Journal of Cleaner Production 435 (2024) 140546

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Future zero carbon ammonia engine: Fundamental study on the effect of jet
ignition system characterized by gasoline ignition chamber
Pengbo Dong a, Shihao Chen a, Dongsheng Dong b, *, Fuxing Wei a, Mingfei Lu a, Peng Wang a,
Wuqiang Long a
a
Key laboratory of ocean energy utilization and energy conservation of ministry of education, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, 116024, PR China
b
School of Naval Architecture, Ocean and Energy Power Engineering, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan, 430070, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Handling Editor: Panos Seferlis Ammonia is a carbon-free fuel with tremendous potential for clean internal engine applications in the future.
However, the combustion and emissions limitations of ammonia fuel have impeded the development of ammonia
Keywords: engine. As a combustion enhancement technology, the ignition chamber (pre-chamber) jet ignition system has
Zero carbon ammonia engine emerged as an effective solution to address the challenges associated with ammonia combustion. This study
Gasoline ignition chamber
utilized a high-speed camera to capture the evolution of jet and the combustion processes of ammonia. The
Jet ignition system
combustion method entailed the injection of gasoline into the ignition chamber, while ammonia was injected
Ammonia rapid combustion
Gasoline energy percentage into the main chamber. The experimental results demonstrated that ignition chamber jet ignition system
significantly enhanced ammonia combustion and shortened the combustion duration as compared to spark plug
ignition system. The study involved evaluating the ammonia combustion performance under different equiva­
lence ratios (1.0 and 0.8) while comparing it to various gasoline energy percentages (2.5%, 2.0%, 1.5%, and
1.0%). The results revealed that the combustion performance at 1.5% was superior to other gasoline energy
percentages. Additionally, in comparison to ignition chamber outlet diameter of 4.5 mm and 6.0 mm, it was
found that the 3.0 mm diameter exhibited weak ignition capability, resulting in a 107.1% and 40.3% increase in
ignition delay at the equivalence ratio of 0.8, and ignition failure at the equivalence ratio of 0.6. However, its
high jet velocity induced a more homogeneous mixing of radicals with ammonia/air, leading to a 30.6%
reduction in rapid combustion and a 43.1% decrease in combustion duration at the equivalence ratio of 0.8.
Additionally, the investigation of equivalence ratios (0.8, 1.0, and 1.1) demonstrated that the fastest initial
combustion of ammonia occurred at the equivalence ratio of 0.8, with an ignition delay of only 4.7ms. Therefore,
an appropriate reduction in the equivalence ratio could enhance the ammonia combustion efficiency to some
extent. The findings of this study provide a fundamental ignition technique for future applications of zero carbon
ammonia engines.

1. Introduction high energy density. Furthermore, ammonia can be easily liquefied at

With the escalating levels of greenhouse gas emissions, particularly
CO2, the severity of the greenhouse effect is intensifying. As a result,
reducing carbon emissions has become a consensus. Fossil fuels, pri­
marily oil, serve as major contributors to carbon emissions. To address
this issue, the adoption of clean fuels such as hydrogen and ammonia has
gained significant traction as alternative energy sources (Al-Breiki and
Bicer, 2021). Notably, ammonia, with its primary combustion byprod­
ucts consisting of nitrogen oxides, nitrogen, and water, offers several
advantages including high octane rating, excellent renewability, and
room temperature, boasting a high storage density that facilitates
convenient transportation and utilization, distinguishing it from
hydrogen. Researchers have shown significant interest in utilizing
ammonia as an engine fuel (Cardoso et al., 2021; Wei et al., 2024; Meng
et al., 2022).
However, ammonia faces inherent challenges that hinder its appli­
cation in engines. These challenges include high ignition energy, a
narrow flammability limit, low laminar flame speed, and unstable
combustion (Lesmana et al., 2019). Hence, relying solely on ammonia is
not feasible for conventional SI and CI engines. In recent years,

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: dds2020@whut.edu.cn (D. Dong).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.140546
Received 18 September 2023; Received in revised form 10 December 2023; Accepted 30 December 2023
Available online 1 January 2024
0959-6526/© 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
P. Dong et al.
researchers have explored various technologies to enhance the com­
bustion of ammonia engines (Chiong et al., 2021; Wei et al., 2023b; Liu
et al., 2022). The first approach is auxiliary combustion technology,
which addresses the low flame propagation speed of ammonia by mixing
it with highly reactive fuels to improve its combustion efficiency. These
fuels include hydrogen (Wei et al., 2023b), diesel (Liu et al., 2022;
Yousefi et al., 2022), gasoline (Guo et al., 2022)(S. Liu et al., 2023d),
methanol (Wei et al., 2023a; Dong et al., 2023), and methane (Zhang
et al., 2023). Among these options, gasoline stands out due to its high
energy density, low cost, and convenience in storage and transportation.
Furthermore, gasoline engine technology is well-established, and minor
modifications to the engine structure can enable stable operation of
ammonia/gasoline blended fuel (AGBF) on gasoline engines. However,
AGBF still faces technical challenges, such as controlling the mixture’s
ignition performance and mixing ratio.
Grannell’s (Grannell et al., 2008) experimental results of AGBF on a
SI engine demonstrated the engine’s ability to operate stably and
attenuate the detonation phenomenon, but the addition of ammonia fuel
led to a dramatic increase in NOx emissions while significantly reducing
carbon emissions. Additionally, a large amount of unburned ammonia
was emitted. Ryu (Ryu et al., 2014) utilized gasoline intake tract in­
jection and ammonia in-cylinder injection on a SI engine, achieving an
increase in engine power. However, due to the low combustion tem­
perature of ammonia, there was a reduction in cylinder temperatures,
resulting in a less pronounced improvement in the ammonia combustion
performance. Haputhanthri (Haputhanthri et al., 2015) used an ethanol
emulsifier to increase the solubility of ammonia in gasoline. Although
engine power was increased, the relatively high gasoline energy per­
centage (GEP) in gasoline/ammonia/ethanol blend meant that it was
not particularly effective in reducing carbon emissions. In a more recent
study, lavadera (Lavadera et al., 2021) experimentally measured flame
velocity of ammonia/isooctane blended fuel, which demonstrated that
the addition of ammonia reduces the laminar flame velocity, and their
experimental results are informative for the method of
ammonia-gasoline chemical kinetics. Liu (S. Liu et al., 2023c) investi­
gated the thermal efficiency, detonation, and emission characteristics of
AGBF on a high compression ratio gasoline engine. The findings indi­
cated that the AGBF engine exhibited reduced detonation, increased
engine load, and improved thermal efficiency. However, challenges
remained in terms of increased NOx emissions and ammonia slippage. It
is evident that AGBF spark ignition engines have limitations in
improving ammonia combustion and reducing pollutant emissions.
