astudyonbiogas-fueledsiengines:effectsoffuel composition ... · composition on emissions and...
TRANSCRIPT
A Study on Biogas-Fueled SI Engines: Effects of Fuel
Composition on Emissions and Catalyst Performance
by
Robert Abader
A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirementsfor the degree of Master of Applied Science
Graduate Department of Mechanical and Industrial EngineeringUniversity of Toronto
Copyright c� 2014 by Robert Abader
Abstract
A Study on Biogas-Fueled SI Engines: E↵ects of Fuel Composition on Emissions and
Catalyst Performance
Robert Abader
Master of Applied Science
Graduate Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
University of Toronto
2014
Biogas as a fuel is attractive from a greenhouse standpoint, since biogas is carbon neutral.
To be used as such, increasingly stringent emission standards must be met. Current
low-emission technologies meet said standards by precisely controlling the air-fuel ratio.
Biogas composition can vary substantially, making air-fuel ratio control di�cult. This
research was conducted as part of a larger project to develop a sensor that accurately
measures biogas composition. Biogas was simulated by fuel mixtures consisting of natural
gas and CO2
; the e↵ects that fuel composition has on emissions and catalyst performance
were investigated. Engine-out THC and NOx
increased and decreased, respectively, with
increasing CO2
in the fuel mixture. Doubling the catalyst residence time doubled the
conversion of THC and CO emissions. The e↵ectiveness of the catalyst at converting
THC emissions was found to be dependent on the relative proportions of engine-out
THC, NOx
and CO emissions.
ii
Acknowledgements
First and foremost I would like to thank Professor James Wallace for providing the
opportunity for me to work on this project, and for all the support he’s provided over the
last couple of years. I never left his o�ce without a sense of direction, and his guidance
will not be forgotten.
I would also like to thank my lab mates Charles, Dan, Manuel, Mark, Phil, Silvio and
Vahid for always being there to lend a helping hand, o↵er their thoughts and just overall
making my experience here enjoyable. A special thank you goes out to Osmond Sargeant
and Terry Zak for all the help they’ve provided, and for not letting me take myself too
seriously. I would not have been able to complete this project without their expertise.
Last but definitely not least, I’d like to thank my family and friends for all their love,
support and unending questions about when I’d finally finish.
iii
Contents
1 Introduction 1
2 Background and Literature Review 3
2.1 Current Energy Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2 Biogas As a Promising Alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3 Biogas Composition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.4 Previous Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.4.1 Stoichiometric and Lean-Burn Hydrogen Addition Experiments . 9
2.4.2 Hydrogen Addition with EGR Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.5 Summary and Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3 Test Equipment and Setup 18
3.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.2 Engine Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.3 Catalyst Formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.4 Stamford Electrical Generator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.5 Measurement Apparatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.6 Throttle and Air-Fuel Ratio Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.6.1 Speed Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.6.2 Air-Fuel Ratio Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
iv
4 Testing 31
4.1 Preliminary Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.1.1 Natural Gas Justification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.1.2 Determination of Optimal Spark Timing and Equivalence Ratio . 34
4.2 Brake Specific Energy Consumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.3 Emissions Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
4.3.1 Emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
4.4 Brake Specific Emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
4.5 Catalyst Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
4.5.1 Emission Reductions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
4.5.2 Catalyst Performance vs. Relative Emission Ratios . . . . . . . . 54
5 Conclusions 58
6 Recommendations for Future Work 61
Appendix A Engine Tuning 67
A.1 Spark Timing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
A.2 Optimal Equivalence Ratio for Catalyst Performance . . . . . . . . . . . 74
v
List of Tables
2.1 Theoretical gas yields and methane content [33]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2 Fuel composition (in volume %) of di↵erent gaseous fuels [30]. . . . . . . 6
3.1 Kubota DF-750 specifications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.2 Catalyst specifications [31]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.3 Calibration gases used for their respective measured emissions. . . . . . . 23
4.1 Optimal spark timing for emissions at di↵erent fuel compositions. . . . . 34
A.1 Optimal spark timing for emissions at di↵erent fuel compositions. . . . . 73
vi
List of Figures
3.1 Schematic of engine setup used for testing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.2 Generator E�ciency Curve. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.3 LabView Program Front Panel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.4 ITB and Trim Valve wiring. Letter ”a” indicates a connection to the ITB
and letter ”b” to the Trim Valve. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.5 The ’Overview’ tab displayed when monitoring the speed controller through
the L-Series Service Tool. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.6 The ’Overview’ tab displayed when monitoring the air-fuel ratio controller
through the L-Series Service Tool. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.1 Comparison of engine-out emissions when the engine is fueled by NG vs.
CH4
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.2 Comparison of emission reductions across a catalyst with a space velocity
of 24 457 hr-1 (1 catalyst) when the engine is fueled by NG vs. CH4
. . . . 33
4.3 Comparison of emission reductions across a catalyst with a space velocity
of 12 228 hr-1 (2 catalysts in series) when the engine is fueled by NG vs.
CH4
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4.4 Reduction of THC emissions across the catalyst with a mean � value of
1.013 and with oscillations about the mean as displayed on the x-axis.
Tests conducted with a constant load of 6 kW with NG as the fuel. . . . 35
vii
4.5 Reduction of NOx
emissions across the catalyst with a mean � value of
1.013 and with oscillations about the mean as displayed on the x-axis.
Tests conducted with a constant load of 6 kW with NG as the fuel. . . . 36
4.6 Reduction of CO emissions across the catalyst with a mean � value of
1.013 and with oscillations about the mean as displayed on the x-axis.
Tests conducted with a constant load of 6 kW with NG as the fuel. . . . 36
4.7 Brake specific energy consumption at di↵erent fuel compositions with a 6
kW engine load. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.8 Brake specific energy consumption at di↵erent fuel compositions and at
two di↵erent load conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
4.9 THC emissions with a mean � value of 1.013 as measured at 3 di↵erent
locations and with various fuel compositions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
4.10 NOx
emissions with a mean � value of 1.013 as measured at 3 di↵erent
locations and with various fuel compositions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.11 CO emissions with a mean � value of 1.013 as measured at 3 di↵erent
locations and with various fuel compositions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.12 THC emissions with a mean � value of 1.013 as measured at 3 di↵erent
locations and with various fuel compositions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.13 NOx
emissions with a mean � value of 1.013 as measured at 3 di↵erent
locations and with various fuel compositions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
4.14 CO emissions with a mean � value of 1.013 as measured at 3 di↵erent
locations and with various fuel compositions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
4.15 A comparison of engine-out brake specific THC emissions achieved with
the biogas setup, and previous testing running on gasoline. . . . . . . . . 45
4.16 A comparison of engine-out brake specific NOx
emissions achieved with
the biogas setup, and previous testing running on gasoline. . . . . . . . . 45
viii
4.17 Engine-out brake specific CO emissions achieved with the biogas setup, at
varying fuel compositions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
4.18 A comparison of post-catalyst (space velocity = 12 228 hr-1) brake spe-
cific THC emissions achieved with the biogas setup, and previous testing
running on gasoline (engine-out). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
4.19 A comparison of post-catalyst (space velocity = 12 228 hr-1) brake spe-
cific NOx
emissions achieved with the biogas setup, and previous testing
running on gasoline (engine-out). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
4.20 Post-catalyst (space velocity = 12 228 hr-1) brake specific CO emissions
achieved with the biogas setup, at varying fuel compositions. . . . . . . . 48
4.21 THC emissions reductions with di↵erent fuel compositions. Operating
with a mean � of 1.013 and an engine load of 6 kW. . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
4.22 NOx
emissions reductions with di↵erent fuel compositions. Operating with
a mean � of 1.013 and an engine load of 6 kW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4.23 CO emissions reductions with di↵erent fuel compositions. Operating with
a mean � of 1.013 and an engine load of 6 kW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4.24 THC emissions reductions with di↵erent fuel compositions. Operating
with a mean � of 1.013 and an engine load of 8 kW. . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
4.25 NOx
emissions reductions with di↵erent fuel compositions. Operating with
a mean � of 1.013 and an engine load of 8 kW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.26 CO emissions reductions with di↵erent fuel compositions. Operating with
a mean � of 1.013 and an engine load of 8 kW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.27 THC emissions reductions against NOx
/THC ratio at catalyst entry. Op-
erating with a mean � of 1.013 and at two di↵erent load conditions. . . . 56
4.28 Variation in the engine-out NOx
/THC concentration ratio with changing
fuel composition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
4.29 Further analysis clarifies changes in the catalyst THC conversion e�ciency. 57
ix
4.30 Increase in CO2
concentration in the exhaust gas stream as it flows through
the catalysts, confirming that the NO reaction with CO is occurring. . . 57
A.1 Spark timing sweep, showing the e↵ect that spark advance has on fuel
flow. Test engine fuelled by NG (7 kW load). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
A.2 Spark timing sweep, showing the e↵ect that spark advance has on exhaust
temperature. Test engine fuelled by NG (7 kW load). . . . . . . . . . . . 70
A.3 Spark timing sweep, showing the e↵ect that spark advance has on THC
emissions. Test engine fuelled by NG (7 kW load). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
A.4 Spark timing sweep, showing the e↵ect that spark advance has on NOx
emissions. Test engine fuelled by NG (7 kW load). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
A.5 Spark timing sweep, showing the e↵ect that spark advance has on fuel
flow. Test engine fuelled by a 60% CH4
-40% CO2
fuel mixture (6 kW load). 71
A.6 Spark timing sweep, showing the e↵ect that spark advance has on exhaust
temperature. Test engine fuelled by a 60% CH4
-40% CO2
fuel mixture (6
kW load). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
A.7 Spark timing sweep, showing the e↵ect that spark advance has on THC
emissions. Test engine fuelled by a 60% CH4
-40% CO2
fuel mixture (6 kW
load). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
A.8 Spark timing sweep, showing the e↵ect that spark advance has on NOx
emissions. Test engine fuelled by a 60% CH4
-40% CO2
fuel mixture (6
kW load). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
A.9 Reduction of THC emissions across the catalyst at di↵erent � values.
Sweep conducted with a constant load of 7 kW and with NG as the fuel. 74
A.10 Reduction of NOx
emissions across the catalyst at di↵erent � values.
Sweep conducted with a constant load of 7 kW and with NG as the fuel. 75
A.11 Reduction of CO emissions across the catalyst at di↵erent � values. Sweep
conducted with a constant load of 7 kW and with NG as the fuel. . . . . 75
x
A.12 Reduction of THC emissions across the catalyst at di↵erent � values.
Sweep conducted with a constant load of 6 kW and with a mixture con-
sisting of 60% NG and 40% CO2
as the fuel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
A.13 Reduction of NOx
emissions across the catalyst at di↵erent � values.
Sweep conducted with a constant load of 6 kW and with a mixture con-
sisting of 60% NG and 40% CO2
as the fuel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
A.14 Reduction of CO emissions across the catalyst at di↵erent � values. Sweep
conducted with a constant load of 6 kW and with a mixture consisting of
60% NG and 40% CO2
as the fuel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
xi
Nomenclature
� Excess air ratio
� Fuel/air equivalence ratio
bmep Brake mean e↵ective pressure
bsec Brake specific energy consumption
BTC Before top centre
CAD Crank angle degrees
CNG Compressed natural gas
COVimep
Coe�cient of variation of indicated mean e↵ective pressure
DAQ Data acquisition system
EGR Exhaust gas recirculation
GHG Greenhouse gas
Gtoe Gigatonne of oil equivalent
HC Hydrocarbon
ICE Internal combustion engine
LFG Landfill gas
xii
LPG Liquefied petroleum gas
MBT Maximum brake torque
NG Natural gas
NOx
Oxides of Nitrogen
SI Spark ignition
SLM Standard litres per minute
TDC Top dead centre
THC Total hydrocarbon
WEGO Wide range exhaust gas oxygen
xiii
Chapter 1
Introduction
Utilization of biogas as a fuel is very attractive from a greenhouse standpoint since biogas
is carbon neutral. There are various forms of biogas, including digester gas produced by
an anaerobic digester. Landfill gas is similar in composition. The common constituent
is methane, with varying amounts of carbon dioxide and nitrogen as well as a variety of
other gases in small amounts. Methane is the main source of fuel energy in biogas.
Biogas can be used to fuel either stationary engines or vehicles. Gas storage and
fueling technology developed for compressed natural gas (CNG) fueled vehicles would be
employed for vehicular uses of biogas. Despite the environmental attractiveness of biogas,
new challenges have arisen in the form of stringent engine exhaust emission standards for
both vehicles and most recently for stationary engines. Low emission engine technology
requires precise control of the air-fuel ratio, which in turn requires knowledge of the
fuel’s chemical composition. However, biogas composition varies substantially with time
(and location, in the application where vehicles refill in di↵erent locations). Thus, there
is a need for a gas composition sensor that can characterize the biogas fuel for the
engine control system. A gas composition sensor would also facilitate seamless multi-
fuel capability, i.e. the ability to run on natural gas or LPG or gasoline if biogas is not
available.
