International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 33 (2012) 59–69

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhff

Analysis the effect of advanced injection strategies on engine performance

and pollutant emissions in a heavy duty DI-diesel engine by CFD modeling
Raouf Mobasheri a,⇑, Zhijun Peng a, Seyed Mostafa Mirsalim b
a
School of Engineering and Informatics, University of Sussex, Brighton, East Sussex BN1 9QT, United Kingdom
b
Engine Research Center (IPCO), Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: An Advanced CFD simulation has been carried out in order to explore the combined effects of pilot-, post-
Received 15 June 2011 and multiple-fuel injection strategies and EGR on engine performance and emission formation in a heavy
Received in revised form 5 October 2011 duty DI-diesel engine. An improved version of the ECFM-3Z combustion model has been applied coupled
Accepted 7 October 2011
with advanced models for NOx and soot formation. The model was validated with experimental data
Available online 8 November 2011
achieved from a Caterpillar 3401 DI diesel engine and good agreement between predicted and measured
in-cylinder pressure, heat release rate, NOx and soot emissions was obtained. The optimizations were
Keywords:
conducted separately for different split injection cases without pilot injection and then, for various multi-
Multiple injections
CFD simulation
ple injection cases. Totally, three factors were considered for the injection optimization, which included
DI diesel engine EGR rate, the separation between main injection and post-injection and the amount of injected fuel in
EGR each pulse. For the multiple injection cases, two more factors (including double and triple injections
Pollutant emissions during main injection) were also added. Results show that using pilot injection accompanied with an
optimized main injection has a significant beneficial effect on combustion process so that it could form
a separate 2nd stage of heat release which could reduce the maximum combustion temperature, which
leads to the reduction of the NOx formation. In addition, it has found that injecting adequate fuel in post-
injection at an appropriate EGR allows significant soot reduction without a NOx penalty rate.
Ó 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The improvement of DI diesel engines to comply with the strin-
gent exhaust emissions standards is closely linked to continued
development of the injection systems. Traditional injector design
is often suitable for injection timings close to TDC and cannot sat-
isfactorily meet the requirements for very early or late injection
timings. A growing trend in the diesel engine industry is towards
wider use of electronically controlled high pressure injection sys-
tems which can inject fuel at any point in the cycle without the
injection rate changing owing to injection timing or engine speed.
Multiple injections have shown to be an effective means for
reduction of pollutants emissions in diesel engines (Li et al.,
Abbreviations: ATDC, after top dead center; BTDC, before top dead center; BSFC,
brake specific fuel consumption; CFD, Computational Fluid Dynamics; DI, direct
injection; EGR, exhaust gas recirculation; EVC, exhaust valve closing; EVO, Exhaust
Valve Opening; HRR, heat release rate; IMAP, intake manifold air pressure; IMAT,
intake manifold air temperature; IVO, inlet valve opening; IVC, inlet valve closing;
NOx, oxides of nitrogen; RPM, revolutions per minute; SOI, start of injection.
⇑ Corresponding author. Address: Shawcross 2B12, School of Engineering and
Informatics, University of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9QT, United Kingdom. Tel.: +44 (0)
1273 872562.
E-mail addresses: R.Mobasheri@sussex.ac.uk (R. Mobasheri), Z.Peng@sussex.
ac.uk (Z. Peng), Mo_Mirsalim@aut.ac.ir (S.M. Mirsalim).
2004; Mendez et al., 2008; Husberg et al., 2008; Badami et al.,
2002; Mobasheri et al., 2011; Shundoh et al., 1992). Multiple injec-
tions divide the total quantity of fuel into two or more injections
per combustion event. A pilot injection is also usually defined as
an injection where 15% or less of the total mass of fuel is injected
in the first injection. Many researchers are now investigating pilot
and split injection as an effective means to simultaneously reduce
NOx and soot emissions.
The benefits of multiple injections have been found to be highly
dependent on the specification of the quantity of fuel in each injec-
tion and the dwell between injections. Shundoh et al. (1992)
reported that NOx could be reduced by 35%, and smoke by 60 to
80%, without a penalty in fuel economy if pilot injection was uses
in conjunction with high pressure injection. Nehmer et al. (1994)
studied the effect of split injection in a heavy-duty diesel engine
by varying the amount of fuel in the first injection from 10% to
75% of the total amount of fuel. They found that split injection
better utilized the air charge and allowed combustion to continue
later into the power stroke than for a single injection case, without
increased levels of soot production. Tow et al. (1994) found that
using a double injection with a relatively long dwell on a heavy
duty engine resulted in a reduction of particulate emissions by a
factor of three with no increase in NOx and only a slight increase

