energies
Review
A Comprehensive Overview of Hydrogen-Fueled Internal
Combustion Engines: Achievements and Future Challenges
Zbigniew St˛epień






Citation: St˛epień, Z. A
Comprehensive Overview of
Hydrogen-Fueled Internal
Combustion Engines: Achievements
and Future Challenges. Energies 2021,
14, 6504. https://doi.org/10.3390/
en14206504
Academic Editors: Alessandro
D’Adamo, Stefano Fontanesi and
Giuseppe Cantore
Received: 13 August 2021
Accepted: 28 September 2021
Published: 11 October 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the author.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Energies 2021, 14, 6504. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14206504
Oil and Gas Institute—National Research Institute, 31-503 Kraków, Poland; stepien@inig.pl
Abstract: This paper provides a comprehensive review and critical analysis of the latest research
results in addition to an overview of the future challenges and opportunities regarding the use of
hydrogen to power internal combustion engines (ICEs). The experiences and opinions of various
international research centers on the technical possibilities of using hydrogen as a fuel in ICE
are summarized. The advantages and disadvantages of the use of hydrogen as a solution are
described. Attention is drawn to the specific physical, chemical, and operational properties of
hydrogen for ICEs. A critical review of hydrogen combustion concepts is provided, drawing on
previous research results and experiences described in a number of research papers. Much space is
devoted to discussing the challenges and opportunities associated with port and direct hydrogen
injection technology. A comparison of different fuel injection and ignition strategies and the benefits
of using the synergies of selected solutions are presented. Pointing to the previous experiences
of various research centers, the hazards related to incorrect hydrogen combustion, such as early
pre-ignition, late pre-ignition, knocking combustion, and backfire, are described. Attention is focused
on the fundamental importance of air ratio optimization from the point of view of combustion quality,
NOx emissions, engine efficiency, and performance. Exhaust gas scrubbing to meet future emission
regulations for hydrogen powered internal combustion engines is another issue that is considered.
The article also discusses the modifications required to adapt existing engines to run on hydrogen.
Referring to still-unsolved problems, the reliability challenges faced by fuel injection systems, in
particular, are presented. An analysis of more than 150 articles shows that hydrogen is a suitable
alternative fuel for spark-ignition engines. It will significantly improve their performance and greatly
reduce emissions to a fraction of their current level. However, its use also has some drawbacks, the
most significant of which are its high NOx emissions and low power output, and problems in terms
of the durability and reliability of hydrogen-fueled engines.
Keywords: hydrogen; alternative fuel; internal combustion engine; combustion concepts; fuel
injection; ignition strategies; abnormal combustion
1. Introduction
Under the proposed Green Deal program, the European Union will aim to achieve
zero net greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. The interim target is to reduce GHG by 55%
(relative to the 1990 reference year) by 2030. Only a 20% reduction has been achieved by
2020, so significant additional efforts are required to meet the target. The requirement
for CO2 -neutral powertrains to have the lowest possible emissions compared with other
regulated exhaust components is a key factor in the diversification of future fuels. Today,
an alternative fuel must not only be technically feasible and economically viable to produce
but, above all, must reduce environmentally harmful emissions, including CO2 , to the
greatest possible extent. Current alternative fuels such as ethanol, methanol, biodiesel,
propane, natural gas, and hydrogen can reduce engine emissions to varying degrees com-
pared to emissions caused by conventional liquid hydrocarbon fuels. Of these, hydrogen,
as an energy carrier, is the only fuel that is potentially free of hydrocarbon, carbon monox-
ide, and carbon dioxide emissions. Hydrogen has a very high combustion velocity in
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 2 of 26

the engine combustion chamber (about 6 times higher than petrol), which contributes
to high engine efficiency [1–4]. Hydrogen also has a wide range of flammability, which
allows it to burn in engines when mixed with air in a wide range of different proportions
(4–75%). This enables the use of very lean mixtures. Based on the research conducted
so far, over 5% higher efficiency of a hydrogen-fueled reciprocating internal combustion
engine compared to a diesel-fueled ZS engine (about 44.5% for a prototype engine) has
already been achieved [1–6]. Therefore, hydrogen is considered one of the most important
fuels of the future. Its use will make it possible to meet increasingly stringent emissions
standards. Consequently, hydrogen is one of the most important candidates for satisfying
future energy demands (including its application as a fuel for future vehicle powertrains)
and plays a key role in most government strategic plans [4–11]. Hydrogen, as a sustainable
fuel of the future, will reduce global dependence on fossil fuel resources and the level of
exhaust emitted from motor vehicles [1–6,9–16]. However, the quantities of emissions are
highly influenced by the method of hydrogen production [17–24].
Various methods are currently used to produce hydrogen [2–4]. Currently, the most
widely used method to produce hydrogen is steam methane reforming. In this case, the effi-
ciency of hydrogen production is very high (65–75%) and the costs are relatively low. How-
ever, in this case, hydrogen production results in high levels of CO2 emission [3–5,11,25–31].
Another widely used method of hydrogen production is coal gasification. In this case,
however, the efficiency of hydrogen production is low (45%) and CO2 emissions are high.
Electrolysis of water is another method of producing hydrogen, but it requires the use
of large amounts of electricity and is therefore very expensive. In this case, the level of
CO2 emissions depends on the electricity source. Less common methods can also be used
to produce hydrogen, such as biomass gasification, biomass-derived liquid reforming, or
microbial biomass conversion [3–5,11,25–31]. However, only the solar–hydrogen system al-
lows emission-free—but expensive—hydrogen production. In 2016, 96% of total hydrogen
was produced from fossil fuels [6]. However, when fossil hydrocarbons are used, CO2 is
produced during reforming. In order to prevent its emission into the atmosphere, it must be
captured and stored [2,3,5,11,28–39]. The use of hydrogen as a fuel for internal combustion
engines (ICEs) or fuel cell (FC) vehicles is a promising trend for the transport sector in
future. An internal combustion engine may be operated using different fuels. However, it
requires appropriate adjustment of the engine control unit and the material compatibility
of engine components with different fuels [9–13]. The use of hydrogen as a fuel to power
ICEs has significant advantages over FC technology. The most important of these are
greater tolerance to contamination, maturity of the ICE technology, reduced consumption
of scarce materials, and easy adaptation of the ICE to run on hydrogen [7–12]. Hydrogen-
fueled ICEs (H2ICEs) have been the subject of research since the last century [13–25,33–37].
Figure 1 provides a critical comparison of the torque and power output characteristics of
an internal combustion engine versus an electric motor as a power source in BEVs and
FCEVs [26,36–40].
Noteworthy is the torque of the electric motor, which is very high at low motor speeds
but decreases hyperbolically with increasing motor speed. The power output of an electric
motor is represented by a flat line because each electric motor has a constant power rating
to avoid overheating and to prevent damage to the electrical wiring insulation. By contrast,
the torque of an internal combustion engine remains more or less constant with increasing
engine speed (particularly the case for supercharged engines). Consequently, the ICE has
greater power output at higher engine speeds. As can be seen in Figure 1, above a certain
speed, there is an excess of ICE output power. This is favorable and typical characteristic
of internal combustion engines, including those fueled with hydrogen [26].
Energies 2021,
Energies 14, 14,
2021, x FOR
6504PEER REVIEW 3 of 26 3 of 26

Figure 1. Comparison of ICE and electric motors (BEVs and FCEVs).

