Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 8

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y x x x ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 e8

Available at www.sciencedirect.com

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/he

Technical Communication

Comparison of fuel economies of high efciency diesel and hydrogen engines powering a compact car with a ywheel based kinetic energy recovery systems
Alberto Boretti*
School of Science and Engineering, University of Ballarat, PO Box 663, Ballarat, Victoria 3353, Australia

article info
Article history: Received 13 April 2010 Received in revised form 7 May 2010 Accepted 7 May 2010 Available online xxx Keywords: H2ICE Kinetic energy recovery system Fuel economy Direct injection Jet ignition

abstract
Coupling of small turbocharged high efciency diesel engines with ywheel based kinetic energy recovery systems is the best option now available to reduce fuel energy usage and reduce green house gas (GHG) emissions. The paper describes engine and vehicle models to generate engine brake specic fuel consumption maps and compute vehicle fuel economies over driving cycles, and applies these models to evaluate the benets of a H2ICEs developed with the direct injection jet ignition engine concept to further reduce the fuel energy usage of a compact car equipped with a with a ywheel based kinetic energy recovery systems. The car equipped with a 1.2 L TDI Diesel engine and KERS consumes 25 g/km of fuel producing 79.2 g/km of CO2 using 1.09 MJ/km of fuel energy. These CO2 and fuel energy values are more than 10% better than those of todays best hybrid electric vehicle. The car equipped with a 1.6 L DI-JI H2ICE engine consumes 8.3 g/km of fuel, corresponding to only 0.99 MJ/km of fuel energy. 2010 Professor T. Nejat Veziroglu. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1.

Direct injection jet ignition engine concept

The hydrogen fuelled internal combustion engine is now receiving large attention because of the opportunity to operate lean of stoichiometry (l > 2.25) achieving top brake efciencies over 45% while permitting below EURO 6 emissions without any after treatment [1e10]. The DOEs near-term goals for the H2ICE in 2007 were same as for fuel cell vehicle with peak brake thermal efciency !45% and Tier2/bin5 emissions or better (NOx 0.07 g/mile) [32]. Brake efciencies above 45% have been already computed in [14] and [33]. The Direct Injection Jet Ignition engine concept being developed by the author for gaseous fuels, not only hydrogen but also propane and methane, permits to further boost top brake efciencies

but more then that dramatically increase part load efciencies controlling the load Diesel like by quantity of fuel injected [11e15]. The DI-JI engine concept uses a jet ignition device to ignite with multiple jets of reacting gases lean stratied mixtures produced within the cylinder by a direct fuel injector. The jet ignition device is made up of a pre-chamber, connected to the main chamber through calibrated orices, accommodating a pre-chamber fuel injector. The jet ignition device also includes a spark plug or a glow plug according to the spark ignited or auto igniting version. The spark plug ignites a prechamber mixture slightly rich. The glow plug controls the auto ignition of a smaller amount of fuel that is injected in the prechamber and then auto ignites after impinging on the hot

* Tel.: 61 3 5327 9108; fax: 61 3 5327 9240. E-mail address: aboretti@staff.ballarat.edu.au 0360-3199/$ e see front matter 2010 Professor T. Nejat Veziroglu. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.05.031

Please cite this article in press as: Boretti A, Comparison of fuel economies of high efciency diesel and hydrogen engines powering a compact car with a ywheel based kinetic energy recovery systems, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy (2010), doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.05.031

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y x x x ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 e8

