See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/245353324

A New Criterion to Determine the Start of Combustion in Diesel Engine

Article  in  Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power · October 2006

DOI: 10.1115/1.2179471

CITATIONS READS

31 218

3 authors:

Tomaž Katrašnik Ferdinand Trenc

University of Ljubljana Retired professor at the University of Ljubljana
79 PUBLICATIONS   770 CITATIONS    39 PUBLICATIONS   281 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Samuel Rodman Opresnik

University of Ljubljana
23 PUBLICATIONS   249 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Dear Sir, View project

Asterics View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ferdinand Trenc on 17 October 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

TRK-3 TOC
Proceedings of
Proceedings ICEF’04
of ICEF04
2004 Fall Technical Conference of the ASME Internal Combustion Engine Division
2004 Fall Technical Conference of the ASME Internal Combustion Engine Division
October 24-27, 2004 Long Beach, California
October 24-27, 2004, Long Beach, California USAUSA
Proceedings of ASME ICEF:
Internal Combustion Engine Division
2004 Fall Technical Conference
ICEF2004-830
ICEF2004-830
Long Beach, CA, USA
October 24-27, 2004

ICEF2004-830

A New Criterion to Determine the Start of Combustion in Diesel Engine

Tomaž Katrašnik Samuel Rodman Oprešnik

Department of Mechanical Engineering Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of Ljubljana University of Ljubljana
Aškerčeva 6 Aškerčeva 6
SI-1000 Ljubljana SI-1000 Ljubljana
Slovenia Slovenia
Tel.: +386 1 4771 310
Fax.: +386 1 2518 567
tomaz.katrasnik@fs.uni-lj.si

Ferdinand Trenc Nedjeljko Škifić

Department of Mechanical Engineering Technical Faculty
University of Ljubljana University of Rijeka
Aškerčeva 6 Vukovarska 58
SI-1000 Ljubljana 51000 Rijeka
Slovenia Croatia

ABSTRACT
A new criterion for the determination of the start of
combustion (SOC) from the diesel engine in-cylinder pressure
diagram was developed. It is defined as the maximum of the
third order derivative of the cylinder pressure with respect to
the crank angle. This criterion declares SOC more precisely
than other previously published criterions based on pressure
diagnostics. This fact was proven analytically and was
discernable from the analysis of the experimental data. Beside
its accuracy it is also robust enough to allow automatic
evaluation of the SOC during processing of the pressure data
for a large number of cycles. Analysis of the first law of
thermodynamics applied to the engine cylinder showed that the
third order derivative of the cylinder pressure with respect to
the crank angle is the most suitable criterion for determination
of the SOC from the cylinder pressure diagram. Subsequently
the criterion was validated through experimental data analysis
of the cylinder pressure diagrams for various engine speeds and
loads. Cylinder pressure diagrams were processed with a
computer code based on the first law of thermodynamics to
evaluate the rate of heat release (ROHR), which formed the
base for the experimental validation. The cylinder pressure was
measured with an advanced piezoelectric sensor at the
resolution 0.1 deg. CA. Top dead center was determined with
the capacitive top dead center sensor. Due to the analytic
foundation of the developed method and its validation through
highly accurate experimental data it can be concluded that new
criterion is credible for the determination of the SOC.
INTRODUCTION
Selection of the proper ignition criterion is of crucial
importance for credible analysis of in-cylinder pressure
diagrams, which are used for the determination of ignition
delay period and evaluation of the ROHR. The definition of the
SOC from the experimental data is still a complicated issue.
The common term “ignition delay” or exactly “pressure rise
delay” as proposed by Hardenberg and Hase [1] consists of
physical delay and combined ignition delay of the fuel, which
consists of cold flame phase and blue flame phase [1,2]. As it is
extremely difficult to distinguish between blue flame phase and
the explosion flame phase [2] and taking into account that all
these reactions are exothermic, there exists no exact-single

