Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy

A literature review of fuel effects on performance and emission T

characteristics of low-temperature combustion strategies
Tamilselvan Pachiannana, Wenjun Zhonga,b, Sundararajan Rajkumarc, Zhixia Hea,d, ,
⁎

Xianying Lengd, Qian Wanga

a
School of Energy and Power Engineering, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang 212013, China
b
Key Lab for Power Machinery and Engineering of M. O. E, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, SSN College of Engineering, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Kalavakkam, Chennai 603 110, Tamil Nadu, India
d
Institute for Energy Research, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang 212013, China

HIGHLIGHTS

• The development and characteristics of low temperature combustion are reviewed.

• The various modes of achieving low temperature combustion are analyzed fuel wise.
• The effects of various fuels on low temperature combustion are discussed.
• Limitations and key factors of low temperature combustion engines are pointed out.
• Vast experimental data on low temperature combustion for many fuels are tabulated.

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords:
Low temperature combustion (LTC)
Homogeneous charge compression ignition
(HCCI)
Premixed charge compression ignition (PCCI)
Partially premixed combustion (PPC)
Reactivity controlled compression ignition
(RCCI)
Gasoline compression ignition (GCI)
Renewable fuels
The fast rate of depletion of fossil fuel resources due to increasing demands and the adverse environmental
impact by the automotive engines forced researchers to develop alternative strategies to meet the stringent
emission norms in terms of oxides of nitrogen and particulate matter. In this regard, low temperature combustion
is one of the promising advanced in-cylinder combustion strategies for reducing both oxides of nitrogen and
particulate matter emissions simultaneously with a beneficial effect on specific fuel consumption. The low
temperature combustion is achieved through homogeneous charge compression ignition, premixed charge
compression ignition, reactivity controlled compression ignition and gasoline compression ignition. In this
paper, an attempt is made to assemble and summarize a listing of important research articles on low-temperature
combustion using a wide variety of conventional and alternate renewable fuels. The effect of low-temperature
combustion on engine performance and emission characteristics over a wide range of engine test conditions and
the challenges faced in these strategies are also described. From the assemblage of articles on low-temperature
combustion using conventional and renewable fuels, it is understood that this strategy can help in achieving
better performance, lower cylinder pressure and heat release rate, and simultaneous reductions of nitrogen
oxides and particulate matter, but typically with an increase in carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions.
This literature review is expected to be useful to the researchers for understanding the concept, challenges, and
the state-of-the-art of the different modes of low-temperature combustion using conventional and sustainable
alternate fuels.

1. Introduction
Compared to other reciprocating engine types, the direct injection
diesel engines are more efficient (low carbon dioxide) due to their
unthrottled charging, overall fuel lean combustion, and high compres-
sion ratio operation. Though the overall fuel lean combustion of the
diesel engine provides low carbon monoxide (CO) [1,2] and hydro-
carbon (HC) [3,4] emissions compared to those of spark ignition en-
gines, the serious concerns are oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and particulate
matter (PM) emissions due to high combustion temperature [5,6] and
fuel-rich regions [7,8] respectively.

⁎
Corresponding author at: Institute for Energy Research, Jiangsu University, No 301, Xuefu Road, Zhenjiang City, Jiangsu Province 212013, China.
E-mail address: zxhe@ujs.edu.cn (Z. He).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113380
Received 3 December 2018; Received in revised form 17 May 2019; Accepted 18 May 2019
0306-2619/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
T. Pachiannan, et al. Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

Nomenclature MK modulated kinetics

MPCI multiple premixed compression ignition
Abbreviations NMHC non-methane hydrocarbon
NOx oxides of nitrogen
BMEP brake mean effective pressure NTC negative temperature coefficient
CDC conventional diesel combustion NVH noise, vibration, and harshness
CH4 methane O2 oxygen
CI compression ignition PCCI premixed charge compression ignition
CNG compressed natural gas PCI premixed compression ignition
CO carbon monoxide PFI port fuel injection
CO2 carbon dioxide PM particulate matter
COHR center of heat release PN particle number
COV coefficient of variation PPAC premixed pilot assisted combustion
DEE diethyl ether PPC partially premixed combustion
DF dual fuel PPCI partially premixed compression ignition
DI direct injection PRFs primary reference fuels
DOC diesel oxidation catalyst PRR pressure rise rate
DPF diesel particulate filter RCCI reactivity controlled compression ignition
EGR exhaust gas recirculation RON research octane number
EGT exhaust gas temperature SACI spark assisted compression ignition
EVC exhaust valve closing SCCI stratified charge compression ignition
GCI gasoline compression ignition SCR selective catalytic regeneration
GDCI gasoline direct injection compression ignition SFC specific fuel consumption
GDI gasoline direct injection SI spark ignition
H2 hydrogen SINL spatial integration of natural luminosity
H2O water SOC start of combustion
HC hydrocarbon SOI start of injection
HCCI homogeneous charge compression ignition SoMI start of main injection
HCII homogeneous charge induced ignition SoPI start of pilot injection
HECC high-efficiency clean combustion TDC top dead center
HRF high reactive fuel VCR variable compression ratio
HRR heat release rate VVT variable valve timing
HTR high-temperature reaction WDFs wide distillation fuels
IMEP indicated mean effective pressure WHTC world harmonized transient cycle
ISFC indicated specific fuel consumption WHVC world harmonized vehicle cycle
ITE indicated thermal efficiency
IVO intake valve opening Greek symbols
LNT lean nitrogen oxide trap
LRF low reactive fuel λ fuel-air equivalence ratio
LTC low temperature combustion φ air-fuel equivalence ratio
LTR low-temperature reaction ∼ approximately

1.1. NOx and soot emissions
The nature of diesel engine combustion tends to form NOx and soot
(major fraction of PM) emissions in a diesel engine [9]. The diesel en-
gine combustion is characterized by premixed and mixing controlled
combustion phases. During the former phase, a higher rate of heat is
released when the ignitable fuel prepared during the ignition delay
burns under near stoichiometric conditions. This causes a sudden rise in
cylinder pressure and temperature which promote the formation of NOx
emission [10]. In the mixing controlled combustion phase, the burning
rate of fuel is controlled by the rate of air-fuel mixing. The poor mixing
forms a heterogeneous mixture and promotes soot formation in con-
ventional diesel engines in conjunction with the very nature of diesel
fuel [11]. NOx and PM emission causes adverse effects on human and
environment like cardiovascular diseases, acid rain, photochemical
smog, greenhouse effect, etc. [12,13]. Increasing concerns on en-
vironment and sustainability led to reduce emissions and the environ-
mental damages caused by humans. In order to abate these emissions
stringent vehicle emission regulations (EURO-VI, TIER-4 final, etc.)
have been implemented throughout the world in recent decades to
protect the environment and public health. These emission standards
are enforced to regulate the engine emissions including motor vehicles

Table 1
European emission standards for passenger diesel cars, g/km [14].
Tier Date CO THC NMHC NOx HC + NOx PM PN (#/km)

Euro 1 July 1992 2.72 (3.16) – – – 0.97 (1.13) 0.14 (0.18) –

Euro 2 January 1996 1.0 – – – 0.7 0.08 –
Euro 3 January 2000 0.66 – – 0.50 0.56 0.05 –
Euro 4 January 2005 0.50 – – 0.25 0.30 0.025 –
Euro 5a September 2009 0.50 – – 0.180 0.230 0.005 –
Euro 5b September 2011 0.50 – – 0.180 0.230 0.005 6 × 1011
Euro 6 September 2014 0.50 – – 0.080 0.170 0.005 6 × 1011

2
T. Pachiannan, et al. Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

in quantitative limits which vary over specific time frames. Different

countries have different emission norms framed by their government in
terms of their policies, act, etc. For example, Canada (Canadian En-
vironmental protection act), United States of America (Environmental
protection agency), European Union (own policy of Euro norms), China
(Energy policy of China) and India (Bharat stage emission standards)
have their own emission norms. Most of the countries are following the
European Union emission norms namely EURO I to VI during different
terms. The emission norms of passenger diesel cars and light commer-
cial diesel vehicle are shown in Tables 1 and 2 respectively. Emission
standards of the United States of America are managed by the En-
vironmental Protection Agency (EPA). The light-duty vehicles have
three different emission standards over different periods, namely Tier 1
(below 8500-pound vehicles), Tier 2 (up to 10,000-pound vehicles) and
Tier 3 (up to 10,000-pound vehicles) for the period from 2000 to 2025.
These emission regulations are observed to be more stringent compared
to its preceding regulations. India follows Bharath stage emission
standards based on Euro emission norms from 2000. The emission
norms from Euro I to IV are followed from the year 2000, 2005, 2010
and 2017 respectively and planned to implement Euro VI norms from
2020. Chinese emission standards also follow the Euro norms I to V
from 2000, 2004, 2007, 2015 and 2018 and Euro VI norms from 2020.
The detailed information on EURO norms can be viewed from Ref. [14].
These regulations have forced the engine manufacturers and re-
searchers to control the emissions, especially NOx and PM [15,16].
1.2. Mitigation of NOx and soot emissions
The typical flame structure of diesel flame is shown in Fig. 1. [17].
From Fig. 1, the heterogeneity nature of the diesel engine flame and
various regions of NOx and soot formation can be noted. The major
pollutants of the diesel engines are observed to be NOx and soot which
are controlled by several methods. However, simultaneous control of
these two emissions is not so easy because of the nature of diesel
combustion. For example, the NOx emission can be reduced by exhaust
gas recirculation (EGR) or retarding the fuel injection timing, but only
with increased PM emission. However, reducing the EGR rate and ad-
vancing the injection timing decrease the PM emission with an increase
in NOx emission. Thus, the two possible approaches used at present are
either optimizing the engine design to control the emissions formation
or abating them using exhaust gas after treatment techniques. The
earlier emission control techniques are explored mostly without using
exhaust after-treatment devices, through in-cylinder strategies utilizing
higher injection pressure [18,19], adjusting fuel injection timing
[20,21], low to medium level of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR)
[20,22], improved combustion chamber designs [23] to augment the
in-cylinder air motion [24,25] and turbocharging [26,27]. Apart from
these measures, several techniques namely modified fuel injection
systems [28–31], combustion system development [32] and employing
exhaust gas after-treatment devices [33,34] are also analyzed to address
the contemporary emission norms. These methods significantly im-
proved the NOx-PM trade-off scenario. However, in order to meet the
tightened emission regulations that are enforced from time to time, it
has become mandatory to further explore alternative strategies in order
Fig. 1. Typical diesel engine flame structure [17].
to reduce the NOx and soot emissions simultaneously. Considerable
progress has been made on combustion, alternate fuels, and catalyst
emission control techniques to mitigate the emissions. In the past sev-
eral years, many alternate fuels (biodiesel, butanol, methanol, etc.) are
proposed for the diesel engine either as neat fuel or blended with diesel
fuel. Biodiesel fuel and its blends are generally known to produce less
carbon monoxide (CO), hydrocarbon (HC) [35] and soot [36] emissions
due to its higher oxygen content [37]. However, due to some limitations
of the biodiesel fuel (more NOx emission, higher viscosity, the dur-
ability of injection systems, deposits on the engine, etc.), it is not pre-
sently used in commercial vehicles on large scales basis [38,39]. Sui-
table after-treatment technologies namely diesel oxidation catalyst
(DOC), diesel particulate filter (DPF) and selective catalytic regenera-
tion (SCR) [40,41] are also employed to meet the emission standards
with some of the disadvantages like expensive [42], frequent main-
tenance, decrease in fuel economy [43], increased engine complexity,
etc., [44].
1.3. Improving NOx and soot trade-off
Therefore to overcome the NOx-PM trade-off issue of conventional
diesel combustion [45–47] and to satisfy the emission standards
[48,49], four general methods are widely developed to meet the tigh-
tened emission legislation and great demand on fossil fuels through
improving combustion process, using alternate fuels, exhaust after-
treatment and introducing advanced combustion concepts [50,51].
Developing after-treatment technologies to reduce NOx and PM in-
dividually is economically unattractive. From the nature of diesel
combustion standpoint [9], to reduce both NOx and PM emissions, high
temperature stoichiometric and fuel-rich regions should be avoided
simultaneously. Hence, one of the effective approaches is low tem-
perature combustion (LTC) featured by improved fuel atomization,
mixture preparation, lower local equivalence ratios and reduced com-
bustion temperature [52,53] that increase the possibilities of reducing
the NOx and PM emissions simultaneously [54,55] while maintaining

Table 2
European emission standards for light commercial diesel vehicle > 1760 kg reference mass, g/km [14].
Tier Date CO THC NMHC NOx HC + NOx PM PN (#/km)

Euro 1 October 1994 6.9 – – – 1.7 0.25 –

Euro 2 January 1998 1.5 – – – 1.2 0.17 –
Euro 3 January 2001 0.95 – – 0.78 0.86 0.10 –
Euro 4 January 2006 0.74 – – 0.39 0.46 0.06 –
Euro 5a September 2010 0.740 – – 0.280 0.350 0.005 –
Euro 5b September 2011 0.740 – – 0.280 0.350 0.005 6 × 1011
Euro 6 September 2015 0.740 – – 0.125 0.215 0.005 6 × 1011

3
T. Pachiannan, et al.
higher thermal efficiency [56] to meet the emission standards and in-
creasing fuel demands. One of the major problems of LTC engines i.e.
increase in carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbon (HC) emissions can
be taken care by after-treatment devices like catalytic converter [57,58]
and use of oxygenated fuels [46,59]. Meanwhile, to meet the fast de-
pleting petroleum resources, the use of alternate fuels are also pro-
posed. The biodiesel fuels attracted many researchers because of its
renewable in nature and to remain CO2 neutral. However, it is reported
that biodiesel fuel increases the NOx emission in conventional diesel
engines [35,60,61]. Hence, there was a need for developing some ad-
vanced strategies to address the unresolved NOx – soot trade-off of
diesel engines as well as enhancing the utilization of alternate sus-
tainable fuels. In this regard, LTC mode is reported as one of the reliable
strategies for achieving the simultaneous reduction of NOx and soot
emission from both the conventional and renewable alternate fuels. A
brief introduction to LTC follows in the next section.
1.4. LTC and its advantages
As the NOx and soot emissions are strongly influenced by the flame
temperature and equivalence ratio, controlling the flame temperature
and the local equivalence ratio can lead to a simultaneous reduction of
these emissions. The LTC strategy involves reducing the flame tem-
perature and allows sufficient fuel-air mixing by increasing mixture
homogeneity [62]. Thus, the lower peak cylinder temperatures with
enhanced air-fuel mixing alleviate the formation of NOx and particulate
matter simultaneously. Hence, the LTC has become an attractive re-
search area which has received much attention in recent years among
engine researchers [63–67]. Normally, in conventional CI engines
which use the diesel fuel of moderate cetane number (about 50), high
viscosity and low volatility, it is very difficult to prepare well premixed
air-fuel mixture before the start of combustion (SOC) and thus results in
locally rich and high-temperature regions. This tends to produce more
PM and NOx emissions [68]. The LTC is the advanced combustion
concept achieved by early fuel injection that improves in-cylinder air-
fuel mixing before the SOC, injecting the fuel closer to TDC with EGR
controlled combustion, dual fuel injection with varying fuel reactivities,
etc. Thus the enhanced fuel-air mixing in LTC avoids the fuel rich re-
gions and lowers the combustion temperature below 2100 K which in
turn reduces both PM and NOx emissions respectively [69,70]. The
fairly homogeneous mixture is obtained by prolonging the ignition
delay as well as by reducing the cetane number of the fuels and hence
most of the researchers used low cetane number fuels for LTC study
[71–73]. This type of advanced combustion mode increases the engine
efficiency with simultaneous reduction of exhaust emissions to meet the
emission regulations and improve the urban air quality [74].
Fig. 2. Contour plots of emissions depicting the operating regions of LTC modes compared to the conventional diesel combustion (CDC) mode [44].
4
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
1.5. Variants of LTC
From the literature, it is inferred that the LTC is mostly achieved
through various methods namely homogeneous charge compression
ignition (HCCI), premixed charge compression ignition (PCCI), partially
premixed combustion (PPC), reactivity controlled compression ignition
(RCCI) and gasoline compression ignition (GCI). Some other methods of
attaining LTC are high-efficiency clean combustion (HECC) [75–77],
spark assisted compression ignition engines (SACI) [78], laser-assisted
compression ignition engines [79], etc. Fig. 2 shows the different re-
gions of NOx, soot, CO and HC emission with respect to the fuel-air
equivalence ratio (λ) and flame temperature as well as the operating
ranges of different modes of LTC. This helps in selecting the optimal
combustion flame temperature and fuel-air equivalence ratio for
achieving the emission reductions. In addition to the simultaneous re-
duction of NOx and PM, the LTC reduces the throttle loss, adopts higher
compression ratio, shortens the combustion duration [80], increases the
flexibility in fuel selection and combines the advantages of both SI and
CI engines [81]. However, some of the major concerns in LTC are
combustion control [82] over a wide range of loads, increased com-
bustion noise [83] and relatively higher CO [84,85] and HC [75]
emissions.
1.6. Scope of current review
The review articles of Imtenan et al. [86] and Agarwal et al. [87]
provide essential information on the progress and development of LTC
concepts. Currently, numerous researchers are concentrating on redu-
cing the use of conventional fuels, establishing alternate fuels, and re-
formulating the fuel to reduce emission [88], etc. In this regard, the
review articles for the detailed analysis of all the modes of LTC and its
impact on performance, combustion and emission characteristics of
diesel engines fueled with both conventional and alternate fuels are
scant. Hence, this review article is aimed to focus on the effect of
various fuels on performance, combustion, and emission of LTC en-
gines. As the fuel properties influence the ignition quality and com-
bustion process due to the changes in physicochemical processes such
as formation of fuel spray, evaporation, mixing and combustion, many
researchers explored the LTC mode using variety of fuels namely con-
ventional fuels (diesel and gasoline), alcohol fuels (ethanol and me-
thanol), biodiesel fuels (methyl esters), gaseous fuels (hydrogen, nat-
ural gas, biogas, etc.), blended fuels (two or more fuel blends), etc. The
renewable fuel combined with LTC combustion mode provides better
results in terms of emission characteristics [59,86]. Therefore, the main
objective of this review article is to present the state-of-the-art of the
experimental investigations on low-temperature combustion strategies
T. Pachiannan, et al. Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

using conventional and renewable fuels. Hence, in this paper, an at- short chemical ignition time), the tendency of auto-ignition, fuel wet-
tempt is made to analyze the characteristics of a wide variety of fuels ting, controlling the auto-ignition and expansion of load due to the low
when they are operated on different LTC modes such as HCCI, PCCI, volatility of diesel fuel, etc.
RCCI, and GCI. Furthermore, a quantitative summary of performance, HCCI combustion involves on the premixed air-fuel mixture at
combustion and emission characteristics of each low-temperature equivalence ratios between 0.15 to the stoichiometric or lean mixture.
combustion modes including engine details and its operating conditions The review article by Jin and Zheng [91] on optical based LTC studies
are also reviewed and furnished. The novelty of the paper is to syn- explains the detailed chemistry of HCCI combustion. In HCCI engines,
thesize the effect of various fuel on all the LTC modes comprehensively the auto-ignition combustion process takes place at multiple locations
and to provide a detailed fuel-wise analysis of each LTC strategy. Thus [122] when the homogeneous mixture reaches its chemical activation
this paper provides a fuel-wise comprehensive review on performance, energy [123] which is controlled by the chemical kinetics. However, it
combustion and emission characteristics of conventional and renewable is very difficult to control the auto-ignition over entire operating load
fuelled compression ignition engines under low-temperature combus- and speed conditions [124] of the engine. Several physical parameters
tion modes (HCCI, PCCI, RCCI, and GCI). affect the quality of HCCI combustion and ignition delay namely mix-
ture homogeneity, inlet fuel and air temperatures, equivalence ratio,
2. HCCI combustion level of turbulence [125], fuel composition and fuel oxidation kinetics
at lower temperatures [126]. Fig. 4 shows the HCCI diesel combustion
The most typical method of achieving LTC is homogeneous charge with two-stage heat release in which the first stage of heat release is
compression ignition engine mode [87,89]. The earlier HCCI combus- associated with the low-temperature kinetic reaction and the time delay
tion systems utilized advance fuel injection strategies to obtain the between these two heat releases is called “Negative Temperature
necessary homogeneous mixture by injecting the fuel early in the Coefficient (NTC) regime”. The main challenges for HCCI engines which
compression stroke [90,91] and hence a premixed homogeneous charge prevent them from commercial use are extending the operating load
is provided before the start of combustion. This mixture is characterized range [127], controlling the auto-ignition [128], increase in engine
by the equivalence ratio, which is observed to be less than unity ev- noise, knocking tendency [129] and higher HC and CO emissions [130].
erywhere in the combustion chamber [92]. While a spark is used to It is reported that early auto-ignition at low engine speeds leads to
initiate the ignition of the reactive air-fuel mixture in conventional SI knocking and late auto-ignition at high engine speeds leads to misfire
engines, the fuel injection process initiates the air-fuel mixing followed [96]. To overcome these problems, EGR, variable valve timing (VVT),
by the auto-ignition of the air-fuel mixture in CI engines. variable compression ratio, higher inlet air temperature, different air-
fuel ratios (charge stratification) and high octane fuels or alternate fuels
2.1. Principle of HCCI engine are proposed for the enhancement of HCCI engine combustion
[131,132]. Fig. 5 shows the various generalized diesel fueled HCCI
In HCCI, a homogeneous or well premixed air-fuel mixture auto- combustion concepts and combustion systems [133]. The high com-
ignites at the end of compression stroke without spark [93–95]. In HCCI pression ratio and lean mixture give higher efficiency and lower NOx
engines, the combustion occurs in multiple locations due to the auto- emissions respectively [134]. The comparison of different parameters
ignition of the mixture which attains its chemical activation energy which influence the combustion process in SI, CI and HCCI engines are
[96] and the combustion is spontaneous without any discernible dif- provided in Table 3.
fusion flame or flame front propagation [97,98]. In the homogeneous
mixture, the increase in pressure and temperature during the com-
2.2. Methods of homogeneous mixture preparation
pression stroke result in simultaneous auto-ignition across the whole
cylinder called hotspots. This eliminates the high-temperature flame
To obtain the homogeneous mixture, several methods namely ultra-
front and maintains the local temperatures at low levels [99]. In an
high injection pressure with small nozzle holes [135], high boost
optical study, it is shown that near-zero NOx emissions are possible due
pressure [136], and high swirl ratio [137] are used to increase the
to low combustion temperature and subsequent high EGR dilution [91].
homogeneity of mixture [138]. The control strategies such as variable
The overall homogeneous lean mixture also avoids the soot formation
compression ratio (VCR) [139], exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) [140],
[100]. Hence, in HCCI engines, the ignition is controlled by the com-
controlling charge temperature and equivalence ratio [93] and fuel
position of the air-fuel mixture and the in-cylinder temperature [101].
modification technique [141] are adopted to increase the ignition
HCCI combustion typically uses port fuel injection (PFI) or early
direct injection (DI) to form a homogeneous air-fuel mixture [102].
Typical injection timing for the HCCI engine is shown in Fig. 3 [103].
The main characteristics of HCCI combustion are premixed mixture
[104], compression ignition and low-temperature combustion
[105–107]. It combines the best features of both premixed mixture of SI
engines and compression ignition of diesel engines [108–110] to pro-
duce better thermal efficiency like diesel engine [111,112] and lower
NOx and soot emissions [113–115] like SI engines. The HCCI com-
bustion was initially developed by Onishi et al. [97] using the gasoline-
fueled engine to increase the combustion stability of two-stroke engine
and later Najt and Foster [116] demonstrated it on a four-stroke engine.
This combustion technology provides less throttle loss which favors
higher thermal efficiency, fuel flexibility (it can use a variety of fuels
viz. diesel, gasoline, ethanol, methanol, natural gas, hydrogen, etc.)
[117], lower carbon dioxide (CO2) [118], NOx and PM emissions [119]
vis-à-vis conventional diesel fuel combustion. Theoretically, diesel
fueled HCCI can achieve nearly zero level NOx and PM emission [120].
However, it is opined that the diesel-fueled HCCI combustion poses
some difficulties such as higher cetane number of diesel fuel [121],
problems associated in forming a homogeneous mixture (but with the Fig. 3. Typical injection timings for different combustion systems.

5
T. Pachiannan, et al. Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

preparation), poor vaporization and wall impingement with the heavy

fuels. Since the charge homogeneity is influenced by the injection
timing, early direct injection is the most common method used for
achieving HCCI mode. In this method, fuel is injected early in the
compression stroke which allows sufficient mixing time to form the
homogeneous mixture. The multiple injections are also used in HCCI
mode instead of single injection at high loads. In late direct injection
mode, fuel is injected just before TDC (at later crank angles) in the
environment of decreasing gas temperature and density due to piston
expansion, which leads to longer ignition delay and improved mixture
formation [138].
Several experimental investigations are conducted on HCCI com-
bustion using a different type of fuels. The fuel-wise review on HCCI
combustion is summarized below.
Fig. 4. Typical heat release curve from HCCI combustion of n-heptane fuel
[107].
2.3. Diesel fuel on HCCI combustion

In HCCI diesel combustion, a two-stage heat release process takes

Fig. 5. Generalized HCCI combustion concepts and combustion systems [133].
delay. The homogeneous mixture is prepared either by external mixture
preparation or by in-cylinder direct injection technique [138] as sum-
marized below:
2.2.1. External mixture preparation
Preparing the homogeneous mixture outside the engine cylinder is
an effective method due to the availability of increased mixing time
before the start of combustion. This type of mixture preparation is
found to be more suitable for gasoline and alcohol (high volatile) fuels
[142]. Some of the mixture preparation strategies are port fuel injection
(PFI), manifold induction, wide open throttle carburetion, fumigation,
etc. For diesel (low volatile) like fuels, the external mixture preparation
is achieved with the help of a vaporizer. Considering the longer time
needed for homogeneous mixture preparation, the port fuel injection
method is the simplest and the most straight forward method in ex-
ternal mixture preparation. In this method, the injector is placed in the
intake manifold very close to the intake valve for improving fuel dis-
tribution and allowing the mixture into the engine during suction stroke
[138].
2.2.2. Internal mixture preparation
In internal mixture preparation strategies, early direct injection
and/or late direct injection are proposed to overcome the drawbacks of
external mixture preparation such as controlling the start of ignition
(which cannot be influenced by the injection timing in external
place. During the first stage, a low-temperature reaction (LTR) occurs
followed by the high-temperature reactions (HTR) in the second stage.
While ∼7–10% of the energy is released in the first stage, the re-
maining energy is released during the second stage [143]. Mathivanan
et al. [144] evaluated the effects of fuel injection quantity and fuel
injection timing on the engine performance, combustion and emission
characteristics of a diesel-fueled HCCI engine with multiple injection
strategy. In this strategy, the fuel is injected in five different pulses
during the compression stroke. The first four injection pulses helped in
forming a homogeneous mixture and the last injection pulse influenced
the combustion phasing. The combustion phasing is generally described
as CA10, CA50, and CA90 which represent the crank angle at which
10%, 50% and 90% mass of total injected fuel is burned. Studies
mention that CA10 as ignition delay point, CA50 as combustion phasing
and CA90 as the end of combustion. Combustion duration is calculated
based on CA90 and CA10 results. The most dominant parameter af-
fecting fuel conversion efficiency is combustion phasing. It is sensitive
to cylinder heat transfer and less sensitive to burn duration. It is ob-
served that the increase of first injection pulse duration (i.e decrease in
fuel amount at later pulses) from 274 to 334 μs decreased the peak heat
release rate, retarded combustion phasing and lowered NOx emissions
(up to 29%). The reduction in NOx emission is attributed to the reduced
heat release rate due to multiple injection pulses. The peak heat release
rate of single and multiple injection in HCCI mode is noted to be 50 kJ/
deg. CA compared to that of conventional diesel engine (220 kJ/deg.
CA). This reduction in peak HRR reduced the NOx emissions to a very
low level about 6 ppm (for single pulse) and 17 ppm (for multiple pulse)
compared to that of 381 ppm in the conventional single injection mode.
Higher thermal efficiency (15%), lower HC (56%) and smoke (24%)
emissions are also observed with the multiple-injection modes than
those of single pulse injection mode. In a similar study with multiple-
injection strategy (double injection – pilot and then followed by the
main injection) based HCCI combustion, the effects of premixed ratio
(ratio of the mass of pilot fuel to the total fuel) and EGR rate on

Table 3
Comparison of SI, CI and HCCI combustion engines [138].
S. No Engine type SI CI HCCI

1 Ignition method Spark ignition Auto-ignition Auto-ignition

2 Charge Premixed homogeneous mixture before ignition In-cylinder heterogeneous Premixed homogeneous charge
3 Ignition point Single Multiple flame propagation At multiple without a discernible flame propagation
4 Throttle loss Yes No No
5 Compression ratio Low High High
6 Combustion flame Flame propagation Diffusive flame Multi-point auto-ignition
7 Major emissions HC and CO NOx and PM HC and CO
8 Injection type Port injection Direct injection Both port and direct injection
9 Equivalence ratio ∼1 Lean to too rich Lean mixture

6
T. Pachiannan, et al.
performance, combustion and emission characteristics are studied by
Das et al. [145]. From this study, it is observed that the increase in
premixed ratio resulted in higher peak pressure (by 3 bar at 80% pre-
mixed ratio), rate of pressure rise (∼28%) and heat release rate and
advanced combustion. These characteristics are attributed to the re-
duction in ignition delay and burning of a major fraction of fuel in
homogeneous mode. The higher cylinder pressure and rate of pressure
rise at the higher premixed ratio (80% at the SOI of 5 deg. CA aTDC)
increased the NOx emission, which limited the HCCI combustion on
high engine load operation. In order to reduce the NOx emission, EGR
(30%) is introduced and it significantly reduced the in-cylinder pressure
(∼5 bar) and heat release rate (27%) and retarded the combustion
phasing than those of the conventional fuel operation at the same SOI of
5 deg. aTDC without EGR. Increase in the premixed ratio reduced the
indicated specific fuel consumption (ISFC) and increased the indicated
mean effective pressure (IMEP) due to more complete combustion and
reduced exhaust gas temperature (however, the IMEP is reduced by
8.5% with 30% EGR). It is reported that the HCCI combustion reduces
smoke (∼58%) with a slight increase in NOx emission (∼10%) than
those of the baseline data. However, the introduction of EGR (30%)
resulted in a simultaneous reduction of NO and smoke by 40% and 76%
respectively with an increase in CO (∼31.6%) and HC (∼135.6%)
emission.
The HCCI mode with 30% EGR decreased both the brake thermal
efficiency and NOx emission by 12.6% and 95% respectively vis-à-vis
direct injection mode [146], where a fuel vaporizer is used to make a
homogeneous mixture of fuel and air. It is also observed that this vapor
induction and EGR reduced the smoke emission up to 83% at 30% EGR
rate due to the absence of local fuel rich mixture and diffusion com-
bustion. However, the lean mixture and EGR of LTC increased both CO
and HC emissions up to 7.5 g/kWh and 0.81 g/kWh respectively. Diesel
vapor induction with increasing EGR rate reduced the peak cylinder
pressure to 50.99 bar with retarded occurrence compared to those of
peak cylinder pressure (66.7 bar) and rate of heat release (41 J/deg.
CA) in the DI mode conventional diesel combustion.
2.4. Gasoline fuel on HCCI combustion
Though the SI engines are operated with homogeneous charge, the
HCCI operation of SI engine decreases the fuel consumption at steady
state conditions vis-à-vis conventional throttled SI engine [147]. The
HCCI operated gasoline engines are proved to provide better thermal
efficiency and reduced emissions compared to that of conventional SI
engine. Normally SI engine requires stoichiometric mixture for catalyst
operation and fails to reduce NOx at excess air, while HCCI results in
low NOx emission even at non-stoichiometric conditions. Other ad-
vantages of gasoline HCCI operation compared to those of conventional
SI combustion are faster combustion (more like theoretical) and re-
duction in heat loss due to low combustion temperature. However, due
to high volatility and higher self-ignition temperature of gasoline fuel, it
is essential to increase the air-fuel temperature suitably by certain
methods which enable the auto ignition towards the end of the com-
pression stroke. There are several methodologies suggested in the lit-
erature, namely increasing the compression ratio, intake air heating and
variable valve timing (VVT) [147] for HCCI combustion mode in SI
engine. However, in HCCI mode of gasoline on a single cylinder engine
[148], it is observed that the increase in compression ratio increased
the tendency of knocking and vice-versa. Reduction in torque (10 N m),
lower brake thermal efficiency (18%) and higher fuel consumption
(∼930 g/kWh) are observed in HCCI combustion compared to those of
conventional SI mode. The HCCI operation reduced the engine noise
and HC and NOx emissions by 30% and 78% respectively than those of
SI engine combustion. It is difficult to control the gasoline HCCI com-
bustion because it is dominated by the chemical kinetics, unlike the
conventional SI or CI engines. Due to this, the operating range of HCCI
mode is limited. Hence, to extend the operating range for operating in a
7
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
stable state, a study on HCCI engine by Lee et al. [149] revealed a lower
peak cylinder pressure of 25.2 bar, heat release rate of 101.4 kJ/m3 deg.
CA, prolonged combustion duration (> 50% than the external EGR)
and higher IMEP of 4.42 bar with the use of stratified EGR. The NOx
emission is increased from 30 to 200 ppm (with an increase in low load
to high load) but still found to be less than that of SI engines. However,
the low-temperature combustion in the lean mixture increases the HC
and CO emissions compared to those of conventional SI engines [150].
In order to reduce these emissions, the effective control of NO, HC and
CO emissions at both the lean and stoichiometric condition with the
three-zone catalytic converter is studied [150]. In this catalytic con-
verter, the first, second and third zones are designed to reduce HC and
NOx emissions (using alumina or zeolite) at high temperatures
(> 400 °C), to reduce NOx (using alumina or zeolite) and to control
hydrocarbon and CO at fewer temperatures (< 300 °C) respectively.
This catalytic converter showed an emission reduction capability both
in SI and HCCI modes of operation.
In combustion control standpoint, cooled EGR is tried by Kim and
Lee [151] with the premixed fuels (Gasoline, diesel, and n-heptane)
which are supplied through the intake port. The EGR helped in sup-
pressing the advanced auto-ignition of the premixed fuels. Gasoline
premixed fuel reduced NOx and soot emissions effectively with the
increase in premixed ratio compared to the diesel and n-heptane pre-
mixing. Another method of extending the high load limit of HCCI
combustion is fuel stratification which improves the control over the
combustion phase as well as reduces the maximum rate of pressure rise
[152]. To achieve this, a single-cylinder engine equipped with a dual
fuel injection system i.e. a port injector for supplying homogeneous
charge and a direct in-cylinder injector for achieving the desired fuel
stratification is attempted. While the homogeneous charge is prepared
using gasoline, the fuel stratification is created by in-cylinder injection
of either gasoline or methanol during the compression stroke [152]. It is
reported that the increase in stratified injection ratio decreased the in-
cylinder pressure with methanol (∼2.99 MPa) than the gasoline due to
the higher latent heat of vaporization of methanol fuel (∼three times
more) and reduced the heat release rate to 47.1 kJ/deg. CA with pro-
longed combustion duration. In this study, the methanol stratification
showed more influence on HCCI combustion than gasoline fuel. In-
creasing the stratification with a higher quantity of gasoline direct in-
jection deteriorated both the combustion efficiency and the CO emis-
sion significantly. However, methanol stratification retarded the
ignition timing and prolonged the combustion duration which sub-
stantially reduced the maximum rate of pressure rise (< 0.5 MPa/deg.
CA) and the maximum cylinder pressure which is indispensable for
HCCI high load extension. Except for HC emission, the NOx
(< 150 ppm) and CO (< 0.25%) emissions of the methanol stratifica-
tion are observed to be lower than those of gasoline stratification while
these emissions increase with an increase in the premixed ratio.
2.5. Alcohol fuels on HCCI combustion
The alcohol fuel, considered as one of the second generation bio-
fuels, could be used as an alternate fuel in SI engines [153]. He et al.
[154] studied the combustion and emission characteristics of n-butanol
fuel in HCCI engine by maintaining constant IMEPs (which is achieved
by varying the air-fuel ratio). The n-butanol fuel delayed and lowered
the heat release rate with increasing air-fuel ratio, which indicates the
reduction in temperature as well as the amount of retained residual gas
in the cylinder from the previous cycle. The autoignition is advanced at
2000 rpm (up to 8.3 deg. CA) compared to that of 1500 rpm for the
same air-fuel ratio and exhaust valve closing (EVC) timing. The exhaust
gas temperature (EGT) and NOx emission are observed to be lower by
27 °C and 40 ppm respectively at 2000 rpm than those at 1500 rpm due
to lower in-cylinder temperatures. The HCCI mode produced lower NOx
emission and the maximum value is observed to be less than 60 ppm.
However, it is concluded that the HCCI combustion is feasible at low
T. Pachiannan, et al.
engine speeds and at part loads to improve the fuel economy [154].
Maurya and Agarwal [155] studied the HCCI combustion in a
modified diesel engine using ethanol fuel at different inlet air tem-
peratures (120–150 °C) and fuel-air equivalence ratio ratios (2–5).
Fig. 6 shows the in-cylinder pressure and heat release rate histories of
ethanol-fueled HCCI combustion at different air-fuel ratios and at
120 °C. As more amount of fuel is available for auto-ignition in rich
mixtures, it increased the maximum pressure and heat release rate,
mean gas temperature (1600 K) and achieved higher combustion effi-
ciency (∼97.45%). The maximum pressure and heat release rates are
observed in the richest mixture and vice versa in lean mixtures at all the
inlet air temperatures. Increase in inlet air temperature reduced HC and
CO emissions from 400 to 175 ppm (∼57%) and 0.81 to 0.1% V/V
(∼87%) respectively, while these emissions increased in the lean
mixtures. However, the NOx emission is found to be very low
(< 5 ppm) in lean mixtures (λ > 3.5) due to lower combustion tem-
perature. Increase in inlet air temperature decreased the CO and HC
emissions and increased the NOx emission.
In another study, it is reported that the intake temperature is the
most sensitive parameter that influences the methanol combustion
characteristics considerably compared to the fuel-air equivalence ratio
[156]. In this methanol-fueled HCCI study, it is also observed that the
equivalence ratio affects only IMEP and causes cyclic variation with
little influence on thermal efficiency. In HCCI engines, the air-fuel
mixture is auto-ignited by chemical reaction (i.e the temperature at
which the chemical reaction rates of the air-fuel mixture is favorable)
due to compression and hence the HCCI combustion is more sensitive to
the intake temperature. Since the HCCI combustion is controlled by the
intake temperature which increases exponentially with ambient tem-
perature, and hence any little change in the ambient temperature could
lead to a significantly different result. Decreased cylinder pressure and
heat release rate and retarded combustion phasing are observed with a
decrease in intake air temperature from 160 to 135 °C, air-fuel
equivalence ratio from 0.5 to 0.26 and engine speeds from 1400 to
1100 rpm. Advanced ignition timing (CA10 and CA50) and shortened
combustion duration are also observed with an increase in intake
temperature and engine speed. Increase in IMEP and indicated thermal
efficiency (ITE) is noted with increase in equivalence ratio at both in-
take temperatures of 140 °C and 160 °C because of more injected fuel at
higher equivalence ratios led to more energy input. Higher ITE of about
44.7% is obtained at 7.7 deg. CA with a shorter combustion duration of
about 11 deg. CA [156]. Aceves and Flowers [157] reported the effect
of intake temperature on compression ratio for various fuels as shown
in Fig. 7.
In a comparative study of Maurya and Agarwal [158] on perfor-
mance, combustion and emission characteristics of HCCI engine using
methanol, ethanol and gasoline fuel, a decrease in IMEP is noted in lean
mixtures at higher intake temperatures and vice-versa. It is observed
that higher intake temperature is required for gasoline fuel at higher
engine speeds, while the alcohol did not require the elevated intake
temperature due to its properties. For gasoline fuel, the maximum in-
cylinder pressure and heat release rates are decreased from 75 to 45 bar
and from 192 to 23 J/deg. CA respectively with a change in mixture
quality i.e. from the rich mixture (λ = 2) to lean mixture (λ = 2.6) due
to a reduction in the quantity of fuel injected. These rates are also in-
creased from 44 to 76 bar and from 52 to 188 J/deg. CA respectively
along with the earlier start of combustion and advanced combustion
phasing when the initial temperature of the charge is increased from
120 to 160 °C. Lean mixtures retarded the SOC compared to that of the
rich mixture for all the tested fuels at all the intake air temperatures,
which is attributed to the lower reactivity of the mixture at the lean
condition. Earlier auto ignition and smaller combustion duration are
observed for methanol fuel than those of gasoline and ethanol fuels. The
IMEP is decreased for all the test fuels at a lean mixture, due to the
availability of lower energy input to the combustion chamber. Ethanol
produced higher IMEP and higher indicated thermal efficiency (48.8%)
8
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
than the gasoline and methanol fuel. The combustion efficiency of
ethanol and methanol is observed to be up to 99% for rich mixtures at
higher intake temperatures due to the oxygen content of alcohol fuel,
whereas for the gasoline it is up to 96%. Lower NOx emission is ob-
served from HCCI mode and it is concluded that the air-fuel ratio
contributes more to the NOx emission than the intake air temperature.
However, higher CO (55 g/kWh for methanol) and HC (18.4 g/kWh for
gasoline) emissions are recorded in HCCI operation than those of the
conventional mode. From the experimental results, it is noted that both
the methanol and ethanol fuel showed good fuel characteristics which
make them as substitute fuels for gasoline in HCCI mode. Methanol gets
auto-ignited relatively earlier than gasoline and ethanol fuels when it is
operated in HCCI mode. The NOx emission is found to be 45 ppm in the
HCCI operating range, which is an order of magnitude lower than
conventional combustion. However, HC and CO emissions are found to
be more in HCCI mode compared to those of conventional modes.
Among all the tested fuels in HCCI engines, alcohol fuel is considered as
one of the most suitable alternate fuels which completely utilizes the
full advantage of HCCI combustion mode. This is due to the higher
octane number, a higher range of equivalence ratio, and extended op-
erational range with emissions reduction from alcohol.
2.6. Biodiesel fuels on HCCI combustion
It is quite evident from the literature that the use of biodiesel fuel
generally increases NOx emission [35] which is termed as a biodiesel-
NOx penalty. Biodiesel-fueled HCCI combustion is a new research area
due to the combined advantages of both biodiesel and HCCI combustion
which can address this biodiesel-NOx penalty. The main advantage of
using biodiesel in the HCCI engine is to reduce CO2, NOx and soot
emissions simultaneously.
Hiremath et al. [159] carried out experimental work with honne oil
methyl ester (HOME) and compressed natural gas (CNG) fuels on both
dual fuel (DF) and HCCI mode at different inlet temperatures, IMEPs,
and CNG ratios. CNG is used as the main fuel for both the DF and HCCI
modes, while diesel/biodiesel is used as pilot fuels. With 65% of com-
pressed natural gas energy ratio (CNGER) at 3 bar BMEP, higher brake
thermal efficiency (BTE) of 25.3% and 24.75% are observed on com-
pressed natural gas-diesel homogeneous charge compression ignition
(CNGDHCCI) and compressed natural gas-biodiesel homogeneous
charge compression ignition (CNGBHCCI) modes respectively. At this
Fig. 6. Pressure and rate of heat release histories for ethanol at different re-
lative air-fuel ratios [155].
T. Pachiannan, et al.
Fig. 7. Required intake required for fuels to operate under HCCI mode with
varying compression ratios.
condition, the BTE of HCCI and DF mode operation is found to be 8–9%
and 20–24% lower than the neat CI mode. HC emissions from both
HCCI and DF mode are observed to be higher about 35–40 and 80–84
times respectively than that of CI mode at the same CNGER and BMEP.
At the same operating conditions, lower NOx, smoke, peak pressure and
heat release rate are also observed in HCCI mode compared to those of
DF mode. However, the CO emission in both these modes is found to be
higher than the CI mode. The HCCI mode showed a beneficial effect in
terms of performance and emission (except CO and HC emissions)
compared to the DF mode. A reduction of NOx emission from biodiesel
fuel is demonstrated by Mancaruso and Vaglieco [160] too in the in-
vestigation of HCCI combustion behavior using rapeseed methyl ester
(RME) in an optical engine. The HCCI mode of LTC reduced the NOx
emission to a very low level (< 60 ppm). The PM emission is noted to
be decreasing with an increase in injection pressure due to improved
atomization, better vaporization, and homogenization. In addition to
NOx and PM reduction, lower HC concentration is also observed from
biodiesel fuel (< 43 ppm) because of its oxygen content and absence of
aromatics. Hence, the HCCI operation of biodiesel fuels can be con-
sidered as one of the feasible solutions for addressing the biodiesel-NOx
penalty.
2.7. Gaseous fuels on HCCI combustion
In general gaseous fuels are suitable for internal combustion engines
due to their ability to readily form a mixture with air. Antunes et al.
[161] investigated the effect of HCCI operation on CI engine using
hydrogen. The peak cylinder pressure of HCCI mode with hydrogen fuel
is noted to be increasing (∼40%) with a faster pressure rise rate (PRR)
than that of the conventional diesel engine. Increase in inlet air tem-
perature decreased the engine power output, brake thermal efficiency
and indicated mean effective pressure due to a reduction in volumetric
efficiency. Heating the inlet air and/or increasing the compression ratio
of the engine are required to enable the auto-ignition of hydrogen. The
higher compression ratio reduced the required inlet air temperature for
auto ignition, for example, 65 °C of air is required at the compression
ratio of 20. Higher excess air ratios (λ > 3.5) reduced the combustion
temperature and hence formed lower NOx emission. The CO and un-
burned hydrocarbon emissions are observed to be extremely less on
HCCI mode which is about 0.01 and 0.02 g/kWh respectively, vis-à-vis
the conventional diesel engine (2.0 and 0.5 g/kWh respectively). It is
also observed that the combustion chamber also plays a significant role
in reducing CO and HC emission from HCCI engine [162]. The engine
performance, combustion phasing and emission characteristics of HCCI
engine with and without pre-combustion chamber were reported by
9
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
Yousefi et al. [162] using natural gas. Higher cylinder pressure
(180 bar), HRR (193.074 J/deg. CA), IMEP (8.5 bar) and advanced SOC
are observed for the modified combustion chamber (without pre-com-
bustion chamber) than those of the comet MK.V chamber (with the pre-
combustion chamber). The higher temperature of the modified com-
bustion chamber led to higher NO emission and lower CO and HC
emissions. The results of engine performance and emission character-
istics showed that the HCCI engine with the modified chamber is pre-
ferred for lower equivalence ratio (ϕ < 0.3).
In a biogas-fueled HCCI engine, the effect of charge temperature and
quantity of diesel on controlling the combustion is analyzed [163].
Higher brake thermal efficiency (27.2% at 4 bar BMEP) and HC emis-
sion (4900 ppm at 135 °C) emission are obtained at higher charge
temperature and higher loads (at 50% energy ratio of biogas). However,
an increase in biogas energy ratio beyond 50% decreased the brake
thermal efficiency. While more CO (0.17%) and HC emissions are found
at higher biogas energy ratios (which is reduced by increasing inlet
charge temperature and engine loads), the NOx (< 20 ppm) and smoke
emissions (< 0.1 BSU) are observed to be very low. Increase in biogas
energy ratio from 40 to 57% delayed the combustion and reduced the
heat release rate and maximum PRR (< 2 bar/deg. CA). The increase in
biogas energy ratio (40–57%) is found to be very effective in lowering
cylinder temperature from 1600 K to 1330 K.
Bika et al. [164] tested the HCCI engine using synthesis gas by
varying its blend ratios. While synthesis gas or producer gas from bio-
mass gasification mainly composed of H2, CO, CO2, CH4, N2 and tars
[165], the gas used in this study consists of 100/0, 75/25 and 50/50 of
H2 to CO ratio. Increase in intake air temperature (up to 90 °C) and the
CO ratio up to 50% in the blend increased the in-cylinder pressure
(75.41 bar) and peak heat release rate (44.58 J/deg. CA) with advanced
combustion. High intake temperatures advanced the combustion and
increased peak pressure and vice-versa. Higher peak in-cylinder tem-
perature of 1415 K is obtained from the gas which H2 to CO ratio is 50/
50. Increase in CO necessitated the requirement of higher intake tem-
peratures of 78, 84 and 98 °C for 100/0, 75/25 and 50/50 H2 to CO
ratio at an equivalence ratio of 0.26; however little change is observed
on combustion phasing with an increase in quantity of CO. The com-
bustion efficiency is noted between 83 and 88% for all the test condi-
tions which is increased with an increase in H2 fraction.
From the experimental investigations on biogas as primary fuel
through direct injection and diethyl ether (DEE) as ignition improver
through intake port in HCCI engine by Sudheesh and Mallikarjuna
[166], it is inferred that increase in DEE excess air ratio retarded the
occurrence of peak pressure. The BTE of biogas-DEE HCCI combustion
is noted to be higher than that of SI and dual fuel modes. Since it is
difficult to auto-ignite the biogas at low loads, more amount of DEE is
required during the engine operation. In DEE HCCI combustion, more
CO emission is observed at all the loads (about 0.64 times at full load),
while lower NO (up to 99.7%), HC and smoke (< 0.1 BSU) emissions
are recorded than those of conventional SI mode. This study demon-
strated the possibilities of achieving a simultaneous reduction of NOx
and smoke emission from HCCI combustion.
2.8. Acetylene fuel on HCCI combustion
Nathan et al. [167] conducted the experiments on HCCI engine
using acetylene fuel and the results showed that brake thermal effi-
ciency is comparable to that of conventional diesel CI mode. The in-
creased heat release rate and the advanced start of combustion are
observed with increase in BMEP (0.5–1.5 bar) and vice versa with an
increase in EGR rate. The acetylene HCCI combustion produced very
low NO (about 20 ppm) and smoke emissions (below 0.1 BSU). How-
ever, higher HC emission (about 2000 ppm) is noted with acetylene
HCCI combustion compared to that of diesel combustion (300 ppm).
T. Pachiannan, et al.
2.9. n-Heptane fuels on HCCI combustion
In HCCI mode, it is proved that the combustion of n-heptane with
oxygen produces lower combustion temperature compared to that of
combustion with air which delayed the lower temperature reaction of
HCCI operation [168]. In an experimental study, the effect of EGR,
coolant temperature, intake charge temperature and engine speed on
HCCI combustion and emission characteristics are studied using n-
heptane and RON25, RON50 and RON75 fuels [169]. The cooled EGR
with n-heptane resulted in retarded combustion (close to TDC), while
RON75 resulted in a delay in SOC, decrease in maximum cylinder
pressure up to 5.35 MPa, decrease in gas temperature up to 1768.2 K
and decrease in the peak value of heat release rate up to 0.11 kJ/deg.
CA. Increase in the EGR rate (to 45%) reached the incomplete com-
bustion limit of HCCI combustion. Increase in EGR rate reduced the
oxygen concentration and resulted in delayed ignition timing and in-
creased burn duration (> 10 deg. CA) for RON75 fuel. EGR rate had the
nominal effect with n-heptane fuel on CO and HC emissions, while a
rapid increase in these emissions is observed with RON75. Increase in
EGR rate increased the CO emission by 1% and HC (> 2000 ppm)
emissions. In n-heptane fuel, increase in inlet charge temperature
slightly affected the engine results (except NOx emission), while in
RON75 it resulted in a higher in-cylinder gas pressure of 9.46 MPa, heat
release rate up to 0.36 kJ/deg. CA and lower CO and HC emissions.
Increasing the coolant temperature from 67 °C to 95 °C increased the
pressure, heat release rate, burn duration, NOx (slight increase), and
lowered CO (0.39 to 0.2%) and HC (598 to 428 ppm) emissions. As far
as NOx emission is concerned, n-heptane produced more emission
compared to that of other tested fuels. The effect of intake charge
temperature on NOx emission is shown in Fig. 8. Increase in inlet
temperature increases NOx emission and the trend of increase in NOx
emission of n-heptane is found to be significant compared to that of
other test fuels. The authors [169] concluded that intake charge tem-
perature plays an important role in HCCI combustion than the other
factors.
The port injection of n-heptane and direct injection of primary re-
ference fuels (PRFs) with different octane number ranges from 0 to 100
in HCCI-DI stratified combustion mode is studied by Qian et al. [170].
The effect of the overall equivalence ratio (obtained from the total fuel)
and partial equivalence ratio (based on premixed fuel fraction through
port injection) on HCCI operation are too explored. Increase in the
quantity of the port injection fuel (n-heptane) enhanced the maximum
PRR and advanced the SOC which is found to play a dominant role in
HCCI combustion. The port injection fuels slightly influenced the CO
emission. In this study, it is proved that the HCCI-DI stratified com-
bustion mode could be used above the medium loads which eliminate
the knocking problem of high load HCCI combustion, while HCCI
combustion is the most suitable at low to medium loads. Thus HCCI-DI
stratified combustion extends the operating range of HCCI combustion
to the higher end.
2.10. Blended fuels on HCCI combustion
It is widely reported that the operating range of HCCI combustion is
limited by controlling the combustion in a highly reactive mixture.
Hence, the mixture formation plays an important role in extending the
HCCI operating range. In the blended fuel approach when two or more
fuels are used, the rate of injection of the first fuel and varying the
injection timing of another fuel could help in providing better control
over the combustion. This section provides a summary of experimental
investigations carried out on blended fuels.
2.10.1. Gasoline and diesel blends
To overcome the difficulties such as control of combustion and
limited operating range associated with HCCI combustion, Tong et al.
[171] studied the combustion and emission characteristics of
10
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
homogeneous charge induced ignition (HCII) combustion on a heavy
duty multi-cylinder engine using a gasoline-diesel blend with different
gasoline ratios. Decreased combustion duration (up to 7.4 deg. CA) and
ignition delay are observed with an increase in the gasoline ratios than
those of diesel fuel. This shortened combustion duration is attributed to
the decrease in diffusion combustion with an increase in the percentage
of gasoline ratios. Both the combustion efficiency and peak pressure rise
rate (PPRR) dropped gradually with increase in gasoline ratios which
are found to be 3% and 0.15 MPa/deg. CA respectively. Increase in
gasoline ratio also decreased the after-burning process and thus reduced
the exhaust gas temperature. Fig. 9 shows the emissions and BSFC of
conventional diesel combustion and optimized HCII combustion at
different loads. The NOx and soot emissions are reduced in HCII com-
bustion than those of diesel combustion which is attributed to the
homogeneous gasoline charge and short residence time (for reduction
in NOx) and increased premixed gasoline combustion (reduction of
diesel diffusion combustion for reduction in soot) respectively. The CO
and HC emissions of this type of combustion are observed to be higher
due to flame quenching and crevice trap effects. However, it is reported
that these emissions can be reduced by using diesel oxidation catalyst as
an effective after treatment device to meet the Euro V emission reg-
ulations. From the experimental results, 0–80% of gasoline is suggested
for better combustion and emission characteristics. It is also re-
commended not to use the lower gasoline ratios and neat gasoline fuel
in order to avoid the incomplete combustion and higher peak pressure
rise rate.
To address the shortcomings of HCCI engines namely narrow op-
erating ranges, and uncontrollable ignition timing and combustion rates
due to low volatility and high ignitability, gasoline/diesel fuel blends
are used in the name of compound HCCI combustion mode, in which
port fuel injection of gasoline and in-cylinder direct injection of diesel
fuel are combined [172]. In this study, the effect of gasoline and its
quantity, premixed ratio, and intake air boost on combustion and
emission characteristics of compound HCCI combustion are in-
vestigated by Lu et al. [172]. The compound HCCI combustion is based
on mode transition in which the engine operates on HCCI mode at low
to medium loads and switches to SI mode during cold start, idling and
high load operations. Increasing the premixed ratio (increase in gaso-
line fraction) resulted in increased in-cylinder pressure (to 7.21 MPa)
and lowered peak heat release rate (to 69.54 J/deg. CA), while the peak
heat release is increased (e.g. 119.62 J/deg. CA for 30% gasoline). The
higher premixed ratio increased the peak cylinder pressure (> 7 MPa),
average temperature (> 1600 K) and pressure rise rate (> 0.6 MPa/
deg. CA). The higher premixed ratio also reduced the NOx and smoke
emissions, while it increased the CO and HC emissions. Intake air boost
reduced the maximum PRR and average temperature with simultaneous
Fig. 8. Effect of intake charge temperature and fuel on NOx emission [169].
T. Pachiannan, et al.
Fig. 9. Emissions and BSFC of HCII in the whole operating range [171].
reduction of NOx (< 50 ppm) and soot opacity (< 8%) by maintaining
CO (> 0.5%) and HC (> 150 ppm) emissions.
2.10.2. Gasoline and alcohol blends
In a study on alcohol blended fuels [173], a blend of n-butanol with
gasoline found to be auto-ignited earlier than ethanol-gasoline blends,
which shortened the combustion duration for the same EVC/IVO tim-
ings and engine speeds. The decrease in IMEP and ITE are also observed
in the n-butanol gasoline blends. In the experimental investigations on a
single cylinder, four-stroke diesel engine with different alcohol-gasoline
blends and two-stage direct injection technique, Turkcan et al. [174]
evaluated the effects of fuel injection parameters on HCCI combustion.
Almost 80% (injection ratio) of the total fuel is injected during the
suction stroke (SOI1) to form a homogeneous charge and remaining fuel
is injected towards the end of the compression stroke (SOI2) to control
the ignition timing. While the timing of SOI1 is varied as 100, 110, 120
and 130 deg. CA aTDC in the intake stroke, the SOI2 timing is kept
constant at 30 deg. CA bTDC in the compression stroke where the
maximum engine moment is obtained. It is observed that the increase in
ethanol and methanol ratio in the gasoline and alcohol fuel blends
decreased the maximum cylinder pressure and rate of heat release and
delayed the start of combustion when the SOI1 is at 130°CA aTDC. This
is due to the higher latent heat of vaporization of ethanol (2.5 times)
and methanol (3.3 times) than that of the gasoline fuel (decreases the
in-cylinder temperature too). Retardation of SOI2 from 30 to 15 deg. CA
bTDC decreased MPRR and IMEP for all the tested fuels. Increasing the
ethanol quantity in ethanol-gasoline blend decreased the maximum
pressure and increased combustion duration compared to those of ga-
soline due to the higher latent heat of vaporization. However, for me-
thanol it is observed to be on another way i.e. increasing methanol
content in the fuel blend caused an increase in maximum pressure. It is
concluded from the teste results that the performance and combustion
characteristics of HCCI combustion can be directly controlled by SOI2
than SOI1. However, for a fixed SOI1 and SOI2 timings, varying the
injection ratio plays a dominant role in the control of HCCI combustion
phases for all the tested fuels. This investigation concluded that the
operating range of the HCCI engine can be extended using alcohol-
11
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
gasoline fuel blends with the optimized SOI2 timing and injection ratio.
2.10.3. n-Heptane and iso-octane blends
In order to study the effects of intake air temperature on cylinder
pressure, heat release rate, start of combustion, combustion duration,
Cinar et al. [175] investigated the performance, combustion and ex-
haust emissions of HCCI combustion in a single cylinder HCCI gasoline
engine using 20% n-heptane with 80% isooctane fuels at different in-
take air temperatures (40–120 °C) and air-fuel ratios (λ = 0.6 and 0.7).
Increase in intake air temperature increased the peak cylinder pressure
from 45 to 63 bar, heat release rate from 67 to 188 J/deg. CA and in-
cylinder gas temperature from 1282 to 3145 K with an improvement in
the auto-ignition characteristics due to accelerated chemical reactions
between oxygen and hydrocarbons at the higher temperatures.
Minimum specific fuel consumption of 0.29 kg/kWh and higher brake
torque of 21.2 N m are obtained (on λ = 0.7) at 85 and 65 °C of intake
air temperatures respectively. The combustion duration decreased with
the increase in intake air temperature and air-fuel ratio. The CO and HC
emissions are increased up to 100 °C of intake air temperature and a
further increase in temperature reduced these emissions at all the air-
fuel ratios, however, it is vice-versa for NO emission. This study helped
in determining the effect of intake air temperature and air-fuel ratios for
the betterment of HCCI combustion.
It is reported that retardation of combustion-phasing decreases the
peak HRR heat release rate, the maximum PRR and engine knock (for
the blend of 80% iso-octane and 20% n-heptane) but with an increase in
cycle-to-cycle variations [176]. The autoignition of n-heptane and iso-
octane blends (27% and 73% by volume) is observed to be sensitive to
the local equivalence ratio. The combustion phasing also helps in
shaping the HRR and maximum PRR which control the propensity of
knocking [177].
2.10.4. n-Heptane and alcohol blends
Uyumaz [178] studied the performance, combustion and emission
characteristics of n-heptane (base fuel) and blends of isopropanol/n-
heptane and n-butanol/n-heptane on HCCI combustion. n-Butanol, is a
second generation biofuel alternate to gasoline, bio-derived through
T. Pachiannan, et al.
fermentation of lignocellulose materials (wood, non-edible plants, etc)
which exhibits less corrosion on metal fueling systems, higher energy
content and good miscibility with diesel fuel [179]. Delayed start of
combustion (up to 10 deg. CA) and advanced auto-ignition are noted
with an increase in the quantity of alcoholic fuels in the blend of iso-
propanol/n-butanol due to its higher octane number and increase in the
inlet air temperature respectively [178]. Lower cylinder pressure (up to
57.36 bar) and heat release rate (up to 78.87 J/deg. CA) are observed
for the higher percentage (40%) of isopropanol and n-butanol in the n-
heptane blend than the neat n-heptane fuel. Decreased combustion
duration (CA10-90) is found with increase in quantity of n-butanol and
isopropanol in the blend as well as with the increase in inlet air tem-
perature from 313 to 393 K. This is due to the increase in cetane
number with addition alcohol fuel, improved chemical reactions and
increasing activated molecules during combustion because of higher
inlet air temperature. It is observed that the increase in inlet air tem-
perature decreased the IMEP, while increase in the quantity of n-hep-
tane in the fuel blends (due to higher calorific value) increased the
IMEP (25.71%). Advanced auto-ignition at higher inlet temperatures
led to higher thermal efficiency and maximum thermal efficiency of
49.31% is obtained with 20% n-butanol blend at the inlet air tem-
perature of 393 K. Extremely low NOx emission (1–2 ppm) is observed
(for 20% of iso-butanol and n-heptane) in this type of combustion due
to low combustion temperature. CO and HC emissions are decreased
with the increase in inlet air temperature, because of better oxidation of
CO, improved chemical reaction and rapid combustion respectively at a
higher temperature. Higher CO and HC emissions are observed from
blended fuels. Maximum CO (0.144%) and HC emission (440 ppm) are
noted for 40% of isobutanol and 30% isopropanol fuels respectively.
Authors [178] concluded that use of proper fuel mixture and inlet air
temperature can address the limitations of HCCI combustion such as
extending the operating range of HCCI, controlling the combustion,
preventing the knocking combustion and reducing CO and HC emis-
sions.
2.10.5. n-Heptane and biogas blend
From the study of adding high reactivity fuel n-heptane to biogas in
HCCI engine, Kozarac et al. [180] too suggested that the port injection
of n-heptane is an effective method to control the combustion phase.
Fig. 10 shows the effect of IMEP on adding n-heptane (0–29%) to the
biogas which indicates an initial increase in IMEP followed by a drop
when the energy fraction of n-heptane is more than 20%. This is be-
cause of the high reactivity fuel (n-heptane) which starts burning at a
lower temperature compared to the biogas or methane fuel and hence
the combustion efficiency decreases due to low in-cylinder temperature.
The earlier start of combustion, lower peak heat release, and longer
combustion duration are recorded with the n-heptane mixed fuels. The
lower cylinder temperature due to the addition of n-heptane (pure
biogas blended with 29% energy fraction of n-heptane) decreased the
NOx emissions from 36 ppm to 0.2 ppm and increased the CO and HC
emissions.
2.10.6. Diethyl ether and ethanol blends
In a similar approach to explore the consequence of inlet air tem-
peratures, Polat [181] studied the effects of diethyl ether-ethanol
blends in a single cylinder HCCI engine using different ratios of ethanol
and diethyl ether fuels under different inlet air temperatures. It is ob-
served that the cylinder pressure is increased with an increase in inlet
air temperature and a decrease in λ for all the tested fuel blends. The
lower energy density and higher octane number of ethanol fuel retarded
the combustion with an increase in ethanol fuel fraction in the blends. A
delay in SOC with leaner mixtures (e.g: 18–10 deg. CA bTDC for
E30D70 blend) and higher percentage of ethanol content (e.g: from 26
to 8 deg. CA bTDC for E0% to E50% fuel) and an advance in SOC (eg:
5.4–11 deg. CA bTDC, for 333 to 383°K) with higher inlet air tem-
peratures are also observed. These are attributed to the sluggish
12
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
combustion of hydrocarbon and oxygen molecules at leaner mixtures,
ethanol’s higher resistance to auto-ignition and easy auto-ignition at
higher inlet air temperatures respectively. Shorter combustion duration
is observed with the higher air-fuel ratio, which is extended with in-
creasing ethanol content. Indicated thermal efficiency is increased with
an increase in inlet air temperature and a decrease in air-fuel ratio,
while the highest indicated thermal efficiency of 35.5% is obtained
from E30D70 among the tested fuel blends at λ = 1.5. Lower air-fuel
ratio of λ = 1.4, 40% ethanol content and higher inlet air temperature
of 393 °C showed higher IMEP. Lower pressure rise rate of 3 bar/deg.
CA is observed at higher λ and lower ethanol content. However, a PRR
of 1 bar/deg. CA is noted at the inlet air temperature of 333 K. Ex-
tremely low NOx and higher CO and HC emissions are observed in
higher ethanol content fuels with lower air-fuel ratios.
2.10.7. Diesel and biodiesel blends
EGR is considered as another parameter for controlling the HCCI
combustion. The effect of diesel and biodiesel blends (B20 and B40) on
performance and emission characteristics of HCCI combustion at dif-
ferent EGR conditions is studied by Singh et al. [182]. The experiments
achieved a stable HCCI combustion with biodiesel compared to diesel
HCCI due to a lower rate of heat release and slower chemical kinetics of
the of biodiesel fuel. Increase in fuel-air equivalence ratio (from
λ = 2.1 to 5.6), EGR ratio (up to 30%) and biodiesel content (up to
40%) decreased the cylinder pressure and heat release rate which is
attributed to reduced fuel quantity, lower oxygen content and lower
calorific value respectively. Peak cylinder pressure also reduced (from
55 to 51 bar at λ = 3.7 and from 60 to 55 bar for B20) with an increase
in EGR rate as well as biodiesel content. Higher ISFC, lower exhaust gas
temperature and indicated thermal efficiency are recorded with an in-
crease in EGR ratio and biodiesel quantity. While CO, HC, and smoke
emissions are increased with an increase in biodiesel fraction and EGR
rate, NO emission decreased due to lower cylinder temperature and
heat release rate. In a study of the effect of EGR coupled with the swirl
ratio and late injection by Espadafor et al. [183], increase in biodiesel
percentage with EGR resulted in a higher maximum heat release rate of
178.3 J/deg. CA and the reduction of combustion duration and NOx
emission (< 150 ppm) [183]. Thus these studies confirm that the in-
crease in NOx emission from biodiesel in CI mode can be overcome by
HCCI combustion with an overall improvement in performance and
combustion characteristics [182,183]. The lower volatility, higher
density and surface tension of biodiesel fuel than those of diesel pro-
duced larger fuel droplet size and caused more cylinder wall impinge-
ment. This is attributed to the longer ignition delay of biodiesel fuel
which provided more time for providing better mixing and increased
the premixed combustion. However, it is observed that the increase in
Fig. 10. IMEP and Intake temperature of different n-heptane percentage [180].
T. Pachiannan, et al.
EGR rate increases the smoke (> 0.4 BSU), CO (> 1200 ppm) and HC
(> 2000 ppm) emissions [183].
2.10.8. Hydrogen, natural gas, and diesel blends
The review article by Hairuddin et al. [96] provides detailed in-
formation on adding hydrogen and natural gases into diesel in HCCI
operation. Hydrogen fuel has wide availability and better environ-
mental benefits with fewer emissions than conventional fuels in addi-
tion to economic benefits. It can also operate in HCCI engines as a neat
fuel but it is often unstable and generates knocking. It has a higher
diffusivity with air than any other gases, which leads to faster mixing
rate. H2 is also added as an additive by most of the researchers to
control the ignition timing and to improve engine performance. Natural
gas is also a more readily available source with a higher auto-ignition
point of 810 K. This higher auto-ignition temperature is found to be
more advantageous in terms of operating at higher compression ratios
and emitting lower HC and CO emissions. The combination of either
natural gas or hydrogen (as high octane fuels) with diesel (high cetane
fuel) tends to increase the engine performance with reduced emissions.
Increasing IMEP and compression ratio reduce the required intake
temperature of an HCCI engine which helps to control the combustion
and to achieve an optimized combustion point. Addition of hydrogen
into the diesel fuel is found to increase the peak pressure and to provide
better power and brake thermal efficiency (13–16%). The gaseous state
of hydrogen and natural gas fuels reduces the wall wetting effect on
cylinder liner which reduces UHC, CO, NOx and PM emissions. While
the maximum BMEP of natural gas and hydrogen with diesel in HCCI
engine is about 0.4 MPa (at 51% of natural gas) and 0.6 MPa respec-
tively, it is up to 0.91 MPa with hydrogen fuel in supercharged condi-
tion. However, a higher fraction of natural gas and hydrogen (> 16%)
in the diesel fuel tends to produce knocking. This is attributed to the
presence of higher OH concentration regions in the high-temperature
zone which initiate local combustion resulting in local heat release rate.
In HCCI mode, the usage of the port injection system (to form a
homogeneous mixture) leads to significant NOx and soot emission re-
duction vis-à-vis conventional SI engines. It is observed that the earlier
injection timing strategy leads to cylinder wall impingement and results
in higher emissions. The late injection method is suggested to be op-
timal than these two methods (port and early injections) in controlling
the start of combustion. The methods like heating inlet air, increasing
intake pressure, adding hydrogen and using EGR control the ignition
timing of the HCCI engines [96].
2.10.9. Jet B and hydrocarbons
In a different approach, a set of fuels using a Jet B as base fuel and
having different cetane numbers (from 33 to 40) and different chemical
compositions (which are varied by adding reactive products of olefinic
and naphthenic compounds) are studied to control the HCCI combus-
tion [184]. At 1500 rpm, the NOx emission of 0.12 g/kWh, the smoke of
less than FSN 2 and noise of less than 86 dB is achieved. At 2500 rpm,
higher cetane number fuels produced more smoke (1.97 FSN) and CO
(57.72 g/kWh) emissions than those of lower cetane number fuels due
to the fast and early initiation of combustion. Lower cetane number fuel
showed a lower cylinder pressure of 63.75 bar, longer ignition delay of
20.11 deg. CA and shorter combustion duration of 23.71 deg. CA which
are vice versa for the higher cetane number fuels. It is concluded that
fuel of low cetane number, high volatility and appropriate chemical
composition (by adding 10% of olefinic and naphthenic compounds)
could improve the HCCI operating range.
2.11. Summary of HCCI combustion
From the above review, it is evident that the HCCI combustion is
capable of achieving a reduction of NOx and soot emissions simulta-
neously. However, it faces major challenges such as control of com-
bustion, combustion phasing, extending the operating range of HCCI
13
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
mode, achieving a cold start, meeting stringent emission norms, con-
trolling engine knock, reducing CO and HC emissions under low load,
etc. It is reported that the HCCI combustion mainly depends on the
chemical kinetics of fuel-air mixtures under practical engine operating
conditions. Physical and chemical properties of the fuel, spatial and
time history have a significant effect on ignition and combustion
characteristics. In HCCI engines, the chemical kinetic rates of auto-ig-
nition and combustion phasing depend on the air-fuel equivalence ratio
(termed as φ-sensitivity) too which in turn determined by the load and
cylinder temperature. The auto-ignition of gasoline is slightly enhanced
with increase in equivalence ratio [185]. The overall reactivity of the
fuel controls the φ-sensitivity. The fuel with weak φ-sensitivity slightly
reduces the maximum combustion pressure rise rate [186]. However,
the strong ϕ-sensitivity (which increases significantly with an increase
in intake pressure) of gasoline effectively reduces the HRR, and hence
maximum PRR and knocking tendency HCCI combustion. [187]. In
HCCI engines, at low engine speeds, the early auto-ignition may lead to
knocking, while it is prone to misfire due to the late auto-ignition at
higher engine speeds [96]. In order to overcome the challenges in HCCI
mode, the researchers explored the various possibilities. The review
article by Gan et al. [90] discusses the usage of HCCI combustion in DI
diesel engines with early, multiple and late injection strategies. In early
injection strategies, the formation of lean and premixed charge is not
possible due to inadequate mixing of the huge amount of injected fuels
which could produce knocking at higher loads. For multiple injection
strategies, the fuel injected in the second or main injection combusts
with much higher air-fuel mixing rate than the conventional diesel
engines which can achieve very less NOx and soot emissions. In the late
injection strategies, fuel injected just before TDC at later crank angles
leads to longer ignition delay with improved mixture formation (re-
duces the soot emission). By reducing the nozzle diameter and in-
creasing injection pressures, the air-fuel mixing process can be en-
hanced. It is suggested that the air-fuel mixing rate can be improved by
using the high-pressure fuel injection system, small nozzle holes,
combustion chamber geometry designs, utilization of spray wall im-
pingement energies and multi-phase injection system, extending the
ignition delay by using EGR, variable compression ratio technology and
changing the fuel properties [107,120,135]. The autoignition tem-
perature can be controlled by varying EGR [188]. The modulated ki-
netics (MK) combustion system is proposed by Nissan Motor in order to
provide good control over mixture homogeneity and HCCI combustion.
This system comprises retarded fuel injection timing (starts from 7 deg.
bTDC to 3 deg. aTDC), high EGR rate and higher swirl ratio [189–191].
In this combustion system, the ultra-high pressure injection system with
a small nozzle hole reduces the soot formation, while the pulse injection
system and high swirl ratio improve the mixture homogeneity [138].
Fig. 11 shows the different methods that are adapted for controlling the
combustion phasing of HCCI operation. It is to control the phasing, burn
rate and primary auto-igniting fuel-air charge stability. The lowest ac-
ceptable combustion temperature is also a sensitive parameter to
combustion phasing which affects the time available for fuel burn-out
Fig. 11. Methods of controlling combustions phasing in HCCI engines [138].
 Table 4
Summary of performance, combustion and emission characteristics of HCCI engines.
Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection EGR Valve Performance Combustion Emission
condition Timing rate open
and Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
T. Pachiannan, et al.

