500 rpm

8000

Throttle : WOT

7000

NO (ppm)

6000
MBT

5000
4000

Before TDC

TDC

After TDC

3000
2000
1000

FFR : 0.68 kg/h

FFR : 0.76 kg/h

0
-20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2
0
Spark timing (CA fromTDC)

Fig. 10. Effect of spark timing on NO emission.

4
Maximum Rate of pressure rise(bar/CA)

1166

3.5
3
2.5
MBT

2
1.5
1
0.5

Speed : 2500 rpm

Throttle : WOT
FFR : 0.68 kg/h
FFR : 0.76 kg/h

Before TDC TDC

After TDC

0
-20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10

-8

-6

-4

-2

Spark timing (CA fromTDC)

Fig. 11. Variation of maximum rate of pressure rise with spark timing.

V. Subramanian et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 1159 1173

higher FFRs. Of course, at a low FFR, NO emissions are quite

low not to warrant any remedial measures. Table 3 shows the
reduction in NO emissions and corresponding BTE. Higher reduction of NO emission is possible at lower equivalence ratios by retarding the spark timing with some drop in BTE. NO
emissions come down from 2750 to 1350 ppm with 3% loss
in BTE (Table 3). Highly retarded spark timing at the higher
equivalence ratio could favor backring by rising the residual
gas temperature. It is evident from Fig. 10 that a greater reduction in NO emission cannot be obtained by retarding the spark
timing at higher FFRs. Retarding the spark timing by 4 CA
lowers the rate of pressure rise by about 0.5 bar/ CA as it can
be seen from Fig. 11.
Since spark timing retardation alone is not very much effective in reducing NO emission without much affecting the
BTE, water injection in the manifold was tried as an additional
means. It was decided to evaluate the effect of water ow rate
on the performance, emission characteristics and combustion
parameters.
5.5. Effect of water injection on performance, emission
characteristics and combustion parameters
Basically, water is an added diluent which will help to control the peak temperature during combustion. The vaporization
of water will help to reduce the charge temperature. In addition, the vaporized water will reduce the concentration of both
oxygen and nitrogen. It will also alter the specic heats of the
charge. Diluents with high specic heat capacity and latent heat
of vaporization are always preferred so that a small amount will
be enough. The reduced temperature will lower the rate of heat
release and thus help to suppress the knocking tendency.
In this work, water under ambient temperature and at a pressure of around 3 bar has been injected in the form of a ne
spray into the intake manifold during the suction stroke. This
was done for the equivalence ratio ranging from 0.6 to 0.8,
where higher NO emission is expected. Experiments were conducted for ve FFRs of 0.65, 0.71, 0.73, 0.75 and 0.78 kg/h.
The range of fuel ow rates is corresponding to the equivalence ratios where NO formation is high (Fig. 4). During experimentation, it was found that, the variations in equivalence
ratio were insignicant with the variation of water ow rate at
a given FFR. In every trial, the FFR was xed and the quantity
of water injected was varied. There was practically no signicant change in the air ow rate. The impact of water injection
on performance, emission and combustion is explained in the
following sections.
From Fig. 12, it can be observed that with water injection the
brake torque was slightly increased. However, it was observed
that indicated mean effective pressure (IMEP) remains the same
with water injection (Fig. 13). Therefore, the increase in torque
may be due to a slight reduction in friction losses. Further
experiments that are beyond the scope of the present work are
needed for better explaining the above observed phenomenon.
In general it was seen that the spark timing had to be advanced with water injection to compensate for the slower combustion. The spark ignition advance required for the range of