1 Copyright © #### by ASME

1 Copyright © 2004 by ASME
point of the SOC. In addition, in the “ignition delay” period the which are defined by the rapid pressure rise do not fulfill
exothermic pre-flame reactions are interlaced with the previously mentioned demands since they are speed and load
endothermic fuel droplet reactions. Therefore, the SOC is dependent. Additionally, these criteria demand manual
commonly defined with distinct pressure deviation from the processing of the in-cylinder pressure data, which is unsuitable
pure compression pressure, which is the consequence of for the computer analysis of large amount of the data. The
significant departure of ROHR from 0. criterion, which is defined by the point where pressure recovers
The ignition criterions can roughly be divided into those to the value that corresponds compression without fuel
based on pressure diagnostics [1,3-8] and those based on light evaporation and is presented in [5,6], is more suitable for bomb
emission [9,10]. Assanis and co-authors [7] stated that pressure tests rather than the use of the analysis of internal combustion
based techniques are more reliable than the light emission ones. engine data. For the later use a reference state must be
Additionally, Heywood [8] indicates that the pressure change is computed, which introduces additional error and effort in
often detected before the luminosity detector has noted the processing the data.
appearance of a flame, although Taylor [11] states that in the Criteria that have been used to characterize knock in spark
average data coincide well, but are scattered. From the ignition engines [12-15] are also suitable for detection of auto-
arguments stated above and the complexity of the either of the ignition in diesel engines due to the similarity of the processes.
above methods, pressure based diagnostics can be privileged All criteria [12-15] based on gradient and interval methods of
obviously. pressure analysis are not suitable for the determination of SOC
In the presented paper a new ignition criterion based on since their primary task is knock detection and not its exact
pressure diagnostics is presented. Characteristics of published positioning. Criterion based on max(d 2 Q f / dϕ 2 ) presented in
criteria will be discussed first. This chapter is followed by the
[12,13] is similar to max(d 2 p / dϕ 2 ) , which was used as the
analytic derivation of the new criterion, which was
subsequently confirmed by highly accurate experimental data, ignition criterion by [7,8]. Relation between these two criteria
the accordance of which is presented in the Results. will be exposed later. This widely used criterion also predicts
SOC with delay, which is also indicated in [12,13] and will be
NOMENCLATURE later proven analytically and confirmed with experimental data.
Checkel and Dale [14] proposed the minimum of the third order
Symbols derivative of the cylinder pressure with respect to the crank
Hd [kJ/kg] lower heating value of the fuel angle as the appropriate criterion for knock detection. This
criterion indeed clearly indicates the knock, but it is unable to
J [-] Bessel function of the first kind exactly detect its starting point. Barton and co-authors [15]
m [kg] mass proposed the use of the pressure derivative to detect knock.
p [Pa] pressure This criterion suffers from the same weakness already
Q [J] heat described in relation to [3,4] and is inaccurate as ignition
R [kJ/kgK]gas constant criterion as will be shown later.
T [K] temperature
u [m2/s2] specific internal energy ANALYTICAL EVALUATION
[m3] volume Analytic derivation of the original ignition criterion based
V
on the maximum of the third order derivative of the cylinder
ϕ [deg. CA] crank angle
pressure with respect to the crank angle is presented in this
κ [-] isentropic exponent chapter.
λ [-] air-fuel ratio Applying first law of thermodynamics to the control
volume – cylinder – using ideal gas law
Subscripts pV = mRT (1)
A air and following relations for specific internal energy and gas
f fuel constant
st stoichiometric u = u ( p, T , λ ) (2)
w wall R = R ( p, T , λ ) (3)
the ROHR is expressed as [16,17]
Abbreviations
A after; referring to TDC of low pressure phase dV  1 ∂u   ∂u ∂u T B  dp dQw
p 1 +  + m +  −
bmep brake mean effective pressure dQ f dϕ  RA ∂T   ∂p ∂T p A  dϕ dϕ , (4)
= Hd
CA crank angle dϕ T ∂u mA  ∂u T ∂R 
ROHR rate of heat release Hd − u + + m − 
A ∂T λst m f  ∂λ R ∂λ 
2
SOC start of combustion
TDC top dead center where
T ∂R (5)
A = 1+
LITERATURE REVIEW R ∂T
A suitable criterion for the accurate detection of the SOC and
should be independent of the engine load and speed. Such p ∂R . (6)
B = 1−
criterion is generally applicable on different engines operating R ∂p
at arbitrary running conditions. Criteria presented in [3,4],