In addition to auxiliary combustion technology, ignition chamber jet
ignition systems have also proven effective in enhancing the perfor­
mance of ammonia engines. These systems are characterized by a large
ignition area, high ignition energy and high turbulence (Z. Liu et al.,
2023a). The ignition chamber offers a wide range of fuel selectivity and
requires minimal fuel, thereby effectively increasing the fuel energy
percentage in the main chamber. This is particularly advantageous for
ammonia engines aiming to reduce carbon emissions. Researchers have
analyzed the combustion performance of various fuels, including
hydrogen, ammonia, methanol, and natural gas, using the ignition
chamber jet ignition system (Wei et al., 2022)(Z. Liu et al., 2023a; Wu
et al., 2023). The results demonstrate that the significant ignition energy
and high jet velocity from ignition chamber not only enhance combus­
tion stability and accelerate flame propagation but also extend the lean
combustion limit.
The structure of ignition chamber plays a crucial role in influencing
the combustion and gas sweep within the chamber, as well as the jet
process (Novella et al., 2021). The researchers carried out studies on
ignition chambers of cylindrical, conical and spherical shapes (Tian
et al., 2020)(X. Liu et al., 2023d). When the ignition chamber volume is
fixed, the spherical shape has the smallest surface area and experiences
less heat exchange loss with the wall. However, the spherical structure is
not favorable for flame jet propagation. Wolff’s conclusion (Wolff et al.,
1997) suggests that the mixture is more uniformly distributed, and
2
Journal of Cleaner Production 435 (2024) 140546
combustion is more stable in the case of a cylindrical shape compared to
a conical shape.
Recently, researchers have shown interest in the operation method of
the gasoline ignition chamber jet ignition ammonia engine. Liu (Z. Liu
et al., 2023b) conducted experiments on an ignition chamber engine to
ignite ammonia using gasoline, methane and hydrogen jets flow,
respectively. They found that gasoline ignition chamber improved the
thermal efficiency, average effective pressure, and specific fuel con­
sumption of the ammonia engine. It also effectively reduced NOx and
unburned ammonia emissions in comparison to spark plug ignition.
Although the ammonia engine performed best when hydrogen was used
as the ignition chamber fuel, gasoline was considered a more practical
option due to its cost and safety advantages at this stage. To gain a
deeper understanding of the gasoline/ammonia combustion process,
Pan (Pan et al., 2023) conducted a study that involved numerical
analysis and experimental methods to examine the oxidation of
ammonia/n-heptane. The findings revealed a mutual reinforcement of
oxidative reactivity between ammonia and n-heptane at medium
temperatures.
It is true that despite the promising performance of the gasoline
ignition chamber jet ignition ammonia engine, there is a lack of
comprehensive studies in this area, especially the fundamental research
on the processes of jet and flame development has not been reported. To
better understand the response of ammonia combustion process to
different initial conditions, further systematic studies are needed to
examine the effects of ignition chamber structure, GEP, and ammonia/
air equivalence ratio (AER) on ammonia combustion performance.
These studies will be crucial in optimizing the design and operation of
such engines for improved efficiency and emissions control.
The experiment conducted a fundamental study to visualize the
processes of jet and combustion in the ignition chamber jet ignition
ammonia system. The experimental platform utilized a constant volume
combustion chamber (CVCC) system, allowing for the visualization of jet
and flame propagation processes using the shadowgraph method. The
analysis focused on four key aspects: ignition method, GEP, ignition
chamber outlet (ICO) diameter, and AER. By examining shadowgraph
images and monitoring variations in main chamber pressure, the
experiment aimed to provide insights into the jet development and the
combustion performance of ammonia. The purpose of this research is to
fill in the gaps in the basic research of gasoline ignition chamber jet
ignition ammonia system, and potentially offer theoretical guidance for
practical implementation of ammonia engine.
2. Experimental setting
2.1. Experimental equipment
The gasoline ignition chamber jet ignition visualization platform is
shown in Fig. 1. The experimental setup was adapted from a previous
study (Wei et al., 2023b) and primarily comprised five components: the
optical path, fuel supply apparatus, pressure and temperature control
device, CVCC, and signal receiving and processing unit.
Fig. 2 displays the profile structure of the CVCC, featuring essential
components such as the ignition chamber, visualization window, heater,
and main chamber. The ignition chamber and main chamber were
connected by a cylindrical outlet. In this study, the ignition chamber was
configured in a cylindrical shape with a designed volume of 6 ml, based
on the research by Cui (Cui et al., 2022). The structure of the ignition
chamber is outlined by the red box line in Fig. 2. Positioned at the upper
section of the ignition chamber was an adapter housing a gasoline
injector and spark plug. The injection pressure for gasoline was set at 13
MPa. The area delineated by the yellow box in Fig. 2 facilitates the as­
sembly of the adapter.
For visualization purposes, two quartz glass panes measuring 120 *
80 mm2 were installed on both sides of the CVCC as visual windows,
enabling observation of the jet and combustion process. Shadowgraphs
P. Dong et al.
Fig. 1. Layout of experimental equipment.
Fig. 2. Structure of CVCC and ignition chamber.
were captured using the Photon SA-Z high-speed gray camera, config­
ured with a frame rate of 20,000 frames per second (fps) and the
exposure time of 1/20409 s. The heater consisted of six heating rods that
heated the main chamber externally, preventing localized high tem­
peratures in the fuel. Real-time recording of main chamber pressure was
facilitated by a Kistler 6117B pressure sensor.
The control signals for the spark plug ignition, injector injection,
camera and data acquisition were accessed through a customized
Fig. 3. Schematic diagram of the control signals sequence.
