Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 31 (2016) 819e828

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering

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

Effect of varying compression ratio on combustion, performance, and

emissions of a hydrogen enriched compressed natural gas fuelled
engine
Tadveer Singh Hora, Avinash Kumar Agarwal*
Engine Research Laboratory, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur 208016, India

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

Article history: Compressed natural gas (CNG) and hydrogen are potential alternate fuels for internal combustion (IC)
Received 19 September 2015 engines, which are capable of sustaining large part of global transportation system in future. However
Received in revised form these fuels suffer from some combustion related issues. A blend of CNG and hydrogen cancels their
26 February 2016
negative individual properties, mutually. As a consequence, hydrogen enriched compressed natural gas
Accepted 12 March 2016
(HCNG) is emerging as an acceptable alternative fuel for spark ignition (SI) engines. HCNG resists
Available online 17 March 2016
knocking hence it delivers superior engine performance. Therefore it is usable at higher compression
ratios (CRs). Effect of CR on HCNG fuelled engine's performance, combustion and emission characteristics
Keywords:
HCNG mixture
is experimentally evaluated in this study. Experiments were performed at three CRs (10, 11 and 12) under
Combustion characteristics identical conditions, in order to assess their effect on two different HCNG compositions (20HCNG and 30
Emission characteristics HCNG) for comparison. Brake specific energy consumption (BSEC) was lower at higher CRs which
Performance characteristics decreased with increasing engine load/ brake mean effective pressure (BMEP). Brake thermal efficiency
Heat release rate (BTE) was higher at higher CRs for both HCNG mixtures. 30HCNG showed relatively higher BTE and lower
BSEC compared to 20HCNG. Higher peak cylinder pressures were obtained for higher CRs. Combustion
parameters such as rate of pressure rise (RoPR), heat release rate (HRR) and cumulative heat release
(CHR) improved at higher CRs for both HCNG mixtures however 30HCNG performed slightly better
amongst the two HCNG compositions. Regulated emissions such as HC, CO and NOx were relatively
higher at higher CRs, but CO2 emission was relatively lower.
© 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction vehicle, 2012). CNG has a reputation of an environment-friendly