2 Copyright © #### by ASME

2 Copyright © 2004 by ASME
 Taking into account temperature and pressure range in an Intuitively and also physically adequate is to define SOC
internal combustion engine cylinder, relations (2) and (3) can as the instant when dQ f / dϕ significantly departs from 0, i. e.
be simplified to the point of maximum curvature of dQ f / dϕ (Fig. 1:
u = u (T , λ ) (7)
and max(d 3 Q f / dϕ 3 ) ) or speaking mathematically the maximum
R = R (λ ) (8) of the second derivatives of dQ f / dϕ , which reads
without a noticeable loss of accuracy [18]. Eq. (7) and (8) max(d 3 Q f / dϕ 3 ) . Following the idea presented above, the
imply that A = 1 and B = 1 , rewriting eq. (4) to a simpler form
dV  1 ∂u  V ∂u dp dQ w SOC, from the diesel engine in-cylinder pressure diagram, can
p 1 + + − be defined as
dQ f dϕ  R ∂T  R ∂T dϕ dϕ . (9)
= Hd  d3p 
dϕ ∂u mA  ∂u T ∂R  ϕ SOC = max 3  . (12)
Hd − u + T + m −   dϕ 
∂T λ st m 2f  ∂λ R ∂λ 
The relevance of the above statements will be confirmed
For the analysis of SOC from the in-cylinder pressure with the analysis of experimental in-cylinder pressure
diagrams it is reasonable to consider only the significant terms diagrams. The ROHR was derived from the in-cylinder
and only the significant physical effects in eq. (9). Considering pressure diagrams with the application of eq. (4), using the
the perfect gas simplification and omitting heat transfer to the author’s FORTRAN code.
walls, which is, around the SOC, insignificant compared to
other two terms of the numerator of eq. (9), eq. (9) can be EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
rewritten in the form A modern 6-cylinder, 6.87 liter turbocharged and
dQ f 1  dV dp  . (10) aftercooled low emission truck diesel engine MAN D 0826
=  κp +V 
dϕ κ − 1  dϕ dϕ  LOH 15, with 108/125 mm bore/stroke, compression ratio 18:1,
In TDC eq. (10) further simplifies to the form equipped with the HOLSET H1E - 8264BF/H16WA8 free-
dQ f dp . floating turbocharger and developing 162 kW/2400 rpm was
∝ (11) used for the experiments. The laboratory experimental setup is
dϕ dϕ capable of simultaneous measurements of engine system
parameters as well as cycle-resolved parameters. The engine is
140
coupled with an Zöllner eddy-current dynamometer controlled
dQf
120 max with AVL BME-400 and Zöllner LSE 513. A 12 bit 16 channel
dϕ
100
National Instruments data-acquisition system with maximum
sampling frequency 1 MS/s was used for measurements of the
[J/deg.]

80 in-cylinder pressure diagrams. A COM CAM UNIT Type 2613

2
60 max
d Qf shaft encoder provides an external trigger and an external clock
dϕ 2 (0.1 – 6 deg. CA) for data-acquisition system. In-cylinder
dQf
dϕ

