Applied Energy 189 (2017) 187200

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy

Experimental and modelling investigations of the diesel surrogate fuels

in direct injection compression ignition combustion
Xinlei Liu, Hu Wang , Xiaofeng Wang, Zunqing Zheng, Mingfa Yao
State Key Laboratory of Engines, Tianjin University, No. 92 Weijin Road, Nankai District, Tianjin 300072, PR China

h i g h l i g h t s

The engine combustion of three diesel surrogate fuels were investigated.

A reduced n-dodecane-TRF-c-hexane-PAH mechanism was developed and validated.

3-D modelling investigations were performed.

The physical and chemical effects on the soot formation were clarified.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Experimental investigations on the combustion and emission characteristics of diesel and three potential
Received 8 August 2016 diesel surrogate fuels have been performed, including the 85% (vol.) n-heptane blended with 15% toluene
Received in revised form 14 November 2016 (T15), 81% n-heptane blended with 14% toluene and 5% c-hexane (T15 + CH5), and 80% (vol.) n-heptane
Accepted 11 December 2016
blended with 20% toluene (T20). The experimental results showed that due to the lower reactivity of the
three diesel surrogate fuels, the combustion phases were more retarded and the indicated thermal effi-
ciencies were lower compared to diesel. For the diesel surrogate fuels with higher volatility, the soot
Keywords:
emissions were lower than those of diesel due to more premixed combustion. Moreover, a reduced n-
Diesel surrogate
Engine combustion
dodecane-toluene reference fuel-c-hexane-polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) mechanism com-
Soot posed of 167 species and 671 reactions was formulated and was extensively validated against the exper-
TRF imental results. To clarify the experimental results, the reduced mechanism was then used for the three-
Chemical kinetics dimensional (3-D) modelling investigations. The modelling results showed that the reduced mechanism
can reasonably capture the combustion characteristics of T15 + CH5 in the direct injection compression
ignition combustion. The NOx and soot emissions were both reasonably predicted. From the modelling
investigations, it was inferred that the physical effects on the soot emission were larger than the chemical
effects of the different fuel carbon-chain structures. According to the 0-D modelling investigations, the
soot tendency of the four pure diesel surrogate constituents can be sequenced as toluene > c-
hexane > n-dodecane > n-heptane. Given that toluene is the dominant factor affecting the soot formation
than the other three components, the soot tendency of the four diesel surrogate fuels can be sequenced as
T20 > T15 + CH5 (n-dodecane) > T15 + CH5 (n-heptane)  T15.
2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction stringent fuel consumption and emission regulations. Advanced

Due to the higher thermal efficiency compared to the spark
ignition (SI) engines fueled with gasoline, compression ignition
(CI) engines fueled with diesel have been widely used in trans-
portation, power plant, engineering, and agriculture [13]. How-
ever, owing to the diffusion-controlled combustion, it is difficult
for the conventional diesel engines to meet the more and more
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: wang_hu@tju.edu.cn (H. Wang).
engine combustion concepts like homogeneous charge compres-
sion ignition (HCCI) combustion and low temperature combustion
(LTC) have been put forward, which may help relieve the concerns
on the trade-off between fuel consumption and emission control
[4]. HCCI combustion is characterized by the homogeneous fuel-
air mixture distribution ahead of the main combustion [5]. Owing
to the lean mixture and low temperature during combustion, the
soot and NOx emissions are extremely lower. However, as a conse-
quence of the kinetically controlled heat release, the combustion is
difficult to be controlled and the pressure rise rate (PRR) is too high

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.12.054
0306-2619/ 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
188 X. Liu et al. / Applied Energy 189 (2017) 187200

Nomenclature

A1 benzene IMEP indicated mean effective pressure

A1- phenyl ISFC indicated specific fuel consumption
A1C2H phenylacetylene ITE indicated thermal efficiency
A2R5 acenaphthylene JSR jet stirred reactor
A3 phenanthrene LTC low temperature combustion
A4 pyrene Mol. mole fraction
ATDC after top dead center MPRR maximum pressure rise rate
CA crank angle n-c7h16 n-heptane
CA10 crank angle corresponding to the 10% of the total heat n-c12h26 n-dodecane
release PAH polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
CA50 crank angle corresponding to the 50% of the total heat PRF primary reference fuel
release PRR pressure rise rate
CA90 crank angle corresponding to the 90% of the total heat RCM rapid compression machine
release ROP rate of production
CI compression ignition SI spark ignition
CFD computational fluid dynamic SOI start of injection
CN cetane number ST shock tube
CO carbon oxide THC total hydrocarbon
C2H2 acetylene TRF toluene reference fuel
C4H2 biacetylene T15 85% n-heptane blended with 15% toluene
C5H5 cyclopentadienyl T15 + CH5 81% n-heptane blended with 14% toluene and 5% c-
C6H5CH2 benzyl hexane
C6H5CH3 toluene T15 + CH5 (n-dodecane) 81% n-dodecane blended with 14% to-
DI direct injection luene and 5% c-hexane
EGR exhaust gas recirculation T20 80% n-heptane blended with 20% toluene
/ equivalence ratio Vol. volume fraction
HACA H-abstraction C2H2-addition 3-D three-dimensional
HCCI homogeneous charge compression ignition
ICE internal combustion engine

