Compositional Effect of Gasoline on Fuel Economy and Emissions

Subscriber access provided by UNIV OF CAMBRIDGE

Fossil Fuels

Compositional Effect of Gasoline on Fuel Economy and Emissions Yongqiang Han, Shicheng Hu, Yuncai Sun, Xingyu Sun, Manzhi Tan, Yun Xu, Jing Tian, Runzhao Li, and Zhujie Shao Energy Fuels, Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.8b00722 • Publication Date (Web): 04 Apr 2018 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on April 4, 2018

Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.

is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.

Page 1 of 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

1

Compositional Effect of Gasoline on Fuel Economy and Emissions

2 3

Yongqiang Han1, Shicheng Hu1, Yuncai Sun2, Xingyu Sun2, Manzhi Tan1*, Yun Xu1, Jing Tian1,

4

Runzhao Li1, Zhujie Shao1

5

1

6

China

7

2

State Key Laboratory of Automotive Simulation and Control, Jilin University, Changchun 130025,

Shandong Chambroad Petreochemicals Co. Ltd, Shandong 256500, China

8 9

ABSTRACT

10 11

In the paper, fuel economy and emissions of a port-fuel-injection (PFI) engine fueled with four

12

gasoline were experimentally investigated so as to verify the validity and universality of the

13

conclusions from the previous experiment conducted in a gasoline direct injection (GDI) engine. Based

14

on the previous results, which showed that aromatics and short-chain alkanes were beneficial to

15

improving fuel economy and that oxygenated fuels could reduce emissions to some extent, commercial

16

gasoline with research number of 92 and three customized gasoline with different aromatics,

17

short-chain alkanes and oxygen contents were chosen to conduct comparative tests in a wide range of

18

working speeds (1000–3600 rpm) without any modification on the engine systems. Results show that:

19

Aromatics do have great advantages on fuel economy under all operating conditions while the mean

*

Corresponding author.

E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Tan). 1

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

20

fuel-saving ratio (FSR) of gasoline F with highest aromatics content could reach 5.25% under stable

21

operating conditions. Moreover, short-chain alkanes show the good superiority of saving fuel

22

consumption at light and medium loads of medium speeds while the mean FSR of gasoline L with

23

higher short-chain alkanes content is 3.55%. As to oxygenated fuels, gasoline E with higher oxygen

24

content, in which methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) is used as oxygen additive, shows the good

25

capability of balancing fuel consumption and emissions. Therefore, it has been proved that the previous

26

results are valid and that the practical impacts on the performances of main engines applied in the

27

markets accord with the expectations.

28 29

Keywords:

30

Fuel economy; Emissions; Aromatics; Short-chain alkanes; Oxygenated fuel

31

2


Page 2 of 37

Page 3 of 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

32

1. INTRODUCTION

33

With the extensive applications of internal combustions engines (ICE), fuel resources are depleted

34

and atmospheric environment is becoming terrible1-3. To solve the problems of energy dilemma and

35

environmental deterioration, various countries in the world have introduced a series of policies to

36

restrict exhaust emissions and fuel consumption in succession4. Under this circumstance, engine

37

technology and fuel property have made great progress in recent decades5-8. Advanced engine

38

technologies such as GDI and turbocharging have been widely applied to practical productions8-10. In

39

addition, the researches about new combustion models have gained many breakthroughs, just like

40

stratified charge spark ignition (SCSI), homogeneous charge spark ignition (HCSI), and homogeneous

41

charge compression ignition (HCCI)11, 12. However, in order to maximize the advantages of advanced

42

engine technologies, it is necessary to optimize gasoline composition and improve the quality of

43

gasoline. And in this way, the fuels could be combined with advanced engine technologies to meet the

44

rigorous emissions and fuel consumption legislations.

45

As to gasoline, on account of fossil energy crisis, there are many studies aiming at finding

46

alternatives, especially reproducible biofuels, among which ethanol, methanol, isobutanol, n-butanol

47

and acetone are considered as the most promising alternative fuels13, 14. Doğan et al.15 studied the effect

48

of ethanol-gasoline blends on performance and exhaust emissions in a spark ignition (SI) engine and

49

found that ethanol-gasoline was able to reduce carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO2) and

50

nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions without significant loss of power compared to gasoline by energy

51

analysis. Costagliola et al.16 investigated the combustion efficiency and emissions of an SI engine

52

fueled with alcohol-gasoline blends and found that the blended fuels were beneficial to the reduction of

53

particulate emissions. The gasoline blended with ethanol has been universally used in Americas where 3


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 4 of 37

54

the local agriculture is well-developed17. Moreover, other oxygenated fuels also have been widely

55

investigated, such as ether, ester and ketone18-22. Li et al.23-25 investigated the effect of

56

acetone-butanol-ethanol

57

isopropanol-butanol-ethanol (IBE) gasoline on combustion and performance of the engine. The

58

experiment results showed that IBE30 (30vol.% IBE and 70vol.% gasoline ), ABE30 and ABE29W1

59

(29vol.% ABE, 1vol.% water and 70vol.% gasoline) performed better than pure gasoline with respect

60

to engine performance and emissions. Elfasakhany26, 27 researched the use of n-butanol-gasoline blends

61

and isobutanol-gasoline blends in an SI engine and found that blended fuels, compared to neat gasoline,

62

could reduce CO, CO2 and UHC emissions but would make the power decline. Schifter et al.28 studied

63

the effect of ethanol, ethyl tertiary butyl ether (ETBE) and dimethyl carbonate (DMC) blended with

64

gasoline on a single cylinder SI engine and found that oxygenated fuels made more homogeneous

65

cycle-by-cycle operation and DMC and ethanol could increase combustion speed under the operating

66

conditions of lean air-fuel ratio. Topgül29 investigated performance and emissions of the engine fueled

67

with MTBE and gasoline blends with various blending rates (0, 5, 10, 20 and 30 vol.% MTBE). The

68

experiment results indicated that MTBE blends could improve brake thermal efficiency and decrease

69

brake specific energy consumption and that CO and HC emissions would reduce with the increase of

70

MTBE content in the blended fuels. On the whole, the previous studies about oxygenated fuels

71

revealed that oxygenated fuels do have great potentials to alternate fossil fuels and optimize

72

performances of engines30, 31.