0142-727X/$ - see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2011.10.004
60 R. Mobasheri et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 33 (2012) 59–69
in BSFC compared to a single injection. Zhang (1999) used a single
cylinder HSDI diesel engine to investigate the effect of pilot injec-
tion with EGR on soot, NOx and combustion noise, and found that
pilot injection increased soot emissions. The author also showed
that reducing the amount of fuel in the pilot injection and increas-
ing the interval between pilot and main injections could reduce the
pilot flame area when the main injection starts, resulting in lower
soot emissions.
It is well known that exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) is effective
for the reduction of NOx emissions (Ladommatos et al., 1997;
Hentschel and Richter, 1995; Ladommatos et al., 1998; Arcoumanis
et al., 1983). The application of EGR in diesel engines helps to
replace part of oxygen and nitrogen in the inlet air with carbon
dioxide and water vapor from the exhaust that have higher specific
heat capacities.
Ladommatos et al. (1997) conducted a detailed study of the ef-
fects of EGR in a 2.5 L, four-cylinder DI diesel engine. Their results
showed that the reduction in NOx emissions and the increase in
particulate emissions due to EGR could mainly be attributed to
the dilution function of residual gas to inlet charge oxygen. Hent-
schel and Richter (1995) investigated the formation of soot in a
1.9 L DI diesel engine and found that with increasing EGR rates,
the amount of soot formed was increase only slightly, but the
amount of soot oxidized during combustion decreased signifi-
cantly. Ladommatos et al. (1998) also observed that use of EGR
caused an increase in the ignition delay and shift in the location
of the whole combustion process further towards the expansion
stroke. This resulted in the combustion gases spending shorter
periods at high temperature, leading to lower thermal NOx forma-
tion as well as a reduced rate of soot oxidation.
Arcoumanis et al. (1983) reported that cold EGR resulted in low-
er NOx emissions at EGR rates below 30%, but at higher EGR rates
cold EGR seemed to offer marginally higher NOx emissions in com-
parison to hot EGR. As its influence is so complicated, normally the
application of EGR must be considered to combine with other
optimizations, such as fuel injection strategy.
As mentioned earlier, multiple injections are considered as an
effective means to improve particulate emissions. Thus, it is of
interest to explore the possibility of simultaneous reduction in par-
ticulate and NOx emissions with the combined use of EGR and
multiple injections. Mikulic et al. (1993) investigated the effects
of pilot injection with EGR on engine emissions and fuel consump-
tion and found that the lowest NOx emissions could only be
reached using a combination of EGR and pilot injection. They also
found that pilot injection in combination with EGR provided no
deterioration of fuel consumption and HC emissions. Uchida
et al. (1998) found that the combined use of pilot injection with
EGR results in little advantages for the NOx-BSFC trade-off since
smoke increased, especially under low load conditions. They ar-
gued that the smoke deterioration might be caused by the interfer-
ence of the main injection sprays in a hot and higher equivalence
ratio zone near the injector nozzle. Pierpont et al. (1995) examined
the combined effects of EGR and multiple injections and achieved
significant reductions in both NOx and soot emissions with only a
slight increase in BSFC when EGR was used in combination with
optimized double and triple injections.
Advanced injection strategies offer possible ways to improve
the mixing process which could lead to reduce both NOx and soot
emissions. In the current study, it was of interest to determine the
emission reduction capability of the combined effect of advanced
injection strategies and EGR in a DI diesel engine through Compu-
tational Fluid Dynamics (CFDs) simulation. For this purpose, three
factors have been considered for the injection optimization, which
included EGR rate, the separation between main injection and
post-injection and the amount of injected fuel in each pulse. Based
on those simulations, the optimum operating points for obtaining
the minimum amount of NOx and soot emissions have been
demonstrated.
2. Numerical procedure
2.1. CFD code and calculating meshes
The computational mesh was created using AVL ESE Diesel Tool
(ICE Physics and Chemistry, 2009). Because of the symmetrical
location of the injector at the center of the combustion chamber,
the CFD calculations are performed on 60sector meshes. Exhaust
and intake ports are not included in the computational mesh by
concentrating this simulation on in-cylinder flow and combustion
processes. Calculations begin at Intake Valve Closure (IVC) and end
at Exhaust Valve Opening (EVO). The same initial and boundary
conditions are used for all the computations. The time step used
for calculation is 0.2 deg of crank angle. The final mesh consists
of a hexahedral dominated mesh. Exact number of cells in the
mesh was 34725 and 79311 at TDC and BDC, respectively. The
present resolution was found to give adequately grid independent
results.
2.2. The Spray Model
The standard WAVE model, described in Liu et al. (1993) was
used for the primary and secondary atomization modeling of the
resulting droplets. In this model the growth of an initial perturba-
tion on a liquid surface is linked to its wave length and to other
physical and dynamic parameters of the injected fuel and the do-
main fluid. Drop parcels are injected with characteristic size equal
to the nozzle exit diameter (blob injection). The Dukowicz model
was applied for treating the heat-up and evaporation of the drop-
lets, which is described in Dukowicz (1979). This model assumes a
uniform droplet temperature. In addition, the rate of droplet tem-
perature change is determined by the heat balance, which states
that the heat convection from the gas to the droplet either heats
up the droplet or supplies heat for vaporization. The spray wall
interaction model used in the simulations was based on the
spray-wall impingement model described in Naber et al. (1988).
This model assumes that a droplet, which hits the wall is affected
by rebound or reflection based on the Weber number. The Shell
auto-ignition model was used for modeling of the auto-ignition
(Halstead et al., 1977). In this generic mechanism, 6 generic species
for hydrocarbon fuel, oxidizer, total radical pool, branching agent,
intermediate species and products were involved. In addition the
important stages of auto-ignition such as initiation, propagation,
branching and termination were presented by generalized reac-
tions, described in Halstead et al. (1977).
2.3. The Turbulent Mixing Model
The k-e approach has been used to take account of turbulent
effects, while the complex oxidation process of diesel fuel has been
summarized by a single step irreversible reaction (ICE Physics and
Chemistry, 2009; Liu et al., 1993). The mean reaction rate has been
evaluated by means of the Coherent Flamelet Model (CFM) Colin
and Benkenida, 2004. For a diesel spray, the fuel droplets are very
close to each other and are located in a region essentially made of
fuel. After the evaporation of the fuel, an adequate time is needed
for the mixing from the nearly pure fuel region with the ambient
air. In this case, the mixing of fuel with air is modeled by initially
placing the fuel into the ‘pure fuel’ zone of the ECFM-3Z model (Co-
lin and Benkenida, 2004). A transport equation for the ‘unmixed
fuel’ is solved where the source term for the transfer of fuel from
the unmixed to the mixed state can be described as follows:
 R. Mobasheri et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 33 (2012) 59–69 61

