1.

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Gasoline Direct Injection

Gasoline Direct Injection (GDI) is certainly not new. The first known application of this
technology was introduced in 1925 in a Hesselman engine for airplanes. Cars starting using it
in the 50’s with the Mercedes Benz Gullwing (1953) having this technology. It certainly
wasn’t the same as the technology we use today, but had the foundations of this operational
platform. In today’s market, the high majority of the current OEM manufacturers have at least
one and in most cases, many GDI equipped engines in their product line. Most experts agree
that GDI will soon replace the conventional port fuel injection systems that we have been
familiar with for years. As new technologies come and go, based on many reasons, it looks
like GDI is here to stay. It certainly isn’t a perfect technology and there is work presently
going on to correct some issues, but the advantages seem to far outweigh any disadvantages
and the benefits of having this technology are impressive.

The basic goals of the automotive industry; a high power, low specific fuel consumption, low
emissions , low noise and better drive comfort. With increasing the vehicle number, the role
of the vehicles in air pollution has been increasing significantly day by day. The environment
protection agencies have drawn down the emission limits annually. Furthermore,
continuously increasing price of the fuel necessitates improving the engine efficiency. Since
the engines with carburetor do not hold the air fuel ratio close to the stoichiometric at
different working conditions, catalytic converter cannot be used in these engines. Therefore
these engines have high emission values and low efficiency. Electronic controlled Port Fuel
Injection (PFI) systems instead of fuel system with carburetor have been used since 1980’s. In
fuel injection systems, induced air can be metered precisely and the fuel is injected in the
manifold to air amount. By using the lambda sensor in exhaust system, air/fuel ratio is held of
stable value. Fuel systems without electronic controlled it is impossible to comply with the
increasingly emissions legislation.

If port fuel injection system is compared with carburetor system, it is seen that has some
advantages. These are;

1. Lower exhaust emissions.

2. Increased volumetric efficiency and therefore increased output power and torque. The
carburetor venturi prevents air and, in turn, volumetric efficiency decrease.

3. Low specific fuel consumption. In the engine with carburetor, fuel cannot be delivered the
same amount and the same air/fuel ratio per cycle, for each cylinder.

4. The more rapid engine response to changes in throttle position. This increases the drive
comfort.

5. For less rotation components in fuel injection system, the noise decreases (Heywood, 2000;
Ferguson, 1986).

Though the port fuel injection system has some advantages, it cannot be meet continuously
increased the demands about performance, emission legislation and fuel economy, at the
present day (Stone, 1999). The electronic controlled gasoline direct injection systems were
started to be used instead of port fuel injection system since 1990’s. The Gasoline Direct
Injection (GDI) engines give a number of features, which could not be realized with port
injected engines: avoiding fuel wall film in the manifold, improved accuracy of air/fuel ratio
during dynamics, reducing throttling losses of the gas exchange by stratified and
homogeneous lean operation, higher thermal efficiency by stratified operation and increased
compression ratio, decreasing the fuel consumption and CO2 emissions, lower heat losses,
fast heating of the catalyst by injection during the gas expansion phase, increased
performance and volumetric efficiency due to cooling of air charge, better cold start
performance and better the drive comfort (Zhao et al., 1999; Karamangil, 2004; Smith et al.,
2006).

In internal combustion engines, Gasoline Direct Injection (GDI), also known as Petrol
DirectInjection or Direct Petrol Injection or Spark Ignited Direct Injection (SIDI) or Fuel
StratifiedInjection (FSI), is a variant of fuel injection employed in modern two-stroke and
four-strokegasoline engines. The gasoline is highly pressurized, and injected via a common
rail fuel linedirectly into the combustion chamber of each cylinder, as opposed to
conventional multi-pointfuel injection that happens in the intake tract, or cylinder port.
METHODS

1.High compression ratio

2. Pre-heating of induction gases

3. Forced induction

4. Retained or re-inducted exhaust gasesOnce ignited, combustion occurs very quickly. When
auto-ignition occurs too early or with toomuch chemical energy, combustion is too fast and
high in-cylinder pressures can destroy anengine. For this reason, HCCI is typically operated
at lean overall fuel mixtures.

Although Gasoline Particle Filters (GPFs) may ultimately be the preferred approach to reduce
PN and PM emissions, the effect of fuel composition on particulate emissions is also of
interest. This report investigates the effects of fuel properties, in particular the use of two
different fuel oxygenates representative of current and future fuels, on particulate and other
regulated emissions from two modern European GDI cars.The GDI vehicles used in this
study met Euro 4 and Euro 5 emissions limits and were tested over the New European
Driving Cycle (NEDC) using ethanol and ether-containing gasolines at different oxygen
levels characterized by a range of RON values. Both oxygenate containing matched RON and
matched oxygen content blends were specially prepared and tested. In addition fuels were
also splash blended with ethanol and an ETBE-containing matched blend was also tested for
comparison. Fuels were tested in duplicate using a randomized test order in order to improve
statistical certainty. A rigorous test protocol was used to allow the vehicle to adapt to each
fuel and reduce carryover effects.

All results were well within applicable limits for both vehicles (Vehicle 1: Euro 4, Vehicle 2:
Euro 5) except for a single non-methane hydrocarbon (NMHC) data point from Vehicle 2.
Although only two GDI vehicles were tested, in both cases the vehicle had a greater impact
on particle and gaseous emissions than the fuel and driving cycle.

PM measured gravimetrically was difficult to interpret for fuel effects because the PM
emission levels were very low from these modern GDI vehicles. All PN results fell within
interim Euro 6 (2014) limit of 6 x 1012, but exceeded the final target for Euro 6 (2017) PN
level of 6 x 1011 which was surprising given that neither of these vehicles were optimized for
Euro 6 emissions levels.