1
Chapter 1. Introduction 2
Low cost sensors that provide unambiguous gaseous fuel composition information
do not currently exist. This engine research is part of a larger project focused on the
development of a fiber optic based gas composition sensor. The larger project developed
a laboratory prototype sensor system using an absorption cell with multipoint sensing
on a single fiber. Absorption sensors measure the spectral absorption features of gas
species methane (CH4
) and carbon dioxide (CO2
), the main components of biogas from
an anaerobic digester or a landfill site. Reliable gas concentrations for both CH4
and
CO2
can be obtained for gas mixtures in the 30 to 60% CH4
concentration range with a
maximum error of 4%. Further work is needed to achieve the same accuracy at higher
CH4
concentrations.
The focus of this engine study was on the e↵ect of biogas, especially with high CO2
concentrations, on the operation of a standard 3 way catalytic converter. Methane is
particularly di�cult to oxidize and specialized catalysts have been developed for natural
gas. Use of biogas as a fuel changes both the chemical composition of the exhaust gas
and the temperature of the exhaust gas, both of which have an impact on catalytic
converter operation. The overall objective of the engine study was to evaluate the e↵ect
of biogas on the operation of a standard 3-way catalytic converter. Specific questions to
be answered include:
• Does the fuel composition a↵ect the engine spark timing required for optimal cat-
alyst operation?
• What is the optimal air-fuel ratio to maximize conversion and does this optimal
air-fuel ratio change with fuel composition?
• Does the fuel composition have an impact on the catalyst size requirement?
• What are the minimum emission levels achievable?
• Does the fuel composition have an impact on engine e�ciency, as characterized by
brake specific energy consumption?
Chapter 2
Background and Literature Review
2.1 Current Energy Needs
Worldwide energy consumption has had an increasing trend over the past several decades,
and was recently estimated to be at 11.8 Gtoe (2009), 23% greater than what it was only
a decade earlier in 1999 [1]. Fossil fuels have been primarily used to meet this demand, as
80.9% of the total energy consumption was comprised of fossil fuel consumption in 2009
(varying by only 1% since 1990). If this trend of increasing energy demand continues, as
is expected, then a rise in fossil fuel consumption would also result [33]. However, with a
new worldwide commitment (proceeding from the 2011 United Nations Climate Change
Conference) to reducing greenhouse gas emissions that includes the major fossil fuel
consuming nations of China, India (both of which did not have to cut emissions under
the first round of the Kyoto protocol) and the U.S. (which did not ratify the Kyoto
protocol), it is clear that, if the goals outlined are to be achieved, fossil fuel consumption
must be reduced. Alternative energy sources will have to provide clean energy and will
therefore play a large role in the future.
3
Chapter 2. Background and Literature Review 4
2.2 Biogas As a Promising Alternative
Biogas is an interesting alternative fuel, which can be used as a replacement of fossil fuels
in heat and power production, or as an engine fuel [33]. It is produced through anaerobic
digestion, which is an after-treatment of biomass that is applied in landfill sites and
also used on farms. Biogas provides the benefit of displacing the need for fossil fuels,
along with the additional advantage of not allowing methane (the gas with the highest
content in the mixture) [8], which is a greenhouse gas (GHG), to be released directly to
the atmosphere as it would through ordinary biological decay. By using this fuel in an
internal combustion engine (ICE), the methane content is combusted, releasing CO2
to
the atmosphere instead, which has a global warming potential that is 21 times less than
that of methane [12][28].
Several other benefits also exist [20], which have been quantified by means of economic
analyses. The economic analysis conducted by White et al. [34] showed that for small-
scale Ontario dairy and beef farms (with digesters capable of producing below 250 kW),
savings of CAN$7.70 and CAN$5.32 per animal per year, respectively, can be realized.
When taking into account the Ontario Feed-in-Tari↵ (FIT) program (which guarantees to
pay approximately 5 times the wholesale market price of electricity for 20 years to farms
that generate electricity by means of an anaerobic digester system), it was ultimately
determined that approximately 4000 dairy farms in Ontario have favourable profitability
(ROI greater than 10% in a payback time of less than 10 years) and that 5000 beef farms
in the province do also. If the Ontario FIT program were to be extended Canada wide,
these numbers become 20,000 and 30,000, respectively. Yiridoe et al. [38] conducted a
more comprehensive analysis which took into account other benefits of on-farm biogas
energy production such as odour reduction, toxicity and pathogen reduction, reductions
in weed seed germination, the organic manure produced as a by-product of the spent
digestate, heat energy production and GHG reduction. They showed that with a medium
level of governmental support (30% cost sharing), the digester/ICE power systems of all
Chapter 2. Background and Literature Review 5
swine farms in a large size range (with between 50 and 800 sows, inclusive) would have a
net present value greater than zero, and likewise for dairy farms with 100-800 cows. It is
worth noting that these papers focused on the economic feasibility of small-scale biogas
plants only, since large-scale plants have already been shown to be profitable [34][38].
Since such small-scale installations have already been shown to be economically viable,
improvements, such as in the e↵ectiveness of engines fueled by the biogas and used to
power generators to produce electricity, would only make them more so.
2.3 Biogas Composition
Weiland [33] has shown that biogas production through anaerobic digestion has been
steadily increasing at a rate of 20% per year, with 6 Mtoe of energy having been produced
in 2007. An issue with the end use of the gas however, is that the gas content varies
significantly based on the feedstock, the process technology used and the retention time
of the waste in the digester. In the agriculture sector, biogas plants digest manure from
pigs, cows, and chickens along with additional co-substrates (which increase the content of
organic material to achieve higher gas yields). These co-substrates usually include harvest
residues, such as organic wastes from agriculture-related industries, collected municipal
bio- waste from households, energy crops, etc. The e↵ect of di↵erent feedstocks is shown
in Table 2.1, which displays the theoretical biogas yields per ton of total solids (TS) and
the methane content for di↵erent biomass substrates [33].
Research is currently being undertaken on the e↵ects that di↵erent digester processes
have on gas yields and compositions. Processes can be classified into two types: wet and
dry, which operate with a total solids concentration in the fermenter of less than 10% and
between 15-30%, respectively. Wet fermentation processes are the most widely used in
the agriculture sector. In a study of 61 plant farms, Weiland [33] showed that two-stage
digester systems, consisting of a high-loaded main fermenter and a low-loaded secondary
Chapter 2. Background and Literature Review 6
Table 2.1: Theoretical gas yields and methane content [33].
Substrate Biogas (Nm3/t TS) CH4
(%) CO2
(%)
Carbohydrates 790-800 50 50
Raw protein 700 70-71 29-30
Raw fat 1200-1250 67-68 32-33
fermenter in series, resulted in higher gas yields and a reduced residual methane potential
of the digestate. However, due to the complexity and the availability of parameters that
can be measured online, these processes are di�cult to control. Research is currently
underway as to what indicators would be the most e�cient and e↵ective for control,
and on how they may be obtained [33]. As a result of less than optimal control, the
composition of biogas varies even if it is produced using the same process and at the
same location. When taking into account all of the di↵erent processes that can be used
and the variability in feedstock, the composition of biogas varies significantly. The range
of biogas compositions typically found is shown in Table 2.2, along with the composition
of natural gas for comparison.
Table 2.2: Fuel composition (in volume %) of di↵erent gaseous fuels [30].
CH4
CO2
N2
H2
O2
H2
S NH3
Biogas 55-65 35-45 0-3 0-1 0-2 0-1 0-1
Landfill Gas 45-60 40-60 2-5 0-0.2 0.1-1 0-1 0.1-1
Natural Gas 70-90 0-8 0-5 0 0-0.2 0-5 0
A higher CH4
content is preferred, as it gives the gas a higher energy content (since
it and hydrogen are the flammable gases), whereas carbon dioxide and nitrogen are inert
and therefore have no energy content. Hydrogen sulfide and ammonia, which are toxic
Chapter 2. Background and Literature Review 7
and require treatment to be removed, are present only as minor impurities [24]. An
investigation on the e↵ect of the methane concentration in biogas when used as a fuel
for a spark ignition engine by Porpatham et al. [25], showed that as CO2
levels were
reduced, the brake power output and thermal e�ciency increased for the entire range of
equivalence ratios tested (0.6 to 1.2). E↵ects of these composition changes on emissions
were also researched. It was seen that as the concentration of CO2
decreased, there was
a drop in hydrocarbon emissions, because an increase in combustion temperature leads
to better oxidation. An inverse relationship was found to exist between NO emissions
and the CO2
concentration, for the same reason. Near stoichiometric equivalence ratios,
CO and CO2
emissions behaved similarly. The researchers determined that a reduction
of CO2
concentration to 30% of the fuel by volume was optimal for hydrocarbon and
NO emissions reduction, though at the expense of brake torque and thermal e�ciency
[25]. Since biogas is often used as the fuel in engines designed to be fuelled by natural
gas, research has been conducted in order to alter biogas combustion properties to more
closely resemble those of natural gas, either at the production stage, or by using additives.
Chandra et al. [7] compared the evaluated parameters of power developed, brake specific
gas consumption and brake thermal e�ciency for an engine running on three di↵erent
fuels: CNG, methane enriched biogas (95% CH4
, 3% CO2
, 2% other gases) and raw biogas
(65%CH4
, 32% CO2
, 2% other gases). They reported that methane-enriched biogas
was able to produce 1.43 times as much power as raw biogas under similar operating
conditions. Brake specific gas consumption (BSGC) values were also measured, and it
was found that the BSGC of raw biogas was relatively high as compared to the other
two fuels, which had comparable BSGCs. E↵ects on the thermal e�ciency were also
investigated, and for the methane enriched biogas, the maximum brake thermal e�ciency
was 26.2%, at a brake load of 59%, whereas for the raw biogas, it was 23.3%, at a brake
load of 53.5% [7], which is in agreement with the findings of Porpatham et al. [25]. For
this study, these brake loads correspond to the respective maximum brake power outputs
Chapter 2. Background and Literature Review 8
for the di↵erent gaseous fuels.
It should be noted that several factors significantly a↵ect the performance and emis-
sions of an engine, which must be taken into account when using biogas as the fuel for an
engine not designed to run on it. Compression ratio and spark timing are usually altered
and have been for many of the engines used in this area of research, and the altered
values can significantly a↵ect the data. One example is in the research by Bade Shrestha
and Narayanan [28], where it was determined that for the same natural gas engine with a
compression ratio of 8.5 running on pure methane, comparable performance was achieved
by running on landfill gas with a compression ratio of 12 (the engine used had variable
compression ratios). Although the same engine could not be used at a compression ratio
greater than 10 when fueled by methane due to knock issues, it was able to run at a
higher compression ratio with landfill gas because the diluents (CO2
and N2
) in the gas
act as heat sinks and knock suppressant agents. Along with increasing the compression
ratio on these engines to achieve similar performance when landfill gas is used as the fuel,
spark advance also had to be increased from 12 to 25� BTC [28].
Nges et al. [23] did a study on the feasibility of supplementing an industrial waste
anaerobic digester feedstock, consisting of wastes such as pig manure, slaughterhouse
waste, food processing and poultry waste, with carbohydrate-rich energy crops. They
found that the methane yield per ton of feedstock improved by 27% by adding energy
crops such that the maximum total solids content, 12% for the plant studied, of a con-
tinuous stirred tank reactor was reached.
The e↵ect of hydrogen addition to engine fuels, including biogas, has been the subject
of several recent studies [24][3][6][14][16][18][39]. Some of hydrogens advantages as a fuel
include its excellent combustion properties (a laminar flame speed of 1.6 m/s, compared
to 0.38 m/s for CH4
), the absence of carbon emissions since the only product from its
combustion with O2
is water, it is highly ignitable, and has a high heating value on a
mass basis. Some disadvantages are that the storage of hydrogen is problematic, because
Chapter 2. Background and Literature Review 9
its heating value on a volume basis is very low. Therefore, instead of using it alone as a
fuel, hydrogen is being considered as a fuel additive to enhance combustion [28].
2.4 Previous Work
2.4.1 Stoichiometric and Lean-Burn Hydrogen Addition Exper-
iments
Bade Shrestha and Narayanan [28], simulating landfill gas with a test fuel composition
of 53% CH4
, 42% CO2
and 5% N2
, studied the e↵ect that hydrogen addition has on com-
bustion. Using hydrogen as an additive in landfill gas, it was found that H2
increased the
thermal e�ciency (only with a H2
/(LFG+H2
) ratio up to 5%, above which it decreased),
increased the peak cylinder pressure significantly in all operating conditions, significantly
reduced the coe�cient of variation of peak cylinder pressure, and significantly reduced
ignition lag and combustion duration. There were particularly significant improvements
in thermal e�ciency and power at lean conditions. It was also reported that the coe�-
cient of variance for the indicated power was very high when the equivalence ratio was
greater than unity and low otherwise, suggesting that operating at stoichiometry would
require very tight control on the air-fuel ratio in order for results to be consistent and
repeatable [28].
