See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/245391244

Fast mass-fraction-burned calculation using the net pressure method for

real-time applications

Article  in  Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part D Journal of Automobile Engineering · March 2009
DOI: 10.1243/09544070JAUTO1006

CITATIONS READS

26 2,916

3 authors, including:

Guoming Zhu Harold Schock

Michigan State University Michigan State University
262 PUBLICATIONS   2,891 CITATIONS    201 PUBLICATIONS   3,396 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Ph.D. research View project

Internal Combustion Engine Modeling View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Guoming Zhu on 19 February 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 TECHNICAL NOTE 389

Fast mass-fraction-burned calculation using the net

pressure method for real-time applications
M Mittal*, G Zhu, and H Schock
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA

The manuscript was received on 9 September 2008 and was accepted after revision for publication on 17 November 2008.

DOI: 10.1243/09544070JAUTO1006

Abstract: The mass fraction burned (MFB) is determined from the analysis of measured in-
cylinder pressure data. In this paper, a net pressure method (model 2) is used to evaluate the
MFB curves at different load conditions (3.3 bar indicated mean effective pressure and wide-
open throttle) using a constant polytropic index. Results are compared with the well-known
Rassweiler–Withrow method (model 1), which is a linear model for the polytropic index. Model
2 showed good agreement with model 1 at high-load conditions; however, it predicts slower
combustion at part-load conditions than that of model 1. It is found that the proper selection of
the polytropic index n and the determination of the end of combustion are the important
parameters for calculating the MFB curves using model 2. The modified form of model 2
compares well with the results of model 1 for evaluating the MFB at part-load conditions. The
MFB results of the modified form (of model 2) also show good agreement with model 1 at high-
load conditions. Model 2 has an advantage that the data-processing time is short enough to
allow for online processing.

Keywords: in-cylinder pressure, mass fraction burned, engine

1 INTRODUCTION compared the performance of five alternative MFB

The mass fraction burned (MFB) shows how the in-
cylinder combustion progresses as a function of the
crank angle. The rate of combustion inside an engine
cylinder is a very important parameter affecting the
engine thermal efficiency, peak cycle temperature
and pressure, and exhaust emissions. This combus-
tion rate is usually quantified by calculation of the
burn crank angles at which the MFB reaches a
specified value [1]. Several methods have been
suggested to evaluate the MFB in gasoline engines
based upon the measured pressure data. Stone and
Green-Armytage [2] compared the two methods (the
two-zone combustion method and the Rassweiler–
Withrow method) to evaluate the MFB as a function
of time in a spark ignition (SI) engine. Their results
of the complex two-zone combustion model showed
good agreement with a simpler model presented by
Rassweiler and Withrow. Brunt and Emtage [1]
*Corresponding author: Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Michigan State University, 141, ERC South, East Lansing, MI,
48824, USA. email: mittalma@msu.edu
models using simulated and experimental data. They
preferred the Rassweiler–Withrow model to produce
the best results to determine the MFB in their
comparative tests. Shayler et al. [3] investigated the
best form to implement the Rassweiler–Withrow
method and discussed the effect of uncertainty
assumptions. They found that the end of combustion
(EOC) determination, the selection of the polytropic
index, and the effect of signal noise are important
parameters for calculating the MFB using the Rass-
weiler–Withrow method. Overall, the Rassweiler–
Withrow method to estimate the MFB profile using
in-cylinder pressure and volume data is a well-
established technique [4]. Therefore, it can be used
to compare with the other methods to improve the
MFB calculations. Mittal et al. [5] compared the MFB
analysis using the net pressure method with the
Rassweiler–Withrow method for port fuel injection
(PFI) E85–direct-injection (DI) gasoline and PFI gaso-
line–DI E85 systems at different load conditions. E85
in their work represented a blend of 85 per cent
ethanol and 15 per cent gasoline by volume. Their
results of MFB using both the methods showed good

