Energy Balance and Power Loss

Pathway Study of a 120 cc

Jason R. Blantin
Air Force Institute of Technology,
Four-Stroke Internal Combustion
Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433
e-mail: Jason.Blantin.3@us.af.mil Engine
Marc D. Polanka

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/gasturbinespower/article-pdf/140/7/072803/6180378/gtp_140_07_072803.pdf by Universidad Del Norte user on 23 November 2020

Air Force Institute of Technology,
Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433
e-mail: Marc.Polanka@afit.edu
Joseph K. Ausserer
U.S. Air Force Test Pilot School,
Edwards AFB, CA 93523
e-mail: Joseph.Ausserer.2@us.af.mil
Paul J. Litke
Air Force Research Laboratory,
Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433
e-mail: Paul.Litke.3@us.af.mil
Jacob A. Baranski
Innovative Scientific Solutions, Inc.,
Dayton, OH 45459
e-mail: Jacob.Baranski.ctr@us.af.mil
Efforts to improve the range and endurance of group 2 (10–25 kg), internal combustion
engine (ICE) powered unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have been underway for several
years at Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL). To obtain the desired performance
improvements, research into improving the overall efficiency of the ICE powerplants is of
great interest. The high specific energy of hydrocarbon fuels (13,000 W h/kg for gaso-
line), but low fuel conversion efficiency for small ICEs means that relatively minor
improvements in the fuel conversion efficiency of the engines can yield large improve-
ments in range and endurance. Little information is available however for the efficiency
of ICEs in the size range of interest (10–200 cm3 displacement volume) for group 2 UAVs.
Most of the currently available efficiency data for 10–200 cm3 ICEs is for two-stroke
engines. The goal of this study was to provide an in-depth probe of the efficiency and
energy losses of a small displacement four-stroke engine which could potentially be used
to power a group 2 UAV. Energy balances were performed on a Honda GX120 four-
stroke engine using empirical research methods. The engine was a 118 cm3 displacement,
single cylinder ICE. Energy pathways were characterized as a percentage of the total
chemical energy available in the fuel. Energy pathways were characterized into four cat-
egories: brake power, cooling load, exhaust sensible enthalpy and incomplete combus-
tion. The effect of five operating parameters was examined in the study. Fuel conversion
efficiency ranged from 22.2% to 25.8% as engine speed was swept from 2000 to 3600
RPM, from 20.8% to 27.3% as equivalence ratio was swept from 0.85 to 1.25, and from
15.7% to 24.9% as throttle was swept from 28.5% to 100%. Combustion phasing and cyl-
inder head temperature sweeps showed only minor changes in fuel conversion efficiency.
[DOI: 10.1115/1.4038881]

1 Introduction be 3.5–4.2% efficient. The impact of the differences in specific

energies of hydrocarbon fuels versus batteries is that small
Recent estimates have predicted that global unmanned aerial
improvements in ICE efficiency can yield large improvements in
vehicle (UAV) production spending will skyrocket from $4 billion
the range and endurance of group 2 UAVs while extensive
to $14 billion annually over the next decade [1]. The U.S. Air
improvements in battery specific energy are needed to provide
Force, specifically the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL),
similar results. The AFRL Small Engine Research Laboratory
has identified “propulsion methods and efficiency” as a key area
(SERL) has previously researched the power and efficiency of
of study in developing UAV technology for the future [2]. Part of
commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) 10–100 cm3 displacement two-
this boom in UAV demand and research is the constant drive to
stroke ICEs [3] for group 2 UAVs. Small Engine Research Labo-
lower operating costs either by development of new technologies
ratory also examined the possibility of running the same COTS
or optimization of current ones. The two current primary means of
engines on heavy fuels. Utilizing COTS engines for small UAVs
propulsion power for group 2 UAVs (10–25 kg) are electric
provides an inexpensive and easily available powerplant with little
motors and small internal combustion engines (ICEs).
to no development time required. In this study, a complimentary
The differences in the two types of propulsion systems lead to
analysis was performed on a 120 cm3 four-stroke ICE of similar
many design trade-offs. For instance, electric motors are powered
displacement and power to the previous SERL study. The engine
by batteries and are generally very efficient (75–90%). To achieve
was run on a test bench while varying engine speed, equivalence
maximum operating range, these batteries must store as much
ratio, combustion phasing, throttle setting, and engine cooling.
energy as possible in the lightest package possible. In other words,
Energy balances were performed on the engine for the various
they must have high specific energy. In a typical group 2 UAV
running conditions by experimentally measuring brake power,
application using a 600 W h/kg lithium–sulfur rechargeable bat-
cooling load, exhaust enthalpy, and incomplete combustion. Com-
tery, there is 450–540 W h/kg of usable energy. Internal combus-
plete understanding of the energy pathways of four-stroke engines
tion engines tend to be much less efficient, but run on fuels with
and how they compare to similar two-stroke engines will lay the
much higher specific energy (typically around 13,000 W h/kg). To
groundwork for future improvements in small ICE efficiency.
achieve the same amount of usable energy, an ICE only needs to

Contributed by the IC Engine Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL

OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received September 27,
2017; final manuscript received December 1, 2017; published online April 24, 2018.
Editor: David Wisler.
This material is declared a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to
copyright protection in the United States. Approved for public release; distribution is
unlimited.
2 Background
A compilation of brake mean effective pressure (BMEP) and
fuel conversion efficiency at peak engine power, using manufac-
turer provided performance data from ICEs of various configura-
tions (two-stroke, four-stroke, diesel, etc.) was published in 2013