Bysveen’s [6] research used a mix of CNG and hydrogen with a much higher hydrogen
content (29-vol %) and with excess air ratios (�) ranging from 1.1 to 1.8. She showed that
the amount of unburned hydrocarbons increased with increasing �, and, at a given �, was
lower when running on the mix with hydrogen as opposed to just on CNG. NOx
emissions
were found to be higher for the mix for the same �, because with H2
, combustion speeds
and temperatures increase. However, since running lean generally reduces NOx
emissions
significantly, and the addition of H2
extends the lean burn limit, the counter e↵ect gener-
Chapter 2. Background and Literature Review 10
ally keeps the levels quite low. Also, the brake thermal e�ciency was considerably higher
when hydrogen was added for the same given power (31% compared to 27.5% at 24 kW),
and the brake thermal e�ciency advantage hydrogen provided increased at higher engine
speeds and higher excess air ratios. This was attributed to the fact that H2
addition
allows for higher flame speeds and therefore shorter combustion duration, and less cyclic
variability, which are issues that exist with lean-burn engines fueled by NG [6].
Kahraman et al. [16] investigated the e↵ect that adding hydrogen to methane has
on engine performance, cylinder pressures, brake thermal e�ciencies and emissions. The
experiments were performed at wide-open throttle, at several engine speeds and varying
� of 1, 1.05, 1.1, 1.15 and 1.2. CH4
/H2
volume fraction ratios of 100/0, 90/10, 80/20 and
70/30 were used. They reported that peak cylinder pressures increased as the volume
fraction of H2
increased for the entire range of � that was tested. It was also observed
that the e↵ect that � has on peak pressure timing relative to top dead center (TDC) is
dependent on the fuel blend used, although the relationship is not necessarily linearly
dependent on the H2
volume fraction. For a constant �, the relationship between H2
con-
tent and peak pressure timing showed that as the volume fraction of H2
is increased, less
spark advance is required for peak pressure to occur at the same location, as the engine
speed is increased up until about 2000 rpm, after which changes become insignificant.
Carbon monoxide emissions were shown to decrease with an increasing �, and generally
settled to negligible levels as the � was increased past a certain limit. At higher engine
speeds, the CO emissions settle to these negligible levels at lower � values. Another
trend observed was that as the H2
fraction in the fuel increased, CO emissions decreased,
though it should be noted that the research of Zhunqing and Zhang [39] concluded that
CO emissions increase as the hydrogen fraction is increased. Carbon dioxide emissions in-
crease with increasing � up until � values of approximately 1.05-1.11. Ratios higher than
this lead to a decrease in CO2
emissions. As the H2
fraction increases, CO2
emissions de-
crease. Across the entire range of � tested, the e↵ect of increasing H2
by a certain amount
Chapter 2. Background and Literature Review 11
on CO2
emissions was fairly consistent, except for � values approaching 1.35, where the
e↵ect of adding H2
decreases. As the hydrogen fraction increases, hydrocarbon emissions
decrease. The lowest emission values for all the di↵erent fuel blends are observed when �
is between 1.1 and 1.2, and when the value is above or below this range, the HC emissions
increase. This is due to the fact that as the excess air ratio is increased, generally HC
emissions are reduced, but after a certain increase, the flame propagation slows enough
that there is insu�cient time to burn all of the fuel in the combustion chamber, resulting
in a net increase in HC emissions. As the hydrogen fraction is increased, flame speeds
increase, and as such, fuels with higher hydrogen content were found to have decreasing
HC emissions over a wider range of �. The brake thermal e�ciency was also found to
increase when the fuel used had a higher hydrogen content. Also, with increasing �,
⌘th
increases, though its e↵ect varies based on the engine speed, which also exhibited a
proportional influence on ⌘th
[16].
Since prior research provided mixed results, Park et al. [24] aimed to more clearly
demonstrate the e↵ect of H2
addition on the thermal e�ciency of a biogas engine. A mix
of only natural gas and N2
was used to simulate biogas, as the researchers stated that
the overall trends of N2
dilution are similar to those of CO2
dilution. Using di↵erent
gas compositions, ranging from 0% to 80% N2
as fuel and at an equivalence ratio of
unity the thermal e�ciency at each composition was calculated. The maximum thermal
e�ciency observed was 31.1% at 80% N2
. It was also found that as the inert gas (N2
)
concentration was increased, the MBT spark timing was advanced. However, contrary
to the result that this would have on NOx
and THC emissions when using higher density
fuels, NOx
emissions significantly decreased with rising N2
concentrations, while THC
emissions increased. The e↵ect of H2
addition was also investigated, ranging from 5%
to 30% addition. Using biogas with the lowest heating value that could be reasonably
expected (80% N2
), and running at stoichiometric conditions (since combustion stability
would not allow for lean operation at low hydrogen concentrations) they observed a
Chapter 2. Background and Literature Review 12
maximum thermal e�ciency of 32%, at 5% hydrogen addition, and a MBT timing of 16�
BTC. At H2
concentrations greater than 5%, cooling losses became so high that thermal
e�ciency decreased, as opposed to the proportional relationship that exists between the
concentration of H2
and thermal e�ciency in the 0% to 5% range. The e↵ect of hydrogen
addition at lean operating conditions was also studied, and the peak thermal e�ciency
for this test was found at 30% excess air and 10% hydrogen addition [24].
2.4.2 Hydrogen Addition with EGR Systems
Though hydrogen addition allows for more favourable combustion characteristics in bio-
gas, the e↵ects it has on reducing emissions are not significant, and for example, in the
case of NOx
emissions, hydrogen addition actually increases emissions. Therefore, other
means of reducing emissions are considered, one of which is the use of an exhaust gas
recirculation (EGR) system.
Research on the e↵ects that di↵erent volume fractions and exhaust gas recirculation
rates would have on the heat release rate, flame development duration, rapid combustion
duration and the coe�cient of variance of the indicated mean e↵ective pressure, has also
been done. Hu et al. [14] used natural gas-hydrogen fuel blends in which the volumetric
fractions of H2
were 0%, 10%, 20%, 30% and 40% along with varying EGR rates. They
reported that as the EGR rate increases, the optimum ignition timing occurs at a greater
advance for all compositions, and that the opposite is observed with increasing H2
con-
centrations. Also, as the EGR rate increases, the beginning of heat release is postponed
(increasing the combustion duration) and the mass fraction burned increases at a slower
rate due to the decrease of propagating flame speed. With an increase in the H2
concen-
tration, the flame duration decreases, since the early stage of flame development is highly
related to ignition delay, which depends on the mixture concentration and temperature.
Results showed that hydrogen addition has a greater e↵ect on the flame development
duration as compared to its e↵ect on the rapid combustion portion of the combustion.
Chapter 2. Background and Literature Review 13
The coe�cient of variation of the indicated mean e↵ective pressure (CoVimep
) was also
analyzed, and was observed to be highly dependent on engine speed. When running at
2000 rpm, it was determined that a very slight negligible di↵erence exists when using
an EGR rate between 0-10%. However, at an EGR rate greater than this, a significant
spike was seen. When using 15% EGR, the CoVimep
jumped from 4% to 32% when using
a blend with 0% H2
, but up to 5% from 2% when using the 40% H2
blend. The e↵ect
was greater at 20% EGR for the higher hydrogen fraction fuel blend, as a jump from 5%
to about 42% in the CoVimep
was observed. When running at 3000 rpm, the change in
the EGR rate from 0-25% had a negligible e↵ect on the CoVimep
, though a very slight
increasing trend was seen. When using 30% EGR, the CoVimep
increased to 22% for the
0% H2 fuel blend, but no significant change was seen among the other blends at this
EGR rate. At 35% EGR, a significant increase was seen for the 0%, 10% and 20% H2
blends, and at 40% EGR, increases of 12% and 9% in the CoVimep
were observed for the
30% and 40% H2
blends, respectively [14].
The e↵ect on generating e�ciency and emissions of hydrogen addition along with the
use of an EGR system were studied by Lee et al. [18]. Their research investigated the
relationships between generating e�ciency, spark timing, the EGR rate, and emissions
(NOx
and CO2
) in an engine fueled by a biogas-hydrogen blend. These relationships were
investigated alongside those for natural gas and a simulated biogas without a hydrogen
additive as well. The composition of gas used to simulate biogas consisted of 60% CH4
and 40% CO2
. For the experiments with a hydrogen additive, 5% of the total heating
value of the fuel was added (approximately 9% of the total gas flow volume), as their
studies showed this to be the most e↵ective composition for improving the generating
e�ciency. Previous studies also showed that using a � value of 1.2 was the most e↵ective
for improving this e�ciency, and so all their experiments were run at such conditions.
They reported that MBT spark timing is more retarded with hydrogen addition (from
16 to 13� BTC). However, as EGR rates increased to 15%, spark timing advanced, and
Chapter 2. Background and Literature Review 14
EGR rates higher than this did not a↵ect the spark timing. E�ciency was also shown to
decrease from 30.15% to 29.02% as the EGR rate was increased from 0% to 15%. When
studying the emissions, they showed that the biogas with the H2
additive generally had
higher NOx
concentrations than the plain biogas for the same EGR rate, though it was
found that this di↵erence decreased significantly at an EGR rate greater than or equal to
15%. CO2
emissions in the H2
addition test were also found to be lower than those of the
plain biogas. With an EGR rate of 15%, and optimal spark timing, e�ciency increased
from 29.5% to 31% when hydrogen was added [18].
In a separate paper, Hu and Huang [13] researched the optimization of the EGR ratio
for a spark ignition engine fueled by natural gas-hydrogen blends. They showed that at
lower EGR rates, the thermal e�ciency increases with increasing EGR primarily due to
the fact that combustion is improved for the blend because the intake charge temperature
is increased with increasing EGR rates (since the recirculated gas was cooled by a fixed
amount of cooling water). At higher EGR rates, the decrease in the e↵ective thermal
e�ciency as the EGR rate was increased was due to the possible occurrence of bulk
mixture quenching and partial burning. Flame development duration increased with an
increase in the EGR rate, since the dilution of EGR increases the ignition delay and
slows down the early stage of flame development. With advanced timing, the duration
increased, because flame development is defined as the crank angle interval between the
start of ignition and the point at which 10% of the mass fraction is burned. Since the
in-cylinder temperatures are lower when the spark timing is advanced, flame speed is
decreased, thus increasing the flame development duration. Rapid combustion duration
was also investigated, and the total duration was found to increase with an increase of the
EGR rate and to decrease with the advance of spark timing. The concentration of NOx
was found to decrease with increased EGR rate, which is due to mixture dilution of large
specific heat capacity gases (CO2
and H2
O), which absorb the released heat, reducing
the combustion temperature. Also, an increase in the EGR rate means a decrease in
Chapter 2. Background and Literature Review 15
fresh air and fuel, which decreases the amount of heat released and the combustion
temperature. NOx
emissions increased with the advance of spark timing, due to the
higher in-cylinder pressures and temperatures that it causes. Hydrocarbon emissions
were shown to increase with an increase in the EGR rate, due to mixture bulk quenching
at low flame velocities and large cycle-by-cycle variations. Also, by decreasing the spark
advance HC emissions decreased, as emissions temperatures rise and the combustion of
HC emissions in the expansion stroke is enhanced. They reported only slight variations
were found in CO and CO2
emissions with changes in the EGR rate and spark timing, and
emissions were relatively constant, with about 0.5% and 10% concentrations observed for
each, respectively. Though the relation between the e↵ective thermal e�ciency and NOx
emissions (when using di↵erent EGR rates) provided scattered results, it was determined
that the best results for low NOx
emissions and high e�ciency were when the EGR rate
was set at 15%, and MBT timing was used [13].
Along with these developments, come advances in catalyst technology as well. Kwak
et al. [17] report on the NOx
storage behavior of Pt/BaO/CeO2
ceria-based catalysts in
the presence of SO2
. They found that the catalyst has a high sulfur tolerance (maintaining
the time of complete NOx
uptake even upon being exposed to approximately 3 g/L of
SO2
).
2.5 Summary and Conclusion
Meeting stringent emissions standards yet realizing as much of a power output as possible
is the goal with internal combustion engines. However, as attested to in the literature,
there is often a trade-o↵ between the two. Lean operation has been a method used to
reduce emissions. Consistency exists in the findings of Bysveen et al. [6] and Kahraman et
al. [16], which have shown that generally as � increases, unburned HC emissions decrease,
except for when operating at high excess air ratios. Furthermore, reductions in CO
Chapter 2. Background and Literature Review 16
emissions [16] and NOx
emissions [6] display the motivation behind moving towards lean
operation. However, additional unfavourable results of increasing � include significant
reductions in the brake thermal e�ciency and power output of an engine [6].
To alleviate these adverse e↵ects of running lean, hydrogen addition has been pro-
posed, with a consensus in the literature that has shown experimentally that the thermal
e�ciency and power output of an engine can be increased significantly when hydrogen
is added to the fuel mix [28][24][6][16]. It is interesting to note that the findings of
Bade et al. [28] and Park et al. [24] agree that the maximum thermal e�ciency that
can be achieved occurs with a 5% hydrogen addition. It is also interesting to note that
research by the latter was conducted when running stoichiometric, meaning that the
additional favourable characteristics that hydrogen addition provides could be coupled
with stoichiometric operating conditions (to maximize e�ciency and power output).