close torque/IMEP
(deg.
CA)

Mathivanan et al. Four-stroke, HCCI multiple Diesel 100 deg. CA – – – – ↑ TE of 15% – ↓ NOx – ↓ HC ↓ Smoke
[144] four cylinder, injection system bTDC for multiple emissions emission of emission of
RP: 105 kW injections 56% 24% for
CR: 17.2:1 multiple
RS: 1800 rpm injections
IP: 1200 bar
Injection
system:
common rail
Das et al. [145] Four-stroke, HCCI-DI Diesel Pilot: 180 15 – ↑ IMEP with ↓ ISFC with – ↑ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Smoke
single cylinder, combustion bTDC and increasing increasing pressure, emission up emission with emission with emission of
RP: 7.4 kW Main: 20 30% premixed premixed pressure rise to 76% with increasing increasing 58%
CR: 17.5:1 bTDC ratio ratio rate and heat 30% EGR premixed premixed
RS: 1500 rpm release rate ratio ratio
IP: 200 bar with increasing
Injection premixed ratio
system: pilot
and main
Premixed
ratio:0–80%

14
Ganesh and Single cylinder, HCCI Diesel 23 deg. CA Up – – – ↓ BTE up to ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Smoke
Nagarajan AC, combustion bTDC to 12.6% with pressure, emission up emission up emission up emission
[146] RP: 4.4 kW with external 30% vapouriser pressure rise to 95% to 7.5 g/kWh to 0.81 g/ up to 83%
CR: 17.5:1 mixture and rate and heat kWh
RS: 1500 rpm formation increasing release rate
IP: 200 bar EGR rate with vapouriser
Injection and increasing
system: EGR rate
common rail
Hussaini et al. Four-stroke, HCCI Petrol – – IVO ↓ Torque and ↑ Fuel ↓ BTE – ↓ NOx No change ↓ HC –
[148] four cylinder, (bTDC): power consumption emissions of emission of
SI, 7.5 of 700 gm/hp- 78% 30%
CR: 12:1 IVC hr
(aBDC):
25.5
EVO
(bBDC):
21
EVC
(aTDC):
3
Lee et al. [149] Single cylinder, HCCI Gasoline – – IVO ↑ IMEP with – – ↓ Peak cylinder ↓ NOx – – –
GE, (bTDC): using pressure of emissions
CR: 10.5:1 312 stratified 25.2 bar and than SI
Injection IVC EGR heat release engines
system: Direct (bTDC): rate of
and port 140 101.4 kJ/
injection EVO m3.deg with
(aTDC): using stratified
(continued on next page)
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
 Table 4 (continued)

Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection EGR Valve Performance Combustion Emission
condition Timing rate open
and Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
close torque/IMEP
T. Pachiannan, et al.

(deg.
CA)

160 EGR
EVC
(aTDC):
296
Hasan et al. [150] CR: 11:1 Gasoline bi- Gasoline – – – – ↓ Fuel – – ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↓ HC at –
RS: mode SI/HCCI consumption emissions emissions higher engine
1500–2500 rpm engine of 14% speeds
IP: 200–225 bar
Injection
system: Direct
injection
Kim and Lee et al. Four-stroke, Premixed fuel Gasoline, −22 deg. CA 40% – – ↑ Specific fuel – ↑ cylinder ↓ NOx – ↑ HC ↓ Soot
[151] single cylinder, and cooled EGR diesel, and n- aTDC consumption pressure and emission for emission with emission
CR: 19:1 on HCCI heptane with heat release gasoline fuel increasing for gasoline
RS: 1200 rpm combustion increasing rate with premixed fuel
IP: 5.5 MPa premixed increasing ratio
(premixed) ratio premixed ratio
Injection
system:
premixed
Yang et al. [152] Four-stroke, Fuel Gasoline and – – IVO – – – ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↓ CO ↑ HC –

15
single cylinder, stratification on methanol (not (deg. CA pressure and emission for emission for emission for
CR: 13:1 HCCI high load blends) aTDC): heat release methanol methanol methanol
RS: 1200 rpm extension 80 rate with stratification stratification stratification
Injection IVC increasing
pressure: (deg. CA stratification
0.3 MPa (port) aTDC): ratio especially
and 5 MPa 250 for methanol
(Direct) EVO Advanced
Injection (deg. CA combustion
system: port and aTDC): phasing with
direct 250 lower pressure
EVC rise rate for
(deg. CA methanol
aTDC):
80
He et al. [154] Four-stroke, HCCI engine n-butanol – – – – – – ↓ Heat release ↓ NOx – – –
single cylinder, rate emission up
GE to 40 ppm
Maurya RK and Four-stroke, two HCCI Ethanol 24 deg. CA – – ↓ IMEP for ↑ ISFC for lean ↓ ITE for lean ↓ Pressure and ↓ NOx ↑ CO at lower ↑ HC at lower –
Agarwal AK cylinder, AC, intake air bTDC lean mixtures mixtures mixtures heat release emission inlet air inlet air
[155] CR: 16.5:1 temperature rate for lean temperatures temperatures
RS: 1500 rpm (120–150 °C) mixtures
Injection
system: Direct
injection
Zhang and Wu Four-stroke, two HCCI Methanol 80 deg. CA – IVO ↓ IMEP at – ↓ ITE at ↓ Cylinder – – – –
[156] cylinder, DE, before intake (bTDC): higher engine higher engine pressure and
CR: 17:1 TDC 17 speeds speeds heat release
Injection IVC rate for lower
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

(continued on next page)

 Table 4 (continued)

Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection EGR Valve Performance Combustion Emission
condition Timing rate open
and Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
close torque/IMEP
T. Pachiannan, et al.

(deg.
CA)

system: port fuel (aBDC): intake

Injector 43 temperatures
Injection EVO and speeds
duration: (bBDC):
4–8 ms 47
EVC
(aTDC):
17
Maurya RK and Four-stroke, HCCI at Gasoline, – – IVO ↓ IMEP for – ↓ ITE of ↓ maximum ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC –
Agarwal AK four cylinder, different λ and ethanol, and (bTDC) : lean mixtures 48.8% for cylinder emissions emission of emission of
[158] CR: 17.5:1 inlet air methanol 10 ethanol pressure and 55 g/kWh for 18.4 g/kWh
RS: 1500 rpm temperatures IVC heat release for methanol for gasoline
Injection (aBDC) : a lean mixture
system: 18
common rail EVO
(bBDC):
56
EVC
(aTDC):
5
Hiremath et al. Four-stroke, HCCI and DF Honne oil – – – – – ↓ BTE for ↓ Peak pressure ↓ Upto 95% ↑ Up to 10% ↑ 29–35% for ↓ Up to

16
[159] single cylinder, mode methyl ester both modes and HRR for for HCCI for HCCI both HCCI 85% for
RP: 5.2 kW 1. Different (HOME) and both modes Up to 83% ↑Up to 15% and DF HCCI
CR: 17.5:1 CNG energy compressed for DF for DF ↓Up to 82%
RS: 1500 rpm ratio with natural gas for DF
IP: 200–225 bar different charge (CNG)
Injection temperatures at
system: 3 bar BMEP
common rail 2. 50% CNG
energy ratio at
different BMEP
Mancaruso and Four-stroke, HCCI Rapeseed – – – – – – Same Cylinder ↓ NOx ↓ CO ↓ HC –
Vaglieco single cylinder, methyl ester pressure, heat emissions emissions for emissions for
[160] CR: 17.5:1 (RME) release rate at RME RME
RS: 1500 rpm all injection
IP: 200–225 bar pressures
Injection
system:
common rail
Antunes et al. Four-stroke, HCCI Hydrogen – – IVO ↓ IMEP at – ↑ BTE at ↑ Peak cylinder ↓ NOx ↓ CO ↓ HC ↓ PM
[161] single cylinder, (bTDC) : high inlet air λ=3 pressure of emissions emissions of emission of
AC 32 temperatures about 40% about 0.01 g/ about 0.02 g/
CR: 17:1 IVC kWh kWh
RS: 2200 rpm (aTDC) :
59
EVO
(bTDC):
71
EVC
(aTDC):
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

(continued on next page)

 Table 4 (continued)

Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection EGR Valve Performance Combustion Emission
condition Timing rate open
and Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
close torque/IMEP
T. Pachiannan, et al.

(deg.
CA)

32
Yousefi et al. Single cylinder, HCCI with and Natural gas – – IVO ↑ IMEP of – – ↑ Cylinder ↑ NOx for the ↓ CO for the ↓ HC for the –
[162] DE, without pre- (bTDC): 8.5 bar for pressure of modified modified modified
CR: 17,2:1 chamber 7 the modified 180 bar, heat chamber chamber chamber
IVC chamber release rate of
(aBDC): 193.074 J/deg
36 for modified
EVO chamber
(bBDC):
36
EVC
(aTDC):
7
Nathan et al. Single cylinder, Biogas-diesel Biogas – – – – – ↑ BTE for – ↓ NOx ↓ CO ↑ HC ↓ smoke
[163] WC, HCCI higher inlet emission of emission at emission with emission of
RP: 3.7 kW combustion charge < 20 ppm higher inlet increasing < 0.1 BSU
CR: 16:1 temperature charge biogas energy
RS: 1500 rpm and 50% temperature ratio
IP: 220 bar biogas energy
Intake charge ratio
temperature:

17
80, 100 and
135 °C
Bika et al. [164] Four-stroke, HCCI Synthesis gas – – – – – ↑ Combustion ↑ Cylinder – – – –
single cylinder, combustion efficiency pressure, in-
AC, with cylinder
CR: 21.2:1 increasing H2 temperature
RS: 1800 rpm composition and heat
Injection release rate
system: port with increasing
inlet air
temperature
and CO ratio
Sudheesh and Single cylinder, HCCI Diethyl ether as – – – – – ↑ BTE than ↑ cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↓ HC ↓ Smoke
Mallikarjuna WC, combustion ignition the SI mode pressure, emission up emission emission emission of
[166] RP: 3.7 kW improver for temperature to 99.7% < 0.1 BSU
CR: 16:1 biogas and heat
RS: 1500 rpm release rate
IP: 220 bar with increasing
Injection engine load
system: port and
direct injection
Nathan et al. Single cylinder, HCCI Acetylene (OF) – – – – – Comparable ↑ Heat release ↓ NOx ↓ CO ↑HC ↓ Smoke
[167] WC, thermal rate and emissions emissions emissions emissions
RP: 3.7 kW efficiency advanced SOC about 20 ppm about
CR: 16:1 for higher 2000 ppm
RS: 1500 rpm BMEP and
IP: 200–225 bar charge
Injection temperature
system: Direct
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

(continued on next page)

 Table 4 (continued)

Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection EGR Valve Performance Combustion Emission
condition Timing rate open
and Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
close torque/IMEP
T. Pachiannan, et al.

(deg.
CA)

injection
Zhijun et al. et al. DE, WC, RP: HCCI at n-heptane (OF) – – IVO – – – ↑ Heat release – – – –
[168] 5.2 kW different oxygen (aTDC): rate of 75.11 J/
CR: 17.5:1 fractions −15 °CA
RS: 1500 IVC ↓ Cylinder
Injection (aTDC): pressure of
system: port 225 72.63 bar
EVO
(aTDC):
−225
EVC
(aTDC):
15
Lu et al. [169] Four-stroke, Operating n-heptane and – – IVO Up to 45% – – ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC –
single cylinder, conditions and RON75 (bTDC): pressure and emission for emission with emission with
CR: 18.5:1 EGR rate on 16 heat release n-heptane increasing increasing
RS: 1500 rpm HCCI IVC rate with EGR rate EGR rate
Injection combustion (aBDC): increasing EGR
system: port 52 rate, decreasing
EVO inlet charge
(bBDC): temperature

18
66 and coolant
EVC temperature
(aTDC):
12
Tong et al. [171] Four-stroke, 6- Homogeneous Gasoline with −300 deg. CA – IVO – ↓ Up to 75% – ↓ Combustion ↓ Nox ↓ By adding ↓ By adding Almost
cylinder, port, Charge Induced diesel fuel ATDC (aTDC): load duration, emission of diesel diesel zero at low
and direct Ignition (HCII) blend −377 ignition delay, 1–3.8 g/kW.h oxidation oxidation load
injection, IVC combustion catalyst catalyst conditions
CR: 18:1 (aTDC): efficiency and
Injection −154 Peak Pressure
system: EVO Rise Rate of
common rail (aTDC): 0.15 MPa/°CA
125
EVC
(aTDC):
−346
Lu et al. [172] Four-stroke, Compound Gasoline and Port- 340 deg. – IVO – – – ↑ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Smoke
single cylinder, HCCI diesel blends CA bTDC (aTDC): pressure and emission of emission emission opacity of
CR: 18.5:1 combustion 344 lower heat < 50 ppm < 8%
RS: 1800 rpm IVC release rate
IP: 19 MPa (bTDC): with increasing
Injection 128 premixed ratio
system: port and EVO ↑ maximum
direct injection (aTDC): mass average
114 temperature
EVC and pressure
(bTDC): rise rate with
348 increasing
premixed ratio
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

(continued on next page)

 Table 4 (continued)

Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection EGR Valve Performance Combustion Emission
condition Timing rate open
and Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
close torque/IMEP
T. Pachiannan, et al.

(deg.
CA)

He et al. [173] Four-stroke, HCCI n-butanol/ – – – ↓ IMEP n- – ↓ ITE n- Shorter – – – –

single cylinder, ethanol- butanol butanol combustion
GE, Injection gasoline blends gasoline gasoline duration and
system: Port blends blends earlier
autoignition for
n-butanol
gasoline blends
Turkcan et al. Four-stroke, HCCI with Gasoline, SOI1- – IVO ↓ IMEP for – ↓ TE for ↓ Maximum – – – –
[174] single cylinder, different ethanol and 100–130 deg. (bTDC): blends blends up to cylinder
WC, injection methanol CA aTDC 22 5% pressure and
CR: 17:1 parameters blends SOI2- IVC heat release for
RS: 1100 rpm 15–30 deg. CA (aBDC): blends
Injection bTDC 60
system: EVO
common rail (bBDC):
66
EVC
(aTDC):
16
Cinar et al. [175] Four-stroke, HCCI with a 20% n-heptane – – IVO ↑ Torque for ↓ SFC of – ↑ Peak in- ↑ NOx ↓ CO ↓ HC –
single cylinder, different intake with 80% (bTDC): λ = 0.7 0.29 kg/kWh cylinder emissions at emissions at emissions at

19
SI, temperature isooctane fuels 12 for λ = 0.7 at pressure from higher higher higher
CR: 13:1 IVC 85 °C 45 to 63 bar, temperatures temperatures temperatures
RS: 1200 rpm (aBDC): heat release
RP: 15 kW 56 rate from 67 to
Injection EVO 188 J/°CA and
system: Port (bBDC): in-cylinder gas
56 temperature for
EVC higher inlet air
(aTDC): temperatures
12 ↓ Combustion
duration for
higher inlet air
temperatures
Ahmet Uyumaz Four-stroke, Homogeneous n-heptane, – – IVO ↑ IMEP of – – ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC –
[178] single cylinder, charged isopropanol/ (bTDC): 25.71% for pressure, hear emission of emission for emission for
RP: 15 kW compression n-heptane and 12 the blends release rate and 1–2 ppm blends up to blends up to
CR: 13:1 ignition (HCCI) n-butanol/n- EVC ↓ for higher combustion 0.144% 440 ppm
RS: 1500 rpm heptane (aBDC): inlet air duration for
IP: 200–225 bar mixtures 56 temperature higher
Injection percentage
system: port blends
injection
Kozarac et al. Four-stroke, HCCI Biogas and n- – – – ↓ IMEP for – ↑ BTE for ↓ Peak heat ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC –
[180] multi-cylinder, heptane 20% of n- 18% n- release, emissions up emissions emissions
CR: 17:1 mixtures heptane heptane cylinder to 0.2 ppm
RS: 1800 rpm temperature,
and
combustion
efficiency
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

(continued on next page)

 Table 4 (continued)

Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection EGR Valve Performance Combustion Emission
condition Timing rate open
and Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
close torque/IMEP
T. Pachiannan, et al.

(deg.
CA)

Seyfi Polat [181] Four-stroke, HCCI at diethyl – – IVO ↓ IMEP for – ↓ ITE of ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC –
single cylinder, different λ and ether–ethanol (bTDC): lean mixtures 35.5% at pressure, heat emissions at emissions emissions
GI, inlet air fuel blends 12 higher air- release rate and higher air-
RP: 15 kW temperatures EVC fuel ratios combustion fuel ratios
CR: 13:1 (aBDC): duration at
RS: 1200 rpm 56 higher air-fuel
Injection ratios
system: port
Singh et al. [182] Four-stroke, two HCCI at Biodiesel 24 deg. CA – – – ↑ ISFC for ↓ ITE for ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↑ Soot
cylinder, AC, different λ and blends bTDC biodiesel biodiesel pressure and emissions emissions emissions emissions
RP: 5.85 kW EGR ratios blends blends heat release
CR: 16.5:1 rate for higher
RS: 1500 rpm biodiesel
IP: 210 kg/cm2 blends, EGR
Injection and λ
system:
common rail
Jiménez- Four-stroke, Biodiesel Colza biodiesel 50–45 deg. CA – IVO – – – ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↑ Smoke
Espadafor single cylinder, fuelled HCCI blends bTDC (aTDC): pressure and emission emission with emission with emission
et al. [183] CR: 18.4:1 combustion −2 higher heat with EGR increasing increasing with
RS: 2100 rpm IVC release rate EGR EGR increasing

20
IP: 300 bar (aTDC): with increasing EGR
216 EGR rate
EVO
(bBDC):
36
EVC
(bBDC):
−182
Starck et al. [184] Four-stroke, Fuel properties kerosene cut – – – – Similar fuel – ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↓ HC ↑ Smoke
single cylinder, on HCCI (Jet-B), 10% consumption pressure and emissions emission for emissions emission
CR: 15:1 combustion olefinic and for all the delayed heat higher cetane for higher
RS: naphthenic tested fuels release rate of fuels cetane
1500–2500 rpm with jet-B and low cetane fuels
Injection 20% olefinic fuels
system: and naphthenic Longer ignition
common rail with jet-B fuels delay and
(Blends) shorter
combustion
duration for
low cetane
fuels

