See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/282366434

The Effect of Injection Pressure and Strategy in a Jaguar V6 Diesel Engine

Article · January 2009

CITATIONS READS
7 90

7 authors, including:

Nik Rosli Abdullah Rizalman Mamat

Universiti Teknologi MARA Universiti Malaysia Pahang
77 PUBLICATIONS   440 CITATIONS    404 PUBLICATIONS   3,154 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Miroslaw Lech Wyszynski Hongming Xu

University of Birmingham University of Birmingham
224 PUBLICATIONS   2,448 CITATIONS    235 PUBLICATIONS   2,470 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

PhD Research View project

Green Manufacturing View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Miroslaw Lech Wyszynski on 05 October 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


Effect of Injection Pressure with Split Injection in a V6 Diesel Engine
Nik Rosli Abdullah, Rizalman Mamat, P. Rounce, A. Tsolakis, M. L. Wyszynski, H. M. Xu.
School of Mechanical Engineering, University of Birmingham, UK
Copyright © 2009 SAE International
ABSTRACT
Multiple fuel injections with higher injection pressure are
a way to improve diesel engine performance and lower
emissions of unburned HCs, smoke, particulate matter
and carbon monoxide (CO). However this method leads
to a higher level of NOx emissions. A combination of
higher pressure split injection and exhaust gas
recirculation (EGR) has potential in controlling NOx
emissions and engine performance simultaneously. The
focus of this study is to investigate the effect of variation
in injection pressure with split (pilot and main) injection,
(with and without cooled EGR) on engine performance
and emissions. The engine used is a common rail direct
injection V6 Diesel fitted with turbo-charged variable
turbine geometry (VTG) turbochargers, fuelled with ultra
low sulphur diesel (ULSD). The experiments include five
different levels of injection pressure 300, 430, 500, 600,
700 bar, at two different engine speeds and various
loads, 1500 rpm (35.1, 70.2 and 140 Nm) and 2000 rpm
(43.3, 86.6 and 120 Nm).
Fuelled by ULSD, the experimental results show that the
performance and emissions of the engine at higher
pressure split injection were improved, compared to
lower pressure. This applied to both EGR cases (EGR
ON and EGR OFF). These results showed strong
evidence that the increase of the injection pressure up to
a certain value, can lower emissions of total
hydrocarbons (THCs), carbon monoxide (CO) and
particulate matter (PM). In addition, it has been shown
that combination of higher pressure split injection with
EGR has potential to lower nitrogen oxides (NOx) and
fuel consumption without significant smoke penalties.
INTRODUCTION
Research into direct injection, common rail high pressure
injection diesel engines has been carried out in order to
improve power, engine efficiency and emissions [1-5]. A
diesel engine operates with a lean mixture, however
there are local rich regions that contribute to high levels
of emissions. It is widely accepted that the combustion
2009-24-0049
and emissions characteristics are highly reliant on the
fuel mixture quality. A better mixture can be obtained
through the optimisation of nozzle parameters, injection
pressure, and injection rate scheduling [6]. Furthermore,
it also depends on the start of injection (SOI), since the
piston position influences the movement of air in the
cylinder. This can potentially initiate a superior
combustible mixture formation by a swirling motion [6, 7].
Another option to improve the quality of the mixture is by
using a split injection. This technology also produces
lower NOx, soot and low engine noise [6-9]. Indeed,
multiple pilot injections can reduce the HC and CO
emissions by controlling the rapid pressure rise during
combustion and consequently, reducing the main ignition
delay [10].
The higher injection pressure leads to a more complete
combustion due to increased fuel penetration resulting in
a homogenous mixture. Unfortunately, this condition
gives increased NOx emissions due to faster
combustion, a higher combustion temperature and in-
cylinder pressure [9, 11]. However, at too high injection
pressure, the unburned HCs emissions tend to increase
due to increased spray tip penetration, leading to more
spray impingement on the cylinder wall and piston [9].
The present study uses cooled EGR since higher EGR
temperature reduces oxygen availability leading to a
poor combustion process [12] .
Siddappa et al. [13] utilised a single cylinder direct
injection engine to study the performance and emissions
at different injection pressures and injection timing
fuelled with diesel and biodiesel. According to their
experimental results the higher injection pressure
produces improved engine performance and emissions
in terms of smoke, HC and CO, but NOx emissions were
slightly increased.
Research by R. E. Morgan et al. [14] investigated the
effect of high injection pressure on soot formation. The
results showed a reduction of soot with increased
injection pressure due to enhanced mixing and shorter
residence time of the fuel in the combustion chamber.
Shigeru Ueki and Akinori Miura [15] used three different
1
types of high pressure injection systems, such as the in-
line pump, common rail injection system and unit injector
on a single cylinder naturally aspirated diesel engine and
the results showed a significant reduction in smoke at
high injection pressure.
D. A Dhananjaya et al. [11] studied the effect of different
injection pressure (180, 200, 220 and 240 bar) on the
combustion performance and emission characteristics by
using a naturally aspirated four stroke single cylinder
diesel engine fuelled by jatropha oil methyl ester (JOME)
and blends with diesel. The emissions of NOx and
UBHC were decreased as the injection pressure
increased from 180 bar to 220 bar due to an enhanced
spray formation. Murari Mohon Roy and Hideyuki
Tsunemoto [16] studied the effects of injection pressure
(200 - 1200 bar) and split injection on emissions and
engine noise using a common rail four-stroke multi
cylinder 7.7 litre direct injection diesel engine. The
results showed that the higher injection pressure around
600 bar improves CO, PM and THCs emissions.
A. Tsolakis et al. [17] investigated the effect of EGR on
engine performance and emissions. Their results
showed that EGR can be used to reduce NOx emissions
but other emissions e.g. CO, HC and smoke were
increased. These results are in agreement with Alain
Maiboom et al.[18], who studied the effect of various
EGR rates using a modern high speed direct injection
diesel engine. The present study uses (16- 55%) EGR
with the aim of NOx reduction. EGR is an effective NOx
control mechanism [17-20].
From the literature review, it was concluded that the
combined effects of split injection pressure and EGR on
performance and emissions of a diesel engine have not
been fully investigated. The present study was
performed by using a V6 Jaguar diesel engine to
investigate the combination of variation of injection
pressure for a split injection strategy (Pilot + Main) and
EGR in order to control the emissions. At the same time
maintaining suitable engine performance in terms of fuel
consumption and power density. The selected speeds
are 1500 rpm and 2000 rpm and were chosen to study
low speed engine operation.
EXPERIMENT SET UP AND PROCEDURE
The experiments were carried out on a fully
instrumented V6 Jaguar diesel engine, twin-
turbocharged, water-cooled, variable geometry
turbochargers, with cooled EGR and equipped with a
common rail direct fuel injection system.
Figure 1: Schematic diagram of engine set up
The engine capacity is 2.7 litres as shown in table 1. The
electronic control unit (ECU) model no. is 4S7Q-9K546-
AD from Siemens (unmodified as provided by the
manufacturer) with a six-hole nozzle fuel injector with
156 degrees of cone angle. An eddy-current
dynamometer type Schenck W230 was utilised and an
engine starter motor used to load and start the engine.
The Schenck series 2000 controller was used to control
the dynamometer operation. The engine test set-up is
shown in figure 1.The exhaust gas flows through a
sample line into the AVL (DIGAS 440) and the smoke
meter data is recorded on computer 1. The pressure
transducer (AVL GU13G piezo transducer) is located in
cylinder 2. Computer 2 is used to record the pressure
history by using in-house developed Labview software
The voltage signal from the pressure transducer in
cylinder 2, was converted into pressure values by using
this Labview software. The average of peak cylinder
pressure comes from 100 engine cycles. The engine and
exhaust temperatures were measured using
thermocouples. Engine parameters are controlled and
monitored using ETAS software on computer 4. The
details of the experimental setup have been described in
detail in previous publications [21-24].
Pressure (bar)
Pilot Injection Main Injection
10 % 90 %
Time (us)
Fixed Pilot Timing Fixed MainTiming
CAD
Figure 2: Injection pressure, timing and fuel quantity
2
 ROHR vs CAD (1500rpm, 35.1Nm, EGR OFF ) Table 1: Engine Specifications
50
Bore 81.0 mm
300 bar Stroke 88.0 mm
Rate of Heat Release ROHR (J/CAD)

