You are on page 1of 14

Theoretical and experimental investigations

on the performance of dual fuel diesel engine with
hydrogen and LPG as secondary fuels
D.B. Lata*, Ashok Misra
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, Ranchi 835215, India
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 4 March 2010
Received in revised form
9 August 2010
Accepted 9 August 2010
Available online 16 September 2010
Keywords:
Dual fuel engine
Combustion
Modeling
Alternative fuels
Hydrogen
a b s t r a c t
The mathematical models to predict pressure, net heat release rate, mean gas tempera-
ture, and brake thermal efficiency for dual fuel diesel engine operated on hydrogen, LPG
and mixture of LPG and hydrogen as secondary fuels are developed. In these models
emphasis have been given on spray mixing characteristics, flame propagation, equilibrium
combustion products and in-cylinder processes, which were computed using empirical
equations and compared with experimental results. This combustion model predicts
results which are in close agreement with the results of experiments conducted on a multi
cylinder turbocharged, intercooled gen-set diesel engine. The predictions are also in close
agreement with the results on single cylinder diesel engine obtained by other researchers.
A reasonable agreement between the predicted and experimental results reveals that the
presented model gives quantitatively and qualitatively realistic prediction of in-cylinder
processes and engine performances during combustion.
ª 2010 Professor T. Nejat Veziroglu. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Due to fast depletion of fossil fuels and increase in demand of
energy with clean environment, it is not only essential to use
liquefied petroleum fuel efficiently, but also to explore other
resources of energy. Hence, several gaseous fuels such as CNG
(CH
4
) [1], LPG (C
3
H
8
) [2], hydrogen [3], biogas [4], producer gas
[5], etc. are being experimented as alternative fuels for dual
fuel internal combustion engines. Prakash et al. [6] modified
stationary diesel engine to work on biogas/diesel dual fuel
engine.
The two zone quasi-dimensional model for the simulation of
combustion process in spark ignition engines fueled with
hydrogen, methane, or hydrogenemethane blends were devel-
oped by Federico et al. [7]. Roy et al. [8] investigated the effect of
hydrogen content in the producer gas on the performance and
emissions of a supercharged dual fuel diesel engine fueled at
constant injection pressure and injection quantity. Saravanan
et al. [9] had experimentally analyzed the combustion of
hydrogen with diesel and hydrogen with diethyl ether (DEE) and
observedanincreaseinbrakethermal efficiency. Lambeet al. [10]
converted conventional diesel engine into hydrogen operated
dual fuel engine.
Choi et al. [11] developed the heavy-duty variable
compression engine to investigate the performance and
emission characteristics for hydrogen enriched LPG fueled
engine. Pooniaet al. [12] investigatedtheeffect of intakecharge
temperature, pilot fuel quantity, exhaust gas recirculation and
throttling of the intake to improve the performance of LPG-
diesel dual fuel engine.
Karim et al. [13] investigated the performance of dual fuel
diesel engine by using different proportions of CH
4
/H
2
mixture
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ91 9431382608; fax: þ91 6512275401.
E-mail address: devdaslata@yahoo.com (D.B. Lata).
Avai l abl e at www. sci encedi r ect . com
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ he
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 1 9 1 8 e1 1 9 3 1
0360-3199/$ e see front matter ª 2010 Professor T. Nejat Veziroglu. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.08.039
and equivalence ratio. Ma et al. [14] developed computer
simulation to predict the performance of a hydrogen vehicle
engine. Janabi et al. [15] developed a quasi-dimensional model
to study the effect of hydrogen blending on fuel consumption
and pollutant concentrations. Liu et al. [16] developed thermo-
dynamic multi-zone model to predict combustion process in
dual fuel engine. Wanget al. [17] developedacombustionmodel
on the basis of CFD and reaction kinetics. Wong et al. [18]
developed a model for the reaction rate development in
a motored engine working on fuel mixtures of hydrogen,
methane and propane with air in the presence of exhaust gas
recirculation. Metghalchi and Keck [19] measured the laminar
burning velocities of the stoichiometric hydrogenepropaneeair
flames. Huang et al. [20] studied the laminar burning charac-
teristics of propaneehydrogeneair flames.
The concept of multi-fuels engine system is definitely
attractive but it requires a thorough investigation at both
theoretical and experimental level. With this aim in view, this
paper presents a theoretical analysis and experimental results
on the performance of a dual fuel diesel engine with hydrogen
and LPG as secondary fuels.
2. Combustion analysis
2.1. Combustion process
In a dual fuel engine, much of the energy is released from the
combustion of gaseous fuel, while a small amount of diesel
liquid fuel provides ignition. It was reported that addition of
hydrogen in gasoline engine not only reduces the mass of
gasoline but also increases its thermal efficiency [21]. A
gaseous fuel induction in hydrogen-diesel dual fuel engine
also gives higher efficiency [9]. However, the combustion
process in a diesel engine becomes more complex with the
addition of gaseous fuel [22].
Following Liu and Karim [16] the combustion process
within a hydrogen-LPG-diesel operated dual fuel engine can
be visualized as shown in Fig. 1.
A mixture of hydrogen, LPG, and air is inducted into the
dual fuel engine. At the ideal situation near the end of
compression stroke, diesel is injected into the engine cylinder
as a pilot fuel. As a result the combustion space is divided into
three regions before ignition. The rich and unvaporized pilot
diesel at the core of the injection forms the first region. During
the end of compression stroke, some part of the vaporized
diesel diffuse into the approaching charge of hydro-
geneLPGeair mixture, and forms the second region, which
becomes flammable due to the high temperature and pressure
of the mixture. The gaseous-air charge, which is away from
the injected pilot fuel, forms the third region of lean fuel
character.
The core of the spray on diesel fuel injection, which
contains rich liquefied pilot diesel, constitutes the unburnt
diesel fuel region. As reaction rates of gaseous-air charge with
vaporized pilot diesel in flammable region reach at stoichio-
metric condition, the ignition takes place, and forms the
premixed diffusion combustion region. Now the flame prop-
agates through the gaseous-air charge due to its homogeneity
across the flammable region and forms the flame propagation
region of the gaseous fuel. The remainder gaseous-air charge
far away from the injection pilot zone forms the region of
unburnt lean gaseous-air mixture. This lean gaseous-air
mixture is compressed and heated by the combination of the
movement of the piston and flame front. Once the fuel charge
is entrained from the unburnt zone to the burnt zone, its
energy is released at the burnt zone periphery.
During the ignition delay period, a part of the injected
fuel mixes with the gaseous fueleair mixture and forms
a combustible mixture. Thus, ignition starts at premixed
zone. At the time of ignition, the premixed combustible
mixture has been considered to be bounded by the lean
limit of combustion at the outer edge of spray and rich limit
near the core. After ignition more fuel from the spray core
becomes combustible because of continuous gaseous
fueleair entrainment. The concentration of reactant mixture
decreases across the flame front, and the temperature
increases as shown in Fig. 2 [23].
Thus, the gaseous fueleair charge within the engine
cylinder undergoes different combustion processes producing
varying temperature and combustion products.
2.2. Spray mixing model
When the liquid fuel at high pressure is injected into
a combustion chamber, which contains high pressure and
high temperature air, it breaks up into fine droplets. The
variation in velocity between injected fuel and gaseous
fueleair causes deceleration of the spray and growth in the
spray width. This results in non uniform distribution of
velocity, temperature and fueleair ratio.
Rich pilot fuel
Reacting Area
Unburnt Gaseous
Fuel –air Charge
Propagation of Gaseous Fuel-air
Charge
Premixed Diffusion
Region
Unburnt Pilot
fuel
Fig. 1 e Spray zone.
Temperature
Reactant
Un-burnt
Reactant
Zone
Pre-
Combustion
zone
Reaction
Zone
Product
Zone
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
Flame Front
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
Fig. 2 e Temperature and concentration profile.
i nt e r na t i o na l j our na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 1 9 1 8 e1 1 9 3 1 11919
In running engine, properties of fuels and air vary with
time, but for simplicity, these values are treated as average
during the fuel injection period. The instantaneous injection
velocity, V
f
[16], fuel mass injection rate, m
f
[16], spray angle of
pilot fuel [24], break-up period of the pilot fuel [24], spray
penetration of pilot fuel [24], shape of spray cross section
[16,25e27] and rate of air entrainment [28] all were considered
in spray mixing model.
2.3. Flame propagation model
An important intrinsic property of a combustible gaseous fuel
and air mixture is its laminar burning velocity [29]. The
laminar burning velocity as a function of equivalence ratio of
LPGeair mixture at a temperature of 298 K and pressure of
1 atm is given as [19].
S
uLPG
¼ 4:407f
3
À150:69f
2
þ308:62f À122:7 (1)
and for hydrogeneair mixture combustion, the equation is
[29]
S
uH
2
¼ 51:902f
3
À394:46f
2
þ835:14f À267:07 (2)
where S
uLPG
and S
uH
2
are the laminar burning velocities of LPG
and hydrogen in cm/sec respectively.
The laminar burning velocity of hydrogeneLPGeair
mixture can be predicted by Le Chatelier’s Rule [20]
S
uðf;H
2
Þ
¼
_
_
1
x
H
2
S
uH
2
ðfÞ
þ
x
LPG
S
uLPG
ðfÞ
_
_
(3)
where X
H
2
and X
LPG
are the mole fraction of hydrogen and LPG
respectively. The turbulent flame velocity may be obtained by
multiplying S
uðf;H
2
Þ
with a factor K, known as turbulent velocity
factor [24].
2.4. Heat transfer
The heat transfer Q expressed as
Q ¼ A
S
hðT À T
S
Þ
has the convective heat transfer coefficient, h, based on
Woschni correlation [30], as
h ¼ 110$
_
d
À0:2
p
0:8
_
C
1
c
m
þ C
2
V
S
T
1
P
1
V
1
ðP ÀP
0
Þ
_
0:8
T
À0:53
_
(4)
where d ¼ cylinder diameter, p ¼ instantaneous cylinder
pressure (bar), T ¼ instantaneous mean gas temperature (K ),
T
S
is surface temperature assumed to be 550 K [31], C
1
¼ 2.28,
c
m
¼ mean piston speed, and
A
S
¼ AðpistoncrownÞ þA
0:3
ðpistontoplandÞ
2.5. Combustion modeling
Because of differences inthe reactionrates, reactionconstants,
and energy release rates of three different kinds of fuels, i.e.,
diesel, LPG and hydrogen, modeling is confined to single zone
combustion. For manypurposes indiesel engine simulationthe
assumption of no dissociation with a single zone model is
acceptable. The assumptions reduce the computational time
significantly without a serious loss of accuracy. As the
combustionshouldalways beweakof stoichiometric, this leads
totemperature at whichdissociationdoes not havemucheffect
on the thermodynamic performances of the engine. Hence, for
diesel engines, the combustion model is frequently modeled as
a single zone [32].
It is assumed that the mixture comprising of ideal gases
(including gaseous fuels and high temperature vapors) obeys
the following [33]:
The mixture as a whole obeys the equation of state
pV ¼ MR
mol
T, where M is the total number of moles of all
kinds, R
mol
the universal gas constant, kJ/kg-mol K. The
system is assumed to undergo quasi static processes.
The unburnt mixture of hydrogen, LPG, air and residual
gases forms a homogenous non reactive mixture.
The instantaneous heat transfer coefficient is same for all
metallic surfaces.
The dissociation takes place whenever temperature exceeds
1600 K.
Combustion is assumed to occur due to the entrainment of
fuels and air in stoichiometric proportion during premixed
combustion phase [34].
When a fuel C
a
H
b
O
g
N
d
burns with air in an equivalence
ratio 4 and the products are subjected to temperature and
pressure which attain equilibrium [35], the equation in the
premixed zone (Fig. 1) for the mixture of diesel, LPG, hydrogen
and air may be written as
xC
a
H
b
þyC
3:36
H
8:72
þzH
2
þ
a
S
f
ðO
2
þ3:76N
2
þ0:044$ArÞ/n
1
CO
2
þn
2
H
2
Oþn
3
N
2
þn
4
Hþn
5
Oþn
6
Nþn
7
H
2
þn
8
O
2
þn
9
OH
þn
10
COþ n
11
NOþn
12
Ar
(5)
where
a
S
¼ x
_
a þ
b
4
_
þ5y þ
z
2
; and ðx þy þzÞ ¼ 1: (5a)
x, y and z are the mole fractions of diesel, LPG and hydrogen
respectively. The chemical composition of fuels is shown in
Table 1.
Consider an elemental time step dt after some time t ¼ t
1
during the combustion process. Let R
i
be the symbols for the
coefficients of the constituents at the beginning of the process
of the time step dt, and P
i
the symbols for the coefficients of
the constituents at the end of time step dt. Then following
species are present during the beginning of process at time t
1,
Table 1 e Average composition of fuels.
Sr. No. Fuel Composition Mass (%)
1. LPG (Equivalent Chemical
Symbol C
3.36
H
8.72
)
C
2
H
6
1.0
C
3
H
8
62
C
4
H
10
37
2. Diesel (C
14.4
H
24.9
) C (By weight) 84.8
H (By weight) 15.2
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 1 9 1 8 e1 1 9 3 1 11920
R
1
CO
2
þR
2
H
2
Oþ R
3
N
2
þ R
4
HþR
5
OþR
6
NþR
7
H
2
þR
8
O
2
þR
9
OHþ R
10
COþR
11
NOþR
12
Ar þR
13
C
a
H
b
þR
14
C
3:36
H
8:72
þR
15
H
2
¼ A; say
(6)
and at time t
2
¼ t
1
þ dt,
P
1
CO
2
þP
2
H
2
OþP
3
N
2
þP
4
HþP
5
OþP
6
NþP
7
H
2
þP
8
O
2
þ P
9
OH
þP
10
COþP
11
NOþP
12
Ar þP
13
C
a
H
b
þP
14
C
3:36
H
8:72
þP
15
H
2
¼ B; say
(6a)
The absolute internal energy E(T ) of the cylinder contents at
time t
1
can be expressed as
EðTÞ ¼