for practical application under high load conditions. LTC has gained
much attention for the partially premixed combustion characteris-
tic. By using exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) dilution, the combus-
tion can be partially decoupled from the injection event. The
ignition delay time is longer while the mixture is leaner, result in
lower combustion temperature. Thus, the NOx and soot emissions
can be reduced simultaneously. For the superiority and the com-
plexity of LTC, it is necessary to further investigate the combustion
and emission characteristics experimentally and theoretically.
Three-dimensional computational fluid dynamics (3-D CFD)
simulations have been widely used for the engine design and com-
bustion optimization at a comparatively lower cost [6,7]. To better
describe the fuel combustion and emission characteristics, the CFD
code should be coupled with the corresponding detailed chemical
kinetic mechanisms for combustion and emission predictions. In
the simulations, the corresponding physical properties, such as
density, viscosity, vapor pressure, specific heat capacity, latent heat
of vaporization, and thermal conductivity, should also be consid-
ered to describe the multi-phase interaction processes, i.e. in the
injection and spray processes [8,9]. While diesel comprises of hun-
dreds of compositions, and the compositions vary for the different
origins and refinery methods, making it quite hard to develop the
full-scale detailed combustion kinetic mechanism and measure all
the relevant physical properties [1012]. Thus, some main surro-
gate fuels of diesel were often used to simulate the combustion
characteristics. Farrell et al. [13] summarized the database and
kinetic models for the diesel surrogate fuels, and they proposed
the main criterion in the selection of the surrogate fuels. Mati
et al. [14] proposed a detailed surrogate model fuel consisted of
n-hexadecane, n-propylcyclohexane, n-propylbenzene, iso-octane,
and 1-methylnaphthalene. They used this model to simulate the
experimental species mole fraction profiles measured in a jet stir-
red reactor (JSR), and general good agreement was achieved.
Lemaire et al. [15] compared the soot formation in turbulent
flames of diesel and the diesel surrogate fuels of n-decane and 1-
methylnaphthalene. Experimental results showed that the fraction
of 20% 1-methylnaphthalene of the diesel surrogate fuels exhibited
the similar soot formation region with that of diesel.
However, the detailed combustion mechanism of the diesel sur-
rogate fuels usually includes hundreds of species. Due to the limit
of the computational resources and expenses, in the short-term,
direct coupled with the detailed mechanism for the 3-D CFD mod-
elling studies cost a lot of CPU time, which is unbearable for the
practical application. Thus, reduction of the detailed combustion
kinetic mechanism is necessary.
n-Heptane is the most widely used single diesel surrogate to
describe the diesel combustion for its close cetane number
(CN  56) to that of diesel (CN  4055). Halstead et al. [16] devel-
oped a reduced n-heptane kinetic model to simulate the auto-
ignition measured in a rapid compression machine. Known as the
Shell model, this model has been incorporated in many commercial
CFD codes. However, the Shell model was based on empirical fit,
and the operating condition was confined to the lower tempera-
ture region (650805 K). Curran et al. [17] developed a comprehen-
sive detailed combustion mechanism of n-heptane, which has been
extensively validated against the experimental ignition delays and
species concentrations. This detailed n-heptane combustion mech-
anism has been used as the basis to obtain the reduced mechanism
in many investigations [1820]. However, n-heptane produces
lower soot emission compared with diesel, given that diesel com-
prised of a certain amount of aromatics, which contribute to the
soot emission tremendously [21]. Luo et al. [22] developed a
reduced n-heptane-toluene-1-hexene mechanism to describe the
combustion of diesel in LTC combustion. Although the addition of
 X. Liu et al. / Applied Energy 189 (2017) 187200 189

1-hexene enhanced the soot emission by the formation of more

acetylene (C2H2), 1-hexene is not the main constituent of diesel.
Wang et al. [21] developed a reduced toluene reference fuel
(TRF) combustion kinetic mechanism based on the work of Mehl
et al. [23] to model the diesel combustion. The modelling results
indicated that in engine condition, the toluene reference fuels still
produced the lower soot emission than diesel. More recently,
Chang et al. [24] developed a diesel surrogate model including n-
decane, iso-octane, methylcyclohexane, and toluene, which model
has been well validated against the experimental ignition delays,
species mole fraction profiles, and laminar flame speeds. However,
no engine combustion simulations were performed.
Most of the reduced combustion kinetic mechanisms for diesel
surrogate fuels considered only the chemical characteristics in
homogeneous combustion, and experimental investigations on
the differences of the combustion and emission characteristics
between diesel and surrogate fuels in engine combustion were
rare. In this work, as a further attempt to find an appropriate com-
position of the diesel surrogate fuel that could better capture the
combustion and emission characteristics of the diesel fuel (Jing V
diesel), experimental investigations into the combustion and emis-
sion characteristics of three diesel surrogate fuels and diesel in Fig. 1. Schematic of the experimental setup. 1. Air compressor. 2. Valve. 3. Airflow
direct injection compression ignition (DICI) combustion mode meter. 4. Stabilized pressure tank. 5. EGR cooler. 6. Fuel tank. 7. Electronic control
were performed. In addition, to clarify the experimental results, unit. 8. In-cylinder pressure transducer. 9. Fuel injector. 10. Smoke meter. 11.
Exhaust gas analyzer. 12. Crank angle encoder. 13. Dynamometer. 14. Charge
for 3-D CFD modelling investigations a reduced n-dodecane- amplifier. 15. Computer.
toluene-n-heptane-isooctane (TRF)-c-hexane-polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbon (PAH) mechanism was constructed and used to sim-
ulate the combustion of diesel and surrogate fuels. The effects of Table 1
the physical and chemical properties on the soot formation have Engine specifications.
been clarified. 0-D modelling investigations into the soot tendency Engine type YC-XX
of the diesel surrogate fuels and each constituent have also been Number of valves 4
performed. Bore/stroke (mm) 105/125
Connecting rod length (mm) 210
Bowl volume (L) 1.08
Compression ratio 16:1
2. Experimental and modelling setup Intake valve close timing (CA -133
ATDC)
2.1. Experimental setup Exhaust valve open timing(CA 125
ATDC)
Common rail injector 8 holes, injection angle 150, 0.15 mm
The DICI combustion experiments fueled with diesel and three nozzle
diesel surrogate fuels were conducted on a single-cylinder engine
with independent intake/exhaust and injection systems. The
single-cylinder engine was modified from a six-cylinder engine, in the modelling investigations, another diesel surrogate consists
of which the other 5 cylinders remained unchanged. An air com- of 81% n-dodecane blended with 14% toluene and 5% c-hexane
pressor was used to simulate the boosting pressure. A back- (T15 + CH5 (n-dodecane)) was used for comparison. The relative
pressure valve was used to regulate the exhaust content and to errors of major properties of the surrogate fuels compared to those
achieve EGR. The in-cylinder pressure was detected by a pressure of diesel were controlled within 20%, except c-hexane.
transducer, and was then averaged for 50 cycles to obtain the pres- The engine operating condition is listed in Table 3. During the
sure profiles. The fuel flow rate was measured by a fuel consump- experiment the engine speed was maintained at 1400 rpm. The
tion meter (AVL 733S). The NOx emission was measured with a intake pressure and temperature were set at 1.5 bar and 313 K,
FTIR emission analyzer, and the soot emission was measured with respectively. The injection pressure was 80 MPa, and the start of
an AVL 415S smoke meter. The schematic of the experimental injection (SOI) was 10 crank angle after top dead center (ATDC).
setup is shown in Fig. 1. The engine specification is listed in Table 1. The injected fuel quantity per cycle was adjusted to have the
Detailed descriptions about the experimental setup can be referred equivalent energy of 50 mg diesel. The EGR rates were swept from
to Refs. [2527]. 0% to about 55%.
The main fuel properties of tested fuels, including cetane num-
ber, H/C ratio, density, lower heating value, and major contents, are
listed in Table 2 [28]. It should be noted that for the surrogate fuels, 2.2. Mechanism development
the corresponding main fuel properties were obtained by using lin-
ear calculation method. The main fuel properties of diesel were The reduced n-dodecane-TRF-c-hexane-PAH mechanism was
obtained by experimental test, while those of each pure surrogate constructed in a hierarchical structure based on our previous
fuel were referenced from the work of Murphy et al. [28]. works [21,29,30], with the reduced TRF sub-mechanism from
Three diesel surrogate fuels were used for experimental investi- Wang et al. [21], the reduced n-dodecane sub-mechanism from
gations, i.e. 85% (vol.) n-heptane blended with 15% toluene (T15), Wang et al. [29], and the reduced c-hexane sub-mechanism from
81% n-heptane blended with 14% toluene and 5% c-hexane (T15 Qi et al. [30]. Given that these reduced combustion mechanisms
+ CH5), and 80% (vol.) n-heptane blended with 20% toluene (T20). were all developed by our group using a hierarchical structure,
To further analyze the carbon-chain length on the soot formation the TRF sub-mechanism [21] was used as the base mechanism, of
190 X. Liu et al. / Applied Energy 189 (2017) 187200