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power JULY 2018, Vol. 140 / 072803-1
C 2018 by ASME
Copyright V
by Menon and Cadou [4]. A selection of microglow fuel engines
was characterized by Menon and Cadou and added to the manu-
facturer data, and general scaling laws were fitted to the data
points. The results have been reproduced in Figs. 1(a) and 1(b) by
Ausserer et al. [3] with data points added for three two-stroke
engines of 28, 55, and 85 cm3, which were tested at the SERL. A
key finding of Ausserer et al. was that the three two-stroke engines
exhibited short-circuiting (scavenging) losses of 40–50% [3]
under all wide open throttle (WOT) conditions. To highlight the
effect these high short-circuiting losses had on the fuel conversion
efficiency of the engines, Ausserer et al. plotted the fuel conver-
sion efficiency both with and without the short-circuiting losses as
shown in Fig. 1(b).
The region of Figs. 1(a) and 1(b) highlighted as “group 2
remotely piloted aircrafts” was sparsely populated in the original
figure and was the primary focus of research in both Ausserer
et al. [3] and this study. This particular displacement range was of
interest due to its proximity to the rapid drop in power and effi-
ciency seen on the left side of Figs. 1(a) and 1(b), and a general
lack of publicly available data regarding efficiency and energy
loss pathways in the group 2 UAV ICE power and displacement
range. There is an interest in determining the overall efficiency
and peak power of both two-stroke and four-stroke ICEs in this
range and a complete accounting of where all of the energy con-
tained in the fuel is dissipated, ultimately improving the effi-
ciency, range, and duration for group 2 UAVs. Of particular
interest is the question of where the energy is lost when the
40–50% short circuiting losses of two-stroke ICEs are no longer
present.
3 Methodology
A 120 cm3 displacement Honda GX120 four-stroke engine was
installed on the SERL small engine research bench (SERB), and
an energy balance was performed under various running condi-
tions. To accomplish this task, the test bench (previously used for
studies of 1–10 kW single cylinder two-stroke engines) was modi-
fied to handle four-stroke engines. The SERB, shown in Fig. 2,
consisted of several subsystems which are briefly discussed in the
following paragraphs.
Fig. 1 BMEP and overall engine efficiency at peak power for various ICE types and displacement volume. Adapted from
Menon and Cadou [4] and modified by Ausserer [5]: (a) BMEP as a function of displacement volume and (b) efficiency at peak
power as a function of displacement volume.
072803-2 / Vol. 140, JULY 2018
To enhance consistency of running conditions and provide
improved control of fuel/air flow into the engine, the
manufacturer-supplied carburetor was removed and replaced with
an electronic fuel injection (EFI) system adapted from a mix of
new and existing components on the SERB. An engine control
unit (ECU) originally designed and built at SERL [6] was paired
with an Ecotrons 18 mm throttle body and an Ecotrons EFIJ-2-128
(128 g/min) fuel injector. Fuel flow was measured with a Max
Machinery 213 Piston Type flow meter. To ensure proper fuel
delivery timing, a hall effect sensor was integrated onto the valve
cover of the four-stroke engine to detect intake valve position.
The engine was run on a primary reference fuel blend of 98% iso-
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/gasturbinespower/article-pdf/140/7/072803/6180378/gtp_140_07_072803.pdf by Universidad Del Norte user on 23 November 2020
octane and 2% n-heptane. Although manufacturer recommenda-
tions did not require 98 octane rating fuel, the mixture percentage
was used to maintain consistency with the previous SERL two-
stroke study. Intake air was ducted from inside the test cell, with
flow rate measurement provided by three TSI 40211 high per-
formance linear mass flow meters in parallel. Intake air was first
passed through a 55 gal baffle (seen in Fig. 2) to damp oscillations
in the flow before continuing on through a heat exchanger mated
to a Thermo Neslab RTE-211 recirculating water bath to control
intake air temperature at 30  C.
The test engine was started with a pneumatic motor and one-
way bearing coupled to the dynamometer torque input shaft which
was in turn coupled to the engine driveshaft via belts and pulleys.
A National Instruments Compact Field Point system (referred to
as low speed data acquisition (LSDAQ)) was used to acquire low-
speed data, send commands to the ECU, and control various sys-
tems on the research bench. High-speed, crank-angle resolved
data were collected with an AVL Indismart combustion analyzer.
Crank angle was detected and provided to the AVL system using
a U.S. Digital E6 optical encoder with 1800 counts per revolution.
Continuous in-cylinder pressure measurement was provided via
Kistler pressure transducer spark plugs.
3.1 Engine Selection. This study includes the characteriza-
tion of a single-cylinder, four-stroke COTS engine chosen to study
and compare to the two-stroke engines of Ausserer et al. [3] and
provide data to fill in the gap within Fig. 1 labeled group 2
Transactions of the ASME
 Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/gasturbinespower/article-pdf/140/7/072803/6180378/gtp_140_07_072803.pdf by Universidad Del Norte user on 23 November 2020
Fig. 2 The AFRL SERB