Figure 1. Comparison of ICE and electric motors (BEVs and FCEVs).
According to standards set by the EU, a vehicle qualifies as zero-emission if it meets
According
the following to standards set by the EU, a vehicle qualifies as zero-emission if it meets
criteria:
the following criteria: vehicle without or with an internal combustion engine, its
For a heavy-duty
emissions
For must be less
a heavy-duty than 1 without
vehicle g CO2 /kWh, as defined
or with in accordance
an internal with Regula-
combustion engine, its
tion (EC) No 595/2009 and its implementing measures, or which emits
emissions must be less than 1 g CO2/kWh, as defined in accordance with Regu- less than
1 g CO(EC)
lation 2 /kmNoas determined
595/2009 and in accordance with Regulation
its implementing (EC)orNo
measures, 715/2007
which emits less
of the European Parliament and of the Council and its implementing measures
than 1 g CO2/km as determined in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 715/2007
(European Parliament, 2019).
of the European Parliament and of the Council and its implementing measures
Currently, the
(European hydrogen-powered
Parliament, 2019). internal combustion engine is the only known
internal combustion engine that meets these strict EU regulations. A hydrogen-powered
engineCurrently,
also emitsthe hydrogen-powered
significantly lower levels internal combustion
of other pollutant engine
species is thetoonly
compared known in-
a diesel-
ternal
powered combustion
engine. The engine
only that meets pollutants
significant these strict EUareregulations.
that A hydrogen-powered
potential byproducts of H2
engine also emits
combustion significantly
are nitrogen lower levels
oxides (NOx). of other
However, usingpollutant
an advanced species compared
combustion to a diesel-
process
and a relatively simple aftertreatment system, NOx emissions can be reduced
powered engine. The only significant pollutants that are potential byproducts of H2 com- to near zero.
An important
bustion advantage
are nitrogen of a hydrogen-powered
oxides (NOx). However,ICE usingis that the technology
an advanced can be brought
combustion process and
to the market quickly and therefore be practically disseminated with minimal
a relatively simple aftertreatment system, NOx emissions can be reduced to near zero. An delay should
the use of diesel vehicles be gradually reduced in the coming years [27–29,35,36,41–43].
important advantage of a hydrogen-powered ICE is that the technology can be brought to
Several types of low-emission propulsion systems are currently being considered for use in
the market quickly and therefore be practically disseminated with minimal delay should
the near and distant future, considering the need for diversification in conjunction with
the use of
specific diesel vehicles
applications. be gradually
These propulsion reduced
systems includein the
theincreasingly
coming years [27–29,35,36,41–43].
widespread use of
Several
electric types
drivesof low-emission
powered propulsion
with batteries (BEVs)systems are (FCEVs),
or fuel cells currentlyinternal
being considered
combustion for use
inengines
the near and distant
powered future, considering
with synthetic the need
fuels, and internal for diversification
combustion in conjunction
engines powered with with
specific
hydrogen applications.
and hybrid These propulsion
powertrains. Eachsystems
of these include
drives has theitsincreasingly
own advantages widespread
and use
ofdisadvantages
electric drives thatpowered
enable their
withoptimal use only
batteries (BEVs)in aor
specific application.
fuel cells (FCEVs), Table 1 compares
internal combustion
the two powered
engines powertrains currently
with mostfuels,
synthetic commonly considered
and internal as the future
combustion of road
engines transport,
powered with hy-
i.e., battery electric and fuel cell electric powertrains as well powertrain based on the
drogen and hybrid powertrains. Each of these drives has its own advantages and disad-
traditional hydrogen-powered internal combustion engine.
vantages that enable their optimal use only in a specific application. Table 1 compares the
two powertrains currently most commonly considered as the future of road transport, i.e.,
battery electric and fuel cell electric powertrains as well powertrain based on the tradi-
tional hydrogen-powered internal combustion engine.
 Energies
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR 2021,
PEER14, x FOR PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 4 of 27
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 27
Energies 2021, 14, x2021,
Energies FOR 14,
PEER
Energies
REVIEW
6504 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 27 4 of 26
Table 1.ofComparison
Table 1. Comparison of the three zero-emission
the three zero-emission technologies. technologies.
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER
Energies
REVIEW Table
2021, 14, x FOR 1. REVIEW
PEER Comparison of the three zero-emission technologies. 4 of 27
TableREVIEW Parameters
1. Comparison Parameters
of the
Tablethree
1. the Battery
Comparison
zero-emission Battery
Fuel
oftechnologies.
the three Cell Fuel
zero-emission Cell
technologies.
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER Table 1. Comparison
Parameters
of three zero-emission
Battery
technologies.
Fuel
Electric Cell H2 EngineH2 Engine 4 of 27
Electric
ER
Energies
REVIEW2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW Electric Electric 4 of 27 H2 EngineVehicles
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 27
Parameters Parameters Electric
Battery Electric Electric
Vehicles Fuel CellFuel Vehicles H2 Engine
Electric
Vehicles Vehicles
Parameters
TableREVIEW
1. Comparison of the Table Battery
three
1. Comparison
zero-emission Fuel
Vehicles Cell
Battery
Vehicles
oftechnologies.
the three zero-emission Cell
Vehicles
technologies.
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER Vehicles H2 Engine
Vehicles H2 Engine 4 of 27
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW
Electric Vehicles
Production Electric
+
Vehicles
Electric Electric
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW Production
Table 1. Comparison
Production + of + Vehicles
the three zero-emission technologies. Vehicles 4 of 27
Parameters Vehicles VehiclesVehicles Vehicles
Table 1. Comparison of the Table
three Production
1. Comparison
zero-emission
infrastructure
infrastructure +Parameters
the Battery
oftechnologies.
three
+ operating + + operating
infrastructure
zero-emission Fuel Cell
Battery
technologies.Table 1.
Fuel Cell
Comparison
H2 Engine of the three zero-emission
H2 Engine technolog
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER
Energies
REVIEWProduction
2021, 14, x infrastructure
Parameters
operating
costs
FOR PEER costs
REVIEW + Electric Battery
+Production
operating
costs Electric
+ Electric
Fuel Cell Electric 4 of 27
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW Table 1. Comparison of the three zero-emission technologies. Vehicles H2 EngineVehicles 4 of 27
Parameters Parameters
Battery costs
infrastructure +14, Fuel
operating
Suitability for
Vehicles+Electric
Cell
Battery
infrastructure
daily
Vehicles
Fuel
operating Vehicles
Cell Electric
Parameters Vehicles Battery Fuel Cell
Table
Energies 2021, 1.x Table
Comparison
FOR PEER
Suitability for daily use 1. Comparison
Suitability
of
REVIEW for
the daily
three of
use the three
zero-emission
H2 Engine zero-emission
technologies.
H2 Engine technologies.
Vehicles
costsElectric
Production use
Parameters
Suitability Electric
for costs
+daily Electric
Production
use BatteryElectric
Vehicles + Vehicles
Fuel Cell Electric Electric
Vehicles Vehicles H2 Engine
Vehicles Vehicles Vehicles
Parameters VehiclesBattery Fuel Cell
Suitability Parameters
infrastructure
Table +
1. Comparison
Driving
for operating
1.Ranges
daily
Production
Table use Driving Ranges
infrastructure
of the
Tablethree +Electric
Battery
operating
1.ofComparison
Suitability
Comparison zero-emission
+for three
the daily Electric
the threeFuel
oftechnologies.
use
zero-emission Cell
zero-emission
technologies. technologies. H2 Engine Vehicles
Vehicles
Driving Ranges Vehicles
H2 Engine
Driving Ranges Vehicles
Electric Electric
Vehicles Electric
1. Comparison Electric
Production costs
+Production infrastructure ++costsoperatingTable Production + Vehicles
of the three zero-emission
Vehicles technologies.
Parameters
Driving Ranges
infrastructure + operatinginfrastructure Parameters
costs+ operating Parameters
Battery
Driving
RefuelingRanges
time Vehicles
Battery Vehicles
Fuel Cell
Battery
Vehicles
Fuel Cell Vehicles
Fuel Cell
Suitability Refueling
for daily
Production time
use Suitability +for daily use infrastructure
H2 Engine + operating
Refueling time Electric Electric H2 EngineH2 Engine
costs costs Refueling time+Production
infrastructure
Production operating
use +
Electric
Parameters + Electric
Electric
costsBattery
Vehicles
Electric Fuel Cell
Vehicles H2 Engine
Suitability for daily
Vehicles VehiclesVehicles Vehicles
Vehicles
Driving Ranges
Refueling time
Suitability for daily use Suitability costs
infrastructure
Fuel
for efficiency
daily use Driving
Fuel Ranges
infrastructure
efficiency
+Refueling
operatingtime +Vehicles
operating Vehicles Electric Electric
Fuel efficiency Suitability for daily use Vehicles
Fuel efficiency
Productioncosts
Driving
ProductionRanges costs
+Production + + Vehicles Vehicles
Suitability for daily use
Driving Ranges Driving
Fuel Ranges
infrastructure
efficiency
Refueling Durability
time Durability
+ operating+infrastructure
Fuel efficiency
Refueling + operating
infrastructure
Suitability
Durabilityfor daily use time
operating
Suitability for daily
Productionuse +Driving Ranges
costs Durability
costs costs
Driving Ranges
Refueling time infrastructure + operating
Refueling time Durability
Fuel Climate
efficiency
Refueling time
Driving Climate
Durability
Driving
Protection
Fuel Protection
Ranges
efficiency
costs
Suitability for dailyRanges
Suitability
Climate use Suitability
for daily
Protection use for daily use Refueling time
Climate Protection
Fuel efficiency
Refueling time Suitability for daily use
Climate
Durability
Driving Protection
Ranges Climate
DurabilityProtection
Fuel efficiency Fuel efficiency
Driving
Refueling timeDriving
Ranges RefuelingRanges
time Fuel efficiency
FuelAs can
Durability
efficiencybe seen in
As Table
can be1,
Driving battery
seen in
Ranges electric
Table 1,
As can be seen in Table 1, battery electric vehicles vehicles
battery (BEVs)
electric have
haveconsiderable
vehicles
(BEVs) (BEVs) havepotential,
considerable considerable
potential, pote
Durability Climate
DurabilityProtection
especially
As canin Climate
urban Protection
traffic, where they are sufficient for short ranges. Fuel cell electric vehi-
Refueling especially
time
Fuel efficiency
Refueling inbe
time seen traffic,
Fuel in time
Refueling
urban Table
efficiency
especially 1, battery
in urban
where theyelectric
traffic, where
are vehiclesfor(BEVs)
they are
Durability
sufficient short have
sufficient considerable
for
ranges. short
Fuel ranges.potential,
Fuel
cell electric cell electr
ve-
cles
As can (FCEVs)
especially
Climate
Durability
hicles can
Protection
(FCEVs)
be seen in perform
in hicles
urban
canAs
Table traffic,
(FCEVs)
perform
1, battery
can well
be canin
where
well
seen large
inthey
perform
electric
in and
large
Tableare
and
vehicles
1,heavy
heavy
battery vehicles
sufficient
well in large
(BEVs) for
and
vehicles
electric
have and
short
heavy
andtrucks
ranges.
trucks
considerable
vehicles where
Fuel
vehicles and
where
(BEVs) an
cellan
potential,
have extended
electric
trucks ve-
where
extended
considerablean pote
exte
Refueling time
Climate Protection Climate
Fuel range
hicles
efficiency
especiallyrange is
Protection
in urban
Durability
required.
(FCEVs) can
rangeHowever,
perform
is
Durability
Fuel
is required.
traffic, required.
efficiency
However,
especially
where intheythe
well
the
urban fuel
in cell
large
However,
fuel cell
aretraffic, has
and
sufficient the
has
where high
heavy
fuelthermal
Climate
forhigh
they vehicles
cell has management
and
high
Protection
shortthermal
are
ranges.
sufficienttrucks
thermal
management
Fuel cell requirements,
where an
management
requirements,
for short
electric
ranges. is
extended
requiremen
ve- Fuel cell is electr
Fuel efficiency
less
range robust and
isProtection
required.lessdurable, However,
robust and requires
the fuel cell aandahydrogen
has high purity
thermal level ofpurity
of>99.9%
management asasopposed
requirements, toto
is
hiclesAs less
(FCEVs)
can berobust
Climate can
seen inand
perform
hicles
Table durable,
well
As(FCEVs)
1, inand
battery
canFuel and
large
be durable,
can
seen requires
and
electric
efficiencyperform
in heavy
Table
vehicles well
1, requires
hydrogen
vehiclesin
battery
(BEVs)large and ahave
hydrogen
purity
and
electrictrucks level
heavy where
considerable
vehicles vehicles>99.9% level
an potential,
(BEVs)extended
and have of
trucks >99.9%
opposed where
considerable asan oppos
exte
pote
hydrogen-fueled
less robust and vehicle
durable,
hydrogen-fueled engines
and that
requires
vehicle have a
engines the
hydrogen fewest
that weaknesses
purity
have the level
fewest ofand are
>99.9%
weaknesses the as most
opposed
and versa-
are to
the
range
Durability
especially is hydrogen-fueled
required.
Climate
tile in[28].
urban
Durability As
However,
Protection
can
Thus,
Climate
range
traffic,
especially
be H seen
vehicle
Durability is
where
-ICE in
Protection
the engines
required.
fuel
inthey
Table
cell
urban
powertrains are
1,
that
However,
has high
traffic,
sufficient
batteryare
have where
electric
a viable
the
thermal
the fewest
fuel
forvehicles
they
shortare
alternative
weaknesses
management
cell has
ranges. high
sufficient
(BEVs) to Fuel
have
and
thermal
requirements,
cell
for are
short
electric
considerable
battery-electric
the
management
ranges. most
is
ve-potential,
mobility
versa-
Fuel
and cell electrv
most
requiremen
less robust hydrogen-fueled
tile and [28]. Thus,
durable, tile 2
Hand vehicle
[28].
-ICE Thus, engines
powertrainsH -ICE thatare have
powertrains
a well the fewest
viable are aaand
alternative weaknesses
viable toalternative and
battery-electric are
to themobility
most
battery-electric versa-
and asmobilit
in less 2robust requires
inand durable,
2a hydrogen and purity
requires level hydrogen
of heavy
>99.9% purity
as opposed
level ofto >99.9% oppos
As can be seen in Table hicles As (FCEVs)
1, battery
can be
especially
fuel can
seen
cells,electricperform
hicles
Table
vehicles
urban
especially well
(FCEVs)
1,traffic,
for large
Durability
battery
(BEVs)
light- can
where
and and
electric
haveperform
heavy
considerable
they vehicles
heavy-duty are vehiclesin
(BEVs)
sufficient large and
potential,
vehicles As have
for
cantrucks
in where
considerable
short
be
the seen vehicles
ranges. an
in Table
medium-to-long extended
and
potential,
Fuel celltrucks
electric
1,medium-to-long
battery
terms where ve- an
electric
with exte
vehicle
hydrogen-fueled
Climate tile
fuel
Protection [28].
cells, Thus,
vehicle fuel
especiallyH -ICE
2cells,
hydrogen-fueled
engines
Climate for powertrains
especially
light-
that
Protection have and for
vehicle
the are
light-
heavy-dutya
fewest viable
engines and alternative
heavy-duty
vehicles
weaknesses
that have in
the
and to
the battery-electric
vehicles in
medium-to-long
fewest
are the the
weaknesses
most versa-mobility
terms
and are and
with
the termsv
most
especially in urban traffic, range
especially
whereis required.
Climate
in
they urban are However,
Protectionrange
traffic,
sufficient is
where the
forrequired.
fuel
short cell
theywell However,
has high thermal
the fuel management
cell has high thermal
requirements, management is requiremen
tile [28].
hicles
regard
fuel cells,
regard
Thus, As
H
(FCEVs)
to
2to
both
can
-ICE be
especially
both
can
the
seen
regard
tilethe
CO
powertrains
[28].
perform
COin
for
to equivalent
2 Table
Thus,light-
2both are 1,are
the
equivalent
H
ranges.
a2aandCO
-ICE
sufficient
in
viable
large
and
battery Fuel
heavy-duty
equivalent
and
and cell
for
performance
electric
performance
2powertrains
alternative
short
heavyelectric
especially
vehicles
vehicles
and
are
to
ranges.
vehiclesve-
in
in urban
characteristics.
(BEVs)
aaperformance the
Fuel
and
characteristics.
battery-electric
viable have cell
trucks
traffic,
medium-to-long
alternative
electric
where
Today, where
considerable
characteristics.
Today,
mobility
to
theve-
the
an extended
they
prospects
terms are
potential,
Today,
prospects
battery-electric
and withsufficient
the pros
mobilit
hicles (FCEVs) can perform less
hicles robust
well
(FCEVs)in
range
for and
large can
hydrogen durable,
is and
required.less
perform
heavy and
mobilityrobust
well
As requires
vehicles
However,
can in and
large
Climate
are be durable,
and
the
better
seen hydrogen
and
trucksheavy
Protection
fuel
than
in Table and
where
cell
ever, purity
has
1, requires
vehicles
andan
high
hicles
battery level
extended
and
thermal
hydrogen
(FCEVs)hydrogen
electric of >99.9%
trucks where purity
management
internal
can
vehicles as(BEVs)
perform anopposed
level
extended
combustion oftolarge
requirements,
wellhave in >99.9%
engines and
considerable as
is oppos
heavy pote v
fuel cells, especially
regard
for As
hydrogen
especially tocan in
both be
for urban
for seen
the
mobility
fuel
light- CO
hydrogen
cells,traffic,
in
and Table
2 are
especiallywhere
1,
equivalent
mobility
better
heavy-duty they
battery and
than
for are are
electric
light-
vehicles sufficient
performance
better
ever, and vehicles
and
in than
heavy-duty
the for
ever,
hydrogen short
(BEVs)
characteristics.
and
medium-to-long ranges.
have
hydrogen
internal
vehicles in Fuel
considerable
Today,
terms cell
the
internal
combustion
the versa- electric
potential,
prospects
medium-to-long
with ve-
combustion
engines terms en
range is required. However, hydrogen-fueled
range is
therequired.
(H fuel
less cell
robust
-ICEs) vehicle
are hydrogen-fueled
However,
has andone engines
high thermal
durable,
of the that
fuel and
pillars have vehicle
management
cell hasthe
requires
of this fewest
highengines
a
mobility weaknesses
thermal
hydrogen that
requirements,
solution
range have
management
ispurity the
isand fewest
are
level
[30,33,42,43].
required. the weaknesses
most
requirements,
of
However, >99.9% theas and
is
opposed
fuel are
cell
Fuelhasthe
to most
cellhigh v
th
regard to hicles
especially
for
(H 2 hydrogen
both -ICEs)(FCEVs)
the in especially
are
CO (H can
urban
mobility
one2-ICEs)
regard of
equivalentperform
traffic,
tothe
in
are
are
both
urban
well
where
better
one
pillars
and the of
of
traffic,
in large
they
than
the
this
performance
CO are
pillarswhere
and
ever,
mobility
equivalent of they
heavy
sufficient
andthis
characteristics.
and
are
vehicles
for
hydrogen
mobility
solution
sufficient
short and
solution
[30,33,42,43].
performance Today,
for short
trucks
ranges.
internal where
Fuel ranges.
combustioncellan
[30,33,42,43].
characteristics.
the prospects extended
electric
engines
Today, ve-the
electr
pros
less robust and durable, tileand
less [28].
robust Thus, andH
2 2a-ICE tile
2powertrains
[28]. Thus, are H a2a-ICE
viable 2powertrains
alternative are
to battery-electric
a andviable alternative mobility
toandbattery-electric
and mobilit
for Asrequires
hydrogen range
hicles
can
(H2be isdurable,
hydrogen-fueled
seen
-ICEs)
As
hydrogen
required.
(FCEVs)
can
mobility inbe
are hicles
can
Table
one
for
and
seen
are As
of1,
hydrogen
purity
in
better
requires
vehicle
(FCEVs)
However,
perform
battery
can
theTable be level
engines
pillars
than
can
the
well
seen
electric
1,
mobility
hydrogen
of
of
inthat
perform
fuel
in
battery
ever,
>99.9%
large
Table
this have
cell
vehicles
and
are
well
mobility
electric
purity
1,has
and asheavy
the less
in
battery
better
hydrogen
opposed
fewest
high
(BEVs)large
vehicles
than
level
robust
thermal
vehicles
electric
solution have
internal
ever,
ofto >99.9%
weaknesses
and
heavy durable,
considerable
vehicles
[30,33,42,43].
(BEVs) and have
combustion
as
and
vehicles
management
and trucks
hydrogen
opposed
(BEVs)are
and
where the
potential,
considerable have
engines
internalantoconsiderable
most
requires
trucks
requirements, versa-
a hydrogen
where
extended
potential,
combustionis an pote
exte
en
hydrogen-fueled vehicle fuel cells,2.tile
hydrogen-fueled
engines especially
Thermophysical
that have
[28]. vehicle
Thus, for
thefuel
light-
H
range cells,
fewest
engines
2-ICEis and especially
Properties heavy-duty
weaknesses
that
powertrains
required. have of for
Hydrogen
the
and
However, light-
arevehicles
fewest
are
a and
the
viable
the as inaheavy-duty
the
Fuel
weaknesses
most
fuel medium-to-long
for
versa-
alternative
hydrogen-fueled
cell has and vehicles
Internal
to
high are the interms
the
Combustion
most
battery-electric
vehicle
thermal engines medium-to-long
with
versa- Engines
mobility
management that have and the terms
fewes
requiremen
especially
(H -ICEs) less
range
especially
2.are robust
one is of
inThermophysical
urban inand
required.
traffic,
the urban
(H durable,
especially
2. pillars
-ICEs)However,
where
Thermophysical
traffic,
Properties
ofare and
inthey
urban
this the
are
where
As
one requires
of
can
mobility
of fuel
traffic,
they cell
sufficient
Properties
Hydrogen
be
the are
seen a
pillars
solutionhydrogen
has
where for
of high
they
short
Hydrogen
sufficient
in ofas
Table a Fuel
1,purity
thermal
areranges.
for
[30,33,42,43].
this for
battery
mobility short level
sufficient
as Fuel
Internal of
management
aelectric
Fuel cell
for
ranges.
solution >99.9%
forshort
electric
Internal
Fuel
Combustion
vehicles as
ranges.
cell
[30,33,42,43]. ve-opposed
requirements,
(BEVs) Fuel
Combustion
electric
Engineshave to
isconside
cell
ve- electr
Eng
tile [28]. Thus, H2-ICE regard tile2
powertrains
hicles [28]. toThus,
both
fuel are Hthe
hydrogen-fueled
less
(FCEVs) a2-ICE
cells,
The
robust
can
2. Thermophysical
CO
viable regard
equivalent
especially
physical less
and
perform
2
2powertrains
hicles and
robustto
alternativefor
vehicle
durable,
well
(FCEVs)
both
Propertiesandand
are
inlight-
chemical the
tocan
engines
and
large aperformance
COheavy-duty
viable
and
durable,
and
2 equivalent
battery-electric
properties
that
requires
perform
of heavyalternative
Hydrogen and
haveaand
wellofcharacteristics.
requires
the
hydrogen
vehiclesin
as
and
mobility
hydrogen
tile to
vehicles
a[28].
fewest
large and
Fuel aperformance
battery-electric
andin
differ
Thus,
hydrogen
weaknesses
purity
andtrucks
for
Today,
theH
level
heavy where
Internal
characteristics.
the
purity
of and
vehicles
prospects
mobility
2medium-to-long
significantly
-ICE powertrains
level
are
>99.9%
andiffer the
extended
and
Combustion asand
from ofmost
Today,
terms
those
are
>99.9%
opposed
trucks a with
oftotheoppos
viable
versa-
where
Engines as pros
analtern
exte
for hydrogen hicles (FCEVs)
The
mobility physical
for can
are perform
The
and
hydrogen
better especially
physical
chemical
than well
mobility in
andin large
urban
chemical
properties
ever, and
are betterof
hydrogen heavy