_ F!M ¼  1
~FFu
q~ MM Table 1
SFu y ð1Þ Engine specifications.
sm q~ u MFu
Engine type Caterpillar 3401
Where y ~FFu is the mass fraction of unmixed fuel, MM is the mean mo-
Bore  stroke 13.719 cm  16.51 cm
lar mass of the gases in the mixed zone, MFu is the molar mass of
Compression Ratio 15.1:1
Fuel, q
~ is mean density, q ~ u is the density of the unburned gases Displacement 2.44 l
(the density of fresh gases that would be obtained if combustion Connecting rod length 26.162 cm
had not occurred), and sm is the mixing time. Squish clearance 4.14 mm
IVO/IVC 32° ATDC/147° ATDC
EVO/EVC 134° ATDC/29° ATDC
2.4. The Combustion Model IMAP 184 kPa
IMAT 310 K
The combustion model is based on the Coherent Flame Model Engine speed 1600 rpm
originally. The ECFM-3Z model (Colin and Benkenida, 2004; Hélie Piston shape Mexican hat style

and Trouvé, 2000) distinguishes between all three main regimes

relevant in diesel combustion, namely auto-ignition, premixed
flame and non-premixed, i.e. diffusion combustion. The auto-igni- Table 2
tion pre-reactions are calculated within the premixed charge of – Injector fuel system specifications.
fuel and air, with the ignition delay governed by the local temper- Injector type Common rail
ature, pressure, fuel/air equivalence ratio and the amount of resid-
Injection pressure Variable (up to 120 MPa)
ual gas. Local auto-ignition is followed by premixed combustion in Number of nozzle holes 6
the fuel/air/residual gas mixture formed during the time period Nozzle hole diameter 0.26 mm
between start of injection and auto-ignition onset within the Start of injection 9ATDC
Injection duration 21.5° CA
ECFM-3Z modeled according to a flame propagation process. The
Fuel injected 0.1622 g/cycle
third regime is the one of diffusion combustion where the reaction
takes place in a thin zone which separates fuel and oxidizer. In the
ECFM-3Z it is assumed that the chemical time in the reaction zone
is much smaller than the time needed for the diffusion process. 12 80
Therefore the rate of reaction during diffusion combustion is deter- In-cylinder Pressure
mined entirely by the intermixing of fuel and oxidizer. This distinct (CFD Simulation)
70
separation of the different ignition/combustion regimes makes the 10
In-cylinder Pressure

Heat Release Rate (J/deg)

In-cylindet Pressure (MPa)

ECFM-3Z model specifically applicable to conventional as well as (Experiment) 60

alternative diesel combustion modes. In the conventional case 8 Heat Release Rate
50
most part of the combustion can be assumed as diffusion type, in (CFD Simulation)

the case of recently introduced alternative concepts a large amount Heat Release Rate
6 40
of fuel is consumed within premixed combustion. (Experiment)

30
2.5. The Pollutant Models 4
20
It is well known that the formation of NO depends mainly on 2
three different processes, the thermal NO, the prompt NO and 10
the fuel NO mechanism (ICE Physics and Chemistry, 2009). Usually
0 0
in automotive diesel engine applications the third one can be ne- 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400
glected, because there is no significant amount of nitrogen in the
Crank Angle (degree)
fuel. The two other mechanisms can contribute to the NO forma-
tion in engines, where mainly thermal NO is formed, but also some Fig. 1. Comparison of calculated and measured in-cylinder pressure and heat
amount of prompt NO can appear. The model used for this work, release rate.
covers these two contributions (ICE Physics and Chemistry, 2009).
The Hiroyasu model (ICE Physics and Chemistry, 2009; Hioyasu
et al., 1989) was also used to anticipate the soot formation. Gener- The fuel delivery system was an electronically controlled, com-
ally, it is well accepted that the production of soot occurs in two mon rail fuel injection system (Wiedenhoefer and Reitz, 2000). In
main phases, soot formation and soot oxidization. These processes all the injection cases studied, the same amount of fuel is injected
depend on the fuel composition, in-cylinder gas pressure, in-cylin- in each engine cycle. The main characteristics of the injection
der gas temperature, and local fuel and oxygen concentrations. The system are listed in Table 2.
soot formation model which has implemented in the current study Fig. 1 shows comparisons between the predicted and measured
is based upon a combination of suitably extended and adapted in-cylinder pressure and heat release rate. The result is based on
joint chemical/physical rate expressions for the representation of the assumption of uniform wall temperature 425 K for the cylinder
the processes of particle nucleation, surface growth and oxidation. wall, 525 K for the cylinder head and 525 K for the piston top.
The trend predicted by the model is reasonably close to exper-
3. Results and discussion imental results, although there are still some differences as can be
seen in Fig. 1. These discrepancies could be related to experimental
3.1. Model validation uncertainties in input parameters to the computations such as the
precise injection duration, start of injection timing and gas temper-
The diesel engine used for the model validation is a single-cyl- ature at IVC.
inder version of a Caterpillar 3401 heavy-duty truck engine. The Figs. 2 and 3 present comparisons between the predicted and
engine specifications are given in Table 1 (Wiedenhoefer and Reitz, measured engine-out soot and NOx values for EGR levels of 0%
2000). and 10%.
62 R. Mobasheri et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 33 (2012) 59–69

45 45 1.8
Single injection,SOI=-9 ATDC Single injection, EGR=0 %
40 40 1.6
35 35 1.4
NOx (g/kg-fuel)

30
30 1.2

NOx (g/kg-fuel)

Soot (g/kg-fuel)
25
25 1
20
20 0.8
Experiment (EGR=0%)
15
Experiment (EGR=10%) 15 0.6
10 NOx (CFD Simulation)
CFD Simulation (EGR=0%)
10 NOx (Experiments) 0.4
5
CFD Simulation (EGR=10%)
Soot (CFD Simulation)
5 0.2
0
Soot (Experiments)
351 371 391 411 431 451 471 491
0 0
Crank Angle (degree) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Fig. 2. Predicated NOx in comparison with measured data (Wiedenhoefer et al.,

SOI (CA, BTDC)
2000).
Fig. 4. The effect of injection timing on NOx and soot, single injection, EGR = 0%.

