Fuel 214 (2018) 98–107

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Fuel
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fuel

Full Length Article

Effects of applying a Miller cycle with split injection on engine performance T

and knock resistance in a downsized gasoline engine
⁎ ⁎
Haiqiao Wei , Aifang Shao, Jianxiong Hua, Lei Zhou , Dengquan Feng
State Key Laboratory of Engines, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Downsizing a spark ignition (SI) engine with boost pressure is a proven way of increasing the thermal efficiency
Miller cycle and reducing CO2 emissions. However, the occurrence of abnormal combustion problems such as knock and
Split injection super knock could seriously damage the downsized SI engine and limit its efficiency improvement. In this study,
Knock the effects of the Miller cycle on anti-knock and engine power are experimentally investigated using a single-
Engine power
cylinder gasoline engine, the speed corresponded to 1600 rpm and air–fuel ratio corresponded to 1. The Miller
Boost pressure
cycle provides a good anti-knock performance because of its low in-cylinder temperature induced by the lower
effective compression ratio, however, it has a poor dynamic output. To increase the intake charge of the Miller
cycle, boost pressure was applied. The results showed a clear improvement in both the thermal efficiency and
torque of the engine. Furthermore, the knock tendency of the engine was reduced. However, compared with the
Miller cycle without boost pressure, the knock tendency with boost pressure was significantly higher. Therefore,
to improve both engine power and knock resistance, this study combined split injection to the Miller cycle with
boost pressure. The result indicates that the combined method can effectively decrease the knock tendency and
increase the engine torque. The best secondary start of injection timing for the Miller cycle with boost pressure
and split injection is 100 CAD BTDC. In conclusion, the Miller cycle with intake boost pressure and split injection
has a considerable potential for achieving both a better knock resistance and higher engine power.

1. Introduction thermodynamic efficiency and fuel economy are degraded. In previous

Strict legislations on CO2 emissions and the global energy crisis have
resulted in intense efforts to improve the thermal efficiency and reduce
fuel consumption in the automotive field. Some researchers found that
alternative fuels can decrease fuel consumption, such as LPG (liquefied
petroleum gas). O. Arslan presented that fuel consumption and emis-
sions can obviously be reduced by LPG. However, the use of LPG has
some disadvantages, such as additional tax and additional costs sourced
by additional equipment, which limits the application of the alternative
fuel [1]. The current development of downsized spark ignition (SI)
engines with boost pressure is a proven way of increasing the thermal
efficiency and reducing CO2 emissions. However, engine knocking,
which is a serious hindrance in achieving a high thermal efficiency, is
likely to occur. In this context, many experimental and numerical in-
vestigations have been conducted to suppress the knock occurrence by
adopting various methods such as exhaust gas recirculation (EGR)
[2–4], low compression ratio (CR), transforming the combustion
chamber shape, alternative fuels [5], and delayed ignition timing (IT).
Knock is suppressed when using these methods, however, the
studies, the Miller cycle has shown a potential to reduce the knock
tendency and improve fuel economy in a boosted downsized SI engine.
Moreover, the Miller cycle is not difficult to achieve; hence, it has be-
come the focal point of research.
The Miller cycle is generally achieved in a gasoline engine with
reduced effective CR through early intake valve closure (EIVC) during
the intake stroke and late intake valve closure (LIVC) during the com-
pression stroke. A low effective CR can reduce the end-gas temperature
and, consequently, the Miller cycle can suppress knock [6]. Li et al. [7]
performed an experiment in a 4-cylinder DISI engine at low- and high-
load conditions to investigate these issues. The result showed that at
high-load operation, both LIVC and EIVC can suppress knock, although
LIVC is more effective. In addition, the Miller cycle has other ad-
vantages. First, the partial air–fuel mixtures of the LIVC flow back to the
inlet manifold, and less fresh air enters into the EIVC cylinder. As a
result, both techniques for the Miller cycle have been proven to improve
fuel economy at partial loads, owing to a more widely open throttle
(WOT) and lower pumping loss [7–10]. Second, the Miller cycle, which
is based on the Otto cycle, has an expansion stroke longer than the

⁎
Corresponding authors at: 92 Weijin Road, Nankai District, Tianjin, China
E-mail addresses: whq@tju.edu.cn (H. Wei), lei.zhou@tju.edu.cn (L. Zhou).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2017.11.006
Received 27 June 2017; Received in revised form 8 October 2017; Accepted 3 November 2017
Available online 09 November 2017
0016-2361/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
H. Wei et al. Fuel 214 (2018) 98–107

Nomenclature EGR exhaust gas recirculation

HCCI homogeneous charge compression ignition
ATDC after top dead center IMEP indicated mean effective pressure
BTDC before top dead center IT ignition timing
CA50 combustion phasing defined by the crank angle at 50% LIVC late intake valve closure
accumulative heat release (°CA) MAPO maximum amplitude of filtered pressure oscillations
CAD crank angle degree MFB mass fraction burned
CI compress ignition PCCI premixed charge compression ignition
COV coefficient of variation Pmax maximum pressure
CR compression ratio REEV range extended electric vehicle
DISI direct injection spark ignition SOI start of injection
DVVT dual variable valve timing SI spark ignition
EIVC early intake valve closure WOT widely open throttle