Hydrogen addition provides these advantages along with decreased CO [16], CO2
[16]
[18] and unburned HC [16] emissions, although it also increases NOx
emissions [6][18].
To counteract the increase in NOx
emissions, EGR systems can be put into e↵ect, which
cause significant decreases in NOx
emissions [18][13]. A very e↵ective means of emissions
control, used widely today in cars to meet emissions standards is the three-way catalyst.
With the findings of Rasi et al. [26], which have shown that sulfur can be e↵ectively
removed from biogas, along with those of Kwak et al. [17] on catalysts with high sulfur
tolerances, the conclusions of Roubaud et al. [27] may not apply, and three-way catalysts
could possibly be an e↵ective means of reducing emissions.
The major challenge in being able to do so is due to the operating principles of three-
way catalysts, which require stoichiometric conditions. With the varying composition
of biogas, this is di�cult. A solution would be to have a fuel composition sensor that
can determine within a reasonable amount of time, the composition of the fuel. Such a
sensing system would need to be capable of determining the portion of the fuel that is
made up of CH4
, CO2
, N2
and H2
, and thus capable of sensing these gases within the
Chapter 2. Background and Literature Review 17
ranges specified in Table 2.2 (though it should be capable of sensing H2
from the range
of 0% to 5% of the overall fuel composition, since 5% hydrogen addition gives favourable
performance). Ideally it would also be compact and inexpensive, making it suitable for
automotive applications.
Chapter 3
Test Equipment and Setup
3.1 Overview
The equipment used for measurement and testing is described in this chapter. A schematic
of the equipment setup used for testing is shown in Figure 3.1. Several components are
primarily unchanged from the setup detailed by Tadrous [31]. For the convenience of the
reader, a brief review is provided. Several of the components, including the engine, the
system by which the engine is loaded, the measurement apparatus, the speed control and
air-fuel ratio control, will be discussed in more detail.
18
Chapter 3. Test Equipment and Setup 19
Sole
noid
Val
ve
Sole
noid
Val
ve
Flow
Con
trol
ler
Flow
Con
trol
ler
Flam
e Ar
rest
er
Flow
Con
trol
ler
Man
ual V
alve
Man
ual V
alve
Trim
Val
ve
Engi
ne
NG/
CH4
CO2
H 2
DAQBa
ll Va
lve
ITB
Air P
lenu
m
Gene
rato
r
THPS
400
Cata
lyst
Cata
lyst
Inta
ke A
ir
Air F
low
Enco
der
Spar
k
WEG
O
Sens
orEx
haus
t
Emiss
ions
An
alyz
ers
Exha
ust
Air
Tem
pera
ture
an
d Pr
essu
re
Serv
ice
Tool
Da
taEx
haus
t Te
mpe
ratu
re
and
Pres
sure
Gene
rato
r Vo
ltage
and
Cu
rren
t
IMAP
an
d EM
AP
Figure 3.1: Schematic of engine setup used for testing.
Chapter 3. Test Equipment and Setup 20
3.2 Engine Specifications
For this research, a naturally aspirated 3-cylinder Kubota DF-750 four-stroke SI engine
was used. The engine specifications are provided in Table 3.1. Although this engine
was designed to run on either gasoline or LPG, only minor modifications were made for
it to run on biogas and natural gas. An MSD digital programmable 6 AL-2 ignition
system was used to control spark timing, as the optimal timing varies with varying fuel
composition, and the engine originally had fixed ignition timing.
Table 3.1: Kubota DF-750 specifications.
Type Vertical
Number of Cylinders 3
Bore ⇥ Stroke 68 ⇥ 68 mm
Total Displacement 740 cc
Brake Power SAE Net (Continuous) 13.4 kW/3600 rpm
Brake Power SAE Net (Intermittent) 16.4 kW/3600 rpm
Compression Ratio 9.0:1
3.3 Catalyst Formulation
Tadrous [31] showed that a catalyst formulation as that detailed in Table 3.2 can ad-
equately reduce THC, NOx
and CO emissions, and so the same one was used for all
catalyst tests. The space velocity (defined by Equation 4.2) of one catalyst is 24 457 hr-1.
To show the e↵ect of space velocity on emissions, a second catalyst was placed in series
with the first (making the e↵ective space velocity equal to 12 228 hr-1), and emissions
were measured before the catalysts, after 1 catalyst, and after 2 catalysts.
Chapter 3. Test Equipment and Setup 21
Table 3.2: Catalyst specifications [31].
Part No. PGM Loading PGM Loading Loading Ratio Wash-Coat Feature
(g/ft3) (g/litre) (Pt/Pd/Rh)
Z60-0290 20 0.706 5/0/1 ZX ceria
3.4 Stamford Electrical Generator
A Stamford model BCI-162D electrical generator, directly coupled to the engine, and
a resistive load bank were used to apply a load to the engine. It is a 2-pole generator
configured to deliver 240V AC at 60 Hz. Ten 240 V AC electric heaters, which could be
switched on and o↵ in di↵erent combinations by relays, were used to control the load on
the engine. A more comprehensive description of this setup has been written by Foster
[9]. The generator e�ciency curve is shown in Figure 3.2.
3.5 Measurement Apparatus
As seen in Figure 3.1, several measurements were made to aid with analysis. This in-
cludes several thermocouples (K-type thermocouples were used) to measure the intake
air temperature, exhaust temperature (both pre- and post-catalyst). For safety, and to
ensure that the engine was operating within specifications, coolant temperature was also
measured, though not recorded. Also, absolute pressure transducers were used to mea-
sure the intake air pressure along with pressure in the intake and exhaust manifolds. A
wide range exhaust gas oxygen (WEGO) sensor was used to measure exhaust oxygen
for air-fuel ratio control (discussed further in section 3.6). To measure the electrical
power generated, the voltage and current of the generator were measured. A transformer
reduced voltage such that it could be measured by the data acquisition system (DAQ)
and a current transducer converted the current to a linear voltage output. In order to
Chapter 3. Test Equipment and Setup 22
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1025
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
y=−0.00007279x4+0.00243x3−0.03196x2+0.192+0.2631
Electrical Power Output (kW)
Ge
ne
rato
r E
ffic
ien
cy (
%)
Figure 3.2: Generator E�ciency Curve.
[31]
Chapter 3. Test Equipment and Setup 23
simulate biogas, flow controllers were used to mix di↵erent pure gases, and the flows of
each gas, measured in standard litres per minute (SLM), were measured and monitored
to confirm that the biogas composition conformed with that required for the testing in
progress.
Table 3.3: Calibration gases used for their respective measured emissions.
Emission Range Calibration Gas
THC 0-5000 ppm 2000 ppm methane, N2
balance
NOx
0-100 ppm 90 ppm NOx
, N2
balance
0-1000 ppm 980 ppm NOx
, N2
balance
0-10 000 ppm 4500 ppm NOx
, N2
balance
CO 0-20 000 ppm 15 000 ppm CO, N2
balance
CO2
0-14% 13.5% CO2
, N2
balance
O2
0-1.1% 0.9% O2
, N2
balance
Emissions measurements were made using CAI instruments, including a heated flame
ionization detector (HFID) to measure THC emissions, a heated chemiluminescent de-
tector (HCLD) for NOx
emissions and non-dispersive infrared detectors (NDIRs) for CO,
CO2
and O2
emissions. A heated line was used to maintain sample temperature at
191�C to prevent condensation as it flowed to the emissions rack, where the sample is
split between the HFID, HCLD and a chilling system to remove water. A flow manifold
downstream of the chilling system further split o↵ the sample into the analyzers requiring
dry samples, that is, the CO, CO2
and O2
analyzers. Table 3.3 shows the calibration
gases used for each measurement.
LabView was used to interface with the DAQ and the measured values. The front
panel of the program used is shown in Figure 3.3.
Chapter 3. Test Equipment and Setup 24
1450
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
0.00
Air Flow
1200
20
4060
80
10011
Intake Air Temp
800
0
200
400
600
19:01:1619:00:00
AfterBefore
Exhaust Temp
1200
10
20
30
40
5060
70
80
90
100
110
Manifold Pressure
kPa
60 Target (s)
0.0 Elapsed (s)
Recording
Output File Path
Engine must be turning, or errors will occur.
50000250
750
1000
1250
1500
20002500
3000
3500
3750
40004250
4500
0
RPM
Stop
0.8019
0.8009
0.8010
0.8011
0.8012
0.8013
0.8014
0.8015
0.8016
0.8017
0.8018
1070 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0.000
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
07:00:45 PM07:00:00 PM 07:00:10 PM 07:00:20 PM 07:00:30 PM
CO2 H2CH4
Fuel Flow
115
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.000
CH420
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0.000
H2
0.00Electrical Power(KW)
0.000
Phi to Trim
1
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
510 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
0
0.00Voltage VAC
0.00Current Amps
1000.5
1
1.5
2
2.53
3.54
4.5 5 5.56
6.57
7.5
8
8.5
9
9.50
Power kW
0.00
rms value
115
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.000
CO2
Phi Offset
Offset
0
Intake Air Pressure (kPa)
0
In. Man. Press (kPa)
50000250
500
750
1000
1250
1500
17502000
2500 2750
3250
3500
3750
4000
4250
4500
RPM_analog
0.00RPM_anal
OFF
Reset Overspeed Overspeed?
%
ppm
ppm
ppm
%
ppm
5.0000.000 0.500 1.000 1.500 2.000 2.500 3.000 3.500 4.000 4.500
0.00Exhaust CO - High Range
5.0000.000 0.500 1.000 1.500 2.000 2.500 3.000 3.500 4.000 4.500
0.00Exhaust CO - Low Range
20.0000.000 2.500 5.000 7.500 10.000 12.500 15.000 17.500
0.00Exhaust CO2
5000.0000.000 1000.000 2000.000 3000.000 4000.000
0Exhaust NOX
25.0000.000 5.000 10.000 15.000 20.000
0.00Exhaust O2
5000.0000.000 1000.000 2000.000 3000.000 4000.000
0Exhaust THC
0
H2 % Req'd
0
H2 Flow Required
0
CO2 % Req'd
0
CO2 Flow Required
0.3
% Off Tolerance
Inc 2Dec
Inc 3Dec
1000
20
40 60
80
Throttle Position (%)
0.00
Throttle
1000
20
40 60
80
Trim Valve Position
0.00
Trim
Figure 3.3: LabView Program Front Panel.
Chapter 3. Test Equipment and Setup 25
3.6 Throttle and Air-Fuel Ratio Control
Originally, the engine’s stock configuration used a carburetor to control gas mixing, and
a governor to activate the throttle in response to engine speed. The stock carburetor
(designed for LPG fuel) was replaced with a venturi-type natural gas carburetor to pro-
vide better mixing characteristics, and the governor was replaced with a servo motor to
control the throttle. However, these changes still left much to be desired with regards
to stability. Since one of the goals outlined from the onset of this project was to look at
emissions and performance parameters when running at constant power, with a constant
load applied (as the system had already been set up), it was deduced that the desired
stability could be realized if the engine speed could be well controlled. Cyclic variations
would also be reduced if the air-fuel ratio could be better controlled.
3.6.1 Speed Control
In order to control engine speed, a Woodward L-series integrated throttle body (ITB)
controller was installed. The ITB is composed of a venturi mixer (to mix fuel with air)
and an electric actuator. The actuator accepts a speed signal from an optical encoder
(the signal provided to the actuator gives 36 pulses per revolution), compares it to the
configured speed setpoint, and drives a 0-60� output throttle shaft to the commanded
position based on an internal shaft position sensor [35]. Software to configure the ITB
was available on the Woodward website (L-Series Service Tool Version 2.6 was used).
Wiring for both the ITB and Trim Valve (air-fuel ratio controller) is shown in Figure 3.4.
Also, Figures 3.5 and 3.6 show the respective ’Overview’ tabs for the L-Series Service
Tool when connected to the ITB and Trim Valve, respectively.
Both the ITB and Trim Valve controllers are connected by means of 12 pin Deutsch
connectors, as stated in their respective manuals [35][37]. A brief explanation of the
wiring is stated here. In Figure 3.4, a number preceded by the letter ’a’ denotes that
Chapter 3. Test Equipment and Setup 26
+12 VDC
560 Ω
6 A fusePower On LED
+5 VDC
ModeSelector 180 Ω
Analog Mode LED
180 Ω
Auto LED
a8
a5
a1
b1
a5
b5
a5
a4 (incr)
a6 (decr)
10k pot
10k pot
b6
180 Ω
Manual LED
a5
a5
b4
Φ+ Signal b8
Φ GND Signal b3
MPU + Signal a11
DAQ Output: Dev 2: pin 21 a10
MPU GND Signal a3
DAQ Inputs:
Throttle Position a2
Trim Valve Position b2
Figure 3.4: ITB and Trim Valve wiring. Letter ”a” indicates a connection to the ITB
and letter ”b” to the Trim Valve.
