Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018

The Engineering Society

For Advancing Mobility
Land Sea Air and Space®

INTERNATIONAL 400 COMMONWEALTH DRIVE, WARRENDALE, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A.

SAE Technical
Paper Series

902169
A Model for Hydrocarbon Emissions from
SI Engines
Jesper Schramm and Spencer C. Sorenson
Laboratory for Energetics
Technical University of Denmark

Reprinted from SP-839 –

New Directions and Developments in
Automotive Emission Control

International Fuels and Lubricants

Meeting and Exposition
Tulsa, Oklahome
October 22-25, 1990
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018

The papers included in this volume

are abstracted and Indexed in the
SAE Global Mobility Database

No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in

an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without the prior
written permission of the publisher.

ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright 1990 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for
the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE. The author presentation or publication through SAE should send the
is solely responsible for the content of the paper. A process manuscript or a 300 word abstract of a proposed
is available by which discussions will be printed with the manuscript to: Secretary, Engineering Activity Board, SAE.
paper if it is published in SAE Transactions. For permission
to publish this paper in full or in part, contact the SAE
Publications Division. Printed in USA
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018

902169
A Model for Hydrocarbon Emissions from
SI Engines
Jesper Schramm and Spencer C. Sorenson
Laboratory for Energetics
Technical University of Denmark

ABSTRACT passage. This layer was postulated to be the main

source of hydrocarbon emissions in the exhaust.
A model which calculates the hydrocarbon emissions Later studies (1, 2)* showed that hydrocarbons formed
from an SI engine is presented. The model was
by wall quenching in the combustion chamber will
developed in order to obtain a better under-standing of
quickly diffuse into the hot bulk gases and the
experimental results from an engine operating on consequent oxidation will result in essentially complete
different fuels and lubricants. The model is based on
removal of the hydrocarbons. At the present time, the
the assumptions that fuel is stored in crevices and oil
most widely accepted mechanisms for hydrocarbon
film during intake and compression followed by emissions in exhaust gasses of spark ignition engines
desorption during expansion and exhaust. The model
are:
also calculates the amount of desorbed material that
undergoes in cylinder oxidation and exhaust port
a) crevices in the combustion chamber which are
oxidation. The model succesfully predicts the trends
filled with unburned mixture during compression,
followed by varying different engine parameters. The
and remain unburned after flame passage, since
effect of changing the lubricant is of the same order of
the flame cannot propagate into the crevices.
magnitude as found experimentally, but the effect of
changing the fuel could not be predicted very well by
b) the oil film on the cylinder wall absorbs fuel during
the model. A possible explanation is, that the lubricant
the intake and compression processes, and the
film thickness varies due to viscosity variations of the
fuel is desorbed after the completion of
oil film, when the fuel is dissolved in the film.
combustion.

c) in a manner similar to b), the fuel is absorbed and

desorbed in deposits on the surface of the
INTRODUCTION combustion chamber.

The formation of hydrocarbon emissions in spark

d) incomplete combustion in situations with mixtures
ignition engines has been studied throughout the past
near the flammability limit.
35 years. The earliest theories were based on the wall
quench mechanism at the cold combustion chamber
walls, whi ch resulted in a small layer of unburned In order to improve understanding of previous
hydrocarbons after flame measurements of hydrocarbon emissions from a
research engine using different combinations of
lubricant and fuel (3, 4), a simulation model was
*Numbers in parentheses designate references at end
developed. The purpose of the model is
of paper

