Downloaded from SAE International by The Library | University of Bath, Thursday, July 23, 2020

Study on Fuel Economy Improvement by 2016-01-0678

Low Pressure Water-Cooled EGR System Published 04/05/2016

on a Downsized Boosted Gasoline Engine

Haifeng Lu, Jun Deng, Zongjie Hu, Zhijun Wu, and Liguang Li
Tongji Univ.

Fangen Yuan, Degang Xie, and Shuang Yuan

Zhejiang Geely Powertrain Research Institute

Yuan Shen
Zhejiang Geely Automobile Research Institute

CITATION: Lu, H., Deng, J., Hu, Z., Wu, Z. et al., "Study on Fuel Economy Improvement by Low Pressure Water-Cooled EGR
System on a Downsized Boosted Gasoline Engine," SAE Technical Paper 2016-01-0678, 2016, doi:10.4271/2016-01-0678.
Copyright © 2016 SAE International

Abstract inescapable in stoichiometric gasoline engine. However, the elevated

power density of the downsized boosted engine increases the
This research was concerned with the use of Exhaust Gas
propensity for abnormal combustion (knock, super knock and
Recirculation (EGR) improving the fuel economy over a wide
preignition) especially in the low-speed/high-load region, for the rise
operating range in a downsized boosted gasoline engine. The
of cylinder pressure and gas temperature.
experiments were performed in a 1.3-Litre turbocharged PFI gasoline
engine, equipped with a Low Pressure (LP) water-cooled EGR
The traditional method of knock control relies on retarding ignition
system. The operating conditions varied from 1500rpm to 4000rpm
timing, which will lead to deterioration in thermal efficiency.
and BMEP from 2bar to 17bar. Meanwhile, the engine’s typical
Additionally, the higher exhaust temperatures caused by the late
operating points in NEDC cycle were tested separately. The
combustion phasing require that fuel enrichment be used to protect
compression ratio was also changed from 9.5 to 10.5 to pursue a
the turbocharger, causing greater penalties for both the fuel economy
higher thermal efficiency. A pre-compressor throttle was used in the
and the conversion efficiency of the Three-Way Catalytic Converters
experiment working together with the EGR loop to keep enough EGR
(TWC) [1]. However, even under such conditions, a compromised
rate over a large area of the engine speed and load map. The results
lower geometric compression ratio has to be used to mitigate knock
indicated that, combined with a higher compression ratio, the
in boosted gasoline engines.
LP-EGR could help to reduce the BSFC by 9∼12% at high-load
region and 3∼5% at low-load region. The fuel consumption reduction
Therefore, the two main directions of the modern gasoline engine
mechanisms were mainly attributed to heat loss reduction and lower
development are, on the one hand, to overcome the downsizing
pumping losses at low-to-moderate loads. During the high loads, the
limitation of the abnormal combustion in the region of high load. On
combustion phasing improvement combined with reducing fuel
the other hand, the part load efficiency should be further improved,
enrichment played a significant role to optimize the fuel efficiency,
which have a significant impact on the real road driving conditions.
and the knock suppression effect was apparent.
An alternative solution that is emerging as a promising technology to
meet these demands is Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR).
Introduction
Cooled EGR technology, in which EGR temperature is reduced with
China’s State Council has released the Energy-Saving and New
an intercooler, has got an intensified focus in recent years. Differ
Energy Vehicle Industrialization Plan, which states an expected fleet
from the Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) reduction purpose in Diesel engine:
average fuel consumption target of 5.0L/100km by 2020. This means
cooled EGR in gasoline engine is employed primarily to reduce fuel
that the OEMs must apply much more advanced technologies to their
consumption. At first, the fuel-saving benefits of EGR was realized
mass-produced engines to meet the standard. Meanwhile, gasoline
by reducing the propensity of engine knock, which is still the most
engines have been substantially downsized in recent years to improve
primary aim of the EGR technology in gasoline engine nowadays. In
fuel economy. The basic principle is to shift a large proportion of
1996, Diana, et al. from Insituto Motori [2] investigated the influence
engine operating range into higher loads. This can help to reduce the
of cooled EGR in a four cylinder 1.2 liter PFI gasoline engine with
pumping losses in a given road load requirement, which is
 Downloaded from SAE International by The Library | University of Bath, Thursday, July 23, 2020
the compression ratio increased from 10 to 13. The engine had two
valves per cylinder and the inlet port design didn’t promote any
organized air motion. The results showed that EGR turned out to be
an effective way to control knock and the gains of specific fuel
consumption at high load can exceed 10%. The authors postulated
that EGR adoption should be matched with improved air motion to
obtain further fuel economy at low loads. In a later work in 1998,
Grandin, et al. from Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm [3]
adopted cooled EGR in a 2.3 liter turbocharged PFI engine
(Compression Ratio=8.95) to study the knock inhibition effect. It was
concluded that EGR decreased the average flame speed in
