Injector Deposit Formation in Gasoline Direct Injection Engines

by

Przemek R. Jamroz

B.S., Mechanical Engineering

University of Maine, 2000

Submitted to the Department of Mechanical Engineering

January 2002 in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering

at the

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

-January 2002 BARKER

© 2002 Massachusetts Institute of Technology MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE

OF TECHNOLOGY
All rights reserved
MAR 2 5 002
LIBRARIES

Signature of Author
bepartment of(IVJchanical Engineering
January 18, 2002

Certified by
Wai K. Cheng
Professor of Mechanical Engineering
Thesis Supervisor

Accepted by
Ain A. Sonin
Chairman, Department Committee on Graduate Students
2
 Injector Deposit Formation in Gasoline Direct injection Engines
by

Przemek R. Jamroz

Submitted to the Department of Mechanical Engineering

January 2002 in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering

Abstract
Spark ignited gasoline direct injection (GDI) engines are attractive alternatives to the
traditional port fuel injection (PFI) engines. The configuration promises increased
versatility of engine operation with higher thermal efficiency, reduced pumping losses
and improved emission control. Despite many advantages, direct injection has several
important drawbacks, such as increased NOx and particulate emissions, as well as
elevated rates of deposit accumulation on intake valves and in fuel injectors. Injector
deposit is the subject of this study.
Injector deposits are undesirable due to their potentially damaging effects on the
injection process. According to published reports, injector fouling has negative impacts
on the engine performance, driveability, fuel economy and emissions. The result of
injector fouling due to residue buildup is a poor spray quality exhibited by distorted, non-
symmetric flow of fuel into the cylinder. Deposits also impact injector's flow capacity,
thus affecting fuel/air mass ratio in the cylinder.
The purpose of this study is to record what happens to the residual fuel in the nozzle
passage following an injection. This is accomplished by video imaging the injector
passage at different operating conditions for isooctane and commercial gasoline. The
setup used a transparent quartz nozzle where evaporation of the residual fuel can be
recorded using a high-speed digital camera coupled with a zoom lens.
The images showed that below a critical temperature the evaporation time was long
compared to the time between injection events. There was a continuous presence of
liquid fuel in the nozzle passage after the injection. The removal of this liquid in the next
injection reduced the likelihood of deposit formation. At higher temperatures, fuel flash
boiled quickly after the end of injection, leaving very little liquid in the nozzle. The nozzle
wall deposit may form from the wall film interacting with the combustion gas.

Thesis Advisor: Professor Wai K. Cheng

Title: Professor of Mechanical Engineering

3
4
Acknowledgments
The author of this paper would like to express his gratitude to everyone who contributed
to the work in this project. This especially includes Prof. Wai K. Cheng, my academic
advisor and project supervisor who assisted me with project definition, planning and
execution. Specifically, I would like to thank for his help with troubleshooting during test
apparatus design and refinement as well as his guidance in analyzing the obtained
experimental data.
I would also like to thank Thane DeWitt, whose help was invaluable in solving practical
obstacles inherently associated with building and operation of my apparatus. I have
acquired much practical knowledge from these experiences.
I would also like to express my appreciation for the valuable input to this project
obtained from members of Engine and Fuel Consortium, companies whom they
represent in part sponsored this study.
My thanks also go to all students in the Sloan Automotive Laboratory for creating an
inspiring atmosphere of camaraderie and cooperation. Special thanks to all, with whom
I had a pleasure of sharing the office space in 31-158, including (in chronological
order): Halim Santoso, Christoph Kausch, Jeff Matthews and Jeremy Llaniguez.
Special acknowledgments are also for the efforts of all the engineering faculty I came in
contact with during my undergraduate years at University of Maine. Their exceptional
commitment to quality teaching made studying pleasurable and allowed me to come to
MIT well prepared.
On a more personal note, I would like to add thanks to my family whose support and
encouragement has been invaluable during the period of last three semesters I spent at
MIT. This includes my mother, Barbara Jamroz who had taught me the passion of
science and intellectual exploration. Special thanks also go to my sister, Gosia Deja for
her kind and enthusiastic spirit as well as my girlfriend, Natania Morrissey for her
unconditional love, support and understanding.

5
6
Table of Contents
Abstract 3
Acknowledgments 5
Table of Contents 7
List of Figures 8
Nomenclature 9
1.0 Introduction 10
1.1 Fuel Delivery Systems in Automotive Engines 10
1.2 Previous Work on Injector Deposits in GDI Engines 12
1.4 Figures 14
2.0 Experimental Approach 21
2.1 Apparatus 21
2.2 Procedures 23
2.3 Figures 25
3.0 Results 31
3.1 Summary 31
3.2 Temperature Effect 31
3.3 Ambient Pressure Effect 32
3.4 Fuel Properties 32
3.5 Injector Orientation 32
3.6 Injection 33
3.7 Deposit buildup 35
3.8 Figures 36
4.0 Summary and Conclusions 54
4.1 GDI Injector Deposits 54
4.2 Summary of the Project 54
4.3 Future Efforts 55
5.0 References 56