traffic, hydrogen
than vehicles
where
properties internal
ever, they
of
differ
andandare
hydrogen trucks
sufficient
significantly
combustion
hydrogen where for
engines an
from
internal extended
short
significantlythoseranges.
of
combustion from Fuel
tho
env
fuel cells, especially forfuel light-
range cells,
isand especially
regard
tile heavy-duty
conventional
required. [28].
hydrogen-fueled toThus, for
both
However, light-
vehicles
fossil
the
H
range 2-ICECO
hydrogen-fueled and
fuels
vehicle
isthe in heavy-duty
thecell
equivalent
2powertrains
engines
required.
fuel medium-to-long
[11,15,16,31–35,44–48].
vehicle and
that
However,
has arevehicles
high a
haveperformance
engines
viable
the
thermal
the in
fuel terms
that
fuel the
Several
cells,
have
alternative
fewest medium-to-long
with key
especially
thehigh
weaknesses
management
cell has toproperties
characteristics.
fewest for terms
of
Today,
light-
weaknesses
battery-electric
and
thermal
requirements, are with
hydrogen
thethe
and
management and
mobility
most
is have
prospects
heavy-duty
are
versa-the
and vehic
most
requiremen
2. Thermophysical
(H -ICEs) range
conventional
are one is
Theof required.
Properties
the2.
physical
conventional
(Hfossil
pillars
-ICEs)However,
Thermophysical
and
fuelsof
ofareHydrogen
chemical
hicles
this the
(FCEVs)
fossil
onemobility
of fuel
Properties
properties
fuels
[11,15,16,31–35,44–48].
the cell
aspillars
a Fuel
can
solution has of
of
perform high
for Hydrogen
[11,15,16,31–35,44–48].
of thermal
Internal
hydrogen well
Several
[30,33,42,43].
this mobility in large
key management
Combustion
as solution
differ aproperties
Fuel
and
Several for
significantly
heavy
key of requirements,
Internal
Engines from
vehicles
properties
hydrogen
[30,33,42,43]. Combustion
those
and of is
of
trucks
hydrogen
have Eng
whe
regard to both the CO2regard equivalent
less
2
robusttohadboth
for
fuel
tile and
and the
a[28].
major
hydrogen
cells, performance
CO 2 equivalent
impact
especially
Thus,
durable, less
2
mobility
tileHand[28].
-ICE
2robust
oncharacteristics.
for the
Thus,are and
light- design
powertrains
requiresand better
H performance
-ICE
and
durable,
2a Today,
changes
than aaever,
powertrains
heavy-duty
are
hydrogen and viablecharacteristics.
the
and
purityand
regard
requires prospects
technological
are
vehicleshydrogen
to
apurityboth
a viable
alternative
level in
hydrogen
of Today,
the
toalternative
>99.9% the
developments
internal
the CO
medium-to-long
battery-electric
purity prospects
combustion
2 equivalent
to of internal
and
battery-electric
terms
mobility engines
performance
with
and asmobilit
The less
had
physical robust
conventional
amobility
majorand and
had
impactdurable,
fossil
chemical aThefuels
major
on range
the
physicaland
properties requires
[11,15,16,31–35,44–48].
impact
is
design on
required.
and of the
changes
chemical
hydrogen hydrogen
design
However,and Several
changes
properties
differ the key
fuel
technological andlevel
significantly
of cell
hydrogen ofas
properties
technological
has opposed
>99.9%
high
developments
from
level
of
differ as
thermal
those
of
hydrogento
of
>99.9%
opposed
developments
significantly
of haveto
management
internal from
oppos
of tho
int
r
for hydrogen mobilityfor are hydrogen
better
hydrogen-fueled (H than
combustion
regard
fuel 2 -ICEs)
cells, ever,
to are
both and
are
engines.
one
fuel
especially
vehicle the hydrogen
better
of
cells,
CO
hydrogen-fueled
engines The
the
for than
main
pillars
2especially
internal
equivalent
light-
that have ever,
of
and
vehicle
the and
this
for and combustion
characteristics
light-
heavy-duty
fewest hydrogen
mobility
engines and
performance of
for a engines
internal
hydrogen
solution
hydrogen
heavy-duty
vehicles
weaknesses
that have in
the
and combustion
fuel
[30,33,42,43].
mobility
vehicles
characteristics.
the comparedare
in
medium-to-long
fewest
are the the
Today,
weaknesses
most engines
to
better other
than
medium-to-long
the
versa- fuels
ever,
prospects
terms
and arewith
the and
terms
most hyv
2. Thermophysical hydrogen-fueled
had
combustion a major impact
combustion
Properties
2. vehicleon
Thermophysical
engines. ofless engines
the design
robust
engines.
Hydrogen that
and
The
Properties
asin have
changes
durable,
main
aSeveral
Fuel the and fewest
and
characteristics
offor Hydrogen
Internal weaknesses
technological
requires of a
Combustion
as afuel and
developments
hydrogen
hydrogen
Fuel forkeyare the
purity
fuel
Internal
Engines most
of
compared versa-
internal
level
Combustion of >99.9%
to other
Eng
(H2-ICEs) are one of the conventional
(H pillars
tile2-ICEs) of
[28]. commonlyare
for this
regard
Thus,
fossil
one
Hmobility
hydrogen
2to
-ICE
fuels
ofboththe
used conventional
pillars
solution
in
regard
mobility
tilethe
powertrains
[28].COtoThe
[11,15,16,31–35,44–48].
ICEs of
both
Thus,are
main
fossil
[30,33,42,43].
this
are the
better
equivalent
are H a2in
characteristics
mobility
presented fuels
CO
-ICE than
viable solution
Table
equivalent
and ever,
performance
2powertrains
alternative (H 2of
[11,15,16,31–35,44–48].
and
key a hydrogen
and
are
properties
[30,33,42,43].
2[11,15,33,34,44–51].
-ICEs)
hydrogen are to
performance one
characteristics.
Several
of
internal
compared
ofhydrogen
the pillars
characteristics.
combustion
Today,
to this
properties
have
of
the
other fuels
of hydrogen
mobility
Today,
engines
prospects the solut
pros
had aThe majortile
commonly [28].
combustion
impact Thus, on H
engines.
commonly
used
had the 2-ICE
ina ICEs
design
major
2powertrains
The usedmain
hydrogen-fueled
areimpact
changes ICEs
presented on are
characteristics
andare
the ain viable
vehicle
presented
Table
technological
design 2 ato battery-electric
ain
ofalternative
changes
viable
hydrogen
engines that
Table
[11,15,33,34,44–51].
developments
and
alternative
2 fuel
have mobility
battery-electric
compared
the to battery-electric
fewest
[11,15,33,34,44–51].
technological of internal
and
mobility
to other
weaknesses
developments andand
fuels mobilit
ofareint
fuel cells,physical2.
(H
for Thermophysical
2-ICEs)
hydrogen
especially
fuel
commonly cells,
andare
for chemical
for
one
fuel
used light-
especially
The
hydrogen
mobilityofICEs
cells,
in the
and
for
physical
properties
Properties
especiallymobility
pillars
are better
heavy-duty
light-
tile are[28].
and
of
offor
and
presented
Thus,
of chemical
this
than hydrogen
Hydrogen
are
light-
heavy-duty
H
better
mobility
ever,
vehicles
in and
Table
-ICE
properties
as
and
in differ
athe
than Fuel
solution
vehicles
2
significantly
hydrogen
heavy-duty for
ever, ofand
medium-to-long
in
hydrogen
Internal
the
[11,15,33,34,44–51].
powertrains are
hydrogen
[30,33,42,43].
internal
vehicles
a
from differ
those
Combustion
incombustion
medium-to-long
viable terms
the significantly
internal of Engines
medium-to-long
with
alternative terms
to
combustion
engines from tho
withto terms
battery-electr
en
2. Thermophysical Properties Tablecombustion
2. 2. Hydrogen
Thermophysical
conventional engines.
of Hydrogen properties
fossil The
fuelscombustion
Properties
as a main
compared
Fuel
conventional
(H characteristics
offor engines.
with
Hydrogen
[11,15,16,31–35,44–48].
-ICEs) are Internal
fossil
one of The
gasoline,
fuels
the of main
2a
Combustion
as a
pillars hydrogen
diesel,
Fuel characteristics
ofand
for
[11,15,16,31–35,44–48].
Several 2. key fuel
methane
Engines
Internal
properties
Thermophysical
this mobility compared
of a
Combustion hydrogen
[11,15,33,34].
Several
of
solution to
hydrogen
Propertiesother
key fuel
Engines fuels
properties
have
of
[30,33,42,43]. compared
Hydrogen of hydrogen
as other
a Fu
regard to (Hboth
regard The
2-ICEs)the to2.physical
are
CO
both 2 one
regard and
of
equivalent
2
the COtothe chemical
bothpillars
and the
equivalent ofproperties
this
performance
CO mobility
2 equivalent
and of hydrogen
solution
characteristics.
and differ
performance Today, significantly
[30,33,42,43]. characteristics.
the prospects from those
Today, ofthe pros
The physical andTable
Table
commonly
had
chemical
2. major
aThe Hydrogen Table
used
physical impact
properties and
Hydrogen
properties
in ICEson
ofcommonly
had are
the
chemical
properties
compared
abetter
hydrogen design
major
2fuel
presented used cells,
with
impact in
changes
properties
differ
compared
especially
gasoline,
Table
ICEson and 2 performance
are
the
significantly
of
with
hydrogen
for
diesel, gasoline,
presented
technological
designfrom
light-
and
[11,15,33,34,44–51].
differ in
changes
those
characteristics.
diesel,
and
methane Table and
heavy-duty
developments
and
significantly
of
methane
[11,15,33,34]. Today,
2 [11,15,33,34,44–51].
technological
from of of
the
internal
those
in prospects
[11,15,33,34].
vehicles the
developments
of
medium-to-l of int
for hydrogen 2.
2. Hydrogen Thermophysical
conventionalmobility
properties fossil
forare hydrogenProperties
fuels
compared than mobility
are with of
ever, Hydrogen
[11,15,16,31–35,44–48].
and
are better
hydrogen as a
than Fuel
Several
The
internalfor
ever, key
physical Internal
and properties
and
combustion
hydrogen Combustion
chemical hydrogen
engines
internal Engines
properties have
combustionof hydro en
Property
combustion
for hydrogen
engines. The
mobility
combustion
main
Hydrogen
regard
characteristics
engines. togasoline,
better thanthe
both
The of main
a
diesel,
ever,
Methane
hydrogen2andand hydrogen
COcharacteristics methaneand
equivalent fuel
[11,15,33,34].
compared
of
internal
Gasoline
aperformance
hydrogen
to
combustion
other fuel
Dieselengines
characteristics.
fuels compared to Today
other
conventional fossilProperty fuels conventional
(H -ICEs) Property
2[11,15,16,31–35,44–48].
had
2.are fossil
a major
Thermophysical
one of
Thecomparedfuels
the2.
(H
physical Thermophysical
pillars
-ICEs) Hydrogen
[11,15,16,31–35,44–48].
impactSeveral
and on
Properties
ofarekey
the
this
chemicalone Hydrogen
of
mobility
of Properties
properties
design Hydrogen
the Methane
Several
changes
pillars
ofproperties of
solution of
hydrogen
of
of and
as Hydrogen
key
a Fuel
conventional Methane
properties
[30,33,42,43].
this
hydrogen have
technological
mobilityfor as a
Gasoline
Internal
fossil
differ Fuel
of
solutionfuels for
hydrogen
developments Gasoline
Internal
Combustion have Combustion
Diesel
of
[11,15,16,31–35,44–48].
[30,33,42,43].
significantly from internal
Engines Diesel
Eng
Sev
(HTable
2-ICEs) are onewith of the pillars thismobility
mobility solution [30,33,42,43]. 86 those of comb
2
Carbon content Table(mass%)
2. Hydrogen properties in2. ICEs
Hydrogen for
properties
gasoline,hydrogen
0 in compared
diesel, and with
methane are
gasoline,
75 better
[11,15,33,34].
indiesel, than and 84ever,
methane and[11,15,33,34].
hydrogen internal
had a major
Carbon content Carbon
impact Property
(mass%) commonly
content
on had (mass%)
thea designmajor usedimpact
changes
combustion oncommonly
andthe
engines. Hydrogen
aretechnological
presented
designThe used changes Table
ICEs 02Methane
are
developments
and
0[11,15,16,31–35,44–48].
main characteristics [11,15,33,34,44–51].
presented
technological
75 ofSeveral
of aainternal Table
75 Gasoline
developments
hydrogen 2fuel
[11,15,33,34,44–51].
84 comparedof of 84
internaltoDiesel86
other fuels and86tec
conventionalThe physical fossil Thefuels
and physical
chemical
(H and
2-ICEs) properties
are chemical
one of ofhad
the properties
hydrogen
pillars major of of
keyimpact
hydrogen
differ
this propertieson the
significantly
mobility differdesign
solutionhydrogen
from changes
significantlythose have
[30,33,42,43]. offrom tho
Lower(net)
Carbon
combustion
Lower (net)
content
Property Lower
heating
(mass%)
engines.
heating (net)
value
The
value heating
(MJ/kg)
combustion
main
(MJ/kg)
2. Thermophysical value
characteristics
Property
commonly (MJ/kg)
engines. The
Hydrogen
used of
Properties
2. main
a
in
conventional hydrogen
ICEs
Thermophysical of 0
119,9 119.9
characteristics
are
Hydrogen fuel
Methane
presented
fossil 119,9
compared
Hydrogen of
Properties
fuels as a a
in 45.8
75
hydrogen
45,8
Table
Fuel to
offor other
2 fuel
Gasoline 45,8
fuels
Methane compared
[11,15,33,34,44–51].
Hydrogen
[11,15,16,31–35,44–48]. Internal
combustion 43.9
84
43,9
Combustion
as a
engines. Fuel
Several to
for
The other
Diesel 43,9
Gasoline
Internal
Engines
main
key fuels 42.586
42,5
Combustion
characteristics
properties of 42,5
Diesel
of
hydrogen Eng
a h
had
2. a
conventional major
Thermophysical 3 impact
fossil on
Properties
fuels the design of changes
Hydrogen
[11,15,16,31–35,44–48]. and
as a technological
Fuel
Several for key Internal developments
properties Combustion
of hydrogen of internal
Engines have
Lower
Density
commonly (net)
(at Table
11heating
bar &2. 273K;
Density Hydrogen
value (at 1(MJ/kg)
kg/m properties
barpresented
&33 273K;Tablekg/m
)combustion compared
2.Table
Hydrogen
) are with properties
gasoline,
119,9
0,089 compared
diesel, and
0,089 with
methane
45,8
0,72gasoline, [11,15,33,34].
diesel,
0,72 and methane [11,15,33,34].
43,9
730-780 730-780 42,5
830 infuels 830
Carbon content Density (atused
(mass%) barin
Carbon&ICEs
273 commonly
K;are
content kg/m (mass%))
had
The3)physical used a in
in
major ICEs
and had 2
0
engines.
impact
chemical[11,15,33,34,44–51].
a presented
Themajor
onThe the
physical0.089
impact
main
properties in
design Table
and 75
on 02
the
characteristics
changes
ofchemical
hydrogen[11,15,33,34,44–51].
0.72
design commonly
and of changes
a 84
hydrogen
technological75
used 730–780
and in ICEs
technological
fuel compared
developments 86
are 84
presented 830
developments
to other
of internalTable 2
of86[11
int
Density Volumetric energy barThe
content physical
(at 1119,9
bar and
& 273K; 2. Thermophysical
chemical properties
10,7 ofproperties
Properties differ significantly
hydrogen of33,0of hydrogen
Hydrogen
differ 3 from
asdiffer
significantly those
a Fuel
33x10significantly
for
from of
3 Internal
those offrom
Combu
35x10 tho3
heating(at 1energy
bar & 273K; kg/m 0,089 0,72 730-780 830 3
Lower (net) Volumetric value Lower
(MJ/kg) content
Table
(net) 2.(at
heating 1 value
Hydrogen & 273K;
properties
(MJ/kg) compared
combustion 10,7 with
engines. gasoline,
45,8
The119,9 main 33,0
diesel, and methane
characteristics43,9 45,833 33x10
[11,15,33,34].
of aofhydrogen 42,5 43,9
fuel 35x10
compared 42,5
toDiesel
other
Volumetric
Volumetric
3 Property
energy
MJ/m
energy content
3
) conventional
content (at 1 Property
commonly
combustion
bar
(atproperties
1273K; & fossil
273
conventional
bar &kg/m K; Hydrogen
used
fuels
MJ/m
273K;
3in
engines.
conventional
fossil ) ICEs
fuelsThe are
[11,15,16,31–35,44–48].main
fossil
10.7 Methane
Hydrogen
presented
characteristics
fuels
[11,15,16,31–35,44–48].
Thediesel,
10,7[11,15,33,34].physical in Table
and 33.0 of
33,0chemical2
[11,15,16,31–35,44–48].
Several key Gasoline
a
SeveralMethane
[11,15,33,34,44–51].
hydrogen
properties key
properties ×
fuel
Several
10 3 Diesel
compared
hydrogen
properties3
33x10 of hydrogen Gasoline
key of to
properties
have
35
hydrogen× other
10 3
fuels
3 of hydrogen
have
differ significantly
35x10
Density
Carbon (atMJ/m
ble 2. Hydrogen
content
)& 273K;
properties
1 bar(mass%) Table compared
Density
kg/m
Carbon
3
2. Hydrogen
)(at 1 bar
content with &gasoline, 3
compared
diesel, andwith
)commonly
0,089 methane gasoline,
used 0,72
in ICEs and
0,089
Table are 2.methane
Hydrogen
presented [11,15,33,34].
730-780
in 0,72
properties
Table 2 compared 830730-780
with
[11,15,33,34,44–51]. 84gasoline, diesel, and 830m
MJ/m 3
Molecular)
Molecular Property
Molecular
weight
weight hadweighta (mass%)
majorcommonly
had impact
a major used
onhad 0 in
the
impact ICEs
a design
major
Hydrogen
on are
the
2,016 2.016
conventionalpresented
impact
changes
design 75
on and 0 in
the
changes
2,016
fossil Table
technological
design
Methane
16.043
fuels
16,043 and 2changes 8416,043
technological75
[11,15,33,34,44–51].
developments
3 and
Gasoline
[11,15,16,31–35,44–48]. ~110technological
~110 developmentsof86 internal
3 developments
~110
Several Diesel
of
~170
key
3~170 internal
properties of86of
~170 int3
Volumetric
Lower (net) energy
heating content
value Volumetric
Lower (at
(MJ/kg) 1
Table
(net) barenergy
2.&
heating 273K;
Hydrogencontent
value (at
properties
(MJ/kg) 1 10,7
bar
119,9 &
compared 273K; with 33,0
gasoline,
45,8 10,7
119,9 diesel, and 33x10
methane
43,9 33,0
45,8 [11,15,33,34]. 35x10
42,5 33x10
43,9 35x10
42,5
erty Molecular Property Boiling
weight Hydrogencombustion
point (K) engines. Methane The
combustion
Hydrogen main characteristics
2,016engines.
GasolineMethane The of
20 main
a hydrogen
16,043 characteristics
Diesel fuel
Gasoline compared
111 of a
~110 hydrogen
to other
Diesel fuel
298-488fuels compared
~170 to other
453-633
MJ/m
Density
3 Carbon
) (atBoiling
Boiling content
point
point
1 bar(mass%)
& 273K;
(K)(mass%)
MJ/m
(K)
Density
3
) 3)(at 1 bar & combustion
kg/mvalue Table(K)
273K; kg/m 3
2. ICEs
engines. The
Hydrogen
)commonly
0,089
had
properties
0main
20 a major
20 characteristics
Property
compared
0,72
impact
0,089 with
75
on
111
111 of
thea hydrogen
gasoline,
design changes
730-780diesel,
0,72
fuel
298-488
298–488
and
compared
84Hydrogen
methane
and technologicalto453-633
453–633
[11,15,33,34].
830730-780
other fuels
86 Methane developme
830
Carbon content
Boiling
Lower point
(net)
Auto-ignition Auto-ignition
(K)
heating
temperature Table
commonly 2. Hydrogen
temperature
0(MJ/kg)
(K) used
commonly properties
in 75
used are
0 incompared
presented
ICEs arewith
used
20
119,9
853 in84gasoline,
Table
ICEs
presented 75 are
853 2in diesel,
111
45,8
Table
813 and
[11,15,33,34,44–51].
presented 286 methane
in84 Table
813
[11,15,33,34,44–51].[11,15,33,34].
2~623
[11,15,33,34,44–51].
298-488
43,9 86 ~623 453-633
42,5
~523 ~523
Molecular weight Property
Molecular weight Carbon
2,016 content
combustion
Hydrogen (mass%) engines.
16,043 2,016 Methane The main ~110 characteristics
16,043
3 Gasoline 0
of a
~170 hydrogen
~110
3 Diesel
3 fuel 75
compare
~170 3
Volumetric Auto-ignition
energy content temperature
Volumetric
Minimum(at 1 bar (K)
energy
ignition & 3 273K;
content
energy in (atair 1 10,7
bar
(at 1 &
bar 273K;
& 853
at 33,0 10,7
0,02 813 33x10 33,0
0,29 ~623 35x10 33x10
0,24 ~523 35x10
0,24
Lower
e (MJ/kg)
Boiling (net)
3 point
heating
Density
Minimum (atvalue
Auto-ignition
(K) content 1 bar
ignition(MJ/kg)
temperature
& 3energy
Boiling 273K; 119,9
point (K)
kg/m
(K)air)Property
in (at 1 bar & 45,8 119,9
at Lower
20 Hydrogen (net) 853
0,089
0,02
0heating
commonly 43,9Hydrogen
45,8
value
used
111 20(MJ/kg)
in 75 42,5
813
0,72
0,29
ICEs 43,9
are298-488Methane
presented 111Gasoline~623
730-780
0,24
in84Table 42,5
2Gasoline
119,9
453-633 ~523
830
0,24
86 3 45,8
[11,15,33,34,44–51].
298-488 Diesel
453-633
MJ/m Carbon Property
(mass%) Methane Diesel
K; kg/m)3)(atstoichiometry;
Density
Auto-ignition 1 bar
Minimum
Volumetric
Lower & 273K;
temperature
MJ/m
Table
ignition
energykg/m
mJ)
)content
Auto-ignition
(K)
Carbon
(net) heating
3
stoichiometry;
2. energy
Hydrogen
) 0,089
Table
content
value in mJ)
(at
2. properties
air 1 (at
Hydrogen
temperature
(MJ/kg)(mass%) Table
bar 1 &bar compared
2.273K;
Hydrogen
0,72
&
properties
(K) 0,089
at 853 with properties
compared
Density gasoline,
(at 0,02
10,7
1
119,9 730-780
with
bar compared
&diesel,
0,72
gasoline,
273K;
813 and
8530 with
kg/m methane
3 gasoline,
0,29
33,0
diesel, )
45,8 830
and [11,15,33,34].
730-780diesel,
methane
~623 813
75 and 0,24
33x10
[11,15,33,34].
43,9
3
methane 0,089 [11,15,33,34].
830
~523 ~623
84 42,5 0,24
35x10 0,72 ~523
86
Molecular Carbon
weight3 content (mass%)
Molecular weight 2,016 0 16,043
3 2,016 75 ~110
3 16,043 3 84 ~170~1103 86 ~170
ent (at 1 MJ/m
Volumetric
Minimum stoichiometry;
bar
energy
&
ignition
Density ) 273K;
(atcontent
energy
1 mJ)
Minimum
Lower
bar in
& (atair 1
(net)
273K; 10,7
bar
(at
ignition
1 &
heating
kg/m bar3 273K;
) energy
& at
value in
(MJ/kg) 33,0
air 10,7
Volumetric
(at
0,02
Table 1 2.bar &
Hydrogen
0,089 at 33x10
energy 33,0
content
0,29
properties 0,02
119,9 (at
compared
0,721 35x10
bar 33x10
&
with0,24 273K;
0,29
gasoline,
45,8 730-780diesel, 35x10
10,7
0,24
and 0,24
methane
43,9 830 33,0
[11,15,33,34]. 0,24
42,5
Boiling
MJ/m 3 Lower
point (K)
) Molecular Property
(net) heating
Boiling
weight
value
point
PropertymJ)3 (MJ/kg)
(K) Property Hydrogen 20
3 MJ/m3Hydrogen
119,9
2,016 Methane
Hydrogen
111 20 Methane45,8
16,043 Gasoline
Methane
298-488 111 43,9
Gasoline
~110 3 Diesel
Gasoline
453-633298-488 42,5
Diesel
~170 3 Diesel
453-633
stoichiometry; mJ)
Volumetric
Density stoichiometry;
Density
(at 1energy
bar & 273K; (at 1kg/m
content bar(at &)1273K; bar &(K) kg/m 273K; ) 853 ) 0,08910,7 0,089 33,0
0,72 0,72 33x10
730-780 730-780 35x10
830 830
Auto-ignition
Carbon
Molecular content temperature
Carbon
weight
Boiling(mass%)
content
point Auto-ignition
(K) (K)
Carbon
(mass%) content
2,016 temperature
(mass%) Property
16,043 0
2,016 0
20 ~110 813
75
16,043 8530 75
Hydrogen
111 ~170 ~623
84
~110 813
75 84
Methane
298-488 ~523
86
~170 ~623
84 3 86Gasoline
453-633 ~523
86 3
MJ/m 3
) energy
Volumetric Volumetric
energy content energy
(at 1 content
bar & 273K; Molecular
(atair1119,9
bar1 & 273K; weight
10,7 10,7 33,0 33,0 33x103 2,016 33x10 35x10 3 16,043 35x10
Minimum
Lower (net)
Boiling point ignition
heating
Lower value
(K)3 (net)weight Minimum
Lowerin
(MJ/kg)
heating air
(net)
3value
(at
ignition
1
heating
20(MJ/kg) bar energy
& at
value in
(MJ/kg) (at
0,02
111Boiling
20 bar &
119,9 at 298-488 0,29
45,8
111 0,02
119,9 45,8
813453-633 0,24
43,9
0 298-488 ~623 0,29
45,8 43,9 0,24
42,5 0,24
43,9 42,5 0,24
42,5
stoichiometry;
Density
Auto-ignition
Molecular
MJ/m mJ))&(at
temperature
MJ/m
stoichiometry;
(K) content (mass%)
) 3)(atCarbon mJ) 3 273K; kg/m3) 0,089
point853(K)
2,016 16,043 ~110 75453-633 20 ~523
~170 84 111 830
e (K) (atDensity
Auto-ignition 1 bar
Minimum
Boiling
273K;
temperature
point
Density
1 bar
ignition kg/m
& energy
(K)
Molecular
(K)
273K; 1
853
Lower bar
kg/m
in
weight
&
air ) (at 1 bar
(net) heating value &813 at 853 0,089
0,02
(MJ/kg) 20 temperature
Auto-ignition ~623 0,72
813 0,089
2,016 (K)16,0430,72
0,29 ~523
111119,933x10
730-780
~623 0,72
16,043
730-780
0,24
298-488
830
~523
45,8853 ~110 730-780 830 43,9813
0,24
453-633 ~170 3
Volumetric Molecular
energy
Volumetric weight
content
Volumetric
energy (atair 1(at
content barenergy&
(at 273K;
1 content
bar & (at
273K; 1 10,7
bar & 2,016
3273K;
10,7 33,0 10,7 33,0
3
33,0 ~110 3 35x10
33x10
3
33x10 3~170 3
35x10 35x10
Minimum
y in 3air (atstoichiometry;
ignition
1 bar
Auto-ignitionenergy
& at mJ)in
Boiling
temperature point0,02 1
Density
(K)
(K) bar & at
(at 1 bar & 273K; 0,29 0,02 kg/m ) 853
Minimum ignition 0,24 0,29
energy 20 in air
813 0,24
0,089
(at 1 0,24
bar &111 at ~623 0,24
0,720,02298-488~523 730-780 0,29 453-633
MJ/m ) Boiling
stoichiometry;MJ/mmJ)3 point (K)
) MJ/m ) Volumetric energy content (at 1 20
3
bar & 273K;853 0,2910,7
111 298-488 453-633 3
Minimum ignition
Auto-ignition Auto-ignition
energy (K)
temperature temperature
in air (at 1 bar (K) & atstoichiometry; 853 mJ)
0,02 813 813 ~623 0,2433,0 ~623 ~523 0,2433x10 ~523
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 5 of 26