JAUTO1006 F IMechE 2009 Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part D: J. Automobile Engineering
390 M Mittal, G Zhu, and H Schock
agreement at high-load conditions; however, the net
pressure method showed slower combustion than
that of the Rassweiler–Withrow method at part-load
conditions.
The objective of this paper is to improve the
calculation of MFB using the net pressure method in
a gasoline-fuelled SI engine at part-load conditions.
Results are compared with the well-established
Rassweiler–Withrow method. The principal advan-
tages of the net pressure method are that it is simple
to implement and fast enough to allow for real-time
applications. The in-cylinder pressure data used in
this work are obtained at different load conditions,
3.3 bar indicated mean effective pressure (IMEP) and
wide-open throttle (WOT), inside a single cylinder of
a Ford 5.4 l three-valve engine (Fig. 1) (see reference
[5]). Both PFI and DI were used with the variation in
PFI percentage from 100 to 0. The percentage of DI
was correspondingly increased to maintain a con-
stant relative air-to-fuel ratio l, inverse of the fuel-
to-air equivalence ratio W. In this paper, first, the two
methods are outlined for the PFI gasoline–DI
gasoline system considering the case with 100 per
cent PFI at different load conditions, 3.3 bar IMEP,
and WOT. Then the comparison of MFB curves is
extended to the PFI E85–DI gasoline system with
100 per cent and 70 per cent PFI E85 respectively at
different loads and engine speeds to test the
robustness of the net pressure method. Note that
the percentage of DI gasoline was correspondingly
Fig. 1
Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part D: J. Automobile Engineering
increased to maintain a constant relative air-to-fuel
ratio l, as discussed.
2 MEASUREMENT PROCEDURE AND RESULTS
The primary purpose of combustion in a piston
engine is to increase the in-cylinder pressure for
shifting the expansion process away from the com-
pression process and to produce the work cycle.
The MFB is a measure of the fraction of thermal
energy released, owing to combustion of the air–fuel
mixture inside an engine cylinder, with respect to
the total energy released at the EOC during a cycle.
This work utilizes the net pressure method, denoted
as model 2, to evaluate the MFB curves as discussed
in section 2.2. Comparison is presented with the
Rassweiler and Withrow method, denoted as model
1 in this paper. Start of combustion (SOC) and EOC
are determined from the logarithmic pressure indi-
cator diagram using a least-squares fit algorithm.
Model 2 is of interest owing to its advantage of fast
data processing for real-time applications.
2.1 The Rassweiler–Withrow method (model 1)
The implementation details of the Rassweiler–
Withrow [6] method vary in the literature. The data
depicted in Fig. 2 show the measured pressure profile
(average of 300 consecutive cycles) for the PFI
Experimental rig
JAUTO1006 F IMechE 2009
 Fast mass-fraction-burned calculation 391

Fig. 2 Measured pressure data for PFI gasoline and DI Fig. 3 Indicator diagram on a double-logarithmic
gasoline system at WOT (100 per cent PFI) scale for a PFI gasoline–DI gasoline system at
WOT (100 per cent PFI)
gasoline–DI gasoline system at WOT load condition
with 100 per cent PFI. In this figure, a crank angle due to volume change in the absence of combustion
degree of 0u represents the piston position at the top can be obtained using
dead centre (TDC). The initial state i and the final 
ndk 
state f are the essential singularities of the combus- Vk{1
Dpv ~pk {pk{1 ~pk{1 {1 ð2Þ
tion process which represent the SOC and EOC Vk
respectively. The transition from i to f is referred to
as the dynamic stage of combustion [7]. An indicator diagram on logarithmic scales (Fig. 3) is
In this model, it is assumed that for any crank used to evaluate the polytropic indices nc and ne. Vs
angle interval Dh the actual pressure change Dp in the figure represents the normalized volume with
inside an engine cylinder is composed of a pressure respect to the clearance volume. The two states i and
rise Dpc due to combustion and a pressure change f are identified by the departure of the curve from
Dpv due to the volume change; therefore Dp 5 the state lines representing the compression and
Dpc + Dpv. The pressure change due to volume expansion processes using a least-squares fit algo-
change can be obtained using a polytropic index. rithm. Now, with the known Dpc 5 Dp 2 Dpv, and
A constant index value was chosen originally by assuming that the mass of charge burned in the
Rassweiler and Withrow where the magnitude was interval Dh is proportional to the pressure rise due to
the average of the polytropic indices before and after combustion, the MFB at the end of the kth interval
the combustion process. Bitar et al. [7] used a linear can be evaluated using
exponent in their work to define the polytropic Pk
pressure model for the dynamic stage of combus- mbk Dpc
~ PN0 ð3Þ
tion. Brunt and Emtage [1] used the compression mbtotal 0 Dpc
index nc up to TDC and the expansion index ne,
thereafter. A linear model for the polytropic index nd where N is the total number of crank angle intervals
during the combustion process is introduced into during the combustion process.
this work to evaluate the pressure change due to the
volume change, according to
2.2 The net pressure method (model 2)
nd ~nc zðne {nc Þt ð1Þ This model evaluates the MFB by normalizing the
net pressure with respect to the overall net pressure
where
increase at the EOC [8]. The net pressure change
h{hi Dp(k) between the two crank angles is
t~ ( )
hf {hi  
V ðk Þ n~1:3 V ðkÞ
Dpðk Þ~ pðkz1Þ{pðk Þ ð4Þ
Therefore, in any interval Dh the pressure change V ðkz1Þ VIg