Displacement volume 3
40 700 bar 2720 cm
Maximum torque 435 Nm @ 1900 rpm
30
Main Combustion Maximum power 152 kW @ 4000 rpm
Compression ratio 17.3:1
20 Pilot Combustion Connecting rod length 160.0 mm
Pilot Injection Main Injection
(16 CAD BTDC) (2.55 CAD ATDC)
10 Table 2: Fuel Characteristics



0
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60
Cetane number 53.9
CAD Density at 15 oC (kg m-3) 827.1
Viscosity at 40 oC (cst) 2.5
Figure 3: Pilot and main injection
50 % distillation (oC) 264
The tests were carried out with five different pressures 90 % distillation (oC) 329
300, 430, 500, 600, 700 bar with fixed pilot and main LCV (MJ kg-1) 42.6
injection timing as shown in figure 2 at two different Suplhur (mg kg-1) 46
engine speeds and three different engine loads. The
injection pressures are the same for both pilot and main Mono-aromatics (% wt.) 21
injection. The ECU signals for engine operating Di-aromatics (% wt.) 3.1
parameters such as air mass flow-rate, fuel mass flow- Molecular mass (eq.) 209
rate, start of pilot and main injection, temperature of
coolant and lubrication, intake manifold pressure and C (% wt.) 86.5
injection pressure can be monitored, calibrated, and H (% wt.) 13.5
recorded using INCA V5.3 software from ETAS. All the O (% wt.) -
test conditions were performed with ultra low sulphur
diesel (ULSD) and the fuel properties are given in table Engine Test Conditions
2. The engine exhaust gas is passed through the gas
analyser via a sample line and five gases HC, CO, CO2, The present work involves two different engine speeds
NOx and O2 are measured and recorded in computer 1. and three different engine loads as shown in table 3
The exhaust sample acquisition time is approximately 10 below.
seconds in an operating environment temperature of 28
to 30 °C and the relative humidity is approximately 40-50
percent. All tests were repeated ten times and an Table 3: Speed Load Conditions
average is presented here. Speed (rpm) Engine Load (Nm)
1500 35.1 70.2 140.4
The effects of variation of pressure when operating with 10% 20% 40%
(16-55) percent cooled EGR and EGR OFF on engine
2000 43.4 86.2 120
performance and emissions were examined. The EGR
rate was controlled automatically by the EMS, this rate of 10% 20% 28%
EGR varied between 16 – 55 percent and is dependent
on the engine test condition. The selected conditions Table 4: Summary of Engine Test Conditions
were chosen in order to investigate injection pressure Test Injection Pressure (bar)
effect at low speed and moderate engine loads.
(1-12) 300 430 500 600 700
.

