Fuel 83 (2004) 327336 www.fuelrst.

com

Knock rating of gaseous fuels in a single cylinder spark ignition engine

C. Rahmounia, G. Brecqb, M. Tazeroutb, O. Le Correb,*
b a CreeD, 291 Avenue Dreyfous Ducas, 78520 Limay, France Ecole des Mines de Nantes, Department of Energy and Environment System, 4 Rue A. Kastler, BP 20722, 44307 Nantes Cedex 3, France

Received 25 February 2003; revised 7 July 2003; accepted 7 July 2003; available online 6 August 2003

Abstract This paper presents the determination of knock rating of gaseous fuels in a single cylinder engine. The rst part of the work deals with an application of a standard method for the knock rating of gaseous fuels. The Service Methane Number (SMN) is compared with the standard Methane Number (MN) calculated from the standard AVL software METHANE (which corresponds to the MN measured on a Cooperative Fuel Research engine). Then, in the second part, the mechanical resistance to knock of our engine is highlighted by means of the Methane Number Requirement (MNR). A single cylinder LISTER PETTER engine was modied to run as a spark ignition engine with a xed compression ratio and an adjustable spark advance. Effects of engine settings on the MNR are deduced from experimental data and compared extensively with previous studies. Using the above, it is then possible to adapt the engine settings for optimal knock control and performances. The error on the SMN and MNR stands beneath ^ 2 MN units over the gases and engine settings considered. q 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Knock rating of gaseous fuels; Service methane number; Methane number requirement

1. Introduction The composition of natural gas depends on the feed stock location [1]. For instance, the methane concentration in natural gas supplied in Europe ranges from about 80 to 98% [2]. When natural gas is used to run an internal combustion engine, these variations can induce knock occurrence and lead to increasing emissions and decreasing engine efciency. Knock is due to auto-ignition of the end-gas ahead of the propagating ame. When this auto-ignition takes place in the cylinder, the chemical energy contained in the end gas is released very rapidly. Beyond a certain burn rate, it causes the propagation of shock waves across the combustion chamber that is then forced to resonate at its natural frequencies. This can lead to high frequency shock waves hitting the cylinder walls and causing irreversible damages. The indicator generally used to characterise changing composition is the methane number (MN). It is similar to the octane number (ON) used for liquid fuels. MN characterises the tendency to knock of gaseous fuels measured on a Cooperative Fuel Research engine (CFR engine) [3 5].
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 33-2-518-58257; fax: 33-2-518-58299. E-mail address: lecorre@emn.fr (O. Le Corre). 0016-2361/$ - see front matter q 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/S0016-2361(03)00245-X

Methane, which is the least detonating hydrocarbon, has a conventional MN of 100. At the opposite scale, hydrogen, which is the most detonating gas [6], has a conventional MN of 0. It is however possible to get a MN over 100 for gases mainly composed of methane and inert compounds like nitrogen and carbon dioxide (biogas for instance) [3]. Shrestha and Karim [7] and Brecq et al. [8] have investigated the effect of inert gases on the knock rating of gaseous. Combined heat and power (CHP) engines run at knock limit for optimal efciency and environmental performances in order to reduce the pay-back period [9]. Because of environmental and economical concerns, engines are set with high compression ratios. Consequently, optimal operating conditions are generally very close to those of knock occurrence. Human ear was for a long time the unique mean of knock detection. This method is still taken as a reference in recent works carried out by Kalghatgi in 1996 [10]. ON was frequently determined using this specic knock detection [11]. But, because of subjectivity (human ear is incapable of measuring knock intensity), it was necessary to dene a knock indicator capable of characterising its intensity and determining its threshold in a reliable and reproducible manner.

328

C. Rahmouni et al. / Fuel 83 (2004) 327336

Nomenclature IMPO MAPO KLCR KLER KLEP KLIP KLIT KLSA KLST KLVE SA integral of modulus of pressure oscillations, bar.CA maximum amplitude of pressure oscillations, bar knock limited compression, knock limited equivalence ratio, knock limited exhaust pressure, Pa knock limited intake pressure, Pa knock limited intake temperature, K knock limited spark advance, 8CA knock limited spark timing, 8CA knock limited volumetric efciency, % spark advance, CA

ST MN SMN MNR T PKC KC

spark timing, CA methane number, service methane number, methane number requirement, temperature, K percentage of knocking cycles, % knocking cycles

