Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (2008) 1284–1290

www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng

Double-Wiebe function: An approach for single-zone

HCCI engine modeling
a,b,* a,b
H. Yasar , H.S. Soyhan , H. Walmsley a, B. Head a, C. Sorusbay c

a
Shell Global Solutions, Shell Technology Centre Thornton, Chester CH1 3SH, UK
b
Sakarya University, Engineering Faculty, Department of Mechanical Engineering, 54187 Esentepe-Sakarya, Turkey
c
Istanbul Technical University, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, 34437 Istanbul, Turkey

Received 22 June 2007; accepted 19 October 2007

Available online 3 December 2007

Abstract

Single-zone Wiebe-function HCCI combustion models tend to over-predict the peak cylinder pressure. The over-prediction arises
because it is not possible for the standard Wiebe function to fully match both the slower combustion (i.e. the large spread of autoignition
times) that occurs in the cooler boundary regions adjacent to the walls and the faster combustion (small spread of autoignition times) in
the hot core. The slower combustion by the wall is commonly modeled with a multi-zone approach. The aim of this work was to improve
the ability of a single-zone model to predict cylinder pressure without introducing a separate wall zone. This was accomplished by using,
within a single zone, a double-Wiebe function combustion model in which most of the fuel burns as usual but a minor fraction (typically
10–20%) burns at a reduced rate. In the present article, cylinder pressure traces predicted by using both standard and double-Wiebe func-
tions are compared to experimental pressure traces obtained from a Ricardo Hydra HCCI engine. The best agreement with the exper-
iments was obtained by using double-Wiebe function approach.
Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: HCCI; Ricardo hydra engine; Modeling; Double-Wiebe; Standard Wiebe

1. Introduction of HCCI is the rapid burning of the fuel/air mixture

HCCI is a form of internal combustion in which well-
mixed fuel and oxidizer are compressed to the point of
autoignition. HCCI has characteristics of both of homoge-
neous charge spark ignition (SI) and stratified charge com-
pression ignition (CI), and has the potential to combine
their best properties. The fuel and oxidizer are mixed
together as in SI engines but instead of an electric discharge
to ignite the mixture, the pressure and temperature of the
mixture are raised by compression until the entire mixture
reacts simultaneously as in CI engines. A key characteristic
*
Corresponding author. Address: Sakarya University, Engineering
Faculty, Department of Mechanical Engineering, 54187 Esentepe-
Sakarya, Turkey. Tel.: +90 2642955854; fax: +90 2642955601.
E-mail addresses: halityasar@gmail.com, hyas@sakarya.edu.tr (H.
Yasar).
because of autoignition occurring almost simultaneously
around the cylinder. Results from numerous researches
on HCCI combustion have been published [1–14] in recent
years. HCCI engines have been shown to achieve extremely
low levels of nitrogen oxide emissions (NOx) without cata-
lytic converters. The unburned hydrocarbon and carbon
monoxide emissions are still high due to lower peak tem-
peratures and must still be treated to meet automotive
emission regulations [15–22].
The HCCI process essentially involves premixed fuel
and air at equivalence ratios that are generally lean.
Autoignition occurs at similar times throughout the cylin-
der leading to a very rapid combustion process in which
all heat is released within approximately 5–15 crank angle
degrees (CAD). In exploring HCCI combustion phenom-
ena, models with varying degrees of detail are used in
efforts to understand how mixture preparation and