Chapter 3. Test Equipment and Setup 27
Figure 3.5: The ’Overview’ tab displayed when monitoring the speed controller through
the L-Series Service Tool.
Chapter 3. Test Equipment and Setup 28
Figure 3.6: The ’Overview’ tab displayed when monitoring the air-fuel ratio controller
through the L-Series Service Tool.
Chapter 3. Test Equipment and Setup 29
it is the respective pin number on the ITB, whereas a number preceded by the letter
’b’ is that on the Trim Valve. When pins a4 and a6 are both activated, the ITB is in
analog mode (analog mode can be switched on and o↵ via the ’Mode Selector’ switch).
The MPU+ signal is the A signal from the encoder, divided by 100 (resulting in a TTL
signal that gives 36 pulses per revolution). Pin 2 (a2) on the ITB provides a 0-5V signal
(referenced from the common ground) which indicates throttle position information and
is monitored through the DAQ. Pin 2 (b2) on the Trim Valve provides a similar signal to
indicate the valve position. When a10 is activated (a +5V signal output from the control
box), the control switches from the idle speed to the rated speed (3600 rpm). The �+
signal is an analog signal from the WEGO sensor, and when the AFR ’Mode Selector’
switch is not set to ’Auto’, then it is in the preconfigured position for open-loop control.
Safety considerations included the use of an overspeed trip. Upon sensing an over-
speed condition, the system was set up (on an external circuit) to cut o↵ the fuel supply.
Throughout the setup, especially when tuning the throttle PID, high amplitude spikes
were seen in engine speed, demonstrating the importance of the trip. These spikes would
cause misreads in the encoder counter signal, giving instantaneous values much higher
than the overspeed condition (greater than 4000 rpm), which rendered the use of this
signal as an input to the overspeed trip ine↵ective. Using a digital-to-analog circuit,
the frequency was converted to a 0-5 V signal which gave more accurate engine speed
information during high acceleration transitions. This analog signal was more reliable
and therefore used as the input to the overspeed trip.
3.6.2 Air-Fuel Ratio Control
When fuelling the engine with simulated biogas (NG diluted in CO2
), the flow require-
ments increased such that the recommended upstream fuel line setup for the speed and
air-fuel ratio controllers was not adequate. A work-around involved removing the zero-
pressure regulator that was directly upstream of the trim valve. However, due to the
Chapter 3. Test Equipment and Setup 30
increased fuel pressure at the trim valve, slight changes in trim valve position resulted
in large changes in �, and thus poor air-fuel ratio control. To counteract this, the pro-
portional gain on the trim valve controller was significantly reduced (by a factor of 10).
Since the tests were run at steady state, the slow response that this resulted in was
not a problem. In order to get the engine to the required steady state operating condi-
tions however, a larger proportional gain was needed, and so the system was set up with
two gain settings. To quickly bring the engine near the desired set point with regards
to air-fuel ratio, the ’dynamics setting’ with the larger proportional gain was used and
then the controller was switched to operate with the lower gain setting by means of the
potentiometer on the control box that controls the voltage seen by pin b6.
Chapter 4
Testing
The test program was conducted in two parts. The first part consisted of preliminary
tests to validate the substitution of natural gas for pure methane and to determine
the optimal spark timing and optimal fuel-air equivalence ratio for maximum emissions
reduction. The second part of the tests evaluated the impact of carbon dioxide content
(reduced methane content) of the simulated biogas fuels.
4.1 Preliminary Tests
4.1.1 Natural Gas Justification
In all ensuing tests, natural gas was used as a substitute for methane, as it was much
more accessible and much less expensive. Natural gas provided through the Enbridge
distribution system consistently has a methane content of about 95%. In order to justify
this substitution, tests were conducted to compare results with pure methane and pure
natural gas. These tests were conducted with a constant � of 1.013 (see Section 4.1.2)
and a load of 6 kW. Figure 4.1 shows the di↵erence in engine-out emissions when using
the two di↵erent fuels, and Figures 4.2 and 4.3 show the di↵erences in the e↵ectiveness
of the catalyst in reducing emissions when using NG versus CH4
as the fuel. Engine-
31
Chapter 4. Testing 32
out THC and NOx
emissions are similar in both cases (within 5% of each other). The
reduction of both of these emissions is also consistent at the two catalyst space velocities
tested. Carbon monoxide emissions are slightly higher when using NG versus CH4
, which
could explain the slightly lower reductions across the catalyst. Further analysis showed
that although the nominal � value was 1.013 for both of these tests, the mean measured
values for the NG and CH4
data points were 1.0124 and 1.0127, respectively. The slightly
richer conditions during the NG tests may have contributed to the discrepancy seen with
regards to CO emissions. However, CO is almost completely reduced across the catalyst
with a space velocity of 12 228 hr-1, for either fuel. Since the emissions results are very
close, natural gas was considered a valid substitute for pure methane.
THC NOx CO 0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
830.2 871.8
603.6 616.1
3261.8
3021.0
Emission
En
gin
e O
ut
Em
issi
on
Co
nce
ntr
atio
n (
pp
m)
NGCH
4
Figure 4.1: Comparison of engine-out emissions when the engine is fueled by NG vs.
CH4
.
Chapter 4. Testing 33
THC NOx CO 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
20.1 20.9
71.3 70.0
47.851.2
Emission
Em
issi
on
Re
du
ctio
n (
Ca
taly
st S
pa
ce V
elo
city
= 2
4 4
57
hr−
1)
(%)
NGCH
4
Figure 4.2: Comparison of emission reductions across a catalyst with a space velocity of
24 457 hr-1 (1 catalyst) when the engine is fueled by NG vs. CH4
.
THC NOx CO 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
49.6 49.8
99.3 99.896.1
98.3
Emission
Em
issi
on R
educt
ion (
Cata
lyst
Space
Velo
city
= 1
2 2
28 h
r−1)
(%)
NGCH
4
Figure 4.3: Comparison of emission reductions across a catalyst with a space velocity of
12 228 hr-1 (2 catalysts in series) when the engine is fueled by NG vs. CH4
.
Chapter 4. Testing 34
4.1.2 Determination of Optimal Spark Timing and Equivalence
Ratio
In order to determine the optimal spark timing at each fuel composition, spark timing
sweeps were conducted, as detailed in Appendix A.1. For the convenience of the reader,
the optimal spark timing for each fuel composition is repeated in Table 4.1 (also shown in
Appendix A.1). Although these spark timings were optimized for minimum catalyst-out
emissions and were not MBT timings, they do agree with the findings of Hu et al. [14],
Hu and Huang [13], and Park et al. [24], which all state a requirement for greater spark
advance with increased dilution. Likewise, � sweeps were conducted with the maximum
methane-content fuel (NG) and the minimum methane-content fuel (a mixture consisting
of 60% NG and 40% CO2
), in order to determine the optimal � for catalyst performance
(see Appendix A.2). It was found that the optimal value of 1.013 was the same with both
fuel compositions, and was therefore used as the optimal value for all fuel compositions
tested. This is close, although slightly leaner than the optimal value (1.015) determined
by Tadrous [31].
Table 4.1: Optimal spark timing for emissions at di↵erent fuel compositions.
% NG % CO2
Spark Advance (CAD BTC)
100 0 25
80 20 35
75 25 40
70 30 45
65 35 45
60 40 50
Both the mean value and the amplitude of the fluctuations about the mean value of
the fuel-air equivalence ratio (�) are important for catalyst performance. Due to the
Chapter 4. Testing 35
di�culties experienced with regards to air-fuel ratio control, mentioned in Section 3.6.2,
a set of tests was conducted in which the equivalence ratio was held constant but the
amplitude of the oscillations about the mean was increased. The e↵ect that changing this
has on THC, NOx
and CO emissions is shown in Figures 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6, respectively.
From these figures, the only significant e↵ect seen with changes in the oscillation window
is the significant increase in the variability in the reduction of NOx
as the oscillation
about the mean � value increases above ± 0.005. This is fairly consistent with the
findings of Heywood [11] which showed that the width of the window in which all three
emissions are removed with high e�ciency is about 0.007 equivalence ratio units. With
the system set up as it was, this could be achieved for all fuel compositions, and as such,
only data sets in which the standard deviation of � was equal to or less than 0.005 were
used for analysis throughout this thesis.
−0.0010 0.0000 0.0010 0.0020 0.0030 0.0040 0.0050 0.0060 0.0070 0.008030
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
Φ Oscillation Window
TH
C E
mis
sio
ns
Re
du
ctio
n (
%)
Catalyst Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1
Figure 4.4: Reduction of THC emissions across the catalyst with a mean � value of 1.013
and with oscillations about the mean as displayed on the x-axis. Tests conducted with a
constant load of 6 kW with NG as the fuel.
Chapter 4. Testing 36
−0.0010 0.0000 0.0010 0.0020 0.0030 0.0040 0.0050 0.0060 0.0070 0.008050
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Φ Oscillation Window
NO
x Em
issi
ons
Reduct
ion (
%)
Catalyst Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1
Figure 4.5: Reduction of NOx
emissions across the catalyst with a mean � value of 1.013
and with oscillations about the mean as displayed on the x-axis. Tests conducted with a
constant load of 6 kW with NG as the fuel.
−0.0010 0.0000 0.0010 0.0020 0.0030 0.0040 0.0050 0.0060 0.0070 0.008088
90
92
94
96
98
100
Φ Oscillation Window
CO
Em
issi
ons
Reduct
ion (
%)
Catalyst Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1
Figure 4.6: Reduction of CO emissions across the catalyst with a mean � value of 1.013
and with oscillations about the mean as displayed on the x-axis. Tests conducted with a
constant load of 6 kW with NG as the fuel.
Chapter 4. Testing 37
4.2 Brake Specific Energy Consumption
With increasing CO2
content in the fuel mixture, the engine fuel requirement at the same
load increases. As such, brake specific fuel consumption would not be a useful measure
of the e↵ect that fuel composition has on engine e�ciency. Instead, the brake specific
energy consumption (bsec), defined in Equation 4.1 was used, where E is the energy flow
rate and Pb
is the brake power. The energy flow rate is the product of the fuel mass
flow rate and its lower heating value. Figure 4.7 shows that at the lower load condition,
with increasing CO2
content, the bsec increases, which is in agreement with the findings
of Tadrous [31]. Although the bsec at the higher load condition is greater at the fuel
compositions that include CO2
, compared to the NG test point, the trend here is not
clear. Figure 4.8 shows that the e↵ect of load is much greater than that of changing fuel
composition.
bsec =E
Pb
(4.1)
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 458400
8500
8600
8700
8800
8900
9000
CO2 % in Fuel
bse
c (k
J/kW
hr)
Load=6.0 kW
Figure 4.7: Brake specific energy consumption at di↵erent fuel compositions with a 6 kW
engine load.
Chapter 4. Testing 38
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9x 10
4
CO2 % in Fuel
bse
c (k
J/kW
hr)
Load=6.0 kWLoad=8.0 kW
Figure 4.8: Brake specific energy consumption at di↵erent fuel compositions and at two
di↵erent load conditions.
4.3 Emissions Tests
Engine-out emissions were measured along with post-catalyst emissions (after 1 and after
2 catalysts), in order to show the e↵ect of space velocity, or, inversely, residence time.
Space velocity, s, is defined in equation 4.2, where Vcatalyst
is the catalyst volume in ft3
and Vair
is the volumetric flow rate of air into the engine in standard ft3/hr [31].
s =Vair
Vcatalyst
(4.2)
These test points e↵ectively showed emissions reductions across catalysts with respective
space velocities of 24 457 hr-1 (one catalyst) and 12 228 hr-1 (two catalysts in series).
Engine-out emissions, as seen in Figures 4.9, 4.10, 4.12 and 4.13 show trends in
THC and NOx
emissions with regards to fuel composition. At both 6 and 8 kW loads,
THC emissions increase with increasing CO2
fuel content. This is in agreement with the
findings of Propatham et al. [25] and Tadrous [31]. A study by Park et al. [24] used
N2
as opposed to CO2
as a diluent with methane (stating that the overall trends of N2
Chapter 4. Testing 39
dilution are similar to those of CO2
dilution), and also found a similar trend with regards
to THC emissions and fuel methane content. Hu and Huang [13] also conducted a study
in which NG was diluted with EGR and similarly showed an increase in THC emissions
with increasing dilution. Hydrocarbon emissions form through several mechanisms in SI
engines, but the increase with increasing dilution is due mainly to incomplete combustion.
With increasing dilution, unburned gas temperature and pressure during combustion
decrease, resulting in lower combustion quality. Typically, a substantial amount of the
unburned hydrocarbons that escape the primary combustion process are oxidized during
the latter segment of the expansion stroke, and during the exhaust process. However,
with increasing dilution, exhaust temperatures are lower, resulting in worse oxidation and
exacerbating the situation where already relatively high THC emissions have resulted
from incomplete combustion [11].
These same figures also show that at both load conditions, engine-out NOx
emissions
decrease with increasing CO2
content in the fuel. Studies by Lee et al. [18] along with Hu
and Huang [13], where EGR was used to dilute the fuel mixture, showed similar trends.