Table 2
Fuel properties [28].

Parameters Diesel T15 T15 + CH5 T20

CN 50.4 46.1 44.3 42.99
H/C ratio 1.87 2.06 2.06 1.99
Density (g/ml, 20 C) 0.834 0.715 0.718 0.724
Lower heating value (MJ/kg) 42.83 44.14 44.3 43.89
Paraffin content (wt.%) 78.6 81.8 64.6 76.0
Aromatic content (wt.%) 17.5 18.2 11.4 24.0
c-hexane alternative content (wt.%) 4.1 0 5.4 0

Table 4
Table 3
Sub-models used in the KIVA code.
Engine operating conditions.
Description Model
Engine speed (rpm) 1400 1.0
Injected mass (mg/cyc) 50 0.5 Turbulence Renormalized (RNG) k-e[50]
Injection pressure (MPa) 80 0.8 Heat transfer Han and Reitz [51]
SOI (CA ATDC) 10 0.5 Spray breakup KH-RT [52]
Intake air pressure (bar) 1.5 0.01 Droplet collision Radius of influence (ROI) [53]
Intake air temperature (K) 313 0.5 Near nozzle flow Gas-jet [54]
EGR ratio (%) 0.55 0.15 Spray wall interaction Han and Xu et al. [55]
Evaporation Discrete multi-component fuel (DMC) [56]

Table 5
which the C0-C2 sub-mechanism has been extensively validated Modelling cases.
[29,31]. Then the upper-class reactions of the n-dodecane and c- Cases Target Physical property Chemistry
hexane sub-mechanisms were merged with the base mechanism, fuel
with the same species and reactions adopted from the base mech- Case1 T15 n-heptane-toluene-c- n-heptane-toluene-c-
anism, forming the reduced n-dodecane-TRF-c-hexane mechanism + CH5 hexane hexane
eventually. Minor adjustments were performed to the reduced n- Case2 Diesel n-tetradecane n-heptane-toluene-c-
dodecane and c-hexane sub-mechanisms to better predict the hexane
Case3 Diesel n-tetradecane n-dodecane-toluene-c-
experimental results based on the method proposed by Ra and
hexane
Reitz [33]. In brief, the adjustments were adopted by analyzing
the sensitivity coefficient of ignition delay, which was defined as,