remotely piloted aircrafts. To be consistent with the previous
study, engine selection was limited to the power range of
1–10 kW. It was known from the outset that attempting to match
the power rating of two-stroke engines with four-stroke engines
would require roughly twice the displacement volume. The
engines studied in Ref. [3] were designed specifically for group
2 UAVs, where high power and low weight were the primary
design considerations. The manufacturer advertised peak power
output for the three engines of Ausserer et al. was 2.5, 3.82, and
6.76 kW [7] with displacement volumes of 28, 55, and 85 cm3,
respectively. The specific power based on the manufacturer adver-
tised peak power was 2.07, 1.97, and 2.83 kW/kg. When selecting
the four-stroke engine for this study, it was noted that most hobby
aircraft and small UAV four-stroke engines in the mid to high end
of the 2.5–6.76 kW power range were multicylinder engines. The
engine selected for testing was a 118 cm3 displacement volume
Honda GX120, design parameters of the engine are shown in
Table 1. Although the engine was not designed for small aircraft
specifically, it met the criteria for a single-cylinder engine with
the desired power rating (1.5–2.6 kW [8]) and was a low-cost
COTS alternative. Although the maximum advertised power rat-
ing of the Honda GX120 is only slightly higher than the adver-
tised peak power of the 28 cm3 two-stroke of Ausserer et al., it
should be noted that the SERB measured brake power of the
28 cm3 two-stroke engine was 1.02–1.59 kW, and the SERB meas-
ured brake power of the 55 cm3 two-stroke engine was
1.85–2.91 kW [3], illustrating that the measured peak brake power
was significantly lower than the advertised peak power ratings of
2.5 and 3.82 kW, respectively.
3.2 Energy Balance. An energy balance was performed on
the test engine to determine overall fuel conversion efficiency and
to characterize the energy pathways of the engine under various
running conditions. Energy entering the engine was supplied via
the fuel, while energy exiting the engine was categorized into four
pathways: brake power, cooling load, exhaust sensible enthalpy,
and incomplete combustion. Short circuiting losses were found to
be negligible for this engine.
Engine torque was measured using a Magtrol WB65 eddy cur-
rent dynamometer. Brake torque measurements were converted to
brake power by multiplying the dynamometer torque by the
engine’s rotational speed. The dynamometer was controlled using
the LSDAQ LabVIEW interface. Drivetrain losses were previ-
ously measured at 69.2 6 8.0 W per 1000 RPM [5]. Using the
manufacturer’s suggested engine speed range of 2000–3600 RPM
and advertised power curve, drivetrain losses accounted for
0.14 6 0.02 to 0.25 6 0.03 kW of power, or 9.3–9.6% of total
engine brake power. Drivetrain losses were added to the measured
brake power from the dynamometer to determine corrected brake
power. The equation used to calculate brake power was [9]
Pb ¼ 2pNsb (1)
The engine was cooled using a 2.25 kW blower motor, ducted into
a polycarbonate enclosure that completely encased the engine.
The blower motor was controlled using a variable frequency
drive, which was controlled using the LSDAQ. Cooling air flow
rate into the enclosure was measured using an Omega FMA900
hotwire anemometer. Inlet and outlet temperatures of the

Table 1 Honda GX120 engine design parameters [8]

Engine Displacement Peak power RPM at peak RPM Mass Specific power Bore Stroke Compression Cylinder surface area
volume (cm3) (kW) power range (kg) (kW/kg) (mm) (mm) ratio to volume ratio (1/cm)

Honda GX120 118 2.6 3600 2000–3600 13 0.20 60 42 8.5:1 1.14

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power JULY 2018, Vol. 140 / 072803-3

enclosure were measured using two arrays of three class A, 100 X
platinum resistance temperature detectors at the inlet and outlet of
the enclosure. Cooling load measurements include internal engine
friction losses, which were not measured independently in this
study. Using a control volume type approach, cooling load was
calculated using [9]
Pcool ¼ q_ ¼ m_ a cp;a ðTout  Tin Þ (2)
where m_ a was the mass flow rate of the cooling air, cp,a was the
constant pressure specific heat of the cooling air, and (Tout  Tin)
was the change in temperature across the control volume
(enclosure).
The remaining two energy pathways, exhaust sensible enthalpy
and incomplete combustion, were measured using the SERB
exhaust system. The SERB exhaust system was a three piece sys-
tem consisting of an insulated exhaust adapter, exhaust sampling
runner, and a noninsulated flexible exhaust runner. The sampling
runner contained eight ports for exhaust gas sampling with addi-
tional pressure and temperature taps near the sampling port closest
to the engine. Exhaust sample collection was accomplished using
6.35 mm diameter stainless steel tubing connected to the exhaust
sampling ports in accordance with recommendations from SAE
J254 [10].
Exhaust sensible enthalpy losses are the amount of energy it
would theoretically take to cool the exhaust products to the tem-
perature of the intake charge. To determine exhaust sensible
enthalpy losses, exhaust temperature was obtained via a class 1,
type K thermocouple installed in the exhaust adapter, 5 cm down-
stream from the cylinder head exhaust port. Temperature correc-
tions for radiation heat transfer were not made on the measured
exhaust temperature. The exhaust temperature was used with the
exhaust mixture enthalpy to calculate the enthalpy associated with
the temperature change. The exhaust mixture enthalpy was calcu-
lated using estimates of the amounts of CO, CO2, H2O, and N2 in
the exhaust based on a perfect incomplete combustion approxima-
tion. Intake and exhaust enthalpy were referenced to standard tem-
perature and pressure conditions, with a slight adjustment for
sensible enthalpy of the intake. Exhaust sensible enthalpy change
was calculated using the equation [11]
X
n; products
 