40
pressure was measured with piezo-electric pressure transducer
20 3 AVL GH12D connected to charge amplifier COM PCA Type
d Qf
max 2630. TDC was determined with capacitive sensor COM Type
0 dϕ 3
2653 at the resolution better than 0.1 deg. CA and standard
-20 deviation 0.006 deg. CA. The LabVIEW software was used to
350 352 354 356 358 360 362 364 366 368 370
CA [deg.]
control the data-acquisition system. The LabVIEW
environment was also applied for fast processing of input
signals.
Fig. 1: ROHR with indicated maximum values of its
A large effort was devoted to the exact determination of
derivatives
TDC since its accuracy has a crucial influence on the ROHR.
It will be shown later that relation (11) also holds in the Therefore, only high pressure phase TDC signals from the
capacitive sensor were processed since high and low pressure
vicinity of the TDC, where SOC in modern diesel engines
usually occurs, since the influence arising from the second term phase signals differ slightly, enlarging the standard deviation of
the measurement.
on rhs of eq. (10) is much larger than that from the first one at
Next important step towards better accuracy of the
the SOC. It can therefore be concluded that dQ f / dϕ is related
experimental data is accurate determination of pressure offset.
to dp / dϕ in the vicinity of the SOC. Thus, max(dp / dϕ ) This was done with two methods, which are based on two
coincides with max(dQ f / dϕ ) , which defines the maximum of different principles. First, the inlet manifold pressure was used
for precise pegging of the cylinder pressure, thus preventing the
the ROHR. This criterion obviously indicates SOC with delay. drifting of a signal. This approach, which also defines pressure
Following the same pattern max(d 2 p / dϕ 2 ) coincides with offset, was additionally checked by a method based on the
maximum increase of the ROHR ( max(d 2 Q f / dϕ 2 ) ). The later assumption of the adiabatic behavior of working medium
criterion is evidently more suitable than the first one, but it still during the compression stroke. A suitable interval where heat
indicates SOC with delay; this can be deduced intuitively and is transferred to working medium equals the heat rejected from
shown in Fig 1. the working medium must be chosen to minimize the error
introduced by the above assumption. Many data from the in-

3 Copyright © #### by ASME

3 Copyright © 2004 by ASME
cylinder pressure diagram, which form overdetermined system restriction. The high sampling frequency data were used to
of equations, were then processed with computer code to confirm the validity of the new SOC criterion, which is also
evaluate the pressure offset. Agreement of the results of both applicable on data recorded with coarser sampling resolution.
methods gives confidence in the reliability of the in-cylinder
pressure diagrams. a)
The averaged cycle obtained out of averaging 100 cycles
was used for processing as a representative cycle of the 70
individual operating point of the engine. Very good coincidence
65
of consecutive cycles gave confidence in the regularity of this
approach, since with the averaging high frequency low 60
amplitude errors introduced by the measuring equipment 1 deg. CA

p [kPa]
diminished significantly. Similarity of pressure amplitudes and 55 0.2 deg. CA
0.5 deg. CA
their appropriate shift in the vicinity of the ignition point and 0.1 deg. CA
50
throughout the entire combustion period of individual cycles
proved stability and repeatability of the measurements. 45

RESULTS 40
Experimental data were further processed with author’s
35
FORTRAN code, which enables the first law analysis of in- 350 355 360 365 370 375 380
cylinder pressure data, data smoothing and evaluation of the CA [deg.]
pressure derivatives. Numerical derivatives of the first, second
and third order were evaluated with central schemes with the b)
fourth order accuracy.
In-cylinder pressure diagrams for the operating conditions 67
1200 rpm, 0.2 MPa bmep and sampling resolutions 0.1, 0.2, 0.5
and 1 deg. CA are presented in Fig. 2. Significant oscillations 66
equivalent to predominant cylinder pressure resonance mode
determined by the configuration of the combustion chamber are
65
evident from Fig. 2 a) and b) when high sampling frequencies
p [kPa]