3
Journal of Cleaner Production 435 (2024) 140546
electronic control system and image recording application. The control
signal sequence is shown in Fig. 3. During the experiment, the temper­
ature of the main chamber was initially regulated by the heater to attain
the predetermined initial temperature. Subsequently, air and ammonia
were sequentially injected into the main chamber, with their respective
ratios being controlled using the partial pressure method. The ammonia
used in the experiment had a purity level of 99.9%. Throughout the
ignition process, a control signal was utilized to trigger the data acqui­
sition system, ensuring synchronized recording of data.
2.2. Experimental conditions
In this study, specific experimental conditions are established and
are presented in Table 1. In order to achieve a high energy percentage of
ammonia, gasoline was used as the ignition chamber fuel with GEPs of
only 1.0%–2.5%. The ammonia energy percentage reached approxi­
mately 98%, resulting in a significant reduction in CO2 emissions. The
GEP in the study is defined as follows:
MC5− 12 LHVC5− 12
GEP = (1)
MNH3 LHVNH3 + MC5− 12 LHVC5− 12
where LHVC5− 12 and MC5− 12 denote the low calorific value and injection
mass of gasoline, while LHVNH3 and MNH3 represent the low calorific
value and injection mass of ammonia, respectively.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Analysis of jet and ammonia combustion processes
Previous research has classified the ignition mechanism of the igni­
tion chamber into three categories: flame ignition, free radical ignition,
and mixture ignition. These mechanisms are primarily influenced by the
ICO diameter (Yamaguchi et al., 1985). Free radical ignition occurs
when the flame generated within the ignition chamber gets extinguished
while traversing the ICO. The jet material contains abundant free radi­
cals such as OH, H, and CH, which enhance the ignition capability and
help overcome ignition challenges encountered during lean combustion
or ammonia combustion (Biswas et al., 2016). In this experiment, the
fuel in the ignition chamber does not combust sufficiently at high
equivalence ratios, resulting in the production of a significant number of
free radicals. Moreover, the maximum ICO diameter used in this
experiment is 6.0 mm, indicating that the ignition mechanism can be
classified as free radical ignition.
According to the characteristics of shadowgraph, the jet develop­
ment can be classified into three stages (Maxson J.A.; Oppenheim,
1991). As illustrated in Fig. 4, the first stage is the cold jet stage. During
this stage, the gasoline premixture is ignited by the spark plug, leading
to an increase in pressure. Consequently, some of the unburned gasoline
mixture enters the main chamber through the ICO. The primary char­
acteristics of this stage include light-colored jet material, relatively low
temperature, limited aggregation within a specific area, and the pres­
ence of a folded boundary with mixture, as depicted by the blue
boundary curve in Fig. 4. The second stage is known as the hot jet stage,
during which the primary component of the jet material comprises in­
termediate products of gasoline combustion. Compared to the cold jet
Table 1
Experimental conditions.
Parameters Value
ICO diameter d/mm 3.0, 4.5, 6.0
Ignition chamber volume V/ml 6.0
Initial temperature T/K 500
GEP 1.0%–2.5%
Initial pressure P/MPa 0.9
AER 0.8, 1.0, 1.1
P. Dong et al.
Fig. 4. Shadowgraph of the jet development process.
material, the hot jet material is darker and hotter, as shown by the
yellow boundary curve in the shadowgraph of Fig. 4. The increased
pressure within the ignition chamber leads to a larger volume of jet
material. The axial propagation speed of hot jet material is significantly
higher compared to its lateral propagation velocity, resulting in a nar­
row distribution area. Simultaneously, the high velocity and turbulence
of the hot jet material facilitate the spreading of jet material and
enhance the extent of mixing between ammonia and air. In the jet
ignition stage, as the hot jet material accumulates, its distribution area
expands, resulting in a stronger ignition capability. Initially, the flame
appears inside the hot jet material, and subsequently, it rapidly spreads
and propagates throughout the combustion system.
As illustrated in the shadowgraph image in Fig. 5, for a more
comprehensive analysis of the jet and ammonia combustion process, this
study has divided jet and combustion processes into five distinct stages:
a, b, c, d, and e. These stages are characterized as the end of the cold jet
(a), the axial distribution distance where hot jet material occupies two-
thirds of the main chamber (b), flame touching the bottom (c), the flame
area covering two-thirds of the space (d), and the flame filling the entire
space (e). The number of free radicals and velocity of the jet material
play crucial roles in influencing stages d and e of the ammonia com­
bustion process. Stage b allows for the determination of jet velocity,
while stage c enables the analysis of the combined impact of free radicals
and jet velocity.
3.2. Ignition method assessment
In this section, the jet development and flame propagation processes
under the ignition chamber jet and spark ignition methods are analyzed
based on three key aspects: the jet and flame shadowgraph, the pressure
and pressure rise rate of the main chamber, and the durations of each
combustion stage. The specific parameters used in the analysis are as
follows: the ICO diameter is set to 3.0 mm, the AER is set to 1.0, the
initial pressure is 0.9 MPa, the initial temperature is 500 K, and the GEP
is 1.5% under the ignition chamber method. By examining these aspects,
a comprehensive understanding of jet and flame propagation processes
can be obtained for the given ignition chamber setup and operating
conditions.
Fig. 6 presents the shadowgraph depicting the jet development and
ammonia combustion process in the ignition chamber and spark ignition
methods. Due to the low laminar flow flame velocity of ammonia, the
flame propagates slowly downward and fills the main chamber at
145.50ms under the spark ignition method. Comparing the shadow­
graphs of stages d and e, it can be found that the flame propagation
Fig. 5. Characteristic shadowgraph of the development of jet and ammonia combustion.
4
Journal of Cleaner Production 435 (2024) 140546
speed is significantly higher in the gasoline ignition chamber method
compared to the spark ignition method. Additionally, the duration of
stages d and e in the former is only approximately 13% of that observed
in the latter. Obviously, the ignition chamber jet ignition system dem­
onstrates a significant enhancement in the flame speed of ammonia.
Under the gasoline ignition chamber jet ignition method, the unburned
gasoline mixture and free radicals primarily concentrate in the middle
and lower part of the main chamber. During the ignition and initial
combustion processes, the ammonia/air in this region ignites first,
resulting in a vigorous combustion. The shadowgraph of stage d reveals
a fan-shaped flame boundary, which then rapidly propagates upward
until it fills the entire main chamber.