Pexh ¼ n_ exh vi ðhi  hi;298:15 Þ (3)
i power as measured for this engine. As seen in the figure, at 2000
where n_ exh was the total molar flow rate of the exhaust gases, vi
 
was the mole fraction of each product, and ðhi  hi;298:15 Þ was the
enthalpy per mole of each of the exhaust products, referenced to
298.15 K, calculated using NIST Shomate equation coefficients
[12].
Incomplete combustion losses are the energy losses associated
with the chemical energy in the CO, H2, and unburned hydrocar-
bons (UHCs) found in the exhaust gases of the engine. In ICEs
with negligible short circuiting, the UHCs are typically intermedi-
ate combustion products. Unburned hydrocarbons are separate
from short circuited fuel/air mixture (which is the result of scav-
enging and is completely unreacted). Incomplete combustion
losses were calculated using exhaust samples pulled from the
exhaust sampling ports using a R254-AT-AA1 Dia-Vac inert sam-
pling pump and collected in 2 L Supel Inert Foil Gas Sampling
Bags.
For hydrogen and carbon monoxide, exhaust samples were ana-
lyzed using an HP 6890 gas chromatograph (GC) with an Agilent
brand HP-MOLSIV column connected to a thermal conductivity
detector and converted to mass flow rates using the following gen-
eral equation (using intake air nitrogen concentration as an inter-
nal standard):
072803-4 / Vol. 140, JULY 2018
 
%i m_ air vN2
m_ i ¼ MWi (4)
%N2 MWN2
where m_ i was the mass flow rate of species “i” in the exhaust sam-
ple, %i was the percent of species i in the exhaust sample, %N2
was the percent of N2 in the exhaust sample, vN2 was the mass
fraction of N2 in air, MWi was the molecular weight of species i,
and MWN2 was the molecular weight of %N2.
For UHCs, exhaust samples were run through the same HP
6890 GC with a J&W Scientific 115-3532 alumina column con-
nected to a flame ionization detector, then converted to mass flow
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/gasturbinespower/article-pdf/140/7/072803/6180378/gtp_140_07_072803.pdf by Universidad Del Norte user on 23 November 2020
rates using the following general equation (using iso-octane in the
fuel as an internal standard)
  m_ v
yi;ex f isooctane;f
m_ i ¼ MWi (5)
yisooctane;ex MWisooctane
where yi,ex was the mole fraction of species i in the exhaust, yiso-
was the mole fraction of iso-octane in the exhaust, m_ f was
octane,ex
the mass flow rate of fuel, viso-octane,f was the mass fraction of iso-
octane in the fuel, and MWiso-octane was the molecular weight of
iso-octane. It should be noted that this method had higher uncer-
tainty under lean running conditions, and all assumptions of the
modified Watson method found in Ref. [5] applied. Further detail
of incomplete combustion loss determination can be found in Ref.
[13]. Power lost to incomplete combustion was then calculated
using [5]
X
Pinc ¼ n_ i ðhc;i Þ (6)
where n_ i was the molar flow rates of H2, CO, and UHCs in the
exhaust, and hc;i was the enthalpy of combustion per mole for H2,
CO, and UHCs in the exhaust.
4 Results and Discussion
The Honda GX120 engine was installed on the SERB and swept
through the manufacturer’s recommended operating range of
2000–3600 RPM. The baseline test conditions were / ¼ 1.05
6 0.02, throttle setting ¼ 100% (WOT), CA50 ¼ 8 6 0.2 deg after
top dead center (aTDC), and cylinder head temperature
¼ 140 6 1  C. Brake power versus engine speed for the engine is
shown Fig. 3(a); the line with triangles is the experimental brake
RPM the SERB brake power measurements were very similar to
the manufacturer provided data (solid line). As engine speed
increased, the measured power started to deviate from the manu-
facturer’s power curve. At 3600 RPM, the SERB brake power
measurement was nearly 3 kW, 15% higher than the 2.6 kW value
provided by the manufacturer. A significant difference was that the
engine was run on the SERB without a muffler. To understand this
impact, another data set (the line with circles) was collected with
the manufacturer’s muffler installed. Measured engine power with
the stock exhaust closely matched the supplied manufacturer data
with the exception of the data point taken at 3600 RPM.
Measured brake power at 3600 RPM with the stock exhaust
was 2.84 kW, 9.2% higher than the 2.6 kW value provided by the
manufacturer. One reason for the disparity at high engine speed
was that the Honda data was obtained using the engine’s stock
carburetor. The intake area of the stock carburetor on the GX 120
was 201 mm2 (16 mm bore), while the intake area of the SERB’s
Ecotrons 18 mm bore throttle body was 255 mm2. The larger throt-
tle body of the SERB EFI likely reduced the pumping losses asso-
ciated with the stock carburetor. The near linearity of the power
curves obtained on the SERB (both with and without the stock
muffler) suggest that the GX120 engine with the SERB EFI does
not become breathing limited at 3600 RPM, whereas the GX120
with the stock carburetor does. Furthermore, the SERB EFI and
Transactions of the ASME