[↑ – Increase/High; ↓ – Decrease/Low; CR – Compression ratio; WC – Water cooled; AC-Air cooled; RP – Rated power; RS – Rated speed; rpm – revolution per minute; IP – Injection pressure; IVO – Inlet valve opening; IVC
– Inlet valve closing; EVO – Exhaust valve opening; EVC – Exhaust valve closing; aTDC – after Top Dead Center; bTDC – before Top Dead Center; aBDC- after Bottom Dead Center; bBDC – before Bottom Dead Center; ]
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
T. Pachiannan, et al.
and oxidation of CO [192]. The high load limit of the HCCI engine can
be extended with ethanol stratification which increases the thermal
stratification and leads to a considerable reduction in the PRR [193].
Spark assisted ignition can be used to control the combustion phasing
and burn rate by changing modes between HCCI, SACI and SI com-
bustion modes [194]. The spark assisted compression ignition which
reduces the peak heat release rate effectively is also widely used to
expand the high load limit of HCCI engine [78]. During the transition of
HCCI to SACI, a portion of heat release occurs due to flame propagation
and hence the overall combustion duration increases which avoid high-
pressure rise rate and results in an increase in charge energy content
and load limit [195].
Despite some of the concerns discussed above, HCCI is proved to be
an effective method of achieving low-temperature combustion and
achieving simultaneous reduction in NOx and smoke emissions. Table 4
shows the summary of performance, combustion and emission char-
acteristics of HCCI engines operated with various fuels under a wide
range of operating conditions.
3. PCCI combustion
Some of the serious complexities of HCCI combustion are its limited
operating range due to high-pressure rise rate and difficulty in con-
trolling combustion parameters like SOC which depends on many fac-
tors such as fuel properties, auto ignition characteristics, mixture
homogeneity, temperature, and in-cylinder pressure, etc., [196]. These
challenges motivated the researchers to develop a different type of low-
temperature combustion strategy, known as premixed charge com-
pression ignition (PCCI) combustion [197,198] which is evolved from
HCCI combustion in order to control the SOC and burn duration. Pre-
mixed charge compression ignition (PCCI) is another advanced com-
bustion strategy, capable of reducing NOx and soot emissions simulta-
neously similar to that of HCCI concept with improved engine efficiency
[199]. However, PCCI combustion results in higher NOx and soot
emissions and lower HC and CO emissions compared to those of HCCI
engines [87].
3.1. Evolution of PCCI
One of the major challenges in the HCCI engine is the short com-
bustion duration which causes higher pressure rise rate. Though this
excessive PRR results in an increase in thermal efficiency; it is harmful
to the engine components in addition to noise, vibration, and harshness
(NVH) problems [200]. This problem even aggravates at higher loads
due to an increase in the rate of injection which advances the com-
bustion and hence increases the PRR. It is found that the intensity of
PRR can be influenced by varying the combustion phasing. In this
pursuit, a pre-mixed diesel combustion mode (diesel PCCI) is proposed
by Toyota et al. [201–203]. In this strategy, the charges are diluted with
a higher rate of EGR to prolong the ignition delay and to increase
mixing time. Increasing the mixing time has a beneficial effect on re-
ducing NOx and PM emissions. Prolonged ignition delay reduces the
fuel-rich regions and lowers the peak combustion temperatures which
reduce PM and NOx emissions respectively. However, in PCCI com-
bustion the high levels of EGR affect the combustion stability at higher
loads which can be overcome by early injection strategies for limited
load capability with a reduction in thermal efficiency [204]. The
technical barriers in commercializing diesel PCCI engine are lower
volatility and high ignitability which make the in-cylinder mixture
formation and combustion phase control difficult.
3.2. Principle of PCCI engine
In the conventional diesel engine, the combustion takes place first
by premixed combustion phase followed by mixing controlled com-
bustion (diffusion phase of combustion) phase. The oxidation reactions
21
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
during the mixing controlled phase are observed to be much faster than
the diffusion rate of the fuel into the charge [205,206]. The major
fraction of the fuel burns in the diffusion phase in which the flames are
found at nearly stoichiometric regions within the overall lean mixture,
but locally a heterogeneous mixture. This produces a high flame tem-
perature and hence large amounts of NOx are formed [207–209].
Moreover, the diffusive combustion phase is primarily responsible for
the soot formation due to the locally rich mixture which is not oxidized
due to insufficient air/mixing during the later stages of the combustion
[205]. Thus, the NOx and PM are emitted mostly during the mixing
controlled combustion phase and hence they can be reduced by ex-
tending the premixed combustion phases with a well premixed fuel-air
mixture [210]. In this PCCI combustion mode, an early in-cylinder fuel
injection [103] before TDC leads to a better fuel-air mixture before the
combustion and high levels of EGR (reduces the O2 concentration and
combustion flame temperature) increases the ignition delay [211].
Hence the fuel-rich pockets and high-temperature regions inside the
cylinder are avoided and the premixed combustion phase increases,
thereby NOx and soot emissions are reduced simultaneously [212].
PCCI combustion has the advantages of both HCCI and direct injection
compression ignition (DICI) combustion modes with lower emissions
and higher efficiency [213] as well as significantly faster combustion
process than those of CI and SI engines [214]. In PCCI combustion, the
combustion does not occur in a fully homogeneous mixture like HCCI
and it is capable of operating on a wide range of fuels (includes bio-
diesel, gasoline, and ethanol, etc.,) [215].
3.3. Method of charge preparation in PCCI
In LTC, for a given combustion phasing, NOx emission primarily
depends on the EGR rate rather than the fuel cetane number and vo-
latility [216]. Cooled EGR is a common strategy to achieve LTC by
reducing combustion temperature and by prolonging ignition delay.
Reduced combustion temperature suppresses NOx and PM formation.
Prolonged ignition delay allows additional time for fuel and air mixing,
which reduces the fuel rich zones and suppresses the soot formation
[217]. In addition to EGR, retardation of injection timing is one of the
most effective techniques for extending the ignition delay to achieve
LTC operation [92]. However, enhanced premixed combustion in PCCI
increases the rate of peak pressure rise which makes the combustion
phasing control difficult [218]. For the PCCI combustion strategy, fuel
is injected into the combustion chamber by three methods; viz. port fuel
injection, advanced direct injection and late direct injection. While the
first two methods are used similar to HCCI combustion and suffer from
cylinder wall impingement and incomplete evaporation of fuel, the late
injection avoids the wall-impingement and used to control the com-
bustion phasing [219]. The detailed review of PCCI combustion based
on different fuels is presented in the following section.
3.4. Diesel fuel on PCCI combustion
The influence of EGR in a diesel engine equipped with twin stage
turbocharger and optimized pilot injection strategy running on a late
PCCI combustion is studied by Ambrosio and Ferrari [220]. The EGR
rate is varied from 0 to 50% at low loads and it increased the ignition
delay due to the reduction of oxygen concentration. Retardation of
combustion timing and higher EGR rate offered a better NOx reduction.
The peak heat release rate is normally observed to decrease for the pilot
injection case and the cylinder pressure also decreased up to 44.3 bar
with an increase in EGR rate up to 48%. While the EGR rate up to 30%
did not influence the HC and CO emissions significantly, the HC emis-
sion is slightly reduced with 30–40% EGR rate. However, there is an
increase in soot emission with increasing EGR rate due to lack of oxygen
content. Increasing the EGR rate above 20% slightly increased the BSFC
due to reduction in fuel-air equivalence ratio and increase in combus-
tion duration. In a similar approach with double-injection, Torregrosa
T. Pachiannan, et al.
et al. [221] studied the effect of pilot injection on PCCI and analyzed its
effect on emissions, combustion noise, and performance of a diesel
engine. In this study, a longer ignition delay (up to 17 deg. CA) is ob-
served for the PCCI combustion than that of the conventional diesel
combustion mode which provided more time for mixing air and fuel.
High EGR rate (40%) reduced the oxygen content (up to 10%) and
combustion temperatures which in turn lowered the NOx emission
below 25 ppm on PCCI mode and 80 pm on diesel combustion. Increase
in pilot injection quantity decreased soot emissions and combustion
noise. However, the increase in pilot fuel quantity more than 40% de-
creased the BMEP significantly. In another study, Jain et al. [222] re-
ported that the combination of split fuel injection strategy and EGR can
be used for extending the applicable limits of PCCI combustion by
controlling the start of combustion and combustion phasing. These
control reduced knocking and NOx emission levels. In this experimental
investigation [222], the authors explored the PCCI combustion using an
optimized injection strategy and EGR rate to reduce the NOx and PM
emissions and engine knocking. Advancing start of main injection
(SoMI) from 12 to 24 deg. CA bTDC increased the time available for
fuel-air mixing and premixed combustion (increased the peak cylinder
pressure from 66.5 to 72.8 bar and heat release rate from 142.2 to
210.37 J/deg. CA) and reduced the main combustion phase. However,
advancing the start of pilot injection (SoPI) lowered the cylinder tem-
perature and pressure due to inferior fuel-air mixing. At a constant SoPI
of 35 deg. bTDC with increasing EGR rate up to 30% resulted in lower
maximum cylinder pressure from 78 to 72 bar and peak heat release
rate from 226 to 130 J/deg. CA due to longer ignition delay and the
retarded start of combustion. Advanced start of combustion from −2 to
−10.5 deg. CA and combustion phasing from −0.5 to −9 deg. CA and
shorter combustion duration from 16 to 12 deg. CA are found with the
advanced SoMI and SoPI timings. This is attributed to the improved
mixing rate, better-premixed combustion and faster chemical kinetics of
the fuel. Increasing the EGR rate from 0 to 30% reduced the peak knock
intensity from 8 to 2 bar and the combustion noise significantly from 98
to 92 dB. Lowered BTE (25 to 22% at advancing injection timing), re-
duced EGT (up to75°C) and increased BSFC (0.3 to 0.37 g/kWh) are
observed with advancing injection timing and increasing EGR rate.
These observations are attributed to higher negative piston work at
more advanced injection timings, lower in-cylinder pressure and che-
mical kinetics of fuel-air mixture as opined by the authors. Extremely
low NOx emission (less than 5 ppm), increased CO (from 5 to 15 g/
kWh), HC (∼up to 5 g/kWh), and smoke opacity (up to 6%) are ob-
served with advancing injection timings and increasing EGR rate. A
reduction in particle number size and its concentrations are observed
with advancing main injection timings due to increase in time for
mixing which prepared a more homogeneous mixture. The PCCI
emission results also showed a lower trace of metals inside the cylinder
with increasing EGR rate than that of HCCI combustion mode. In an
experimental investigation of studying the effects of fuel injection
parameters on PCCI combustion using EGR and its performance and
emission characteristics [223], it is observed that advanced start of
combustion (∼7–9° bTDC), higher cylinder pressure and heat release
rate is obtained by advancing the start of main injection (SoMI – from
12 to 24° bTDC). This is due to the increased time for mixing and the
enhanced premixed fuel-air quantity which caused more fuel to parti-
cipate in premixed combustion phase than the diffusion combustion
phase. Increasing fuel injection pressure from 400 to 1000 bar im-
proved the fuel atomization which enhanced the fuel spray character-
istics and increased the cylinder pressure from 72 to 78 bar and peak
heat release rate from 170 to 230 J/deg. CA. Advanced combustion
phasing (∼8 CAD) and shortened combustion duration (∼15 deg. CA)
are found when the start of the main injection is advanced from 12 to
24 deg. bTDC. Advanced SoMI also reduced the knock intensity due to
the effect of pilot injection and EGR which enabled smooth combustion.
However, decreased BTE (∼27.5–23.6% and 27.5–24.8%) and in-
creased BSFC (0.31–0.36 kg/kWh and 0.31–0.34 kg/kWh) are observed
22
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
with increasing fuel injection pressure and advancing SoMI timings
respectively. While CO and HC emissions are increased with increasing
injection pressure due to the formation of homogeneous mixtures and
low combustion temperature, it favored in reducing NOx and smoke. It
is concluded that increasing the fuel injection pressure along with the
advanced start of the main injection improves the PCCI combustion
process [223]. Thus it is obvious from these experimental results
[221–223] that the PCCI combustion can be controlled with split in-
jection strategy by optimizing injection timings, injection pressure and
EGR rate.
Parks et al. [224] studied the PCCI combustion by increasing EGR
rate, advancing fuel injection timing and increasing fuel rail pressure.
In this study, it is observed that the PCCI combustion occurs in an en-
hanced homogeneous combustion flame vis-à-vis the conventional
diesel engine where the combustion occurs in a stratified flame along
with the fuel spray. Increase in EGR rate reduced the NOx emission with
a significant drop in engine efficiency (from 28 to 24.2%), while CO and
HC emissions are increased from 11.12 to 27.08 g/bhp-hr and from 1.59
to 8.13 g/bhp-hr respectively. These emission changes occurred dras-
tically when the EGR rate is increased beyond 40% due to incomplete
combustion as shown in Fig. 12. The emissions of formaldehyde (16.4
and 103.7 ppm in CI and PCCI modes respectively) and acetaldehyde
(12.5 and 63.7 ppm in CI and PCCI modes) are observed to increase in
PCCI combustion mode than those of from CI combustion. The PM
emission from PCCI combustion is found to be around 0.35 g/kg of fuel
which is less than that of the conventional combustion mode (∼0.76 g/
kg of fuel). Authors [224] also studied the effects of PCCI combustion
on different catalyst devices (emission control systems) such as lean
NOx trap (LNT), diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC) and diesel particulate
filter (DPF). With the help of LNT, the PCCI combustion showed very
low NOx emissions (< 5g/bhp-hr) than that of the conventional modes.
The higher catalyst temperature (> 220 °C) of DOC at higher loads
(> 2 bar and at 1500 rpm) controlled the formaldehyde and acet-
aldehyde emissions below Tier 2 Bin 5 regulation, while these reduc-
tions are not observed at low loads due to ineffective oxidization.
The combustion and emission characteristics of the PCCI engine in
terms of spray impingement, injection parameters, and EGR rate are
studied by Kiplimo et al. [225]. The experimental observations showed
that the higher injection pressure of 140 MPa resulted in higher heat
release rate (∼120 J/deg. CA) with shortened combustion duration
compared to that of the lower injection pressure of 80 MPa. It also led to
better ITE of 47.4% and IMEP of 325 kPa and lower smoke and HC
emissions with an unaltered CO emission. These effects are attributed to
better atomization and vaporization characteristics at higher injection
pressures. In contrary to the conventional diesel combustion, the lower
injection pressure produced higher NOx emission and vice-versa. De-
creased in-cylinder pressure and heat release rate, increased ignition
delay (up to 8 deg. CA) and retarded combustion phasing are observed
Fig. 12. Efficiency and emissions of PCCI combustion with an EGR rate [224].
T. Pachiannan, et al.
with EGR. The maximum indicated thermal efficiency is found to be
∼48.7% (at 343 kPa IMEP and 40% EGR rate) when the injection
timing range is between 15 and 20 deg. bTDC. The PCCI combustion
with EGR lowered the oxygen availability as well as the adiabatic flame
temperature which resulted in lower NOx emission; however, it in-
creased the CO (∼12 g/kWh) and HC (∼8 g/kWh) emissions. Very low
smoke emission (less than 0.5%) level is achieved using EGR at injec-
tion timing between 15 and 25 deg. bTDC. The optimum injection
timing (reported as 20 deg. bTDC) with EGR simultaneously reduced
both NOx and soot emissions. It is opined by the authors that the PCCI
combustion also eliminates the fuel-rich zones and thus prevents the
soot formation. These results also proved that the selection of injection
timings and EGR rate helps in achieving better PCCI combustion.
Laguitton et al. [226] tried to achieve low NOx and soot emissions
in a PCCI diesel engine at lower compression ratios. The lower com-
pression ratio is adopted to reduce the in-cylinder temperature which in
turn reduces the flame temperature as well as the NOx emission. Re-
duction in NOx emission is observed by lowering the compression ratio
from 18.4:1 to 16:1 as well as by retarding the injection timing. In PCCI
mode, during the premixed combustion conditions, the NOx emission is
mainly controlled by the air-fuel ratio and EGR rate than the tem-
perature and pressure. The rate of combustion and the proportion of
diffusion combustion are reduced due to low pressure and temperature
conditions during the injection and combustion, which promoted the
fuel-air mixing. It is also found that the reduction in compression ratio
also decreased the maximum rate of pressure rise and soot emission.
3.5. Biodiesel fuels on PCCI combustion
The performance, combustion and emission characteristics of neat
biodiesel (B100) and diesel fuel are compared numerically under PCCI
combustion mode in a single cylinder light-duty diesel engine. The
numerical simulation is carried out through KIVA-3V CFD code coupled
with CHEMKIN [227]. Higher density, viscosity and surface tension of
biodiesel vis-à-vis diesel fuel increased the Sauter mean diameter (up to
∼12.8 μm) and spray penetration than those of the diesel fuel which
caused higher THC emission. In biodiesel, the optimum injection timing
for achieving the lowest NOx (13%), THC (12%) and CO (27%) emis-
sions than those of the diesel fuel is found to be 30 deg. CA bTDC. In
biodiesel fuel, the earlier formation OH radical advanced the peak heat
release rate, in-cylinder pressure, and the temperature rise.
3.6. Gaseous fuels on PCCI combustion
While concentrating on the reduction of NOx and soot emissions
from a diesel engine, one of the key priorities in the engine design is
also to reduce the CO2 emission which is possible by increasing the
engine efficiency. In this regard, alternate fuel like hydrogen could be a
better choice for eliminating the CO2 emission because of the absence of
carbon atoms. Jeon and Bae [228] compared the performance and
emission characteristics of a dimethyl-ether (DME) fueled PCCI engines
with hydrogen-DME fueled PCCI engines equipped with multiple-in-
jection systems. In the double injection strategy of DME fueled PCCI
engines, 64.5% of the fuel is injected in the first pulse at −120 deg. CA
aTDC followed by the second injection where the remaining 35.5% fuel
is injected (timing is varied from −80 deg. CA aTDC to 0 deg. CA
aTDC). The heat release rate (149.31 J/deg. CA) of single injection is
found to be higher than that of the multiple injections (with respect to
change in the second injection timings, it is about 98.08, 76.15 J/deg.
CA, etc.). Increased IMEPs and no change in emission characteristics are
found with retarding the second injection timings. In the study of hy-
drogen fuel, the first injection of hydrogen is followed by DME injection
which injection timing is varied from −80 to 0 deg. CA aTDC. While
the second injection timing up to −40 deg. CA aTDC did not affect the
combustion characteristics, the injection timing after −30 deg. CA
aTDC is found to affect the combustion phase by reducing the ignition
23
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
delay (from 5 to 10 deg. CA) due to the injection of fuel in the high
pressure and temperature environment. Increasing the quantity of hy-
drogen delayed and lowered the heat release due to the presence of H2
which consumed the OH radical, suppressed the high temperature and
slowed down the chain reaction. Delay in the combustion phase of
hydrogen-DME PCCI combustion produced higher IMEP than that of the
DME PCCI combustion. CO, CO2, HC emissions are observed to decrease
with increasing hydrogen content without any major influence on NOx
emission. In a study of effect of pilot fuel quantity of DME in PCCI-DI
combustion mode (combination of premixed charge compression igni-
tion and conventional direct-injection compression ignition combus-
tion), higher maximum pressure (7.5 MPa), higher heat release rate
(0.13 kJ/deg. CA), advanced occurrence of maximum pressure (about
6 deg. CA aTDC) and shortened combustion duration are observed with
increase in DME pilot quantity from 22.8 to 30.4 mg/cycle [229]. This
is due to the fumigated DME on intake air which ignited the premixed
charge, increased the cylinder pressure and temperature and hence
shortened the ignition delay. Comparable power output and brake
thermal efficiency (maximum of 31% at 1800 rpm) are obtained from
DME PCCI-DI engine combustion. NOx emission of PCCI-DI combustion
is also observed to be lower than (∼90%) that of conventional diesel
combustion. At a high load (0.67 MPa BMEP) and at 22.8 mg/cycle of
pilot quantity, NOx reduction is noted to be 43.5% and 37.6% at 1400
1800 rpm respectively. However, the HC and CO emissions of this PCCI-
DI mode are observed to be higher than those of the conventional diesel
combustion. Increase in HC and CO emissions is found with increasing
pilot fuel quantity too due to the low temperature in PCCI combustion.
3.7. Blend/dual fuels on PCCI combustion
The PCCI combustion is achieved mainly due to the earlier diesel
fuel injection under relatively lower in-cylinder pressure. This leads to
longer spray penetration and spray wall impingement [5,8] which in-
crease the HC emission. Moreover, the homogeneity achieved from the
low-volatile and high reactive fuel (diesel) is not sufficient for PCCI
combustion. Hence it is reported that enabling PCCI combustion
through the direct injection of fuel has certain limitations. Therefore,
the dual-fuel PCI (premixed compression ignition) concept is suggested
first by Inagaki et al. with premixed iso-octane and direct-injected
diesel [12]. It is worthwhile to note that the PCCI is also accompanied
by a higher level of EGR rate to increase the ignition delay and to re-
duce the combustion temperature [230]. However, a higher rate of EGR
(more than 55%) decreases fuel efficiency and increases CO and HC
emissions. Hence, it is opined that the so-called soot–NOx trade-off of
conventional diesel combustion migrates into soot–fuel efficiency trade-
off [231]. To mitigate the effect of the soot–NOx and soot–fuel effi-
ciency trade-offs, the use of medium EGR rate and fuel blends with low-
cetane number fuels (diesel blended with lower cetane number fuel like
gasoline) are suggested to increase the ignition delay period and to
enhance the fuel-air mixing process prior to combustion [232]. The
study of dual-fuel strategy on controlling the combustion phase in PCCI
engines is widely reported in the literature [233–235]. In order to
control the auto-ignition timing and to extend the operating load range
of PCCI combustion mode of diesel engines using dual fuel concept,
extensive experimental investigations are carried out using variety of
fuels such as propane [210], gasoline [236–238], alcohol fuels
[239–241], dimethylfuran [242], dimethyl ether [243,244], biodiesel
[245–247]. In this context, some of the important investigations on the
effect of blends/dual fuel operations on performance, combustion and
emission characteristics of PCCI combustion are discussed below.
3.7.1. Propane and diesel
In the experimental investigations to study the effect of direct in-
jection strategies and propane ratio on propane-diesel dual fueled PCCI
engine [210] on combustion and emissions, a longer ignition delay,
increased premixed combustion and decreased mixing controlled
T. Pachiannan, et al.
combustion phase are observed than those of conventional diesel
combustion. With 50% propane fuel ratio, shortened combustion
duration up to 4.97 deg. CA and reduced maximum cylinder pressure
rise rate (up to 4.08 bar/deg. CA) are observed from the dual fuel
multiple injection strategy due to the longer premixed duration of
propane, and shorter mixing controlled combustion and in-cylinder fuel
stratification respectively. Propane-diesel dual fuel combustion using
early multiple injection reduced the NOx (about 7 ppm) and PM emis-
sions (a huge reduction to 54.1 mg/m3). This reduction is attributed to
the mixture leanness or improved premixed combustion of propane and
diesel as well as the reduced quantity of directly injected diesel fuel. In
this dual fuel combustion, higher CO and THC emissions are found due
to incomplete auto-ignition, crevice effects of propane and wall im-
pingement of diesel fuel during early injection periods. For efficient
combustion, the stratification of diesel fuel at lower propane ratios and
the diesel as an ignition source at higher propane ratios are suggested.
3.7.2. DMC and diesel
As the low cetane bio-fuel extends the operating range of PCCI
combustion, dimethyl carbonate (DMC) can be used as an additive for
diesel and gasoline fuels. DMC is produced from CO2 and methanol.
Production of DMC from the CO2 is beneficial in terms of environmental
viewpoint. DMC-diesel fuel blends are used with different EGR ratio
and injection timings in a DI diesel engine to test the performance,
combustion and emission characteristics [248]. In the DMC15 blend
(15% DMC with diesel fuel), retarding the injection timing from 25 to
21 deg. CA bTDC reduced peak cylinder pressure (from 76.3 to
66.4 bar), heat release rate and cumulative heat release rate due to the
continued combustion over the expansion stroke, increased heat loss
and reduction in the combustion temperature (because of EGR). In-
crease in BTE and EGT are observed with advancing the injection
timing from 21 to 25 deg. CA bTDC and they found to decrease with
increase in EGR rate from 0 to 30%. Both the injection retardation and
increased EGR rate reduced the NOx and smoke emissions (as shown in
Fig. 13) due to the prolonged combustion after TDC, lower oxygen
content and the flame temperatures. In DMC15, reduction in NOx and
smoke emissions are up to 46.1% and 64.7% respectively at the injec-
tion timing of 21 deg. CA bTDC with 30% EGR. THC and CO emissions
of this blended fuel are comparable to those of diesel fuel at the ad-
vanced injection timing of 25 deg. CA bTDC due to the improved
combustion.
In a similar study of using DMC-diesel fuel blends (10% DMC-diesel
fuel), Mei et al. [249] examined the performance, combustion and
emission characteristics of PCCI engine at the different center of heat
release (COHR) modes using heavy EGR rate coupled with pilot-pilot-
main injection strategies in a common rail injection system. DMC is
added to improve the fuel atomization to enhance air-fuel mixing. Re-
tardation of COHR from 7 to 19 deg. CA as well as the ignition delay
from 14.3 to 9.7 deg. CA reduced the peak cylinder pressure from 6.02
to 3.92 MPa, in-cylinder temperature from 1335.5 to 1238.7 K and peak
heat release rate up to 4.14%. The thermal efficiency of the DMC blend
is found to be better than the diesel fuel at all the COHR and the
maximum value is obtained at 10 deg. CA of COHR, which is probably
due to shorter combustion duration, fuel-bound oxygen and lower
viscosity of DMC. The DMC blend reduced CO and HC emission up to
∼3 g/kWh and ∼1 g/kWh respectively because of its higher oxygen
content which oxidizes the fuel completely, but these emissions are
increased with retarding COHR. The NOx and PM emissions (in diesel
and DMC blend) are found to decrease with retarding COHR (from 7 to
19 deg. CA) from 0.43 to 0.24 g/kWh and 0.015 to 0.006 g/kWh re-
spectively due to the lower combustion temperature. However, in
general, the NOx emission of DMC blend is reported to be slightly
higher than diesel fuel due to fuel-borne oxygen.
3.7.3. DME and diesel
In a dual fuel engine with DME and diesel, the effect of PCCI
24
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
combustion is studied by varying pre-mixing ratio of DME as well as the
rate of externally cooled EGR by Zhao et al. [250]. The DME fuel is
inducted along with intake air and the diesel fuel is directly injected
into the cylinder for achieving PCCI combustion. Increase in the pre-
mixed ratio of DME up to 30% resulted in increased in-cylinder pressure
from 6.1 to 6.79 MPa and cylinder temperature from 1648 to 1755 °C at
0.25 MPa of BMEP. Increase in EGR rate (at 14% premixed ratio and
0.25 MPa of BMEP) reduced the availability of oxygen content for
combustion, which prolonged the ignition delay and decreased the in-
cylinder pressure from 6.48 to 6.27 MPa (refer Fig. 14) and combustion
temperature from 1699 to 1667 °C. Increase in the premixed ratio en-
hanced the density of the premixed mixture and led to lower peak heat
release rate (from 137.3 to 63 J/deg. CA) with advanced diffusion
combustion. Extended combustion duration (up to 2.2 deg. CA at 30%
premixed ratio) and earlier SOC are observed with increase in premixed
ratio and EGR rate mainly due to the enhanced premixed combustion
before the commencement of diesel injection and increased specific
heat capacity of the charge respectively. While a decrease in BSFC (up
to 6%) and an increase in BTE (up to 2%) are observed at 0.25 MPa of
BMEP with an increase in premixed ratio due to improved fuel con-
version efficiency, an opposite trend is noted with increasing EGR rate.
The NOx emission decreased with increase in premixed ratio and in-
crease in EGR rate due to more homogeneous mixture and reduced
high-temperature regions, oxygen content and flame temperatures. A
huge reduction in smoke emission (72%) is recorded at 40% premixed
rate due to the absence of CeC bond in the molecular structure of DME
and a decrease in diffusion combustion. The higher amount of CO and
HC emissions are observed with an increase in both mixing ratio and
EGR rates due to reduced combustion temperature and oxygen content.
In a dimethyl ether-diesel dual-fuel PCCI combustion, the effect of
port injected gaseous fuel (DME) energy ratio on performance, com-
bustion and emission characteristics of a diesel engine is studied by
Wang et al. [243]. As the premixed ratio of DME increased (up to 40%),
the heat release rate is divided into two stages. The first stage is de-
scribed as a cool flame between 24 and 25 deg. CA bTDC. The shortened
NTC, advanced occurrence of the second stage of heat release with the
decreased maximum heat release rate of diffusion combustion and in-
creased cylinder pressure are observed. The decrease in maximum heat
release rate (from ∼115.3 to 58.79 J/deg. CA) and increased peak cy-
linder pressure (from 92.82 to 113.03 MPa) at 2110 rpm and at
0.25 MPa of BMEP are noted. These changes are due to the mixture of
fumigated DME air which ignites during the premixed combustion and
leads to earlier SOC. The specific fuel consumption decreased up to
∼10g/kWh and brake thermal efficiency increased up to ∼5.5% with
increasing DME premixed ratio due to a homogeneous mixture of gas-
eous fuel and reduced wall impingement which improved the fuel
conversion efficiency. Decreased NOx and soot emissions from ∼610 to
Fig. 13. Smoke opacity vs. EGR rates at various injection timings [248].
T. Pachiannan, et al.
Fig. 14. Effects of pre-mixing ratio and EGR rate on the in-cylinder pressure [250].
508 ppm and from 0.45 to 0.15 k/m−1 or m−1 (k – coefficient of light
absorption) respectively and increased CO (∼0.025–0.174%) and HC
(∼8–77 ppm) emissions are observed with increase in DME at
2100 rpm and at 0.64 MPa of BMEP. The higher HC emission is pri-
marily due to premixed fuel-air mixtures trapped in the crevices and the
boundary layer which hardly get oxidized during the combustion pro-
cess. In order to to reduce the drawbacks of dual fuel PCCI engines such
25
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
as knocking due to earlier SOC and better auto-ignition property of
DME, Wang et al. [251] examined the effects of adding LPG as an ig-
nition inhibitor in DME-diesel dual fuel engine. The increase in peak
heat release rate along with advanced combustion phasing is observed
when the LPG ratio is increased (from 30 to 40%) due to the higher
heating value. Increasing the quantity of higher octane fuel (LPG
mixing ratio) in the DME blend decreased the combustion phasing
T. Pachiannan, et al.
(CA10 and CA50), the maximum cylinder pressure and the average
cylinder temperature with retarded occurrences. The combustion
duration is shortened up to 6.2 deg. CA with 50% LPG mixing ratio at
0.48 MPa of BMEP. Reduction in BTE (up to ∼1.5%) is noted with an
increase in LPG ratio due to prolonged ignition delay and retarded
combustion phasing which also reduced NOx emission slightly.
3.7.4. Gasoline and diesel blends
The low reactive fuel like gasoline increases the delay period and
hence improves the fuel-air mixing. It is reported that the gasoline-
diesel blend prolongs the ignition delay and achieves ultra-low soot
emission [252]. Thus blending diesel fuel with the fuels which are more
volatile and have high resistance to auto-ignition compared to those of
diesel extends the load range of LTC, reduces fuel rich areas and
minimizes soot emissions without significant impact on NOx emission.
The extension of PCCI engine load limits with gasoline-diesel blend is
proved by Han et al. [232]. The higher resistance to the auto-ignition of
gasoline enhances the rate of air-fuel mixing before the SOC, which
provides additional degrees of freedom at the time of deciding EGR rate
and hence improves the trade-off between engine emissions and fuel
economy. As far as LTC is concerned, gasoline fuel provides better
atomization, evaporation and more control over the combustion which
promote it as a suitable fuel blend for LTC operation. In a numerical and
experimental investigation, the effect of gasoline premixed fuel ratio of
on combustion and emission characteristics of the diesel engine is
studied by Lee et al. [253]. Increasing the premixed ratio (from 0 to
0.85) decreased the cylinder pressure from 51.5 to 44 bar and peak heat
release rate, retarded the ignition timing slightly (16–22 deg. CA) and
shortened the combustion duration (48–25 deg. CA). Increase in the
premixed ratio also decreased the NOx (one by tenth) and soot emis-
sions (> 50%) and increased HC emission (up to 480 ppm vol) vis-à-vis
conventional diesel engine. In the PCCI engine, the EGR reduced the
NOx (up to 37%) emission with a controlled rate of UHC emissions.
Kim et al. [254] attempted the load expansion of naphtha multiple
premixed compression ignition (MPCI) from low loads to high loads and
also compared this with naphtha partially premixed compression igni-
tion (PPCI) operation. The naphtha (low octane number gasoline fuel)
fueled MPCI combustion mode is successfully extended up to 1.4 MPa of
IMEP with appreciable performance and emission characteristics. The
indicated thermal efficiency of 47%, NOx emission of 0.28 g/kWh, the
smoke of 0.06 m−1, HC of 3.02 g/kWh and CO emission of 9.32 g/kWh
are observed from MPCI combustion. The higher thermal efficiency of
MPCI combustion than that of the PPCI and conventional diesel com-
bustion is due to the low exhaust loss from the early combustion
phasing. The lower peak heat release rate of 125 J/deg. CA is observed
for MPCI than that of PPCI mode (345 J/deg. CA) due to the divided
heat release rate process of two-stage combustion. The HC and CO
emissions of this MPCI mode are comparable at all the loads. It is
concluded that PPCI and conventional diesel combustion modes are
preferable at low load operations in terms of thermal efficiency and
combustion stability.
The suitability of gasoline-diesel blends in a PCCI engine to improve
the emission and combustion noise, as well as the fuel economy is ex-
plored by Torregrosa et al. [255]. Very low NOx (< 5ppm) and soot
emissions (< 2.5 mg/m3) are observed with increase in the quantity of
the gasoline from 25 to 50% due to longer ignition delay, increased
mixing time and extended premixed combustion in high octane fuel.
For all the tested fuels, lowering the oxygen concentration from 14.5 to
10% (by means of EGR) at all the injection timings resulted in reduced
combustion noise due to longer ignition delay. Advancing the injection
timing from −18 to −38 deg. CA aTDC reduced the fuel burning ve-
locity which in turn lowered the cylinder pressure and pressure deri-
vative. BMEP increased from 1.9 to 2.4 bar (at −38 deg. aTDC) and
from 2.4 to 3.5 bar with increasing gasoline quantity (up to 50%) and
retarding the start of injection respectively. These trends are attributed
to the better combustion phasing, longer ignition delay, longer mixing
26
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
time which enriched the homogeneous mixture and reduced the wall-
impingement. From the emission results, oxygen content less than 12%
with the range of start of energizing from −30 to −18 deg. CA aTDC is
recommended as the best zone for lower NOx and soot emissions from
all the fuels. From the experimental results, it is proved that gasoline-
diesel blends provide better thermal efficiency and lower emissions
with limited combustion noise in a wider operating range.
In a study of determining the effect of EGR rate and injection and
intake pressures on HC and CO emissions from the premixed combus-
tion on a single cylinder direct injection diesel engine fueled with ga-
soline-diesel blends [256], it is observed that the increase in both the
equivalence ratio and proportion of gasoline (with increasing gasoline
up to 40%) extended the ignition delay by 15.2 and 14.3 deg. CA re-
spectively due to reduction in charge ignition tendency and cetane
number respectively and increased the HC emission (by more than
∼3.3 g/kg fuel) due to a reduction in O2 concentration at higher
equivalence ratio. This higher equivalence ratio also deteriorated the
HC oxidation process and reduced the cetane number which increased
the ignition delay. While the CO emission increased with increase in
equivalence ratio up to 130 g/kg fuel, it decreased with increase in
gasoline blends up to 66.3 g/kg fuel which is possibly due to weakened
fuel oxidation process and longer ignition delay. At higher intake
pressure of 2 bar, a decrease in HC emission and an increase in CO
emissions are observed vis-à-vis lower intake pressures; but without
significant effect. From this experimental study [256], it is concluded
that while HC emission mainly depends on ignition delay than the
equivalence ratio, the CO emission mainly depends on the equivalence
ratio.
The effect of the sensitivity of research octane number (RON-90-
100#) of gasoline on combustion and emission characteristics in the
premixed low-temperature combustion using wide distillation fuels
(WDFs) is studied by Liu et al. [257]. The WDF is referred to as fuel
with distillation range from the initial boiling point of gasoline to final
boiling point of diesel fuel. At 1600 rpm and 0.6 MPa, the better air-fuel
mixing of WDFs before the start of combustion significantly increased
the ignition delay compared to that of diesel fuel which showed an
influence of RON on ignition delay. Slight difference in ignition delay
necessitated the injection timing advance from 4 deg. CA bTDC (of
diesel) to 8 deg. CA bTDC. However, similar combustion phasing and
cylinder pressure are observed with the WDFs to that of base diesel fuel.
Faster heat release rate of WDF90 or gasoline 90# produced higher
MPRR and NOx (0.46 g/kWh) emission than those of all the other tested
fuels. WDFs showed lower soot emissions (< 0.02 m−1) than the diesel
fuel (up to 0.1 m−1) due to longer ignition delay and higher volatility.
The CO emission of the tested fuels increased from 4.6 to 24.5 g/kWh
with an increase in ignition delay from 13 to 21 deg. CA. However, it is
found that the HC emission mainly depends on RON than the effect of
ignition delay since the HC emission of WDF100 is about 10 g/kWh
whereas it is ∼4.6 g/kWh for diesel at a particular operating point.
Lower indicated thermal efficiency (up to 3.2%), combustion efficiency
(up to 1.5%), NOx (< 0.7 g/kWh) and HC (< 2.3 g/kWh) emissions are
also observed with the WDFs. At high loads, it is noted that the RON has
little impact on CO and HC emissions.
The potential of simultaneous reduction of NOx and soot emissions
using gasoline-diesel (0 to 40% of gasoline by volume) blends in a
premixed low-temperature combustion mode was investigated by Han
et al. [252]. As the intake-oxygen concentration is increased from 12 to
16% by reducing EGR rate, ignition delay of all the test fuels is de-
creased from 7.7 to 12.12 deg. CA and from 32.12 to 16.8 deg. CA with
diesel fuel and G40 blend respectively. In diesel fuel, reducing the
oxygen concentration restricted the NOx emission whereas it increased
the soot emission, while this NOx and soot emission trade-off is absent
in G40 fuel. Advanced injection timing (6 ± 2 deg. aTDC) and in-
creased EGR rate (35–50%) reduced the oxygen concentration which
lowered the combustion temperature. Increasing the injection pressure
(from 800 to 1200 bar) and oxygen concentration reduced the soot
T. Pachiannan, et al.
emissions drastically from 2 (at 800 bar) to 0.1 FSN (at 1200 bar) at
16% of oxygen concentration. The longer ignition delay of gasoline fuel
is found to enhance the mixing rate of fuel and air and thus eliminated
the soot favorable rich regions. The experimental results proved that
the gasoline-diesel blend is capable of reducing NOx and soot emissions
simultaneously.
3.7.5. Kerosene and diesel blends
Blends of low volatility fuels (kerosene and diesel) with gasoline are
tested in a spark-assisted premixed charge combustion (SAPCCI) engine
[258] at the injection timing of 25 deg. CA bTDC. Kerosene-diesel
blends showed lower peak cylinder pressure (∼36 bar) than that of the
gasoline-diesel blends (∼37.5 bar) and neat gasoline fuel (∼42.7 bar)
at full load. This is due to the poor air-fuel mixing of kerosene blends
than the gasoline blends. Though PCCI combustion doesn’t affect the
maximum heat release rate at higher loads, it changes slightly at lower
loads. The retarded occurrences of peak cylinder pressure and heat
release rate are observed (up to 5 deg. CA) for all the blends of kerosene
and diesel fuel with gasoline at higher loads. Longer ignition delay,
higher volatility and improved fuel-air mixing of the lower blend ratio
(5% of kerosene and diesel with 95 %gasoline) produced higher BTE
(up to 3.7%) especially at higher loads. Higher reactivity and improved
chemical kinetics of kerosene blends led to relatively higher exhaust gas
temperature up to ∼38 °C at lower loads and ∼25 °C at higher loads
than that of the neat gasoline fuel operation. The CO emission of ker-
osene-gasoline blends is found to be less (up to 27 g/kWh) than that of
all the tested fuels due to higher combustion temperatures. SAPCCI
combustion mode produced almost similar HC emission to that of CI
engines at higher loads. The NOx emission of SAPCCI combustion and
CI mode varied from 4 to 12 g/kWh and 5 to 8 g/kWh respectively at
1500 rpm. It is reported that the low quality and low octane fuels can be
used in the internal combustion engine on SAPCCI combustion mode
which provides comparable performance, combustion, and emission
characteristics.
3.7.6. Alcoholic fuels and diesel blends
Alcoholic fuels are one of the most suitable sources for achieving
LTC because of their desirable properties such as high resistance to
auto-ignition and longer delay period (due to low cetane number)
which provides sufficient time for air-fuel mixing and faster rate of
evaporation (due to high volatility). Alcohol fuels are oxygenated with
a hydroxyl group which increases the availability of oxygen during the
combustion process and hence reduces smoke emissions from diesel
engines especially at high loads [259]. The higher latent heat of va-
porization and the lower energy content of alcoholic fuels vis-à-vis
diesel do not increase NOx emissions significantly compared to that of
diesel [260].
In an early directly injected PCCI combustion study using ethanol-
diesel (20% ethanol) blend at the injection timing of 18 deg. bTDC with
an equivalence ratio of 0.6 [261], it is observed that the ethanol
blended fuel increased the peak heat release rate to 75.97 kJ/m3 deg.
CA (with a slightly lower in-cylinder pressure) compared to that of the
diesel-fueled PCCI combustion (61.41 kJ/m3deg. CA) and conventional
diesel operation (64.57 kJ/m3deg. CA). This is attributed to the etha-
nol’s higher oxygen content and the reduction of combustion tem-
perature by the cooling effect of ethanol. It also provided higher exergy
efficiency up to 23.6% which is about 3% higher than that of the diesel
combustion. The reduction in emissions such as CO, NOx, and smoke
from the ethanol-fueled PCCI is observed which is about 41.66, 80.53
and 75.49% than those of the diesel fuel with an increase in (47.5%)
unburned hydrocarbon emission.
Srihari and Thirumalini [262] conducted similar experimental in-
vestigations with diesel-ethanol (15%) blends (E15D) and multiple-in-
jection strategies (through pilot and main injections to overcome the
drawbacks of PCCI engine with direct injection). The maximum re-
duction of NOx and smoke emissions of E15D-E15D (pilot-main fuel) is
27
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
observed to be 85% and 33% respectively. The reduction in NOx and
soot emissions is attributed to the lower heat release rate, the higher
latent heat of vaporization of ethanol fuel that reduced the combustion
temperature and increased oxygen content which improved the fuel-air
mixing respectively. A significant and marginal increase in HC (up to
68.46 ppm at low loads and up to 14% at high loads) and CO emissions
are observed (up to 0.12% at low load and up to 0.09% at high load) at
low and higher loads respectively in PCCI combustion with diesel-
ethanol blends. This increase in HC and CO emissions is due to the
release of more amount of fuel particles (that are trapped in the crevice
regions) during exhaust stroke and low combustion temperature per-
iods respectively. However, decreased CO2 emission (up to 31%) and
increased BSFC (up to 14%) is observed from the ethanol-fueled PCCI
combustion due to lower calorific value.
In order to control the combustion in PCCI engine, Valentino et al.
[263] explored the potential of employing fuel blends having low ce-
tane number and high resistance to auto-ignition such as n-butanol fuel
with diesel. NOx and smoke emissions are decreased from the diesel
fuel at the retarded SOI and the best results are obtained when the SOI
is at −1 deg. CA aTDC (less than 440 ppm of NOx and 0.75 FSN re-
spectively). The blend BU20 (20% butanol by volume) shortened the
ignition delay and reduced combustion phase, smoke (0.15 FSN) and
NOx emissions (500 ppm) at the SOI of −8 deg. CA aTDC (at later SOI).
For BU40, the in-cylinder pressure and heat release rate are noted to be
similar to that of BU20 fuel. However, increasing the quantity of n-
butanol in the blend, increased the ignition delay and hydrocarbon
emission due to the strong effect of oxygen and cooling effect respec-
tively. At an injection timing of −6 deg. CA aTDC, an injection pressure
of 160 MPa and 19% of oxygen concentration, the ignition delay of
diesel fuel, BU20 and BU40 is observed to be 14, 14.6 and 18.9 deg. CA
respectively. The experimental results showed an increase in BSFC up to
5.5% at the best exhaust emission (NOx and smoke) points.
In an experimental investigation of Rajesh Kumar and Saravanan
[264], two blends of alcoholic fuel and diesel (40% iso-butanol and
diesel and 40% n-pentanol and diesel) are used to achieve the si-
multaneous reduction of NOx and smoke under premixed LTC in a
diesel engine using low EGR rate and retarded injection timing. The
results showed that the addition of alcohol fuels, EGR rate, and retarded
injection timing increased the ignition delay, premixed combustion
rapidness and peak heat release rate with retarded occurrences (diesel
87.3 J/deg.CA at −3.4 deg. CA aTDC, n-pentanol 123.2 J/deg.CA at
0.47 deg. CA aTDC and isobutanol 157.8 J/deg.CA at 2.22 deg. CA
aTDC). Butanol blends showed longer ignition delay, higher peak
pressure (up to 2 bar) and combustion efficiency than the pentanol
blends due to the lower cetane number (< 15 for 18.15% for pentanol)
and higher oxygen content (21.62% of weight) of butanol fuel. Slightly
lower BTE (up to 5% and 0.6% for -pentanol and butanol blends re-
spectively without EGR) and higher fuel consumption are observed for
the tested fuel blends than those of the diesel fuel due to the lower
heating value of the alcohol fuels. It is observed that the performance of
butanol blends is comparable to diesel fuel, but it is better than the
pentanol blends. Though the heating value of iso-butanol is slightly
higher than n-pentanol fuel, the lower viscosity and density of iso-bu-
tanol than those of n-pentanol provides better spray characteristics
(enhanced atomization) and results in better combustion. The NOx
emission is found to be slightly less from butanol blend vis-à-vis pen-
tanol blend due to overall lean mixture and temperature; however, it is
vice-versa for the smoke emission due to its less oxygen content. Re-
tarding the injection timing by 2 deg. CA bTDC and increasing the EGR
rate up to 30% reduced the NOx and smoke emissions by 39.3% and
41.7% and 90.8% and 15% from pentanol and butanol blends respec-
tively. The huge reduction of NOx emission from butanol blend than
that of pentanol blend is attributed to relatively longer ignition delay,
decreased flame temperature and reduced oxygen concentrations of
butanol blend. Retardation of injection timing and higher latent heat of
evaporation of these alcohol fuels increase the HC emission, while they
T. Pachiannan, et al.
decrease the CO emissions at all EGR rates. From the experimental re-
sults, it is shown that alcohol fuels could be a better choice for blending
with the diesel fuel to achieve premixed low-temperature combustion.
The PM emission characteristics of a single cylinder diesel engine
using two fuel-borne oxygen fuels such as biodiesel and ethanol blends
are studied under premixed low-temperature combustion with medium
EGR rate [265]. While the conventional combustion mode produced
similar particle size distribution for all the tested fuels, lower particle
number is observed from the biodiesel-ethanol (20%) blend than that of
diesel and neat biodiesel blend in PCCI combustion. The particle
number concentrations (#/cm3) of the diesel, biodiesel, and biodiesel-
ethanol blend are observed as 2.6x107 ± 5.0x105,
2.0x107 ± 4.6x105and 6x107 ± 4.0x105 respectively which explain
the presence of oxygen content in reducing the particle concentration.
When the EGR rate exceeded 40%, the combustion efficiency is dropped
from 98.5 to 96.5% and CO and HC emissions are increased from 41 to
117 g/kg-fuel and 6.4 to 8.2 g/kg-fuel respectively. Among the tested
fuels, biodiesel-ethanol blends emitted very low soot emissions
(∼ < 0.12 FSN) at all the EGR rates. At 40% EGR rate the NOx is
emission is about 25 ppm which is found to be > 500 ppm without
EGR.
The performance, combustion and emission characteristics of the
PCCI-DI engine with premixed fuels of ethanol and gasohol (90% ga-
soline and 10% ethanol by volume) through port fuel injection and
direct injection of diesel fuel are investigated by Saravanan et al. [266].
The peak cylinder pressure of premixed gasohol (72.60 bar at 6 deg.
aTDC) and ethanol (68.85 bar at 7 deg. aTDC) are observed to be higher
than the neat diesel fuel (68.2 bar at 8 deg. aTDC) due to improved
premixed combustion which led to complete combustion and higher
energy release rate. The maximum heat release rate is also observed to
be higher for premixed ethanol (81.10 kJ/m3) and gasohol (77.08 kJ/
m3) fuel than that of diesel fuel (62.02 kJ/m3). The higher latent heat of
vaporization and auto-ignition temperature of low cetane number fuels
(gasohol and ethanol) increased the ignition delay and hence shortened
the combustion duration compared to those of diesel fuel. The higher
brake thermal efficiency and lower brake specific fuel consumption of
premixed gasohol (4.65% and 14.93% respectively) and ethanol fuel
(3.69% and 16.92% respectively) are noted vis-à-vis diesel fuel at full
load due to enhanced combustion rate. Higher latent of vaporization of
the premixed fuel lowered the in-cylinder temperature and produced
higher CO and unburned hydrocarbon emissions. The average reduc-
tion in NOx and smoke emissions from the premixed gasohol is about
30% and 70% respectively due to the lean air-fuel mixture and less
carbon-rich zones in the premixed fuel respectively.
Asad et al. [267] investigated the premixed pilot assisted combus-
tion (PPAC) through port fuel injection of ethanol which is ignited by a
pilot injection of diesel to overcome the drawbacks of diesel-fueled LTC
such as high reactivity and low volatility of diesel fuel. It is opined that
the low reactivity and high volatility of ethanol make it a suitable fuel
for LTC operation in CI engines. Increase in the ethanol fraction (EF)
reduced the premixed combustion phase and NOx (up to 0.14 g/kWh)
and soot (0.01 g/kWh) emissions and increased HC emission. NOx re-
duction is attributed to charge cooling which reduced the combustion
temperature and lowered the heat release rate. The maximum cylinder
pressure rise rate dropped from 11.5 to 7.5 bar/deg. CA when the
ethanol fraction is increased > 0.6. Nearly 8 bar of pressure drop is
observed with increasing ethanol fraction from 0.3 to 0.6 at a load
9.8 bar IMEP along with a drop in temperature around 100 K due to the
higher enthalpy of vaporization and lower boiling point of ethanol fuel.
Increase in EGR rate lowered the combustion temperature, reduced the
oxygen content and slowed down the thermal kinetics of NO which
decreased the NOx emission below 1.5 g/kWh. While there is no sub-
stantial change in UHC (3.5 g/kWh) and CO (about 12–18 g/kWh)
emissions in PPAC, they are found to be higher than those of the diesel-
fueled LTC. In a similar investigation of dual fuel PCCI combustion
mode using an unreactive bio-ethanol fuel through PFI and diesel fuel
28
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
(PFI as well as DI) in an optically accessible CI engine [268], it is re-
ported that higher amount of ethanol injection i.e. higher premixed
ratio retarded the combustion away from the TDC due to its lower ce-
tane number and affected the auto-ignition process. The higher pre-
mixed ratios (rp = 0.42 and 0.67) of ethanol also increased the ignition
delay due to reduced auto-ignition capability of ethanol fuel.
3.7.7. Biogas and diesel blends
The performance and combustion characteristics of biogas-diesel on
predominantly premixed charge combustion (PPCCI) mode is compared
with those of biogas-diesel dual fuel operation by Ibrahim et al. [269].
While the dual fuel operation is achieved by inducting the biogas along
with the intake air and injecting the diesel fuel into the cylinder, the
biogas is inducted into the inlet manifold and the diesel fuel is injected
at highly advanced timings in PPCCI mode. Advancing the injection
timing from 80 to 110 deg. CA bTDC and increasing the biogas energy
ratio from 39 to 60% results in, lowered and retarded peak heat release
rate from 110 to 36.5 J/deg. CA and 62.8 to 42.9 J/deg. CA respec-
tively. This is mainly due to the formation of more homogeneous
mixture and increased CO2 in the charge respectively. Increase in
charge temperature in biogas-diesel PPCCI mode from 50 to 80 °C ad-
vanced and increased the combustion rate. From the combustion
characteristics, biogas-diesel PPCCI combustion is found to be more
efficient than the dual fuel mode. The brake thermal efficiency of PPCCI
mode increased with increase in energy ratio of biogas due to their
better combustion phasing and also it is found to be higher than that of
dual fuel mode when biogas energy ratio is > 70%. Higher energy ratio
of biogas reduced the NOx and smoke emissions (1.2 g/kWh and 0.02
FSN respectively at 80% energy ratio) due to lower combustion tem-
perature. The main advantage of biogas in the PPCCI combustion is the
reduction in HC and CO emissions with an increase in biogas ratio due
to better combustion. In another investigation the performance, com-
bustion and emission characteristics of biogas-diesel premixed charge
compression ignition are studied by Rahman and Ramesh [270]. The
results showed an improved BTE of 22% with an increase in biogas
percentage up to 70%; after which (i.e. > 70%), the BTE is reduced at
loads of 2 and 3 bar of BMEP due to lower heat release rate and well-
retarded combustion respectively. Increase in biogas energy ratio from
25 to 58% necessitated the injection timing to be retarded from 54 to
58 deg. bTDC in order to obtain stable combustion and better efficiency.
Increasing the biogas energy ratio lowered the peak heat release rate,
increased THC emission and decreased CO emissions. The NO
(20 ± 8 ppm) and smoke (< 0.5 FSN) emissions are found to be very
low from the biogas-diesel fuel on PCCI mode of combustion.
3.7.8. Gasoline, biodiesel and diesel blends
It is reported that the oxygenated fuel produces ultra-low soot
emission due to higher fuel-borne oxygen content, longer ignition delay
and better spray atomization [217]. Hence, in order to study the effect
of oxygen concentration on the trade-off among NOx, soot and com-
bustion efficiency in premixed low-temperature combustion, Zhu et al.
[216] used different fuel blends on a single cylinder diesel engine. The
oxygen concentration is varied by blending more oxygenated fuels re-
ferred as 0%, 7%, 15% oxygen fuels which include 80% diesel with 20%
gasoline, 70% soy-based methyl ester with 10% diesel and 20% gaso-
line, and 80% biodiesel with 20% ethanol respectively. These three test
fuels showed similar in-cylinder pressure and heat release traces at 40%
EGR (15% of intake oxygen) rate indicating an identical combustion
process. Though ignition delay of the lower oxygen fraction (0 and 7%)
fuels is found to be the same at a certain O2 concentration, it is slightly
longer compared to that of higher oxygen (15%) fuel due to ethanol’s
auto-ignition resistance than that of the gasoline fuel. Three test fuels
exhibited similar equivalence ratios and NOx emission, while the EGR
rate or intake oxygen concentration is observed to be the main factor in
NOx emission. The decrease in intake-oxygen from 16 to 11.6% de-
creased the NOx emission from 1.65 to 0.14 g/kg fuel from 7% oxygen
T. Pachiannan, et al.
fuel. The soot emission is reduced from the higher fuel oxygen fractions
which had a significant impact than the fuel volatility. The CO and HC
emissions are found to decrease with increasing intake oxygen con-
centration. This is because of a similar local equivalence ratio of the
fuels which indicates that fuel bound oxygen does not reduce these
emissions (CO and HC) and depends on the intake-oxygen concentra-
tion or EGR rate. From the experimental results, the optimized range of
15% oxygenated fuel (at 14% of intake oxygen concentration) provided
the better NOx (< 0.4 g/kg fuel) and soot (< 0.15 FSN) emission with
98% combustion efficiency.
3.7.9. Alcohol, biodiesel and diesel blends
It is well known that a surfactant or an emulsifier is necessary to
prevent the separation of ethanol from diesel fuel and to increase the
mixing fraction of ethanol in the fuel blends [271,272]. In this regard,
biodiesel could be used as an additive to stabilize ethanol and diesel
blends and to obtain a homogeneous solution of ethanol–diesel blends
[273,274]. It is reported that one of the serious concerns of LTC with
diesel is more smoke emission at high loads [275]. As oxygenated fuels
are known to reduce the smoke level, it is possible to decrease the same
with biodiesel and biodiesel–ethanol fuels and hence extend the high
load limit of LTC mode. The biodiesel and ethanol fuels are proved to
reduce the smoke emission from conventional diesel combustion and
the low cetane number of ethanol have the potential of improving fuel-
air mixing [276,277]. In this context, a study of combustion and
emission characteristics of ethanol–diesel-biodiesel (waste cooking oil)
blends fueled premixed LTC using EGR [278] considered three varia-
tions of fuel blends such as BD10 (10% biodiesel with 90% diesel by
volume), BDE10 (10% biodiesel, 10% ethanol with 80% diesel) and
BDE20 (10 biodiesel, 20% ethanol with 70% diesel). In-cylinder pres-
sure and heat release rate is observed to increase with increase in
ethanol fraction than those of the diesel fuel (115.8 J/deg. CA at
10.7 deg. CA for diesel and 152.5 deg. CA at 14.57 deg. CA for BDE20).
Biodiesel blends also retarded the occurrence of peak HRR. This in-
dicates the delay in SOC and higher premixed combustion due to longer
ignition delay of the low cetane number fuel and improved spray
characteristics in terms of enhanced mixing of fuel and air. Higher BSFC
up to 8.06% (BDE20) and similar BTE (change is < 0.25%) are ob-
served with ethanol blends due to lower heating value and higher latent
heat of vaporization of the ethanol fuel respectively. This character-
istics of ethanol fuel reduced the NOx and smoke emissions by 8.55 and
31.79% (with BDE10) and 23.08 and 73.44% (with BDE20) at the en-
gine load of 0.6 MPa (for NOx emission) and 0.8 MPa (for smoke
emission) BMEP respectively at the injection timing of 1.8 deg. CA
aTDC. Higher CO and HC emissions are also recorded due to lower
combustion temperature except for biodiesel (BD10) blend. From these
results, it is concluded that ethanol–diesel-biodiesel blends are capable
of effectively reducing NOx and smoke emission simultaneously under
premixed LTC and extending the load range of LTC.
In another biodiesel study, the effects of biodiesel (soybean methyl
ester) and biodiesel-ethanol (80% soybean biodiesel-20% ethanol)
blend on premixed low-temperature combustion under late injection,
intake boosting and EGR conditions [217] are investigated. A shorter
ignition delay for the biodiesel and longer ignition delay for biodiesel-
ethanol blends compared to those of the diesel fuel is observed due to
higher cetane number of biodiesel and higher auto-ignition resistance
of ethanol. It is noted that the higher EGR rate (> 40%) controlled the
NOx emission effectively at low loads (< 1 g/kg-fuel) and even emitted
very less smoke emission at the loads between 0.2 and 0.6 MPa of IMEP
from all the tested fuels. While further increase in load lowered the
smoke emission of the biodiesel-ethanol blend than that of neat bio-
diesel fuel; however with increase in smoke level compared to that of
diesel fuel. This reduction was attributed to the prolonged ignition
delay, improved spray and atomization characteristics and higher
oxygen concentration of both biodiesel (10.2%) and ethanol (35%)
fuels. Due to the combustion under too lean and rich mixture conditions
29
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
at the low and high load respectively, the combustion efficiency is
dropped. The high load operation using diesel, biodiesel and biodiesel-
ethanol blends are limited by smoke emission. Increasing the intake
pressure from 120 to 150 kPa extended the premixed LTC operating a
range of biodiesel-ethanol blends from 0.4 to 0.65 and 0.35 to 0.82 MPa
of IMEP respectively.
Besides ethanol, diethyl ether (DEE) also qualifies as an additive in
the biodiesel-diesel blends due to its higher oxygen content and high
volatility. It is reported that the addition DEE in the biodiesel-diesel
blend reduces smoke and NOx emission even at higher loads. Moreover,
the limitations associated with the PCCI combustion can be resolved to
some extent by adding DEE which has a high cetane number, low auto-
ignition temperature and low viscosity [279]. Apart from these quali-
ties, it is non-toxic, environmentally benign, odorless and not adverse to
human health [243]. In this approach, Srihari et al. [196] evaluated the
performance and emission characteristics of PCCI engine by varying the
quantity of DEE from 5 to 15% with cottonseed oil biodiesel (20%)-
diesel blends. Increasing the quantity of DEE in biodiesel-diesel blend
decreased the NOx emissions and the average reduction of NOx is ob-
served as 46% (for 15% DEE) than that of the diesel-fueled combustion.
This reduction is attributed to the increased latent heat of vaporization
and reduced combustion temperature due to the increased fraction of
DEE in the blend. A higher percentage of DEE with biodiesel-diesel
blends showed better CO and HC emissions than the normal biodiesel
blends. 15% DEE blend showed an average reduction in HC emission
about 15% and 40% compared to that of diesel fuel and biodiesel-diesel
blends respectively. Addition of DEE in the blends reduced the density
and improved the fuel-air mixing which lowered the smoke emissions
up to 50%. Addition of 15% DEE in the blend also decreased the BSFC
to 0.2593 kg/kWh vis-à-vis the diesel fuel (0.3187 kg/kWh) at the full
load and reduced the exhaust gas temperature (up to 90 °C) due to its
longer ignition delay and lower calorific value. Blends with DEE de-
creased the viscosity of the fuel, enhanced the spray atomization
characteristics and improved the combustion. An increase in BTE (up
to ∼ 6.5%) is noted with an increase in DEE blend among the tested
fuels. The higher peak cylinder pressure (64.19 bar for 15% DEE-bio-
diesel-diesel blend) and the advanced start of combustion are observed
with DEE with biodiesel-diesel blends which are attributed to the
higher vaporization rate, higher premixed combustion, and low auto-
ignition temperature of DEE. Thus, this study proved that the addition
of DEE can address the limitations of PCCI combustion in terms of re-
duction in CO and HC emissions.
The effect of combustion and emission characteristics of n-butanol
through PFI and DI of peanut biodiesel in a compression ignition engine
at idling loads and at 1 to 3 bar of IMEP are studied by Soloiu et al.
[238]. Addition of n-butanol injection decreased the maximum cylinder
pressure by 20% with retarded occurrence (up to 7 deg. CA). The heat-
release profile of n-butanol PCCI combustion showed diminished pre-
mixed combustion and delayed combustion phase as similar to diffusion
flame period, mainly at low loads. The ignition delay of diesel, n-bu-
tanol and biodiesel fuels is observed to be 9, 3 and 7 deg. CA respec-
tively. The maximum cylinder temperature of the PCCI combustion at
low loads is about 1250 K which is lower than that of the conventional
diesel combustion (1500 K). In the PCCI combustion of n-butanol, NOx
and soot emissions are reduced by 75% and 98% respectively than
those of the diesel fuel, due to the low combustion temperature and
oxygenated properties. However, the CO and HC emissions are in-
creased due to incomplete combustion during the premixed combustion
phase.
3.8. LTC through PPC
It is reported that the longer ignition delay enhances the premixed
charge and brings the emission characteristics of CI engine closer to
HCCI engine [280]. This intermediate HCCI concept is termed as par-
tially premixed combustion (PPC). The ignition delay of the PPC engine
T. Pachiannan, et al.
depends on the start of injection timing. In this regard, the experimental
investigations systematically characterize the effects SOI of diesel fuel
on diesel-ignited methane dual fuel low-temperature combustion over a
wide range of engine loads [281]. Increase in peak pressure (to 108 bar
at 30 deg. CA bTDC), heat release rate (up to 180.8 J/deg. CA at 30 deg.
CA bTDC), MPRR, fuel conversion efficiency, and combustion efficiency
are observed when the SOI is advanced from 0 to 30 deg. CA bTDC. The
NOx and smoke (less than 0.05 FSN) emissions are reduced by sweeping
the SOI, while the CO and HC emission initially decreased (to 15 g/
kWh-CO and 45 g/kWh-HC respectively) and then increased up to 70 g/
kWh and 80 g/kWh respectively at the SOI of 100 deg. CA bTDC. This is
due to the reduction in peak bulk in-cylinder temperature and com-
bustion phasing after TDC which did not oxidize the trapped HC in the
crevices regions. Compared to 4.1 bar IMEP load, the 12.1 bar IMEP
load needed higher premixed energy ratio of gasoline (by 95%) to avoid
higher peak in-cylinder pressure and maximum pressure rise rates at
advanced SOI timings. At higher loads (12.1 bar), CO and HC emissions
are decreased when the SOI is advanced up to 50 deg. CA bTDC, while
the NOx and smoke emissions are increased.
In a comprehensive experimental investigation, Lewander et al.
[282,283] carried out PPC with three different fuels such as diesel, low
octane gasoline (with similar characteristics of diesel), and high octane
standard gasoline. The high octane fuel is found to be the most suitable
one for achieving superior PPC combustion because of its longer igni-
tion delay and the capability of extending the operating region of PPC.
In a study of effect of various injection parameters on engine com-
bustion and emission characteristics under early and pre-injection PPC
combustion mode using n-butanol/diesel blends (B30 and B50) in a
four-cylinder turbocharged diesel engine [284], lower peak cylinder
pressure of 4.23 MPa and delayed start of combustion (> 5 deg. CA) are
observed from the butanol blends vis-à-vis diesel fuel. However, this
trend is reversed (9.49 MPa of peak cylinder pressure) when the in-
jection timing is advanced from 0 to −20 deg. CA aTDC. In a split in-
jection strategy, the pre-injection timing from −25 to 75 deg. CA aTDC
showed similar cylinder pressure and heat release rate characteristics to
that of diesel fuel. However, when the butanol ratio is increased up to
50%, the peak heat release rate during the cool flame stage is reduced
with delayed premixed combustion due to absorption of more heat by
the vaporized butanol fuel. Increase in pre-injection quantity ratio from
0.1 to 0.5 resulted in increased premixed combustion and decreased
peak heat release rate from 154.6 to 61.57 J/deg. CA. In butanol blends,
advancing the pre-injection timing from −25 to 35 deg. CA aTDC in-
creased the peak values of particle accumulation, while the nucleation
of the particle is decreased with a significant reduction in the geometric
mean diameter of the particles.
In the experiments of combustion and emission characteristics of a
multi-cylinder diesel engine with PODE-gasoline blends (0–20% of
PODE by volume) [285], PODE is used as an additive to the gasoline for
optimizing the fuel properties. At high loads (at 16 bar BMEP), increase
in PODE (0–20%) and EGR rate (> 20%) reduced the premixed heat
release rate, pressure rise rate (up to 5.3 bar/deg. CA) and ignition
delay (up to 2 deg. CA) due to reduction in octane number of the blends
compared to that of gasoline fuel. Slightly higher mechanical efficiency
(1.9%) and brake thermal efficiency (0.2%) are observed from the
PODE blends at 30% EGR rate due to its higher viscosity and longer
combustion duration respectively. At 30% EGR, lower CO (< 0.4 g/
kWh), HC and soot (up to 94%) emissions are observed from the blends,
while the NOx emission is increased due to the higher oxygen content of
PODE (47.95% weight). The fuel blends also achieved stable combus-
tion with improved combustion efficiency from 85.1 to 99.3% and
significantly reduced CO (71%) and HC (98%) emissions at low loads.
The blends of n-heptane, gasoline and n-butanol (80%) with diesel
fuel are tested in a multi-cylinder PPC operation to explore the required
physio-chemical properties of the fuel [286] for better low-temperature
combustion. It is found that the addition of n-heptane reduced the
boiling point, viscosity, aromatics, and sulfur content. Addition of
30
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
gasoline and n-butanol reduced the cetane number, viscosity and in-
creased the volatility, while the addition of n-butanol increased the
oxygen content. Longer ignition delay and higher heat release rate are
observed for the butanol (> 8 deg. CA and 530 J/deg. CA) and gasoline
blends (> 7 deg. CA and 390 J/deg. CA), while the n-heptane blends
showed similar ignition delay of the diesel up to 42% EGR. Butanol
blends showed higher maximum pressure rise rate (> 15 bar/deg. CA)
at 1330 rpm compared to that of gasoline blends. The maximum pres-
sure rise rate of n-heptane is reduced at the higher speed of 1660 rpm.
EGR rate of more than 35% reduced the NOx emission below 2 g/kWh
from all the tested fuels. Brake specific fuel consumption of butanol
blends is found to be 3–5 g/kW-h more than that of diesel, while the
other two fuels demonstrated more BSFC about 8–10 g/kWh compared
to that of diesel fuel. Except for n-heptane blend, the other two fuels
showed higher CO and HC emission than those of the diesel fuel.
Similar kind of research is done by Cheng et al. [287,288] too using
n-butanol-diesel blends (10 (B10) and 30 (B30) % of n-butanol by vo-
lume) using early injection strategy in a PPC mode. For all the tested
fuels, advancing the injection timing from −8 to −33 deg. CA aTDC
increased the ignition delay from 9 to 16 deg. CA due to the enhanced
homogeneous mixture and the peak pressure rise rate (below 0.75 MPa/
deg. CA). This also reduced the NOx, CO and HC emissions from all the
tested fuels, while the smoke emission is increased in more advanced
injection timing. It is stated that the total mass of PM can be reduced by
60% at the SOI of −23 deg. CA aTDC than that of conventional injec-
tion timing (−3 deg. CA aTDC). In B30 blend, maximum brake thermal
efficiency (34.3%) and lower fuel consumption (235 g/kW-hr) are ob-
served at the injection timing of −13 deg. CA aTDC due to lower cetane
number and high volatility of n-butanol fuel which increased the energy
release during premixed combustion. For all the fuels, it is found that
increasing the injection pressure from 100 to 140 MPa at a constant
load of 0.86 MPa of BMEP resulted in higher cylinder pressure and peak
heat release rate, a slight increase in NOx emission and reduction in
smoke and CO emissions. A similar trend of increase in NOx
(> 700 ppm) and reduction in smoke (< 1 FSN) emissions is reported
from the investigation on four-cylinder diesel engine [289] using n-
butanol-diesel blends (B20 and B40). For all the fuel blends, increasing
the fuel injection pressure from 100 to 160 MPa reduced the ignition
delay, while B40 showed a longer ignition delay than that of diesel fuel
and other tested fuel blends due to the lower cetane number of the
butanol fuel. Butanol blends also showed higher in-cylinder pressure
(90 bar with retarded occurrences), heat release rate (383 kJ/m3 deg.
CA) and brake specific fuel consumption than those of the diesel fuel
[289].
Qiu et al. [290] studied the performance, combustion and emission
characteristics of partially premixed combustion using single and
multiple injection strategies in a light-duty diesel engine. Three injec-
tion timings are chosen in a single injection mode such as early injec-
tion at 18 deg. CA bTDC, conventional injection at 3 deg. CA bTDC, and
late injection at 5 deg. CA aTDC. The late injection increased the igni-
tion delay (up to 12 deg) and lowered the maximum cylinder pressure
(33%) than the other two injection timings due to more mixing time
and enhanced homogeneous mixture. This late timing also reduced the
NOx (< 200 ppm) and smoke (< 0.5 1/m) emissions, while it increased
the CO (< 120 ppm) and HC (< 40 ppm) emissions compared to the
other two injection timings at 0.86 MPa of BMEP. In multiple injection
modes, the main injection timing is kept as constant at 3 deg. CA bTDC
and the pilot injection timing is varied. Increasing the interval between
the pilot and main injection from 10 to 60 deg. CA lowered the pressure
rise rate (below 0.4 MPa/deg), NOx (below 400 ppm) and smoke (below
0.4 1/m) emissions, while it increased the CO and HC emissions more
than 1000 ppm and 80 ppm respectively. Increase in CO and HC emis-
sion is also reported by Yanzhao An et al. [291] in their study on the
optical engine. Increase in CO and HC emission in PPC is attributed to
more amount fuel that hits the piston top or cylinder wall and some fuel
that gets trapped in the piston crevices [291]. The multiple-injection
 Table 5
summary of performance, combustion and emission characteristics of PCCI engines.
Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Percentage of Performance Combustion Emission
condition Timing EGR/O2
concentration Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
T. Pachiannan, et al.

torque/IMEP

Srihari et al. Four-stroke, PCCI-DI engine Diethyl ether- – – – ↓ BSFC of ↑ BTE up to ↑ Peak ↓ NOx ↑ CO emission ↓ HC emission ↓ Smoke
[196] single cylinder, biodiesel-diesel 0.2593 kg/ ∼6.5% at cylinder of emission about for higher emission at
RP: 5.5 kW blends kWh at higher loads 64.19 bar with 46% DEE blends higher loads
CR: 18:1 higher loads DEE addition
RS: 2000 rpm
IP: main-180 bar
Pilot-3.5 bar
Injection system:
common rail
Lee et al. [210] Four-stroke, Dual fuelled Propane (Gas) – – – – Almost ↓ HRR and ↓ NOx ↑ CO emission ↑ HC emission ↓ PM emission
single cylinder, PCCI with diesel fuel similar combustion emission of of 54.05 mg/m3
CR: 15.5:1 (Dual fuel) thermal duration up to 7 ppm
RS: 1500 rpm efficiency 4.97 deg for
IP: 75 MPa dual fuel
Injection system: mode
common rail
Zhu et al. [216] Four-stroke, Premixed low- Diesel, biodiesel, – – – – – Similar ↓ NOx ↓ CO emission ↓ HC emission ↓ Soot emission
single cylinder, temperature gasoline, and cylinder emission for at higher at higher at higher
CR: 15:1 combustion ethanol blends pressure and lower oxygen oxygen oxygen oxygen
RS: 1500 rpm heat release concentration concentration concentration concentration
IP: 100 MPa rate for the
Injection system: test fuels

31
common rail Longer
ignition delay
for higher
oxygen fuels
Zhu et al. [217] Single cylinder, Premixed low Biodiesel, – – – – – Almost similar ↓ NOx – – ↓ Smoke
CR: 15:1 temperature Biodiesel- cylinder emission emission < 0.5
RS: 1500 rpm combustion ethanol blend pressure and < 1 g/kg-fuel FSN
IP: 100 MPa heat release
Injection system: rate for the
common rail test fuels
Longer
ignition delay
for biodiesel-
ethanol blends
d’Ambrosio and RP: 71 kW PCCI Diesel – 0–50% – – – ↓ Peak ↓ NOx Comparable Comparable ↑ Smoke
Ferrari CR: 16.3:1 cylinder emissions emissions emissions emission using
[220] RS: 1500 rpm pressure and EGR
IP: 200–225 bar HRR up to
Injection system: 48% EGR rate
common rail
Torregrosa et al. Four-cylinder, Pilot injection Diesel – – ↓ BMEP for ↑ BSFC with – ↓ Combustion ↓ NOx – – ↓ Soot
[221] CR: 18:1 PCCI greater pilot increasing noise with emissions emissions
RS: 1500 rpm combustion injection pilot increasing < 25 ppm
IP: 800 bar quantities injection pilot injection
Injection system: quantity quantities
pilot injection
Jain et al. [222] Single cylinder, PCCI Diesel SoPI- 30, 35 0–30% – ↑ BSFC up to ↓BTE with ↓ Peak ↓ NOx ↑ CO emission ↑ HC emission ↑ Smoke
RP: 6.25 kW combustion and 40 deg. 0.07 g/kWh increasing cylinder emission up to 10 g/ up to 5 g/ opacity up to
CR: 17.5:1 CA bTDC with EGR rate pressure from < 5 ppm kWh kWh 6% with
(continued on next page)
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
 Table 5 (continued)

Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Percentage of Performance Combustion Emission
condition Timing EGR/O2
concentration Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
torque/IMEP
T. Pachiannan, et al.

