Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Tuesday, July 31, 2018
Combustion Characteristics and Generating
Efficiency Using Biogas with Added Hydrogen
Kyungsun Chung and Kwang-Min Chun
Yonsei University
ABSTRACT
Biogas has been used as a fuel because of its lean-burn
capability, low cost, and direct application to current engine
systems. However, some performance loss occurs when using
biogas as a fuel in a typical gas engine. To compensate that
performance loss, hydrogen can be added to enhance
combustion. Given the increasing need to substitute energy
sources, many studies have been performed to examine the
performance of biogas-hydrogen blends. In this study,
experiments and simulations of a gas engine fueled with biogas
were compared to confirm the accuracy of the simulation
model under a fixed excess air ratio of 1.2 and spark timing of
16 CA BTDC. Performance predictions were made numerically
for various spark timings, excess air ratios, and amounts of
added hydrogen. With increased amounts of added hydrogen,
the cylinder pressure and heat release rate increased and the
ignition delay was reduced. The analyses were then extended
to consider various excess air ratios and lean operating
conditions. A DOE method was used to optimize the generating
efficiency at each excess air ratio and hydrogen addition level.
INTRODUCTION
The generation of waste products as a result of rapid
industrialization and urbanization, coupled with dwindling
resources, has resulted in environmental problems and concern
about resource depletion. Efficient use of resources and the
development of renewable energy sources are necessary
because of concern about global warming effects and high oil
prices. Alternative fuels, such as methane, hydrogen, and
mixtures of hydrogen, are clean-energy substitutes [1]. Biogas
has also received attention as a substitute energy source [2].
2013-01-2506
Published
10/14/2013
Copyright © 2013 SAE International and Copyright © 2013 KSAE
doi:10.4271/2013-01-2506
Biogas is approximately two-thirds methane (CH4), and most
of the rest is carbon dioxide (CO2). Methane and carbon
dioxide are greenhouse gases. The global warming potential
(GWP) of methane is about 21 times higher than that of carbon
dioxide. Compared with natural gas, it has a slower flame
speed and a lower energy density. For these reasons, biogas
has a lower generating efficiency than natural gas in gas engine
generator.
Many studies have examined about natural gas and biogas.
Although our previous research has focused on natural gas
composed of methane, there have been some researches about
biogas. The influence of a biogas-biodiesel dual fuel on
combustion characteristics and exhaust emissions of a diesel
engine has been studied [6]. An availability analysis has been
applied to the cylinder of a spark-ignition engine during the
closed part of the engine cycle when biogas-hydrogen blends,
with volumetric fractions of hydrogen up to 15%, were used as
a fuel [7]. Hydrogen has been added in small amounts (5%,
10%, 15% on an energy basis) to biogas and tested in a
sparkignition engine at constant speed and different equivalence
ratios to study the effects on performance, emissions, and
combustion [8]. Research has been conducted to improve its
generating efficiency because biogas has a lower generating
efficiency than that of natural gas. The generating efficiency
can be enhanced by the addition of hydrogen to the fuel [11,
12, 13, 14, 15]. However, NOx emissions are also increased by
the addition of hydrogen. These NOx emissions can be reduced
by lean operating condition and exhaust gas recirculation.
In our previous research, we investigated the generating
efficiency and pollutant emissions from a four-stroke
sparkignition gas-engine generator operating on biogas-
hydrogen blends in various excess air ratios and hydrogen
concentrations. We also investigated the generating efficiency
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Tuesday, July 31, 2018

and NOx emissions of a gas-engine generator with a Table 1. Engine specifications and operating conditions
lowpressure loop exhaust-gas recirculation system fueled by a
model biogas [9, 10].

Our previous research was based on experiments, but there are

many restrictions in performing actual tests. It was difficult to
confirm combustion characteristics in a gas-engine generator.
Also, spark-timing ranges and engine operating conditions
were restricted. However, simulation is possible to investigate
combustion characteristics in various operating conditions.

In this study, numerical analysis using cycle simulation was

compared to the results obtained from biogas engine
experiments. This research confirmed the accuracy of the
simulations.

To improve generating efficiency of gas engine generator

fueled biogas, hydrogen has been suggested as an additive
because hydrogen accelerates flame propagation initiation
rates with decreasing combustion duration for various spark
timings. [3, 16] This study analyzed combustion characteristics
of gas engine generator in various hydrogen contents (5%,
10%, 15%).