Oxygen content had no measurable effects on PM or gaseous emissions over the NEDC
cycle. However, a step-change down in PN emissions for Vehicle 1 was observed for fuels
containing >3.7% mass oxygen compared to lower oxygen levels. Fuel consumption tends to
increase with increasing fuel oxygen content and other fuel related parameters such as
oxygenate content, E100 (%age evaporated at 100oC) and reducing calorific value. At the
same oxygen content, ETBE had no different effect on volumetric fuel consumption
compared to Ethanol.

In fuels of matched octane, there were no statistically significant differences in emissions or

fuel consumption consistent across the vehicles between E0 and E10. Between hydrocarbon
base fuel and the same splash blended with 10% and 20% volume of ethanol there were no
effects on emissions which were statistically significant in both vehicles, but a statistically
significant penalty in fuel consumption was observed in both vehicles with the E20 blend.
Although not the main focus of the study it was observed that varying RON between 95 and
98 RON without the presence of oxygenate had no consistent effect on emissions or
volumetric fuel consumption in these vehicles.

The accurate measurement of automotive particle emissions continues to be of considerable

interest within the regulatory environment. Particles from vehicles and from other sources are
now accepted as having an impact on air quality and on human health [1,2]. Despite extensive
studies, however, the mechanisms by which ultrafine particles impact human health are still
uncertain, although there are several hypotheses that attempt to explain the relationship
between particle parameters and health impacts.

The introduction of clean fuels and advanced vehicle and after-treatment technologies has
resulted in a substantial reduction in automotive particulate mass (PM) emissions [3,4] with a
corresponding improvement in air quality. This reduction in PM emissions, however, has also
made the remaining low levels of particle emissions increasingly difficult to practically
measure (with vehicle compliance regulations still based on PM). For this reason,
considerable work has been undertaken internationally to address improved measurement
techniques [5], either by modifying filter procedures for mass measurement (PM) or by
introducing a new metric for ultrafine particles (PN). Over the past decade, many studies
[6,7,8] have investigated different techniques and measurement protocols for ensuring the
repeatable measurement of particle number emissions. It is now generally accepted that
automotive particle emissions fall into two broad categories [17]:

• “Nucleation” mode particles, generally less than about 30 nm particle size, comprising
predominantly condensed volatile material, mainly sulphates and heavy hydrocarbons, and

• “Accumulation” mode particles, mainly carbonaceous in nature and larger than about 30 nm
particle size.

The DG TREN “Particulates” Consortium [14] addressed issues related to the formation and
measurement of both nucleation and accumulation mode particles under different conditions
and provided a harmonised particulate sampling and measurement methodology. Within this
test work, accumulation mode particles were measured using an Electrical Low
PressureImpactor (ELPI) after volatile material had been removed from the particles by
passing them through a Thermal Denuder (TD).

This methodology was applied in the DG TREN programme to quantify the effects of fuel
properties and vehicle technology changes on both nucleation and accumulation mode
particles. This work resulted in an improved understanding and knowledge of particle
emissions, as well as a substantial database of validated data, and included measurements
over a wide range of test cycles. Concawe’s work within the DG TREN Consortium effort
was published separately [28]

In addition to the DG TREN Consortium, an extensive “Particle Measurement Programme”

(PMP) was carried out under the sponsorship of the UNECE GRPE [15]. The objective of this
programme on light-duty vehicles initially was develop and then validate a methodology to
measure carbonaceous particles that could be used within the regulatory framework to certify
the emissions performance of new vehicles. The methods tested included both particulate
mass and carbonaceous particle number measurements. Accumulation mode carbonaceous
particles were selected for the particle number measurements because they can be more
repeatedly sampled and measured while nucleation mode particles do not substantially
contribute to particulate mass measurements. Phase I of the PMP assessed a variety of
measurement approaches and selected two (one particulate mass based and one particle
number based) for further investigation in Phase II. The particulate mass method was based
on the US 2007 filter procedure. The particle number measurement used a novel approach to
eliminate nucleation particles. For this measurement, a Constant Volume Sampling (CVS)
system was used (in line with current regulatory requirements) and a subsample extracted
from the CVS was subjected to rapid expansion in a hot evaporation tube. This approach
rapidly reduces the partial pressure of the exhaust gas stream and ensures that any volatile
material remains in the gas phase or, if already condensed on the carbonaceous particles, re-
volatilizes into the gas phase before the particles are detected. Instead of the ELPI detector
used in the DG TREN programme, a Condensation Particle Counter (CPC) is used to count
the resulting “dry” carbonaceous particles.

This PMP procedure led to revisions in both the light duty and heavy duty regulated
measurement protocols [16] and the addition of particle number measurements to future light
duty vehicle certifications [10,18]. This is the technique that has been used to assess light-
duty vehicles and a compliance limit of 6x1011 particles/km for light-duty diesel vehicles
was adopted in the EU’s Euro 5b technical regulation.

Up until recently gasoline legislation has concentrated on carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons

