Exploring the high load potential of diesel–methanol dual-fuel operation with Miller cycle,exhaust gas recirculation,and intake air cooling on a heavy-duty diesel engine

Legislations concerning emissions from heavy-duty diesel engines are becoming increasingly stringent. This requires conventional diesel combustion to be compliant using costly and sophisticated aftertreatment systems. Preferably, diesel–methanol dual-fuel is one of the suitable alternative combustion modes as it can potentially reduce the formation of nitrogen oxide and soot emissions which characterised the diesel mixing-controlled combustion. This is primarily due to the high latent heat of vaporisation and oxygen content of the methanol fuel. At high engine loads, however, the potential of diesel–methanol dual-fuel operation is constrained by the excessive combustion pressure rise rate and peak in-cylinder pressure, which limits both the engine efficiency and the percentage of methanol that can be used. For the first time, experimental studies were conducted to explore advanced combustion control strategies such as Miller cycle, exhaust gas recirculation, and intake air cooling for improving upon high load diesel–methanol dual-fuel combustion. Experiments were carried out at 1200 r/min and 18 bar indicated mean effective pressure on a single-cylinder heavy-duty diesel engine, which equipped with a high pressure common rail diesel injection, a methanol port fuel injection, and a variable valve actuation system on the intake camshaft. Results showed that the methanol energy fraction of a conventional diesel–methanol dual-fuel operation with a baseline intake valve closing timing was limited to 28%. This was due to the high combustion temperature at a high load which advanced the ignition timing of the premixed charge, resulting in high levels of pressure rise rate. The application of lower effective compression ratio and intake air temperature (T_int) effectively decreased the compression temperature, which successfully delayed the ignition timing of the premixed charge. This allowed for a more advanced diesel injection timing to achieve improvement in the thermal efficiency and potentially enabled a higher methanol substitution ratio. Although the introduction of exhaust gas recirculation demonstrated very slight impact on the ignition timing of the premixed charge, a higher net indicated efficiency was observed due to a relatively lower local combustion temperature which reduced heat transfer loss. Moreover, the optimised diesel–methanol dual-fuel operation allowed a higher methanol energy fraction of 40% to be used at an effective compression ratio of 14.3 and T_int of 305 K and achieved the highest net indicated efficiency of 47.4%, improving by 3.7% and 2.6%, respectively, when compared to the optimised conventional diesel combustion (45.7%) and conventional diesel–methanol dual-fuel (46.2%). This improvement was accompanied with a reduction of 37% in nitrogen oxide emissions and little impact on soot emissions in comparison with the conventional diesel combustion.