(ABE)

gasoline,

water-containing

ABE

gasoline

and

73

However, there are also restrictions in the practical applications of these alternative fuels, for

74

instances, raw materials production cost, transition cost and storage capacity. For example,

75

ethanol-gasoline has been widely used in America and Brazil, while it is not general in Chinese markets. 4


Page 5 of 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

76

Therefore, it is important and meaningful to research the effect of different hydrocarbons which are the

77

main components of gasoline on the performances of engines. Recently, fine particulate matter (PM 2.5)

78

has seriously influenced lives of human beings and received extensive concerns. Hence, there are many

79

studies about particulate emissions32-35. Yao et al.36 found that the ultrafine particle emissions of GDI

80

engines, especially the nucleation mode particles, increased with the increment of aromatics content

81

under warm engine operating conditions and that heavy aromatics (aromatics with c>9) content has a

82

more significant effect on ultrafine particles. Wang et al.37 studied the impact of fuel compositions on

83

the particulate emissions in a GDI engine fueled with six test fuels with different aromatics, olefin,

84

sulfur, Methyl-cyclopentadienyl Manganese Tricarbonyl (MMT), ethanol contents. The experiment

85

results showed that the higher aromatics content would lead to higher particle mass (PM), particle

86

number (PN) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) emission and much higher toxicity to

87

human health and that the lower olefin content was beneficial to reduce PM and PN emissions

88

especially under high load engine operation conditions.

89

These researches above provided references to the gasoline compositions, but their objectives were

90

to reduce emissions and meet the more stringent emissions regulations. On the other hand, facing with

91

the stricter fuel consumptions legislations, it is urgent to optimize gasoline components because there is

92

a long way for ICE to completely step down from the stage of history38-40. Cooperating with advanced

93

engine technologies, the high-quality gasoline could further improve fuel economy. The current fuel

94

consumption standard of light-duty cars in China is 6.7L/100km which will be cut to 5.0L/100km in

95

2020, 4.0L/100km in 2025, and 3.2L/100km in 2030. According to the International Energy Agency

96

(IEA), 70% of light-duty vehicles and passenger cars will still be using gasoline engines in 2020. And

97

by 2050, 58% of passenger cars will still be powered by ICE40, 41. Nevertheless, there are not many 5


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

98

studies aiming at improving fuel economy by optimizing gasoline compositions and also not enough

99

investigations about the effect of alkanes in gasoline on fuel economy42. Previous studies had

100

researched the effect of aromatics, alkanes and MTBE on the performance of GDI engine. The

101

experiment results indicated that aromatics had a good impact on fuel economy under all operating

102

conditions and that short-chain alkanes had a good potential to reduce fuel consumption at light and

103

medium loads of medium speeds43. It had also been found that oxygenated fuels were able to reduce

104

emissions to a certain degree43, 44. Based on these conclusions, commercial gasoline with research

105

number of 92 and three gasoline with different aromatics, short-chain alkanes and oxygen contents

106

were used in a PFI engine to verify the validity and universality of the previous results.

107 108

2. EXPERIMENTAL METHODS

109

2.1 Test engine and instruments

110

The test engine was a four-cylinder, natural-aspirated, multi-point PFI engine, and the detailed

111

specifications of the engine are given in Table 1. In order to acquire fuel consumption and exhaust

112

emissions, a fuel consumption meter (ONO SOKKI-DF2420) and an exhaust gas analyzer

113

(HORIBA-MEXA-7400DRGE) were utilized in the test system. The engine was connected to an eddy

114

current dynamometer (Luoyang Nanfeng-CW260) controlled by a measuring and controlling system

115

(FST-Open) by which engine speed and torque could be changed according to experiment plan. In

116

addition, the intake pressure, intake temperature, oil temperature and water temperature could be

117

real-time displayed and recorded to monitor engine status through this measuring and controlling

118

system. The measuring range and accuracy of the experimental apparatus are listed in Table 2. The

119

layout schematic of test engine and instruments are presented in Fig. 1. 6


Page 6 of 37

Page 7 of 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

120

7


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

121

Table 1

122

Engine specifications. Item

Specification

Engine type

SI engine

Air inlet

Natural inspiration

Fuel injection

Port fuel injection

Number of valves

4

Number of cylinders

4

Bore

77.4mm

Stroke

85mm

Compression ratio

10:1

Displacement

1.599L

Ignition sequence

1-3-2-4

123 124

8


Page 8 of 37

Page 9 of 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

125

Table 2

126

Measuring range, accuracy of the experimental apparatus. Apparatus

Measuring range

Accuracy(±)

Engine speed

0-7500 rpm

0.1%

Torque

0-500 Nm

0.4%

CO emission

0-10 vol.%

0.5%

NOx emission

0-5000 ppm

0.5%

THC emission

0-5000 ppm

0.5%

Fuel flow meter

0-100 L/h

0.1%

127

9


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 10 of 37

Pressure sensor

Oil tank

Thermal sensor

Fuel flow meter

Throttle valve

Oil rail

Air cleaner

Air

Injector

ECU

Dynamometer

Data monitor and acquisition system

Thermal sensor

EGR valve

Dynamometer controller

Exhausts

128 129

Fig. 1. Engine setup.