Table 2. Cont.

Property Hydrogen Methane Gasoline Diesel

Minimum ignition energy in air (at 1 bar & at
0.02 0.29 0.24 0.24
stoichiometry; mJ)
Stoichiometry air/fuel mass ratio 34.4 17.2 14.7 14.5
Quenching distance (at 1 bar & 298 K at
0.64 2.1 ~2 -
stoichiometry; mm)
Laminar flame speed in air (at 1 bar & 298 K at
1.85 0.38 0.37–0.43 0.37–0.43
stoichiometry; m/s)
Diffusion coefficient in air (at 1 bar & 273 K; m2 /s) 8.5 × 10−6 1.9 × 10−6 - -
Flammability limits in air (vol%) 4–76 5.3–15 1–7.6 0.6–5.5
Adiabatic flame temperature (at 1 bar & 298 K at
2480 2214 2580 ~2300
stoichiometry; K)
Octane number (R+M)/2 130+ 120+ 86–94 -
Cetane number - - 13–17 40–55

At atmospheric pressure and a temperature of 273 K, the density of hydrogen is very

low, less than that of natural gas by an order of magnitude. This is due to its very low
molecular weight. Hydrogen has the highest mass–energy ratio among the chemical fuels
and, in terms of mass–energy consumption, it outperforms conventional gasoline fuel by
approximately 3 times, alcohol by 5 to 6 times, and methane and propane by 2.5 times.
Therefore, an admixture of hydrogen to hydrocarbon fuel can be used to increase effective
engine efficiency and reduce specific fuel consumption. The low density of hydrogen
results in reduced energy density of the hydrogen-air mixture inside the engine cylinder,
leading to a low power output. An effective method to eliminate the reduction in power
output is to use direct H2 injection with the intake valve closed. To increase the hydro-
gen density and the associated volumetric energy content, it is necessary to increase the
hydrogen storage pressure. As an example, hydrogen compressed to 350 bar at 273 K
can increase the density of the gas to 31 kg/m3 . At the same time, the volumetric energy
content increases to 3700 MJ/m3 [30,34–36,42,43,46]. Beneficial for the combustion process
are the high molecular diffusivity and flame speed of the burning hydrogen resulting in
a faster production of a homogeneous mixture of fuel and air, and a better combustion
efficiency and cycle-to-cycle variation in a wide range inside the cylinder. The use of
gaseous fuel for short periods during engine start-up and warm-up eliminates problems
associated with the evaporation of cold liquid fuel. It also reduces the uneven distribution
of fuel to the cylinders due to the presence of a layer of liquid on the intake manifold walls.
This, in turn, prevents undesirable changes in the fuel–air mixture ratio in the various
cylinders of the engine during transients such as acceleration or deceleration. Hydrogen
has wide flammability limits compared to other fuels (4–75% compared to 1.4–2.3% by
volume in air in the case of gasoline). A significant advantage of this is that hydrogen
can run on a lean mixture. It is characterized by a wide range of flammability limits, with
flammable mixtures ranging from as poor as λ = 10 to as rich as λ = 0:14 (0:1 < φ (fuel/air
equivalence ratio) < 7:1). This makes it possible to achieve a wide range of engine power
by varying the mixture composition. Additionally, hydrogen wide flammability limits,
allowing unthrottled engine operation at partial loads with a subsequent improvement in
thermal efficiency [9,10,15,16,21,51–53]. The flammability limits widen with the increasing
temperature with the lower flammability limit dropping to 2 vol % at 300 ◦ C (equivalent to
λ = 20/φ = 0:05) [16,36]. The lower flammability limit increases with increasing pressure,
with the upper flammability limit taking different values in the pressure-dependent range.
That, however, is less relevant regarding its application in engines [37]. Running the engine
on a lean mixture produces a low flame temperature. This leads to less heat transfer to the
walls and allows increased fuel economy due to the total fuel burnt. In addition, the wide
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 6 of 26

flammability range of hydrogen enables ultra-efficient engine operation, resulting in lower

NOx emissions and increased brake thermal efficiency [33,38,39,51,52]. There is a limit to
the leanness of a fuel mixture. Running the engine with a lean mixture can significantly re-
duce the power output. The reason for this is a reduction in the volumetric heating value of
the fuel–air mixture. The minimum energy required to ignite a hydrogen–air mixture under
atmospheric conditions is very low, an order of magnitude lower than that for the methane–
air and iso-octane–air mixtures. It is only 0.017 mJ (compared to 0.24 mJ for a gasoline-air
mixture) for hydrogen concentrations of 22–26% (λ = 1:2–1:5/φ = 0:67–0:83) [16,39–42].
The figure quoted above corresponds to a spark plug gap of 0.5 mm. For a spark plug gap
of 2 mm, the minimum ignition energy is approximately 0.05 mJ. This is approximately
constant for hydrogen concentrations between 10% and 50% (λ = 0.42–3.77, φ = 0.27–2.38).
When the hydrogen concentration drops below 10%, its sharp increase occurs. This poses
a risk of the hot gases and hot spots in the combustion chamber becoming a source of
premature ignition and flashback. Due to the very low ignition energy, a low-energy spark
is sufficient to initiate combustion. Therefore, the combustion process can be initiated by
a glow plug or a resistance hot wire [33,42–44,49–57]. Hydrogen has a small quenching
distance of merely 0.6 mm, which is much shorter than that of gasoline. The quenching
distance is the distance from the inner wall of the cylinder below which the combustion
flame extinguishes. For nearly stoichiometric mixtures, it is minimal and decreases with
increasing pressure and temperature. Consequently, hydrogen flames are closer to the
cylinder wall before they are extinguished compared to other fuels. This has a considerable
impact on the crevice combustion and heat transfer through the walls [16,35,42–46]. It
is more difficult to extinguish a hydrogen flame compared with other fuels. It tends to
backfire, especially since it may escape through a nearly closed intake valve [33,42–47]. The
hydrogen flame ignites and burns quickly and is therefore relatively short-lived [39,45–49].
Unfortunately, the low flame quenching distance of hydrogen also results in increased
lubricant evaporation, and as a result to increased particle formation in DI hydrogen
ICEs [36,42–49].
The autoignition temperature of hydrogen is 853 K, significantly higher than that of
other fuels. This makes ignition of the hydrogen–air mixture much more difficult when
relying only on temperature increase during compression. Thus, ignition of a hydrogen–air
mixture is difficult without an additional ignition source, and this is important when a
mixture of hydrogen and air is compressed. The autoignition temperature is important
because it allows the maximum compression ratio of the engine to be determined due to
the relationship of temperature rise during compression to the compression ratio. Further-
more, this temperature allows higher compression ratios to be used in hydrogen-fueled
engines [40–43]. Due to its very high autoignition temperature and octane number, re-
sistance to knocking combustion should be higher for hydrogen than for hydrocarbon
fuels [47]. Of note, the unambiguous, precise upper limit of the hydrogen octane number
has not been established [30,46]. Its minimum ignition energy in air at stoichiometric ratios
is an order of magnitude lower than that of hydrocarbon fuels. This poses the risk of
hydrogen ignition from hot spots or residues in the combustion chamber. Consequently,
this can result in the premature initiation of uncontrolled fuel ignition. There are, therefore,
risks regarding loss of control of the combustion process, knocking combustion, and the
possibility of mechanical damage to the engine [30,47]. The motor octane number (MON)
of hydrogen is significantly lower than its RON compared to a typical drop of 8–10 points
for gasoline. The exact MON of hydrogen, however, has not been clearly defined. However,
there is a view that the MON is a more accurate measure of resistance to knock combustion
in hydrogen engines [47,54–58].
For the complete combustion of hydrogen in air, the stoichiometric or chemically
correct A/F ratio (λ) is 34.29 kg air to 1 kg hydrogen. This corresponds to a stoichiometric
percentage of 29.52% hydrogen in air by volume. This is much higher than the 14.7:1 (A/F)
ratio required for gasoline. Hydrogen has a high flame speed at stoichiometric ratios, and
under these conditions, the hydrogen flame speed is nearly an order of magnitude higher
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 7 of 26

(faster) than that of gasoline. This allows hydrogen engines to more closely approximate
the thermodynamically ideal engine cycle. At leaner mixtures, the flame velocity decreases
significantly, and the fuel economy improves. The adiabatic temperature of the flame
and its velocity affect engine parameters such as thermal efficiency, combustion stability,
exhaust emissions, etc. Another property of hydrogen is its very high diffusivity. The ability
of hydrogen to disperse in air is much greater than that of petrol. This is advantageous
for two main reasons: it facilitates the formation of a homogeneous mixture of fuel and
air; and from the point of view of application safety, it disperses rapidly in the event of a
hydrogen leak [33,41,47,48,53,55,58].

3. Hydrogen Use in Internal Combustion Engines

Hydrogen can be used in spark ignition (SI) as well as compression ignition (CI) engines.

3.1. Spark Ignition Engines

Hydrogen has considerable potential in applications to power spark ignition engines
and to achieve good performance. Some beneficial properties of hydrogen, such as fast
flame propagation, low ignition energy, and a wide operating range, allow for optimization
and improvement of the combustion process. This makes it possible, among other things,
to limit the emission of harmful components to only NOx [15,30,33,41,49–53]. Hydrogen in
SI engines can be used in one of the following ways [52–59]:
- Manifold induction—Low-temperature hydrogen is injected into the manifold through
a valve controlled duct.
- Direct introduction—A cryogenic cylinder is used to store hydrogen. A pump cir-
culates liquid hydrogen to a heat exchanger to vaporize it. Then, cold hydrogen is
injected into the engine. By using cold hydrogen, pre-ignition is avoided and NOx
formation in the combustion process is reduced.
- Hydrogen addition to gasoline: In this method, a mixture of hydrogen and petrol is
introduced into the combustion chamber of an internal combustion engine. There, the
compressed mixture is ignited by a spark.
Hydrogen fuel, when mixed with air, forms a combustible mixture. It can be burned
in a conventional spark ignition engine with an equivalence ratio below the flammability
limit of a gasoline–air mixture. The resulting ultra-lean combustion produces low flame
temperatures. This directly leads to lower heat transfer to the walls, higher engine efficiency,
and lower NOx emissions. This is an important advantage of hydrogen-powered SI engines.
Hydrogen-powered engines have lower unwanted emissions compared to hydrocarbon-
fueled engines. Previous studies have shown that the main pollutants in hydrogen engines
are NOx as well as PM. NOx emissions from hydrogen-fueled ICEs are higher than from
petrol-fueled ICEs due to the high combustion temperature. Due to the higher combustion
temperatures, high NOx emissions occur especially when the engine is operating in the
stoichiometric fuel-to-air ratio range. Reducing the air–fuel ratio decreases the combustion
temperature and NOx emissions.
Spark ignition engines can be fueled with hydrogen without requiring major modifi-
cations. A higher hydrogen burning velocity improves combustion and allows for higher
brake thermal efficiency. Emissions of hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide are virtually
negligible. Only trace amounts of these emissions are produced by the evaporation and
burning of the lubricating oil film on engine cylinder walls [39,55–59]. The performance
of a hydrogen engine is better than that of a gasoline-powered engine, particularly under
part-load operation. Hydrogen can also be used as an admixture in methane or petrol. This
makes it possible to burn very lean mixtures with an equivalence factor of 0.1. However,
spark ignition engines are an inferior solution where high levels of torque are required at
low engine speeds. In such cases, engines operating at higher compression ratios, such as
diesels, are usually used.
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 8 of 26

3.2. Compression Ignition Engines

There are several reasons for using hydrogen as a diesel fuel additive in compression
ignition (CI) internal combustion engines [60–63]. The injection of small amounts of
hydrogen into a CI internal combustion engine improves the homogeneity of mixing in the
diesel spray stream. This is largely due to the high diffusivity of hydrogen. As a result, the
combustible mixture is more thoroughly mixed with air [34,60–66]. As such, the formation
of hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide during combustion can be almost
completely eliminated. Only the partial combustion of lubricating oil can produce trace
amounts of these compounds in the combustion chamber [61–63]. In hydrogen-fueled CI
engines, an injector is used to inject high-pressure hydrogen into the cylinder. Therefore,
not only is the design of the engine structure important but that of the injector because
the injection nozzle controls how pressurized hydrogen is injected into the combustion
chamber [62–65]. Compression ignition engines cannot be operated with hydrogen as a
standalone fuel the compression temperature is insufficient for initiating combustion due
to the higher autoignition temperature required [61–65]. Therefore, burning hydrogen
in a CI engine requires the aid of a spark plug or a glow plug. With a dual-fuel engine,
the main fuel (hydrogen) is injected into the intake air or carburetor. Combustion is
initiated by the diesel fuel acting as an ignition source. The amount of pilot fuel can be
10–30% of the total fuel, with the rest of the energy provided by the main fuel (hydrogen).
Similarly to SI engines, nitrogen oxides (NOx) are a major problem in hydrogen-operated
dual-fuel CI engines. EGR is effective in reducing the NOx emissions due to the dilution
effect, which reduces the oxygen concentration in the intake charge. However, volumetric
efficiency significantly decreases as EGR increases. Compared to a dual-fuel hydrogen
propulsion system without EGR, an approximately 15% decrease in volumetric efficiency
is observed [35]. In addition, the use of EGR in hydrogen dual-fuel operation can increase
particulate emissions. The effect of a bi-fuel engine using hydrogen and EGR is to produce
smoke levels similar to those of a CI ICE. At the same time, the use of EGR increases
the emissions of unburned HC, CO, and CO2 . Another way to reduce NOx emissions
is to introduce liquid water into the combustion chamber. It can also prevent knocking
combustion and premature ignition when burning hydrogen. The action of water has a
similar effect to the dilution of exhaust gases by EGR, causing cooling of the charge and
reducing the combustion rate. However, water injection into the intake manifold results in
reduced volumetric efficiency of the engine [65,66].