163
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018
to investigate some of the various theories for
hydrocarbon emission formation by comparing model
predictions with experimental results. Earlier important
model studies has been made by Daniel (5), Lavoie et.
al (6), Lavoie and Blumberg (7), Shyy and Adamson
(8) and Dent and Lakshminarayanan (9).
since the engine used for the experimental was
deposit free, and since the engine was operated far
away from the flammability limits, the resulting model
only contains the effects of mechanisms a) and b)
above.
The purpose of this paper is to compare the previous
measurements of hydrocarbon emissions with the
predictions of the simulation in order to evaluate the
theories incorporated into the simulation model. In
order to investigate the general applicability of the
model, the predictions of the model are also compared
to the independent experimental results of Lavoie and
Blumberg (7).
MODEL
The complete engine model consists of three
submodels; a thermodynamic model for combustion
chamber gasses, a hydrocarbon formation model, and
a post-flame oxidation model. The thermodynamic
model calculates the physical and chemical conditions
in the cylinder as a function of crank angle. The
hydrocarbon model calculates the amount of unburned
hydrocarbons in the cylinder as a function of crank
angle and calculates the respective contributions from
the oil film and the crevices. The post-flame oxidation
model is used to calculate the oxidation of the
hydrocarbons which appear in the bulk cylinder
gasses after the main combustion process is
completed, as well as oxidation in the exhaust port.
Termodynamic model
Basic Assumptions
The assumptions made in the development of the
model are the following:
1. The fuel is completely vaporized and has the
composition CnH2n and a mass specific heat
equal to that of ethylene.
2. All substances are ideal gases with temperature
dependent specific heats.
164
3. Intake and exhaust ports are constant pressure
reservoirs.
4. Intake and exhaust valve flow are isentropic with
empirical flow coefficients.
5. There is no dissociation of the products of
combustion.
6. Heat transfer is calculated through the use of the
Woschni heat transfer correlation (10).
7. The pressure is uniform throughout the
combustion chamber.
8. The combustion process is modeled through an
empirical equation for the rate of heat release.
9. The residual gases and the fresh charge in the
combustion chamber are completely mixed at all
times.
10. Reverse flow gases through the intake valve
during overlap and at the end of the compression
stroke remain seperate from the incoming fuel air
mixture in the intake manifold. The back flow is
completely purqed from the intake manifold
before any new fresh charge enters the
combustion chamber.
The equations for the thermodynamic model are given
in Appendix 1.
Calculation of the oil film temperature
Since the solubility of fuel in the lubricant is
temperature dependent, it is necessary to know the
temperature of the lubricant film.
The temperature profile in the area of the wall is shown
schematically in Figure 1. The most
Figure 1. Temperature profile near the cylinder
wall.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018
significant temperature drops occur in the boundary
layers of the combustion chamber gasses and the
coolant. It is therefore reasonable to assume that the
temperature of the oil film and the cylinder wall are
constant and equal.
Lavoie et. al., (6) have reported an average heat
transfer coefficient, U , between the wall and the
coolant over an engine cycle. Using the heat transfer
coefficient, the heat transfer through the cylinder wall
can be calculated as:
φ = A ⋅ U ( Tc – Tw )
where:
Tc is the coolant temperature
A is the average area in contact with the
cylinder gasses:
where: tc is the time for 1 engine cycle.
Woschni (10) presents a method to calculate the
instantaneous heat transfer from the cylinder gasses
via a heat transfer coefficent, h. The instantaneous
heat transfer is then:
φ (t ) = A ( t ) ⋅ h (t ) ⋅ (Tw – T (t ) )
since the wall temperature T w is assumed constant
over an engine cycle. T(t) is the mass average
temperature of the cylinder gasses at time, t.
Since the heat transfer for the complete cycle must be
the same over the entire cross section shown in Figure
1 the following must be valid:
T w can be found from this expression by iteration in
the model, since A(t), h(t) and T(t) are calculated in the
cycle simulation.
The value of U was selected to agree with
experimental results of Huls et. al. (12), which show
that Tw is about 30 K larger than the coolant
temperature in the reference condition. This results in
a value of U of 0,3 kW/m2-K instead of the value from
(6), which was 1, 8.
(1) The oil film temperature was set equal to T w , since
the temperature over the oil film was assumed to be
constant.
HYDROCARBON MODE
Oil mechanism
A fundamental assumption for the model of the
absorption and desorption of fuel components in the oil
film on the cylinder wall is that the diffusion of the fuel
in the oil film is the limiting factor. This is a reasonable
assumption, since the diffusion constant, D, in the
liquid phase is approximately 104 times smaller than
the corresponding value in the gas phase. In addition,
it is assumed that traverse flow across the oil film is
negligible. With these assumptions, it is possible to
(3) calculate the concentration profile of the fuel in the oil
film completely analytically.
Figure 2 shows a cross section of the oil film. Using
the coordinate system shown in the figure, the mass
concentration, C(x, t) of fuel in the oil film can be
determined as a function of distance to the cylinder
wall and time using the diffusion equation:
2
∂c ∂ C
------ – D ----------- = 0 (5)
∂t 2
∂x
With the appropriate boundary conditions:
∂C
------- ( o, t ) = 0 (5a)
∂x
c(1, t) = F(t) (5b)
c(x, 0) = 0 (5c)
165
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018

where F(t) is a known function. Boundary condition

(5c) corresponds to the situation where the engine has
just been filled with fresh oil, i. e. there is no fuel in the
oil film. This is actually not important, since in this
study we are only interested in the steady-state
condition, that is the solution for t → ∞. Equation (5c) is
used as the last boundary condition, since it gives the
simplest calculations. As the gas liquid interface,
Henry’s law is assumed to apply:
H · x 2 = p2 (6)

p P 2
= ----  -------
p
=> X = ---- Y
2 H p  H 2
where: X2 is the mole fraction of fuel in the oil,
p2 is the pressure of fuel in the gas phase
mixture,
H is Henry’s constant for the fuel disolved in
the oil,
p is the total pressure of the gas mixture.
Y2 is the mole fraction of fuel in the gas
mixture.
Using v1 and v2 as the number of moles of oil and fuel
in the liquid phase, and g2 and g3 as the moles of fuel
and other gasses in the gas phase, equation (6) can
be written:
Figure 2. Cross section of wall / oil film.
Then:

M
3
where: K = -------------------
*
H ⋅ M2
Using m to denote mass and M to denote molecular
weight: F(t) is known, since p(t) and Ym(t) are known from the
thermodynamic model, and H* is known from
experimental measurements (3, 4). M2 and M3 are the
molecular weights of the fuel and the complete fuel air
mixture respectively.
(5) can be written:

* M1
Since H = H ⋅ -------- and Ym is the mass fraction of fuel
M
2
in the gas phase.