4000rpm/13∼18bar BMEP, which was favorable for suppressing
knock and could thus substitute fuel enrichment strategy.
During those years, the interest of lean burn technology (excess
air dilution) began to rise, and various researchers naturally tried
to compare it with the EGR technology. In 1997, Lumsden, et al.
from Tickford Ltd. [4] used a four cylinder 1.6 liter PFI unit to
evaluate the difference between lean burn and EGR. That engine
had a special intake charge activity feature including one high
swirl port per pair and one straight port with a deactivation plate.
The researchers concluded that the engine had a very high
tolerance to EGR rate (greater than 25% in many cases). 10%
EGR gave a 70% reduction in NOx emission, but the fuel
consumption gains beyond 10% EGR were small and HC
emissions started to rise more rapidly. However, using lean burn
could get the possible specific fuel consumption between 3∼10%,
which is better than what could be realized by EGR.
In a later similar study in 1999, Grandin, et al. [5] found that both
lean burn and cooled EGR were possible to replace the fuel
enrichment in 5000 rpm/16.5bar BMEP with the same test bench in
1998. In addition, the lean burn offered an even more substantial
reduction of CO and HC in tail pipe, but carried a penalty in NOx
compared to EGR for the failure of TWC. It was notable that the
author also analyzed the ratio of specific heats (γ), specific heat
capacity and heat capacity of fuel enrichment, lean and EGR, and
concluded that γ increased with increased dilution, and this was due
to a relative reduction of fuel. The specific heat of charge is higher
with rich combustion, but the total mass of the mixture is higher with
a lean or with EGR, which results in a higher heat capacity of the
end-gas in comparison with a rich mixture. This leads to a lower
temperature of the combustion, and the heat capacity of EGR is even
greater than lean mixture.
This opinion was to some extent supported by experimental evidence
reported by Duchaussoy, et al. from Renault in 2003 [6]. The test was
carried out on a 2.0 liter PFI engine (CR=9.5) in 5000rpm/17bar
BMEP. It was concluded that introducing EGR provided better fuel
consumption benefits over excess air dilution due to the advanced
combustion phasing (6°CA advanced than lean mode) at high loads.
The ignition delay and the combustion duration of EGR were also
longer than lean burn, which indicate that EGR had a greater
inhibition effect on the combustion. Some other researches [7, 8] also
gave the similar ideas that the cooling effect of EGR was attributed to
both the thermodynamic aspect (heat capacity) and the chemical
aspect (lower flame speed). This synergy made EGR a better knock
inhibitor than excess air or fuel.
There are several different kinds of EGR loop architecture, and the
most commonly used solutions are High-Pressure loop EGR
(HP-EGR), Low-Pressure loop EGR (LP-EGR) and Mixed-Pressure
loop EGR (Mixed-EGR). Several researchers had made comparisons
of these architectures. In 2007, Potteau, et al. from Valeo [9]
compared the difference between HP-EGR and LP-EGR on a 2.0 liter
turbocharged PFI engine (CR=9.0). The HP-EGR was withdrawn
from pre-turbine to post-compressor (upstream of the charge cooler),
and the LP-EGR was taken from post-TWC to pre-compressor. It was
concluded that the LP-EGR could gain 7.4% reduction of Brake
Specific Fuel Consumption (BSFC) in 1500rpm/11.3bar BMEP and
13.5% reduction of BSFC in 5500rpm/12.9bar BMEP. The HP-EGR
could not provide sufficient EGR rate in low-speed/high-load region,
for the pressure difference between exhaust and intake side was not
favorable to EGR flow. This situation remained the same until the
speed reached 2500rpm. Meanwhile, the HP-EGR could gain 6.6%
reduction of BSFC at 5500rpm/12.9bar BMEP. The HP-EGR
performance was lower compared to LP-EGR, and this is primarily
due to the lack of EGR flow.
In 2008, Cairns, et al. from MAHLE [10] compared the HP-EGR and
Mixed-EGR in a 2.0 liter turbocharged GDI engine (CR=9.0) at
4000rpm/19bar BMEP and 5500rpm/15.8bar BMEP. The HP-EGR
was taken from pre-turbine to post-compressor (downstream of the
charge cooler) and the Mixed-EGR was withdrawn from pre-turbine
to pre-compressor. The authors concluded that the HP-EGR could
supply sufficient EGR rate at high speed/moderate load, and the
Mixed-EGR provided even more EGR flow. But both of them had the
problem of torque losses at low speed, even while the EGR valve was
closed. This was because the pre-turbine EGR pick-up added the dead
volume before turbine and lowered the charge efficiency, which
insinuated a hot-side valve might be required. In addition, it was
postulated that the LP-EGR and Mixed-EGR would face the
compressor durability problem, and the slower transient response
were also inevitable. Some later alternative studies [11, 12] also
expressed similar ideas as mentioned above.
Figure 1. Working mechanisms of cooled EGR in gasoline engine.
 Downloaded from SAE International by The Library | University of Bath, Thursday, July 23, 2020

In summary, LP-EGR could introduce cooler EGR in a wider Table 1. Specification of test engine and equipment.
operating range, while HP-EGR had a better compressor durability
and transient response. The Mixed-EGR might be applied as a
supplementary approach to the HP-EGR, when a pre/post compressor
path switching was available.