130

10


Emissions analyzer

Page 11 of 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

131

2.2 Test fuels

132

In this study, commercial gasoline with research octane number of 92 and other three test gasoline

133

with different contents of aromatics, short-chain alkanes and oxygen were chosen to investigate the

134

compositional effect of gasoline. According to the previous experimental results, which found that

135

aromatics were able to improve fuel economy under all operating conditions and that short-chain

136

alkanes had a good potential to save fuel consumption under light and medium loads at low speeds,

137

three customized gasoline, referred to as gasoline F, L and E respectively, were used to compare with

138

the commercial gasoline referred to as gasoline C43. Gasoline F, with higher content of aromatics,

139

aimed to optimize fuel economy under all operating conditions. Gasoline L, with higher content of

140

short-chain alkanes, was designed to decrease fuel consumption at light and medium loads of low

141

speeds. Gasoline E, in which MTBE was used as oxygen additive, had higher oxygen content with

142

lower cost. The test fuels were modulated by Shandong Jingbo Petrochemical Co. Ltd according to the

143

needs of the experiments. Moreover, short-chain alkanes were defined as alkanes and alkenes with less

144

than 7 carbon atoms. The properties and compositional contents of test fuels provided by Shandong

145

Jingbo Petrochemical Co. Ltd are listed in Table 3.

146

11


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

147

Table 3

148

Properties of the test fuels.

Page 12 of 37

Fuel

C

L

F

E

Research Octane Number (RON)

92.9

85.3

87.2

90

Density [kg/m3](20ºC)

738.1

749.8

758.7

747.4

Vapor pressure[kPa]

61.25

48.25

49

53.1

Aromatics%

25.1

36.45

44.27

32.95

Alkenes%

9.5

1.1

0.85

1.2

Alkanes(C≤6)%

-

23.68

21.58

21.05

Oxygen content %

1.71

0.003

0.003

13.03

149

12


Page 13 of 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

150

2.3 Test conditions and parameters

151

In this study, load-characteristics of the engine were tested at 9 speeds-1000, 1300, 1500, 1800, 2000,

152

2400, 2800, 3200 and 3600rpm. At each speed, different load rates were chosen to ensure adequate

153

operating conditions and abundant testing data45. And the decisions of speeds and loads were on the

154

basis of Chinese standards GB/T 14951-2007 and GB/T 18297-200146, 47. In order to ensure the test

155

results repeatable and reliable, important operating parameters, such as coolant temperature and oil

156

temperature were kept stable in the experiment. The coolant temperature and the oil temperature were

157

maintained at 80±5 ℃ and 90±10 ℃ , respectively. Furthermore, before the beginning of data

158

acquisition, the engine was required to run for an extended period of time under each operating

159

conditions to ensure steady-state measurements. Fuel consumption data were acquired over a 20-s

160

period for three times and then were averaged. The CO, THC and NOx emissions and AFR were

161

measured every second and averaged over a 30-s period. Besides, the test was conducted in a

162

temperature-controlled laboratory during several consecutive days, so the effect of humidity was

163

assumed to be negligible. Since the experimental study was aimed at practical applications, which

164

meant that the objective of this research was to reduce volume consumption of gasoline. Therefore, the

165

fuel consumption of gasoline L, F and E were converted into volume consumption and then were

166

compared with gasoline C. The fuel-saving ratio (FSR) was calculated by the formula (1).

167 168

FSR = (1 −

୆ୗ୊େ(୐/୊/୉) ୆ୗ୊େ(େ)

஡(େ)

∙ ஡(୐/୊/୉)) × 100%

Where BSFC is brake specific fuel consumption and ρ refers to fuel density.

169

13


(1)

Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

170

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

171

3.1 Comparison of fuel economy for different gasoline

172

Fig. 2 shows the FSRs of gasoline L, F, and E at different speeds. As indicated in Fig. 2, there are obvious

173

fluctuations of FSRs under light loads (torque80Nm, speed2000rpm), the performance of gasoline F and E is obviously better than

184

gasoline L due to their higher research octane numbers. It could be concluded that anti-knock capability plays an

185

important role in saving fuel consumption under knock-sensitive operating conditions. In general, the distributions

186

of FSRs of three gasoline have similar characteristics, which indicates that the test system is reliable.

187

14


Page 14 of 37

25

FSR of gasoline L /%

15

1300 1800 2400 3200

5 -5 0

40

80

120

-15 -25

188

1000 1500 2000 2800 3600

40 30 20

0 0

-20

Torque/Nm

50

100

Torque/Nm 1000 1500 2000 2800 3600

17

1300 1800 2400 3200

9 1 0

50

100

150

-7 -15

1300 1800 2400 3200

10

25

189 190

1000 1500 2000 2800 3600

-10

FSR of gasoline E /%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

FSR of gasoline F /%

Page 15 of 37

Torque/Nm

Fig. 2. The FSRs of gasoline L, F and E under different operating conditions.

191

15


150

Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

192

Fig. 3 and 4 compare the mean FSR of gasoline L, F and E under different operating conditions. As shown in

193

Fig. 3, the mean FSRs of full operating conditions, stable operating conditions (speed>2000rpm,

194

100Nm>torque>50Nm) and unstable operating conditions (speed80Nm) are compared.