compression stroke. A longer expansion stroke can obtain more energy
from combustion [11], and thus, the Miller cycle can achieve a higher
efficiency than the Otto cycle. Third, the Miller cycle can also reduce
NOX emissions by decreasing the charge quantity and temperature at
the end of the compression stroke [12,13]. Roskilly et al. [12] in-
vestigated the effect of the Miller cycle on NOX emissions and found
that the minimum reduction rate was 8% with an engine power loss of
1% at full load. However, the Miller cycle has higher hydrocarbon and
CO emissions because of the low in-cylinder temperature [14]. In ad-
dition, the backflow induces a decreased torque at low speeds. Because
of the reduced inlet at low speeds than at high speeds, the amount of
fresh air is not sufficient. This suggests that medium and high speeds
are the best operating conditions for the Miller cycle. The Miller cycle
was applied to a range extended electric vehicle (REEV) and enabled it
to fully develop its efficiency [8]. The engine of an REEV does not di-
rectly provide power; thus, its power requirement is lower than that of a
conventional engine. As a result, the engine of an REEV with Miller
cycle can achieve sufficient torque and low specific fuel consumption.
Another common method of increasing torque is to boost the pressure,
so that more fresh air is taken into the cylinder. Currently, most ve-
hicles are equipped with superchargers or turbochargers. However,
pressure boosting increases the knock tendency. To decrease the knock
tendency, the Miller cycle with boost pressure is always combined with
another strategy, such as EGR, which is a method of increasing inert
gases in the cylinder to reduce the end-gas autoignition. Knock of an SI
engine with natural gas can also be prevented by inert gases, such as N2
and CO2 [15]. Meanwhile, EGR can increase the heat capacity of the
charge and lower the charge temperature. As a result, the knock ten-
dency can be suppressed [2–4]; however, the torque of an engine
equipped with EGR declines.
It has been shown that split injection can optimize both a com-
pression ignition (CI) engine and an SI engine. In CI engine, the split
injection strategy is a potentially effective technique in reducing
emissions. Pilot injection and main injection can decrease the flame
temperature [16]; therefore, split injection at low pressures assists in
reducing NOX emissions and noise, and post injection at high pressures
helps in reducing soot and exhaust temperature [17]. The split injection
strategy can also improve efficiency, owing to better combustion
phasing and higher heat release rates. Split injection can optimize both
a compression ignition (CI) engine and an SI engine. However, there are
more studies on CI engines, including homogeneously charged [18] and
premix charged CI [19] engines. In SI engine, split injection can reduce
the knock tendency [20], improve engine power [21], and reduce cycle
variability. Turbulence can be improved by the split strategy, which can
result in an increased flame propagation speed [22]. Generally, knock
occurrence is strongly related to end-gas autoignition; therefore, a
technology for reducing combustion duration is applied to reduce the
occurrence of end-gas autoignition. Both higher turbulence intensity
and shorter flame propagation distance can reduce the combustion
duration [23].Among the above presented strategies, the split injection
strategy has shown a potential to reduce the knock tendency [20];
however, the comprehensive effect of split injection on engine perfor-
mance and anti-knock ability has not been completely studied. In ad-
dition, the split injection strategy is a potentially effective technique in
reducing emissions. To decrease the knock tendency and improve
torque in the Miller cycle with boost pressure, the split injection
strategy is used in this study. Zhao et al. [24] found that a late split
injection strategy is an effective approach on dealing with slow com-
bustion problem of EIVC. However, a Miller cycle combined with split
injection strategy for improving thermal efficiency and suppressing
knock occurrence has not been reported before.
In summary, EGR, low CR, transforming the combustion chamber
shape, alternative fuels, and delaying IT to suppress knock could reduce
the thermal efficiency in general. Miller cycle and split injection are
good methods, which can suppress knock and decrease BSFC. In recent
years, increasing research works have been conducted on using Miller
cycle, whereas most of them did not combine Miller cycle with split
injection. Still limited information has been known about the perfor-
mance of Miller with boost and split injection. The objective of this
work is better comprehension of the effect of Miller with boost and split
injection on knock suppression and engine performance. In particular,
the impacts of these different techniques on torque, percentage of knock
cycles, CA50, indicated thermal efficiency, and COV in terms of the
Miller cycle with boost pressure and the combined method are com-
prehensively investigated in the present experiment using a single-cy-
linder engine. The torque, CA50, indicated thermal efficiency and COV
are the average of 200 cycles, including knock cycles.
2. Experiment
2.1. Experimental setup
The engine used for this experiment was a Ricardo E6 4-stroke SI
engine. Details of the engine specifications are provided in Table 1, and
a schematic view of the engine and instrumentation setup are shown in
Table 1
Engine specifications.
Engine type Single cylinder, 4-stroke
Bore × stroke (mm) 80 × 100
Sweep volume (L) 0.5
Compression ratio 10:1
Valve mechanism 2-valve, VVT
Combustion system Direct injection
Intake valve close timing 130 CAD BTDC (baseline)
Intake valve open timing 370 CAD BTDC
Exhaust valve close timing 150 CAD ATDC
Exhaust valve open timing 380 CAD ATDC
Piston shape Flat
Engine speed (rpm) 1600

99
H. Wei et al. Fuel 214 (2018) 98–107

Fig. 1. Schematic view of the engine and

instrumentation setup.