Park’s study with N2
dilution and Porpatham et al.’s research with biogas showed the
same trend [24][25]. Nitrogen oxide engine emissions are predominantly comprised of
NO, the formation rates of which have strong temperature dependence. Therefore, for
the same reasons that THC emissions increase with increasing CO2
in the fuel mixture,
namely, decreasing temperatures, NOx
emissions decrease [11].
Carbon monoxide emissions do not seem to change with increasing CO2
content (see
Figures 4.11 and 4.14). Since the equivalence ratio was held constant at 1.013 for all test
points, this was expected, as CO emissions are dependent on � [11].
Chapter 4. Testing 40
4.3.1 Emissions
6 kW Load
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
CO2 % in Fuel
TH
C E
mis
sio
ns
(pp
m)
Engine−Out
After Catalyst (Space Velocity = 24 457 hr−1)
After Catalyst (Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1)
Figure 4.9: THC emissions with a mean � value of 1.013 as measured at 3 di↵erent
locations and with various fuel compositions.
Chapter 4. Testing 41
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45−100
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
CO2 % in Fuel
NO
x Em
issi
on
s (p
pm
)
Engine−Out
After Catalyst (Space Velocity = 24 457 hr−1)
After Catalyst (Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1)
Figure 4.10: NOx
emissions with a mean � value of 1.013 as measured at 3 di↵erent
locations and with various fuel compositions.
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
CO2 % in Fuel
CO
Em
issi
on
s (p
pm
)
Engine−Out
After Catalyst (Space Velocity = 24 457 hr−1)
After Catalyst (Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1)
Figure 4.11: CO emissions with a mean � value of 1.013 as measured at 3 di↵erent
locations and with various fuel compositions.
Chapter 4. Testing 42
8 kW Load
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
CO2 % in Fuel
TH
C E
mis
sio
ns
(pp
m)
Engine−Out
After Catalyst (Space Velocity = 24 457 hr−1)
After Catalyst (Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1)
Figure 4.12: THC emissions with a mean � value of 1.013 as measured at 3 di↵erent
locations and with various fuel compositions.
Chapter 4. Testing 43
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35−200
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
CO2 % in Fuel
NO
x Em
issi
on
s (p
pm
)
Engine−Out
After Catalyst (Space Velocity = 24 457 hr−1)
After Catalyst (Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1)
Figure 4.13: NOx
emissions with a mean � value of 1.013 as measured at 3 di↵erent
locations and with various fuel compositions.
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 350
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
CO2 % in Fuel
CO
Em
issi
on
s (p
pm
)
Engine−Out
After Catalyst (Space Velocity = 24 457 hr−1)
After Catalyst (Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1)
Figure 4.14: CO emissions with a mean � value of 1.013 as measured at 3 di↵erent
locations and with various fuel compositions.
Chapter 4. Testing 44
4.4 Brake Specific Emissions
Previous research conducted on this engine by Foster [9] included tests with the engine
running on gasoline. A comparison of engine-out brake specific emissions (normalized to
engine brake power) is presented here. Figures 4.15, 4.16 and 4.17 display brake specific
emissions at two di↵erent load conditions and against varying fuel compositions. The
experimental setup detailed by Foster [9] uses the same generator as that used for the
biogas testing, and as such, the generator e�ciency curve shows that 6 kW and 8 kW
loads correspond to brake power outputs of approximately 8 kW and 10 kW, respectively.
Foster’s tests were conducted at engine power outputs ranging from 1 to 13 kW, but the
test points at 8 and 10 kW were used as comparison points to the tests conducted for
this research. Specific emissions at these two load points are plotted alongside biogas
emission data in the succeeding plots. It should be noted that the CO plots do not
provide this data, as the brake specific CO emissions in Foster were much higher than
the emissions seen when running on the various fuel mixtures used to simulate biogas.
Whereas the highest engine-out CO emissions value seen in Figure 4.17 is 12 g/kWh,
the gasoline testing conducted by Foster showed values of approximately 180 and 110
g/kWh at the 8 and 10 kW engine power points, respectively. The engine-out THC
emissions were much higher with the NG and biogas tests than with gasoline. This
can be attributed to the recurrent theme of di�culties with regards to the oxidation of
methane. It can also be seen from Figure 4.15 that with increasing dilution, brake specific
THC emissions increase. Engine-out NOx
emissions are very similar between NG and
gasoline, and, the e↵ect of engine load is much more significant than it is on brake specific
THC emissions, even though these emissions are already normalized to the engine power,
a finding that Foster also noted. Increasing fuel CO2
content clearly results in decreasing
NOx
emissions. At the lower load condition, specific CO emissions are higher, and the
trend seems to show that these increase with greater dilution, although the trend is not
consistent.
Chapter 4. Testing 45
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
CO2 % in Fuel
bsT
HC
(g/k
Wh)
6 kW Load8 kW LoadFoster 8 kW Brake PowerFoster 10 kW Brake Power
Figure 4.15: A comparison of engine-out brake specific THC emissions achieved with the
biogas setup, and previous testing running on gasoline.
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 451
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
CO2 % in Fuel
bsN
Ox (
g/k
Wh
)
6 kW Load8 kW LoadFoster 8 kW Brake PowerFoster 10 kW Brake Power
Figure 4.16: A comparison of engine-out brake specific NOx
emissions achieved with the
biogas setup, and previous testing running on gasoline.
Chapter 4. Testing 46
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 456.5
7
7.5
8
8.5
9
9.5
CO2 % in Fuel
bsC
O (
g/k
Wh)
6 kW Load8 kW Load
Figure 4.17: Engine-out brake specific CO emissions achieved with the biogas setup, at
varying fuel compositions.
In order to demonstrate the value of a catalyst, these same engine-out brake specific
emissions from the gasoline tests were further compared to post-catalyst brake specific
emissions from the biogas tests in Figures 4.18, 4.19 and 4.20. Here, although there is a
significant decrease, specific THC emissions from the biogas tests are still much higher
than those achieved with gasoline fuel. Also the trend with regards to the e↵ect of CO2
dilution still holds. A significant reduction is seen in specific NOx
emissions. Specific CO
emissions, already much lower than their counterparts from the gasoline tests, are even
further reduced.
Chapter 4. Testing 47
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
CO2 % in Fuel
bsT
HC
(g/k
Wh)
6 kW Load8 kW LoadFoster 8 kW Brake PowerFoster 10 kW Brake Power
Figure 4.18: A comparison of post-catalyst (space velocity = 12 228 hr-1) brake specific
THC emissions achieved with the biogas setup, and previous testing running on gasoline
(engine-out).
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
CO2 % in Fuel
bsN
Ox (
g/k
Wh
)
6 kW Load8 kW LoadFoster 8 kW Brake PowerFoster 10 kW Brake Power
Figure 4.19: A comparison of post-catalyst (space velocity = 12 228 hr-1) brake specific
NOx
emissions achieved with the biogas setup, and previous testing running on gasoline
(engine-out).
Chapter 4. Testing 48
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
CO2 % in Fuel
bsC
O (
g/k
Wh)
6 kW Load8 kW Load
Figure 4.20: Post-catalyst (space velocity = 12 228 hr-1) brake specific CO emissions
achieved with the biogas setup, at varying fuel compositions.
4.5 Catalyst Performance
4.5.1 Emission Reductions
Next, catalyst performance was evaluated. Figures 4.21, 4.22, 4.23, 4.24, 4.25 and 4.26
show the e↵ectiveness of the catalyst at reducing THC, NOx
and CO emissions at two
load conditions and with two di↵erent catalyst space velocities.
There does not seem to be a consistent trend with regards to any e↵ect that the fuel
composition may have on the e↵ectiveness of the catalyst at reducing THC emissions, at
either load condition. However, with two catalysts instead of one, approximately twice as
much reduction is seen across all fuel compositions, at both load conditions. This suggests
that with a decrease in space velocity, full hydrocarbon reduction can be achieved. It
is worth noting that low THC emissions reduction was expected, as methane is di�cult
to oxidize. These results are in agreement with previous research conducted by Tadrous
[31].
The e↵ectiveness of the catalyst at reducing NOx
emissions decreases with increasing
Chapter 4. Testing 49
CO2
, at both load conditions. Also, whereas halving the space velocity approximately
doubles the reduction of THC and CO emissions, the same does not hold true for NOx
emissions, even though more than 50% (mean values) of emissions are reduced across
only 1 catalyst under both load conditions. This suggests that there is another factor
limiting the full reduction of NOx
, separate from the catalyst space velocity.
Under both load conditions, CO emissions are reduced by approximately 50% when
passed through the catalyst with a space velocity of 24 457 hr-1 (1 catalyst) and are
approximately fully reduced when the space velocity is halved (2 catalysts).
Chapter 4. Testing 50
6 kW Load
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45−10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
CO2 % in Fuel
TH
C E
mis
sions
Reduct
ion (
%)
Catalyst Space Velocity = 24 257 hr−1
Catalyst Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1
Figure 4.21: THC emissions reductions with di↵erent fuel compositions. Operating with
a mean � of 1.013 and an engine load of 6 kW.
Chapter 4. Testing 51
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 4530
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
CO2 % in Fuel
NO
x Em
issi
on
s R
ed
uct
ion
(%
)
Catalyst Space Velocity = 24 257 hr−1
Catalyst Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1
Figure 4.22: NOx
emissions reductions with di↵erent fuel compositions. Operating with
a mean � of 1.013 and an engine load of 6 kW.
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 4530
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
CO2 % in Fuel
CO
Em
issi
on
s R
ed
uct
ion
(%
)
Catalyst Space Velocity = 24 257 hr−1
Catalyst Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1
Figure 4.23: CO emissions reductions with di↵erent fuel compositions. Operating with
a mean � of 1.013 and an engine load of 6 kW.
Chapter 4. Testing 52
8 kW Load
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 350
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
CO2 % in Fuel
TH
C E
mis
sio
ns
Re
du
ctio
n (
%)
Catalyst Space Velocity = 24 257 hr−1
Catalyst Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1
Figure 4.24: THC emissions reductions with di↵erent fuel compositions. Operating with
a mean � of 1.013 and an engine load of 8 kW.
Chapter 4. Testing 53
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 3520
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
CO2 % in Fuel
NO
x Em
issi
on
s R
ed
uct
ion
(%
)
Catalyst Space Velocity = 24 257 hr−1
Catalyst Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1
Figure 4.25: NOx
emissions reductions with di↵erent fuel compositions. Operating with
a mean � of 1.013 and an engine load of 8 kW.
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 3520
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
CO2 % in Fuel
CO
Em
issi
on
s R
ed
uct
ion
(%
)
Catalyst Space Velocity = 24 257 hr−1
Catalyst Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1
Figure 4.26: CO emissions reductions with di↵erent fuel compositions. Operating with
a mean � of 1.013 and an engine load of 8 kW.
Chapter 4. Testing 54
4.5.2 Catalyst Performance vs. Relative Emission Ratios
To provide further insight on the factors a↵ecting catalyst performance, the reduction
of THC and NOx
emissions versus the relative proportions of engine-out emissions was
explored. Typically, three way catalysts operate best at a stoichiometric equivalence
ratio, as fluctuations about a stoichiometric mean allow the catalyst to undergo reduction-
oxidation reactions. When the catalyst is in an oxidized state, CO and THC emissions
can be oxidized, reducing the catalyst component, which can then react with NO under
lean conditions (leaving the catalyst component in an oxidized state, to repeat the cycle)
[11]. Since slightly rich equivalence ratios were used for these tests however, less O2
was
available to oxidize CO and hydrocarbons. NO catalysis, which involves the reduction of
NO by CO, hydrocarbons and H2
in the exhaust, is actually more e↵ective under these
rich conditions as there are much more reducing species than oxidizing species present.
Under these reducing conditions, possible NO reactions are [11]:
NO + CO �! 1
2N
2
+ CO2
(4.3)
2NO + 5CO + 3H2
O �! 2NH3
+ 5CO2
(4.4)
Figure 4.27 illustrates the indirect e↵ect that NOx
emissions have on the ability of the
catalyst to oxidize hydrocarbon emissions. An interesting observation from this figure
is that THC and NOx
are competing. As the NOx
/THC ratio increases, the conversion
e�ciency with regards to THC emissions decreases. Although the equivalence ratio is
slightly rich, CO is oxidized through Equation 4.3, but there is less oxidation of THC
emissions. However, as the NOx
/THC ratio continues to increase, there comes a point
where THC oxidation increases. Further analysis showed that the NOx
/THC ratio was
dependent on the operating conditions, namely, the fuel composition. With increasing
dilution, the NOx
/THC ratio decreases, as seen in Figure 4.28. It is also known that
with increasing dilution, there are two major temperature e↵ects that significantly a↵ect
the formation of NOx
and the oxidation of hydrocarbons. The increased heat capacity of
Chapter 4. Testing 55
the charge in the cylinder that is associated with increased dilution, corresponds to lower
peak combustion temperatures, and thus, a decrease in NO formation (as NO formation
rates are highly temperature dependant). Although lower peak temperatures result, there
are also higher exhaust temperatures, which are due to increased combustion durations,
and subsequently, higher temperatures at the exhaust valve opening event. These trends
are shown in Figure 4.29, and can be used to explain the changes in THC oxidation
across the catalyst. The decreasing exhaust temperatures that coincide with increasing
NOx
/THC ratios explain the decreasing THC conversion rates, as less oxidation occurs
in the catalyst at lower temperatures. The results of these temperature e↵ects can also
explain the eventual increase in THC conversion at high enough NOx
/THC ratios.