195

Apparently, gasoline L, F and E are able to optimize fuel economy under stable and full operating conditions,

196

especially gasoline F. It could be concluded that high aromatics contents are beneficial to saving fuel consumption.

197

And the higher aromatics content, the better performance of fuel economy. Under stable operating conditions,

198

gasoline F with the highest aromatics content presents the best fuel economy while the mean FSR could reach

199

5.25%. Furthermore, the mean FSR of gasoline L and E under these operating conditions also verify the result that

200

the higher aromatics content, to a certain degree, is conductive to the improvement of fuel economy. However,

201

aromatics content is not the only factor influencing fuel economy. The aromatics content of gasoline L is higher

202

than that of gasoline E, but the mean FSR of gasoline L is 1.96%, which is lower than that of gasoline E under full

203

operating conditions. On the whole, gasoline L can hardly save fuel consumption because of deteriorated fuel

204

economy under unstable operating conditions as a result of the lower research octane number and the stronger

205

tendency of knock combustion. The higher oxygen content of gasoline E makes for the improvement of the

206

oxygen content of mixture and combustion velocity so that the combustion process could be optimized. As a

207

consequence, the higher oxygen content, to some extent, is helpful for fuel economy by virtue of better

208

combustion process. In contrast, under unstable operating conditions, the mean FSR of three gasoline present great

209

dependency on octane number, as these operating conditions are knock-sensitive under which knock is a key

210

factor influencing the overall performance of the engine. The mean FSR of gasoline L under unstable operating

211

conditions is -12.58% which is 7.63% and 7.75% lower than that of gasoline F and E, respectively. The fuel

212

economy of gasoline F is not better than that of gasoline E under unstable operating conditions although gasoline F,

213

obviously, has the higher aromatics content. In general, aromatics content has a great influence on fuel economy if 16


Page 16 of 37

Page 17 of 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

214

the octane number of fuels meets the requirement of the engine. The octane number representing the anti-knock

215

capability of fuels also influences fuel economy to some extent, especially under knock-sensitive operating

216

conditions, but the effect is limited. The higher oxygen content is capable of optimizing combustion process so as

217

to decrease fuel consumption, nonetheless, the impact on fuel economy is not as deep as that of aromatics.

218

17


Energy & Fuels

7

5.25 3.68

4

2.77 1.55

1

Mean FSR /%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 18 of 37

-2

2.02

0.06

L

F

E

-5 -4.95

-4.83

-8 Full conditions -11

219 220

-14

Stable conditions Unstable conditions

-12.58

Fig. 3. The mean FSRs of gasoline L, F and E under different operating conditions.

221

18


Page 19 of 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

222

Fig. 4 compares the mean FSRs of different speed ranges and load ranges of gasoline L, F and E. As indicated in

223

Fig. 4, the mean FSR of gasoline F reaches the maximum value of 6.96% at 2000rpm. Moreover, it also reaches the

224

maximum value of 5.23% at 30-60Nm. It means that gasoline F shows great superiority in different speed and load

225

ranges, especially at medium and high speeds and medium loads. It could certainly confirm the conclusion that

226

aromatics are beneficial to improving fuel economy under all operating conditions. Nevertheless, gasoline E with

227

lower aromatics contents and higher oxygen content performs better than gasoline L with higher aromatics content,

228

especially at low speeds and heavy loads. The mean FSRs of gasoline E at 1000-1300rpm and 100-130Nm are 2.84%

229

and 6.71% higher than those of gasoline L, respectively, as a result of the higher research octane number and oxygen

230

content of gasoline E. It indicates that the fuel consumption mainly depends on octane number under

231

knock-sensitive operating conditions and that the higher oxygen content could benefit fuel economy, which is in

232

correspondence with the results concluded from Fig. 2 and 3. As to gasoline L, the red curves in the two graphs are

233

like arrows pointing to 2400-2800rpm and 30-60Nm where the mean FSRs are 3.55% and 2.50%, respectively. It

234

proclaims that gasoline L has great capabilities to save fuel consumption at medium speeds and light loads, which is

235

also consistent with the results of previous experimental study conducted on a GDI engine. Comparing gasoline L

236

with gasoline F, it could be found that fuel consumption is sensitive to the aromatics content, especially under stable

237

operating conditions. The aromatics content of gasoline F is 7.82% higher than that of gasoline L while the

238

difference of mean FSRs between the two gasoline is 2.20-7.69%.

239

19


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Mean FSR of different load ranges

Mean FSR of different speed ranges

L

L F E

Page 20 of 37

1000-1300

8 5

F

7

E

2

2 3200-3600

100-130

-4

2400-2800

-3

1500-1800

-1

-8

30-60

2000

60-100

240 241

0-30

Fig. 4. The mean FSRs of gasoline L, F and E in different speed ranges and load ranges.

242

20


Page 21 of 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

243

Fig. 5 shows the FSR characteristics maps of gasoline L, F and E. As indicated in Fig. 5, there are evident belt

244

regions between 1800rpm to 2000rpm for the three gasoline where the curves are dense. It is the change of engine

245

control strategy that makes the fuel consumption sensitive to the change of engine speed at this speed range. In the

246

left upper corner of three graphs, there are three blue areas where the fuel economy deteriorates seriously due to the

247

bad combustion process. It is evident that the proportion of the blue area of gasoline E is the smallest due to the

248

higher octane number. It could be concluded that the research octane number is the main cause for the performance

249

of fuel economy under knock-sensitive operating conditions, which further confirms the conclusions above.