Natural gas compressed to high pressures (roughly upto
225 bars) is known as compressed natural gas (CNG), whereas
natural gas stored in cryogenic cylinders in liquid form is known as
liquefied natural gas (LNG). Methane is the main constituent of the
natural gas. Other constituents of natural gas include small frac-
tions of ethane, propane, butane, nitrogen, carbon dioxide and few
other trace gases. Natural gas is considered to be one of the best
gaseous alternate fuels for transportation sector, which has capa-
bility to replace conventional petroleum products without major
modifications in the existing engine hardware. Increased concerns
about emissions, rising petroleum prices and depleting petroleum
reserves have shifted global focus on natural gas (Natural gas
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: akag@iitk.ac.in (A.K. Agarwal).
and clean automotive fuel however carbon content of natural gas
contributes to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In addition, some
properties of CNG are not ideally suitable for optimized combustion
in IC engines such as requirement of high ignition energy, lower
quenching distance, and relatively lower flame speed compared to
gasoline. To offset these adverse properties, hydrogen enriched
compressed natural gas (HCNG) can be used. Blending hydrogen
and natural gas was first proposed by Hydrogen Components, Inc.
(HCI) in 1989. They carried out engine tests on HCNG mixtures in
Colorado State University, USA. Frank Lynch was the inventor of
‘Hythane’, which was a blend of CNG (80% v/v) and hydrogen (20%
v/v). The energy contribution of hydrogen was ~5e7% in this HCNG
mixture (http://hythane.net/hythan).
Hydrogen and CNG, both have high auto-ignition temperatures
therefore none of these fuels can be combusted in compression
ignition (CI) mode in an engine. They require external ignition
support such as an electrical spark to initiate the combustion.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2016.03.041
1875-5100/© 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
820 T.S. Hora, A.K. Agarwal / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 31 (2016) 819e828
Octane numbers (Serrano et al., 2010) of natural gas and hydrogen
are higher than gasoline hence HCNG exhibits superior anti-knock
characteristics compared to gasoline, which allows use of higher
compression ratios (CRs) in a dedicated engine. Higher octane
number makes engine operation smoother with lower noise levels,
even at higher CRs. The most important and useful properties of
HCNG are its wider flammability range and higher diffusivity in air.
Wider flammability range allows combustion of leaner mixtures i.e.
combustion in presence of excess air. The flammability range of
CNG is widened because of addition of hydrogen, thus the HCNG
mixture offers benefits of both constituent fuels. Table 1 shows
comparison of most important fuel related properties of hydrogen,
CNG and gasoline.
Lower ignition energy and wider flammability range of
hydrogen can potentially cause pre-ignition and backfire and is the
primary reason for its undesirable combustion features such as
knocking/ detonation, whereas CNG has significantly narrower
flammability range and requires an order of magnitude higher
ignition energy, which may cause misfire at times. On the other
hand, HCNG enjoys benefits of optimum flammability range and
adequate ignition energy, since it is a mixture of the two fuels;
hydrogen and natural gas. Quenching distance is defined as the
closest gap between the engine cylinder wall and the flames, before
the flames get extinguished. Smaller quenching gap is a desirable
feature of a good fuel. This increases the combustion efficiency
because lesser fuel remains unburnt in the quenching gap and is
emitted in the engine exhaust. However very small quenching
distance increases the possibility of backfire in the intake manifold
because flames can travel through nearly closed intake valves into
the intake manifold, where combustible charge is available,
possibly leading to backfire. Liu et al. (2008) experimentally
investigated the backfire phenomenon in a hydrogen fuelled en-
gine. Quenching distance for CNG and gasoline are significantly
higher than those for hydrogen. In a hydrogen fuelled engine,
quenching gap is small enough to cause backfire. Benefits of an
optimal quenching gap can therefore be reaped in a HCNG engine.
Lower heating value (LHV) of CNG and gasoline are almost
similar however hydrogen has almost three times greater LHV
therefore significantly lower hydrogen mass is required to produce
equivalent power output from the same engine. Hydrogen has very
low density compared to natural gas at atmospheric pressure
therefore its volumetric energy density is rather low. By mixing
hydrogen and CNG, overall LHV of mixture becomes higher than
that of baseline CNG. Hydrogen has higher flame speed and higher
maximum combustion temperature, which results in higher ther-
mal nitrogen oxide (NOx) production in the combustion chamber.
Higher NOx emissions observed in hydrogen engine can be reduced
by using HCNG. Since the combustion is completed to a higher
Table 1
Properties of CNG, hydrogen and gasoline (Serrano et al., 2010; Agarwal et al., 2009).
Properties CNG Hydrogen
Formulae CH4 H2
Molar Mass 16 2 98
Octane Number 120 130
Auto Ignition Temperature (
C) 540 585
Flammability Limit (Vol. % air) 5e15 4e75
Flame Quenching Distance (mm) 2.03 0.64
Minimum Ignition Energy (mJ) 0.29 0.02
Stoichiometric A/F Ratio 17.16 34.33
Lower Heating Value (MJ/Kg) 47.3 120
Diffusion Coefficient (cm2/sec) 2.0 6.1
Laminar Burning Velocity in Air (m/s) 0.4 2.9e3.5
Molar Carbon-to-Hydrogen Ratio 0.25 0 0.44
Density (Kg/m3) at STP 0.717 0.0899
degree, hydrocarbons (HC) and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions
are significantly lower. Application of CNG and hydrogen results in