1167

water ow rates tested is between 3 and 6 CA. The variation

of EGT with water ow rate is shown in Fig. 14. The EGT
reduces signicantly with water injection ow rate due to reduction of cycle temperature.
Fig. 15 shows that water injection reduces volumetric efciency slightly. This is predominant at higher FFRs. It depends
on how far the injected water vaporizes in the inlet manifold
and displaces the air. At higher FFRs, the engine temperature
is quite high, which enhances the water vaporization causing a
noticeable drop in volumetric efciency. From Fig. 16, It can
be observed that the drop in volumetric efciency does not
cause a signicant drop in the oxygen concentration. This is
an advantageous feature while using water as a diluent as compared to gaseous diluents because they can cause signicant
reduction of volumetric efciency and hence available oxygen
for combustion.
As mentioned earlier, the presence of water makes the cycle peak temperature to come down and lowers NO emissions
signicantly. Fig. 17 shows the variation of NO emission with
water injection rate at different FFRs. At the maximum water
ow rate of around 6 kg/h, the value of NO has been reduced
by around 70% to 80% when compared to that of the normal
engine without any reduction in BTE. Even a water ow rate
of about 2.25 kg/h is sufcient to cause a signicant drop in the
NO emission. At this water ow rate, the NO falls from 1310
to 323 ppm at the FFR of 0.65 kg/h. This reduction is quite signicant when compared to that of retarded spark timing. From
Fig. 18, it can be seen that HC emissions are not much affected
by the water injection rate. Slight reduction was observed due
to reduced cycle temperatures.
The water injection is also benecial in terms of smoothness
of combustion. Addition of water reduces the rate of combustion and rate of pressure rise and thus prevents rough operation.
Fig. 19 shows the variation of MRPR with water injection rate.
It is seen that even for a low water injection rate of 2.5 kg/h reduces the MRPR by about 0.5 bar/ CA. This leads to reduction
in mechanical stresses in the engine components.
The ignition delay and combustion duration with water injection are shown in Figs. 20 and 21, respectively. The ignition
delay here is dened as the crank angle covered in rst 5%
of total heat release and combustion duration as 5%90% of
total heat release. As expected, both ignition delay and combustion duration show increasing trends with water injection
rate indicating slower combustion. Ignition delay was increased
by about 23 CA and combustion duration was increased by
about 35 CA with water injection rate.
An analysis of the cylinder pressure variation shows that
there is an increase in the exhaust pressure with water injection
due to retarded combustion. However, there is also a decrease
in the compression work due to reduced charge temperature.
Fig. 22 shows the variation in COV of peak pressure for 100
consecutive cycles. Water injection slightly increases the uctuations in peak pressures. This is probably due to a reduction
in the combustion rate due to the dilution effect of water. High
combustion rates are known to reduce cyclic uctuations [23].
There is no noticeable effect on IMEP uctuations with water
injection, which is an advantage.

V. Subramanian et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 1159 1173

29
FFR : 0.78 kg/h

28

FFR : 0.75 kg/h

FFR : 0.73 kg/h

27
Brake torque (Nm)

FFR : 0.71 kg/h

26

FFR : 0.65 kg/h

Speed : 2500 rpm
Throttle : WOT
Spark timing : MBT

25
24
23
22
21
20
0

4
5
6
Water flow rate (kg/h)

Indicated mean effective pressure (bar)

Fig. 12. Effect of water injection on brake torque.

7.5
FFR : 0.78 kg/h
FFR : 0.75 kg/h

7.3

FFR : 0.73 kg/h

FFR : 0.71 kg/h

7.0

FFR : 0.65 kg/h

Speed : 2500 rpm
Throttle : WOT
Spark timing : MBT

6.8
6.5
6.3
6.0
0

4
5
6
Water flow rate (kg/h)

Fig. 13. Variation of indicated mean effective pressure with water injection rate.

540
FFR : 0.78 kg/h

Exhaust gas temperature (C)

1168

FFR : 0.75 kg/h

520

FFR : 0.73 kg/h

500

FFR : 0.71 kg/h

FFR : 0.65 kg/h

480

Speed : 2500 rpm

Throttle : WOT
Spark timing : MBT

460
440
420
400
0

4
5
6
Water flow rate (kg/h)

Fig. 14. Variation of exhaust gas temperature with water injection rate.

V. Subramanian et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 1159 1173

1169

80

Volumetric efficiency (%)

FFR : 0.78 kg/h

FFR : 0.75 kg/h

78

FFR : 0.73 kg/h

FFR : 0.71 kg/h

76

FFR : 0.65 kg/h

74

Speed : 2500 rpm

Throttle : WOT
Spark timing : MBT

72
70
68
0

4
5
6
Water flow rate (kg/h)

Fig. 15. Variation of volumetric efciency with water injection rate.

11
FFR : 0.78 kg/h

10

FFR : 0.75 kg/h

O2 (%)

FFR : 0.73 kg/h

FFR : 0.71 kg/h

FFR : 0.65 kg/h

Speed : 2500 rpm

Throttle : WOT

Spark timing : MBT

4
3
2
1

4
5
6
Water flow rate (kg/h)

Fig. 16. Variation of exhaust oxygen concentration with water injection rate.