250

Furthermore, the hue of the blue area of gasoline F is the lightest, indicating that the fuel consumption has not

251

deteriorated as seriously as the other gasoline. It also proves that, from another perspective, aromatics are capable of

252

improving the performance of fuel economy under all operating conditions. When compared with gasoline L and E,

253

there is an obvious dark green triangle area at 1800-3000rpm and in the graph of gasoline F. In addition, there are

254

also multiple roundabouts at high speeds which presents the advantages of gasoline F under economical operating

255

conditions. As a consequence, the features of the graph of gasoline F have made sure the effect of aromatics on fuel

256

economy. On the other hand, in the graph of gasoline L, an evident yellow roundabout and some small red dots

257

appear in the region of medium speeds and light loads. It indicates that, under these operating conditions, the

258

performance of fuel economy is better. Moreover, it also confirms the conclusion that short-chain alkanes could

259

decrease fuel consumption under these operating conditions of medium speeds and light loads.

260

21


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

261

262 263

Fig. 5. The FSR characteristics maps for gasoline L, F and E.

264

22


Page 22 of 37

Page 23 of 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

265

Energy & Fuels

3.2 Comparison of CO, THC and NOx emissions for different gasoline

266

Fig. 6 compares CO, THC and NOx emissions and AFR of gasoline C, L, F and E at low speed-1000rpm. As

267

shown in Fig. 6, at heavy loads, CO and THC emissions deteriorate seriously due to the unstable status of the

268

engine and lack of oxygen. It is obvious that the CO and THC emissions of gasoline L, F and E are higher than

269

that of gasoline C. Gasoline C presents the 42.9% lower CO emissions and the 60.4% lower THC emissions than

270

other three gasoline, from which it could be concluded that octane number is the key factor influencing engine

271

performance under these operating conditions. Similar to the performance of fuel consumption, anti-knock

272

characteristics is the dominant factor affecting the emissions of incomplete combustion products under

273

knock-sensitive operating conditions. However, at light and medium loads, as indicated in the small windows, the

274

CO emissions and THC emissions of gasoline C do not show any superiorities than that of other three gasoline. On

275

the contrary, gasoline L and F show some advantages on the CO and THC emissions because the octane numbers

276

of two gasoline are lower than 92 which is in favor of shortening ignition delay to optimize combustion process

277

and make combustion more complete. Gasoline L could reduce CO and THC emissions by 21.3-73.7% and

278

35.8-70.6%, respectively. Gasoline F could decrease CO and THC emissions by 24.7-73.7% and 27.9-61.8%,

279

respectively. Furthermore, the CO and THC emissions of gasoline E are not as good as those of gasoline L and F.

280

However, gasoline E also presents the 26.9%-66.7% lower CO emissions and the 6.9%-62.0% lower THC

281

emissions than gasoline C as a result of the higher oxygen content. It means that the higher oxygen content is

282

beneficial to increasing the oxygen content of the mixture so that the incomplete combustion products could be

283

decreased. As to NOx emissions, it increases dramatically for four gasoline at heavy loads. It is the quickly

284

increased in-cylinder temperature that leads to the highest NOx emissions. And the performance of gasoline C is

285

not better than those of other three gasoline. Moreover, there is no evident discrimination of NOx emissions for the

286

four gasoline at medium and light loads. 23


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

287

24


Page 24 of 37

Page 25 of 37

3.5 0.5

CO emissions /%

3

C L F E

1000rpm

0.4 0.3

2.5

0.2 2

0.1 0

1.5

0

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

1 0.5 0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100 110

Load Rate/%

288 5500

250

5000

THC emissions /ppm

4000

150

3500

100

3000

50

2500

0

C

1000rpm

200

4500

L F E

0

2000

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

1500 1000 500 0 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100 110

90

100 110

Load Rate/%

289 500

150

450

C L F E

1000rpm

120

400

NOx emissions /ppm

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

90

350

60

300

30

250

0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

200 150 100 50 0 0

290

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Load Rate/%

25


Energy & Fuels

14.5 1000rpm 14

13.5

AFR

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 26 of 37

13 C L F E

12.5

12 0

291 292

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100 110

Load Rate/% Fig. 6. CO, THC and NOx emissions and AFR for gasoline C, L, F and E at 1000rpm.

293

26


Page 27 of 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

294

Fig. 7 compares CO, THC and NOx emissions and AFR of four gasoline at the commonly used speed of

295

light-duty vehicles-2000rpm. As indicated in Fig. 7, at light loads, the CO and THC emissions of gasoline L

296

deteriorate seriously due to over rich mixture as shown in the graph of AFR. Moreover, the CO and THC

297

emissions of gasoline F and E also increase dramatically because of the same reason. At light loads, the intake

298

temperature and the vapor pressure of gasoline L are lower, which results in bad nebulization and insufficient

299

blend of air and fuel. Therefore, the CO and THC emissions of gasoline L are not as good as that of other three

300

gasoline. In addition, it is evident that gasoline L, F and E, compared to gasoline C, could reduce CO emissions at

301

medium loads as shown in the small window. Gasoline L, F and E present the 32.8-89.3%, 51.0-89.3% and

302

22.3-55.8% lower CO emissions than gasoline C, respectively. Although the oxygen content of gasoline E is

303

higher, the CO emissions of gasoline F and L are lower due to the higher AFR. However, there are no significant

304

differences among the four gasoline in the THC emissions. It means that high aromatics contents would not make

305

CO and THC emissions deteriorate. On the other hand, the NOx emissions of gasoline L and F increase at medium

306

loads as the combustion process is more complete and the AFR is higher which are in favor of the production of

307

NOx.