lower HC, CO and CO2 emissions. Relatively lower C/H ratio of CNG
and hydrogen makes them superior fuel compared to liquid pe-
troleum fuels, from GHG emission viewpoint.
Hydrogen demonstrates many combustive properties of an ideal
fuel, such as high diffusivity in air, zero carbon content, smaller
quenching gap, wider flammability range, high flame velocity and
high calorific value, however operating an engine on 100%
hydrogen is challenging and inherently unsafe. Liu et al. (2008)
performed experiments and simulations and concluded that en-
gine backfire reduced in case of leaner operation and for minimal
residual hydrogen in the intake manifold. Soberanis and Fernandez
(2010) suggested changes required to operate the engine with
hydrogen blended fuels. They proposed three major modifications
for hydrogen engines i.e. injector design, temperature control and
mixture proportion control. Benefits of excellent combustive
properties of hydrogen could be exploited to improve combustion
of CNG by adding hydrogen. Summarily, flammability range of
HCNG is certainly wider than baseline CNG, which in-turn im-
proves lean-burn limit, thereby reducing NOx emissions. HCNG has
overall lower C/H ratio than natural gas. Burning velocity of HCNG
is higher than natural gas due to addition of hydrogen, which im-
proves the thermal efficiency of the engine compared to baseline
CNG. Quenching gap observed in CNG also reduces in case of HCNG,
which results in relatively lower HC emissions (Ma et al., 2007). In
summary, properties of HCNG (Nanthagopal et al., 2011; Patil et al.,
2009) are somewhere in-between hydrogen and CNG, and it de-
livers benefits of both fuels and disadvantages of none. Patil et al.
(2009) enlisted the properties of 5HCNG compared to CNG,
hydrogen and gasoline. Properties of HCNG were in-between
hydrogen and CNG. To analyze the potential of HCNG over CNG,
an attempt was made by our group. Hora and Agarwal (2015)
investigated different HCNG formulations such as 10HCNG,
20HCNG and 30HCNG and compared their engine performance
with baseline CNG. The investigations were performed at a fixed
CR. 30HCNG resulted in best performance, combustion and emis-
sion amongst all tested fuels. Performance and combustion pa-
rameters such as BTE, brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC),
cylinder pressure, RoPR, HRR and CHR were better in case of HCNG.
CO, HC and CO2 emissions were also relatively lower compared to
baseline CNG however an increase in NOx emission was observed.
Efforts have been made to investigate the effect of CR on engine
performance and combustion characteristics. Zheng et al. (2009a)
investigated cyclic variations of CNG fuelled engine with varying
CR. They concluded lower coefficient of variation (COV) of CNG due
to lower combustion duration and flame development duration at
higher CR. Since, hydrogen exhibits relatively higher flame speed
(Wang et al., 2010), HCNG would benefit by improving the CNG
engines. Zheng et al. (2009b) investigated direct injection natural
gas fuelled engine at different CRs. They concluded that CR of 12 is
optimum for natural gas engine's performance and emissions view
point. To prove suitability of HCNG engine at higher CRs, re-
Gasoline
searchers investigated HCNG at different CRs. Ma et al. (2012)
C7.1H12.56 studied the effect of variations in CR (10, 11 and 12) and spark
70e97
timings on engine performance and combustion characteristics.
230e500 They reported lower BSFC and higher brake torque for higher CR,
1e7.6 along with higher peak in-cylinder pressure. Heat release rate
2.84 (HRR) was also relatively higher with lower COV. They reported
0.24
superior fuel economy and higher power output at higher CR. Ma
14.7
40e45 et al. (2012) performed this study at a fixed excess air ratio of 1.6,
0.5 at constant engine load with varying ignition timing. However the
0.5 present study focuses on determining the effect of CR on HCNG
engine's performance, emissions and combustion characteristics at
726
constant ignition timing (20
BTDC) at different loads. Lim et al.
 T.S. Hora, A.K. Agarwal / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 31 (2016) 819e828
(2013a) studied the comparative effect of CR in a heavy duty SI
engine for 30HCNG and CNG. They carried out experiments with CR
of 10.5 and 11.5 and reported that thermal efficiency increased with
increasing CR. NOx emission increased with increasing CR but CO2
emission decreased. Improvement of 6.5% in thermal efficiency for
30HCNG at CR of 11.5 was reported. Tangoz et al. (2015) studied the
effect of CR (9.6, 12.5 and 15) on HCNG in a modified 3.9 L diesel
engine. They concluded that minimum BSFC was observed at CR of
12.5 and not at CR of 15. They suggested that at lower CR of 9.6,
lower fraction of 5% and 10% HCNG is beneficial for engine perfor-
mance and emissions, while at higher CR, CNG and 5% HCNG is
beneficial. However, this study was limited to 20HCNG mixture and
lower attention was focused on combustion characteristics. Park
et al. (2012) investigated the knocking characteristics of HCNG in
a turbocharged heavy-duty engine under wide open throttle (WOT)
condition. They also investigated the effect of boost in lean HCNG
operation, in particular during lean limit operation and reported
that lean limit was extended to l ¼ 1.8. However for richer mix-
tures, they observed relatively lower improvement in thermal ef-
ficiency because of retarded spark timings. They observed highest
efficiency at l ¼ 1.6. Zhao et al. (2013) studied the effect of CR on
exhaust emissions and combustion along with variations in l. They
performed experiments on a turbocharged SI engine for CRs of 10
and 12 using 55HCNG at constant spark timing of 16
BTDC, and
manifold absolute pressure (MAP) of 50 kPa at 1200 rpm. They
reported that engine combustion, performance, and fuel economy
improved at l ¼ 1.8. They reported that lean limit does not change