3
 injection pressure. In addition, the peak in-cylinder
Test RPM Torque Nm EGR pressure mainly depends upon the initial combustion
rate which is strongly influenced by the amount of fuel
1 1500 35.1 46%
available to burn at this stage [13]. However, the effect
2 1500 35.1 0%
of variation of injection pressure at 2000 rpm is less
3 1500 70.2 43% sensitive due to higher air intake mass and combustion
4 1500 70.2 0% temperatures. The turbo boost pressure produced by
5 1500 140.4 16% 2000 rpm approximately averages 10 kpa higher than at
6 1500 140.4 0% 1500 rpm. However, this effect is more significant at
7 2000 43.4 55% 1500 rpm due to variance in fuel penetration as the
8 2000 43.4 0% injection pressure increases, thus producing more fuel
9 2000 86.2 35% available to burn and promote the premixed combustion.
10 2000 86.2 0%
11 2000 120 25% The use of cooled EGR produces lower peak in-cylinder
12 2000 120 0% pressure compared to cooled EGR OFF. This is due to a
retarded combustion, a result of the reduced oxygen
density and high heat capacity of the gas mixture [9, 26].
The EGR rate, injection timing (pilot + main) and fuel In addition, the reduction of fuel burnt in the premixed
quantity (pilot + main) are constant at a constant engine combustion phase can be considered as a strong factor
speed and load. However, these values change when in lowering in-cylinder peak pressure.
the engine is set to a different speed and load (test 1 -
test 12). This is due to all the engine parameters being
controlled by the set map of the ECU. The inlet fuel
CP, ROHR vs CAD (1500rpm, 35.1 Nm, EGR ON )
temperature (35 °C) and inlet air temperature (30 °C)
60 70
were constant throughout the tests. 300 bar
430 bar
50 500 bar

Rate of Heat Release ROHR [J/CAD]

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 600 bar 50
700 bar
Cylinder Pressure CP (bar)

40
Figure 4 shows the rate of heat release (ROHR) and in
cylinder pressure as a function of crank angle degree 30 30
(CAD) from four different engine test conditions and five
different injection pressures (300, 430, 500, 600 and 700 20
bar). It can be clearly seen from figure 4 that the peak 10
cylinder pressure increases as the injection pressure 10
increases. However the rate of rise decreased as the
engine speed and load increased. It is thought that the 0 -10
higher injection pressure initially generates a faster -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40

combustion rate, and it is this that results in higher in- CAD

cylinder peak pressures, temperatures and an advance

in combustion. As engine speed increases, the air flow
and indeed air mass entering the manifold increases, (a)
thus contributing to more complete combustion even CP, ROHR vs CAD (1500rpm, 35.1 Nm, EGR OFF )
when the engine operates at lower injection pressure. In 60 70
300 bar
general, the in-cylinder peak pressure relies on the 430 bar
premixed combustion phase, which is strongly
Rate of Heat Release ROHR [J/CAD]
50 500 bar
600 bar
influenced by air density and the mixing process. For the 50
Cylinder Pressure CP (bar)

700 bar
higher rpm (2000) case, the higher injection pressure 40

(IP) does not have such a strong effect on the peak

30 30
pressure than as is apparent in the lower 1500 rpm
(figure 5).
20
10
The highest injection pressure of 700 bar produced the
10
highest peak in-cylinder pressure from all engine test
conditions, due to better fuel atomisation corresponding 0 -10
to small fuel droplets size, thus, promoting a shorter -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
duration of combustion and faster heat release rate [9, CAD
25]. The same trend was observed when the engine
operates with the cooled EGR. In contrast, the lower (b)
injection pressure produces lower in-cylinder pressure
due to a reduction in the premixed combustion phase, a
consequence of a poor rate of fuel evaporation at lower

4
 CP, ROHR vs CAD (2000rpm, 43.4 Nm, EGR ON ) 80
300 bar 430 bar
60 70
300 bar 70 500 bar 600 bar
430 bar 700 bar

Peak Cylinder Pressure (bar)

Rate of Heat Release ROHR [J/CAD]
60
Cylinder Pressure CP (bar)

50 500 bar
600 bar 50 50
700 bar
40
40

30 30 30

20
20
10 10

10 0
35.1Nm, EGR OFF 70.2 Nm, EGR OFF 140.4 Nm, EGR OFF
0 -10
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 (b)
CAD
80
300 bar 430 bar
(c) 70 500 bar 600 bar