7
List of Figures

Fig. 1.1 Typical automotive carburetor 14

Fig. 1.2 Single point injection system 15
Fig. 1.3 Multipoint, or port fuel injection (PFI) system 15
Fig. 1.4 Late injection in a GDI engine 16
Fig. 1.5 Early injection in a GDI engine 17
Fig. 1.6 Electron microscope images of GDI injector [8] 18
Fig. 1.7 Mechanism of injector deposit accumulation 19
Fig. 1.8 Polymerization theory of deposit formation 20
Fig. 2.1 Completely assembled test apparatus 25
Fig. 2.2 Quartz block with a transparent nozzle in the upright orientation 26
Fig. 2.3 Quartz block with a transparent nozzle in the inverted orientation 26
Fig. 2.5 Output window of the Redlake MotionScope@ 8000 S 27
Fig. 2.6 High-speed imager Redlake MotionScope@ 8000 S with optical system 28
Fig. 2.7 Plunger mechanism and fuel flow through the nozzle 29
Fig. 2.8 Fuel supply system and its operation 30
Fig. 3.1 Evaporation time of commercial gasoline (upright nozzle) 36
Fig. 3.2 Evaporation time for pure isooctane (upright nozzle) 37
Fig. 3.3 Evaporation of gasoline in subcritical conditions (inverted nozzle) 38
Fig. 3.4 Evaporation of gasoline in subcritical conditions (upright nozzle) 38
Fig. 3.5 Evaporation of gasoline in supercritical conditions (inverted nozzle) 39
Fig. 3.6 Evaporation of gasoline in supercritical conditions (upright nozzle) 40
Fig. 3.7 Evaporation of gasoline in cool end of transition range (inverted nozzle) 41
Fig. 3.8 Evaporation of gasoline in cool end of transition range (upright nozzle) 42
Fig. 3.9 Evaporation of gasoline in mid-range of transition zone (inverted nozzle) 43
Fig. 3.10 Evaporation of gasoline in hot end of transition range (inverted nozzle) 44
Fig. 3.11 Evaporation of gasoline in hot end of transition range (upright nozzle) 45
Fig. 3.12 Evaporation time of gasoline at various ambient pressures (inv. nozzle) 46
Fig. 3.13 Rise of bubbles in subcritical conditions (upright nozzle) 47
Fig 3.14 Rise of bubbles in subcritical conditions (inverted nozzle) 47
Fig. 3.15 Evaporation time of gasoline in two nozzle orientations 48
Fig. 3.16 Turbulent flow patterns during subcritical injection (inverted orientation) 49
Fig. 3.17 Absence of flow patterns during supercritical (inverted orientation) 49
Fig. 3.18 Post-injection distortions of meniscus due to plunger oscillations 50
Fig. 3.19 Video image of an empty nozzle prior to injection (inverted nozzle) 51
Fig. 3.20 Blurred image of injection flow 51
Fig. 3.21 Volumes of liquid fuel during subcritical injection (inverted nozzle) 52
Fig. 3.22 Suggested mechanism of deposit formation process in GDI injectors 53

8
Nomenclature

A - surface area, unit: square meter [m2

CO - carbon monoxide

d -- diameter, unit: meter [m]

fps - frames pre second

GDI - gasoline direct injection

-- heat transfer coefficient, unit: Watt per square meter degree Celsius [W/m
2
h
OC]
HC -- hydrocarbons
hfg - latent heat of vaporization
/ -- length, unit: meter [m]

m -- mass, unit: kilogram [kg]

mm -- millimeter
ms -- millisecond
NOx - oxides of nitrogen
ON -octane number
PF - port fuel injection
(APn;) - injection pressure difference, unit: [psi]
psi - pounds per square inch
psig - pounds per square inch of gauge pressure
o - heat transfer rate, unit: Watt [W]
rpm - revolutions per minute
p -- density, units: kilogram per cubic meter [kg/M 3]

T -- temperature, unit: degree Celsius [SC]

t -- time, unit: second [s]

T -- evaporation time, unit: second [s]

V -- volume, unit: cubic meter [M 3]

9
1.0 Introduction

1.1 Fuel Delivery Systems in Automotive Engines

All spark ignited gasoline engines require a reliable and versatile fuel distribution
system to provide an appropriate combustible mixture to the cylinder. A successful fuel
delivery system adjusts rapidly to varying conditions in the engine due to transients in
speed and torque demand. Since the air-fuel ratio impacts the fuel consumption and
engine emissions, the fuel delivery system controls significantly the engine behavior.
The ability to satisfy all of the above requirements is often challenging and subject to
intense research in the engine community.

Gasoline direct injection is historically third in a sequence of steps leading to the

development of modern fuel delivery systems in internal combustion engines. Originally,
automotive engines relied on carburetors (Fig. 1.1), which measured and introduced
fuel into the air stream depending on the intake pressure. For long, carburetors were a
standard in automotive fuel systems due to their simplicity. They however did not allow
for control of fuel delivery on demand, and were phased out when feedback controllers
were needed to lower emissions. The development of electronic injectors, which are
more precise and controllable than carburetors, leads to improved mixture preparation
and lower emissions. Initially, the electronic injection involved a single point injection
with one central injector located upstream of the throttle and is shared by all cylinders
(Fig. 1.2). This system was eventually phased out giving way to multipoint injection or
port fuel injection (PFI), where each injector delivers fuel directly to the intake port of
one individual cylinder (Fig. 1.3). In both cases, the amount of fuel injected as well as
injection duration and timing relative to the engine cycle is controlled by an on-board
computer, linked to a set of sensors measuring throttle position, intake pressure and
oxygen content in the exhaust. These improvements allow for a much greater control
over fuel distribution to the engine, allowing to improve fuel economy as well as to
minimize emissions.

Despite its advantages, port fuel injection is inherently limited in its ability to fully control
fuel delivery because the fuel is not directly delivered to the cylinder. Thus the fuel that
appears in the charge may come partly from the fuel metered for the current cycle, and
partly from the previous cycles. This makes mixture control in engine transients difficult.

Gasoline direct injection offers a greater versatility in controlling the mixture preparation
and combustion process in an automotive engine. The concept has reached production
stage in the late 90s, thanks to the development of inexpensive electronic fuel injection

10
systems. With the increasingly restrictive fuel economy and emission regulations in
industrialized nations, GDI may soon become a potential replacement for the traditional
PFI technology.

The central focus of GDI technology is direct injection of fuel into the cylinder. A driving
factor for the technology is the capability of stratified operation so that the overall lean
limit is extended. This extension significantly improves the fuel economy at part load by
reducing the throttle loss. For partial load operation the injection is set to occur late (late
injection), during compression stroke, when the piston is traveling upward (Fig. 1.4 a
and b). The injector delivers only a small amount of fuel into the cylinder, creating a
stratified charge sufficient to sustain stable combustion. The fuel is otherwise
incombustible in homogenous conditions if it were fully mixed with the cylinder air. The
operation of a GDI engine at higher loads resembles that of an ordinary PFI engine.
The injection timing is advanced well into the intake stroke (early injection), allowing for
a thorough mixing of the fuel with the incoming air (Fig. 1.5 a and b). Therefore, the
resulting mixture is either stoichiometric or slightly rich and it's homogeneous
throughout the cylinder to prevent soot formation. The transition point between the early
and late injection is an additional design parameter, sometimes distinguished by an
intermediate homogeneous lean operation [2, 7].