In the gasoline ignition chamber method, stage e of ammonia com­
bustion reveals a two-stage process. Initially, the lower region of the
main chamber experiences primary fuel burnout, followed by a con­
centration of combustion in the upper region. However, it’s noteworthy
that the combustion rate starts to decrease at this point. This transition is
evident from the inflection point on the pressure rise rate curve depicted
in Fig. 7. The flame image within the dashed circle corresponds to stage
e of the combustion process. Furthermore, it is crucial to consider the
issue of inhomogeneous combustion of ammonia. The incomplete
combustion of ammonia is a significant factor contributing to the
inadequate combustion and resulting ammonia slip phenomenon.
Therefore, more attention needs to be paid to the inhomogeneous
combustion of ammonia.
Fig. 7 displays the pressure and pressure rise rate curves of the main
chamber. Under the conditions of a 3.0 mm ICO diameter and 1.5% GEP,
the ignition chamber method experiences a substantially advanced
combustion phase compared to spark ignition. Additionally, its pressure
rise rate and pressure peak are higher. The rapid pressure rise in the
ignition chamber method is attributed to two factors: Firstly, the high
ignition capability enables quick ignition of ammonia. Secondly, the
assistance of free radicals and unburned gasoline mixture accelerates
combustion. Additionally, the high turbulence from ignition chamber
facilitates homogeneous mixing of free radicals and ammonia/air,
enabling multi-point ignition of ammonia and enhancing flame propa­
gation velocity.
In this study, the beginning of main chamber pressure rise is regar­
ded as initial moment, namely the end moment of cold jet. The ignition
delay is then regarded as the time interval between this initial moment
and the occurrence of ammonia combustion. It is worth noting that there
are limited methods for determining the moment of ammonia combus­
tion, mainly by observing shadowgraphs (Tian et al., 2020) and
analyzing pressure curves (Chinnathambi et al., 2021). However, both
methods have their limitations. Therefore, this research is based on a
MATLAB image processing method constructed by Wang (Wang et al.,
2023) to accurately determine the ammonia combustion moment. The
termination of combustion is defined as the moment when the main
chamber reaches its maximum pressure. The duration of combustion is
considered as the time interval from the initial moment to the end of
combustion. Additionally, the interval of time from ammonia combus­
tion to the midpoint of the total combustion duration is regarded as the
rapid combustion.
In Fig. 8, the ignition delay and combustion duration for both the
spark ignition and gasoline ignition chamber methods are presented. In
P. Dong et al.
Fig. 6. Shadowgraph of the development of jet and ammonia combustion in ignition chamber jet and spark ignition methods. (d = 3.0 mm, Φ = 1.0, P = 0.9 MPa, T
= 500 K, and GEP is 1.5%).
Fig. 7. Pressure and pressure rise rate curves of the main chamber for ignition
chamber and spark ignition methods. (d = 3.0 mm, GEP is 1.5%).
Fig. 8. The duration of each stage of combustion in the main chamber for
gasoline ignition chamber and spark ignition methods. (d = 3.0 mm, GEP
is 1.5%).
5
Journal of Cleaner Production 435 (2024) 140546
comparison to the spark ignition, the ignition delay and combustion
duration of the gasoline ignition chamber method are reduced by 27ms
and 140.0ms, respectively. The flame images corresponding to the
ignition delay presented in Fig. 8 reveal that the flame is distributed over
a larger area under ignition chamber compared to spark ignition.
Despite having similar pressures, the flame propagation speed in igni­
tion chamber is considerably higher, resulting in a more intense com­
bustion process. Towards the end of the combustion process, the
ammonia/air mixture combusts more fully, leading to a larger pressure
peak in the gasoline ignition chamber method. However, it is important
to note that there are some areas of incomplete combustion, as indicated
by the red curve in the flame image corresponding to the combustion
duration in Fig. 8. Overall, the conclusion can be drawn that gasoline
ignition chamber jet ignition ammonia system is highly effective in
enhancing ammonia combustion.
3.3. Effect of GEP on jet development and ammonia combustion process
In this study, the GEP not only affects fuel combustion in the ignition
chamber, but also has a significant impact on jet velocity and material
distribution region in the main chamber. These factors are crucial in
determining the ammonia/air combustion performance (Bunce et al.,
2014). This section analyzes the effects of GEPs (1.0%, 1.5%, 2.0%, and
2.5%) on the processes of jet and ammonia combustion for AERs of 1.0
and 0.8.
Fig. 9 illustrates the shadowgraph images capturing the jet and
ammonia combustion processes under various GEP conditions. At the
AER of 1.0, the duration of b-stage increases as the GEP value increases,
and the highest jet velocity is observed at 1.0% GEP. However, at the
AER of 0.8, the fastest jet velocity occurs at the GEP of 1.5%, where the
equivalence ratio is closest to 1.0. Therefore, fuller fuel combustion in
the ignition chamber results in a higher b-phase jet velocity. Notably, the
jet velocity in the ignition chamber affects the velocity and distribution
of the jet material in the main chamber. The slowest jet velocities are
recorded at the 2.5% and 1.0% GEP conditions for AERs of 1.0 and 0.8,
respectively. Consequently, this leads to an accumulation of more jet
materials within the central region of the main chamber, subsequently
resulting in a higher flame propagation velocity in the lateral direction.
The process of ignition (c-stage) and ammonia combustion (d and e-
stage) are affected by the combined effect of jet velocity and the amount
of jet material (mainly free radicals). At AERs of 1.0 and 0.8, the shortest
c-stage time, the most effective combined ignition effect, and the
shortest e-stage time (18.95ms and 19.2ms, respectively) are recorded
for the GEPs of 1.5% and 2.0%, respectively. At the AER of 1.0, the b-
stage shows the fastest jet velocity at 1.0% GEP, but with fewer free
radicals compared to the 1.5% GEP condition. Additionally, a low GEP
reduces the amount of gasoline and causes thin fuel combustion in the
ignition chamber, which reduces energy release and the amount of jet
P. Dong et al.
Fig. 9. Shadowgraph of jet development and ammonia combustion processes for various GEPs. (d = 3.0 mm).
material during combustion, resulting in lower jet velocity and ignition
capability. For example, the equivalence ratio for the 1.0% GEP condi­
tion at the AER of 0.8 is too low at 0.64. On the other hand, a high GEP
leads to a high equivalence ratio in the ignition chamber, causing
insufficient combustion of the gasoline mixture, which also reduces the
jet velocity and ignition capability. For example, the equivalence ratio
for the 2.5% GEP condition is too high at the AER of 1.0 at 2.09.