Fig. 1. The cylinder bore, stroke, and CR are 80 mm, 100 mm, and 10:1,
respectively. To achieve split injection, a piezoelectric injector was
used. The injections, ITs, and injection durations are controlled by an
electronic control unit (MOTEC M400). Air is supplied by a compressor
and metered with sonic nozzles to produce the desired intake pressures.
Another major feature applied on the engine is a highly flexible elec-
trohydraulic valve train installed on both the intake and exhaust sides
to achieve the Miller cycle. The valve lift curves used in the experiments
are shown in Fig. 2. The engine is equipped with a direct current dy-
namometer with a speed accuracy of ± 0.2% ( ± 1 rpm). The in-cy-
linder pressure was measured by a pressure transducer (Kistler 6118B)
mounted in the cylinder. The signal was amplified by a charge amplifier
(Kistler 5018). A constant injection pressure of 125 bar was used for all
measurements. Fuel mass was measured by a fuel consumption meter
with an accuracy of ± 0.5%. The equivalence ratio was measured by a
wideband lambda sensor with a measurement accuracy and uncertainty
of ± 0.1% and ± 0.8%, respectively and response time within 0.15 s. A
Siemens PID controller measured the coolant and oil temperatures with
an uncertainty of ± 3 °C. Details of the engine and data acquisition can
be found in [25].
2.2. Operating conditions
The measurements were performed at a constant engine speed of
1600 rpm. IT sweeps were performed at 100% throttle openings. No
external EGR was used. The intake manifold temperature was
20 ± 3 °C. Atmospheric backpressure was used for all intake pressures.
The engine coolant temperature, which was controlled by the Siemens
PID, was maintained at 80 °C. The gasoline used in this experiment was
2.3. Evaluation methods for onset and intensity of knock
The maximum amplitude of filtered pressure oscillations (MAPO) is
defined as the largest absolute amplitude of the band pass filtered
pressure oscillations within a crank angle [26]. In this study, the cri-
terion for MAPO is 0.1 MPa and a cycle is considered a knock cycle
when MAPO is greater than 0.1 MPa [27]. An operating condition at
which 10% of the total cycles are knock cycles is considered a knock
occurrence. The effective output torque and in-cylinder pressure for
200 consecutive cycles were recorded. The cutoff frequency of the band
pass filter was set at 5–20 kHz to identify the knock-oscillated pressure
traces.
3. Baseline case
The start of injection (SOI) for a single injection can cause an in-
crease in the in-cylinder pressure and combustion speed. The turbu-
lence intensity is increased by the retarding injection, which can cause
an increase in in-cylinder pressure. The equivalence ratio distribution is
changed by the retarding injection, which affects the flame speed. [21]
which also affects the knock tendency. This experiment involved
sweeping of SOI timings to obtain a baseline case for comparison with
other cases. Initially, SOI timings such as 120 CAD BTDC, 150 CAD
BTDC, 180 CAD BTDC, 210 CAD BTDC, and 240 CAD BTDC were swept
8 Intake Valve
EIVC60
7 LIVC50
Exhaust
6
Valve Lift (mm)

commercial 92 RON Shell petrol, which is widely available in the

5
market. The oil temperature was 85 ± 3 °C. The basic measurements
(without Miller cycle) were as follows: the intake valve open timing was 4
370 CAD BTDC, intake valve close timing was 130 CAD BTDC, exhaust
3
valve open timing was 150 CAD ATDC, and exhaust valve close timing
was 380 CAD ATDC. Dual variable valve timing was coupled with the 2
engine. It has been proved that the fuel-air ratio has effect on the
knocks [2]. Therefore, the fuel-air ratio in all the experiments was set as 1
1 ± 0.01 to avoid its effect. To decrease the errors, 200 cycles were 0
recorded for each case. -360 -270 -180 -90 0 90 180 270 360
Crank (CAD)
Fig. 2. Schematic of valve lift profiles for different Miller cycles.