and NOx. However, there have been increasing concerns with new technologies and the
number of very small particulates being generated which it is thought can penetrate more
deeply in the lungs than larger particles. Gasoline Direct Injection (GDI) vehicles have been
shown to produce more particulates than Port Fuel Injection vehicles (PFI). GDI vehicles may
operate in a stratified charge lean mode or in a homogeneous charge stoichiometric mode.
The formation of soot in GDI engines is thought to come from two mechanisms stratification
of the charge leading to rich burning zones in the fuel jet and the fuel spray striking the piston
forming polls of liquid which burn to form particulates and hydrocarbons. Stoichiometric
GDI engines use early injection to minimize stratification but this propensity for impingement
leads to more soot formation than PFI engines [17]. As a result gasoline particulate limits
were phased in from Euro 5 onwards for direct injection engines only in 2009 with increased
emphasis on particulates with Euro 6 limits in 2014 using the PMP protocol with particulate
number limits being phased in for new vehicles for 2014 to 2017 [16]. The upper limit of 6 x
1011 particles/km for diesel vehicles will also apply to gasoline GDI vehicles from 2017 with
a first stage interim limit of 6 x 1012 particles/km introduced in 2014. A recent CRC report
has highlighted the challenges of measuring PM emissions at very low levels and concluded
that there is still work to be done to understand test variability at these levels [32].
A European Joint Research Centre report from 2011 which describes a cost benefit analysis
[11] makes the assumption that GDI vehicles at least in the short time frame will not meet
stricter limits from engine developments alone and will require the use of GPF although it
does state that this is thought to be the worst case scenario and there are other options are
likely to be successful in a longer timeframe. A Transport and Environment briefing [9]
suggests that that the use of a gasoline particulate filter (GPF) will be necessary to meet the
new standards, however this did not involve the vehicle optimization including optimization
of the injection system which is likely to be the focus of OEM research for Euro 6 vehicles. In
a recent joint programme by Concawe and AECC a commercial GDI vehicle in combination
with a GPF was tested using current NEDC and future WLTC and Real Driving Emissions
test cycles (RDE) and it was found that the vehicle easily met the standards for Euro 6
[34].Other recent articles published by SAE [13] and presented at the International Vienna
Motor Symposium [12] suggest that a range of solutions are likely to be available including
combined port fuelled and direct injection systems and highly controlled direct injection
systems. In the latter presentation, Bosch presented data on a 350 bar gasoline direct injection
system, demonstrating reduced particle number compared to a 200 bar system and that the
2017 limits were met.

In parallel to the developments on vehicle technology and emissions regulation, the

Renewable Energy Directive (RED, 2009/28/EC) [19] requires 10% renewable energy in
transport fuels by 2020 within the European Union while the Fuel Quality Directive (FQD,
2009/30/EC) [20] will also require reductions in GHG emissions intensities from transport
fuels of 6%. Changes to the European gasoline and diesel fuel specifications have already
been made to enable higher blending of bio-components into market gasoline and diesel fuels
to try to meet these requirements. Oxygenates in the form of ethanol and ETBE are the most
commonly used components which are being added to fossil gasoline while fatty acid methyl
esters (FAME) from difference sources are commonly used in diesel fuels. EN228 can now
contain up to 10% ethanol while the diesel fuel specification can contain up to B7.

Literature searches have suggested that there is only limited data on particulates from direct
injection engines and even less on the effect of oxygenates on gasoline particulates. The
presence of oxygen in fuel has been shown in previous studies to effect PM and PN in diesel
vehicles (see for example [30]), so it may be reasonably expected to affect gasoline direct
injection combustion as well. However, the data that exists particularly on oxygenates
suggests a complex story. It appears that emissions from direct injection engines are very
dependent on test cycle. A most comprehensive study was carried out by JPEC [21] which
concluded that particulates from fuels, particularly those including oxygenates was greatly
influenced by test cycle and only those which were close to conditions experienced with
congested roads (i.e. low speed) showed a decrease in particulates with increasing oxygenate
content, although the European test cycle NEDC was not run in that study.

In fact most of the studies that have been carried out have been on US cycles. A CRC study
looked at E10, E15 and E20 tested in 15 vehicles using the LA-92 test cycle. They found a
decrease in HC and CO, NOx did not change and varying results for particulates [22].
Karavalakis et al. ran two GDI vehicles on the US Federal Test Procedure (FTP) drive cycle
with a variety of different alcohol containing fuels and responses increasing up to E20 ranged
from no difference in particulate in one vehicle to significant reduction compared to the other
ethanol containing fuels. Longer chain alcohols e.g. butanols showed higher amounts of
particulates [23,33]. Storey et. al compared E0 with E30 and isobutanol (iso Bu48) and
although the E30 showed less mass, E0 had the lowest mean particle size followed by the iso
Bu48 and the E30 [24,25].

Vuk and Vander Griend [26] carried out an evaluation on three 2011 model year vehicles on
the FTP75 and US06 drive cycles on 0, E10, E30 and E50 and found that although the
oxygenated fuels decreased particulate compared to the base fuel, the optimum treat of
ethanol was E10. It was hypothesised that the ethanol promotes evaporation and significantly
reduces particulates in fuels containing high boiling point aromatics. Catapano et. al [27] also
came to similar conclusions in studies using an optical engine although they said that the
higher ethanol containing fuels could lead to increased fuel impingement depending on rpm
and whether the engine was being run on part or full load.

Previous studies have sometimes involved attempts to match the properties of different fuels
and sometimes only used splash blended (i.e. unmatched) fuels. It was decided togenerate
more data by conducting a test program to improve Concawe’s understanding of the PM/PN
performance from two modern (Euro 4+) gasoline direct injection vehicles using the
European NEDC test cycle and a mixture of matched and splash blended fuels. In a previous
study [28], Concawe investigated particulate mass (PM) and particle number (PN) emissions
from two gasoline direct injection (GDI) vehicles. These were a 2003 vehicle meeting Euro 3
emissions levels and a 2004 vehicle meeting Euro 4 emissions levels. Two different petrol
fuels were used in these tests but neither fuel contained oxygenates. Oxygenated fuels were
used in another study which included a Euro 4 GDI vehicle along with two port fuel injected
vehicles [29]. In this study although fuel properties including octane and oxygenates were
widely varied, fuel effects were found to be small compared to vehicle to vehicle and drive
cycle differences. The study did demonstrate the difference in particulates between PFI and
GDI vehicles. In addition, tailpipe emissions were collected, including CO2, NOx, HC, CO,
PM, and PN as well as information on the composition of the particulates from these tests.The
current study extends the previous work to include two more modern (Euro 4 and Euro 5)GDI
vehicles using the European NEDC test cycle. A wider range of fuels has also been
investigated including ethanol in fuels both octane matched and splash blended as well as an
octane matched ETBE containing fuel in order to better understand the effect of these.