RS: 4200 rpm SoMI- 12, 16, increasing 78 to 72 bar increasing EGR
IP: 700 bar 20 and EGR rate and heat rate
Injection system: 24 deg. CA release rate
common rail bTDC from 226 to
130 J/CAD
with using
EGR
Advanced SOC
and shorter
combustion
duration up to
4CAD
Jain et al. [223] Single cylinder, PCCI Diesel – 0–15% – ↑ BSFC up to ↓BTE up to ↑ Peak ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Smoke
RP: 6.25 kW 0.05 kg/ 3.9% for cylinder emissions emissions emissions emissions
CR: 17.5:1 kWh for higher pressure up to
RS: 4200 rpm higher injection 78 bar and
IP: 400–1000 bar injection pressures HRR up to
Injection system: pressures 230 J/CAD for
common rail higher
injection
pressures and
advanced
injection

32
timings
Parks et al. [224] Four-cylinder PCCI Diesel – 0–54% – – – – ↓ NOx ↑ CO emission ↓ HC emission ↓ PM emission
combustion emission from 11.12 to from 1.59 to of 0.35 g/kg of
with emission < 5 g/bhp-hr 27.08 g/bhp- 8.13 g/bhp-hr fuel
control devices hr
Kiplimo et al. Four-stroke, PCCI Diesel 2–40 deg. CA 40% ↑ IMEP with – ↑ ITE of ↓ Peak ↓ NOx ↑ CO of 12 g/ ↑ HC of 8 g/ ↓ Smoke
[225] single cylinder, bTDC using EGR 48.7% with cylinder emission with kWh emission kWh emission emission of less
WC, using EGR pressure and EGR than 0.5% with
CR: 17.5:1 heat release EGR
RS: 1000 rpm rate with
IP: 80 and using EGR
120 MPa
Injection system:
common rail
Laguitton et al. Four stroke, PCCI Diesel – Up to 45.4% – – – ↓ Pressure rite ↓ NOx – – ↓ Smoke
[226] single cylinder combustion rate emissions emissions
from four
cylinder engine,
CR: 18.4:1
RS:
1500–2000 rpm
IP: 30–160 MPa
Zehni et al. Single cylinder, PCCI Biodiesel and −31.1 to – – – – ↓ And ↓ NOx ↓ CO emission ↑ HC emission ↓ Soot
[227] WC, combustion diesel fuel −15.8 deg. advanced heat emission up to up to 27% emissions
CR: 16.7:1 using CFD CA aTDC release rate 13%
RS: 1500 rpm for the
IP: 860 bar biodiesel fuel
Injection system:
common rail
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

(continued on next page)

 Table 5 (continued)

Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Percentage of Performance Combustion Emission
condition Timing EGR/O2
concentration Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
torque/IMEP
T. Pachiannan, et al.

Jeon and Bae Single cylinder, PCCI DME and – – ↑ IMEP for a – – ↓ HRR of No change ↓ CO ↓ HC –
[228] CR: 17.3:1 Hydrogen(Gas) higher H2 98.08 J/CAD emissions emissions
RS: 1200 rpm percentage for multiple
IP: 0.5-H2 & injections
30 MPa-DME
Injection system:
common rail
Ying et al. [229] Four-stroke, PCCI-DI Dimethyl ether 12 °CA bTDC – Comparable – ↑ BTE Shorter ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC –
single cylinder, (DME) on pilot power combustion emissions up emissions emissions
RP: 11 kW injection (Gas) output duration and to 90%
CR: 10.7:1 ignition delay
RS: 2200 rpm
IP: 200–225 bar
Injection system:
direct
Soloiu et al. Four-stroke, PCCI n-butanol (Port 20 deg. CA – – – – ↓ Peak ↓ NOx ↑ CO emission ↑ HC emission ↓ Soot
[238] single cylinder, fuel injection) BTDC cylinder emission of emissions of
RP: 16.9 kW and peanut pressure by 75% for n- 98% for n-
CR: 16:1 biodiesel (Direct 20%, cylinder butanol PCCI butanol PCCI
RS: 800 rpm injection) temperature combustion combustion
IP: 200 bar of 1250 K and
heat release
rate

33
Wang et al. Twin cylinder, PCCI DME (Gas) with 18°CA BTDC – – ↓ BSFC up to ↑ BTE up to ↓ Peak HRR ↓ NOx ↑ CO emission ↑ HC emission ↓ Smoke
[243] CR: 17:1 diesel (Dual fuel) ∼10 g/kWh ∼5.5% with from 115.3 to emission from from 0.025 to from 8 to emission from
RS: 1500 rpm with increasing 58.79 J/°CA 610 to 0.174% 77 ppm 0.45 to
Injection system: increasing DME and higher 508 ppm 0.15 m−1
Direct DME cylinder
pressure from
92.82 to
113.03 MPa
Rajesh Kumar Four-stroke, Partially Dimethyl 23 °CA bTDC 0–30% – – ↑ BTE for ↓ Peak ↓ NOx Comparable Comparable ↓ Smoke
and single cylinder, premixed low- carbonate advanced cylinder emissions up emissions emissions emissions for
Saravanan RP: 4.4 kW temperature (DMC) with injection pressure and to 46.1% for higher EGR
[248] CR: 17.5:1 combustion diesel blend timings from HRR for DMC15 at 30% rate
RS: 1500 rpm 21 to 25°CA retarded EGR rate
IP: 21 MPa bTDC injection
Injection system: timings
direct injection
Injection
duration:
20–30°CA
Mei et al. [249] Four-stroke, PCCI DMC-diesel 7 °CA to – – – – ↓ Peak ↓ NOx ↓ CO emission ↓ HC emission ↓ PM emission
single cylinder, blend 19 °CA cylinder emission from up to up to 0.015–0.006 g/
CR: 15.88:1 pressure from 0.43 to 0.24 g/ ∼3 g/kWh ∼1 g/kWh kWh for DMC
RS: 4000 rpm 6.02 to kWh with for DMC for DMC and retarding
IP: 60 MPa 3.92 MPa and retarding blend blend CA50
Injection system: heat release CA50
common rail up to 4.14%
↓ bulk gas
temperature
and ignition
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

(continued on next page)

 Table 5 (continued)

Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Percentage of Performance Combustion Emission
condition Timing EGR/O2
concentration Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
torque/IMEP
T. Pachiannan, et al.

delay from
14.3 to 9.7°CA
with retarding
CA50
Zhao et al. [250] Four-stroke, twin PCCI DME (Intake air 7 deg. CA 0–27% – ↓ BSFC up to ↑ BTE up to ↓ Peak ↓ NOx ↑ CO emission ↑ HC emission ↓ Smoke
cylinder, [Gas]) with bTDC 6% with 2% with cylinder emission emission up to
RP: 21.9 kW diesel(Dual fuel) increasing increasing pressure up to 72% with
CR: 17:1 premixed premixed 6.27 MPa and increasing
RS: 2300 rpm ratio ratio HRR up to premixed ratio
Injection system: 63 J/°CA with
common rail increasing
EGR rate
Wang et al. Four stroke, twin LPG addition DME (Gas)- 7 °CA BTDC – – – ↓ Slightly BTE ↓ Peak ↓ NOx – – –
[251] cylinder, with dual diesel fuel with of 1.5% with cylinder emission
CR: 17:1 fuelled PCCI LPG addition the addition pressure and
RS: 1500 rpm combustion (Dual fuel) of LPG cylinder
Injection system: temperature
Direct injection with
increasing
LPG
Shorter
combustion
duration up to

34
6.2°CA

Han et al. [252] Single cylinder, Premixed low- Gasoline-diesel – 35–50% – – – ↑ Ignition ↓ NOx – – ↓ Soot emission
CR: 15:1 temperature blends delay with emission below 0.1 FSN
RS: 1500 rpm combustion increasing
IP: 800–1200 bar gasoline
Injection system: percentage
common rail and EGR rate
Lee et al. [253] Four-stroke, PCCI with Diesel, gasoline – 0–30% – – – ↓ Peak ↓ NOx – ↑ UHC ↓ Soot
single cylinder, different (Premixed fuel) cylinder emissions Up without using emissions
DE, premixed ratio pressure up to to 1/10th of EGR
CR: 19:1 7.5 bar and diesel fuel
RS: 1200 rpm HRR for
Injection system: higher
Solenoid type premixed
ratios
↓ Cylinder
temperature
and shorter
combustion
duration up to
23 deg
Kim et al. [254] Single cylinder MPCI, PPCI Naphtha (low – – – – Considerable ↓ Peak ↓ NOx Comparable Comparable ↓ Soot emission
retrofitted from a compared with octane number ITE for MPCI cylinder emissions of emissions emissions of 0.06 m−1
4-cylinder diesel CDC gasoline fuels) mode pressure and 0.28 g/kWh
engine, HRR of 125 J/
CR: 16.7:1 CAD for MPCI
RS: 1600 rpm
IP: 80 MPa
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

(continued on next page)

 Table 5 (continued)

Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Percentage of Performance Combustion Emission
condition Timing EGR/O2
concentration Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
torque/IMEP
T. Pachiannan, et al.

Injection system:
common rail
Torregrosa et al. Four cylinder, PCCI Gasoline-diesel −38 to −18 – ↑ IMEP for – – Longer ↓ NOx – – ↓ Soot emission
[255] CR: 18:1 blends cad aTDC gasoline ignition delay emission of of
RS: 1500 rpm blends and < 5 ppm at < 2.5 mg/m3
IP: 80 MPa combustion low oxygen at low oxygen
phasing concentrations concentrations
↓Combustion
noise
Han et al. [256] Single cylinder, Premixed low Diesel with – – – – – Longer – ↑ CO emission ↑ HC emission –
CR: 15:1 temperature gasoline blends ignition delay up to 130 g/ of up to 3.3 g/
RS: 1500 rpm combustion with kg fuel for the kg fuel for the
IP: 800–1200 bar increasing blends blends
Injection system: equivalence
common rail ratio and
gasoline
blends
Liu et al. [257] Single cylinder, premixed Gasoline-diesel – 25–30% – – ↓ITE for Similar ↓ NOx ↑ CO emission ↓ HC emission ↓ Soot emission
CR: 16.7:1 low- blends WDFs cylinder emission at from 4.6 to at higher below
RS: 1600 rpm temperature pressure and higher loads 24.5 g/kWh loads 0.02 m−1
IP: 80 bar combustion of heat release at higher
Injection system: wide rate for the loads
common rail distillation fuel WDFs

35
Longer
ignition delay
from 13 to
21 deg and
shorter
combustion
duration
Verma et al. Single cylinder, Spark assisted Gasoline-diesel 364.5° bTDC – – – ↑ BTE for up ↓ Peak ↑ NOx ↓ CO emission ↓ HC emission ↓ Soot
[258] WC, premixed and kerosene- to 3.7% the cylinder emissions from up to 27 g/ at higher emissions
RP: 6.28 kW charge diesel blends blends pressure up to 4 to 12 g/kWh kWh at higher loads
CR: 11:1 compression 36 bar and for kerosene loads for the
RS: 1500 rpm ignition engine similar heat blends blends
IP: 220 bar release rate
Injection system: for the blends
Port injection
Natarajan et al. Four-stroke, Early injected Bioethanol- – – – – – ↑ Peak HRR of ↓ NOx ↓ CO emission ↑ UHC ↓ Smoke
[261] single cylinder, PCCI engine diesel blend 75.97 kJ/ emission of of 41.66% emission of emission of
CR: 17.5:1 m3deg.CA and 80.53% 47.5% 75.49%
RS: 1500 rpm lower cylinder
IP: 200–225 bar pressure for
Injection system: ethanol
common rail
Srihari and Four-stroke, PCCI-DI Diesel-ethanol – – – ↑ BSFC up to – – ↓ NOx ↑ CO emission ↑ HC emission ↓ Smoke
Thirumalini single cylinder, blends 14% for emission up to up to 0.12% up to 14% at emission up to
[262] AC, ethanol 85% at low load high loads 33%
RP: 5.5 kW blends
CR: 18:1
Injection system:
pilot and main
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

(continued on next page)

 Table 5 (continued)

Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Percentage of Performance Combustion Emission
condition Timing EGR/O2
concentration Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
torque/IMEP
T. Pachiannan, et al.

Valentino et al. Four cylinder, Premixed low n-Butanol-diesel – – – ↑ BSFC for n- – Longer ↓ NOx – ↑ UHC ↓ Smoke
[263] CR: 17.5:1 temperature blends butanol ignition delay emission emission emission of
RS: 1500 rpm combustion blends for blends 500 ppm 0.15FSN
IP: 160 MPa

Rajesh Kumar Four-stroke, Premixed iso-Butanol- 23 deg. CA 0–30% – ↑ BSFC for ↓BTE for ↑ Peak HRR of ↓ NOx ↓ CO emission ↑ HC emission ↓ Smoke
and single cylinder, low- diesel, n- bTDC blends alcohol 157.8 J/deg. emission up to with using emission up to
Saravanan AC, temperature pentanol diesel blends CA 41.7% EGR 90.8%
[264] RP: 4.4 kW combustion blends (Alcohol
CR: 17.5:1 blends)
RS: 1500 rpm
Injection system:
Direct
Su et al. [265] Single cylinder, Premixed low Diesel, Biodiesel – 0–40% – – – ↓ Combustion ↓ NOx ↑ CO emission ↑ HC emission ↓ Soot emission
CR: 15:1 temperature (Used cooking efficiency up emission from 41 to from 6.4 to
RS: 1500 rpm combustion oil), Biodiesel- to 2% with < 25 ppm 117 g/kg-fuel 8.2 g/kg-fuel
IP: 100 kPa ethanol blend increasing
Injection system: EGR rate
common rail
Saravanan et al. Four-stroke, PCCI-DI engine Ethanol and 23 deg. CA – – ↓ BSFC up to ↑ BTE of up to ↑ Peak ↓ NOx ↑ CO emission ↑ UHC ↑ Smoke
[266] single cylinder, gasohol (Dual bTDC 14.93% for 4.65% for the cylinder emission on emission opacity up to
AC, RP: 4.4 kW fuel) the premixed pressure up to the average of 70%
CR: 17.5:1 premixed fuels 72.60 bar and 30% for

36
RS: 1500 rpm fuels HRR up to gasohol
IP: 220 bar 81.10 kJ/m3
Injection system: for premixed
common rail gasohol and
ethanol fuel
↑ ignition
delay and
combustion
duration
Asad et al. [267] Single cylinder, Premixed Pilot Ethanol (Pilot – Up to 42% – – – ↓ Premixed ↓ NOx No There is no ↓ Soot emission
CR: 18.2:1 Assisted injection) combustion emission up to substantial huge increase below 0.01 g/
RS: 1500 rpm Combustion fractions and pressure 0.14 g/kWh change in CO kWh
IP: 60–150 MPa (PPAC) rise rate emission of
Injection system: 12–18 g/kWh
common rail
Ibrahim et al. Four-stroke, twin predominantly Biogas (Gas) – – – – ↑ BTE with ↓ HRR for ↓ NOx ↓ CO emission ↓ HC emission ↓ Smoke
[269] cylinder, WC, premixed with diesel fuel increasing higher biogas emission of emission of
RP: 18.4 kW charge (Dual fuel) biogas energy energy ratio 1.2 g/kWh 0.02 FSN
CR: 18.5:1 compression ratio
RS: 3600 rpm ignition
Injection system: (PPCCI)
common rail
Abdul Rahman Four-stroke, twin Biogas diesel Biogas with air 33–91 °bTDC – – – ↑ BTE up to ↓ Peak ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ THC ↓ Smoke
and Ramesh cylinder, WC, predominantly and diesel with 70% biogas cylinder emissions emissions emissions emissions
[270] RP: 19.2 kW premixed common rail pressure and
CR: 18.5:1 charge HRR
RS: 1800 rpm compression
IP: 600 bar ignition
(BDPPCCI)
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

(continued on next page)

 Table 5 (continued)

Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Percentage of Performance Combustion Emission
condition Timing EGR/O2
concentration Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
torque/IMEP
T. Pachiannan, et al.

Fang et al. [278] Four-stroke, four Premixed low- Ethanol- −7.5–5 deg. Up to 30% – ↑ BSFC up to Similar BTE ↑ Peak HRR of ↓ NOx ↑ CO emission ↑ HC emission ↓ Smoke
cylinder, temperature diesel–biodiesel CA aTDC 8.06% 152.5 J/°CA emission up to for ethanol for ethanol emission up to
CR: 16.8:1 combustion (Waste cooking 23.08% blends blends 73.44%
RS: 1450 rpm oil) blends
Injection system:
common rail
Guerry et al. Four-stroke, Dual fuel LTC Common rail – – – – Maximum ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO emission ↑ HC emission ↓ Smoke
[281] single cylinder, injection of High fuel pressure with emissions up emission
CR: 17.1:1 reactivity fuel- conversion more to 320 CAD
RS: 1500 rpm Diesel efficiency and advanced SOI
IP: 200–1300 bar Port injection of combustion and injection
Injection system: Low reactivity efficiency at pressure
port and fuel- Gasoline 300CAD Higher heat
common rail release rate
with advanced
combustion
phasing
Liu et al. [284] Four cylinder, PPC n-butanol/diesel 0 to 30% – – – ↓ Cylinder – – – ↓ Particle
CR: 17.1:1 blends −20 deg. CA pressure and number size
RS: 2400 rpm aTDC heat release
IP: 100 MPa rate with
Rated power: advanced SOI
147 kW

37
Liu et al. [285] Six cylinder, PPC Gasoline/PODE −9.5 to Up to 40% – ↓ BSFC for ↑ BTE for the ↓ Cylinder ↑ NOx ↓ CO emission ↓ HC emission ↓ Soot emission
CR: 16.8:1 blends −14 deg. CA the PODE PODE blends pressure and emission of of up to 94%
RS: 1660 rpm aTDC blends pressure rise < 0.4 g/kWh
IP: 1200 bar rate for the
Injection system: blends
common rail
Mao et al. [286] Six cylinder, PPC n-heptane, −5.5 to Up to 42% – ↑ BSFC for – ↑ Ignition ↓ NOx ↑ CO emission ↑ HC emission –
RS: 2200 rpm gasoline, and n- −14 deg. CA the blends delay, heat emission at for the for the
IP: 145 MPa butanol blends aTDC release rate higher EGR gasoline and gasoline and
Injection system: and maximum rate n-butanol n-butanol
common rail pressure rate blends blends
for the
gasoline and
n-butanol
blends
Qiu et al. [290] Four cylinder, PPC Diesel Single 25% – ↑ BSFC with ↓ BTE with ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO emission ↑ HC emission ↓ Smoke
CR: 17.5:1 injection: 18 advancing advancing pressure and emission for emission for
RS: 2400 rpm to −5 deg. injection injection heat release multiple multiple
IP: 100 MPa CA bTDC timing and timing and it rate with injections injections
Injection Multiple it is better is better for advanced SOI
system:common injection: for multiple multiple
rail 13–63 deg. injections injections
CA bTDC
(pilot)

[↑ – Increase/High; ↓ – Decrease/Low; CR – Compression ratio; WC – Water-cooled; AC-Air cooled; RP – Rated power; RS – Rated speed; rpm – revolution per minute; IP – Injection pressure; IVO – Inlet valve opening; IVC
– Inlet valve closing; EVO – Exhaust valve opening; EVC – Exhaust valve closing; aTDC – after Top Dead Center; bTDC – before Top Dead Center; aBDC- after Bottom Dead Center; bBDC – before Bottom Dead Center].
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
T. Pachiannan, et al.
with both high and low EGR rates achieves an efficiency of 48% which
is more vis-à-vis single and double injection [292]. This is attributed to
the reduction in heat transfer due to the movement of the fuel center
region towards the center of combustion chamber which is noted in this
optical study [292].
3.9. Summary of PCCI combustion
In spite of numerous research work on PCCI combustion, the con-
cepts of PCCI are not completely understood. The problems associated
with higher CO and HC emissions and combustion control at high en-
gine loads are yet to be addressed [87]. It is reported that the major
drawbacks of PCCI combustion are extending the lean operating range,
controlling of combustion phasing [293], unacceptable noise levels and
higher CO and HC emissions [227,294]. CO and HC emission can be
decreased with the binary mixtures of oxygenated fuels (n-butanol and
cottonseed biodiesel) by 10% and 25% respectively [295]. Some re-
searchers have suggested that combustion phasing can be controlled by
using variable valve actuation (VVA) [296] and multiple injection
strategies [228]. This limitation of PCCI combustion such as extending
the operational range can be resolved by altering in-cylinder pressur-
e–temperature history during the time of fuel injection suitably [222].
Many studies showed that optimizing injection timings and EGR rate
help to achieve improved PCCI combustion [219,222,223]. While high
EGR rate (more than 55%) is preferred to reduce NOx and PM emission
simultaneously to a very low level in PCCI engine, it deteriorated the
combustion efficiency and increased the products of incomplete com-
bustion [297,298]. In addition to the difficulty in controlling the
combustion in PCCI engines at high loads, the high load operation also
increases the smoke emission and combustion noise to the unacceptable
levels. While the increase in smoke is attributed to the increased com-
bustion temperature and reduced in-cylinder oxygen, high combustion
noise is due to the rapid heat release caused by the LTC which takes
place in more quantity of premixed charge. Therefore, it is a tedious
task to extend the LTC mode to higher load [89]. It led the researchers
to explore the various possibilities of extending the operating load
range of PCCI combustion such as (i) increasing intake boost pressure
[299,300] which improves combustion efficiency and extend high load
limit, (ii) prolonging the ignition delay with low compression ratio
which reduces the smoke emission and increase the operating load
range along with decrease in thermal efficiency [301], (iii) adopting
high pressure multiple-injections strategies which reduces intensity of
peak heat release rate and enhances fuel-air mixing (reduces both noise
and smoke) [302] and (iv) varying the valve actuation timing and fuel
properties [303]. Besides these engine operating conditions, selection of
fuel with low cetane number enables in extending the high load limits
of LTC. The low cetane number fuels increase the delay period and thus
enhance the fuel-air mixing and reduce soot emission [304,305].
Blending the diesel with the fuel which has high volatility (compared to
that of diesel) and high resistance to auto-ignition such as gasoline
reduces smoke emission. It is opined that the low reactivity and high
volatility of ethanol make it a suitable fuel for LTC operation in CI
engines [267]. It is possible to control the combustion phase in PCCI
using multiple-injection strategy [306], where the fuel is injected not
only through the intake port but also into the cylinder directly. It is also
suggested to adopt spark assisted PCCI combustion to use lower quality
and lower octane fuels which give comparable engine performance,
combustion and emission characteristics [258].
Table 5 shows the summary of performance, combustion and
emission characteristics of PCCI engines fueled with various fuels along
with the experimental conditions.
4. RCCI combustion
The present review on HCCI and PCCI combustion exhibit the cap-
ability of LTC in terms of improvement in performance and emissions.
38
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
However, both these LTC modes suffer from several drawbacks namely
control of combustion, extending LTC for high load range, CO and HC
emissions, etc. The better auto-ignition qualities of diesel fuel facilitate
the PCCI combustion without major problems at low loads. However,
its high reactivity poses difficulties in controlling the combustion
phasing and excessive pressure rise at higher loads. Hence, in a dual-
fuel combustion mode, the blends of better auto-ignition characteristics
and low reactivity fuels such as diesel and gasoline respectively, it is
possible to achieve the relative benefits of the two fuels.
4.1. Development of RCCI engine
In this pursuit, Kokjohn and co-workers [307,308] explored a dual-
fuel engine by blending the low reactivity gasoline and high reactivity
diesel fuel based on the earlier work of Bessonette et al. [309] and
Ingaki et al. [233], which is termed as RCCI combustion [310]. In this
work, an attempt is made to address the several drawbacks of HCCI and
PCCI combustion namely lack of combustion phasing control at high
engine loads and excessive PRR. In this strategy, in-cylinder fuel
blending using port fuel injection of low reactivity fuel (gasoline) and
early direct injection of low reactivity fuel (diesel) is adopted. The in-
cylinder fuel blending helps to achieve the necessary fuel reactivity by
changing the gasoline and diesel fuel quantities over the wide range of
engine load and speed [311]. Thus, it is established that controlling the
fuel blend in terms of spatial stratification of the fuel reactivity achieves
control over the combustion duration. Several researchers proposed
RCCI combustion which has the potential to overcome some of the
drawbacks of HCCI and PCCI modes of combustion [312,313]. Both the
experimental and numerical simulations on heavy-duty engines de-
monstrated that RCCI combustion is a more promising LTC strategy
than HCCI and PCCI [307,314]. The process of RCCI combustion is also
envisaged from the effort of the researchers to reduce the rate of EGR at
higher loads while investigating the PCCI regime [86].
4.2. Principle of RCCI engine
Reactivity controlled compression ignition is a dual-fuel combustion
strategy using an in-cylinder blending of minimum two fuels with dif-
ferent auto-ignition characteristics to control the combustion phasing
and heat release rate [315,316] and to achieve lower NOx and soot
emissions simultaneously below EURO VI norms over a wide range of
engine loads (4.6–14.6 bar) [317,318]. In the RCCI mode, multi-stage
injection strategy achieves more homogeneous mixture and longer ig-
nition delay (with high EGR) which can inhibit particle formation
[319]. In this mode, a homogeneous charge of high octane or low re-
active fuel (eg: gasoline, methanol, etc.) is injected into the intake port
and then a small amount of high reactive fuel (eg: diesel, biodiesel, etc.)
is injected through direct injection into the combustion chamber with
single or multiple injections which act as an ignition source [320–322].
The dual fuel engine combustion technology of RCCI uses blended fuels
with at least two fuels of different reactivity and multiple injections
(injected at scheduled intervals) to have control over the fuel re-
activates to optimize the combustion phasing, duration, and magnitude.
Varying the relative quantity and/or timing of injection of the two
different reactivity fuels, it is possible to control the combustion timing.
Therefore, RCCI provides a flexible operation over a wide range of
engine operating conditions by varying both the low reactivity fuel
quantity in the blend and the timing of direct injection [311,323]. The
variations between the fuel reactivity enable the necessary in-cylinder
equivalence ratio and reactivity stratification [317,324]. However, it is
confirmed that the higher portion of the energy must be obtained from
the low reactivity fuel for achieving high efficiency with a significant
reduction in NOx and soot emissions [325,326]. In the process of RCCI
combustion, a low reactivity fuel is inducted to create a better mixing
among fuel, air, and recirculated gases followed by the direct in-cy-
linder injection of a high reactivity fuel before the start of ignition of
T. Pachiannan, et al.
the premixed fuel by adopting single or multiple injections.
4.3. Combustion in RCCI engine
The schematic diagram of RCCI combustion is shown in Fig. 15.
Many studies confirm that for achieving higher efficiency with lower
NOx and soot emissions, higher energy fraction (up to 90%) is neces-
sary mainly from the low reactive fuel [325–327]. The RCCI combus-
tion mode achieves a very low level of NOx emission even at higher
loads even with reduced EGR rate due to fuel reactivity gradient inside
the cylinder. These RCCI combustion engines are highly dependent or
sensitive to the fuel properties and the shape of piston bowl which also
plays an important role in facilitating fuel-air mixing inside the com-
bustion chamber [328–330]. The combustion starts initially from the
auto-ignition of high reactive fuel followed by low reactive fuel [331].
In this RCCI combustion, the in-cylinder reactivity stratification by
enlarging the reactivity difference between the two fuels controls the
combustion phasing [332] and combustion duration [333] and enables
high load extension [334,335] along with higher efficiency due to a
reduction in heat transfer losses [336]. Hence, this type of combustion
mode has the potential to overcome the difficulties faced by other low-
temperature combustion modes such as HCCI and PCCI [337,338]. It is
also considered better than other types of LTC modes [339,340]. In
RCCI combustion, the combustion is staged [341] and it continues from
locally high reactivity fuel areas to low reactivity. The initial ignition of
RCCI is controlled by the spray-combustion process of HRF with the
primary heat release on the spray periphery fuel areas [342]. This
staged combustion significantly expands the duration of premixed
combustion which results in high thermal efficiency, low rate of pres-
sure rise rate and lower emissions even at higher loads [343]. The
major phases of neat diesel combustion are classified as (i) at first it
shows cool flame reactions followed by the (ii) main heat release stage
(due to premixed burning) and (iii) a short tail of late combustion
[344]. However, in RCCI mode when the diesel is injected into the
gasoline-air atmosphere, it gets evaporated and creates non-uniform
reactivity stratification in the cylinder and thus there is a change in
combustion behavior as (i) low-temperature reactions and cool flames
appear similar to the neat diesel case promoted by the diesel injection,
(ii) afterward the auto-ignition from the high reactivity zones leads to
higher heat release rate due to increase in the mass of burnt fuel in this
premixed stage and (iii) finally, the previous multiple site combustion
leads to multiple propagation flames [344]. The RCCI mode of com-
bustion is proven to control the combustion better than the other
strategies, such as HCCI, PCCI, dual fuel HCCI, and PCCI and single fuel
PPC and to improve the thermal efficiencies (∼60%) [345]. RCCI
combustion is capable of achieving relatively higher brake thermal ef-
ficiency compared to that of all other modes of LTC, with relatively
lower NOx and PM emissions [324,310]. It also enables a smoother
combustion process by reducing engine knock [346] with acceptable
ringing intensity than that of HCCI engines [347]. Several numerical
studies also showed that RCCI combustion is a promising LTC mode
compared to the other techniques of LTC [348,349]. However, RCCI
combustion too has certain limitations like lower combustion efficiency
mainly at low loads, high load extension restricted by excessive pres-
sure rise rate or NOx/soot emissions [350,351] and higher CO and HC
emissions found in the crevice regions [352,353]. This can be mitigated
by optimizing various control parameters including injection strategy,
intake temperature and boosting, EGR rate, and variable valve timing,
etc. [354,355].
4.4. Fuels for RCCI combustion
From the concept of RCCI, it is evident that the combustion para-
meters are governed by the degree of reactivity of the charge. Hence, it
is essential to maintain different conditions to operate the engine with
different fuel blends. The engines should be capable of operating with
39
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
fuel blends under a wide range of fuel from neat gasoline (low reactive
fuel) to neat diesel fuel (high reactive) in order to effectively make use
of RCCI strategy. There exists a variety of combination of low and high
reactive fuels namely gasoline-diesel, ethanol-diesel, gasoline-biodiesel,
and gasoline-gasoline and also with some additives for improving the
cetane number. Since the most of the researches are carried out using
diesel, biodiesel or its blends and n-heptane fuels as high reactive fuels
in RCCI combustion studies, the present review is discussed according
to low reactive fuels used in RCCI combustion modes, mainly gasoline,
alcoholic, gaseous and blended fuels.
4.5. Low reactive gasoline fuel on RCCI combustion
Benajes et al. [356] investigated the RCCI combustion on a heavy-
duty engine using diesel and gasoline fuel to achieve ultra-low NOx and
soot emissions over a wide range of engine speed and loads. While the
LRF gasoline is injected into the intake manifold through port fuel in-
jection system, the HRF diesel is directly injected into the combustion
chamber through common rail injection system which is capable of
providing up to five injection pulses. In this study, the authors [356]
demonstrated the capability of RCCI concept with EGR rate and ad-
vanced SOI (which are the key factors) to reach EURO VI NOx level and
ultra-low soot emissions in a heavy-duty engine over the entire engine
map. In RCCI concept, it is observed that the reduction in EGR (from
41.65 to 36.14%) improved the HC and CO emissions about 45% and
76% respectively with low NOx emission (less than 0.4 g/kWh). The
advanced injection timing (from −8 to −32 deg. CA aTDC) reduced the
CO and HC emissions (< 3 g/kWh) along with an improvement in the
fuel consumption of 3.5%. It is noted that the use of a higher com-
pression ratio (14.4:11) needs a retarded injection timing to avoid ex-
cessive knocking, which results in unacceptable soot emissions at the
loads more than 50%. However, this limitation is not applicable to the
lower compression ratio (11:1).
In another study, Benajes et al. [357] investigated the effect of
RCCI/CDC (conventional diesel combustion) dual fuel mode to extend
the LTC concept over the whole operating range of the engine and to
comply with EURO VI norms by using 20% ethanol and 80% of 95
octane number gasoline fuel (by v/v) as LRF and diesel/biodiesel blend
(7% biodiesel and 93% diesel fuel) as HRF in a medium duty diesel
engine with the compression ratio of 17.5:1. This work is intended to
cover the entire map of the engine by switching between the RCCI and
CDC such that CDC becomes useful in covering the zones of the engine
map where the RCCI operation is limited. This provided essential in-
sights to explore the zones where the RCCI is beneficial and vice-versa.
As expected, RCCI combustion emitted higher CO and HC emissions
than those of CDC and their peak values are observed to be 37 g/kWh
Fig. 15. Schematic diagram of RCCI combustion.
T. Pachiannan, et al.
and 23 g/kWh respectively. The maximum pressure rise rate and
maximum pressure restricted the maximum operating loads of RCCI
combustion to 35% at all engine speeds. This combustion also lowered
the combustion noise and increased the exhaust gas temperature above
200 °C which ensured the effective oxidization of CO and HC emissions
in diesel oxidation catalyst.
In the experiments of combustion and emission characteristics of
RCCI engine using gasoline as LRF with the directly injected high re-
active diesel and polyoxymethylene dimethyl ethers (PODE) fuels
[358], more mixing controlled combustion and slightly higher peak
pressure rise rate of 0.3 bar/deg. CA are observed with PODE than that
of diesel fuel due to longer injection duration (as its lower LHV by
36%), higher cetane number and more volatility of PODE. PODE pro-
duced slightly higher ITE (0.6%) and lower smoke (0.093 FSN) and CO
emissions (2.779 g/kWh) than those of diesel fuel along with higher
NOx emission (0.03 g/kWh). The use of PODE with EGR and change of
SOI at high load condition is found to be beneficial in terms of emission
reduction except for CO emission (12 g/kW-hr at full load) due to some
of its properties like higher cetane number and oxygen content.
It is shown from computational results that the crevices and squish
volumes are the primary sources of incomplete combustion. Hence, the
performance and emission characteristics of RCCI combustion are
evaluated in a heavy duty engine at different loads with a compression
ratio of 14.4:1using different piston bowl geometries (stock, stepped
and bathtub as shown in Fig. 16) [359]. This study used diesel as HRF
and gasoline as LRF. The stepped and bathtub piston bowl geometries
are proposed to reduce the UHC and CO accumulation in the squish
regions and the heat transfer losses than the stock geometry type. This
is achieved by modifying the squish flow and by reducing piston surface
area for lowering heat transfer losses. It is stated that the stock piston
provides enhanced charge motion, which results in faster mixing and
earlier auto-ignition or SOC than the bathtub and stepped geometries.
Both the bathtub and stepped pistons achieved lower NOx emission
(< 0.4 g/kWh) to meet EURO VI norms and better fuel consumption.
However, the HC and CO emissions are found to be higher from the
stepped piston than other geometries. At medium load, the lower area
to volume ratio of bathtub piston reduced the heat transfer loss which
promoted the peak higher combustion temperature, reduction in com-
bustion loss and fuel consumption (< 4% than the conventional diesel
combustion) with lower NOx and soot emission by complying EURO VI
norms. Finally at high load, stepped piston showed better results than
the other two geometries in terms of fuel consumption, NOx and soot
emission with slightly higher HC emissions. In this study, the perfor-
mance of these three different piston bowls is compared at the same
engine operating points using single and double injection strategies. It
is observed that at low loads, advancing pilot injection at constant main
injection timing did not have a strong effect on combustion develop-
ment. Multiple fuel injection with higher gasoline fraction (> 65%)
resulted in more delayed combustion with almost equal combustion
duration to that of a single injection, better fuel consumption, de-
creased soot and NOx emissions (of < 0.5 g/kWh) and increased CO
and HC emissions. The authors concluded the following: (i) a flat bowl
with reduced piston surface area increases RCCI efficiency, (ii) under
the operating conditions of the current study, bathtub piston is not the
most suitable geometry for full operating range, (iii) limitation on soot
emission makes the bathtub geometry to be suitable neither for ex-
tending the RCCI concept up to full load nor for implementing dual-
mode concept. Hence in this type of piston bowl, convention diesel
combustion is preferred, if it is not possible to achieve RCCI combustion
at full loads.
The potential of gasoline/diesel RCCI combustion over a wide range
of engine speeds is examined in a heavy-duty diesel engine and its
performance and emission characteristics are compared with diesel LTC
[360]. At low loads, increase in EGR rate from 50 to 70% decreased the
peak in-cylinder pressure from 6.22 MPa to 5.62 MPa, heat release rate
from 153.45 J/deg. CA to 84.9 J/deg. CA, and increased the combustion
40
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
duration. EGR rate above 50% produced very less NOx emission
(< 0.1 g/kWh). Increasing the injection pressure from 80 to 140 MPa
shortened the ignition delay up to 1 deg. CA which resulted in lower
soot emissions due to better atomization. Increase in CO and HC
emissions to 35 g/kWh and 5.5 g/kWh respectively are observed with
increase in both the injection pressure (80 to 140 MPa) and EGR rate
(50–70%). Increasing the gasoline proportion or advancing the injec-
tion timing decreased the MPRR below 0.6 MPa/deg. CA. Increase in
gasoline proportion also increased the NOx emission up to 0.8 g/kWh,
HC emission up to 10 g/kWh and reduced specific fuel consumption due
to the shifting of combustion phasing (retarded) which increased the
ITE. At higher loads, from the combination of both the EGR and gaso-
line, it is possible to reduce the combustion temperature and to achieve
ultra-low NOx and soot emission (< 0.4 g/kWh and 0.003 g/kWh re-
spectively) as well as the lower CO and HC emissions and fuel con-
sumption (168.6 g/kWh). Hence, it is shown that the use of low reactive
fuel in RCCI mode could extend the operating range of RCCI engines. It
is also suggested that at low loads the RCCI operating range can be
expanded with the help of intake boosting [360].
In order to extend the capabilities of RCCI combustion to the entire
mapping of a medium duty engine and to solve the main challenges
(abating CO and UHC emissions at low load and fuel consumption
penalty) of RCCI, Benajes et al. [361] conducted two different types of
investigations viz. i) to develop and evaluate the engine map without
exceeding a pressure rise rate of 15 bar/deg. CA and also to fulfill the
EURO VI norms of NOx and soot emissions and ii) to improve fuel
consumption and CO and UHC emissions at low loads. A lower heat
release rate and combustion phasing closer to TDC are observed in the
RCCI combustion. It is found that the NOx and soot emissions of RCCI
combustion at low loads are below the EURO VI norms (0.4 g/kWh and
0.01 g/kWh) due to better air-fuel mixing and lower maximum bulk
temperature (below 1200 K). However, such low temperature increased
the CO and HC emissions due to inability of promoting the oxidation
process. At medium to higher loads, the soot emission of both RCCI and
CDC are found to be lower than the EURO VI norms due to the extra
mixing time which avoided the locally rich equivalence ratio and higher
in-cylinder temperature. However, only RCCI mode exhibited lower
NOx emission below EURO VI norms. The huge reduction in CO emis-
sion is observed at lower loads and quite similar results on HC emission
from low to medium loads are noted. The decrease in CO and HC
emissions is observed at high loads due to higher maximum bulk gas
temperature (> 1200 K) and peak heat release rate which improved the
indicated fuel consumption too. Two sweep operations are proposed to
improve fuel consumption and to optimize the combustion process at
low load such as (i) adjusting premixed energy ratio and EGR rate with
constant diesel injection and combustion phasing and (ii) modifying the
intake temperature and premixed energy ratio with constant combus-
tion phasing. These operations resulted in a slight improvement in fuel
consumption at higher engine speeds (more than 1200 rpm) and
Fig. 16. The tested piston bowl profiles [359].
T. Pachiannan, et al.
reduction of CO and UHC emissions. This study concluded that RCCI
mode is a reliable way to meet EURO VI limitations in terms of NOx and
soot and it can be extended almost to the entire engine map.
In a similar RCCI combustion study, i.e. to extend the RCCI com-
bustion to the entire map of an engine (in addition to operate at higher
loads), Benajes et al. [362] modified the piston bowl volume to reduce
the compression ratio from 17.5:1 to 15.3:1 and used gasoline and
diesel fuels. Three combustion strategies (refer Fig. 17) are used to
achieve dual-fuel operation (in all the strategies it is ensured that the
maximum pressure rise rate is below 15 bar/deg. CA and maximum in-
cylinder pressure is about 190 bar) as follows: (i) fully premixed – this
strategy is used from idling to 40% load (around 8 bar IMEP) which
achieved using a double diesel injection pulse with highly advanced
injection timings. The advance in injection timing increased the time
available for air-fuel mixing before the SOC and resulted in ultra-low
NOx and soot emissions, (ii) highly premixed – it is adapted from 40%
to 75% load (around 15 bar IMEP) and it is too achieved using a double
diesel injection pulse with the adjustment of second injection timing in
the vicinities of the TDC. While the first injection improved the re-
activity in the crevices zone where a high amount of fuel is trapped, the
second pulse injected at the higher in-cylinder pressure and tempera-
ture conditions became an ignition source. This strategy produced
higher soot levels than that of fully premixed strategy (still NOx
emission is below the EURO VI limit) due the shortened time for pre-
mixing (as the diesel is injected closer to TDC), and (iii) dual fuel dif-
fusion – it is used from 75% to full load and is achieved with single
pulse diesel injection but with a delayed injection timing which ne-
cessitated the requirement of high amount of fuel to achieve the re-
quired load without exceeding the engine mechanical constraints (PRR
and Pmax). This strategy emitted a higher level of soot emission be-
cause of the diffusive nature of combustion, unlike the highly premixed
strategy. NOx emission is also not maintained below the EURO VI limit.
Up to 75% of the engine load, the NOx and smoke emissions are ob-
served to be less than 0.4 g/kWh and 0.2 FSN respectively and a further
increase in load (to 100%) increased the NOx and smoke emissions to
1.4 g/kWh 2 FSN respectively as shown in Fig. 18. However, these
values are found to be lesser than those of conventional diesel com-
bustion. The reduction in NOx emission is up to 98% from 75% in RCCI
combustion strategy compared to conventional diesel combustion op-
eration and the smoke emission is found to be very low in the region
below 10 bar IMEP above 1800 rpm. It is suggested that the gasoline
fraction and EGR rate at low and high loads should be less to avoid
excessive pressure rise rate, combustion instabilities, excessive un-
burned products, and soot emissions. CO and HC emissions followed a
decreasing trend with an increase in engine load and speed due to
better oxidation (since the maximum bulk gas temperature is more than
1500 K), while at idling and low engine speed they are found to be
higher.
The particulate matter characteristics including particulate number
and size distributions of RCCI engine are also studied by Benajes and co-
workers [363]. While the first peak heat release rate is reduced due to
minimum quantity of burned gasoline, the second peak heat release rate
increased up to 435 J/deg. CA due to the burning of more gasoline.
Increase in load advanced the combustion phasing from 15.3 to
12.9 deg. CA. Increased smoke emission (> 1FSN) and total particulate
numbers (> 2 × 107 #/cm3) are observed at high load (> 80%) at
higher speeds (> 1500 rpm), while there was no coherence between
these two parameters at low load. Particle size distributions are mainly
governed by the engine load with a little impact on engine speed. Fully
premixed RCCI combustion, dual fuel diffusion combustion, and highly
premixed RCCI combustion are dominated by small particles with a
diameter of 30 nm, larger particles of diameter 100 nm and transitional
particle size with two peak values of 20 and 80 nm respectively. Some
of the large particles found in the RCCI combustion are described as the
nucleus of carbonaceous nature on which the volatile species tend to
condense.
41
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
The performance and emission characteristics of both dual mode
RCCI/CDC and dual-mode dual-fuel (DMDF – based on dual-fuel dif-
fusion combustion) RCCI combustion strategy are studied on World
Harmonized Vehicle Cycle (WHVC), a version of chassis dynamometer
of World Harmonized Transient Cycle (WHTC), which is proposed for
EURO VI regulation for the heavy-duty engines [316]. From the seven
gear shifting strategy, it is possible to cover till maximum engine torque
(1200–1800 rpm). The test lowered fuel consumption and reduced en-
gine emissions on both modes. These two modes with optimal gear
shifting strategy showed that the specific fuel consumption of DMDF
mode is 7% lower than RCCI/CDC concept and DMDF mode also re-
duced the NOx emission by 87% with an average value of 0.33 g/kWh
which is less than that of EURO VI norms of 0.46 g/kWh. The HC and
CO emissions are found to be lower for CDC and these emissions from
DMDF are observed to be 2 and 10 times more than RCCI and CDC
modes respectively, while the soot emission maps are noted to be si-
milar on both modes.
A numerical study of dual fuel RCCI combustion fueled with gaso-
line/biodiesel by Li et al. [364] compared the combustion and emission
characteristics of conventional SOI (C-SOI of −7 deg. CA aTDC) and
advanced SOI (A-SOI of −35 deg. CA aTDC) by varying gasoline ratios
from 0.0 to 0.8. In the A-SOI strategy, an increase in premixed gasoline
ratios from 0.0 to 0.8 showed higher peak in-cylinder pressure from
57.6 to 78.8 bar and heat release rate from 21.5 to 174 J/deg. CA. While
the increase in gasoline ratio did not change the ignition delay and
maximum pressure rise rate of C-SOI considerably, it increased them
about 13 deg. CA and 8 bar/deg. CA respectively on A-SOI mode.
Varying the gasoline ratio decreased the combustion duration (from 20
to 10 deg. CA) with a slight change in combustion phasing and caused a
significant shift in combustion phasing (80–5 deg. CA) on C-SOI and A-
SOI modes respectively. More gasoline injection produced a richer ga-
soline-air mixture which supported the auto-ignition of gasoline and
rapid heat release rate. Both the SOI modes showed a decrease in NOx
emission with an increase in gasoline ratio due to more homogeneous
combustion. In A-SOI mode, increasing the gasoline ratio reduced the
NOx and increased the soot emissions than those of C-SOI mode.
In another CFD simulation, the effect of fuel injection parameters
such as spray angle, injection pressure, SOI timing and premixed ratio
on the performance and combustion characteristics of light-duty RCCI
combustion mode [365] is analyzed. It is predicted that the spray angle
is the dominant parameter which affects both the performance and
combustion characteristics of RCCI combustion than the injection
Fig. 17. Combustion strategies used to cover the engine map [362].
T. Pachiannan, et al.
Fig. 18. NOx and smoke emission maps for dual-fuel RCCI combustion strategy
[362].
pressure. Decreasing the spray angle from 74 to 55° reduced the HC and
CO emissions by 15% and 27% respectively with improved combustion
and indicated thermal efficiencies. Premixed ratio and spray angle are
predicted to be the main factors in controlling CA50 and CA90. Ad-
vancing SOI from −53 deg. CA aTDC to −58 deg. CA aTDC increased
the peak cylinder pressure, peak cylinder temperature and NOx emis-
sion due to longer mixing time and decreased the HC, CO and soot
emissions; however, further advancing injection timing to −63 deg. CA
aTDC resulted in vice-versa. It is observed that the optimum spray angle
of 55 to 45° and SOI of −53 to −63 deg. CA aTDC play an important
role in providing better RCCI engine performance because these two
parameters are found to directly affect the heat release rate, PPRR, and
engine-out emissions. With a spray angle of 55°, SOI at −53 deg. aTDC,
injection pressure of 580 bar and the premixed ratio of 0.76, a better
engine performance (gross indicated efficiency of 42.8% and combus-
tion efficiency of 94.8%) with lowered HC and CO emissions by 23%
and 39% respectively are recorded.
In order to analyze the essential limiting factors for extending the
upper and lower limits of RCCI operations, Wang et al. [366] in-
vestigated the effect of operating parameters such as intake pressure,
EGR rate, gasoline fraction, diesel injection timing, etc on engine per-
formance, combustion and emission characteristics in a water-cooled
six-cylinder engine. As the gasoline proportion is increased similar to
HCCI combustion, very low NOx (less than 0.05 g/kWh) and soot
emissions (0.002 g/kWh), higher fuel consumption and more CO (60 g/
kWh) and HC emissions (< 20 g/kWh) are observed. The 0.12 MPa
intake pressure, 30% EGR rate and 70% gasoline proportion achieved
lower NOx, soot and HC emissions and fuel consumption compared to
those at the other operating conditions. MPRR and in-cylinder tem-
perature are increased with increasing gasoline proportion and also
with advancing injection timing. This work demonstrated very low NOx
and soot emissions with high thermal efficiencies at moderate-to-high
engine loads when the engine is operated in the regime of diesel/ga-
soline RCCI. However, this regime is found to be not suitable for low-
load operations due to more CO and HC emissions. It is suggested that
increasing the diesel proportion (which increases the global chemical
reactivity of the in-cylinder charge) can extend the low-load operating
42
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
range of RCCI combustion. It is also opined that increasing the EGR rate
and the proportion of gasoline and advancing the diesel injection
timing can lower the global reactivity of the cylinder charge and avoid
premature combustion, excessive pressure rise rate and high peak in-
cylinder pressure which are favorable for extending RCCI operation to
higher loads. However, ultra-high EGR rate or too early fuel injection
led to unstable combustion and made combustion phasing control ex-
tremely difficult.
The mixing, auto-ignition process and emission characteristics of
RCCI engine are studied experimentally and numerically by Benajes
et al. [344] using gasoline and diesel fuel with a variation in their
blending ratio. In RCCI mode, the injection of diesel fuel into the ga-
soline-air environment vaporizes it and creates a non-uniform reactive
charge stratification inside the cylinder. Increasing the amount of port
injected gasoline fuel enhanced the mixture stratification because of
more diesel fuel at higher equivalence ratio and less fuel at lower
equivalence ratio. Reduction in diesel quantity from 100 to 10% in-
creased the ignition delay due to lowering the total fuel reactivity
which decreased the peak cylinder pressure and heat release rate
(< 80 J/deg. CA). The NOx and soot emissions are reduced below
EURO VI norms by increasing the gasoline proportion, while the CO
(35.7 g/kWh) and HC (32.6 g/kWh) emissions are increased (with a
huge change at higher amount of gasoline i.e. 90%) due to the highly
deteriorated combustion process. Sweeping diesel SOI from −15 to
−30 deg. CA aTDC at 65% gasoline showed a retarded heat release rate
with lowered CO, HC, NOx and soot emissions than those of 75% ga-
soline fraction.
In order to overcome the major drawbacks of RCCI combustion such
as increased CO and HC emissions at low loads and unacceptable level
of increased pressure rise rate at high loads, Benajes et al. [338] pro-
posed the dual-mode dual-fuel concept which combines the reactivity
controlled compression ignition and diffusive dual-fuel diesel-gasoline
combustion. It combined the full RCCI strategy (dual-fuel) at low load
and when the load is increased the diesel fuel injection is retarded to
reduce the fuel premixed blend like diffusive combustion behavior. This
method is found to extend the RCCI engine load without exceeding the
allowable pressure rise rate by maintaining thermal efficiency. The
maximum cylinder pressure up to 156 bar, pressure rise rate up to
13 bar/deg. CA and heat release rate up to 405 J/deg. CA are observed
in DMDF mode which are higher than those of CDC at all the loads. The
NOx emission of DMDF (using 20–50% of EGR) is found to be less than
that of CDC as well as below EURO VI norms due to lower in-cylinder
temperatures. However, the CO emission of 92 g/kWh and HC emission
of 12 g/kWh are noted to be higher than those of CDC (CO and HC are
below 4 g/kWh and 0.6 g/kWh respectively in CDC), while these
emissions are found to be extremely high at lower loads.
4.6. Low reactive alcoholic fuels on RCCI combustion
Several researchers worked on exploring the suitability of alternate
fuels for RCCI combustion. In this regard, alcohol fuels such as me-
thanol, ethanol, and butanol are shown to achieve stable and extended
RCCI operation [367,368] due to their higher latent heat of vaporiza-
tion and lower reactivity. In several studies, it is established that the use
of renewable oxygenated fuels, such as ethanol [369,370], increases CO
and HC emissions while it decreases NOx and soot emission simulta-
neously. It is reported that the physicochemical properties of ethanol
affect the combustion behavior with a narrow operating range and
causes a misfire and excessive knocking at low and high load respec-
tively. However, in contrary, it is shown that the small proportion of
ethanol (10–20%) can achieve NOx and soot emission levels of EURO VI
with improved HC and CO emissions from low to high load [371]. This
section reviews the effect of alcohol fuels on RCCI combustion in detail.
Zhang et al. [337] investigated the effect of direct injection pres-
sure, fuel quantity and injection timing on performance, combustion
and emission characteristics of RCCI combustion fueled with n-heptane
T. Pachiannan, et al.
and n-butanol. Increase in DI pressure (up to 6 MPa) increased the in-
cylinder pressure to 6.18 MPa, pressure rise rate (0.77 MPa/deg. CA),
indicated thermal efficiency (39.39%) and heat release rate (0.132 kJ/
deg. CA); however, a further increase in injection pressure caused wall
impingement. Increasing the injection pressure also advanced CA10,
CA50 (up to 0.45 deg. CA) and slightly increased combustion duration
(up to 1.83 deg. CA). The optimum injection timing is observed to be
20 deg. CA bTDC where better performance, combustion and emission
characteristics are achieved.
Optimizing the operating parameters of RCCI combustion fueled
with diesel and hydrous ethanol is attempted by Fan et al. [315] using
Response Surface Methodology. The diesel and hydrous ethanol are
injected through common rail diesel injection and intake port respec-
tively. The operating parameters considered in this study are intake
temperature, intake pressure, EGR rate, the interval between two in-
jections (dwell period), diesel second pulse injection timing, diesel fuel
rail pressure, a fraction of first diesel injection pulse, and fumigant
energy fraction etc., Higher HC emission is observed due to decreased
intake pressure. At higher loads, the HC and CO emissions are affected
by intake air temperature, diesel injection pressure and first pulse diesel
injection fraction. The NOx and soot emissions are simultaneously re-
duced with the optimization path such as advanced diesel injection,
retarded combustion phasing, and higher diesel fraction at first pulse
injection with high pressure which promoted the fuel-air mixing pro-
cess and hence more premixed combustion. Decreased indicated
thermal efficiency (from 49 to 43.8%) and shortened combustion
duration (from 26.7 to 23.6 deg. CA aTDC) are observed when the rail
pressure is increased from 400 to 800 along the optimized path due to
delayed combustion phasing (CA50) and enhanced premixed combus-
tion respectively. From the experimental results, it is observed that the
NOx and soot emissions are reduced by 79% and 50% at low loads and
72% and 27% at high loads respectively. The following conclusions are
drawn from this study. (i) At low load RCCI, the fumigant energy
fraction significantly affected HC emissions mainly from unburned
ethanol and the intake air pressure showed the most significant effect
on CO emissions, (ii) the fraction of the first pulse diesel injection as
well as diesel rail pressure and the intake air temperature affected
significantly the HC and CO emissions respectively at higher load and
(iii) the NOx emissions are sensitive to all the active factors namely the
fraction of first diesel injection quantity, the second diesel pulse in-
jection timing, diesel fuel rail pressure and intake pressure at all the
loading conditions.
In a study of combustion and emission characteristics of RCCI
combustion fueled with directly injected n-heptane and port injected
ethanol, n-butanol and n-amyl alcohol fuels in a single cylinder engine
[372], it is stated that the higher latent heat and lower cetane number
of ethanol fuel increased the ignition delay compared to other two al-
cohol fuels. Decreased peak in-cylinder pressure from 70.1 to 56.42 bar
and heat release rate from 44.94 to 31.9 J/deg. CA with delayed com-
bustion phasing are observed from the port injected ethanol fuel when
the premixed ratio is increased from 0.47 to 0.85. This is attributed to
the reduction in the quantity of directly injected n-heptane fuel which
decreased the reaction activities of the reactive mixtures. At an in-
creased premixed ratio (> 0.7), the higher latent heat of alcohol fuels
and the decreased amount of n-heptane fuel delayed the CA10, CA50,
and CA90. At higher premixed ratios, the NOx (89.5%) and soot
(0.95–0.06 m−1 for ethanol) emissions are found to be lower, while
higher CO (0.34–0.51% for ethanol) and HC (348.9–1651 ppm for
ethanol) emissions are observed due to reduced in-cylinder reaction and
the increased cooling effect of alcohol fuels respectively.
In order to improve the CO and HC emissions at low loads and hence
extending the RCCI operation at these loading conditions, an internal
EGR (iEGR) and throttled operation of ethanol-diesel dual-fuel RCCI
combustion is attempted [373]. The ethanol and diesel fuels are in-
jected through port fuel injection and common rail injection system
respectively. In iEGR, the in-cylinder and exhaust gas temperatures are
43
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
increased by means of retaining hot residuals from the previous cycle
which helped in oxidizing CO and HC. Dual fuel combustion strategy
with early diesel injection between −55 deg. CA aTDC and −25 deg.
CA aTDC allowed sufficient time for linear combustion phasing control
with low COV of IMEP. Shorter combustion process, higher in-cylinder
gas temperature (up to 1892 K) and higher heat release rate (up to
209.2 J/deg. CA) are observed with iEGR and intake throttling modes
compared to those of base dual-fuel mode. Shorter combustion duration
(from 10.3 to 7.63 deg. CA) is observed with the increase in global
equivalence ratio. The throttled iEGR and throttled modes reduced CO
and HC emissions up to 15.5 g/kWh, 7.5 g/kWh and 7.6 g/kWh, 9.3 g/
kWh respectively. Internal EGR also reduced the NOx and soot emis-
sions from 0.54 to 0.40 g/kWh and 0.007 to 0.002 g/kWh respectively
due to longer ignition delay and better mixing of diesel fuel, while
throttling mode increased both these emissions. Both of these methods
increased the baseline combustion efficiency from 87.7% to 96% in
addition to the higher exhaust gas temperature which is helpful in the
oxidation operation of the catalyst.
Isık and Aydın [370] studied the effect of port injected ethanol (as a
fraction of 30 and 50% of the total fuel mass) on directly injected saf-
flower biodiesel (10, 20 and 50%)-diesel blends in a diesel power
generator working on RCCI combustion mode. Higher peak pressure of
79.21 bar (50% ethanol with B50), shorter combustion duration of
95.8 deg. CA and shorter ignition delay are obtained. Increasing the
percentage of biodiesel in biodiesel-diesel blends shortened the com-
bustion duration and increased premixed combustion due to the higher
density of biodiesel, increased flame speed of burning charge and
higher cetane number of the fuel. At the higher ratio of biodiesel
blends, the increase in cetane number and decrease in distillation
temperatures of biodiesel fuel reduced the cycle-cycle variation than
the other tested fuels. The combination of B20 with 30% ethanol pro-
duced higher peak heat release rate (80.2 J/deg. CA) due to auto-ig-
nition of high reactivity fuel and non-uniform reactivity stratification
inside the combustion chamber. In this RCCI combustion test, the ad-
dition of biofuels reduced NOx emission (< 490 ppm) and smoke
emissions and increased CO (up to 0.069%) and HC (730.54 ppm)
emissions as shown in Fig. 19. This is attributed to the lower combus-
tion temperature, mixture leanness, high latent heat of vaporization
and the cooling effect of ethanol fuel.
In RCCI combustion the local reactivity plays an effective role to
enhance the combustion propagation which proceeds gradually from
high reactivity to low reactivity regions and reducing the incomplete
combustion. It is established that the quantity of LRF plays a dominant
role in achieving high efficiency with significant reduction NOx and
soot emissions [325,326]. In this regard, Benajes et al. [331] studied
the effect of ethanol and its blends as low reactivity fuel on performance
and emission characteristics of RCCI combustion at low loads with a
constant direct injection of the diesel-biodiesel blend (B7-7% biodiesel
and diesel blends) as high reactivity fuel. The four tested LRFs are E10-
Fig. 19. HC emissions of biodiesel blends at different RCCI modes [370].
T. Pachiannan, et al.
95 (10% ethanol-65 ON gasoline by v/v), E10-98 (10% ethanol-98 ON
gasoline by v/v), E20-95 (20% ethanol-95 ON gasoline by v/v) and E85
(85% ethanol) keeping B7 as HRF. In order to keep a constant com-
bustion phasing (CA50) from the four different low reactive port in-
jected fuel (E10-95, E10-98, E20-95 and E85), the EGR rate is modified.
Increasing the premixed energy ratio led to reduced low-temperature
peak heat release stages. The higher octane number of E85 caused an
earlier high-temperature heat release growth which is followed by E10-
98, E20-95 and E10-95 fuel blends as shown in Fig. 20. This study
showed a reduction in combustion duration since the combustion is
strongly affected by low reactivity fuel and the auto-ignition is en-
hanced with high reactivity fuel. Except for E85, all other fuels pro-
duced very low NOx emission. The higher NOx emissions from E85
(0.8 g/kWh at 59% premixed energy ratio) is due to lower EGR rate to
maintain the constant combustion phasing. Soot emissions levels are
also observed to be below the detection limit of AVL 415S smoke meter
for all the tested fuels due to the advanced injection strategy with
sufficient mixing time. The reduced reactivity between two reactive
fuels enhanced the combustion process and hence decreased the CO and
HC emissions considerably and decreased combustion loss which in
turn increased the gross indicated efficiency up to 4.5%.
Similar to the above study of evaluating the characteristics of LRF
and its amount on the combustion development and emissions, Benajes
et al. [371] examined the RCCI combustion with different blending
ratios using four types of fuels as discussed above [331]. Increase in
premixed ratio of low reactivity fuels (E20-95 and E85) with advanced
diesel SOI (−60 to −30 deg. aTDC) decreased the rate of heat release
(RoHR- up to 227.58 J/deg. CA) with retarded occurrences (up to
17 deg. CA) of peak RoHR due to lower quantity of diesel injection and
higher mixing rate. The advanced injection timing (−60 to −20 deg.
CA aTDC) showed two stage heat release rate for all the tested fuels
with an increase in combustion duration. Increasing the premixed ratio
of the tested fuels also showed an increased combustion duration and
combustion phasing up to 6 deg. CA and 4 deg. CA respectively. In-
crease in the premixed energy ratio at low and medium loads worsened
Fig. 20. RoHR for the different premixed ratios and blends [331].
44
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
the combustion process; however, it lowered NOx and soot emission
(complied EURO VI norms) and increased CO and HC emissions, while
at high loads these emissions are observed to be vice-versa.
In the experimental study on combustion and emissions character-
istics of RCCI combustion on a single-cylinder RCCI engine, the widely
used diesel surrogate, n-heptane is used instead of diesel fuel to explore
the RCCI ignition and combustion process with the aim of using alter-
nate fuels and improving fuel economy [374]. In this study, n-heptane
is injected directly into the combustion chamber and ethanol and ga-
soline are injected through the port. Increase in gasoline premixed ratio
up to 0.64 increased the in-cylinder pressure (up to 79.5 bar) and heat
release rate, but further increase in the premixed ratio reduced the
cylinder pressure to 56.29 bar and heat release rate to 32.6 J/deg. CA
due to increased vaporization of ethanol and decreased amount of n-
heptane through direct injection. Ethanol injection with gasoline
showed lower cylinder pressure and heat release rate than those of
gasoline, due to variation in chemical and physical properties of
ethanol fuel. Increase in the premixed ratio of gasoline (from 0.4 to 0.8)
increased the maximum cylinder pressure from 65.7 to 89.4 bar, max-
imum pressure rise rate from 2.9 to 11.5 bar/deg. CA and cylinder
temperature from 1267 to 1486° C. While, increase in ethanol premixed
ratio (up to 0.67) increased the above parameters due to advanced
combustion phase and more homogeneous mixture, they are observed
to be decreasing with further increase in premixed ratio beyond 0.67.
Ethanol injection showed better NOx (< 20 ppm at 0.8 PR) and soot
(< 0.1 m−1 at 0.8 PR) emissions compared to that of gasoline, while it
emitted higher CO and HC emissions up to 0.5% and 1541 ppm re-
spectively at higher premixed ratios (more than 0.67). The experi-
mental results showed a better indicted thermal efficiency with lower
emissions at the premixed ratio of 0.57.
In another n-heptane [375] study, commercial gasoline with
RON92, ethanol, and n-butanol are selected as port fuel and high-purity
n-heptane is used as the pilot fuel (HRF injected directly into the cy-
linder). Retardation of DI timing from 25 to 5 deg. CA bTDC decreased
the peak in-cylinder pressure and heat release rate from 85.9 to 48.2 bar
T. Pachiannan, et al. Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

