JSAE Review 23 (2002) 297–302

Study on pilot injection of DI diesel engine using common-rail

injection system
Takehiro Tanakaa, Akihiro Andoa, Kazuyoshi Ishizakab
a
Group 2, Nippon Soken, Inc., Iwaya 14, Simohasumi-cho, Nishio-shi, Aichi 445-0012, Japan
b
Power Train Engineering Div. I, Toyota Motor Corp., Toyota-cho 1, Toyota-shi, Aichi 471-8572, Japan
Received 31 October 2001; received in revised form 28 January 2002

Abstract

In recent DI diesel engines designed to achieve high output and meet future exhaust regulation, the pilot injection control
using a common-rail injection system is adopted. In this research, we developed visualization equipment for pilot combustion
behavior of non-luminous flame to clarify the influence of pilot injection parameters (timing and quantity) on engine per-
formance. As a result of this analysis, we clarified the influence of pilot injection parameters on pilot-main combustion and found
the optimum pilot injection controlling method. r 2002 Society of Automotive Engineers of Japan, Inc. and Elsevier Science B.V.
All rights reserved.

1. Introduction 2. Experimental details

Direct fuel injection diesel engines are widely used
because of their high efficiency, and their adoption in
small passenger cars has been increasing recently.
However, there is demand for higher output, lower
noise and greater emissions performance for diesel
engines designed for passenger cars. In meeting these
demands, the common-rail fuel injection system, en-
abling high-pressure injection and high control flex-
ibility, attracts much attention.
Pilot injection, a special feature of the common-rail
injection system, is effective in combustion noise
control, and is considered to be a necessary feature of
the fuel injection control for diesel engines designed for
passenger cars. The investigations concerning the effects
of pilot injection on combustion noise and emission
have been reported in the past [1–3]. However, detailed
analyses of the influences of pilot injection quantity and
timing have been scarce.
This paper reports a detailed analysis of the
influences that pilot injection quantity and timing
have on combustion noise and emission, including
the visualization of the combustion chamber, with a
mass production engine. Based on the results,
the optimum pilot injection controls that reduce
combustion noise and emission simultaneously are
discussed.
2.1. Test engine and fuel injection system
Engine tests were performed with a mass production
engine. Detailed specifications are shown in Table 1. The
test engine was an in-line 4-cylinder with turbocharger
and after-cooler. The fuel injection system is a common-
rail type that consists of a high-pressure supply pump,
common rail and electromagnetic drive injector. The
maximum injection pressure was 135 MPa, and the fuel
injection timing and quantity were adjusted by the
timing and width of electric pulse.
The NOx, HC, and CO emissions were measured
using CLD, FID, and NDIR analysis devices, respec-
tively, and the smoke concentration was measured using
a Bosch smoke meter. The combustion noise was
calculated by the measured cylinder pressure.
2.2. Visualization equipment for combustion behavior
Combustion visualization was performed with a
fiberscope system shown in Fig. 1. The fiberscope was
located in the cylinder head directly above the combus-
tion chamber. The field of view allowed most of two
spray plumes to be visualized. Furthermore, an image
intensifier (hereafter II) was used to inspect the pre-

0389-4304/02/$22.00 r 2002 Society of Automotive Engineers of Japan, Inc. and Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 3 8 9 - 4 3 0 4 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 1 9 5 - 9 JSAE20024248
298 T. Tanaka et al. / JSAE Review 23 (2002) 297–302

Table 1 NOx decreased on the retard timing side by minimizing

Engine specifications pilot injection quantity, and further decrease was
Engine type 4-cyl. direct injection (Toyota 1CD-FTV [4]) possible by advancing the timing. In this case, pilot
injection quantity had less effect.
Bore  stroke (mm) 82.2  94
Displacement (L) 1.995 As shown in the middle column of Fig. 2, HC and CO
Compression ratio 18.6 were not affected by the pilot injection quantity on the
Fuel injection system Common rail system retard timing side. HC and CO increased as the injection
Nozzle type VCO 1 0.136  6 timing was advanced. The increase ratio was less for
smaller pilot injection quantity.
As shown in the right column of Fig. 2, PM and
smoke decreased by minimizing the pilot injection
quantity and advancing the timing. However, on the
advance timing side, pilot injection quantity had very
little effect. PM and smoke did not increase for large
pilot quantity on the advance timing side.