308

On the whole, higher aromatics and short-chain alkanes contents would not lead to the increasement in CO and

309

THC emissions. In contrast, the gasoline with higher aromatics and short-chain alkanes contents even could

310

reduce CO and THC emissions to some extent. But they are not beneficial to controlling NOx emissions,

311

especially under stable operating conditions. Nonetheless, taking the advanced emissions reprocessing

312

technologies into consideration, the influences do not matter seriously.

313

27


Energy & Fuels

1.8

0.25

C L F E

2000rpm

0.2

1.5

CO emissions /%

0.15 0.1

1.2

0.05 0.9

0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

0.6

0.3

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100 110

Load Rate/%

314 1200

250

C L F E

2000rpm 200

THC emissions /ppm

1000

150

800 100

600

50 20

30

40

50

60

70

80 90

400 200 0 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100 110

Load Rate/%

315 600

2000rpm

C L F E

500

NOx emissions /ppm

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 28 of 37

400 300 200 100 0 0

316

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Load Rate/%

28


90

100 110

Page 29 of 37

14.4 2000rpm 14.2 14

AFR

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

13.8 C L F E

13.6 13.4 13.2 0

317 318

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100 110

Load Rate/% Fig. 7. CO, THC and NOx emissions and AFR for gasoline C, L, F and E at 2000rpm.

319

29


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

320

4. CONCLUSIONS

321

In this study, the compositional effect of gasoline on fuel economy and emissions were experimentally

322

investigated in PFI engine so as to confirm the correctness and universality of the conclusions from the previous

323

experimental study. The results prove the practicality of the previous conclusions that aromatics could benefit fuel

324

economy under all operating conditions and that short-chain alkanes have a good potential to reduce fuel

325

consumption at light and medium loads of medium speeds. The main results are summarized as follows:

326

1.

Gasoline L, F and E with the higher aromatics content, compared with gasoline C, have great advantages

327

on saving fuel consumption under all operating conditions, which confirms that aromatics are able to

328

improve fuel economy. The mean FSR of gasoline F with the highest aromatics content is 3.68%,

329

presenting comprehensive superiorities than other test gasoline. It also could be found that fuel

330

consumption is sensitive to the change of aromatics content.

331

2.

Gasoline L with the highest short-chain alkanes content shows good performance of fuel economy at light

332

and medium loads of medium speeds while the maximum FSR is 3.55%. It also verifies that short-chain

333

alkanes do have great advantages on fuel economy under specific operating conditions.

334

3.

The performance of fuel economy of gasoline E whose oxygen content is the highest but aromatics content

335

is the lowest among three customized gasoline is only inferior to gasoline F. It indicates that higher oxygen

336

content could benefit fuel economy to some extent. In addition, the research octane number tokening the

337

anti-knock characteristics plays a more important role in fuel consumption under knock-sensitive operating

338

conditions.

339

4.

In general, the emissions of gasoline L, F and E are not worse than those of gasoline C. Gasoline F and L

340

with the higher aromatics content are even capable of reducing CO and THC emissions. Although the NOx

341

emissions of gasoline F and L deteriorate at medium loads, it does not matter seriously when three-way 30


Page 30 of 37

Page 31 of 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

342

catalyst is taken into consideration. It means that the emissions would not deteriorate with the improvement

343

of fuel economy.

344

345

AUTHOR INFORMATION

346

Corresponding Author

347

*E-mail: [email protected]

348

ORCID

349

Manzhi Tan: 0000-0002-5142-4212

350

Notes

351

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

352 353

354

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

355

The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support to the research provided by the National Natural

356

Science Foundation of China (No.51576089).

357

31


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

358

REFERENCES

359 360

(1)

Shafiee, S.; Topal, E., When will fossil fuel reserves be diminished? Energy Policy 2009, 37, (1), 181-189.

361

(2)

Nel, W. P.; Cooper, C. J., Implications of fossil fuel constraints on economic growth and global warming.

362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375

Energy Policy 2009, 37, (1), 166-180. (3)

Abdul-Manan, A. F. N.; Arfaj, A.; Babiker, H., Oil refining in a CO 2 constrained world: Effects of carbon

pricing on refineries globally. Energy 2017, 121, 264-275. (4)

Oliver, H. H.; Gallagher, K. S.; Tian, D.; Zhang, J., China's fuel economy standards for passenger vehicles:

Rationale, policy process, and impacts. Energy Policy 2009, 37, (11), 4720-4729. (5)

Needleman, H. L., The removal of lead from gasoline: historical and personal reflections. Environmental

research 2000, 84, (1), 20-35. (6)

Hoekman, S. K.; Broch, A., MMT Effects on Gasoline Vehicles: A Literature Review. SAE International

Journal of Fuels and Lubricants 2016, 9, (1), 322-343. (7)

Kovarik, W., Ethyl-leaded gasoline: how a classic occupational disease became an international public

health disaster. International journal of occupational and environmental health 2005, 11, (4), 384-97. (8)

Chincholkar, S. P.; Suryawanshi, J. G., Gasoline Direct Injection: An Efficient Technology. Energy Procedia

2016, 90, 666-672. (9)

Saliba, G.; Saleh, R.; Zhao, Y.; Presto, A. A.; Lambe, A. T.; Frodin, B.; Sardar, S.; Maldonado, H.; Maddox,