1.2 Need for gasoline direct injection

Gasoline Direct Injection (GDI) technology was developed in order to improve the fuel
efficiency and performance of internal combustion engines. The traditional fuel injection
system, known as port injection, injects fuel into the intake manifold, which can result in
some of the fuel being wasted as it does not reach the combustion chamber. In contrast, GDI
directly injects fuel into the combustion chamber, allowing for more precise control of the
fuel-air mixture. This can lead to

Improved fuel efficiency : GDI engines can have higher compression ratios, which can
increase the amount of energy produced by the combustion of the fuel. This can lead to more
power and better fuel economy.

Improved performance : GDI engines can have faster combustion, which can result in
quicker acceleration and more power.

Reduced emissions : GDI engines can have a more complete combustion of the fuel, which
can result in lower emissions.Overall, GDI technology allows for more efficient use of fuel
and improved performance, which helps to reduce emissions and save fuel.
1.3 What is the impact of gasoline direct injection

The impact of Gasoline Direct Injection (GDI) technology on the automotive industry has
been significant. GDI technology has led to improvements in fuel efficiency and performance,
which has been a major driver for the widespread adoption of GDI engines in vehicles.

Improved fuel efficiency: GDI engines have higher compression ratios, which can increase
the amount of energy produced by the combustion of the fuel. This can lead to more power
and better fuel economy. Improved performance: GDI engines can have faster combustion,
which can result in quicker acceleration and more power.
Reduced emissions: GDI engines can have a more complete combustion of the fuel, which
can result in lower emissions.
Maintenance: GDI engines require more maintenance than traditional engines, as they have
more complex systems and components that are more likely to wear out. Overall, GDI
technology has led to more efficient and powerful engines, which has helped to reduce
emissions and save fuel. It has also been a key driver in the development of smaller and more
fuel-efficient engines for vehicles. However, GDI engines require more maintenance and
have a higher cost to produce than traditional engines.
 2. WORKING AND PERFORMANCE OF GDI

2.1 Performance of the GDI Engine

The parameters that have the greatest influence on engine efficiency are compression ratio
and air/fuel ratio. The effect of raising compression ratio is to increase the power output and
to reduce the fuel consumption. The maximum efficiency (or minimum specific fuel
consumption) occurs with a mixture that is weaker than stoichiometric (Celik, 2007). Because
the port fuel injection engines work at stoichiometric air/fuel ratio, it is impossible to see
more improvement in the fuel economy. In these engines, the compression ratio is about 9/1-
10/1. To prevent the knock, the compression ratio cannot be increased more. For the same
engine volume, the increasing volumetric efficiency also raises the engine power output. GDI
engine operate with lean mixture and unthrottled at part loads, this operation provide
significantly improvements in fuel economy. At full load, as the GDI engine operates with
homogeneous charge and stoichiometric or slightly rich mixture, this engine gives a better
power output (Spicher et al., 2000). In GDI engine, fuel is 3 injected into cylinder before
spark plug ignites at low and medium loads. At this condition, Air/Fuel (A/F) ratio in cylinder
vary, that is, mixture in front of spark plug is rich, in other places is lean. In all cylinder A/F
ratio is lean and A/F ratio can access until 40/1. In homogeneous operation, fuel starts
injecting into cylinder at intake stroke at full loads (Alger et al., 2000; Ç1nar, 2001). The fuel,
which is injected in the intake stoke, evaporates in the cylinder. The evaporation of the fuel
cools the intake charge. The cooling effect permits higher compression ratios and increasing
of the volumetric efficiency and thus higher torque is obtained (Munoz et al., 2005). In the
GDI engines, compression ratio can gain until 12/1 (Kume, 1996). The knock does not occur
because only air is compressed at low and medium loads. At full load, since fuel is injected
into cylinder, the charge air cool and this, in turn, decreases knock tendency. Since the
vehicles are used usually in urban traffic, studies on improving the urban driving fuel
economy have increased. Engines have run usually at part loads (low and medium loads) in
urban driving. Volumetric efficiency is lower at part loads, so engine effective compression
ratio decreases (e.g. from 8/1 to 3/1-4/1), engine efficiency decreases and fuel consumption
increases. The urban driving fuel economy of the vehicles is very high (Celik, 1999).
Distinction between the highway fuel economies of vehicles is very little. As majority of the
life time of the vehicles pass in the urban driving, the owners of the vehicles prefer the
vehicles of which the urban driving fuel economy is low. At full load, as the GDI engine
operate with throttle, only a small reduction of fuel consumption can be obtained to the PFI
engine. There is the more fuel economy potential at part load. At compression stroke, since
air is given the cylinders without throttle for stratified charge mode, pumping losses of the
GDI engine is minimum at part loads, Fig.1 (Baumgarten, 2006). The improvements in
thermal efficiency have been obtained as a result of reduced pumping losses, higher
compression ratios and further extension of the lean operating limit under stratified
combustion conditions at low engine loads. In the DI gasoline engines, fuel consumption can
be decreased by 4 up to 20%, and a 10% power output improvement can be achieved over
traditional PFI engines (Fan et al., 1999).