are used. These pressure oscillations appear after the start of

combustion. These oscillations coincide perfectly with the
calculated lowest excitation frequency of the gas in the
combustion chamber, which corresponds to the first extreme of
the Bessel function defined as dJ 1 ( z ) / dz = 0 , for all operating
conditions of the engine. Similar effects were observed by
[12,14,15] when knock in SI engines was analyzed. It can be
seen from Fig. 2 b) that pressure oscillations disappear at
sampling resolution 1 deg. CA, since sampling frequency is
nearly equal to the primary gas vibration frequency. By the
introduction of high sampling frequencies the measured
pressure is no more the representative in-cylinder pressure but
only the local pressure. This difficulty could be overcome by
the use of multiple sensors placed at various radii and azimuth
angles, since the averaged signal from all the sensors would be
oscillation free.
Pressure slope changes due cylinder pressure resonance
mode are larger than that due to the SOC. This is valid only for
the sampling frequencies, which are capable to capture cylinder
pressure resonance oscillations. In the presented investigation
the data recorded at sampling resolutions 0.1 and 0.2 deg. CA
were processed until the occurrence of these oscillations. On
the other hand the data recorded at sampling resolutions 0.5 and
1 deg. CA were processed in the whole, since the derivatives of
the cylinder pressure resonance oscillations have smaller
magnitude than that of the SOC. The procedure used with
sampling resolutions 0.1 and 0.2 deg. CA is in no means
incorrect, since the recorded pressure is no more the
representative in-cylinder pressure but only the local pressure.
This difficulty could be overcome, as was already mentioned,
with the use of many sensors, since the differentiation of the
averaged oscillation free data could be performed without
64 0.1 deg. CA
0.2 deg. CA
63 1 deg. CA
62
358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368
CA [deg.]
Fig. 2: In-cylinder pressure @ 1200 rpm, 0.2 MPa
bmep for different sampling resolutions
At high sampling frequencies a care should be devoted
when preparing the data for post procession. Frequency
filtering during the measurement is not appropriate due to the
shift of the data. Post procession of the data with the Fourier
transformation is appropriate for smoothing the pressure data,
but the higher pressure derivatives start to oscillate with cut off
frequency. For the necessity of presented analysis the most
suitable data smoothing technique was “low-pass” filtering with
weighted average of neighboring points. This technique was
used with data measured at sampling resolutions of 0.1 deg.
CA, whereas almost all data recorded at 0.2 deg. CA and all
data recorded at 0.5 and 1 deg. CA could be processed without
smoothing. Furthermore, the results obtained when processing
high accuracy data recorded at 0.1 deg. CA resolution will be
shown, whereas at the end of this chapter the results obtained
when processing the data at different sampling resolutions will
be compared.

4 Copyright © #### by ASME

4 Copyright © 2004 by ASME
 200 dp / dϕ , d 2 p / dϕ 2 , d 3 p / dϕ 3 and dQ f / dϕ for the operating
conditions 1200 rpm, 0.2 MPa bmep. It is obvious that
150
max(dp / dϕ ) coincides perfectly with max(dQ f / dϕ ) , as stated
dp in the chapter “Analytical evaluation”. Furthermore, it can be
100 ∝
dϕ
[J/deg.]

seen that commonly used ignition criterion max(d 2 p / dϕ 2 )

coincides with maximum increase of the ROHR and therefore
50
dQw indicates SOC with delay, which again confirms the derivation
dϕ presented in “Analytical evaluation”. From Fig. 5 it is also
0 discernible that max(d 3 p / dϕ 3 ) precisely indicates the point of
dV
∝
dϕ
maximum curvature of dQ f / dϕ , which was the main request
-50
350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 on the new SOC criterion.
CA [deg.]
1.2
dp
1
Fig. 3: The magnitude of the numerator terms in eq. dϕ
1
(4) @ 1200 rpm, 0.2 MPa bmep 2
dp
2

relative amplitude [-]

0.8 dϕ 2
Fig. 3 represents the magnitude of the numerator terms in 3
dp 3
eq. (4) for the engine running conditions: 1200 rpm, 0.2 MPa 0.6 3
dϕ 3 2
bmep (SOC 356.9 deg. CA ATDC according to the proposed dQf
0.4
method). It is obviously, as was already stated above, that the 4 dϕ
heat transfer term, calculated with the empirical formulae 0.2
proposed by Hohenberg [19], is much smaller than other two
0 1 4
terms and could therefore be omitted in the derivation of eq.
(12). -0.2
Furthermore, Fig. 4 presents the magnitude of the terms 355 355.5 356 356.5 357 357.5 358 358.5 359
obtained after two-fold differentiation of the eq. (10) for the CA [deg.]
operating conditions 1200 rpm, 0.2 MPa bmep. These results
confirm the above statement that max(d 3 Q f / dϕ 3 ) coincides Fig. 5: Pressure derivatives and ROHR @ 1200 rpm,
0.2 MPa bmep
with max(d 3 p / dϕ 3 ) , which is indispensable in deriving eq.
(12). It can be seen that each term containing higher derivative Analyzing Fig. 5, it can be concluded that point of
of the pressure is nearly two orders of magnitude larger than the maximum curvature of dQ f / dϕ takes place slightly after the
term containing the lower one in the vicinity of SOC.
significant departure of the ROHR from 0. This discrepancy is
120 the consequence of complex set of physical and chemical
1 ∝p 3 reactions occurring during the “ignition delay” period, due to
dp
100
dp 4 ∝ the occurrence of exothermic reactions prior to the explosion
2 ∝ dϕ dϕ 3
flame [2]. The delay between the significant departure of the
80 4
2
dp 5 ROHR from 0 and the point of maximum curvature of dQ f / dϕ
J/deg.3 [-]