glow plug surface that keeps the temperature within the prechamber very high. The hot reacting gases from the prechamber then bulk ignite the ultra lean, stratied main chamber mixture through the multiple jets of hot reacting gases entering the cylinder. Fuel is injected directly within the cylinder by the main chamber DI injector operating single or multiple injections to produce a lean stratied mixture. This non homogeneous mixture is mildly lean in an inner region surrounded by air and some residuals from the previous cycle. The extension of the inner region is reduced in size to achieve mean chamber average mixtures ranging from l 2.25 to l 7. This mixture is then ignited by jets of reacting gases that issue from the pre-chamber. With reference to homogeneous DI or port fuel injection (PFI) and main chamber spark ignition, non homogeneous DI and jet ignition offer the advantage of much faster, more complete, much leaner combustion, less sensitivity to mixture state and composition, and reduced heat losses to the main chamber walls. This is because of better fuel to air ratio of the combusting mixture for same chamber averaged lean conditions, combustion in the bulk of the in cylinder gases, heat transfer cushion of air between hot reacting gases and walls, very high ignition energy, multiple simultaneous ignition sites igniting the bulk of the in cylinder gases, and large concentrations of partially oxidized combustion products initiated in the pre-chamber accelerating the oxidation of fresh reactants. The concept is an original evolution of the idea of using jetstyle ignition to enable the operation of a ame-propagation engine with very lean mixtures explored many times, mostly in the large engine natural gas industry. The major differences of the present concept are the direct injector to the main chamber creating there mixtures from lean homogeneous to lean stratied to explore the many options of low temperature combustion, and the small size pre-chamber tted with a second fuel injector and a spark or a glow plug, enabling start of combustion by multiple jet of hot reacting gases originating from ignition of a small fraction of the total fuel. The volume of the jet ignition pre-chamber less than 1 cm3 is denitively small if compared with main chamber combustion chamber volumes at top dead centre of about 130 cm3 in a 11 L in-line 6 truck engines, or about 60 cm3 in a 3.6 L V6 passenger car engines, totaling respectively the 0.8 and the 1.6% (indirect injection diesel engine combustion chambers were not less than 40e50% of the main chamber combustion chamber volumes at top dead centre). The mass of air in the pre-chamber that will mix with the mass of fuel to be injected there is therefore roughly 0.8 to 1.6% of the mass of air trapped within the cylinder respectively in larger heavy duty truck or smaller passenger car engines. This is not the actual value, just a reference value, because injection within the pre-chamber occurs with the piston moving upward and not with the piston xed at top dead centre. This small size volume of the prechamber and the requirement to inject within the pre-chamber only a very small fraction of the total fuel is supposed to keep low NOx production otherwise a major detriment of traditional pre-chamber engines even at very lean operating conditions. As a matter of fact, in a traditional pre-chamber engine, all the fuel is introduced within the pre-chamber, and combustion therefore starts within an environment that is relatively fuel rich. As a result, Diesel pre-chamber engines have always been

suffering much higher NOx than their direct injection counterparts.

2.

Kinetic energy recovery systems

Recovery of braking energy during driving cycles is the most effective option to improve fuel economy and reduce green house gas (GHG) emissions. The latest generation of hybrid electric vehicles (HEV) makes use of many fuel savings technologies to increase fuel efciency. The power train system comprises a gasoline engine, an electric motor, a generator, a hybrid battery pack, drive wheels and brakes. The seriesparallel power train system provides drive power independently from the gasoline engine or the electric motor or from both of them simultaneously. Starting is powered by the battery feed electric motor. Normal running with light acceleration is achieved by using a combination of both the battery feed electric motor and the gasoline engine. Full, heavy acceleration is obtained by using all the power of the engine and the battery feed electric motor. During deceleration and braking, the gasoline engine is shut-off and the electric motor convert the kinetic energy into electricity stored in the battery. Finally, stopping, the gasoline engine is also shut-off. The best C class (compact car) hybrid electric now available has a CO2 production of 89 g/km over the new European driving cycle, corresponding to a hydrocarbon fuel economy 10% better than the best vehicle with a traditional power train [16]. The most part of the fuel saving of HEV comes from recharging the battery during braking and using the electric motor to replace the thermal engine power supply, with the latter being shut-off at idle and during braking and portions of the accelerations. Savings also comes in minor part from the thermal engine downsizing permitted by the torque assistance in heavy accelerations. Recovery of kinetic energy in HEV is not very efcient due to a very well known fundamental of physics, that transforming energy from one form to another inevitably introduces signicant losses. When a battery is involved, there are four efciency reducing transformations in each regenerative braking cycle. (1) Kinetic energy is transformed into electrical energy in a motor/generator, (2) the electrical energy is transformed into chemical energy as the battery charges up, (3) the battery discharges transforming chemical into electrical energy, (4) the electrical energy passes into the motor/generator acting as a motor and is transformed once more into kinetic energy. The four energy transformations reduce the overall level of efciency. If the motor/generator operates at 80% efciency under peak load, in and out, and the battery charges and discharges at 75% efciency at high power, the overall efciency over a full regenerative cycle is only 36%. This means that hybrid vehicles waste near 64% of the braking energy that could possibly be recovered to improve the fuel economy. The ideal solution is to avoid all four of the efciency reducing transformations from one form of energy to another by keeping the vehicles energy in the same form as when the vehicle starts braking when the vehicle is back up to speed. This can be done using high speed ywheels, popular in space and uninterruptible power supplies for computer systems, but novel in ground vehicles. For the space and computer