Greek symbols

D f hv

variation, equivalence ratio, bar volumetric efciency,

Several knock detection methods exists in both industry and research [12]: Wall losses. When knock occurs, wall losses are clearly more important. Syrimis and Assanis [13,14] are the main authors whose work deals with the link between heat transfer and knock. Trapy also provides lots of results in this eld [15]. Ion current. Along with the propagating ame (presence of ions), to the spark plug neighbourhood, the electrical conductivity changes and so far the current intensity. There is a correlation between the ion current intensity and the value of the cylinder pressure [16,17]. Therefore, the high frequencies contained in the ion current signal can be used to detect knock [18 21]. That technique is however not yet reliable because of a high noise level. Engine vibrations. By means of an accelerometer xed onto the outer surface of the engine cylinder head. The high noise level is the main drawback of this technique [12,22], especially for high speed running engines. Cylinder pressure. That old technology, found in previous works [23], is based on the fact that cylinder pressure is directly linked to knock via shock waves. Because this technique is based on the real nature of knock, it is much more reliable than the one using engine vibrations. Many authors advise it [12,24,25]. However, these sensors are very expensive and not adapted for industrial purpose. It mainly remains a research tool. The two rst techniques are not commonly used. The rst one is still a principle and the second is efcient and interesting but is still known as an emerging technology. The last two techniques are much more used: accelerometer technique is mainly employed in industrial engines because of a cost-effective sensor. The cylinder pressure measure is mainly employed in research elds because of the quality of the results and the high cost of pressure probes. Advantages and drawbacks of each technique are presented in Ref. [26].

Most of knock indicators that can be used to quantify knock strength (that is knock intensity) are based on cylinder pressure measurement: Direct evaluation from cylinder pressure (peak pressure analysis, for instance) [3,27 29]; Filtered pressure analysis (MAPO,IMPO,) [4 6,12, 29 34,38 45,54]; Pressure derivatives analysis [29,35 37]. There are numerous existing means to determine knock limit in spark ignition engines. These means result from three different choices: the choice of probes, the choice of knock indicators and the choice of analytical methods to be employed. Thus, the denition of knock limit is a relative notion because it depends on these three choices. There are different couples indicator-method according to many authors to dene knock limit in SI engines. The synthesis of these different indicators with the corresponding methods is given in Table 1. IMPO and MAPO. There are two knock indicators, based on a high frequency analysis of cylinder pressure data, commonly used in the literature. The rst one is the integral of modulus of pressure oscillations (IMPO), representing the energy contained in the high frequency oscillations of the cylinder pressure signal (including noise). The second one is the maximum amplitude of pressure oscillations (MAPO), related to the peak of the pressure oscillations due to knock. IMPO and MAPO are obtained for N consecutive cycles and are expressed by the following relations: MAPO
N 1 X max lp ~l N 1 ui ;ui W

IMPO

N ui W 1 X lp ~ l du N 1 ui

C. Rahmouni et al. / Fuel 83 (2004) 327336 Table 1 Knock detection methods Knock indices Method Constant threshold method Raw pressure Checkel and Dale [27], Russ [28], Chun and Kim [29] Filtered pressure Millo and Ferraro [12], Thomas et al. [30], Dubel et al. [31], Chun and Kim [29], Lee et al. [32], Westin et al. [33], Attar and Karim [6],a Brunt et al. [34], Brecq et al. [44], Worret et al. [45] Ortmann et al. [38],a Schmillen and Rechs [22], Ryan et al. [4],a Lee et al. [32], Callahan et al. [5],a Ferraro et al. [39] Checkel and Dale [27] Najt [40], Ho and Kuo [41], Dubel et al. [31], Abu Qudais [42],a Goto and Itoh [43]a Pressure derivative

329

Checkel and Dale [35], Ando et al. [36], Dhall and Beans [37], Chun and Kim [29]

Updated threshold method Trend-intersection method

a

Indicators not given explicitly.

N represents the number of computed cycles, ui the crank angle corresponding to the beginning of the window of calculation, W the value of the window of calculation and p ~ the ltered in-cylinder pressure. Percentage of knocking cycle (PKC). A general method, based on a statistical analysis of the in-cylinder peak pressure (PP) and angle of peak pressure (APP) during combustion was presented in Ref. [26]. Studies of Brecq et al. [26,55] showed that over a great number of cycles (about 400 cycles), two separated groups of cycles can be distinguished: group A of non-knocking cycles and group B of knocking cycles (Fig. 1). In this paper, an analysis, rst outlined in Ref. [26], concerning the evolution of the PKC with spark advance showed that a threshold of knocking cycles xed at 50% gives a knock limit close to that given by standard knock indices (Figs. 2 and 3). This indicator was then used in all the experiments carried out because of its versatility and its accuracy. Indicators for knock rating of gaseous fuels. An adaptation of engine settings to changing gas composition is then necessary in order to ensure a safe running of the engine. Schiffgens et al. [46] have already used a sensor to

adapt the engine to variable composition by means of a measure of MN. MN is directly linked to knock in SI engines. Numerous authors [3,4 6,28,33,47 50] have observed interconnections between knock limited engine parameters and engine settings on the one hand, and between knock limited engine

Fig. 2. Evolution of the % of knocking cycles versus spark advance (SA).