The use of direct in-cylinder injection has several additional benefits in terms of engine
performance and emissions. Vaporization of the fuel cools the cylinder air, effectively
increasing its density, leading to an increase in volumetric efficiency [2, 3] by as much
as 5% compared to a PFI engine [2]. Subsequently, the peak cylinder temperature is
lower, making GDI engines less likely to knock [2]. Higher resistance to knock allows
GDI engines to have higher compression ratio for higher thermal efficiency or more
advanced spark timing for increased torque output. Lean operation at part load yields
additional gains in thermal efficiency, mostly due to better thermoproperties of lean
mixtures (higher y coefficient) and lower heat loss. In addition, the unthrottled operation
of GDI engines significantly reduces pumping losses at partial loads. Important
drawbacks of GDI technology include elevated NOx [4, 8] and particulate [4, 8]
emissions during stratified combustion as well as increased deposit accumulation on
intake valves [8] and injector nozzle passage [2, 4, 5, 6, 8]. Additional NOx production is
mostly due to lean conditions and higher burned gas temperature at partial load [7],
while soot formation is caused by insufficient mixing of fuel and rich burn of the mixture.
Due to the critical nature of fuel system reliability in GDI technology, the problem of
injector deposits is especially challenging to resolve.

11
1.2 Previous Work on Injector Deposits in GDI Engines
The problem of injector deposit formation has been previously studied by a number of
automotive and gasoline manufacturers [1, 2, 4, 5, 6]. Two types of injector deposits
have been identified: carbonaceous sediment produced from the soot and lubricating oil
during the normal work cycle, and those believed to be formed from fuel matter leftover
in the hot environment of the injector passage following injection [2, 6]. Deposits of the
latter type typically accumulate as thin layers of waxy residue on the injector's internal
surfaces, near the injector tip and at the nozzle outlet [6, 8]. The residue typically forms
a characteristic circular pattern around the plunger tip as well as the outlet (Fig. 1.6 a
and b). Figure 1.7 a, b and c offers a plausible scenario for the internal deposit
formation. When the injector nozzle temperature is sufficiently high, the bulk of the
residual liquid fuel in the nozzle after an injection flash boils, leaving a thin liquid film of
the heavier fuel components on the wall. This film interacts with the charge gas and
forms a deposit layer. In the next cycle, however, part of this deposit is washed away by
the fluid flow. the deposit pattern is thus result of the formation and wash away process.

Injector deposits are highly undesirable, especially if they reside on the internal
surfaces of the injector. Such accumulation is likely to cause damage to the carefully
designed and calibrated injection process in GDI engines. While some deposits,
concentrated near the tip area are believed to affect the spray geometry and aiming [6],
the accumulation around the minimum metering area cause reduction in gasoline flow
[6, 8]. All researchers reported loss of injector flow as one of the principle effects of the
deposit accumulation [2, 4, 5, 6, 8] leading to change of effective air-fuel ratio in the
cylinder. All immediate effects of deposit formation listed above have been linked to
subsequent increase in vehicle NOx and particulate emissions [4, 8], some increase in
CO and HC emissions [4, 8], and general decrease in vehicle's performance in terms of
its driveability [4], acceleration [8] and fuel economy [4, 8].

There have been several attempts to explain the deposit formation process on injector
surfaces. According to one theory, the accumulation in GDI injectors results from fuel
polymerization or coking in the hot environment of the injector passage [6]. This
condition, believed to be caused by high-boiling point residual fuel leftover from the
injection process leads to the formation of a waxy residue on the injector's internal
surfaces (Fig. 1.8 a, b and c).

Operating conditions in the cylinder are believed to affect the deposit accumulation
process. Injector tip temperature has been found to have by far the greatest effect on
deposit formation [1, 5, 6]. In general, loss of fuel flow rate due to the accumulation

12
increases sharply for tip temperatures exceeding 1500C, peaking around 1750C. On the
contrary, maintaining the tip temperature always below 150 0 C has been found to
significantly reduce the residue formation [6]. Most of the deposit build-up occurs early
[4, 5], suggesting that injector surface might play a significant role in the initial
sedimentation. Indeed, surface coatings have been found to inhibit the initial
accumulation but had little effect on residue build-up once the process has started [5,
6]. Low fuel injection pressure is indirectly related to the deposit formation in that it
limits the washing action of a fresh charge [1, 6]. Fuel properties, such as low T90 point
(90% distillation temperature), high olefin and aromatic content in gasoline have been
found to increase the deposit build-up rate, resulting in a faster and more severe loss of
fuel flow rate [4, 5, 6, 8]. Gasoline additives, such as polyehteramines and
polyisobutylene amines detergents significantly reduce accumulation of deposits and
even leads to partial recovery of fuel flow rate in heavily deposited injectors [4, 5, 8].

1.3 Objectives
In response to the need of better understanding deposit buildup in injector nozzle, this
study observed and recorded processes involving the residual fuel in the time following
the injection event. Despite the renewed interest in GDI technology in the past decade,
majority of researchers have concentrated their efforts on evaluating only the
cumulative effects of injector deposits on engine performance and emissions, leaving
relatively little in the literature describing processes leading to such accumulation based
on real-time observations. This project is therefore intended to fill this gap by providing
detailed real-time recordings of injection process as well as fuel evaporation
immediately following the injection.

The focus of the observation is in the two regimes in the post-injection evaporation
process of the fuel: the slow, diffusive evaporation at lower temperatures and the more
rapid, flash boiling process observed at higher temperatures. The results of previously
conducted studies in the area of GDI injector fouling indicate the existence of a
temperature threshold [5, 6], above which deposit formation rates are dramatically
increased. The detailed observations of the processes associated with fuel injection are
aimed to verify that transition temperature for these two regimes is likely to be the
threshold of deposit formation process.

13
 -~4I

1.4 Figures
All figures presented below refer to the textual information in this chapter.

Fuel Flow
Air Flow

V Spray Nozzle

Boost Venturi

Float Chamber Main Venturi

Throttle Valve
N

Fig. 1.1 Typical automotive carburetor.

14
 Single Injector
(Ir rottle Valve

Intake Ports

Fuel Spray

Cylinders

Fig. 1.2 Single point injection system.

Fig. 1.3 Multipoint, or port fuel injection (PFI) system.

15
 (a)

(b)
Fig. 1.4 Late injection in a GDI engine: (a) Atomization of the liquid spray and impingement on piston
crown bowl surface, (b) Vaporization and transport towards the spark plug.

16
 (a)

(b)
Fig. 1.5 Early injection in a GDI engine: (a) Atomization of the liquid spray, (b) Mixing of the fuel with the
surrounding intake air.

17
 (a)

(b)
Fig. 1.6 Electron microscope images of a deposited GDI injector after 20,100 km of lean operation. (a)
Deposits accumulated in a circular pattern around the injector tip, (b) Cross section of the nozzle passage
of the same injector revealing increased residue buildup at the outlet of the nozzle [8].