166
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018

where: the element shown, F* falls to V5 at this time. During

expansion, the piston passes the element at the time
T3 on its way down, and F* decreases to 0, since the
concentration of fuel in the gas phase now is 0. At time
T5, the piston again passes the element on its way up
during the exhaust stroke. At this time, the value of F*
where 1 is the oil film thickness and Y UB is the mass once again is V5.
fraction of fuel in the unburned mixture. Details of the solution of equation (8) with the F*
The boundary conditions for this equation become: function shown in Figure 3 can be found in (4).
crevice mechanism.
It is assumed that the pressures in the cylinder and the
crevice volumes are the same throughout the
complete engine cycle, and that the temperature in the
crevice volumes is equal to the piston temperature,
since the most significant crevice volume from our
experimental engine (3.4) is found behind the piston
ring and is surrounded by the piston walls. This means
that the mass mc of unburned charge in the crevice
volume can be calculated as:
If the oil film is divided into small elements in the
vertical direction, a typical element F*(t*) will in
principle have the variation over an engine cycle
shown in Figure 3. At the start of the engine cycle, F*
is equal to an initial value V5, since the piston is
located above the element. That is, the element at that
time is in the crankcase environment. At time To, the and the time rate of change of mc is:
piston passes the element on the intake stroke and F*
is equal to V1. At time T1, the pressure rise from
compression starts and lasts until time T2, at which
time either combustion causes F* to decrease to 0, or
else the piston passes the element during
compression, and in this case F* falls to V 5 (crankcase
environment). For

Figure 3. Principal variation of F*(t) with crank angle.

167
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018

where: p is the cylinder pressure, Post-Flame Oxidation in the cylinder.

Vc is the crevice volume,
M is the molecular weight of the unburned Post-flame oxidation in the cylinder is assumed to
mixture, occur in a boundary layer near the cylinder wall, where
R is the gas constant the temperature is equal to the average of the wall and
Tp is the piston temperature. cylinder gas temperatures. The same assumption is
Vc and Tp are assumed to be constant. used by Dent and Lakshminarayanan (9). If the
temperature is assumed to be equal to the cylinder
Post-Flame oxidation Model.
gas temperature, this will result in the complete
Post-flame oxidation of the hydrocarbons occurs in oxidation of the hydrocarbons, if only there is sufficient
two steps. The first step is the oxidation in the cylinder oxygen available. The concentrations of the species in
after the flame is completed and the second is an equation 11 are assumed to be the concentrations
oxidation in the exhaust port. Oxidation in the rest of which result from completely mixing the complete
the exhaust system was neglected because of the contents of the cylinder. This is an approximation,
presence of a heat exchanger at the exit of the since the concentration of hydrocarbons in the
exhaust port. boundary layer will be greater but in turn, the
concentration of O2 will be less. The volume is

The rate of post-flame oxidation can be written in the assumed to be the entire cylinder volume.
following form:
The boundary layer is assumed to leave the cylinder
via the exhaust valve in the same proportion as that
portion of the total cylinder contents which leaves the
cylinder at a given time.

where [ ] denotes concentration in mol/cm3, A has the Plost-Flame Oxidation in the Exhaust Port.
units of (cm3/mol) a+b-1/s and E is in (cal/mol). T is the
temperature in K, while the gas constant R = 1,987 In a given amount of time, dt, a given mass, dm, is
cal/(mol K). CR is a calibration constant, which is used discharged from the cylinder. It is assumed that dm
to fit calculated results to experimental results. C R was passes through the exhaust valve without loss
chosen such that model calculations and experimental (isenthalpic), such that the temperature of dm at the
results agreed as closely as possible for a reference entrance to the exhaust port is the same as the
case. cylinder gas temperature at that time.
Table 1 shows for the constants as found in the
The flow through the exhaust part is assumed to be
literature.
plug flow, which means that an element, dl, with mass
dm passes through the port as a closed plug, without
mixing with neighboring elements. The element dl is
Reference Fuel A E a b assumed to contain the contents of the gasses which
(15) gasoline 7.7.1015 37230 1.0 1.0 flow through the exhaust valve over one degree of
crank rotation. The energy loss from the element is
(16) p-xylene 2.3.1014 45040 0.882 0.657
exclusively to the port wall. This situation is shown in
Figure 4.
Table 1. Constants used in the post-flame
oxidation model. An energy balance for element dl gives the following
equation, (7):