Fig. 3 Power curves of (a) Honda GX120 brake power versus engine speed and (b) Modellmotoren 3W-55i
brake power versus engine speed engines across the manufacturer’s recommended operation ranges [3]
ECU allow for precise control of / and ignition timing, which the
stock carburetor and ignition did not.
Figure 3(b) shows the power curve of a two-stroke, 55 cm3 dis-
placement volume, 3W-55i engine run on the SERB. The 3W-55i
was tested using the SERB EFI system with a Currawong throttle
body and fuel injector and a SERB exhaust system of the same
diameter and design as the SERB exhaust used for the four-stroke
GX120 testing. Test conditions were / ¼ 1.06 6 0.02, throttle
setting ¼ 100% (WOT), CA50 ¼ 8 6 0.5 deg aTDC, and cylinder
head temperature ¼ 130 6 2  C as described in Ref. [3]. No
changes were made to the SERB drive train or dynamometer in
the interval between the 3W-55i engine runs and Honda GX120
engine runs. Comparison of the power curves in Figs. 3(a) and
3(b) shows that the two-stroke and four-stroke engines had similar
levels of brake power output across their respective engine speed
ranges. The slope of the 3W-55i engine’s power curve begins to
flatten above 6000 RPM, indicating that the engine was breathing
limited at higher speed while the slope of the GX120 engine does
not, suggesting that more power may be obtained from the larger
four-stroke engine if operated above the manufacturer’s suggested
RPM limit. The GX120 was not tested above 3600 RPM due to
concerns that excessive vibration or engine failure may occur.
4.1 Energy Balance Results
4.1.1 Speed Sweep. A complete energy balance of the Honda
GX120 as it was swept through the range of 2000–3600 RPM is
shown in Fig. 4. The baseline test conditions were / ¼ 1.05 6 0.02,
throttle setting ¼ 100% (WOT), CA50 ¼ 8 6 0.2 deg aTDC, and
cylinder head temperature ¼ 135 6 1  C. In Fig. 4(a), the power (in
kW) lost to each of the four energy pathways is shown, while
Fig. 4(b) represents the energy losses as a percentage of the total
fuel energy entering the engine. The clearest trend shown in Fig. 4
is that incomplete combustion became the dominant loss pathway
at low RPM (20.4% at 3600 RPM, 31.3% at 2000 RPM), while the
amount of energy lost to incomplete combustion remained rela-
tively consistent throughout the operating range (2.07–2.31 kW).
Fuel conversion efficiency ranged from 22.2% at 2000 RPM to
25.8% at 3600 RPM. The error bars shown indicate the total uncer-
tainty in the energy balance for each test point. For example, at
3600 RPM, brake power was 2.91 kW 6 0.10 kW (3.37%), cooling
load was 2.96 kW 6 0.29 kW (9.63%), exhaust enthalpy losses
were 2.92 kW 6 0.12 kW (9.63%), and incomplete combustion
losses were 2.31 kW 6 0.24 kW (10.34%). The combined uncer-
tainty of the four energy pathway measurements was 0.74 kW, or
6.51% of the total measured fuel energy entering the engine, which
was 11.39 kW.
A similar energy balance performed on a 3W-55i two-stroke
engine by Ausserer et al. [3] is shown in Fig. 5(a). Baseline test
conditions were / ¼ 1.06 6 0.02, throttle setting ¼ 100% (WOT),
CA50 ¼ 8 6 0.5 deg aTDC, and cylinder head temperature
Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/gasturbinespower/article-pdf/140/7/072803/6180378/gtp_140_07_072803.pdf by Universidad Del Norte user on 23 November 2020
¼ 140 6 2  C. The 3W-55i engine exhibited fuel conversion effi-
ciency ranging from 13.0% at 4000 RPM to 14.9% at 7500 RPM
and large short circuiting losses (40.1–47.6%) across the range of
operating speeds. To compare the performance of the four-stroke
and two-stroke engines, it is useful to view the two-stroke energy
balance as a percentage of trapped fuel energy, i.e., without short
circuiting, as shown in Fig. 5(b).
With the short circuiting losses removed, both the two-stroke
and four-stroke engines had similar percentage ranges of fuel con-
version efficiency (22–26%), while the four-stroke had higher
heat loss (25–29%) than the two stroke (18–20%) and slightly
lower exhaust enthalpy (21–26%) than the two-stroke
(28–31%). The four-stroke exhibited high levels of incomplete
combustion at low speed (31.3% at 2000 RPM), with a decreasing
trend as speed increased. The two-stroke engine showed the oppo-
site trend in incomplete combustion at the high end of the speed
range (30.1% at 7900 RPM). This may be in part due to the trend
shown in Fig. 3(b), which shows the two-stroke engine reaching
peak power at 7500 RPM, while the four-stroke appears to have
not yet reached its maximum potential at 3600 RPM. Figure 4(b)
also shows that the four-stroke engine data had a higher degree of
uncertainty at low speed, primarily driven by low brake torque
and cooling air flow rates.
The impact of the two-stroke short circuiting losses becomes
very apparent when the fuel conversion efficiency values from
Figs. 4(b) and 5(a) are converted to brake specific fuel consump-
tion (BSFC), as shown in Fig. 6. The four-stroke engine exhibited
BSFC values of 318–364 g/kWh, while the two-stroke had BSFC
values of 545–625 g/kWh, with the lowest BSFC for both engines
at the high end of the tested engine speeds. This finding suggests
that if these two engines were being compared for the purpose of
powering a small UAV, the weight penalty incurred by using the
four-stroke engine may be offset by the much lower fuel con-
sumption rate. Uncertainty in the GX120 BSFC measurements
ranged from 5.88% at 2000 RPM to 3.65% at 3600 RPM.
4.2 Parametric Studies. A series of parametric studies was
performed to examine the influence of /, throttle setting, combus-
tion phasing (CA50), and cooling load on the energy balance of
the Honda engine.
4.2.1 Equivalence Ratio Sweep. The GX120 engine was run
at equivalence ratios ranging from / ¼ 0.85 to / ¼ 1.25 as engine
speed was held constant at 2800 RPM, throttle was held at 100%
(WOT), CA50 was held at 8 deg aTDC, and cylinder head temper-
ature was held at 140  C. The engine speed chosen for the para-
metric studies was somewhat arbitrary, 2800 RPM was used,
because it was the midpoint of the recommended operation range.
The values used for throttle, CA50, and cylinder head temperature
were chosen to roughly match the operating parameters of the pre-
vious two-stroke study. As seen in Fig. 7, incomplete combustion
JULY 2018, Vol. 140 / 072803-5