M
i
e
i
ðTÞ þ

M
i
e
0
i
ðTÞ (7)
where M
i
e
0
i
ðTÞ is the internal energy at absolute zero of the ith
specie in the mixture. M
i
is the number of moles of ith specie
in the gas mixture. Now, the specific internal energy e
i
(T ) may
be expressed as [33],
e
i
ðTÞ ¼ R
mol
_
_
_
_

j¼5
j¼1
u
ij
T
j
_
_
À T
_
_
(8)
where R
mol
is the universal gas constant.
The coefficients u
ij
( j ¼ 1e5) are referred from [33]. From
Eqs. (7) and (8), the absolute internal energy E
R
of the mixture
at time t
1
can be written as
E
R
¼

15
i;j
0
¼1
R
i
ðe
0
Þ
j
0 þ

15
i;j
0
¼1
R
i
ðT
1
Þ
j
0 (9)
where i ¼ 1e15, and j’ ¼ 1e15 implies that 1 ¼ CO
2
, 2 ¼ H
2
O,
3 ¼ N
2
, 4 ¼ H, 5 ¼ O, 6 ¼ N, 7 ¼ H
2
, 8 ¼ O
2
, 9 ¼ OH, 10 ¼ CO,
11 ¼ NO, 12 ¼ Ar, 13 ¼ C
n
H
m
, 14 ¼ C
3.36
H
8.72
, 15 ¼ H
2
; T
1
is the
temperature at time t
1
, and the absolute internal energy E
P
at
time t
2
as
E
P
¼