NUMERICAL ANALYSIS AND

MODELING
Fuel
CH4 and CO2 gas mixtures, simulating biogas and natural gas,
were used as fuels. Although real biogas contains some
impurities, such as H2S, N2, and NH3, these components were
not considered in this study because their amounts are typically
negligible. In this study, our experiments and simulation model
used model biogas. The model biogas used to operate the gas-
engine generator consisted of CH4 and CO2 in a ratio of 6 to 4.
Quantities of hydrogen equivalent to 5%, 10%, and 15% of
volume percent of the fuel were considered.
Model Description
The research was carried out using a 2.3-L four-cylinder, four-
stroke, spark-ignition engine. The specifications of the engine
and operating conditions are listed in Table 1. The engine had
a turbocharger and an intercooler. The turbocharger, placed
downstream of the intake manifold, compressed the fuel-air
mixtures to a pressure of 1.2 bar. The spark timing of the gas
engine was set to 16 CA BTDC, which was identified as the
maximum brake torque (MBT). The MBT point was found
from our previous experiments using biogas with no hydrogen
addition. All simulation runs were performed at a constant
engine speed of 1820 rpm and an excess air ratio of 1.2, without
a swirl effect. The generator produced electricity at an output
power of 15 kW.
The numerical analyses were performed using GT-POWER,
which was designed for engine-cycle simulation based on
thermodynamic analyses, and can be used for analyzing engine
performance, acoustics, emissions, and power train control
under steady-state or transient operation [17]. It is based on
one-dimensional gas dynamics, representing the flow and heat
transfer in the pipes and other components of an engine system.
To model the target engine, geometrical data for the pipes,
cylinders, and valves (including valve lifts and discharge
coefficient) were used as input data. The operating parameters
for the target engine, such as engine operating speed, ambient
conditions, and spark timing, were also used as input data. The
performance of the turbocharger was determined by the
compressor and the turbine map. The boost pressure was
maintained at 1.2 bar by the proportional-integral-derivative
(PID) control method.
Numerical Analysis
The combustion process in the cylinder was represented by a
two-zone model. The unburned fuel and associated air was
transferred from the unburned zone to the burned zone in a
given time step. In a two-zone model, the following energy
equations are solved separately for each time step in each
zone [18]:
for the unburned zone (1)
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Tuesday, July 31, 2018
for the burned zone (2)
There are four terms on the right-hand side of (1) energy
equation for the unburned zone. These terms address pressure
work, heat transfer, combustion, and addition of enthalpy from
the injected fuel, respectively. The third term (combustion)
contains the instantaneous rate of fuel consumption or burn
rate (dm/dt). The burn rate is calculated from the measured
cylinder pressure using the same equations described (1),(2)
equations.
The numerical model for the heat release rate, or the calculated
rate of heat release from combustion, is based on the pressure
in the cylinder. The expression for the apparent rate of heat
release is thus:
(3)
The (3) equation is solved after each time step using the
cylinder pressure result from that time step as an input. This
model predicts the burn rate for homogeneous charge in spark-
ignition engines and is based on following equations:
(4)
(5)
(6)
These equations take into account the cylinder's geometry,
spark-timing, air-motion, and fuel properties. The mass
entrainment rate into the flame front and the burn rate are
governed by these equations, which state that the unburned
mixture of fuel and air is entrained into the flame front through
the flame area at a rate proportional to the sum of the turbulent
and laminar flame speeds. The burn rate is proportional to the
amount of unburned mixture behind the flame front, (Me-Mb),
divided by a time constant, τ. The time constant is calculated
by dividing the Taylor microscale, λ, by the laminar flame
speed.
The laminar flame speeds for biogas-air and biogas-air-
hydrogen mixtures were determined from literature data
published by Halter et al. [19], Sarli and Benedetto [20], and
Hu et al. [21]. In our previous research, we found that the
higher the volume percent of hydrogen, the faster the achieved
flame speed of methane [22].
Using the above equations, numerical analyses of the gas-
engine generator fueled with biogas were performed at 1820
rpm, a boost pressure of 1.2 bar, and a wide-open throttle
condition. To predict the effects of added hydrogen, the volume
percent of hydrogen was varied up to 15%. In our previous
research, experiments with the gas-engine generator fueled
with biogas were performed only for low levels of hydrogen
addition because of engine durability concerns.
By varying the volume percent of hydrogen (0%, 5%, 10%,
15%) in the fuel, the fundamental characteristics of combustion
in the gas engine were investigated numerically under an
excess air ratio (EAR) of 1.2 and a spark timing of 16 BTDC.
Then, independent variables, such as the EAR, spark timing,
and volume percent of hydrogen, were selected as control
factors for the design of experiment (DOE) analysis method,
which can predict the relationships of independent variables
that dominantly affect the dependent variables. The DOE
method has been used to investigate results and perform
optimization tasks. The basis of the DOE processor is a
mathematical surface fit that is applied to selected results.
Once this mathematical response surface has been calculated,
it is possible to perform optimizations or other investigations
on the response surface very quickly. The DOE analysis was
built on a foundation based on the analysis of variance, a
collection of models in which the observed variance is
partitioned into components due to different factors that are
estimated or tested. The structured set of design data produced
by DOE runs can also be used in conjunction with approximation
models for use in optimization methods. DOE methods include
full factorial, central composite, Latin hypercube, optimal
Latin hypercube, orthogonal arrays, and parameter studies.
The full factorial process considers every combination of all
inputs at all specified values, and requires many runs. In our
research, we used a full factorial DOE because there were 54
cases in the simulation model. To apply the DOE method, the
matrix of simulations must be set up over the desired ranges of
one or more input parameters. The design matrix is the list of
experiments that will then be executed. The DOE type, along
with the factor configuration, generates the matrix. In this
study, the desired spark-timing range extended from 10 to 50
CA BTDC, and was separated into nine blocks. Table 2 lists
the control factors and the desired ranges for the DOE analysis
used in this study.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Tuesday, July 31, 2018