Fig. 4 Honda GX120 speed sweep energy balance: (a) overall energy in each pathway (kW) and (b) percentage
of fuel energy in each pathway
Fig. 5 3W-55i speed sweep energy balance: (a) 3W-55i percentage of fuel energy in each pathway and (b) 3W-
55i percentage of fuel energy in each pathway with short circuiting removed
increased both in magnitude and as a percentage of fuel efficiency
as / increased, becoming the dominant energy pathway when /
was greater than 1.05. This was an expected result for a fuel rich
environment.
Fig. 6 BSFC of Honda GX120 four-stroke engine and 3W-55i
two-stroke engine
072803-6 / Vol. 140, JULY 2018
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/gasturbinespower/article-pdf/140/7/072803/6180378/gtp_140_07_072803.pdf by Universidad Del Norte user on 23 November 2020
Fuel conversion efficiency ranged from 27.3% at / ¼ 0.85 to
20.8% at / ¼ 1.25, a percent difference of 27.0%, while brake
power varied from 2.00 kW at / ¼ 0.85 to 2.23 kW at / ¼ 1.05
and 1.15, a percent difference of only 10.9%. This finding sug-
gests that running the engine at a / of 0.85 would be highly desir-
able considering the large gain in fuel conversion efficiency.
However, the engine did not run as consistently. Figure 8 shows
that coefficient of variance (CoV) of indicated mean effective
pressure (IMEP) was roughly three times higher at / ¼ 0.85 than
it was at / ¼ 1.05–1.25. A better alternative was seen at / ¼ 0.95,
where fuel conversion efficiency was 26.8%, with a CoV of IMEP
of 1.6%, which was more stable and very near the maximum effi-
ciency seen throughout the study.
Indicated mean effective pressure and CoV of IMEP for the
engine as it was run through the equivalence ratio sweep is shown
in Fig. 8. This figure shows that the engine IMEP varied little
from 7.63 bar at / ¼ 0.85 to 8.50 bar at / ¼ 1.05, but had much
higher CoV of IMEP (2.60%) at / ¼ 0.85, than at rich operating
conditions (0.89–1.09% at / ¼ 1.05–1.25). This suggests that,
although higher fuel conversion efficiency is achievable when
running the engine very lean, consistent power output at very lean
conditions is more difficult to achieve. High levels of cycle to
cycle variation in IMEP can also lead to accelerated wear of
engine components.
4.2.2 Throttle Sweep. Next the engine was run as the throttle
was varied from 28.5% open (44% volumetric efficiency) to
100% open (93% volumetric efficiency). Intake air flow rate was
Transactions of the ASME
 Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/gasturbinespower/article-pdf/140/7/072803/6180378/gtp_140_07_072803.pdf by Universidad Del Norte user on 23 November 2020
Fig. 7 Honda GX120 equivalence ratio sweep energy balance: (a) overall energy in each pathway (kW) and (b)
percentage of fuel energy in each pathway

monitored at each test point to ensure evenly spaced intervals

were maintained from point to point. To generalize the results,
intake air mass flow rates were then converted to volumetric effi-
ciency (gv). The volumetric efficiencies shown in the following
figures corresponded to intake air mass flow rates of 0.08 kg/min
(gv ¼ 0.44), 0.11 kg/min (gv ¼ 0.57), 0.13 kg/min (gv ¼ 0.68),
0.15 kg/min (gv ¼ 0.81), and 0.18 kg/min (gv ¼ 0.93, WOT).
Engine speed was held constant at 2800 RPM, / was held at 1.05,
CA50 was held at 8 deg aTDC, and cylinder head temperature
was held at 140  C. Figure 9 shows that incomplete combustion
became the dominant source of energy losses under throttled con-
ditions, while fuel conversion efficiency decreased from 24.9% at
WOT to 15.7% at 28.5% open throttle. The data showed a higher
degree of uncertainty at highly throttled conditions, driven by low
brake torque output and cooling air flow rates.
Figure 10 shows the combustion phasing throughout the throttle
sweep. As volumetric efficiency was varied from 0.44 to 0.93,
ignition timing ranged from 42 deg before top dead center (bTDC)
to 30.0 deg bTDC. CA10 ranged from 7.7 deg bTDC to 5.1 deg
bTDC while CA90 ranged from 22.3 deg aTDC to 19.1 deg
aTDC. The number of crank angle degrees required for a 10%
burn of the fuel in the cylinder (h0–10) and the number of crank
Fig. 8 IMEP (top) and CoV of IMEP (bottom) of GX120 from
equivalence ratio sweep
angle degrees required for a 90% burn of the fuel in the cylinder
(h0–90) reached a maximum of 36.0 deg and 64.6 deg, respectively,
when the volumetric efficiency was 0.44 (throttle 28.5% open)