9000
FFR : 0.78 kg/h

8000

Nitric oxide (ppm)

FFR : 0.75 kg/h

7000

FFR : 0.73 kg/h

6000

FFR : 0.71 kg/h

FFR : 0.65 kg/h

5000

Speed : 2500 rpm

Throttle : WOT

4000

Spark timing : MBT

3000
2000
1000
0
0

3
4
Water flow rate (kg/h)

Fig. 17. Reduction in NO emission with water injection rate.

V. Subramanian et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 1159 1173

100
FFR : 0.78 kg/h

90

FFR : 0.75 kg/h

80

FFR : 0.73 kg/h

HC (ppm)

70

FFR : 0.71 kg/h

FFR : 0.65 kg/h

60

Speed : 2500 rpm

50

Throttle : WOT
Spark timing : MBT

40
30
20
10
0

Water flow rate (kg/h)

Fig. 18. Variation of HC emission with water injection rate.

Max. Rate of pressure rise (bar/CA)

4.5
FFR : 0.78 kg/h

FFR : 0.75 kg/h

FFR : 0.73 kg/h

3.5

FFR : 0.71 kg/h

FFR : 0.65 kg/h

2.5

Speed : 2500 rpm

Throttle : WOT
Spark timing : MBT

2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0

Water flow rate (kg/h)

Fig. 19. Variation of maximum rate of pressure rise with water injection rate.

15
FFR : 0.78 kg/h
FFR : 0.75 kg/h

12
Ignition delay (CA)

1170

FFR : 0.73 kg/h

FFR : 0.71 kg/h

FFR : 0.65 kg/h

Speed : 2500 rpm
Throttle : WOT

Spark timing : MBT

0
0

4
5
6
Water flow rate (kg/h)

Fig. 20. Variation of ignition delay with water injection rate.

V. Subramanian et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 1159 1173

1171

Combustion Duration (CA)

35
FFR : 0.78 kg/h
FFR : 0.75 kg/h
FFR : 0.73 kg/h
FFR : 0.71 kg/h
FFR : 0.65 kg/h

30

Speed : 2500 rpm

Throttle : WOT
Spark timing : MBT

25

20

15

10
1

4
5
6
Water flow rate (kg/h)

Fig. 21. Variation of combustion duration with water injection rate.

5
FFR : 0.78 kg/h
FFR : 0.75 kg/h
FFR : 0.73 kg/h
FFR : 0.71 kg/h
FFR : 0.65 kg/h

COV of peak pressure (%)

4.5
4

Speed : 2500 rpm

Throttle : WOT
Spark timing : MBT

3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0

Water flow rate (kg/h)

Fig. 22. Variation of COV of peak pressure with water injection rate.

80

Water flow rate = 0 kg/h

Water flow rate = 1.03kg/h
Water flow rate = 2.24kg/h

Heat release rate (J/CA)

70

Water flow rate = 5.9 kg/h

60

Speed : 2500 rpm

Throttle : WOT

50

Fuel flow rate : 0.78 kg/h

Spark timing : MBT

40
30
20
10
0
340

350

360

370

Crank angle (CA)

Fig. 23. Variation of heat release rate with water injection rate.

380

1172

V. Subramanian et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 1159 1173

Fig. 23 shows the trace of net HRR with and without water
injection. We found that with water injection, the peak HRR
comes down. It reduces from 81 to 56 J/ CA at the FFR of
0.78 kg/h, when the water ow rate varied from 0 to 5.9 kg/h.
The starting of combustion is delayed with water injection.
In spite of the fact that the combustion slowed down, it was
observed that the IMEP has not reduced as explained earlier
due to advantage in friction reduction.
On the whole, water injection is found to be a very effective
strategy to reduce nitric oxide emission and to control hydrogen
knocking. It is more advantageous than retarding the spark
timing as greater reductions in NO are seen without any loss in
BTE. However, material compatibility with prolonged usage of
water in the manifold has to be studied in detail as water can
lead to corrosion. Water vapor also reaches the crankcase with
the blow by gas and this will affect lubricating oil properties.