Fig. 1. Knocking-cycle distinction by PP analysis.

Fig. 3. Value of PKC to determine the onset of knock.

330

Table 2 Effect of 10 MN units variation on critical engine parameters Leiker [3] KLST KLCR KLIT KLCT KLIP KLEP KLER Speed 1 to 38CA 0.5 to 0.8 10 to 14 8C Douaud [51] 4 to 58CA 0.9 40 to 130 8C 150 to 210 8C 13 to 16 kPa ^ 0.17c 2 40% Ryan [4] Schiffgens [46] 3 to 68CAa 0.6b 20 to 25 8Cb Ho [49] 48CA Russ [28] 68CA 1.2 40 8C 48 to 60 8C 15 to 20 kPa 180 kPa ^ 0.15c Faure [50] Attar [6] 2 to 38CAb 0.6 40 8C Westin [33]

0.7

C. Rahmouni et al. / Fuel 83 (2004) 327336

110 to 180 kPa

Operating conditions according to authors Engine Fuel No of cylinder Displacement (cm3) Compression ratio Speed (rpm) Spark timing Equivalence ratio Intake temperature (K)
a b c

CFR Natural gas 1 677 375 1.0 298

Gasoline 4 1289 9.5 3000 1.2 < 300

CFR Natural gas 1 677 1115 900 158CA 1.0 294

FEVa Natural gas 1 < 2000 9.413 1500 5 to 308CA 1.0 313 and 353

Cat. G3505 Gasoline 4300 811 1400 < 0.6 and 0.8 330

FEV Gasoline 1 676 9.112.5 1500 1 to 118CA 1.17 < 300

CFR Gasoline 1 677 128CA 1.1 313 and 353

CFR Binary gases 1 677 8.5 11 900 158CA 0.8 and 1.0 300

Mitsubishia Gasoline 4 572 8.95 3500 <1 313

Valid for 40 , MN (turbocharged engines). Valid for 40 , MN , 80. Sign in lean mixtures and sign 2 in rich mixtures.

C. Rahmouni et al. / Fuel 83 (2004) 327336

331

parameters and knock rating indicators (MN, ON) on the other hand. Among them, Russ [28] managed to nd relations between knock limited parameters of the engine, via a variation of ON. Douaud [51] has also given prominence to numerous dependencies between knock limited parameters and ON. Leiker et al. [3] have linked some knock limited parameters to a variation of 10 MN units. The effect of a variation of 10 MN units on the different knock limited parameters has been performed (Table 2). As many authors have used ON instead of MN, a conversion between these two indicators has been applied so that comparisons can then be possible. By adding lead tetraethyl to iso-octane, it is possible to estimate the ON of gaseous fuels up to 120.3 ON units [52]. This method has been applied by Kubesh et al. [52] in order to measure ON of gaseous fuels. They also obtained a ON value for pure methane of about 140. Besides, Daverat [53] and Dimpelfeld and Foster [47] have as well measured ON of heavy hydrocarbons like ethane, propane and n-butane. Thus, using the composition tested by Kubesh [52], Daverat [53] and Dimpelfeld [47] and the software developed by AVL for the calculation of MN from composition, a relation between ON and MN can be established (Fig. 4). The link between the work carried out on liquid fuels and those carried out on gaseous fuels is realised by the connecting relation between MN and ON ( 5.7 ON units corresponds to 10 MN units). Globally, there is a good agreement of the results, summed up in Table 2, among the different authors. The most important differences between authors result from the KLIT (knock limited intake temperature). However, the study of the impact of the KLIT on the KLST results in the identication of the following trends: Russ [28], 2 7 K/8CA Faure [50], 2 7 K/8CA

Leiker [3], 2 6 K/8CA1 Schiffgens [46], 2 10 to 2 5 K/8CA Douaud [51], 2 14 K/8CA2 The differences observed in Table 2 result from the mean of calculation, based on the KLST variation of Russ [28] which is relatively important ( 5.7 ON units corresponds to 10 MN units). The aim of this work is to dene a knock indicator in a single cylinder spark ignition engine, taking into account gas composition and engine tunings. Two main points have been tackled in this study: Capability of the MN to characterise the tendency to knock of gaseous fuels, from different critical parameters (equivalence ratio, volumetric efciency, spark advance); Measurement of the methane number requirement (MNR) of the engine from different engine parameters (equivalence ratio, volumetric efciency, spark advance) and comparison with the results of Table 2. The inuence of temperature on knock limited spark advance is also presented in order to outline the temperature dependence of all the results.