Please cite this article in press as: Boretti A, Comparison of fuel economies of high efciency diesel and hydrogen engines powering a compact car with a ywheel based kinetic energy recovery systems, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy (2010), doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.05.031

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y x x x ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 e8

applications, high speed motor or generators are used to add and remove energy from the ywheels, while in ground vehicles; more efcient mechanical, geared systems are preferred. Over the short periods required in cut-and-thrust trafc, a mechanically driven ywheel is much more effective than a battery-based hybrid, providing an overall efciency over a full regenerative cycle of more than 70%, almost twice the value of battery-based hybrids [23]. However, a mechanically driven ywheel system has losses, due to friction in bearings and windage effects, which make it less efcient than a battery-based system in storing energy for long times. Considering the theoretical advantages of storing braking mechanical energy with a much more efcient, simple and lighter mechanical device, and the recent improvements in kinetic energy recovery systems (KERS) for F1 applications [17e28], conventional power trains with high efciency Diesel engines may be coupled with KERS to deliver better than hybrids fuel economies. SuperCaps might probably be better than batteries for this application, and the efciency of CVTs generally poor, especially at part load, certain leaves space to further improvements. Flywheels at high speed are very risky because in case of a failure or accident the stored energy gets free within a time going to zero and the power is seemingly unlimited. The F1 ywheel comprised a carbon bre lament wound rim surrounding a steel hub [24]. Weighing in at circa 5 kg with a diameter of 200 mm and a length of 100 mm, the ywheel spins at high speeds with an operating range of 64,500 rpm to 32,250 rpm running in a vacuum and being enclosed within a housing that provides containment in the event of failure [24]. The total system weight for the ywheel, housing gear drives and CVT was less than 25 kg [24]. The total axial length of CVT and ywheel was 300 mm. Speed of ywheels for passenger car applications and more over for heavy duty truck applications do not have to be that high as it has been proposed for F1 applications, because the weight and packaging constraints are respectively not that signicant or non signicant at all. Therefore, risk of ywheel storage perhaps controllable with a careful design is not expected to be that relevant in passenger car and heavy duty truck applications. KERS store energy under vehicle braking and return it under vehicle acceleration. The system utilizes a ywheel as the energy storage device and a Continuously Variable Transmission (CVT) to transfer energy to and from the driveline. Transfer of vehicle kinetic energy to ywheel kinetic energy reduces the speed of the vehicle and increases the speed of the ywheel. Transfer of ywheel kinetic energy to vehicle kinetic energy reduces the speed of the ywheel and increases the speed of the vehicle. The CVT is used because ratios of vehicle and ywheel speed are different during a braking or acceleration event. A clutch allows disengagement of the ywheel when not used. Recovery of the braking energy reduces the amount of thermal energy requested to power the vehicle and reduce the time the thermal engine is on. Efciency of KERS energy storage and release, maximum amount of energy being stored, energy loss in start/stop of engine and timing of deceleration and acceleration processes and therefore

efciency of the control play a dominant role in determining the best conguration of a KERS assisted power train. Using optimized strategies, CO2 and fuel consumption reductions of over 20% are possible on test cycles and more than 30% is possible in real world conditions with gasoline powered vehicles [18].

3.

Fuel economy data

Fuel economy is measured over test cycles. The ECE EUDC cycle is a test cycle performed on a chassis dynamometer used for emission certication of light duty vehicles in Europe [EEC Directive 90/C81/01]. The entire cycle includes four ECE segments, repeated without interruption, followed by one EUDC segment. Before the test, the vehicle is allowed to soak for at least 6 h at a test temperature of 20e30  C. It is then started and the emission sampling begins at the same time. This cold-start procedure is also referred to as the New European Driving Cycle or NEDC. The ECE cycle is an urban driving cycle, also known as UDC. It was devised to represent city driving conditions, e.g. in Paris or Rome. It is characterized by low vehicle speed, low engine load, and low exhaust gas temperature. The EUDC (Extra Urban Driving Cycle) segment has been added after the fourth ECE cycle to account for more aggressive, high speed driving modes. The maximum speed of the EUDC cycle is 120 km/h Table 1 summarizes the parameters for both the ECE and EUDC cycles. The best C class (compact car) vehicle available today [17] couples thermal engine, electric motor, generator, battery pack, drive wheels and brakes to power the vehicle with modulated thermal and electric motors and recovery of braking energy. However, the increase in vehicle weight and dimensions per load volume and the inefciency of the multiple mechanical to electric energy conversions make their effectiveness much less than what is expected by a car much more environmentally expensive to produce, maintain and dispose. Table 2 presents fuel economy and CO2 production data of the best C class (compact car) hybrid electric and traditional power train now available [1]. The rst has a 1.8 L gasoline engine, while the second a 1.6 L TDI Diesel engine. Considered lower heating values (LHV) are 42 MJ/Kg and 43.5 MJ/Kg for gasoline and Diesel fuels, while densities are 0.75 and 0.835 kg/ L respectively. The hybrid electric vehicle is more environmentally friendly during operation, and in particular covering the urban (cold) sector where accelerations are followed by decelerations and stop thanks to the recovery of braking energy completely dissipated with the traditional power train conguration.

