4.7 Article

The Miller cycle effects on improvement of fuel economy in a highly boosted, high compression ratio, direct-injection gasoline engine: EIVC vs. LIVC

期刊

ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT
卷 79, 期 -, 页码 59-65

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2013.12.022

关键词

Fuel economy; Gasoline engines; Intake boosting; Miller cycle; Knock; Pumping loss

资金

  1. Doctoral Fund of Ministry of Education of China [20120073120059]
  2. Shanghai Pujiang Program [13PJ1404300]
  3. Recruitment Program of Global Youth Experts of Chinese Government

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A combination of downsizing, highly boosting and direct injection (DI) is an effective way to improve fuel economy of gasoline engines without the penalties of reduced torque or power output. At high loads, however, knock problem becomes severer when increasing the intake boosting. As a compromise, geometric compression ratio (CR) is usually reduced to mitigate knock, and the improvement of fuel economy is discounted. Application of Miller cycle, which can be realized by either early or late intake valve closing (EIVC or LIVC), has the potential to reduce the effective CR and suppress knock. In this paper, the effects of EIVC and LIVC on the fuel economy of a boosted DI gasoline production engine reformed with a geometric CR of 12.0 are experimentally compared at low and high loads. Compared to the original production engine with CR 9.3, at the high load operation, the brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC) is improved by 4.7% with CR12.0 and LIVC, while the effect of EIVC on improving BSFC is negligibly small. At the low load operation, combined with CR12.0, LIVC and EIVC improve the fuel economy by 6.8% and 7.4%, respectively, compared to the production engine. The mechanism behind the effects of LIVC and EIVC on improving the fuel economy is discussed. These results will be a valuable reference for engine designers and researchers. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据