2. Material and methods Test bench. The test bench is composed of a naturally aspirated single-cylinder SI gas engine of Lister-Petter make. Table 3 gives the main characteristics of this engine. The engine is connected to an electrical generator, which maintained the speed at 1500 rev/min (to generate 50 Hz electrical power). Engine and main measurements are presented in Fig. 5. The engine is based on a DI Diesel engine, with bowl chamber and at-faced cylinder head. It is adapted to SI operation by reducing its compression ratio and by connecting a spark plug in the injector location. The data acquisition system of cylinder pressure is composed of Sensor AVL QH32D, gain 25.28 pC/bar, range 0 200 bar; Piezo amplier AVL 3066A0, gain 400 pC/V with no pressure reference; Piezo resistive pressure sensor xed inside the inlet manifold, range 0 2.5 bar. The acquisition frequency of the in-cylinder pressure is 90 kHz. It corresponds to a resolution of 0.1 CA.
1 Average value calculated from the effect of the variation of MN on KLST and KLIT. 2 Average value calculated from the mean effect of the variation of 18CA of spark advance on ON.

Fig. 4. Relation between IM and IO for gas mixtures [52] and pure gases [47,53].

332 Table 3 Engine technical features Type Bore Stroke Displacement Compression ratio Cooling system No. of cylinders

C. Rahmouni et al. / Fuel 83 (2004) 327336 Table 4 Operating conditions for the rst stage Spark ignition 95.3 mm 88.9 mm 633 cm3 12.37:1 Forced air circulation One T f hv 288, 293, 298 and 310 K 0.7, 0.8 and 0.9 60 and 70%

3. Results and discussion Experiments were divided into two distinct stages: First, a matrix of different gas composition was established [54]. The service methane number (SMN) [3] of these gases is measured. The relation between the SMN and the standard MN calculated by the METHANE software developed by AVL is performed. Finally, various specied operating conditions were tested to calculate the MNR of the engine. This allows us to obtain the variation of the MNR from engine parameters. The methodologies for the determination of the SMN and the MNR are also described in Ref. [54]. Table 4 gives the values of the engine parameters considered. The fuel used is the synthesised Abu Dhabi gas, whose composition is 82% of methane, 16% of ethane and 2% of propane. The MN of this gas is 69.1 (AVL). Measurement of the SMN using spark advance as critical parameter. The measurement of the SMN, for different gaseous fuels, is based on a test gas matrix suggested by the work carried out by Klimstra [5]. This database includes 21 gases of different compositions (binary, ternary gases or more) [54]. Technical limitations on the mass ow rates leaded in a limited range of pure gases as given in Ref. [54]. Despite these limitations, a large range of SMN has been covered, from 70 to 110. Results are given in Fig. 6. A comparison between the SMN, determined with spark advance as critical parameter, and the standard MN, determined in a CFR engine with compression ratio as critical parameter, is made (Fig. 6). The link between knock

Exhaust gases are analysed by a COSMA Cristal 500 analyser. Experiments were carried out with synthesised natural gas fuel. A matrix of nine pure gases (CH4, C2H6, C3H8, C4H10, CO2, N2, O2, H2, CO) simulates various natural gas compositions accounting for the main constituents of natural gas encountered in stationary applications. The gas composition was determined from the mass ow rates and checked by gas chromatography. Knock rating of gaseous fuels is determined by varying the engine spark advance unlike Leiker [3] who used the compression ratio. Authors have made this choice because spark advance is the main adjustable parameter in stationary gas engine. Determination of knock limited spark advance (KLSA). The knock limit is determined by increasing gradually the SA until the occurrence of knock (Fig. 2), materialized by oscillations of the in-cylinder pressure. The other engine parameters (equivalence ratio and volumetric efciency) must remain constant during this operation. The knock limit, corresponding to the onset of pressure oscillations in the cylinder, is set using the PKC [3,6]. The threshold of knock was xed at 50% of knocking cycles (Fig. 3). We can notice that the threshold of knock, xed at 50% PKC, gives a knock limit close to that obtained by the MAPO analysis (Fig. 2).

Fig. 5. Test rig and main sensor locations.

Fig. 6. KLSA versus SMN and standard MN (AVL) for the 21 gases of the test matrix.