168
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018
Figure 4.The "plug flow" situation from (7).
Where: hp is the heat transfer coefficient,
Dp is the effective port diameter,
Tp(θ, t) is the time dependent temperature of
the element, which left the cylinder
during crank angle e.
Twp is the wall temperature of the exhaust port.
P and u are average values of density and velocity of
an element, dl, during its time in the exhaust
port.
Integrating (12) from 0 to t and using the Nusselt
number,
h p ⋅ Dp
Nu = -------------------
k are shown as a function of crank angle in Figure 6.
where k is the thermal conductivity, the following
equation is obtained:
where Tpi is the temperature of an element, dl, located
at the entrance to the exhaust port (t=0).
The temperature of element dl during flow through the
exhaust port can be found via:
Tp (e, t) = e-Gt (Tpi (θ) -Twp) + Twp (15)
where:
4 ⋅ Nu ⋅ k
G = ------------------------------- (16)
2
ρ ⋅ Cp ⋅ Dp
The temperature drop in the exhaust port is therefore
relatered to the Nusselt number.
The following relation found by Hires and Pochmara
(13) for exhaust ports of different geometries is used in
the model:
Nu = 0,258.ReD0.8 (17)
SIMULATED RESULTS
The simulated absorption of hydrocarbons in the oil
film and accumulation in crevices as well as the total
absorption are shown as a function of crank angle in
Figure 5. The absorption in the oil film starts before
intake (0°KV) in that portion of the oil film under the
piston. This absorption comes from the hydrocarbons
in the crankcase. The figure shows that the
accumulation in the crevices occurs mainly during the
compression process, while the absorption in the oil
film occurs over a longer period of time.
The simulated desorption of hydrocarbons from the oil
film and the discharge from the crevices as well as the
total release of hydrocarbons from these two sources
(13)
The desorption from the oil film is not as large as the
absorption shown in Figure 5, since the desorption
curve only includes the hydrocarbons which are
desorbed above the piston. A small amount of
hydrocarbons are also desorbed below the piston to
the crankcase. The desorption starts at about 400
°CA. 75% of the crevice material is already released
by 470 °CA, while 75% of the oil film hydrocarbons are
first released by 530 °CA. The points for 90% release
are 530 °CA and 590 °CA respectively. In other words,
the crevice hydrocarbons are released about 60 °CA
before the oil hydrocarbons. This means that a larger
portion of the
169
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018
Figure 5. Hydrocarbon absorption in crevices
and oil film.
Figure 6. Hydrocarbon desorption from crevices and
oil film.
crevice hydrocarbons will be oxidized after release into
the combustion chamber.
Figure 7 shows the cumulative hydrocarbon
desorption from both the oil film and the crevice
volume. Post-flame oxidation stagnates around 600
°CA, where the temperature is approximately 900 °C.
35% of the hydrocarbons accumulated in the oil film
and crevices is oxidized in the cylinder after release.
The lower curve shows the accumulated hydrocarbon
emission from the exhaust port. The exhaust valve
opens at 460 °CA, but it is first at about 560 °CA that
the post
170
Figure 7. The total desorption from crevices and oil
film ( ). Left after in-cylinder oxidation (+).
Left unburned after exhaust port oxidation
.
Figure 8. The simulated amount of hydrocarbons
desorbed from the oil film versus oil film
thickness.
flame oxidation is not complete for released
hydrocarbons. An additional 35% of the accumulated
hydrocarbons is oxidized in the exhaust port. This
means that of the original 100% of the hydrocarbons
which are released from the oil film and crevices, 30%
appears in the engine exhaust gas.
The simulated amount of hydrocarbons desorbed from
the oil film is shown as a function of oil film thickness in
Figure 8. Hydrocarbon desorption increases
approximately linearly until an oil film thickness of
approximately 2 µm, after
Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018

Figure 9. Concentration profile for the oil

film’s top element versus crank angle.
X=L at the oil film/wall interface. Oil film
thickness = 2 microns.

Figure 10. As Figure 9, but oil film

thickness = 5 microns.

171
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018

which there is no significant change. In the following, Minimum value of 0.4 % was used for oxygen
an explanation of the desorption mechanism is given. concentrations in rich mixtures. A doubling of this
value resulted in a decrease in the hydrocarbon
Figure 9 shows concentration profiles for the oil film’s
emission of 20% in rich mixtures.
top element during the pressure rise in the cylinder,
where most of the absorption of hydrocarbon in the oil COMPARISON WITH EXPERIMENTS -
film occurs. The oil film thickness in this case is taken BUKH ENGINE
to be 2 µm. The increase in concentration occurs
simultaneously with the pressure rise at about 320 - The first comparison between simulation and
340 °CA. At about 420 °CA, the concentration of experimental results will be made for a series of
measurements which the authors have made on a
hydrocarbons in the cylinder falls to 0 due to
BUKH single cylinder experimental engine (3, 4). The
combustion, which can be seen by the decrease of the results are compared to a reference condition, and
hydrocarbon concentration at the oil film/cylinder gas unless otherwise noted, comparisons are referred to
interface to 0 at that time. There will then be a these conditions. The reference condition is described
concentration gradient in the film at the right of the in Table 2.
maximum point of the curve and a gradient out of the
film to the left of the maximum. By 420 °CA there is
only a concentration gradient out of the film. This
means that at an early point in the process, a diffusion Parameter BUKH engine CFR engine
of hydrocarbon out of the film occurs. The diffusion out Speed - rpm 2000 1250
of the film and consequently the desorption is, Fuel-air equivalence ratio 0.9 0.9
therefore, quite effective and the final level before the compression ratio 8.0 7.0
Ignition Timing °BTC 25 35
gas phase concentration starts to increase again (720
Bore - mm 85 82.5
°KV) is quite low. In other words, the oil film is quite
Stroke - mm 85 114.3
effectively emptied of fuel hydrocarbon. Coolant Temperature *C 80 94
Fuel Iso-octane Isoo-octane*
Figure 10 shows corresponding curves for an oil film
Lubricant Oil C Oil B/C**
thickness of 5 µm. During compression, the oil film Exhaust Port Length - mm 75 160
contains significantly more fuel than in the previous Exhaust Port Diameter - mm 39 32
case, but the emptying of the film is not as effective, oxidation correction, CR 0.2 0.2
since for a long time after combustion, there are crevice volume - mm3 540 280
oil film thickness - µm 5 5
concentration gradients which lead to diffusion in both
Intake Pressure - kPa 74.5 ***
directions. This means that there is a larger amount of
Piston Temperature - °C 250 250
fuel in the oil film at the end of the engine cycle for an IMEP *** 380
oil film of 5 µm than with 2µm. In this case, a thicker oil ISFC *** 240
film does not result in increased desorption. Heat Transfer Coefficient
between coolant and cylinder
In the thermodynamic cycle simulation, it is necessary wall - kW/m2-K 0.3 0.3
to assume that even with mixtures which are richer
Table 2. Basis parameters for the simulation model
than stoichiometric, there is still some oxygen present
with the BUKH and CFR engines.
after combustion which can participate in post-flame
* Indolene used in experiments, iso-octane
oxidation. This is a result of chemical equilibrium,
data used for simulation
which is not included in the cycle simulation. ** Unknown oil used, this mixture is typical
Measurements of exhaust gas composition can be for commercial oils
used to give an indication of the amount of oxygen *** Variable on account of data presentation
present in the exhaust. In the model calculations a form