376

C.; May, A. A.; Drozd, G. T.; Goldstein, A. H.; Russell, L. M.; Hagen, F.; Robinson, A. L., Comparison of Gasoline

377

Direct-Injection (GDI) and Port Fuel Injection (PFI) Vehicle Emissions: Emission Certification Standards, Cold-Start,

378

Secondary Organic Aerosol Formation Potential, and Potential Climate Impacts. Environmental science &

379

technology 2017, 51, (11), 6542-6552. 32


Page 32 of 37

Page 33 of 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

380

Energy & Fuels

(10)

Tang, Q.; Fu, J.; Liu, J.; Boulet, B.; Tan, L.; Zhao, Z., Comparison and analysis of the effects of various

381

improved turbocharging approaches on gasoline engine transient performances. Applied Thermal Engineering

382

2016, 93, 797-812.

383 384 385 386 387

(11)

Alkidas, A. C., Combustion advancements in gasoline engines. Energy Conversion and Management

2007, 48, (11), 2751-2761. (12)

Wang, Z.; Wang, J.-X.; Shuai, S.-J.; Wang, Y.-J.; Tian, G.-H.; An, X.-L., Study of Multimode Combustion

System With Gasoline Direct Injection. Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power 2007, 129, (4), 1079. (13)

Yusri, I. M.; Mamat, R.; Najafi, G.; Razman, A.; Awad, O. I.; Azmi, W. H.; Ishak, W. F. W.; Shaiful, A. I. M.,

388

Alcohol based automotive fuels from first four alcohol family in compression and spark ignition engine: A review

389

on engine performance and exhaust emissions. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2017, 77, 169-181.

390

(14)

Elfasakhany, A., Investigations on performance and pollutant emissions of spark-ignition engines fueled

391

with n -butanol–, isobutanol–, ethanol–, methanol–, and acetone–gasoline blends: A comparative study.

392

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2017, 71, 404-413.

393

(15)

Doğan, B.; Erol, D.; Yaman, H.; Kodanli, E., The effect of ethanol-gasoline blends on performance and

394

exhaust emissions of a spark ignition engine through exergy analysis. Applied Thermal Engineering 2017, 120,

395

433-443.

396

(16)

397 398 399 400 401

Costagliola, M. A.; De Simio, L.; Iannaccone, S.; Prati, M. V., Combustion efficiency and engine out

emissions of a S.I. engine fueled with alcohol/gasoline blends. Applied Energy 2013, 111, 1162-1171. (17)

Lanzanova, T. D. M.; Dalla Nora, M.; Zhao, H., Performance and economic analysis of a direct injection

spark ignition engine fueled with wet ethanol. Applied Energy 2016, 169, 230-239. (18)

Li, Y.; Gong, J.; Deng, Y.; Yuan, W.; Fu, J.; Zhang, B., Experimental comparative study on combustion,

performance and emissions characteristics of methanol, ethanol and butanol in a spark ignition engine. Applied 33


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

402 403 404 405 406 407

Thermal Engineering 2017, 115, 53-63. (19)

Elfasakhany, A., Performance and emissions analysis on using acetone–gasoline fuel blends in

spark-ignition engine. Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal 2016, 19, (3), 1224-1232. (20)

Yee, K. F.; Mohamed, A. R.; Tan, S. H., A review on the evolution of ethyl tert-butyl ether (ETBE) and its

future prospects. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2013, 22, 604-620. (21)

Al-Farayedhi, A. A.; AL-Dawood, A.M.; Gandhidasan, P., Effects of Blending MTBE With Unleaded

408

Gasoline on Exhaust Emissions of SI Engine.pdf. Journal of Energy Resources Technology-Transactions of the ASME

409

2000,122,4,239-247.

410 411 412

(22)

Hergueta, C.; Bogarra, M.; Tsolakis, A.; Essa, K.; Herreros, J. M., Butanol-gasoline blend and exhaust gas

recirculation, impact on GDI engine emissions. Fuel 2017, 208, 662-672. (23)

Li, Y.; Nithyanandan, K.; Lee, T. H.; Donahue, R. M.; Lin, Y.; Lee, C.-F.; Liao, S., Effect of water-containing

413

acetone–butanol–ethanol gasoline blends on combustion, performance, and emissions characteristics of a

414

spark-ignition engine. Energy Conversion and Management 2016, 117, 21-30.

415 416 417

(24)

Li, Y.; Meng, L.; Nithyanandan, K.; Lee, T. H.; Lin, Y.; Lee, C.-f. F.; Liao, S., Experimental investigation of a

spark ignition engine fueled with acetone-butanol-ethanol and gasoline blends. Energy 2017, 121, 43-54. (25)

Li, Y.; Meng, L.; Nithyanandan, K.; Lee, T. H.; Lin, Y.; Lee, C.-f. F.; Liao, S., Combustion, performance and

418

emissions characteristics of a spark-ignition engine fueled with isopropanol- n -butanol-ethanol and gasoline

419

blends. Fuel 2016, 184, 864-872.

