The Effects of Combustion Chamber Design On
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE EFFECTS OF COMBUSTION CHAMBER DESIGN ON TURBULENCE, CYCLIC VARIATION AND PERFORMANCE IN AN SI ENGINE By Esther Claire Tippett B.E.Mech (Hons) University of Canterbury, New Zealand. 1983 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF APPLIED SCIENCE in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August, 1989 © Esther Claire Tippett, 1989 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of Mechanical Engineering The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada Date: ABSTRACT An experimental program of motored and fired tests has been undertaken on a single cylinder spark ignition engine to determine the influence of combustion chamber design on turbulence enhancement in the achievement of fast lean operation. Flow field measurements were taken using hot wire anemometry in the cylinder during motored operation. On line performance tests and in-cylinder pressure data were recorded for the operation of the engine by natural gas at lean and stoichiometric conditions over a range of speed and loads. Squish and squish jet action methods of turbulence enhancement were investigated for six configurations, using a standard bathtub cylinder head and new piston designs incorporating directed jets through a raised wall, a standard bowl-in-piston chamber and an original squish jet design piston. A non squish comparison was provided by a disc chamber. Peak Pressure and Indicated Mean Effective Pressure (IMEP), two parameters char• acterizing performance and cyclic variability, showed that enhanced turbulence by com• bustion chamber geometry is effective in improving performance at lean operation. The single jet action directed towards the spark was most effective in improving the efficiency at high speed and lean mixtures. The addition of jets to the single jet, or jet chan• nels to the main squish action of the bowl- in-piston chamber, reduced performance and increased cyclic variability. Mass fraction burn analysis of the cylinder pressure data showed that squish action was most effective in the main burn period. Configurations with large squish area and centrally located spark produced the greatest reduction in both the initial and main burn ii periods. The potential for the squish jet action to improve engine drivability and increase the knock limit was exhibited in reduced coefficient of variance of IMEP and reduced ignition advance requirements. Directions for further research to exploit this potential for engines operated by alternative fuels are identified. iii Table of Contents ABSTRACT ii List of Tables viii List of Figures xii Nomenclature xxii Acknowledgments xxvi 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Introduction and Background 1 1.2 Objective of this study 4 1.3 Turbulent Flow Field in an Engine 4 1.4 Discussion of Terminology in Turbulence Studies 6 1.5 Scope of Work 8 1.6 Structure of thesis 10 2 Literature Review 11 2.1 Introduction 11 2.2 Turbulence studies in Engines 12 2.3 Combustion Studies in Engines 16 2.4 Combustion Chamber Design 24 3 Experimental Apparatus and Method 27 iv 3.1 Introduction 27 3.2 Experimental Apparatus 28 3.2.1 Introduction . 28 3.2.2 Engine Bed . 29 3.2.3 Combustion Chambers 30 3.2.4 Modified bathtub pistons 32 3.2.5 Instrumentation 34 3.2.6 Data Acquisition 36 3.3 Motored Engine Tests 38 3.3.1 Introduction 38 3.3.2 Operational Procedures 39 3.3.3 Pressure Measurements 41 3.3.4 Hotwire Measurements 42 3.4 Fired Engine Tests 44 3.4.1 Introduction 44 3.4.2 Operational Procedures 45 3.4.3 Performance Measurements 46 3.4.4 Pressure Measurements 46 4 Data Analysis 48 4.1 Introduction 48 4.2 Motored Engine Tests 48 4.2.1 Analytical Procedure 48 4.2.2 Pressure Signal Processing 49 4.2.3 Anemometer Signal Processing 53 4.2.4 Flow Field Data Analysis 55 v 4.3 Fired Engine Tests 58 4.3.1 Analytical Procedure 58 4.3.2 Pressure Signal Processing 59 4.3.3 Performance Data Analysis 59 4.3.4 Combustion Analysis 62 5 Experimental Results and Discussion 66 5.1 Introduction 66 5.2 Motored Tests 66 5.2.1 Motored Pressure Results 66 5.2.2 Flow Field Results 68 5.3 Fired Tests 72 5.3.1 General Performance Parameters 72 5.3.2 Fired Pressure Results 75 5.3.3 Mass Fraction Burned Results 80 5.4 Experimental Uncertainties and Technique 86 5.4.1 Flow Measurement 86 5.4.2 Performance Measurements 88 5.5 Turbulence, Combustion and Performance 91 6 Conclusions and Recommendations 94 6.1 Introduction 94 6.2 Conclusions 95 6.2.1 