15
i;j
0
¼1
P
i
ðe
0
Þ
j
0 þ

15
i;j
0
¼1
P
i
ðT
2
Þ
j
0 (10)
The first law of thermodynamics for the process is
dQ ÀdW ¼ dE
where dE ¼ E
P
ÀE
R
¼ change in internal energy during the time
interval dt; dQ and dW are the corresponding heat and work
transfer respectively. Therefore,
dQ ÀdW ¼
_
M
P
i
e
0P
i
þ M
P
i
e
P
i
ðT
P
Þ
¸
À
_
M
R
i
e
0R
i
þM
R
i
e
R
i
ðT
R
Þ
¸
(11)
dQ ÀdW ¼
_
M
P
i
e
0P
i
À M
R
i
e
0R
i
¸
þ
_
M
P
i
e
P
i
ðT
P
Þ ÀM
R
i
e
R
i
ðT
R
Þ
¸
(12)
where ½M
P
i
e
0P
i
ÀM
R
i
e
0R
i
Š is the heat of reaction. The Q
VS
, at
absolute zero can be predicted from heat of reaction at some
reference temperature T
S
; Q
VS
is negative at exothermic
reaction. This lower heat of reaction may be replaced by lower
calorific value q
vs
, which is positive during exothermic
reaction.
Thus Q
VS
¼ Àq
vs
Then the generalized form of first law of thermodynamics
for the process during the step dt becomes
dQ À dW ¼
_
M
P
i
e
0P
i
þM
P
i
e
P
i
ðT
S
Þ
¸
À
_
M
R
i
e
0R
i
þM
R
i
e
R
i
ðT
S
Þ
¸
þd
mf
q
vs
ÀdQ
h
(13)
where d
mf
, the mass of fuels, is burnt during time interval dt,
and dQ
h
is the heat transfer to the metallic surfaces.
2.6. Cycle analysis
During the period of ignition delay, the gaseous-air mixture is
entrained into the core of pilot diesel spray and forms pre-
mixed diffusion burn zone, which is assumed to burn stoi-
chiometrically [15]. The fresh mixture of diesel, gaseous fuels
and air is entrained from the surroundings to this burn zone
and its energy is released immediately. The flame propagates
towards the flammable region of the gaseous-air mixture and
forms a propagation burn zone. Hence, the combustion is
assumed to complete by two combustion processes as the
amount of gaseous fueleair mixture whichis entrained during
the time of ignition delay period along with premixed pilot
diesel is burnt stoichiometrically and instantaneously: a part
is assumed to burn at constant volume process due to pres-
ence of hydrogen and the rest of the diffused pilot fuel and
gaseous fueleair mixture is assumed to burn at constant
pressure process.
The cycle consists of the following processes, depicted in
Fig. 3,
(i) Polytropic compression of the mixture of air, LPG and
hydrogen from A to B,
(ii) Adiabatic instantaneous constant volume combustion
process from B to C,
(iii) Adiabatic instantaneous constant pressure combustion
process from C to D,
(iv) Polytropic expansion of the products of the combustion
from D to E; and finally,
(v) Constant volume exhaust process from E to A.
P
V
A
B
C
D
E
Fig. 3 e Cycle analysis.
i nt e r na t i o na l j our na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 1 9 1 8 e1 1 9 3 1 11921
2.6.1. Polytropic compression of the mixture of air, LPG and
hydrogen
A mixture of air, LPG and hydrogen is inducted into the
cylinder and compressed polytropically from A to B. The
process calculation is based on the first law of thermody-
namics by dividing the stroke volume into large number of
elemental volume changes. Let i’ and i’ þ 1 represent the
states before and after some time step dt during the process
AB. For isentropic compression dQ ¼ 0, and as there is no
combustion d
mf
$q
vs
¼ 0; the first law for the polytropic
compression process, Eq. (13), reduces to
½EðT
i
0
þ1
Þ ÀEðT
i
0 ފ þ dW ÀdQ
h
¼ 0 (14)
The work term, dW, equals pdV for an infinitesimal change.
If the change is sufficiently small the work term can be
approximated by [32]
dW ¼
ðP
i
0 þP
i
0
þ1
Þ
2
ðV
i
0
þ1
ÀV
i
0 Þ (15)
where V
i’þ1
is given by [23]
V
i þ1
V
C
¼ 1 þ
1
2
ðr
C
À1Þ
_
R þ1 Àcosq À
_
R
2
Àsin
2
q
_
1=2
_
(16)
where R ¼ l/a; l ¼ length of connecting rod; a ¼ length of crank
radius.
Substitution of Eq. (15) into Eq. (14) yields
EðT
i
0
þ1
Þ ÀEðT
i
0 Þ þ
ðP
i
0 þ P
i
0
þ1
Þ
2
ðV
i
0
þ1
ÀV
i
0 Þ ¼ 0 (17)
As there is no combustion during this process, the pressure
and temperature relation may be written as
P
i
0
þ1
¼
ðV
i
0 Þ
ðV
i
0
þ1
Þ
ðT
i
0
þ1
Þ
ðT
i
0 Þ
P
i
(18)
The first value of (T
i’þ1
) is thus obtained as
ðT
i
0
þ1
Þ ¼ ðT
i
Þ
_
V
1
V
2
_
kÀ1
where k is polytropic index, while further values of (T
i’þ1
) at
different states are
ðT
i
0
þ1
Þ
nþ1
¼ ðT
i
0
þ1
Þ
n
þ
_
f ðE
i
0
þ1
Þ
nÀ1
M$C
V
ðT
i
0
þ1
Þ
nÀ1
_
(19)
where M$C
V
ðT
i
0
þ1
Þ ¼