18
 Fuel Spray

Injector
Plunger F

(a)

Injector
Plunger

(b)

Fuel Spray
mw~~
Injector
Plunger

(c)
Fig. 1.7 Mechanism of injector deposit accumulation: (a) Fuel flow through a clean nozzle during an
injection event, (b) A layer of deposit forms during the interval between injections, (c) Some of the deposit
is washed off during the next injection event leaving characteristic circular pattern around the tip and on
the nozzle walls.

19
 Liquid Fuel Deposit Precursors

(a)

(b)

(c)

Fig. 1.8 Polymerization theory of deposit formation: (a) Dispersion of deposit precursors in liquid fuel
immediately after the injection event, (b) Accumulation of deposit, (c) Cohesion of deposit particles into
larger groups, forming waxy residue of polymerized fuel.

20
2.0 Experimental Approach

2.1 Apparatus
The experimental apparatus used to conduct this study was designed to match the
geometry and operating conditions of an actual injector. The test rig consisted of an
injector body with a plunger mechanism and transparent quartz nozzle, where
evaporation of the residual fuel was recorded using a high-speed video camera
equipped with a zoom lens. The injector body was obtained from a common-rail PFI
system used in a 2.OL 4-cylinder Saturn production engine and was fitted into the
assembly and sealed against any leaks to the outside using a set of o-rings (Fig. 2.1).
The plunger seat was replaced with a precision-machined channel for small clearance
fit to prevent any lateral movement of the plunger, which could result in a subsequent
fuel leakage through the nozzle during the interval between injections. Such leakage
would be highly undesirable as it would lead to significant data distortion. The quartz
piece was fixed in position by an aluminum cover plate and was placed between two
silicon rubber gaskets (Fig. 2.2 and 2.3), which provided a good contact seal with the
plunger head and prevented any damage to the glass due to impact loading.

The most important part of the apparatus was the nozzle passage (Fig. 2.4). A
precision-machined and polished hole inside a quartz block was located downstream of
the injector assembly. The nozzle simulated conditions that existed inside the internal
injector passage during the running cycles. The hole was 0.5 mm in length and
approximately 0.25 mm in diameter, matching the geometry of a typical injector nozzle.
The passage was illuminated by a background light source positioned in such way as to
allow a clear distinction of a surface during evaporation when liquid fuel filled the
nozzle. In such condition, the gaseous phase (fuel vapor) appeared dark and liquid
phase (liquid fuel) appeared transparent. During injection, there were further optical
distortions due to density gradients (shadow graph effect). All images of the evaporation
processes were captured by a Redlake MotionScope® 8000 S high-speed video imager
(Fig. 2.6) and subsequently stored on a videotape. The camera was additionally
equipped with a 50-mm zoom lens with a 40-mm spacer for close-up imaging. Due to
lighting constraints, the optimum image was obtained at a recording rate of 4000
frames per second, allowing viewing of events as short as one quarter of a millisecond
with a magnification of over 100:1. The effective imaging area on the video screen was
about 32.67 cm2.

21
Imager Redlake MotionScope@ 8000 S
Max recording speed 8000 fps (frames per second)
Available playback speeds: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 30, 60, 125, 250, 500,
1000, 2000, 4000 and 8000 fps
Resolution at 4000 fps 100 x 98 pixels
Sensor array 656 x 496 pixels
Maximum recording time 8.2 sec.
Maximum number of frames per recording 32,768
Exposure time at 4000 fps 0.230 ms
Imaging area 0.25 mm 2
Optical system 50-mm zoom lens with 40-mm spacer
Effective magnification Over 100:1
Image size of 0.25-mm diameter nozzle Approximately 1.0 in. (2.54 cm)
Table 2.1

The output from the high-speed video imager also included a frame counter, which
allowed an exact determination of time and number of frames elapsed in the
measurements. Other information provided by the output window included the current
recording and playback speeds as well as identification number (event number)
assigned to each test run. Fig. 2.5 illustrates a typical output window for the Redlake
MotionScope@ 8000 S.

During the experiment, the injector coil was activated by an electrical pulse produced by
a signal generator. The injection event (Fig. 2.7 a and b), simulated that in a running
engine. Both the pulse width and pulse spacing (for intermittent injection) can be
adjusted. From the optical point of view, given the lighting constraints at the chosen
recording speed, best evaporation results were expected for long injection pulse,
allowing more fuel to be delivered to the nozzle. This was likely to be especially
advantageous at higher temperatures, when evaporation time eventually plunges below
equipment recording capacity. Therefore, for the purpose of this experiment, the pulse
width was set to about 20-25 ms and pulse spacing to 90 ms. In terms of an actual
engine operation, these settings correspond to a 2000 injection pulse in an engine
running at high load at a speed of 1500 rpm.

Fuel was supplied to the injector assembly by means of a simple pressurized system,
shown on figure 2.8 a, b and c. The supply system was composed of a floating-piston
hydraulic cylinder, vacuum pump, fuel tank and compressed nitrogen supply, all linked
by a system of valves, which allowed for emptying, charging and cleaning of the
system. The injection pressure was controlled by gas pressure of compressed nitrogen

22
in the upper part of the floating-piston cylinder and was maintained at a constant value
during each test run. The outlet of the quartz nozzle was also maintained at a constant
pressure by being connected, through an outlet channel to a very large vessel, which,
owing to its size can be considered essentially isobaric. Varying the outlet atmosphere
pressure allows for a quantitative analysis of the effects of nozzle pressure on
evaporation time.

The high temperature environment in the engine cylinder was simulated by electrically
heating the walls of the nozzle. The temperature of the apparatus was continuously
monitored by a thermocouple embedded in the aluminum cover of the quartz block to
ensure an intimate contact with the glass surface. The nozzle temperature was
controlled by adjusting voltage supplied to two 500-Watt cartridge heaters inserted in
the assembly (Fig. 2.1). Similarly to a functioning engine, the injected fuel was
essentially at the room temperature. Preheating takes place in the reservoir located in
the assembly upstream of the plunger head where fuel resided prior to injection.

2.2 Procedures
The experimental part of the project comprised a series of test runs as a function of two
independent parameters: nozzle wall temperature and pressure at the nozzle passage.
These experiments were performed for two different fuels and two injector orientations.
The fuels were isooctane and commercial gasoline (ON 87). While isooctane is a pure
hydrocarbon, the commercial gasoline is a mixture of several hydrocarbons whose
chemical composition is typically represented by an averaged formula: CnH 1.87 n. The
neat fuel was only used to simplify the analysis and interpretation of data.