In more recent works, more interested were focused on the whole-

map BSFC optimizing potential of the cooled EGR. In 2014, Song, et
al. from Great Wall [13] investigated the LP-EGR in a 1.5 liter
turbocharged PFI engine with the compression ratio changed from
9.3 to 11.5. The experiments swept the full operation map from
1000rpm to 5500rpm, and the results showed that 2∼7% fuel
economy could be achieved. In the same year, Liu, et al. from
General Motors [14] a LP-EGR was implemented to a 2.0 liter
twin-scroll turbocharged GDI engine with the CR increased from9.3
to 10.9. It was colluded that combined with higher CR, the EGR
could gained 5∼7% better fuel efficiency over moderate load and
4∼6% over the high load. In addition, the authors stated that the fuel
economy benefit was limited at high load due to the EGR ratio was
restricted by the boost pressure ratio.

Based on the previous researches, the benefits of cooled EGR and their
working mechanisms can be summarized/ hypothesized in Figure 1.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate LP-EGR system on a

production downsized boosted engine and explore the maximum fuel
consumption reduction potential in a typical operating range of road
load and NEDC cycle. A PFI engine is chosen rather than a GDI unit,
There were two exhaust gas sample points (before turbine and after
for the former one is supposed to satisfy the fuel consumption targets
TWC) to analyze the concentration of CO, HC, NOx, O2 and CO2,
and emission standards in China with a lower cost.
which could monitor both the raw emissions and the catalytic
conversion efficiency. The position of intake gas sample is after the
Experimental Setup charge cooler to measure the concentration of CO2 which is used to
The experiments were performed on a standard production four calculate EGR ratio. By comparing the volume fraction of CO2 in the
cylinder 1.3L turbocharged PFI engine, equipped with an intake exhaust gas with that in the intake side, the value of EGR rate is
variable cam phasing. The tests were carried out at the determined, given by Equation 1.
compression ratios of 9.5 (standard) and 10.5 (with modified
pistons). The inlet port design does not promote any organized air
motion. Some general details of the engine and the test equipment
are summarized in Table 1. (1)

Each cylinder was equipped with a measuring spark plug integrated a

A LP-EGR loop was chosen in this experiment, for it could provide
piezoelectric pressure sensor, and cylinder pressure data were collected
enough EGR rate in a large operating range, which was critical for
every 0.5°CA. The data presented in this paper are taken from the
evaluating the EGR on a downsized engine. A schematic of the
average results of multi-cylinder over 200 combustion cycles.
engine layout is shown in Figure 2.

The combustion analysis of the cylinder pressure was computed by a

In this low pressure circuit, the EGR was diverted from
self-developed calculation program in real time, which was combined
downstream of the TWC and introduced upstream of the
with a Labview-based data acquisition system. The model used for
compressor. Since removing the NOx from the exhaust gas could
determination of heat release was based on an energy balance
further enhance the knock suppression effect of EGR [15]. No
according to the first law of thermodynamics, neglecting heat transfer
active exhaust backpressure control was applied during this study.
and assuming γ to be constant.
Thus, a precompressor throttle was placed downstream of the air
filter to establish vacuum when needed. The EGR rate was
Since the different compression ratio and EGR rate would change the
controlled by the EGR valve and the pre-compressor throttle,
combustion process of the engine, the standard electronic
which were actuated via pulse width modulated signal generated
management was no longer suitable. An adjustable ECU was used to
by a self-developed control unit. For most of the time, the control
control main throttle, fuel injection, ignition timing, waste gate of
was executed by EGR valve and the pre-compressor throttle was
turbine and intake VVT. The basic strategy for engine control was to
kept fully open.
achieve the minimum BSFC in every operation point. Ignition timing
had been setting to Minimum Spark Advance for Best Torque (MBT).
 Downloaded from SAE International by The Library | University of Bath, Thursday, July 23, 2020
By means of a closed loop control with the λ feedback, injection
duration was further adjusted to maintain A/F ratio close to
stoichiometry (λ = 1) in most of the tests, unless the enrichment was
necessary. The limit temperature of the exhaust gas before turbine
was fixed to 900°C, so as to protect the components on the exhaust
side. Once running steadily, the supply of EGR was gradually
adjusted and the combustion stability was evaluated from the
Coefficient of Variation (COV) of IMEP, considering the acceptable
upper limit of 5%.
Figure 2. Schematic of the engine test bench layout.
The Knock Intensity (KI) was calculated from the maximum absolute
values of the band pass filtered cylinder pressure. The threshold level
for knock was set to 50kPa. Once exceeded this value, the ignition
retarding strategy would intervene.
During all the tests, the EGR cooling system was in parallel with
the engine cooling cycle to create a situation similar to the real car
arrangement. The coolant temperature was held constant at 88°C.
An independent liquid to air heat exchanger was used for the
charge cooler and the outlet air temperature was controlled to the
same settings as the calibration. The outlet gas temperature of EGR
cooler was always below 100°C, thus a solenoid valve was used to
release the condensate water.
A commercial unleaded gasoline with 92 RON was utilized in all
tests. The temperature of intake air was fixed at 25°C by intake air
conditioning system, while humidity was kept between 50∼60%.
The engine was run at two kinds of operating conditions: one was
the ordinary map of 1500∼4000rpm/1∼17bar BMEP; the other was
the typical operating points in NEDC cycle of the target car
equipped with this engine. Since 3500∼4000rpm were not
commonly used economic speed, they were not the focus of this
research. Thus, only 2 loads were tested. The details of the
conditions were shown in Table 2.
Table 2. Description of the operating conditions in the test
Results and Discussion
In order to make the paper concise, all the following data are the best
fuel consumption results of the operating conditions. The adjustable
parameters include injection pulse, ignition timing, main throttle,
precompressor throttle, EGR valve, intake VVT and the wastegate of
turbine. These parameters were coordinated with each other to achieve
the lowest BSFC under the specified rpm/BMEP conditions. The curves
of different compression ratios and w/ or w/o EGR are abbreviated as
CR9.5-Base, CR9.5-EGR, CR10.5-Base and CR10.5-EGR.
Combustion Effects
Best EGR Rate and COV of IMEP
It should be noted that the calibration of EGR rate was relatively a
more difficult process. Changing EGR rate would lead to changes of
the other parameters, such as throttle angle, intake VVT, Wastegate
Duty Cycle (WGDC), ignition timing et al., when the specified speed
and load were fixed. However, the changes of other parameters would
affect the EGR rate in turn. Therefore, the calibration of each
operating point was an iterative process, which added the difficulty of
the experiments. Thus the changing step of EGR rate (ΔEGR%) was
set about 5% to simplify the experiments.
Figure 3 and 4 show the load curve of best EGR rate and the COV of
IMEP in different engine speeds. The maximum EGR rate this engine
could tolerate was about 20%, for the ignition system and the
in-cylinder air flow had not been optimized. Under the moderate load,
higher EGR rates could be used than that in low/high load. But the
reasons were different. The weaker airflow movement and the higher
residual gas ratio in the low loads made the combustion not stable
enough to bear the high EGR rate. However, in the high loads the
EGR rate was restricted by the capability of the boost system, for the
turbocharger could not provide enough fresh air to compensate for
the power loss caused by EGR. Moreover, if the EGR rate was not
high enough in the high loads, the propensity of knock was still
severe, which resulted in a higher COV of IMEP.
 Downloaded from SAE International by The Library | University of Bath, Thursday, July 23, 2020