6. Conclusions

rate (HRR) was almost double as that of gasoline operation

and this leads to high temperatures and NO emissions.
Brake thermal efciency (BTE) is not signicantly affected
at higher equivalence ratios as compared to lower equivalence ratios when the spark timing is retarded from MBT
which seems to be an advantage as NO emissions are very
high only with relatively rich mixtures. However, higher reductions NO levels by retarded spark timing are possible
only at lower equivalence ratios, that too with a certain drop
in BTE. Thus spark retarding does not seem to be a very
effective way to control NO for hydrogen fuelled engine.
Water injection leads to a signicant reduction in NO levels.
At full throttle and equivalence ratio of 0.82, NO dropped
from 7670 to 2490 ppm with a water ow rate of 5.9 kg/h.
There is no adverse effect on the BTE and a small reduction
in HC emissions is observed.
Ignition delay is increased by 23 CA and combustion duration is increased by 35 CA and no change in cyclic variations is seen with water injection.
On the whole, water injection is found to be a very effective
strategy to reduce nitric oxide emission and to control hydrogen knocking. Even though water injection is very effective in reducing NO emissions, it can certainly leads to many
adverse effects like corrosion, lubricant contamination etc.

A single cylinder SI engine was successfully tested with

hydrogen fuel using electronically controlled timed manifold
injection. This work was primarily aimed at controlling NO
emissions using the technique of water injection into the intake
manifold and retarding the spark timing. The following conclusions are drawn based on the experimental results obtained:

The maximum power output of the engine with hydrogen is

about 78% of the rated power with gasoline due to a reduction
in the air admitted.
The NO level was negligible up to an equivalence ratio of
0.55 where the power output was about 60% of the rated
value. Afterwards it shoots up to 7500 ppm (at  = 0.8).
Traces of HC emissions were seen at high loads due to vaporization of the lubricating oil.
The high combution rates lead to extremely low cycle by cycle variations even with lean mixtures. The peak heat release

Acknowledgement
The authors gratefully acknowledge IIT Madras for funding this research work through the interdisciplinary thrust area
project on energy.
Appendix A
Table 1 gives a comparative picture of important properties
of hydrogen, gasoline and methane.

Table 1
Properties of some fuels [24,25]
Properties

Hydrogen

Gasoline

Methane

Molecular mass (kg/kmol)

Normal boiling point (K)
Density of vapor at NTP (kg/m3 )
Gas constant R (kJ/kg K)
Limits of ammability in air (% vol)
Limits of detonability in air (% vol)
Stoichiometric composition (% vol)
Minimum Ignition energy (mJ)
Autoignition temperature (K)
Lower enthalpy of combustion (kJ/kg)
Higher enthalpy of combustion (kJ/kg)
Adiabatic Flame temperature in air (K)
Specic heat (Cp) of NTP gas (kJ/kg K)
Ratio of specic heats (at NTP)
Octane number
Laminar burning velocity at NTP air (m/s)
Quenching distance in NTP air (cm)
Flame color

2.016
20.268
0.083764
4.124157
4 to 75
18.3 to 59
29.53
0.02
858
119, 930
141, 860
2318
14.89
1.383
130
2.653.25
0.064
Colorless

107
310 to 478
4.4
0.077704
1 to 7.6
1.1 to 3.3
1.76
0.24
501 to 744
45, 000
48, 000
2470
1.62
1.05
87
0.370.43
0.2
Yellowish blue

16.043
111.632
0.65119
0.518251
5.3 to15
6.3 to 13.5
9.48
0.29
813
50, 020
55, 530
2148
2.22
1.308
125
0.370.45
0.203
Blue

V. Subramanian et al. / International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32 (2007) 1159 1173

1173

Table 2
Engine specications
Type
Fuel
Number of cylinders
Bore stroke
Displacement
Compression ratio
Rated power
Rated speed

Four stroke, water cooled, single cylinder, OHV, SI three wheeler engine
Hydrogen and Gasoline
One
85 90 mm
510 cm3
9:1
13 bhp with gasoline
2500 rpm

Table 3
Gain in NO reduction with loss in BTE by retarding the spark timing
FFR = 0.68 kg/h
Retardation
from MBT
CA