for higher CR and THC and NOx emissions increased with increasing
CR.
In this study, the effect of CR on engine combustion, perfor-
mance and emission characteristics has been investigated
comprehensively. Three CRs of 10, 11 and 12 were used. The effect of
HCNG composition was varied and two mixture compositions
(20HCNG and 30HCNG) were used. A customized, naturally aspi-
rated (NA) engine was suitably instrumented for data acquisition at
different engine operating conditions and further analysis.
2. Experimental setup
Schematic of the experimental setup consisting of a prototype
HCNG engine, dynamometer, and instruments, is shown in Fig. 1. A
single cylinder engine was suitably modified for use in these ex-
periments. Table 2 shows the specifications of the test engine. Test
engine was coupled with a transient dynamometer, which main-
tained a constant engine speed of 1500 rpm during the
experiments.
Engine load (Brake mean effective pressure: BMEP) was varied
by controlling the fuel quantity injected into the manifold using a
solenoid CNG injector (Bosch; 280150842) and an injector driver
circuit, which controls the pulse width to this CNG injector. Original
pistons (of diesel engine) were machined from the top to increase
the clearance volume of the combustion chamber, in order to
achieve desired CR of the modified engine. CR of the engine was
changed by changing the pistons, one for each CR. Pre-blended
HCNG mixtures were used in the experiments. Study was limited
to maximum 30HCNG (30% H2 þ 70% CNG, v/v) since any further
hydrogen concentration increase led to abnormal combustion
features such as backfire, pre-ignition or knocking. Flekiewicz et al.
(2012) reported knocking as hydrogen fraction in HCNG increased
beyond 40%. HCNG injection pressure (4 bar) was maintained at all
test points. Fuel injection quantity was measured using a Coriolis
mass flow meter (Emersion; CMF010M). Intake air manifold was
connected to a laminar flow element (Cussons; P7205/150) (range:
0e100 Lit/sec), which measured the intake air mass flow rate and
reduced turbulence during suction. A piezoelectric pressure
821
transducer (Kistler; 6631CQ09-01) was mounted flush in the cyl-
inder head, to measure the in-cylinder pressure variations. Crank
angle position was detected by a precision optical shaft encoder
(Encoder India; ENC 58/6-720ABZ), which was coupled to the en-
gine camshaft. A high speed combustion data acquisition system
(Hi-Techniques; MeDAQ) acquired in-cylinder pressure signals
corresponding to the crank angle position and analyzed the data.
Pressure signals were acquired for 200 consecutive engine cycles at
each experimental condition and an average data set was used for
detailed combustion analysis, in order to reduce the effect of cyclic
fluctuations. Regulated emissions (HC, CO, CO2 and NO) were
measured using exhaust gas emission analyzer (Horiba; Mexa-
584L). A Lambda sensor (Bosch; LSU 4.9) was mounted on the en-
gine exhaust line to detect the air-to-fuel ratio. A K-type thermo-
couple was also mounted on the exhaust pipe, which measured the
exhaust gas temperature.
3. Results and discussion
Experiments were performed to study the effect of varying CR
on engine combustion, performance and emission characteristics of
HCNG mixtures. Effect of three different CRs (10, 11 and 12) was
experimentally analyzed at constant engine speed (1500 rpm) us-
ing two test fuels, namely 20HCNG (20% H2 þ 80% CNG, v/v) and
30HCNG (30% H2 þ 70% CNG, v/v). The results are categorized in the
following sub-sections namely combustion, performance and
emission characteristics.
3.1. Combustion characteristics
The cylinder pressure data acquired w.r.t. crank angle was
analyzed and presented in the form of pressure-crank angle history
(Peq), rate of pressure rise (RoPR), heat release rate (HRR), cumu-
lative heat release (CHR), mass burn fractions (MBF) and combus-
tion duration (CD). Combustion characteristics were evaluated at
different loads however all data at each experimental condition is
not shown in the figures in this section. Fig. 2 shows the Peq dia-
gram at three different CRs for 20HCNG and 30HCNG. Cylinder
pressure data is presented at two BMEP (2.98 bar and 5.30 bar),
which are representative of medium and high load conditions
respectively.
Higher CR shows relatively higher peak in-cylinder pressure
(Pmax) for both 20HCNG and 30HCNG, and the pressure peak shifts
towards TDC due to relatively higher heat release rate (HRR). Ma
et al. (2012) also reported similar results of higher Pmax at higher
CRs. At 5.30 bar BMEP, Pmax for the CRs of 10, 11 and 12 were 31.49,
36.51 and 41.02 bar respectively for 20HCNG. Due to relatively
lower power output at lower CRs, BMEP of 6.18 bar could not be
attained for CR of 10. Slightly higher Pmax was observed for 30HCNG
at different BMEP for different CRs, compared to 20HCNG.
Fig. 3 shows the Pmax observed at three different CRs for both
test fuels and corresponding crank angle positions. It shows that
Pmax increased with increasing CRs for both 20HCNG and 30HCNG,
while respective peak pressure crank angle position retarded with
increasing CR i.e. maximum pressure was observed closer to TDC
with increasing CR. Relatively higher Pmax was observed for
30HCNG compared to 20HCNG, primarily due to higher hydrogen
content of the test fuel, which increased HRR. Also, crank angle
position for Pmax was relatively advanced for 30HCNG compared to
20HCNG.
Fig. 4 shows RoPR and HRR variations at different CRs (10/11/12)
with varying BMEP for 20HCNG and 30HCNG. It is observed that
RoPR increased with increasing CR for both HCNG mixtures. CR of
10 showed relatively lower RoPR. Higher RoPR at higher CRs was
primarily due to relatively earlier start of combustion (SoC) and
822 T.S. Hora, A.K. Agarwal / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 31 (2016) 819e828