M
i
C
V
i
ðT
i
0
þ1
Þ and
f ðE
i
0
þ1
Þ
nÀ1
¼ EðT
i
0
þ1
Þ ÀEðT
i
0 Þ þ
ðP
i
0 þP
i
0
þ1
Þ
2
ðV
i
0
þ1
ÀV
i
0 Þ (19a)
M
i
is the number of moles of gas i in the mixture; C
v
¼ specific
heat.
For an ideal cycle, no products of combustion are left as
residuals; the amount of various gases forming the mixture in
the cylinder depends upon overall equivalence ratio4. If the
actual fueleair ratio is (F/A) and the stoichiometric fueleair
ratio is (F/A)
ST
, and the number of moles of the mixture in the
cylinder at the beginning of the compression stroke at A is
given by Eq. (6), i.e.
R
1
¼ R
2
¼ R
4
to R
13
¼ 0; R
8
¼
a
S
f
overall
;
R
3
¼ 3:76 R
8
; R
14
¼ y; R
15
¼ z;
and since there is no combustion, the number of moles at
state A and B remains the same. The overall equivalence ratio
(4
overall
) for the mixture of three fuels is given as
f
overall
¼
_
_
_
m
d
_
maÀ
_
m
H
2
_
C
cH
2
C
a
_
st
þ
m
LPG
_
C
cLPG
C
a
_
st
__
_
_
_
_
C
d
C
a
_
st
Therefore,
f
overall
¼
14:3m
d
_
m
a
À
_
34:01m
H
2
þ15:57m
LPG
_¸ (20)
where m
a
, m
d
, m
H
2
, and m
LPG
are the mass of air, diesel,
hydrogen, and LPG in kg respectively.
2.6.2. Adiabatic instantaneous constant volume combustion
process
If during the entire combustion, x moles of diesel, y mol of LPG
and z moles of hydrogen are burnt then total moles of fuels
burnt are M ¼ x þ y þ z. It is now assumed that only a fraction
X
f
of fuels is burnt during the constant volume combustion
process. Thus, the moles of fuels burnt are X
f
Mduring process
BC.
Let 1 and 2 represent the states before and after time step dt
within the process BC. Then Eq. (13) is written as
dQ ÀdW ¼ f
1
ðEÞ
¼ ½E
2
ðT
2
Þ ÀE
2
ðT
S
ފ À ½E
1
ðT
1
Þ ÀE
1
ðT
S
ފ þ X
f
M$q
vs
ÀdQ
h
(21)
The first value of T
2
is obtained from
T
2
¼ T
1
þ
X
f
M$q
vs
M
1
$C
V
ðT
1
Þ
(22)
Further calculations of T
2
are made from the expression
ðT
2
Þ
n
¼ ðT
2
Þ
nÀ1
þ
f
1
ðEÞ
M
R
i
C
V
ðT
2
Þ
nÀ1
and P
2
¼ P
1
_
T
2
T
1
__
M
2
M
1
_
(23)
where M
1
and M
2
are the number of moles of products before
and after combustion, and q
VS
is the sum of lower calorific
value of diesel, LPG and hydrogen.
2.6.3. Adiabatic instantaneous constant pressure combustion
process
Now, (1 À X
f
) portion of pilot diesel fuel is burnt during the
combustion at constant pressure. Thus, the mass of total fuels
burnt during this process is (1 À X
f
)M.
Let 1 and 2 represent the state change during the time step
dt within the process CD. Thus, the first law of thermody-
namics from Eq. (13) assuming no heat losses hence dQ
h
¼ 0;
dW ¼ P
1
(V
2
À V
1
) becomes
dQ ÀP
1
ðV
2
À V
1
Þ ¼
_
M
P
00
i
e
0P
00
i
þM
P
00
i
e
P
00
i
ðT
S
Þ
_
À
_
M
R
00
i
e
0R
00
i
þM
R
00
i
e
R
00
i
ðT
S
Þ
_
þ
_
1 ÀX
f
_
M$q
vs
(24)
M
R
i
isthenumber of molesat thebeginningof processisgivenas
R
i
¼ R
iðBCÞ
þ X
f
$M; R
8
¼ R
8ðBCÞ
Àa
S
_
X
f
$M
_
;
R
3
¼ 3:76$R
8
; R
13
¼ R
13ðBCÞ
À
_
X
f
$M
_
$x; R
14
¼ R
14ðBCÞ
À
_
X
f
$M
_
y;
R
15
¼ R
15ðBCÞ
À
_
X
f
$M
_
$z;
where R
1
,R
2
,.....R
15
, are the moles at the start of
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 1 9 1 8 e1 1 9 3 1 11922
constant pressure combustion process at C.
P
1
,P
2
,.....P
15
, are the moles of products after combus-
tion at constant pressure within the process CD.
While,
P
i
¼ R
i
þM; ði ¼ 1 to 12 except 3 and 8Þ; ðP
3
¼ R
3
Þ;
_
P
8
¼ P
8ðBCÞ
À a
S
M
_
; P
13
¼ P
14
¼ P
15
¼ 0;
Hence, M
1
¼

R
i
; M
2
¼

P
i
; then Eq. (13) becomes
0 ¼ ½E
2
ðT
2
Þ À E
1
ðT
1
ފ þP
1
ðV
2
ÀV
1
Þ þ
_
1 ÀX
f
_
M$q
vs
ÀdQ (25)
The first values of T
2
are predicted as
T
2
¼ T
2ðBCÞ
þ
_
1 À X
f
_
$M$q
vs
M
1
C
P
ðT
1
Þ
; V
2
¼
_
M
2
M
1
__
T
2
T
1
_
$V
1
;
Further values of T
2
are given as
ðT
2
Þ
n
¼ ðT
2
Þ
nÀ1
þ
f
2
ðEÞ
nÀ1
M
2
C
P
ðT
2
Þ
nÀ1
; where C
P
¼ C
V
ðT
2
Þ þ R
mol
; f
2
ðEÞ
nÀ1
¼ ½E
2
ðT
2
Þ À E
1
ðT
1
ފ þ P
1
ðV
2
ÀV
1
Þ þ
_
1 ÀX
f
_
M$q
vs
ÀdQ
2.6.4. Polytropic expansion process from D to E
The composition of mixture within the cylinder after
combustion remains the same during the expansion process
DE. Thus, the calculations of the state changes are same as
those of polytropic compression process from A to B with the
number of moles equal to the moles at the end of the adiabatic
instantaneous constant pressure combustion process, D.
The logic for compression and expansion processes is the
same with change in the nomenclature of their respective
variables.
The cycle closes at A by considering constant volume
process from E to A.
The thermal efficiency of the cycle is predicted as [36]
h
Thermal
¼ 1 À
ðT
E
À T
A
Þ
ðT
C
ÀT
B
Þ þ kðT
D
À T
C
Þ
(26)
3. Heat release rate
The ignition delay in millisecond (ms) is given as [37]
s
id
¼ 0:01$P
À2:5
f
À1:04
exp
_
6000
T
g
_
(27)
where P and T
g
are the mean cylinder pressure (atm) and
charge temperature (K) during the ignition delay period and f
is the equivalence ratio of the fuel vapor-air mixture. Miya-
moto et al. [38] showed two Wiebe’s functions for heat release
as
dQ
dq
¼ a
1
Q
P
q
P
ðM
P
þ1Þ$
_
q
q
P
_
MP
exp
_
Àa
1
_
q
q
P
_
MPþ1
_
þa
2
Q
d
q
d
ðM
d
þ1Þ$
_
q
q
d
_
M
d
exp
_
Àa
2
_
q
q
P
_
M
d
þ1
_
(28)
where the subscripts, p and d refer to the premixed and
diffusive combustion parts, respectively, Q
p
and Q
d
are the
quantity of premixed and diffusion combustion parameter
respectively, M
p
and M
d
are shape factors, q
p
and q
d
are the
duration of energy release, a
1
and a
2
are constants.
Q
P
¼ b$f
1
ðtÞ
_
m
d
q
vsd
þm
LPG
q
vsLPG
þm
H
2
q
vsH
2
_
;
Q
d
¼ ð1 À bÞf
2
ðtÞ
_
m
d
q
vsd
þm
LPG
q
vsLPG
þm
H
2
q
vsH
2
_
;
4. Mean gas temperature
The mean gas temperature, which is required for the calcu-
lation of heat transfer equation, is predicted by considering
polytropic process, pV
k
¼ constant
T
2
¼ T
1
_
V
1
V
2
_
kÀ1
¼ T
1
_
p
2
p
1
_
kÀ1=k
(29)
Therefore, at a known reference position, i.e., at inlet valve
closure or crank angle at the start of injection:
p
ref
$V
ref
¼ k$R$T
ref
By assuming k (polytropic index) and R to be constant;
T
calc
¼ p
calc
$V
calc
$
T
ref
p
ref
$V
ref
(30)
Based on the above equations, a computer programme was
developed to analyze the theoretical results. The main inputs
to the model are: engine geometry, engine speed, mass flow
rate of diesel and gaseous fuels, density of fuels, polytropic
index (calculated fromlog P vs log V curve), injection pressure,
nozzle orifice diameter, inlet temperature and pressure.
The gaseous-air mixture properties were computed from
inlet valve closer to start of injection with respect to variation
in cylinder volume. The inlet temperature and pressure were
considered to be initial conditions at inlet valve closer. The
fuel preparation was considered from the end of the brake-up
spray penetration length. The flow chart of the computer
model is shown in Fig. 4, where the suffices ivc, inj, id, inj. dur.,
evo, p and d represent inlet valve closer, injection timing,
ignition delay, injection duration, exhaust valve opening,
premixed combustion phase and diffusion combustion phase
respectively. The incremental step of 0.1