about 9.52°CA and in CR10.5-EGR is about 9.83°CA. Under

moderate loads, the prolongations of the ignition delay are most
obvious due to the higher EGR rates.

Figure 3. Best EGR rate and COV of IMEP (CR9.5-EGR vs. CR9.5- Base)

Figure 5. Ignition delay at best BSFC EGR rate (CR9.5-EGR vs. CR9.5-Base)

Figure 4. Best EGR rate and COV of IMEP (CR10.5-EGR vs. CR10.5- Base)

For the EGR could to some extent inhibit the flame development,
thus the instable combustion would produce larger cyclic variations.
However, the COV of IMEP could also be controlled below 5% by
Figure 6. Ignition delay at best BSFC EGR rate (CR10.5-EGR vs. CR10.5-Base)
means of matching the proper ignition timing. Increasing the
compression ratio would also deteriorate the COV, but it was
acceptable in this case.

Ignition Delay
The ignition delay in this paper is defined as the difference of
crank angle between CA10 and the ignition timing. The ignition
delay is an important indicator of the stability of ignition, and can
also affect the COV of IMEP indirectly. The ignition delay of
CR9.5-Base and CR10.5-Base both decreased with the increasing
of the load and maintained at about 15°CA when the loads were
greater than 8bar BMEP. Increasing the compression ratio helped
reduce the ignition delay. As expected, the EGR could largely
extend the ignition delay and the greater COV of IMEP also
increased the fluctuation of the ignition delay curves. But in the Figure 7. Ignition delay at best BSFC EGR rate (CR10.5-EGR vs. CR9.5-EGR)
high loads (> 11bar BMEP), the ignition delay of diluted
conditions seemed to decrease and similar to the base condition. Table 3. Average increase of ignition delay
This is due to the EGR rate in these cases were also lower.
Moreover, the severe knock tendency is also the reason for
reducing the ignition delay in the high loads. The data were shown
in Figure 5, 6, 7.

Table 3 lists the statistical results of the average increase of ignition

delay by adding EGR in different compression ratios. The results
show that the average increase of ignition delay in CR9.5-EGR is
 Downloaded from SAE International by The Library | University of Bath, Thursday, July 23, 2020

Combustion Duration
Figure 8, 9, 10 show the effects of EGR on combustion duration,
which was is defined by the duration from 10% to 90% mass fraction
burned. Similar to the ignition delay, the combustion duration of both
cases decreased with the increasing of the load. Between 8 and 12bar
BMEP, it reached the lowest value. But the combustion duration rose
again for the sake of avoiding knock by means of retarding the
ignition timing. The rise of the compression ratio could get about
5°CA shorten of the combustion duration.