Fig 2.1 Reduction of throttle losses in the stratified-charge combustion

The CO2 emissions, which are one of the gases, bring about the global warming. To decrease
CO2 emitted from vehicles, it is required to decrease fuel consumption. Downsizing
(reduction of the engine size) is seen as a major way of improving fuel consumption and
reducing greenhouse emissions of spark ignited engines. In the same weight and size,
significant decreases in CO2 emissions, more power and higher break mean effective pressure
can be obtained. GDI engines are very suitable for turbocharger applications. The use of GDI
engine with turbocharger provides also high engine knock resistance especially at high load
and low engine speed where PFI turbocharged engines are still limited (Lecointe & Monnier,
2003; Stoffels, 2005). Turbocharged GDI engines have showed great potential to meet the
contradictory targets of lower fuel consumption as well as high torque and power output
(Kleeberg, 2006 . 5 In GDI engine, by using twin charging system drive comfort, engine
torque and power can be increased for the same engine size. For example, Volkswagen (VW)
has used the dual charging system in TSI (twin charged stratified injection) engine. The
system includes a roots-type supercharger as well as a turbocharger. The supercharger is
basically an air compressor. A mechanical device driven off the engine's crankshaft, it
employs rotating vanes which spin in opposite directions to compress air in the engine's
intake system. The high and constant torque is obtained at wide range speed by activate
supercharger at low speeds and turbo charger at high speeds (Anon, 2006). In Table 1, it is
given specifications of the two different engines belonging to the 2009 model VW Passat
vehicle, for example. TSI engine urban driving fuel economy is 18% lower than that of PFI
engine. CO2 emission is 12% lower than that of PFI engine. Although TSI engine swept
volume is lower than PFI engine, power and torque is higher by 20% and 35%, respectively
(Table 1). As engine torque is maximum at interval 1500-4000 1/min, shifting is not
necessary at the acceleration and thus drive comfort increase (Anon, 2009).

2.2 Exhaust Emissions of the GDI Engine

CO emission is very low in GDI engine. CO varies depending on air /fuel ratio. CO is high at
rich mixtures. Since GDI engines operate with lean mixture at part loads and stoic mixture at
full load, CO is not a problem for these engines. In GDI engine, due to the wetting of the
piston and the cylinder walls with liquid fuel, HC 6 emission can increase. Hydrocarbon (HC)
emissions are a function of engine temperature and, therefore it can rise during cold start. The
cold starts characteristics vary depending on the fuel distribution characteristics, the in-
cylinder air motion, fuel vaporization, and fuel-air mixing (Gandhi et al., 2006). During cold-
start of a GDI engine, homogeneous operation can be employed due to a higher exhaust gas
temperature resulting in a shorter time for catalyst light-off, and lower engine out HC
emissions (Gandhi et al., 2006). Gasoline engines do not emit soot emission normally. Soot
emission can occur at very rich mixtures. However, the GDI engines emit soot at stratified-
charge operation, as in–cylinder can be areas with very rich mixtures. In addition, in GDI
engine, if mixture formation do not realize at full loads due to rich mixture, the soot emission
can increase. NOx emission is maximum at high cylinder temperatures and at λ =1.1. As
torque output rises, temperatures rise and, in turn, the engine-out NOX emissions display an
increase. NOx emissions increase especially at full load.
2.3 The Emission Control in GDI Engine

Environmental legislation determines the limits for exhaust emissions in the spark ignition
engines. It is required the treatment of the exhaust gases to meet these limits. The three-way
catalytic converter show high performance for converting the CO, HC and NOx in the
engines with operation at λ=1.0. But, NOx cannot be completely converted harmless gases at
lean mixture operation. Therefore, engines with lean mixture also require a NOx storage type
catalytic converter to convert the NOx.

The two catalytic converters are successively used in GDI engine exhaust system. The one is
Pre-catalytic converter (Three Way Converter -TWC). This converter has little volume and is
connected close to the engine. The other is main catalytic converter which combines a NOx
catalyst and a TWC. This converter has higher volume than the pre-catalytic converter and is
connected not close to the engine. The Pre-catalytic converter convert the CO, HC and NOx
to harmless gases (CO2, H2O and N2) at λ=1.0. However, when engine operates at stratified
mode with lean 7 mixture, NOx cannot be converted to nitrogen. In such cases, NOx is sent
to main catalytic converter (Anon, 2002). In the NOx storage type catalytic converter, the
components such as Ba and Ca are used for NOx conversion at lean mixtures. These
components provide NOx to storage. At λ=1.0, the operation of the NOx converter resembles
three way converter. At lean mixtures, NOx conversion is realized in three stages: NOx
accumulation, NOx release and conversion. Nitrogen oxides reacts chemically with barium
oxide (BaO) and thus barium nitrate (Ba(NO3)2 forms. (NOx storage stage) Then, to
convert, engine is operated momentarily in the rich homogeneous mode. Thanks to rich
mixture, there is CO in exhaust system. The barium nitrate reacts chemically with CO and, as
a result of this CO2, BaO and NO arise (NOx release stage). And then, NO reacts chemically
with CO and, N2 and CO2 form (conversion stage). NOx storage converter can storage the
NOx at temperatures of 250-500oC (Anon, 2002; Bauer, 2004). An exhaust gas recirculation
system is necessary, as the NOx after treatment systems do not reach the conversion rates of
λ = 1 concepts. With the exception at the highest loads, exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) is
used extensively to control NOx emissions (Alkidas, 2007). To meet the valid emission
limits and diagnose the pre and main catalyst faults, and provide optimum engine operation 4
sensors (3 lambda sensor and 1 exhaust gas temperature sensor) are used in the exhaust
system. The wide band lambda sensor upstream of pre-catalyst determines residual oxygen
value in exhaust gas. The required λ for homogeneous lean operation can be controlled by
this sensor. For each catalytic converter two lambda sensors (upstream and downstream
sensor) are used. The faults of the pre and main converters can be diagnosed by signal of
dual sensors. The temperature sensor is used to determine the temperature of the NOx
catalyst (Kusell et al., 1999).
3. THE MIXTURE FORMATION AND OPERATION MODES IN THE GDI

3.1 The Mixture Formation 8

The air-fuel mixture in the gasoline engines is prepared in-cylinder and out-cylinder. While
the mixture in the engine with carburetor and port fuel injection is prepared out-cylinder,
mixture in the gasoline direct injection engines is prepared in-cylinder.