16
Table 3
14 Single injection,SOI=-9 ATDC Computational conditions for studied cases.

Total fuel 0.1622 g/cycle

12 Experiment (EGR=0%)
Pilot (SOI) 30.075° ATDC
Pilot duration 1.075° CA
Soot (g/kg-fuel)

10 Experiment (EGR=10%)
Separationa 30° CA
CFD Simulation (EGR=0%) Main (SOI) 9° ATDC
8
Main duration 21.5° CA
CFD Simulation (EGR=10%)
6 a
The period between end of pilot injection and start of main
injection.
4

2
0 lowing sections. Totally, 24 different injection arrangements for
340 355 370 385 400 415 430 445
Crank Angle (degree)
Fig. 3. Predicated soot in comparison with measured data (Wiedenhoefer et al.,
2000).
As illustrated in Fig. 2, increasing EGR, which causes dilution of
intake charge, and insufficient oxygen in intake charge, leads to
lower combustion temperature and therefore decreases NOx emis-
sion. In contrast, as it can be seen in Fig. 3, this variation has a
reverse effect on soot formation.
While NOx and soot formation processes can be predicted but
there is only one measured value for these two components. For
further assessment of predication capability of the model, the
trade-off between NOx and soot was simulated with several differ-
ent injection timing. Results shown in Fig. 4 suggested that the
models used in this study can provide enough confidence to the
following simulation results with regard to the combustion process
and emissions.
It is evident from Fig. 4 that the predicted trends are fairly sim-
ilar to the experimental values. In particular, they capture the
trend of reduced NOx and increasing soot with fuel injection
retard.
3.2. Modeling methodology
As mentioned earlier, careful optimization of engine operating
conditions is required to get the full benefit of combined effects
of multiple injection parameters. Based the above success of
validations with a single injection, simulation results for different
multiple injection cases have presented and discussed in the fol-
460 475 490
which split and multiple injection cases with variable fuel amount
for each pulse (up to 30% for the second pulse) and variable sepa-
ration/dwell between pulses (up to 30° CA) have considered. The
optimization were conducted separately for split injection cases
without pilot injection and then for different multiple injection
strategies accompanied with an early pilot injection. In addition,
for multiple injection cases, two more cases (including double
and triple injections during main injection) were also evaluated
which will be discussed in next section.
Table 3 shows the parameters which were fixed for all injection
cases.
The injection schemes used in this study are shown schemati-
cally in Figs. 5 and 6. The same amount of fuel is injected in all
the cases considered. Based on previous research which was done
by Mobasheri et al. (2011) at this operating points, the optimum
separation for simultaneous reduction of soot with low NOx emis-
sions was obtained by using 20° CA dwell delay between the injec-
tion pulses for split injection cases without pilot injection.
3.2.1. Influence of split injection strategies on fuel consumption and
exhaust emissions
In this section, the results obtained for different split injection
schemes based on strategies presented in Fig. 5 are considered.
Figs. 7 and 8 show the amount of soot and NOx emission for differ-
ent split injection cases with 0% and 10% EGR rate. The labeling
scheme for the split injection cases gives the percent of the fuel
injected in the first and last pulses, and the dwell between two
injections. For instance, 70(10)30 represents 70% fuel injected in
the first pulse, 10 crank angle degree dwell between the two injec-
tion pulses and 30% fuel in the second pulse.
 R. Mobasheri et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 33 (2012) 59–69 63

Injection Duration= 21.5 ° CA

100% Single Injection

SOI

15.05° CA 6.45° CA
10-20-25-30 °CA
70% 30%

17.20° CA 4.30° CA
10-20-25-30 °CA
80% 20%

19.35° CA 2.15° CA
10-20-25-30 °CA
90% 10%

9° CA BTDC
Crank Angle (degree)

Fig. 5. Injection profiles for different split injection cases without pilot injection.

Injection Duration= 21.5° CA

100% Single Injection

SOI SOI
Pilot Injection Main Injection

15.05° CA 5.37° CA
10-20-25-30 °CA
5% 70% 25%

17.20° CA 3.22° CA
10-20-25-30 °CA
5% 80% 15%

18.27° CA 2.15° CA
10-20-25-30 °CA
5% 85% 10%

30.075° CA BTDC 9° CA BTDC Crank Angle (degree)

Fig. 6. Injection profiles for different multiple injection cases.

As illustrated in Figs. 7 and 8, some split injection schemes can
reduce NOx emissions significantly, while some can increase NOx
emissions. It can be seen in Figs. 7 and 8 that the emission produc-
tion histories of the split injections are changed significantly from
the original single injection cases and the majority of split injection
schemes can simultaneously reduce soot and NOx emissions
compared to traditional single injection scheme, though some
cases have increased emissions. If considering all data in Figs. 7
and 8, it can be seen that the split injection strategy under 10%
EGR conditions can be more beneficial for the substantial reduction
of NOx formation. As shown in Fig. 7, the minimum amount of NOx
formation was achieved with the case of 70(25)30, though it is just
a little lower than other several operating points. It may be due to
the fact that premixed combustion which is the main source of the
NOx formation is relatively low in comparison with other cases.
Higher amounts of the second injection pulse into the lean and
hot combustion zones cause the newly injected fuel to burn rapidly
and effectively at high temperature, resulting in high soot oxida-
tion rates. The optimum engine performance for reduction of soot
and NOx emissions can be obtained with 20° CA delay between
injection pulses in the 80(20)20 and 90(20)10 cases, though the
lowest total soot is seen with the split injection ratio 90(25)10.
As can be seen in Figs. 7 and 8, the delay dwell does not affect
soot formation significantly. The combustion of 30% fuel in the sec-
ond injection pulse only causes a small effect of soot variations
compared to the other cases in this injection category i.e.
70(x)30. It is clearly seen in Fig. 9 that the 90(20)10 case shifts
the soot-NOx trade-off to the optimum level.
Figs. 9 and 10 show BSFC vs. NOx curves at 0% and 10% of EGR.
As shown in Figs. 9 and 10, for the 90(x)10 case the differences
between BSFC vs. NOx emission is lower than other cases. It can be
concluded that the split injection shows minimal effects on BSFC
64 R. Mobasheri et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 33 (2012) 59–69