Table 1 e Main characteristics of ECE and EUDC cycles. Characteristics


Distance [km] Duration [s] Average Speed [km/h] Maximum Speed [km/h]

ECE 15
4 1.013 4.052 4 195 780 18.7 (with idling) 50

EUDC
6.955 400 62.6 120

Please cite this article in press as: Boretti A, Comparison of fuel economies of high efciency diesel and hydrogen engines powering a compact car with a ywheel based kinetic energy recovery systems, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy (2010), doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.05.031

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y x x x ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 e8

Table 2 e Fuel economy of C class (compact car) vehicles with hybrid and traditional power trains (measured values [17]). Best C class hybrid electric car
Fuel Urban (cold) Fuel [l/100 km] Extra Urban Fuel [l/100 km] Combined Fuel [l/100 km] Combined CO2 [g/km] Combined Energy [MJ/km] gasoline 4 3.8 4 89 1.26

Best C class car with a traditional power train


Diesel 4.7 3.4 3.8 99 1.38

4.

Computational results

Fig. 1 presents the fuel ow rate for a D class, full size passenger car equipped with a gasoline engine, during two accelerations with an intermediate deceleration. The KERS permits to shut-off the engine when the car is braking spinning the ywheel to increase its energy. The engine is then restarted when the stored kinetic energy is used to partially reaccelerate the vehicle. The engine stop/start is integrated with the KERS. A model for the engine and a model for the car have been dened using the WAVE and the Lotus vehicle software [30,31]. An engine model is applied rst to compute the brake specic fuel consumption map vs. engine speed and load of the engine. Results of simulations are validated vs. available experimental data. Then, a vehicle model is applied to compute the instantaneous fuel ow rate to the engine of the vehicle with traditional power train running a driving cycle. The fuel ow rates are obtained interpolating the brake specic fuel consumption map with the computed instantaneous speeds and loads with corrections for the cold-start. Results of simulations are validated vs. the fuel consumption data measured. Engine and car manufacturer name as well as details of the experiments are covered by condentiality. What is important for the reader is to understand that the WAVE model for the 1.6 TCDI Diesel engine and the Lotus model for the C class car with tted the 1.6 TCDI Diesel engine are validated vs. reliable experiments done by their original equipment manufacturer.
12 11 10 9 Fuel Flow Rate [Kg/hr] 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 640 650 660 670 680 time [s] 690 700 710 720

no KERS KERS

Table 3 presents the main data of the 1.6 L TDI engine, while Table 4 presents the main data of the vehicles. Fig. 2 presents the brake specic fuel consumption and brake efciency maps computed with WAVE. Brake specic fuel consumption is in g/kWh and it is presented vs. engine speed in rpm and brake mean effective pressure in bar. Fig. 2 also presents the maximum load brake mean effective pressure vs. engine speed. Load variations are obtained by reducing the amount of fuel injected, i.e. changing the air-to-fuel equivalence ratio. This produces the typical high efciency map of Diesel over the most part of engine loads. At idle, efciency theoretically goes to zero, or the brake specic fuel consumption goes theoretically to innity, because a certain amount of fuel is used to produce an indicated mean effective pressure equal to the friction mean effective pressure with no brake mean effective pressure output. The brake specic fuel consumption map is completed by using nite values at idle. First, baseline computations have been performed. Results of simulations agree with measured data. Fig. 3 presents the engine brake mean effective pressureespeed operating points of the baseline conguration. One operating point is considered every 0.5 s. Computations have then been performed modeling a modied version with KERS. Reference values [17e28] are assumed for maximum energy storage in KERS, energy penalties for start/stop, efciency of storage and recovery of energy, energy requested to run ancillary loads, new ancillary loads introduced by KERS and engine warmeup prole. The engine is shut-off during decelerations, and it is restarted during the following acceleration when the kinetic energy recovered during the braking is fully consumed. No weight penalty is considered for the KERS, and no weight reduction is considered following downsizing. These two differences in weights are roughly the same. Results show the engine may be stopped more than 50% of the time with KERS, with the engine being run to deliver only the amount of energy needed by the vehicle during part of accelerations and cruising, and to cover the start-stop penalties. Fig. 4 presents the engine brake mean effective pressureespeed operating points of the conguration with a 1.6TDI engine and the KERS. One operating point is considered every 0.5 s. The shut-off of the engine reduces the number of points in gure. Computations have nally been performed considering the option to downsize the engine to 1.2 L thanks to the boost provided by KERS. For sake of simplicity, the same brake specic fuel consumption map and maximum load brake mean effective pressure curve is supposed to apply for