420 421 422 423

(26)

Elfasakhany, A., Experimental study on emissions and performance of an internal combustion engine

fueled with gasoline and gasoline/n-butanol blends. Energy Conversion and Management 2014, 88, 277-283. (27)

Elfasakhany, A., Experimental investigation on SI engine using gasoline and a hybrid

iso-butanol/gasoline fuel. Energy Conversion and Management 2015, 95, 398-405. 34


Page 34 of 37

Page 35 of 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

424 425 426 427 428

Energy & Fuels

(28)

Schifter, I.; González, U.; González-Macías, C., Effects of ethanol, ethyl- tert -butyl ether and

dimethyl-carbonate blends with gasoline on SI engine. Fuel 2016, 183, 253-261. (29)

Topgül, T., The effects of MTBE blends on engine performance and exhaust emissions in a spark ignition

engine. Fuel Processing Technology 2015, 138, 483-489. (30)

Schifter, I.; González, U.; Díaz, L.; Sánchez-Reyna, G.; Mejía-Centeno, I.; González-Macías, C.,

429

Comparison of performance and emissions for gasoline-oxygenated blends up to 20 percent oxygen and

430

implications for combustion on a spark-ignited engine. Fuel 2017, 208, 673-681.

431 432 433

(31)

Oh, C.; Cha, G., Influence of oxygenate content on particulate matter emission in gasoline direct

injection engine. International Journal of Automotive Technology 2013, 14, (6), 829-836. (32)

Zhu, R.; Hu, J.; Bao, X.; He, L.; Zu, L., Effects of aromatics, olefins and distillation temperatures (T50 &

434

T90) on particle mass and number emissions from gasoline direct injection (GDI) vehicles. Energy Policy 2017,

435

101, 185-193.

436

(33)

Jin, D.; Choi, K.; Myung, C.-L.; Lim, Y.; Lee, J.; Park, S., The impact of various ethanol-gasoline blends on

437

particulates and unregulated gaseous emissions characteristics from a spark ignition direct injection (SIDI)

438

passenger vehicle. Fuel 2017, 209, 702-712.

439

(34)

Karavalakis, G.; Short, D.; Vu, D.; Russell, R.; Hajbabaei, M.; Asa-Awuku, A.; Durbin, T. D., Evaluating the

440

Effects of Aromatics Content in Gasoline on Gaseous and Particulate Matter Emissions from SI-PFI and SIDI

441

Vehicles. Environmental science & technology 2015, 49, (11), 7021-31.

442 443 444 445

(35)

An, Y.-z.; Teng, S.-p.; Pei, Y.-q.; Qin, J.; Li, X.; Zhao, H., An experimental study of polycyclic aromatic

hydrocarbons and soot emissions from a GDI engine fueled with commercial gasoline. Fuel 2016, 164, 160-171. (36)

Yao, C.; Dou, Z.; Wang, B.; Liu, M.; Lu, H.; Feng, J.; Feng, L., Experimental study of the effect of heavy

aromatics on the characteristics of combustion and ultrafine particle in DISI engine. Fuel 2017, 203, 290-297. 35


Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

446

(37)

Yinhui, W.; Rong, Z.; Yanhong, Q.; Jianfei, P.; Mengren, L.; Jianrong, L.; Yusheng, W.; Min, H.; Shijin, S.,

447

The impact of fuel compositions on the particulate emissions of direct injection gasoline engine. Fuel 2016, 166,

448

543-552.

449

(38)

450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457

Huo, H.; He, K.; Wang, M.; Yao, Z., Vehicle technologies, fuel-economy policies, and fuel-consumption

rates of Chinese vehicles. Energy Policy 2012, 43, 30-36. (39)

Huo, H.; Zhang, Q.; He, K.; Yao, Z.; Wang, M., Vehicle-use intensity in China: Current status and future

trend. Energy Policy 2012, 43, 6-16. (40)

Zhang, Q.; Tian, W.; Zheng, Y.; Zhang, L., Fuel consumption from vehicles of China until 2030 in energy

scenarios. Energy Policy 2010, 38, (11), 6860-6867. (41)

Wang, Z.; Liu, H.; Reitz, R. D., Knocking combustion in spark-ignition engines. Progress in Energy and

Combustion Science 2017, 61, 78-112. (42)

Sarathy, S. M.; Kukkadapu, G.; Mehl, M.; Wang, W.; Javed, T.; Park, S.; Oehlschlaeger, M. A.; Farooq, A.;

458

Pitz, W. J.; Sung, C.-J., Ignition of alkane-rich FACE gasoline fuels and their surrogate mixtures. Proceedings of the

459

Combustion Institute 2015, 35, (1), 249-257.

460 461 462 463 464

(43)

Han, Y.; Hu, S.; Tan, M.; Xu, Y.; Tian, J.; Li, R.; Chai, J.; Liu, J.; Yu, X., Experimental study of the effect of

gasoline components on fuel economy, combustion and emissions in GDI engine. Fuel 2018, 216, 371-380. (44)

Peng, D.X., Effect of Unleaded Gasoline-Biofuel Blends on Exhaust Emissions. Chemistry and

Technology of Fuels and Oils 2017, 53, (5), 754-758. (45)

Mohamad, T. I.; How, H. G., Part-load performance and emissions of a spark ignition engine fueled with

465

RON95 and RON97 gasoline: Technical viewpoint on Malaysia’s fuel price debate. Energy Conversion and

466

Management 2014, 88, 928-935.

467

(46)

GB/T 14951-2007, Meassurement method of fuel saving technology for automobiles, 2007. 36


Page 36 of 37

Page 37 of 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

468

(47)

GB/T 18297-2001, Performance test code for road vehicle engines, 2001.

469

(48)

Chen, H.; Xu, M.; Hung, D. L. S.; Zhuang, H., Cycle-to-cycle variation analysis of early flame propagation

470

in engine cylinder using proper orthogonal decomposition. Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 2014, 58,

471

48-55.

472

37


Compositional Effect of Gasoline on Fuel Economy and Emissions

Recommend Documents