and 65.66 to 34.24 J/deg. CA respectively due to earlier combustion authors concluded that though CO and HC emissions are increased, they
phase near to TDC. At the constant DI timing of 25 deg. CA bTDC, the are observed to be less than those of biodiesel-ethanol [378] and diesel-
peak cylinder pressure and heat release rate of n-butanol are observed ethanol dual-fuel combustion [379].
to be (89.19 bar and 70.79 J/deg. CA respectively) the highest followed
by ethanol (88.33 bar and 65.66 J/deg. CA) and gasoline (87.12 bar and
4.7. Low reactive gaseous fuel on RCCI combustion
55.64 J/deg. CA) due to faster combustion velocity of alcohol fuels with
higher oxygen content. Reduction in CO (0.56–0.31% for n-butanol),
In alternate fuels standpoint, the low reactive gaseous fuels also can
HC (690.4–343.5 ppm for n-butanol) and smoke emissions
be employed to achieve RCCI combustion similar to alcohol fuels. Due
(32.17–15.82%) and increase in NOx (13.25–512.7 ppm) emission and
to the higher octane number (∼110) of gaseous fuels compared to the
indicated thermal efficiency are observed with advancing the injection
other low reactive fuels (gasoline is < 100), they can be a good choice
timing (from 5 to 20 deg. CA bTDC). Since the higher premixed ratio of
for the RCCI combustion [380]. Since there is a large reactivity differ-
ethanol fuel delayed the combustion phasing with ultra-low NOx and
ence (because of higher octane number) between diesel and gaseous
soot emissions than the other tested fuels, it is concluded that ethanol
fuel, they provide better control over maximum pressure rise rate and
fuel could be an alternate choice for the RCCI engines to realize the
peak cylinder temperature with extended combustion duration [312].
reduction in emissions.
The various low reactivity gaseous fuels such as natural gas [381,382],
Owing to the little differences between methanol and gasoline in
biogas [383,384] and CNG [385] are used for RCCI combustion. The
terms of RON, auto-ignition temperature, molecular structure, etc., the
review of gaseous fuels is discussed in detail in the following section.
methanol/diesel and gasoline/diesel are tested in RCCI engine to
identify the impact of chemical properties on engine performance and
operating range of CA50 [376]. This study comprises CFD simulation 4.7.1. Biogas as LRF
and its satisfactory validation with in-cylinder pressure, heat release In an investigation to study the effect of dual-fuel on RCCI com-
rate, HC and NOx emissions. The decrease in initial in-cylinder tem- bustion using in-cylinder early injection (40 deg. CA bTDC) of diesel
perature and increase in the premixed ratio of gasoline retarded the fuel and the port injection of gasoline and biogas fuels around TDC
combustion phasing, while higher initial in-cylinder temperature [383], it is reported that advancing the injection timing of single fuel
(419 K) advanced the ignition timing and achieved better fuel efficiency injection from 5 to 40 deg. CA bTDC reduced IMEP about 51.8% and
along with higher maximum in-cylinder pressure (9.67 MPa) and peak increased the ignition delay from ∼5.56 to 23.73 deg. CA. This is at-
heat release rate (70.2 J/deg. CA). When the initial in-cylinder tem- tributed to advanced injection timing where the fuel is injected towards
perature is greater than 419 K, it advanced the combustion phasing the squish and crevice areas and formation of the air-fuel mixture at the
before TDC and led to excessive peak pressure and combustion rate outer side of the combustion chamber which resulted in poor fuel
with unacceptable ringing intensity. It is observed that the premixed evaporation and sprays targeting issues. This advanced SOI also in-
ratio of more than 75% is capable of reducing the NOx emission below creased all the emissions such as soot from 0.004 to 0.427 g/kWh, CO
the EURO VI norms, because of the elimination of rich-fuel regions and from 0.016 to 0.321 g/kWh and HC from 0.097 to 1.44 g/kWh, except
reduction in local temperatures below 2200 K. It is concluded that the NOx emission due to lower combustion temperature. To overcome
combustion rate of methanol/diesel RCCI is faster than that of gasoline/ these drawbacks, the dual-fuel (diesel-gasoline and diesel-biogas)
diesel RCCI for the same premixed ratio which is attributed to the en- combustion strategy is adapted. Increase in port injection ratio from 0.2
hanced more homogeneous fuel/air mixture formation with longer ig- to 0.8 increased the IMEP about 78.9% and 49.7% respectively. This is
nition delay. The methanol/diesel RCCI also decreased the SFC vis-à-vis because of adding the high octane fuels through port injection increased
gasoline/diesel RCCI due to faster combustion rate, reduced incomplete the ignition delay (13% for diesel-gasoline and 35% for diesel-biogas)
combustion, and lower heat transfer losses. While both gasoline/diesel and reduced the negative work, especially at higher premixed ratios.
RCCI and methanol/diesel RCCI achieved very low NOx emissions with Higher maximum in-cylinder pressure (∼1.35 MPa for diesel-gasoline
a high premixed ratio, the NOx emissions from methanol/diesel are and ∼2 MPa for diesel-biogas mode as shown in Fig. 22) and lower
observed to be much lower than that of gasoline/diesel due to the re- peak heat release rate are observed on this combustion mode with an
duction in local maximum combustion temperature and equivalence increase in the premixed ratio (increasing the quantity of the port in-
ratio. jection fuel). Retarded combustion phasing and increased combustion
The combustion and emission characteristics of modified single duration (1 deg. CA and 31.3 deg. CA for diesel-gasoline and diesel-
cylinder diesel engine are studied by Park et al. [377] using dual-fuel biogas respectively) are also observed from the dual fuel combustion.
RCCI combustion mode fueled with ethanol and direct injection of di- Increase in premixed combustion ratio reduced the NOx and soot
methyl ether (DME). Advancing the fuel injection timing (from 0 to
−25 deg. CA aTDC) gradually decreased the IMEP from 5 to 2.7 bar due
to an increase in negative work on the piston before TDC. Increasing the
ethanol fraction from 20% to 60% retarded the ignition timing and
combustion phasing, prolonged the ignition delay and increased the
combustion duration. Increasing the ethanol quantity also decreased
the premixed duration and increased the diffusion combustion dura-
tions due to increase in ignition delay which affected the flame pro-
pagation and progress of combustion. The decrease in IMEP is found
with advanced in-cylinder ignition timing. The effect of ethanol fraction
on IMEP is observed to be greater at the advanced in-cylinder injection
timings than the timings close to the TDC. The DME-ethanol dual-fuel
combustion strategy achieved a significant reduction in NOx emission
without deteriorating soot emission. At all the injection timings, the
increase in ethanol fraction increased the ISHC and ISCO emissions.
However, the increase in ethanol fraction decreased the in-cylinder
temperature due to the evaporation of ethanol and resulted in in-
complete combustion. Hence, it increased CO and HC emissions up to Fig. 21. ISHC emission of DME-ethanol RCCI combustion at various injection
16 g/kWh and 1.46 g/kWh respectively as shown in Fig. 21. The timings [377].

45
T. Pachiannan, et al.
Fig. 22. Effect of premixed ratio or port injection fuel on combustion pressure [383].
emissions simultaneously. The total number of particulate emission and
its size are observed to be very less at advanced injection timing at the
higher premixed ratio of 0.8. While CO and HC emissions of dual fuel
combustion are found to be higher than conventional single diesel in-
jection, they are lower than those of diesel combustion at advanced SOI
(40 deg. CA bTDC).
Qian et al. [384] studied PM emission on a cylinder engine working
on RCCI combustion using two kinds of biogas (with varying compo-
sition) as Biogas 1# (H2:CO:CH4:N2 = 5:40:5:50) and Biogas 2#
(H2:CO:CH4:N2 = 15:30:5:50). The biogas and diesel are injected
through port injection and direct injection respectively. Increase in the
premixed ratio up to 0.8 decreased the in-cylinder pressure, heat re-
lease rate and maximum mass average temperature from 100 bar,
122 J/deg. CA, 1700 °C to 68 bar, 85 J/deg. CA and 1450 °C respec-
tively with a delay in combustion. This is attributed to the increase in
the premixed ratio i.e. decrease in diesel fuel and an increase in biogas
quantity which in turn reduced the in-cylinder reactivity and the
oxygen concentration respectively. Between two biogas fuels (Biogas
1# and Biogas 2#), biogas 2# caused better in-cylinder pressure, heat
release rate and maximum mass average temperature than those of
biogas 1# fuel, due to a higher proportion of H2 which provided a faster
burning rate in biogas 2#. The peak values of particle size distributions
are found to be less than 50 nm (nucleation mode) on this RCCI com-
bustion due to a reduction in fuel-rich regions which decreased the
accumulation of more particles of sized 50–1000 nm. However, particle
size distributions increased with increase in premixed ratio due to the
reduction of oxygen concentration and incomplete combustion. The
geometric mean diameters of particles are also increased with increase
in a premixed ratio from 0.4 to 0.8 (however it is less than 30 nm).
While the peak values of the particle size of biogas 1# are between 30
and 40 nm, that of biogas 2# is approximately 20 nm as shown in
Fig. 23.
Fig. 23. Effect of premixed ratio on particle size distribution with Biogas 1# and 2# [384].
46
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
4.7.2. Natural gas LRF
In a CFD simulation study [385] for analyzing the effect of natural
gas (higher octane and low reactivity fuel) and diesel (low octane and
high reactivity fuel) on RCCI combustion, the natural gas is mixed with
intake air and the diesel is injected directly into the combustion
chamber through multiple injection strategies. It is observed that the
increase in premixed ratio increased the ignition delay. Retarding SOI2
of diesel fuel decreased the heat release rate, combustion temperature
and ringing intensity (an indication of knocking from 7.3 to 1.22 MW/
m2). This led to lower NOx (less than 1 g/kWh) and higher CO (15 g/
kWh) and HC (58.2 g/kWh) emissions. Increasing fuel amount and an
injection pressure of the first pulse of diesel increased the NOx (due to
increase in in-cylinder temperature), CO and HC emissions (due to the
accumulation of diesel fuel in the cylinder wall and crevice volumes).
In a similar method of fuel induction on a heavy duty RCCI engine
fueled with natural gas and diesel direct injection strategy, Paykani
et al. [386] investigated the effect of engine speed and initial tem-
perature on combustion and emission characteristics through CFD si-
mulation and experimental investigations. Increasing the natural gas
mass fraction from 73 to 85% retarded the ignition timing, decreased
in-cylinder pressure (from 14.5 to 7.9 MPa), HRR and gross indicated
efficiency (from 47.5 to 17.1%). It also caused misfiring when the
natural gas proportion exceeded 89%. However, delayed combustion
phasing up to 12.8 deg. CA and reduced ringing intensity from 9.1 to
0.44 MW/m2 are observed with increasing premixed ratio of natural gas
from 50 to 88% due to its lower cetane number. As expected, the CO
(1–2.1 g/kWh) and HC (2.1–3.33 g/kWh) emissions are increased with
increase in premixed ratio from 50 to 85% but with a reduced NOx
(from 0.7 to 0.02 g/kWh) and soot (from 0.0023 to 0.0013 g/kWh)
emissions due to lower combustion temperature. Retarding the first
(−100 to −55 deg. CA aTDC) and the second injection pulse (−60 to
0 deg. CA aTDC) timings of diesel along with an increase in initial
T. Pachiannan, et al. Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

temperature and second pulse fuel quantity produced the above similar
results which increased the combustion temperature, local fuel re-
activity, ringing intensity and NOx and soot emissions with advanced
combustion phasing.
The performance and emission characteristics of intake manifold
injected CNG and solenoid injected diesel fuel and the effects of EGR on
RCCI combustion are investigated by Kalsi and Subramanian [387].
While increase in CNG ratio up to 65% increased thermal efficiency
(from 33.4 to 34.3% at 37% CNG) and decreased brake specific energy
consumption (from 10.76 to 10.46 MJ/kWh at 37% CNG) due to en-
hanced degree of homogeneity and higher peak heat release rate; but it
is found to be vice-versa at higher CNG energy ratios. The EGR rate up
to 15% did not affect engine efficiency. Increasing CNG ratio also in-
creased the equivalence ratio, premixed combustion phase (17–25%
with 37% CNG) and prolonged the ignition delay due to more mixing
time and longer combustion duration. While, the CO and HC emissions
Fig 25a. NOx emission at various loads.
are increased marginally from 1.77 to 10.1 g/kWh and 0.58 to 0.95 g/
kWh respectively with 85% CNG energy share at 5 kW conditions due to
high in-cylinder temperature, they increased significantly up to 33.3 g/
kWh and 7.08 g/kWh respectively at 2 kW as shown in Fig. 24. Increase
in CNG energy ratio caused charge dilution and lower in-cylinder
temperature which reduced the NOx emission to 1.48 g/kWh (at 5KW
with 85% CNG) and 0.64 g/kWh (at 2KW with 92% CNG) and smoke
opacity from 4.9% to 0.2% compared to those of base diesel fuel due to
more homogeneous mixture formation (reduced rich fuel pockets).
The dual fueled RCCI combustion is studied with compressed nat-
ural gas (CNG)/waste fish oil biodiesel at various engine loads by
Gharehghani et al. [388]. The test includes four categories such as i)
conventional combustion of diesel and ii) biodiesel and RCCI combus-
tion iii) CNG/diesel and iv) CNG/biodiesel. The RCCI combustion
showed a higher peak in-cylinder pressure and heat release rate than
the conventional combustion mode at both 50% and full load due to
higher cetane number of oxygenated biodiesel which increased the
premixed combustion and also the shortened the ignition delay. The Fig 25b. CO emission at various loads.
higher gross indicated thermal efficiency of 45.25% at full load is ob-
served from the CNG/biodiesel RCCI mode due to oxygenated fuels that 4.7.3. Hydrogen blended CNG as LRF
resulted in better combustion and lower heat transfer losses during low- The use of hydrogen blended compressed natural gas as LRF and
temperature combustion. This also lowered the exhaust gas tempera- Pongamiapinnata biodiesel (B100) as directly injected fuel (HRF) re-
ture (12% than that of the conventional diesel combustion), heat loss vealed that addition of hydrogen to natural gas extends the lean limit of
(8.1%) and combustion loss (14.5%) and hence produced higher gross natural gas combustion and improves the reactivity of the gaseous fuel
work of 44% than all the other tested cases. The emission character- [389]. It is reported that this mixture enhances the formation of OH
istics of the four cases are shown in Fig. 25a–25c. While, extremely radicals [12] which in turn accelerates the oxidation rate of inter-
lower NOx emission of less than 50 ppm is observed on RCCI combus- mediate products such as CO into CO2 during combustion [15]. While
tion from both CNG/diesel and CNG/biodiesel than those of conven- the brake thermal efficiency of HCNG (34.6%) is observed to be more
tional diesel and biodiesel mode (Fig. 25a), the CO (Fig. 25b) and UHC than that of CNG fuel (33.2%) due to its high degree of charge homo-
(150 ppm, refer Fig. 25c) emissions of RCCI combustion are noted to be geneity, it is dropped at higher energy ratio of gaseous fuel due to the
higher than those of conventional combustion mode. charge dilution effect [389]. The heat release percentage during pre-
mixed combustion is increased to 16.3% (with 39% CNG) and 21.3%

Fig. 24. CO emission at diesel-CNG dual fuel mode with different EGR rate [387].

47
T. Pachiannan, et al.
Fig 25c. UHC emission at various loads.
(with 38% HCNG) and the combustion duration is decreased up to
1.3 deg. CA (up to 69% of HCNG). Addition of these gaseous fuels (CNG
and HCNG) decreased the in-cylinder pressure due to their slow che-
mical reaction. The CO and HC emission are increased with increasing
the share of gaseous fuels due to low combustion temperature, while
the CO and HC emissions of HCNG fuel (CO − 5.25 g/kWh and HC −
0.54 g/kWh with 86% HCNG) are observed to be better than those of
CNG fuel (CO − 7.67 g/kWh and HC − 0.82 g/kWh with 85% CNG).
The NOx and smoke emissions are decreased from 4.8 to 2.5 g/kWh and
4.4 to ∼0.1% opacity respectively with an increase in the quantity of
gaseous fuels due to lower combustion temperature and increase in
overall hydrogen to carbon ratio. The authors concluded that the HCNG
increases the in-cylinder reaction rate which helps in a better conver-
sion of intermediate combustion products to CO2 and hence the major
problems of HC and CO emissions in RCCI combustion could be reduced
significantly with HCNG.
4.7.4. Propane as LRF
In the study of effect of SOI, diesel injection pressure and intake
boost pressure on the performance, combustion and emission char-
acteristics of single cylinder dual fuel LTC engine using propane (which
is fumigated in the intake manifold) and diesel fuel [390], it is reported
that advancing the diesel SOI from 5 to 30 deg. CA bTDC increased peak
in-cylinder pressure from 69.3 to 112.6 bar with the retarded occur-
rence (a shift towards TDC) and increased two stage heat release rate
due to heterogeneous combustion. A further advance in SOI (40 to
80 deg. CA bTDC) decreased the peak cylinder pressure from 85.2 to
109.5 bar with single stage heat release rate due to more homogeneous
combustion. Advancing SOI from 5 to 20 deg. CA increased the MPRR
(from 3.3 to 8.8 bar/deg. CA), advanced the SOC with earlier com-
bustion phasing and decreased the combustion duration from 25.3 to
9.9 deg. CA° (for advancing the SOI from 5 to 50 deg. CA bTDC). Ad-
vanced SOI up to 20 deg. CA bTDC increased the fuel conversion effi-
ciency, combustion efficiency, NOx emissions (from 3.5 to 9.4 g/kWh)
and reduced CO (to 11 g/kWh) and HC (to 15 g/kWh) emissions.
However, further advancing SOI (40 to 80 deg. CA bTDC) lowered the
NOx (0.12 g/kWh) and smoke emission (0.02 FSN) and increased CO
(46 g/kWh) emission due to delayed combustion phasing and increased
combustion duration. Increasing the injection pressure from 200 to
1300 bar increased the heat release rate up to 294.2 J/deg. CA, pro-
longed ignition delay from 37 to 50 deg. CA, reduced the peak in-cy-
linder pressure from 112 to 98 bar with delayed combustion phasing,
reduced NOx emission (< 0.02 g/kWh) and increased CO (16 g/kWh)
and HC (18 g/kWh) emissions. In this study, an optimal injection
pressure of about 500 bar is suggested. Increasing boost pressure from
1.1 to 1.8 bar reduced NOx and HC emission and increased the fuel
conversion efficiency (from 43.7 to 48.7%) and CO emission.
48
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
4.8. Summary of RCCI combustion
The above review of RCCI combustion explains its potential in
achieving LTC with a variety of fuels. Although RCCI is proved to be
better than the other LTC concepts, the major problem is the high load
extension which is mainly limited by either excessive NOx or soot
emissions [87]. High EGR rate, high gasoline percentage and advanced
or early injection timings are considered as the primary factors for
extending the RCCI combustion to higher engine load to reduce the
NOx and soot emissions. However, it leads to unstable combustion and
makes controlling the combustion phasing difficult [365]. Increasing
the premixed ratio addresses this issue to some extent; however, too
much increase in premixed ratio leads to gasoline like HCCI combus-
tion. Several strategies namely enhancing the in-cylinder mixtures
stratification, multiple-injection strategy, and dedicated optimization,
etc., are suggested by several researchers to extend the operational
range of the RCCI engine. For extending the upper load limit of RCCI
combustion, it is necessary to enhance the mixture stratification which
can be achieved by adopting an additional gasoline DI injector along
with a mineral diesel DI injector [391]. In general, it is reported that
RCCI combustion produces more CO and HC emissions [388]. This
shortcoming can be overcome by the effective conversion of CO and HC
emissions with several diesel oxidation catalysts (DOC) [392] and using
oxygenated fuels such as ethanol [369,393] and butanol [59]. It is
shown that hydrogen-CNG blends help in the better conversion of in-
termediate products to CO2. Hence CO and HC emissions could be re-
duced significantly with hydrogen blended CNG [389]. The issue of
combustion loss could be mitigated by varying the different engine
operating parameters such as in-cylinder gas temperature and oxygen
concentration with gasoline fraction, which are capable of increasing
the combustion efficiency above 98% [394]. The review of RCCI lit-
erature suggests that the RCCI operating range is to be around 8–15 bar
IMEP for realizing high efficiency, low emissions, and low knocking
levels simultaneously [357]. If the engine load exceeds these limits,
either thermal efficiency or emissions are to be sacrificed at the cost of
low-pressure rise rates [359]. Though RCCI combustion is a reliable
strategy to meet current EURO VI limitations in terms of NOx and soot
emissions [360], it is necessary to develop a dedicated optimization
scheme for fitting the RCCI concept into the entire operating range of
the engine mapping [357].
Table 6 shows the summary of performance, combustion and
emission characteristics of RCCI engines operated on various fuels
under a wide range of experimental conditions.
5. GCI combustion
Gasoline compression ignition combustion is one of the variants of
LTC which is reported to emit lower emissions and to provide high fuel
efficiency. GCI is an advanced low-temperature combustion strategy
using gasoline as a fuel in compression ignition engine instead of con-
ventional diesel fuel which provides higher efficiency or at least diesel-
like efficiency with lower emissions [395]. Gasoline compression igni-
tion is also known as gasoline direct injection compression ignition
(GDCI) engine [396] and partially premixed compression ignition
(PPCI) engine [397]. In recent years, GCI combustion is an inspiring
research topic in the engine field due to its diesel-like thermal efficiency
[398] with a significant reduction of NOx and soot emissions
[399,400]. The potential of GCI combustion compared to other LTC
strategies such as HCCI and PCCI combustion in terms of fuel injection
systems and auto-ignition controllability are well demonstrated
[401,402].
5.1. Development of GCI combustion
It is reported that GCI combustion is one of the milestones achieved
by the researchers when they explored the possibilities of using low-
 Table 6
summary of performance, combustion and emission characteristics of RCCI engines.
Investigat- Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Valve open Percentage Performance Combustion Emission
ors condition Timing and close of EGR/O2
Common Port (deg. CA) concentra- Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
T. Pachiannan, et al.

rail injection tion torque/

IMEP

Fang et al. Four-stroke, single Optimized High Low SOIC 1- – 0–29% – – ↓ ITE for the Shorter ↓ NOx ↓ CO ↑ HC ↓ Soot
[315] cylinder modified RCCI reactivity reactivity −60 deg. optimized combustion emissions up emissions up emission up emissions up
from 4C, combustion fuel- Diesel fuel- CA aTDC conditions duration for to 79% to to 27.1 g/ to 50%
RP: 157 kW Ethanol SOIC 2- the optimized 16.8 g/kW- kW-hr
CR: 18.5:1 −32 to conditions hr
RS: 1500 rpm 22 deg. CA
IP: 400–800 bar aTDC
Injection system:
port and common
rail
García Four-stroke, single Two dual- High Low – – – – ↓ SFC of 7% – – ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC Similar soot
et al. cylinder, mode RCCI reactivity reactivity for DMDF emission of emission for emission for emissions
[316] RP: 177 kW combustion fuel- Diesel fuel- 87% with both modes both modes for both
CR: 17.5:1 and strategies Gasoline DMDC modes
15.3:1 under the
RS: 950–2200 rpm World
IP: 2000 bar Harmonized
Injection system: Vehicle
port and common Cycle
rail (WHVC)
Benajes Four-stroke, single Low load High Low −30 deg. IVO (aTDC): – – – ↑ gross ↓ heat release ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ UHC ↓very low

49
et al. cylinder, RCCI reactivity reactivity CA aTDC 375 indicated rate and emission emission > emission > smoke
[331] CR: 14.4:1 combustion fuel- B7 fuel- E10- (diesel main IVC (aTDC): efficiency longer except E85 EURO VI EURO VI emission
RS: 1200 rpm diesel 95, E10-98, injection) 535 combustion fuel norms norms below the
IP: 700 bar E20-95 and 385 deg. CA EVO duration with detection
Injection system: E85 aTDC (low (aTDC): 147 increasing limit of
port and common reactive fuel EVC (aTDC): octane smoke meter
rail injection) 347 number of low
reactive fuels
Zhang Four-stroke, two RCCI High Low – IVO (bTDC): – – – ↑ ITE at all ↑ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC –
et al. cylinder, reactivity reactivity 17 tested pressure and emission emission emission
[337] CR: 17:1 fuel- n- fuel- n- IVC (aBDC): modes heat release < 5 ppm
RS: 1200 rpm heptane butanol 43 rate
IP: 4–8 MPa EVO Advanced
Injection system: (bBDC): 47 combustion
port and common EVC (aTDC): phasing with
rail 17 increased
combustion
duration
Benajes Four-stroke, single DMDF High Low 340 CAD – 45% – – – ↑ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↑ soot
et al. cylinder modified combustion reactivity reactivity ATDC pressure and emissions emission emission emissions
[338] from multi- fuel- Diesel fuel- (Gasoline) heat release below EURO mainly at mainly at More and
cylinder, Gasoline rate for DMDF VI norms low loads low loads higher size
RP: 177 kW of
CR: 15.3:1 particulate
RS: 1200 rpm matter
IP: 2000 bar
Injection system:
port and common
rail
(continued on next page)
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
 Table 6 (continued)

Investigat- Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Valve open Percentage Performance Combustion Emission
ors condition Timing and close of EGR/O2
Common Port (deg. CA) concentra- Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
rail injection tion torque/
T. Pachiannan, et al.

IMEP

Benajes Four-stroke, single RCCI High Low −15 to IVO (aTDC): 45% – – – ↓ heat release ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Soot
et al. cylinder, combustion reactivity reactivity −30 deg. 375 rate and emissions emission emission emission
[344] CR: 14.4:1 fuel- Diesel fuel- CA a TDC IVC (aTDC): adiabatic below EURO below EURO
RS: 1200 rpm Gasoline 535 flame VI norms VI norms
IP: 900 bar EVO temperature
Injection system: (aTDC): 147 with
port and common EVC (aTDC): increasing
rail 347 gasoline
percentage
Benajes Four-stroke, single RCCI High Low For gasoline IVO (aTDC): Up to 45% – – – unchanged ↓ NOx ↓ CO ↓ HC ↓ Soot
et al. cylinder, combustion reactivity reactivity 385 deg. CA 375 combustion emissions emissions up emissions up emission
[356] CR: 14.4:1 fuel- Diesel fuel- aTDC IVC (aTDC): phasing < 0.4 g/ to 76% to 45%
RS: 1500 rpm Gasoline 535 kWh retarding retarding
IP: 400–800 bar EVO EGR EGR
Injection system: (aTDC): 147
port and common EVC (aTDC):
rail 347
Benajes Four-stroke, four RCCI/CDC High Low 340 deg. CA – – – – – ↑ MPRR and ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Soot
et al. cylinder, reactivity reactivity ATDC of low maximum emissions emission emission emission of
[357] RP: 177 kW fuel- fuel- 20% reactivity pressure at below EURO 37 g/kWh 23 g/kWh 58%
CR: 17.5:1 biodiesel ethanol with fuel higher loads VI
RS: (7%)- Diesel 80%

50
1000–2200 rpm blends gasoline
IP: 100 bar
Injection system:
port and common
rail
Tong et al. Four-stroke, single RCCI High Low −133 deg. – – – – ↑ ITE at low ↑ Cylinder ↑NOx ↑ CO ↓ HC ↓ Soot
[358] cylinder modified combustion reactivity reactivity CA aTDC loads pressure emission of emission of emissions emission
from 6C, WC, fuel- Diesel fuel- 0.429 g/ 16.87 g/ 0.012 FSN
CR: 16:1 and Gasoline kWh at full kWh
RS: 1500 rpm polyoxyme- load
IP: 80 MPa thylene
Premixed ratio: dimethyl
55–85% energy ethers
Injection system: (PODE)
port and common
rail
Benajes Single cylinder, Piston bowl High Low – IVO (aTDC): – – ↓ BSFC for – ↑ MPRR for ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Soot
et al. RP: 41 kW geometry on reactivity reactivity 375 stepped and bathtub piston emissions emission emission emission for
[359] CR: 14.4:1 RCCI fuel- Diesel fuel- IVC (aTDC): bathtub at higher loads stock and
RS: 1200 rpm combustion Gasoline 535 pistons stepped
IP: 1000–1890 bar EVO pistons
(single injection) (aTDC): 147
Injection system: EVC (aTDC):
port and common 347
rail
(continued on next page)
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
 Table 6 (continued)

Investigat- Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Valve open Percentage Performance Combustion Emission
ors condition Timing and close of EGR/O2
Common Port (deg. CA) concentra- Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
rail injection tion torque/
IMEP
T. Pachiannan, et al.

Wang Four-stroke, single RCCI High Low −133 deg. IVO (aTDC): Up to 70% ↑ IMEP ↑ ISFC – ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↓ CO ↓ HC ↓ Soot
et al. cylinder modified combustion reactivity reactivity CA ATDC 343 increases increases pressure and emissions emissions emissions emission of
[360] from 6C, WC, at low loads fuel- Diesel fuel- IVC (aTDC): with with heat release below 0.4 g/ with with 0.003 g/
RP: 162 kW Gasoline −133 increasing increasing with kWh advanced advanced kWh
CR: 16:1 EVO engine injection increasing injection injection
RS: 1600 rpm (aTDC): 125 speed and pressure and EGR rate from timing and timing and
IP: 80–140 MPa EVC (aTDC): EGR rate EGR rate 50 to 70% EGR EGR
Injection system: −343
port and common
rail
Benajes Four-stroke, single RCCI High Low 340 deg. CA – Up to 60% – ↓ ISFC with – ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Soot
et al. cylinder modified reactivity reactivity aTDC of low increasing pressure, heat emissions emission emission emissions
[361] from 4C, fuel- Diesel fuel- reactivity gasoline release and below EURO below EURO
RP: 177 kW Gasoline fuel fraction delayed VI VI
CR: 17.5:1 & combustion
12.75:1 phasing
RS: 950–2200 rpm
IP: 1200–1400 bar
Injection system:
port and common
rail
Benajes Four-stroke, single RCCI High Low 340 deg. CA – – – – – Higher ↓ NOx ↓ CO ↓ HC ↓ Soot
et al. cylinder, reactivity reactivity aTDC of low maximum emissions emissions emissions emissions

51
[362] RP: 177 kW fuel- Diesel fuel- reactivity bulk gas below EURO with with below
CR: 17.5:1 and Gasoline fuel temperature VI up to increasing increasing 0.2FSN up
15.3:1 and 75% load engine engine to 75% load
RS: 950–2200 rpm equivalence speed and speed and
IP: 2000 bar ratio with load load
Injection system: increasing
port and common engine load
rail
Benajes Four-stroke, single Particle High Low – – – – – – ↑ Heat release – – ↓ HC Particle size
et al. cylinder, characteris- reactivity reactivity rate and emissions increases
[363] RP: 177 kW tics on RCCI fuel- Diesel fuel- cylinder with with
CR: 15.3:1 Gasoline pressure with increasing increasing
RS: 950–2200 rpm increasing engine load
IP: 2000 bar engine load speed and
Injection system: load
port and common
rail
Li et al. Single cylinder Numerical High Low −7 and −9 IVC (aTDC): – – – – ↑ Heat release ↓ NOx – – ↓ Soot
[364] modified from 4C, investiga- reactivity reactivity deg. CA −130 rate and emission emission
CR: 16.7:1 tion of RCCI fuel- Palm fuel- aTDC EVO cylinder with with
RS: 1400 rpm Oil Methyl Gasoline (aTDC): 94 pressure for C- increasing increasing
IP: 40–180 MPa Ester SOI gasoline gasoline
Injection duration: Longer ratio ratio
405 and 330 μs ignition delay
Injection system: and MPRR for
port and common C-SOI
rail Shorter
combustion
duration with
increasing
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

gasoline
(continued on next page)
 Table 6 (continued)

Investigat- Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Valve open Percentage Performance Combustion Emission
ors condition Timing and close of EGR/O2
Common Port (deg. CA) concentra- Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
rail injection tion torque/
T. Pachiannan, et al.

IMEP

fraction
Nazemi Four cylinder, Modeling High Low – IVC (aTDC): Up to 52% Difference – – ↑ Peak ↑NOx ↓ CO ↓ HC ↓ Soot
and CR: 17.5:1 analysis of reactivity reactivity −132 between cylinder emission emissions emissions emissions
Shah- RS: 1500 rpm RCCI fuel- Diesel fuel- EVO experiment pressure and with with with with
bakhti IP: 480 bar Gasoline (aTDC): 112 and model temperature advancing advancing advancing advancing
[365] Injection system: was 0.2 bar with SOI of −63° SOI of −63° SOI of −63° SOI of −63°
port and common advancing SOI aTDC aTDC aTDC aTDC
rail
Wang Four-stroke, single RCCI High Low −133 deg. IVO (aTDC): Up to 45% – ↓ fuel – ↑ MPRR ↓ NOx ↓ CO ↓ HC ↓ Soot
et al. cylinder modified combustion reactivity reactivity CA ATDC 343 consump- ↑ in-cylinder emission of emissions emissions emissions of
[366] from 6C, WC, fuel- Diesel fuel- IVC (aTDC): tion with temperature < 2.5 g/ with with < 1 mg/
RP: 162 kW Gasoline −133 increasing with kWh optimizing optimizing kWh
CR: 16:1 EVO gasoline advancing operating operating
RS: 1600 rpm (aTDC): 125 fraction injection conditions conditions
IP: 80 MPa EVC (aTDC): timing
Injection system: −343
port and common
rail
Isık and Four-stroke, four RCCI High Low – – – – ↑ fuel ↑ BTE with ↑ Peak ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Smoke
Aydın cylinder, WC, application reactivity reactivity consump- addition of cylinder emissions emission of emission of emission
[370] RP: 18 kW in a diesel fuel- fuel- tion of about biodiesel pressure and < 490 ppm up to 730.54 ppm
CR: 17:1 generator Safflower Ethanol 360 g/kWh fuels peak heat 0.069%

52
RS: 1500 rpm biodiesel- release rate for
Injection system: Diesel biodiesel
port and common blends addition
rail Shorter
combustion
duration and
ignition delay

Benajes Four-stroke, single High Low 385 deg. CA IVO (aTDC): Up to 45% ↓ IMEP with – – ↓ heat release ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Smoke
et al. cylinder, reactivity reactivity aTDC of low 375 increasing rate and emissions emission emission of emission of
[371] CR: 14.4:1 fuel- fuel- reactivity IVC (aTDC): premixed increased < 1.5 g/ < 4 g/kWh < 0.01 g/
RS: 1200 rpm biodiesel Ethanol fuel 535 ratio combustion kWh at higher kWh up to
IP: 100 bar (7%)- Diesel EVO duration with loads medium
Injection system: blends (aTDC): 147 increasing loads
port and common EVC (aTDC): premixed ratio
rail 347
Qian et al. Single cylinder, RCCI High Low – – – – – – ↓ Peak ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Soot
[372] WC, combustion reactivity reactivity cylinder emissions up emission up emission up emission of
CR: 18.5:1 fuel- n- fuel- pressure up to to 89.5% to 0.51% for to 1651 ppm 0.06 m−1
RS: 1500 rpm heptane Ethanol, n- 56.42 bar and ethanol
IP: 200 bar butanol, and HRR 31.9°/
Injection system: n-amyl CAfor higher
port and common alcohol premixed
rail ratios

(continued on next page)

Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
 Table 6 (continued)

Investigat- Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Valve open Percentage Performance Combustion Emission
ors condition Timing and close of EGR/O2
Common Port (deg. CA) concentra- Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
rail injection tion torque/
T. Pachiannan, et al.

IMEP

Pedrozo Single cylinder, Load High Low – – – – – ↑ ↑ Heat release ↓ NOx ↓ CO ↓ HC ↓ Soot
et al. CR: 16.8:1 extension of reactivity reactivity Combustion rate of emissions up emissions emissions emission of
[373] RS: 1200 rpm RCCI fuel- Diesel fuel- efficiency 209.2 J/CAD to 0.40 g/ for both for both 0.002 g/
IP: 50–220 bar combustion Ethanol up to 96% and in- kWh using modes modes kWh
Injection system: cylinder gas iEGR
port and common temperatures
rail of 1892 K
Qian et al. Single cylinder, RCCI High Low 25 deg. CA IVO (aTDC): – – – ↑ ITE for ↑ Peak heat ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Smoke
[374] WC, reactivity reactivity BTDC 344 gasoline release rate emission of emission up emission up emissions of
CR: 18.5:1 fuel- Diesel fuel- IVC (bTDC): injection and lower < 20 ppm to 0.5% at to 1541 ppm < 0.1 m-1 at
RS: 1500 rpm Gasoline 128 cylinder at 0.8 PR for higher at higher 0.8 PR
IP: 200 bar and ethanol EVO pressure was ethanol premixed premixed
Injection system: (aTDC): 114 observed for ratios ratios
port and common EVC (bTDC): ethanol
rail 348 ↑ Cylinder
pressure and
temperature
increases with
increasing
premixed ratio
for gasoline
Zhu et al. Single cylinder, RCCI High Low 5–25 deg. IVO (aTDC): – – – ↑ ITE with ↑ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↓ CO ↓ HC ↓ Smoke

53
[375] CR: 18.5:1 combustion reactivity reactivity CA BTDC 344 advancing pressure and emission emissions emissions emissions
RS: 800–2000 rpm fuel- n- fuel- IVC (bTDC): injection heat release with with with with
IP: 5 bar (port) heptane Gasoline, 128 timing rate for n- increasing advancing advancing advancing
Injection system: ethanol, and EVO butanol fuel premixed injection injection injection
port and common n-butanol (aTDC): 114 Longer ratio timing timing timing
rail EVC (bTDC): ignition delay
348 and cylinder
pressure with
advancing SOI
Li et al. CR: 17.3:1 RCCI High Low −45 deg. IVC (aTDC): – – ↓ ISFC for – ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ UHC
[376] RS: 1900 rpm reactivity reactivity CA ATDC −132 methanol pressure, emission emission emission
IP: 500 bar fuel- Diesel fuel- EVC (aTDC): higher heat with than the than the
Injection system: Gasoline, 112 release and increasing gasoline gasoline
port and common methanol shorter premixed
rail combustion ratio
duration for
methanol than
the gasoline

Park et al. Four-stroke, single Dual fuel High Low – – – ↓ IMEP up to – – ↑ Ignition ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Soot
[377] cylinder, RCCI reactivity reactivity 2.7 bar with delay, emission of emission up emission up emissions of
CR: 17.8:1 combustion fuel- fuel- advancing combustion < 0.4 g/ to 16 g/kWh to 1.46 g/ < 1 mg/
RS: 1200 rpm Dimethyl Ethanol injection duration with kWh kWh kWh
IP:600 bar ether (DME) timing retarded
Injection system: combustion
port and common phasing with
rail increasing
gasoline
fraction
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

(continued on next page)

 Table 6 (continued)

Investigat- Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Valve open Percentage Performance Combustion Emission
ors condition Timing and close of EGR/O2
Common Port (deg. CA) concentra- Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
rail injection tion torque/
T. Pachiannan, et al.

IMEP

Park and Single cylinder, RCCI High Low 5–40 deg. – – ↓ IMEP of up ↑ ISFC for – ↑ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Soot
Yoon CR: 17.8:1 combustion reactivity reactivity CA bTDC to 78.9% biogas mode pressure and emissions emission emission emission
[383] RS: 1200 rpm fuel- Diesel fuel- than lower peak Lesser sized
IP: 0.4 MPa-biogas Gasoline gasoline heat release PM and the
3 MPa – gasoline and biogas mode rate total
Injection system: Longer number of
port and common ignition delay PM
rail up to 35%
Qian et al. Four cylinder, RCCI High Low 14–10 deg. IVO (aTDC): – – – – ↓ Cylinder – – – Particle size
[384] CR: 18:1 combustion reactivity reactivity CA bTDC 337.5 pressure and distribution
RS: 1500 rpm fuel- Diesel fuel- Biogas IVC (aTDC): heat release are
IP: 120 MPa −144.5 with < 50 nm
Injection system: EVO increasing
port and common (aTDC): premixed ratio
rail 122.5 Biogas 2
EVC (aTDC): provides
−334.5 higher heat
release rate
and cylinder
temperature
Poorghas- Four cylinder, Numerical High Low – IVC (aTDC): – – – – ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC –
emi RP: 66 kW study of reactivity reactivity −169 pressure and emission emission emission

54
et al. CR: 17:1 RCCI fuel- Diesel fuel- Natural EVO heat release with with all the with all the
[385] RS: 1500 rpm combustion gas (aTDC): 162 with increasing operating operating
IP: 400–800 bar increasing premixed conditions conditions
Injection system: premixed ratio ratio
port and common
rail
Paykani Single cylinder, RCCI High Low – IVO (aTDC): – – – – ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ UHC ↓very low
et al. CR: 16.1:1 combustion reactivity reactivity 335 pressure and emission emission emission smoke
[386] RS: 1500 rpm fuel- Diesel fuel- Natural IVC (aTDC): heat release with an with an emission
IP: up to 1300 bar gas −143 with increased increased
Injection system: EVO increasing premixed premixed
port and common (aTDC): 130 premixed ratio ratio ratio
rail EVC (aTDC):
−335
Kalsi and Four-stroke, single, RCCI with High Low 43 deg. CA IVO (bTDC): Up to 30% – ↓ BSFC with ↑ TE with Longer ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Soot
Subr- RP: 7.4 kW CNG reactivity reactivity ATDC for 43 the lesser the lesser combustion emissions emission emission emissions
ama- CR: 19.5:1 fuel- Diesel fuel- CNG CNG IVC (aBDC): addition of addition of duration and below below 0.2%
nian RS: 1500 rpm through the 67 CNG CNG higher heat 1.48 g/kWh
[387] IP: 250–260 bar intake EVO release rate
Injection system: manifold (bBDC): 87 with less
port and common EVC (aTDC): percentage of
rail 39 CNG
(continued on next page)
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
 Table 6 (continued)

Investigat- Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Valve open Percentage Performance Combustion Emission
ors condition Timing and close of EGR/O2
Common Port (deg. CA) concentra- Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
rail injection tion torque/
T. Pachiannan, et al.

IMEP

Gharehgh- Single cylinder, RCCI High Low 45 deg. CA IVO (bTDC): – – – – ↑ Peak heat ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ UHC –
ani VCR, combustion reactivity reactivity BTDC 7 release rate emission of emission emission
et al. CR: 17:1 fuel- Waste fuel- Natural IVC (aBDC): and cylinder < 45 ppm of >
[388] RS: 1200 rpm fish oil gas 36 pressure for 150 ppm
IP: 150–200 bar biodiesel EVO CNG/biodiesel
Injection system: (bBDC): 36 mode
port and common EVC (aTDC): ↓ EGT than all
rail 7 the modes

Kalsi and Four-stroke, single, RCCI with High Low 3.3 deg. CA – – – – ↑ BTE for ↑ Heat release ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Smoke
Subr- RP: 7.4 kW CNG reactivity reactivity BTDC HCNG fuel rate, in- emission of emission up emission up emissions of
ama- CR: 19.5:1 fuel- fuel- cylinder < 0.4 g/ to 8 g/kWh to 0.9 g/ < 0.1 g/
nian RS: 1500 rpm Pongamia Hydrogen temperature kWh with with kWh with kWh with
[389] IP: 250–260 bar pinnata blended and increasing increasing increasing increasing
Injection system: biodiesel with CNG combustion gaseous fuel gaseous fuel gaseous fuel gaseous fuel
port and common (HCNG) duration for
rail HCNG than
CNG
Krishnan Four-stroke, single Dual fuel High Low 280–355 de- IVO (CAD): – – – – ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Smoke
et al. cylinder, combustion reactivity reactivity g. CA 32 pressure with emissions emission emission emission
[390] CR: 17.1:1 fuel- Diesel fuel- IVC (CAD): more
RS: 1500 rpm Propane 198 advanced SOI

55
IP: 200–1300 bar (Gas) EVO (CAD): and injection
Injection system: 532 pressure
port and common EVC (CAD): Higher heat
rail 14 release rate
with advanced
combustion
phasing

[↑ – Increase/High; ↓ – Decrease/Low; CR – Compression ratio; WC – Water cooled; AC-Air cooled; RP – Rated power; RS – Rated speed; rpm – revolution per minute; IP – Injection pressure; IVO – Inlet valve opening; IVC
– Inlet valve closing; EVO – Exhaust valve opening; EVC – Exhaust valve closing; aTDC – after Top Dead Center; bTDC – before Top Dead Center; aBDC- after Bottom Dead Center; bBDC – before Bottom Dead Center].
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
T. Pachiannan, et al.
Fig. 26. (a) Natural flame luminosity and (b) heat release rate and normalized spatial integration of natural luminosity (SINL) curve with increasing pilot injection
quantity [395].
cetane fuels in PCCI combustion modes [403]. The low-cetane fuels
have good resistance to the auto-ignition unlike diesel fuel and hence
they can be adopted for PCCI mode of combustion. The use of low-
cetane fuel increases the ignition delay without using higher EGR rate
like diesel PCCI mode. The increase in delay period provides a longer
time for mixing and thus enhances air-fuel mixing which leads to a
reduction in NOx and PM emissions. Lower EGR rate is sufficient in low-
cetane PCCI mode to improve combustion stability. In this regard,
Kalghatgi et al. [404] attempted to explore the usage of gasoline (low-
cetane fuel) in PCCI mode in a 2-liter single cylinder diesel engine. It is
observed that compared to diesel PCCI, the gasoline PCCI produced
better NOx and PM emission levels and also extended the operating
load range of LTC compared to those of diesel PCCI. Wang et al. [365]
reported that the RCCI combustion at higher loads necessitated a
strategy of combining the higher amount of gasoline fraction with early
diesel injection and higher EGR rate in order to avoid excessive PRR
obtained from the early combustion. Hence, the premixing of gasoline is
carried out to extend the operating range of the RCCI engine. However,
control over the combustion phasing became difficult due to the com-
bined effect of the higher amount of EGR and early injection of diesel.
In this regard, an optimization study [405] demonstrated that the GCI
strategy is suitable for full load conditions. This allowed the GCI en-
gines to cover the LTC operation even at high loads with higher effi-
ciency and lower NOx and soot emissions.
56
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
5.2. Principle of GCI engine
The diesel fuel has a high tendency towards auto-ignition unlike the
low cetane fuel such as gasoline. Hence the low-cetane fuels can be used
in PCCI modes of combustion to increase ignition delay without the
necessity of higher EGR rates vis-a-vis diesel PCCI. While the increased
mixing time lowers the NOx and PM, the lower EGR rate improves
combustion stability. Compared to diesel PCCI, GCI mode is capable of
reducing NOx/PM levels to acceptable levels and also it achieves higher
loads than achievable by PCCI. It is a combustion regime which can
address the limitations of LTC and HCCI engines [236,237]. From the
present review on LTC concept, it is obvious that the various LTC
strategies such as HCCI, PCCI and RCCI can use a wide variety of fuels.
In fact, the RCCI engine uses gasoline fuel as LRF for controlling the
combustion and extending the load limits. The use of gasoline like fuel
in the HCCI engine is initially demonstrated by Kalghatgi et al.
[237,406] due to the higher resistance of gasoline to the auto-ignition.
The higher volatility of those fuels is quite suitable for preparing the
well-premixed charge or stratified mixture prior to the ignition which
reduces both NOx and soot emissions simultaneously [407,408] while
maintaining high efficiency which is comparable to that of conventional
diesel engines [409,410]. Thus the GCI concept utilizes the variations in
fuel properties, such as a lower cetane number and higher volatility
[411]. Compared to the different LTC modes, GCI does not need a high
EGR rate to overcome the high-load limitations [236,237]. The mod-
erate EGR is sufficient to reduce the NOx emissions from GCI
 Table 7
summary of performance, combustion and emission characteristics of GCI engines.
Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Timing Valve Percentage of Performance Combustion Emission
condition open and EGR/O2
close concentration Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
T. Pachiannan, et al.