Table 3 e Basic engine data. Parameter


Number of Cylinders Bore [mm] Stroke [mm] Compression ratio Swept Volume [l]

1.6TDI Diesel engine


4 79.50 80.50 16.5 1.5984

Fig. 1 e Fuel ow rates with and without KERS.

Please cite this article in press as: Boretti A, Comparison of fuel economies of high efciency diesel and hydrogen engines powering a compact car with a ywheel based kinetic energy recovery systems, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy (2010), doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.05.031

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y x x x ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 e8

Table 4 e Basic vehicle data. Parameter Best C class car with a traditional power train
1336 2.2 0.298 0.3080 3.389 Manual 5 3.7780 1.9440 1.1850 0.8160 0.6250

Weight [kg] Frontal Area [m2] Drag Coefcient Tyre Rolling Radius [m] Final Drive Ratio Gearbox Number of ratios Gear. 1 Ratio Gear. 2 Ratio Gear. 3 Ratio Gear. 4 Ratio Gear. 5 Ratio

a downsized version of the engine to 1.2 L, having reduced bore and stroke reduced (72.2 and 73.1 mm respectively) and same compression ratio. Therefore maximum power and maximum torque speeds are the same for both engines, while maximum power and maximum torque outputs reduce with downsizing by the displacement ratio. Fig. 5 presents the engine brake mean effective pressureespeed operating points of the conguration with a 1.2TDI engine and the KERS. One operating point is considered every 0.5 s. The shut-off of the engine reduces the number of points in gure. The downsizing of the engine increases the operating BMEP towards points of better fuel economy. Torque assistance by KERS permits same maximum accelerations of the larger engine following a deceleration. Computations have then been performed for a 1.6 L H2ICE engine, derived from the engine in Table 3 reducing the compression ratio to 14.5 and adopting a central direct injector plus the central jet ignition pre-chamber. Fig. 6 presents the brake specic fuel consumption map computed with WAVE. Brake specic fuel consumptions in g/kWh and presented vs. engine speed in rpm and brake mean effective pressure in bar. Fig. 6 also presents the maximum load brake mean effective pressure vs. engine speed. It has to be pointed out that the conversion to hydrogen is not optimal, and better top brake efciencies may certainly follow an engine optimization for hydrogen. Despite of that, the hydrogen engine has better than Diesel part load conditions, thanks to the always lean burn properties of the DI-JI engine concept. The H2ICE is able to deliver better part load efciency than the Diesel because of the better thermodynamic. Both the Diesel and the DI-JI H2ICE have the load controlled by the quantity of fuel injected. However, the DI Diesel engine combustion is different from the DI-JI H2ICE combustion. In the Diesel combustion, the fuel is injected in air, then it diffuses in air, then it auto ignites. In the DI-JI H2ICE, the main chamber combustion is premixed and not diffusion. The fuel is injected in air, then it mixes, then it receives the multiple jets of reacting gases from the jet ignition pre-chamber and burns almost instantaneously. Recalling basic thermodynamics concepts, the Air-Standard Otto Cycle has efciency: h 1 1 rk1

Fig. 2 e Maps of (a) brake specic fuel consumption (in g/kWh) and (b) Brake efciency for the1.6 TDI Diesel engine (values computed with a validated WAVE [29] engine model).

Please cite this article in press as: Boretti A, Comparison of fuel economies of high efciency diesel and hydrogen engines powering a compact car with a ywheel based kinetic energy recovery systems, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy (2010), doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.05.031

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y x x x ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 e8

20 18 16 14 B ME P [b a r ] 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500

Engine Speed [Rpm]

Fig. 3 e Engine brake mean effective pressureespeed operating points of the baseline conguration with a 1.6TDI engine.