Peak Cylinder Pressure (bar)

700 bar
CP, ROHR vs CAD (2000rpm, 43.4 Nm, EGR OFF ) 60

60 70 50
300 bar
430 bar
40
50 500 bar
Rate of Heat Release ROHR [J/CAD]

600 bar 50 30
700 bar
40
Cylinder Pressure CP (bar)

20

30 30 10

0
20 43.4 Nm, 55 % EGR 86.2 Nm, 35 % EGR 120 Nm, 25 % EGR
10
10 (c)
80
0 -10 300 bar 430 bar
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 70 500 bar 600 bar
700 bar
Peak Cylinder Pressure (bar)

CAD
60
(d)
Figure 4: The heat release rate and cylinder pressure 50

for several injection pressures for a split injection 40

a)1500rpm, 35.1Nm EGR ON, b) 1500 rpm, 35.1Nm
30
EGR OFF, c) 2000 rpm, 43.4 Nm, EGR ON, d) 2000
rpm, 43.4 Nm, EGR OFF. 20

10

0
80 43.4 Nm, EGR OFF 86.2 Nm, EGR OFF 120 Nm, EGR OFF
300 bar 430 bar
70 500 bar 600 bar
(d)
Peak Cylinder Pressure (bar)

700 bar
60
Figure 5 shows the variations of average peak in-
50 cylinder pressure for several pressures (300, 430, 500,
40
600 and 700 bar) a) 1500 rpm, EGR ON, b) 1500 rpm,
EGR OFF. c) 2000 rpm, EGR ON d) 2000 rpm, EGR
30
OFF.
20

10

0
35.1Nm, 46 % EGR 70.2 Nm, 43 % EGR 140.4 Nm, 16 % EGR

(a)

5
Table 5 : Turbo Boost Pressure 450 35.1 Nm EGR
ON
Test Boost Pressure
35.1 Nm EGR
Conditions ( + 101.325 kPa) 400 OFF
70.2 Nm EGR

BSFC (g/kWh)
1 0.5
ON
2 10.23 350
70.2 Nm EGR
3 3.9 OFF
300 140.4 Nm
4 16 EGR ON
5 19 140.4 Nm
250 EGR OFF
6 25
300 400 500 600 700
7 4
Injection Pressure (bar)
8 15
(a)
9 13.8
10 23 450
43.4 Nm EGR
11 22 ON
12 31 43.4 Nm EGR
400 OFF

BSFC (g/kWh)
86.8 Nm EGR
The Brake Specific Fuel Consumption ON
350
86.8 Nm EGR
In all engine test conditions the BSFC decreases as the OFF
injection pressure increases due to an improved fuel 300 120 Nm EGR
mixture and rapid combustion rate [11]. However, these ON
values were slightly increased when the engine operates 120 Nm EGR
OFF
with cooled EGR ON (1500 rpm, 35.1Nm EGR OFF) at 250
600-700 bar injection pressure. This is strongly believed 300 400 500 600 700
to be due to decreased combustion temperature and Injection Pressure (bar)
reduced oxygen availability for EGR ON. This results in
higher fuel consumption. The reduced oxygen, higher (b)
inert in-cylinder gas and low boost pressure contributed
to the poor combustion with cooled EGR ON. Figure 6: The variation of brake specific fuel
consumption (BSFC) for several injection pressures for a
The results also show that the BSFC decreases as the split injection with EGR ON and EGR OFF a) 1500 rpm,
engine speed increases. Furthermore, the higher load b) 2000 rpm.
also exhibits lower BSFC than lower load. The main
reason is that both of them are related to the air intake
density. This engine is turbocharged, so, engine speed Exhaust Gas Temperature
has a significant affect on the air intake density due to
the boost pressure increase at high rpm. Table 5 shows The variation of exhaust gas temperature (EGT) with
the relative intake pressures. In addition, based on the respect to the variation of pressure for a split injection is
lower carbon monoxide and unburned hydrocarbon shown in Figure 7.
emissions, it can be concluded that the higher injection
pressure with higher operating load gave slightly All results show that the exhaust gas temperature
improved fuel combustion. This is strongly believed to be increases as the injection pressure increases. The
due to the higher air density at high speed operation as higher engine load and speed produces higher
compared with the lower speed operation. temperatures due to more fuel being injected for
increased load and the shorter time period of increased
The overall results show that higher injection pressure speeds, therefore, more heat is generated in the
leads to an improvement in the combustion process and combustion chamber. EGR ON produces lower exhaust
a high power output is produced due to better fuel gas temperature due to lower combustion temperatures.
distribution and heat utilisation [11] for almost all engine The overall results show that EGT increases as injection
test conditions. pressure increases for all engine test conditions. This is
again due to a more complete combustion as IP
increases. The BSFC pattern from figure 5 can be used
to support the above argument.