and 1.0

crank angle
is exhibited in the flow chart (Fig. 4).
5. Experimental
Atest diesel engine setup was developed to carry out the study
on dual fuel engines.
A four stroke compression ignition engine, model Ashok
Leyland ALUWO4CT, turbocharged withinter-cooler and gen-
set was used for the experimental investigation which is
designated as Engine A. Table 2 shows the engine geometry
and operating parameter for the present work. The diesel
engine was modified to work on dual fuel mode by attaching
a hydrogen and LPG gas cylinder connection to the intake
manifold throughflame traps, and mass flowmeters, followed
byaone waynonreturnvalveandcommonflamearrestor. The
engine was coupled to a D.C. generator of 62.5 kW. The load on
the engine was varied by introducing five water pump and
twelve 3 kW industrial water heaters in a set of four each. The
engine was run at constant speed of 1500 RPM. The amount of
i nt e r na t i o na l j our na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 1 9 1 8 e1 1 9 3 1 11923
pilot diesel fuel was automatically controlled with the help of
governor while the flow of gaseous fuels was controlled
manually. The predetermined amount of gaseous fuel was
inducted into the intake manifold through the gaseous fuel
supply system. High precision optical crank angle encoder
(maker of Kistler) was usedto determine the locationof the top
dead center (TDC) position precisely and then correlate
cylinder pressure data with cylinder volume.
Since the engine was modified to run simultaneously with
liquid and gaseous fuels, two separate fuel induction, meter-
ing and measurement systems were used. The liquid fuel
measurement system for the test rig was based on the gravi-
metric principle. For this purpose a 1000 cc glass bulb appa-
ratus with a control valve was placed in between the fuel tank
and engine fuel supply system. For gaseous fuels two separate
flame traps and mass flow meters were used. The percentage
uncertainty of the measuring instruments is as follows: mass
flow rate of gaseous fuels Æ4%, mass flow rate of diesel Æ4%,
load Æ3% and speed Æ3 revolutions.
The results obtained were compared with the results of
Saravanan et al. [9] on the engine, designated as Engine B in
Table 2.
The experiments were performed on the Engine A under
the following four conditions.
(i) Case I: Engine run on diesel only.
(ii) Case II: Engine run on diesel as pilot fuel and hydrogen as
secondary fuel.
(iii) Case III: Engine run on diesel as pilot fuel and LPG as
secondary fuel.
(iv) Case IV: Engine run on diesel as pilot fuel and LPG plus
hydrogen as secondary fuel.
Fig. 4 e Flow chart for computer model.
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 1 9 1 8 e1 1 9 3 1 11924
The theoretical results reported in the present paper are
compared with the experimental results of the engine run at
80% load condition for all the four cases described above. The
constants and coefficients, which are used in semi-empirical
equations, are shown in Table 3. The various mass distribu-
tions of the fuels in the four cases of experiments are shownin
Table 4. Further, for the analysis of brake thermal efficiency
the experiments were conducted for all the four cases (Cases
IeIV) at 9, 16, 40, 64 and 80% of load condition.
6. Result and discussion
The rated speed 1500 rpm, injection pressure 260 bar, injection
timing16

BTDCandthetotal amount of fuel consumedat selected
loads were taken for model calibration. The experimental data
analyzed and presented here are based on average values of 100
cycles. The shape factor for heat release profile, convective heat
transfer and gaseous fueleair entrainment rate were determined
by measured cylinder pressure and heat release profile.
Selecting the constant a
3
of the air entrainment equation
from 0.016 to 0.11 [28], the rate of gaseous fueleair mixture
entrainment into the spray zone was simulated. The physical
processes such as injection of fuel, atomization of fuel into
droplets, fuel spray penetration, vaporization of fuel and
mixing of diesel fuel with air and gaseous fuels in spray zone,
which are collectively known as preparation of fuel, were
evaluated from spray mixing model [16,24e28]. Based on the
combustionmodel describedaboveunder Section2.5andcycle
analysis under Section 2.6, the temperature at points B, C, D
andEwerepredicted. Theoverall laminar flamevelocityduring
every phase of combustion was predicted by considering local
Table 2 e Engine specifications.
Sr. No. Engine A
specification
Engine B
specification [9]
1. Make and model Ashok Leyland ALU
WO4CT Turbocharged,
inter-cooler, Gen-Set
Kirloskar, AV1 Make
2. General details Four stroke, compression ignition,
constant speed, vertical, water-cooled,
direct injection, turbo charger, Intercooler,
Gen-Set
Four stroke, compression ignition,
constant Speed, vertical, water-cooled,
direct injection
3. No. of cylinder 4 1
4. Bore (mm) 104 80
5. Stroke (mm) 113 110
6. Rated Speed (rpm) 1500 1500
7. Swept volume (cc) 3839.67 553
8. Clearance volume (cc) 84.90 36.87
9. Compression ratio 17.5:1 16.5:1
10. Injection pressure (bar) 260 205
11. Injection timing (BTDC) 16

23

12. Rated power kW at
1500 rpm
62.5 3.7
13. Inlet Pressure (bar) 1.06 1
14. Inlet temperature (K) 313 e
15. Nozzle diameter (mm) 0.285 e
Table 3 e Constants/coefficient for semi-empirical equations of Engine A and B.
Case I II III IV
Coefficient for heat transfer for
Engine A & B
C
1
during
compression & expansion
2.28 2.28 2.28 2.28
C
2
during
Combustion process (m/s K)
3.34 Â 10
À3
3.34 Â 10
À3
3.34 Â 10
À3
3.34 Â 10
À3
Constant (a
3
) for gaseous
fueleair entrainment
Engine A 0.0915 0.079 0.087 0.095
Engine B e 0.088 e e
Polytropic index ‘k’ Engine A 1.324 1.32 1.315 1.3
Engine B e 1.318 e e
Constant for heat release Engine A q
0
p
5 5 5 5
q
0
d
13 8 5 5
Engine B q
0
p
e 7 e e
q
0
d
e 7 e e
Constant k
3
Engine A 0.87 0.94 0.97 0.956
Engine B e 0.785 e e
Shape factor for heat release rate Engine A m
p
4.0 4.06 4.09 4.03
m
d
1.5 1.57 &1.54
(3rd phase)
1.57 &1.51
(3rd phase)
1.58
i nt e r na t i o na l j our na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 1 9 1 8 e1 1 9 3 1 11925
mass fraction of remaining LPG and hydrogen in unburnt
gaseous fueleair mixture. It was further assumed that the
flame propagates ina conical shape into combustionchamber.
By considering the experimental data available during the
study, a turbulent flame velocity factor of 1.55 was obtained.
The standard range of the turbulent flame velocity factor lies
between 1.2 and 1.6 [24].
In the simulation, an incremental step of 0.1

crank angles
(CA) yielded results within a variation of 3e4% between the
theoretical and experimental values.
6.1. Ignition delay
Ignition delay period was found to be 9

, 13

, 11

and 10

for
Cases IeIV respectively. Ignition delay period increased
slightly with the addition of hydrogenand LPG[2]. This may be
because the addition of hydrogen or LPG or a mixture of LPG
and hydrogen in the charge reduces the air intake and hence
oxygen in the cylinder. The other reason for increase in delay
period is formation of intermediate compounds during
compression due to partial oxidation of gaseous fueleair
mixture. This is caused by the loss of the very reactive OH
radical in the reaction with molecular hydrogen, which gives
less reactive species that are not capable of accelerating the
reaction at the same rate as that of OH radicals [10]. At higher
concentration of hydrogen plus LPG in the mixture, ignition
delay decreases due to addition of significant amounts of
energy and species. The measured and predicted ignition
delay period for all the four cases is shown in Table 5.
6.2. Cylinder pressure and mean gas temperature
The predicted and experimental results of variation in
cylinder pressure with crank angle (CA) under addition of
hydrogen, LPG and mixture of hydrogen and LPG are shown in
Fig. 5. The pilot fuel quantity varied due to addition of gaseous
fuel into the cylinder. The quantity of pilot fuel injected affects
the mean diameter of the spray. The peak pressures for Cases
IeIV are 80.70, 68.37, 80.73, and 84.41 bar at 367