Fig. 1. Schematic of the experimental setup.

Table 2 flame speeds. This increased HRR for higher CRs for the same
Specifications of the test engine. reason. Peak in-cylinder pressure also shifted towards top dead
Engine type Single cylinder center (TDC) (Fig. 2) at higher CRs. For 20HCNG, relatively lower
Rated engine speed 1500 rpm variation in HRR was observed for CRs of 10 and 11. 30HCNG
Compression ratio/s 10/11/12 showed relatively higher RoPR and HRR compared to 20HCNG. This
Air intake Naturally aspirated
IVO and IVC 4.5
BTDC and 35.5
ABDC
was due to higher hydrogen content in the test fuel, which
EVO and EVC 35.5
BBDC and 4.5
ATDC increased rate of combustion by rapid formation of hydroxyl (OH)
Bore/ stroke 102 mm/ 116 mm and oxygen (O) ions.
Cubic capacity 0.948 L Fig. 5 shows variations in RoPRmax and its corresponding crank
Fuel injection system Port fuel injection
angle position at different CRs for 20HCNG and 30HCNG mixture.
Ignition system Spark ignition
Cooling system Water cooling RoPR increased with increasing CR for both 20HCNG and 30HCNG.
Relatively higher RoPR was observed for 30HCNG compared to
20HCNG at a given BMEP for same CR. The crank angle position for
peak ROPR was closer to TDC for higher CR for both fuels. It was
higher HRR at higher CRs (Fig. 4).
observed that 30HCNG showed peak RoPR relatively closer to TDC,
HRR was relatively higher for higher CRs for both 20HCNG and
compared to 20HCNG at a given BMEP for all CRs. At BMEP of
30HCNG. Higher temperature and pressure of the unburned charge
6.18 bar, maximum RoPR for 20HCNG at a CR of 11 and 12 were
at the end of compression stroke due to higher CR led to shorter
1.65 bar/CAD and 1.77 bar/CAD respectively at corresponding crank
ignition delay, which resulted in relatively earlier SoC and higher