6
 35.1 Nm EGR pressure increases for all engine test conditions. The
500
ON higher injection pressure leads to higher levels of NOx
Exhaust Temperature ( °C)

35.1 Nm EGR emissions when compared to the lowest injection

OFF pressure. This is due to active combustion as a result of
400 70.2 Nm EGR smaller fuel droplet particles, which lead to the faster
ON combustion process [11, 13]. A consequence of this is
70.2 Nm EGR the higher observed cylinder temperature [4, 27].
300 OFF
140.4 Nm EGR
ON Interestingly the results from figure 8 show that the NOx
140.4 Nm EGR emissions constantly increase as injection pressure
200
OFF increases (engine condition of 1500 rpm, 140.4Nm, EGR
300 400 500 600 700
ON) even for the engine operating with cooled EGR. The
Injection Pressure (bar) cooled EGR ON is better for NOx reduction due to lower
(a) oxygen concentration and high levels of CO2 and H2O in
500 cylinder to absorb more heat from the combustion
43.4 Nm EGR process. Thus the reduced combustion temperature
ON
leads to the lower level of NOx emissions [12, 28, 29].
Exhaust Temperature ( °C)

400
300
200
300 400 500
Injection Pressure (bar)
(b)
Figure 7: The exhaust gas temperature (EGT) for
several pressures for a split injection with EGR ON and
EGR OFF a) 1500 rpm, b) 2000 rpm
Emissions
Strong evidence that the combustion is poorer at the
lowest injection pressure is shown on comparison of the
emissions for the various injection pressures at equal
engine load conditions. This occurs due to poor air fuel
mixing due to the deflection of spray patterns at lower
injection pressure [13]. In addition, the engine operation
with cooled EGR ON emits higher levels of emissions
43.4 Nm EGR The smaller fuel droplets size, produced by the higher
OFF
injection pressure, strongly contributes to the higher
86.8 Nm EGR combustion temperature. This is due to increased fuel
ON
burn and a consequence of this is promotion of NOx
86.8 Nm EGR
OFF
formation [13, 30]. However, a too small fuel droplet size
will decrease NOx formation by reducing the ignition
120 Nm EGR
ON
delay. This is due to less residence time to form a
combustible mixture and a small amount of fuel burnt in
120 Nm EGR
OFF the premixed combustion [13].
600 700
The rate that NOx emissions increased as injection
pressure rose was lower for EGR ON than for EGR OFF.
This demonstrates the superiority of EGR ON over EGR
OFF in terms of NOx emissions as injection pressures
become higher. Several factors that contribute to the fast
combustion process in diesel engines are; fuel droplet
size, penetration length, turbulence intensity, fuel
evaporation, rate of combustion and ignition delay.
However, all of these can contribute to the higher NOx
formation [4, 31, 32]. As expected, the EGR ON
produces improved NOx reduction even at higher
injection pressure for all engine test conditions.
35.1 Nm EGR
8 ON
35.1 Nm EGR
6 OFF
NOx (g/kWh)

when compared with EGR OFF due to a poor mixing 70.2 Nm EGR
process. This is a consequence of less oxygen density 4 ON
and a higher proportion of inert gas in the combustion 70.2 Nm EGR
chamber [9, 26]. However, at higher injection pressure, OFF
2
the fuel easily evaporates on injection. This leads to a 140.4 Nm
better mixture formation and is due to increased EGR ON
0
atomisation i.e. small fuel droplet size. On the other 140.4 Nm
300 400 500 600 700
hand, at too high injection pressure, the combustion gets Injection Pressure (bar)
EGR OFF
worse due to wall impingement [13].
(a)
NOx Emissions

All results show that the NOx emissions were increased

dramatically when the engine operation changed from
cooled EGR ON to the EGR OFF. In addition, the results
also showed NOx emissions increased as injection

7
 50
8 35.1 Nm EGR
43.4 Nm
EGR ON 40 ON
7
35.1 Nm EGR
6 43.4 Nm OFF
EGR OFF 30

CO (g/kWh)
70.2 Nm EGR
5
Nox(g/kWh)

86.8 Nm ON
4 EGR ON 20 70.2 Nm EGR
86.8 Nm OFF
3
EGR OFF 10 140.4 Nm EGR
2 ON
120 Nm EGR
ON 140.4 Nm EGR
1 0 OFF
120 Nm EGR 300 400 500 600 700
0
OFF
300 400 500 600 700 Injection Pressure (bar)
Injection Pressure (bar) (a)
(b) 50 43.4 Nm
Figure 8: NOx Emissions from variation of pressure for a EGR ON
split injection operating with cooled EGR ON and cooled 40 43.4 Nm
EGR OFF. a) 1500 rpm, b) 2000 rpm EGR OFF
86.8 Nm

CO( g/kWh)
30
EGR ON
86.8 Nm
20 EGR OFF
Carbon Monoxide Emissions (CO)
120 Nm EGR
10 ON
Figure 9 shows the pattern of carbon monoxide (CO)
120 Nm EGR
emissions from a diesel engine operating with a variation 0 OFF
of pressure (300, 430, 500, 600, 700 bar) for a split 300 400 500 600 700
injection. All results show that the CO emissions Injection Pressure (bar)
gradually increased when the engine operation was
switched from EGR OFF to the EGR ON. The overall
results also show that the CO emissions decrease as (b)
Figure 9 : CO emissions for several injection pressures
injection pressure increases for almost all engine test
conditions due to a more complete combustion at the for a split injection operating with cooled EGR ON and
higher injection pressure and therefore, complete cooled EGR OFF. a) 1500 rpm, b) 2000 rpm
oxidation of CO to CO2.