4. Abnormal Combustion Challenges

The primary problem that has been encountered in the development of hydrogen
engines is premature ignition (pre-ignition). Premature ignition occurs when the fuel
mixture in the combustion chamber is ignited before ignition is produced by the spark plug.
This results in inefficient, erratic engine operation and the loss of maximum power [66,67].
If premature ignition occurs near the fuel intake valve, it can lead to a flame backflow
traveling back into the induction system and, consequently, backfire. When the intake
valves are opened, a hydrogen–air mixture flows into the combustion chamber, and the
occurrence of backfire is then possible, which is caused by hot spots in the combustion
chamber and hot exhaust gases. The remaining charge in the ignition system will ignite
the hydrogen due to its low ignition temperature. As a result, pre-ignition is followed
by flame retraction. The only difference is the moment at which it happens. Unrestricted
combustion occurs during the compression stroke, before ignition. During this time, the
intake and exhaust valves close before the spark from the spark plug. At the same time,
pre-ignition initiates flashback during the compression stroke when the intake valve is
open. Thereafter, the flashback moves forward until the mixture fed into the cylinder is
ignited [66–68]. Backfire can initiate the combustion process, which increases the pressure
in the intake manifold that can lead to damage to the intake system. Backfire is more likely
to occur when using PFI-H2 ICE because hydrogen is fed into the intake manifold before the
intake valve opens. As a result, a combustible mixture is formed with the air in the intake
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 9 of 26

manifold, and this occurs before the mixture enters the combustion chamber. Abnormal
combustion may occur in hydrogen-fueled ICEs because of hydrogen’s wide flammability
limits and low ignition energy together with the high speed of flame propagation.
The problem of abnormal combustion in hydrogen-fueled ICEs has still not been fully
resolved. Most often, solving this problem requires changes to engine design, mixture
strategy, and load control. In general, there are three regimes of abnormal combustion in
spark ignition engines. The first is knock combustion and, therefore, spontaneous ignition
in the final gas region. The second is pre-ignition, i.e., uncontrolled ignition caused by a
hot spot. The third is backfire (also known as backflash, flashback, or induction ignition)
or premature ignition during the suction stroke, which can be seen as an early form of
pre-ignition [33,41,52,69]. Knocking combustion is a frequently encountered problem
in hydrogen-fueled engines. Knocking combustion can damage the engine due to the
large amplitude of pressure waves causing high mechanical and thermal stresses. For a
hydrogen-fueled ICEs, the effects of knocking combustion can be particularly severe due to
the high burning speed of the hydrogen mixture. The knock properties of a specific fuel can
be determined using a dedicated engine test bench (CFR). This test bench makes it possible
to compare the knock resistance of a test fuel with a mixture of heptane and iso-octane.
The most common, standardized tests for determining a fuel’s resistance to knocking are
those conducted on a CFR engine bench, in which the research octane number (RON)
and motor octane number (MON) of the fuel under test are determined. In the case of
hydrogen, very high flame speeds in near-stoichiometric mixtures cause inconsistencies in
the determination of knock resistance. Therefore, this standard procedure for determining
knock resistance is inappropriate and controversial in this case. To date, a number of
studies have been conducted to assess the knock resistance of hydrogen used to power an
ICE, in which high qualitative agreement was found for compression ratio difference, fuel–
air equivalence ratio, and intake air temperature [41,70–75]. The possibility of knocking
combustion occurring significantly reduces the operating regime of hydrogen-fueled ICEs.
Premature ignition is a much greater problem in hydrogen-fueled engines compared to
other IC engines because of the hydrogen’s lower ignition energy, wider flammability
range, and shorter quenching distance. In general, both high temperatures and residual
charge can cause pre-ignition. Due to the dependence of the minimum ignition energy
on the equivalence ratio, pre-ignition is more likely when the hydrogen–air mixtures
approach stoichiometric levels. In addition, operating conditions at increased engine
speeds and loads are more conducive to the occurrence of pre-ignition. This is caused by
higher gas and component temperatures. In general, the sources of pre-ignition are as
follows [41,66–68,76–80]:
- Hot spark plug components;
- Hot surfaces of exhaust valve heads;
- Hot combustion gases from the combustion process;
- Combustion occurring in the crevice volume between the piston and cylinder.
The following are methods to reduce the occurrence of pre-ignition [16,68,74,76,80–82]:
- Suitable, dedicated spark plug design;
- Maximum reduction in the residual charge in the ignition system;
- Adjustment of the crankcase ventilation system;
- Use of exhaust valves filled with sodium;
- Restriction of the occurrence of hot spots by means of an appropriate course of the
cooling channels in the engine head;
- Hydrogen-adapted direct-injection systems;
- Optimization of valve timing for increased efficiency;
- Adjustment of valve timing for efficient use of exhaust gas residues.
As is well known, backfire is a particularly difficult obstacle encountered in the
development of hydrogen engines. The reasons for this phenomenon are as follows [69]:
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 10 of 26

- Hot spots in the engine combustion chamber—These hot spots are mainly deposits
and particles [79], spark plugs [81,82], gas residue [82–86], exhaust valves [87–93],
etc. Deposits and particulates are mostly formed by the partial combustion of engine
lubricating oil.
- Residual energy in the ignition circuit—The lower ion concentration in the hydrogen–
air flame compared to the hydrocarbon–air flame means that the ignition energy is
not completely deposited in the flame. Therefore, it may remain in the ignition circuit.
Under favorable conditions created in the cylinder (during expansion or intake stroke
when the pressure is low), a second unwanted ignition may occur [82,87,88].
- Induction in the ignition cable—In the case of multicylinder engines, the controlled
ignition in one cylinder can cause an induced ignition in another cylinder. This phe-
nomenon can occur when individual ignition cables are placed close together [80,92,94].
- Combustion at the piston crown surface continuing until the intake valve opens
and a fresh charge is ignited [9,16–18,83,88]—This is caused by the difference in the
quenching gap for hydrogen mixtures compared to that for typical hydrocarbon
mixtures. This allows the hydrogen flame to propagate into the top land.
- Pre-ignition—Premature ignition occurs during the compression stroke. Then, the
temperature in the combustion chamber rises, causing hot spots. They initiate a
pre-ignition and raise the temperature, which leads to further pre-ignitions in the
next cycle. This development of successive pre-ignitions continues until it occurs
during the suction stroke and causes the flame to reverse. DI is an effective tool for
counteracting pre-ignition and the associated backfire [80,88,90,92,94].
Many works have been conducted to optimize intake design and injection strate-
gies to avoid backfiring. Consequently, the measures that help in avoiding pre-ignition
also reduce the risk of backfiring. Some of the strategies that are used to avoid backfir-
ing [16,66,67,89,93–95] are listed below:
- Injection strategies that allow pure air to flow into the combustion chamber to cool
the potential hot spots before fuel–air mixture aspiration;
- Optimization of the fuel injection strategy in conjunction with variable timing phases
for both the intake and exhaust valves, which allows the port-injected hydrogen
engine to operate with a stoichiometric mixture over the entire speed range.

5. Hydrogen Fuel Induction Techniques

Fuel induction techniques play a major role in the development of hydrogen-powered
ICEs, which is primarily concerned with optimizing fuel consumption, power output,
and exhaust emissions. The structure of hydrogen-fueled engines is almost the same
as for conventional internal combustion engines. However, modifications are required,
particularly to the fuel supply and combustion system. This allows avoiding significant
problems such as abnormal combustion, low power, or high NOx emissions. Studies
have shown that a unit volume of a stoichiometric hydrogen–air mixture provides only
85% of the calorific value compared to a gasoline–air mixture (reviewed in [90]). In
addition, hydrogen-fueled ICEs suffer from the problem of dangerous flameback in the
inlet system. With some proportions of hydrogen mixed with air, this causes the engine
to run irregularly. This is the biggest challenge in using hydrogen as a fuel in internal
combustion engines. Notably, the amount of NOx formed depends on the air/fuel ratio,
which in turn determines the combustion temperature. Therefore, rich, clean combustion
or staged combustion techniques are usually employed to control unwanted emissions.
This requires the use of appropriate fuel injection systems [90–94]. As a result, hydrogen
fuel induction techniques play a critical role in the development of the hydrogen engines.
Various fuel induction techniques are reviewed below to assess the progress that has
already been achieved in this area [36,92,95–97].
Use of a carburetor is the simplest and oldest technique for supplying fuel, such as
petrol, to an engine. An important advantage of such a system is that when hydrogen is
used as a fuel, its pressure does not need to be as high as with other methods. With this
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 11 of 26

fuel system, it is easy to convert a standard petrol engine to a hydrogen or petrol–hydrogen

engine. The disadvantage of central hydrogen injection in an internal combustion engine
is that the volume occupied by the fuel is approx. 1.7% of the mixture and, consequently,
the use of carbureted hydrogen gas engine fueling results in an approx. 15% loss of power.
The higher the amount of hydrogen–air mixture in the manifold, the greater the likelihood
of premature ignition. Therefore, if ignition occurs in an engine with a pre-created mixture
when the intake valve is opened, the flame may spread and pass through the valve. In this
case, the fuel–air mixture in the intake manifold may ignite or the flame may backfire. With
this type of induction, there is always the possibility of a significant amount of hydrogen–
air mixture in the intake manifold, so extreme care must be taken to prevent ignition. If a
backfire occurs, serious engine damage may result.
With PFI, the hydrogen fuel is injected into the port by mechanically or electrically
controlled injectors after the start of the inlet stroke. For precise control of the injection
timing and injection duration at high engine speeds, electronic injectors are preferred.
Therefore, at the beginning of each intake stroke, hydrogen fuel is injected into the manifold
via electronic injectors. Injectors adapted to injecting hydrogen allow precise control of
the timing and duration of its injection. At the same time, air is supplied separately at the
intake stroke to dilute the hot residual gases. This reduces the temperature in the engine
combustion chamber [36,64,85,96–98]. Furthermore, when there is less gas (hydrogen or
air) in the intake manifold, premature ignition is less likely to occur. However, if it does
occur, it is less violent. The intake system pressure with port injection is usually higher than
with carburetor or central injection systems. However, it is lower than for direct injection
systems. A constant volume injection (CVI) system uses mechanical cam-controlled devices
to determine the timing of hydrogen injection into each cylinder. The electronic fuel
injection (EFI) system dispenses hydrogen to each cylinder via individual electronic fuel
injectors (solenoid valves). These injectors are connected to a common fuel rail. The CVI
system uses a constant injection frequency and variable fuel rail pressure; the EFI system
uses a variable injection frequency and constant fuel rail pressure instead [36,95,97].
In direct injection (DI), hydrogen is directly injected into the combustion chamber at
the end of the compression stroke. Because hydrogen disperses quickly, mixing it with
air causes the flame to immediately spread. Diesel fuel or a spark plug is used as the
ignition source. With manifold injection, there may be a drop in power may drop, which
can be prevented using direct injection. In the idle speed range, the engine efficiency
may be slightly reduced. However, compared to other inductive methods, this method
is the most efficient. Using this method, a 20% increase in power output can be achieved
compared to a petrol engine due to the higher stoichiometric heat of combustion per
standard kilogram of air for hydrogen (approximately 3.37 MJ for hydrogen compared
with 2.83 MJ for gasoline). Additionally, 42% more power is obtained compared to the
carburetion system using hydrogen [33,36,41,98,99]. However, some challenges, related to
the properties of hydrogen, are associated with the use of hydrogen in a DI engine. The
main challenges are the high self-ignition temperature of hydrogen, the long autoignition
delay, and the fast rate of pressure increase. The use of direct injection solves the problem
of premature ignition in the intake manifold but does not guarantee control against the
possible occurrence of pre-ignition in the engine combustion chamber. The created fuel–air
mixture will not be fully homogeneous due to the reduced time for the mixing of the
hydrogen with the air. Test results showed that this could lead to higher NOx emissions
compared to nondirect injection systems [62,91,93,94,99].
The primary tasks of the fuel injection system are fuel metering and fuel delivery.
Gaseous fuels are compressed outside the fuel injection system; therefore, only the fuel
metering function is used [62,90,98]. The quantity of hydrogen injected into the engine
combustion chamber is precisely measured and actively controlled by varying the duration
of injection. The basic functional requirements to be met by the hydrogen injector are
as follows:
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 12 of 26

- Short time of full opening of the injector—This is the time required to move the injector
needle from one extreme position to the other. It is recommended that the injection
time be limited and low flow rates used when opening and closing the valve. This
maximizes the average mass flow rate during injection. In this way, internal mixture
formation can also be improved.
- Rapid response of the injector to the impulse activating its operation—This is the
time from the impulse controlling the initial needle movement to when there is actual
initial needle movement. The upper limit of the response time is usually close to the
time of one engine cycle. An overly delayed time between needle response and the
control impulse prevents the injector operation from adapting to high engine speeds.
- Duration of fuel injection—To achieve the required fuel–air mixing ratio, this time
should be carefully controlled. Therefore, the use of an electronic control system with
an efficient controller should be considered to optimize engine performance [95,97].
- Minimum fuel leakage—Such leakage would result in the possibility of premature
ignition during compression in the induction phase. In addition, leakage of the valve
during the exhaust stroke would lead to hydrogen loss, which would also result in
decreased volumetric efficiency.
- Durability of the injector—The injector needle moves at a frequency of 50 Hz. The
high dynamics of its movement cause a high impact load on the surfaces restricting
this movement. For this reason, the injector valve should be resistant to damage. In ad-
dition, it should be characterized by optimum flow performance and tightness [96,97].
To meet the above requirements, direct injection hydrogen systems can use one of two
types of injection—low-pressure direct injection (LPDI) and high-pressure direct injection
(HPDI). LDPI is based on fuel injection when the intake valve is closed and under low
cylinder pressure, whereas HPDI is based on fuel injection at the end of the compression
stroke [64,99–103].
Finding the perfect compromise among power density, efficiency, and cost plays a
crucial role in determining the final design of an injection system. The comparison of
different injection concepts for a hydrogen engine considering current applications is
mainly concerned with port fuel injection and direct injection. Direct injection allows
a higher power density and a reduced risk of erratic combustion events [98–103]. Port
fuel injection requires a higher charge–air pressure compared to direct injection if an
identical fuel–air ratio (lambda) is the target parameter (owing to the volume of the injected
hydrogen). Given the same charge–air pressure, a higher efficiency is obtained with
direct injection along with a higher torque available at the operating points close to full
load. One advantage of DI over PFI, particularly in lean-burn operation, is the greater
potential in terms of power density. The widespread port fuel injection method features
a uniform mixture of air and fuel and is technically simpler to implement than direct
injection because the position of the injector is outside the cylinder, usually just before
the intake valves [6,15,99–103]. Therefore, this method is referred to as external mixture
formation. Because of the simple system and low costs, many studies have focused on PFI
to date [101]. In the case of direct injection, the injector is mounted in the cylinder head in
such a position that the fuel is transported directly to the combustion chamber. The injector
nozzle can be positioned either centrally or laterally. During internal mixture formation,
mixture homogenization is more difficult, but the volumetric efficiency is higher because
the incoming air is not displaced by hydrogen in the intake duct [6,15,99–107]. In the
case of direct injection, we have to distinguish between low- and high-pressure injection.
For high-pressure injection (HP-DI), significantly more effort is required to supply the
necessary pressure, which manifests in the effective efficiency, higher costs, and greater
complexity of the system. Table 3 compares the most important features and parameters of
the PFI and DI systems [98]. Table 4 summarizes some of the advantages of direct injection
compared to fuel injection into the injection port [99,101–107].
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 13 of 26

Table 3. Comparison of key features and parameters of PFI and DI fuel systems [98].

Direct Injection
Features and
Intake Manifold Low Pressure High Pressure
Parameters
DI DI
H2 injection PFI single point PFI open valve Suction & begin Near TDC
of compression
stroke
Fuel Injec- Moderate Best cost/bebefit Costly H2
tionEquipment Trade-off Injection system
costs
Comparable to Diesel resp. 0 to
Power density Ca. −30% comp. To Diesel
−20%
Efficiency Slightly below Diesel Close to Diesel
Further features High risk of Risk of backfire H2 LP—system H2 compression
backfire as FCEV, allows pump require
high milage

Table 4. Advantages of direct injection vs. port fuel injection [99].

Basic Advantages Related to the Injection Process

Power density improvement
Air is not displaced by H2 during intake stroke
Elimination of backfire
H2 injection after intake valve closing
Recovery of a portion of tank energy
Ideally inject at TDC
Reduced pre-ignition tendency
Late injection results in less compression
heating, incylinder residance time and
exposure to hot spots
Reduced thermal losses with charge
stratification
Minimal wall contact with fuel
Low Nox, multi-injection strategies
Pressure rise rate control with multi-injection
Improved thermal efficiency
Increased compression ratio potential

Synergy of Injection and Ignition Strategies

Internal combustion engines can be divided into two groups according to their fuel
injection strategy as port fuel injection and direct injection engines. These two groups can
be further categorized considering the ignition strategy of the engine. For port fuel-injected
engines, homogeneous charge compression ignition, spark ignition (SI), and ignition with
pilot diesel are the most common. Direct-injected hydrogen can be ignited with a glow
plug or with a spark ignition or a pilot diesel [27,104,106,108].
When developing injection and ignition strategies, the correlations among the engine
load (which is related to the fuel/air ratio for unthrottled operation), injection timing, and
nitrogen oxide emissions are important [104–109]. At low engine loads and, therefore, low
air/fuel ratios, early direct injection (resulting in a lean homogeneous mixture) produces
low NOx emissions. Beyond a certain load or air/fuel ratio (~0.5), the NOx emissions
increase rapidly, peaking around ~0.8 and decreasing slightly as they approach a stoichio-
metric mixture. This general trend applies to both hydrogen port injection and early direct
hydrogen injection due to the resulting fairly homogeneous mixture at the start of the
combustion. Late direct injection, just before ignition timing, generally results in opposite
trends in terms of NOx emissions. Stratification leads to increased NOx emissions at low
engine loads and a significant reduction at high engine loads compared to early injec-
tion [27,91,102,106]. Notably, the low flame quenching distance of hydrogen also results
in increased lubricant evaporation and, as a result, increased particle formation in DI hy-
drogen ICEs [16,35,43,44,102]. Figure 2 shows the six basic injection and ignition strategies
under both low- and high-load conditions. These are referred to the engine bottom dead
center (BDC), intake valve closure (IVC), and combustion position (TDC) [99,104].
 drogen during the actual combustion process. Depending on the spark timing relative to the
start of the second injection, we can further differentiate whether or not the mixture is al-
ready ignited at the start of the second injection [104]. Stratification of the air–hydrogen mix-
ture helps minimize heat losses. By using very late direct injection of fuel in the compression
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 stroke, the combustion rate can be significantly increased by stratification. At the same 14time,
of 26
fuel wetting of the combustion chamber walls and heat loss are significantly minimized. The
nozzle design is a key factor in optimizing this stratification [104,110,118].