Fig. 3.1 The mixture formation systems in the gasoline engines

In place of PFI engines where the fuel is injected through the port, in GDI engines, the fuel is
injected directly into cylinders at a high pressure. During the induction stroke, only the air
flows from the open intake valve and it enters into the cylinder. This ensures better control of
the injection process and particularly provides the injection of fuel late during the
compression stroke, when the intake valves are closed (Sercey et al., 2005). The acting of the
intake system as a pre-vaporizing chamber is an advantage in the PFI engines (Rotondi,
2006). As the lack of time to fuel vaporize in GDI engines, the fuel is injected into the
cylinder at a very high pressure to help the atomization and vaporization process. The
duration for injection timing is little; advanced injection timing causes piston wetting and
retarded injection timing decrease sufficient time for fuel-air mixing (Gandhi et al., 2006). In
the PFI engine, a liquid film is formed in the intake valve area of the port, which causes
delayed fuel vaporization. Especially during cold start, it is necessary to increase fuel amount
for the ideal stoichiometric mixture. This “over fueling” leads to increasing HC emissions
during cold start. Alternatively, injecting the fuel directly into the 9 combustion chamber
avoids the problems such as increasing HC and giving the excess fuel to engine (Hentschel,
2000). To the GDI engines, it is implemented the two basic charge modes, stratified and
homogeneous charge. At the partial load conditions, stratified charge (late injection) is used,
that is, fuel is injected during the compression stroke to supply the stratified charge. The
engine can be operated at an air-fuel ratio exceeding 100 and fully unthrottled operation is
possible, but the engine is throttled slightly in this zone and the air-fuel ratio is controlled to
range from 30 to 40 in order to introduce a large quantity of Exhaust Gas Recirculation
(EGR) and to supply the vacuum for the brake system. A homogeneous charge (early
injection) is preferred for the higher load conditions, that is, fuel is injected during the intake
stroke so as to provide a homogeneous mixture. In most of this mode, the engine is operated
under stoichiometric or a slightly rich condition at full load. In the lowest load conditions in
this mode, the engine is operated at homogeneous lean conditions with a air-fuel ratio of from
20 to 25 for further improvement of fuel economy (Kume, 1996). During operation with
homogeneous charge the adjustment of engine load is done by throttling while during
operation with stratified charge the engine runs with unthrottled conditions and engine load is
adjusted by fuel/air-equivalence ratio (Spicher et al., 2000). Fig.3.2 shows the homogeneous
(early injection) and stratifiedcharge modes (late injection).

Fig 3.2 GDI combustion system

Wall-Guided combustion system: The fuel is transported to the spark plug by using a
specially shaped piston surface. As the fuel is injected on the piston surface, it cannot
completely evaporate and, in turn, HC and CO emissions, and fuel consumption increase. To
use this system alone is not efficient. Air-Guided combustion system: The fuel is injected into
air flow, which moves the fuel spray near the spark plug. The air flow is obtained by inlet
ports with special shape and air speed is controlled with air baffles in the manifold. In this
technique, fuel does not wet the piston and cylinder. Most of stratified-charge GDI engines
use a large-scale air motion (swirl or tumble) as well as specially shaped piston a surface in
order to keep the fuel spray compact and to move it to the spark plug (Baumgarten, 2006). In
the air-guided and wall guided combustion systems the injector is placed remote to the spark
plug. VW direct injection combustion system is a combination of two systems– wall guided
and air guided –by tumble flow. This system is less sensitive against the cyclic variations of
airflow. This combustion system shows advantages as well in the stratified and in the
homogenous mode. Injector is intake-side placed,The fuel is injected to the piston under
given angle. The piston has two bowls. The fuel bowl 11 is on the intake-side; the air bowl is
on exhaust-side. Tumble flow is obtained by special shaped intake port (Stefan, 2004). The
fuel is guided simultaneously via air and fuel bowl to the spark plug.

Spray-Guided combustion system: In the spray-guided technique fuel is injected near spark
plug where it also evaporates. The spray-guided technique theoretically has the highest
efficiency. The spray guided combustion process requires advanced injector systems such as
piezo injection. This technique has some advantages: reduced wall wetting, increased
stratified operation region, less sensitive to incylinder air flow, less sensitive to cylinder to
cylinder variation and reduced raw HC emissions. Reported disadvantages are spark plug
reliability (fouling) and poor robustness (high sensitivity to variation in ignition & injection
timing) (Cathcart& Railton, 2001). Mercedes-Benz developed a new spray guided
combustion system. This system has the Stratified-Charged Gasoline Injection (CGI) engine
with Piezo injection technology. The spray-guided injection achieves better fuel efficiency
than conventional wall-guided direct injection systems. The main advantage of the CGI
engine is obtained at the stratified operating mode. During this mode the engine is run with
high excess air and thus excellent fuel efficiency is provided. Multiple injections extend this
lean-burn operating mode to higher rpm and load ranges, too. 12 During each compression
stroke, a series of injections is made spaced just fractions of a second apart. This allows the
better mixture formation and combustion, and lower fuel consumption.
3.2 The Operating Modes

GDI engine operates at different operating modes depending on load and engine speed for a
stable and efficient engine operation. These engines have three basic operating modes,
stratified with an overall lean mixture, homogeneous with lean mixtures and homogeneous
with stoichiometric mixtures. The engine is operated with the stratified, homogeneous lean
and homogeneous stoichiometric modes; at low load and speed, at medium load and speed
and at high load and speed, respectively. Fig. 6 shows an example of the GDI operating
modes depending on engine load and speed. The engine control unit continually chooses the
one among the operating modes. Each mode is determined by the air-fuel ratio. The
stoichiometric air-fuel ratio for petrol (gasoline) is 14.7:1 by weight, but ultra-lean mode
(stratified-charge) can involve ratios as high as 65:1. These mixtures are much leaner than
conventional mixtures and reduce fuel consumption considerably. Stratified-charge mode is
used for light-load running conditions, at constant or low speeds, where no acceleration is
required. The fuel has to be injected shortly before the ignition, so that the small amount of
air-fuel mixture is optimally placed near the spark plug. This technique enables the usage of
ultra-lean mixtures with very high air-fuel ratio, impossible with traditional carburetors or
even port fuel injection. The lean burn increases the NOx emissions. In this mode, EGR is
actuated in order to decrease NOx. The area of stratified operation is limited by load and
speed. At high load, the mixture in the stratified mode can be too rich, and thus soot can form.
At high speed, it is impossible to provide sufficient stratification due to high turbulence in the
cylinder. Therefore, at the higher load and speed range, the engine is operated in
homogeneous mode to obtain low emissions and high torque.
 Fig 3.3 Homogenous (left) and Stratified (right) mode operation