(deg. CA) torque/IMEP

Loeper et al. Single cylinder, GCI Gasoline First: −350 deg. IVO – ↓ Net IMEP Fuel – Injection ↓ NOx Injection Injection –
[200] CR: 16.6:1 combustion on CA aTDC (aTDC): by decreasing consumption pressure has emission by pressure has pressure has
RS: light duty Second: 344 inlet between 180 the higher decreasing the higher the lower
1500–2000 rpm engines −39 deg. CA IVC temperature and 200 g/ effect on inlet effect on CO effect on
IP: 700 bar aTDC (aTDC): kWh combustion temperature emissions UHC
Injection system: −132 phasing and emissions
common rail EVO pressure rise
(aTDC): rate
112
EVC
(aTDC):
388
Kim and Bae Four-stroke, GCI at low Gasoline −24 to −8 deg. – – ↓ IMEP ↑ ISFC with – ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx with ↑ CO with ↑ HC with ↓ Soot
[395] single cylinder, load CA aTDC) advancing advancing pressure, heat increasing advancing advancing
CR: 17.4:1 injection pilot injection release rate pilot pilot pilot
RS: 1200 rpm timing timing and pressure injection injection injection
IP: 40 MPa rise rate for quantity timing timing
Injection system: multiple
common rail injections
Sellnau et al. Four cylinder, GDCI engine Gasoline – – Up to 45% – Lower BSFC at The Lower cylinder ↓ NOx – – ↓ Smoke
[396] CR: 15:1 all the loads combustion pressure of emission at emission at
RS: efficiency of < 160 bar all the loads all the loads

57
800–2500 rpm 92–96% at with lower
Injection system: low loads combustion
direct injection noise
Putrasari and Four-stroke, GCI Gasoline 18–75 deg. CA IVO – More or less – More or less More advanced ↑ NOx – ↓THC –
Lim single cylinder, and soya bTDC (bTDC): similar IMEP similar and little bit emissions up emissions
[401] WC, bean 7 thermal wider to 8.5 g/kg- with
CR: 19.5:1 biodiesel IVC efficiency combustion fuel advancing
RS: 1200 rpm blends (aTDC): Similar SOI
IP: 700 bar 43 combustion
Injection EVO phasing and
duration: 800 μs (bBDC): duration was
Injection system: 52 observed
common rail EVC
(aTDC):
6
Goyal et al. Four-stroke, Double Gasoline Double – – ↓ IMEP ↓ Fuel – ↓ Cylinder – – – –
[413] single cylinder, injection GCI injection: 12 to advancing consumption pressure, heat
CR: 17.7:1 combustion 3 deg. CA bTDC injection for double release rate
RS: 1600 rpm timing for injection and pressure
IP: 50 MPa single rise rate for
Injection system: injection double
common rail injection
strategy
Putrasari and Four-stroke, GCI using Gasoline – – – – – ↓ Thermal ↓ Cylinder ↑ NOx ↓ CO ↓THC –
Lim single cylinder, biodiesel and soya efficiency for pressure for 5% emission for emissions emissions
[414] WC, blends bean the biodiesel biodiesel the biodiesel for the for the
CR: 19.5:1 biodiesel blends blends blends biodiesel biodiesel
RS: 1200 rpm blends blends blends
IP: 70 MPa
(continued on next page)
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
 Table 7 (continued)

Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Timing Valve Percentage of Performance Combustion Emission
condition open and EGR/O2
close concentration Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
(deg. CA) torque/IMEP
T. Pachiannan, et al.

Injection
duration: 800 μs
Injection system:
common rail
Jia et al. Four-stroke, GCI using PRF92, −10 to IVO Up to 45% – – – ↑ Ignition delay ↓ NOx with ↑ CO with ↑ THC with ↓ smoke
[422] single cylinder, gasoline TRF25, −13 deg. CA (aTDC): and increasing increasing increasing with
WC, surrogates TRFDIB, aTDC 343 combustion EGR EGR EGR increasing
CR: 16:1 and IVC phasing with EGR
RS: 1500 rpm gasoline (aTDC): increasing EGR
IP: 60 MPa −133
Injection system: EVO
common rail (aTDC):
125
EVC
(aTDC):
−343
Ra et al. CR: 16.5:1 Gasoline Gasoline First pulse: – – – – ↑ Combustion ↑ Cylinder ↓ NOx – – ↓PM
[424] RS: 2500 rpm direct −350 deg. CA efficiency pressure and emissions emissions
IP: 500–1500 bar injection aTDC with maximum below 0.1 g/ below
Injection compression Second pulse: advancing pressure rise kg-fuel 0.1 g/kg-
duration: 800 μs ignition −40 deg. CA SOI rate with fuel
Injection system: (GDICI) aTDC advancing SOI
pilot

58
Loeper et al. Single cylinder, Swirl effects Gasoline First: −350 deg. IVO – – ISFC of ↑ ITE of 44% Advanced ↑ NOx – – –
[426] CR: 16.6:1 on GCI light- CA aTDC (aTDC): 189.7 g/kWh combustion emission at
RS: duty engine Second: 344 at 1300 rpm phasing at lower swirl
1500–2000 rpm −39 deg. CA IVC 1300 rpm of ratios
IP: 700 bar aTDC (aTDC): about 10CAD
Injection system: −132
common rail EVO
(aTDC):
112
EVC
(aTDC):
388
Mao et al. Six cylinder, DI, GCI Gasoline – – Up to 30% – ↓ BSFC at low – ↓ Heat release ↓ NOx – – ↓ Soot
[429] CR: 16.8:1 injection rate for the emission emission
RS: 1330 rpm pressure multiple
IP: 70–160 MPa injections
Injection system:
Common rail
Liu et al. Six cylinder, GCI Gasoline Single:15.6 deg. – 45% – ↓ BSFC at – ↓ Heat release – ↑ CO – ↓ Soot
[430] CR: 16.8:1 CA aTDC multiple rate and emission emission
RS: 1660 rpm Multiple: injection maximum
IP: 100–140 MPa Pilot- pressure rise
Injection system: −20 deg.CA rate for
Common rail aTDC multiple
Main-40 deg.CA injection
aTDC
Zou et al. Single cylinder, GCI Gasoline −3 deg. CA IVO 40% – – ↑ ITE with ↓ Cylinder Similar NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Soot
[431] CR: 17.1:1 aTDC (aTDC): delaying IVTC pressure and emission emission emission emission
RS: 1300 rpm 340 temperature
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

(continued on next page)

 Table 7 (continued)

Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Timing Valve Percentage of Performance Combustion Emission
condition open and EGR/O2
close concentration Power/ BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
(deg. CA) torque/IMEP
T. Pachiannan, et al.

IP: 140 MPa IVC with delaying

Injection system: (bTDC): IVTC
Common rail 146
EVO
(aTDC):
131
EVC
(bTDC):
339
Wei et al. Four-stroke, Gasoline Single-240 deg. IVO – – ↓ BSFC with – ↑ Cylinder – ↓ CO ↓ HC –
[432] single cylinder, CA bTDC (bTDC): advancing SOI pressure and emission emission
CR: 17.5:1 0 heat release with with
RS: 1500 rpm IVC rate with advancing advancing
IP: 1300 bar (bTDC): advancing SOI SOI SOI
Injection system: 230
common rail EVO
(bTDC):
210
EVC
(bTDC):
40
Adams et al. Four-stroke, GCI Gasoline −350 deg. CA – 0% – – – ↑ PRR and ↓ NOx ↓ CO ↓ HC –
[435] single cylinder, combustion and soy aTDC – Pilot advanced emissions of emissions emissions

59
CR: 16.6:1 methyl injection combustion < 1 g/kg-fi with with
RS: ester phasing with advancing advancing
1500–2500 rpm biodiesel advancing SOI SOI SOI
IP: 400–700 bar blends
Injection system:
pilot and main
injection
Putrasari and Four-stroke, GCI Gasoline- Single-40 deg. – – – – ↓ ITE for the ↓ Cylinder ↑ NOx ↓ CO ↑ HC –
Lim single cylinder, soya bean CA bTDC blends pressure and emission emission emission
[437] WC, biodiesel Multiple: heat release
CR: 19.5:1 blend Pilot-350 deg.CA rate for the
RS: 1200 rpm bTDC gasoline
IP: 70 MPa Main-40 deg.CA biodiesel
Injection system: bTDC blends
Common rail Shorter
combustion
duration and
lower pressure
rise rate

[↑ – Increase/High; ↓ – Decrease/Low; CR – Compression ratio; WC – Water cooled; AC-Air cooled; RP – Rated power; RS – Rated speed; rpm – revolution per minute; IP – Injection pressure; IVO – Inlet valve opening; IVC
– Inlet valve closing; EVO – Exhaust valve opening; EVC – Exhaust valve closing; aTDC – after Top Dead Center; bTDC – before Top Dead Center; aBDC- after Bottom Dead Center; bBDC – before Bottom Dead Center].
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
T. Pachiannan, et al.
Fig. 27. Variation of Peak Cycle Temperature with different primary fuels
[444].
combustion and hence without the deterioration in the particulate
emissions [411].
5.3. Combustion in GCI engine
GCI strategy combines the superior characteristics of both diesel and
SI engines. It takes the inherent characteristics of a diesel engine like
higher compression ratio, and throttleless and lean mixture operation
[412]. GCI adopts a new low-temperature combustion process for PCCI
engines. The multiple-late-injection of gasoline vaporizes it and mixes
with air at a faster rate under low injection pressure similar to that of
GDI (gasoline direct injection) engines. This provides essential in-cy-
linder mixture stratification with sufficiently mixed fuel and air. In GCI
engines, low combustion temperatures combined with low mixture
motion and reduced chamber surface area to reduce the heat losses
[396]. In GCI engines, gasoline fuel is directly injected into the com-
bustion chamber close to TDC than that of HCCI engines but earlier
than conventional diesel combustion [413]. Longer ignition delay of
gasoline-like fuels with a higher octane number provides sufficient time
for the mixing of air and fuel. This enhances the premixed combustion
which leads to lower NOx and soot emissions simultaneously
[414,415]. It is a cost-effective diesel engine because it can use a low-
pressure injection system compared to that of diesel engines which are
using high-pressure injection systems [416]. These combustion engines
are expected to solve the demand for imbalance between the heavy
(diesel) and light (gasoline) fuels. In GCI engines, combustion phasing
Fig. 28. Ignition delay at different EGR rates [449].
60
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
Fig. 29. Variation of in-cylinder temperature for D70B30 fuel at different EGR
rates [461].
can be controlled by injection timing and high efficiency can be
achieved up to 56% in heavy-duty GCI engine [417].
5.4. Challenges and remedies of GCI combustion
Some drawbacks of GCI combustion include the requirement of high
intake temperature, high compression ratio, low lubricity, cold start
capability, combustion stability at low loads and higher CO and HC
emissions [401]. At low loads, overall lean air-fuel ratio requires high
boost conditions or inlet temperature to initiate auto-ignition [200] and
an efficient oxidation catalyst to reduce CO and HC emissions [418].
Use of multiple-injection is also explored to overcome the dis-
advantages of GCI combustion [395].
In general, the GCI engine uses the gasoline, its surrogates and
blends of gasoline-high reactive fuels. The optimum fuel for GCI com-
bustion is less processed fuels like gasoline, naphtha, etc, with its re-
search octane number (RON) between 70 and 85 [419]. The fuel-wise
review of GCI combustion is described as follows.
5.5. Gasoline fuel on GCI combustion
Kim and Bae [395] investigated the double injection strategy such
as the combination of the pilot (SOI at −12, −16 and −20 deg. CA
aTDC) and main injections in a GCI engine at low loads to reduce
combustion noise and emissions. This double injection strategy is found
to reduce the peak cylinder pressure (from 9.3 to 6.3 MPa) and heat
release rate (from 143 to 48.2 J/deg. CA) significantly. The maximum
pressure rise rate is reduced from 1.3 to 0.2 MPa/deg. CA when the
injection timing is advanced from 0 to −20 deg. CA aTDC, with a loss of
fuel economy due to increased heat loss. Advancing the injection timing
also decreased the IMEP and deteriorated COV of IMEP due to the de-
creased net work and the cooling effect of gasoline (which reduces in-
cylinder temperature). The double injection strategy with an advanced
pilot injection from 0 to −20 deg. CA aTDC reduced the NOx (from 7.6
to 3.6 g/kWh) and soot emissions, while it increased the CO (10.2–32 g/
kWh) and HC (1–2.68 g/kWh) emissions due to the overall lean mix-
ture, lower cylinder temperature, and pressure. Increasing the pilot fuel
quantity from 20 to 40%, increased the first peak cylinder pressure
(from 7.1 to 6.4 MPa), heat release rate (from 45 to 14.6 J/deg. CA)
followed by a strong natural luminosity by soot incandescence (shown
in Fig. 26) and maximum pressure rise rate due to enhanced and
complete combustion. These facts reduced HC emission and increased
NOx emission.
In another GDCI study, Sellnau et al. [396] carried out experimental
investigations on the multi-cylinder engine at low load-low speeds
(2–4.5 bar BMEP and 800–1500 rpm) and medium to higher loads-
 Table 8
Summary of performance, combustion and emission characteristics of miscellaneous methods of LTC.
Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Timing Valve open Percentage of Performance Combustion Emission
condition and close EGR/O2
(deg. CA) concentration BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
T. Pachiannan, et al.

Liu et al. Four stroke, single Fuel Mixture of cetane −8 deg. CA aTDC IVO Up to 62% – – ↑ Heat release ↓ NOx ↓ CO ↓THC ↓ Soot
[242] cylinder, WC, properties and iso-octane, (aTDC): rate, cylinder emissions of emissions emissions emission for
CR: 16:1 on LTC Heptane 20, 343 pressure and < 1 g/kWh up to 50% up to 50% DMF20
RS: 1400 rpm DMF20 and IVC pressure rise EGR rate EGR rate
Injection pressure: DMF20 + EHN (aTDC): rate for DMF20
1300 bar −133
Injection system: EVO
common rail (aTDC):
125
EVC
(aTDC):
−343
Cheng et al. Four cylinder, PPC n-Butanol/diesel −33 to 5 deg. CA – 26% ↑ BSFC for the ↑ BTE for the ↑ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↓ CO for the – ↓ Smoke
[287] CR: 17.5:1 blends aTDC blends blends pressure and emission with butanol emission for
RS: 1500 rpm heat release rate advanced SOI blends the butanol
IP: 100–140 MPa with advancing blends
Injection system: SOI
common rail
Valentino Four cylinder, PPC n-Butanol/diesel −12 to 0 deg. CA – 0% ↑ BSFC for the – ↑ Cylinder ↓ NOx – – ↓ Smoke
et al. CR: 17.5:1 blends aTDC blends pressure, heat emission emission for
[289] RS: release rate and the butanol
2000–2500 rpm ignition for the blends
IP: 100–160 MPa blends

61
Injection
system:common
rail
Zheng et al. Four-stroke, single Biofuel LTC Soy, canola and – IVC Up to 65% ↑ BSFC for ↓ BTE up to 25 Similar cylinder ↓ NOx – – ↓ Soot
[447] cylinder, yellow grease (aTDC): biodiesel fuels for the pressure and emissions with emissions
CR: 17.8:1 biodiesel −135 biodiesel fuels heat release rate increasing with higher
Rated power: EVO ↑ Ignition delay EGR EGR rate
12.5 kW (bBDC): 45 with increasing
RS: 1400 rpm EGR
Injection system:
common rail
Pidol et al. Four-stroke, single Biofuel LTC Ethanol, rapeseed – – Up to 45% ↑ BSFC for the – ↓ Combustion ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ smoke
[448] and four cylinder, oil biodiesel and blends noise using EGR emissions emission emission emissions
CR: 15 &18:1 diesel blends
RS:
1500–4000 rpm
IP: 1600 bar
Injection system:
common rail
Zhang et al. Four-stroke, single Biofuel LTC 2,5- −6 deg. CA aTDC IVC Up to 55% – ↑ ITE at lower ↑ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↓ CO ↓THC ↓ Smoke
[449] cylinder, WC, Dimethylfuran (aTDC): EGR rate pressure and emissions emissions emissions emissions
CR: 16:1 (DMF), gasoline −137 °CA heat release rate increasing up to 35% up to 35% for DMF 40
RS: 1400 rpm blends ATDC for DMF EGR rate EGR EGR
IP: 1600 bar Longer ignition
Injection system: delay
common rail combustion
duration with
increasing EGR
rate
(continued on next page)
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
 Table 8 (continued)

Investigators Engine Setup Operating Fuel Injection Timing Valve open Percentage of Performance Combustion Emission
condition and close EGR/O2
(deg. CA) concentration BSFC/ISFC BTE/ITE NOx CO HC PM/Soot
T. Pachiannan, et al.

Zheng et al. Four-stroke, single Biofuel LTC n-Butanol 331.0–347.0 deg. – – ↑ Fuel ↑ ITE ↑ Heat release ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ HC ↓ Smoke
[454] cylinder modified CA consumption for rate and lower emissions emission emission emission
from 4C, n-butanol cylinder < 100 ppm < 0.1 FSN
CR: 18.2:1 pressure
RS: 1500 rpm Longer ignition
IP: 600 bar delay and
Injection system: shorter
common rail combustion
duration
Zhang et al. Four-stroke, single Biofuel LTC n-Butanol – IVC Up to 65% ↑ Fuel ↑ ITE for the ↑ Heat release ↓ NOx ↓ CO ↓ HC ↓ Soot
[455] cylinder, (aTDC): consumption for blends rate and emissions emissions emissions emission for
CR: 16:1 −137 °CA the blends and cylinder < 0.5 g/kWh up to 45% up to 45% higher
RS: 1400 rpm ATDC also with pressure EGR rate EGR rate blends
IP: 1600 bar increasing EGR ↑ Ignition delay
Injection system: and pressure
common rail rise rate

Zheng et al. Four-stroke, single Biofuel LTC n-Butanol, sec- 8 deg. CA bTDC – Up to 52% – – ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↑ CO ↑ THC ↓ Smoke
[456] cylinder, WC, butanol, iso- pressure and emissions emission emission emissions
CR: 16:1 butanol, and tert- higher heat increasing with with for isomer
RS: 2500 rpm butanol release rate for EGR rate increasing increasing blends
IP: 100 MPa the isomer EGR EGR
Injection system: blends
common rail Longer ignition

62
delay and
shorter
combustion
duration
Huang et al. Four-stroke, four LTC using Gasoline and n- −7 deg. CA aTDC – 0.7–39.7% – – ↓ Cylinder ↓ NOx ↓ CO ↓THC ↓ Soot
[461] cylinder, WC, EGR butanol blends pressure and emissions of emissions emissions emissions
CR: 16.5:1 higher heat < 1 g/kWh up to 25% up to 25% up to 25%
Rated power: release rate for EGR rate EGR rate EGR rate
100 kW the blends with
RS: 1600 rpm increasing EGR
Injection pressure: Longer ignition
90 MPa delay and lower
Injection system: pressure rise
common rail rate at higher
EGR rate

Huang et al. Four cylinder, Injection Butanol blends up Main injection: −8 – 25% ↑ BSFC with ↓ BTE with ↑ Heat release ↓ NOx – – ↓ Soot
[468] CR: 16.5:1 strategy on to 30% deg. CA aTDC increasing advancing rate and emissions emissions
Rated power: LTC Pilot injection: butanol injection cylinder
100 kW −30,-45, −60 deg. percentage and timing, pressure with
RS: 4000 rpm CA aTDC EGR increasing increasing pilot
Injection pressure: butanol injection
120 MPa percentage quantity
Injection system: and EGR ↑ Ignition delay
common rail with increasing
EGR
(continued on next page)
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
T. Pachiannan, et al. Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380

[↑ – Increase/High; ↓ – Decrease/Low; CR – Compression ratio; WC – Water cooled; AC-Air cooled; RP – Rated power; RS – Rated speed; rpm – revolution per minute; IP – Injection pressure; IVO – Inlet valve opening; IVC
– Inlet valve closing; EVO – Exhaust valve opening; EVC – Exhaust valve closing; aTDC – after Top Dead Center; bTDC – before Top Dead Center; aBDC- after Bottom Dead Center; bBDC – before Bottom Dead Center].
medium speeds (8–17 bar BMEP and 1500–2500 rpm). For all the tests,

emission for
the blends
improved BSFC and peak cylinder pressure (< 160 bar) are obtained at
PM/Soot
the inlet manifold pressure (∼3.5 bar) and EGR rate (< 45%). At low
↓ Soot loads, the absence of smoke and reduction in CNL (combustion noise
level) are observed along with combustion efficiency between 92% and
96%. At medium-high load conditions, the NOx emission is decreased
emission

with an increase in load and EGR levels. The minimum BSFC of 214 g/
↑ HC
HC

kWh is observed at 13.5 bar BMEP at 2000 rpm. The efficiency of the
GDI operation is found to be 5% higher than that of a diesel engine
which is significantly higher than SI engines. The NOx and smoke
emission

emission are observed to be less than 0.02 g/kWh and 0.08 FSN re-
↑ CO
CO

spectively even at the full load.

Goyal et al. [413] tested the GCI engine and compared the results
with single (SOI at 30–10 deg. CA bTDC) and double injection (while
emission for
the blend

the first injection is at 170 deg. CA bTDC, the second injection is varied
Emission

↑ NOx

from 12 to 3 deg. CA bTDC) strategies at fixed operating conditions

NOx

(1600 rpm and 90 kPa of net IMEP). This test showed that advancing
the injection timing from 10 to 30 deg. CA bTDC increased the in-cy-
↑ Heat release
rate, cylinder

linder pressure from 6.9 to 9.8 MPa and the pressure rise rate from 1 to
pressure and

pressure rise
Combustion

rate for the

maximum

2.29 MPa/deg. CA with advanced combustion and controlled combus-

blends

tion phasing. This indicates the advantage of GCI engine over the other
LTC modes. Double injection strategy showed reduction in cylinder
pressure (6.39 MPa), pressure rise rate (1.49–0.36 MPa/deg. CA) and
heat release rate than those of single injection due to increased charge
BTE/ITE

premixing and combustion at the locally leaner mixture. Ignition delay

of single injection is noted to be longer than the double injection up to
–

17.85 deg. CA. Similar combustion phasing and longer burn duration
(35.69 deg. CA) are too observed with double injection vis-à-vis single
↑ BSFC for the
Performance

injection due to a high level of premixing and locally lean mixtures.

BSFC/ISFC

Advancing the injection timing increased the ignition delay from 22 to

blends

30.17 deg. CA, advanced the combustion phasing from 35.8 to 18 deg.
CA aTDC, shortened the burn duration from 26.39 to 35.69 deg. CA and
decreased the IMEP. The double injection strategy improved the overall
concentration
Percentage of

engine efficiency (almost twice that of the single injection) and reduced
EGR/O2

the fuel consumption (below 165.7 g/kWh). The experimental results

from this study showed the advantages of double injection strategy to
–

control the GCI combustion phasing.

Valve open

In an extensive parametric study in order to identify and quantify

(deg. CA)
and close

the effects of varying the operating parameters such as inlet tempera-

ture, injection pressure, injection timing, injection duration, inlet
–

pressure and engine speed on the overall performance of the GCI engine
[200], it is reported that, reducing the inlet temperature (by 40 °C)
Injection Timing

retarded the combustion into the later phase, i.e. in the expansion
stroke and decreased the net IMEP (from 4.5 to 6.25 bar), NOx emission
(less than 0.6 g/kg-fuel), fuel consumption (between 180 and 200 g/
kWh) and pressure rise rate (below 8 bar/deg. CA) with better com-
–

bustion stability. Reducing the intake temperature from 80 to 65 °C

n-butanol blends
Diesel/gasoline/

decreased the load from 5.7 to 4.5 bar net IMEP with reduction of 21%
net IMEP, combustion phasing from 6.8 to 15.8 deg. aTDC and bulk gas
temperature from 881 to 849 K with COV of 6%. It is observed that the
injection pressure significantly affected CO and NOx emissions, while it
Fuel

had little effect on UHC emissions. Amount of early injected fuel during
valve overlap heavily influenced the combustion efficiency and reduced
strategy on
Operating
condition

Injection

the premixed fuel amount which increased the NOx emission.

Rose et al. [418] studied the GCI engine concept at two different
LTC

compression ratios (17 and 19) with different hydraulic flow rates (HFR
Injection pressure:

310 and 520). HFR is defined as the amount of fuel (in cm3) injected in
Injection system:
Four-stroke, four

30 s at 10 MPa injection pressure. At full load, pilot injection with

cylinder, WC,

RS: 1600 rpm

Rated power:
Engine Setup

common rail

higher fuel injection pressure reduced the noise levels. The resistance to
CR: 16.5:1

100 kW

90 MPa

the auto-ignition of gasoline prevented the need for the very high
Table 8 (continued)

amount of EGR and extended the operating range. It is reported that

using optimized techniques; it is possible to achieve high engine speed
Investigators

Huang et al.

or loads in a GCI engine under better combustion stability. In this

[470]

combustion mode, NOx (< 2 g/kWh) and combustion noise being ob-
served to be comparable to those of diesel engines but CO and HC
(> 20 g/kWh at high EGR) emissions are noted to be higher. In a