While looking at Figure 4.29 keep in mind that approximately full CO oxidation is
seen through both catalysts. It is believed that unburned hydrocarbons are competing
with CO for oxidation via the catalyst oxidation sites. As CO is much more reactive
than hydrocarbons, and in particular, methane, CO oxidation suppresses hydrocarbon
oxidation. However, with high enough NOx
levels, CO oxidation via the NO reaction
decreases the CO concentrations in the exhaust, freeing up catalyst oxidation sites for
THC oxidation. Evidence that this reaction is indeed occurring can be found in Figure
4.30, which shows that, at all fuel compositions tested, the CO2
concentration in the
exhaust gas stream increases as it flows through the catalysts. As CO2
(along with N2
)
is a product of the NO reduction reaction, this explanation is plausible.
Chapter 4. Testing 56
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.410
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
NOx/THC
TH
C E
mis
sions
Reduct
ion (
%)
Space Velocity = 24 457 hr−1, 6 kW Load
Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1, 6 kW Load
Space Velocity = 24 457 hr−1, 8 kW Load
Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1, 8 kW Load
Figure 4.27: THC emissions reductions against NOx
/THC ratio at catalyst entry. Oper-
ating with a mean � of 1.013 and at two di↵erent load conditions.
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 350.55
0.6
0.65
0.7
0.75
0.8
0.85
0.9
0.95
1
1.05
CO2 % in Fuel
NO
x/T
HC
Load=8.0 kW
Figure 4.28: Variation in the engine-out NOx
/THC concentration ratio with changing
fuel composition.
Chapter 4. Testing 57
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.410
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
NOx/THC
TH
C E
mis
sions
Reduct
ion (
%)
Space Velocity = 24 457 hr−1, 6 kW Load
Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1, 6 kW Load
Space Velocity = 24 457 hr−1, 8 kW Load
Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1, 8 kW Load
Increasing Peak In−cylinder Temperatures
Decreasing Exhaust Temperatures
Figure 4.29: Further analysis clarifies changes in the catalyst THC conversion e�ciency.
−5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 3511
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
CO2 % in Fuel
CO
2 E
mis
sio
ns
(%)
Engine−Out
After Catalyst (Space Velocity = 24 457 hr−1)
After Catalyst (Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1)
Figure 4.30: Increase in CO2
concentration in the exhaust gas stream as it flows through
the catalysts, confirming that the NO reaction with CO is occurring.
Chapter 5
Conclusions
Fuel mixtures containing NG and CO2
in varying proportions were used to fuel a 3-
cylinder Kubota SI engine, and the e↵ects that the fuel composition had on emissions
and catalyst performance were studied.
In order for subsequent tests to be of greater value, the optimal spark timing for
emissions reduction was first determined. This set of tests revealed that as the spark
advanced, THC and NOx
emissions increase, and so the most retarded timing at which
the engine would operate before stability began to deteriorate was selected as optimal
from an emissions standpoint, at each fuel composition. The trend seen here was that as
CO2
content in the fuel increases, greater spark advance is required, which is consistent
with the literature.
Once engine-out emissions had been minimized by means of spark timing, catalyst
performance was investigated. Catalyst performance is dependent mainly on temper-
ature (light-o↵ must be achieved) and the fuel-air equivalence ratio. With the spark
timings determined to be optimal at each fuel composition, catalyst temperatures were
su�ciently high, and so the equivalence ratio at which superior performance was ob-
tained was investigated. It was found that fuel composition does not change the optimal
equivalence ratio for catalyst performance, which was found to be 1.013 with the catalyst
58
Chapter 5. Conclusions 59
formulation used for testing.
Having completed these preliminary tests, primary testing on the e↵ect of fuel com-
position on engine-out emissions and catalyst performance was conducted, using the
optimal spark timing and equivalence ratio for each test point. With increasing CO2
content, engine out THC emissions increased, and NOx
emissions decreased, at both
load conditions tested. As the load was increased, THC emissions rose slightly and NOx
emissions increased significantly. CO emissions did not show a trend with increasing
CO2
content, and slightly decreased as the load was increased. Brake specific emissions
were also plotted versus the fuel composition, and a comparison was made between the
engine-out emissions achieved with NG and those achieved in previous research with
gasoline as the fuel. These tests showed comparable specific NOx
emissions. Due to
oxidization issues, higher specific hydrocarbon emissions were associated with NG as
opposed to gasoline, but much lower CO emissions were also a result. Furthermore, a
comparison of the engine-out specific emissions from the gasoline tests to post-catalyst
specific emissions from biogas tests, revealed that NOx
emissions could be reduced to
levels significantly lower than those achieved with gasoline and that THC emissions also
could be reduced such that they approach the levels of engine-out gasoline emissions.
CO emissions, already much lower with NG than with gasoline, were also significantly
reduced with the catalyst.
Emission reductions across the catalyst were conducted at two di↵erent space veloci-
ties, e↵ectively achieved by using either one catalyst or two catalysts in series. At both
load conditions, THC emissions were reductions were similar. With 2 catalysts, at the
higher load condition, the lowest THC emissions concentration achieved was approxi-
mately 500 ppm (about 400 ppm at lower load), with pure NG as the fuel. Although
no clear trend was seen with regards to the e↵ect of fuel composition on catalyst perfor-
mance, the tailpipe (or catalyst-out) emissions under both load conditions showed higher
hydrocarbon emissions with increasing CO2
content in the fuel. Doubling the catalyst
Chapter 5. Conclusions 60
residence time resulted in approximately doubling the reduction, suggesting that with
a large enough catalyst, full THC reduction can be achieved. Tailpipe NOx
emissions
increased with increasing CO2
fuel content, despite an opposite trend in engine-out emis-
sions, suggesting that catalyst performance decreases with increasing CO2
dilution. The
majority of NOx
emissions are reduced across the first catalyst, and the second cata-
lyst provides further reduction, though at a lower e�ciency. Tailpipe NOx
emissions
were below 200 ppm at the higher load condition and below 100 ppm at the lower load.
Carbon monoxide emissions were almost fully reduced at both load conditions, with ap-
proximately 50% reduction through the first catalyst and the rest through the second
catalyst. If a larger catalyst is used (for better THC reduction), then CO emissions are
not a concern as they are removed the most e↵ectively of all three. No trend with regards
to catalyst CO reduction and fuel composition was observed.
Plots were made showing the e↵ect that the relative proportions of THC and NOx
engine-out emissions had on catalyst performance. It was found that as the THC/NOx
ratio increased, catalyst performance with regards to the oxidation of THC emissions
was hindered, due to reactions involving both NOx
and CO, resulting in CO emissions
being oxidized while hydrocarbon emissions were not. Under rich conditions, and with
methane being particularly di�cult to oxidize, this e↵ect was amplified. This suggests
that an emissions control strategy for biogas-fueled engines would require tuning that is
specific to a particular catalytic converter formulation.
The results show that low emissions can be achieved from a spark ignition engine
fueled by biogas through the use of conventional three-way catalytic converter technology.
Chapter 6
Recommendations for Future Work
The results discussed in the latter parts of Chapters 4.5.2 and 5 suggest that the catalyst
performance pertaining to its reduction of THC emissions is dependent on the NOx
/CO
ratio. However, changing exhaust temperatures make this conclusion arguable. Testing
using a steady-state test bench rather than an engine (as suggested previously by Tadrous
[31]) could provide further insight towards what factors have dominant e↵ects on the
outcomes.
61
Bibliography
[1] International energy agency, 2011.
[2] International energy outlook 2011. Technical report, U.S. Energy Information Ad-
ministration, September 2011.
[3] S. Orhan Akansu, Zafer Dulger, Nafiz Kahraman, and T. Nejat Veziroglu. “Internal
combustion engines fueled by natural gas-hydrogen mixtures”. International Journal
of Hydrogen Energy, 29(14):1527–1539, 2004.
[4] A.B. Baspinar, M. Turker, A. Hocalar, and I. Ozturk. “Biogas desulphurization at
technical scale by lithotrophic denitrification: Integration of sulphide and nitrogen
removal”. Process Biochemistry, 46(4):916–922, 2011.
[5] Ivan D. Bedoya, Samveg Saxena, Francisco J. Cadavid, Robert W. Dibble, and
Martin Wissink. “Experimental study of biogas combustion in an HCCI engine
for power generation with high indicated e�ciency and ultra-low NOx
emissions”.
Energy Conversion and Management, 53(1):154–162, 2011.
[6] Marie Bysveen. “Engine characteristics of emissions and performance using mixtures
of natural gas and hydrogen”. Energy, 32(4):482–489, 2007.
[7] R. Chandra, V.K. Vijay, P. M.V. Subbarao, and T. K. Khura. “Performance evalu-
ation of a constant speed IC engine on CNG, methane enriched biogas and biogas”.
Applied Energy, 88(11):3969–3977, 2011.
62
Bibliography 63
[8] M. Fatih Demirbas and Mehmet Balat. “Progress and recent trends in biogas pro-
cessing”. International Journal of Green Energy, 6(2):117–142, 2009.
[9] Matthew Foster. “Design of a Hydrogen Injection System for a Prechamber
Hydrogen-Fueled Internal Combustion Engine”. Master’s thesis, University of
Toronto, 2009.
[10] Brian Eric Hallgren. Impact of Retarded Spark Timing on Engine Combustion,
Hydrocarbon Emissions, and Fast Catalyst Light-O↵. PhD thesis, MIT, 1976.
[11] John B. Heywood. Internal Combustion Engine Fundamentals. McGraw-Hill, 1988.
[12] John Theodore Houghton, Bert Bolin, and L. Gylvan Mera Filho. Climate Change
1995: The Science of Climate Change. Number 22. Cambridge University Press,
1996.
[13] Erjiang Hu and Zuohua Huang. “Optimization on ignition timing and EGR ratio of
a spark-ignition engine fueled with natural gas-hydrogen blends”. Number 2011-01-
0918, Detroit, 2011. SAE 2011 World Congress and Exhibition, SAE.
[14] Erjiang Hu, Zuohua Huang, Bing Liu, Jianjun Zheng, and Xiaolei Gu. “Experi-
mental study on combustion characteristics of a spark ignition engine fueled with
natural gas-hydrogen blends combining with EGR”. International Journal of Hy-
drogen Energy, 34(2):1035–1044, 2009.
[15] Peter V.K. Funk Jr., Daniel J. Bauer, and Duane Morris. “The promise and realities
of biogas produced from landfills and farm waste”. Cogeneration and Distributed
Generation Journal, 25(2):44–51, 2010.
[16] Nafiz Kahraman, Bilge Cepera, S. Orhan Akansu, and Kadir Aydin. “Investigation of
combustion characteristics and emissions in a spark-ignition engine fueled with nat-
Bibliography 64
ural gas-hydrogen blends”. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 34(2):1026–
1034, 2009.
[17] Ja Hun Kwak, Do Heui Kim, Janos Szanyu, and Charles H.F. Peden. “Excellent
sulfur resistance of Pt/BaO/CeO2
lean NOx
trap catalysts”. Applied Catalysts B:
Environmental, 84(3-4):545–551, 2008.
[18] Kyungtaek Lee, Taesoo Kim, Hyoseok Cha, Soonho Song, and Kwang Min Chin.
“Generating e�ciency and NOx
emissions of a gas engine generator fueled with a
biogas–hydrogen blend and using an exhaust gas recirculation system”. International
Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 35(11):5723–5730, 2010.
[19] Stefan Luck, Gabriele Buge, Holger Plettenberg, and Martin Ho↵mann. “Near-
infrared spectroscopy for process control and optimization of biogas plants”. Engi-
neering in Life Sciences, 10(6):537–543, 2010.
[20] D. I. Masse, G. Talbot, and Y. Gilbert. “On farm biogas production: A method to
reduce GHG emissions and develop more sustainable livestock operations”. Animal
Feed Science and Technology, 166-167:436–445, 2011.
[21] D. Mescia, S. P. Hernandez, A. Conoci, and N. Russo. “MSW landfill biogas desul-
furization”. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 36(13):7884–7890, 2011.
[22] Nirendra N. Mustafi and Robert R. Raine. “Application of a spark ignition engine
simulation tool for alternative fuels”. Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and
Power, 130(1), January 2008.
[23] Ivo Achu Nges, Federico Escobar, Fu Xinmei, and Lovisa Bjornsson. “Benefits of
supplementing an industrial waste anaerobic digester with energy crops for increased
biogas production”. Waste Management, 32(1):53–59, 2011.