Homogeneous mode is used for acceleration, full load and high engine speeds. The air-fuel
mixture is homogenous and the ratio is stoichiometric or slightly richer than stoichiometric.
As the fuel is injected during the intake stroke, there is sufficient time for air-fuel mixture
formation. In this mode, as engine operates with stoichiometric mixture, NOx emission
decrease and therefore EGR is not activated. In the transient areas the engine can be operated
in homogeneous lean mode to optimize fuel consumption. Homogeneous lean mode is
activated for moderate load and speed conditions. In this mode, fuel is injected during the
intake stroke. The airfuel mixture is homogeneous. The A/F ratio is lean or stoichiometric. As
engine operates with lean mixture, NOx emission increase and therefore EGR is activated.

The one another operating mode is homogeneous-stratified mode. This mode is used at
acceleration conditions when passing from stratified to homogeneous mode. The two stage
injection (double injection) is implemented. The primary injection is performed at intake
stroke and majority of fuel is injected. The remaining fuel is injected at secondary injection
and compression stroke. Double injection is made to reduce soot emissions and to decrease
fuel consumption at low engine speeds in the transition area between stratified and
homogeneous operation. The double injection 14 can also be used to heat rapidly catalyst
with a lean stratified operation mode. At low speed and high loads, combustion duration is
long and temperature is high. Therefore, the engine tends to knock. In this homogeneous
charge mode, by using dual injection at full load and by decreasing the ignition timing knock
can be prevented.
ADVANTAGES OF GASOLINE DIRECT INJECTION
• 8-22% higher fuel economy
• More torque and horsepower allowing smaller engines
• Can inject fuel anytime during the 4-stroke cycle of events
• Cylinder scavenging is greatly enhanced
• Compression ratios can be higher
• Leaner fuel mixtures during cold engine operation
• Adjustable fuel modes to target emission problems
• Lower CO2 emission levels
• Reduced engine pumping losses
• Cylinder charge cooling
• Much smaller droplets spray of fuel
• Reduced cylinder wall temperatures (A/C theory- high pressure liquid changing to a low
pressure gas)
• Spark knock is much more controlled.

DISADVANTAGES OF GASOLINE DIRECT INJECTION

• Dramatic changes in the fuel delivery and control systems
• Small injection time window (sometimes in micro-sec.)
• Lean burns make post combustion NOX difficult to control
• High levels of soot (carbon) formation due to lower intake temps & exhaust inversion
• Increased electrical power demands for injectors
• Proper engine maintenance is very critical
• Components can be more expensive
• Newer technologies require technician training
• Many components are “one-time” use. (Seals, HP line, etc)
• Fuel rail and lines are made from stainless steel
• Has many “special tools” needed for routine service.
 4 . CASE STUDY

There are several case studies of the implementation of Gasoline Direct Injection (GDI)
technology in the automotive industry.
Here is one example:
Ford EcoBoost Engine: Ford introduced GDI technology in their EcoBoost engine in 2009.
The EcoBoost engine is a smaller, more fuel-efficient engine that uses GDI technology to
improve fuel efficiency and performance. Ford claims that the EcoBoost engine can provide
similar performance to a larger engine, while achieving better fuel economy. The EcoBoost
engine has been used in a wide range of Ford vehicles, including the F-150 pickup truck, the
Fusion sedan, and the Edge crossover.
Audi's TFSI engine: Audi has been using GDI technology in their TFSI engine since 2004.
The TFSI engine is a turbocharged, direct-injection engine that uses GDI technology to
improve fuel efficiency and performance. Audi claims that the TFSI engine can provide up to
20% better fuel economy than a traditional engine. The TFSI engine has been used in a wide
range of Audi vehicles, including the A4, A5, and A6.
Honda's i-VTEC engine: Honda has been using GDI technology in their i-VTEC engine since
2005. The i-VTEC engine is a variable valve timing engine that uses GDI technology to
improve fuel efficiency and performance. Honda claims that the i-VTEC engine can provide
up to 15% better fuel economy than a traditional engine. The i-VTEC engine has been used in
a wide range of Honda vehicles, including the Civic, Accord, and CR-V.
These are some examples of GDI technology implementation in the automotive industry,
showing how major automotive manufacturers have adopted GDI technology to improve fuel
efficiency and performance in their vehicles, while reducing emissions.

2.1. Flue gas source

Emissions related with cement industry can be divided into two groups; CO2 emissions and
others. CO2 emissions occur during the process of calcination and also occur during energy
production. Majority of the CO2 (50%) is released during calcination. This is followed by
fossil fuel combustion (40%), transportation (5%) and electricity consumption (5%).Average
CO2 released during the production of portland cement in USA is 0.927 kg of CO2 per 1 kg
of cement. Gross CO2 emissions factor for China's cement sector is 0.883 kg of CO2 per 1 kg
of cement where 0.415 kg comes from calcination and 0.467 kg comes from energy
production. CO2 is not the only greenhouse gas emitted to atmosphere during cement
production. SOx, NOx, CO, N2, O2 and volatile organic compounds and dust may also be
released during cement production. Among these CO2, NOx, SOx, CO and some of the
volatile organic compounds are greenhouse gases. Amount of these emissions is based on
cement type, cement production method and type of fuels used for the process. Flue gas
composition used in this study is taken.It is assumed that NOx, SO2, O2 and H2O are
removed from the flue gas before injecting into reservoir.