Fig. 2. In-cylinder pressure variation at different CRs for HCNG mixtures.

 T.S. Hora, A.K. Agarwal / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 31 (2016) 819e828 823

Fig. 3. Pmax at different CRs and corresponding CAD for HCNG mixtures.

Fig. 4. RoPR and HRR variations at different CRs for HCNG mixtures.

angle position of 3.5
ATDC and 0
ATDC. Similarly for 30HCNG,
observed values were 1.69 bar/CAD and 1.99 bar/CAD at corre-
sponding crank angle positions of 1.5
ATDC and 1.5
BTDC.
Fig. 6 shows maximum HRR for 20HCNG and 30HCNG for CR of
10, 11 and 12 with corresponding crank angle positions. Higher
BMEP corresponds to higher HRR. Also higher CR showed higher
HRR for both fuels.
At a given BMEP, 30HCNG showed relatively higher HRR
compared to 20HCNG for each CR. Crank angle location for HRRmax
was closer to TDC for 30HCNG compared to 20HCNG for all BMEPs
at a given CR.
Figs. 7 and 8 showed variations in CHR, MBF and CD for different
824 T.S. Hora, A.K. Agarwal / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 31 (2016) 819e828

Fig. 5. RoPRmax variations at different CRs for HCNG mixtures.

Fig. 6. HRRmax variations at different CRs for HCNG mixtures.

CRs using 20HCNG and 30HCNG. CHR was highest at CR of 12
amongst all tested CRs. Higher CHR was primarily due to higher
HRR observed at higher CRs. Relatively earlier SoC and higher flame
speed reduced combustion duration for higher CRs. Ma et al. (2012)
reported similar effect of varying CR on engine combustion in their
experimental study.
Variation of MBF10 (Fig. 8) showed that with higher CR, flame
development duration reduced. 30HCNG also showed lower flame
development period compared to 20HCNG for all tested conditions.
This shows the effect of hydrogen on the combustion speed. Also,

Fig. 7. Variations in CHR at different CR for HCNG mixtures.