Turbulence Studies 95 6.2.2 Performance and Combustion Studies 96 6.3 Recommendations 97 vi Bibliography 99 Appendices 190 A Instrument Specification and Calibration 190 B Hot Wire Anemometry Specification and Calibration 198 C BC Natural Gas Properties 202 D Pressure Filtering Methods 206 vii List of Tables 3.1 Ricardo Hydra Gasoline (or Gaseous fuel) Engine Specifications 104 3.2 Motored operating conditions for Pressure and Hotwire measurements at WOT 105 3.3 Fired operating conditions for Pressure measurements at MBT and Full Load (WOT) 105 3.4 Fired operating conditions for Pressure measurements at MBT and Part Load 105 4.1 Motored data Analysis program flow chart 106 4.2 Fired data Analysis program flow charts 107 5.1 Compression and Expansion coefficients for the motored condition. 108 5.2 Engine performance as per SAEJ1349 for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean RAFR at MBT, WOT, and 20.0 rps 109 5.3 Engine performance as per SAEJ1349 for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean RAFR at MBT, WOT, and 33.3 rps 110 5.4 Engine performance as per SAEJ1349 for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean RAFR at MBT, WOT, and 50.0 rps 110 5.5 Engine performance as per SAEJ1349 for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean RAFR at MBT, 2.5 bmep, and 33.3 rps Ill 5.6 Engine performance as per SAEJ1349 for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean RAFR at MBT, 3.5 bmep, and 50.0 rps Ill viii 5.7 Ignition Advance and Brake Thermal Efficiency for different piston geome• tries for RARFwl.00-1.35 at MBT, WOT, and 20.0 rps 112 5.8 Ignition Advance and Brake Thermal Efficiency for different piston geome• tries for RARF «1.00-1.35 at MBT, WOT, and 33.3 rps 113 5.9 Ignition Advance and Brake Thermal Efficiency for different piston geome• tries for RARF «1.00-1.35 at MBT, WOT, and 50.0 rps 113 5.10 Imep, peak pressure and angle of occurance of peak pressure for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean RAFR at, MBT, WOT, and 20.0 rps 114 5.11 Imep, peak pressure and angle of occurance of peak pressure for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean RAFR at, MBT, WOT, and 33.3 rps 115 5.12 Imep, peak pressure and angle of occurance of peak pressure for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean operation at, MBT, WOT, and 50.0 rps 116 5.13 Imep, peak pressure and angle of occurance of peak pressure for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean RAFR at, MBT, 2.5 bmep, and 33.3 rps 117 5.14 Imep, peak pressure and angle of occurance of peak pressure for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean RAFR at, MBT, 3.5 bmep, and 50.0 rps 118 5.15 Initial (0-01% massburned) and Main (01-90% massburned) combustion durations for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean RAFR at MBT, WOT, and 20.0 rps 119 IX 5.16 Initial (0-05% massburned) and Main (05-90% massburned) combustion duration for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean RAFR at MBT, WOT, and 20.0 rps 120 5.17 Initial (0-01% massburned) and Main (01-90% massburned) combustion duration for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean RAFR at MBT, WOT, and 33.3 rps 121 5.18 Initial (0-05% massburned) and Main (05-90% massburned) combustion duration for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean RAFR at MBT, WOT, and 33.3 rps 122 5.19 Initial (0-01% massburned) and Main (01-90% massburned) combustion duration for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean RAFR at MBT, WOT, and 50.0 rps 123 5.20 Initial (0-05% massburned) and Main (05-90% massburned) combustion duration for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean RAFR at MBT, WOT, and 50.0 rps 124 5.21 Initial (0-01% massburned) and Main (01-90% massburned) combustion duration for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean RAFR at MBT, 2.5 bmep, and 33.3 rps 125 5.22 Initial (0-05% massburned) and Main (05-90% massburned) combustion duration for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean at RAFR MBT, 2.5 bmep, and 33.3 rps 126 5.23 Initial (0-01% massburned) and Main (01-90% massburned) combustion duration for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean RAFR at MBT, 3.5 bmep, 50.0 rps 127 x 5.24 Initial (0-05% massburned) and Main (05-90% massburned) combustion duration for different piston geometries for stoichiometric and lean RAFR at MBT, 3.5 bmep, and 50.0 rps 127 A.l Pressure transducer specifications for Kistler model 6121 191 A.