Therefore, it can be concluded that the primary factor affecting jet ve­
locity at a constant ICO diameter is the GEP, which can hinder the jet
process if it is too large or too small. Meanwhile, the gasoline equivalent
ratio in the ignition chamber should be slightly higher than 1.0 to
enhance the jet ignition capability while ensuring the jet velocity.
Fig. 10 demonstrates the pressure curves of the main chamber at
different GEPs. As illustrated in Fig. 10(a), the 1.5% GEP condition
reaches its pressure peak earliest and exhibits the largest pressure peak
of 5.23 MPa at the AER of 1.0. Fig. 10(b) shows that the pressure peaks
of the 1.5% and 2.0% conditions are similar at the AER of 0.8, with
corresponding times and more overlapping and crossing in their pres­
sure curves, as denoted by the red and purple circles. The pressure peaks
are less influenced by free radicals and unburned gasoline mixture.
Under the experimental conditions, the primary factors affecting the
pressure peaks are the AER. For the same GEP, there is more ammonia/
Fig. 10. Pressure curves of the main chamber for different GEP. (d = 3.0 mm).
6
Journal of Cleaner Production 435 (2024) 140546
air combustion at an AER of 1.0, yielding a much larger pressure peak
than that at an AER of 0.8. The difference in peak pressure between the
1.5% and 2.5% GEPs at an AER of 1.0 is 0.22 MPa, which can be
attributed to the higher jet velocity at the 1.5% condition, enhancing the
ammonia combustion rate.
Fig. 11 illustrates the pressure rise rate curves at different GEPs,
which visually reflect the pressure change rate. At the AER of 1.0, the
1.5% condition has the largest pressure rise rate peak, is the earliest to
reach the peak, and has the shortest duration of the pressure rise phase
at 40ms. At the AER of 0.8, the 2.0% GEP condition has a higher pressure
rise rate peak than that of the 1.5% GEP condition, and the former has a
higher pressure rise rate mean. The optimum main chamber pressures
and pressure rise rates are obtained at 1.5% and 2.0% GEPs conditions
for AERs of 1.0 and 0.8, respectively. At 1.0% GEP, better pressure
performance is obtained at the AER of 1.0, while the worst pressure
performance is obtained at the AER of 0.8. Therefore, it is necessary to
select the appropriate GEP for different AERs.
Additionally, as depicted in Fig. 11, the maximum rate of pressure
rise is observed when the flame completely fills the main chamber,
indicating the fastest ammonia combustion. Consequently, modifying
the structure of ignition chamber and adjusting the environmental pa­
rameters of the main chamber can regulate the distribution of jet
P. Dong et al.
Fig. 11. Pressure rise rate curves of the main chamber for various GEPs. (d = 3.0 mm).
material, thereby controlling the initial combustion region. This, in turn,
promotes earlier flame propagation into the upper half region of the
main chamber, potentially enhancing the rate of ammonia combustion.
Fig. 12 demonstrates the ignition delay, rapid combustion and
combustion duration under various GEPs. Observations show that at
AERs of 1.0 and 0.8, the 1.5% GEP exhibits the shortest time for all
combustion stages, with a maximum or larger peak pressure. This in­
dicates that compared to GEPs of 1.0%, 2.0%, and 2.5%, the ammonia
combustion performance is optimal at 1.5% GEP. Furthermore, results
demonstrate that the time for each combustion stage is lower for both
the 2.0% and 2.5% GEPs than the 1.0% GEP at the AER of 0.8, in contrast
to observations at the AER of 1.0. Thus, it is appropriate to use a higher
GEP at lower AER conditions. In summary, selecting the most suitable
GEP for specific AER conditions is crucial to achieve superior ammonia
combustion performance.
3.4. Effect of ICO diameter on jet development and ammonia combustion
processes
The ICO diameter not only affects the material transfer process be­
tween the two chambers, but also serves as the primary factor deter­
mining the jet velocity and the distribution region of the jet material.
This has important implications for the jet and ammonia combustion
processes (Shah et al., 2015). When the jet material enters the main
chamber under the pressure difference between the chambers, a smaller
ICO diameter leads to faster jet velocity and generates greater
Fig. 12. The duration of each stage of combustion in main chamber under
various GEPs.
7
Journal of Cleaner Production 435 (2024) 140546
turbulence intensity. This fosters a more uniform mixing of ammo­
nia/air and enhances the ammonia/air combustion process. However, a
small ICO diameter also reduces the amount of jet material, which
weakens the ignition capability. Therefore, finding a balance between
jet velocity and ignition capability is necessary. Meanwhile, based on
the benefits of ammonia lean combustion, such as high energy utiliza­
tion, low NOx emission, and safety and reliability, this section in­
vestigates the processes of jet and combustion under the conditions of
3.0 mm, 4.5 mm, and 6.0 mm ICO diameters at AERs of 0.8 and 0.6.
In Fig. 13, the shadowgraph illustrates the processes of jet and
ammonia combustion for various ICO diameter conditions at the AERs of
0.8 and 0.6. At the AER of 0.8, it is observed that with a smaller ICO
diameter, the axial propagation of jet material in stage a is longer, the
time in stage b is shorter, and the jet velocity is faster. Conversely, a
larger ICO diameter results in a greater number of jet materials in stage b
and a stronger ignition capability. Compared to the 0.8 AER, the
ammonia/air mixture at 0.6 AER needs a higher ignition energy, how­
ever, the number of jet materials is the lowest at 3.0 mm ICO diameter.
Thus, the ignition capability is the weakest, leading to the failure of
igniting the ammonia/air mixture. Therefore, when the AER is low, it is
recommended to avoid using a very small ICO diameter to prevent
ignition failure caused by insufficient ignition capability.