s2:0 2.3. Modelling setup

S 1 1
s1:0
The KIVA3V code coupled with CHEMKIN [49] was used for the
where 3-D CFD modelling studies. Some updated sub-models [5056]
S, sensitivity coefficient were used to describe the physical phenomena in the engine, as
s2:0 , ignition delay with the reaction rate constant multiplied by shown in Table 4.
2 In the validation section for the T15 + CH5 case, the combustion
s1:0 , the original ignition delay of the diesel surrogate fuels were modelled with their respective
combustion chemistries and physical properties. To further clarify
The positive value of S indicates that the reaction reduces the the physical and chemical effects on the soot formation in the fol-
ignition delay. Thereafter adjustments were implemented by per- lowing section, another two modelling cases were also performed.
turbation of the reaction rate constant. The detailed descriptions The corresponding physical property and chemistry setup have
of the merge process and the adjustment method can be referenced been summarized in Table 5.
from [31,32].
Given that PAHs are the most important precursors of soot, to
describe and clarify the soot formation process, the reduced PAHs
sub-mechanism up to A4 (pyrene) taken from Wang et al. [21] was
also incorporated in the reduced mechanism. Finally, a combined
reduced n-dodecane-TRF-c-hexane -PAH mechanism composed of
167 species and 671 reactions was formulated. The reduced mech-
anism in CHEMKIN format is available in the Supplemental
Material.
Figs. S1S8 show the comparisons of the experimental and pre-
dictive ignition delays, species mole fraction profiles, and laminar
flame speeds of the TRF fuel, n-dodecane, and c-hexane [23,34
48]. Overall, as shown in these figures, the formulated reduced
mechanism was able to reasonably capture the main combustion
characteristics of the fuels, owing to the fact that the decoupled
method was adopted and the reduced n-dodecane-TRF-c-hexane-
PAH mechanism is based on the previous reduced mechanisms
[21,29,30], which have been extensively validated. Therefore, the
reduced mechanism could be well implemented for 3-D modelling
investigations and practical applications. Fig. 2. Computational mesh.
 X. Liu et al. / Applied Energy 189 (2017) 187200
The NOx emission was predicted by the reduced NOx chemistry
of the original TRF-PAH mechanism [21], and the soot formation
and oxidation processes were predicted by the multi-step phe-
nomenological soot model with A4 as the precursor [57]. Consider-
ing the 8-hole nozzle configuration of the engine, a 45-sector
mesh containing 9560 grid points was adopted for computational
time saving. The mesh grid is illustrated in Fig. 2. The modelling
studies started from -133 CA ATDC (intake valve closing timing)
and ended at 125 CA ATDC (exhaust valve opening timing).
To compare the chemical effects of three diesel surrogate fuels
on soot formation, 0-D modelling investigations were also per-
formed. Given that A4 is one of the most important soot precursors,
it was used as the investigated target to indicate the soot formation
tendency. For the 0-D modelling study, the SENKIN code in the
CHEMKIN package was used [49].
Fig. 3. Experimentally measured in-cylinder pressure and heat release rate profiles
of diesel and surrogate fuels.
191
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Experimental results
Fig. 3 shows the experimentally measured in-cylinder pressure
and heat release rate profiles of diesel and three surrogate fuels
under various EGR rate conditions. Fig. 4 shows the crank angles
corresponding to the 10% (CA10) and 50% (CA50) of the total heat
release for these fuels. As seen in these two figures, overall the
combustion of all fuels were postponed at higher EGR rate, and
consequently retarded CA10 and CA50 were observed. This can
be attributed to the lower combustion temperature and oxygen
concentration caused by the introduce of EGR [58].
It can also be observed that the heat release was directly related
with the fuel CN value. As seen in Table 2, the CN values of diesel
and the three diesel surrogates can be sequenced as die-
sel > T15 > T15 + CH5 > T20. Given that lower CN indicates lower
fuel reactivity, the ignition and the main combustion phase were
retarded. The CA10 of T15 was close to that of diesel, while CA10
of T15 + CH5 was later and T20 was the latest. Also, due to the
more retarded combustion phasing and higher volatility of diesel
surrogate fuels compared to those of diesel, the premixed combus-
tion became significant and the CA50 advanced. Furthermore, at
lower EGR rate minor discrepancies could be observed among
three diesel surrogate fuels, while at higher EGR rate conditions
larger discrepancies were observed.
Fig. 5 shows the indicated thermal efficiency (ITE), indicated
mean efficient pressure (IMEP), and indicated specific fuel con-
sumption (ISFC) of diesel and the three diesel surrogate fuels from
experiments. It can be observed that at lower EGR rates (640%), the
ITE, IMEP, and ISFC did not change too much. While at higher EGR
rates (>40%), the combustion phasing was retarded and deterio-
rated due to the oxygen deficiency and lower combustion temper-
Fig. 4. CA10 and CA50 of diesel and surrogate fuels.
192 X. Liu et al. / Applied Energy 189 (2017) 187200
Fig. 5. ITE, IMEP, and ISFC of diesel and surrogate fuels.
ature, as shown in Fig. 4. As a consequence, the ITE and IMEP
became lower, resulting in higher ISFC.
Comparatively, at lower EGR rate conditions, these three diesel
surrogate fuels had lower ITE and IMEP, and higher ISFC compared
to those of diesel. At higher EGR rate conditions, the discrepancies
in ITE, IMEP, and ISFC between diesel and three diesel surrogate
fuels became smaller. These can be explained by the different com-
bustion characteristics of diesel and surrogate fuels. Fig. 6 shows
the maximum pressure rise rate (MPRR) of diesel and three surro-
gates. Overall the MPRRs of these surrogates were similar. The
MPRR of diesel was the lowest at lower EGR rates but was close
to those of these surrogate fuels at higher EGR rate conditions.
Given that MPRR was related with heat transfer loss [59,60], the
heat transfer loss followed the trend of MPRR at various EGR rates.
It is seen that due to the lower heat transfer loss of diesel at lower
EGR rates, higher ITE and IMEP and lower ISFC were achieved.
Fig. 7 shows the experimentally measured NOx, soot, CO, and
THC emissions of diesel and surrogate fuels at various EGR rates.
Fig. 6. MPRR of diesel and surrogate fuels.
The emissions were closely related to the combustion characteris-
tics. As seen in Fig. 4, as the increase of EGR rate the combustion
was retarded due to both the thermal and oxygen deficiency
effects, which was also the reason for the lower NOx emission at
high EGR rate. Fig. 8 shows the combustion loss of diesel and sur-
rogate fuels. At lower EGR rate (640%) the combustion efficiency
remained at high levels and the temperature was sufficient for
the oxidation of CO and hydrocarbons, thus the CO, THC, and soot
emissions retained at low levels. While at higher EGR rate (>40%)
the combustion loss grew rapidly, thus the CO and THC emissions
became higher. Due to the lower combustion temperature and
oxygen concentration, the soot formation was enhanced while
the soot oxidation was weakened. Thus, the final soot emission
increased. When the EGR rate was higher than 50%, the combus-
tion was over retarded and meanwhile the combustion tempera-
ture was below the soot formation threshold, for which the final
soot emission became lower.
Regarding the emissions, at lower EGR rate conditions the NOx
emissions of diesel surrogate fuels were higher than that of diesel,
which can be attributed to their more premixed combustion and
the higher combustion temperature. The soot and CO emissions
of all tested fuels were negligible at low EGR rate conditions. Due
to the higher volatility and stronger quenching effects, the THC
emissions of these surrogate fuels were also higher than diesel.
At higher EGR rate conditions the NOx emissions of all fuels were
all maintained at low levels. The CO and THC emissions can be
sequenced as diesel > T20 > T15 + CH5  T15, which was in agree-
ment with the combustion loss differences. However, the soot
