In-depth comparison of methanol port and direct injection strategies in a methanol/diesel dual fuel engine

For methanol/diesel dual-fuel combustion, there are two different methanol injection implementations: port injection into the intake manifold and direct injection into cylinder. In this work, an experimental comparison was conducted for the two methanol injection strategies to study the effects of the methanol-energy-substation ratio (ESR) and diesel injection timing on the fuel-air mixing and combustion characteristics. The results showed that the ignition delay was increased with ESR due to the cooling effect of methanol evaporation in the cylinder. The combustion duration under methanol direct injection condition was much shorter than that of the methanol port injection strategy. The methanol direct injection strategy had a more controllable and stable heat release than that of methanol port injection strategy. The maximum ESR could reach up to 96.0% in the methanol direct injection strategy. The methanol direct injection strategy had a better fuel economy, and its maximum indicated thermal efficiency could reach up to 41.55% at 50% ESR. The methanol direct injection strategy yielded higher NOx emissions than that with the port injection strategy, accompanied by a mild increase of soot emissions. Compared with methanol port injection, the methanol direct injection strategy exhibits lower CO emissions, however, it suffers from higher HC emissions.

Automated summary

An experimental comparison between port injection and direct injection of methanol in diesel engines was conducted to study the effects on fuel-air mixing and combustion. The results showed that direct injection had a more controllable heat release and better fuel economy, but higher NOx and HC emissions compared to port injection.