, 367

, 365

,
and 366

CArespectively. The additionof gaseous fuels in Case
IVincreases peak pressure due to higher energy release during
their combustion. The presence of turbocharger with inter-
cooler increases charge/air velocity and density of the gaseous
charge in the cylinder [39]. This higher air velocity and
gaseous-air entrainment lead to increase in rate of evapora-
tion of the liquid fuel and gives higher rate of heat release
resulting in higher peak pressure in the cylinder.
The predicted peak cylinder pressure was found to be
76.66, 62.98, 75.55 and 78.79 bar for Cases IeIV respectively. A
number of runs were performed for different values of the
diffusion burning factor k
3
. This value of k
3
varies from 0.055
to 1.10 [39]. The satisfactory results were obtained within
5e6% variation between present combustion model and
experimental results, with k
3
equal to 0.87, 0.94, 0.97 and 0.956
for Cases IeIV respectively. The measured and predicted
cylinder peak pressure for all the four cases is shown in
Table 6.
Fig. 6 shows the variation of mean gas temperature with
crank angle for the experimental and predicted results for
Case IV. Adrop intemperature (around 20 K) before the start of
combustion is observed in all the four cases, which is due to
the vaporization of pilot fuel. A sharp rise in temperature
during the combustion is observed in Case I as compared to
Cases II to IV for other gaseous fuels. The measured and pre-
dicted mean gas temperature for Cases IeIV is shown in
Table 7. This minor discrepancy of about 4% in the predicted
and measured values may be due to unable to predict correct
air/charge velocity inside the combustion chamber, turbu-
lence factor or gaseous fueleair entrainment into the pilot
diesel spray zone.
6.3. Brake thermal efficiency
Fig. 7 shows experimental result for the brake thermal effi-
ciency at different load conditions. The brake thermal effi-
ciency of the engine when working on dual fuels (Cases IIeIV)
is found to be 17.34%, 18.47% and 18.25% respectively, as
compared to Case I of 19.57% at 9% load. This may be due to
lower charge temperature at the end of compression process,
Table 5 e Ignition delay.
Case I II III IV
Ignition Delay (

CA) Measured 9 13 11 10
Predicted 7 10 8 9
Table 4 e Mass of different fuels.
Case no. Mass of diesel
kg/min
Mass of hydrogen
kg/min
Mass of LPG
kg/min
I 0.1434 e e
II 1.148 Â 10
À4
0.04897 e
III 1.066 Â 10
À4
e 0.143072
IV 6.56 Â 10
À5
6.396 Â 10
À3
0.1055
Engine B [9] 2.95 Â 10
À3
0.6285 (7.5 lpm) e
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
b
a
r
)
Crank Angle (Degree)
Measured
Predicted
Cylinder Pressure Curve (Diesel + LPG + H
2
)
Fig. 5 e Cylinder pressure (bar) vs crank angle (

CA) for
diesel and mixture of LPG and hydrogen.
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 1 9 1 8 e1 1 9 3 1 11926
low flame velocity of the lean gaseous fuels-air mixture and
enough time available in transferring heat to the adjacent
cylinder walls. While in Case I at light load, the penetration of
spray may be such that it does not reach the cylinder walls
and combustion is confined to the piston combustion
chamber (bowl) only. The combustion zone is surrounded by
air that works as semi-insulator in between the burned gases
and the cylinder walls. This may reduce the heat losses to the
cylinder walls and thereby increase the thermal efficiency in
Case I operation as compared to Cases IIeIV [10].
The brake thermal efficiency of dual fuel engine when
operating on Cases IIeIV is still lower up to 60% of load i.e.,
23.22%, 24.20%and 25.47%respectively as compared to 25.55%
in Case I. The addition of hydrogen or/and LPG causes higher
diesel consumption. Hydrogen and LPG have higher flame
velocity and diffusivity than diesel fuel; therefore, these
gaseous fuels consume most part of the oxygen from the
entrained air during main part of combustion. Hence, a part of
injected diesel goes into the exhaust without taking part in
combustion. This leads to lower brake thermal efficiency.
At higher load i.e., at 80% load, the brake thermal effi-
ciencies were 32.64%, 31.3%and 33.56%for the Cases II, III and
IVrespectively as compared to 31.5%of Case I, due to presence
of rich gaseous fueleair mixture. The higher flame velocity of
these gaseous fuels takes less time to reach the cylinder walls
and hence less time is available for heat transfer to the
cylinder wall. Therefore, heat losses are less, resulting in
higher brake thermal efficiencies. The brake thermal effi-
ciency of Case IV (mixture of hydrogen and LPG) was more
than brake thermal efficiency of Case II and III, because it was
improved by the presence of small amount of LPG in the
mixture. The LPG reduces the laminar burning velocity of
hydrogen and suppresses the propensity of onset of both
diffusional-thermal and hydrodynamic cellular instabilities in
hydrogen-air flames. It also retards the reaction intensity and
increases the critical radius [38]. While the LPG has unstable
flame at lean gaseous fueleair mixture, but due to the pres-
ence of hydrogen, the flame becomes more stable and hence
results in higher brake thermal efficiency.
The theoretically predicted brake thermal efficiency for
Cases II to IV of Engine A were found to be 31.66%, 27.97%, and
32.3%respectively as compared to 31.03%of Case I at 80%load.
Similarly, by present combustion modeling the brake thermal
efficiency of Engine B [9] was predicted on dieselehydrogen
dual fuel mode and was found to be 14.83% as compared to
their measured values of 15.29% at 80% load.
The predicted brake thermal efficiency was 3e4% less than
the measured brake thermal efficiency due to over prediction
of the heat transfer and frictional losses. The assumption that
the process is quasi static is not true in actual sense. As the
liquid fuel is injected into the atmosphere of gaseous fueleair
mixture, it gets vaporized and mixes with the gaseous fuels
that makes non-uniform fueleair ratio in the combustion
zone. The polytropic index k also varies during combustion
process, while in the present combustion model it was
assumed to be constant. The comparison between measured
and predicted brake thermal efficiency at 80% load condition
in all the four cases with respect to Engine A and B are shown
in Table 8.
Table 6 eMeasured and predicted cylinder peak pressure.
Case I II III IV
Measured cylinder peak pressure (bar) 80.49 68.37 79.11 83.82
Predicted cylinder peak pressure (bar) 76.66 62.98 75.55 78.79
300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460
0
300
600
900
1200
1500
1800
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

(
K
)
Crank Angle (Degree)
Measured
Predicted
Mean Gas Temperature (Diesel + LPG + H
2
)
Fig. 6 e Mean gas temperature (K) vs crank angle (

CA) for
diesel and mixture of LPG and hydrogen.
Table 7 e Measured and predicted cylinder mean
temperature.
Case I II III IV
Measured cylinder
mean temperature
(K)
1863.42 at
382

CA
1751.08 at
372

CA
1828.94 at
381

CA
1678.26 at
378

CA
Predicted cylinder
mean temperature
(K)
1798.13 at
378

CA
1698.57 at
365

CA
1746.64 at
374

CA
1619.39 at
370

CA
Fig. 7 e Brake thermal efficiency (h) vs Load (%) with
different gaseous fuels subst.
i nt e r na t i o na l j our na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 1 9 1 8 e1 1 9 3 1 11927
6.4. Net heat release analysis
Fig. 8aed, show predicted and measured net heat release rate
with crank angle of Cases I to IV. The net heat release rate of
Case I (Fig. 8a) by first phase of combustion is 94.26 J/

CA at
TDC. It shows two phases of combustion. The first phase is
due to premixed combustion while second phase by diffused
combustion of diesel fuel, while Cases IIeIV (Fig. 8bed) show
one more phase of combustion. In dual fuel operation, heat
release is mainly due to three phases of combustion; first, by
premixed burning of pilot diesel fuel and combustion of part
of gaseous fueleair mixture that is entrained during the
ignition delay period. In the second phase of combustion, it is
due to auto ignitionof gaseous-air mixture in the close vicinity
of pilot spray zone and diffusive burning of remaining pilot
diesel fuel. In the third phase of combustion, heat is released
by flame propagation from spray zone into the gaseous
fuelseair mixture [12].
At lean gaseous fueleair mixture as in Case II, Fig. 8b shows
lower peak of first phase of combustion 60.57 J/CA at 355

CA
than Case I because heat release is mainly controlled by pre-
mixed burning of part or complete pilot diesel fuel plus small
amount of gaseous fuel entrained into the spray zone. The net
heat released rates in second and third phases of combustion
are 44.86 J/CA at 361