100
H. Wei et al.
for studying the effects of SOI on knock and torque. The SOI timings of
120 CAD BTDC and 150 CAD BTDC were used during the compression
stroke. The SOI of 180 CAD BTDC was located at the transition of the
compression and intake strokes. The SOI timings of 210 CAD BTDC and
240 CAD BTDC were located at the intake stroke. Therefore, the five
SOI timings employed covered both intake and compression strokes.
Fig. 3 shows the percentage of knock occurrence cycles and the
maximum pressures (Pmax) of the 200 cycles in the cylinder. Note that
the knock sound could be clearly heard in the experiment when the IT
was fixed at 24 CAD BTDC. Thus, the effect of SOI timings on knock and
in-cylinder pressure was analyzed at an IT of 24 CAD BTDC. It can be
observed that advancing the SOI timing increases the percentage of
knock occurrence and Pmax, except at 180 CAD BTDC. Knock is the
spontaneous combustion of the end of mixture. Firstly, the end gas has
sufficient time to auto-ignite, when the injection timing was advanced.
In addition, the advanced injection timing decreases turbulent kinetic
energy and the flame speed, therefore, the duration of the flame spreads
to the wall is increased. As a result, it is easier to increase the knock
tendency. Thirdly, the fuel-air ratio near the wall is increased by ad-
vancing the injection timing. Above all, late injection timing suppresses
knock.
Fig. 4(a) and (b) show the effect of IT on torque and indicated mean
effective pressure coefficient of variation (IMEP-COV), respectively.
The torque of 240 CAD BTDC is the highest among all the cases, when
ITs are 20, 22 and 24 CAD BTDC. The error bar of all cases is lower than
0.15 N∗m, except 120 CAD BTDC, which indicates the cases are stable.
All the error bar in this paper is the standard deviation of the experi-
mental data in the one condition, this method also was applied in other
paper [28]. In addition, IMEP-COV is generally used to evaluate the
combustion stability of an engine. The IMEP-COV of different SOI
timings, except for 120 CAD BTDC, was similar with a value below
10%. However, the IMEP-COV at 120 CAD BTDC was more than 20%,
which is much higher than in the other cases. It indicates that the
combustion became unstable. In addition, the torque of 120 CAD BTDC
was also lower because of poor combustion characteristics owing to less
mixing time.
It can been concluded from Figs. 3 and 4 that the knock tendency
and Pmax of 240 CAD BTDC are the highest, and the torque and IMEP-
COV are similar to the other single injection cases. Consequently, to
better understand the performance of the proposed and adopted stra-
tegies for suppressing knock, the 240 CAD BTDC was set as the baseline
case of single injection for all the relevant cases. A summary of the
baseline case parameters are provided in Table 2.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Effect of Miller cycle
To analyze the impact of the Miller cycle on engine performance
and anti-knock capability, several experimental investigations were
carried out by comparing the CA50, torque, and percentage of knock
occurrence. To avoid the effect of fuel-air ratio on the knock resistance,
this experiment use different fuel mass to maintain the same equiva-
lence ration for different Miller cycles. Note that CA50, which is used to
describe the combustion phasing, is defined by a specific crank angle
where 50% of the total fuel energy is released. The intake valve close
timing is fixed at 130 CAD BTDC for the baseline without the Miller
cycle. In this study, to achieve the Miller cycle, the LIVC timings were
set at approximately 15 CAD, 30 CAD, and 45 CAD later than the close
timing of the baseline, and they were called LIVC15, LIVC30, and
LIVC45, respectively. EIVC timings that were set at approximately 15
CAD, 30 CAD, and 45 CAD earlier than the close timing of the baseline
were called EIVC15, EIVC30, and EIVC45, respectively.
Fig. 5 shows that the knock tendencies of LIVC30 and LIVC45 are far
lower than those of EIVC. The knock tendency of LIVC15 is lower than
that of EIVC15 and EIVC30. This result indicates that LIVC has more
101
Fuel 214 (2018) 98–107
capability for knock resistance than EIVC. Overall, the Miller cycle with
both EIVC and LIVC can effectively reduce knock tendency, but the
effects of EIVC and LIVC are significantly different. Compared with
LIVC, EIVC increases the knock tendency. This result is primarily due to
the smaller amount of fresh air charged into the cylinder owing to the
advancing of intake valve closure timing. More residual gas from the
last cycle is left behind in the new cycle, resulting in a higher cylinder
temperature. On the contrary, with the delayed LIVC, the knock ten-
dency decreases because of the low in-cylinder temperature. For LIVC,
part of the intake charge is pushed out owing to the late intake valve
closure, which can decrease the cylinder temperature. As a result, LIVC
decreases the in-cylinder temperature, and suppresses knock more ef-
fectively than EIVC. As shown in Fig. 6, the in-cylinder temperature in
the intake stroke of LIVC 45 is the lowest among all the Miller cycle
cases. On the other hand, it has been proved that a retarded CA50 is
very effective in controlling knock [29]. The best example is retarding
IT, which retards CA50, thereby controlling knock. It can also be ob-
served in Fig. 5 that the CA50 of LIVC is greater than that of EIVC.
Meanwhile, the CA50 of EIVC is obviously retarded because of the
advanced IVC timing. It also indicates that with LIVC, the engine will be
much more knock resistant than with EIVC, and a more advanced or
delayed IVC timing will result in a much more knock resistant engine.
However, the torque in all tests with the Miller cycle is lower than
the torque in the baseline case, as shown in Fig. 7(a). The highest drop
is 19.6% at LIVC45, due to the reduction of the injection duration. The
torque of EIVC is higher that of LIVC. The torque of EIVC15 is slightly
higher than that of LIVC15, and the injection duration of LIVC15 is
nearly equal to EIVC15, which indicates the thermal efficiency of
LIVC15 is lower than EIVC15. The torque of EIVC30 is nearly the same
with LIVC30. The torque of EIVC 45 is obviously higher than that of
LIVC45. Nevertheless, all Miller cycle cases are stable, which can be
indicated by the error bar of the torque. In addition, as observed in
Fig. 7(b), the IMEP-COV of the Miller cycle is lower than 6%, except for
LIVC30 at IT of 16 CAD BTDC, which has a value that is slightly greater
than 6%. The main reason for the decline is the lesser charge of the
Miller cycle as well as the equivalence ratio, which was set as unity in
all tests; this resulted in less injection quantity in the Miller cycle as
shown in Table 3.
A high boost pressure in the downsized boosted gasoline engine can
compensate for the decreased intake charge of the Miller cycle.
Therefore, in order to improve the anti-knock capability and maintain
engine power, the performance of the Miller cycle with boost pressure
was thoroughly investigated.
4.2. Effect of Miller cycle with boost pressure
The Miller cycles typically produce a lower intake charge, which
may limit the torque. The benefit of the Miller cycle for knock
Fig. 3. Knock tendency of single injection under different SOI timings. Percentage of
knock cycles and Pmax obtained at IT 24 CAD BTDC.
H. Wei et al. Fuel 214 (2018) 98–107

(a) Torque (b) IMEP-COV

Fig. 4. Torque and IMEP-COV of single injection under different IT timings.