172
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018

Effect of Fuel Air Ratio

Figure 11 shows a comparison of model results for the

crevice contribution and the total hydrocarbon
emission with experimental measurements for the
BUKH Engine. As the mixture becomes lean, the
hydrocarbon emissions decrease. In the model, this is
due to both a decreasing concentration of fuel in the
gas phase and a decreasing cylinder pressure.
According to Henry’s law, the concentration in the
liquid phase (oil film) is proportional to the partial
pressure of fuel in the gas phase and, therefore
proportional to both gas phase concentration and the
total pressure. The crevice contribution to hydrocarbon
emissions will also decrease with lower pressure,
since less unburned mixture is forced into the crevices. Figure 11. Comparison of model results and
experimental results for varying relative
For Φ < 1 there is a sharp decrease in the HC fuel-air ratio.
emission, since post-flame oxidation becomes rapid
• Experiments
due to the increased oxygen content of the exhaust
- Model
gas. The calculated decrease is larger than the
measured decrease. The contributions of the crevice
°BTDC and 20 °BTDC, is shown in Figures 12 and 13.
and the oil film are shown seperately in the figure. For
For 30 °BTDC timing, the comparison is very similar to
mixtures richer than stochiometric, the crevice volume
that for the base timing of 25 °BTDC. For spark at 20
gives the largest contribution to the hydrocarbon °BTDC the slope of the simulated curve for 0.95 < Φ <
emission, but for leaner mixtures the contributions are 1.00 is in better agreement with the experimental
more equal. This is due to the more rapid post flame results, but the predictions of the model give
oxidation of the crevice material, since it is released hydrocarbon emissions which are lower than the
earlier than the oil film contribution. With earlier experiments.
release, the released hydrocarbons encounter a
Simulated results for variations in fuel air ratio and
higher temperature. This is additionally significant in
ignition timing are shown together in Figure 14. The
lean mixtures, since post-flame oxidation is more
model predicts the expected decrease in hydrocarbon
significant with higher oxygen concentrations. In
emission with retarded timing. The contributions from
addition, the lower pressure which is a result of
both the crevice volume and the oil film decrease with
increasingly lean combustion will result in an even retarded timing. For richer mixtures, the decrease is
larger reduction to the contribution from the crevices. mainly due to the decrease in the crevice contribution.
With leaner mixtures, the decrease in the oil film
The agreement between the model calculations and
contribution is of the same size as the decrease in the
the measured results is good except that the slope of
crevice volume contribution. The decrease in the
the curve for the simulation is too large for 0.95 < Φ <
hydrocarbon emission with retarded timing is partially
1.00. This means that the model predicts a post-flame
oxidation which is too high. This could, for example, be due to the decrease in cylinder pressure which causes
caused by uncertainties in the exhaust gas heat less absorption in the oil film, and less unburned
transfer and oxygen concentrations. mixture in the crevices, and partially due to the
increase in post-flame oxidation brought on by the
Effect of ignition timing. higher exhaust temperature with retarded timing.
Another thing which can be seen from curves 12 - 14
A comparison between simulated and experimental is that the relative contribution from the oil film
results for two other ignition timings, 30 increases with retarded timing,

173
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018
Figure 12. As Figure 11, but for ign. 30 BTDC.
• Experiments
- Model
Figure 14. Simulated results for variations in
relative fuel-air ratio and ignition
timing.
even though the general hydrocarbon level decreases.
This can be seen in Figure 15, where the contribution
from the oil film in % of the total is shown as a function
of the equivalence ratio and ignition timing. This is
related to the increased post-flame oxidation with the
retarded
174
Figure 13. As Figure 11, but for ign. 20 BTDC.
• Experiments
- Model
Figure 15. Oil related hydrocarbons in the exhaust gas
for variations in relative fuel-air ratio and
ignition timing.
timing. As previously mentioned, the oil film
contribution is not oxidized to the same extent as the
crevice contribution. In addition, the lower cylinder
pressure will also cause a significant reduction in the
crevice contribution to the hydrocarbon emission.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018