The c-stage exhibits the shortest duration of 3.82ms and 3.12ms for
ICO diameters of 4.5 mm and 6.0 mm, respectively, at AERs of 0.8 and
0.6. This can be attributed to the optimal combination of jet rate and
ignition capability, leading to efficient ignition during this stage.
Regarding the shortest times observed in the e-stage, they are 21.13ms
and 64.83ms for ICO diameters of 3.0 mm and 4.5 mm, respectively.
Therefore, in the case of successful ignition, the main influencing factor
in the combustion process during stages d and e is the jet velocity.
The pressure curves at different ICO diameters at 0.8 and 0.6 AERs
are illustrated in Fig. 14. The pressure peak is first attained at 3.0 mm
ICO diameter and is the highest, measuring 4.86 MPa, which is sub­
stantially higher than the pressure peaks at ICO diameters of 4.5 mm and
6.0 mm. The difference in pressure peaks between ICO diameters of 4.5
mm and 6.0 mm, at AERs of 0.8 and 0.6 respectively, is 0.06 MPa and
0.1 MPa. The effect of the number of jet material on the combustion rate
is mainly reflected in the initial ammonia combustion process, as shown
in Fig. 14 (a). The lowest number of jet materials is associated with the
3.0 mm ICO diameter, which exhibits the lowest initial pressure rise
rate. In Fig. 14 (a), there are two notable peaks in the pressure rise rate
curves at ICO diameters of 4.5 mm and 6.0 mm, as compared to 3.0 mm.
These peaks occur during the early stage of combustion (stage d) and are
indicated by square symbols. This is attributed to a higher concentration
of unburned gasoline mixture and jet materials from the stage’s jet at
ICO diameters of 6.0 mm and 4.5 mm, which are more effective at
promoting combustion and sharply increase the ammonia combustion
rate in the short term. The peaks labeled with circular symbols
P. Dong et al.
Fig. 13. Shadowgraph of the processes of jet and ammonia combustion for various ICO diameters. (GEP is 1.5%).
correspond to the rapid combustion, with steep peaks of pressure rise
rate curves due to fast ammonia combustion speed at 3.0 mm ICO
diameter, while the peaks are flat and the combustion speed is slow at
6.0 mm and 4.5 mm.
The ICO diameter determines the amount of jet material, and
consequently affects the ignition capacity as depicted in Fig. 14 (b). This
is evident from the fact that ammonia combustion requires a greater
ignition capacity at the AER of 0.6, and the low ignition capacity of the
3.0 mm ICO diameter leads to ignition failure. Meanwhile, as shown in
the red box, the initial combustion rate of 6.0 mm ICO diameter is
significantly higher than that of 4.5 mm, which is not obvious in Fig. 14
(a). Although the early stage of ammonia combustion is slow at a small
ICO diameter, its high jet velocity expands the distribution area of jet
material, facilitating the mixing of free radicals with ammonia/air.
Furthermore, this accelerates the middle and late stages of ammonia
combustion, resulting in enhanced ammonia combustion rate.
Fig. 15 illustrates the timing of each combustion stage in the main
chamber for different ICO diameters at AERs of 0.8 and 0.6. It is
observed that larger ICO diameters at both AERs result in extended
periods of rapid combustion and combustion duration, while yielding
lower ammonia combustion rates. Ignition delay is affected by the
number of jet material and the jet velocity. Specifically, at the AER of
0.8, the ignition delay is smallest with a 4.5 mm diameter, which ex­
hibits higher jet velocity than the 6.0 mm diameter and a greater
quantity of jet materials compared to the 3.0 mm diameter. Conversely,
at the AER of 0.6, the ignition delay is smallest with a 6.0 mm diameter
due to the heightened ignition energy demand at low AERs. Therefore, at
low AERs, the ignition delay is primarily affected by the ignition energy.
Under the experimental conditions, the optimal combustion perfor­
mance of ammonia is achieved with ICO diameters of 3.0 mm and 4.5
mm, corresponding to AERs of 0.8 and 0.6, respectively.
3.5. Combustion process under different AERs
This section analyzes the effects of different AERs (1.1, 1.0, and 0.8)
on the combustion process, considering the main chamber pressure and
the timing of each combustion stage. The pressure variations are pre­
sented in Fig. 16, with the maximum pressure observed at the AER of
8
Journal of Cleaner Production 435 (2024) 140546
1.0, measuring 4.92 MPa. Expanding on the findings from the previous
section regarding ICO diameter, it is determined that the number of jet
materials is the primary factor influencing the combustion rate of
ammonia during the initial stage. For the AERs of 0.8, 1.0 and 1.1, the jet
velocity increases with the AER decreases. This effect is primarily driven
by the increased jet velocity at the AER of 0.8. In addition, due to the low
AER of 0.8, more jet materials appear in the main chamber compared to
the AERs of 1.0 and 1.1, which led to earlier ignition and faster com­
bustion speed during the initial stage.
The flame image highlighted by the green circle corresponds to stage
d, where the maximum pressure rise rate is attributed to the unburned
gasoline mixture and jet materials aiding combustion. Subsequently, the
pressure rise rate levels off, and the peak corresponding to stage e is
insignificant because the lower jet velocity associated with the 4.5 mm
ICO diameter does not significantly enhance the flame propagation ve­
locity of ammonia.
Fig. 17 summarizes the ignition delay, rapid combustion, and com­
bustion duration. The ignition delay and rapid combustion increases as
AER increases. The shortest combustion duration, 85.6ms, is observed at
the AER of 1.0. The primary factors influencing rapid combustion and
combustion duration, while maintaining the same ICO diameter, are the
AER and environmental parameters. Although the combustion duration
at the AER of 1.0 is 2.4ms shorter than that at the AER of 0.8, its ignition
delay and rapid combustion are significantly longer. This indicates that
ammonia exhibits more efficient combustion at the AER of 0.8. Addi­
tionally, gasoline consumption is lower at the AER of 0.8. Therefore,
adjusting the AER and GEP in real-time according to the engine’s power
demand is crucial.