20 18 16 14 B M E P [ b a r] 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500

Engine Speed [Rpm]

Fig. 4 e Engine brake mean effective pressureespeed operating points of the conguration with a 1.6TDI engine and KERS.

where r is the compression ratio and k 1.4 for air. Combustion is a constant-volume heat transfer to the air from an external source while the piston is at top dead centre. This process is intended to represent the ignition of the fueleair

20 18 16 14 B ME P [b ar ] 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500

Engine Speed [Rpm]

Fig. 5 e Engine brake mean effective pressureespeed operating points of the conguration with a 1.2TDI engine and KERS.

Fig. 6 e Maps of (a) brake specic fuel consumption (in g/kWh) and (b) Brake efciency for the1.6 H2ICEl engine (values computed with a WAVE [29] engine model).

Please cite this article in press as: Boretti A, Comparison of fuel economies of high efciency diesel and hydrogen engines powering a compact car with a ywheel based kinetic energy recovery systems, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy (2010), doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.05.031

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y x x x ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 e8

20 18 16 14 B M E P [b a r] 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500

to 3.16 L per 100 km, with a fuel saving of 17%. The conguration with the downsized 1.2TDI engine and the KERS reduces the fuel usage to 3.04 L per 100 km, with a total fuel saving of 20%. The 1.6 H2ICE and KERS nally reduces the fuel usage to 8 g/km of fuel, corresponding to only 0.96 MJ/km of fuel energy.

5.

Conclusions

Engine Speed [Rpm]

Fig. 7 e Engine brake mean effective pressureespeed operating points of the conguration with a 1.6 H2ICE engine and KERS.

mixture and the subsequent rapid burning. Conversely, in the Air-Standard Diesel Cycle, the efciency is: h 1   k rc 1 $ rk1 k$rc 1 1

where r is the compression ratio and rc the cut off ratio, ratio of volumes at the end and at the start of the heat addition. In the Diesel cycle the heat addition takes place at constant pressure. Accordingly, the constant-volume process of the Otto cycle involving only heat now involves both work and heat. We can consider this expression with rc 1 in case of the Otto cycle, and rc 2 to rc 3 in case of the Diesel cycle. If we consider the Air-Standard Otto cycle with r 14 representative of the DI-JI H2ICE, and the Air-Standard Diesel cycle with r 16.5 and rc 2, the DI-JI has clear thermodynamic advantages, with a theoretical efciency of 65.2% vs. 61.9%. Fig. 7 presents the engine brake mean effective pressureespeed operating points of the conguration with a 1.6 H2ICE engine and the KERS. The KERS is also used to boost acceleration increasing the engine BMEP when needed in a few points in the low speed range. Table 5 resumes the fuel economy results of all the modeled congurations, the baseline 1.6TDI engine without KERS, this engine and KERS, an intermediate downsized engine 1.2TDI engine without KERS, and the downsized engine 1.2TDI and KERS. The baseline conguration with the 1.6TDI engine and no KERS requires 3.81 L of Diesel fuel per 100 km. The conguration with the 1.6 L engine and the KERS reduces the fuel usage

Table 5 e Fuel economy of C class (compact car) vehicle with traditional power trains and KERS (values computed with a validated Lotus Vehicle [31] model). Conguration Fuel [l/100 km] CO2 [g/km] Energy [MJ/km]
1.6TDI 1.6TDI KERS 1.2TDI 1.2TDI KERS 1.2H2ICE KERS 3.81 3.16 3.66 3.04 99.2 82.4 95.4 79.2 1.38 1.15 1.33 1.10 0.99