Table 2 suppression is generally achieved by decreasing the in-cylinder tem-

Baseline case parameters. perature and thus inhibiting end-gas autoignition. In this study, a Miller
cycle combined with intake boost pressure is applied to increase the
Parameters
intake charge. To understand the effect of the Miller cycle with boost
Engine speed (rpm) 1600 pressure on knock tendency, torque, and indicated thermal efficiency,
Intake valve close timing 130 CAD BTDC the injection quantity and equivalence ratio are compared with those of
Injection timing 240 CAD BTDC single injection without the Miller cycle. The intake boost pressure of
Injection times 1
Equivalence ratio 1
LIVC is 1.2 bar, and the delayed intake valve close timing is 50 CAD,
Fuel injection quantity (kg/h) 1.642977 which is called LIVC50 in this study. Moreover, the boost pressure of
Miller cycle N/A EIVC is also 1.2 bar, and the advanced intake valve close timing is 60
Boost pressure N/A CAD, which is called EIVC60. Because there is fluctuation in the booster
device, the 1.2 bar was selected as the started boost pressure. The
1.2 bar is the absolute pressure. On the one hand, in order to study the
effect of Miller cycle with boost pressure on the dynamic character-
istics, it is necessary to ensure the same fuel injection pulse. On the
other hand, in order to study the impact on the knock, it is necessary to
ensure the same fuel-air ratio, as a result, it is necessary to ensure the
same intake. When the boost pressure was 1.2 bar, the LIVC50 and
EIVC60 were applied to ensure the same intake. If the boost pressure
further increased, it is difficult to achieve the stability of the intake
valve. Above all, the LIVC50 and EIVC60 with 1.2 bar were selected as
the condition.
Fig. 8 shows that the percentage of knock for LIVC50 and EIVC60
are higher than LIVC45 and EIVC45. Compared with EIVC45, the knock
percentage of EIVC60 increased by 26%. Compared with LIVC45, the
knock percentage of LIVC50 increased by 10%. Fig. 8 also shows that
Fig. 5. Knock tendency of single injection under different Miller cycles. Percentage of the percentage of knock for LIVC50 is lower than EIVC60 by approxi-
knock cycles and Pmax at IT 24 CAD BTDC. mately 16%. The maximum in-cylinder pressure of LIVC50 is similar to
that of EIVC60, while the CA50 of LIVC50 is much higher than that of
EIVC60. The performance of LIVC50 in terms of knock resistance is
better than that of EIVC60, which can be attributed to the low in-cy-
linder temperature. The average temperature and in-cylinder pressure
of LIVC50 are lower than those in EIVC60, as shown in Fig. 9(a). Two
reasons can explain why LIVC50 obtains a lower in-cylinder tempera-
ture. Compared with baseline case, part of intake for LIVC50 was pu-
shed out of the cylinder, as a result, the temperature of the mixture in
the cylinder and the exhaust gas decreased. However, the total residual
exhaust gas is extremely less, and the internal EGR is about 1%. The
calculate method is the same with Mirsky method. As a result, the effect
of residual exhaust gas on the knock can be ignored. On the contrary,
less intake of EIVC60 was taken into the cylinder, therefore, the tem-
perature of the intake charge for LIVC50 around the bottom dead center
could be lower than those of EIVC60. Second, part of the intake charge
was pushed out of the cylinder, having received some heat from the
Fig. 6. In-cylinder temperature of different Miller cycles at IT 24 CAD BTDC. cylinder. As a consequence, the temperature in LIVC50 is lower than in
EIVC60 during the compression stroke [7], resulting in a lower knock
tendency.

102
 H. Wei et al. Fuel 214 (2018) 98–107

(a) Torque (b) IMEP-COV

Fig. 7. Torque and IMEP-COV of single injection under different Miller cycles.

Table 3
Fuel consumption of Miller cycle.
Cases
EIVC15
EIVC30
EIVC45
LIVC15
LIVC30
LIVC45
Baseline case
Fig. 10 shows that the torque of the Miller cycle with boost pressure
is higher than that of the baseline case. The torque of LIVC50 increased
by approximately 6%, and that of EIVC60 increased by approximately
4%. The error bars of both cases are lower than 0.15 N∗m, nearly 0.3%
of the experimental data, which indicates both cases are stable. Fig. 10
also shows that the indicated thermal efficiency and torque of LIVC50
are greater than those of EIVC60. Compared with the baseline case, the
increase is approximately 3% and 2.5% in LIVC50 and EIVC60, re-
spectively. The thermal efficiency is only related to thermal losses. The
intake charge of EIVC60 is continually expanded after the intake valve
closure, resulting in a higher temperature and heat transfer from the hot
cylinder wall to ambient. The thermal loss of EIVC60 is higher than that
of LIVC50 and thus, the indicated thermal efficiency of LIVC50 is
greater than that of EIVC60. On one hand, the torque is related to intake
charge. The intake charge of the Miller with boost pressure is higher
than that without Miller and boost. Therefore, the torque of the Miller
Fuel injection Quantity (kg/h)
with boost pressure is higher than in the original one. On the other
1.62446 hand, the torque is also related to mechanical loss. The WOT of all
1.47633 measurements is 100% and, therefore, the pump loss of LIVC50 is the
1.352888
same as that of EIVC60.The piston of EIVC 60 still moved for a distance
1.612116
1.519535
after the intake valve closed, which create a depression inside the cy-
1.346716 linder, consequently induces additional mechanism loss. Meanwhile,
1.642977 the pressure in the compression stroke of LIVC50 is lower than that of
EIVC60, as shown in Fig. 9(b). Hence, the resistance of LIVC50 is lower
than that of EIVC60, and therefore, the torque of EIVC60 is lower than
that of LIVC50.
As mentioned above, the best way of this experimental condition to
reduce the knock tendency and improve engine power is the Miller
cycle of LIVC50 with boost pressure.
4.3. Effect of the proposed method
It can be concluded that the Miller cycle with boost pressure has the
capability to suppress knock as well as improve engine torque.
However, compared with the Miller without boost pressure, the knock
tendency with boost pressure is higher. To improve the torque and
knock resistance, a combination of the Miller cycle with boost pressure
and split injection is proposed, and its effect is thoroughly investigated.