Figure 2. Comparison of various injection and ignition strategies [99,104].

Figure 2 Comparison of various injection and ignition strategies [99, 104].
If port fuel injection (PFI) is used, the homogeneous mixture at the inlet port may
be subject to backfire. Research has shown that timing the port injection so that it occurs
only during part of the suction stroke reduces the occurrence of backfire. However, it
6.still
Combustion Strategies
displaces air (30% at for Increased Efficiency
stoichiometry), which worsens volumetric efficiency and power
density potential.
A major One of
advantage of the advantages
hydrogen is theofability
directtoinjection
combineisthe
thelargely
improved performance.
premixed com-
In addition,
bustion it also
of an SI enables
engine a reduction
with the in NOx emissions
largely non-premixed compared
combustion of a to multiple
diesel injec-
engine to
control the combustion process [111–113,119,121], whereas typically, a partial charge ofto
tion and PFI injection. However, DI may increase particulate emissions compared
PFI [20,39,64,110–120]. In particular, the use of multiple injection can reduce NOx emis-
sions by almost an order of magnitude with only a small loss in the efficiency compared to
a single injection.
In general, the basic idea of multiple injection is to create a lean, homogeneous mixture.
This can be burned without NOx emissions with the controlled addition of additional
hydrogen during the actual combustion process. Depending on the spark timing relative to
the start of the second injection, we can further differentiate whether or not the mixture is
already ignited at the start of the second injection [104]. Stratification of the air–hydrogen
mixture helps minimize heat losses. By using very late direct injection of fuel in the
compression stroke, the combustion rate can be significantly increased by stratification. At
the same time, fuel wetting of the combustion chamber walls and heat loss are significantly
minimized. The nozzle design is a key factor in optimizing this stratification [104,110,118].

6. Combustion Strategies for Increased Efficiency

A major advantage of hydrogen is the ability to combine the largely premixed com-
bustion of an SI engine with the largely non-premixed combustion of a diesel engine to
control the combustion process [111–113,119,121], whereas typically, a partial charge of
hydrogen is injected early and ignited by the spark plug as a homogeneous premix, the
remaining portion of the charge necessary to reach the desired load is injected directly
into the flame for the subsequent, primarily diffusion-type combustion. The initial partial
charge ideally yields overall air conditions above the NOx generation threshold at approx.
λ = 2.2. At such low loads, slight knocking is to be expected. In the diffusion combustion
phase, knocking is basically excluded even at high loads [114–120,122–125].
The hydrogen combustion concepts can be generally divided into various groups of
spark ignition concepts with homogeneous premix and compression ignition concepts.
Spark-ignited hydrogen engines, using a premixed homogeneous charge, enable
100% CO2 reduction (excluding minor emissions from burnt lubricating engine oil or
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 15 of 26

SCR reagent). The achievable power density is heavily dependent on the excess air ratio
at full load and the corresponding allowable engine-out raw NOx emissions [121]. The
greatest engine performance challenges for spark ignition hydrogen concepts are power
density, fuel efficiency, and transient performance. For low-pressure hydrogen combustion
concepts, moderate hydrogen injection pressure is required and there is no need for an
additional compression system. Hydrogen can be directly supplied from the pressure
tanks (350–700 bar). High-pressure concepts require an injection pressure of 250–300 bar;
therefore, an additional compression system is required for compressed hydrogen storage
such that the maximum amount of hydrogen from the tank can be used. When using liquid
hydrogen, the high pressure required in the feed system can be obtained with lower energy
expenditure [121].
Several challenges need to be solved when designing a hydrogen-fueled DI combus-
tion system [122,124,125]:
- The mass flow rate of injected gases can be severely limited by the maximum possible
injector size for small bore engines and at relatively low feeding injection pressures.
The injection timing and duration are directly related to each other, thus rendering
late injections more difficult.
- Hydrogen spray typically evolves within highly underexpanded supersonic condi-
tions, with the formation of one or more Mach disks immediately downstream of
the injector outlet, and typical Coanda effects can occur depending on the wall ge-
ometries. This creates significant difficulties for achieving homogenization in mixing
control and even more so for stratification. Wall-guided mixing strategies are typically
more effective than air- or spray-guided ones, so an appropriate design is required to
adequately address flow and combustion.
- The much higher diffusivity of hydrogen compared to gasoline is advantageous for
mixture homogenization, but unfavorable for controlling the stratification and the
spread toward the cylinder liner and piston crevices.
To increase the efficiency of homogeneous premixed hydrogen, it is important to
consider the potential of further developing inhomogeneous combustion processes (strati-
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 27
fied/diffusive combustion). Figure 3 is a comparison of different hydrogen combustion
processes [120].

Figure 3. Comparison of different hydrogen combustion processes [120].

Figure 3. Comparison of different hydrogen combustion processes [120].
In general, high-pressure injection (200–300 bar) can be used to inject hydrogen during
In general, high-pressure injection (200–300 bar) can be used to inject hydrogen dur-
combustion, whereas diffusive combustion can be used to avoid all the problems of pre-
ing combustion, whereas diffusive combustion can be used to avoid all the problems of
inflammation and knocking, providing considerable potential for increasing efficiency and
pre-inflammation and knocking, providing considerable potential for increasing effi-
ciency and power density. The premixed low-pressure DI combustion process represents
the most balanced compromise in the attempt to resolve the target conflict among effi-
ciency, power density, raw emissions, time to market, and costs [123–128].
In summary, there are many possible combustion process strategies that are related to
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 16 of 26

power density. The premixed low-pressure DI combustion process represents the most
balanced compromise in the attempt to resolve the target conflict among efficiency, power
density, raw emissions, time to market, and costs [123–128].
In summary, there are many possible combustion process strategies that are related to
the selection and optimization of specific parameters, such as the power demand, while
controlling NOx emissions. These strategies are briefly described in [16,122–125,128]
and are presented in order of increasing brake thermal efficiency for use at the lowest
engine loads:
- The operation of the engine on a stoichiometric mixture, with throttling (and/or EGR)
and exhaust after-treatment;
- Maintaining a fixed lean equivalence ratio (NOx threshold deviation) with throttling
without an exhaust aftertreatment system;
- Using an ultra-lean equivalence ratio, with throttling and without an exhaust af-
tertreatment system.
For small loads, in order of increasing brake thermal efficiency [16,122–125], these
strategies include:
- The operation of the engine on a stoichiometric mixture, with throttling (and/or EGR)
and exhaust aftertreatment;
- Maintaining a fixed lean equivalence ratio (NOx threshold deviation) with throttling
and without an exhaust aftertreatment system;
- Engine operation at variable equivalence ratio, with the throttle wide open, at medium
loads, without exhaust aftertreatment;
- The operation of the engine on a stoichiometric mixture, with throttling (and/or EGR)
and exhaust aftertreatment;
- Maintaining a fixed lean equivalence ratio (NOx threshold deviation) with super-
charging and without aftertreatment;
- Engine operation with a variable equivalence ratio, which is operation between
stoichiometric conditions and the NOx threshold at wide open throttle, with lean
NOx aftertreatment.
At the highest loads [16,122–125], the strategies include:
- The operation of the DI engine at stoichiometric mixture with aftertreatment;
- The operation of the PFI engine at stoichiometric mixture with supercharging and
aftertreatment;
- The operation of the PFI engine at stoichiometric mixture with cryogenic fuel injection
and aftertreatment;
- Maintaining a fixed lean equivalence ratio (NOx threshold deviation) with (high)
supercharging and without aftertreatment.

7. Engine Conversion to Hydrogen Fueling

In order to adapt a conventional internal combustion engine to run on hydrogen,
hardware changes are needed in the layout of the combustion and turbocharging systems
as well as in the fuel injection and ignition systems. The control software structure and
the exhaust aftertreatment system must also be changed. The extent of the changes that
include modifying some of the components and adding or removing components from
the engine depends on whether the SI, CI, or CNG engine was already adapted to run on
hydrogen. The most significant changes are listed below [99,121,122,128–130]:
- Combustion systems (cylinder head–spark plug, piston and piston rings, compression
ratio, valve, valve seats and valve guides materials, control system–knock and ignition,
ECU, crankcase ventilation system, and engine lubricating oil);
- Turbocharging system (turbocharger);
- Fuel injection system (hydrogen injectors and relevant rails and pipes, hydrogen fuel
supply according to the pressure level of PFI or DI, and gas pressure regulator);
- Ignition system (spark plugs and ignition coils);
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 17 of 26

- Exhaust gas aftertreatment system.

For hydrogen-fueled engines, irregular combustion events that cannot be avoided in
certain areas of engine operation cause temperature and pressure spikes at critical locations
such as valves or valve seats, which can lead to reduced fatigue life, resulting in high
replacement costs. Crank system components are also subject to irregular combustion
processes. This is one reason for the necessary modifications to hydrogen-powered engines.
Another reason is the well-known effect of hydrogen on the mechanical properties of iron
and steel. Regarding the embrittling effect of hydrogen, it is well known that the dominant
effects are a decrease in ductility and true stress at fracture. Moreover, crankcase ventilation
is much more important for hydrogen than for gasoline engines. Because hydrogen
has a lower ignition energy limit than gasoline, when it enters the crankcase, it has a
higher chance of igniting. Therefore, hydrogen accumulation should be prevented by a
suitable crankcase ventilation system. When hydrogen is ignited in the crankcase, pressure
suddenly increases. To relieve this pressure, a pressure relief valve must be installed on the
valve cover. Ignition in the crankcase can also lead to an engine fire. As for the piston ring
and crevice volumes, the piston top land clearance must be reduced (to prevent hydrogen
flames from propagating into the top land). The volume of the crevice and/or piston ring
must be changed to reduce the re-flow of unburned mixture from the second land to the
top land (preventing fueling of a top land flame during exhaust and intake) [69,129–133].
The most effective method to control pre-ignition and knocking combustion is to redesign
the combustion chamber and the engine cooling system. Additional measures to reduce
the likelihood of premature ignition include using two small exhaust valves instead of
one large valve and to develop an effective scavenging system, i.e., a means of displacing
exhaust gases from the combustion chamber by fresh air. Hot spots in the combustion
chamber that could initiate surface ignition should be avoided or minimized. In this case,
the use of cooled exhaust valves and multivalve engine heads is recommended. They help
to reduce the temperature of the exhaust valves [84,86,129,132]. In addition, the use of an
appropriate lubricating oil and additional optimized engine coolant passages around the
valves and other areas of high thermal load are recommended [129]. In order to reduce
the residual gas temperature, a delay in fuel introduction is required to create air cooling
conditions and adequate exhaust venting (e.g., using variable valve timing [84,132]
Due to the very low lubricity of hydrogen, suitable valve seat materials have to be
chosen, and the design of the injectors should allow for that [85,133]. Low-temperature
spark plugs should be applied so that the spark plug electrode temperatures do not exceed
the autoignition limit and cause the flame to backfire. Spark plugs with a cold characteristic
can be used as they only barely grow deposits. Spark plugs with platinum electrodes should
not be used because they can be a catalyst for hydrogen oxidation [81,83,85,87,133,134].

8. Operational Damage and Future Challenges

The specific properties of hydrogen as a fuel, that were previously indicated and de-
scribed, cause various types of damage, especially to the fuel injection system components
of a hydrogen-fueled engine. In the case of direct hydrogen injection of, a durable and
precise injection capability is required. As shown in Figure 4, this capability is affected
by [109,131–135]:
- Degradation of the piezoelectric ceramics used to actuate the fuel injectors (hydrogen
poisoning and damage due to high-pressure hydrogen uptake);
- Sliding friction and wear of the injector materials (between the needle guide part and
the nozzle body);
- Degradation due to hydrogen diffusion into the dielectric coating or piezoelectric actuator;
- Possible epoxy (dielectric) breakdown due to elevated temperatures, hydrogen pres-
sure, or during depressurization.
 poisoning and damage due to high-pressure hydrogen uptake);
- Sliding friction and wear of the injector materials (between the needle guide part and
the nozzle body);
- Degradation due to hydrogen diffusion into the dielectric coating or piezoelectric ac-
tuator;
Energies 2021, 14, 6504
- Possible epoxy (dielectric) breakdown due to elevated temperatures, hydrogen 18 of 26
pres-
sure, or during depressurization.

Figure 4. Areas and types of fuel injector damage [109,136].

Figure 4. Areas and types of fuel injector damage [109,136].
Impact wear occurs at the contacting surfaces conical needle tip/seat in the fuel nozzle.
TheseImpact wear occurs
components at thetocontacting
are subject impact wear surfaces conical
as a result needle
of the tip/seat
impacts ininjector
of the the fuelneedle
noz-
zle. These components are subject to impact wear as a result of the impacts
on the fuel outlet socket, during its opening and closing. Under real-world conditions, the of the injector
needle on the interaction
needle/seat fuel outlet socket,
is a case during its opening
of sliding impact andthatclosing. Underthe
occurs when real-world condi-
needle contacts
tions, the needle/seat
the nozzle. This leadsinteraction
to a certainisamount
a case of of sliding
energy impact that occurs
being dissipated at when the needle
the contact points
contacts theneedle
of injector nozzle.andThisnozzle
leads to a certain
seat. amount
The contact of energy
surface beingthe
between dissipated
needle face at the
andcon-
the
tact points
nozzle seatofundergoes
injector needle andplastic
a slight nozzledeformation
seat. The contact
during surface between
break-in. Thisthe needle
occurs face
until an
and the nozzle seat undergoes a slight plastic deformation during break-in.
equilibrium state is reached. The cylindrical surface of the hole in the nozzle enables precise This occurs
until an equilibrium
guidance stateneedle.
of the injector is reached. The cylindrical
The friction surfacemethod,
characteristics, of the hole
andin the rate
wear nozzle ena-
of metal
bles precise guidance
components dependof onthe injector
several needle.The
factors. Themost
friction characteristics,
important method,
factors are and wear
the mechanical
rate
andofthermochemical
metal components dependofon
treatment theseveral
material,factors. The most
working importantlubrication,
environment, factors are theand
mechanical
the growthand thermochemical
of surface oxide layers. treatment of the material,
In the chemically working
reducing environment,
environment lubri-
of hydrogen,
cation, and the growth
the progressive, of surfaceloss
wear-induced oxideof layers.
surfaceInoxides
the chemically
will resultreducing
in contactenvironment
with the bare of
hydrogen, the results
surface. This progressive, wear-induced
in increases loss ofand
in the friction surface
wearoxides will result
[109]. Another in contact
type of damage withis
the
thebare surface.ofThis
appearance results in
air bubbles increasesthe
preceding indelamination
the friction and wear
of the [109].
epoxy Another
coating type the
covering of
piezoelectric stack. Previous studies have shown that the epoxy material is susceptible to
hydrogen diffusion. This results in decompression damage upon pressure relief. A further
possible consequence of epoxy damage is the formation of voids and the micro-arcing
and carbon tracks from the damaged epoxy. This can lead to an electrical short between
adjacent electrodes in the stack, ultimately causing an internal short circuit [109,136,137].
Furthermore, piezoelectric elements are exposed to can come into contact with hydrogen
due to hydrogen permeation into the material lattice. This results in the deterioration of
their electrical properties caused by changes in the internal dipole moments in the crystal
due to the formation of –OH bonds. Damage to piezoelectric elements can also be caused
by corona discharges on their surface (apparent short circuits [109,120]).
Due to the low lubricating properties of hydrogen, some hydrogen often leaks into
the engine combustion chamber due to wear of the injector components. These leaks
can cause abnormal combustion processes, such as knocking and flameback, leading to
engine stalling. Additionally, the fuel pump powered by liquid hydrogen can fail due
to hydrogen gas generation in the compression chamber formed by the cylinder and the
pump piston. The generation of hydrogen gas prevents the pump from operating properly,
leading to pumping failure. The saturated liquid hydrogen in the fuel tank where the
pump is located easily changes to gaseous hydrogen. Even then, a small amount of heat is
released due to friction. Friction is also easily created by the moving piston. The higher the
delivery pressure, the greater the friction; hence, it is crucial to minimize friction to near
zero [99,109].
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 19 of 26

Future work will address the challenges and problems in the design and optimiza-
tion of hydrogen-fueled engine systems, subsystems, and components of the H2 ICE that
differ from the baseline powertrains. With respect to the optimization of combustion
and gas exchange as well as the development of emission concepts, depending on the
operational strategy pursued by the H2 ICE concept (lean-only operation or lean and stoi-
chiometric operation) as well as depending on the powertrain configuration and driving
performance requirements, the main research directions and objectives pursued are defined
as follows [99,120,123,136–138]:
- Increasing the combustion potential of the lean mixture during a homogeneous com-
bustion process of premixed hydrogen, achievable by further optimizing the charging
unit in the heavy load range and adjusting the ignition system for leaner mixtures;
- Increasing the compression ratio with dedicated combustion chamber design;
- Optimizing the trade-off between charge motion and cylinder filling;
- Adjusting the characteristics of the intake port considering the effect of direct fuel injec-
tion on the movement of the cargo and the turbulent kinetic energy inside the cylinder,
with the simultaneous optimization of the preparation of the combustible mixture;
- Optimizing H2 PFI and H2DI systems;
- Optimizing the ignition system;
- Optimizing the charging system,
- Applying active temperature management of components with phase-change cooling
to reduce the knocking tendency as much as possible and to increase the enthalpy
of the exhaust gases, in particular, by actively controlling the temperature of the
exhaust manifold;
- Heavy cooling of the external EGR to lower the intake manifold and high-pressure
process temperatures, thus reducing wall heat loss and raw NOx emissions;
- Developing an emission concept for lean-only as well as lean and stoichiometric
operation.
Other challenges arise from the destructive effects of hydrogen on metal parts of the
engine and related systems. It is well known that all metals, when in contact with hydrogen,
may be susceptible to hydrogen embrittlement. This occurs when atomic hydrogen diffuses
into the material, which consequently leads to embrittlement. The phenomenon usually
becomes significant when it leads to cracking. Due to the clean burning of hydrogen,
almost no oil coke lubrication occurs, which results in a lack of lubrication at tribo-pairs
such as valves and valve seats [98,99].
In summary, at this stage of development, hydrogen-powered internal combustion
engines still need to overcome numerous challenges [135–140]. For example, port fuel
injection engines exhibit many limitations. These include including pre-ignition, knock
combustion, flameback, low volumetric efficiency, and problems with loss of compression.
This limits the allowable load on the engine and its efficiency. A possible solution to these
limitations is the use of direct hydrogen injection. Although beneficial, the low compression
ratio of typical spark ignition engines limits their thermodynamic efficiency. In compression
ignition engines, ignition of the air–fuel mixture may be caused by pilot ignition. This
causes the formation of numerous ignition kernels, which promotes the rapid combustion
of the gaseous fuel. This combustion mode is known as dual-fuel hydrogen–diesel direct
injection and has the potential to reduce the power and compression ratio limitations
reported for hydrogen applications in spark ignition engines. However, further research is
needed to better understand the mechanisms governing engine performance and pollutant
formation in such a dual-fuel combustion mode [130–140].