1359-4311/$ - see front matter Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2007.10.014
 H. Yasar et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (2008) 1284–1290
Nomenclature
a adjustable constant ()
m adjustable constant ()
n engine speed (rpm)
P instantaneous cylinder pressure (bar)
Pint intake manifold pressure (bar)
T instantaneous cylinder gas temperature (K)
Tint intake manifold temperature (K)
xb mass fraction burned (%)
V instantaneous cylinder volume (m3)
awall, Kwall fitting parameters of slower combustion ()
k excess air ratio ()
h crank angle (deg)
h0 start of combustion (deg)
h50 time for 50% burn (deg)
Dh total combustion duration (deg)
in-cylinder thermodynamic conditions affect the chemical
kinetics of autoignition.
The physics behind combustion processes can be
described either with multi-dimensional models that solve
numerically the equations for mass, momentum, energy
and species conservation in three dimensions to predict
the thermodynamic state at different positions or, in the
other extreme, with zero-dimensional models that assume
the same average state throughout the gas. The latter can
readily be coupled to empirical heat release models [23].
Zero-dimensional models are the most commonly used
tools for parametric studies associated with HCCI engine
development. The governing equations are ordinary differ-
ential equations since there is only one independent vari-
able. Zero-dimensional HCCI models can contain
multiple zones, for example, a high temperature core and
one or more wall zones and within each zone it is possible
to consider burned and unburned gas. However, as system-
atic spatial trends often have little influence, the simplest
approach is for a single zone containing spatially undiffer-
entiated burned and unburned gas with a possible allow-
ance for the influence of wall layers on heat transfer
processes.
Within this type of zero-dimensional model, combustion
progress can be described by a Wiebe function fitted as far
as possible to the accumulated heat release derived from
the measured cylinder pressure [24]. The Wiebe method
can describe the engine operating conditions for which it
has been tuned and is often accurate enough to be used
for semi-predictive modeling if care is taken when analyz-
ing the results [25].
There are two problems with using the standard Wiebe
function for combustion progress. Firstly, the parameters
that appear in the function vary with operating conditions.
Secondly a standard Wiebe function can only be made to
adopt a limited range of combustion progress shapes and
if there are large differences between the burn rate at differ-
1285
Abbreviations
abs absolute
CAD crank angle degree
CI compression ignition
EVC exhaust valve closing time
EVO exhaust valve opening time
HCCI homogeneous charge compression ignition
int intake
IVC intake valve closing time
IVO intake valve opening time
PID proportional–integral–derivative
SI spark ignition
NOx nitrogen oxide emissions
ent times it can be difficult to obtain an accurate match
between any Wiebe shape and the real combustion progress
variable through all stages of combustion. In HCCI, there
are often large differences in effective burn rate between the
main combustion period and late combustion. These differ-
ences arise because there is a greater spread of autoignition
times in the cooler (late-igniting) regions, where tempera-
ture gradients are high, compared to hotter (early-igniting)
regions where temperatures are relatively uniform.
In this paper, the benefits of adding a second, slower-
burning portion to the standard Wiebe function to repre-
sent these colder areas are explored. This leads to a
‘‘double-Wiebe function’’ model. Canova et al. [5] used a
triple-Wiebe function model for diesel HCCI but with gas-
oline, the initial cool flame heat release is not evident as a
separate feature and a double-Wiebe function is thought to
be sufficient. The utility of the double-Wiebe function mod-
ification by comparing the pressures calculated using the
standard and double-Wiebe function methods with experi-
mental pressure data obtained from a Hydra HCCI Engine
is tested.
2. Model
2.1. The engine model
The model is based on the Shell SI engine code called
TRICE.1 Several modifications were made to TRICE so
that it could be used for HCCI engine modeling. SI TRICE
uses a quasi-dimensional method with physically separate
burned and unburned gas zones of defined geometry.
Either a Wiebe function or a turbulent burning rate model
can be used to specify how much burned and unburned gas
1
TRICE is a modified version of SPICE [26] (Simulated Petrol Internal
Combustion Engine), which was originally derived from the MIT Quasi
model.