C. Rahmouni et al. / Fuel 83 (2004) 327336 Table 5 SMN of Algerian gas for various critical engine parameters r KLSA KLER KLVE 70 70 70 70 77.8

333

Table 6 Levels of variation (experimental plan) and range of validation (correlation) of engine parameters SMN Engine parameters Levels of variation 298 10 and 158CA 0.8 and 0.9 60 and 70% Range of validation 298 10308CA 0.70.9 6070% 83 83 83 83 82

f
0.8 0.7 0.86 0.74 0.70

SA 18.8 30.8 15 25 25

T (K) SA f hv

in engines and knock resistance of fuels is here highlighted. We can thus notice that SMN, as well as MN, is a good indicator for knock resistance of gaseous fuels (reected by KLSA), whatever the engine used as reference. Measurement of the SMN using equivalence ratio and volumetric efciency as critical parameters. SMN can also be determined by varying the equivalence ratio or the volumetric efciency (other parameters remaining constant) using the same methodology as for the spark advance. From Table 5, the SMN is determined for different critical parameters. Thus, let us consider a gas of given composition. For an equivalence ratio of 0.8 and a volumetric efciency of 70%, the KLSA is 18.88CA and for a volumetric efciency of 70% and a spark advance of 158CA, the KLER is 0.86. Whatever critical parameter chosen, the SMN remains 83. These results ascertain the standard methodology used to determine knock rating of gaseous fuels and show that the critical parameters chosen have no effects on the measured SMN. As a consequence, the work carried out on knock rating of gaseous fuels by Leiker et al. [3] (KLCR) and Attar and Karim [6] (KLSA and KLCR) should give similar results. Besides, the determination of SMN is independent of the engine settings considered. Measurement of the MNR. By denition, at knock limit, the MNR is equal to the SMN of the consumed gas. Each engine tuning is associated with a MNR. For its determination, the engine is supplied with a reference blend of methane and hydrogen. At each engine setting, the volumetric percentage of hydrogen is modied so as to reach the knock limit, corresponding to 50% of knocking cycles. The MNR then corresponds to the volumetric percentage of methane in the reference blend. An experimental plan was established in order to determine the effect of each engine parameter on the MNR. Two levels of variation are xed. The mean effect of each engine parameter was calculated to determine the inuent factors on the MNR. The plan quanties the main effects and their interactions on the MNR, which then results in a regression model capable of taking into account MNR variation. The levels of variation and the range of validation of the engine settings considered are given in Table 6. We are looking for a relation between the engine parameters and the gas composition in order to dene a global index to run the engine at knock limit.

Predictive model of the MNR. The mean effect of each engine parameter is obtained thanks to an experimental plan [56]. Table 7 gives the mean effect of each engine parameters and its interactions. By arbitrarily xing a signicant threshold of 1 point for the MNR, we noticed that the mean effect of each parameter taken alone is more signicant than the effect of double interactions. The contribution of each parameter is fairly the same. The effect of double interactions is also signicant. Interactions 3 to 3 are not signicant. A correlation, between the MNR, the main factors and their double interactions, is established
2 MNR C1 h2 v C2 f2 C3 SA C4 hv f C5 hv SA

C6 fSA C7 hv C8 f C9 SA

where Ci are coefcients obtained by the least square method [54], where C1 25:9 1022 ; C2 2:0 102 ; C3 23:7 1023 ; C4 2:4; C5 10:3 1022 ; C6 13:0; C7 6:0; C8 214:7 102 ; C9 214:1 The global behaviour of the MNR, displayed in Fig. 7, is well predicted by correlation (3). The mean absolute error is then lower than 3 MNR units and the global trend of MNR variation is satisfactory for our application. In order to obtain a more general relation, it is necessary to extend the range of variations of the engine parameters. Link between SMN and engine parameters. In order to nd a relation between engine parameters and gas composition, the effect of a variation of composition (here, SMN) on critical parameters such as the KLSA, the equivalence ratio and the volumetric efciency is brought out in Tables 8 and 9. A variation of 10 SMN units corresponds to a variation contained between 2 and 4 CA in term of KLSA, a variation of 0.029 in term of equivalence ratio and a variation of 5.5 points in term of
Table 7 Mean effect of each engine parameter and its interactions on MNR Factor Main factors SA Mean effect 8.0 Interactions

f
8.8

hv
7.0

SAf 2.0

SAhv 1.8

fhv
1.5

SAfhv 2 0.8

334

C. Rahmouni et al. / Fuel 83 (2004) 327336 Table 9 Effect of a 10 SMN units variation on critical engine parameters Tuning No. 1 KLSA KLER KLVE 2.98CA 0.073 Tuning No. 2 2.98CA 0.045 Tuning No. 3 2.28CA Tuning No. 4 3.98CA 0.029 5.5 points

an increase of the ambient temperature leads to a decrease of KLSA. Ambient temperature has a double effect on the inner charge temperature: First, it directly changes the air/fuel mixture temperature; Second, it has an inuence on wall heat transfer. The different tests show that:
Fig. 7. Measured MNR versus calculated MNR for 15 engine tunings.