3 ∝ 2 5
60 dϕ is not constant but depends on operating conditions (Fig. 5-7)
40
and engine design. Therefore, it is still reasonable to define the
SOC as the point of maximum curvature of dQ f / dϕ , since it
20 2
1 has logical physical background and can somehow be related to
0 the onset of explosion flame. Another evidence of suitability of
3 the presented criterion can also be found in Fig. 6, where point
-20
350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358
of maximum curvature of dQ f / dϕ coicides very well with
CA [deg.] significant departure of the ROHR from 0.
The conclusions drawn for pressure derivatives in relation
Fig. 4: The magnitude of terms obtained after two-fold to Fig. 5 are also valid for Fig. 6 and 7. From Fig. 5-7 it is
differentiation of the eq. (10) @ 1200 rpm, 0.2 MPa obvious, considering Fig. 1 and 4, that max(d 3 p / dϕ 3 )
bmep determines SOC more precise and earlier than the
max(d 2 p / dϕ 2 ) : 0.5 deg. CA @ 1200 rpm, 0.2 MPa bmep, 0.6
As it was already stated in the “Introduction” it is difficult
deg. CA @ 1500 rpm, 1.2 MPa bmep and 1.1 deg CA @ 2100
to define exact position of the SOC, since some exothermic
rpm, 0.1 MPa bmep.
reactions take place before the commonly defined SOC that is
defined, as already stated, as distinct pressure deviation from
the compression pressure, which is the consequence of
significant departure of the ROHR from 0. Fig. 5 presents

5 Copyright © #### by ASME

5 Copyright © 2004 by ASME
 1.2 resolution. This fact gives the confidence in using the new SOC
3
1
criterion also on the data recorded with coarser sampling
resolution. Even when the difference between max(d 3 p / dϕ 3 )
relative amplitude [-]

3
0.8 dp and max(d 2 p / dϕ 2 ) is between 0.5 and 1 deg. CA at the
2 3
dϕ 3
0.6 sampling resolution 0.1 deg. CA, the application of these two
dQf
4 criterions on the data recorded at the sampling resolution 1 deg.
0.4 dϕ
dp CA predicts the difference 1 deg. CA.
1
0.2 dϕ
2 1.2
dp 3
dp
2 1 , 0.1
0 4 1 dϕ 2 1 dϕ 3
dQf
-0.2 2 , 0.1 5

relative amplitude [-]

0.8 dϕ
360 360.5 361 361.5 362 362.5 363 363.5 364 364.5 365 3 3 3
dp dp
CA [deg.] 3 , 0.2 1 5 , 0.5
0.6 dϕ 3 dϕ 3
7
dQf dQf
, 0.2 6 , 0.5
Fig. 6: Pressure derivatives and ROHR @ 2100 rpm, 0.4
4
dϕ dϕ
0.1 MPa bmep 7
3
dp
,1
0.2 dϕ 3
1.2 6 dQf
8 ,1
0 4 dϕ
8 2
1
-0.2
355 355.5 356 356.5 357 357.5 358 358.5 359
relative amplitude [-]

0.8
CA [deg.]
3 2 3
0.6 dp
3
dϕ 3 Fig. 8: Third order derivative and ROHR for different
0.4 dQf sampling resolutions @ 1200 rpm, 0.2 MPa bmep
4 dϕ
dp
0.2 1
dϕ 1.2
2 3 2 4 1
0 dp dp
2 1 1
1 4 dϕ 2 dϕ
2
0.8 dp
relative amplitude [-]

