Impacts of Biofuel Blending on MCCI Ignition Delay with Review of Methods for Defining Cycle-by-Cycle Ignition Points from Noisy Cylinder Pressure Data
Conventional diesel combustion, also known as Mixing-Controlled Compression Ignition (MCCI), is expected to be the primary power source for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles for decades to come. Displacing petroleum-based ultra-low-sulfur diesel (ULSD) as much as possible with low-net-carbon biofuels will become necessary to help mitigate effects on climate change. Neat biofuels may have difficulty meeting current diesel fuel standards but blends of 30% biofuel in ULSD show potential as ‘drop-in’ fuels. These blends must not make significant changes to the combustion phasing of the MCCI process if they are to be used interchangeably with neat ULSD. An important aspect of MCCI phasing is the ignition delay (ID), i.e. the time between the start of fuel injection and the initial premixed autoignition that initiates the MCCI process. Bench experiments can evaluate the expected ignition delay of a fuel via cetane number (CN) or alternative methods such as the indicated cetane number (ICN); however, neither CN nor ICN correlate perfectly with the ignition delay measured in actual engine experiments. Furthermore, there is no standardized methodology on how to quantify MCCI ignition delay from engine cylinder pressure measurements, creating difficulties in cross-study comparison. In this study, several engine ignition delay calculation methods are evaluated for robustness in deriving ignition delay on both a cycle-averaged and cycle-to-cycle basis. Eight biofuel blends with varying ICN, oxygen concentration and other fuel properties were used to study the different methods. This yields a thorough analysis of how certain biofuel blends affect ignition delay and the entire MCCI process, as well as a thorough evaluation of the differences between the ID calculation methods. Many of these methods are equally valid, but the choice of method has a significant impact on the resulting ID, which must be carefully considered when evaluating results across multiple studies.