1286 H. Yasar et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (2008) 1284–1290
exists at a given crank angle. The HCCI code uses the
Wiebe function option since a turbulent flame model has
no role in HCCI combustion. Also the spatial separation
of burned and unburned gas has almost no relevance to
HCCI and is dropped from the HCCI modification (e.g.
separate heat loss calculations for burned and unburned
gas zones are abandoned because the two zones are more
intimately mixed and flame engulfment calculations based
on a fixed flame geometry are no longer relevant).
2.2. Fuel burning and heat release rate correlations
The Wiebe function [27] can be expressed as follows:
 mþ1 !
h  h0
xb ¼ 1  exp a ð1Þ
Dh
where xb is the mass fraction burned, h is the crank angle,
h0, which fixes the timing, is the crank angle at the start of
combustion, a and Dh are adjustable constants that deter-
mine the combustion duration, and m is an adjustable
parameter that fixes the shape of the combustion progress
curve.
The constant, a, essentially duplicates the role of the
burn duration, Dh. If a, and Dh are selected independently,
there is a redundant parameter and the physical meaning of
Dh is undefined. However it is useful to retain a because, if
it is fixed judiciously, it allows Dh to be given a clear and
simple meaning. Thus, for example, substituting specific
burn fractions (0.1 and 0.9) and the associated crank angles
into Eq. (1) and applying some algebra show that if
a ¼ a10–90
"  1=mþ1   1=mþ1 #mþ1
1 1
¼ ln  ln
ð1–0:9Þ ð1–0:1Þ
ð2Þ
then Dh = Dh1–9, where Dh1–9 is the 10–90% burn time. This
definition of a in the modeling is used because it leads to a
fixed, clear and simple interpretation of Dh.
For SI simulation, the simplest method of fixing the tim-
ing is to set h0 = hspark. However, a better fit to the mea-
sured pressures may be obtained by treating h0 as an
adjustable parameter and allowing it to drift slightly from
hspark. For HCCI, the latter approach is preferable because
the start of combustion is not a fixed event. For curve fit-
ting purposes it is often easier to set the timing by dealing
with the 50% burn time rather than the ignition time
because the 50% time occurs fairly close to the peak pres-
sure and it is easy to use a measured value of the peak pres-
sure timing as a first approximation to initiate a curve
fitting process. Algebra based on Eq. (1) shows that the
relationship between the ignition time, h0 and the 50% burn
time, h50, is
 1=ðmþ1Þ
lnð2Þ
h0 ¼ h50  Dh10–90 ð3Þ
a10–90
As noted in the introduction, single-zone HCCI models,
with standard Wiebe function combustion tend to over-
predict the peak pressure [28] because of the difficulty of
representing the slower combustion that occurs adjacent
to the walls. The slower combustion is commonly modeled
with a multi-zone approach (usually 2 or 3 zones) but it is
found that wall effects could be accommodated, without
introducing a separate wall zone, by using a double-Wiebe
function combustion model in which a fraction of the fuel
(representing the wall region) burns at a reduced rate. The
double-Wiebe function can be defined as
(  mþ1 !)
h  h0
xb ¼ ð1  awall Þ 1  exp a
Dh
(
 mþ1 !)
h  h0
þ awall 1  exp a ð4Þ
K wall Dh
where awall is the fraction of the mixture that burns in the
slow combustion region and Kwall is the ratio of the slow
burn duration to the standard burn duration. The differ-
ences produced by the double-Wiebe function approach
are illustrated in Fig. 1 which shows Wiebe functions with
different m values between 0.1 and 10 for a burn duration
(10–90%) of 10 crank angle degrees and 50% heat release
at TDC. The curves span virtually the full range of com-
bustion rates that can be obtained by changing m and show
that options here are quite limited. The dotted lines show
the curves that can be obtained with a double-Wiebe func-
tion with Kwall = 10 and a = 0.25. A much more significant
and extended late combustion period can now easily be
represented. However, with large m values, the combustion
is very slow to start and the slow burning mixture remains
unburned during the interval shown.
Another possibility for representing slow combustion
with a Wiebe function is to extend the burn duration. How-
ever it is not possible, even with low m values and therefore
sharp combustion onset, to extend the duration of the late
burn without also either extending the early burn an
1.00
0.75
Heat release fraction
0.50 standard Wiebe, m = 0.1
standard Wiebe, m = 1.0
standard Wiebe, m = 10
double-Wiebe, m = 0.1
0.25
double-Wiebe, m = 1.0
double-Wiebe, m = 10
0.00
350 360 370 380 390 400
Crank Angle (deg)
Fig. 1. Wiebe functions with different m values.
 H. Yasar et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (2008) 1284–1290 1287