volumetric efciency. From Table 2, other authors [3,4,6, 28,33,46,49 51] have quantied the effect of a variation of 10 MN units on critical engine parameters and noted that the corresponding variation in term of KLSA ranges between 1 and 6 CA. These values depend on the operating conditions according to authors and on the kind of engine used. The values obtained from the Lister-Petter engine are similar to those obtained by Leiker et al. [3] or Attar and Karim [6], which ascertains the methodology employed using KLSA. Inuence of ambient temperature on KLSA. The effect of ambient temperature on the occurrence of knock is studied for various engine settings. For each temperature, the engine parameters are xed. The SA is modied until KLSA is reached. Measurements show that temperature has an appreciable effect on KLSA whatever engine settings. An increase of the ambient temperature leads to a decrease in KLSA (Figs. 8 and 9). Knock appears much earlier when the equivalence ratio and temperature are important. The dependence of KLSA, in term of relative variation Dr KLSA; with the absolute variation of ambient temperature DT can be observed in Fig. 10. It can be noted that Dr KLSA is proportional to DT whatever is the engine tuning. Thus,
Table 8 Engine settings considered for the measure of the effect of a 10 SMN units variation on critical parameters Engine set Tuning No. 1 Tuning No. 2 Tuning No. 3 Tuning No. 4 SA w hv KLSA KLER KLVE MNR SMN 10 0.8 70 18.8 1.02 . 75.7 52.7 83 15 0.8 70 18.8 0.858 . 77 70 83 10 0.9 70 12.6 . 1.05 . 76 71 83 25 0.7 70 30.8 0.743 78.1 68 83

Temperature has a great role in the variation of the KLSA. When temperature increases, KLSA decreases; The error on KLSA is estimated to be about ^ 0.5 CA and the error on the ambient temperature to be about ^ 0.2 8C. The slope of the curve is 2 1.7. An error of 2.2% was calculated on this coefcient;

Fig. 8. Effect of the ambient temperature on KLSA hv 70%:

Fig. 9. Effect of the ambient temperature on KLSA hv 60%:

C. Rahmouni et al. / Fuel 83 (2004) 327336

335

9. This work should be expanded for other gas engines in order to conrm the results and to control knock whatever engines.

References
[1] BT104. Gaseous combustibles and combustion principles. Gaz de France; 1993. [in French]. [2] Klimstra J, Hernaez AB, Bouwman WH, Gerard A, Karll B, Quinto V, Roberts GR, Schollmeyer H-J. Classication methods for the knock resistance of gaseous fuels: an attempt towards unication. ASME (ICE) Fall Tech Conf 1999;33-1:12737. [3] Leiker M, Christoph K, Rankl M, Cartellieri W, Pfeifer U. Evaluation of antiknocking property of gaseous fuels by means of methane number and its practical application to gas engines. ASME Paper No. 72-DGP-4. p. 116. [4] Ryan III TW, Callahan TJ, King SR. Engine knock rating of natural gases-methane number. ASME, J Engng Gas Turbines Power 1993; 115:76976. [5] Ryan IIITW, Callahan TJ, Buckingham JP, Kakockzi RJ, Sorge G. Engine knock rating of natural gases-expanding the methane number database. Proceeding of the 18th Annual Fall Technical, Conference of ASME, ICE-vol. 27-4. International Combustion Engine Division; 1996. p. 5964. [6] Attar A, Karim GA. Knock rating of gaseous fuels. Fall Tech Conf ASME 1998;31-3:417. Paper No. 98-ICE-149. [7] Bade Shrestha SO, Karim GA. Predicting the effects of the presence of diluents with methane on spark ignition engine performance. Appl Therm Engng 2001;21:33142. [8] Brecq G, Bellettre J, Tazerout M, Muller T. Knock prevention of gas SI engine by adjunction of inert gases to the fuel. Proceedings of IJPGC (International Joint Power Generation Conference) of the ASME (2002-26112); June 24 26, 2002. ISBN 0-7918-3602-9. [9] Le Corre O, Brecq G, Tazerout M. Thermoeconomic analysis based on energy structure for CHP. Appl Therm Engng 2002;22:5616. [10] Kalghatgi GT. Combustion chamber deposits and knock in a spark ignition engine: some additive and fuel effects. SAE Technical Paper No. 962009; 1996. [11] Heywood JB. Internal combustion engine fundamentals. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1988. [12] Millo F, Ferraro CV. Knock in SI engines: a comparison between different techniques for detection and control. SAE Technical Paper No. 982477; 1998. [13] Syrimis M, Assanis DN. The effect of the location of knock initiation on heat ux into a SI combustion chamber. SAE Technical Paper No. 972935; 1997. [14] Syrimis M. Characterisation of knocking combustion and heat transfer in a spark ignition engine. PhD Thesis. Rice University (1990) and University of Illinois (1992); 1996. ` allumage [15] Trapy J. Les transferts thermiques dans le moteur a : conception et mise au point dun mode ` le spe cique du commande change gaz-parois (Heat transfer in SI engines: coefcient de conception and development of a specic model for wall heat transfer te Franc coefcient). SFT (Socie aise des Thermiciens); 1985. [16] Winch RF, Mayes FM. A method for identifying preignition. SAE Trans 1953;61:453 68. [17] Collings N, Dinsdale S, Eade D. Knock detection by means of the spark plug. SAE Technical Paper No. 860635; 1986. [18] Auzins J, Johansson H, Nytomt J. Ion-gap sense in misre detection, knock and engine control. SAE Technical Paper No. 950004; 1995. [19] Asano M, Kuma T, Kajitani M, Takeuchi M. Development of a new ion current combustion control system. SAE Technical Paper No. 980162; 1998.