2.2. Model development:

2.2.1. Geologic description

The heavy oil field is located in a tectonically active area in Turkey dominated by WSW-ENE
oriented faults, anticlinal features and southerly formation dips . The reservoir is bounded by
a sealing normal fault at the north. Crest of the asymmetric anticline dipping towards the
south leant to this normal fault. There are three major partially sealing NW-SE oriented strike
slip faults. Main production formation is Alt Sinan Formation with an average thickness of 60
m. From core and log studies, it was understood that there are three facies in the reservoir. In
the simulation study, these facies were represented by three different layers. Bottom layer has
10–18% of porosity bearing wackestone with very low permeability. Second layer has 15–
20% of porosity bearing packstone with low permeability. Second layer has 15–20% of
porosity bearing packstone with low permeability . Top layer has 22–30% of porosity bearing
grainstone with the highest permeability where main production is taking place. Thickness of
the first layer increases from west to east of the field and thicknesses of the second and the
bottom layers decrease from west to east.
 5. CONCLUSION

GDI overcomes the problem associated with the PFI technology in gasoline engine and
benefits with better fuel consumption and reduced emissions. Fuel injection system is the
heart of GDI engine and the success of engine lies in the ability of fuel injection system to
form the required mixture for the different GDI operational mode. Stratified and combine
mode operation are quite critical but it gives maximum reduction in fuel consumption, less
emission and opportunity of lean combustion due to its unthrottled operation. GDI is the
proven and feasible technology in GDI system have potential to satisfy future emission norms
but it needs systematic research to adopt higher and higher fuel injection pressure and
development in combustion process.
 REFERENCE

[1] P. Blair. Design and simulation of two stroke engines, SAE 1996 ISBN,1-56091-685-0.
[2] M. C. Drake, D. C. Hawotrh. Advanced gasoline engine development using optical
diagnostics and numerical modeling. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute,31(2007)99–
124.
[3] F. Zhao, M. C. Lai, D. L.Harrington. Automotive spark-ignited direct-injection gasoline
engines. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 25(1999) 437–562.
[4] R.Rotondi, G.Bella. Gasoline direct injection spray simulation. International, J Thermal
Sci45 (2006) 168–179.
[5] C. M.Bartolini, G. Vicenzi, G. Chiatt., Performance analysis of two stroke engine with
direct injection. SAE 931508.
[6] C. E. Carson, R. G. Kee, R. G. Kenny, Stan Lehaman, S. Zwahir. Ram Tunned and air
assisted fuel injection system applied to two stroke engine. SAE 950269.
[7] W. Heimberg. Fitch pressure surge injection system. SAE paper 931508.
[8] H. Nohira. Development of Toyota’s direct injection gasoline engine. Proceedings of
AVL Engine and Environment Conference, 1997.p.239–49.
[9] A. C. Alkidas. Combustion advancements in gasoline engines. Energy Conversion and
Management 48 (2007) 2751–2761
[10] A. C. Alkidas,Tahry, Contributors to the fuel economy advantage of DISI engines over
PFI engines, SAE 2003-01-3101.
[11] A. Gupta, S. Jonathan, G. Ramzy, Abdel-Gayed. Downsizing of a naturally aspirated
engine to turbocharged gasoline direct injection variable valve timing engine. International
Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences Dec 2013.Vol.4,No6
[12]C. W. Park, C. Oh, S. D. Kim , H. S. Kim, S. Y. Lee, C. S. Bae. Evaluation and
visualization of stratified ultra lean combustion characteristics in a spray guided type gasoline
direct injection engine. J of Automotive Technology, Vol.15,No.4,pp.525−533(2014)
[13] K. Kumerave, Prem Ananad B., Anushka K., Saravanan C. G. Effect of air fuel ratio and
injection timing on gasoline direct injection engine performance. 23rd national conference on
ic engine and combustion (NCICEC2013) SVNIT, Surat, India 13-16 Dec13.
[14] M. C. Drake, D. C. Haworth. Advanced gasoline engine development using optical
diagnostics and numerical modelling. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 31(2007)99–
124 .
[15] C. Park, S. Kim, H. Kim, Y. Moriyoshi. Stratified lean combustion characteristics of a
spray-guided combustion system in a gasoline direct injection engine. Energy 41(2012)401-
407.
[16] M. Costa, U. Sorge, L. Allocca. CFD optimization for GDI spray model tuning and
enhancement of engine performance. Advances in Engineering Software 49(2012)43–53.
[17] M. Costa, U. Sorge, L. Allocca. Increasing energy efficiency of a gasoline direct
injection engine through optimal synchronization of single or double injection strategies.
Energy Conversion and Management (2012). [18] W. Hentschel. Optical diagnostic for
combustion pocess development of direct injection engines. Proceedings of the Combustion
Institute, Volume 28,2000 pp.1119–1135.
[19] T. Nakashimaa, M. Basaki, K. Saitob, S. Furuno. New concept of a direct injection SI
gasoline engine: a study of stratified charge combustion characteristics by radical
luminescence measurement. JSAE Review 24(2003)17–23.
[20] G. Rottenkolber, J. Gindele, J. Raposo, K. Dullenkopf, W. Hentschel, U. Spicher.
Spray analysis of a gasoline direct injector by means of two-phase PIV. Experiments in
Fluids 32 (2002) 710–721 Springer-Verlag 2002.
[21] M. C. Drake, T. Fansler, A. M. Lippert. Stratified-charge combustion: modeling and
imaging of a spray-guided direct-injection spark-ignition engine. Proceedings of the
Combustion Institute 30(2005)2683–2691.
[22] W. Salber, P. Wolters, T. Esch, J. Geiger, J. Dilthey. Synergies of variable valve
actuation and direct injection. SAE 2002-01-0706. [23] M. B. Celik, B. Ozdalyan.
Gasoline direct injection. In: Siano D, editor. Fuel Injection, Sciyo; 2010,
http://www.intechopen.com