-0.2 2
359 359.5 360 360.5 361 361.5 362 dϕ 2
CA [deg.] 0.6 dp
3

3
dϕ 3
0.4 dQf
Fig. 7: Pressure derivatives and ROHR @ 1500 rpm, 4
dϕ
1.2 MPa bmep 0.2

0
The observed operating conditions presented in Fig. 5-7
-0.2
cover the broad engine operating range, which is necessary to
validate the credibility of the new SOC criterion. Altogether, 12 -0.4
350 352 354 356 358 360 362 364 366 368 370
engine running conditions were analyzed for the purpose of
CA [deg.]
presented study. It was found out, as already stated, that
max(d 3 p / dϕ 3 ) defines SOC more precise than other two
Fig. 9: Pressure derivatives and ROHR for sampling
criteria based on pressure derivatives. max(d 3 p / dϕ 3 ) indicates resolution 0.5 deg. CA @ 1200 rpm, 0.2 MPa bmep
SOC 0.4 – 1.3 deg. CA earlier than commonly used criterion
max(d 2 p / dϕ 2 ) for the whole operating range of the Fig. 9 and 10 presents the dp / dϕ , d 2 p / dϕ 2 , d 3 p / dϕ 3
investigated engine. This difference has great impact on the and dQ f / dϕ for the operating conditions equivalent to that in
accuracy of the “ignition delay” period and ROHR Fig. 5 for sampling resolutions 0.5 and 1 deg. CA. All
determination, especially at low engine loads where conclusions valid for the sampling resolution 0.1 deg. CA are
combustion lasts only few deg. CA. The difference between the also valid for the coarser sampling resolutions. Comparing Fig.
two criteria depends mostly on the engine speed and increases 9 and 10 it can be seen that the magnitude of the derivatives of
with engine speed. However, this difference is less affected by the cylinder pressure resonance oscillations (Fig. 1, 359-369
the engine load for the investigated engine; it diminishes deg. CA) diminish with the coarser sampling resolutions. An
slightly with increasing bmep. additional peak of d 3 p / dϕ 3 occuring after max(dQ f / dϕ ) can
All presented results (Fig. 3-7) were derived from in-
cylinder pressure data measured at sampling resolutions 0.1 be noticed for some operating conditions. This diffuculty in the
deg. CA. Comparison of d 3 p / dϕ 3 and dQ f / dϕ for sampling definiton of the SOC with max(d 3 p / dϕ 3 ) could be overcome
resolutions 0.1, 0.2, 0.5 and 1 deg. CA is presented in Fig. 8. when a max(d 3 p / dϕ 3 ) prior to max(d 2 p / dϕ 2 ) is considered.
The results (positions of the peaks) coincide very well. The This physically intuitive rule also confirmed its robustness
differences in max(d 3 p / dϕ 3 ) and max(dQ f / dϕ ) for different when analyzing various in-cylinder pressure data.
sampling resolutions are below the particular sampling