1 valve. A proportional–integral–derivative (PID) regulator

held the charge temperature within 3 °C of the set value.
The airflow rate was measured with a Cussons laminar
Heat release fraction

0.75 air flow meter. The gravimetric fuel flow-rate was also mea-
sured. The mixture strength was measured by a Horiba
MEXA 1500 exhaust gas analyzer, which delivers the
0.5
excess air ratio, k, and specific emissions data. Cylinder
Burn duration = 5 CAD pressure was measured with a Kistler 6125 piezoelectric
0.25
Burn duration = 20 CAD pressure transducer located in the side of the pent-roof cyl-
Burn duration = 40 CAD inder head. Heat release data was calculated from the pres-
sure signal by using Rassweiler and Withrow heat release
0 model [29]. The measurement data was recorded on an
340 350 360 370 380 390 400 AVL data acquisition system.
Crank Angle (deg)
3.2. Experimental procedure
Fig. 2. Wiebe functions of different duration, m = 0.1.

unrealistic amount or unrealistically retarding the 50%
burn time. The extended early burn is illustrated in
Fig. 2, which shows how combustion progress varies as
the burn duration is increased for a low m value of 0.1
and a fixed 50% burn time.
3. Experimental
3.1. The test engine and instrumentation
The measurements were carried out on a Ricardo Hydra
single-cylinder research engine with a Typhon 4-valve pent-
roof cylinder head. The piston had a raised crown to
achieve the high compression ratio of 14.04 required to
achieve HCCI operation. The engine specifications and
valve timings are presented in Table 1.
The fuel was injected into the inlet port at compression
Tests were done with a single fuel that had the specifica-
tions given in Table 2. The mixture strength, k, was set to
fixed values of 3.5, 4.0, 4.5 and 5.0 by adjusting the amount
of fuel injected. The engine was operated with intake tem-
perature, intake pressure and engine speed all held constant
at 250 °C, 1.0 bar (abs) and 1200 rpm respectively. Lubri-
cant and coolant temperatures were both held at a constant
90 °C.
An average pressure signal based on 100 cycles was
obtained and stored by the AVL system for each condition
once combustion had stabilized. The uncertainty levels of
the averaged cylinder pressure components are estimated
for N = 10 realizations of the repeated experiments under
the same conditions by considering the statistical errors
as follows. Let m ¼ X be the mean value (time averaged)
of a general random variable X, and M the mean average
of N successive realizations of this random variable
1 XN

TDC and targeted onto the back of the closed inlet valves. M¼ Xi ð5Þ
N i¼1
This timing was designed to allow the maximum possible
time for fuel to evaporate and mix before induction into Denoting hÆi as ensemble average, the normalized disper-
the cylinder. sion hjM  mji/m gives the percentage of uncertainty level
The intake could be pressurized using an electrically dri- (statistical error) in the estimate of mean quantities [30].
ven compressor and the intake air could be heated. The
temperature, Tint, of the fresh charge was measured with
Table 2
a K thermocouple located 80 mm from the manifold head
The specifications of the fuel used during experiments
face and approximately 200 mm from the back of the inlet
Parameter Value Unit
Fuel name Unleaded gasoline
Table 1 Molecular formula C6.43H11.85
Ricardo Hydra engine specifications RON 94.40 –
Parameter Value Unit MON 84.00 –
Stoichiometric AFR. 14.53 –
Bore 86 mm
Heat of combustion, DH 44,810 kJ/kg
Stroke 86 mm
Density (at 20 °C) 731 kg/m3
Connection rod length 143.5 mm
Compression ratio 14.04 –
Inlet valve diameter 32 mm
Number of valves 4 – Table 3
Inlet valve opening (IVO) 340 CAD Uncertainty levels of the cylinder pressure for different mixture strengths
Inlet valve closing (IVC) 612 CAD
Exhaust valve opening (EVO) 120 CAD k = 3.5 k = 4.0 k = 4.5 k = 5.0
Exhaust valve closing (EVC) 332 CAD Uncertainity level (%) 0.115 0.118 0.116 0.117
1288 H. Yasar et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (2008) 1284–1290