KERS permit efcient regenerative braking and torque assistance as a means of dramatically improving efciency and hence reducing fuel consumption and CO2 emissions, while Direct Injection and Jet Ignition permits not only large top brake efciencies, but especially very large part load efciencies. Computational results presented here for a conventional C class (compact car) vehicle equipped with a 1.6TDI Diesel engine running the new European driving cycle (NEDC). The car equipped with a 1.2 L TDI Diesel engine and KERS consumes 25 g/km of fuel producing 79.2 g/km of CO2 using 1.09 MJ/km of fuel energy. These CO2 and fuel energy values are more than 10% better than those of todays best hybrid electric vehicle. The car equipped with a 1.6 L DI-JI H2ICE engine consumes 8.3 g/km of fuel, corresponding to only 0.99 MJ/km of fuel energy. The KERS and the DI-JI engine concept are potential enablers of dramatic improvements in vehicle fuel economy. H2ICE are able to deliver not only similar to Diesel top brake efciencies, but also better than Diesel part load efciencies. Hydrogen is a benecial fuel and KERS is a measure to recover break energy. Synergies of KERS with Diesel engine and DI-JI H2ICE engines are similar because of the good part load efciencies for the sake of quality control of the air to fuel mixture. The Diesel engine coupled with KERS may be considered a bench mark for fuel efciency use with today technologies. The H2ICE with KERS further push forward this benchmarking. The results of the best cars with hybrid gasoline or traditional power train and Diesel are validated via measurements. The results with ywheel based KERS and Diesel or DI-JI H2ICE are only calculated. The calculation accuracy of the engine model is expected to be within a 5%, as well as the calculation accuracy of the vehicle model. The combination of two simulations for the brake specic fuel consumption and for the driving cycle could multiply both deviations. Nevertheless, results of improvement of fuel economy with a ywheel based KERS are in-line with what has been estimated and measured by others, and the better than Diesel fuel efciency map of the DI-JI H2ICE engine will certainly produce better fuel energy usage on the driving cycle. For what concerns DI-JI engine concept, as well as our version of KERS, these and others preliminary evaluations based on simulations are very promising. It is the roles of universities to develop new concepts, but it is then the roles of original equipment manufacturers and their suppliers to develop new technologies and ultimately deliver new products. Unfortunately, the global nancial melt down has left very little moneys to explore new technologies, and the development of the DI-JI engine concept as well as of our version of KERS lacks of nancial support.

Please cite this article in press as: Boretti A, Comparison of fuel economies of high efciency diesel and hydrogen engines powering a compact car with a ywheel based kinetic energy recovery systems, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy (2010), doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.05.031

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y x x x ( 2 0 1 0 ) 1 e8

There are uncertainties involved in assumptions and computations. Nevertheless, the DI-JI engine and the KERS concepts certainly have the potentials e providing adequate funding e to deliver signicant benets in terms of fuel economies, with perspectives much better than all the possible alternatives.

references

[1] White CM, Steeper RR, Lutz AE. The hydrogen-fueled internal combustion engine: a technical review. Int J Hydrogen Energy August 2006;31(10):1292e305. [2] Knop V, Benkenida A, Jay S, Colin Olivier. Modelling of combustion and nitrogen oxide formation in hydrogenfuelled internal combustion engines within a 3D CFD code. Int J Hydrogen Energy October 2008;33(19):5083e97. [3] 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 May 2009;34(10):4406e12. [4] 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 February 2007;32(2):296e304. [5] Boretti AA, Watson HC. Enhanced combustion by jet ignition in a turbocharged cryogenic port fuel injected hydrogen engine. Int J Hydrogen Energy March 2009;34(5):2511e6. [6] Safari H, Jazayeri SA, Ebrahimi R. Potentials of NOX emission reduction methods in SI hydrogen engines: simulation study. Int J Hydrogen Energy January 2009;34(2):1015e25. [7] D0 Errico G, Onorati A, Ellgas S. 1D thermo-uid dynamic modelling of an S.I. single-cylinder H2 engine with cryogenic port injection. Int J Hydrogen Energy October 2008;33(20):5829e41. [8] Kawahara N, Tomita E. Visualization of auto-ignition and pressure wave during knocking in a hydrogen spark-ignition engine. Int J Hydrogen Energy April 2009;34(7):3156e63. [9] Gomes Antunes JM, Mikalsen R, Roskilly AP. An experimental study of a direct injection compression ignition hydrogen engine. Int J Hydrogen Energy August 2009;34(15):6516e22. [10] Nieminen J, D0 Souza N, Dincer I. Comparative combustion characteristics of gasoline and hydrogen fuelled ICEs. Int J Hydrogen Energy, in press. [11] Boretti AA, Watson HC. The lean burn direct-injection jetignition turbocharged liquid phase LPG engine. 15th Asia Pacic Automotive Engineering Conference (APAC-15). Hanoi, Vietnam; October 2009. [12] Boretti AA, Watson HC. The lean burn direct-injection jetignition gas engine. Int J Hydrogen Energy September 2009;34 (18):7835e41. [13] Boretti AA, Watson HC. The lean burn direct-injection jetignition exi gas fuel LPG/CNG engine. 2009 SAE Power trains. Fuels and Lubricants Meeting, San Antonio, Texas, USA; November 2009. SAE P. 2009-01-2790. [14] Boretti AA, Watson HC, Tempia A. Computational analysis of the lean burn direct-injection jet-ignition hydrogen engine. Proc Inst Mech Eng D J Automob Eng 2010;224(2):261e9. [15] Boretti AA. Modelling auto ignition of hydrogen in a jet ignition pre-chamber. Int J Hydrogen Energy; 2010;. doi:10. 1016/j.ijhydene.2010.01.114. [16] Boretti AA. Vehicle driving cycle performance of the sparkless DI-JI hydrogen engine. Int J Hydrogen Energy; 2010;. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.02.136.