emissions of these surrogate fuels were similar and were much
lower than those of diesel. Given that the reactivity of these diesel
surrogate fuels were much lower while their volatility were higher
compared with that of diesel (seen in Figs. 3 and 4), the mixing
process was improved, resulting in more premixed combustion.
In addition, due to the lower PAHs content than diesel, the soot
emissions of these surrogate fuels were lower. This was further
clarified by the modelling investigations presented in the next
section.
3.2. Modelling results
Given that the main properties of the diesel surrogate fuel (T15
+ CH5) listed in Table 2 are more close to that of diesel, the com-
bustion chemistry of T15 + CH5 can be used to model the combus-
tion of diesel. In this section, modelling investigations fueled with
T15 + CH5 (Case1) were performed firstly to validate against the
experimental results. In the simulation the corresponding experi-
mental control parameters were taken as the inputs. After model
 X. Liu et al. / Applied Energy 189 (2017) 187200
Fig. 7. NOx, soot, CO, and THC emissions of diesel and surrogate fuels.
Fig. 8. Combustion loss of diesel and surrogate fuels.
validations numerical investigations of Case2 and Case3 were con-
ducted. By comparing these three cases the physical and chemical
properties of the fuel on combustion and soot formation were
analyzed.
Fig. 9 shows the comparisons between the modelling and
experimental in-cylinder pressure and heat release rate profiles
for Case1. As shown in this figure although the heat release rates
in the premixed combustion fueled with T15 + CH5 at lower EGR
rates was over-predicted by the simulation, the in-cylinder pres-
sure profiles and the diffused combustion processes were well cap-
tured. Fig. 10 shows the comparisons of NOx and soot emissions
between the modelling and experimental results for Case1. As
depicted in this figure, the NOx emissions at various EGR rates
were well predicted by the simulation. The soot emissions were
also reasonably predicted, although at the 45% EGR rate it was
193
slightly over-predicted. Overall the predicted NOx and soot emis-
sions were in good agreement with the experimental results.
As mentioned in the previous section, the soot emissions of
these three diesel surrogate fuels were lower than diesel especially
at higher EGR rates. To clarify the reason for this three modelling
cases (Case1, Case2, and Case3) at 45% EGR rate were conducted,
as listed in Table 5. Case1 was used to simulate the combustion
of T15 + CH5. Case2 and Case3 were used to simulate the combus-
tion of diesel fuel. The major difference between Case1 and Case2
was the physical properties adopted in the modelling. For Case1,
the physical properties of the diesel surrogate fuel were adopted,
while for Case2 the physical properties of n-tetradecane was
adopted to simulate the spraying process of diesel. By comparing
Case1 and Case2, the physical effects on the soot formation can
be analyzed. For Case2 and Case3 the same physical property of
n-tetradecane was adopted, and the only difference was the differ-
ent surrogate constituents. By comparing Case2 and Case3, the
chemical effect on the soot formation can be analyzed.
Fig. 11 shows the comparisons between the predicted in-
cylinder pressure and heat release rate profiles at 45% EGR rate
for Case2 and Case3. It can be seen that the diesel combustion
can be well predicted by T15 + CH5 (n-heptane) and T15 + CH5
(n-dodecane) with the same physical properties of n-tetradecane.
Comparisons of the predicted soot emissions for Case1, Case2,
and Case3 are shown in Fig. 12. Due to the different physical prop-
erties the combustion in Case2 was more advanced and the dif-
fused combustion was stronger. Thus the soot emission was
about 55% higher than that of Case1. This can also be observed in
Fig. 13, which shows the equivalence ratio and soot distribution
contours for Case1, Case2, and Case3. T15 + CH5 (n-dodecane)
was more prone to produce soot than T15 + CH5 (n-heptane) due
to the longer carbon-chain structure. It was inferred that compared
to the physical properties the carbon-chain length had relatively
less effect on the soot formation.
194 X. Liu et al. / Applied Energy 189 (2017) 187200
Fig. 9. Comparisons between the modelling and experimental in-cylinder pressure
and heat release rate profiles for Case1.
It should be mentioned that according to the constituent mea-
surement test the PAHs constituted about 9% mass fraction of prac-
tical diesel. Given that only toluene was considered as the single-
ring aromatic while the PAHs were not included in the diesel sur-
rogate fuels in this work, the predicted soot emission in Case 3 was
still lower than the experiment. However, compared to T15 + CH5
(n-heptane), T15 + CH5 (n-dodecane) seems to be more suitable as
the diesel surrogate.
Fig. 14 shows the comparisons between the modelling (Case3)
and experimental in-cylinder pressure and heat release rate pro-
files for diesel combustion. It can be seen that overall the diesel
combustion at various EGR rates were reasonably captured by
the modelling results of the T15 + CH5 (n-dodecane) surrogate
fuels (Case3). The experimental NOx and soot emissions were also
Fig. 10. Comparisons of the NOx and soot emissions between the modelling and
experiment for Case1.
Fig. 11. Comparisons of the in-cylinder pressure and heat release rate profiles
between experiment and simulations for Case2 and Case3.
Fig. 12. Comparisons of the soot emissions among Case1, Case2, and Case3.
reasonably predicted, as shown in Fig. 15. While the NOx emission
was a little over-predicted at the lower EGR rate due to the more
premixed combustion in the simulation. The soot emission was
slightly underestimated mainly attributed to the neglect of the
PAHs in the diesel surrogate fuels, as discussed in the previous
part.
To further clarify the EGR effects on the combustion and emis-
sions, Fig. 16 shows the equivalence ratio and soot distribution
contours at EGR rates of about 0%, 30%, and 50% for Case3. As
 X. Liu et al. / Applied Energy 189 (2017) 187200
Fig. 13. Equivalence ratio and soot distribution contours for Case1, Case2, and Case3.
Fig. 14. Comparisons between the modelling (Case3) and experimental in-cylinder
pressure and heat release rate profiles for diesel combustion.
195
Fig. 15. Comparisons of the NOx and soot emissions between the modelling (Case3)
and experiment for diesel combustion.
shown in this figure, as the EGR was higher the combustion was
more retarded and the equivalence ratio of the fuel mixture at
CA10 was much lower, resulting in the more premixed combustion
and higher combustion temperature in the chamber. OH radical is
the indicator of the high temperature combustion and an impor-
tant oxidant. The distributions of the OH radical and the high tem-
perature regions coincide with each other. On the other hand,
given that the NOx emissions favor the high temperature and rich
oxygen environment, the NO was reduced as the higher EGR rate
for the lower temperature and oxidant content.
However, the soot emissions were higher at the higher EGR rate.
It can be explained by Fig. 17, showing the time evolution of C2H2,
A1, A4, and soot integrated over the whole computational domain.
It can be observed that the formation of C2H2 and A1 were directly
related with the fuel combustion and heat release rate, given that
these species can be directly formed by the fuel decomposition
reactions of n-dodecane and toluene. The two species were formed
in the fuel combustion and were then fast consumed off. At the
higher EGR rates the formation of C2H2 and A1 were higher due
to the less oxygen and lower combustion efficiency. The formation
of A4 and soot were later than those of C2H2 and A1, and the soot
emission evolution were in accordance with those of the A4 forma-
tion, since A4 is the most important precursor of soot. The final soot
emission was depended on the competition between the soot for-
mation and oxidation processes. As the EGR rate was higher, the
soot formation process was enhanced while the oxidation process
was weakened attributed to the less oxygen content. However,
compared with the 50% EGR rate case the soot oxidation process
196 X. Liu et al. / Applied Energy 189 (2017) 187200