0.6 0.3
70 (x) 30
0.55 70 (x) 30
0.29 (30)
(10) 80 (x) 20
0.5 80 (x) 20
0.28
(20) 90 (x) 10 (25)
Single Injection
0.45 (25) 90 (x) 10

BSFC (kg/kW-hr)
Soot (g/kg-fuel)

(30) 0.27
(25) Single inj.
0.4 (30) Single Injection
0.26 (25)

0.35 (20)
(20)
(30) (10) 0.25 (30)
0.3 (20) (25)
(10)
(10)
0.24 (20) (10)
0.25 (20)
(10)

(30) 0.23 Single Injection

0.2 (25) EGR= 0 %
EGR= 0 %

0.15 0.22
30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54
NOx (g/kg-fuel) NOx (g/kg-fuel)

Fig. 7. Soot-NOx trade-off, split injection, EGR = 0%. Fig. 9. BSFC vs. NOx trade-off, split injection, EGR = 0%.

0.32
1.5
0.31 (30) 70 (x) 30

1.3 0.3 80 (x) 20

(10) (25)
(30) (25)
0.29 90 (x) 10
BSFC (kg/kW-hr)

(20)
1.1 Single Injection (30)
0.28
Soot (g/kg-fuel)

(25) (20) (25) Single Injection

(10) 0.27 (20)
0.9 (30)
0.26 (20) (10)
(30)
Single Inj. (10)
(25) (10)
(20) (10) 0.25
0.7
70 (x) 30
0.24 Single Injection
(30)
0.5 (20) 80 (x) 20
0.23 EGR= 10 %
(25)
EGR= 10 % 90 (x) 10
0.22
0.3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NOx (g/kg-fuel)
NOx (g/kg-fuel)
Fig. 10. BSFC vs. NOx trade-off, split injection, EGR = 10%.
Fig. 8. Soot-NOx trade-off, split injection, EGR = 10%.

0.55
when the secondary injection were relatively small compared to
the main injection. In addition, as can be seen the trade-off charac- 0.5
teristics for the 90(x)10 case is relatively different for two level of
0.45 Single Injection
EGR rates.
(10)
0.4
Soot (g/kg-fuel)

(30)
3.2.2. Influence of multiple injection strategies on fuel consumption 0.35 (25) Single inj.
and exhaust emissions (30)
(20)
0.3
Benefits of split injection for emission reduction were discussed (20) (10)
(10) 5 (20) 65 (x) 30
(20)
in previous section. In order to fully investigate the potential of 0.25 (25)

multiple injection strategies, the effects of pilot injection followed (30)

(25)
5 (20) 75 (x) 20
by various main and post-injection schemes based on strategies 0.2
presented in Fig. 6 are considered in this section. 0.15 EGR= 0 % 5 (20) 80 (x) 15
Figs. 11 and 12 show the amount of soot and NOx emissions for
different multiple injection cases for EGR levels of 0% and 10%, 0.1
29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49
respectively.
As illustrated in Figs. 11, for multiple injection schemes both NOx (g/kg-fuel)
NOx and soot emissions decreased compared to split injection Fig. 11. Soot-NOx trade-off, multiple injection, EGR = 0%.
schemes in majority of cases. The pilot injection, which was set at
about 30.075° CA BTDC, reduces the ignition delay and therefore
the amount of premixed combustion, leading to lower tempera- effectiveness of multiple injections at controlling soot emission un-
tures and NOx emissions. The results of Fig. 12 confirm EGR’s der EGR conditions. It can be concluded that by using multiple
effectiveness at reducing NOx. In addition, Fig. 12 shows the injections the soot formation is accrued in the multiple regions in
 R. Mobasheri et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 33 (2012) 59–69 65

1.3 0.3

1.2 (30)
5 (20) 65 (x) 30
0.29
1.1 Single Injection
(25) (10)
0.28
1 (20)
(10) (30) (30) 5 (20) 75 (x) 20
Soot (g/kg-fuel)

BSFC (gr/kW-hr)
(20)
0.9 (30) 0.27 (10)

(25) 5 (20) 80 (x) 15

0.8 (25) Single Inj.
0.26
(10)
0.7 (20)
5 (20) 65 (x) 30
(10)

0.25 (25)
0.6
(20) 5 (20) 75 (x) 20 (20)
(30) (30) (25)
0.5 0.24
(25)
0.4 EGR= 10 %
5 (20) 80 (x) 15 (10)
0.23 (20)
0.3 EGR= 10 %
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
0.22
NOx (g/kg-fuel) 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Fig. 12. Soot-NOx trade-off, multiple injection, EGR = 10%.

NOx (g/kg-fuel)

Fig. 14. BSFC vs. NOx trade-off, multiple injection, EGR = 10%.