The CO emissions are greatly dependent on the air-fuel

ratio [13]. At higher injection pressure, the fuel droplet
size is particularly fine. This allows more air entrainment
during the injection process, promoting a fast
combustible mixture formation. At lower injection
pressure, the mixing process is very poor and this
lessens the quality of the mixture formation. The
premixed lean burn is reduced, giving higher CO
emissions.[33]
Overall, the results show that the cooled EGR ON
produces relatively high CO emissions when compared
to EGR OFF due to less oxygen availability [28, 29] and
a lower combustion temperature. The higher EGR
concentration tends to decelerate the combustion rate,
hence producing lower temperatures, resulting in high
carbon monoxide emissions in the exhaust [28].
The CO emissions level is higher at higher engine speed
for EGR ON. However, the emissions level is static when
the engine is operating with EGR OFF. This is strongly
believed to be due to the low levels of CO that are
emitted, therefore, the reduction is small.
Total Hydrocarbons (THCs) emissions
Figure 10 shows the total hydrocarbons (THCs)
emissions from the engine operating with a variation of
pressure for a split injection. THCs emissions are
emitted by the engine as a result of incomplete
combustion, due in part to heavier hydrocarbons in
diesel fuel [11]. The atomisation and fuel evaporation are
the most important parameters that need to be controlled
in order to increase the combustion efficiency.
Furthermore, the atomisation and mixing process are
highly dependant on the physical fuel properties and
injection strategy.
It is clearly seen from the figure 9 that the THCs
emissions decrease gradually as the injection pressure
increases, due to a faster vaporisation process to form a
more combustible mixture. This leads to a more
complete combustion and therefore, lower THCs
emission [30]. The higher injection pressure produces
improved spray atomisation to initiate an enhanced
combustion resulting in a rapid rise in the cylinder

8
pressure thus producing less THCs emissions [3, 30].
However, at too high injection pressure, THCs emissions
will be increased due to longer fuel penetration resulting
in wall impingement [13].
The results also showed that the lower load (35.1Nm)
emits higher THCs emissions compared to the higher
load (140.4Nm) for both cooled EGR ON and EGR OFF
at 1500 rpm. The poor fuel distribution and large
amounts of excess air at low load conditions contributed
to the higher THCs emission in the exhaust pipe [34]. In
addition, the combustion temperature at the lower load is
lower when compared with the higher load. The lower
THCs emissions were emitted at higher load due to a
higher combustion temperature [13].
4 speeds.
35.1 Nm
EGR ON
3 35.1 Nm
EGR OFF
THCs ( g/kWh)
injection pressure and EGR ON is needed to control the
emissions.
In addition, the comparison of engine performance and
emissions between the cases of cooled EGR ON and
EGR OFF and the split injections pressure ranging from
300 bar to 700 bar are listed below:
1- The peak cylinder pressure was increased with
EGR OFF by approximately 10 % at 1500 rpm and
by approximately 13 % at 2000 rpm.
2- The specific fuel consumptions were decreased
with EGR OFF by approximately 6 % at 1500 rpm
and by approximately 8 % at 2000 rpm.
3- The exhaust gas temperatures were increased with
EGR OFF by approximately 15 % at both engine
4- The NOx emissions were increased with EGR OFF
by approximately 4 times at 1500 rpm especially at
70.2 Nm and by approximately 3 times at 2000 rpm
especially at 43.4 Nm.

70.2 Nm
2 EGR ON 5- The CO emissions were decreased with EGR OFF
70.2 Nm by approximately 80 % at 1500 rpm and by
EGR OFF approximately 60 % at 2000 rpm.
1 140.4 Nm 6- The THC emissions were decreased with EGR OFF
EGR ON
by approximately 70 % at 1500 rpm and
140.4 Nm
0 EGR OFF approximately 90 % at 2000 rpm.
300 400 500 600 700
The overall results show that the engine operating with
Injection Pressure (bar)
higher pressure split injections produces improved
(a) overall results except for NOx emissions. It can therefore
4 43.4 Nm EGR be assumed that the combination of cooled EGR with
ON
higher injection pressure can be considered as a
43.4 Nm EGR enhanced strategy in order to control exhaust emissions
3 OFF
and performance simultaneously.
THCs (g/kWh)