It is obvious that EGR could increase the combustion duration due to

the dilution effect prolonged the flame speed. However, this effect
seemed to be undermined in the low speed (1500rpm and 1750rpm) and
high load conditions, for the propensity of knock played a compensation
Figure 10. Combustion duration at best BSFC EGR rate (CR10.5-EGR vs.
effect. But in the low load, adding small amounts of EGR usually
CR9.5-EGR)
tended to increase the combustion duration rapidly to the point where
the thermal efficiency started to fall. This is the main reason restrict the Table 4. Average increase of combustion duration
EGR rate in partial load, which insinuates that to speed up the
combustion speed by optimizing the air flow can cooperate with the
EGR technology on further tapping the fuel economy potential.

Combustion Phasing
Figure 11, 12, 13 show the effects of EGR on combustion phasing,
which is defined by the crank angle when 50% of fuel is burned. The
curves indicate that the best combustion phasing of this engine is
about 8∼10°CA ATDC, in which the balance of combustion speed,
heat transfer, and mechanical efficiency et al. could help achieve the
best thermal efficiency. But this best combustion phasing would be
Figure 8. Combustion duration at best BSFC EGR rate (CR9.5-EGR vs.
limited by the knock tendency in the high loads. In the cases of
CR9.5-Base) CR9.5-Base and CR9.5-EGR, the best BSFC CA50 were
comparatively later in the low loads, especially at 1 bar BMEP. This
was mainly due to the lower airflow movement and higher residual
gas ratio in the cylinders in the low loads. Under these conditions, the
further advance of the ignition would not bring fuel consumption
optimization, but make the COV of IMEP worse. This phenomenon
had been alleviated in CR10.5, which was probably contributed to the
higher compression ratio.

Figure 9. Combustion duration at best BSFC EGR rate (CR10.5-EGR vs.

CR10.5-Base)

Table 4 lists the statistical results of the average increase of

combustion duration by adding EGR in different compression ratios.
The results show that the average increase of combustion duration in
CR9.5-EGR is about 3.70°CA and in CR10.5-EGR is about 4.34°CA.
Under moderate loads, the prolongations of the combustion duration
Figure 11. CA50 at best BSFC EGR rate (CR9.5-EGR vs. CR9.5-Base)
are most obvious due to the higher EGR rates.
 Downloaded from SAE International by The Library | University of Bath, Thursday, July 23, 2020
The addition of EGR helped to expand the window of the best
combustion phasing due to its knock suppressing effect. Since the
phasing optimizing effect of EGR was concentrated in the high load
range, this means that only the high-load EGR benefits could attribute
to this reason and the low-load EGR benefits were due to other
reasons, such as reduce pumping losses or lower heat transfer et al.
Figure 12. CA50 at best BSFC EGR rate (CR10.5-EGR vs. CR10.5-Base)
Figure 13. CA50 at best BSFC EGR rate (CR10.5-EGR vs. CR9.5-EGR)
Table 5 lists the statistical results of the average advance of CA50 by
adding EGR in different compression ratios. The results show that the
average advance of CA50 in CR9.5-EGR is about 4.27°CA and in
CR10.5-EGR is about 2.74°CA. Under high loads, the advances of
CA50 are most obvious due to the overcome of knock tendency.
Table 5. Average advance of CA50
Pumping Losses
The pumping losses of this engine were calculated by the integral of
pressure curves during intake and exhaust strokes. The effects of
EGR on pumping losses are shown in Figure 14, 15, 16. In these
figures, ‘positive’ means losses. It is obvious that the pumping losses
of both cases decreased with the increasing of the load, and lower
engine speed could help to achieve lower pumping losses. It is
interesting that the pumping losses could become negative in the
maximum load of 1500rpm and 1750rpm. This means that charge
effect was very powerful, despite the turbine would increase the
backpressure of the exhaust stroke.
EGR could really help to decrease the pumping losses during the low/
moderate load. Due to the robustness of combustion in the low load
was not strong enough to sustain higher EGR rate, thus the benefit
was less than in the moderate loads.
But this pumping losses optimization would be weakened even turn
into a negative effect when the load larger than 12bar BMEP. Because
the introduction of EGR increased the burden of turbocharger, and
the closing of wastegate would raise the exhaust gas pressure.
When the load is less than 11bar BMEP, the average proportion of
reduced pumping loss to BMEP is about 0.3∼0.8% (CR9.5-EGR vs.
CR9.5-Base) and about 0.4∼1.2% in high compression ratio case
(CR10.5-EGR vs. CR9.5-Base), and these proportions decreased with
increasing of speed. In addition, increasing the compression ratio
seemed to be able to slightly reduce pumping losses in these cases.
But as the sparkplug-mounted pressure sensors were not as accurate
as the in-cylinder flush-mounted pressure sensors, these differences
may not be very convincing.
Figure 14. Pumping losses at best BSFC EGR rate (CR9.5-EGR vs.
CR9.5-Base)
Figure 15. Pumping losses at best BSFC EGR rate (CR10.5-EGR vs.
CR10.5-Base)
 Downloaded from SAE International by The Library | University of Bath, Thursday, July 23, 2020

Figure 16. Pumping losses at best BSFC EGR rate (CR10.5-EGR vs. Figure 18. Exhaust Gas Temperature at best BSFC EGR rate (CR10.5-EGR
CR9.5-EGR) vs. CR10.5-Base)

Table 6 lists the statistical results of the average reduction of pumping

losses by adding EGR in different compression ratios. The results
show that the average reduction of pumping losses in CR9.5-EGR is
about 0.017bar and in CR10.5-EGR is about 0.029bar. Under
moderate loads, the reductions of pumping losses are most obvious
due to the higher EGR rates.