4. Conclusion
This study focuses on investigating the processes of gasoline ignition
chamber jet and ammonia combustion using a visualized CVCC experi­
ment platform. Specifically, these processes are analyzed from four as­
pects: ignition method, GEP, ICO diameter, and AER, using the
shadowgraph method. The conclusions are as follows:
P. Dong et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 435 (2024) 140546

Fig. 16. Pressure and pressure rise rate curves for different AERs. (GEP
is 1.5%).

Fig. 14. Pressure and pressure rise rate curves of the main chamber for various
ICO diameters. (GEP is 1.5%).

Fig. 17. The duration of each stage of combustion in the main chamber for
different AERs. (GEP is 1.5%).

1) The jet and combustion processes are divided into five stages to
describe the combustion phenomenon: cold jet, hot jet, jet ignition,
flame propagation, and rapid combustion stage.
2) Compared with spark ignition, the gasoline ignition chamber ex­
hibits a significant ability to enhance flame propagation speed and
reduce the duration of each combustion stage of ammonia. The
gasoline ignition chamber jet ignition system has proven to be
effective in significantly improving ammonia combustion.
3) It is appropriate to use a higher GEP to increase the ammonia com­
bustion velocity when the AER is relatively low. The optimal
ammonia combustion performance is achieved at the 1.5% GEP,
which demonstrates superior applicability compared to GEPs of
1.0%, 2.0%, and 2.5%.
4) The ICO diameter has a significant impact on the jet velocity and the
quantity of jet materials in the main chamber. The 3.0 mm ICO
diameter demonstrates a weaker ignition capability compared to ICO
diameters of 4.5 mm and 6.0 mm, which respectively increases the
ignition delay by 107.1% and 40.3% at the AER of 0.8, and resulted
Fig. 15. The duration of each combustion stage in the main chamber for in the ignition failure at the AER of 0.6. However, compared to the
different ICO diameters. (GEP is 1.5%). 4.5 mm ICO diameter, the high jet velocity of the 3.0 mm ICO
diameter led to a more homogeneous mixing of ammonia and air,

9
P. Dong et al.
which decreases the rapid combustion by 30.6% and the combustion
duration by 43.1% at the AER of 0.8.
5) The initial stage combustion of ammonia is fastest at the AER of 0.8
compared to AERs of 1.0 and 1.1. Therefore, an appropriate reduc­
tion of AER could improve the ammonia combustion efficiency,
which should be adjusted in real time according to the load re­
quirements of the engine.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Pengbo Dong: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Methodology,
Writing – review & editing. Shihao Chen: Formal analysis, Writing –
original draft. Dongsheng Dong: Conceptualization, Methodology,
Writing – review & editing. Fuxing Wei: Data curation, Investigation.
Mingfei Lu: Writing – review & editing. Peng Wang: Data curation.
Wuqiang Long: Writing – review & editing.
Declaration of competing interest
We declare that we have no known competing financial interests or
personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work
reported in this paper.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgments
This work was financially supported by the National Key R&D pro­
gram of China (No. 2022YFB4300700), the State Key Laboratory of
Ocean Engineering (Shanghai Jiao Tong University, ) (Grant No.
GKZD010087), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central
Universities (DUT21RC(3)070).
References
Al-Breiki, M., Bicer, Y., 2021. Comparative life cycle assessment of sustainable energy
carriers including production, storage, overseas transport and utilization. J. Clean.
Prod. 279, 123481 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123481.
Biswas, S., Tanvir, S., Wang, H., Qiao, L., 2016. On ignition mechanisms of premixed
CH4/air and H2/air using a hot turbulent jet generated by pre-chamber combustion.
Appl. Therm. Eng. 106, 925–937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2016.06.070.
Bunce, M., Blaxill, H., Kulatilaka, W., Jiang, N., 2014. The effects of turbulent jet
characteristics on engine performance using a pre-chamber combustor. SAE
Technical Papers 1. https://doi.org/10.4271/2014-01-1195.
Cardoso, J.S., Silva, V., Rocha, R.C., Hall, M.J., Costa, M., Eusébio, D., 2021. Ammonia as
an energy vector: current and future prospects for low-carbon fuel applications in
internal combustion engines. J. Clean. Prod. 296 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2021.126562.
Chinnathambi, P., Thelen, B., Cook, D., Toulson, E., 2021. Performance metrics for fueled
and unfueled turbulent jet igniters in a rapid compression machine. Appl. Therm.
Eng. 182, 115893 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2020.115893.
Chiong, M.C., Chong, C.T., Ng, J.H., Mashruk, S., Chong, W.W.F., Samiran, N.A.,
Mong, G.R., Valera-Medina, A., 2021. Advancements of combustion technologies in
the ammonia-fuelled engines. Energy Convers. Manag. 244, 114460 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enconman.2021.114460.
Cui, Z., Tian, J., Zhang, X., Yin, S., Long, W., Song, H., 2022. Experimental study of the
effects of pre-chamber geometry on the combustion characteristics of an ammonia/
air pre-mixture ignited by a jet flame. Processes 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/
pr10102102.
Dong, D., Wei, F., Long, W., Dong, P., Tian, H., Tian, J., Wang, P., Lu, M., Meng, X., 2023.
Optical investigation of ammonia rich combustion based on methanol jet ignition by
means of an ignition chamber. Fuel 345, 128202. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
FUEL.2023.128202.
Grannell, S.M., Assanis, D.N., Bohac, S.V., Gillespie, D.E., 2008. The fuel mix limits and
efficiency of a stoichiometric, ammonia, and gasoline dual fueled spark ignition
engine. J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 130, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2898837.
Guo, B., Ichiyanagi, M., Kajiki, K., Aratake, N., Zheng, Q., Kodaka, M., Suzuki, T., 2022.
Combustion analysis of ammonia fueled high compression ratio SI engine with glow
plug and sub-chamber. International Journal of Automotive Engineering 13, 1–8.
https://doi.org/10.20485/JSAEIJAE.13.1_1.
Haputhanthri, S.O., Maxwell, T.T., Fleming, J., Austin, C., 2015. Ammonia and gasoline
fuel blends for spark ignited internal combustion engines. Journal of Energy
10
Journal of Cleaner Production 435 (2024) 140546
Resources Technology, Transactions of the ASME 137, 1–7. https://doi.org/
10.1115/1.4030443.