86.8 Nm EGR
ON
2 Acknowledgements
86.8 Nm EGR
OFF
1 120 Nm EGR The authors would like to thank to the Government of
ON Malaysia for the PhD. scholarships awarded to Mr Nik
120 Nm EGR Rosli Abdullah (UiTM) and Mr Rizalman Mamat (UMP).
0 OFF Sincere thanks to Dr S. Chuepeng and Dr G. Tian for
300 400 500 600 700 providing valuable comments and suggestions. The
Injection Pressure (bar) authors are grateful to the Future Power Group
(b) members of Birmingham University, Jaguar Car Ltd and
Figure 10: THC emissions for several pressures for a Shell Global Solutions (UK) for their support during this
split injection operating with cooled EGR ON and EGR experiment.
OFF. a) 1500 rpm b) 2000 rpm
REFERENCES
CONCLUSION
1. Gavin Dober, Simon Tullis, Godfrey Greeves,
The results clearly showed that increasing the injection Nebojsa Milovanovic, Martin Hardy and S.
pressure from 300 bar to 700 bar resulted in a significant Zuelch, The Impact of Injection Strategies on
improvement in engine performance and emissions for Emissions Reduction and Power Output of
almost all engine conditions tested. The current study Future Diesel Engines. SAE Paper, 2008-01-
found that when the engine was operating with a higher 0941.
pressure split injection and EGR OFF, the emissions of 2. Ueki, S., Miura, Akinori, Effect of difference of
hydrocarbons (THCs) and carbon monoxide (CO) were high pressure fuel injection systems on exhaust
decreased but the oxides of nitrogen (NOx) were emissions from HDDI diesel engine. JSAE
increased. Therefore, a combination of higher split Review, 1999. 20(4): p. 555-557.