Table 6. Average reduction of pumping losses

Figure 19. Exhaust Gas Temperature at best BSFC EGR rate (CR10.5-EGR
vs. CR9.5-EGR)

Test results confirm that EGR is an effective means to reduce the

Exhaust Gas Temperature exhaust gas temperature, which could also reflect that the combustion
temperature is lowered simultaneously. This cooling effect is due to
Figure 17, 18, 19 show the effects of EGR on Exhaust Gas
that EGR could not only increase the average specific heat capacity
Temperature (EGT). The red dash-dotted line shows the upper limit of
of the mixture, but also increase the mass of the working fluid. These
the exhaust gas temperature control. The temperature of both cases
two reasons increase the overall heat capacity in the end. It should be
increased with the increasing of the speed/load. With the adding of
noted that with the rising of the specific heat capacity, the ratio of
EGR, the exhaust gas temperature decreases. But the temperature rises
specific heats (adiabatic index) of the diluted mixture would also
again when the loads are close to the wide open throttle (WOT) curve
increase, but this issue will not be discussed in this paper.
for a lower EGR rate limited by the insufficient charge pressure.

The lower combustion temperature could help to reduce the heat transfer
losses and also had a strong suppressing effect of knock, which would
lead to an advanced combustion phasing. Moreover, the optimized
combustion phasing could also contribute to lower exhaust temperature
and eventually reduced the dependence on the enrichment strategy.

Furthermore, the decreased flame speed caused by the EGR would

slow down the heat release rate, which could also reduce the max
combustion temperature (adiabatic flame temperature) and
simultaneously increase the exhaust gas temperature. But the
advanced CA50 optimized by EGR in the high load will reduce the
exhaust gas temperature in compensation. However, compared with
heat capacity increased by EGR, the above effects is less obvious.
EGR can both increase the average specific heat capacity and the
Figure 17. Exhaust Gas Temperature at best BSFC EGR rate (CR9.5-EGR vs.
mass of the working fluid. The increased heat capacity dominates the
CR9.5-Base)
combustion temperature and the exhaust gas temperature in the end.
 Downloaded from SAE International by The Library | University of Bath, Thursday, July 23, 2020
Table 7 lists the statistical results of the average reduction of exhaust gas
temperature by adding EGR in different compression ratios. The results
show that the average reduction of exhaust gas temperature in CR9.5-
EGR is about 57.2°C and in CR10.5-EGR is about 58.9°C. Under high
loads, the reductions of exhaust gas temperature are most obvious.
Table 7. Average reduction of exhaust gas temperature
Air-Fuel Equivalence Ratio (λ)
Figure 20 shows the effects of EGR on enrichment strategy. As to the
case of CR9.5, EGR could help to reduce the over-fuelling region and
the intensity also decreased.
Figure 20. A/F equivalence ratio (λ) map of CR9.5-Base, CR9.5-EGR and
CR10.5-EGR.
Increasing the compression ratio would transfer the enrichment
region to low speed conditions. This is because the higher
compression ratio increased the knock propensity, especially in
low-speed/full-load region, which forced the ignition retarding
strategy to be engaged. The postponed combustion made the exhaust
temperature rise, which led to the adoption of enrichment. After the
addition of EGR, this phenomenon had been well improved.
It was quite unexpected that the CR10.5-EGR case had an even
smaller enrichment region than that in CR9.5-EGR case. This could
be partly because the rising theoretical thermal efficiency caused by
higher compression ratio had converted more heat into useful work,
which reduced the amount of heat carried by the exhaust gas.
Emission Effects
Figure 21 and 22 show the effects of EGR on emissions before and after
the three-way catalytic converter. For brevity, only one speed condition
(2500rpm) will be considered in detail. The gases analyzer employed in
this research estimated HC, CO, CO2 by standard non-dispersive
infrared method and detected NOx by electrochemical method, which
might not be as precise as the flame ionization and chemiluminescense
method, but could also provide some qualitative conclusions.
Figure 21. Emissions at 2500rpm (CR9.5-EGR vs. CR9.5-Base)
Figure 22. Emissions at 2500rpm (CR10.5-EGR vs. CR10.5-Base)
The results indicated that increasing the compression ratio would lead
to higher raw NOx emissions. The rising curve of both cases in the
high load was due to the enrichment strategy. Since the intensity of
 Downloaded from SAE International by The Library | University of Bath, Thursday, July 23, 2020

enrichment in the case of CR10.5-EGR was lighter than that in the

CR9.5-EGR, this change could also be reflected from the amplitudes
of the HC and CO emissions.

EGR could significantly reduce the NOx emissions, but it still needed
to be further purified by the TWC. As to the HC and CO emissions,
the impact was not obvious. It could be noticed that the HC and CO
in CR9.5-Base had an ascent in low load. This was due to the torque
reservation strategy of the original ECU map.