JAUTO1006 F IMechE 2009 Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part D: J. Automobile Engineering
392 M Mittal, G Zhu, and H Schock
Fig. 4 MFBs for the PFI gasoline–DI gasoline system at 3.3 bar IMEP (upper graph) and WOT
(lower graph)
and the net pressure at each crank angle is
pNET ðkÞ~pNET ðk{1ÞzDpðk Þ
where n is the constant polytropic index, p is the
pressure, V is the volume, and VIg is the chamber
volume at the ignition point. The simplicity of model
2 is apparent from equations (4) and (5). It is com-
putationally efficient and provides a short data-pro-
cessing time compared with model 1.
Figure 4 shows the comparison of MFB curves for
model 1 (linear model for a polytropic index and the
model used by Brunt and Emtage [1]) and model 2
with a constant polytropic index n 5 1.3, at 3.3 bar
IMEP (upper graph) and WOT (lower graph) load
conditions. As shown in the figure, model 1, which
is a linear model for the polytropic index, showed
similar results when the compression index nc was
used up to TDC and the expansion index ne there-
after [1]. Model 2 shows good agreement with
model 1 when the MFB is calculated at high-load
Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part D: J. Automobile Engineering
conditions (WOT); however, it predicts slower com-
bustion at part-load conditions.
ð5Þ The accurate identification of the EOC is an
important measure to minimize the uncertainties
associated with the MFB calculations using model 2.
The EOC in model 1 is determined accurately using a
least-squares fit algorithm; however, in model 2, it is
determined by locating the peak of the net pressure. At
high-load conditions, model 2 determines the EOC
with reasonable accuracy, and therefore the results
are in close agreement with model 1. At part-load
conditions, this method (model 2) is less ideal for
determining the EOC than at high loads. It predicts
EOC significantly later than the actual crank angle
value, and therefore model 2 has slower combustion
than model 1. The accurate determination of the
EOC in model 2 is affected by selection of the poly-
tropic index n. Note that the constant polytropic
index n 5 1.3 is used in equation (4). The effect of
the polytropic index on the EOC determination, and
therefore its influence on the MFB calculation, at
JAUTO1006 F IMechE 2009
 Fast mass-fraction-burned calculation
Fig. 5 MFBs for the PFI E85–DI gasoline system at 3.3
bar IMEP and 1500 r/min
part-load conditions, is shown in Fig. 4 (upper graph).
The difference in calculating the MFB (using model 2)
decreases compared with model 1 when the index
valve n 5 ne 5 1.20 is used in equation (4). This is due
to the determination of the EOC with improved
accuracy; however, some slight differences can still
be observed from this index value (n 5 ne). The index
value n 5 nc 5 1.165, in equation (4), determines the
EOC with reasonable accuracy compared with the
model 1 determination using a least-squares fit algo-
rithm. Therefore the MFB profile is in good agree-
ment with model 1 when n 5 nc is used in equation
(4). The model 2 MFB calculation, with n 5 nc, also
shows good agreement with model 1 results at the
WOT load condition (lower graph).
Note that with the polytropic index ne of expan-
sion, the SOC and EOC determinations using a least-
squares fit algorithm make model 1 computationally
more expensive than model 2. Therefore, model 2 is
simple to implement, and the data-processing time
is short enough to allow for real-time applications.
Further results are presented to test the robustness
of model 2 (with n 5 nc) with various percentages
of the dual-fuel system (the PFI E85–DI gasoline
system) at different loads and engine speeds. Two
different cases are considered with 100 per cent and
70 per cent PFI E85. The percentage of DI gasoline is
correspondingly increased to maintain a constant
relative air-to-fuel ratio l.
2.3 PFI E85–DI gasoline system
Figure 5 shows the MFB curves at 3.3 bar IMEP load
condition and 1500 r/min engine speed. Two different
cases are presented with PFI E85 percentages of 100
JAUTO1006 F IMechE 2009
393
Fig. 6 MFBs for the PFI E85–DI gasoline system at
WOT and 1500 r/min
and 70. As shown in the figure, model 2 shows good
agreement with model 1 at this part-load condition.
The burn duration decreases with increase in PFI E85.
Ethanol has the advantage of high combustion speed
for SI engines [9]. The combustion process starts at
about 220u crank angle for both the cases. There is no
significant difference in the 10 per cent burn dura-
tions; however, the 50 per cent and 90 per cent burn
durations are faster with 100 per cent PFI E85 than
with 70 per cent PFI E85. The burn duration is about
51u crank angle for 100 per cent PFI E85 and increases
with decrease in PFI E85 percentage.
Figure 6 shows the MFB curves at WOT load and
1500 r/min engine speed with PFI E85 percentages of
100 and 70. Similar to the part-load condition, model
2 shows good agreement with model 1. As expected,
the burn duration increases with decrease in PFI E85
percentage. Combustion starts at about 212u crank
angle for both the cases and significant difference
can be observed even at earlier stages (10 per cent
burn) with much faster combustion for 100 per cent
PFI E85. The burn duration is about 39u crank angle
for 100 per cent PFI E85. Figure 7 shows the MFB
curves at WOT load and 2500 r/min engine speed.
Again, model 2 shows good agreement with model 1
at this high load and higher-engine-speed condition.
The burn duration is about 37u crank angle for 100
per cent PFI. It increases with decrease in the PFI
E85 percentage.
3 CONCLUSIONS
An experimental study is performed to investigate
the MFB in an SI engine. The MFB calculation using
the net pressure method is presented and compared
Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part D: J. Automobile Engineering
394 M Mittal, G Zhu, and H Schock