Table 2. Control factors and desired ranges for DOE analysis

Using the results of the DOE analysis, the generating efficiency Table 3 Experimental conditions
was assessed according to the range of the EAR and spark
timing. The generating efficiency was defined as the ratio of
the electric power output (15 kW) to the fuel power. Then, the
fuel power was calculated from the lower heating values and
mass flow rate of the fuel mixture: The generating efficiency
can be calculated as follows:

(7)

EXPERIMENT
In our previous study, experiments were conducted with a 2.3-
L four-cylinder, four-stroke, spark-ignition gas-engine
generator fueled with biogas. The engine had a turbocharger in
the intake manifold that compressed the fuel-air mixture to a
pressure of 1.2 bar. The experiments were carried out at a
constant engine speed of 1820 rpm and a constant electric
output of 15 kW. The experimental data are summarized in
Table 3. The experiments were performed with no hydrogen
addition at a spark timing of 16 CA BTDC, and with 5%
hydrogen by volume at a spark timing of 13 CA BTDC. In this
study, these experiments were compared with simulations to
examine the model's accuracy in terms of maximum cylinder
pressure. The results of our previous study demonstrated that
the addition of hydrogen to the biogas enabled the effective
generation of electricity using a gas-engine generator through
lean-burn combustion.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Effects of Hydrogen Addition on a Fixed
Spark Timing and EAR
The combustion characteristics of biogas-hydrogen blends
inside the cylinder are shown in Figures 1, 2, 3 for a fixed
spark timing of 16 CA BTDC and an EAR of 1.2.
Figure 1 shows the heat release rate during the combustion
process as a function of the crank angle. The heat release rate
is a fundamental property for determining flame behavior and
is used to represent the combustion characteristics. When the
added hydrogen was increased, the peak heat release rate
increased and the crank angle was advanced. The crank angle
at the peak heat release rate for 15% H2 was advanced by about
10 CA compared with the corresponding value for no H2.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Tuesday, July 31, 2018
Figure 1. Heat release rate as a function of crank angle for
the addition of varying amounts of hydrogen at a fixed EAR
of 1.2 and spark timing of 16 CA BTDC.
Figure 2 shows the ignition delay as a function of the spark
timing and EAR. Ignition delay is defined as the difference
between spark timing and the start of combustion (2% mass
fraction burned)
With increasing amounts of hydrogen, the ignition delay was
shortened, approaching complete combustion, increasing
power output, and improved fuel conversion efficiency. Figure
2 shows the ignition delay for variable spark timing (10-50 CA
BTDC). For 15% H2, the ignition delay was shortened by
about 30% compared with the corresponding value for no H2.
Figure 3 shows the ignition delay for variable EAR (1.0-1.5).
The results show that the ignition delay was shortened at an
EAR of 1.2; it was shortened markedly with the addition of
hydrogen. In particular, a rapid decrease in the ignition delay
was observed between 0% H2 and 5% H2. The decrease in the
ignition delay with hydrogen addition was because of the fast
flame speed of hydrogen.
Figure 2. Ignition delay as a function of spark timing
for the addition of varying amounts of hydrogen at an
EAR of 1.2.
Figure 3. Ignition delay as a function of EAR for the
addition of varying amounts of hydrogen at a spark timing
of 16 CA BTDC.
Effects of Hydrogen Addition on a
Variable Spark Timing
The engine performances with biogas-hydrogen fuel blends