The estimated uncertainty levels of the measured cylinder The results for other k values are very similar and are
pressure are given in Table 3. not shown in separate figures to avoid repetition. Instead,
the measured and calculated results for the four different
4. Results and discussion k values, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5 and 5.0 are given in Tables 5 and 6.
The double-Wiebe function predicts almost identical
With the standard Wiebe function, different sets of results to the measurements until the expansion stroke
parameters can fit either the time or the value of maximum but at this stage it over-predicts the pressure. The standard
pressure but, if 100% combustion is assumed, it is not pos- Wiebe function is also over-predicts the pressure during
sible to match both simultaneously. It becomes possible to expansion. The reason is believed to lie in the neglect of
match both quantities if it is allowed that less than 100% blow-by in the model where the measurements indicated
combustion but then a significant fraction of unburned 0.55% blow-by over the whole cycle. Most of the blow-by
material needs to be specified (15% for our data) and this occurs during expansion so that by neglecting it we tend
is inconsistent with measured hydrocarbon emissions. to predict higher pressures with both the standard and
With a double-Wiebe function, it is possible to fit both the double-Wiebe functions. The blow-by effect has been
the magnitude and the time of the measured maximum modeled approximately by forcing the exhaust valve to
pressure without the need so specify an unrealistic propor- open slightly early in the expansion stroke. In this way
tion of unburned fuel. blow-by can be represented by an orifice mass-flow calcula-
Best-fit parameters obtained for both the standard and tion between cylinder pressure and atmospheric pressure
double-Wiebe functions by parametric study for a mixture and both mass and enthalpy losses can be accounted for.
strength of 3.5 are given in Table 4. Fig. 3 compares the A blow-by of 0.4% during expansion was found to permit
predicted cylinder pressures, obtained as discussed in Sec- the pressure traces to be matched to the experimental
tion 2.2, with the measured ones, derived by the AVL soft- curves. Comment on relation between predicted expansion
ware as described in Section 3.1, for the k value of 3.5. blow-by for best-fit and measured, whole-cycle blow-by. In
future, a full description of blow-by into SPICE will be
incorporated.
Table 4
Table 5 gives the maximum cylinder pressures and the
The best-fit parameters of standard and double-Wiebe functions for a percentage differences between maximum measured and
mixture strength of 3.5 predicted pressures for the time of the measured maximum
Parameter Standard Wiebe Double- pressure. The difference between model and experiment for
Best-fit to the value of Best-fit to the timing of
Wiebe the standard Wiebe function is at least 6.84%, but is
the maximum pressure the maximum pressure reduced to 1.52% with the double-Wiebe function.
h50 (CAD) 360.07 355.99 355.90
The mass fraction burned curves obtained from the
Dh (CAD) 9.25 5.20 4.15 standard Wiebe and double-Wiebe functions by using the
m 1.50 1.50 1.50 best-fit curves is shown in Fig. 4. The last 5% or so of com-
awall – – 0.155 bustion with the double-Wiebe function occurs relatively
Kwall – – 10 quickly. This is an artefact arising from the SI origins of
the code. For SI applications with a central ignition point,
the flame area grows continuously until a sudden extinction
when the flame reaches the wall. The sudden extinction
60 caused problems for the integration subroutine that were
standard Wiebe (*) circumvented in the SI code by replacing the sudden extinc-
standard Wiebe (+)
50 double-Wiebe Function tion with a more gradual rundown of combustion rate over
experiment
the last few percent burned. Sudden extinction of combus-
Pressure (bar)

40 tion is not a feature of the HCCI Wiebe or double-Wiebe

functions so this feature is not necessary. Inadvertently it
30
was left in the code with the results that can be seen in
Fig. 4.
20

10 Table 5
Measured and predicted maximum cylinder pressures and differences
0 Excess Experiment Standard Diff. Double-Wiebe Diff.
300 315 330 345 360 375 390 405 420 air ratio (bar) Wiebe function (%) function (bar) (%)
Crank Angle (deg) (k) (bar)
(*) the standard Wiebe curved best-fitted to the timing of maximum pressure 3.5 47.725 51.297 7.96 47.924 0.42
(+)the standard Wiebe curved best-fitted to the value of maximum pressure 4.0 44.493 48.818 9.70 44.912 0.90
4.5 42.274 46.693 10.50 42.801 1.20
Fig. 3. Measured and predicted cylinder pressure traces, k = 3.5, n = 1200
5.0 39.545 43.847 10.90 40.215 1.70
rpm, Tint = 523 K, Pint = 1.026 bar, fuel = unleaded gasoline fuel.
 H. Yasar et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (2008) 1284–1290 1289

Table 6
The 10%, 50% and 90% mass fraction burned points that gave the best-fit results with the standard-Wiebe and double-Wiebe functions
Mass fraction k = 3.5 k = 4.0 k = 4.5 k = 5.0
burned (%)
Standard Double- Standard Double- Standard Double- Standard Double-
Wiebe (CAD) Wiebe Wiebe (CAD) Wiebe Wiebe (CAD) Wiebe Wiebe (CAD) Wiebe
(CAD) (CAD) (CAD) (CAD)
10 353.5 353.6 354.1 354.3 354.5 354.8 354.9 355.2
50 355.5 355.9 356.5 357.0 357.2 358.0 358.0 359.3
90 357.8 380.7 359.1 395.8 360.2 406.1 362.0 410.5

1.2 heat-release rate than the standard Wiebe function and

agrees better with the experimental results. The improved
1.0 agreement is a result of the slower combustion of part of
Mass Fraction Burned

the mixture in the double-Wiebe function.