0.28

5 (20) 65 (x) 30
(30) 60
0.27
EGR= 0 % 90 (20) 10
(30)
5 (20) 75 (x) 20 50
Rate of Heat Release (J/deg)
80 (20) 20
BSFC (gr/kW-hr)

0.26
(20)
(25) 5 (20) 75 (25) 20
(10)
5 (20) 80 (x) 15 40
0.25 (25)
5 (20) 80 (30) 15
(20)
(30) (10) 30
0.24 (25)

(10)
20
0.23 (20)

EGR= 0 % 10

0.22
29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 0
340 360 380 400 420 440
NOx (g/kg-fuel)
Crank Angle (degree)
Fig. 13. BSFC vs. NOx trade-off, multiple injection, EGR = 0%.
Fig. 15. The HRR curve, optimum injection cases, EGR = 0%.

the combustion chamber and thus has more area for oxidation.
Finally, the fuel that is pulsed into the combustion chamber after
main injection ignites rapidly and thus will not contribute signifi-
60
cantly to soot formation in high temperature rich regions. Even
EGR= 10 % 90 (20) 10
though the EGR reduces some of the intake oxygen content, the heat
added to the intake air enhances the soot oxidation to some extent 50 80 (20) 20
Rate of Heat Release (J/deg)

which leads to reduction of soot emission. When the percentage of

5 (20) 75 (25) 20
the second pulse injected fuel is larger than 75% of the total fuel, the 40
NOx formation history of the multiple injection has a more impact 5 (20) 80 (30) 15
to simultaneous reduction of Soot and Nox emissions. This trend
30
has also observed when 10% EGR is used. It can be also concluded
that the NOx chemistry is sensitive to the early combustion details
because these combustion products stay at a high temperature for 20
the longest time, and the combustion region is not cooled by the
vaporization of the continuously injected fuel that occurs in the sin- 10
gle injection case.
Figs. 13 and 14 show BSFC vs. NOx curves at 0% and 10% of EGR
0
for different multiple injection cases. 340 360 380 400 420 440
Approximately the same trend of overall reduction of NOx Crank Angle (degree)
emission and increase of BSFC could be observed in different cases,
as illustrated in Fig. 13 and 14, although this trend is different for Fig. 16. The HRR curve, optimum injection cases, EGR = 10%.
20° CA dwell in 5(20)85(x)10 cases. From these results, it can be
summarized that the optimum engine performance for reduction
of soot and NOx emissions can be obtained with 25° CA and 30° Figs. 15 and 16 illustrate the heat release rates for optimum
CA delay between main and post-injection pulses in the split and multiple injection cases for EGR levels of 0% and 10%,
5(20)75(25) and 5(20)80(30)15 cases, respectively. respectively.
66 R. Mobasheri et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 33 (2012) 59–69

1800 As shown in Figs. 15 and 16, the second fuel injection, occurred
1700 EGR= 0 % at the late combustion stage, affects the in-cylinder pressure and
1600 temperature that causes second peak in HRR diagram. In addition,
the amount of injected fuel in each pulse and the delay between
1500
injections strongly affect the timing and magnitude of the second
Temperature (k)

1400
peak. As illustrated in Figs. 15 and 16, the main combustion event
1300 usually has a short auto-ignition delay for multiple injection cases
1200 due to the high in-cylinder temperature produced by pre-combus-
90 (20) 10
1100 tion resulted of pilot injection. It can be seen that the second peak
1000
80 (20) 20 is significantly moved toward the expansion stroke for the
900 5(20)80(30)15 case. On the other hand, multiple injections is found
5 (20) 75 (25) 20
to reduce NOx emission significantly since it reduces the magni-
800
5 (20) 80 (30) 15 tude of the combustion peak.
700
Figs. 17 and 18 show the cylinder temperature for optimum
600 split and multiple injection cases for EGR levels of 0% and 10%,
330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 410 420 430 440
respectively.
Crank Angle (degree) As can be seen in Figs. 17 and 18, for the 5(20)80(30)15 case, the
Fig. 17. In-cylinder temperature, optimum injection cases, EGR = 0%. second peaks are lower than the other cases for both EGR rates.
Moreover, for the 70(20)30 case, the first peak are lower than the
other cases. In addition, after the second peak, the cylinder temper-
1800 ature tends to increase more in comparison with the other cases.
1700 EGR= 10 % Fig. 19 shows the velocity field contours for single injection case
in comparison with the three optimum injection cases at 360°,
1600
385° and 410° CA.
1500 As can be seen in Fig. 19, the velocity field within the cylinder
Temperature (k)

1400 increases dramatically for the three optimum injection cases in

1300 comparison with the single injection case at 410° CA especially
1200 for 5(20)80(30)15 case. It can be concluded that multiple injection
90 (20) 10
1100 had a significant effect on flow filed and causes the subsequent ef-
80 (20) 20 fects on soot oxidization and NOx formation.
1000
The NOx distribution for the three optimum injection cases
900 5 (20) 75 (25) 20
compared to single injection case are shown in Fig. 20 at 370°,
800 385° and 400° CA. Fig. 21 shows the comparison of in-cylinder soot
5 (20) 80 (30) 15
700 formations at same operating points.
600 As can be seen in Figs. 20 and 21, the local soot-NOx trade-off is
330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 410 420 430 440 evident in these contour plots, as the NOx formation and soot for-
Crank Angle (degree) mation occur on opposite sides of the high temperature region. It is
widely reported that the combustion of single injection caused the
Fig. 18. In-cylinder temperature, optimum injection cases, EGR = 10%.
rapid premixed combustion phases, because most fuel is injected

Single Injection (80) 20 (20) 5 (20) 80 (30) 15 5 (20) 75 (25) 20

Fig. 19. The velocity fields contours, Single injection case in comparison with three optimum injection cases at 360°, 385° and 410° CA.
 R. Mobasheri et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 33 (2012) 59–69 67

Single (80) 20 (20) 5 (20) 80 (30) 15 5 (20) 75 (25) 20

Fig. 20. NOx mass fraction contours, Single injection case in comparison with three optimum injection cases at 370°, 385° and 400° CA.