CA and 29.9 J/CA at 366

CA respectively.
The heat released during compression process is due to
preignition chemical reaction of hydrogen with the air.
In Case III, Fig. 8c the heat release rate during compression
process is due to partial oxidation of LPG gas. The heat release
rate during first phase of combustion is 77.57 J/CA at 356

CA.
This is due to energy released by part of pilot diesel fuel
accumulated during ignition delay period and part of LPG gas
entrained in to the spray zone. The net heat release rate by
Table 8 e Measured and predicted brake thermal
efficiency.
Case I II III IV
Brake thermal efficiency
Engine A
Measured 31.5 32.64 31.3 33.82
Predicted 31.03 31.66 30.35 32.30
Brake thermal efficiency
Engine B
Measured e 15.29 e e
Predicted e 14.83 e e
340 350 360 370
0
20
40
60
80
100
Measured
Predicted
Net Heat Release Rate (Diesel)
N
e
t

H
e
a
t

R
e
l
e
a
s
e

R
a
t
e

(
J
/
C
A
)
Crank Angle (Degree)
340 350 360 370
-20
0
20
40
60
80
Net Heat Release Rate (Diesel+H
2
)
III Phase of
Combustion
II Phase of
Combustion
I Phase of
Combustion
N
e
t

H
e
a
t

R
e
l
e
a
s
e

R
a
t
e

(
J
/
C
A
)
Crank Angle (Degree)
Measured
Predicted
340 350 360 370
-20
0
20
40
60
80
Net Heat Release Rate (Diesel + LPG)
III Phase of
Combustion
II Phase of
Combustion
I Phase of
Combustion
N
e
t

H
e
a
t

R
e
l
e
a
s
e

R
a
t
e

(
J
/
C
A
)
Crank Angle (Degree)
Measured
Predicted
340 350 360 370
-20
0
20
40
60
80
Net Heat Release Rate (Diesel + LPG + H
2
)
I Phase of
Combustion
II Phase of
Combustion
III Phase of
Combustion
N
e
t

H
e
a
t

R
e
l
e
a
s
e

R
a
t
e

(
J
/
C
A
)
Crank Angle (Degree)
Measured
Predicted
b
d
c
a
Fig. 8 e a. Net heat release rate (J/CA) vs crank angle (

CA) for diesel. b. Net heat release rate (J/CA) vs crank angle (

CA) for
diesel and hydrogen. c. Net heat release rate (J/CA) vs crank angle (

CA) for diesel and LPG. d. Net heat release rate (J/CA) vs
crank angle (

CA) for diesel and mixture of LPG and hydrogen.
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 1 9 1 8 e1 1 9 3 1 11928
second phase of combustion i.e., diffusion controlled combus-
tionis 39 J/CAat TDC. It was observedthat the entire pilot diesel
quantity does not burn in the first phase of combustion while
some of the pilot fuel quantity along with the induced gaseous
fuel burnt inthe secondphase of combustionandhence second
peakis distinct inheat releasecurve. Theendof secondphaseof
combustion is shown as second dip in the heat release curve.
The third peak of 35 J/CA was observed at 364

CA, which is
possibly due to energy release by flame propagation of
remaining unburnt gaseous fueleair mixture present in the
combustion chamber. This third peak may also be due to the
presence of turbocharger that makes higher density of
unburned gaseous fueleair mixture. The negative loop during
this third phase of combustion during expansion process indi-
cates larger heat transfer to the cylinder wall and combustion
chamber. The nature of the curve is very much similar to the
findings of Poonia et al. [2].
The net heat release curve of Case IV is shown in Fig. 8d. It
shows two distinct peaks of combustion phases. The heat
release rates in first and second phases of combustion are
73.88 J/CA at 355

CA and 69.04 J/CA at 360

CA respectively.
This indicates that due to presence of LPG in the mixture of
hydrogen and air, the propagating flame probably becomes
more stable and significant amount of these fuels are burnt
along with diffusion burning of pilot diesel fuel, during second
phase of combustion.
At higher load (rich gaseous fueleair mixture), both the
phases of combustion are equally important. The peak of first
phase of combustion was affected due to higher intake
gaseous fueleair mixture. It shows that heat release during
premixed combustion phase depends not only on the amount
of pilot diesel fuel but also on the amount of gaseous fuel
entrainment. The end of first phase of combustion is shown
by first dip in the rate of heat release. The second peak is due
to diffusion phase of combustion. It appears that gaseous
fueleair mixture nearer to pilot spray auto ignites at higher
temperature. The remaining combustion is the third phase of
combustion due to flame propagation.
For Cases II, III and IV, total combustion duration was
observed to be increased as compared to Case I. This may be
due to the entrainment of gaseous fuels in the pilot spray zone
and flame propagation [12]. The magnitude of first phase of
combustion decreased in Cases IIeIV (Fig. 8bed), which may
be due to reduction in pilot diesel fuel quantity during pre-
mixed combustion phase and due to sluggish combustion [12].
In all the above three cases, net heat release rate peak occurs
earlier than Case I operation, due to gaseous fueleair mixture
surrounding the pilot fuel, which promoted faster initial
combustion rate, and further caused rise in temperature.
Hence, reaction zone widened and more and more gaseous
fuel then burned in the second phase of combustion [22].
In diesel engine operation, after the injection of pilot diesel
fuel, net heat release rate is reduced due to vaporization of
fuel, prior to combustion. The start of combustion is often
defined as when the net heat release rate becomes positive
[32]. The net heat release rate is positive before injection of the
pilot fuel as shown in Fig. 8bed (Cases IIeIV) due to heat
release by preignition energy reaction of gaseous fuels during
compression process. The amount of heat release depends
upon the type of gaseous fuel and its concentration. The
negative net heat release rate during expansion process
indicates that there was heat transfer to the cylinder walls,
and the ignition was close to the minimum of net heat release
rate. The heat transfer increased as the temperature and
flame velocity increased during combustion. But due to limi-
tation of present model it is difficult to predict correct net heat
release rate by preignition reaction of these gaseous fuels
during compression process.
Fig. 9 shows the mass fraction burnt curve for Cases IeIV.
Ignition delay from Fig. 9 for Cases IeIV is found to be 9

, 13

,
11

and 10

respectively. It is evident from Fig. 9 that about
34%, 27% and 31% of the total mass of fuels is burnt within 1

crank angles for the Cases II, III and IV respectively. Hence the
assumption of an additional constant volume process appears
reasonably justified.
7. Conclusions
The combustion models have been developed to calculate
variations in pressure and net heat release rate with respect to
crank angle. These theoretical models can also be used to
predict ignition delay, brake thermal efficiency, mean gas
temperature, and net heat transfer rate.
These results have been verified by performing experi-
ments on 4 cylinder turbocharged, intercooled with 62.5 kW
gen-set diesel engine and with the results on single cylinder
diesel engine obtained by other researchers. The experiments
were performed to measure brake thermal efficiency at
different load conditions, pressure and net heat release rate
with respect to crank angle on following four cases.
(i) Case I: Engine runs on diesel only.
(ii) Case II: Engine runs ondiesel as pilot fuel and hydrogenas
secondary fuel.
(iii) Case III: Engine runs on diesel as pilot fuel and LPG as
secondary fuel.
(iv) Case IV: Engine runs on diesel as pilot fuel and LPG plus
hydrogen as secondary fuel.
350 355 360 365 370
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Mass Fraction Burnt Curve
Crank Angle
Diesel
Diesel + H
2
Diesel + LPG
Diesel + H
2
+ LPG
Fig. 9 e Mass fraction burnt (%) vs crank angle (