9. Summary
Hydrogen, as a fuel for internal combustion engines, can significantly contribute
to alternative, environmentally friendly road mobility solutions, including meeting the
EU’s 2050 CO2 neutrality targets. Hydrogen can be used in both spark ignition as well
as compression ignition engines without any major modifications to the existing systems.
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 20 of 26

Hydrogen-powered internal combustion engines with near-zero emissions and higher

efficiency than diesel engines are an attractive automotive solution. This solution also takes
significant advantage of the mature ICE design. The necessary modifications related to the
use of hydrogen as a fuel concern the following engine subsystems and components:
- Injection system (timed injection is a prerequisite; high flow rate injectors designed
for gas are needed both for PFI and DI);
- Intake manifold (For H2PFI, H2 injectors installation and gas exchange optimization
are required);
- Ignition system (to prevent the occurrence of uncontrolled ignitions due to residual
ignition energy, the ignition system must be properly grounded);
- Spark plugs (cold-rated spark plugs should be used);
- Cylinder head (cooling optimization to avoid hot spots in the combustion chamber;
cooled exhaust valves, new materials for cylinder head, valves, seats, and guides due
to risk caused by hydrogen embrittlement and lack of lubrication for clean burning
of H2 );
- Piston and piston rings (for reduced oil consumption, to minimize blow-by and H2
leak to the sump, and for crevice volumes reduction);
- Crank train (risk of engine lubricating oil ageing and washing effects with wear impact
and corrosion related issues);
- Combustion chamber (due to the high flame speeds of hydrogen, a low turbulence
combustion chamber should be used; this solution is beneficial for engine efficiency);
- Compression ratio (optimal compression ratio adapted for hydrogen combustion);
- Turbocharging (H2 -specialized turbocharging system for lower boost pressure de-
mand);
- Aftertreatment system (optimized for H2 combustion and NOx emissions);
- Crankcase ventilation system (to limit hydrogen leakage into the crankcase and to
avoid critical, ignitable mixtures);
- Lubrication (engine lubricating oil should be adapted to the increased concentration
of water in the crankcase) and an ashless oil to avoid deposit formation and formation
hot spots, and an improved blow-by separator.
Hydrogen-fueled internal combustion engines have considerable potential for in-
creasing efficiency: the wide flammability limits and high flame velocity of hydrogen–air
mixtures allow various load control strategies, and the high autoignition temperature al-
lows increased compression ratios. Current research works on advanced hydrogen-fueled
ICEs have focused on achieving brake thermal efficiency higher than 45% while keeping
the levels of NOx emissions low. To accomplish this goal, modern hydrogen-fueled ICEs
use direct injection (DI) fueling strategies. This results in increased volumetric efficiency
and mitigates issues of knock, pre-ignition, and backfire, which are all negative effects
associated with hydrogen port fuel injection. However, DI requires the precise control of
air/fuel mixing during the compression stroke such that optimal fuel stratification can be
obtained at ignition.
The operation and widespread adoption of internal combustion engines running on
hydrogen fuel pose several challenges, the most important of which are:
- Cylinder head adaptation for injectors;
- Turbo charger for lower pressure demand;
- Combustion irregularities;
- Early pre-ignition;
- Late pre-ignition;
- Knocking;
- Optimization of the mixture formation in the cylinder;
- Oil input into the combustion chamber;
- Piston rings and crevice volumes;
- Optimal compression ratio;
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 21 of 26

- Optimizing injection strategies to improve engine efficiency, emissions, and power

density;
- Load control strategies;
- Degradation and damage of piezoelectric injectors;
- Maximum reduction in adhesive wear and leakage between the needle and seat
with age;
- Counteracting hydrogen diffusion into a dielectric shell or piezoelectric actuator;
- Delamination of dielectric epoxy coating;
- Piezoelectric surface blistering;
- Actuator cracking due to unwanted tensile loads;
- Sliding friction and wear of moving parts of injectors;
- Durability of valves and spark plugs;
- Hydrogen slip into crankcase;
- High oil consumption.
The widespread introduction of hydrogen combustion engines into serial production
has not yet begun, primarily because the hydrogen infrastructure that is required for all
hydrogen-powered vehicles (i.e., fuel cell electric motors as well as hydrogen-fueled inter-
nal combustion engines) is underdeveloped. With the construction of H2 infrastructure
planned and already underway in some markets, whether and how hydrogen-powered
internal combustion engines can complement fuel cells to contribute to CO2 -free propulsion
systems are currently being discussed. Examples of arguments in favor of hydrogen-fueled
internal combustion engines include low investment due to extensive use of existing pro-
duction capacity and vehicle architecture to date as well as long service life. Furthermore,
hydrogen-fueled ICEs can be integrated with electric motors in electrified powertrains (in
hybrid powertrains). In addition to the advantages in terms of efficiency and driving range,
this leads to attractive functional synergies and additional degrees of freedom in terms of
design and operating strategies to be considered.

Funding: This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Hosseini, S.E.; Butler, B. An overview of development and challenges in hydrogen-powered vehicles. Int. J. Green Energy 2020, 17,
13–37. [CrossRef]
2. Elnashaie, S.; Chen, Z.; Prasad, P. Efficient Production and Economics of Clean-Fuel Hydrogen. Int. J. Green Energy 2007, 4,
249–282. [CrossRef]
3. Hosseini, S.E.; Wahid, M.A.; Ganjehkaviri, A. An overview of renewable hydrogen production from thermochemcial process of
oil palm solid waste in Malaysia. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015, 94, 415–429. [CrossRef]
4. Balat, M. Potential importance of hydrogen as a future solution to environmental and transportation problems. Int. J. Hydrogen
Energy 2008, 33, 4013–4029. [CrossRef]
5. Dougherty, W.; Kartha, S.; Rajan, C.; Lazarus, M.; Bailie, A.; Runkle, B.; Fencl, A. Greenhouse gas reduction benefits and costs of a
large-scale transition to hydrogen in the USA. Energy Policy 2008, 37, 56–67. [CrossRef]
6. Yip, H.L.; Srna, A.; Chun Yin Yuen, A.; Kook, S.; Taylor, R.A.; Heng Yeoh, G.; Medwell, P.R.; Chan, Q.N. A review of hydrogen
direct injection for internal combustion engines: Towards carbon-free combustion. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4842. [CrossRef]
7. Hänggi, S.; Elbert, P.; Bütler, T.; Cabalzar, U.; Teske, S.; Bach, C.; Onder, C. A review of synthetic fuels for passenger vehicles.
Energy Rep. 2019, 5, 555–569. [CrossRef]
8. Helmolt, R.V.; Eberle, U. Fuel cell vehicles: Status. J. Power Sources 2007, 165, 833–843. [CrossRef]
9. Verhelst, S. Recent progress in the use of hydrogen as a fuel for internal combustion engines. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2014, 39,
1071–1085. [CrossRef]
10. White, C.M.; Steeper, R.R.; Lutz, A.E. The hydrogen-fueled internal combustion engine: A technical review. Int. J. Hydrogen
Energy 2006, 31, 1292–1305.
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 22 of 26

11. Al-baghdadi, M. An overview of hydrogen as an alternative fuel. Encyclopedia 2020. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/
revision/9798/v1 (accessed on 12 June 2021).
12. Shelef, M.; Kukkonen, C. Prospects of hydrogen-fueled vehicles. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 1994, 20, 139. [CrossRef]
13. Eichlseder, H.; Wallner, T.; Freymann, R.; Ringler, J. The Potential of Hydrogen Internal Combustion Engines in a Future Mobility
Scenario; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2003.
14. Wimmer, A.; Wallner, T.; Ringler, J.; Gerbig, F. H2-Direct Injection—A Highly Promising Combustion Concept; SAE International:
Warrendale, PA, USA, 2005.
15. Verhelst, S.; Sierens, R.; Verstraeten, S. A Critical Review of Experimental Research on Hydrogen-Fueled SI Engines; SAE International:
Warrendale, PA, USA, 2006.
16. Verhelst, S.; Wallner, T. Hydrogen-fueled internal combustion engines. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 2009, 35, 490–527. [CrossRef]
17. Kawamura, A.; Yanai, T.; Sato, Y.; Naganuma, K.; Yamane, K.; Takagi, Y. Summary and Progress of the Hydrogen ICE Truck
Development Project; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2009; SAE paper no. 2009-01-1922.
18. Kawamura, A.; Sato, Y.; Naganuma, K.; Yamane, K.; Takagi, Y. Development Project of a Multi-Cylinder DISI Hydrogen ICE System for
Heavy Duty Vehicles; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2010; SAE paper no. 2010-01-2175.
19. Obermair, H.; Scarcelli, R.; Wallner, T. Eciency Improved Combustion System for Hydrogen Direct Injection Operation; SAE International:
Warrendale, PA, USA, 2010; SAE paper no. 2010-01-2170.
20. Wallner, T.; Matthias, N.S.; Scarcelli, R.; Kwon, J.C. Evaluation of the efficiency and the drive cycle emissions for a hydrogen
direct-injection engine. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part D J. Automob. Eng. 2012, 227, 99–109. [CrossRef]
21. Verhelst, S.; Maesschalck, P.; Rombaut, N.; Sierens, R. Increasing the power output of hydrogen internal combustion engines by
means of supercharging and exhaust gas recirculation. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2009, 34, 4406–4412. [CrossRef]
22. Heindl, R.; Eichlseder, H.; Spuller, C.; Gerbig, F.; Heller, K. New and Innovative Combustion Systems for the H2-ICE: Compression
Ignition and Combined Processes; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2009; SAE paper no. 2009-01-1421.
23. Welch, A.; Mumford, D.; Munshi, S.; Holbery, J.; Boyer, B.; Younkins, M.; Jung, H. Challenges in Developing Hydrogen Direct Injection
Technology for Internal Combustion Engines; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2008; SAE Paper no. 2008-01-2379.
24. Sopena, C.; Dieguez, P.; Sainz, D.; Urroz, J.; Guelbenzu, E.; Gandía, L.M. Conversion of a commercial spark ignition engine to run
on hydrogen: Performance comparison using hydrogen and gasoline. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2010, 35, 1420–1429. [CrossRef]
25. Yamane, K. Hydrogen-Fueled ICE, Successfully Overcoming Challenges through High-Pressure Direct Injection Technologies: 40 Years of
Japanese Hydrogen ICE Research and Development; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2018; No. 2018-01-1145. [CrossRef]
26. Walter, L.; Sommermann, A.; Hyna, D.; Malischewski, T.; Leistner, M.; Hinrichsen, F.; Wöhner, P.; Schmitt, J.; McMackin, M.
The H2 combustion engine—the forerunner of a zero emissions future. In Proceedings of the 42nd International Vienna Motor
Symposium, Vienna, Austria, 29–30 April 2021.
27. Korn, T.; Nobile, R.-F.; Grassinger, D. Zero-emission, maximum performance—the latest generation of hydrogen combustion
engines. In Proceedings of the 42nd International Vienna Motor Symposium, Vienna, Austria, 29–30 April 2021.
28. Pauer, T.; Weller, H.; Schünemann, E.; Eichlseder, H.; Grabner, P.; Schaffer, K. H2 ICE für zukünftige PKWs und leichte
Nutzfahrzeuge. In Proceedings of the 41st Internationales Wiener Motorensymposium, Vienna, Austria, 22–24 April 2020.
29. Boretti, A. Transient positive ignition internal combustion engines have now surpassed the 50% fuel conversion efficiency barrier.
Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2019, 44, 7051–7052. [CrossRef]
30. Das, L.M. Hydrogen engines: A view of the past and a look into the future. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 1990, 15, 425–443. [CrossRef]
31. Glaude, P.A.; Fournet, R.; Bounaceur, R.; Molière, M. Adiabatic flame temperature from biofuels and fossil fuels and derived
effect on NOx emissions. Fuel Process Technol. 2010, 91, 229–235. [CrossRef]
32. Chong, C.T.; Hochgreb, S. Measurements of laminar flame speeds of liquid fuels: Jet-A1, diesel, palm methylesters and blends
using particle-imaging velocimetry (PIV). Proc. Combust. Inst. 2011, 33, 979–986. [CrossRef]
33. Srinivasana, C.B.; Subramanian, R. Hydrogen as a spark ignition engine fuel technical review. Int. J. Mech. Mechatron. Eng.
IJMME-IJENS 2014, 14, 111–117.
34. Dimitriou, P.; Tsujimura, T. A review of hydrogen as a compression ignition engine fuel. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2017, 42,
24470–24486. [CrossRef]
35. Kumar, N. Hydrogen use in internal combustion engine. Int. J. Adv. Cult. Technol. 2015, 2, 87–99.
36. Faizal, M.; Chuah, L.S.; Lee, C.; Hameed, A.; Lee, J.; Shankar, M. Review of hydrogen fuel for internal combustion engines. J.
Mech. Eng. Res. Dev. (JMERD) 2019, 42, 35–46.
37. Molnarne, M.; Schendler, T.; Schroeder, V. Sicherheitstechnische Kenngroessen, Band 2: Explosionsbereiche von Gasgemischen.
In Wirtschaftsverlag NW—Verlag fuer neue Wissenschaft; 2003.
38. Schroeder, V.; Holtappels, K. Explosion characteristics of hydrogen-air and hydrogen-oxygen mixtures at elevated pressures. In
Proceedings of the International Conference on Hydrogen Safety, Pisa, Italy, 8–10 September 2005. Paper No. 120001.
39. Subash, G.P.; Das, L.M. An experimental investigation on the performance and emission characteristics of a hydrogen fueled
spark ignition engine. Int. J. Sci. Technol. Manag. 2011, 8, 197–208.
40. Karim, G.A. Hydrogen as a spark ignition engine fuel. Chem. Ind. 2002, 6, 256–263. [CrossRef]
41. Ono, R.; Nifuku, M.; Fujiwara, S.; Horiguchi, S.; Oda, T. Minimum ignition energy of hydrogen-air mixture: Effects of humidity
and spark duration. J. Electrost. 2007, 65, 87–93. [CrossRef]
42. Gandhi, R.D. Use of hydrogen in internal combustion engine. Int. J. Eng. Manag. Sci. (IJEMS) 2015, 3, 207–216.
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 23 of 26

43. Ciniviz, M.; Kose, H. Hydrogen use in internal combustion engine. Int. J. Automot. Eng. Technol. 2012, 18, 1–15.
44. Hong, S.-W.; Shin, Y.-S.; Song, J.-H.; Chang, S.-H. Performance test of the quenching meshes for hydrogen control. J. Nucl. Sci.
Technol. 2003, 40, 814–819. [CrossRef]
45. Potter, A.E., Jr. Flame Quenching, Progress in Combustion and Fuel Technology; Durcarme, J., Gerstain, M., Lefebvre, A.H., Eds.;
Pergamon Press: New York, NY, USA, 1960; Volume 1, p. 5182.
46. Korn, T. The Most Efficient Way for CO2 Reduction: The New Generation of Hydrogen Internal Combustion Engines. In
Proceedings of the 41th International Vienna Motoren Symposium, Vienna, Austria, 22–24 April 2020.
47. Wahab, A.M. Addition of hydrogen to gasoline-fueled 4 stroke SI engine using 1-dımensıonal analysis. In Faculty of Mechanical
Engineering; University Malaysia Pahang: Pahang, Malaysia, 2009; pp. 1–68.
48. Maher, A.R. Sadiq Al-Baghdadi. Alternative fuels research progress. In International Energy and Environment Foundation; Maher,
A.R., Al-Baghdadi, S., Eds.; 2013; 442p, ISBN 9781484057711.
49. Aleiferis, P.G.; Rosati, M.F. Controlled autoignition of hydrogen in a direct-injection optical engine. Combust. Flame 2012, 159,
2500–2515. [CrossRef]
50. Ingersoll, J.G. Natural Gas Vehicles; Fairmont Press: Lilburn, GA, USA, 1996.
51. Mazloomi, K.; Gomes, C. Hydrogen as an energy carrier: Prospects and challenges. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16,
3024–3033. [CrossRef]
52. Heffel, J.W. NOx emission and performance data for a hydrogen-fueled internal combustion engine at 1500 rpm using exhaust
gas recirculation. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2003, 28, 901–908. [CrossRef]
53. Acar, C.; Dincer, I. The potential role of hydrogen as a sustainable transportation fuel to combat global warming. Int. J. Hydrogen
Energy 2018, 45, 3396–3406. [CrossRef]
54. Bradley, D.M.; Lawes, K.; Liu, S.; Verhelst, S.; Woolley, R. Laminar burning velocities of lean hydrogen–Air mixtures at pressures
up to 1.0 MPa. Combust. Flame 2006, 149, 162–172. [CrossRef]
55. Luo, Q.; Sun, B. Inducing factors and frequency of combustion knock in hydrogen internal combustion engines. Int. J. Hydrogen
Energy 2016, 41, 16296–16305. [CrossRef]
56. Verhelst, S.; Sierens, R. Aspects concerning the optimization of a hydrogen-fueled engine. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2001, 26, 981–985.
[CrossRef]
57. Negurescu, N.; Pana, C.; Cernat, A. Aspects of using hydrogen in SI engine. Univ. " Politeh. " Buchar. Sci. Bull. Ser. D Mech. Eng.
2012, 74, 11–20.
58. Abdelghaffar, W.A. Spark ignition engine fueled by Hydrogen: Comparative analysis. Eur. J. Sci. Res. 2010, 44, 13–28.
59. Suryawanshi, J.G.; Nitnaware, P.T. An investigation on SI engine using Hydrogen and CNG blends. IJRRAS 2011, 7, 295–303.
60. Szwaja, S.; Grab-Rogalinski, K. Hydrogen combustion in a compression ignition diesel engine. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2009, 34,
4413–4421. [CrossRef]
61. Saravanan, N.; Nagarajan, G.; Sanjay, G.; Dhanasekaran, C.; Kalaiselvan, M.K. Combustion analysis on a DI diesel engine with
hydrogen in dual fuel mode. Fuel 2008, 87, 3591–3599. [CrossRef]
62. Gomes Antunes, J.M.; Mikalsen, R.; Roskilly, A.P. An experimental study of a direct injection compression ignition hydrogen
engine. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2009, 34, 6516–6522. [CrossRef]
63. Naber, J.D.; Siebers, D.L. Hydrogen combustion under diesel engine conditions. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 1998, 23, 363–371.
[CrossRef]
64. Saravanan, N.; Nagarajan, G. Performance and emission studies on port injection of hydrogen with varied flow rates with Diesel
as an ignition source. Appl. Energy 2010, 87, 2218–2229. [CrossRef]
65. Korakianitis, T.; Namasivayam, M.A.; Crookes, J.R. Hydrogen dual-fueling of compression ignition engines with emulsified
biodiesel as pilot fuel. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2010, 35, 13329–13344. [CrossRef]
66. Kirchweger, W. Applications of the LIF method for the diagnostics of the combustion process of gas-IC-engines. Exp. Fluids 2007,
43, 329–340. [CrossRef]
67. Lee, S.J.; Yi, H.S.; Kim, E.S. Combustion characteristics of intake port injection type hydrogen-fueled engine. Hydrogen Energy
1995, 20, 317–322. [CrossRef]
68. Liu, X.H. Backfire prediction in a manifold injection hydrogen internal combustion engine. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2008, 33,
3847–3855. [CrossRef]
69. Verhelst, S.; Verstraeten, S.; Sierens, R. A comprehensive overview of hydrogen engine design features. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part
D J. Automob. Eng. 2007, 221, 911–919. [CrossRef]
70. Saravanan, N.; Nagarajan, G.; Dhanasekaran, C.; Kalaiselvan, K. Experimental investigation of hydrogen port fuel injection in DI
diesel engine. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2007, 32, 4071–4080. [CrossRef]
71. Leiker, M.; Cartelliere, W.; Christoph, H.; Pfeifer, U.; Rankl, M. Evaluation of anti-knocking property of gaseous fuels by means of
methane number and its practical application to gas engines. ASME 1972, 94, 55.
72. Li, H.; Karim, G.A. Hydrogen-fueled spark-ignition engines predictive and experimental performance. Trans. ASME J. Eng. Gas
Turbines Power 2006, 128, 230–236. [CrossRef]
73. Kleijn, R.; Van der Voet, E. Resource constraints in a hydrogen economy based on renewable energy sources: An exploration.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2010, 14, 2784–2795. [CrossRef]
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 24 of 26