3.2. Pilot and main combustion behavior

To clarify the influence of pilot injection timing and

quantity, the results of the combustion chamber activity
inspections are shown in Fig. 3. In addition to the results
from photographs taken by the CCD camera, the results
of the visualized pilot combustion using II are also
shown. To analyze the influence of fuel injection timing,
three conditions were selected as follows (i) small
quantity and retard timing condition (fuel injection
quantity 1 mm3/st, 101 ATDC), (ii) small quantity and
advance timing condition (fuel injection quantity 1 mm3/
st, timing 501 ATDC) and, to further analyze the
influence of fuel injection quantity, (iii) large quantity
and retard timing condition (fuel injection quantity
5 mm3/st, timing 101 ATDC).

3.2.1. Influence of pilot injection timing ((i), (ii))

Fig. 1. Optical system.
mixed combustion behavior of non-luminous flame of
the pilot injection.
3. Results
3.1. Combustion noise and emission performance
Fig. 2 shows the relation between pilot injection and
combustion noise in emission performance. The test
conditions were as follows: Engine speed 2000 rpm,
equivalence ratio 0.3 and main injection timing TDC.
As shown in the left column of Fig. 2, when the pilot
injection timing was retarded, the combustion noise
decreased with minimized pilot injection quantity.
However, when the pilot injection timing was advanced,
the combustion noise decreased for large quantity pilot
but increased for small pilot with less than 3 mm3/st.
As shown in Fig. 3, the results of CCD camera
photographs, when pilot injection timing was advanced
to 501 ATDC, the combustion area spread throughout
the entire combustion chamber at the crank angle 81 and
121 ATDC, and main combustion was remarkably
active. As a result of the photographs from II, it was
confirmed that when the pilot injection timing was 101
ATDC, the pilot combustion area was concentrated
around the fuel-injected area, whereas when the fuel
injection timing was 501 ATDC, the combustion area
dispersed near the wall of the combustion chamber. The
heat release rate at 501 ATDC condition indicated that
the main combustion was active.
3.2.2. Influence of pilot injection quantity ((i), (iii))
When the pilot injection quantity was increased to
5 mm3/st, the main ignition timing was advanced more
than when the pilot injection quantity was 1 mm3/st.
However, the main combustion area was small and
combustion was inactive at the range of 8–121 ATDC.
In addition, from the results of II photography, it was
observed that the pilot combustion luminance was
 T. Tanaka et al. / JSAE Review 23 (2002) 297–302 299

Fig. 2. Effect of pilot timing and quantity on combustion noise and emission performance (engine speed/2000 rpm, equivalence ratio/0.3, main
injection timing/TDC).

Fig. 3. Pilot and main combustion behavior (photographed by CCD camera only and using II).
300 T. Tanaka et al. / JSAE Review 23 (2002) 297–302

intense and that dense pilot burned gas was forming at

5 mm3/st pilot injection.