Two injector orientations were selected for the experiments: upright with fuel injected
upwards and inverted, with fuel injected downward at an angle of 200 off the vertical
axis. The data produced using the latter orientation more closely resembled injector
orientation in a typical GDI engine with fuel sprayed down towards the piston crown
bowl. Using the two orientations is nonetheless important as it is likely to provide clues
to the role of gravity in the evaporation process, when liquid fuel is present in the nozzle
because of the bubble formation. Injector orientation is not likely to be as important for
experiments performed at higher temperatures, where flash boiling occurred.

Since the nozzle wall temperature is a major factor affecting deposit formation in GDI
engines, the dependence of evaporation time on temperature was tested for each
selected pressure level at the nozzle exit in sweeps ranging from 90 0C to 130 C, at
roughly 5 0C intervals. The experiments for each data point are repeated three times to

23
account for statistical variability of injection processes. The goal was to cover the
transition from the normal evaporation to the flash boiling regime.
In all of the experiments, evaporation was determined as follows. The time t = 0 was
defined at the end of injection. Evaporation time is then assumed equal to t = 'r when
no liquid fuel was visible inside the nozzle. At lower temperatures with surface clearly
visible and moving slowly, the end of evaporation was visually well-defined. At higher
temperatures, measurements of evaporation time proved more challenging and
required careful review of the data acquired with the high-speed video equipment.

In the course of repeated test runs, the silicon rubber gasket materials were subjected
to repeated stress due to the pounding action of the plunger head. The compressive
force distorted the gasket material around the opening area, eventually disrupting the
injection process. To ensure reliable data, gaskets were replaced after the recordings
for each data point are completed.

With each fuel change, the supply system was carefully purged with nitrogen. To
prevent possible contamination of the nozzle, the entire injector as well as the quartz
piece were completely disassembled and then likewise cleaned with a jet of nitrogen.
All silicon rubber gaskets supporting the quartz piece were removed and replaced. The
nozzle passage was carefully inspected for any residue and subsequently cleaned with
a stream of nitrogen. The test rig was then reassembled and refilled with new fuel.
Once the injection pressure was set, the cartridge heaters were inserted into the rig and
slowly brought to the desired temperature, at which the measurements of evaporation
time were to be carried out.

24
 I
2.3 Figures
All figures presented below refer to the textual information in this chapter.

Quartz Block
0-Ring Seals Aluminum Cover

Plunger Mechanism

Injection Signal
Input Socket

* FUEL FLOW

Fig. 2.1 Completely assembled test apparatus.

25
 Quartz Block

Silicon Rubber Nozzle

Gasket -
lu Cover

O-Ring Seal
4 Fuel
Passages x

Heater
Plunger

Fig. 2.2 Quartz block with a transparent nozzle, where fuel injection and evaporation processes are
observed (here for the upright orientation).

Plunger

4 Fuel Heater
Passages

Cover
O-Ring Seal
Nozzle

Silicon Rubber
Gasket
Quartz Block

Fig. 2.3 Quartz block with a transparent nozzle, where fuel injection and evaporation processes are
observed (here for the inverted orientation).

26
 Fuel

d = 0.25 mmNz ze

L = 0.50 mm Out let cone

I
0 = 200
Fig. 2.4 Geometry of the test nozzle (here in inverted orientation).

Frame #

Time

Event #

Recording
speed [fps]

Playback
speed [fps]

Fig. 2.5 Output window of the high-speed Redlake MotionScope@ 8000 S imager used in this experiment.

27
Fig. 2.6 High-speed imager Redlake MotionScope@ 8000 S with optical system used to capture images of
evaporating fuel for this experiment.

28
 Plunger rests against the seal

Fuel in
reservoir
and
passages

Empty
nozzle
(a)

Plunger is retre

Fuel in
reservoir
and
passages

Fuel
flow in
nozzle
(b)
Fig. 2.7 Plunger mechanism and fuel flow through the nozzle: (a) Plunger is blocking the nozzle opening,
forcing the fuel to remain in the reservoir, (b) Plunger is activated allowing the fuel to flow through the
nozzle.

29
 Floating piston

N2C 2W_- W

- - Y

Vacuum pump
(a)
Floating piston

Fuel tank

Vacuum pump
(b)
Floating piston

Injector

N2

Fuel tank

,S;2
(c)
Fig. 2.8 Fuel supply system during 3 stages of operation: (a) Purging, (b) Charging, (c) Injecting.

30
3.0 Results

3.1 Summary
For both the isooctane and gasoline, the evaporation time of the residual fuel in the
nozzle after injection decreased sharply when the nozzle temperature was above a
critical value. The evaporation process changed from surface mass transfer to bulk
flash boiling as described in section 2.2. The shift decreased the evaporation time from
minutes and seconds to less than a millisecond within a temperature interval of less
than 15 0C. This behavior was observed in all test cases, regardless of the ambient
pressure, fuel type or nozzle orientation.

3.2 Temperature Effect

The nozzle temperature was found to have by far the most dramatic effect on the
evaporation of fuel left in the nozzle after injection. In all cases, the data followed a
trend of sharp decline in evaporation time with temperature increase within a well
defined transition zone. Figures 3.1 and 3.2 clearly illustrate this trend, for the two fuels
used in this study: commercial gasoline and isooctane. Below the critical temperature,
the evaporation time is long compared to the period between injections. This results in
a continuous presence of liquid in the nozzle passage. This region generally below
110 OC for isooctane and below 95 OC for commercial gasoline. The images obtained at
this temperature range (Fig. 3.3 and 3.4) show very slow evaporation process with
complete vaporization of the residual fuel in over a minute. The liquid forms a clearly
defined surface with a meniscus, which slowly moves toward the plunger as the fuel
evaporates. Any vapor bubbles are small and move slowly.

At higher temperatures, the evaporation rate is dramatically increased to the point

where it is difficult for the high-speed imaging system to detect any liquid during and
after the injections (Fig. 3.5 and 3.6). For isooctane this occurs at temperatures above
120 0C and for gasoline above 105 0C - 110 0C, depending on the nozzle orientation.
Such sharp transition implicates occurrence flash boiling of fuel.

Images acquired in the transition range show increased vapor presence with
increasingly vigorous boiling as temperatures increase. At the low end of the transition
region, the evaporation time is still large compared with injection spacing. The liquid fuel
fills up the cavity with a clearly formed meniscus, which quickly recedes towards the
plunger (Fig. 3.7 and 3.8). Vapor bubbles created during this process are generally
much larger and more buoyant than these generated during the diffusive evaporation.
As the temperature is further increased, the meniscus structure disappears giving way

31
to a combination of large vapor pockets and a thin film covering the nozzle walls
(Fig. 3.9). At the high end of the transition region, these changes further progress in the
direction of increased vapor content. The liquid no longer fills up the nozzle passage but
splatters on the walls forming a quickly disappearing thin film (Fig. 3.10 and 3.11). With
increasing temperatures, the size of the wetted wall area decreases until no liquid can
be observed.

