Analysis of the applicability of a common rail pump for an aircraft engine
 
More details
Hide details
1
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Lublin University of Technology.
Publication date: 2019-10-01
 
Combustion Engines 2019,179(4), 192–197
 
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
The paper presents an analysis of the possibility of using a common rail pump to supply an aircraft compression-ignition engine. It is an engine with a two-stroke cycle, three cylinders, opposing pistons and 100 kW power. Its each combustion chamber is supply by one or two injectors controlled by electromagnetic valves. In order to assess the possibility of using a common rail pump, four high-pressure pumps were tested on a bench. They are piston pumps differing in the number and geometry of their pumping sections. The analysis included the pumping output, the torque on the pump drive shaft and the power needed to drive the pump. The weight and overall dimensions of the pump were also considered, including the arrangement of the pumping sections and the way the drive is transmitted. The research allowed to optimize the engine power supply system depending on fuel demand and the way the pump is mounted on the engine.
 
REFERENCES (29)
1.
PIRAULT, J., FLINT, M. Opposed Piston Engines: Evolution, Use, and Future Applications. SAE Technical Paper. 2009.
 
2.
Heywood, J. Internal combustion engine fundamentals. McGraw-Hill International Editions. 1988.
 
3.
FRANKE, M., HUANG, H., LIU, J. Opposed piston op-posed cylinder 450 hp engine: performance development by CAE simulations and testing. SAE Technical Paper. 2006.
 
4.
MA, F., ZHAO, C., ZHANG, F. et al. Effects of scavenging system configuration on in-cylinder air flow organization of an opposed-piston two-stroke engine. Energies. 2015, 5866-5884.
 
5.
PETER, H. Opposed piston opposed cylinder (OPOC) engine for military ground vehicles. SAE Technical Paper. 2005-01-1548, 2005.
 
6.
NAIK, S., JOHNSON, D., KOSZEWNIK, J. et al. Practical applications of opposed-piston engine technology to reduce fuel consumption and emissions. SAE Technical Paper 2013-01-2754, 2013.
 
7.
REGNER, G., JOHNSON, D., KOSZEWNIK, J., LYNN, F. Modernizing the opposed piston, two stroke engine for clean. efficient transportation. SAE Technical Paper. 2013-26-0114, 2013.
 
8.
GHARAKHANI, A., GHONIEM, A.F. 3D vortex simulation of flow in an opposed-piston engine. Esaim Proc. 1999, 7, 161-172.
 
9.
REGNER, G., HEROLD, R.E., WAHL, M.H. et al. The Achates power opposed-piston two-stroke engine: performance and emissions results in a medium-duty application. SAE Technical Paper. 2011-01-2221, 2011.
 
10.
STUMPP, G., RICCO, M. Common rail-an attractive fuel injection system for passenger car DI diesel engines. Proceedings of the International Congress and Exposition. Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), 26-29 February 1996.
 
11.
BOEHNER, W., HUMMEL, K. Common rail injection system for commercial diesel vehicles. SAE International. 1997.
 
12.
REDON, F. Opposed-piston engine for light-duty applications. SAE High Efficiency IC Engine Symposium, 2013.
 
13.
CATANIA, A.E., FERRARI, A., MANNO, M., SPESSA, E. Experimental investigation of dynamic effects on multiple-injection common rail system performance. J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power. 2008, 130, 460-466.
 
14.
HENEIN, N.A., LAI, M.C., SINGH, I.P. et al. Characteristics of a common rail diesel injection system under pilot and postinjection modes. SAE Technical Paper. 2002-01-0218, 2002.
 
15.
BIANCHI, G.M., FALFARI, S., PELLONI, P. et al. Numerical and experimental study towards possible improvements of common rail injectors. SAE Technical Paper. 2002-01-0500, 2002.
 
16.
YANG, F.Y., ZHANG, J.Y., WANG, X.G. et al. Judgement and application of ignition moment during engine startup period based on crankshaft transient acceleration analysis. Autom. Eng. 2003, 25, 111-115.
 
17.
SONG, G.M., YANG, F.Y., OUYANG, M.G. et al. Equilib-rium algorithm research for each individual cylinders of common rail based on self-adaptive fuzzy control. Trans. Csice. 2005, 23, 451-456.
 
18.
SONG, J., TIAN, L.Y., LI, X.L. et al. Design of ECU for common rail system of diesel engine and study of injection characteristics. Trans. Csice. 2006, 24, 28-34.
 
19.
BIANCHI, G., PELLONI, P., CORCIONE, F., LUPPINO F. Numerical analysis of passenger car HSDI diesel engines with the 2nd generation of common rail injection systems: the effect of multiple injections on emissions. SAE Technical Paper. 2001.
 
20.
CATALANO, L., TONDOLO, V., DADONE, A. Dynamic rise of pressure in the common-rail fuel injection system. SAE Technical Paper. 2002.
 
21.
KLYZA, C.A. Fuel injection strategies in opposed-piston engines with multiple fuel injectors, Pub. No.: US 2017/0198632 A1, San Diego 2017.
 
22.
SOCHACZEWSKI, R., SZLACHETKA, M. Numerical analysis of a fuel pump for an aircraft diesel engine. MATEC Web of Conferences. 2019, 252, 01003.
 
23.
SOCHACZEWSKI, R., CZYŻ, Z., SIADKOWSKA, K. Modeling a fuel injector for a two-stroke diesel engine. Combustion Engines. 2017, 170(3), 147-154.
 
24.
NAIK, S. et al. Practical applications of opposed-piston engine technology to reduce fuel consumption and emissions. SAE Technical Paper. 2013-01-2754. 2013. DOI: 10.4271/2013-01-2754.
 
25.
GRABOWSKI, Ł., PIETRYKOWSKI, K., KARPIŃSKI P. Charging process analysis of an opposed-piston two-stroke aircraft Diesel engine. Web of Science. ITM Web of Conferences. 2017, 15.
 
26.
NATIONAL INSTRUMENTS CORP., http://www.ni.com/pl.
 
27.
Zemic Europe B.V. - Load Cells & Sensors, https://www.zemiceurope.com.
 
28.
Autoelektronika 2017, Opis Techniczny Stanowiska Testo-wania Pomp i Wtryskiwaczy STPiW3.
 
29.
Meister Strömungstechnik GmbH, https://meister-flow.de.
 
eISSN:2658-1442
ISSN:2300-9896