 T.S. Hora, A.K. Agarwal / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 31 (2016) 819e828
Fig. 8. Variations in MBF and CD at different CRs for HCNG mixtures.
shorter MBF50 at higher CRs showed rapid flame propagation.
30HCNG showed advanced MBF50 compared to 20HCNG, which
indicated faster flame propagation speed due to hydrogen addition.
Both flame development and flame propagation duration
decreased with increasing BMEP. MBF90 and combustion duration
shortened for higher BMEP. However unpredictable behavior of
lower crank angle position for MBF90 and combustion duration at
CR of 10 was also observed. This could be due to relatively deteri-
orated combustion at lower CRs, possibly due to relatively richer
mixture in combustion chamber at this CR (10). Moreno et al.
(2012) specified effect of hydrogen addition on HCNG flame evo-
lution duration and combustion duration. Due to higher burning
velocity of hydrogen, combustion phase ends rather quickly in
HCNG mixtures compared to baseline CNG.
3.2. Performance characteristics
Fig. 9 shows the effect of varying CRs on brake thermal efficiency
(BTE), exhaust gas temperature (EGT), brake specific energy con-
sumption (BSEC) and relative air-fuel ratio (l) with respect to BMEP
for 20HCNG and 30HCNG.
BTE increased with increasing BMEP (i.e. engine load) as well as
with increasing CR. Lowest BTE was observed at CR of 10 due to
relatively more fuel consumption to deliver same power output,
while CR 12 showed highest thermal efficiency for both 20HCNG
and 30HCNG amongst the CRs investigated.
At higher CR, BTE was higher. l varied (Fig. 9) for different CRs.
At lower CR, relatively richer mixtures were required to produce
825
the same power output from HCNG mixtures. At 4.10 bar BMEP,
20HCNG showed maximum BTE of 22.39%, 23.70% and 24.94% at
CRs of 10, 11 and 12 respectively, whereas 30HCNG showed effi-
ciency of 22.99%, 24.12% and 25.51% for the same CRs of 10, 11 and
12 respectively. Due to relatively lower power output at lower CR,
6.18 bar BMEP could not be achieved at CR of 10.
EGT increased with increasing BMEP but it decreased with
increasing CR for a specific fuel (Fig. 9). For 20HCNG, EGT increased
from 491
C to 561
C with corresponding BMEP increase from
2.98 bar to 6.18 bar for a CR of 11, while for CR of 12, EGT increased
from 419
C to 558
C. For CR of 10, EGT for three BMEP's (2.98, 4.10
and 5.30 bar) was 500
C, 534
C and 575
C respectively. Similarly
for 30HCNG, variations observed in EGT were from 445
C to 553
C
for 11 CR and 407
C to 541
C at 12 CR. Lower EGTs at higher CR
were due to higher BTE. At higher CR, higher HRR produced desired
power output and lesser thermal energy remained in the exhaust,
resulting in relatively cooler exhaust (Pesic et al., 2010).
Fig. 9 showed the variation of BSEC for these three CRs. BSEC
reduced with increasing BMEP for both 20HCNG and 30HCNG.
However at constant BMEP, higher CR showed lower BSEC due to
relatively lower fuel consumption to produce the same power
output. At BMEP of 4.10 bar, BSEC decreased from 15.19 to 14.43 MJ/
kWh for CRs of 11 and 12 respectively, while for CR of 10, it was
16.07 MJ/kWh for 20HCNG. Similarly for 30HCNG, variations in
BSEC were 14.95 to 14.11 MJ/kWh at CR of 11 and 12 respectively
while for CR of 10, it was 15.66 MJ/kWh. Ma et al. (2012) and Zhao
et al. (2013) reported similar effects of CR on BSEC and BTE for
20HCNG and 55HCNG respectively. 30HCNG showed relatively
826 T.S. Hora, A.K. Agarwal / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 31 (2016) 819e828
Fig. 9. Variations in performance parameters at different CRs for HCNG mixtures.
lower BSEC and higher BTE compared to 20HCNG for all test
conditions.
3.3. Emission characteristics
Fig. 10 shows the raw and mass emissions for 20HCNG and
30HCNG at three different CRs (10, 11 and 12). NOx formation de-
pends on peak in-cylinder temperature and the excess oxygen
available in the combustion chamber, which increases with
increasing CR. Thus, maximum NOx was observed at CR of 12 for
both HCNG mixtures. This was due to higher peak in-cylinder
temperature at higher CRs. In addition, at lower CRs, richer fuel-
air mixtures resulted in lower excess oxygen available in the
combustion chamber therefore lower l led to relatively lower NOx
emissions.
30HCNG at CR of 12 showed maximum NOx emissions
(4063 ppm) due to higher peak in-cylinder temperature, primarily
due to higher hydrogen quantity added to the CNG. At 2.98 bar
BMEP, no significant variation in NOx was observed for both HCNG
mixtures due to relatively lower peak in-cylinder temperature and
relatively leaner mixtures. At 5.30 bar BMEP, NOx concentration for
CRs of 10, 11 and 12 were 1957 ppm, 2138 ppm and 2629 ppm
respectively for 20HCNG. NOx emission increased with increasing
load and CR for both fuels.
HC emissions increased with increasing CR for a specific fuel.
Highest HC emissions were observed for the CR of 12. This was
primarily due to greater fuel-air mixture quantity entering the
crevice volume at higher CR, which gets released during the
exhaust stroke and in-turn increases trapped unburnt fuel mass in
the exhaust. Therefore at higher CR, exhaust gas temperature was
also lower (Fig. 9), which hampered the post-oxidation reactions of
hydrocarbons in the exhaust. Therefore higher HC emissions were
observed in the engine exhaust. Zhao et al. (2013) also reported
relatively lower HC emissions at CR of 12 and reasoned it to be a
consequence of stronger wall quenching effects due to higher
temperature prevailing at higher CR. At 5.30 bar BMEP, HC con-
centrations for CRs of 10, 11 and 12 were 16 ppm, 19 ppm and
23 ppm respectively for 30HCNG. These values are negligible and
can be ignored from emission stand point and no cognigence of any
trend can be made at such low concentrations of HC in the engine
exhaust. Lim et al. (2013b) reported similar effect of CR on CO, CO2,
HC and NO emissions in their study.
CO emission (Fig. 10) increased with increasing CR however the
values were low and insignificant, similar to HC. The CO2 emissions
increased at higher BMEPs and were relatively lower for higher CR
(12). Lower CO2 emissions at higher CRs were due to higher BTE and
higher peak in-cylinder temperatures. 30HCNG showed relatively
lower CO2 concentration for a specific CR and BMEP due to lower C/
H ratio of the 30HCNG mixture compared to 20HCNG. Zhao et al.
(2013) also reported lower CO2 emission at CR of 12 compared to
lower CR of 10.
4. Conclusions
Following conclusions can be drawn from the experiments
carried out using the two HCNG mixtures for combustion, perfor-
mance and emission characterization at different compression ra-
tios in a prototype single cylinder engine.
1. Increased CRs showed improved engine performance of HCNG
mixtures.
T.S. Hora, A.K. Agarwal / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 31 (2016) 819e828 827