6 Copyright © #### by ASME

6 Copyright © 2004 by ASME
 1.2
3 2 4 1
1 1
0.8
relative amplitude [-]
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
350 352 354 356 358 360 362
CA [deg.]
Fig. 10: Pressure derivatives and ROHR for sampling
resolution 1 deg. CA @ 1200 rpm, 0.2 MPa bmep
CONCLUSION
A new accurate criterion for determination of the SOC
from the diesel engine in-cylinder pressure diagram was
developed and validated. The criterion has a clear physical
background, which was confirmed with many results obtained
from high accuracy experimental data recorded for various
engine operating regimes. The new criterion defines SOC with
higher precision than others previously published criterions
based on pressure diagnostics. The criterion is robust enough to
allow automatic evaluation of the SOC during processing of the
pressure data for a large number of cycles, since its robustness
is in the range of that of the criterion based on the second
derivative. Care should be taken when processing high
sampling frequency data, since cylinder pressure resonance
oscillations could disfigure the results. However, this is not the
consequence of the deficiency of the criterion but faultiness in
the representation of the measured data, since the physical
relevance of the experimental data should not be lost out of
focus, as it was explained above.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The financial support of the Ministry of Education, Science
and Sports of the Republic of Slovenia is greatly appreciated.
Valuable support of the MAN Slovenia is also gratefully
acknowledged.
REFERENCES
[1] Hardenberg, H. O. and Hase, F. W., 1979, “An Empirical
Formula for Computing the Pressure Rise Delay of a Fuel
from its Cetane Number and from the Relevant Parameters
of Direct-Injection Diesel Engines”, SAE paper 790493.
[2] Sitkei, G., 1963, “Über den dieselmotorischen
Zündverzug”, MTZ, 24, 6, 190-194
View publication stats
[3] Wong, C. L. and Steere, D. E., 1982, “The Effect of Diesel
dp
dϕ Fuel Properties and Engine Operating Conditions on
2
2
dp Ignition Delay”, SAE paper 821231.
dϕ 2 [4] Xia, Y. Q. and Flanagan, R. C., 1987, “Ignition Delay - A
3
3
dp General Engine/Fuel Model”, SAE paper 870591.
dϕ 3
dQf
[5] Aligrot, C., Champoussin, J. C., Guerrassi, N. and Claus,
4
dϕ G., 1997, “A Correlative Model to Predict Autoignition
Delay of Diesel Fuels”, SAE paper 970638.
[6] Kobori, S., Kamimoto, T. and Aradi, A. A., 2000, “A study
of ignition delay of diesel fuel sprays”, Int. J. Engine
Research, 1, 1, 29-39.
[7] Assanis, D. N., Filipi, Z. S., Fiveland, S. B., Syrimis, M.,
364 366 368 370 2003, “A Predictive Ignition Delay Correlation Under
Steady-State and Transient Operation of a Direct Injection
Diesel Engine”, ASME, J. eng. gas turbine power, 125,
450-457.
[8] Heywood, J. B., 1988, “Internal combustion engine
fundamentals”, Mc-Graw-Hill
[9] Pischinger, F., Reuter, U. and Scheid, E., 1988, “Self-
Ignition of Diesel Sprays and Its Dependence on Fuel
Properties and Injection Parameters”, ASME, J. eng. gas
turbine power, 110, 399-404.
[10] Cowell, L. H. and Lefebvre, A. H., 1986, “Influence of
Pressure on Autoignition Characteristics of Gaseous
Hydrocarbon-Air Mixtures”, SAE paper 860068.
[11] Taylor, C. F., 1985, “The Internal-Combustion Engine in
Theory and Practice” Volume 2, The M.I.T. Press
[12] Ando, H., Takemura, J. and Koujina, E., 1989, “A Knock
Anticipating Strategy Basing on the Real-Time
Combustion Mode Analysis”, SAE paper 890882.
[13] Michael, S., Shigahara, K. and Assanis, D. N., 1996,
“Correlation Between Knock Intensity and Heat Transfer
Under Light and Heavy Knocking Conditions in a Spark
Ignition Engine”, SAE paper 960495.
[14] Checkel, M. D. and Dale, J. D., 1986, “Computerized
Knock Detection from Engine Pressure Record”, SAE
paper 860028.
[15] Barton, R. K., Lestz, S. S. and Duke, L. C., 1970, “Knock
Intensity as a Function of Engine Rate of Pressure
Change”, SAE paper 700061.
[16] Katrašnik, T., 2001, “Analysis of Transient Process in a
Turbocharged Diesel Engine”, Master Sc. Thesis No.
M/1177, Dep. Mech. Engineering, University of Ljubljana,
Slovenia.
[17] Katrašnik, T., 2004, “Numerical Modeling of Transient
Processes in a Turbocharged Diesel Engine”, Doctor Sc.
Thesis No. Dr/278, Dep. Mech. Engineering, University of
Ljubljana, Slovenia.
[18] Pischinger, R., Krassnig, G., Taučar, G. and Sams, T.,
1989, “Thermodynamik der Verbrennungskraftmachine,
Springer-Verlag.
[19] Hohenberg, G., 1979, “Advanced approaches for heat
transfer calculation” SAE Paper 790825.
7 Copyright © #### by ASME
7 Copyright © 2004 by ASME