Single (80) 20 (20) 5 (20) 80 (30) 15 5 (20) 75 (25) 20

Fig. 21. Soot mass fraction contours, Single injection case in comparison with three optimum injection cases at 370°, 385° and 400° CA.

during the ignition delay period under high ambient pressure and
temperature conditions and, thus, is combusted immediately. For
this reason, undiluted air–fuel mixtures and fuel-rich region exist
locally in the combustion chamber, which usually causes the for-
mation of harmful exhaust emissions and combustion noises. In
the single injection case, the soot formed in the later combustion
phase is difficult to oxidize for two reasons. First, it is close to
the end of the combustion period, and second, the temperature
decreases rapidly in expansion stroke. In the same manner, the
soot produced during the main combustion phase will not be oxi-
dized easily for the lower temperature in-cylinder. It can be seen
that for optimum injection cases, NOx and soot mass fractions
are lower in comparison with the single injection case. It can be
concluded that, for the split injection case, the second pulse
injected fuel enters into a relatively lean and high temperature re-
gion which is remained from the combustion of the first pulse. Soot
formation is therefore significantly reduced because the injected
fuel is rapidly consumed by combustion before a rich soot region
can accumulate.
The temperature distributions at two crank angle degrees for
three optimum injection cases compared to single injection case
are shown in Fig. 22.
As can be seen in Fig. 22, at 410° CA the maximum temperature
in optimum cases has a higher amount than single injection case. It
can be concluded that injecting adequate fuel in post-injection
leads to the increase of temperature in late stage of combustion
process that allows soot reduction without a NOx penalty rate.
3.2.3. Using double and triple injections for main injection
The previous section has shown the potential of different multi-
ple injection cases to reduce NOx and soot emissions. In this sec-
tion, the main injection has divided in two and three pulses to
68 R. Mobasheri et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 33 (2012) 59–69

Single (80) 20 (20) 5 (20) 80 (30) 15 5 (20) 75 (25) 20

Fig. 22. Temperature contours, Single injection case in comparison with three optimum injection cases at 385, 400.

SOI SOI
Pilot Injection Main Injection
4° CA

8.6° CA 8.6° CA 3.225° CA

25° CA
40% 40% 15%
5%

4° CA 4° CA

5.375° CA 5.375° CA 5.375° CA 4.3° CA

20° CA
25% 25% 25% 20%
5%

30.075° CA BTDC 9° CA BTDC CrankAngle (degree)

Fig. 23. Injection profiles for two multiple injection cases with double and triple main injections.

50 1600 Table 4
Soot, NOx and BSFC for two multiple main injection cases.
EGR= 0 % 5 (20) 25 (4) 25 (4) 25 (20) 20
45 1500
5 (20) 40 (4) 40 (25) 15 Case Soot (g/kg-fuel) NOx (g/kg-fuel) BSFC (g/kw h)
40 1400
Rate of Heat Release (J/deg)

5(20)25(4)25(4)25(20)20 0.242 28.43 0.2574

5(20)40(4)40(25)15 0.2311 30.21 0.2751
35 1300
Temperature (k)