4. Discussion

4.1. Combustion noise and emission performance

As shown in the pilot combustion peak heat release

rate of Fig. 4 upper, the combustion noise reduction
shown in Fig. 2 by the minimizing pilot injection
quantity on the retard timing side was due to the
combustion noise being restrained by the pilot combus- Fig. 5. Effect of pilot injection on ignition lag of main combustion.
tion itself. Combustion noise reduction for large
quantity pilot when the timing was advanced was due
to the decrease in the peak heat release rate of the pilot
combustion. On the other hand, as shown in Fig. 4
lower, the increase in combustion noise for small
quantity pilot on the advance timing side was due to
the increase in ignition lag of the main combustion
(Fig. 5) caused by the increase in the main combustion
peak heat release rate. This is considered to be a result of
the decrease in cylinder temperature during the main
fuel injection by decrease in pilot heat release quantity,
as shown in Fig. 6.
The reason for the decrease in NOx by minimizing
pilot injection quantity on the retard timing side (Fig. 2)
is considered to be a result of the decrease in pilot heat
release quantity, shown in Fig. 6, and the excessive Fig. 6. Heat release quantity of pilot combustion.
increase in cylinder temperature being restrained. The
decrease in NOx on the advance timing side was due to
the inactive pilot combustion (Fig. 4 upper). The reason for the increase in HC and CO by the
advancing pilot injection timing (Fig. 2), was due to the
decrease of pilot heat release quantity as shown in
Fig. 6. The II pilot combustion flame behavior shown in
Fig. 3 indicated that on the advance injection timing (ii),
compared to the retard injection timing (i), the pilot
combustion area had dispersed near the wall of the
combustion chamber, causing fuel to adhere to the wall
surfaces. In addition, on the advance pilot injection
timing, it took a significant amount of time until
ignition, causing the formation of excessive lean air–
fuel mixture, resulting in a decrease in combustion
quantity.
The decrease in PM and smoke by minimizing the
quantity and advancing the timing for the pilot injection
(Fig. 2) was due to the main combustion becoming
active, as shown in Fig. 7. It was observed from the
main combustion behavior taken by CCD at crank
angle 81 and 121 ATDC in Fig. 3, that the combustion
for small pilot quantity on the advance timing side (ii)
was active including the areas near the wall, compared
to the small pilot quantity on the retard timing side (i)
and large pilot quantity on the retard timing side (iii).
Fig. 4. Effect of pilot injection on peak heat release rate of pilot and The II photographed pilot combustion flame behavior
main combustion. indicated that the burned pilot gas had a tendency to
 T. Tanaka et al. / JSAE Review 23 (2002) 297–302
Fig. 7. Effect of pilot injection on main combustion period.
stay in the main injection area under greater quantity
pilot or retard-timing pilot, causing a local lack of
oxygen. This was the cause of the inactivity of the main
combustion, resulting in the further increase of the PM
and smoke. Very little increase in PM and smoke for
large pilot quantity on the advance timing side means
that it was more effective advancing the timing than
increasing the quantity.
4.2. Pilot injection control guideline
From the aforementioned results of combustion
noise, emission performance and combustion flame
observation, it is considered that combustion noise
reduction and high emission performance can be
achieved simultaneously through minimizing the effects
of burned pilot gas by advance timing and a small
quantity of pilot injection. However, excessively mini-
mizing the quantity and advancing the timing of pilot
injection causes delay of main combustion ignition,
resulting in greater combustion noise. Furthermore, HC
and CO increase by the deterioration of the pilot
combustion itself. It is necessary to limit minimizing
the quantity and advancing the timing within the region
of complete combustion of pilot fuel.
4.3. Pilot injection control with EGR
As the exhaust gas is re-circulated into the cylinder,
the effects of EGR on the emission must be taken into
consideration, the same as burned pilot gas. The results
of combustion noise, PM and cylinder pressure indi-
cator analysis under EGR ratio changes are shown in
Fig. 8. Although PM increased with increasing EGR
ratio, the deterioration rate decreased by advancing the
injection timing. Combustion noise was not affected by
the increase in EGR ratio on the retard timing side of
pilot injection. However, on the advance timing side,
combustion noise decreased with increase in EGR ratio.
On the advance timing side, pilot heat release quantity
increased with increase in EGR ratio. Accordingly, the
cylinder temperature increased during the main injec-
301
Fig. 8. Effect of EGR ratio.
tion, causing the decrease in main ignition lag, resulting
in the reduction in the combustion noise. Furthermore,
it is considered that by advancing the pilot injection
timing, pilot burned gas was dispersed, causing a
reduction in PM.
From the aforementioned, it is considered that
advance-timing limits of the pilot injection increased
due to the increase in pilot heat release quantity with
EGR.
5. Conclusion
The influence of pilot injection on DI diesel engine
performance using common-rail injection system was
clarified through combustion analysis utilizing visualiza-
tion of the combustion chamber.
(1) Simultaneous reduction of combustion noise and
emission performance are possible by decreasing the
influence of pilot burned gas by minimizing the quantity
and advancing the timing of the pilot injection. How-
ever, excessive minimization and advancement deterio-
rate the pilot combustion, so that minimizing the
quantity and advancing the timing must be restricted.
(2) Advancing of pilot injection timing causes pilot
burned gas to disperse, and the minimizing of pilot
injection quantity causes a decrease in the quantity of
pilot burned gas, meaning that they are effective in
active main combustion.
302 T. Tanaka et al. / JSAE Review 23 (2002) 297–302
(3) Advance timing limits of pilot injection increase
due to the increase in the pilot heat release quantity with
EGR.
References
[1] M. Durnholz, et al., Preinjection a measure to optimize the
emission behavior of DI-diesel engine, SAE Paper 940674, 1994.
[2] T. Minami, et al., Reduction of diesel engine NOx using pilot
injection, SAE Paper 950611, 1995.
[3] K. Nakakita, et al., Optimization of pilot injection pattern and its
effect on diesel combustion with high-pressure injection, Proceed-
ings of the 10th International Combustion Symposium, Japan, p.
193, 1992 (in Japanese with English Summary).
[4] Y. Matsuda, et al., The development of exhaust emission
performance on in-line 4-cyl. DI diesel engine, Proceedings of the
Autumn Convention of JSAE, No. 20005512, 2000 (in Japanese
with English Summary).