Fuel Economy
In this section, the comprehensive impact of EGR on the fuel
economy will be summarized by two maps: one is the normal
operation map which concentrated on the common speeds, the other
is the typical operation conditions of NEDC cycle.

Figure 24. BSFC benefit percentage (CR10.5-EGR vs. CR9.5-Base)

BSFC Benefit of Normal Operating Map
Figure 23 and 24 show the effects of EGR on BSFC benefits, which
are illustrated by percentage of optimization. It was obvious that EGR
could really improve the fuel efficiency in most of the conditions and
the effect was quite exciting in the high load. This is because the
combustion phasing improvement, heat loss reduction and
enrichment elimination had played greater roles in such region. As to
the low load, the main contributions came from the pumping losses
reduction, heat loss reduction and the rise of heat capacity ratio.

Figure 25. BSFC benefit percentage (CR10.5-EGR vs. CR9.5-EGR)

Table 8 lists the statistical results of the average BSFC benefit of normal
operating map. The results show that CR9.5-EGR could get a average
benefit of 5.18% and CR10.5-EGR is even higher about 7.15%.

Table 8. Average BSFC benefit of load map

Figure 23. BSFC benefit percentage map (CR9.5-EGR vs. CR9.5-Base)

Figure 25 further compares the results of CR9.5-EGR and

CR10.5EGR. It could be seen that the rising of compression ratio
could further enlarge the fuel saving effect of EGR. But in the
low-speed/full-load region the CR9.5-EGR was better, which was
mainly due to the knock limitation. In the full load region, the EGR
rate was closely related to the ability of the turbocharger. Higher
EGR rate required a higher charge pressure; otherwise the torque loss
would be inevitable. On the other hand, the closing of wastegate
would also increase the backpressure of the exhaust gas, which would
hinder the scavenging and increase the tendency of knock. But for
most of the cases, the rising of the compression ratio was worthwhile.
BSFC Benefit of NEDC Map
Figure 26 and 27 show the effects of EGR on BSFC benefits under
typical NEDC conditions. The red numbers are the proportion of each
operating point in the NEDC cycle. The NEDC percentage means the
proportion of time of these operation points of the engine in the
whole NEDC test cycle.
 Downloaded from SAE International by The Library | University of Bath, Thursday, July 23, 2020
The results turned out that EGR could also achieve remarkable
benefits in the test cycle. Due to the operating points share different
proportion in NEDC, the weighted average benefit was also
calculated which was shown in Table 9. Furthermore, since idle
condition occupies a large proportion in the test cycle (about 9.43%)
and the EGR was unable to improve the fuel efficiency in this
condition. Thus, the weighted average without the share of idle was
also be listed in this table.
The results turned out that CR9.5-EGR could achieve 4.49% fuel
benefit and CR10.5-EGR could get 6.39%. If the idle mode was
neglected, the percentage would further improved about 0.6%, which
insinuated the start-stop system might be useful.
Figure 26. NEDC BSFC benefit percentage (CR9.5-EGR vs. CR9.5-Base)
Figure 27. NEDC BSFC benefit percentage (CR10.5-EGR vs. CR10.5-Base)
Table 9. Weighted average BSFC benefit of NEDC
Conclusions
The research results show that the application of water-cooled,
low-pressure EGR could significantly improve the fuel efficiency of
the downsized turbocharged PFI gasoline engine. The contribution of
EGR for fuel efficiency was primarily due to heat loss reduction,
combustion phasing improvement, increasing of ratio of specific heats
and enrichment elimination. In contrast, the contribution of pumping
losses reduction to the BSFC benefits was comparatively less.
1. In the original engine (CR9.5), EGR could help to get an
average BSFC benefit of 5.18%: 2.74% in the low loads (<4 bar
BMEP), 4.03% in the moderate loads (4∼10 bar BMEP), 7.79%
in the high loads (>10 bar BMEP).
2. Increasing the compression ratio was a useful method to further
enlarge the fuel-saving effect of EGR. In the case of CR10.5,
EGR could help to get an average BSFC benefit of 7.15%: 5.22%
in the low loads (<4 bar BMEP), 6.3% in the moderate loads
(4∼10 bar BMEP), 9.34% in the high loads (>10 bar BMEP).
3. Compared with CR9.5-EGR, CR10.5-EGR has shorter ignition
delay and combustion duration. This led to a more ‘constant
volume heat release’ combustion, which led to a higher thermal
efficiency. Furthermore, CR10.5-EGR had a smaller less fuel
enrichment area. This has a positive effect on improving the fuel
economy in high loads.
4. In the low speed/high loads, CR9.5-EGR could get better
fuel economy than CR10.5-EGR. Especially in the range of
1500∼1750 rpm, the BSFC benefits of CR9.5-EGR is 3∼5%
higher than CR10.5-EGR. This is mainly due to the higher
knock tendency in CR10.5 required higher EGR rates to
suppress it. But the turbocharger could not provide enough fresh
air in this cases, which led to a lower EGR rates and the retarded
ignition timing strategy had to be used.
5. The combustion inhibition effect of EGR, like prolong the
combustion duration and reduce the combustion temperature,
was a double-edged sword. However, through the proper
calibration of ignition timing, VVT, charge pressure et al. the
positive aspect of EGR could be employed.
References
1. Kaul, B., Finney, C., Wagner, R., and Edwards, M., "Effects
of External EGR Loop on Cycle-to-Cycle Dynamics of Dilute
SI Combustion," SAE Int. J. Engines 7(2):606-614, 2014,
doi:10.4271/2014-01-1236.
2. Diana, S., Giglio, V., Iorio, B., and Police, G., "A Strategy
to Improve the Efficiency of Stoichiometric Spark
Ignition Engines," SAE Technical Paper 961953, 1996,
doi:10.4271/961953.
3. Grandin, B., Ångström, H., Stålhammar, P., and Olofsson,
E., "Knock Suppression in a Turbocharged SI Engine by
Using Cooled EGR," SAE Technical Paper 982476, 1998,
doi:10.4271/982476.
4. Lumsden, G., Eddleston, D., and Sykes, R., "Comparing
Lean Burn and EGR," SAE Technical Paper 970505, 1997,
doi:10.4271/970505.
 Downloaded from SAE International by The Library | University of Bath, Thursday, July 23, 2020