0.8
5. Conclusions
0.6

standard Wiebe Function

In this work, an experimental and modeling study has
0.4
double-Wiebe Function
been carried out to compare the performance of the stan-
0.2
dard Wiebe function with a double-Wiebe function that
allows us to define a proportion of slower combustion for
0.0 HCCI engine modeling. The engine simulation code,
350 360 370 380 390 400 410 TRICE, was modified and used to model the Ricardo
Crank Angle (deg) Hydra single-cylinder research engine running on HCCI
Fig. 4. Mass fraction burned traces for standard and double-Wiebe
mode. The standard and double-Wiebe functions were
functions, k = 3.5, n = 1200 rpm, Tint = 523 K, Pint = 1.026 bar, implemented into the model to evaluate their performance
fuel = unleaded gasoline. in comparison with the experimental data obtained in Shell
Thornton.
The study showed that by describing a proportion of
140
slower combustion with a double-Wiebe function, it was
120
standard Wiebe Function possible to achieve better a match to experimental data
double-Wiebe Function
than with a standard Wiebe function. A standard Wiebe
Net Heat Release (kJ/m deg)

experiment
100 function can be fitted either to predict the value of max-
3

imum pressure or the time of the maximum pressure but

80
not both. However it is possible to predict them both
60 simultaneously by using the double-Wiebe function. It is
expected to get closer results to multi-zone models by
40 using the double-Wiebe function in single zone HCCI
models.
20