Effect of lubricant.
Lubricant B Lubricant C
Engine experiments have been conducted using two
Molecular weight ≈550 ≈550
different lubricants with iso-octane as fuel (3).
Lubricant B is a fully synthetic lubricant based on Density (kg/m3) at 15°C 864 961
polyalpha olifin, while lubricant C is a fully synthetic Viscosity (cSt) at 40°C 107 81.5
lubricant based on polyolester. Properties of the Viscosity (cSt) at 100° 18.1 13.7
lubricants are shown in Table 3. Viscosity Index 188 184
SAE classification 5W-50 10W-40
Figures 16-18 show the simulated hydrocarbon
emission for oils B and C as a function of fuel air ratio Table 3 - Properties of the lubricants used in the
and ignition timing. The fuel is more soluble in oil B investigation.
and the model therefore predicts higher hydrocarbon
emissions with oil B. By comparing the simulated
curves with the experimental results in Figure 19, it
can be seen that the predicted difference in emissions
with the use of different lubricating oils is of the same
size as the experimental results. The simulated results
show a slightly decreasing difference between
lubricating oils with decreasing fuel air ratio, which is
opposite that of the experimental results. The model
predicts a slightly decreasing difference because of a
decreasing fuel concentraton in the gas phase with
decreasing fuel air ratio and because of lower cylinder
pressure.
An explanation for the observed larger difference in Figure 17. As Figure 16, but ign 25 BTDC.
the effect of lubricant with leaner mixtures may be the
difference in oil film thickness for varying fuel air ratio.
For leaner mixtures, the viscosity of the oil will be
higher, because less fuel is disolved in the oil film. An
increased viscocity will result in an increased oil film
thickness, which can in turn cause increased
absorption and desorption of the oil

Figure 18. As Figure 16, but ign. 20 BTDC.

Figure 16. Simulated hydrocarbon emission for

lubricant B and C at an ignition timing
of 30 BTDC.

175
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018

Figure 19. Experimental results with lubricant B and C for various

relative air-fuel ratio and ignition timing.
+ Oil B - - -
∆ Oil C

film and consequently a larger contribution from the oil
film mechanism with leaner mixtures.
Effect of fuel type
A comparison between predictions and measurements
for xylene as fuel is shown in Figure 20. The model
predicts hydrocarbon emissions which are too large.
This is because xylene is very soluble in the lubricant
and the model predicts a large contribution to the
hydrocarbon emission from the oilfilm.
There appear to be 3 possible explanations for this.
First, it could be suggested that the oil film becomes
saturated and that there is no absorption or
desorption. The model predictions show that this is not
the case. Secondly, it could be suggested that there is
a difference in the rate of diffusion between iso-octane
and xylene. Measurements of the diffusion coefficients
show that the lubricant, but not the fuel, influences the
diffusion coefficient. This is shown in Table 4. A third
explanation; that when the fuel dissolves in the oil, it
lowers the viscosity and therefore reduces the oil film
thickness, seems more likely.
The lubricating used, when in equilibrium with a
mixture of air and xylene, in stoichiometric proportions
at atmospheric pressure will contain 1.8% xylene. For
the corresponding conditions with isooctane, the
lubricating oil will contain only 0.3% isooctane. It is
possible that this concentration difference could cause
a significant reduction of the viscosity of the oil film
when the engine is operated with xylene as fuel.
The simulation shows that an oil film thickness of
about 1 µm will give results in good agreement with
the measured results for xylene.
This explanation is also consistent with the
experimental results where two different oils were
tested with isooctane. For richer mixtures, the
hydrocarbon emissions from the two oils approach
each other. According to this explanation, more fuel is
dissolved in the oil film for richer mixtures and
therefore the oil film thickness is reduced and the
contribution from the oil film mechanism becomes
smaller with richer mixtures.

176
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018

Fuel
Xylene Lubricant
Isooctane

B 1,3.10-10 1,3.10 -10

C 1,5.10-10 1,5.10 -10

units: m 2/s

Table 4. Diffusion coefficients for different

combinations of fuel and lubricant (4).

decrease is due to an increase in the oil film

Figure 20. Comparison between simulations and temperature with increasing load (the temperature
measurements for xylene as fuel. increased from 118°C at the lowest load to 135°C at
the highets load), which results in a lower solubility of
• Experiments
the fuel in the oil film. This results in less absorption
- Model
and desorption. In addition, the post flame oxidation
increases due to higher combustion chamber and
exhaust temperatures with increasing load. The model
predicts a lower concentration with high load than the
COMPARISON WITH EXPERIMENTS - CFR ENGINE experimental results, but the concentration is of the
Experimental hydrocarbon emissions from a CFR same magnitude. The model predicts that, in contrast
engine have been reported by Lavoie and Blumberg to the BUM engine, it is the oil film mechanism which
(7). The variation of the different engine parameters in gives the largest contribution to hydrocarbon
the model were examined and compared to a emissions in the CFR engine.
reference condition. The model parameters in the
reference condition are given in Table 2.
The same calibration constants were used with the
CFR engine as with the BUM engine. It cannot be
expected that the agreement between the simulation
and the experimental results will be as good as with
the BUKH engine, since the model has been calibrated
with respect to another fuel and engine. By using the
same calibration constants, it is thereby possible to
gain an impression of the generality of the model.