60 17 Fig. 8. Knock tendency for different cases. Percentage of

knock cycles, CA50, and Pmax at IT 24 CAD BTDC.
Percentage of Knock Cycles 14
Pmax
50
CA50 16 12
Percentage of Knock Cycles (%)

10
CA50 (CAD ATDC)

40
15
Pmax (MPa)

8
30

14 6
20
4
13
10
2

0
0 12 0
Baseline case LIVC50+1.2bar EIVC60+1.2bar EIVC45 LIVC45

103
H. Wei et al. Fuel 214 (2018) 98–107

( a ) In-cylinder temperature ( b ) P–V

Fig. 9. Average temperature and P–V of Miller cycles with boost pressure and baseline case at IT 24 CAD BTDC.

When MAPO is higher than 0.1 MPa, the cycle is considered as a

Fig. 10. Torque and indicated thermal efficiency of single injection under different Miller
cycles with boost pressure.
The split injections are conducted on LIVC50 and EIVC60. The fuel
quantity ratio of the first injection and secondary injection was set as
4:1. The SI engine was applied in this paper. The compression ratio of it
is lower than CI engine. If more fuel was applied before TDC, the air-
fuel mixture is difficult to combust. As a result, it is better to provide
more fuel in the first injection. The injection duration is 2.65 ms, which
is very short. In order to ensure the injection precision, the injection
proportion is 4:1.The first SOI was fixed at 240 CAD BTDC and the
secondary SOI timings at 60 CAD BTDC, 100 CAD BTDC, 140 CAD
BTDC, and 180 CAD BTDC. The stoichiometric ratio combustion was
performed in this experiment.
knock cycle. As shown in Fig. 11, the knock cycles with boost pressure
and split strategy are fewer than those of the baseline case. In addition,
the knock cycles with boost pressure and split strategy are fewer than
those of the Miller cycle with boost pressure, when secondary SOI
timings of 100 CAD BTDC and 60 CAD BTDC were adopted. The knock
percentage of 60 CAD BTDC is the lowest, and there is no knock cycle.
This indicates that compared with the performance of the LIVC50 with
boost pressure of 1.2 bar, the split injection could further suppress
knock. The pressure profiles using single injection, Miller cycle with
boost pressure, and proposed combination method are shown in
Fig. 12(a)–(c). The knock onset of the single injection is earlier than
that when using other methods; its oscillation duration is also the
longest. It can be observed in Fig. 12(d) that the heat release rate os-
cillation using a single injection is much higher than that using other
methods when knock occurs, indicating that earlier autoignition oc-
curred for single injection.
The torques of the proposed method increased except for the sec-
ondary SOI timing of 60 CAD BTDC, as shown in Fig. 13. Taking the
secondary SOI timing of 100 CAD BTDC as an example, the combustion
speed could be accelerated by split injection. As for the split injections,
combustion started more quickly and burning rate was faster. The mass
fraction burned (MFB) by the Miller cycle with boost pressure and 100
CAD BTDC late injection was higher than that in the other cases.
Consequently, the engine power becomes higher, as shown in
Fig. 12(d). In addition, the maximal error bar of 100 CAD BTDC is
0.1 N∗m, which is only the 0.2% of the corresponding experimental
data. In general, considering engine power and knock resistance, the

Fig. 11. MAPO of LIVC50 with boost pressure,

Baseline case LIVC50+1.2bar LIVC50+1.2bar+dual 180 CAD BTDC
baseline case, and LIVC50 with split injection
0.8
3 and boost pressure at IT 24 CAD BTDC.
0.6
2
0.4
Critical Value
MAPO (MPa)

1 0.2

0 0.0
LIVC50+1.2bar+dual 140 CAD BTDC LIVC50+1.2bar+dual 100 CAD BTDC LIVC50+1.2bar+dual 60 CAD BTDC
0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0 100 200 0 100 200 0 100 200
Cycles

104
H. Wei et al. Fuel 214 (2018) 98–107

(a) Single injection 240 CAD BTDC (b) Miller with boost pressure

(c) Miller with boost pressure and split injection (d) Heat release rate and MFB
Fig. 12. Pressure, pressure oscillation, heat release rate, and MFB for different strategies at IT 24 CAD BTDC.