Fig. 10. Raw and mass emissions at different CRs for HCNG mixtures.
828 T.S. Hora, A.K. Agarwal / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 31 (2016) 819e828
2. BTE and BSEC improved at higher CRs and EGT was relatively
lower. Excess-air ratio (l) was higher at higher CRs.
3. Peak in-cylinder pressure (Pmax) was higher at higher CRs at all
BMEP's. CR 10 showed lower Pmax compared to CRs of 11 and 12.
4. Combustion improved by both, (i) hydrogen addition to the
CNG, and (ii) increasing CR. RoPR, HRR and CHR were higher for
higher CRs due to relatively higher flame speeds achieved.
5. 10%, 50% and 90% MBF advanced with increasing BMEP at all
CRs. However, compared to CR of 11 and 12, CR 10 showed rather
random behavior of MBF and combustion duration, especially
for 20HCNG. This could be due to richer mixtures and prominent
after-burning at lower CR.
6. HCNG combustion reduced exhaust emissions. CO, HC and NOx
emissions increased with increasing CR, while CO2 emission
reduced. HC emissions increased primarily because of trapped
fuel-air mixture in the crevice volume and lower exhaust gas
temperature at higher CR, resulting in higher unburnt fuel in the
exhaust, followed by lower intensity post-oxidation reactions,
however this was not very significant.
Overall, 30HCNG mixture provided superior performance with
CR of 12 and could be adopted in engines as a partial replacement of
CNG by hydrogen i.e. in the form of 30HCNG. This step would take
us closer to hydrogen economy.
References
Agarwal, S., Singh, J., Kulshrestha, G., 2009. Development of Bi-fuel CNG Engine
Based Passenger Vehicle and Field Trials Study in Indian Condition. SAE 2009-
28-0019.
Flekiewicz, B., Flekiewicz, M., Kubica, G., 2012. Identification of Optimal CNG-
hydrogen Enrichment Ratio in the Small SI Engines. SAE 2012-32-0015.
Hora, T.S., Agarwal, A.K., 2015. Experimental study of the composition of hydrogen
enriched compressed natural gas on engine performance, combustion and
emission characteristics. Fuel 160, 470e478.
hythane http://hythane.net/hythane-fuel/.
Lim, G., Lee, S., Park, C., Choi, Y., Kim, C., 2013. Effect of compression ratio on per-
formance and emission characteristics of heavy-duty SI engine fuelled with
HCNG. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 38, 4831e4838.
Lim, G., Lee, S., Park, C., Choi, Y., Kim, C., 2013. Knock and Emission Characteristics of
Heavy-duty HCNG Engine with Modified Compression Ratios. SAE 2013-01-
0845.
Liu, X., Liu, F., Zhou, L., Sun, B., Schock, H.J., 2008. Backfire prediction in a manifold
injection hydrogen internal combustion engine. Int. J Hydrogen Energy 33,
3847e3855.
Ma, F., Wang, Y., Liu, H., Li, Y., Wang, J., Zhao, S., 2007. Experimental study on
thermal efficiency and emission characteristics of a lean burn hydrogen
enriched natural gas engine. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 32, 5067e5075.
Ma, F., Li, S., Zhao, J., Qi, Z., Deng, J., Naeve, N., He, Y., Zhao, S., 2012. Effect of
compression ratio and spark timing on the power performance and combustion
characteristics of an HCNG engine. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 37, 18486e18491.
Moreno, F., Arroyo, J., Munoz, M., Monne, C., 2012. Combustion analysis of a spark
ignition engine fueled with gaseous blends containing hydrogen. Int. J
Hydrogen Energy 37, 13564e13573.
Nanthagopal, K., Subbarao, R., Elango, T., Baskar, P., Annamalai, K., 2011. Hydrogen
enriched compressed natural gas- A futuristic fuel for internal combustion
engines. Therm. Sci. 14, 1145e1154.
Natural Gas Vehicle, 2012. NGV Global. http://www.iangv.org.
Park, C., Kim, C., Choi, Y., 2012. Power output characteristics of hydrogen-natural gas
blend fuel engine at different compression ratios. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 37,
8681e8687.
Patil, K.R., Khanwalkar, P.M., Thipse, S.S., Kavathekar, K.P., Rairikar, S.D., 2009.
Development of HCNG blended fuel engine with control of NOx emissions. Int.
Conference on Emerging Trends in Engineering and Technology. ICETET-09.
Pesic, R.B., Milojevic, S.T., Veinovic, S.P., 2010. Benefits and challenges of variable
compression ratio at diesel engines. Therm. Sci. 14, 1063e1073.
Serrano, D., Laget, O., Soleri, D., Richard, S., Douailler, B., Ravet, F., Moeau, M.,
Dioc, N., 2010. Effects of Methane/Hydrogen Blends on Engine Operation:
Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Different Combustion Modes. SAE
2010-01-2165.
Soberanis, M.A.E., Fernandez, A.M., 2010. A review on the technical adaptations for
internal combustion engines to operate with gas/hydrogen mixtures. Int. J
Hydrogen Energy 35, 12134e12140.
Tangoz, S., Akansu, S.O., Kahraman, N., Malkoc, Y., 2015. Effects of compression ratio
on performance and emission of a modified diesel engine fueled by HCNG. Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy 40, 15374e15380.
Wang, J., Huang, Z., Tang, C., Zheng, J., 2010. Effect of hydrogen addition on early
flame growth of lean burn natural gas-air mixtures. Int. J Hydrogen Energy 35,
7246e7252.
Zhao, J., Ma, F., Xiong, X., Deng, J., Wang, L., Naeve, N., Zhao, S., 2013. Effect of
compression ratio on the combustion and emission of a hydrogen enriched
natural gas engine under different excess air ratio. Energy 59, 658e665.
Zheng, J., Huang, Z., Wang, J., Wang, B., Ning, D., Zhang, Y., 2009. Effect of
compression ratio on cycle-by-cycle variations in a natural gas direct injection
engine. Energy Fuels 23, 5357e5366.
Zheng, J.J., Wang, J.H., Wang, B., Huang, Z.H., 2009. Effect of compression ratio on
the performance and combustion of a natural-gas direct injection engine.
J. Automob. Eng. 223, 85e98.