Fig. 10. Effect of ambient temperature on Dr KLSA for the Abu Dhabi gas (MN 69.1).

A 10 8C increase in the temperature between two tests corresponds to a decrease of approximately 17 ^ 0.4% on the relative variation of the KLSA. Depending of the KLSA, one obtains a variable trend ranging between 2 1.5 K/8CA (for very low knocking conditions) and 2 10 K/8CA, reecting a noticeable inuence of the intake temperature compared to other studies (2 5 to 2 14 K/8CA). It can be explained by the double inuence of the ambient air also used to cool the engine.

4. Conclusions 1. Knock has been studied in a natural gas fuelled SI engine. 2. A database of 21 different gases was established and their SMN was measured. We calculated the SMN of gases, using Leikers methodology by varying SA. 3. A remarkable result is that the SMN is a very good indicator of knock rating of gaseous fuels. 4. The measured SMN is highly correlated with the MN, derived from the AVL software METHANE. MN is also a good indicator for the knock rating of gaseous fuels. 5. An experimental plan was established to obtain the inuence of engine parameters (equivalence ratio, volumetric efciency and spark advance) on MNR. This latter was determined from 15 different engine tunings. 6. A correlation between the MNR and the engine parameters was deduced from experimental data using a least square method. Optimal operation of the engine (knock-free operation) is then possible by adapting engine parameters to variation of gas quality. 7. The determination of the SMN was proved to be independent of the critical parameters chosen. 8. Experiments conrm the role of temperature and highlight an inuence twice as much important in the case of a cooled air engine.

336

C. Rahmouni et al. / Fuel 83 (2004) 327336 [39] Ferarro CV, Marzano M, Nuccio P. Knock-limit measurement in high speed SI engines. SAE Technical Paper No. 850127; 1985. [40] Najt PM. Evaluating threshold knock occurrence and intensity in multicylinder engine. SAE Technical Paper No. 820074; 1982. [41] Ho SY, Kuo TW. A hydrocarbon autoignition model for knocking combustion in SI engines. SAE Technical Paper No. 971672; 1997. [42] Abu Qudais M. Exhaust gas temperature for knock detection and control in spark ignition engine. Energy Conversion Mgmt 1996;37: 138392. [43] Goto S, Itoh Y. Development of lean burn high-output spark-ignited gas engines (experimental study in lean gas engines). In: Nippon Kikai Gakkai Ronbunshu, editor. Transactions of the Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers, Part B, vol. 63.; 1997. p. 105561. [44] Brecq G, Bellettre J, Tazerout M. A new indicator for knock detection in gas SI engines. Int J Therm Sci 2003;42(5) S23S32. [45] Worret R, Bernhardt S, Schwarz F, Spicher U. Application of different cylinder pressure based knock detection methods in spark ignition engines. SAE Technical Paper No. 2002-01-1668; 2002. [46] Schiffgens HJ, Endres H, Schrey E, Wackertapp H. Concept for the adaptation of SI engines to changing methane number. Trans ASME, J Engng Gas Turbine Power 1994;116:7339. [47] Dimpelfeld PM, Foster DE. The prediction of auto-ignition in a sparkignited engine. SAE Technical Paper No. 841337; 1984. [48] Ryan WT, Callahan JT. Effects of gas composition on engine performance and emissions. Topical Report GETA 91-13, NTIS, Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, TX; December 1991. [49] Ho S, Amlee D, Johns R. A comprehensive knock model for application in gas engines. SAE Technical Paper No. 961938; 1996. [50] Faure E, Montagne X. ORI: assessment methodology and inuence of engine running parameters. SAE Technical Paper No. 972933; 1997. ments danalyse du cliquetis et de ses effets (Elements [51] Douaud A. Ele trole for the analysis of knock and its effects). Revue lInst Franc ais Pe (IFP) 1983;38(5). [52] Kubesh J, King SR, Liss WE. Effect of gas composition on octane number of natural gas fuels. SAE Technical Paper No. 922359; 1992. ` gaz et coge ne ration (Gas engines and [53] Daverat P. Moteurs a ne rale de Thermique No. 383; 1993. cogeneration). Revue Ge [54] Brecq G, Rahmouni C, Taouri A, Tazerout M, Le Corre O. Service methane number as a mean to avoid knock in natural gas fuelled spark ignition engines. Salzburg, Austria: Internal Combustion Engine Division of the ASME; May 11 14, 2003. ICES2003-573. [55] Brecq G, Ramesh A, Tazerout M, Le Corre O. An experimental study of knock in a natural gas fuelled spark ignition engine. SAE Technical Paper No. 2001-01-3562; 2001. riences: De lexpe rimentation a ` [56] Sado G, Sado M-C. Les plans dexpe (Experimental plans). AFNOR Technique; 1991. lassurance qualite ISSN: 0297-4827.