Bibliography 65
[24] Cheolwoong Park, Seunghyun Park, Yonggyu Lee, Changgi Kim, Sunyoup Lee, and
Yasuo Moriyoshi. “Performance and emission characteristics of a SI engine fueled
by low calorific biogas blended with hydrogen”. International Journal of Hydrogen
Energy, 36(16):10080–10088, 2011.
[25] E. Porpatham, A. Ramesh, and A. Nagalingam. “Investigation on the e↵ect of
concentration of methane in biogas when used as a fuel for a spark ignition engine”.
Fuel, 87(8-9):1651–1659, 2007.
[26] S. Rasi, J. Lantela, and J. Rintala. “Trace compounds a↵ecting biogas energy
utilisation - A review”. Energy Conversion and Management, 52(12):3369–3375,
July 2011.
[27] Anne Roubaud, Roger Rothlisberger, and Daniel Favrat. “Lean-burn cogeneration
biogas engine with unscavenged combustion prechamber: comparison with natural
gas”. International Journal of Thermodynamics, 5(4):169–175, 2002.
[28] S.O. Bade Shrestha and G. Narayanan. “Landfill gas with hydrogen addition - A
fuel for SI engines”. Fuel, 87(17-18):3616–3626, 2008.
[29] Gabriela Soreanu, Patricia Faletta, Michel Beland, Kara Edmonson, Bert Ventresca,
and Peter Seto. “Empirical modelling and dual-performance optimisation of a hy-
drogen sulphide removal process for biogas treatment”. Bioresource Technology,
101(23):9387–9390, 2010.
[30] James G. Speight. Synthetic Fuels Handbook: Properties, Process, and Performance.
McGraw-Hill, United States, 2008.
[31] Mark Tadrous. “Achieving Low Emissions from a Biogas Fuelled SI Engine Using a
Catalytic Converter”. Master’s thesis, University of Toronto, 2012.
Bibliography 66
[32] N. Tippayawong and P. Thanompongchart. “Biogas quality upgrade by simultaneous
removal of CO2
and H2
S in a packed column reactor”. Energy, 35(12):4531–4535,
2010.
[33] Peter Weiland. “Biogas production: current state and perspectives”. Applied Mi-
crobiology and Biotechnology, 85(4):849–860, 2009.
[34] Andrew J. White, Donald W. Kirk, and John W. Graydon. “Analysis of small-scale
biogas utilization systems on Ontario cattle farms”. Renewable Energy, 36(3):1019–
1025, 2011.
[35] Woodward, 1000 East Drake Road, Fort Collins CO 80525, USA. L-Series Integrated
Speed Control, 26250 edition.
[36] Woodward, 1000 East Drake Road, Fort Collins CO 80525, USA. L-Series ITB
LC-50, 26249 edition.
[37] Woodward, 1000 East Drake Road, Fort Collins CO 80525, USA. L-Series Process
Controller, 26251 edition.
[38] Emmanuel K. Yiridoe, Robert Gordon, and Bettina B. Brown. “Nonmarket coben-
efits and economic feasibility of on-farm biogas energy production”. Energy Policy,
37(3):1170–1179, 2008.
[39] Hu Zhunqing and Xin Zhang. “Experimental study on performance and emissions of
engine fueled with lower heat value gas-hydrogen mixtures”. International Journal
of Hydrogen Energy, 37(1):1080–1083, 2011.
Appendix A
Engine Tuning
A.1 Spark Timing
Spark timing can have a significant e↵ect on engine emissions. Tests are typically con-
ducted with the spark timing set such that minimum timing for best torque, or MBT
is achieved, although that is not optimal from an emissions reduction standpoint. To
illustrate this, Figure A.1 shows the e↵ect that spark advance has on fuel flow. With
the engine producing constant power and operating at a constant equivalence ratio, it
follows that the value of spark advance at which fuel consumption is lowest, corresponds
with the operating condition where the throttle is least open, and thus where volumetric
e�ciency is maximized; this is also the MBT spark advance. In Figure A.1, it is seen
that MBT spark advance lies between 30 and 40 CAD BTC. However, the engine’s stock
spark advance is listed as 18 CAD BTC.
In order to determine the engine operating conditions to be used for testing, spark tim-
ing sweeps were conducted with the engine fuelled by both NG (the maximum methane-
content fuel used in testing), and a 60% CH4
-40% CO2
fuel mixture (he lowest methane-
content fuel used in testing). Seven kilowatt and 6 kW loads were applied to the engine,
for both fuel cases, respectively, as these were the maximum loads at which the engine
67
Appendix A. Engine Tuning 68
would run in a stable manner for the respective operating conditions and for all spark
timing settings. The spark advance was set to the maximum possible advance with the
given setup, and retarded in increments of 10 CAD BTC. When stability deteriorated,
the advance was advanced by 5CAD BTC from the setting in place to provide further
information as to the optimal spark timing to be used for the composition being tested.
Spark timing sweeps with the e↵ects on fuel consumption, THC emissions, NOx
emissions
(engine-out emissions, in both cases) and the exhaust temperature at the catalyst are
shown in Figures A.1, A.2, A.3, A.4, A.5, A.6, A.7 and A.8.
In the maximum-methane content fuel case, it can be seen that the minimum fuel
consumption occurs with the spark timing set somewhere between 30 and 40 CAD BTC,
and in the minimum-methane content fuel case, it seems that minimum fuel consumption
occurs with the spark advance set to greater than the maximum setting of 60 CAD BTC
that the system is capable of. The exhaust temperatures in both cases are greater than
500 �C, which is well above the temperature required to activate the catalysts, which is
important. Exhaust temperature seems to level o↵ when the spark advance is set to 50
CAD BTC or more when the engine is fuelled by NG. When fueled by NG, the engine
stability deteriorated with the spark advance set to 20 CAD BTC or less. When fueled
by the minimum methane-content fuel, engine stability deteriorated with the advance
set to 45 CAD BTC or less. In both cases, both THC and NOx
emissions decreased
with less spark advance. Hydrocarbon emissions decrease as spark timing is retarded
(relative to MBT) because the peak in-cylinder pressure is reduced, resulting in less
unburned mixture being forced into crevice regions and exiting the cylinder unburned.
Also, as seen in Figures A.2 and A.6, the exhaust temperatures that are a result of
lower e�ciencies associated with not using MBT timing, contribute to better oxidation
rates, further decreasing engine-out THC emissions [10]. NOx
emissions decrease with
spark retard mainly because of the lower in-cylinder peak pressures, and thus, peak
temperatures, which the formation of NOx
is highly a function of [11].
Appendix A. Engine Tuning 69
As such, it was determined that the optimal spark timing for emissions was 25 CAD
BTC with the engine fueled by NG, and 50 CAD BTC when fueled by the minimum
methane-content fuel. Since these spark timing settings are di↵erent, it was necessary to
conduct spark timing sweeps at all compositions to be used in testing. These sweeps were
performed in the same manner as that described for these two fuel compositions. The
trends with regards to THC and NOx
emissions were consistent for all fuel compositions
in between, and as such, the minimum spark advance at which the engine would operate
with stability was selected as the optimal timing for each composition. The result of
these tests is shown in Table A.1.
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 6535
35.5
36
36.5
37
37.5
38
38.5
39
Spark Advance (CAD BTC)
Tota
l Fuel F
low
(S
LM
)
Φ=1.00
Figure A.1: Spark timing sweep, showing the e↵ect that spark advance has on fuel flow.
Test engine fuelled by NG (7 kW load).
Appendix A. Engine Tuning 70
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65510
520
530
540
550
560
570
580
590
Spark Advance (CAD BTC)
Exh
aust
Tem
pera
ture
(°C
)
Φ=1.00
Figure A.2: Spark timing sweep, showing the e↵ect that spark advance has on exhaust
temperature. Test engine fuelled by NG (7 kW load).
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
Spark Advance (CAD BTC)
TH
C E
mis
sio
ns
(pp
m)
Φ=1.00
Figure A.3: Spark timing sweep, showing the e↵ect that spark advance has on THC
emissions. Test engine fuelled by NG (7 kW load).
Appendix A. Engine Tuning 71
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
Spark Advance (CAD BTC)
NO
x Em
issi
ons
(ppm
)
Φ=1.00
Figure A.4: Spark timing sweep, showing the e↵ect that spark advance has on NOx
emissions. Test engine fuelled by NG (7 kW load).
44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 6255.5
56
56.5
57
57.5
58
Spark Advance (CAD BTC)
Tota
l Fuel F
low
(S
LM
)
Φ=1.00
Figure A.5: Spark timing sweep, showing the e↵ect that spark advance has on fuel flow.
Test engine fuelled by a 60% CH4
-40% CO2
fuel mixture (6 kW load).
Appendix A. Engine Tuning 72
44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62545
550
555
560
565
570
575
Spark Advance (CAD BTC)
Exh
aust
Tem
pera
ture
(°C
)
Φ=1.00
Figure A.6: Spark timing sweep, showing the e↵ect that spark advance has on exhaust
temperature. Test engine fuelled by a 60% CH4
-40% CO2
fuel mixture (6 kW load).
44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62850
900
950
1000
1050
1100
1150
1200
Spark Advance (CAD BTC)
TH
C E
mis
sio
ns
(pp
m)
Φ=1.00
Figure A.7: Spark timing sweep, showing the e↵ect that spark advance has on THC
emissions. Test engine fuelled by a 60% CH4
-40% CO2
fuel mixture (6 kW load).
Appendix A. Engine Tuning 73
44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62160
180
200
220
240
260
280
Spark Advance (CAD BTC)
NO
x Em
issi
on
s (p
pm
)
Φ=1.00
Figure A.8: Spark timing sweep, showing the e↵ect that spark advance has on NOx
emissions. Test engine fuelled by a 60% CH4
-40% CO2
fuel mixture (6 kW load).
Table A.1: Optimal spark timing for emissions at di↵erent fuel compositions.
% NG % CO2
Spark Advance (CAD BTC)
100 0 25
80 20 35
75 25 40
70 30 45
65 35 45
60 40 50
Appendix A. Engine Tuning 74
A.2 Optimal Equivalence Ratio for Catalyst Perfor-
mance
As discussed in 4.1, � sweeps were conducted with fuel compositions containing the maxi-
mum and minimum methane contents, as with the spark timing sweeps. These tests were
conducted with a constant catalyst space velocity of 12 228 hr-1, in order to determine the
value of � at which the catalyst converted THC, NOx
and CO emissions most e↵ectively,
at each di↵erent fuel composition. The results, shown in Figures A.9, A.10, A.11, A.12,
A.13 and A.14, show that a � value of 1.013 is optimal for catalyst performance. Since
the compositions tested represent the maximum and minimum methane content fuels
used for all tests, it was inferred that this � value was optimal for all fuel compositions
used in other tests.
0.9950 1.0000 1.0050 1.0100 1.0150 1.0200 1.025010
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
Φ
TH
C E
mis
sions
Reduct
ion (
%)
Catalyst Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1
Figure A.9: Reduction of THC emissions across the catalyst at di↵erent � values. Sweep
conducted with a constant load of 7 kW and with NG as the fuel.
Appendix A. Engine Tuning 75
0.9950 1.0000 1.0050 1.0100 1.0150 1.0200 1.02500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Φ
NO
x Em
issi
on
s R
ed
uct
ion
(%
)
Catalyst Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1
Figure A.10: Reduction of NOx
emissions across the catalyst at di↵erent � values. Sweep
conducted with a constant load of 7 kW and with NG as the fuel.
0.9950 1.0000 1.0050 1.0100 1.0150 1.0200 1.025050
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
Φ
CO
Em
issi
on
s R
ed
uct
ion
(%
)
Catalyst Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1
Figure A.11: Reduction of CO emissions across the catalyst at di↵erent � values. Sweep
conducted with a constant load of 7 kW and with NG as the fuel.
Appendix A. Engine Tuning 76
0.9950 1.0000 1.0050 1.0100 1.0150 1.0200 1.025010
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Φ
TH
C E
mis
sions
Reduct
ion (
%)
Catalyst Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1
Figure A.12: Reduction of THC emissions across the catalyst at di↵erent � values. Sweep
conducted with a constant load of 6 kW and with a mixture consisting of 60% NG and
40% CO2
as the fuel.
0.9950 1.0000 1.0050 1.0100 1.0150 1.0200 1.0250−20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Φ
NO
x Em
issi
ons
Reduct
ion (
%)
Catalyst Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1
Figure A.13: Reduction of NOx
emissions across the catalyst at di↵erent � values. Sweep
conducted with a constant load of 6 kW and with a mixture consisting of 60% NG and
40% CO2
as the fuel.
Appendix A. Engine Tuning 77
0.9950 1.0000 1.0050 1.0100 1.0150 1.0200 1.025060
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
Φ
CO
Em
issi
on
s R
ed
uct
ion
(%
)
Catalyst Space Velocity = 12 228 hr−1
Figure A.14: Reduction of CO emissions across the catalyst at di↵erent � values. Sweep
conducted with a constant load of 6 kW and with a mixture consisting of 60% NG and
40% CO2
as the fuel.