inside the cylinder are shown in Figures 4-5 for a fixed EAR of
1.2 and variable spark timing (10-50 CA BTDC).
Figure 4 shows the peak cylinder pressure as a function of the
spark timing and hydrogen addition at a fixed EAR of 1.2. The
results show a peak cylinder pressure inside the cylinder,
allowing comparison of the numerical analyses and the
experiment. Our previous research was performed to measure
the peak cylinder pressure at a fixed EAR and spark timing
using a target gas engine with H2 contents of 0% and 5%. They
were in good agreement with the numerical results, within an
error range of ±3%. The peak cylinder pressures increased
with advancing spark timing and increasing hydrogen content.
Figure 4. Comparison between numerical and experimental
results for peak cylinder pressure as a function of spark
timing at an EAR of 1.2.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Tuesday, July 31, 2018
Figure 5 shows the burned fuel fraction as a function of the
spark timing for a fixed EAR of 1.2. With the addition of
hydrogen, the burned fuel fraction increased in the range
between 10 and 35 CA BTDC of the spark timing. These
results show that hydrogen addition enhanced the combustion
of biogas. Indeed, the combustion of biogas was close to
complete through the addition of hydrogen.
Figure 5. Burned fuel fraction as a function of spark
timing with the addition of varying amounts of
hydrogen at an EAR of 1.2.
Effects of Hydrogen Addition for a
Variable EAR (1.0-1.5)
The engine performances with biogas-hydrogen fuel blends
inside the cylinder are shown in Figures 6, 7, 8 for a fixed
spark timing (16 CA BTDC) and variable EAR (1.0-1.5).
Figure 6 shows the burned fuel fraction as a function of the
EAR and the amount of hydrogen added at a fixed spark timing
of 16 CA BTDC. With hydrogen addition, the burned fuel
fraction increased greatly. This illustrates that the addition of
hydrogen enhanced the combustion of biogas. As shown in the
figure, with hydrogen addition, the combustion of biogas was
markedly improved at EARs of 1.0 and 1.5. These results
indicate that the combustion of biogas was close to complete
with the addition of hydrogen.
Figure 6. Burned fuel fraction as a function of EAR with
the addition of varying amounts of hydrogen at a spark
timing of 16 CA BTDC.
Figure 7 shows a 10-90% burned duration as a function of the
EAR and the hydrogen addition at a fixed spark timing of 16
CA BTDC. The 10-90% burned duration is related to the flame
speed and propagation of the flame. Generally, hydrogen has a
fast flame speed, which affects the 10-90% burned duration.
As shown in Figure 8, as hydrogen was added, the 10-90%
burned duration decreased greatly. In particular, for 15% H2, it
decreased by about 50% compared with the corresponding
value for no H2 at EARs of 1.0 and 1.5.
Figure 7. 10-90% burn duration as a function of EAR with
the addition of varying amounts of hydrogen.
Figure 8 shows the fuel power as a function of the EAR and the
hydrogen added at a fixed spark timing of 16 CA BTDC. It was
important to estimate the fuel power as an input parameter
related to the generating efficiency. As shown in Figure 9,
when the EAR was increased, the fuel power decreased. The
fuel power in the lean region was lower than in the rich region.
With hydrogen addition, the fuel power was decreased at all
EARs because hydrogen has a lower heating value than biogas;
the added hydrogen served as a substitute for some of the
biogas. These results demonstrate that the fuel power decreased
with hydrogen addition during lean combustion
Figure 8. Fuel power as a function of EAR with the
addition of varying amounts of hydrogen.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Tuesday, July 31, 2018