63
T. Pachiannan, et al.
comparative study of RCCI and GCI combustion strategies at high load
and low-speed conditions through CFD modeling and experiments
[420], it is showed that controlling the combustion phasing is stronger
in RCCI than the GCI combustion strategy due to shorter ignition delay
of diesel vis-à-vis gasoline. However, RCCI mode increased the soot
emission and produced higher peak pressure rise rate compared to
those of GCI mode which enabled nearly zero soot emissions. It is also
shown that both strategies exhibited higher gross indicated efficiency
(approximately 47%) and very low NOx emission. Though both stra-
tegies are sensitive to EGR, the GCI is found to be more sensitive than
the RCCI combustion strategy.
To study the effect of fuel property primarily by octane number, n-
heptane and isooctane are used to obtain four gasoline surrogates with
RONs of 90, 80, 70 and 60, which are denoted as PRF90, PRF80, PRF70,
and PRF60, respectively. In GCI mode with intake supercharging, the
fuel economy is observed to be better in low RON fuels. The increase in
intake pressure promoted the complete combustion by advancing the
combustion phase and reducing the combustion duration with CO and
HC emissions reduction. It is suggested that intake air heating is not
necessary for medium load operation. It is possible to achieve high
thermal efficiency with intake heating at low loads and by super-
charging at all the loads. [421]. The combustion and emission char-
acteristics of three gasoline surrogates (primary reference fuel-PRF92,
toluene reference fuel-TRF25 and toluene reference fuel with diisobu-
tylene-TRFDIB) are compared with RON92 gasoline fuel in GCI mode at
different load and EGR conditions [422]. Increasing the EGR rate at low
loads, the ignition delay and combustion phasing of the fuels are first
shortened (ID from 16 to 14.5 deg. CA and CA50 from 3.5 to 1.75 deg.
CA aTDC for TRFDIB) and then increased except from PRF92 fuel which
followed an increased trend alone (ID from 14.5 to 18.5 deg. CA and
CA50 from 1.75 to 5 deg. aTDC). In PRF92 fuel, NOx (from 14 to 4.1 g/
kWh) and smoke (below 2 mg/kWh) emissions are decreased with in-
creasing the EGR, which showed better NOx, smoke and THC emissions
than those of the other tested fuels at low loads. At the medium load
also, similar results to those of low load are obtained from all the sur-
rogate fuels. At high loads, increasing the EGR rate prolonged the ig-
nition delay and reduced the NOx and smoke emissions (about less than
1 g/kWh and 0.5 mg/kWh respectively at the EGR rate of more than
40%). Except NOx emission, all the other emissions from all the tested
surrogates are found to be higher than those of gasoline fuel especially
at the EGR rate of more than 30%. While TRFDIB coincided well with
gasoline fuel in terms of combustion and soot characteristics, TRF25
surrogate is found to be more closure in terms of NOx, CO and THC
emissions among the other surrogates. In another study of GCI, it is
established that a simple two-component primary reference fuels sur-
rogate capture the ignition behavior of light naphtha adequately at high
temperatures region [423].
The LTC regime of gasoline direct injection compression ignition
(GDICI) in a high-speed light-duty engine is studied both numerically
and experimentally by Ra et al. [424]. Advancing the SOI2 from −17 to
−29 deg. CA aTDC advanced the ignition timing, increased the max-
imum pressure rise rate (up to 11.2 bar/deg. CA), combustion efficiency
(up to 94%) and NOx emissions (up to 0.033 g/kg-fuel) and reduced the
soot emission (less than 0.05 g/kg-fuel). Increasing the oxygen con-
centration by retarding the EGR rate increased the maximum PRR and
combustion efficiency. Though the initial gas temperature is also a
dominant factor in influencing the GDICI operation range, low gas
temperatures are preferred with suitable EGR rate in order to maintain
the wide engine operating range. The injection pressure of 1200 bar is
found to enhance the air-fuel mixing which resulted in highly favorable
fuel and thermal distributions to get enough combustion efficiency with
reduced pressure rise rate. The low cetane number and high volatility of
gasoline fuel combined with less combustion temperature by EGR, the
GDICI mode achieved very low NOx and PM (to 0.1 g/kg-fuel) emis-
sions with an ISFC of 180 g/kWh.
The speed-load operating map of a light duty single cylinder engine
64
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
is explored by Sellnau et al. [425] using gasoline to arrive at the best
injection strategy for attaining low NOx and PM emissions. In this
study, triple-injection showed improved ISFC of 181 g/kWh, lowered
maximum heat release rate, reduced NOx emission of 0.7 g/kWh and
reduced heat losses compared to those of double and single injection
strategies. At low loads, better ISFC of 230 g/kWh and stable combus-
tion are achieved with exhaust port temperature of ∼250 °C. At
medium loads (1500 pm at 6 bar IMEP), using triple or multiple injec-
tion strategies with low swirl attained the best ISFC and lower smoke
emissions. At higher loads, cylinder pressure and temperature are re-
duced by using late intake valve closing which achieved minimum ISFC
of 181 g/kWh with acceptable combustion noise, pressure rise rate and
ringing intensity. From the overall experimental results on the single
cylinder engine, it is concluded that the GDCI combustion system is
capable of achieving high efficiency and low-emissions.
It is well known that the in-cylinder mixture stratification plays an
important role in LTC. Varying the inlet air swirl ratio is one of the
methods to vary the in-cylinder temperature stratification. In this re-
gard, the effect of inlet swirl on characteristics of GCI engine over a
wide range of speed and load is studied by Loeper et al. [426]. It is
shown that the inlet swirl variation on light duty engine significantly
affected the combustion phasing at low speed, for e.g. varying swirl
ratio from 3.5 to 1.5 advanced the combustion phasing by 10 deg. CA at
1300 rpm in contrast to the retardation of combustion phasing by 2 deg.
CA at 2000 rpm. NOx emissions are observed to be higher at the lower
swirl ratios (1.5) due to higher combustion temperature. Also, the swirl
ratio of 1.5 at 1300 rpm provided the best performance characteristics
such as gross ITE of 44% and ISFC of 189.7 g/kWh.
The effect of compression ratio (12, 13 and 14) and derived cetane
number (DCN:31-light naphtha and 41-heavy naphtha) of naphtha fuel
on GCI combustion in a single cylinder engine is analyzed by Viollet
et al. [427]. Since GCI engine operates on low cetane fuel, the naphtha
(with a cetane number of 40) suited well for this operation. Further
naphtha is one of the less processed fuels and hence helps in saving
energy during fuel production. Among all the different tested config-
urations, light naphtha at the compression ratio of 14 provided the best
performance in terms of fuel consumption and matched with the im-
proved bowl design. It is opined that the double injection strategies are
required to improve stability at low loads and to control smoke emis-
sion at medium to high loads. Use of EGR necessitated the advance of
injection timing to maintain combustion phasing and to use the op-
timum piston bowl geometry which played an important role in the
progress of burn and ignition delay. In order to establish a suitable fuel
for GCI engines, a blend of low-octane (light and heavy naphtha) and
high-octane (reformate) distillate fuels with a research octane number
of 77 and a motor octane number of 73.9 are proposed. This blend has
paraffinic components (∼64%), aromatics (∼20) and naphthenes
(15%) by volume [428].
Mao et al. [429] conducted the experimental investigations on GCI
mode in a multi-cylinder heavy-duty diesel engine with constant com-
bustion phasing of 15 and 9 deg. CA aTDC using the single injection and
multiple injection strategies respectively. Increasing EGR rate up to
30% increased the maximum heat release rate (from 403.5 to 564 J/
deg. CA) and reduced the maximum pressure rise rate (< 6 bar/deg.
CA) on single and double injection respectively. In gasoline double
injection, varying the fuel injection pressure from 70 to 160 MPa at the
fixed EGR rate of 20% showed a reduction in BSFC, ignition delay,
combustion duration, and soot (< 0.02 g/kW-hr) emission than those of
diesel fuel. On the GCI mode, lower fuel injection pressure is found to
be suitable for obtaining better mechanical efficiency and combustion
efficiency with lower emissions. Reducing the injection timing intervals
between the pilot and main injection controlled the premixing heat
release rate by reducing the ignition delay which in turn reduced the
combustion noise and emissions.
Liu et al. [430] conducted an experimental study for optimizing the
pilot injection timing in GCI combustion. Early (−41 deg. CA aTDC)
T. Pachiannan, et al.
and late pilot injection (−15.7 to 16 deg. CA aTDC) timings showed
similar heat release rate, while the increase in pilot fuel mass from 3 to
10 mg resulted in increased peak heat release from the pilot injection
and decreased peak heat release from the main injection. Increased
pilot fuel mass also showed similar soot emission (less than 0.01 g/
kWh) of single injection, reduction in BSFC (< 195 g/kW-hr) and in-
crease in CO (up to 0.39 g/kW-hr) emission compared to those of single
injection. The SOI and pilot fuel quantity of an optimal pilot injection
strategy at 100 MPa fuel injection pressure is noted to be about
−25 deg. CA aTDC and 3 mg respectively. This strategy reduced the
maximum pressure rise rate, soot, and BSFC about 51%, 45%, and 1%
respectively. However, at the higher injection pressure of 140 MPa, the
optimal SOI of −27 deg. CA aTDC and pilot fuel quantity of 6 mg re-
duced the maximum pressure rate by 27%.
The influence of delaying intake valve closing timing (IVCT), two-
pulse fuel injection and injection pressure on combustion and emission
characteristics of GCI combustion under high load conditions are stu-
died by Zou et al. [431]. Delaying the IVCT reduced the compression
ratio and maintaining the constant expansion ratio. The higher ringing
intensity of greater than 5 MW/m2, the maximum pressure rise rate of
greater than 1.4 MPa/deg. CA and a little drop in cylinder pressure and
temperature due to the increased fuel mixing time about 2 deg. CA are
observed when ICVT is delayed. This also reduced the soot emission,
while it increased the CO and HC emissions. At higher loads (15 bar
IMEP), delaying IVCT and using two pulse injection strategy (increasing
pilot injection ratio from 17.2 to 60.8% and reducing the ignition delay
by retarding SOI2), it is possible to control the heat release rate and
ringing intensity for clean combustion. From this study, 2.95 bar of
intake pressure, 44% of EGR rate and 32.8% of pilot injection ratio are
described as better operating conditions at 15 bar IMEP. It is reported
that the moderate fuel injection pressure (60–100 bar) with the com-
bination of delay in IVCT and two-pulse injection can reduce the mixing
time of the main injection and the ringing intensity. The 3.4 bar of in-
take pressure, 47% of EGR rate, 10% of pilot injection (at −70 and
−7 deg. CA aTDC), 80 MPa of injection pressure at 15 bar IMEP re-
sulted in 53.1% of indicated thermal efficiency, 0.0068 g/kWh of soot,
0.21 g/kWh of NOx and 4.13 MW/m2 of ringing intensity.
The knocking intensity of GCI combustion is compared with that of
SI engine and the engine performance is also studied by Wei et al.
[432]. Advancing the injection timing from 16 to 34 deg. CA bTDC
increased the combustion efficiency, cylinder pressure (4.2–6.7 MPa),
heat release rate (82 J/deg. CA) and maximum pressure rise rate
(1.3–7.3 bar/deg. CA), while it reduced the BSFC (363–250 g/kWh), CO
(< 55 g/kWh) and HC (< 12 g/kWh) emissions. This is attributed to
the increased time for fuel-air mixing which reduced the fuel rich re-
gions and led to complete combustion. Since the combustion modes of
SI and GCI are different, knocking in SI engine is a random phenom-
enon caused by auto-ignition of end gas and in GCI engine it is caused
by local rapid burning which is not in random.
5.6. Gasoline-diesel blends on GCI combustion
It is concluded that blending gasoline with diesel fuel (10%) is
beneficial in achieving stable GCI combustion [433]. The similar in-
ference is obtained by Roberts et al. [434] that increasing intake tem-
perature or pressure and adding diesel fuel facilitates the stable op-
eration in GCI engine at low loads.
5.7. Gasoline-Biodiesel blends on GCI combustion
The practice of using gasoline-biodiesel blends in GCI engine is
quite a new approach and it is reported that the several problems in-
volved in GCI combustions like low lubricity, higher volatility, low
cetane number; longer ignition delay and lower viscosity can be re-
solved by blending a small amount of biodiesel with gasoline fuels. Few
researchers investigated the effects of the gasoline-biodiesel blend on
65
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
GCI combustion [414,435]. From the review article on GCI engines
fueled with biodiesel-gasoline blends, it is inferred that the GCI engine
achieves a reduction in CO and NOx emissions [436]. In a study of
combustion and emission characteristics of a GCI engine using gasoline-
biodiesel blends (5–20%) with variation in SOI [401], a compression
ratio of 19.5 is used for GCI engines without increasing intake air
temperatures to promote the ignition. The biodiesel in the gasoline fuel
increased the cetane number and it is ignited more readily. The gaso-
line-biodiesel blends operated at the SOI from 18 to 75 deg. CA bTDC
showed more advanced and a little bit wider combustion vis-à-vis diesel
fuel. The maximum cylinder pressure at the SOI of 40 deg. CA bTDC is
found to be 7.5 MPa and the highest heat release rate of 35 J/deg. CA is
achieved at the SOI of 20 deg. CA bTDC. The pressure rise rate, com-
bustion duration and combustion phasing of diesel and gasoline-bio-
diesel blends are observed to be identical at various SOI with little
deviations. Shortened ignition delay is observed from the blends than
the diesel fuel due to the high reactivity of biodiesel fuel. Advancing the
SOI increased the IMEP and thermal efficiency (3.2% higher at 60 deg.
CA bTDC) than those of diesel fuel. Decreased HC (3.3 g/kg-fuel at
20 deg. CA bTDC) and NOx (up to 8.5 g/kg-fuel at all the SOI varia-
tions) emissions are observed due to the more homogeneous fuel-air
mixture with a higher amount of gasoline and more oxygen content of
biofuel. In another experimental investigation [414], gasoline-biodiesel
blends (5% of biodiesel as GB05 and 20% of biodiesel as GB20) are used
to study the effect of cetane number, auto-ignition resistance and
oxygen content on the emission reduction capability of GCI engine
using single injection strategy [414]. The term “G” and “B” refer to the
gasoline and biodiesel respectively and the numeric value refers to the
quantity of the biodiesel in the blend in percentage. Lower cylinder
pressure is observed with GB05 than that of the diesel fuel, while the
peak cylinder pressure of GB20 is found to be higher than GB05 due to
the increased density of biodiesel fuel. The thermal efficiency of the
biodiesel blends is decreased when the quantity of biodiesel in the
blend is increased. It is observed that the biodiesel blends produced
lower CO and THC emissions, while the NOx emissions are observed to
be higher than that of the diesel fuel due to higher oxygen content.
In order to reduce the necessity of higher intake temperature in GCI
engines at low loads, Adams et al. [435] attempted blending the soy
methyl ester biodiesel with gasoline at 5% (BG5) and 10% (BG10) in a
single cylinder light-duty diesel engine. At a low load (3 bar imep)
operation at 1500 rpm, the required intake temperatures are observed
to be 130 °C, 110 °C and 95 °C for pure gasoline, BG5 and BG10 re-
spectively. While the peak pressure rise rate and COV of IMEP are found
to be less than 4 bar/deg. CA and 3% respectively for the blends, they
are 4–8.5 bar/deg. CA and 1% respectively for gasoline. The peak bulk
gas temperatures of all the tested fuels are observed to be within the
range of 1405– 1450 K. The NOx emission from the blends are observed
to be low (1 g/kg-FI), while retarding the second injection timings in-
creased the bulk gas temperature as well as heat release rate. This in-
creased the NOx (slightly) and combustion efficiency and reduced CO
and UHC emissions. Retarding the second injection timing also shor-
tened the ignition delay and advanced the combustion phasing with
higher peak bulk gas temperature. The combustion phasing (CA50) of is
BG5, BG10 and neat gasoline fuels are observed between 4.6 and 5 deg.
CA aTDC, 2.9 and 3.9 deg. CA aTDC and 7.1 and 7.2 deg. CA aTDC
respectively.
The effect of multiple injection strategies and gasoline-biodiesel
(5%-GB05) blends on GCI mode of combustion is studied by Putrasari
and Lim [437]. During the multiple injection modes, a major fraction of
the fuel is injected in the pilot pulse (70%, i.e. 31 mg) followed by the
remaining 30% (10 mg) of fuel in the main injection. The highest peak
cylinder pressure is observed with neat diesel (10.04 MPa) operation on
single-injection mode followed by GB05 (7.55 MPa) on multiple injec-
tion mode, GB05 (6.58 MPa) on single injection mode and the neat
diesel fuel (6.4 MPa) on multiple injection mode. This reduction in peak
pressure in multiple injection mode is due to the poor premixed
T. Pachiannan, et al.
combustion caused by the pilot injection, which decreased the pressure
and temperature before the main injection. The lower cylinder pressure
of GB05 is due to its lower density. The difficulty in auto-ignition of
GB05 is resolved by increasing the intake temperature to 358 K. Re-
duction in ignition delay and combustion duration is reported with
GB05 on both the single and multiple injection modes due to improved
cetane number (because of the addition of 5% biodiesel) and higher
intake temperature. While, the peak pressure rise rate (< 0.3 MPa/deg.
CA) and ringing intensity (< 2.5 kW/m2) of GB05 are found to be lower
than those of diesel fuel (0.43 MPa/deg. CA and 4.2 kW/m2) on single
injection, they are slightly higher than those of diesel fuel on multiple
injection mode. More combustion efficiency (> 92%) and lower CO
(0.2 g/kWh) emission than those of the diesel fuel are also observed
with GB05 due to more complete combustion and high volatility of the
fuel. The NOx emission of GB05 on both the single and multiple in-
jection modes is observed to be higher than the diesel fuel due to the
oxygen content of biodiesel fuel.
5.8. Summary of GCI combustion
In recent years, GCI combustion has evolved as one of the most
promising topics of research due to its capability of attaining very high
thermal efficiencies with a significant reduction in engine pollution
[418,438]. GCI is a new dual fuel combustion concept which is reported
to be better than HCCI and PCCI [438]. Though GCI engine is capable of
achieving high thermal efficiencies, low NOx and soot emissions and
low combustion temperatures [418] compared to those of gasoline
engines, it suffers from several drawbacks such as the requirement of
high intake temperature, low lubricity and high compression ratio
[401]. Auto-ignition resistance of gasoline limits the EGR rate (hence
limited in NOx reduction) and its operation to very low load (limited
operating range). It is reported that the high load condition of the GCI
engine requires multiple-injection compulsorily for reducing the com-
bustion noise [237,439]. However, the research concerning multiple-
injection at low loads is limited due to combustion instability and
higher maximum pressure rise rate of ∼12 bar/deg. CA [440]. Thus the
GCI operation imposes serious problems under the low load condition
[395]. The spark assisted ignition with double injection is found to
extend the limits of GCI combustion mode at low-medium load condi-
tions [441]. Moreover, a significant improvement on cold-start (for
controlling HC and CO emission) and noise reduction at high loads are
to be addressed for implementing the GCI concept in commercial en-
gines [442]. The combustion stability at low load conditions and cold-
start firing are the major challenges in GCI combustion. Though several
strategies like fuel reforming and intake preheating are able to solve
these problems to some extent, the cold start problem remains un-
resolved [443]. The results show that the start of injection (SOI) during
the intake stroke yields the best fuel economy, and injection during the
compression stroke has the potential to extend the low load limit. In-
cylinder fuel reforming and intake preheating are found to be appro-
priate for engine cold-start and warm-up [443]. Engine hardware op-
timization is needed to improve the practical application of GCI engine
including combustion chamber design, injector holes and angles, in-
jection methods, EGR, Turbocharging, exhaust treatment devices and
fuel quality [436]. Hence, the GCI concept has become one of the
prospective research areas in terms of achieving higher thermal effi-
ciency and lower emission characteristics.
Table 7 shows the summary of performance, combustion and
emission characteristics of GCI engines fueled with various fuels under
different experimental conditions.
6. Miscellaneous methods of LTC
Though the LTC combustion is mainly achieved through various
strategies namely HCCI, PCCI, RCCI, and GCI which are discussed in the
earlier sections, many researchers explored the possibilities of lowering
66
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
the combustion temperature through several techniques such as dual
fuel combustion, alternate fuels, partially premixed dual fuel, etc. In
these articles, the method of achieving LTC is not explicitly defined by
the researchers. Hence, this section reviews these miscellaneous tech-
niques for achieving LTC as well as some other methods which are not
legibly categorized within the above discussed four broad strategies.
6.1. LTC through dual fuel combustion
A diesel engine is modified as a dual fuel engine in which high
octane fuel (gas or liquid) is supplied with air during the intake, then
compressed and ignited by a liquid fuel injected during the compression
stroke in order to improve the performance and combustion char-
acteristics of the engine [444]. Similarly, the conventional diesel en-
gines are converted into dual fuel engine with minor modifications
[445,446]. The variation in peak cycle temperatures of different fuels at
100% and 40% loads in dual fuel mode of operation is shown in Fig. 27.
It is inferred from the Fig. 27 that the dual fuel operation reduces the
peak cycle temperature which can be attributed to the higher latent
heat of vaporization of the inducted primary fuels. Among all the fuels,
methanol offered a significant reduction in cycle temperature due to its
higher latent heat of vaporization [444].
6.2. LTC through biofuels
In a performance and emission comparisons study, the effects of soy,
canola and yellow grease derived B100 biodiesel fuels on LTC are
analyzed and compared with the low sulfur diesel fuel at high load
engine operating conditions [447]. The ignition delay of diesel, soy,
canola, and yellow grease is observed to be 0.95 0.91, 0.71 and 0.83 ms
respectively at higher loads (> than 9.8 bar of IMEP). The NOx emis-
sion of biodiesel fuels is noted to be higher than that of diesel fuel
except canola biodiesel, while the oxygen content of biodiesel fuel
promoted the combustion and resulted in reduced soot, CO, and THC
formations. In this work, an attempt is made to initiate LTC by ex-
tensively applying EGR at medium and low load conditions which in-
creased the ignition delay and reduced the combustion temperature. An
intake throttling valve is implemented to increase the pressure differ-
ence between the intake and exhaust to affect the rate of EGR. It is
reported that the NOx and soot emission are reduced simultaneously
when the ignition delay is prolonged (more than 50%) compared to that
of no EGR conditions at low load. The ultra-low levels of NOx and soot
emissions are realized by prolonging the ignition with the help of more
than 80% EGR; beyond which (> 80%) there is an increase in the cycle
to cycle variation, CO and THC emissions along with deterioration in
the thermal efficiency.
In another LTC study, the ethanol-biodiesel-diesel blend is used and
the results are compared with the diesel combustion on both single and
multi-cylinder engines [448]. The biodiesel is selected to act as am-
phiphile (surface reactive agent) to stabilize the ethanol-diesel blend as
well as to increase lubricity and to overcome the immiscible nature of
ethanol with diesel over a wide temperature range. Ethanol in diesel-
ethanol blend resulted in a very low smoke emission due to its addi-
tional oxygen content and higher volatility which enhanced the mixing
process. Conventional diesel combustion using ethanol blends at lower
loads resulted in incomplete and unstable combustion especially
without using Fisher-Tropsch fuel (which has strong auto-ignition
properties and hence improves the ignitability). The optimized com-
bustion settings comprising injection timing, number of injection and
injection duration solved the problems of weak ignitability of ethanol
blends at lower loads and the improved noise level. Increase in EGR
(from 42 to 58%) reduced the NOx and PM emissions simultaneously
with some fuel penalty and acceptable noise levels. Ethanol blends in
the LTC resulted in very low smoke emission; however, the limiting
factor for LTC is the combustion noise which can be reduced by redu-
cing the rail pressure without affecting the smoke level.
T. Pachiannan, et al.
Since the physicochemical properties of Dimethyl furan (DMF) are
similar to those of gasoline fuel, the effects of adding DMF (20 and
40%) with the diesel fuel on combustion and emission characteristics in
a heavy-duty diesel engine on LTC mode are studied and the results are
compared with the effects of adding gasoline (40%) with diesel fuel
[449]. It is opined by the authors that the diesel-DMF blended fuel is
more suitable for LTC due to lower cetane number of DMF. In DMF40,
increase in EGR rate (from 0 to 55%), increased the ignition delay (from
4.9 to 17.55 deg. CA). At the same EGR rate, ignition delay of DMF40
(17.55 deg. CA) is found to be longer than the gasoline (G40) as shown
in Fig. 28 due to the lower cetane number of DMF fuel. Increasing the
EGR rate (from 0 to 55%) also increased the combustion duration in-
itially from 26 to 30 deg. CA (for G40) and then decreased to 24.54 deg.
CA (at 55% EGR rate), while DMF40 showed the shorter combustion
duration (maximum of 21.5 deg. CA) among all other blends. However,
it has become difficult to control the combustion with an increase in
DMF fraction at higher EGR rate. DMF40 showed higher peak cylinder
pressure of 11.53 MPa, the heat release rate of 427.88 J/deg. CA and
pressure rise rates (12 bar/deg. CA at all EGR rates) than the other
tested fuel blends. There is no effect on ITE at lower EGR rate, but
DMF40 showed 1% higher ITE than the gasoline fuel. All the tested
fuels emitted lower NOx (< 1 g/kWh), soot (almost equal to zero), CO
and THC (< 1 g/kWh) emissions at 35% EGR rate.
It is concluded that [450] n-butanol coupled with high-pressure
direct injection strategy is more suitable for LTC operation than diesel
fuel. The n-butanol has a low boiling point and viscosity and higher
heat of vaporization, which enhance the mixing process and leads to
lower flame luminosity and soot concentrations. Because of the less
hydrophilicity and higher miscibility of n-butanol with diesel fuel vis-à-
vis ethanol, n-butanol can be easily blended with diesel [451,452]. The
empirical results suggest that the lower ignitability of the fuel is helpful
in extending the LTC operation to higher engine loads compared to that
of fuel volatility [304,453]. As n-butanol has low cetane number (∼25)
and oxygen content of 22% by weight compared to that of diesel fuels,
it has good potential for LTC operation with proper control of engine
operating parameters such as fuel injection strategy, air-fuel mixing,
etc.
It is reported that the direct injection provides good control over the
injection process and hence on the subsequent combustion process
compared to that of port fuel injection. In this context, Zheng et al.
[454] investigated the LTC mode with directly injected n-butanol on a
diesel engine and it is observed that the use of n-butanol resulted in
longer ignition delay from 2.34 to 3.78 ms, advanced combustion
phasing and higher single peak (premixed burning) heat release rate
(up to 196.4 J/deg. CA) than those of the diesel fuel, while the diesel
fuel exhibited two combustion phases (premixed and diffusion). Higher
fuel consumption, higher indicated thermal efficiency (47.16%), max-
imum pressure rise rate (up to 21.6 bar/deg. CA) and shorter combus-
tion duration are also observed with n-butanol. The LTC mode of n-
butanol reduced the NOx and soot below 100 ppm and 0.1 FSN re-
spectively without EGR, while it increased the CO and HC emissions.
However, the use of EGR reduced the pressure rise rate (which resulted
in lower engine efficiency) as well as the maximum pressure rise rate
and prolonged the combustion duration. Increase in EGR reduced the
heat release rate and also lowered the NOx and soot emissions to a very
low level with a slight increase in CO and HC emissions. It is suggested
that the combustion controllability in n-butanol can be improved by
using a multi-shot injection strategy including earlier pilot injection
which can achieve a substantial reduction in NOx emission without
EGR. However, n-butanol provided a narrower injection timing window
which is limited by the maximum rate of pressure rise and/or unstable
combustion. The combined effect of multi-shot injections and moderate
use of EGR can improve the control over the combustion and exhaust
emissions while minimizing the penalties on the engine efficiency.
In a similar study with n-butanol, it is opined that the higher heating
value, good miscibility and lower cetane number of n-butanol vis-à-vis
67
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
ethanol/methanol make n-butanol as more suitable for LTC [455]. In-
creasing the blend (20% and 40%) and the EGR rate increased the ig-
nition delay up to 19 deg. CA at the advanced injection timing
(> 13 deg. CA bTDC). Higher cylinder pressure of 9.81 MPa, heat re-
lease rate of 341.98 J/deg. CA and a maximum pressure rise rate (up to
10 bar/deg. CA for B40) are also observed with increase in butanol
quantity. Higher indicated thermal efficiency (less than 1% increase) is
observed for the butanol blends than the diesel fuel, while it decreased
with increase in EGR rate. Higher EGR rate up to 45% decreased the
NOx (about 0.5 g/kWh), CO (below 5 g/kWh) and THC (below 0.5 g/
kWh) emissions. The soot emission is found to be almost equal to zero
from the 40% butanol blends.
The butanol isomers such as n-butanol, sec-butanol, iso-butanol, and
tert-butanol added to the diesel fuel as additives by 20% and 40%,
which are referred to as N20/N40, S20/S40, I20/I40 and T20/T40 re-
spectively. The effects of these additives and EGR on both CDC and LTC
modes are studied by Zheng et al. [456]. Up to 38% EGR rate, the four
butanol isomers blends exhibited a retarded cylinder pressure rise with
higher peak cylinder pressure and double peak heat release rate com-
pared to those of diesel fuel. These are attributed to their higher vola-
tility and cetane number of these fuels which enhanced the mixing
process and resulted in a faster burning rate and higher peak cylinder
pressure. Further increase in EGR lowered the peak pressure up to
6.37 MPa and delayed the combustion with a single peak heat release
rate up to 292.56 J/deg. CA due to the higher octane number of the
blends. Increasing the EGR rate and the blends ratio showed longer
ignition delay up to 15.46 deg. CA in the sequence of I40 followed by
S40 and N40 due to the decrease in research octane numbers of the
isomers in the order of 113, 101 and 96 respectively. The isomer blends
shortened the combustion duration and increased thermal efficiency at
higher EGR rates compared to those of diesel fuel. A higher fraction of
isomers in the blends lowered the soot emissions (3.5 FSN with 40%
blend) compared to that of diesel fuel. The soot emission is observed to
be in the order of T40 > N40 > S40 > I40. Use of EGR reduced the
NOx emission almost equal to zero at higher EGR rate due to lower
combustion temperature and reduced oxygen concentration (thermal
and dilution effect respectively), while it increased the CO (more than
50 g/kWh) and THC (more than 3 g/kWh) emissions.
6.3. LTC through EGR
The combustion temperature can also be reduced by decreasing the
oxygen content with the help of a large amount of EGR which prolongs
the ignition delay and forms a partially premixed charge [457,458].
Thus in CI engine, the high rate of EGR is one of the methods for im-
plementing the LTC. The EGR replaces the fresh air with the products of
combustion namely carbon dioxide (CO2) and water (H2O) and causes
thermal, dilution, and chemical effects [459,460] which control the
ignition timing and combustion reaction rate [460]. It is reported that
the large amount of cooled EGR reduces the combustion temperature
low enough to mitigate the NOx and soot emission simultaneously. This
concept is known as EGR-diluted low-temperature combustion [242].
Huang et al. [461] investigated the LTC with gasoline and n-butanol
blends in a diesel engine at different EGR rates and compared the
combustion and emission characteristics with those of diesel fuel. The
tested fuels are 30% gasoline with diesel (D70G30), 30% n-butanol with
diesel (D70B30) and 15% gasoline and 15% n-butanol with diesel fuel
(D70G15B15). At 40% EGR rate, all the tested fuels (especially the
blends) showed lower cylinder pressure (up to 5.47 MPa) and heat re-
lease rate (up to 93.16 kJ/m3/deg. CA) with the retarded occurrences
due to lower oxygen concentration and longer ignition delay (up to
20.7 deg. CA). Increasing the EGR rate especially more than 30% re-
duced the maximum pressure rise rate below 8 bar/deg. CA due to
slower combustion rate. However, it increased BSFC (more than 255 g/
kWh) mainly from the butanol blends due to lower energy density. It
also delayed the combustion phasing and the longest delay is found
T. Pachiannan, et al.
with D70B30 followed by D70G15B15, D70G30 and diesel fuel (i.e. in
decreasing order). Increase in EGR rate reduced the intake-oxygen
concentration and in-cylinder temperature (shown in Fig. 29) which
lowered NOx emission (below 1 g/kWh). 25% EGR rate emitted lower
soot (∼0.1 g/kWh), CO (∼2 g/kWh) and THC emission (∼0.6 g/kWh)
beyond which (i.e. when EGR rate is > 25%), all the emissions are in-
creased. At a fixed EGR rate, n-butanol blends showed a reduction in
total PM number concentration compared to the other tested fuels.
6.4. LTC achieved through fuel properties
One of the requirements for LTC is prolonging the ignition delay by
any means in order to prepare a premixed charge. Similar to EGR, the
fuels with lower cetane number provide strong resistance to auto-ig-
nition and hence increase the ignition delay which helps in achieving
the LTC operations [184,462]. In order to explore the fuel suitability for
high load LTC operation in high compression ratio (16:1 and 18.2:1)
engines, four types of fuels (Diesel, gasoline, n-butanol, and ethanol)
are chosen for the analysis [450]. In a single shot diesel injection LTC
mode, up to 1 MPa IMEP needed the high injection pressure and intake
boost to lower the soot emission and high EGR rate to reduce NOx to
maintain the operation in LTC regime. Since diesel is low volatile and
highly reactive fuel, it is very difficult to prepare or form the well-mixed
charge inside the cylinder to enable LTC. In terms of low NOx and soot
emissions with LTC mode, gasoline and diesel fuel are found to be
suitable up to medium load (1 MPa IMEP). Up to a load of 1.16 MPa
IMEP, port injection of gasoline provided better emissions by control-
ling the intake boost and EGR rate. The n-butanol fuel is admitted
through direct injection to eliminate its premature auto-ignition. This
provided nearly zero soot emission due to longer ignition delay and its
oxygen content. Up to the load of 1–1.3 MPa IMEP, LTC needed the
stratified charge of n-butanol to achieve lower NOx and soot emissions
under moderate EGR rate and intake boost. Ethanol/diesel combustion
provided superior control over combustion and offered emission ben-
efits up to the load of 1.65 MPa IMEP. The experimental results showed
that ethanol is a suitable fuel for LTC at high load.
In another analysis of fuel properties to study the effect of DMF (2,5-
dimethylfuran) and cetane number improver on the combustion and
emission characteristics of diesel engine under LTC [242], four different
fuel mixtures are considered by mixing cetane and iso-octane (Ref 20),
n-heptane (Heptane 20), DMF (DMF20) and DMF and EHN
(DMF20 + EHN (2-Ethylhexyl nitrate)) mixture with 20% of diesel fuel.
The test results of these fuels are compared with diesel fuel. The higher
cetane number of DMF20 is found to influence the cylinder pressure
and heat release rate than other parameters. DMF20 showed higher
cylinder pressure (10.69 MPa), pressure rise rate and heat release rate
(237 J/deg. CA) than those of the other tested fuels due to its longer
ignition delay (up to 15.5 deg. CA) and rapid burning of fuel which is
injected before the start of ignition. The pressure rise rate of more than
10 bar/deg. CA resulted in higher combustion noise and mechanical
loading. It is reported that this can be alleviated by adding EHN with
DMF which makes DMF similar to that of diesel fuel since EHN is a
cetane improver. DMF addition also reduced the soot emission to a very
low level (less than 1 FSN) at the EGR rate of below 50% than that of
other tested fuels due to its oxygen content and longer ignition delay.
The EGR rate up to 50% reduced CO (< 7 g/kWh), THC (< 0.15 g/
kWh) and NOx (< 1 g/kWh) emissions, while further increase in EGR
rate increased the CO and THC emissions due to incomplete combus-
tion. Addition of EHN with DMF20 in lower fraction (< 0.5%) ex-
hibited more sensitivity to combustion and emission characteristics.
However, it is reported that further addition of EHN is to be combined
with high EGR rate to affect the combustion and emissions.
6.5. LTC through injection strategy
As the diesel injection process is central to the combustion process,
68
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
it considerably influences the combustion and emissions characteristics
of diesel engines. Several research works concerning multiple-injection
proved that it is a vital solution to reduce NOx [463,464] and soot
[465,466] emissions simultaneously. The results showed that advan-
cing pilot injection timing prolonged the ignition delay. The maximum
cycle temperature and the combustion noise of the pilot injection case
are observed to be much lower than those of the single injection
strategy [467].
In order to study the effect of pilot injection timing and its quantity
under medium EGR rate (25%) on combustion and emission char-
acteristics of LTC engine, butanol (up to 30%)-diesel blend is con-
sidered as test fuel [468]. Advancing the pilot injection timing de-
creased the peak value of heat release rate and in-cylinder pressure
[469] which is found to be vice-versa with an increase in butanol
fraction in the blends due to prolonged ignition delay. Increasing the
butanol quantity in the blend (up to 30%) increased the maximum
pressure rise rate from 0.48 to 0.9 MPa/deg. CA due to longer ignition
delay which formed a more combustible mixture. Advancing pilot in-
jection timing from −30 to −60 deg. CA aTDC and increasing the
butanol quantity (from 0 to 30%) increased the BSFC (224.7 to
245.76 g/kWh) and lowered the brake thermal efficiency due to in-
creased heat transfer loss, friction loss, negative compression work and
lower heating value of butanol. Prolonging the ignition delay by ad-
vancing the pilot injection timing and increasing the butanol quantity
in the blends reduced the NOx emission and soot emission below 0.6 g/
kWh and 2% respectively. Increase in EGR rate reduced the NOx
emission and increased the soot emission by more than 2% due to lower
combustion temperature. Increasing the pilot injection quantity from 2
to 8 mg increased the in-cylinder pressure, heat release rate, BSFC, NOx
and smoke emission and reduced the brake thermal efficiency.
In another experimental investigation, Huang et al. [470] compared
the effects of pilot injection strategy and fuel properties on LTC in a
four-cylinder engine using diesel/gasoline/n-butanol blends with
medium EGR rate. It is observed that increasing the pilot injection
quantity increased the in-cylinder pressure and heat release rate during
the pilot injection stage and reduced the heat release rate during the
main injection due to reduction in fuel quantity. The blends showed a
higher in-cylinder pressure up to 8.735 MPa and higher heat release
rate of 130.2 J/deg. CA with retarded occurrences due to lower cetane
number. The blended fuels increased the maximum pressure rise rate
(more than 8 bar/deg. CA) and BSFC (> 240 g/kWh) than those of the
diesel fuel. Addition of gasoline and n-butanol reduced the soot emis-
sion below 0.2 g/kWh and increased NOx emission (> 1 g/kWh) than
those of diesel fuel. The NOx and smoke emissions are not significantly
influenced by the rate of pilot injection and pilot-main intervals. In-
crease in pilot injection quantity and pilot-main interval increased both
CO and THC emissions; however, these emission changes among the
tested fuels are marginal.
Table 8 shows the summary of performance, combustion and
emission characteristics of the above discussed miscellaneous methods
of LTC.
7. Conclusions
To cope up the current and future emission regulations of diesel
engines below Euro VI norms especially the oxides of nitrogen and
particulate matter emissions, the attention is focused over the past
several decades on advanced in-cylinder/combustion strategy known as
low-temperature combustion. This review paper comprehensively
summarized the effect of various fuels on performance, combustion,
and emission characteristic of spark and compression ignition engines
using low-temperature combustion strategies namely homogeneous
charge compression ignition, premixed charge compression ignition,
partially premixed combustion, reactivity controlled compression ig-
nition and gasoline compression ignition. Low temperature combustion
through exhaust gas re-circulator and enhanced premixing improve the
T. Pachiannan, et al.
fuel efficiency with reduced emissions by simultaneously eliminating
high temperature and fuel-rich regions during the combustion devel-
opment stage. Therefore, from the above-detailed review, it is obvious
that the inherent problem of oxides of nitrogen and particulate matter
trade-off in a conventional diesel engine can be resolved by low-tem-
perature combustion. The low-temperature combustion concept is
capable of reducing oxides of nitrogen and particulate matter emissions
from diesel engines to ultra-low level while improving the thermal ef-
ficiency of gasoline-fueled engines. This low-temperature combustion
mode eliminates the dependency of after treatment systems which
usually increase the cost and complexity of the vehicles. Moreover, the
use of renewable and sustainable biofuels in low-temperature com-
bustion achieves a simultaneous reduction of carbon dioxide, oxides of
nitrogen and soot emissions. Despite extraordinary progress in low-
temperature combustion technology, commercialization of low-tem-
perature combustion engines has faced several hurdles due to the lim-
ited operating range, control over the start of combustion at high loads,
and higher hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emissions. Though the
low-temperature combustion concept has been successfully proved on
low load conditions even in heavy-duty engines, its application on high
load even in light-duty engines is still limited. From the present fuel-
wise review on the low-temperature combustion strategies, the fol-
lowing conclusions are drawn.
7.1. Homogeneous charge compression ignition
It is the initially proposed low-temperature combustion technique to
reduce the oxides of nitrogen and particulate matter simultaneously
with improved thermal efficiency using early injections and subse-
quently multiple injections to extend the operating range. However, it
suffers from higher carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions (ex-
cept with the addition of gaseous fuels which lowers carbon monoxide
and hydrocarbon emissions). The auto-ignition characteristics of the
fuels are influenced by both the equivalence ratio and charge tem-
perature in this mode. Homogeneous charge compression ignition
combustion is one of the possible ways for abating the oxides of ni-
trogen emission from sustainable biodiesel.
7.2. Premixed charge compression ignition
The premixed charge compression ignition mode is evolved from
homogeneous charge compression ignition which is proposed to abate
the drawbacks of homogeneous charge compression ignition combus-
tion mode (limited operating range, knocking and controlling com-
bustion parameters). The main difference between these two combus-
tion modes is the level of air-fuel mixing. Unlike homogeneous charge
compression ignition, the premixed charge compression ignition mode
is not completely homogeneous and thus the fuels can be injected
through advanced direct injection, port fuel injection and late direct
injection. However, the mixture preparation methods in premixed
charge compression ignition are more sensitive to in-cylinder condi-
tions compared to that of homogeneous charge compression ignition
engines. Compared to homogeneous charge compression ignition
combustion mode, premixed charge compression ignition produces re-
latively lower oxides of nitrogen and particulate matter emission
without increasing the carbon monoxide as well as hydrocarbon emis-
sions, and noise to the level of homogeneous charge compression ig-
nition. However, higher brake thermal efficiency, carbon monoxide and
hydrocarbon emissions are observed from most of the fuels compared to
those of conventional diesel combustion.
7.3. Reactivity controlled compression ignition
It is a dual fuel combustion strategy using two fuels blends with
different auto-ignition characteristics (low and high reactive fuel) to
control the combustion phasing and heat release rate (main difficulties
69
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
in homogeneous charge compression ignition and premixed charge
compression ignition modes) with reduced emissions. Low reactive fuel,
is used up to 90%, plays an important role in performance, combustion
and emission characteristics of the engine. Lower carbon monoxide and
hydrocarbon emission are observed with alcohol as low reactive fuel
and also lower hydrocarbon emission with the gasoline fuel. Hence, it is
considered as one of the most promising low-temperature combustion
modes compared to the other strategies. In most of the cases, the heat
release rate of all the tested fuels under this strategy is observed to be
higher than that of the conventional diesel combustion.
7.4. Gasoline compression ignition
It is an emerging low-temperature combustion mode, using gasoline
fuel in the diesel engines, which results in diesel-like efficiency and low
oxides of nitrogen and soot emissions. Development of these engines is
expected to reduce the imbalanced demand between diesel and gasoline
fuels. This mode of low-temperature combustion reduces the hydro-
carbon emission from most of the tested fuels and also the carbon
monoxide emission by blending biodiesel with gasoline fuel. However,
gasoline compression ignition mode needs further extensive research to
overcome its limitations and challenges such as difficulty in the ignition
at low loads and cold start, low lubricity, viscosity, and cetane number
and its practice on multi-cylinder engines.
7.5. Challenges of low-temperature combustion and its remedies
As discussed elaborately, the low-temperature combustion mode
faced many challenges such as load extension, knocking control at
higher loads, higher carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions, etc.
The several drawbacks of low-temperature combustion and some of the
remedies to resolve the same are summarized here.
• Higher carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions: Lower com-
bustion temperature and high exhaust gas re-circulator rate increase
the carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions which can be re-
duced by using after treatment devices. The effectiveness of the
after-treatment devices is also low at low-temperature combustion
due to low exhaust gas temperature and hence further research
needs to be carried out to increase the effectiveness of these devices.
The use of fuel with oxygen content (the renewable alcohol and
biodiesel fuels) and internal exhaust gas re-circulator can help to
resolve this issue to some extent.
• Extension of maximum achievable load: At high load operations,
low-temperature combustion emits more oxides of nitrogen emis-
sion and higher pressure rise rate which increases the noise too. This
can be solved by adapting boosting devices and compound injection
strategies from medium to high load. The blends of diesel and re-
newable fuels like ethanol and biodiesel are recommended for ex-
tending the load range of low-temperature combustion.
• Ignition timing and combustion control: It is very difficult to control
these parameters in low-temperature combustion since this com-
bustion mode is generally governed by chemical kinetics. The
combustion can be controlled by the properties of fuel and tem-
perature-time history of the fuel-air mixture. Temperature-time
history can be changed by changing the intake air temperature,
variable compression ratio, and exhaust gas re-circulator, etc.
• Combustion noise and stability (misfiring and torque oscillations):
These parameters affect the driving comfort and hence challenge the
implementation of low-temperature combustion concepts for prac-
tical applications. This can be alleviated by using closed-loop com-
bustion control by managing the combustion timing (ignition delay,
combustion phasing, and peak pressure or peak pressure rise rate)
mainly based on the in-cylinder pressure signal.
• Cold start: This can be resolved by using some fuel additives, pro-
viding glow plugs and fuel vaporizer for biodiesel fuels.
T. Pachiannan, et al.
In a nutshell, the fuel injection strategies and the fuel properties
significantly affect the engine characteristics in low-temperature com-
bustion. Optimization of engine design, selection of fuel and control of
operating parameters, etc. are required for achieving a simultaneous
reduction of oxides of nitrogen and particulate emissions in low-tem-
perature combustion mode. Hence, this review article concludes that
the low-temperature combustion mode is a promising advanced com-
bustion technology for a variety of fuels including conventional and
alternate sustainable fuels to meet the required stringent emission
standards and fuel demand; however, it needs further research and
development to overcome the limitation and challenges faced by it in
order to make them viable commercially.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declared that there is no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgments
Funding for this research was supported by the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (Nos. 51706088, 51776088, 51876083)
and this work also was provided by the China Postdoctoral Science
Foundation (2018M632113).
References
[1] Han M. The effects of synthetically designed diesel fuel properties – cetane
number, aromatic content, distillation temperature, on low-temperature diesel
combustion. Fuel 2013;109:512–9.
[2] Huang H, Teng W, Liu Q, Zhou C, Wang Q, Wang X. Combustion performance and
emission characteristics of a diesel engine under low-temperature combustion of
pine oil-diesel blends. Energy Convers Manage 2016;128:317–26.
[3] Tanaka S, Ayala F, Keck JC, Heywood JB. Two-stage ignition in HCCI combustion
and HCCI control by fuels and additives. Combust Flame 2003;132:219–39.
[4] Ramalingam S, Rajendran S, Ganesan P, Govindasamy M. Effect of operating
parameters and antioxidant additives with biodiesels to improve the performance
and reducing the emissions in a compression ignition engine – a review. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2018;81:775–88.
[5] Han S, Kim J, Bae C. Effect of air-fuel mixing quality on characteristics of con-
ventional and low temperature diesel combustion. Appl Energy 2014;119:454–66.
[6] Zheng M, Han X, Asad U, Wang J. Investigation of butanol-fueled HCCI combustion
on a high efficiency diesel engine. Energy Convers Manage 2015;98:215–24.
[7] Tan YH, Abdullah MO, Hipolito CN, Zauzi NSA, Abdullah GW. Engine performance
and emissions characteristics of a diesel engine fueled with diesel-biodiesel-bioe-
thanol emulsions. Energy Convers Manage 2017;132:54–64.
[8] Vávra J, Bortel I, Takáts M, Diviš M. Emissions and performance of diesel–natural
gas dual-fuel engine operated with stoichiometric mixture. Fuel 2017;208:722–33.
[9] Plee SL, Ahmad T, Myers TP. Flame temperature correlation for the effects of ex-
haust gas recirculation on diesel particulate and NOx emissions. SAE paper
811195; 1981.
[10] Murayama T, Tsukahara M. A study on reduction of NOx of diesel Engine. Bull
JSAE 1974;745506(6):64–6. [JSAE paper].
[11] Tesarek H. Investigations concerning the employment possibilities of the diesel-gas
process for reducing exhaust emissions, especially soot (Particulate Matters). SAE
paper 750158; 1975.
[12] Abedin MJ, Imran A, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA, Shahir SA, Varman M, et al. An
overview on comparative engine performance and emission characteristics of
different techniques involved in diesel engine as dual-fuel engine operation.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;60:306–16.
[13] Rajesh Kumar B, Saravanan S. Use of higher alcohol biofuels in diesel engines: a
review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;60:84–115.
[14] European Emission Standards; 2018. https://www.wikipedia.org [accessed 10
October 2018].
[15] Jeftic M, Reader GT, Zheng M. Impacts of low temperature combustion and diesel
post injection on the in-cylinder production of hydrogen in a lean-burn compres-
sion ignition engine. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2017;42:1276–86.
[16] Datta A, Mandal BK. Engine performance, combustion and emission characteristics
of a compression ignition engine operating on different biodiesel-alcohol blends.
Energy 2017;125:470–83.
[17] Dec JE. A conceptual model of DI diesel combustion based on laser-sheet imaging.
SAE paper 970873; 1997.
[18] Kato T, Tsujimura K, Shintani M, Minami T, Yamaguchi I. Spray characteristics and
combustion improvement of D.I. diesel engine with high pressure fuel injection.
SAE paper 890265; 1989.
[19] Oblander K, Kollmann K, Kramer M, Kutschera I. The influence of high pressure
fuel injection on performance and exhaust emissions of a high speed direct in-
jection diesel engine. SAE paper 890438; 1989.
[20] Ishiwata H, Okubo H. A new series of timing and injection rate control systems –
70
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
Ad-Tics and P-Tics. SAE paper 880491; 1988.
[21] Yu RC, Shahed SM. Effects of injection timing and exhaust gas recirculation on
emissions from a D.I. diesel engine. SAE paper 811234; 1981.
[22] Dürnholz M, Eifler G, Endres H. Exhaust-gas recirculation – a measure to reduce
exhaust emissions of DI diesel engines. SAE paper 920725; 1992.
[23] Allan AB, Khin A. Investigation of combustion phenomena in a swirl chamber
compression ignition engine using Schlieren techniques. SAE paper 700500; 1970.
[24] Monaghan ML, Pettifer HF. Air motion and its effect on diesel performance and
emissions. SAE paper 810255; 1981.
[25] Shimada T, Sakai K, Kurihara S. Variable swirl inlet system and its effect on diesel
performance and emissions. SAE paper 861185; 1986.
[26] Watson N. Turbochargers for the 1980s – current trends and future prospects. SAE
paper 790063; 1979.
[27] Suzuki T, Joko I, Kakegawa T. Development of Hino turbocharged diesel engines.
SAE paper 840015; 1984.
[28] Tsukahara M, Chikahisa T, Miyamoto N, Murayama T. A study on the reduction of
NOx of diesel engine by the use of an auxiliary injection method. Bull JSME
1981;24(189):571–7.
[29] Mayer KP. Fuel economy, emissions and noise of multi-spray light duty DI diesel –
current status and development trends. SAE paper 841288; 1984.
[30] Shinoda K, Koide H, Kobayashi F, Nagase M, Ikeda S, Takata M, Nakano J.
Development of new electronic control system for a diesel engine. SAE paper
860597; 1986.
[31] Hil RW, Lawrence CS, Clarke DP, Needham JR. The optimized direct injection
diesel engine for future passenger cars. SAE paper 880419; 1988.
[32] Musculus MPB, Miles PC, Pickett LM. Conceptual models for partially premixed
low-temperature diesel combustion. Prog Energy Combust Sci 2013;39:246–83.
[33] Shinozaki O, Shinoyama E, Saito K. Trapping performance of diesel particulate
filters. SAE paper 900107; 1990.
[34] Ha K, Larocque J, Walsh J, Skabowski A, Goldberger L. Field evaluation of a diesel
particulate trap system for a 6V-92TA transit bus engine. SAE paper 900112; 1990.
[35] Tamilselvan P, Nallusamy N, Rajkumar S. A comprehensive review on perfor-
mance, combustion and emission characteristics of biodiesel fueled diesel engines.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;79:1134–59.
[36] Datta A, Mandal BK. A comprehensive review of biodiesel as an alternative fuel for
compression ignition engine. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;57:799–821.
[37] Omidvarborna H, Kumar A, Kim DS. NOx emissions from low-temperature com-
bustion of biodiesel made of various feedstocks and blends. Fuel Process Technol
2015;140:113–8.
[38] Tormos B, Novella R, Garcıa A, Gargar K. Comprehensive study of biodiesel fuel for
HSDI engines in conventional and low temperature combustion conditions. Renew
Energ 2010;35:368–78.
[39] Saxena MR, Maurya RK. Effect of premixing ratio, injection timing and compres-
sion ratio on nanoparticle emissions from dual fuel non-road compression ignition
engine fueled with gasoline/methanol (port injection) and diesel (direct injection).
Fuel 2017;203:894–914.
[40] Ramesh N, Mallikarjuna JM. Low temperature combustion strategy in an off-
highway diesel engine – experimental and CFD study. Appl Therm Eng
2017;124:844–54.
[41] Resitoglu IA, Altinisik K, Keskin A, Yildirimcan S, Ocakoglu K, Omar MA.
Development of Fe2O3 based catalysts to control pollutant emissions in diesel
engines. Fuel 2017;208:111–6.
[42] Xu G, Jia M, Li Y, Xie M, Su W. Multi-objective optimization of the combustion of a
heavy-duty diesel engine with low temperature combustion under a wide load
range: (I) Computational method and optimization results. Energy
2017;126:707–19.
[43] Wang S, Zhu X, Somers LMT, Goey LPH. Effects of exhaust gas recirculation at
various loads on diesel engine performance and exhaust particle size distribution
using four blends with a research octane number of 70 and diesel. Energy Convers
Manage 2017;149:918–27.
[44] Solouk A, Tripp J, Herfeh MS, Shahbakhti M. Fuel consumption assessment of a
multi-mode low temperature combustion engine as range extender for an electric
vehicle. Energy Convers Manage 2017;148:1478–96.
[45] Reijnders J, Boot M, Goey P. Impact of aromaticity and cetane number on the soot-
NOx trade-off in conventional and low temperature combustion. Fuel
2016;186:24–34.
[46] Hodges KA, Aniello A, Krishnan SR, Srinivasan KK. Impact of propane energy
fraction on diesel-ignited propane dual fuel low temperature combustion. Fuel
2017;209:769–75.
[47] Thangaraja J, Kannan C. Effect of exhaust gas recirculation on advanced diesel
combustion and alternate fuels – a review. Appl Energy 2016;180:169–84.
[48] Bendu H, Deepak BBVL, Murugan S. Multi-objective optimization of ethanol fueled
HCCI engine performance using hybrid GRNN–PSO. Appl Energy
2017;187:601–11.
[49] Bergthorson JM, Thomson MJ. A review of the combustion and emissions prop-
erties of advanced transportation biofuels and their impact on existing and future
engines. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;42:1393–417.
[50] Feng H, Zhang C, Wang M, Liu D, Yang X, Chia-fon L. Availability analysis of n-
heptane/iso-octane blends during low-temperature engine combustion using a
single-zone combustion model. Energy Convers Manage 2014;84:613–22.
[51] Noh HK, No SY. Effect of bioethanol on combustion and emissions in advanced CI
engines: HCCI, PPC and GCI mode – a review. Appl Energy 2017;208:782–802.
[52] Leermakers CAJ, Musculus MPB. In-cylinder soot precursor growth in a low-tem-
perature combustion diesel engine: Laser-induced fluorescence of polycyclic aro-
matic hydrocarbons. Proc Combust Inst 2015;35:3079–86.
[53] Yousefi A, Guo H, Birouk M. An experimental and numerical study on diesel
T. Pachiannan, et al.
injection split of a natural gas/diesel dual-fuel engine at a low engine load. Fuel
2018;212:332–46.
[54] Asrag HAE, Ju Y. Direct numerical simulations of NOx effect on multistage auto-
ignition of DME/air mixture in the negative temperature coefficient regime for
stratified HCCI engine conditions. Combust Flame 2014;161:256–69.
[55] Niemeyer KE, Daly SR, Cannella WJ, Hagen CL. Investigation of the LTC fuel
performance index for oxygenated reference fuel blends. Fuel 2015;155:14–24.
[56] Kukkadapu G, Kumar K, Sung CJ, Mehl M, Pitz WJ. Autoignition of gasoline sur-
rogates at low temperature combustion conditions. Combust Flame
2015;162:227285.
[57] Lee Y, Huh KY. Analysis of different modes of low temperature combustion by
ultra-high EGR and modulated kinetics in a heavy duty diesel engine. Appl Therm
Eng 2014;70:776–87.
[58] Lilik GK, Boehman AL. Advanced diesel combustion of a high cetane number fuel
with low hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emissions. Energy Fuel
2011;25:1444–56.
[59] Gupta SK, Anand K. Experimental investigations to reduce unburned emissions in
reactivity controlled compression ignition through fuel modifications. Appl Therm
Eng 2019;146:622–34.
[60] Jiaqiang E, Phama M, Zhaoc D, Deng Y, Le D, Zuo W, et al. Effect of different
technologies on combustion and emissions of the diesel engine fueled with bio-
diesel: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;80:620–47.
[61] Sun J, Caton JA, Timothy J. Oxides of nitrogen emissions from biodiesel-fuelled
diesel engines. Prog Energy Combust Sci 2010;36:677–95.
[62] Ramesh N, Mallikarjuna JM. Evaluation of in-cylinder mixture homogeneity in a
diesel HCCI engine – a CFD analysis. Eng Sci Technol Int J 2016;19(2):917–25.
[63] Luo J, Yao M, Liu H, Yang B. Experimental and numerical study on suitable diesel
fuel surrogates in low temperature combustion conditions. Fuel 2012;97:621–9.
[64] Amorim RJ, Novella R, Garcia A, Molina S. Study on LTC for light duty engines –
Part 2 – Spray enhancements. Fuel 2017;193:206–19.
[65] Carlucci AP, Laforgia D, Motz S, Saracino R, Wenzel SP. Advanced closed loop
combustion control of a LTC diesel engine based on in-cylinder pressure signals.
Energy Convers Manage 2014;77:193–207.
[66] Fang C, Yang F, Ouyang M, Gao G, Chen L. Combustion mode switching control in
a HCCI diesel engine. Appl Energy 2013;110:190–200.
[67] Shi L, Xiao W, Li M, Lou L, Deng KY. Research on the effects of injection strategy
on LTC combustion based on two-stage fuel injection. Energy 2017;121:21–31.
[68] Yang B, Yao M, Cheng WK, Zheng Z, Yue L. Regulated and unregulated emissions
from a compression ignition engine under low temperature combustion fueled
with gasoline and n-butanol/gasoline blends. Fuel 2014;120:163–70.
[69] Benajes J, García-Oliver JM, Novella R, Kolodziej C. Increased particle emissions
from early fuel injection timing diesel low temperature combustion. Fuel
2012;94:184–90.
[70] Zheng J, Caton JA. Second law analysis of a low temperature combustion diesel
engine: effect of injection timing and exhaust gas recirculation. Energy
2012;38:78–84.
[71] Wang H, Zheng Z, Yao M, Reitz RD. An experimental and numerical study on the
effects of fuel properties on the combustion and emissions of low-temperature
combustion diesel engines. Combust Sci Technol 2014;186:1795–815.
[72] Dijkstra R, Blasio GD, Boot M, Beatrice C, Bertoli C. Assessment of the effect of low
cetane number fuels on a light duty CI engine: preliminary experimental char-
acterization in PCCI operating condition. SAE technical papers 2011-24-0053;
2011.
[73] Subramanian SN, Ciatti S. Low cetane fuels in compression ignition engine to
achieve LTC. ASME 2011 internal combustion engine division fall technical con-
ference ICEF2011-60014. 2011.
[74] Tompkins BT, Jacobs TJ. Low-temperature combustion with biodiesel: its enabling
features in improving efficiency and emissions. Energy Fuels 2013;27:2794–803.
[75] Sluder CS, Wagner RM. An estimate of diesel high-efficiency clean combustion
impacts on FTP-75 after-treatment requirements. SAE technical paper 2006-01-
3311; 2006.
[76] Park SW, Reitz RD. Numerical study on the low emission window of homogeneous
charge compression ignition diesel combustion. Combust Sci Technol
2007;179(11):2279–307.
[77] Wagner RM, Green J, Dam T, Edwards K, Storey JM. Simultaneous low engine-out
NOx and particulate matter with highly diluted diesel combustion. SAE technical
paper 2003-01-0262; 2003.
[78] Xie H, Li L, Chen T. Study on spark assisted compression ignition (SACI) com-
bustion with positive valve overlap at medium-high load. Appl Energy
2013;101:622–33.
[79] Pal A, Agarwal AK. Effect of laser puls energy on laser ignition of port fuel injected
hydrogen engine. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2016;41(1):675–82.
[80] Epping K, Aceves S, Bechtold R, Dec J. The potential of HCCI combustion for high
efficiency and low emissions. SAE technical paper 2002-01-1923; 2002.
[81] Hadia F, Wadhah S, Ammar H, Ahmed O. Investigation of combined effects of
compression ratio and steam injection on performance, combustion and emissions
characteristics of HCCI engine. Case Stud Therm Eng 2017;10:262–71.
[82] Iwabuchi Y, Kawai K, Shoji T, Takeda Y. Trial of new concept diesel combustion
system premixed compression-ignition combustion. SAE technical paper 1999-01-
0185; 1999.
[83] Hou JX, Qiao XQ. Characterization of knocking combustion in HCCI DME engine
using wavelet packet transform. Appl Energy 2010;87:1239–46.
[84] Pundir BP. Engine emissions – pollutant formation and advances in control tech-
nology. New Delhi: Narosa Publishing House; 2007.
[85] Nakagome K, Shimazaki N, Niimura K, Kobayashi S. Combustion and emission
characteristics of premixed lean diesel combustion engine. SAE technical paper
71
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
970898; 1997.
[86] Imtenan S, Varman M, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA, Sajjad H, Arbab MI, et al. Impact of
low temperature combustion attaining strategies on diesel engine emissions for
diesel and biodiesels: a review. Energy Convers Manage 2014;80:329–56.
[87] Agarwal AK, Singh AP, Maurya RK. Evolution, challenges and path forward for low
temperature combustion engines. Prog Energy Combust Sci 2017;61:1–56.
[88] Rajkumar S, Thangaraja J. Effect of biodiesel, biodiesel binary blends, hydro-
genated biodiesel and injection parameters on NOx and soot emissions in a tur-
bocharged diesel engine. Fuel 2019;240:101–18.
[89] Dec JE. Advanced compression-ignition engines—understanding the in cylinder
processes. Proc Combust Inst 2009;32:2727–42.
[90] Gan S, Kiat Ng H, Pang KM. Homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI)
combustion: implementation and effects on pollutants in direct injection diesel
engines. Appl Energy 2011;88:559–67.
[91] Jin Chao, Zheng Zunqing. A review on homogeneous charge compression ignition
and low temperature combustion by optical diagnostics. J Chem 2015;2015:1–23.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/910348.
[92] Kook S, Bae C, Miles PC, Choi D, Pickett LM. The influence of charge dilution and
injection timing on low-temperature diesel combustion and emissions. SAE tech-
nical paper no. 2005-01-3837; 2005.
[93] Machrafi H, Cavadiasa S. An experimental and numerical analysis of the influence
of the inlet temperature, equivalence ratio and compression ratio on the HCCI
auto-ignition process of primary reference fuels in an engine. Fuel Process Technol
2008;89:1218–26.
[94] Chauvin J, Corde G, Petit N, Rouchon P. Motion planning for experimental airpath
control of a diesel homogeneous charge-compression ignition engine. Control Eng
Pract 2008;16:1081–91.
[95] Garcia MT, Aguilar FJE, Villanueva JAB, Trujillo EC. Analysis of a new analytical
law of heat release rate (HRR) for homogenous charge compression ignition
(HCCI) combustion mode versus analytical parameters. Appl Therm Eng
2011;31:458–66.
[96] Hairuddin AA, Yusaf T, Wandel AP. Review of hydrogen and natural gas addition
in diesel HCCI engines. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;32:739–61.
[97] Onishi S, Jo SH, Shoda K, Jo P, Kato S. Active thermo-atmosphere combustion
(ATAC) – a new combustion process for internal combustion engines. SAE 790501;
1979.
[98] Noguchi M, Tanaka Y, Tanaka T, Takeuchi Y. A study on gasoline engine com-
bustion by observation of intermediate reactive products during combustion. SAE
790840; 1979.
[99] Ishii H, Koike N, Suzuki H, Odaka M. Exhaust purification of diesel engines by
homogeneous charge with compression ignition Part 2: Analysis of combustion
phenomena and NOx formation by numerical simulation with experiment. SAE
paper no. 970315; 1997.
[100] Tree DR, Svensson KI. Soot processes in compression ignition engines. Prog Energy
Combust Sci 2007;33:272–309.
[101] Zhao H, Peng Z. Ladommatos N. Understanding of controlled autoignition com-
bustion in a four-stroke gasoline engine. Proc IMechE Part D J Autom Eng
2003;215:1297–310.
[102] Saxena S, Bedoya ID. Fundamental phenomena affecting low temperature com-
bustion and HCCI engines, high load limits and strategies for extending these
limits. Prog Energy Combust Sci 2013;39:457–88.
[103] Egüz U, Leermakers N, Somers B, Goey P. Modeling of PCCI combustion with FGM
tabulated chemistry. Fuel 2014;118:91–9.
[104] Yasar H, Soyhan HS, Walmsley H, Head B, Sorusbay C. Double-Wiebe function: An
approach for single-zone HCCI engine modeling. Appl Therm Eng
2008;28:1284–90.
[105] Hasan AO, Leung P, Tsolakis A, Golunski SE, Xu HM, Wyszynski ML, et al. Effect of
composite aftertreatment catalyst on alkane, alkene and monocyclic aromatic
emissions from an HCCI/SI gasoline engine. Fuel 2011;90:1457–64.
[106] Song H, Song S. Predicting performance of a methane-fueled HCCI engine with
hydrogen addition considering knock resistance. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2015;40:15749–59.
[107] Yao M, Zheng Z, Liu H. Progress and recent trends in homogeneous charge com-
pression ignition (HCCI) engines. Prog Energy Combust Sci 2009;35:398–437.
[108] Mehresh P, Souder J, Flowers D, Riedel U, Dibble RW. Combustion timing in HCCI
engines determined by ion-sensor: experimental and kinetic modeling. Proc
Combust Inst 2005;30:2701–9.
[109] Mansoury M, Jafarmadar S, Talei M, Lashkarpour SM. Optimization of HCCI
(Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition) engine combustion chamber walls
temperature to achieve optimum IMEP using LHS and Nelder Mead algorithm.
Energy 2017;119:938–49.
[110] Kodavasal J, Lavoie GA, Assanis DN, Martz JB. The effect of diluent composition
on homogeneous charge compression ignition auto-ignition and combustion
duration. Proc Combust Inst 2015;35:3019–26.
[111] Kodavasal J, Lavoie GA, Assanis DN, Martz JB. The effects of thermal and com-
positional stratification on the ignition and duration of homogeneous charge