Its improved performance in suppressing knock can be attributed to the

high turbulence and low in-cylinder temperature.

5. Conclusions

An experimental investigation on the performance of the Miller

cycle with split injection on engine knock resistance and combustion
characteristics was carried out in a boosted DISI engine. The effects of
the different technical strategies on torque, percentage of knock cycles,
CA50, indicated thermal efficiency, and COV were thoroughly eval-
uated. The operating speed was 1600 rpm, and the WOT for the ex-
periment was 100%. By adopting the variable valve timing system, the
Miller cycle was achieved. The conclusions are summarized as follows:

(1) The Miller cycle with LIVC and EIVC can efficiently suppress knock.
Fig. 13. Torque of Miller cycle with boost pressure and split injection at different ITs. Because the intake valve closure timing is retarded in LIVC, the
Miller cycle can obtain a better knock resistance. As for EIVC, the
knock tendency also decreases as the intake valve closure timing is
100 CAD BTDC is the best secondary SOI timing.
advanced. In addition, it was found that although increasing the
Fig. 14(a) shows the torque of most of the cases in this study as
Miller degree could further suppress the knock occurrence, the
listed in Table 4. It can be observed that the torque of the Miller cycle
engine power is also significantly decreased. Without boost pres-
with boost pressure and split injection tests is greater than the torque of
sure, the torques of the engine in EIVC and LIVC are lower than
the other cases. There must be a best IT in these cases because boost
those without the Miller cycle, owing to the low charge quantity.
pressure can increase intake charge while split injection can increase
Compared to the baseline case, the knock cycle of LIVC50 is zero;
turbulence. Fig. 14(b) shows the percentage of knock cycles of most
however, the torque decreased by 19.6%. Therefore, by only using
cases in this study. It can be observed that the percentages of knock
the Miller cycle, the anti-knock capability and engine power are
cycles of the Miller cycle with boost pressure and split injection tests are
compromised.
lower than the percentages of the other cases. Meanwhile, Fig. 14(c)
(2) A high boost pressure in a downsized gasoline engine can com-
follows the same trend, showing that the CA50 of the Miller cycle with
pensate for the decreased intake charge of the Miller cycle. Using a
boost pressure and split injection is much larger than that of the other
1.2 bar boost pressure, it was found that both EIVC and LIVC could
test cases. Both Fig. 14(b) and Fig. 14(c) indicate that the Miller cycle
achieve a better engine efficiency and suppress knocking. It was
with boost pressure and split injection is the best strategy in this study.

105
H. Wei et al. Fuel 214 (2018) 98–107

(b) Percentage of knock cycles

(a) Torque

(c) CA50
Fig. 14. Torque, percentage of knock cycles, and CA50 of the cases listed in Table 4.

Table 4 22%.
Cases for Fig. 14. (3) During the experiment, it was found that the Miller cycle employing
boost pressure and split injection strategy has the capability to
Cases
suppress knock and improve engine torque. An injection strategy is
Case 1 EIVC15 proposed in this study for achieving maximum capability of elim-
Case 2 EIVC30 inating knock and enhancing engine power. In the present study,
Case 3 EIVC45
different secondary SOI timings were investigated in terms of the
Case 4 LIVC15
Case 5 LIVC30
Miller cycle with boost pressure. It was shown that the secondary
Case 6 LIVC45 SOI at 100 CAD BTDC combined with LIVC50 and an intake boost
Case 7 1.2 bar Miller LIVC50 pressure of 1.2 bar achieved the best performance in all experi-
Case 8 1.2 bar Miller EIVC60 mental cases. Compared with the baseline case, its torque is higher
Case 9 1. 2 bar Miller with split injection and secondary SOI of 180 CAD BTDC
by over 10% and its knock percentage is lower by more than 35%.
Case 10 1.2 bar Miller with split injection and secondary SOI of 140 CAD BTDC
Case 11 1.2 bar Miller with split injection and secondary SOI of 100 CAD BTDC
Case 12 1.2 bar Miller with split injection and secondary SOI of 60 CAD BTDC
Acknowledgments

found that LIVC is better than EIVC in terms of knock resistance and This study is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation
indicated efficiency, primarily owing to the lower in-cylinder tem- of China (Grant Nos. 91641203, 51476114, 51606133).
perature of LIVC50. Compared with EIVC60, the torque of LIVC50
is higher by approximately 3%, and its knock percentage is lower by