Instn Mech Engrs, Part D: J. Automobile Engineering,

1987, 201(1), 61–67.
3 Shayler, P. J., Wiseman, M. W., and Ma, T.
Improving the determination of mass fraction burnt.
SAE paper 900351, 1990.
4 Heywood, J. B. Internal combustion engine funda-
mentals, 1998 (McGraw-Hill, New York).
5 Mittal, M., Zhu, G., Schock, H. J., Stuecken, T., and
Hung, D. L. S. Burn rate analysis of an ethanol–
gasoline, dual fueled, spark ignition engine. In
Proceedings of the ASME International Mechanical
Engineering Congress and Exposition, 2008, paper
IMECE2008-66139 (ASME International, New York).
6 Rassweiler, G. M. and Withrow, L. Motion pictures
of engine flames correlated with pressure cards. SAE
Trans., 1938, 42, 185–204.
7 Bitar, E. Y., Oppenheim, A. K., and Schock, H. J.
Fig. 7 MFBs for the PFI E85–DI gasoline system at Model for control of combustion in a piston engine.
WOT and 2500 r/min SAE paper 2006-01-0401, 2006.
8 Zhu, G., Daniels, C. F., and Winkelman, J. MBT
timing detection and its closed-loop control using
with the Rassweiler–Withrow method. The net pres- in-cylinder pressure signal. SAE paper 2003-01-3266,
sure method is of interest because of its advantage 2003.
of reduced data-processing time and capability of 9 Brinkman, N. D. Ethanol fuel – a single-cylinder
real-time applications. The results show that the study of efficiency and exhaust emissions. SAE
net pressure method is in good agreement with the paper 810345, 1981.
Rassweiler–Withrow method at high-load conditions;
however, it provides slower combustion at part-
load conditions. It is found that the net pressure APPENDIX
method determines the EOC with reasonable accur-
acy at WOT; however, its prediction of the EOC at Notation
part-load condition is significantly later than the ac- DI direct injection
tual value. The proposed modification of the net EOC end of combustion
pressure method using the compression polytropic E85 blend of 85 per cent ethanol and 15
index (n 5 nc) provides quite good agreement with per cent gasoline by volume
the results of the Rassweiler–Withrow method at f final state of combustion
part- and high-load conditions for calculating the i initial state of combustion
MFB. IMEP indicated mean effective pressure
MFB mass fraction burned
nc polytropic index, compression
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ne polytropic index, expansion
Financial support from the Michigan Economic Dev- p in-cylinder pressure
elopment Corporation is gratefully acknowledged. PFI port fuel injection
SI spark ignition
SOC start of combustion
REFERENCES TDC top dead centre
V cylinder volume
1 Brunt, M. F. J. and Emtage, A. L. Evaluation of burn WOT wide-open throttle
rate routines and analysis errors. SAE paper 970037,
1997.
2 Stone, C. R. and Green-Armytage, D. I. Comparison h crank angle (deg)
of methods for the calculation of mass fraction l relative air-to-fuel ratio, inverse of W
burnt from engine pressure–time diagrams. Proc. W fuel-to-air equivalence ratio

Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part D: J. Automobile Engineering JAUTO1006 F IMechE 2009

View publication stats