CA).
i nt e r na t i o na l j our na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 1 9 1 8 e1 1 9 3 1 11929
A reasonable agreement between the predicted and
experimental results reveals that this model gives quantita-
tive and qualitative realistic prediction of in-cylinder
processes and engine performances during combustion.
The predicted brake thermal efficiency is found to be 3e4%
less than the experimentally measured brake thermal effi-
ciency due to consideration of quasi static processes.
The predicted maximumpressure rise and net heat release
rate are 6e7% less than experimental results due to under
prediction of charge/air velocity, turbulence and may be due
to over prediction of heat transfer to the cylinder walls and
combustion chamber.
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to Professor Pramod S. Mehta,
Internal Combustion Engine Laboratory, Indian Institute of
Technology, Madras, Chennai and Dr. Bimal Kumar Mishra,
Department of Applied Mathematics, Birla Institute of Tech-
nology, Mesra, Ranchi, for inspiration and helpful discussion.
r e f e r e n c e s
[1] Mansour C, Bounif A, Aris A, Gaillard F. Gas-diesel (dual-fuel)
modeling in diesel engine environment. Int J Therm Sci 2001;
40:409e24.
[2] Poonia MP, Ramesh A, Gaur RR. Experimental investigation
of the factors affecting the performance of a LPG-diesel dual
fuel engine. SAE paper 991123 (1999) 57e65.
[3] Saravanan N, Nagarajan G. An insight on hydrogen fuel
injection techniques with SCR system for NO
x
reduction in
a hydrogen-diesel dual fuel engine. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2009;34:9019e32.
[4] Porpatham E, Ramesh A, Nagalingam B. Effect of hydrogen
addition on the performance of a biogas fuelled spark
ignition engine. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2007;32(12):2057e65.
[5] Uma R, Kandpal TC, Kishore VVN. Emission characteristics of
an electricity generation system in diesel alone and dual fuel
modes. Biom Bioenerg 2004;27:195e203.
[6] Prakash G, Ramesh A, Tazerout M. Influence of injection
timing and load on the performance and combustion
characteristics of a biogas/diesel dual- fuel engine. Fuels Int
2001;1:229e43.
[7] Perini F, Paltrinieri F, Mattarelli E. A quasi-dimensional
combustion model for performance and emissions of SI
engines running on hydrogenemethane blends. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2010;35(10):4687e701.
[8] Roy MM, Tomita E, Kawahara N, Harada Y, Sakane A.
Performance and emission comparison of a supercharged
dual-fuel engine fueled by producer gases with varying
hydrogen content. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2009;34:7811e22.
[9] Saravanan N, Nagarajan G, Sanjay G, Dhanasekaran C,
Kalaiselvan KM. Combustion analysis on a DI diesel engine
with hydrogen in dual fuel mode. Fuel 2008;87:3591e9.
[10] Lambe SM, Watson HC. Low polluting, energy efficient C.I.
hydrogen engine. Int J Hydrogen Energy 1992;17:513e25.
[11] Choi GH, Chung YJ, Han SB. Performance and emissions
characteristics of a hydrogenenriched LPGinternal combustion
engine at 1400 rpm. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2005;30:77e82.
[12] Poonia MP, Ramesh A, Gaur RR. Effect of intake air
temperature and pilot fuel quantity on the combustion
characteristics of a LPG diesel dual fuel Engine. SAE paper
982455 (1998) 97e105.
[13] Karim GA, Wierzba I, Al-Lousi Y. Methaneehydrogen
mixtures as fuels. Int J Hydrogen Energy 1996;21:625e31.
[14] Ma J, Su Y, Zhou Y, Zhang Z. Simulation and prediction on
the performance of a vehicle’s hydrogen engine. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2003;28:77e83.
[15] Al-Janabi HA-KS, Al-Baghdadi MA-RS. A prediction study of
the effect of hydrogen blending on the performance and
pollutants emission of a four stroke spark ignition engine. Int
J Hydrogen Energy 1999;24:363e75.
[16] Liu Z, Karim GA. Simulation of combustion processes in gas-
fuelled diesel engines. J Power Energ Proc Inst Mech Engrs
1997;211 A2:159e69.
[17] Wang Y, Zhang X, Li C, Wu J. Experimental and modeling
study of performance and emissions of SI engine fueled by
natural gas-hydrogen mixtures. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2010;
35(7):2680e3.
[18] Wong YK, Karim GA. A kinetic examination of the effects of
the presence of some gaseous fuels and preignition reaction
products with hydrogen in engines. Int J Hydrogen Energy
1999;24(5):473e8.
[19] Metghalchi M, Keck JC. Laminar burning velocity of propane-
air mixtures at high temperature and pressure. Combust
Flame 1980;38:143e54.
[20] Huang Z, Zhang Y, Zeng K, Liu B, Wang Q, Jiang D.
Measurements of laminar burning velocities for natural gas-
hydrogen-air mixtures. Combust Flame 2006;146:302e11.
[21] D’Andrea T, Henshaw PF, Ting DS-K. The addition of
hydrogen to a gasoline-fuelled SI engine. Int J Hydrogen
Energy 2004;29:1541e52.
[22] Karim GA. Combustion in gas fueled compression: ignition
engines of the dual fuel type. J Eng Gas Turbines Power 2003;
125:827e36.
[23] Ferguson CR, Kirkpatrick AT. Internal combustion engines
applied thermosciences. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley &
Sons Inc.; 2001.
[24] Heywood JB. Internal combustion engine fundamentals. New
York: McGraw-Hill; 1988.
[25] Beer JM, Chigier NA. Combustion aerodynamics. London:
Applied Science Publishers Ltd; 1974.
[26] Chiu WS, Shahed SM, Lyn WT. A transient spray mixing
model for diesel combustion. SAE paper 760128 (1976)
502e512.
[27] Kobayashi H, Yogita M, Kaminimoto T, Matsuoka S. Prediction
of transient diesel sprays in swirling flows via a modified 2-D
jet model. SAE paper 860332 (1986) 2.522e2.530.
[28] Gupta AK, Mehta PS. Air entrainment in a confined fuel
spray. 8 NCICEC-83 PA1 (1983) E1eE8.
[29] Verhelst S, Sierens R. A laminar burning velocity correlation
for hydrogen/air mixtures valid at spark-ignition engine
conditions. ASME ICES 2003-0555 35e43.
[30] Woschni G. A universally applicable equation for the
instantaneous heat transfer coefficient in the internal
combustion engine. SAE paper 670931 (1967) 3065e3083.
[31] Gupta AK, Mehta PS, Gupta CP. Model for predicting air-fuel
mixing and combustion for direct injection diesel engine.
SAE paper 860331 (1986) 2.503e2.521.
[32] Stone R. Introduction to internal combustion engines. 3rd ed.
London: Macmillan Press Ltd; 1999.
[33] Benson RS, Whitehouse ND. Internal combustion engines,
vol. 1. New York: Pergamon Press; 1979.
[34] Patterson J, Clarke A, Chen R. Experimental study of the
performance and emissions characteristics of a small diesel
genset operating in dual-fuel mode with three different
primary fuels. SAE paper 2006-01-50 (2006) 1e11.
[35] Olikara C, Borman GL. A computer program for calculating
properties of equilibrium combustion products with some
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 1 9 1 8 e1 1 9 3 1 11930
applications to I.C. engines. SAE paper 750468 (1975)
01e31.
[36] Lichty LC. Internal combustion engines. New York: McGraw-
Hill Book Company; 1951.
[37] Hiroyasu H, Kadota T, Arai M. Development and use of
a spray combustion modeling to predict diesel engine
efficiency and pollutant emissions (part 1 combustion
modeling). JSME 1983;26:569e75.
[38] Miyamoto N, Chikahisa T, Murayama T, Sawyer R.
Description and analysis of diesel engine rate of combustion
and performance using Wiebe’s functions. SAE paper 850107
(1985) 1.622e1.633.
[39] Assanis DN, Heywood JB. Development and use of
a computer simulation of the turbocompounded diesel
system for engine performance and component heat transfer
studies. SAE paper 860329 (1986) 2.451e2.476.
i nt e r na t i o na l j our na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 1 9 1 8 e1 1 9 3 1 11931