0 Acknowledgements
240 270 300 330 360
-20
Crank Angle (deg)
Fig. 5. Measured and predicted net heat release traces, k = 3.5, n = 1200
rpm, Tint = 523 K, Pint = 1.026 bar, fuel = unleaded gasoline.
Table 6 gives the calculated 10%, 50% and 90% mass
fraction burned crank angles obtained by using the stan-
dard Wiebe and the double-Wiebe functions for four mix-
ture strength value. The variation in mixture strength value
does not change the results very much.
The predicted net heat-release rates are compared with
the measured ones for the k value of 3.5 as seen in
Fig. 5. The double-Wiebe function gives a lower peak
390 420 450 480
This work has been financed under the European Com-
mission Marie Curie Transfer of Knowledge Scheme (FP6)
pursuant to Contract MTKI-CT-2004-509777 and was per-
formed within a framework of a research and technological
development program with the title SUSTAINABLE
FUELUBE.
References
[1] S.M. Aceves, D.L. Flowers, F. Espincisco-Loza, A. Babajimopoulos,
D.N. Assanis, Analysis of premixed charge compression ignition
combustion with a sequential fluid mechanics-multizone chemical
kinetics model, SAE Paper 2005-01-0115.
[2] M. Sjober, J. Dec, N.P. Cernansky, Potential of thermal stratification
and combustion retard for reducing pressure-rise rates in HCCI
1290 H. Yasar et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (2008) 1284–1290
engines, based on multi-zone modeling and experiments, SAE Paper
2005-01-0113.
[3] S. Sato, D. Jun, S. Kweon, D. Yamashita, N. Iida, Basic research on
the suitable fuel for HCCI engine from the viewpoint of chemical
reaction, SAE Paper 2005-01-0149.
[4] M. Konno, Z. Chen, Ignition Mechanisms of HCCI combustion
process fueled with methane/DME composite fuel, SAE Paper 2005-
01-0182.
[5] M. Canova, R. Garcin, S. Midlam-Mohler, Y. Guezennec, G.
Rizzoni, A control-oriented model of combustion process in a HCCI
diesel engine, 2005 American Control Conference, Portland, OR,
USA, 2005, pp. 4446–4451.
[6] J. Chang, O. Guralp, Z. Filipi, D. Assanis, New heat transfer
correlation for an HCCI engine derived from measurements of
instantaneous surface heat flux, SAE Paper 2004-01-2996.
[7] J. Bengtsson, P. Strandh, R. Johansson, P. Tunestål, B. Johansson,
Closed-loop combustion control of homogeneous charge compression
ignition (HCCI) engine dynamics, International Journal of Adaptive
Control and Signal Processing 18 (2004) 167–179.
[8] K. Epping, S. Aceves, R. Bechtold, J. Dec, The potential of HCCI
combustion for high efficiency and low emissions, SAE Paper No.
2002-01-1923.
[9] H.S. Soyhan, T. Lovas, F. Mauss, A stochastic simulation of an
HCCI engine using an automatically reduced mechanism, ASME
Paper No: 2001-ICE-416, 2001; 37-2: pp. 83–96.
[10] R.W. Dibble, M. Au, J.W. Girard, S.M. Aceves, D.L. Flowers, J.M.
Frias, A review of HCCI engine research: analysis and experiments,
SAE Paper 2001-01-2511.
[11] D.L. Flowers, S.M. Aceves, J.R. Smith, J. Torres, J. Girard, R.W.
Dibble, HCCI in a CFR Engine: experiments and detailed kinetic
modeling, SAE Paper 2000-01-0328.
[12] S.M. Aceves, D.L. Flowers, C.K. Westbrook, J.R. Smith, R.W.
Dibble, M. Christensen, W.J. Pitz, B. Johansson, A multi-zone model
for prediction of HCCI combustion and emissions, SAE Paper 2000-
01-0327.
[13] R.H. Stanglmaier, C.E. Roberts, Homogeneous charge compression
ignition (HCCI): benefits, compromises, and future engine applica-
tion, SAE Paper No. 1999-01-3682.
[14] P.M. Najt, D.E. Foster, Compression – ignited homogeneous charge
combustion, SAE Paper 830264.
[15] M. Canova, S. Midlam-Mohler, Y. Guezennec, G. Rizzoni, Theoret-
ical and experimental investigation on diesel HCCI combustion with
external mixture formation, International Journal of Vehicle Design
44 (1/2) (2007) 62–83.
[16] M.Y. Kim, C.S. Lee, Effect of a narrow fuel spray angle and a dual
injection configuration on the improvement of exhaust emissions in a
HCCI diesel engine, Fuel 86 (17–18) (2007) 2871–2880.
[17] D.S. Kim, C.S. Lee, Improved emission characteristics of HCCI
engine by various premixed fuels and cooled EGR, Fuel 85 (5–6)
(2006) 695–704.
[18] L. Shi, Y. Cui, K. Deng, H. Peng, Y. Chen, Study of low emission
homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI) engine using
combined internal and external exhaust gas recirculation (EGR),
Energy 31 (14) (2006) 2665–2676.
[19] L. Xingcai, C. Wei, H. Zhen, A fundamental study on the control of
the HCCI combustion and emissions by fuel design concept combined
with controllable EGR. Part 1. The basic characteristics of HCCI
combustion, Fuel 84 (2005) 1074–1083.
[20] D.S. Kim, M.Y. Kim, C.S. Lee, Combustion and emission
characteristics of partial homogeneous charge compression ignition
engine, Combustion Science and Technology 177 (2005) 107–125.
[21] S. Onishi, S.H. Jo, K. Shoda, P.D. Jo, S. Kato, Active Thermo-
Atmosphere Combustion (ATAC) – A New Combustion Process for
Internal Combustion Engines, SAE Paper 790501.
[22] M. Noguchi, Y. Tanaka, T. Tanaka, Y. Takeuchi, A study on
gasoline engine combustion by observation of intermediate reactive
products during combustion, SAE Paper 790840.
[23] R. Stone, Introduction to Internal Combustion Engines, third ed.,
Macmillan Press, London, UK, 1999.
[24] M. Klein, L. Eriksson, A specific heat ratio model for single-zone heat
release models, 2004; SAE 2004-01-1464.
[25] C. Elmqvist, F. Lindström, H. Ångström, B. Grandin, G. Kalghatgi,
Optimizing Engine Concepts by Using a Simple Model for Knock
Prediction, 2003; SAE 2003-01-3123.
[26] D. Bradley, C. Morley, H.L. Walmsley, Relevance of Research and
Motor Octane Numbers to the Prediction of Engine Autoignition,
2004; SAE 2004-01-1970.
[27] I.I. Vibe, Brennverlauf und Kreisprocess von Verbennungsmotoren,
VEB Verlag Technik, Berlin, 1970.
[28] H. Zhao, H. Xie, Z. Peng, Effect of recycled burned gases on
homogeneous charge compression ignition combustion, Combustion
Science and Technology 177 (10) (2005) 1863–1882.
[29] G.M. Rassweiler, L. Withrow, Motion pictures of engine flames
correlated with pressure cards, SAE Transactions 47 (1938) 185–204.
[30] F. Schmitt, B.K. Hazarika, C. Hirsch, LDV measurements of the flow
field in the nozzle region of a confined double annular burner,
Transactions of ASME, Journal of Fluids Engineering 123 (2001)
228–236.