[17] http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk [retrieved 8.1.10]. [18] http://www.ybridsystems.com/Technology.html [retrieved 8.1.10]. [19] http://www.torotrak.com/IVT/works [retrieved 8.1.10]. [20] http://www.xtrac.com/pdfs/Torotrak_Xtrac_CVT.pdf [retrieved 8.1.10]. [21] http://www.bhr-technology.com/CPC-KERS.pps [retrieved 8. 1.10]. [22] Stone R. Full-toroidal variable drive transmission systems in mechanical hybrid systems e from Formula 1 to road cars. CTI Symposium and Exhibition: Automotive Transmissions, Berlin, Germany, http://www.torotrak.com/Resources/ Torotrak/Documents/Mech%20hybrid%20paper_CTI% 20Berlin09.pdf; December 2009 [retrieved 11.1.10]. [23] Body W, Brockbank C. Simulation of the fuel consumption benets of various transmission arrangements and control strategies within a ywheel based mechanical hybrid system. VDI Transmissions in Vehicles Conference and Exhibition, Friedrichshafen, Germany, http://www.torotrak. com/Resources/Torotrak/Documents/VDI% 20Friedrichshafen%202009.pdf; June 2009 [retrieved 11.1.10]. [24] Brockbank C, Greenwood C. Full-toroidal variable drive transmission systems in mechanical hybrid systems e from Formula 1 to road vehicles. CTI Symposium and Exhibition: Automotive Transmissions, Detroit, USA, http://www. torotrak.com/Resources/Torotrak/Documents/CTI% 20Detroit%20Paper%202009.pdf; May 2009 [retrieved 11.1.10]. [25] Brockbank C, Application of a variable drive to supercharger and turbo compuer applications, SAE World Congress, Detroit, USA, April 2009. 09PFL-0925. http://www.torotrak. com/Resources/Torotrak/Documents/SAE_WC_2009_09PFL0925_Variable_Drive_Boost_System.pdf [retrieved 11.1.10]. [26] Brockbank C, Cross D, Mechanical hybrid system comprising a ywheel and CVT for motorsport and mainstream automotive applications, SAE World Congress, Detroit, USA, April 2009. 09PFL-0922. http://www.torotrak.com/Resources/ Torotrak/Documents/SAE_WC_2009_09PFL-0922_KERS.pdf [retrieved 11.1.10]. [27] Brockbank C, Greenwood C. Full-toroidal variable drive transmission systems in mechanical hybrids - from Formula 1 to road vehicles. CTI Innovative Automotive Transmissions Conference and Exhibition, Berlin, Germany, http://www. torotrak.com/Resources/Torotrak/CTI_Berlin_2008.pdf; December 2008 [retrieved 11.1.10]. [28] Brockbank C, Greenwood C. Formula 1 mechanical hybrid applied to mainstream automotive. VDI Getriebe in Fahrzeuge Conference, Friedrichshafen, Germany, http:// www.torotrak.com/Resources/Torotrak/VDI_2008.pdf; June 2008 [retrieved 11.1.10]. [29] http://www.ricardo.com/Documents/PRs%20pdf/PRs% 202009/Ricardo%20Kinergy%20delivers%20breakthrough% 20technology%20low%20cost%20hybridisation.pdf [retrieved 11.01.10]. [30] http://www.ricardo.com/engb/Software/ Productofferingedescription/WAVE1 [retrieved 8.1.10]. [31] http://www.lesoft.co.uk/index1.html [retrieved 20.1.10]. [32] White C. Advanced hydrogen-fueled engines: potential and Challenges, ERC Symposium: fuels for future internal combustion engines. University of Wisconsin Madison, http://www.erc.wisc.edu/documents/symp07-White.pdf; June 2007. [33] Antunes JMG, Roskilly AP. The use of H2 on compression ignition engines. Third European congress on economics and management of energy in industry; 6the9th April 2004.

Please cite this article in press as: Boretti A, Comparison of fuel economies of high efciency diesel and hydrogen engines powering a compact car with a ywheel based kinetic energy recovery systems, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy (2010), doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.05.031