3.3 Ambient Pressure Effect

In general, ambient pressure affects the value of the temperature which marks the
onset of the transition in evaporation process (Fig. 3.12). Experimental results showed
an increase in average evaporation time at a given temperature as a result of increased
ambient pressure. Qualitatively, the vaporization process inside the nozzle was
essentially unchanged; the transition temperature increased with elevated ambient
pressures. This phenomenon is tied directly to that to have flash boiling, the vapor
pressure has to exceed the ambient pressure to upset the mechanical equilibrium.
Thus, at higher ambient pressure, the required temperature for flash boiling is higher.
This dependence may explain the discrepancy between the transition point in flash
boiling of gasoline observed in this study (at around 110 (C) and the increased deposit
accumulation threshold observed in engine studies to occur around 150 0C. In-cylinder
pressures of a typical engine cycle (2.5 to 3.0 MPa), being greater than the nozzle
outlet pressures used in this study (50 to 200 kPa) would therefore require higher
temperature for the leftover fuel to flash boil.

3.4 Fuel Properties

Experimental results also show a limited effect of fuel composition on the evaporation
process (Fig. 3.1 and 3.2). Both fuels exhibit similar behavior with a clearly defined
decline in evaporation time around their respective critical temperatures. Fuel physical
properties has clearly affected the value of these critical points, suggesting that
evaporation properties of individual fuel components, at least to some degree, may play
a significant role in shifting the transition zone on the temperature scale. The neat fuel
has a rather abrupt transition (Fig. 3.1), while in the multi-component gasoline, the
evaporation time changes were not as abrupt.

3.5 Injector Orientation

The significance of nozzle orientation in the conducted experiments reflects the effect
of gravity in fuel evaporation process. In the absence of forced convection motion the
vapor bubbles, by buoyancy may potentially enhance the heat transfer between liquid
fuel and nozzle walls, leading to an appreciable change in evaporation time. Naturally,

32
this process relies on the presence of vapor pockets suspended in liquid with a clearly
defined free surface. This requirement limits buoyancy effects to a temperature range
below the critical level or, at the very least to the low-end of the transition region where
liquid phase still dominates. As the wall temperature increases, vapor pockets gradually
grow, leading to the disappearance of the free surface, thus making nozzle orientation
essentially irrelevant.

To observe gravitational effects, one must therefore focus on the low temperature
range, where liquid presence is significant. In such conditions, vapor bubbles generated
on the glass surface and on the plunger face universally drift toward the top. In case of
the upright nozzle, this direction corresponds to the nozzle outlet, aiding vapor removal
and inducing a buoyant flow, which enhances heat transfer with the surrounding walls.
The bubbles float to the top, where they escape the free surface meniscus which
gradually advances toward the plunger as the liquid evaporates (Fig. 3.13). For the
inverted configuration, buoyancy forces bubbles to rise, creating a growing vapor pocket
near the plunger. A second meniscus also forms at the bottom, near the nozzle outlet.
The liquid fuel, trapped in the middle, gradually evaporates releasing vapor bubbles,
which eventually escape through by either of the two menisci (Fig. 3.14). The heat
exchange rate for the inverted nozzle is slightly lower when compared with the upright
case, due to decreased convective flow and reduction in heat transfer coefficient at the
surface of the metal plunger, which is now exposed to vapor.

Experimental results indeed show a slight difference in evaporation time between the
two nozzle orientations for tests conducted at the same temperature and injection
pressure (Fig. 3.15). In case of the upright nozzle, evaporation time is shortened by as
much as 15 to 20% when compared to the inverted configuration. This difference
diminishes with increasing temperature. The rapid boiling process, which takes place at
higher temperatures makes gravitational effects all but negligible. Then, the length of
evaporation process is essentially identical for both nozzle orientations.

Overall, gravitational effects are shown to be either small or negligible and can be
comfortably ignored from the standpoint of fuel evaporation time. The data collected for
the upright nozzle can therefore well approximate evaporation process inside an
inverted nozzle, which more closely resembles injector geometry of an actual engine.

3.6 Injection
Several comments have been made earlier suggesting a strong connection between
the rate of injector fouling in GDI engines and the presence of liquid fuel in injector
nozzle. Consequently, the evaporation process has occupied a central place in this

33
research project. Nevertheless, the characteristics of the injection process is also
essential. Conditions during injection set the stage for fuel vaporization, making the two
processes inherently connected. Visual data of injections collected during this study
serve not only as a convenient time reference for the start of evaporation but also
provide valuable clues about the fluid behavior during and after injection. This
information can potentially contribute to a better understanding of fuel vaporization by
establishing a set of similarities between the two processes. Video images gathered
during individual test runs indeed reveal that injection process, like evaporation
changes most dramatically with increasing temperature of the nozzle walls, resembling
the shift observed in the evaporation data. While the timing of injection can not vary
because it is fixed by the pulse duration, there is a sharp contrast in relative content of
liquid phase as the injector temperature increases above the critical value. At low
temperatures, the presence of liquid fuel is very evident and demonstrated by presence
of turbulent patterns and small vapor bubbles in the fuel flow (Fig 3.16). Above the
critical temperature, these patterns are far less visible, possibly due to a significant
vapor content (Fig 3.17), whose flow does not produce observable effects. At
temperature levels high enough, no change can be observed, leaving virtually no liquid
fuel present in the nozzle through most of the injection process. Since the test rig
design eliminates any vapor presence in the line prior to injection (vapor bubbles would
drift upstream inside the line), these results further support previous conclusions about
fuel flash boiling on contact with the hot nozzle walls.

Injection pressure had no visible effect on the process. This is to be expected since the
only pressure-parameter involving injection flow is APin;, which stays constant
throughout the study. Other parameters, such as flow orientation and fuel type have
likewise produced no significant differences.

An interesting phenomenon takes place at the end of injection pulse as the plunger
closes the opening through which the fuel flows into the nozzle. The plunger face hits
the surface of the rubber gasket, which rests between the quartz block and main body
of the apparatus, subsequently inducing an oscillation of the liquid fuel inside the
nozzle. As a result, interesting images of flattened or extruded meniscus surface
appear immediately after the end of injection (Fig. 3.18). It is important to note that
such oscillations would not take place in engine-mounted injectors, where plunger seat
is metal and absorbs most of the shock associated with deceleration of the plunger.

