Research Papers: Fuel Combustion

Prediction of Cyclic Variability and Knock-Limited Spark Advance in a Spark-Ignition Engine

[+] Author and Article Information
Zongyu Yue

Energy Systems Division,
Argonne National Laboratory,
9700 South Cass Avenue,
Lemont, IL 60439
e-mail: zyue@anl.gov

K. Dean Edwards

Energy and Transportation Science Division,
Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
2360 Cherahala Boulevard,
Knoxville, TN 37932
e-mail: edwardskd@ornl.gov

C. Scott Sluders

Energy and Transportation Science Division,
Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
2360 Cherahala Boulevard,
Knoxville, TN 37932
e-mail: sluders@ornl.gov

Sibendu Som

Energy Systems Division,
Argonne National Laboratory,
9700 South Cass Avenue,
Lemont, IL 60439
e-mail: ssom@anl.gov

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Internal Combustion Engine Division of ASME for publication in the Journal of Energy Resources Technology. Manuscript received March 20, 2019; final manuscript received March 29, 2019; published online April 18, 2019. Assoc. Editor: Hameed Metghalchi. The United States Government retains, and by accepting the article for publication, the publisher acknowledges that the United States Government retains, a nonexclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this work, or allow others to do so, for United States government purposes.

J. Energy Resour. Technol 141(10), 102201 (Apr 18, 2019) (8 pages) Paper No: JERT-19-1168; doi: 10.1115/1.4043393 History: Received March 20, 2019; Accepted March 29, 2019

Engine knock remains one of the major barriers to further improve the thermal efficiency of spark-ignition (SI) engines. SI engine is usually operated at knock-limited spark advance (KLSA) to achieve possibly maximum efficiency with given engine hardware and fuel properties. Co-optimization of fuels and engines is promising to improve engine efficiency, and predictive computational fluid dynamics (CFD) models can be used to facilitate this process. However, cyclic variability of SI engine demands that multicycle results are required to capture the extreme conditions. In addition, Mach Courant–Friedrichs–Lewy (CFL) number of 1 is desired to accurately predict the knock intensity (KI), resulting in unaffordable computational cost. In this study, a new approach to numerically predict KLSA using large Mach CFL of 50 with ten consecutive cycle simulation is proposed. This approach is validated against the experimental data for a boosted SI engine at multiple loads and spark timings with good agreements in terms of cylinder pressure, combustion phasing, and cyclic variation. Engine knock is predicted with early spark timing, indicated by significant pressure oscillation and end-gas heat release. Maximum amplitude of pressure oscillation analysis is performed to quantify the KI, and the slope change point in KI extrema is used to indicate the KLSA accurately. Using a smaller Mach CFL number of 5 also results in the same conclusions, thus demonstrating that this approach is insensitive to the Mach CFL number. The use of large Mach CFL number allows us to achieve fast turn-around time for multicycle engine CFD simulations.

Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


ASTM International, 2012, “Standard Test Method for Research Octane Number of Spark-Ignition Engine Fuel,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, ASTM Paper No. D2699-12.
ASTM International, 2016, “Standard Test Method for Motor Octane Number of Spark-Ignition Engine Fuel,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, Standard No. D2700-16.
Kalghatgi, G. T., 2001, “Fuel Anti-Knock Quality—Part I, Engine Studies,” SAE Paper No. 2001-01-3584.
Kalghatgi, G. T., 2001, “Fuel Anti-Knock Quality—Part I, Vehicle Studies—How Relevant Is Motor Octane Number (MON) for Modern Engines?,” SAE Paper No. 2001-01-3585.
Yates, A. D., Swarts, A., and Viljoen, C., 2005, “Correlating Auto-Ignition Delays and Knock-Limited Spark Advance Data for Different Types of Fuel,” SAE Paper No. 2005-01-2083.
Amer, A., Babiker, H., Chang, J., Kalghatgi, G. T., Adomeit, P., Brassat, A., and Günther, M., 2012, “Fuel Effects on Knock in a Highly Boosted Direct Injection Spark Ignition Engine,” SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr., 5(3), pp. 1048–1065. [CrossRef]
Sluder, C. S., Szybist, J. P., McCormick, R. L., Ratcliff, M. A., and Zigler, B. T., 2016, “Exploring the Relationship Between Octane Sensitivity and Heat-of-Vaporization,” SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr., 9(1), pp. 80–90. [CrossRef]
Szybist, J. P., and Splitter, D. A., 2016, “Pressure and Temperature Effects on Fuels With Varying Octane Sensitivity at High Load in SI Engines,” Combust. Flame, 177, pp. 49–66. [CrossRef]
Eckert, P., Kong, S., and Reitz, R., 2003, “Modeling Autoignition and Engine Knock Under Spark Ignition Conditions,” SAE Paper No. 2003-01-0011.
Liang, L., Reitz, R., Iyer, C., and Yi, J., 2007, “Modeling Knock in Spark-Ignition Engines Using a G-Equation Combustion Model Incorporating Detailed Chemical Kinetics,” SAE Paper No. 2007-01-0165.
Shao, J., and Rutland, C., 2014, “Modeling Investigation of Auto- Ignition and Engine Knock by HO2,” SAE Paper No. 2014-01-1221.
Shao, J., and Rutland, C. J., 2014, “Modeling Investigation of Different Methods to Suppress Engine Knock on a Small Spark Ignition Engine,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turb. Power, 137(6), p. 61506. [CrossRef]
Pal, P., Wu, Y., Lu, T., Som, S., See, Y. C., and Le Moine, A., 2018, “Multidimensional Numerical Simulations of Knocking Combustion in a Cooperative Fuel Research Engine,” ASME J. Energy Resour. Technol., 140(10), p. 102205. [CrossRef]
Pan, J., Wei, H., Shu, G., Pan, M., Feng, D., and Li, N., 2017, “LES Analysis for Auto-Ignition Induced Abnormal Combustion Based on a Downsized SI Engine,” Appl. Energy, 191, pp. 183–192. [CrossRef]
Converge, 2016, 2.3 Theory Manual, Convergent Science Inc., Middleton, WI.
Heywood, J. B., 1988, Internal Combustion Engine Fundamentals, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Vermorel, O., Richard, S., Colin, O., Angelberger, C., Benkenida, A., and Veynante, D., 2007, “Multi-Cycle LES Simulations of Flow and Combustion in a PFI SI 4-Valve Production Engine,” SAE Paper No. 2007-01-0151.
Granet, V., Vermorel, O., Lacour, C., Enaux, B., Dugué, V., and Poinsot, T., 2012, “Large-Eddy Simulation and Experimental Study of Cycle-to-Cycle Variations of Stable and Unstable Operating Points in a Spark Ignition Engine,” Combust. Flame, 159(4), pp. 1562–1575. [CrossRef]
Schmitt, M., Hu, R., Wright, Y. M., Soltic, P., and Boulouchos, K., 2015, “Multiple Cycle LES Simulations of a Direct Injection Natural Gas Engine,” Flow Turbul. Combust, 95(4), pp. 645–668. [CrossRef]
Zhao, L., Moiz, A. A., Som, S., Fogla, N., Bybee, M., Wahiduzzaman, S., Mirzaeian, M., Millo, F., and Kodavasal, J., 2017, “Examining the Role of Flame Topologies and In-Cylinder Flow Fields on Cyclic Variability in Spark-Ignited Engines Using Large-Eddy Simulation,” Int. J. Eng. Res., 19(8), pp. 886–904. [CrossRef]
Ameen, M. M., Mizaeian, M., Millo, F., and Som, S., 2018, “Numerical Prediction of Cyclic Variability in a Spark Ignition Engine Using a Parallel Large Eddy Simulation Approach,” ASME J. Energy Resour. Technol., 140(5), p. 052203. [CrossRef]
Kodavasal, J., Moiz, A. A., Ameen, M., and Som, S., 2018, “Using Machine Learning to Analyze Factors Determining Cycle-to-Cycle Variation in a Spark-Ignited Gasoline Engine,” ASME J. Energy Resour. Technol., 140(10), p. 102204. [CrossRef]
Richards, K., Probst, D., Pomraning, E., Senecal, P. K., and Scarcelli, R., “The Observation of Cyclic Variation in Engine Simulations When Using RANS Turbulence Modeling,” ASME Internal Combustion Engine Division Fall Technical Conference, Columbus, IN, Oct. 19–22, 2014, p. V002T06A010.
Scarcelli, R., Richards, K., Pomraning, E., Senecal, P., Wallner, T., and Sevik, J., 2016, “Cycle-to-Cycle Variations in Multi-Cycle Engine RANS Simulations,” SAE Paper No. 2016-01-0593.
Battistoni, M., Grimaldi, C., Cruccolini, V., Discepoli, G., and De Cesare, M., 2017, “Assessment of Port Water Injection Strategies to Control Knock in a GDI Engine Through Multi-Cycle CFD Simulations,” SAE Paper No. 2017-24-0034.
Han, Z., and Reitz, R. D., 1995, “Turbulence Modeling of Internal Combustion Engines Using RNG κ-ε Models,” Combust. Sci. Technol., 106(4–6), pp. 267–295. [CrossRef]
Amsden, A.A., 1997, “KIVA-3V: A Block Structured KIVA Program for Engines With Vertical or Canted Valves,” Los Alamos National Laboratory, Technical Report No. LA-13313-MS.
Leguille, M., Ravet, F., Le Moine, J., Pomraning, E., Richards, K., and Senecal, P. K., 2017, “Coupled Fluid-Solid Simulation for the Prediction of Gas-Exposed Surface Temperature Distribution in a SI Engine,” SAE Paper No. 2017-01-0669.
Reitz, R. D., 1987, “Modeling Atomization Processes in High-Pressure Vaporizing Sprays,” Atomization Spray Technol., 3, pp. 309–337.
Beale, J. C., and Reitz, R. D., 1999, “Modeling Spray Atomization With the Kelvin-Helmholtz/Rayleigh-Taylor Hybrid Model,” Atomization Spray, 9(6), pp. 623–650. [CrossRef]
Schmidt, D. P., and Rutland, C. J., 2000, “A New Droplet Collision Algorithm,” J. Comput. Phys., 164(1), pp. 62–80. [CrossRef]
Peters, N., 1986, “Laminar Flamelet Concepts in Turbulent Combustion,” Symp. (Int.) Combust., 21(1), pp. 1231–1250. [CrossRef]
Tan, Z., and Reitz, R. D., 2003, “Modeling Ignition and Combustion in Spark-Ignition Engines Using a Level Set Method,” SAE Paper No. 2003-01-0722.
Peters, N., 2000, Turbulent Combustion, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Wang, H., Yao, M., Yue, Z., Jia, M., and Reitz, R. D., 2015, “A Reduced Toluene Reference Fuel Chemical Kinetic Mechanism for Combustion and Polycyclic-Aromatic Hydrocarbon Predictions,” Combust. Flame, 162(6), pp. 2390–2404. [CrossRef]
Metghalchi, M., and Keck, J. C., 1982, “Burning Velocities of Mixtures of Air and Methanol, Isooctane and Indolene at High Pressures and Temperatures,” Combust. Flame, 48, pp. 191–210. [CrossRef]
Gulder, O.L., 1984, “Correlations of Laminar Combustion Data for Alternative S.I. Engine Fuels,” SAE Paper No. 841000.
Babajimopoulos, A., Assanis, D. N., Flowers, D. L., Aceves, S. M., and Hessel, R. P., 2005, “A Fully Coupled Computational Fluid Dynamics and Multi-Zone Model With Detailed Chemical Kinetics for the Simulation of Premixed Charge Compression Ignition Engines,” Int. J. Engine Res., 6(5), pp. 497–512. [CrossRef]
Dahms, R. N., Drake, M. C., Fansler, T. D., Kuo, T.-W., and Peters, N., 2011, “Understanding Ignition Processes in Spray-Guided Gasoline Engines Using High-Speed Imaging and the Extended Spark-Ignition Model SparkCIMM. Part A: Spark Channel Processes and the Turbulent Flame Front Propagation,” Combust. Flame, 158(11), pp. 2229–2244. [CrossRef]
Colin, O., and Truffin, K., 2011, “A Spark Ignition Model for Large Eddy Simulation Based on an FSD Transport Equation (ISSIM-LES),” Proc. Combust. Inst., 33(2), pp. 3097–3104. [CrossRef]
Gubba, S. R., Jupudi, R. S., Pasunurthi, S. S., Wijeyakulasuriya, S. D., Primus, R. J., Klingbeil, A., and Finney, C. E. A., 2018, “Capturing Pressure Oscillations in Numerical Simulations of Internal Combustion Engines,” ASME J. Energy Resour. Technol., 140(8), p. 082205. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Engine geometry used for simulations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Measured and predicted pressure traces. Circles are the peak pressure points for 300-cycle experimental measurements. Thin lines are 3rd to 10th cycles CFD predictions. Thick lines are experiment mean and CFD mean results. (a) 11.5 bar IMEP, SI = −10.18° aTDC, (b) 11.5 bar IMEP, SI = −13.47° aTDC, (c) 11.5 bar IMEP, SI = −14.23° aTDC, (d) 11.5 bar IMEP, SI = −15.21° aTDC, and (e) 7.5 bar IMEP, SI = −23° aTDC.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