5. Grandin, B. and Ångström, H., "Replacing Fuel Enrichment in 14. Liu, Z. and Cleary, D., "Fuel Consumption Evaluation of Cooled
a Turbo Charged SI Engine: Lean Burn or Cooled EGR," SAE External EGR for a Downsized Boosted SIDI DICP Engine," SAE
Technical Paper 1999-01-3505, 1999, doi:10.4271/1999-01-3505. Technical Paper 2014-01-1235, 2014, doi:10.4271/2014-01-1235.
6. Duchaussoy, Y., Lefebvre, A., and Bonetto, R., "Dilution Interest 15. Kawabata, Y., Sakonji, T., and Amano, T., "The Effect of NOx
on Turbocharged SI Engine Combustion," SAE Technical Paper on Knock in Spark-ignition Engines," SAE Technical Paper
2003-01-0629, 2003, doi:10.4271/2003-01-0629. 1999-01-0572, 1999, doi:10.4271/1999-01-0572.
7. Alger, T., Chauvet, T., and Dimitrova, Z., "Synergies between
High EGR Operation and GDI Systems," SAE Int. J. Engines
Contact Information
1(1):101-114, 2009, doi:10.4271/2008-01-0134.
Liguang LI
8. Kaiser, M., Krueger, U., Harris, R., and Cruff, L., "“Doing More
liguang@tongji.edu.cn
with Less” - The Fuel Economy Benefits of Cooled EGR on a
Direct Injected Spark Ignited Boosted Engine," SAE Technical
Paper 2010-01-0589, 2010, doi:10.4271/2010-01-0589. Acknowledgments
9. Potteau, S., Lutz, P., Leroux, S., Moroz, S. et al., "Cooled This research is funded by Geely Automotive Research Institute.
EGR for a Turbo SI Engine to Reduce Knocking and Fuel
Consumption," SAE Technical Paper 2007-01-3978, 2007,
doi:10.4271/2007-01-3978. Definitions/Abbreviations
10. Cairns, A., Fraser, N., and Blaxill, H., "Pre Versus Post EGR - Exhaust gas recirculation
Compressor Supply of Cooled EGR for Full Load Fuel LP-EGR - Low-pressure EGR
Economy in Turbocharged Gasoline Engines," SAE Technical
HP-EGR - High-pressure EGR
Paper 2008-01-0425, 2008, doi:10.4271/2008-01-0425.
CR - Compression ratio
11. Kumano, K. and Yamaoka, S., "Analysis of Knocking
Suppression Effect of Cooled EGR in Turbo-Charged BMEP - Brake mean effective pressure
Gasoline Engine," SAE Technical Paper 2014-01-1217, 2014, BSFC - Brake specific fuel consumption
doi:10.4271/2014-01-1217. NOx - Nitrogen oxide
12. Takaki, D., Tsuchida, H., Kobara, T., Akagi, M. et al., "Study of HC - Hydrocarbon
an EGR System for Downsizing Turbocharged Gasoline Engine
CO - Carbon monoxide
to Improve Fuel Economy," SAE Technical Paper 2014-01-
1199, 2014, doi:10.4271/2014-01-1199. COV - Coefficient of variation

13. Song, D., Jia, N., Guo, X., Ma, X. et al., "Low Pressure Cooled MBT - Minimum Spark Advance for Best Torque
EGR for Improved Fuel Economy on a Turbocharged PFI PFI - Port fuel injection
Gasoline Engine," SAE Technical Paper 2014-01-1240, 2014, EGT - Exhaust Gas Temperature
doi:10.4271/2014-01-1240.

The Engineering Meetings Board has approved this paper for publication. It has successfully completed SAE’s peer review process under the supervision of the session organizer. The process
requires a minimum of three (3) reviews by industry experts.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or
otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE International.

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE International. The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper.

ISSN 0148-7191

http://papers.sae.org/2016-01-0678