A few words should be devoted in this section to the quality of the recorded injection
images. Unlike during evaporation, high velocities of the observed flow make it very
hard to track translation of individual objects such as dust particles or vapor bubbles as

34
they move through the nozzle. This leaves many frames blurred as the initially empty
nozzle, which appears dark (Fig. 3.19), fills up with a chaotic image of turbulent flow
(Fig. 3.20). Gray or dark areas (once again Fig. 3.20) possibly correspond to vapor or
mixed-phase regions. Similar images with dark areas are also prevalent at very low
temperatures. This suggests a flow-related behavior, where fuel may vaporize due to
cavitation. Density gradient may could also contribute to the dark image due to shadow-
graph effects. Heat transfer, increasingly important at higher temperatures naturally
enhances this process, leading to even greater vapor content. The evidence of liquid
presence is concluded due to occasional increases in clarity of the recorded data. It is
then possible to observe transparent volumes of liquid fuel occupying the nozzle cavity
(Fig. 3.21), similarly to evaporation data. The size and frequency of these transparent
regions decreases sharply with temperature, agreeing with the previously reported
results. Nevertheless, the interpretation of the collected injection data is highly
speculative at the very least, making it impossible to state much with absolute certainty.

3.7 Deposit buildup

The absence of a liquid fueled nozzle passage in between injections as a contributing
factor in injector fouling has been previously suggested in this report. It has also been
suspected by other researchers [5, 6] who linked the absence of liquid phase to
increased residue buildup. The polymerization theory, introduced in section 1.2 further
supports this hypothesis, claiming that reduced liquid presence leads to more difficult
removal of already accumulated deposits. While this is certainly true, the role of fuel
vapor in the nozzle may contribute directly to the deposit formation process. The fuel
vapor reacts chemically with combustion products, which are forced into the nozzle due
to increasing cylinder pressure early during expansion stroke. The resulting product
could accumulate on injector surfaces. This mechanism is schematically illustrated on
figure 3.22 a, b and c.

35
3.8 Figures
All figures presented below refer to the textual information in this chapter.

Evaporation Time For Gasoline

180 -

160

GasolineRUN1
140
- GasolineRUN2

-e- GasolineRUN3
120 --- GasolineAVERAGE

a
E 100
0

C
0 80

cc
Cu
60

40

20

85 95 105 115
Temperature [deg. C]

Fig. 3.1 Evaporation time as a function of nozzle temperature for commercial gasoline (upright nozzle)

36
 Evaporation Time For Isooctane

180
-+ IsooctaneRUN1
160 -+-IsooctaneRUN2
,6- IsooctaneRUN3
=Isooctane_AVERAGE
140

120
U)

E 100
CI
0
80
0.
CL
w
60

40

20

0
100 105 110 115 120
Temperature [deg. C]

Fig. 3.2 Evaporation time as a function of nozzle temperature for pure isooctane (upright nozzle)

37
Fig. 3.3 Evaporation process below critical temperature as observed in the transparent nozzle for gasoline
at 25 0C in inverted nozzle configuration. The dark region in the bottom of the nozzle represents the vapor.
The entire passage is almost filled with liquid, which slowly evaporates. The vapor bubbles seen in the
picture are small, slow and very few. The bright area at the center of the dark region represents a glare
due to background light shining on the cylindrical surface of the nozzle.

Fig. 3.4 Evaporation process in subcritical temperature as observed in the transparent nozzle for gasoline
at 30 C in upright nozzle configuration.

38
-- - i - -". h I- ---

Fig. 3.5 Evaporation process for gasoline above critical temperature (112 0C) as observed in the test
nozzle for inverted orientation. The two images are taken less than 20 ms apart. The upper photograph
shows a small splatter of fuel film, which has clearly evaporated by the time the bottom image was taken.
No liquid could be observed beyond the bottom frame. The bright area at the center of the dark region
represents a glare due to background light shining on the cylindrical surface of the nozzle.

39
Fig. 3.6 Evaporation process for gasoline in supercritical conditions for upright nozzle orientation at
be
110 OC. Similar vaporization of small fuel volume (visible in the glare area in the upper photograph) can
observed for these two images, taken approximately 17 ms apart.

40
Fig. 3.7 Evaporation of gasoline in the inverted nozzle in the low-temperature end of transition region (at
89 0C). As increasing temperatures approach the critical point, the vapor content increases dramatically.
The vapor bubbles increase in size, speed and number compared to the conditions well below the critical
temperature. The two images are taken 3ms apart. Relatively low heat transfer rates associated with
diffusive evaporation ensure continuing presence of liquid fuel, leading to longer evaporation times.

41
Fig. 3.8 Analogous images of fuel evaporation in the low-temperature end of transition region (at 89 0C) in
upright nozzle orientation. The blurred bubble images are due to their increased velocity.

42
Fig. 3.9 Development of large vapor pockets at mid-range of the transition region, here captured for
inverted nozzle at 95 0C. The disappearance of clearly defined liquid phase is accompanied by abundance
of thin and quickly disappearing film on the walls (hence the glare brightness is diminished).

43
 end of the
Fig. 3.10 Further progress towards increased vapor content in the nozzle at high-temperature
at 102 The size of areas covered with fuel film as well as its
transition zone (here for inverted nozzle 0C).
evaporation time is sharply decreased.

44
Fig. 3.11 Analogous changes observed for upright nozzle orientation at 103 OC.

45
 Evaporation Time of Gasoline

320-

300-

280 ~-
- - -* ~aRN -=5

9
260- P = 50 kPaRUN1
P = 50 kPa-RUN2
240-
P = 50 kPaRUN3
220- -0 P = 100 kPaRUN1

200- - P = 100 kPaRUN2

P = 100 kPaRUN3
0 180-
0-P = 200 kPaRUN1

0 160 - -- P = 200 kPa RUN2

0. 140
r -U-P = 200 kPaRUN3
cc
120-

100
-cm

80

K
60

40 -

20 -

0-
75 85 95 105 115 125

Temperature [deg. C]

Fig. 3.12 Evaporation time as a function of nozzle temperature for commercial gasoline at different levels
of ambient pressure (inverted nozzle).

46
Fig. 3.13 Rise of bubbles in upright nozzle in subcritical evaporation conditions; one meniscus develops.

Fig 3.14 Two menisci present in inverted nozzle in subcritical evaporation of gasoline.