compression ignition combustion. Combust Flame 2015;162:451–61.
[112] Machrafi H, Cavadias S, Gilbert P. An experimental and numerical analysis of the
HCCI auto-ignition process of primary reference fuels, toluene reference fuels and
diesel fuel in an engine, varying the engine parameters. Fuel Process Technol
2008;89:1007–16.
[113] Nobakht AY, Saray RK, Rahimi A. A parametric study on natural gas fueled HCCI
combustion engine using a multi-zone combustion model. Fuel 2011;90:1508–14.
[114] Yousefzadeh A, Jahanian O. Using detailed chemical kinetics 3D-CFD model to
investigate combustion phase of a CNG-HCCI engine according to control strategy
requirements. Energy Convers Manage 2017;133:524–34.
T. Pachiannan, et al.
[115] Sharma TK, Rao GAP, Murthy KM. Effective reduction of NOx emissions of a HCCI
(Homogeneous charge compression ignition) engine by enhanced rate of heat
transfer under varying conditions of operation. Energy 2015;93:2102–15.
[116] Najt PM, Foster DE. Compression-ignited homogeneous charge combustion. SAE
paper 830264.
[117] Sarabchi N, Saray RK, Mahmoudi SMS. Utilization of waste heat from a HCCI
(homogeneous charge compression ignition) engine in a tri-generation system.
Energy 2013;55:965–76.
[118] Bogin G, Chen JY, Dibble RW. The effects of intake pressure, fuel concentration,
and bias voltage on the detection of ions in a homogeneous charge compression
ignition (HCCI) engine. Proc Combust Inst 2009;32:2877–84.
[119] García MT, Aguilar FJJE, Lencero TS, Villanueva JAB. A new heat release rate
(HRR) law for homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI) combustion
mode. Appl Therm Eng 2009;29:3654–62.
[120] Walter B, Gatellie B. Near zero NOx emissions and high fuel efficiency diesel en-
gine: the NADITM concept using dual mode combustion. Oil Gas Sci Technol
2003;58:101–14.
[121] Shi L, Cui Y, Deng K, Peng H, Chen Y. Study of low emission homogeneous charge
compression ignition (HCCI) engine using combined internal and external exhaust
gas recirculation (EGR). Energy 2006;31:2665–76.
[122] Khandal SV, Banapurmath NR, Gaitondea VN, Hiremath SS. Paradigm shift from
mechanical direct injection diesel engines to advanced injection strategies of
diesel homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI) engines – a compre-
hensive review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;70:369–84.
[123] Fathi M, Jahanian O, Ganji DD, Wang S, Somers B. Stand-alone single- and multi-
zone modeling of direct injection homogeneous charge compression ignition (DI-
HCCI) combustion engines. Appl Therm Eng 2017;125:1181–90.
[124] Lu XC, Chen W, Huang Z. A fundamental study on the control of the HCCI com-
bustion and emissions by fuel design concept combined with controllable EGR.
Part 1. The basic characteristics of HCCI combustion. Fuel 2005;84:1074–83.
[125] Liu H, Zhang P, Li Z, Luo J, Zheng Z, Yao M. Effects of temperature in-
homogeneities on the HCCI combustion in an optical engine. Appl Therm Eng
2011;31:2549–55.
[126] Machrafi H, Cavadias S. Three-stage autoignition of gasoline in an HCCI engine:
An experimental and chemical kinetic modeling investigation. Combust Flame
2008;155:557–70.
[127] Zeng W, Xie M. A novel approach to reduce hydrocarbon emissions from the HCCI
engine. Chem Eng J 2008;139:380–9.
[128] Machrafi H, Cavadias S, Amouroux J. A parametric study on the emissions from an
HCCI alternative combustion engine resulting from the auto-ignition of primary
reference fuels. Appl Energy 2008;85:755–64.
[129] Luján JM, Guardiola C, Pla B, Bares P. Estimation of trapped mass by in-cylinder
pressure resonance in HCCI engines. Mech Syst Sig Process 2016;66–67:862–74.
[130] Hasan MM, Rahman MM. Homogeneous charge compression ignition combustion:
Advantages over compression ignition combustion, challenges and solutions.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;57:282–91.
[131] Jafarmadar S, Nemati P, Khodaie R. Multidimensional modeling of the effect of
exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) on exergy terms in an HCCI engine fueled with a
mixture of natural gas and diesel. Energy Convers Manage 2015;105:498–508.
[132] García MT, Aguilar FJJE, Lencero TS. Experimental study of the performances of a
modified diesel engine operating in homogeneous charge compression ignition
(HCCI) combustion mode versus the original diesel combustion mode. Energy
2009;34:159–71.
[133] Kumar P, Rehman A. Bio-diesel in homogeneous charge compression ignition
(HCCI) combustion. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;56:536–50.
[134] Viggiano A, Magi V. A comprehensive investigation on the emissions of ethanol
HCCI engines. Appl Energy 2012;93:277–87.
[135] Wang X, Huang Z, Zhang W, Kuti OA, Nishida K. Effects of ultra-high injection
pressure and micro-hole nozzle on flame structure and soot formation of im-
pinging diesel spray. Appl Energy 2011;88:1620–8.
[136] Christensen M, Johansson B, Amneus P, Mauss F. Supercharged homogeneous
charge compression ignition. SAE paper 980787; 1998.
[137] Su WH, Lin TJ, Pei YQ. A compound technology for HCCI combustion in a DI diesel
engine based on the multi-pulse injection and the BUMP combustion chamber.
SAE 2003-01-0741; 2003.
[138] Bendu H, Murugan S. Homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI) com-
bustion: Mixture preparation and control strategies in diesel engines. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2014;38:732–46.
[139] Law D, Kemp D, Allen J, Kirkpatrick G, Copland T. Controlled combustion in an IC
engine with a fully variable valve train. SAE 2001-01-0251; 2001.
[140] Fang-Xi X, Xiao-Ping L, Xin-Chao W, Yan S, Wei H. Research on using EGR and
ignition timing to control load of a spark-ignition engine fueled with methanol.
Appl Therm Eng 2013;50:1084–91.
[141] Saravanan N, Nagarajan G, Dhanasekaran C, Kalaiselvan KM. Experimental in-
vestigation of hydrogen port fuel injection in DI diesel engine. Int J Hydrog Energy
2007;32:4071–80.
[142] Kumar P, Rehman A. Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition (HCCI) com-
bustion engine – a review. IOSR J Mech Civ Eng (IOSR-JMCE) 2014;11:47–67.
[143] Zheng J, Yang W, Miller L, Nicholas PC. Prediction of pre-ignition reactivity and
ignition delay for HCCI using a reduced chemical kinetic model. SAE paper no.
2001-01-1025; 2001.
[144] Mathivanan K, Mallikarjuna JM, Ramesh A. Influence of multiple fuel injection
strategies on performance and combustion characteristics of a diesel fueled HCCI
engine – an experimental investigation. Exp Therm Fluid Sci 2016;77:337–46.
[145] Das P, Subbarao PMV, Subrahmanyam JP. Control of combustion process in an
HCCI-DI combustion engine using dual injection strategy with EGR. Fuel
72
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
2015;159:580–9.
[146] Ganesh D, Nagarajan G. Homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI) com-
bustion of diesel fuel with external mixture formation. Energy 2010;35:148–57.
[147] Stanglmaier R, Roberts C. Homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI):
benefits, compromises, and future engine applications. SAE technical paper 1999-
01-3682; 1999.
[148] Hussaini SY, Lahane S, Patil NG. Analysis of performance and emission char-
acteristics of a homogeeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI) Engine.
Procedia Technol 2016;25:854–61.
[149] Lee K, Cho S, Kim N, Min K. A study on combustion control and operating range
expansion of gasoline HCCI. Energy 2015;91:1038–48.
[150] Hasan AO, Abu-Jrai A, Al-Muhtaseb AH, Tsolakis A, Xu H. HC, CO and NOx
emissions reduction efficiency of a prototype catalyst in gasoline bi-mode SI/HCCI
engine. J Environ Chem Eng 2016;4:2410–6.
[151] Kim DS, Lee CS. Improved emission characteristics of HCCI engine by various
premixed fuels and cooled EGR. Fuel 2006;85:695–704.
[152] Yang D, Wang Z, Wang JX, Shuai S. Experimental study of fuel stratification for
HCCI high load extension. Appl Energy 2011;88:2949–54.
[153] Jafarmadar S, Nemati P. Exergy analysis of diesel/biodiesel combustion in a
homogenous charge compression ignition (HCCI) engine using three-dimensional
model. Renew Energ 2016;99:514–23.
[154] He BQ, Yuan J, Liu MB, Zhao H. Combustion and emission characteristics of a n-
butanol HCCI engine. Fuel 2014;115:758–64.
[155] Maurya RK, Agarwal AK. Experimental study of combustion and emission char-
acteristics of ethanol fueled port injected homogeneous charge compression ig-
nition (HCCI) combustion engine. Appl Energy 2011;88:1169–80.
[156] Zhang C, Wu H. Combustion characteristics and performance of a methanol fueled
homogenous charge compression ignition (HCCI) engine. J Energy Inst
2016;89:346–53.
[157] Aceves S, Flowers D. Engine shows diesel efficiency without the emissions. Sci
Technol Rev 2004:17–9.
[158] Maurya RK, Agarwal AK. Experimental investigations of performance, combustion
and emission characteristics of ethanol and methanol fueled HCCI engine. Fuel
Process Technol 2014;126:30–48.
[159] Hiremath SS, Khandal SV, Banapurmath NR, Math VB, Gaitonde VN. Comparative
analysis of performance of dual fuel (DF) and homogeneous charge compression
ignition (HCCI) engines fueled with honne oil methyl ester (HOME) and com-
pressed natural gas (CNG). Fuel 2017;196:134–43.
[160] Mancaruso E, Vaglieco BM. Optical investigation of the combustion behaviour
inside the engine operating in HCCI mode and using alternative diesel fuel. Exp
Therm Fluid Sci 2010;34:346–51.
[161] Antunes JMG, Mikalsen R, Roskilly AP. An investigation of hydrogen-fueled HCCI
engine performance and operation. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2008;33:5823–8.
[162] Yousefi A, Gharehghani A, Birouk M. Comparison study on combustion char-
acteristics and emissions of a homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI)
engine with and without pre-combustion chamber. Energy Convers Manage
2015;100:232–41.
[163] Nathan SS, Mallikarjuna JM, Ramesh A. An experimental study of the biogas-
diesel HCCI mode of engine operation. Energy Convers Manage 2010;51:1347–53.
[164] Bika AS, Franklin L, Kittelson DB. Homogeneous charge compression ignition
engine operating on synthesis gas. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2012;37:9402–11.
[165] Bhaduri S, Contino F, Jeanmart H, Breuer E. The effects of biomass syngas com-
position, moisture, tar loading and operating conditions on the combustion of a
tar-tolerant HCCI (Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition) engine. Energy
2015;87:289–302.
[166] Sudheesh K, Mallikarjuna JM. Diethyl ether as an ignition improver for biogas
homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI) operation – an experimental
investigation. Energy 2010;35:3614–22.
[167] Nathan SS, Mallikarjuna JM, Ramesh A. Effects of charge temperature and exhaust
gas re-circulation on combustion and emission characteristics of an acetylene
fueled HCCI engine. Fuel 2010;89:515–21.
[168] Zhijun W, Zhe K, Jun D, Zongjie H, Liguang L. Effect of oxygen content on n-
heptane auto-ignition characteristics in a HCCI engine. Appl Energy
2016;184:594–604.
[169] Lu X, Chen W, Huang Z. A fundamental study on the control of the HCCI com-
bustion and emissions by fuel design concept combined with controllable EGR.
Part 2. Effect of operating conditions and EGR on HCCI combustion. Fuel
2005;84:1084–92.
[170] Qian Y, Li H, Han D, Ji L, Huang Z, Lu X. Octane rating effects of direct injection
fuels on dual fuel HCCI-DI stratified combustion mode with port injection of n-
heptane. Energy 2016;111:1003–16.
[171] Tong D, Ren S, Li Y, Wang Z, Zhang H, Wang Z, et al. Performance and emissions
of gasoline homogeneous charge induced ignition (HCII) by diesel through whole
operating range on a heavy-duty multi-cylinder engine. Fuel 2017;197:259–71.
[172] Lu X, Qian Y, Yang Z, Han D, Ji J, Zhou X, et al. Experimental study on compound
HCCI (homogenous charge compression ignition) combustion fueled with gasoline
and diesel blends. Energy 2014;64:707–18.
[173] He BQ, Liu MB, Zhao H. Comparison of combustion characteristics of n-butanol/
ethanol–gasoline blends in a HCCI engine. Energy Convers Manage
2015;95:101–9.
[174] Turkcan A, Ozsezen AN, Canakci M. Experimental investigation of the effects of
different injection parameters on a direct injection HCCI engine fueled with al-
cohol-gasoline fuel blends. Fuel Process Technol 2014;126:487–96.
[175] Cinar C, Uyumaz A, Solmaz H, Sahin F, Polat S, Yilmaz E. Effects of intake air
temperature on combustion, performance and emission characteristics of a HCCI
engine fueled with the blends of 20% n-heptane and 80% isooctane fuels. Fuel
T. Pachiannan, et al.
Process Technol 2015;130:275–81.
[176] Sjoberg M, Dec JE. Comparing late-cycle autoignition stability for single- and two-
stage ignition fuels in HCCI engines. Proc Combust Inst 2007;31:2895–902.
[177] Yang Y, Dec JE, Dronniou N, Sjoberg M. Tailoring HCCI heat-release rates with
partial fuel stratification: comparison of two-stage and single-stage-ignition fuels.
Proc Combust Inst 2011;33:3047–55.
[178] Uyumaz A. An experimental investigation into combustion and performance
characteristics of an HCCI gasoline engine fueled with n-heptane, isopropanol and
n-butanol fuel blends at different inlet air temperatures. Energy Convers Manage
2015;98:199–207.
[179] Liu MB, He BQ, Zhao H. Effect of air dilution and effective compression ratio on
the combustion characteristics of a HCCI (homogeneous charge compression ig-
nition) engine fueled with n-butanol. Energy 2015;85:296–303.
[180] Kozarac D, Taritas I, Vuilleumier D, Saxena S, Dibble RW. Experimental and nu-
merical analysis of the performance and exhaust gas emissions of a biogas/n-
heptane fueled HCCI engine. Energy 2016;115:180–93.
[181] Polat S. An experimental study on combustion, engine performance and exhaust
emissions in a HCCI engine fueled with diethyl ether–ethanol fuel blends. Fuel
Process Technol 2016;143:140–50.
[182] Singh G, Singh AP, Agarwal AK. Experimental investigations of combustion, per-
formance and emission characterization of biodiesel fueled HCCI engine using
external mixture formation technique. Sustainable Energy Technol Assess
2014;6:116–28.
[183] Espadafor FJ, Torres M, Velez JA, Carvajal E, Becerra JA. Experimental analysis of
low temperature combustion mode with diesel and biodiesel fuels: a method for
reducing NOx and soot emissions. Fuel Process Technol 2012;103:57–63.
[184] Starck L, Lecointe B, Forti L, Jeuland N. Impact of fuel characteristics on HCCI
combustion: performances and emissions. Fuel 2010;89:3069–77.
[185] Dec JE, Sjöberg M. Isolating the effects of fuel chemistry on combustion phasing in
an HCCI engine and the potential of fuel stratification for ignition control. SAE
paper 2004-01-0557.
[186] Yang Y, Dec J, Dronniou N, Sjöberg M. Partial fuel stratification to control HCCI
heat release rates: fuel composition and other factors affecting pre-ignition reac-
tions of two-stage ignition fuels. SAE paper 2011-01-1359.
[187] Dec JE, Yang Y, Dronniou N. Boosted HCCI – controlling pressure-rise rates for
performance improvements using partial fuel stratification with conventional
gasoline. SAE paper 2011-01-0897.
[188] Pandeya S, Diwanb P, Sahooa PK, Thipsec SS. A review of combustion control
strategies in diesel HCCI engines. Biofuels 2016. https://doi.org/10.1080/
17597269.2016.1257315.
[189] Kawashima J, Ogawa H, Tsuru Y. Research on a variable swirl intake port for 4-
valve high-speed DI diesel engines. SAE 982680; 1998.
[190] Kimura S, Aoki O, Ogawa H, Muranaka S, Enomoto Y. New combustion concept for
ultraclean and high-efficiency small DI diesel engines. SAE 1999-01-3681; 1999.
[191] Kimura S, Aoki O, Kitahara Y, Aiyoshizawa E. Ultra-clean combustion technology
combining a low-temperature and premixed combustion concept for meeting fu-
ture emission standards. SAE 2001-01-0200; 2001.
[192] Sjoberg M, Dec JE. An investigation into lowest acceptable combustion tempera-
tures for hydrocarbon fuels in HCCI engines. Proc Combust Inst 2005;30:2719–26.
[193] Krisman A, Hawkes ER, Kook S, Sjöberg M, Dec JE. On the potential of ethanol fuel
stratification to extend the high load limit in stratified-charge compression-igni-
tion engines. Fuel 2012;99:45–54.
[194] Olesky LKM, Middleton RJ, Lavoie GA, Wooldridge MS, Martz JB. On the sensi-
tivity of low temperature combustion to spark assist near flame limit conditions.
Fuel 2015;158:11–22.
[195] Olesky LM, Martz JB, Lavoie GA, Vavra J, Assanis DN, Babajimopoulos A. The
effects of spark timing, unburned gas temperature, and negative valve overlap on
the rates of stoichiometric spark assisted compression ignition combustion. Appl
Energy 2013;105:407–17.
[196] Srihari S, Thirumalini S, Prashanth K. An experimental study on the performance
and emission characteristics of PCCI-DI engine fueled with diethyl ether-biodiesel-
diesel blends. Renew Energ 2017;107:440–7.
[197] Rohani B, Park SS, Bae C. Effect of injection strategy on smoothness, emissions and
soot characteristics of PCCI-conventional diesel mode transition. Appl Therm Eng
2016;93:1033–42.
[198] Zhang F, Liu HF, Yu J, Yao M. Direct numerical simulation of n-heptane/air auto-
ignition with thermal and charge stratifications under partially-premixed charge
compression ignition (PCCI) engine related conditions. Appl Therm Eng
2016;104:516–26.
[199] Kocher LE, Hall CM, Stricker K, Fain D, Alstine DV, Shaver GM. Robust oxygen
fraction estimation for conventional and premixed charge compression ignition
engines with variable valve actuation. Control Eng Pract 2014;29:187–200.
[200] Loeper P, Ra Y, Adams C, Foster D, Ghandhi J, Andrie M, et al. Experimental
investigation of light-medium load operating sensitivity in a gasoline compression
ignition (GCI) light-duty diesel engine. SAE Int J Engines 2013:0896. https://doi.
org/10.4271/2013-01-0896.
[201] Shimazaki N, Tsurushima T, Nishimura T. Dual mode combustion concept with
premixed diesel combustion by direct injection near top dead center. SAE tech-
nical paper 2003-01-0742; 2003.
[202] Minato A, Tanaka T, Nishimura T. Investigation of premixed lean diesel com-
bustion with ultra high pressure injection. SAE technical paper 2005-01-0914;
2005.
[203] Okude K, Mori K, Shiino S, Moriya T. Premixed compression ignition (PCI) com-
bustion for simultaneous reduction of NOx and soot in diesel engine. SAE technical
paper 2004-01-1907; 2004.
[204] Blasio GD. Premixed combustion in a light duty compression ignition engine
73
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
through fuel and injection system design: an experimental approach PhD dis-
sertation University of Napoli federico II; 2011
[205] Ladommatos N, Abdelhalim SM, Zhao H, Hu Z. Effects of EGR on heat release in
diesel combustion. SAE paper no. 980184.
[206] Pickett LM, Siebers DL. Non-sooting low flame temperature mixing-controlled DI
diesel combustion. SAE paper no. 2004-01-1399.
[207] Lapuerta M, Hernandez JJ, Gimenez F. Evaluation of exhaust gas recirculation as a
technique for reducing diesel engine NOx emissions. Proc IMechE Part D J Autom
Eng 2000;214:85–93.
[208] Zelenka P, Aufinger H, Reczek W, Catellieri W. Cooled EGR-a key technology for
future efficient HD Diesels. SAE paper no. 980190.
[209] Kreso AM, Johnson JH, Gratz LD, Bagley ST, Leddy DG. A study of the effects of
exhaust gas recirculation on heavy-duty Diesel engine emissions. SAE paper no.
981422.
[210] Lee J, Chu S, Cha J, Choi H, Min K. Effect of the diesel injection strategy on the
combustion and emissions of propane/diesel dual fuel premixed charge com-
pression ignition engines. Energy 2015;93:1041–52.
[211] Jia M, Xie M, Wang T, Peng Z. The effect of injection timing and intake valve close
timing on performance and emissions of diesel PCCI engine with a full engine cycle
CFD simulation. Appl Energy 2011;88:2967–75.
[212] Ambrosio S, Iemmolo D, Mancarella A, Vitolo R. Preliminary optimization of the
PCCI combustion mode in a diesel engine through a design of experiments. Energy
Procedia 2016;101:909–16.
[213] Dempsey AB, Walker NR, Gingrich E, Reitz RD. Comparison of low temperature
combustion strategies for advanced compression ignition engines with a focus on
controllability. Combust Sci Technol 2014;186:210–41.
[214] Reitz RD. Directions in internal combustion engine research. Combust Flame
2013;160:1–8.
[215] Vahid E, Mohammad MS, Ayatallah G, Mostafa M. Extending the lean operating
range of a premixed charged compression ignition natural gas engine using a pre-
chamber. Energy 2017;119:1181–94.
[216] Zhu H, Bohac SV, Nakashima K, Hagen LM, Huang Z, Assanis DN. Effect of fuel
oxygen on the trade-offs between soot, NOx and combustion efficiency in pre-
mixed low-temperature diesel engine combustion. Fuel 2013;112:459–65.
[217] Zhu H, Bohac SV, Nakashima K, Hagen LM, Huang Z, Assanis DN. Effect of bio-
diesel and ethanol on load limits of high-efficiency premixed low-temperature
combustion in a diesel engine. Fuel 2013;106:773–8.
[218] Chen G, Shen Y, Zhang Q, Yao M, Zheng Z, Liu H. Experimental study on com-
bustion and emission characteristics of a diesel engine fueled with 2,5-di-
methylfuran–diesel, n-butanol–diesel and gasoline–diesel blends. Energy
2013;54:333–42.
[219] Manimaran R. Thundil karuppa raj R, Senthil kumar K. Premixed charge com-
pression ignition in a direct injection diesel engine using computational fluid
dynamics. WSEAS Trans Heat Mass Transf 2013;8:17–29. E-ISSN:2224–3461.
[220] Ambrosio S, Ferrari A. Effects of exhaust gas recirculation in diesel engines fea-
turing late PCCI type combustion strategies. Energy Convers Manage
2015;105:1269–80.
[221] Torregrosa AJ, Broatch A, García A, Mónico LF. Sensitivity of combustion noise
and NOx and soot emissions to pilot injection in PCCI diesel engines. Appl Energy
2013;104:149–57.
[222] Jain A, Singh AP, Agarwal AK. Effect of split fuel injection and EGR on NOx and
PM emission reduction in a low temperature combustion (LTC) mode diesel en-
gine. Energy 2017;122:249–64.
[223] Jain A, Singh AP, Agarwal AK. Effect of fuel injection parameters on combustion
stability and emissions of a mineral diesel fueled partially premixed charge
compression ignition (PCCI) engine. Appl Energy 2017;190:658–69.
[224] Parks JE, Prikhodko V, Storey JME, Barone TL, Lewis Sr. SA, Kass MD, et al.
Emissions from premixed charge compression ignition (PCCI) combustion and
affect on emission control devices. Catal Today 2010;151:278–84.
[225] Kiplimo R, Tomita E, Kawahara N, Yokobe S. Effects of spray impingement, in-
jection parameters, and EGR on the combustion and emission characteristics of a
PCCI diesel engine. Appl Therm Eng 2012;37:165–75.
[226] Laguitton O, Crua C, Cowell T, Heikal MR, Gold MR. The effect of compression
ratio on exhaust emissions from a PCCI diesel engine. Energy Convers Manage
2007;48:2918–24.
[227] Zehni A, Saray RK, Poorghasemi K. Numerical comparison of PCCI combustion
and emission of diesel and biodiesel fuels at low load conditions using 3D-CFD
models coupled with chemical kinetics. Appl Therm Eng 2017;110:1483–99.
[228] Jeon J, Bae C. The effects of hydrogen addition on engine power and emission in
DME premixed charge compression ignition engine. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2013;38:265–73.
[229] Ying W, li H, Longbao Z, Wei L. Effects of DME pilot quantity on the performance
of a DME PCCI-DI engine. Energy Convers Manage 2010;51:648–54.
[230] Kamimoto T, Bae MH. High combustion temperature for the reduction of parti-
culate in diesel engines. SAE paper 880423; 1988.
[231] Yao MF, Zhang QC, Liu HF, Lin ZQ, Lin TJ, Shen J. Diesel engine combustion
control: medium or heavy EGR?. SAE 2010-01-1125; 2010.
[232] Han D, Ickes AM, Assanis DN, Huang Z, Bohac SV. Attainment and load extension
of high-efficiency premixed low-temperature combustion with dieseline in a
compression ignition engine. Energy Fuel 2010;24(6):3517–25.
[233] Inagaki K, Fuyuto T, Nishikawa K, Nakakita K. Dual-fuel PCI combustion con-
trolled by in-cylinder stratification. SAE technical paper 2006-01-0028; 2006.
[234] Yeom K, Jang J, Bae C. Homogeneous charge compression ignition of LPG and
gasoline using variable valve timing in an engine. Fuel 2007;86(4):494–503.
[235] Yeom K, Bae C. Gasoline di-methyl ether homogeneous charge compression igni-
tion engine. Energy Fuels 2007;21(4):1942–9.
T. Pachiannan, et al.
[236] Kalghatgi GT, Risberg P, Ångström H-E. Advantages of fuels with high resistance
to auto-ignition in late-injection, low-temperature, compression ignition com-
bustion. SAE technical paper 2006-01-3385; 2006. https://doi.org/10.4271/2006-
01-3385.
[237] Kalghatgi GT, Risberg P, Angstrom H-E. Partially pre-mixed auto-ignition of ga-
soline to attain low smoke and low NOx at high load in a compression ignition
engine and comparison with a diesel fuel. SAE technical paper 2007-01-0006;
2007. https://doi.org/10.4271/2007-01-0006.
[238] Soloiu V, Duggan M, Harp S, Vlcek B, Williams D. PFI (port fuel injection) of
nbutanol and direct injection of biodiesel to attain LTC (low-temperature com-
bustion) for low-emissions idling in a compression engine. Energy
2013;52:143–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.01.023.
[239] Seko T, Kuroda E. Combustion improvement of a premixed charge compression
ignition methanol engine using flash boiling fuel injection. SAE technical paper
2001-01-3611; 2001. https://doi.org/10.4271/2001-01-3611.
[240] Lu X, Hou Y, Zu L, Huang Z. Experimental study on the auto-ignition and com-
bustion characteristics in the homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI)
combustion operation with ethanol/n-heptane blend fuels by port injection. Fuel
2006;85(17–18):2622–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2006.05.003.
[241] Kim Y, Tomita E, Lee K. Effects of ethanol added fuel on exhaust emissions and
combustion in a premixed charge compression ignition diesel engine. Therm Sci
2015;19(6):1887–96. https://doi.org/10.2298/tsci140831120k.
[242] Liu H, Xu J, Zheng Z, Li S, Yao M. Effects of fuel properties on combustion and
emissions under both conventional and low temperature combustion mode fueling
2,5-dimethylfuran/diesel blends. Energy 2013;62:215–23.
[243] Wang Y, Zhao Y, Yang Z. Dimethyl ether energy ratio effects in a dimethyl ether-
diesel dual fuel premixed charge compression ignition engine. Appl Therm Eng
2013;54:481–7.
[244] Kim MY, Lee JH, Lee CS. Combustion characteristics and NOx emissions of a di-
methyl-ether-fueled premixed charge compression ignition engine. Energy Fuels
2008;22(6):4206–12. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef800221g.
[245] Liu H, Huo M, Liu Y, Wang X, Wang H, Yao M, et al. Time-resolved spray, flame,
soot quantitative measurement fueling n-butanol and soybean biodiesel in a
constant volume chamber under various ambient temperatures. Fuel
2014;133:317–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.05.038.
[246] Tsolakis A, Megaritis A. Partially premixed charge compression ignition engine
with on-board production by exhaust gas fuel reforming of diesel and biodiesel. Int
J Hydrogen Energy 2005;30(7):731–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2004.
06.013.
[247] Fang T, Lee CF. Bio-diesel effects on combustion processes in an HSDI diesel en-
gine using advanced injection strategies. Proc Combust Inst 2009;32(2):2785–92.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2008.07.031.
[248] Rajesh Kumar B, Saravanan S. Partially premixed low temperature combustion
using dimethyl carbonate (DMC) in a DI diesel engine for favorable smoke/NOx
emissions. Fuel 2016;180:396–406.
[249] Mei D, Yue S, Zhao X, Hielscher K, Baar R. Effects of center of heat release on
combustion and emissions in a PCCI diesel engine fueled by DMC-diesel blend.
Appl Therm Eng 2017;114:969–76.
[250] Zhao Y, Wang Y, Li D, Lei X, Liu S. Combustion and emission characteristics of a
DME (dimethyl ether)-diesel dual fuel premixed charge compression ignition en-
gine with EGR (exhaust gas recirculation). Energy 2014;72:608–17.
[251] Wang Y, Liu H, Huang Z, Liu Z. Study on combustion and emission of a dimethyl
ether-diesel dual-fuel premixed charge compression ignition combustion engine
with LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) as ignition inhibitor. Energy 2016;96:278–85.
[252] Han D, Ickes AM, Bohac SV, Huang Z, Assanis DN. Premixed low-temperature
combustion of blends of diesel and gasoline in a high speed compression ignition
engine. Proc Combust Inst 2011;33:3039–46.
[253] Lee CS, Lee KH, Kim DS. Experimental and numerical study on the combustion
characteristics of partially premixed charge compression ignition engine with dual
fuel. Fuel 2003;82:553–60.
[254] Kim K, Wang Z, Wang B, Shuai S, Yang H, Bae C. Load expansion of naphtha
multiple premixed compression ignition (MPCI) and comparison with partially
premixed compression ignition (PPCI) and conventional diesel combustion (CDC).
Fuel 2014;136:1–9.
[255] Torregrosa AJ, Broatch A, Novella R, Gomez-Soriano J, Monico LF. Impact of
gasoline and diesel blends on combustion noise and pollutant emissions in pre-
mixed charge compression ignition engines. Energy 2017;137:58–68.
[256] Han D, Ickes AM, Bohac SV, Huang Z, Assanis DN. HC and CO emissions of pre-
mixed low-temperature combustion fueled by blends of diesel and gasoline. Fuel
2012;99:13–9.
[257] Liu H, Wang Z, Wang J, He X. Effects of gasoline research octane number on
premixed low-temperature combustion of wide distillation fuel by gasoline/diesel
blend. Fuel 2014;134:381–8.
[258] Verma G, Sharma H, Thipse SS, Agarwal AK. Spark assisted premixed charge
compression ignition engine prototype development. Fuel Process Technol
2016;152:413–20.
[259] Lapuerta M, García-Contreras R, Campos-Fernández J, Dorado MP. Stability, lu-
bricity, viscosity, and cold-flow properties of alcohol diesel blends. Energy Fuels
2010;24:4497–502.
[260] Doğan O. The influence of n-butanol/diesel fuel blends utilization on a small diesel
engine performance and emissions. Fuel 2011;90:2467–72.
[261] Natarajan S, Shankar SA, Sundareswaran AUM. Early Injected PCCI engine fueled
with bio ethanol and diesel blends – An experimental investigation. Energy
Procedia 2017;105:358–66.
[262] Srihari S, Thirumalini S. Investigation on reduction of emission in PCCI-DI engine
with biofuel blends. Renew Energ 2017;114:1232–7.
74
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
[263] Valentino G, Corcione FE, Iannuzzi SE, Serra S. Experimental study on perfor-
mance and emissions of a high speed diesel engine fueled with n-butanol diesel
blends under premixed low temperature combustion. Fuel 2012;92:295–307.
[264] Rajesh Kumar B, Saravanan S. Effects of iso-butanol/diesel and n-pentanol/diesel
blends on performance and emissions of a DI diesel engine under premixed LTC
(low temperature combustion) mode. Fuel 2016;170:49–59. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.fuel.2015.12.029.
[265] Su J, Zhu H, Bohac SV. Particulate matter emission comparison from conventional
and premixed low temperature combustion with diesel, biodiesel and biodiese-
l–ethanol fuels. Fuel 2013;113:221–7.
[266] Saravanan S, Pitchandi K, Suresh G. An experimental study on premixed charge
compression ignition-direct ignition engine fueled with ethanol and gasohol.
Alexandria Eng J 2015;54(4):897–904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2015.07.
010.
[267] Asad U, Kumar R, Zheng M, Tjong J. Ethanol-fueled low temperature combustion:
A pathway to clean and efficient diesel engine cycles. Appl Energy
2015;157:838–50.
[268] Mancaruso E, Vaglieco BM. Spectroscopic analysis of the phases of premixed
combustion in a compression ignition engine fueled with diesel and ethanol. Appl
Energy 2015;143:164–75.
[269] Ibrahim MM, Narasimhan JV, Ramesh A. Comparison of the predominantly pre-
mixed charge compression ignition and the dual fuel modes of operation with
biogas and diesel as fuels. Energy 2015;89:990–1000.
[270] Rahman KA, Ramesh A. Effect of reducing the methane concentration on the
combustion and performance of a biogas diesel predominantly premixed charge
compression ignition engine. Fuel 2017;206:117–32.
[271] Caro PS, Mouloungui Z, Vaitilingom G, Berge JC. Interest of combining an additive
with diesel-ethanol blends for use in diesel engines. Fuel 2001;80:565–74.
[272] Lu X, Yang J, Zhang W, Huang Z. Effect of cetane number improver on heat release
rate and emissions of high speed diesel engine fueled with ethanol diesel blend
fuel. Fuel 2004;83:2013–20.
[273] Fernando S, Hanna M. Phase behavior of the ethanol biodiesel diesel micro-
emulsion system. Trans. ASAE 2005;48(3):903–8.
[274] Kwanchareon P, Luengnaruemitchai A, Jai-In S. Solubility of a diesel biodiesel
ethanol blend, its fuel properties, and its emission characteristics from diesel en-
gine. Fuel 2007;86:1053–61.
[275] Ickes AM, Assanis DN, Bohac SV. Load limits with fuel effects of a premixed diesel
combustion mode. SAE paper no. 2009-01-1972; 2009.
[276] Xue J, Grift TE, Hansen AC. Effect of biodiesel on engine performances and
emissions. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2011;15:1098–116.
[277] Zhu L, Cheung CS, Zhang WG, Huang Z. Combustion performance and emission
characteristics of a DI diesel engine fueled with ethanol–biodiesel blends. Fuel
2011;90:1743–50.
[278] Fang Q, Fang J, Zhuang J, Huang Z. Effects of ethanol-diesel-biodiesel blends on
combustion and emissions in premixed low temperature combustion. Appl Therm
Eng 2013;54:541–8.
[279] Nabi MN, Rahman MM. Biodiesel from cotton seed oil and its effect on engine
performance and exhaust emissions. Appl Therm Eng 2009;29:2265–70.
[280] Gao Z, Wagner RM, Sluder CS, Daw CS, Green Jr. JB. Using a phenomenological
computer model to investigate advanced combustion trajectories in a CIDI engine.
Fuel 2011;90:1907–18.
[281] Guerry ES, Raihan MS, Srinivasan KK, Krishnan SR, Sohail A. Injection timing
effects on partially premixed diesel–methane dual fuel low temperature combus-
tion. Appl Energy 2016;162:99–113.
[282] Lewander M, Ekholm K, Johansson B, Tunesta P. Investigation of the combustion
characteristics with focus on partially premixed combustion in a heavy duty en-
gine. SAE Int J Fuels Lubr 2009;1(1):1063–74.
[283] Lewander C, Johansson B, Tunestal P. Extending the operating region of multi-
cylinder partially premixed combustion using high octane number fuel. SAE
technical paper 2011-01-1394; 2011.
[284] Liu B, Cheng X, Liu J, Pu H. Investigation into particle emission characteristics of
partially premixed combustion fueled with high n-butanol-diesel ratio blends. Fuel
2018;223:1–11.
[285] Liu J, Shang H, Wang H, Zheng Z, Wang Q, Xue Z, et al. Investigation on partially
premixed combustion fueled with gasoline and PODE blends in a multi-cylinder
heavy-duty diesel engine. Fuel 2017;193:101–11.
[286] Mao B, Liu H, Zheng Z, Yao M. Influence of fuel properties on multi-cylinder PPC
operation over a wide range of EGR and operating conditions. Fuel
2018;215:352–62.
[287] Cheng X, Li S, Yang J, Dong S, Bao Z. Effect of n-butanol-diesel blends on partially
premixed combustion and emission characteristics in a light-duty engine. SAE
technical paper 2014-01-2675; 2014. https://doi.org/10.4271/2014-01-2675.
[288] Xiaobei C, Shuai L, Jin Y, Bei L. Investigation into partially premixed combustion
fueled with n-butanol-diesel blends. Renew Energy 2016;86:723–32. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.renene.2015.08.067.
[289] Valentino G, Corcione FE, Iannuzzi S, Serra S. An experimental analysis on diesel/
n-butanol blends operating in partial premixed combustion in a light duty diesel
engine. SAE technical paper 2012-01-1127; 2012. https://doi.org/10.4271/2012-
01-1127.
[290] Qiu L, Cheng X, Liu B, Dong S, Bao Z. Partially premixed combustion based on
different injection strategies in a light-duty diesel engine. Energy 2016;96:155–65.
[291] An Y, Raman V, Tang Q, Shi H, Sim J, Chang J, et al. Combustion stability study of
partially premixed combustion with low-octane fuel at low engine load conditions.
Appl Energy 2019;235:56–67.
[292] Yin L, Lundgren M, Wang Z, Stamatoglou P, Richter M, Andersson O, et al. High
efficient internal combustion engine using partially premixed combustion with
T. Pachiannan, et al.
multiple injections. Appl Energy 2019;233–234:516–23.
[293] Benajes J, García A, Domenech V, Durrett R. An investigation of partially pre-
mixed compression ignition combustion using gasoline and spark assistance. Appl
Therm Eng 2013;52:468–77.
[294] Jia M, Li Y, Xie M, Wang T, Wang H, Reitz RD. The potential of high-load ex-
tension by using late intake valve closing for a diesel premixed charge compres-
sion ignition (PCCI) engine. Energy Procedia 2015;66:33–6.
[295] Soloiu V, Moncada JD, Gaubert R, Muinos M, Harp S, Ilie M, et al. LTC (low-
temperature combustion) analysis of PCCI (premixed charge compression ignition)
with n-butanol and cotton seed biodiesel versus combustion and emissions char-
acteristics of their binary mixtures. Renew Energ 2018;123:323–33.
[296] Jia M, Li Y, Xie M, Wang T. Numerical evaluation of the potential of late intake
valve closing strategy for diesel PCCI (premixed charge compression ignition)
engine in a wide speed and load range. Energy 2013;51:203–15.
[297] Alriksson M, Denbratt I. Low temperature combustion in a heavy duty diesel en-
gine using high levels of EGR. SAE paper no. 2006-01-0075; 2006.
[298] Alriksson M, Gjirja S, Denbratt I. The effect of charge air and fuel injection
parameters on combustion with high levels of EGR in a HDDI single cylinder diesel
engine. SAE paper no. 2007-01-0914; 2007.
[299] Colban WF, Miles PC, Oh S. Effect of intake pressure on performance and emis-
sions in an automotive diesel engine operating in low temperature combustion
regimes. SAE paper no. 2007-01-4063; 2007.
[300] Asad U, Zheng M. Efficacy of EGR and boost in single-injection enabled low
temperature combustion. SAE paper no. 2009-01-1126; 2009.
[301] Ogawa H, Li T, Miyamoto N, Kido S, Shimizu H. Dependence of ultra-high EGR
and low temperature diesel combustion on fuel injection conditions and com-
pression ratio. SAE paper no. 2006-01-3386; 2006.
[302] Anselmi P, Kashdan J, Bression G, Ferrero-Lesur E, Thirouard B, Walter B.
Improving emissions, noise and fuel economy trade-off by using multiple injection
strategies in diesel low temperature combustion (LTC) mode. SAE paper no. 2010-
01-2162; 2010.
[303] Haifeng L, Xin W, Zunqing Z, Gu J, Hu W, Mingfa Y. Experimental and simulation
investigation of the combustion characteristics and emissions using n-butanol/
biodiesel dual-fuel injection on a diesel engine. Energy 2014;74:741–52.
[304] Li T, Okabe Y, Izumi H, Shudo T, Ogawa H. Dependence of ultra-high EGR low
temperature diesel combustion on fuel properties. SAE paper no. 2006-01-3387;
2006.
[305] Pesant L, Forti L, Jeuland N. Effect of fuel characteristics on the performance and
emission of an early-injection LTC/diesel engine. SAE paper no. 2008-01-2408;
2008.
[306] Kook S, BAE C. Combustion control using two-stage diesel fuel injection in a
single-cylinder PCCI engine. SAE technical paper 2004-01-0938; 2004.
[307] Kokjohn SL, Hanson RM, Splitter DA, Reitz RD. Experiments and modeling of dual-
fuel HCCI and PCCI combustion using in-cylinder fuel blending. SAE paper 2009-
01-2647; 2009.
[308] Hanson R, Kokjohn SL, Splitter D, Reitz RD. An experimental investigation of fuel
reactivity controlled PCCI combustion in a heavy-duty engine. SAE Int J Eng
2010;3(1):700–16.
[309] Bessonette P, Schleyer C, Duffy K, Hardy W, Lietchy M. Effects of fuel property
changes on heavy-duty HCCI combustion. SAE technical paper 2007-01-0191;
2007.
[310] Kokjohn SL, Reitz RD. Reactivity controlled compression ignition and conven-
tional diesel combustion: a comparison of methods to meet lightduty NOx and fuel
economy targets. Int J Engine Res 2013;14:452–68.
[311] Splitter DA, Reitz R. Fuel reactivity effects on the efficiency and operational
window of dual-fuel compression ignition engines. Fuel 2014;118(15):163–75.
[312] Nieman DE, Dempsey AB, Reitz RD. Heavy-duty RCCI operation using natural gas
and diesel. SAE Int J Engines 2012;5:270–85.
[313] Splitter D, Hanson R, Kokjohn S, Reitz R. Reactivity controlled compression ig-
nition (RCCI) heavy-duty engine operation at mid-and high-loads with conven-
tional and alternative fuels. SAE technical paper 2011-01-0363; 2011.
[314] Splitter DA, Wissink ML, Hendricks TL, Ghandhi JB, Reitz RD. Comparison of
RCCI, HCCI, and CDC operation from low to full load. THIESEL 2012 conference
on thermo- and fluid dynamic processes in direct injection engines. 2012.
[315] Fang W, Kittelson DB, Northrop WF. Optimization of reactivity-controlled com-
pression ignition combustion fueled with diesel and hydrous ethanol using re-
sponse surface methodology. Fuel 2015;160:446–57.
[316] García A, Monsalve-Serrano J, Roso VR, Martins MES. Evaluating the emissions
and performance of two dual-mode RCCI combustion strategies under the world
harmonized vehicle cycle (WHVC). Energy Convers Manage 2017;149:263–74.
[317] Zhou DZ, Yang WM, An H, Li J, Shu C. A numerical study on RCCI engine fueled by
biodiesel/methanol. Energy Convers Manage 2015;89:798–807.
[318] Rahnama P, Paykani A, Bordbar V, Reitz RD. A numerical study of the effects of
reformer gas composition on the combustion and emission characteristics of a
natural gas/diesel RCCI engine enriched with reformer gas. Fuel
2017;209:742–53.
[319] Prikhodko VY, Curran SJ, Barone TL, Lewis SA, Storey JM, Cho K, et al. Emission
characteristics of a diesel engine operating with in-cylinder gasoline and diesel
fuel blending. SAE paper 2010-01-2266.
[320] Bhagatwala A, Sankaran R, Kokjohn S, Chen JH. Numerical investigation of
spontaneous flame propagation under RCCI conditions. Combust Flame
2015;162:3412–26.
[321] Li Y, Jia M, Liu Y, Xie M. Numerical study on the combustion and emission
characteristics of a methanol/diesel reactivity controlled compression ignition
(RCCI) engine. Appl Energy 2013;106:184–97.
[322] Luong MB, Yu GH, Chung SH, Yoo CS. Ignition of a lean PRF/air mixture under
75
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
RCCI/SCCI conditions: chemical aspects. Proc Combust Inst 2017;36:3587–96.
[323] Reitz RD, Duraisamy G. Review of high efficiency and clean reactivity controlled
compression ignition (RCCI) combustion in internal combustion engines. Prog
Energy Combust Sci 2015;46:12–71.
[324] Li J, Yang WM, An H, Zhou DZ, Yu WB, Wang JX, et al. Numerical investigation on
the effect of reactivity gradient in an RCCI engine fueled with gasoline and diesel.
Energy Convers Manage 2015;92(1):342–52.
[325] Kokjohn SL, Hanson RM, Splitter DA, Reitz RD. Fuel reactivity controlled com-
pression ignition (RCCI): a pathway to controlled high-efficiency clean combus-
tion. Int J Engine Res 2011;12:209–26.
[326] Splitter DA, Kokjohn SL, Wissink ML, Reitz R. Effect of compression ratio and
piston geometry on RCCI load limits and efficiency. SAE technical paper 2012-01-
0383; 2012. https://doi.org/10.4271/2012-01-0383.
[327] Li Y, Jia M, Chang Y, Liu Y, Xie M, Wang T, et al. Parametric study and optimi-
zation of a RCCI (reactivity controlled compression ignition) engine fueled with
methanol and diesel. Energy 2014;65:319–32.
[328] Li Y, Jia M, Chang Y, Fan W, Xie M, Wang T. Evaluation of the necessity of exhaust
gas recirculation employment for a methanol/diesel reactivity controlled com-
pression ignition engine operated at medium loads. Energy Convers Manage
2015;101:40–51.
[329] Li J, Yang WM, Zhou DZ. Modeling study on the effect of piston bowl geometries in
a gasoline/biodiesel fueled RCCI engine at high speed. Energy Convers Manage
2016;112:359–68.
[330] Kakaee AH, Nasiri-Toosi A, Partovi B, Paykani A. Effects of piston bowl geometry
on combustion and emissions characteristics of a natural gas/diesel RCCI engine.
Appl Therm Eng 2016;102:1462–72.
[331] Benajes J, Molina S, García A, Monsalve-Serrano J. Effects of low reactivity fuel
characteristics and blending ratio on low load RCCI (reactivity controlled com-
pression ignition) performance and emissions in a heavy-duty diesel engine.
Energy 2015;90:1261–71.
[332] Kavuri C, Kokjohn SL. Computational optimization of a reactivity controlled
compression ignition (RCCI) combustion system considering performance at
multiple modes simultaneously. Fuel 2017;207:702–18.
[333] Ansari E, Poorghasemi K, Irdmousa BK, Shahbakhti M, Naber J. Efficiency and
emissions mapping of a light duty diesel-natural gas engine operating in conven-
tional diesel and RCCI modes. SAE international powertrain, fuel and lubricants
conference, 2016-01-2309. 2016.
[334] Tang Q, Liu H, Li M, Geng C, Yao M. Multiple optical diagnostics on effect of fuel
stratification degree on reactivity controlled compression ignition. Fuel
2017;202:688–98.
[335] Zhou DZ, Yang WM, An H, Li J. Application of CFD-chemical kinetics approach in
detecting RCCI engine knocking fueled with biodiesel/methanol. Appl Energy
2015;145:255–64.
[336] Kokjohn SL, Musculus MPB, Reitz RD. Evaluating temperature and fuel stratifi-
cation for heat-release rate control in a reactivity-controlled compression-ignition
engine using optical diagnostics and chemical kinetics modeling. Combust Flame
2015;162:2729–42.
[337] Zhang C, Zhang C, Xue L, Li Y. Combustion characteristics and operation range of a
RCCI combustion engine fueled with direct injection n-heptane and pipe injection
n-butanol. Energy 2017;125:439–48.
[338] Benajes J, García A, Monsalve-Serrano J, Boronat V. Gaseous emissions and par-
ticle size distribution of dual-mode dual-fuel diesel-gasoline concept from low to
full load. Appl Therm Eng 2017;120:138–49.
[339] Salahi MM, Esfahanian V, Gharehghani A, Mirsalim M. Investigating the reactivity
controlled compression ignition (RCCI) combustion strategy in a natural gas/
diesel fueled engine with a pre-chamber. Energy Convers Manage
2017;132:40–53.
[340] Luong MB, Yu GH, Chung SH, Yoo CS. Ignition of a lean PRF/air mixture under
RCCI/SCCI conditions: a comparative DNS study. Proc Combust Inst
2017;36:3623–31.
[341] Splitter D, Kokjohn S, Rein K, Hanson R, Sanders S, Reitz R. An optical in-
vestigation of ignition processes in fuel reactivity controlled PCCI combustion.
SAE technical paper 2010-01-0345; 2010.
[342] Liu X, Kokjohn S, Li Y, Wang H, Li H, Yao M. A numerical investigation of the
combustion kinetics of reactivity controlled compression ignition (RCCI) com-
bustion in an optical engine. Fuel 2019;241:753–66.
[343] Pohlkamp K, Reitz R. Reactivity controlled compression ignition (RCCI) in a
single-cylinder air-cooled HSDI diesel engine. SAE technical paper 2012-34-0074;
2012.
[344] Benajes J, Molina S, García A, Belarte E, Vanvolsem M. An investigation on RCCI
combustion in a heavy duty diesel engine using in-cylinder blending of diesel and
gasoline fuels. Appl Therm Eng 2014;63:66–76.
[345] Splitter D, Wissink M, Vescovo D, Reitz RD. RCCI engine operation towards 60%
thermal efficiency. SAE technical paper 2013-01-0279; 2013.
[346] Kakaee AH, Rahnama P, Paykani A. Influence of fuel composition on combustion
and emissions characteristics of natural gas/diesel RCCI engine. J Nat Gas Sci Eng
2015;25:58–65.
[347] Li J, Yang W, Zhou D. Review on the management of RCCI engines. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2017;69:65–79.
[348] Mikulski M, Bekdemir C. Understanding the role of low reactivity fuel stratifica-
tion in a dual fuel RCCI engine – a simulation study. Appl Energy
2017;191:689–708.
[349] Zhou D, Yang W, Li J, Tay KL, Chou SK, Kraft M. Efficient combustion modelling in
RCCI engine with detailed chemistry. Energy Procedia 2017;105:1582–7.
[350] Molina S, García A, Pastor JM, Belarte E, Balloul I. Operating range extension of
RCCI combustion concept from low to full load in a heavy-duty engine. Appl
T. Pachiannan, et al.
Energy 2015;143:211–27.
[351] Rahnama P, Paykani A, Reitz RD. A numerical study of the effects of using hy-
drogen, reformer gas and nitrogen on combustion, emissions and load limits of a
heavy duty natural gas/diesel RCCI engine. Appl Energy 2017;193:182–98.
[352] Zhou D, Yang W, Zhao F, Li J. Dual-fuel RCCI engine combustion modeling with
detailed chemistry considering flame propagation in partially premixed combus-
tion. Appl Energy 2017;203:164–76.
[353] Liu J, Yang F, Wang H, Ouyang M. Numerical study of hydrogen addition to DME/
CH4 dual fuel RCCI engine. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2012;37:8688–97.
[354] Jia M, Dempsey AB, Wang H, Li Y, Reitz RD. Numerical simulation of cyclic
variability in reactivity-controlled compression ignition combustion with a focus
on the initial temperature at intake valve closing. Int J Engine Res
2015;16:441–60.
[355] Wang S. Limitations of partially premixed combustion PhD. thesis Netherlands:
Eindhoven University of Technology; 2017.
[356] Benajes J, Pastor JV, García A, Monsalve-Serrano J. The potential of RCCI concept
to meet EURO VI NOx limitation and ultra-low soot emissions in a heavy-duty
engine over the whole engine map. Fuel 2015;159:952–61.
[357] Benajes J, García A, Monsalve-Serrano J, Balloul I, Pradel G. An assessment of the
dual-mode reactivity controlled compression ignition/conventional diesel com-
bustion capabilities in a EURO VI medium-duty diesel engine fueled with an in-
termediate ethanol-gasoline blend and biodiesel. Energy Convers Manage
2016;123:381–91.
[358] Tong L, Wang H, Zheng Z, Reitz R, Yao M. Experimental study of RCCI combustion
and load extension in a compression ignition engine fueled with gasoline and
PODE. Fuel 2016;181:878–86.
[359] Benajes J, Pastor JV, García A, Monsalve-Serrano J. An experimental investigation
on the influence of piston bowl geometry on RCCI performance and emissions in a
heavy-duty engine. Energy Convers Manage 2015;103:1019–30.
[360] Wang Y, Zhu ZW, Yao M, Li T, Zhang W, Zheng Z. An investigation into the RCCI
engine operation under low load and its achievable operational range at different
engine speeds. Energy Convers Manage 2016;124:399–413.
[361] Benajes J, Pastor JV, García A, Boronat V. A RCCI operational limits assessment in
a medium duty compression ignition engine using an adapted compression ratio.
Energy Convers Manage 2016;126:497–508.
[362] Benajes J, García A, Monsalve-Serrano J, Boronat V. Achieving clean and efficient
engine operation up to full load by combining optimized RCCI and dual-fuel
diesel-gasoline combustion strategies. Energy Convers Manage 2017;136:142–51.
[363] Benajes J, García A, Monsalve-Serrano J, Boronat V. An investigation on the
particulate number and size distributions over the whole engine map from an
optimized combustion strategy combining RCCI and dual-fuel diesel-gasoline.
Energy Convers Manage 2017;140:98–108.
[364] Li J, Yang WM, An H, Zhao D. Effects of fuel ratio and injection timing on gaso-
line/biodiesel fueled RCCI engine: a modeling study. Appl Energy
2015;155:59–67.
[365] Nazemi M, Shahbakhti M. Modeling and analysis of fuel injection parameters for
combustion and performance of an RCCI engine. Appl Energy 2016;165:135–50.
[366] Wang Y, Yao M, Li T, Zhang W, Zheng Z. A parametric study for enabling reactivity
controlled compression ignition (RCCI) operation in diesel engines at various
engine loads. Appl Energy 2016;175:389–402.
[367] Dempsey AB, Walker NR, Reitz R. Effect of cetane improvers on gasoline, ethanol,
and methanol reactivity and the implications for RCCI combustion. SAE Int J Fuels
Lubr 2013;6:170–87.
[368] Vescovo D, Wang H, Wissink M, Reitz R. Isobutanol as both low reactivity and high
reactivity fuels with addition of di tert butyl peroxide (DTBP) in RCCI combustion.
SAE Int J Fuels Lubr 2015;8:329–43.
[369] Tutak W. Bioethanol E85 as a fuel for dual fuel diesel engine. Energy Convers
Manage 2014;86:39–48.
[370] Isık MZ, Aydın H. Analysis of ethanol RCCI application with safflower biodiesel
blends in a high load diesel power generator. Fuel 2016;184:248–60.
[371] Benajes J, Molina S, García A, Monsalve-Serrano J. Effects of direct injection
timing and blending ratio on RCCI combustion with different low reactivity fuels.
Energy Convers Manage 2015;99:193–209.
[372] Qian Y, Ouyang L, Wang X, Zhu L, Lu X. Experimental studies on combustion and
emissions of RCCI fueled with n-heptane/alcohols fuels. Fuel 2015;162:239–50.
[373] Pedrozo VB, May I, Lanzanova TDM, Zhao H. Potential of internal EGR and
throttled operation for low load extension of ethanol–diesel dual-fuel reactivity
controlled compression ignition combustion on a heavy-duty engine. Fuel
2016;179:391–405.
[374] Qian Y, Wang X, Zhu L, Lu X. Experimental studies on combustion and emissions
of RCCI (reactivity controlled compression ignition) with gasoline/n-heptane and
ethanol/n-heptane as fuels. Energy 2015;88:584–94.
[375] Zhu L, Qian Y, Wang X, Lu X. Effects of direct injection timing and premixed ratio
on combustion and emissions characteristics of RCCI (Reactivity Controlled
Compression Ignition) with N-heptane/gasoline-like fuels. Energy
2015;93:383–92.
[376] Li Y, Jia M, Chang Y, Xie M, Reitz RD. Towards a comprehensive understanding of
the influence of fuel properties on the combustion characteristics of a RCCI (re-
activity controlled compression ignition) engine. Energy 2016;99:69–82.
[377] Park SH, Shin D, Park J. Effect of ethanol fraction on the combustion and emission
characteristics of a dimethyl ether-ethanol dual-fuel reactivity controlled com-
pression ignition engine. Appl Energy 2016;182:243–52.
[378] Park SH, Yoon SH, Lee CS. Bioethanol and gasoline premixing effect on combus-
tion and emission characteristics in biodiesel dual-fuel combustion engine. Appl
Energy 2014;135:286–98.
[379] Park SH, Lee CS. Effect of bioethanol on combustion and exhaust emissions in a
76
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
diesel-bioethanol dual-fuel combustion engine. J Energy Eng 2016;142:E4015009.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EY.1943-7897.0000313.
[380] Wagemakers AMLM, Leermakers CAJ. Review on the effects of dual-fuel opera-
tion, using diesel and gaseous fuels, on emissions and performance. SAE Int J
Engines 2012:1–18. https://doi.org/10.4271/2012-01-0869. 2012-01-0869.
[381] Dahodwala M, Joshi S, Koehler E, Franke M, Tomazic D. Experimental and com-
putational analysis of diesel-natural gas RCCI combustion in heavy-duty engines.
SAE technical paper 2015-01-0849; 2015. https://doi.org/10.4271/2015-01-
0849.
[382] Jia Z, Denbratt I. Experimental investigation of natural gas-diesel dual-fuel RCCI in
a heavy-duty engine. SAE Int J Engines 2015;8(2):797–807. https://doi.org/10.
4271/2015-01-0838.
[383] Park SH, Yoon SH. Effect of dual-fuel combustion strategies on combustion and
emission characteristics in reactivity controlled compression ignition (RCCI) en-
gine. Fuel 2016;181:310–8.
[384] Qian Y, Zhang Y, Wang X, Lu X. Particulate matter emission characteristics of a
reactivity controlled compression ignition engine fueled with biogas/diesel dual
fuel. J Aerosol Sci 2017;113:166–77.
[385] Poorghasemi K, Saray RK, Ansari E, Irdmousa BK, Shahbakhti M, Naber JD. Effect
of diesel injection strategies on natural gas/diesel RCCI combustion characteristics
in a light duty diesel engine. Appl Energy 2017;199:430–46.
[386] Paykani A, Kakaee AH, Rahnama P, Reitz RD. Effects of diesel injection strategy on
natural gas/diesel reactivity controlled compression ignition combustion. Energy
2015;90:814–26.
[387] Kalsi SS, Subramanian KA. Experimental investigations of effects of EGR on per-
formance and emissions characteristics of CNG fueled reactivity controlled com-
pression ignition (RCCI) engine. Energy Convers Manage 2016;130:91–105.
[388] Gharehghani A, Hosseini R, Mirsalim M, Jazayeri SA, Yusaf T. An experimental
study on reactivity controlled compression ignition engine fueled with biodiesel/
natural gas. Energy 2015;89:558–67.
[389] Kalsi SS, Subramanian KA. Experimental investigations of effects of hydrogen
blended CNG on performance, combustion and emissions characteristics of a
biodiesel fueled reactivity controlled compression ignition engine (RCCI). Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2012;37:4548–60.
[390] Krishnan SR, Srinivasan KK, Raihan MS. The effect of injection parameters and
boost pressure on diesel-propane dual fuel low temperature combustion in a
single-cylinder research engine. Fuel 2016;184:490–502.
[391] Lim JH, Reitz RD. High load (21barIMEP) dual fuel RCCI combustion using dual
direct injection. J Eng Gas Turb Power 2014;136:101514.
[392] Prikhodko V, Curran S, Parks J, Wagner R. Effectiveness of diesel oxidation cat-
alyst in reducing HC and CO emissions from reactivity controlled compression
ignition. SAE Int J Fuels Lubr 2013;6(2):329–35. https://doi.org/10.4271/2013-
01-0515.
[393] Sahina Z, Durguna O, Mustafa K. Experimental investigation of improving diesel
combustion and engine performance by ethanol fumigation-heat release and
flammability analysis. Energy Convers Manage 2015;89(1):175–87.
[394] Desantes JM, Benajes J, García A, Monsalve-Serrano J. The role of the in cylinder
gas temperature and oxygen concentration over low load RCCI combustion effi-
ciency. Energy 2014;78(15):854–68.
[395] Kim Donghoon, Bae Choongsik. Application of double-injection strategy on ga-
soline compression ignition engine under low load condition. Fuel
2017;203:792–801.
[396] Sellnau M, Foster M, Hoyer K, Moore W, Sinnamon J, Husted H. Development of a
gasoline direct injection compression ignition (GDCI) engine. SAE Int J Engines
2014;7(2):835–51. https://doi.org/10.4271/2014-01-1300.
[397] Badra JA, Sim J, Elwardany A, Jaasim M, Viollet Y, Chang J, et al. A and Im HG.
Numerical simulations of hollow-cone injection and gasoline compression ignition
combustion with naphtha fuels. ASME J Energy Res Technol 2016;138. 052202-
1–11.
[398] Ra Y, Loeper P, Andrie M, Krieger R, Foster D, Reitz R, et al. Gasoline DICI engine
operation in the LTC regime using triple- pulse injection. SAE Int J Engines
2012;5(3):1109–32. https://doi.org/10.4271/2012-01-1131.
[399] Cracknell R, Ariztegui J, Dubois T, Hamje H, Pellegrini L, Rickeard D, et al.
Modelling a gasoline compression ignition (GCI) engine concept. SAE technical
paper 2014-01-1305; 2014. https://doi.org/10.4271/2014-01-1305.
[400] Chen Y, Mehl M, Xie Y, Chen JY. Improved skeletal reduction on multiple gasoline-
ethanol surrogates using a Jacobian-aided DRGEP approach under gasoline com-
pression ignition (GCI) engine conditions. Fuel 2017;210:617–24.
[401] Putrasari Y, Lim O. A study on combustion and emission of GCI engines fueled
with gasoline-biodiesel blends. Fuel 2017;189:141–54.
[402] Chen Y, Wolk B, Mehl M, Cheng WK, Chen JY, Dibble RW. Development of a
reduced chemical mechanism targeted for a 5-component gasoline surrogate: A
case study on the heat release nature in a GCI engine. Combust Flame
2017;178:268–76.
[403] Tsujimura T, Oguma M, Goto S. A study of fuel auto-ignitability on premixed
compression ignition characteristics. SAE technical paper 2008-01-0062; 2008.
[404] Kalghatgi K, Hildingsson L, Johansson B. Low NOx and low smoke operation of a
diesel engine using gasoline-like fuels ICES2009-76034 American Society of
Mechanical Engineers; 2009.
[405] Kavuri C, Kokjohn SL, Klos DT, Hou D. Blending the benefits of reactivity con-
trolled compression ignition and gasoline compression ignition combustion using
an adaptive fuel injection system. Int J Eng Res 2015;17(8):811–24.
[406] Kalghatgi GT. Auto-ignition quality of practical fuels and implications for fuel
requirements of future SI and HCCI engines. SAE technical paper 2005-01-0239;
2005.
[407] Weall A, Collings N. Gasoline fueled partially premixed compression ignition in a
T. Pachiannan, et al.
light duty multi cylinder engine: a study of low load and low speed operation. SAE
Int J Eng 2009;2(1):1574–86. [SAE paper 2009-01-1791].
[408] Manente V, Johansson B, Tunestal P, Cannella W. Effects of different type of ga-
soline fuels on heavy duty partially premixed combustion. SAE Int J Eng
2009;2(2):71–88. [SAE paper 2009-01-2668].
[409] Manente V, Zander CG, Johansson B, Tunestal P, Cannella W. An advanced in-
ternal combustion engine concept for low emissions and high efficiency from idle
to max load using gasoline partially premixed combustion. SAE technical paper
2010-01-2198; 2010.
[410] Borgqvist P, Tunestal P, Johansson B. Gasoline partially premixed combustion in a
light duty engine at low load and idle operating conditions. SAE technical paper
2012-01-0687; 2012.
[411] Hildingsson L, Kalghatgi G, Tait N, Johansson B, Harrison A. Fuel octane effects in
the partially premixed combustion regime in compression ignition engines. SAE
technical paper 2009-01-2648; 2009.
[412] Sellnau M, Moore W, Sinnamon J, Hoyer K, Foster M, Husted H. GDCI multi-
cylinder engine for high fuel efficiency and low emissions. SAE Int J Engines
2015;8(2). https://doi.org/10.4271/2015-01-0834.
[413] Goyal H, Kook S, Hawkes ER, Chan QN. Performance output of double-injection
gasoline compression ignition (GCI) combustion in a common-rail diesel engine.
20th Australasian fluid mechanics conference – Perth, Australia 5–8 December
2016. 2016.
[414] Putrasari Y, Lim OT. Performance and emission of gasoline compression ignition
engine fueled with 5 and 20% gasoline-biodiesel blends under single injection
strategy. Energy Procedia 2017;105:1743–50.
[415] Zelenyuk A, Reitz P, Stewart M, Imre D, Loeper P, Adams C, et al. Detailed
characterization of particulates emitted by pre-commercial single-cylinder gaso-
line compression ignition engine. Combust Flame 2014;161:2151–64.
[416] Chang J, Viollet Y, Amer A, Kalghatgi G. Fuel economy potential of partially
premixed compression ignition (PPCI) combustion with naphtha fuel. 2013. SAE
technical paper 2013-01-2701; 2013. https://doi.org/10.4271/2013-01-2701.
[417] Kalghatgi GT. Developments in internal combustion engines and implications for
combustion science and future transport fuels. Proc Combust Inst 2015;35:101–15.
[418] Rose KD, Ariztegui J, Cracknell RF, Dubois T, Hamje HDC, Pellegrini L, et al.
Exploring a gasoline compression ignition (GCI) engine concept. SAE technical
paper 2013-01-0911; 2013. https://doi.org/10.4271/2013-01-0911.
[419] Pinazzi PM, Foucher F. Influence of injection parameters, ozone seeding and re-
sidual NO on a gasoline compression ignition (GCI) engine at low load. Proc
Combust Inst 2017;36:3659–68.
[420] Kavuri C, Paz J, Kokjohn SL. A comparison of reactivity controlled compression
ignition (RCCI) and gasoline compression ignition (GCI) strategies at high load,
low speed conditions. Energy Convers Manage 2016;127:324–41.
[421] Jiang C, Li Z, Liu G, Qian Y, Lu X. Achieving high efficient gasoline compression
ignition (GCI) combustion through the cooperative-control of fuel octane number
and air intake conditions. Fuel 2019;242:23–34.
[422] Jia G, Wang H, Tong L, Wang X, Zheng Z, Yao M. Experimental and numerical
studies on three gasoline surrogates applied in gasoline compression ignition (GCI)
mode. Appl Energy 2017;192:59–70.
[423] Javed T, Nasir EF, Ahmed A, Badra J, Djebbi K, Beshir M, et al. Ignition delay
measurements of light naphtha: a fully blended low octane fuel. Proc Combust Inst
2017;36:315–22.
[424] Ra Y, Loeper P, Reitz R, Andrie M, Krieger R, Foster D, et al. Study of high speed
gasoline direct injection compression ignition (GDICI) engine operation in the LTC
regime. SAE Int J Engines 2011;4(1):1412–30.
[425] Sellnau M, Sinnamon J, Hoyer K, Husted H. Full-time gasoline direct-injection
compression ignition (GDCI) for high efficiency and low NOx and PM. SAE Int J
Engines 2012;5(2). https://doi.org/10.4271/2012-01-0384.
[426] Loeper P, Ra Y, Foster D, Ghandhi J. Experimental and computational assessment
of inlet swirl effects on a gasoline compression ignition (GCI) light-duty diesel
engine. SAE technical paper 2014-01-1299; 2014. https://doi.org/10.4271/2014-
01-1299.
[427] Viollet Y, Chang J, Kalghatgi G. Compression ratio and derived cetane number
effects on gasoline compression ignition engine running with naphtha fuels. SAE
Int J Fuels Lubr 2014;7(2). https://doi.org/10.4271/2014-01-1301.
[428] Abbad MA, Badra J, Djebbi K, Farooq A. Ignition delay measurements of a low-
octane gasoline blend, designed for gasoline compression ignition (GCI) engines.
Proc Combust Inst 2019;37:171–8.
[429] Mao B, Chen P, Liu H, Zheng Z, Yao M. Gasoline compression ignition operation on
a multi-cylinder heavy-duty diesel engine. Fuel 2018;215:339–51.
[430] Liu H, Mao B, Liu J, Zheng Z, Yao M. Pilot injection strategy management of
gasoline compression ignition (GCI) combustion in a multi-cylinder diesel engine.
Fuel 2018;221:116–27.
[431] Zou X, Liu W, Lin Z, Wu B, Su W. An experimental investigation of the effects of
fuel injection strategy on the efficiency and emissions of a heavy-duty engine at
high load with gasoline compression ignition. Fuel 2018;220:437–45.
[432] Wei H, Hua J, Pan M, Feng D, Zhou L, Pan J. Experimental investigation on
knocking combustion characteristics of gasoline compression ignition engine.
Energy 2018;143:624–33.
[433] Pinazzi PM, Hwang J, Kim D, Foucher F, Bae C. Influence of injector spray angle
and gasoline-diesel blending ratio on the low load operation in a gasoline com-
pression ignition (GCI) engine. Fuel 2018;222:496–505.
[434] John Roberts J, Chuahy FDF, Kokjohn SL, Roy S. Isolation of the parametric effects
77
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
of pre-blended fuel on low load gasoline compression ignition (GCI). Fuel
2019;237:522–35.
[435] Adams CA, Loeper P, Krieger R, Andrie MJ, Foster DE. Effects of biodiesel–gasoline
blends on gasoline direct-injection compression ignition (GCI) combustion. Fuel
2013;111:784–90.
[436] Putrasari Y, Lim O. A review of gasoline compression ignition: a promising tech-
nology potentially fueled with mixtures of gasoline and biodiesel to meet future
engine efficiency and emission targets. Energies 2019;12(238):1–27.
[437] Putrasari Y, Ocktaeck LIM. A study of a GCI engine fueled with gasoline-biodiesel
blends under pilot and main injection strategies. Fuel 2018;221:269–82.
[438] Leermakers CAJ, Van den Berge B, Luijten CCM, Somers LMT, de Goey LPH,
Albrecht BA. Gasoline-diesel dual fuel: effect of injection timing and fuel balance.
SAE paper 2011-01-2437; 2011. https://doi.org/10.4271/2011-01-2437.
[439] Manente V, Johansson B, Tunestal P. Partially premixed combustion at high load
using gasoline and ethanol, a comparison with diesel. SAE technical paper 2009-
01-0944; 2009.
[440] Kim KH, Kim DH, Jung YJ, Bae CS. Spray and combustion characteristics of ga-
soline and diesel in a direct injection compression ignition engine. Fuel
2013;109:616–26.
[441] Benajes J, Molina S, García A, Serrano JM, Durrett R. Conceptual model de-
scription of the double injection strategy applied to the gasoline partially pre-
mixed compression ignition combustion concept with spark assistance. Appl
Energy 2014;129:1–9.
[442] Kalghatgi G, Johansson B. Gasoline compression ignition approach to efficient,
clean and affordable future engines. Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Eng
2018:1–21.
[443] Zhou L, Hua J, Wei H, Han Y. An experimental investigation on low load com-
bustion stability and cold-firing capacity of a gasoline compression ignition en-
gine. Engineering 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2018.12.010.
[444] Senthil Kumar M, Nataraj G, Arulselvan S. A comprehensive assessment on the
effect of high octane fuels induction on engine’s combustion behaviour of a mahua
oil based dual fuel engine. Fuel 2017;199:176–84.
[445] Ambarita H. Performance and emission characteristics of a small diesel engine run
in dual-fuel (diesel-biogas) mode. Case Stud Therm Eng 2017;10:179–91.
[446] Ramasamy D, Goh CY, Kadirgama K, Benedict F, Noor MM, Najafi G, et al. Engine
performance, exhaust emission and combustion analysis of a 4-stroke spark ignited
engine using dual fuel injection. Fuel 2017;207:719–28.
[447] Zheng M, Mulenga MC, Reader GT, Wang M, Ting DSK, Tjong J. Biodiesel engine
performance and emissions in low temperature combustion. Fuel 2008;87:714–22.
[448] Pidol L, Lecointe B, Starck L, Jeuland N. Ethanol–biodiesel–diesel fuel blends:
Performances and emissions in conventional diesel and advanced low temperature
combustions. Fuel 2012;93:329–38.
[449] Zhang Q, Chen G, Zheng Z, Liu H, Xu J, Yao M. Combustion and emissions of 2,5-
dimethylfuran addition on a diesel engine with low temperature combustion. Fuel
2013;103:730–5.
[450] Han X, Zheng M, Wang J. Fuel suitability for low temperature combustion in
compression ignition engines. Fuel 2013;109:336–49.
[451] Rakopoulos CD, Dimaratos AM, Giakoumis EG, Rakopoulos DC. Investigating the
emissions during acceleration of a turbocharged diesel engine operating with bio-
diesel or n-butanol diesel fuel blends. Energy 2010;35:5173–84.
[452] Merola SS, Tornatore C, Lannuzzi SE, Marchitto L, Valentino G. Combustion
process investigation in a high speed diesel engine fueled with n-butanol diesel
blend by conventional methods and optical diagnostics. Renew Energ
2014;64:225–37.
[453] Kook S, Pickett LM. Effect of fuel volatility and ignition quality on combustion and
soot formation at fixed premixing conditions. SAE technical paper 2009-01-2643;
2009.
[454] Zheng M, Li T, Han X. Direct injection of neat n-butanol for enabling clean low
temperature combustion in a modern diesel engine. Fuel 2015;142:28–37.
[455] Zhang Q, Yao M, Zheng Z, Liu H, Xu J. Experimental study of n-butanol addition
on performance and emissions with diesel low temperature combustion. Energy
2012;47:515–21.
[456] Zheng Z, Li C, Liu H, Zhang Y, Zhong X, Yao M. Experimental study on diesel
conventional and low temperature combustion by fueling four isomers of butanol.
Fuel 2015;141:109–19.
[457] Akihama K, Takatori Y, Inagaki K, Sasaki S, Dean AM. Mechanism of the smokeless
rich diesel combustion by reducing temperature. SAE technical paper 2001-01-
0655; 2001.
[458] Jung Y, Hwang J, Bae C. Assessment of particulate matter in exhaust gas for
biodiesel and diesel under conventional and low temperature combustion in a
compression ignition engine. Fuel 2016;165:413–24.
[459] Ladommatos N, Abdelhalim SM, Zhao H, Hu Z. The dilution, chemical, and
thermal effects of exhaust gas recirculation on diesel engine emissions – Part 1:
Effect of reducing inlet charge oxygen. SAE technical paper 961165; 1996.
[460] Feng H, Zheng Z, Yao M, Cheng G, Wang M, Wang X. Effects of exhaust gas re-
circulation on low temperature combustion using wide distillation range diesel.
Energy 2013;51:291–6.
[461] Huang H, Zhou C, Liu Q, Wang Q, Wang X. An experimental study on the com-
bustion and emission characteristics of a diesel engine under low temperature
combustion of diesel/gasoline/n-butanol blends. Appl Energy 2016;170:219–31.
[462] Ojeda WD, Bulicz T, Han X, Zheng M, Cornforth F. Impact of fuel properties on
diesel low temperature combustion. SAE Int J Engines 2011;4(1):188–201.
T. Pachiannan, et al.
https://doi.org/10.4271/2011-01-0329.
[463] Tow TC, Pierpont DA, Reitz RD. Reducing particulate and NOx using multiple
injections in a heavy duty D.I. diesel engine. SAE paper 940897; 1994.
[464] Pierpont DA, Montgomery DT, Reitz RD. Reducing particulate and NOx using
multiple injections and EGR in a D.I. diesel. SAE paper 950217; 1995.
[465] Badami M, Mallamo F, Millo F, Rossi EE. Influence of multiple injection strategies
on emissions, combustion noise and BSFC of a DI common rail diesel engine. SAE
technical paper 2002-01-0503; 2002.
[466] Rajkumar S, Bakshi S, Mehta PS. Multizone phenomenological modeling of com-
bustion and emissions for multiple-injection common rail direct injection. ASME J
Eng Gas Turb Power 2016;138.
[467] Chen SK. Simultaneous reduction of NOx and particulate emission using multiple
78
Applied Energy 251 (2019) 113380
injections in a small diesel engine. SAE paper 2000-01-3084; 2000.
[468] Huang H, Liu Q, Yang R, Zhu T, Zhao R, Wang Y. Investigation on the effects of
pilot injection on low temperature combustion in high-speed diesel engine fueled
with n-butanol–diesel blends. Energy Convers Manage 2015;106:748–58.
[469] Ge JC, Kim MS, Yoon SK, Choi NJ. Effects of pilot injection timing and EGR on
combustion, performance and exhaust emissions in a common rail diesel engine
fueled with a canola oil biodiesel-diesel blend. Energies 2015;8:7312–25. https://
doi.org/10.3390/en8077312.
[470] Huang H, Wang Q, Shi C, Liu Q, Zhou C. Comparative study of effects of pilot
injection and fuel properties on low temperature combustion in diesel engine
under a medium EGR rate. Appl Energy 2016;179:1194–208.