0
3
6
9
12
15

FFR = 0.76 kg/h

Torque

NO
emission

% loss in
thermal
efciency

% Reduction in NO
emission

Nm
23.65
23.40
22.90
22.20
21.10
19.90

ppm
2750
2070
1350
1040
652.5
509

%
0.00
1.02
3.13
6.09
10.75
15.82

%
0.00
24.73
50.91
62.18
76.27
81.49

Table 2 gives the specications of engine and the schematic

diagram of experimental setup is shown in Fig. 1.
Table 3 shows the reduction in NO emissions and corresponding BTE.
References
[1] International energy outlook 2005. Energy information administration,
USA, http://www.eia.doe.gov/.
[2] National Climatic Data Centre, US Department of Commerce,
regarding Global Warming, Article from website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.
gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html - Q3.
[3] Das LM. Hydrogen engine: research and development R&D) programmes
in Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Delhi. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2002;27:95365.
[4] Verhelst S, Sierens R. Hydrogen engine-specic properties. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2001;26:98790.
[5] Peschka W. Hydrogen: the future cryofuel in internal combustion engines.
Int J Hydrogen Energy 1998;23(1):2743.
[6] Subramanian V, Mallikarjuna JM, Ramesh A. Performance, emission
and combustion characteristics of a hydrogen fuelled SI Enginean
experimental study. SAE Int Mobility Eng Congr Exposition;
2005-26-349.
[7] Lee JT, Kim YY, Lee CW. An investigation of a cause of backre and
its control due to crevice volumes in a hydrogen fuelled engine. Trans
ASME 2001;123:20410.
[8] Das L, Rohit Gulati M, Gupta PK. Performance evaluation of a hydrogen
fuelled spark engine using electronically controlled solenoid actuated
injection system. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2000;25(8):56979.
[9] Lee SJ, Yi HS, Kim ES. Combustion characteristic of intake port injection
type hydrogen fuelled engine. Int J Hydrogen Energy 1995;20(4):
31722.
[10] James WH. NOx emission and performance data for a hydrogen fuelled
internal combustion engine at 1500 rpm using exhaust gas recirculation.
Int J Hydrogen Energy 2003;28(8):9018.

Retardation
from MBT
CA

0
2
4
6
8
10

Torque

NO
emission

% loss in
thermal
efciency

% Reduction in NO
emission

Nm
26.50
26.40
26.30
25.90
25.50
25.10

ppm
7950
7580
7150
6680
6140
5660

%
0.00
0.34
0.72
2.23
3.70
5.21

%
0.00
4.65
10.06
15.97
22.77
28.81

[11] James WH. NOx Emission reduction in a hydrogen fuelled internal

combustion engine at 3000 rpm using exhaust gas recirculation. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2003;28(11):128592.
[12] Das LM. Near term introduction of hydrogen engines for automotive
application. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2002;27(5):47987.
[13] Al-Baghdadi MAS. et al. A prediction study of a spark ignition
supercharged hydrogen engine. Energy Conversion and Manage
2003;44:314350.
[14] Lanzafame R. Water injection effects in a single cylinder CFR engine.
SAE paper 1999-01-0568.
[15] Morse NT, Brueckner SR, Bohac SV. Effect of fuel humidity on the
performance of a single cylinder research engine operating on hydrogen.
SAE paper 2002-01-2685.
[16] Bohacik T. et al. Constant volume adiabatic combustion of stoichiometric
hydrogen oxygen mixtures. J Renew Energy 1996;9:12547.
[17] Hailin Li, Karim GA. Knock in spark ignition hydrogen engine. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2004;29(8):85965.
[18] Hailini Li, Karim GA, The performance of hydrogen oxygen SI engine.
SAE paper 2002-21-2688.
[19] Toshio S, Nakajima Y, Fatakuchi T. Thermal efciency analysis in a
hydrogen premixed combustion engine. JSAE Rev 2000;21:17782.
[20] Homan HS, McLean WJ, De Boer PCT. The effect of fuel injection on
NOx emissions and undesirable combustion for hydrogen fuelled piston
engines. Int J Hydrogen Eng 1983;8(2):13146.
[21] Hayes TK, Savage LD, Sorenson SC, Cylinder pressure data acquisition
and heat release analysis on a personal computer. SAE paper 860029.
[22] De Boer PCT, McLean WJ, Homan HS. Performance and emissions of
hydrogen fuelled internal combustion engines. Int J Hydrogen Energy
1976;1(2):15372.
[23] Frederic Matecunas. Modes and measures of combustion variability. SAE
paper 830337.
[24] Padiyar S. Properties of hydrogen. Proceedings of summer school of
hydrogen energy, Chennai, India: IIT Madras, 1985.
[25] Hydrogen Properties. Module 1, Hydrogen Fuel Cell Engines and Related
Technologies. College of Desert; Revision O, December 2001, CA 92260,
USA.