Generating Efficiency for a Variable

EAR and Spark Timing with the
Addition of Hydrogen
The generating efficiency of biogas-hydrogen blends inside
the cylinder are shown in Figure 9, 10, 11, 12 for a variable
EAR (1.0-1.5) and spark timing (10-50 CA BTDC). These
results were generated by a DOE method. The figure shows the
generating efficiency contour as a function of the EAR and
spark timing. The generating efficiency tended to improve as
the EAR increased and the spark timing was retarded. Figure 9
shows the generating efficiency with no H2. The range of
generating efficiency was from 15 to 25% for a variable EAR
(1.0-1.5) and spark timing (10-50 CA BTDC). Figure 10 shows
the generating efficiency with 5% H2. The generating efficiency
at an EAR of 1.2 and spark timing of 16 CA BTDC was Figure 10. Generating efficiency as a function of EAR and
improved by about 4% compared with the corresponding value spark timing with 5% hydrogen.
for no H2. Figure 11 shows the generating efficiency with 10%
H2. The generating efficiency at an EAR of 1.5 was enhanced,
on average, by about 8% compared with the corresponding
value for no H2. This illustrates that the addition of hydrogen
enhanced lean combustion. Figure 12 shows the generating
efficiency with 15% H2. The fuel power was decreased by the
addition of hydrogen; it also caused enhanced generating
efficiency throughout the range examined. With hydrogen
addition, the generating efficiency was enhanced and lean
combustion was improved because the slow propagation speed
of biogas combustion was improved due to the relatively fast
burning speed of hydrogen.

Figure 11. Generating efficiency as a function of EAR and

spark timing with 10% hydrogen.

Figure 9. Generating efficiency as a function of EAR and

spark timing with 0% hydrogen.