30 1200

25 1100 explore its effects for more reduction of pollutant emissions. For
this purpose, two more injection schemes, as shown in Fig. 23,
20 1000
has been proposed and considered based on optimum cases which
15 900 were obtained in last section.
10 800
Figs. 24 shows the heat release rate and temperature curves
based on strategies illustrated in Fig. 23.
5 700 It can be seen that due to double and triple injection during
0 600 main injection, the peak of HRR and temperature diagram is lower
340 350 360 370 380 390 400 410 420 430 440 than multiple injection schemes which were previously
Crank Angle (degree) considered.
The amount of BSFC, NOx and Soot emission for these cases are
Fig. 24. Heat release rate and temperature for two multiple main injection cases. summarized in Table 4.
 R. Mobasheri et al. / International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 33 (2012) 59–69
0.03
70 (20) 30
EGR= 0 %
80 (20) 20
0.025
5 (20) 75 (25) 20
5 (20) 80 (30) 15
CO (Mass Fraction)
5 (20) 25 (4) (25) (4) (25) 20 (20)
0.02
5 (20) 40 (4) 40 (25) 15
Single Injection
0.015
0.01
0.005
0 Arcoumanis, C., Bicen, A.F., Whitelaw, J.H., 1983. Squish and Swril-Squish
340 360 380 400 420 440
Crank Angle (degree)
Fig. 25. Effects of different injection strategies on CO emissions, EGR = 0%.
It can be concluded from Table 4 that two proposed injection
cases can be more beneficial for the substantial reduction of NOx
and Soot emissions, however the amount of BSFC in these cases
should be considered as a main disadvantage.
The effects of optimum injection strategies on CO emissions are
shown in Fig. 25.
It can be seen that the concentration of CO emissions for two
optimum injection case including 5(20)80(30)15 and
5(20)75(25)20 are generally lower than other cases. The reason
for lower CO emissions can be considered to be that spray has rel-
atively better fuel atomization and air–fuel mixing, as well as a
more complete combustion characteristic, which can be explained
by the faster evaporation and vaporization of fuel spray droplets.
4. Conclusions
The effect of different multiple injection strategies on the
improvement of fuel atomization and the reduction of exhaust
emission characteristics was analyzed on a DI diesel engine. These
results were compared with those obtained from the single injec-
tion case at same operating points. The conclusions are summa-
rized as follows:
 The study confirms the benefit of combining EGR and multiple
injections as a beneficial tool to control both NOx and soot
emissions simultaneously.
 Although EGR is effective at reducing NOx by lowering peak in-
cylinder temperatures, there is a substantial trade-off in
increased soot emissions due to increased high temperature
rich regions. By using multiple injections, the amount of soot
formed in these regions is reduced considerably. Multiple injec-
tion schemes improve fuel–air mixing and lean out the in-cylin-
der mixture, thus reducing the high soot forming regions.
 Compared to the single injection, split injection was very effec-
tive for reducing NOx and Soot emissions. However, the split
injection must be optimized for best emission reducing effects
by varying the fuel distribution in each pulse and the separation
between pulses for each operating condition.
 Investigation on multiple injection strategies showed the soot
level can be dramatically reduced if an early pilot injection is
combined with a main injection.
69
 Employing a post-injection combined with a pilot injection
results in reduced soot formation from diffusion combustion
and enhances the soot oxidation process during the expansion
stroke, resulting in decreased soot emissions, while the NOx
concentration is maintained in low levels.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge the AVL Company to pro-
vide computational resources for this research.
References
460 480 interaction in motored model engines. ASME J. Fluids Eng. 105, 105.
Badami, M., Millo, F., Mallamo, F., Rossi, E.E., 2002. Influence of Multiple Injection
Strategies on Emissions, Combustion Noise and BSFC of a DI Common Rail
Diesel Engine. SAE paper 2002-01-0503.
Colin, O., Benkenida, A., 2004. The 3-zones extended coherent flame model
(ECFM3Z) for computing premixed/diffusion combustion. Oil Gas Sci. Technol.
– Rev. IFP 59 (6), 593–609.
Dukowicz, J.K., 1979. Quasi-Steady Droplet Change in the Presence Of Convection.
Informal Report Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, LA7997-MS.
Halstead, M., Kirsch, L., Quinn, C., 1977. The auto ignition of hydrocarbon fueled at
high temperatures and pressures-fitting of a mathematical model. Combust.
Flame 30, 45–60.
Hélie, J., Trouvé, A., 2000. A modified coherent flame model to describe turbulent
flame propagation in mixtures with variable composition. Proc. Combust. Inst.
28, 193–201.
Hentschel, W., Ritcher, J., 1995. Time-Resolved Analysis of Soot Formation and
Oxidation in a Directed-Injection Diesel Engine for Different EGR-Rates by an
Extinction Method. SAE Paper 952517.
Hioyasu, H., Nishida, K., 1989. Simplified Three Dimensional Modeling of Mixture
Formation and Combustion in a DI Diesel Engine. SAE Paper 890269.
Husberg, T., Denbratt, I., Karlsson, A., Analysis of Advanced Multiple Injection
Strategies in a Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine using Optical Measurements and CFD-
Simulations. SAE Paper 2008-01-1328.
ICE Physics & Chemistry, 2009. AVL FIRE user Manual v.2009. 1, 2009.
Ladommatos, N., Abdelhalim, S.M., Zhao, Hu, Z., 1997. The Dilution, Chamical, and
Thermal Effects of Exhaust Gas Recirculation on Diesel Engine Emission –
Part4:Effects of Carbon Dioxide and Water Vapour. SAE Paper 971660.
Ladommatos, N., Abdelhamin, S.M., Zhao, H., Hu, Z., 1998. Effects of EGR on Heat
Release in Diesel Combustion. SAE Paper 980184.
Li, T., Nishida, K., Zhang, Y., Yamakawa, M., Hiroyasu, H., 2004. An Insight into Effect
of Split Injection on Mixture Formation and Combustion of DI Gasoline Engines.
SAE Paper 2004-01-1949.
Liu, A.B., Reitz, R.D., 1993. Modeling the Effects of Drop Drag and Break-up on Fuel
Sprays. SAE Paper 930072.
Mendez, S., Thirouard, B., 2008. Using Multiple Injection Strategies in Diesel
Combustion: Potential to Improve Emissions, Noise and Fuel Economy Trade-
Off in Low CR Engines. SAE Paper 2008-01-1329.
Mikulic, L., Kuhn, M., Schommers, J., Willing, E., 1993. Exhaust Emission
Optimization of DI Diesel Passenger Car Engine with High-Pressure Fuel
Injection and EGR. SAE Paper, 931035.
Mobasheri, R., Peng, Z., Mirsalim, S.M., 2011. CFD Evaluation of Effects of Split
Injection on Combustion and Emissions in a DI Diesel Engine. SAE Paper 2011-
01-0822.
Naber, J.D., Reitz, R.D., 1988. Modeling Engine Spray/Wall Impingement. SAE Paper
880107.
Nehmer, D.A., Reitz, R.D., 1994. Measurement of the Effect of Injection Rate and Split
Injections on Diesel Engine Soot and NOx Emissions. SAE Paper 940668.
Pierpont, D.A., Reitz, R.D., 1995. Effects of Injection Pressure and Nozzle Geometry
on D.I. Diesel Emissions and Performance. SAE Paper 950604.
Shundoh, S., Komori, M., Tsujimura, K., Kobayashi, S., 1992. Nox Reduction from
Diesel Combustion Using Pilot Injection with High Pressure Fuel Injection. SAE
paper 920461.
Tow, T.C., Pierpont, A., Reitz, R.D., 1994. Reducing Particulate and NOx emissions by
Using Multiple Injections in a Heavy Duty D.I. Diesel Engine. SAE Paper 940897.
Uchida, N., Shimokawa, K., Kudo, Y., Shimoda, M., 1998. Combustion Optimization
by Means of Common Rail Injection System for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines. SAE
Paper 982679.
Wiedenhoefer, J.F., Reitz, R.D., 2000. Modelling the effect of EGR and multiple
injection schemes on I.C. engine component temperatures. Numer. Heat
Transfer, Part A: Appl. 37 (7), 673–694.
Zhang, Long, 1999. A Study of Pilot Injection in a DI Diesel Engine. SAE paper 1999-
01-3493.