Effect of load.

The comparison between simulated and experimental Figure 21. Comparison between simulations
results is shown in Figure 21. Both the model and the and experimental results for varying
experiments indicate a decrease in hydrocarbon load.
emission with increasing load. The • Experiments
- Model

177
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018
Effect of fuel air ratio.
A comparison between simulated and experimental
results for the CFR engine is shown in Figure 22,
which corresponds to the comparison for the BUKH
engine shown in Figure 11. For the BUKH engine, the
model gave a slope for the hydrocarbon emission
which was too large for 0.95 < Φ < 1.00. For the CFR
engine, this slope is of the correct magnitude, and it
appears that the post flame oxidation is simulated
more accurately for the CFR engine.
A significant difference with the CFR engine is that it is
more lightly loaded, which results in a lesser degree of
post flame oxidation. This suggests that the model
better describes the post flame oxidation with lower
load.
The model otherwise correctly predicts the correct
level of hydrocarbon emissions in the exhaust gas,
although the calculated values are somewhat high for
Φ > 1.0. For Φ ≈ 0.7 the hydrocarbon emissions start
to increase again. This is not reflected in the simulated
results, since the model does not consider bulk flame
quenching or misfire, which may occur near the lean
flammability limit.
Effect of ignition timing.
Figure 23 shows simulated and measured results for
varying ISFC. This was obtained by varying the spark
timing. Larger values of ISFC were obtained by
retarding the timing. There is good agreement
between the simulated and measured results.
The decrease in hydrocarbon emission with increasing
ISFC is partially caused by the lower pressure which
causes less collection and release from both the oil
film and the crevice volume and partially by the
increased post flame oxidation caused by the higher
exhaust temperature.
Effect of engine speed.
The comparison between simulated and measured
results is shown in Figure 24. The effect of engine
speed is not very large in either the simulated or the
experimental results. Again, the agreement is quite
good. This is encouraging, since the original
178
calibration of the model did not consider the effect of
variations in either speed or load.
Some of the earliest models, that didn’t include the oil
film mechanism, predicted an increase in hydrocarbon
emissions with increasing engine speed, in contrast to
experimental results. The present model correctly
predicts the decrease in hydrocarbon emissions with
increasing engine speed. This effect is due to the
smaller amount of time available for the absorption
and desorption of the fuel components in the oil film
with higher engine speeds.
CONCLUSION
The complete simulation which is composed of a
thermodynamic engine cycle simulation, a
hydrocarbon formation model and a post-flame
oxidation model, is able to predict hydrocarbon
emission levels and trends for two different engines
with different engine parameters, but with model
constants obtained from calibration with only the one
engine.
The model also correctly predicts trends in
hydrocarbon emission with changes in timing, fuel air
ratio, and load and speed.
The model indicates that the relative significance of
the crevice and oil film contributions is dependent on
engine construction.
The predicted differences in hydrocarbon emission
with different lubricating oils and iso-octane as fuel are
of the same magnitude as those observed
experimentally. The model predicts a slight decrease
in the difference between the oils for leaner mixtures,
while the experimental measurements indicate a slight
increase in the difference.
While the model correctly predicts emissions levels for
isooctane, the predicted levels for xylene are
considerably higher than those measured. It is thought
that the higher concentration of xylene in the oil film
could cause a decrease in the oil viscosity and
therefore a decrease in the oil film thickness, which if
implemented in the model could cause a decrease in
the predicted hydrocarbon emission. The oil film
thickness was assumed to be independent of all
engine parameters in the model.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018

Figure 22. Comparison between simulations Figure 24. Comparison of simulations and
and experimental results for varying experimental results for varying
relative fuel-air ratio. engine speed.
• Experiments • Experiments
- Model - Model

This is supported by the results of Myers, et. al. (14) in

which the oil film thickness between the top piston ring
and the cylinder liner was measured at TDC. It was
found that "overfueling" in a diesel engine almost
completely removed the lubricant film.

Additional studies are needed to determine the effects

of relevant engine parameters on the oil film thickness.

Figure 23. Comparison of simulations and References.

experimental results for varying ignition
timing (or ISFC)
• Experiments
- Model
The mechanism of varying oil film thickness could also
possibly explain the differences in the observed and
predicted effects of fuel air ratio on hydrocarbon
emission. The fuel concentration in the lubricating oil
decreases with leaner mixtures, causing a larger oil
film and therefore a larger relative contribution from
the oil film mechanism.
1. Adamczyk, A. A. and Lavoie, G. A. "Laminar
Head-on Flame Quenching - A. Theoretical
Study". Paper no. 780969, SAE Transactions, vol.
87 pp. 3652-3671, 1978.
2. Westbrook, C. K., Adamczyk, A. A. and Lavoie,
G. A. "A Numerical Study of Laminar Flame Wall
Quenching". Combustion and Flame, vol. 40, pp.
81-99, 1981.
3. Schramm, J. and sorenson, S. C. "Effects of
Lubricating Oil on Hydrocarbon Emissions in an
SI Engine". Paper no. 890622, SAE International
Congress and Exposition, Detroit MI, 1989.