Fig. 16. Equivalence ratio and soot distribution contours for Case3.

at the 30% EGR rate was higher and the soot formed can be oxi-
dized fast in the later combustion process. Thus the final soot emis-
sion at the 30% EGR rate was lower than that at the 50% EGR rate.

3.3. 0-D modelling

To further clarify the chemical effects on the soot formation, 0-

Fig. 17. Comparisons of the time evolution of C2H2, A1, A4, and soot integrated over
the whole computational domain for Case3.
D modelling investigations have been performed. In the 0-D mod-
elling investigations four constituents in the surrogates and four
diesel surrogate fuel cases were considered. The modelling method
was referenced from the work of Akihama et al. [61].
In the modelling constant pressure and temperature condition
was adopted. The initial pressure was 10 MPa. The initial temper-
ature and equivalence ratio (/) were ranging from 10003000 K
and 16 respectively, covering the typical engine combustion con-
ditions. The residence time was set at 1.5 ms, corresponding to
12.6 crank angle at 1400 rpm. The mole fraction of A4 at the end
of the simulations was used for analysis. For comparisons the
results were normalized by the highest value of each cases. The
/T maps of A4 formation region for these four pure constituents
and four diesel surrogate fuel cases are shown in Figs. 18 and 21.
As seen in Fig. 18, the A4 formation of these surrogate con-
stituents can be sequenced as toluene > c-hexane > n-dodecane
(n-c12h26) > n-heptane. Figs. 19 and 20 show the reaction path-
ways of toluene, n-heptane, n-dodecane and c-hexane at the initial
temperature of 1800 K, / = 5.0 and pressure of 10 MPa. As seen in
Fig. 19, the consumption of toluene (C6H5CH3) mainly formed ben-
zyl radical (C6H5CH2) by H abstraction reactions and benzene (A1)
by ipso-substitution reaction. The consumption of C6H5CH2 and A1
both formed phenyl radical (A1-), which is the major intermediate
species for PAHs formation. Biacetylene (C4H2) was also formed by
the decomposition of C6H5CH2. Then by the consecutive combina-
tion with phenylacetylene (A1C2H) and acenaphthylene (A2R5), a
lot of A4 was formed. Acetylene (C2H2) was also important for
the PAHs formation. By the typical HACA (H-abstraction C2H2-
addition) mechanism, much phenanthrene (A3) and A4 were
formed. Therefore, owing to the aromatic structure the soot ten-
dency of toluene was significantly higher than the other three
constituents.
For alkanes like n-heptane and n-dodecane, the consumption of
the fuel molecules were quite similar, i.e. via the H-abstraction and
the following decomposition reactions. The PAHs can be only
formed after the formation of the single-ring chemical structures,
 X. Liu et al. / Applied Energy 189 (2017) 187200 197

Fig. 18. /-T maps of A4 formation region for n-heptane, c-hexane, n-dodecane (n-c12h26), and toluene.

Fig. 19. Reaction pathway of toluene at the initial temperature of 1800 K, / = 5.0 and pressure of 10 MPa. Dashed lines represent the multiple-step reactions.
198 X. Liu et al. / Applied Energy 189 (2017) 187200

Fig. 20. Reaction pathways of n-heptane, n-dodecane, and c-hexane at initial temperature of 1800 K, / = 5.0, and pressure of 10 MPa. Dashed lines represent the multiple-
step reactions.