Lavadera, M.L., Han, X., Konnov, A.A., 2021. Comparative effect of ammonia addition on
the laminar burning velocities of methane, n-heptane, and iso-octane. Energy Fuel.
35, 7156–7168. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.0c03424.
Lesmana, H., Zhang, Z., Li, X., Zhu, M., Xu, W., Zhang, D., 2019. NH3 as a transport fuel
in internal combustion engines: a technical review. Journal of Energy Resources
Technology, Transactions of the ASME 141, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1115/
1.4042915.
Liu, L., Wu, Y., Wang, Y., Wu, J., Fu, S., 2022. Exploration of environmentally friendly
marine power technology -ammonia/diesel stratified injection. J. Clean. Prod. 380,
135014 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.135014.
Liu, Z., Zhou, L., Wei, H., 2023a. Experimental investigation on the performance of pure
ammonia engine based on reactivity controlled turbulent jet ignition. Fuel 335,
127116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.127116.
Liu, Z., Zhou, L., Zhong, L., Wei, H., 2023b. Enhanced combustion of ammonia engine
based on novel air-assisted pre-chamber turbulent jet ignition. Energy Convers.
Manag. 276, 116526 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2022.116526.
Liu, S., Lin, Z., Zhang, H., Lei, N., Qi, Y., Wang, Z., 2023c. Impact of ammonia addition
on knock resistance and combustion performance in a gasoline engine with high
compression ratio. Energy 262, 125458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2022.125458.
Liu, X., Echeverri Marquez, M., Sanal, S., Silva, M., AlRamadan, A.S., Cenker, E.,
Sharma, P., Magnotti, G., Turner, J.W.G., Im, H.G., 2023d. Computational
assessment of the effects of pre-chamber and piston geometries on the combustion
characteristics of an optical pre-chamber engine. Fuel 341, 127659. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.fuel.2023.127659.
Maxson, J.A., Hensinger, D.M., Oppenheim, A.K., Hom, K., 1991. Performance of
Multiple Stream Pulsed Jet Combustion Systems. SAE Study, 910565. https://escho
larship.org/uc/item/3n91092d.
Meng, X., Zhang, M., Zhao, C., Tian, H., Tian, J., Long, W., Bi, M., 2022. Study of
combustion and NO chemical reaction mechanism in ammonia blended with DME.
Fuel 319, 123832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.123832.
Novella, R., Gomez-Soriano, J., Martinez-Hernandiz, P.J., Libert, C., Rampanarivo, F.,
2021. Improving the performance of the passive pre-chamber ignition concept for
spark-ignition engines fueled with natural gas. Fuel 290, 119971. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.fuel.2020.119971.
Pan, J., Tang, R., Wang, Z., Gao, J., Xu, Q., Shu, G., Wei, H., 2023. An experimental and
modeling study on the oxidation of ammonia and n-heptane with JSR. Proc.
Combust. Inst. 39, 477–485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2022.07.193.
Ryu, K., Zacharakis-Jutz, G.E., Kong, S.C., 2014. Effects of gaseous ammonia direct
injection on performance characteristics of a spark-ignition engine. Appl. Energy
116, 206–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.11.067.
Shah, A., Tunestal, P., Johansson, B., 2015. Effect of Pre-chamber Volume and Nozzle
Diameter on Pre-chamber Ignition in Heavy Duty Natural Gas Engines. SAE
Technical Papers. https://doi.org/10.4271/2015-01-0867, 2015-April.
Tian, J., Cui, Z., Ren, Z., Tian, H., Long, W., 2020. Experimental study on jet ignition and
combustion processes of natural gas. Fuel 262, 116467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
fuel.2019.116467.
Wang, P., Long, W., Wei, F., Dong, D., Tian, H., Tian, J., Dong, P., Zhang, X., Lu, M.,
2023. Study on the image recognition of ammonia ignition process induced by
methanol micro-jet. SAE 32, 0067. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
374418423.
Wei, F., Wang, Y., Tian, H., Tian, J., Long, W., Dong, D., 2022. Visualization study on
lean combustion characteristics of the premixed methanol by the jet ignition of an
ignition chamber. Fuel 308, 122001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2021.122001.
Wei, F., Lu, M., Long, W., Dong, D., Dong, P., Xiao, G., Tian, J., Tian, H., Wang, P., 2023a.
Optical experiment study on Ammonia/Methanol mixture combustion performance
induced by methanol jet ignition in a constant volume combustion bomb. Fuel 352,
129090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2023.129090.
Wei, F., Wang, P., Cao, J., Long, W., Dong, D., Tian, H., Tian, J., Zhang, X., Lu, M., 2023b.
Visualization investigation of jet ignition ammonia-methanol by an ignition chamber
fueled H2. Fuel 349, 128658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2023.128658.
Wei, F., Wang, Q., Cao, J., Cui, Z., Long, W., Tian, H., Tian, J., Dong, D., Wang, Y., 2024.
Experimental study of the ignition chamber with accelerating cavity applying to
methanol lean combustion. Fuel 355, 129358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
fuel.2023.129358.
Wolff, D., Tamura, M., Tai, H., Sakurai, T., 1997. Looking into the prechamber of a lean-
burn gas engine. Series B, fluids and thermal engineering 40, 320–327.
Wu, X., Feng, Y., Xu, G., Zhu, Y., Ming, P., Dai, L., 2023. Numerical investigations on
charge motion and combustion of natural gas-enhanced ammonia in marine pre-
chamber lean-burn engine with dual-fuel combustion system. Int. J. Hydrogen
Energy 48, 11476–11492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.04.283.
Yamaguchi, S., Ohiwa, N., Hasegawa, T., 1985. Ignition and burning process in a divided
chamber bomb. Combust. Flame 59, 177–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-2180
(85)90023-9.
Yousefi, A., Guo, H., Dev, S., Liko, B., Lafrance, S., 2022. Effects of ammonia energy
fraction and diesel injection timing on combustion and emissions of an ammonia/
diesel dual-fuel engine. Fuel 314, 122723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
fuel.2021.122723.
Zhang, X., Tian, J., Cui, Z., Xiong, S., Yin, S., Wang, Q., Long, W., 2023. Visualization
study on the effects of pre-chamber jet ignition and methane addition on the
combustion characteristics of ammonia/air mixtures. Fuel 338, 127204. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.127204.