179
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018

4. Schramm, J. "Smφreoliens indflydelse på 13. Hires, S. D. and Pochmara, G. L. "An Analytical

kulbrinteemissioner fra benzinmotorer". (The
Effect of Lubricating Oil an Hydrocarbon Emission
from Gasoline Engines). Ph.D. thesis, Tech.
University of Denmark, Laboratory for Energetics,
1990 (in Danish).
5. Daniel, W. A. "Why Engine Variables Affect
Exhaust Hydrocarbon Emissions". SAE paper no.
700108, 1970.
Study of Exhaust Gas Heat Loss in a Piston
Engine Exhaust Port". SAE Paper no. 76767,
1967.
14. Myers, J. E., Borman, G. L. and Myers, P. S.
"Measurement of Oil Film Thickness and Liner
Temperature at Top Ring Reversal in a Diesel
Engine". SAE Paper no. 900813, SAE
International Congress and Exposition 1990.

6. Lavoie, G. A., Lorusso, J. A. and Adamczyk, A. A. 15. Lavoie, G. A. "Correlations of Combustion Data
"Hydrocarbon Emission Modelling in for S. I. Engine Calculations-Laminar Flame
Reciprocating Engines". Symposium held at The Speed, Quench Distance and Global Reaction
General Motors Research Laboratories, Rates", SAE Paper no. 780229, SAE International
November 1978. Congress and Exposition, 1978.

7. Lavoie, G. A. and Blumberg, P. N. "A Fun
damental Model for Predicting Fuel Consumption,
NOx and HC Emissions of the Conventional
Spark-Ignited Engine". Combustion science and
Technology, vol. 21, pp. 225-58, 1980.
16. Elpern, D. Unpublished MS Thesis, Mechanical
Engineering Department, University of Wisconsin,
1970.

8. Shyy, W. and Adamson, T.C. "Analysis of

Hydrocarbon Emissions from conventional Spark-
Ignition Engines" Combustion Science and APPENDIX 1 - THERMODYNAMIC MODEL
Technology, vol. 33, pp. 245-260, 1983.
Governing Equations
9. Dent, J. C. and Lakshminarayanan, P. A. "A
Model for Absorption and Desorption of Fuel
The cycle simulation is based on the solution of the
Vapor by Cylinder Lubricating Oil Film and its
ordinary differential equations for the conservation of
Contribution to Hydrocarbon Emissions". Paper
energy, total mass, and residual mass in the
no. 830652, SAE International Congress and
combustion chamber, combined with the ideal gas law.
Exposition, 1983. The resulting equations in the three variables,
temperature, mass, and residual mass are shown
10. Woschni, G. "A Universally Applicable Equation
below:
for the Heat Transfer Coefficient in the Internal
Combustion Engine". SAE Transactions, vol. 76.
p. 3065, 1967. Energy:

11. Blumberg, P. and Kummer, J. T. "Prediction of

NO formation in Spark Ignited Engines- An
Analysis of Methods of Control". Combustion Conservation of mass:
Science and Technology, Vol. 4, p. 73, 1971.

12. Huls, T. A., Myers, P. S. and Uyehara, O. A.

"Spark Ignition Engine Operation and Design for
Minimum Exhaust Emission". Paper no. 660405, conservation of residual mass:
SAE Transactions, vol. 75, 1967.

180
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018

The following equations for mass flow are used:

Where: cp = const pressure specific heat Chocked Flow:
cz = const volume specific heat
f = residual fraction
m = mass
· = flow rate per degree
m
p = pressure
· = "heat transfer", sum of heat loss and
Q
combustion heat release.
T = temperature
v = volume Non-Choked Flow:
θ = crank angle
µ = mass of burned products produced
per mass of fuel burned

Subscripts:

o = before combustion
i = intake valve
e = exhaust valve Where: AV = time dependent valve area
f = fuel
r = residual CD = flow coefficient
· = flow rate per degree crank angle
Heat Release Model m

The heat release model is based on the simple p = downstream pressure

trigonometric function used by Blumberg (11): Po = upstream pressure
R = the gas constant
N = engine speed
γ = specific heat ratio

Where:
·
Q APP = apparent heat release rate

LHV = lower heating value of fuel

Two parameters describe the combustion rate, the first
is the start of heat release, θo and the second the
duration of the heat release, θc.
Valve Flow
Flow rates through the valves are calculated by
assuming that the pressures in the intake valve and
exhaust valve ports are constant with respect to time,
and that the flow can be modelled using isentropic flow
relationships with empirical flow coefficients. If the
valve flow area at the valve seat is greater than the
cross section area of the port minus the area of the
valve stem, the smaller port area is assumed to be the
limiting factor and flow rates are calculated using this
area.

181
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of New South Wales, Saturday, September 15, 2018

This paper is subject to revision. Statements and
opinions advanced in papers or discussion are the
author’s and are his responsibility, not SAE’s;
however, the paper has been edited by SAE for
uniform styling and format. Discussion will be printed
with the paper if it is published in SAE Transactions.
For permission to publish this paper in full or in part,
contact the SAE Publications Division.
Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered
for presentation or publication through SAE should
send the manuscript or a 300 word abstract of a
proposed manuscript to: Secretary, Engineering
Activity Board, SAE.
Printed in U.S.A