Fig. 9 Honda GX120 throttle sweep energy balance: (a) overall energy in each pathway (kW) and (b) percentage
of fuel energy in each pathway

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power JULY 2018, Vol. 140 / 072803-7
 Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/gasturbinespower/article-pdf/140/7/072803/6180378/gtp_140_07_072803.pdf by Universidad Del Norte user on 23 November 2020
Fig. 10 Combustion phasing and burn angles of throttle sweep: (a) combustion phasing of throttle sweep
and (b) combustion duration burn angles for throttle sweep

Fig. 11 Honda GX120 CA50 sweep energy balance: (a) overall energy in each pathway (kW) and (b) IMEP (top)
and CoV of IMEP (bottom)

and were minimized at 22.8 deg and 43.8 deg, when the volumet-
ric efficiency was 0.81 (throttle 61.4% open).
4.2.3 CA50 Sweep. The next parametric study consisted of a
sweep of CA50 from 2 deg to 18 deg aTDC. Engine speed was
held constant at 2800 RPM, throttle was held at 100% (WOT), /
was held at 1.05, and cylinder head temperature was held at
140  C. Figure 11(a) shows that the engine showed little variation
in raw power values throughout the range of CA50 values tested.
Mean percentages of fuel energy were 24.7% brake power, 26.7%
cooling load, 25.0% exhaust enthalpy, and 22.3% incomplete

Fig. 12 Combustion phasing and burn angles of CA50 sweep: (a) combustion phasing of CA50 sweep and (b)
combustion duration burn angles for CA50 sweep

072803-8 / Vol. 140, JULY 2018 Transactions of the ASME

 increased to 2.91 kW at 3600 RPM, a 12% increase over the stock
configuration. An important aspect of this investigation was how
the fuel energy was dissipated by the engine and how that com-
pared to two-stroke engines of similar brake power output. At the
baseline condition, the four stroke engine converted 25% of the
fuel to power, with 26% lost to heat transfer, another 25% lost as
exhaust enthalpy, and 23% lost as incomplete combustion. To pro-
duce a similar power, the 3W-55i engine only converts 14% of the
fuel to power resulting in a nearly two times higher BSFC. There-
fore, the added weight of the four-stroke engine may offset the
added weight of the fuel needed to power a two-stroke engine for
the same mission. Finally, the investigation studied five typical

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/gasturbinespower/article-pdf/140/7/072803/6180378/gtp_140_07_072803.pdf by Universidad Del Norte user on 23 November 2020