CA10 and CA50 as function of spark timing for 11.5 bar IMEP condition. Closed symbol lines represent the experimental data, and open symbol lines represent CFD predictions.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Peak pressures at 11.5 bar IMEP condition. Each line represents a spark timing as indicated by the legend.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Span of peak pressure variation for 11.5 bar IMEP condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Visualization of in-cylinder process for a knocking case (eighth cycle, 11.5 bar IMEP and −16.2° aTDC spark timing). Top row: the surface in the center is the isosurface of G = 0; the surface along the liner is the isosurface of 2000 K in the unburnt end-gas. Bottom row: clip plane close to the cylinder head, colored by the difference between local pressure and global mean pressure.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Monitor point location and a radar chart of PDF for maximum pressure oscillation location

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Simulation results of (a) maximum pressure oscillation and (b) end-gas heat release rate for three cases at 11.5 bar IMEP condition with varying Mach CFLs and spark timings

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Calculated convective CFL (CFLU) and Mach CFL (CFLMach) from CFD simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

KI versus peak pressure for 11.5 bar IMEP condition. Dots represent each cycle result. The line is a quadratic regression fitting curve.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

KI as function of spark timing for (a) 11.5 bar IMEP and (b) 7.5 bar IMEP conditions. Dots represent KI at each cycle. Circle line is the KI extrema and square line is the KI of sixth cycle using Mach CFL of 50. Triangle line is the prediction using Mach CFL of 5, divided by a factor of 2.



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In