47
 Evaporation Time for Gasoline

200
0

180 -
a
160 V
UPRIGHT_RUN1
-U-EUIGHTRUN2
140 \A ---- UPRIGHTRUN3
- -UPRIGHTAV ERAGE
- e- INV ERTED_RUN
E 120
- INV ERTEDRUN2
0 o INVERTEDRUN3
100 -U -NVERTEDAVERAGE
0
a
C
80 xv
60
NNR~

40
-a
20

0
85 95 105 115

Temperature [deg. C]

Fig. 3.15 Evaporation time as a function of nozzle temperature for commercial gasoline in two nozzle
orientations: inverted and upright.

48
 LZ

Fig. 3.16 Turbulent flow patterns associated with subcritical (liquid-dominated) injection flow inside the
nozzle (inverted orientation).

Fig. 3.17 Absence of flow patterns in vapor-dominated injection at supercritical conditions (inverted
orientation).

49
Fig. 3.18 Distortions to meniscus shape due to post-injection plunger oscillations. In the upper
photograph, the free surface surges upward and then is driven down towards the outlet (bottom image).
The two images were taken 3 ms apart.

50
Fig. 3.19 Video image of an initially empty nozzle prior to injection (inverted nozzle). The bright area at the
center of the dark region represents a glare due to background light shining on the cylindrical surface of
the nozzle.

Fig. 3.20 Blurred image of injection flow. Rapid changes in image quality make any observations of
injection flow highly speculative.

51
Fig. 3.21 Clearly visible volumes of liquid fuel observed during injections in subcritical conditions (inverted
nozzle).

52
 Liquid Fuel

(a)

Fuel Vapor Combustion

Radicals

,-7.~

(b)

Deposits

(c)

Fig. 3.22 Mechanism of deposit formation process in GDI injectors: (a) Below a critical temperature, the
long evaporation time results in the continuous presence of liquid fuel after the injection thus preventing
deposit formation, (b) At higher temperatures, fuel flash boils quickly after the end of injection, leaving fuel
vapor in the nozzle, which reacts with combustion products forming waxy residue, (c) which accumulates
on the nozzle surfaces.

53
4.0 Summary and Conclusions

4.1 GDI Injector Deposits

Injector deposits have been identified as especially undesirable in GDI combustion
systems because of their detrimental effect on fuel delivery to the cylinders. Most
researchers have thus recognized injector deposits to be a major obstacle in achieving
the full potential of lean-burning engine in terms of improved fuel economy,
performance and lowered emissions [2, 4, 5, 6, 8]. Injector deposits cause general
deterioration of spray quality [6, 8] and reduction in fuel flow [4, 5, 6, 8]. Several
attempts to identify the mechanisms responsible for deposit formation concluded the
residue to originate from partial degradation of fuel in the presence of extreme
conditions in the cylinder early during expansion stroke [4, 6]. Much effort has been
spent on establishing dependencies between the degree of injector fouling and
operating conditions as well as fuel chemistry. The evidence presented points to the
evaporation of the leftover fuel as the key to formation of injector deposits [4, 5, 6].

4.2 Summary of the Project

The principle objective of this study was to observe in real time, the fuel evaporation in
an injector nozzle under various operating conditions. These observations were used to
explain the injector deposit formation and accumulation in GDI engines. A specially
designed apparatus was constructed to perform a series of experiments in order to
qualitatively link the speed of evaporation to the temperature and ambient pressure. An
essential part of the assembly was a transparent quartz nozzle, which allowed for
observation of the evaporation processes with use of a high-speed video recorder
equipped with a magnifying optical system. The system was successful in obtaining
good-quality images of the injection process and of the subsequent evaporation of
leftover fuel. Based on the experimental data, it is concluded that:

1. Nozzle temperature was by far the most important factor influencing the evaporation
process. At temperatures below a critical level, a slow vaporization process led to
continuous presence of liquid fuel in the nozzle for a duration much longer than the
time between injections. The presence of the liquid fuel and the subsequent fuel
flushing out in the next injection minimized deposits from forming. At higher
temperatures, the fuel flash boiled on contact with the nozzle walls, leaving no bulk
liquid in the passage. The transition from a slow diffusion-dominated evaporation
process at the lower temperatures to a very fast flash boiling occurred over a narrow
range of temperature.

54
2. Ambient pressure as well as other factors such as gravity and fuel type only affected
the critical temperature value that marked the transition region.

4.3 Future Efforts

In the course of conducting this research, several valuable suggestions were made by
the members of the sponsoring consortium regarding possible improvements to the
experiment, as well as potential leads to related studies in the future. Among others, it
was recommended that the experiment be repeated for a larger variety of fuels to
address the effects of fuel properties. Other suggestions included introducing
independent temperature controls for the nozzle walls and fuel, and modifying the test
rig geometry to resemble engine environment even more closely.

Due to the necessary presence of combustion products, it would be difficult to continue

this study in its present form. For most meaningful results, a combustion chamber
would be needed with some way to optically monitor the evaporation process and
observe the deposit buildup. Other, more involved setups might prove even more
successful, avoiding such deficiencies of transparent nozzles as inability to test surface
coatings. In any usable form, these future efforts are likely to bring more answers to the
problem of injector deposits.

55
5.0 References

[1] Harada, J., Tomita, T., Mizuno, H., Mashiki, Z., Ito, Y., "Development of Direct
Injection Gasoline Engine," SAE 970540

[2] Iwamoto, Y., Noma, K., Nakayama, 0., Yamauchi, T., Ando, H., "Development of
Gasoline Direct Injection Engine," SAE 970541

[3] Anderson, R. W., Yang, J., Brehob, D. D, Vallance, J. K., Whiteaker, R. M.,
"Understanding the Thermodynamics of Direct Injection Spark Ignition (DISI)
Combustion Systems: An Analytical and Experimental Investigation," SAE 962018

[4] Arters, D.C., Macduff, M. J., "The Effect On Vehicle Performance Of Injector
Deposits In A Direct Injection Gasoline Engine," SAE 2000-01-2021

[5] Aradi, A. A., Colucci, W. J., Scull Jr., H. M., Openshaw, M. J., "A Study of Fuel
Additives for Direct Injection Gasoline (DIG) Injector Deposit Control," SAE 2000-01-
2020

[6] Zhao, F. et al. "Progress in Energy and Combustion Science," SAE 1999

[7] Heywood, J. "Internal Combustion Engines," McGraw-Hill 1988

[8] Arters, D.C., Bardasz, E.A, Schiferl, E.A., Fisher, D.W., "A Comparison of Gasoline
Direct Injection Part I - Fuel System Deposits and Vehicle Performance," SAE 1999-01-
1498

56