9
3. M. Badami, P. Nuccio and G. Trucco, Influence
of Injection Pressure on the Performance of a DI
Diesel Engine with a Common Rail Fuel
Injection System. SAE Paper, 1999-01-0193.
4. Byeong-il An, Yoshio Sato, Seang-Wock Lee
and T. Takayanagi, Effects of Injection Pressure
on Combustion of a Heavy Duty Diesel Engine
With Common Rail DME Injection Equipment.
SAE Paper, 2004-01-1864.
5. C. Beatrice, C. Bertoli, N. Del Giacomo, P.
Massoli and M.n. Migliaccio, Combustion
Behavior Analysis in a Transparent Research
Engine Equipped with a Common Rail Diesel
Injection System. SAE Paper, 2000-01-1825.
6. A. Vanegas, H. Won, C. Felsch, M. Gauding and
N. Peters, Experimental Investigation of the
Effect of Multiple Injections on Pollutant
Formation in a Common-Rail DI Diesel Engine.
SAE Paper, 2008-01-1191, 2008.
7. Mohammad Ghaffarpour and A.R. Noorpoor,
NOx reduction in diesel engines using rate
shaping and pilot injection. Int. J. Automotive
Technology and Management Volume 7, 2007.
No. 1,Vol. 7: p. 15.
8. P. J. Shayler, T. D. Brooks, G. J. Pugh and R.
Gambrill, The Influence of Pilot and Split-Main
Injection Parameters on Diesel Emissions and
Fuel Consumption. SAE Paper, 2005-01-0375,
2005.
9. J Benajes*, S Molina, R Novella and K.
DeRudder, Influence of injection conditions and
exhaust gas recirculation in a high-speed direct-
injection diesel engine operating with a late split
injection. Proc. IMechE Vol. 222 Part D: J.
Automobile Engineering, 10 January 2008. 222:
p. 13.
10. Keiichi Okude, Kazutoshi Mori, Shiroh Shiino,
Kiyoharu Yamada and Y. Matsumoto, Effects of
Multiple Injections on Diesel Emission and
Combustion Characteristics. SAE Paper, 2007-
01-4178, 2007.
11. Dhananjaya D A, Mohanan P and S.C. V, Effect
of injection pressure and injection timing on a
semiadiabatic CI engine fuelled with blends of
Jatropha Oil Methyl Esters. SAE Paper, 2008-
28-0070.
12. D. T. Hountalas, G. C. Mavropoulos and K.B.
Binder, Effect of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR)
temperature for various EGR rates on heavy
duty DI diesel engine performance and
emissions. Energy, Volume 33, 2008. 33(2): p.
272-283.
13. Siddappa S. Bhusnoor and M. K. Gajendra
Babu, J.P.S., Studies on Performance and
Exhaust Emissions of a CI Engine Operating on
Diesel and Diesel Biodiesel Blends at Different
Injection Pressures and Injection Timings. SAE,
2007-01-0613.
14. R. E. Morgan, M. R. Gold, O. Laguitton, C. Crua
and M.R. Heikal, Characterisation of the Soot
Formation Processes in a High Pressure
Combusting Diesel Fuel Spray. SAE Paper,
2003-01-3086.
15. Shigeru Ueki and A. Miura, Effect of difference
of high pressure fuel injection systems on
exhaust emissions from HDDI diesel engine.
JSAE Review, 1999. 20(4): p. 555-557.
16. Murari Mohon Roy and H. Tsunemoto, Effect of
Injection Pressure and Split Injection on Exhaust
Odor and Engine Noise in DI Diesel Engines.
SAE Paper, 2002-01-2874, 2002.
17. A. Tsolakis, A. Megaritis, M. L. Wyszynski and
K. Theinnoi, Engine performance and emissions
of a diesel engine operating on diesel-RME
(rapeseed methyl ester) blends with EGR
(exhaust gas recirculation). Energy Volume 32,
2007. 32(11): p. 2072-2080.
18. Alain Maiboom, Xavier Tauzia and J.-F. Hétet,
Experimental study of various effects of exhaust
gas recirculation (EGR) on combustion and
emissions of an automotive direct injection
diesel engine. Energy, 2008. 33(1): p. 22-34.
19. Haiyong Peng, Yi Cui, Lei Shi and K. Deng,
Effects of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) on
combustion and emissions during cold start of
direct injection (DI) diesel engine. Energy, 2008.
33(3): p. 471-479.
20. Abd-Alla, G.H., Using exhaust gas recirculation
in internal combustion engines: a review. Energy
Conversion and Management, Volume 43, 2002.
43(8): p. 1027-1042.
21. S. Chuepeng, H. M. Xu, A. Tsolakis, M. L.
Wyszynski, P. Price, R. Stone, J. C. Hartland
and J. Qiao, Particulate Emissions from a
Common Rail Fuel Injection Diesel Engine with
RME-based Biodiesel Blended Fuelling Using
Thermo-gravimetric Analysis. SAE Paper, 2008-
01-0074.
22. Rizalman Mamat, Nik Rosli Abdullah, H. Xu,
M.L.Wyszynski and A.Tsolakis, "Effect of Air
Intake Pressure Drop on Performance and
Emissions of Diesel Engine Operating with
Biodiesel and Ultra Low Sulphur Diesel (ULSD)".
International Conference on Renewable
Energies and Power Quality 2009., 2009.
23. Rizalman Mamat, S. Chuepeng, H.Xu,
M.L.Wyszynski and J.Qiao, "Effect of Exhaust
Gas Temperature on Engine Performance and
Emissions of a Conventional V6 Diesel Engine
Operating on Biodiesel and Diesel Fuel with
Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR)". United
Kingdom-Malaysia Engineering Conference
2008., 2008.
24. Rizalman Mamat, Nik Rosli Abdullah, Hongming
Xu, Miroslaw L. Wyszynski and A. Tsolakis,
Effect of Fuel Temperature on Performance and
Emissions of a Common Rail Diesel Engine
Operating with Rapeseed Methyl Ester (RME).
SAE Paper, 2009-01-1896.
25. D.T. Hountalas and D. A. Kouremenos, K.B.B.,
V. Schwarz, G. C. Mavropoulos, Effect of
Injection Pressure on the Performance and
10
 Exhaust Emissions of a Heavy Duty DI Diesel CONTACT PERSON
Engine. SAE, 2003-01-0340.
26. Ming Zheng, Mwila C. Mulenga, Graham T. Professor Miroslaw L Wyszynski
Reader, Meiping Wang, David S. K.Ting and J. School of Mechanical Engineering
Tjong, Biodiesel engine performance and University of Birmingham
emissions in low temperature combustion, e-mail: M.L.Wyszynski@bham.ac.uk
Volume 87. Fuel, 2008. 87(6): p. 714-722.
27. Ekrem Buyukkaya and M. Cerit, Experimental
study of NOx emissions and injection timing of a
low heat rejection diesel engine. International
Journal of Thermal Sciences, Volume 47, 2008. DEFINITIONS, ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS
47(8): p. 1096-1106.
28. Nidal H. Abu-Hamdeh, Effect of cooling the
recirculated exhaust gases on diesel engine BTDC Before top dead centre
emissions. Energy Conversion and CAD Crank angle degree
Management, Volume 44, 2003. 44(19): p. CO Carbon monoxide
3113-3124.
CO2 Carbon dioxide
29. Ming Zheng , Graham T. Reader and J.G.
CP Cylinder pressure
Hawley, Diesel engine exhaust gas recirculation-
-a review on advanced and novel concepts. EGR Exhaust gas recirculation
Energy Conversion and Management, Volume HC Hydrocarbon
45, 2004. 45(6): p. 883-900. HCs Hydrocarbons
30. Özer Can, Ismet Çelikten and N. Usta, Effects of LCV Lowere calorific value
ethanol addition on performance and emissions NOx Nitrogen oxides
of a turbocharged indirect injection Diesel O2 Oxygen
engine running at different injection pressures. PM Particulate matter
Energy Conversion and Management, Volume ROHR Rate of heat release
45, 2004. 45(15-16): p. 2429-2440.
SOC Start of combustion
31. Feng Tao and P. Bergstrand, Effect of Ultra-
High Injection Pressure on Diesel Ignition and ULSD Ultra low sulpur diesel
Flame under High-Boost Conditions. SAE VTG Variable turbine geometry
Paper, 2008-01-1603.
32. W. A. Abdelghaffar, K. Karim and M.R. Heikal,
Fuel Spray Penetration in High Pressure Diesel
Engines. SAE Paper, 2007-01-0066.
33. Philipp Adomeit, Michael Becker, Hans Rohs,
Stefan Pischinger, Andreas Greis and G.
Grünefeld, Potential Soot and CO Reduction for
HSDI Diesel Combustion Systems. SAE Paper,
2006-01-1417,2006.
34. Cenk Sayin, Kadir Uslu and M. Canakci,
Influence of injection timing on the exhaust
emissions of a dual-fuel CI engine. Renewable
Energy, Volume 33, 2008. 33(6): p. 1314-1323.

11

View publication stats