[20] Eriksson L, Nielsen L, Nytomt J. Ignition control by ionisation current interpretation. SAE Technical Paper No. 960045; 1996. [21] Schneider D, Chia Lai M. An investigation of the impact of cycle-tocycle variations on the ionic current signal in SI engines. SAE Technical Paper No. 2000-01-1943; 2000. [22] Schmillen KP, Rechs M. Different methods of knock detection and knock control. SAE Technical Paper No. 910858; 1991. [23] Draper CS. The physical effects of detonation in a closed cylindrical chamber. Technical Report 493, NACA; 1935. [24] Pauzinauskas PV. Examination of methods used to characterise engine knock. SAE Technical Paper No. 920808; 1992. [25] Burgdorf K, Denbratt I. Comparison of cylinder pressure based knock detection methods. SAE Technical Paper No. 972932; 1997. ` la caracte risation du cliquetis dans les [26] Brecq G. Contribution a ` gaz fonctionnant en me lange pauvre (Contribution to the moteurs a thermodynamic characterisation of knock for gas engines: application de Nantes; 2002 to new methods of detection). PhD Thesis. Universite [in French]. [27] Checkel MD, Dale JD. Testing a third derivative knock indicator on a production engine. SAE Technical Paper No. 861216; 1986. [28] Russ S. A review of the effect of engine operating conditions on borderline knock. SAE Paper No. 960497; 1996. [29] Chun KM, Kim KW. Measurement and analysis of knock in a SI engine using the cylinder pressure and block vibration signals. SAE Technical Paper No. 940146; 1994. [30] Thomas JR, Clarke DP, Collins JM, Sakonji T, Ikeda K, Shoji F, Furushima K. A test to evaluate the inuences of natural gas composition and knock intensity. ASME ICE 1994;22:149 59. [31] Dubel M, Schmillen K, Wackertapp H. Inuence of gas composition on the knocking behaviour of spark-ignited gas engines. In International Gas Research Conference Transactions; 1983. p. 95263. [32] Lee JH, Hwang SH, Lim JS, Jeon DC, Cho YS. A new knock-detection method using cylinder pressure block vibration and sound pressure signals from SI engine. SAE Technical Paper No. 981436; 1998. [33] Westin F, Grandin B, Angstrom HE. The inuence of residual gases on knock in turbocharged SI-engines. SAE Technical Paper No. 200001-2840; 2000. [34] Brunt MFJ, Pond CR, Biundo J. Gasoline engine knock analysis using cylinder pressure data. SAE Technical Paper No. 980896; 1998. [35] Checkel MD, Dale JD. Computerised knock detection from engine pressure records. SAE Technical Paper No. 860028; 1986. [36] Ando H, Takemura J, Koujina E. A knock anticipating strategy basing on the real-time combustion mode analysis. SAE Paper No. 890882; 1989. [37] Dhall SN, Beans EW. Correlation of knock with engine parameters for ammonia/nitrous oxide mixtures. SAE Technical Paper No. 912360; 1991. [38] Ortmann S, Rychetsky M, Glenser M, Groppo R, Tubetti P, Morra G. Engine knock estimation neural networks based on a real-world database. SAE Technical Paper No. 980513; 1998.