Fig. 21. /-T maps of A4 formation region for T15, T15 + CH5 (n-c7h16), T15 + CH5 (n-c12h26), and T20.
 X. Liu et al. / Applied Energy 189 (2017) 187200
such as the cyclopentadienyl radical (C5H5), A1, and A1C2H. Com-
pared to n-heptane, n-dodecane had longer carbon-chain structure
and thus the higher tendency to form C5H5, resulting in more A4. c-
Hexane was easier to produce A4 than the two normal alkanes
attributed to the single-ring chemical structure. It can be observed
in Fig. 20 that much C2H2 was formed during the consumption of c-
hexane by the ring-opening and the following decomposition reac-
tions. Furthermore, A1 can also be directly formed via the consec-
utive loss of six H atoms.
Given that toluene was the dominant factor that affects the A4
formation, the effects of n-heptane, n-dodecane, and c-hexane on
the A4 formation were considerably weaker. Therefore the A4 for-
mation capability (concentration) of these four diesel surrogate
fuels can be sequenced as T20 > T15 + CH5 (n-c12h26) > T15
+ CH5 (n-c7h16)  T15, as shown in Fig. 21. The results were in
agreement with the trend that obtained in the DICI modelling
study. Considering the similar soot emissions of T15 and T20 in
the DICI combustion, it can be inferred that the effects of the mix-
ing process induced by the different fuel reactivity prevailed over
the chemical effects on the soot formation.
4. Conclusions
In this work both experimental and numerical investigations on
the combustion and emission characteristics of diesel and three
diesel surrogate fuels were performed. A reduced n-dodecane-
TRF-c-hexane-PAH mechanism was constructed and used for the
practical application and 3-D modelling investigations. The effects
of the fuels physical and chemical properties on the soot formation
have been clarified. 0-D modelling investigations on the soot for-
mation tendency of diesel surrogate fuels and corresponding surro-
gate constituents were also conducted. The major conclusions of
the current study can be summarized as follows:
(1) Due to the lower reactivity of the surrogates than diesel, the
combustion phasing of these surrogate fuels were retarded,
resulting in lower ITE and IMEP, and higher ISFC. Since the
mixing process of these surrogates were improved owing
to the higher volatility, stronger premixed combustion were
observed for these surrogates. Consequently lower soot
emissions and higher NOx emissions were obtained com-
pared to diesel. The CO and THC emissions of all these tested
fuels were in accordance with the combustion loss.
(2) A combined reduced n-dodecane-TRF-c-hexane-PAH mecha-
nism composed of 167 species and 671 reactions was formu-
lated for practical application. The reduced n-dodecane-TRF-
c-hexane-PAH mechanism reasonably captured the combus-
tion and emission characteristics of the T15 + CH5 in DICI
combustion. It was inferred that the fuels physical effects
on soot formation and emissions were higher than the
chemical effects.
(3) The T15 + CH5 (n-dodecane) surrogate fuel was able to rea-
sonably describe the diesel combustion and emission char-
acteristics at various EGR rate conditions. Compared to
T15 + CH5, T15 + CH5 (n-dodecane) is more appropriate to
be the diesel surrogate fuel.
(4) According to the 0-D modelling investigations, the soot ten-
dency of the surrogate constituents can be sequenced as
toluene > c-hexane > n-dodecane > n-heptane. Given that
toluene is the dominant factor affecting the soot formation
than the other three components, the soot tendency of these
four diesel surrogate fuels can be sequenced as T20 > T15
+ CH5 (n-c12h26) > T15 + CH5 (n-c7h16)  T15.
199
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support
provided by the National Natural Science Found of China (NSFC)
through its Projects of 51320105008 and 91541205.
Appendix A. Supplementary material
Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in
the online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.
12.054.
References
[1] Li J, Yang WM, An H, Chou SK. Modeling on blend gasoline/diesel fuel
combustion in a direct injection diesel engine. Appl Energy 2015;160:77783.
[2] An H, Yang W, Li J, Maghbouli A, Chua KJ, Chou SK. A numerical modeling on
the emission characteristics of a diesel engine fueled by diesel and biodiesel
blend fuels. Appl Energy 2014;130:45865.
[3] Ng HK, Gan S, Ng J-H, Pang KM. Simulation of biodiesel combustion in a light-
duty diesel engine using integrated compact biodieseldiesel reaction
mechanism. Appl Energy 2013;102:127587.
[4] Gong C, Jangi M, Bai X-S. Large eddy simulation of n-Dodecane spray
combustion in a high pressure combustion vessel. Appl Energy
2014;136:37381.
[5] Yao M, Zheng Z, Liu H. Progress and recent trends in homogeneous charge
compression ignition (HCCI) engines. Prog Energy Combust Sci
2009;35:398437.
[6] Pang KM, Karvounis N, Walther JH, Schramm J. Numerical investigation of soot
formation and oxidation processes under large two-stroke marine diesel
engine-like conditions using integrated CFD-chemical kinetics. Appl Energy
2016;169:87487.
[7] Wang B, Mosbach S, Schmutzhard S, Shuai S, Huang Y, Kraft M. Modelling soot
formation from wall films in a gasoline direct injection engine using a detailed
population balance model. Appl Energy 2016;163:15466.
[8] Mueller CJ, Cannella WJ, Bays JT, Bruno TJ, DeFabio K, Dettman HD, et al. Diesel
surrogate fuels for engine testing and chemical-kinetic modeling:
compositions and properties. Energy Fuels 2016.
[9] Nazemi M, Shahbakhti M. Modeling and analysis of fuel injection parameters
for combustion and performance of an RCCI engine. Appl Energy
2016;165:13550.
[10] Anand K, Ra Y, Reitz RD, Bunting B. Surrogate model development for fuels for
advanced combustion engines. Energy Fuels 2011;25:147484.
[11] Zheng Z, Lv Z. A new skeletal chemical kinetic model of gasoline surrogate fuel
with nitric oxide in HCCI combustion. Appl Energy 2015;147:5966.
[12] Maghbouli A, Yang W, An H, Li J, Chou SK, Chua KJ. An advanced combustion
model coupled with detailed chemical reaction mechanism for D.I diesel
engine simulation. Appl Energy 2013;111:75870.
[13] Farrell JT, Cernansky NP, Dryer FL, Law CK, Friend DG, Hergart CA, et al.
Development of an experimental database and kinetic models for surrogate
diesel fuels. SAE Technical Paper 2007-01-0201; 2007.
[14] Mati K, Ristori A, Gal S, Pengloan G, Dagaut P. The oxidation of a diesel fuel at
110 atm: experimental study in a JSR and detailed chemical kinetic modeling.
Proc Combust Inst 2007;31:293946.
[15] Lemaire R, Faccinetto A, Therssen E, Ziskind M, Focsa C, Desgroux P.
Experimental comparison of soot formation in turbulent flames of Diesel
and surrogate Diesel fuels. Proc Combust Inst 2009;32:73744.
[16] Halstead MP, Kirsch LJ, Quinn CP. The autoignition of hydrocarbon fuels at high
temperatures and pressures - fitting of a mathematical model. Combust Flame
1977;30:4560.
[17] Curran HJ, Gaffuri P, Pitz WJ, Westbrook CK. A comprehensive modeling study
of n-heptane oxidation. Combust Flame 1998;114:14977.
[18] Su W, Huang H. Development and calibration of a reduced chemical kinetic
model of n-heptane for HCCI engine combustion. Fuel 2005;84:102940.
[19] Tanaka S, Ayala F, Keck JC. A reduced chemical kinetic model for HCCI
combustion of primary reference fuels in a rapid compression machine.
Combust Flame 2003;133:46781.