Figure 12. Generating efficiency as a function of EAR and

spark timing with 15% hydrogen.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Tuesday, July 31, 2018
CONCLUSIONS
In this study, the effects of hydrogen addition to a biogas-
fueled gas-engine generator were investigated numerically in
terms of engine performance. The results of this study can be
summarized as follows.
• The fundamental effects of hydrogen at a fixed EAR of
1.2 and spark timing of 16 CA BTDC were investigated. The
heat release rate increased with increasing amounts of added
hydrogen. The ignition delay was shortened by the rapid flame
speed of hydrogen.
• The combustion characteristics of biogas were investigated
at a fixed EAR of 1.2 and variable spark timing (10-50 CA
BTDC) with increasing amounts of added hydrogen. The peak
pressure and burned fuel fraction improved with hydrogen
addition. The optimum spark timing at which the maximum
brake torque occurred was advanced.
• The fundamental effects of added hydrogen at a fixed spark
timing (16 CA BTDC) and variable EAR (1.0-1.5) were
investigated. With increasing amounts of added hydrogen,
the 10-90% burned duration and fuel power decreased. The
decrease in fuel power influenced the increase in generating
efficiency.
• Using a DOE method, numerical results for generating
efficiency were obtained for a variable EAR (1.0-1.5) and spark
timing (10-50 CA BTDC). The addition of hydrogen, up to
15% in volumetric content, improved the generating efficiency
by an average of 14% in the EAR range from 1.0 to 1.5 and
spark timing range from 10 to 50 CA BTDC. The generating
efficiency increased due to the decreased fuel power.
REFERENCES
1. Kahraman N, Ceper B, Akansu SO, Aydin K.
“Investigation of combustion characteristics and emissions
in a spark-ignition engine fueled with natural gas-hydrogen
blends.” Int J Hydrogen Energy 2008;34:126-34.
2. Huang J, Crookes R. “Assessment of simulated biogas as a
fuel for the spark ignition engine.” Fuel 1998:15:1793-1801
3. Dimopoulos P, Bach C, Soltic P, Boulouchos K.
“Hydrogen-natural gas blends fuelling passenger car engines:
Combustion, emissions and well-to-wheels assessment.” Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2008;33:7224-36.
4. S* Akansu, Zafer Dulgerb, Kahramana N, T. Veziroglu N.
“Internal combustion engines fueled by natural gas-hydrogen
mixtures.” Int J Hydrogen Energy 2004:29:1527-39.
5. Agudelo JR, Gutierrez JN, Gonzalez JC, Corredor
LA. “Influencia de la tecnología de conversión sobre el
comportamiento de motores de gasolina convertidos a gas
natural.” Ingeniería y Desarrollo 2002; 11:28-41.
6. Yoon S, Lee C. “Experimental investigation on the
combustion and exhaust emission characteristics of biogas-
biodiesel dual-fuel combustion in a CI engine.” Fuel
Processing Technology 2011:92:992-1000.
7. Rakopoulos CD, Michos CN. “Generation of combustion
irreversibilities in a spark ignition engine under biogas-
hydrogen mixtures fueling.” Int J Hydrogen Energy
2009:34:4422-4437.
8. Porpatham E, Ramesh A, Nagalingam B. “Effect of
hydrogen addition on the performance of a biogas fuelled spark
ignition engine.” Int J Hydrogen Energy 2007:32:2057-65.
9. Jeong C, Kim T, Lee K, Song S, Chun K. “Generating
efficiency and emissions of a spark-ignition gas engine
generator fuelled with biogas-hydrogen blends.” Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2009: 34:9620-27.
10. Lee K, Kim T, Song S, Cha H, Chun K. “Generating
efficiency and NOx emissions of a gas engine generator
fueled with a biogas-hydrogen blend and using an exhaust gas
recirculation system.” Int J Hydrogen Energy 2010:35:5723-30.
11. Frenillot JP, Cabot G, Cazalens M, Renou B, Boukhalfa
MA. “Impact of H2 addition on flame stability and pollutant
emissions for an atmospheric kerosene/air swirled flame
of laborator scaled gas turbine.” Int J Hydrogen Energy
2009:34:3930-44.
12. Ma F, Ding S, Wang Y, Wang YF, Wang J, Zhao S. “Study
on combustion behaviors and cycle-by-cycle variations in a
turbocharged lean burn natural gas S.I. engine with hydrogen
enrichment.” Int J Hydrogen Energy 2008:33:7245-55.
13. Bysveen M. “Engine characteristics of emissions and
performance using mixtures of natural gas and hydrogen.”
Energy 2007:32:482-9.
14. White CM, Steeper RR, Lutz AE. “The hydrogen-
fueled internal combustion engine: a technical review.” Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2006:31:1292-305.
15. Ji C, Wang S. “Effect of hydrogen addition on
combustion and emissions performance of a spark ignition
gasoline engine at lean conditions.” Int J Hydrogen Energy
2009:34:7823-34.
16. Karim GA, Wierzba I, Al-Alousi YH. “Methane-hydrogen
mixtures as fuels.” Int J Hydrogen Energy 1996;21:625-31.
17. GT-POWER. User's manual Version 6.2. Gamma
Technologies; 2006.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Tuesday, July 31, 2018

18. Heywood JB. Internal combustion engine fundamentals.

International ed. Singapore: McGraw-Hill; 1988.
19. Halter F, Chauveau C, Chaumeix ND, Gökalp.
“Characterization of the effects of pressure and hydrogen
concentration on laminar burning velocities of methane-
hydrogen-air mixtures.” Proc Combust Inst 2005;30:201-8.
20. Ilbas M, Crayford AP, Yilmaz I, Bowen PJ, Syred N.
“Laminar-burning velocities of hydrogen-air and hydrogen-
methane-air mixtures: an experimental study.” Int J Hydrogen
Energy 2006;31:1768-79.
21. Sarli VD and Benedetto AD. “Laminar burning velocity
of hydrogen-methane/air premixed flames.” Int J Hydrogen
Energy 2007;32:637-46.

The Engineering Meetings Board has approved this paper for publication. It has Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not
successfully completed SAE’s peer review process under the supervision of the session necessarily those of SAE. The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper.
organizer. This process requires a minimum of three (3) reviews by industry experts.
SAE Customer Service:
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada)
retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, Tel: 724-776-4970 (outside USA)
photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE. Fax: 724-776-0790
Email: CustomerService@sae.org
ISSN 0148-7191 SAE Web Address: http://www.sae.org
Printed in USA