74. Szwaja, S.; Bhandary, K.; Naber, J. Comparisons of hydrogen and gasoline combustion knock in a spark ignition engine. Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy 2007, 32, 5076–5087. [CrossRef]
75. Verhelst, S.; Sierens, R.; Scarcelli, R. Update on the progress of hydrogen-fueled internal combustion engines. Renew. Hydrogen
Technol. 2013, 381–400. [CrossRef]
76. Li, H.; Karim, G.A. Knock in spark ignition hydrogen engines. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2004, 29, 859–865. [CrossRef]
77. Sadiq Al-Baghdadi Maher, A.R. Effect of compression ratio, equivalence ratio and engine speed on the performance and emission
characteristics of a spark ignition engine using hydrogen as a fuel. Renew. Energy 2004, 29, 2245–2260. [CrossRef]
78. Saxena, R.C. Thermo-chemical routes for hydrogen rich gas from biomass: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2008, 12,
1909–1927. [CrossRef]
79. Bardon, M.F.; Haycock, R.G. The hydrogen research of R. In O. King. In Proceedings of the 14th World Hydrogen Energy
Conference, Montreal, QC, Canada, 9–13 June 2002; p. 22, invited paper.
80. MacCarley, C.A. A study of factors influencing thermally induced backfiring in hydrogen-fueled engines, and methods for
backfire control. In Proceedings of the Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference, Atlanta, GA, USA, 9 August
1981; p. 5.
81. Das, L.M. Near-term introduction of hydrogen engines for automotive and agricultural application. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2002,
27, 479–487. [CrossRef]
82. Lucas, G.G.; Morris, L.E. The backfire problem of the hydrogen engine. In Proceedings of the Symposium Organized by the
University’s Internal Combustion Engine Group, King’s College, London, UK, 1980.
83. Das, L.M. Hydrogen–oxygen reaction mechanism and its implication to hydrogen engine combustion. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy
1996, 21, 703–715. [CrossRef]
84. Berckmüller, M.; Rottengruber, H.; Eder, A.; Brehm, N.; Elsasser, G.; Müller-Alander, G.; Schwarz, C. Potentials of a Charged
SI-Hydrogen Engine; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2003; SAE paper 2003-01-3210.
85. Stockhausen, W.F.; Natkin, R.J.; Kabat, D.M.; Reams, L.; Tang, X.; Hashemi, S.; Szwabowski, S.J.; Zanardelli, V.P. Ford P2000
Hydrogen Engine Design and Vehicle Development Program; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2002; SAE paper 2002-01-0240.
86. Swain, M.R.; Swain, M.N.; Adt, R.R. Consideration in the Design of an Inexpensive Four Hydrogen-Fueled Engine; SAE International:
Warrendale, PA, USA, 1988; SAE paper 881630.
87. Kondo, T.; Iio, S.; Hiruma, M. A Study on the Mechanism of Backfire in External Mixture Formation Hydrogen Engines—About Backfire
Occurred by the Cause of the Spark Plug; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 1997; SAE paper 971704.
88. Lee, J.T.; Kim, Y.Y.; Lee, C.W.; Caton, J.A. An investigation of a cause of backfire and its control due to crevice volumes in
a hydrogen-fueled engine. In Proceedings of the ASME Spring Technical Conference, San Antonio, TX, USA, 2000. paper
2000-ICE-284 (American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York).
89. Verhelst, S.; Demuynck, J.; Sierens, R.; Huyskens, P. Impact of variable valve timing on power, emissions and backfire of a bi-fuel
hydrogen/gasoline engine Inter. J. Hydr. Ener 2010, 35, 4399–4408. [CrossRef]
90. Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy. Hydrogen Use in Internal Combustion Engines. 2020. Available online:
http://www.eere.energy.gov (accessed on 27 September 2021).
91. Shudo, T.; Omori, K.; Hiyama, O. NOx reduction and NO2 emission characteristics in rich-lean combustion of hydrogen. Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy 2008, 33, 4689–4693. [CrossRef]
92. Das, L.M. Hydrogen engine: Research and development (R&D) programmers in Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Delhi. Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy 2002, 27, 953–965.
93. Masood, M.; Ishrat, M.M.; Reddy, S.A. Computational combustion and emission analysis of hydrogen–diesel blends with
experimental verification. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2007, 32, 2539–2547. [CrossRef]
94. Verhelst, S.; Sierens, R. Hydrogen engine-specific properties. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2001, 26, 987–990. [CrossRef]
95. Lucas, G.G.; Emtage, A.L. Microprocessor control of the hydrogen/petrol engine. IMechE 1987, 231–240, paper no. C08/87.
96. Ikegami, M.; Miwa, K.; Shioji, M. A study of hydrogen-fueled compression ignition engines. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 1982, 7,
341–353. [CrossRef]
97. Maccarley, C.A.; Van Vorst, W.D. Electronic fuel injection techniques for hydrogen-powered I.C. engines. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy
1980, 5, 179–203. [CrossRef]
98. Kufferath, A.; Schünemann, E.; Krüger, M.; Krüger, M.; Jianye, S.; Eichlseder, H.; Koch, T. H2 ICE Powertrains for future on-road
mobility. In Proceedings of the 42nd International Vienna Motor Symposium, Vienna, Austria, 29–30 April 2021.
99. Pauer, T.; Weller, H.; Schünemann, E.; Eichlseder, H.; Grabner, P.; Schaffer, K. H2 ICE for future passenger cars and light
commercial vehicles. In Proceedings of the 41st International Vienna Motor Symposium, Vienna, Austria, 22–24 April 2020.
100. Welch, A.; Mumford, D.; Munshi, S.; Holbery, J.; Boyer, B. Hydrogen direct injection technology—challenges and opportunities.
In Proceedings of the NHA Annual Hydrogen Conference 2008, Sacramento, CA, USA, 31 March–4 April 2008. Available online:
https://nha.confex.com/nha/2008/techprogram/P4181.HTM (accessed on 27 September 2021).
101. Sun, B.-G.; Zhang, D.-S.; Liu, F.-S. Cycle variations in a hydrogen internal combustion engine. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2013, 38,
3778–3783. [CrossRef]
102. Salazar, V.; Kaiser, S. Interaction of Intake-Induced Flow and Injection Jet in a Direct-Injection Hydrogen-Fueled Engine Measured by PIV;
SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2011; No. 2011-01-0673. [CrossRef]
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 25 of 26

103. Chand, M.A.; Monga, R. Optimization of hydrogen direct injection engine to reduce NOx emissions. Int. J. Innov. Sci. Res. 2014, 1,
63–66.
104. Wallner, T.; Ciatti, S.; Bihari, B.; Stockhausen, W.; Boyer, B. Endoscopic investigations in a hydrogen internal combustion engine.
In Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Hydrogen Internal Combustion Engines, Graz, Austria, 2006.
105. Boretti, A. Hydrogen internal combustion engines to 2030. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2020, 45, 23692–23703. [CrossRef]
106. Boretti, A.; Watson, H.; Tempia, A. Computational analysis of the lean-burn direct-injection jet ignition hydrogen engine. Proc.
Inst. Mech. Eng. Part D J. Automob. Eng 2010, 224, 261–269. [CrossRef]
107. Mumford, D.; Welch, A.; Bartunek, B. Development of H2 direct injection technology for High efficiency/high BMEP engines. In
Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Hydrogen Internal Combustion Engines, Graz, Austria, 2006.
108. Eichlseder, H.; Grabner, P.; Gerbig, F.; Heller, K. Advanced combustion concepts and development methods for hydrogen IC
engines. In FISITA World Automotive Congress; GWV Fachverlage GmbH: Munich, Germany, 2008.
109. Gerbig, F.; Strobl, W.; Eichlseder, H.; Wimmer, A. Potentials of the hydrogen combustion engine with innovative hydrogen–specific
combustion process. In FISITA World Automotive Congress; GWV Fachverlage GmbH: Munich, Germany, 2004.
110. Wallner, T. Entwicklung von Brennverfahrenskonzepten für Einen Pkw–Motor mit Wasserstoffbetrieb (Development of Combus-
tion Concepts for a Hydrogen-Powered Internal Combustion Engine). PHD Dissertation, TU Graz, Graz, Austria, 2004.
111. Ikegami, M.; Miwa, K.; Shioji, M.; Esaki, M. A study on hydrogen-fueled diesel combustion. Bull JSME 1980, 23, 1187–1193.
[CrossRef]
112. Varde, K.S.; Frame, G.A. Hydrogen aspiration in a direct injection type diesel engine—its effects on smoke and other engine
performance parameters. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 1983, 8, 549–555. [CrossRef]
113. Lilik, G.K.; Zhang, H.; Herreros, J.M.; Haworth, D.C.; Boehman, A.L. Hydrogen-assisted diesel combustion. Int. J. Hydrogen
Energy 2010, 35, 4382–4398. [CrossRef]
114. Santoso, W.B.; Bakar, R.A.; Nur, A. Combustion characteristics of diesel-hydrogen dual fuel engine at low load. Energy Procedia
2013, 32, 3–10. [CrossRef]
115. Suzuki, Y.; Tsujimura, T. The Combustion Improvements of Hydrogen/Diesel Dual Fuel Engine, SAE Technical Paper. 2015; No.
2015-01-1939.
116. Suzuki, Y.; Tsujimura, T.; Mita, T. The performance of multi-cylinder hydrogen/diesel dual fuel engine. SAE Int. J. Engines 2015,
8, 2240–2252. [CrossRef]
117. Karagoz, Y.; Sandalci, T.; Yuksek, L.; Dalkilic, A.S. Engine performance and emission effects of diesel burns enriched by hydrogen
on different engine loads. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2015, 40, 6702–6713. [CrossRef]
118. Dreisbach, R.; Arnberger, A.; Zukancic, A.; Wieser, M.; Kunder, N.; Plettenberg, M.; Raser, B.; Eichlseder, H. The heavy-duty
hydrogen engine and its realization until 2025. In Proceedings of the 42nd International Vienna Motor Symposium, Vienna,
Austria, 29–30 April 2021.
119. Golisano, R.; Scalabrini, S.; Arpaia, A.; Pesce, F.; Vassallo, A.; Borgia, L.; Cubito, C.; Biasin, V.; Knichel, T.; Millo, F.; et al. PUNCH
Hydrogen internal combustion engine & KERS: An appealing value-proposition for green power pack. In Proceedings of the
42nd International Vienna Motor Symposium, Vienna, Austria, 29–30 April 2021.
120. Sens, M.; Danzer, C.; von Essen, C.; Brauer, M.; Wascheck, R.; Seebode, J.; Kratzsch, M. Hydrogen powertrains in competition to
fossil fuel-based internal combustion engines and battery electric powertrains. In Proceedings of the 42nd International Vienna
Motor Symposium, Vienna, Austria, 29–30 April 2021.
121. Rezaei, R.; Riess, M.; Li, Q.; Rolke, P.; Wohlrab, A.; Hayduk, C.; Bertram, C. Decarbonization of commercial vehicles with
hydrogen combustion: From concept to start of production and beyond. In Proceedings of the 2nd World Congress on Internal
Combustion Engines, Jinan, China, 21–24 April 2021.
122. Rezaei, R.; Mennig, M.; Hayduk, C.; Bertram, C.; Hahn, C.; Kureti, S. Holistic engine and exhaust after-treatment system
development for hydrogen combustion concepts. In Proceedings of the 18th FAD Conference Challenge—Exhaust aftertretament,
Radebeul, Dresden, 15–16 September 2020.
123. Rezaei, R.; Hayduk, C.; Sens, M.; Fandakov, A.; Bertram, C. Model-based development methodology for HD hydrogen combustion
system optimization. In ATZ Experten-Forum Powertrain 2020—Ladungswechsel und Emissionierung; 2020.
124. Rezaei, R.; Sens, M.; Riess, M.; Bertram, C. Potentials and challenges of hydrogen combustion system development as a sustainable
fuel for commercial vehicles. ATZ Engine Conference, Baden-Baden, Germany, 2021.
125. Virnich, L.; Lindemann, B.; Müther, M.; Schaub, J.; Huth, V.; Geiger, J. How to improve transient engine performance of HD
hydrogen engines while maintaining lowest NOx Emissions. In Proceedings of the 42nd International Vienna Motor Symposium,
Vienna, Austria, 29–30 April 2021.
126. Swain, M.R.; Schade, G.J.; Swain, M.N. Design and Testing of a Dedicated Hydrogen-Fueled Engine, SAE Technical Paper. 1996; SAE
paper 961077.
127. Koyanagi, K.; Hiruma, M.; Furuhama, S. Study on Mechanism of Backfire in Hydrogen Engines, SAE Technical Paper. 1994; SAE
paper 942035.
128. Tang, X.; Stockhausen, W.F.; Kabat, D.M.; Natkin, R.J.; Heffel, J.W. Ford P2000 Hydrogen Engine Dynamometer Development, SAE
Technical Paper. 2002; SAE Paper No. 2002-01-0242.
129. Olavson, L.G.; Baker, N.R.; Lynch, F.E.; Meija, L.C. Hydrogen Fuel for Underground Mining Machinery, SAE Technical Paper. 1984;
SAE Paper No. 840233.
Energies 2021, 14, 6504 26 of 26

130. Eichlseder, H.; Klell, M.; Sartory, M.; Schaffer, K.; Leitner, D. Potential of Synergies in a Vehicle for Variable Mixtures of CNG and
Hydrogen, SAE Technical Paper. 2009; SAE Paper No. 2009-01-1420.
131. Pitman, S.; Smit, M.; Blau, P.; Boyer, B.; Erdimer, A.; Welch, A. Hydrogen Material Compatibility for Hydrogen ICE. In DOE
Sponsored Project DE AC06 76RLO 1830 Propulsion Materials Technology Development Manager: Jerry Gibbs; 2009. Available online:
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/03/f13/pm_04_smith.pdf (accessed on 27 September 2021).
132. Erdemir, A.; Ozturk, O.; Alzoubi, M.; Woodford, J.; Ajayi, L.; Fenske, G. Near-Frictionless Carbon for Use in Fuel Injectors and Pump
systems Operating with Low-Sulfur Diesel Fuels, SAE Technical Paper. 2000; SAE 2000-01-0518.
133. Yasuda, Y.; Kano, M.; Mabuchi, Y.; Abou, S. Research on Diamond-Like Carbon Coatings for Low-Friction Valve Lifters, SAE Technical
Paper. 2003; SAE 2003-01-1101.
134. Matthias, N.S.; Wallner, T.; Scarcelli, R. A hydrogen direct injection engine concept that exceeds U.S. DOE light-duty efficiency
targets. SAE Int. J. Engines 2012, 5, 838–849. [CrossRef]
135. Antunes, J.G.; Mikalsen, R.; Roskilly, A.P. An investigation of hydrogen-fueled HCCI engine performance and operation. Int. J.
Hydrogen Energy 2008, 33, 5823–5828.
136. Lee, K.J.; Kim, Y.R.; Byun, C.H.; Lee, J.T. Feasibility of compression ignition for hydrogen-fueled engine with neat hydrogen-air
pre-mixture by using high compression. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2013, 38, 255–264. [CrossRef]
137. Chintala, V.; Subramanian, K.A. A comprehensive review on utilization of hydrogen in a compression ignition engine under dual
fuel mode. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 70, 472–491. [CrossRef]
138. Sandalcı, T.; Karagöz, Y. Experimental investigation of the combustion characteristics, emissions and performance of hydrogen
port fuel injection in a diesel engine. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2014, 39, 18480–18489. [CrossRef]
139. Mohammadi, A.; Shioji, M.; Nakai, Y.; Ishikura, W.; Tabo, E. Performance and combustion characteristics of a direct injection SI
hydrogen engine. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2007, 32, 296–304. [CrossRef]
140. Takagi, Y.; Mori, H.; Mihara, Y.; Kawahara, N.; Tomita, E. Improvement of thermal efficiency and reduction of NOx emissions by
burning a controlled jet plume in high-pressure direct-injection hydrogen engines. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2017, 42, 26114–26122.
[CrossRef]