[20] Ra Y, Reitz RD. A reduced chemical kinetic model for IC engine combustion
simulations with primary reference fuels. Combust Flame 2008;155:71338.
[21] Wang H, Yao M, Yue Z, Jia M, Reitz RD. A reduced toluene reference fuel
chemical kinetic mechanism for combustion and polycyclic-aromatic
hydrocarbon predictions. Combust Flame 2015;162:2390404.
[22] Luo J, Yao M, Liu H, Yang B. Experimental and numerical study on suitable
diesel fuel surrogates in low temperature combustion conditions. Fuel
2012;97:6219.
[23] Mehl M, Pitz WJ, Westbrook CK, Curran HJ. Kinetic modeling of gasoline
surrogate components and mixtures under engine conditions. Proc Combust
Inst 2011;33:193200.
200 X. Liu et al. / Applied Energy 189 (2017) 187200
[24] Chang Y, Jia M, Li Y, Liu Y, Xie M, Wang H, et al. Development of a skeletal
mechanism for diesel surrogate fuel by using a decoupling methodology.
Combust Flame 2015;162:3785802.
[25] Liu H, Li S, Zheng Z, Xu J, Yao M. Effects of n-butanol, 2-butanol, and methyl
octynoate addition to diesel fuel on combustion and emissions over a wide
range of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) rates. Appl Energy 2013;112:24656.
[26] Ma S, Zheng Z, Liu H, Zhang Q, Yao M. Experimental investigation of the effects
of diesel injection strategy on gasoline/diesel dual-fuel combustion. Appl
Energy 2013;109:20212.
[27] Yang B, Yao M, Cheng WK, Li Y, Zheng Z, Li S. Experimental and numerical
study on different dual-fuel combustion modes fuelled with gasoline and
diesel. Appl Energy 2014;113:72233.
[28] Murphy MJ, Taylor JD, Mccormick RL. Compendium of experimental cetane
number data. Office of Scientific & Technical Information Technical Reports;
2004.
[29] Hu W, Ra Y, Ming J, Reitz RD. Development of a reduced n-dodecane-PAH
mechanism and its application for n-dodecane soot predictions. Fuel
2014;136:2536.
[30] Qi P, Yao M, Liu H. Reduced mechanical kinetic mechanism of multicomponent
surrogate fuel for diesel. Neiranji Xuebao/transactions of Csice 2015;33:916.
[31] Liu X, Wang H, Zheng Z, Liu J, Reitz RD, Yao M. Development of a combined
reduced primary reference fuel-alcohols (methanol/ethanol/propanols/
butanols/n-pentanol) mechanism for engine applications. Energy
2016;114:54258.
[32] Liu X, Wang H, Wei L, Liu J, Reitz RD, Yao M. Development of a reduced toluene
reference fuel (TRF)-2,5-dimethylfuran-polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
(PAH) mechanism for engine applications. Combust Flame 2016;165:45365.
[33] Ra Y, Reitz RD. A combustion model for IC engine combustion simulations with
multi-component fuels. Combust Flame 2011;158:6990.
[34] Fieweger K, Blumenthal R, Adomeit G. Self-ignition of S.I. engine model fuels: a
shock tube investigation at high pressure. Combust Flame 1997;109:599619.
[35] Shen HS, Vanderover J, Oehlschlaeger MA. A shock tube study of the auto-
ignition of toluene/air mixtures at high pressures. Proc Combust Inst
2009;32:16572.
[36] Vasu SS, Davidson DF, Hong Z, Vasudevan V, Hanson RK. n-Dodecane oxidation
at high-pressures: measurements of ignition delay times and OH
concentration time-histories. Proc Combust Inst 2009;32:17380.
[37] Zhukov VP, Sechenov VA, Starikovskii AY. Autoignition of n-decane at high
pressure. Combust Flame 2008;153:1306.
[38] Lemaire O, Ribaucour M, Carlier M, Minetti R. The production of benzene in the
low-temperature oxidation of cyclohexane, cyclohexene, and cyclohexa-1,3-
diene. Combust Flame 2001;127:197180.
[39] Daley SM, Berkowitz AM, Oehlschlaeger MA. A shock tube study of
cyclopentane and cyclohexane ignition at elevated pressures. Int J Chem
Kinet 2008;40:62434.
[40] Bakali AE, Delfau JL, Vovelle C. Experimental study of 1 atmosphere, rich,
premixed n-heptane and iso-octane flames. Combust Sci Technol
1998;140:6991.
[41] Marchal C, Delfau J, Vovelle C, Morac G, Mounam-Rousselle C, Mauss F.
Modelling of aromatics and soot formation from large fuel molecules. Proc
Combust Inst 2009;32:7539.
[42] Li Y, Cai J, Zhang L, Yuan T, Zhang K, Qi F. Investigation on chemical structures
of premixed toluene flames at low pressure. Proc Combust Inst
2011;33:593600.
[43] Mzahmed A, Hadjali K, Dagaut P, Dayma G. Experimental and modeling study
of the oxidation kinetics of n-undecane and n-dodecane in a jet-stirred reactor.
Energy Fuels 2012;26:425368.
[44] El Bakali A, Braun-Unkhoff M, Dagaut P, Frank P, Cathonnet M. Detailed kinetic
reaction mechanism for cyclohexane oxidation at pressure up to ten
atmospheres. Proc Combust Inst 2000;28:16318.
[45] van Lipzig JPJ, Nilsson EJK, de Goey LPH, Konnov AA. Laminar burning
velocities of n-heptane, iso-octane, ethanol and their binary and tertiary
mixtures. Fuel 2011;90:277381.
[46] Davis SG, Wang H, Breinsky K, Law CK. Laminar flame speeds and oxidation
kinetics of benene-air and toluene-air flames. Symp (Int) Combust
1996;26:102533.
[47] Johnston RJ, Farrell JT. Laminar burning velocities and Markstein lengths of
aromatics at elevated temperature and pressure. Proc Combust Inst
2005;30:21724.
[48] Kumar K, Sung CJ. Laminar flame speeds and extinction limits of preheated n-
decane/O2/N2 and n-dodecane/O2/N2 mixtures. Combust Flame
2007;151:20924.
[49] Kee RJ, Rupley FM, Miller JA. CHEMKIN II: a fortran chemical kinetics package
for the analysis of gas-phase chemical kinetics. Sandia Laboratories Report, S.
89-8009B. Sandia National Laboratories; 1989.
[50] Han Z, Reitz RD. Turbulence modeling of internal combustion engines using
RNG k-e models. Combust Sci Technol 1995;106:26795.
[51] Han Z, Reitz RD. A temperature wall function formulation for variable-density
turbulent flows with application to engine convective heat transfer modeling.
Int J Heat Mass Transfer 1997;40:61325.
[52] Ricart LM, Reitz RD, Dec JE. Comparisons of diesel spray liquid penetration and
vapor fuel distributions with in-cylinder optical measurements. J Eng Gas
Turbines Power 1999;122:58895.
[53] Munnannur A, Reitz RD. Comprehensive collision model for multidimensional
engine spray computations. Atom Sprays 2009;19:597619.
[54] Yoshikawa T, Reitz RD. Validation of a grid independent spray model and fuel
chemistry mechanism for low temperature diesel combustion. Int J Spray
Combust Dyn 2009;1:283316.
[55] Han Z, Xu Z, Trigui N. Spray/wall interaction models for multidimensional
engine simulation. Int J Engine Res 2000;1:12746.
[56] Ra Y, Reitz RD. A vaporization model for discrete multi-component fuel sprays.
Int J Multiphase Flow 2009;35:10117.
[57] Vishwanathan G, Reitz RD. Modeling soot formation using reduced polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbon chemistry in n-heptane lifted flames with application to
low temperature combustion. J Eng Gas Turbines Power 2009;131:032801.
[58] Sjberg M, Dec JE, Hwang W. Thermodynamic and chemical effects of EGR and
its constituents on HCCI autoignition. SAE Techanical Paper 2007-01-0207;
2007.
[59] Tsurushima T, Kunishima E, Asaumi Y, Aoyagi Y, Enomoto Y. The effect of
knock on heat loss in homogeneous charge compression ignition engines. Sae
Technical Papers 2002-01-0108; 2002.
[60] Hildingsson L, Kalghatgi G, Tait N, Johansson B, Harrison A. Fuel octane effects
in the partially premixed combustion regime in compression ignition engines.
SAE Technical Paper 2009-01-2648; 2009.
[61] Akihama K, Takatori Y, Inagaki K, Sasaki S, Dean AM. Mechanism of the
smokeless rich diesel combustion by reducing temperature. SAE Technical
Paper 2001-01-0655; 2001.