control parameters to quantify each parameter’s impact on fuel
conversion efficiency. The primary factor that increased efficiency
for the Honda GX120 was running the engine lean (gf ¼ 27% at
/ ¼ 0.85), while operating at a reduced throttle setting caused a
significant decrease in efficiency (gf ¼ 16% at a 29% open throt-
tle). Varying the engine speed had a small (3%) effect on effi-
ciency over the speed range while changing the CA50 for the
engine and adjusting the head temperatures resulted in less than a
Fig. 13 Honda GX120 cylinder head temperature sweep energy 1% change over their operational range. Four-stroke engines may
balance be tailored to achieve the power required for category 2 UAVs at
higher fuel conversion efficiency than comparable two-stroke
combustion. Figure 11(b) shows the change in IMEP across the engines. These data set represent one of the first complete energy
range of CA50 values tested, with peak IMEP at CA50 ¼ 8 deg accountings in this size class, and the facility is now capable of
aTDC. This is consistent with typical CA50 values for maximum measuring changes in those pathways to enable designers to
brake torque found in ICE textbooks such as Heywood [9] and understand and control these loss mechanisms.
Taylor [14]. The engine showed a high tolerance for the wide
range of CA50 values, with CoV of IMEP ranging from a low of Nomenclature
0.84% at CA50 ¼ 8 deg aTDC to 2.38% at CA50 ¼ 18 deg aTDC.
Figure 12 shows the combustion phasing throughout the CA50 Variables
sweep. As CA50 was varied from 2 deg aTDC to 18 deg aTDC, c ¼ specific heat
ignition timing ranged from 40.0 deg bTDC to 21.0 deg bTDC. CA10 ¼ 10% mass fraction burn angle
CA10 ranged from 14.5 deg bTDC to 2.8 deg aTDC, while CA90 CA50 ¼ 50% mass fraction burn angle
ranged from 6.6 deg aTDC to 31.4 deg aTDC. h0–10 were rela- CA90 ¼ 90% mass fraction burn angle
tively static, reaching a maximum of 25.5 deg when CA50 was h ¼ specific enthalpy
2 deg bTDC and a minimum of 23.8 deg when CA50 was 18 deg N ¼ rotational speed
aTDC. h0–90 showed more variation, with the opposite trend, nR ¼ crank revolutions per power stroke
reaching a maximum of 52.4 deg when CA50 was 18 deg aTDC, P ¼ power
and a minimum of 46.6 deg when CA50 was 2 deg bTDC. q_ ¼ heat transfer rate
T ¼ temperature
4.2.4 Head Temperature Sweep. The last parametric study V ¼ volume
was a cylinder head temperature sweep from 120  C to 160  C in y ¼ mole fraction
10  C intervals. To generalize the results, the velocity of the cool- D ¼ change
ing air was used to distinguish test points. The 120 C head tem- g ¼ efficiency
perature corresponded to an equivalent air speed of 31.5 m/s, h ¼ crank angle
130  C was at 28.1 m/s, 140  C was at 22.2 m/s, 150  C was at h0–10 ¼ 0–10% mass fraction burn angle
19.2 m/s, and 160  C head temperature was at 16.2 m/s. Engine h0–90 ¼ 0–90% mass fraction burn angle
speed was held constant at 2800 RPM, throttle was held at 100% s ¼ torque
(WOT), / was held at 1.05, and CA50 was held at 8 deg aTDC. / ¼ equivalence ratio
Figure 13 shows that the engine displayed little variation in raw v ¼ mass fraction
power values throughout the range of cylinder head temperature
values tested. Mean percentages of fuel energy were 24.5% brake
Subscripts
power, 27.2% cooling load, 24.2% exhaust enthalpy, and 20.7%
incomplete combustion. a ¼ air
b ¼ brake
c ¼ combustion
5 Summary/Conclusions cool ¼ cooling
In this investigation, the SERB facility was modified to investi- d ¼ displacement
gate the performance of small four-stroke engines for use in cate- f ¼ formation, fuel
gory 2 UAVs. With this facility a complete accounting of all h ¼ enthalpy
energy entering and exiting the Honda GX120 engine was inc ¼ incomplete combustion
obtained through purely experimental methods and compared to N2 ¼ nitrogen
the performance of a two-stroke engine with similar brake power p ¼ constant pressure
output. Initial results verified the brake power curve against the s ¼ sensible
manufacturer’s expectations for the Honda GX120 operating in v ¼ volumetric
the stock configuration. Engine performance was then improved References
by converting from the stock carburetor to an electronic fuel injec- [1] Finnegan, P., 2016, “Press Release: UAV Production Will Total $93 Billion,”
tion system coupled with an enhanced engine control unit. The The Teal Group Corporation, Fairfax, VA, accessed May 20, 2016, http://
muffler was also removed. As a result, maximum brake power www.tealgroup.com

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power JULY 2018, Vol. 140 / 072803-9
[2] U.S. Air Force, 2005, “The U.S. Air Force Remotely Piloted Aircraft and
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Strategic Vision,” U.S. Air Force, Washington, DC.
[3] Ausserer, J., Polanka, M., Litke, P., and Grinstead, K., 2017, “The Scaling of
Loss Mechanisms in 1–10 kW Two-Stroke Internal Combustion Engines,” SAE
Int. J. Engines, 10(2), pp. 128–143.
[4] Menon, S., and Cadou, C., 2013, “Scaling of Miniature Piston-Engine Performance
Part 1: Overall Engine Performance,” J. Propul. Power, 29(4), pp. 774–787.
[5] Ausserer, J., 2016, “Scaling of Heat Transfer and Loss Mechanisms in Small
Scale Internal Combustion Engines,” Ph.D. thesis, Air Force Institute of Tech-
nology, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH.
[6] Baranski, J., 2013, “Experimental Investigation of Octane Requirement in a
Turbocharged Spark-Ignition Engine,” M.S. thesis, University of Dayton, Day-
ton, OH.
[7] 3W-Modellmotoren, 2016, “3W Engines and Airplanes,” 3W-Modellmotoren
GmbH, Hanau, Germany, accessed July 13, 2016, http://3w-modellmotoren.de
072803-10 / Vol. 140, JULY 2018
[8] American Honda Motor, 2014, “Honda Gx Series Engines,” Sales Brochure,
Alpharetta, GA.
[9] Heywood, J., 1988, Internal Combustion Engine Fundamentals, McGraw-Hill,
New York.
[10] SAE, 2011, “Instrumentation and Techniques for Exhaust Gas Emissions Meas-
urement,” SAE International, Warrendale, PA, SAE Standard No. J254_201106.
[11] Turns, S., 2012, An Introduction to Combustion: Concepts and Applications,
McGraw-Hill, New York.
[12] NIST, 2016, “NIST Chemistry Webbook,” National Institute of Standards and
Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, accessed Oct. 21, 2014, http://webbook.nist.gov
[13] Ausserer, J., Horn, K., Polanka, M., Litke, P., and Grinstead, K., 2015,
“Quantification of Short-Circuiting and Trapping Efficiency in a Small Internal
Combustion Engine by GC-MS and GC-TCD,” SAE Paper No. 2015-32-0716.
[14] Taylor, C., 1985, The Internal Combustion Engine in Theory and Practice: Vol-
ume 1: Thermodynamics, Fluid Flow, Performance, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/gasturbinespower/article-pdf/140/7/072803/6180378/gtp_140_07_072803.pdf by Universidad Del Norte user on 23 November 2020
Transactions of the ASME