106
H. Wei et al.
References
[1] Arslan O, Kose R, Ceylan N. Experimental analysis of consumption and exhaust
emissions of gasoline and LPG in car engines under cold climatic conditions. Energy
Sources, Part A 2011;33:244–53.
[2] Bozza F, De Bellis V, Teodosio L. Potentials of cooled EGR and water injection for
knock resistance and fuel consumption improvements of gasoline engines. Appl
Energy 2016;169:112–25.
[3] Lee S, Park S, Kim C, Kim YM, Kim Y, Park C. Comparative study on EGR and lean
burn strategies employed in an SI engine fueled by low calorific gas. Appl Energy
2014;129:10–6.
[4] Mardi M. A numerical investigation on the influence of EGR in a supercharged SI
engine fueled with gasoline and alternative fuels. Energy Convers Manage
2014;83:260–9.
[5] Bradley D, Kalghatgi GT. Influence of autoignition delay time characteristics of
different fuels on pressure waves and knock in reciprocating engines. Combust
Flame 2009;156:2307–18.
[6] Li Y, Synergy between boost and valve timings in a highly boosted direct injection
gasoline engine operating with miller cycle. SAE Technical Paper. no. 2015-01-
1262, 2015.
[7] Li T, Gao Y, Wang J, Chen Z. The Miller cycle effects on improvement of fuel
economy in a highly boosted, high compression ratio, direct-injection gasoline en-
gine: EIVC vs. LIVC. Energy Convers Manage 2014;79:59–65.
[8] Zhao J. Research and application of over-expansion cycle (Atkinson and Miller)
engines – A review. Appl Energy 2017;185:300–19.
[9] Ferrey P, Miehe Y, Constensou C, Collee V. Potential of a variable compression ratio
gasoline SI engine with very high expansion ratio and variable valve actuation. SAE
Technical Papers. no. 2014-01-1201, 2014.
[10] Bozza F, De Bellis V, Gimelli A, Muccillo M. Strategies for improving fuel con-
sumption at part-load in a downsized turbocharged si engine: a comparative study.
SAE Technical Papers, no. 2014-01-1064; 2014.
[11] Martins JJ G, Uzuneanu K, Sousa B, Jasansky O, Thermodynamic analysis of an
over-expanded engine. SAE Technical Papers. no. 2004-01-0617, 2004.
[12] Wang Y, Lin L, Zeng S, Huang J, Roskilly AP, He Y, et al. Application of the Miller
cycle to reduce NOx emissions from petrol engines. Appl Energy 2008;85:463–74.
[13] Wang Y, Lin L, Roskilly AP, Zeng S, Huang J, He Y, et al. An analytic study of
applying Miller cycle to reduce NOx emission from petrol engine. Appl Therm Eng
2007;27:1779–89.
[14] Wu J, Fan W, Hua Y, Li YL, Zhang SZ, Pei YQ. Study of combustion and emission
characteristics of gasoline engine with miller Cycle. Adv Mater Res
2014;960–961:1411–5.
[15] Brecq G, Bellettre J, Tazerout M, Muller T. Knock prevention of CHP engines by
107
Fuel 214 (2018) 98–107
addition of N2 and CO2 to the natural gas fuel. Appl Therm Eng 2003;23:1359–71.
[16] Jeon J, Park S. Effects of pilot injection strategies on the flame temperature and soot
distributions in an optical CI engine fueled with biodiesel and conventional diesel.
Appl Energy 2015;160:581–91.
[17] Mohan B, Yang W, Chou SK. Fuel injection strategies for performance improvement
and emissions reduction in compression ignition engines-A review. Renewable
Sustainable Energy Rev 2013;28:664–76.
[18] Mathivanan K, Mallikarjuna JM, Ramesh A. Influence of multiple fuel injection
strategies on performance and combustion characteristics of a diesel fuelled HCCI
engine – An experimental investigation. Exp Thermal Fluid Sci 2016;77:337–46.
[19] Benajes J, Molina S, García A, Monsalve-Serrano J, Durrett R. Performance and
engine-out emissions evaluation of the double injection strategy applied to the
gasoline partially premixed compression ignition spark assisted combustion con-
cept. Appl Energy 2014;134:90–101.
[20] Marseglia G, Costa M, Catapano F, Sementa P, Vaglieco BM. Study about the link
between injection strategy and knock onset in an optically accessible multi-cylinder
GDI engine. Energy Convers Manage 2017;134:1–19.
[21] Song J, Kim T, Jang J, Park S. Effects of the injection strategy on the mixture for-
mation and combustion characteristics in a DISI (direct injection spark ignition)
optical engine. Energy 2015;93:1758–68.
[22] Kim T, Song J, Park S. Effects of turbulence enhancement on combustion process
using a double injection strategy in direct-injection spark-ignition (DISI) gasoline
engines. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 2015;56:124–36.
[23] Zhen X, Wang Y, Xu S, Zhu Y, Tao C, Xu T, et al. The engine knock analysis – An
overview. Appl Energy 2012;92:628–36.
[24] Li Y, Zhao H, Stansfield P, Freeland P, Synergy between boost and valve timings in a
highly boosted direct injection gasoline engine operating with miller cycle. SAE
Technical Papers. no. 2015-01-1262; 2015.
[25] Wei H, Feng D, Pan M, Pan J, Rao X, Gao D. Experimental investigation on the
knocking combustion characteristics of n-butanol gasoline blends in a DISI engine.
Appl Energy 2016;175:346–55.
[26] Sheppard CGW, Tolegano S, Woolley R. On the nature of autoignition leading to
knock in HCCI engines. SAE Technical Papers. no. 2002-01-2831; 2002.
[27] Liu Y, Shi X, Deng J, Chen Y, Hu M, Li L. Experimental study on the characteristics
of knock under DI-HCCI combustion mode with ethanol/gasoline mixed fuel. SAE
Technical Papers. no. 2013-01-0544; 2013.
[28] Wang Z, Liu H, Long Y, Wang J, He X. Comparative study on alcohols–gasoline and
gasoline–alcohols dual-fuel spark ignition (DFSI) combustion for high load exten-
sion and high fuel efficiency. Energy 2015;82:395–405.
[29] Yang Y, Dec JE, Sjöberg M, Ji C. Understanding fuel anti-knock performances in
modern SI engines using fundamental HCCI experiments. Combust Flame
2015;162(10):4008–15.