Indian Journal of Engineering & Materials Sciences

Vol. 12, December 2005, pp. 505-514

Optimizing diesel engine parameters for emission reduction using Taguchi

method: Variation risk analysis approach Part II
M Nataraj*, V P Arunachalam & N Dhandapani
Mechanical Engineering, Government College of Technology, Coimbatore 641 013, India
Received 29 July 2004; accepted 1 August 2005
Taguchi parameter design research methodology allows one to make products or processes robust to uncontrollable
noise factors and will also reduce the number of experiments to be carried out to arrive an optimized system. The main
objective of this work is to study the various operating parameters of diesel engine to propose modified engine parameter
(optimum) settings for reduction in NOX, HC, CO and smoke concentrations simultaneously in diesel emission by applying
Taguchi parameter design concept. Taguchi L18 (2137) quality design concept mixed orthogonal array has been used to
determine the S/N ratio (dB), analysis of variance (ANOVA) and F0 test values for recognizing most significant engine
operating parameters that influence exhaust emission. The experimental results give an idea about how the variations in
engine settings like nozzle spray holes, piston-to-head clearance, nozzle protrusion, injection control pressure, start of
injection timing and swirl level alter the pollutant (NOX, HC, CO and smoke) intensity in emission. Considering these
significant engine-operating parameters, verification of the improvement in the quality characteristics for emission reduction
has been done through confirmation test with reference to the chosen initial or reference parameter settings. These
confirmation test results prove that the optimal combination of diesel engine parameters obtained from the investigation
reducing the pollutant levels in exhaust emission in reality.
IPC Code: F02B

The feasibility of using the Taguchi method to

optimize selected engine design/operating parameters
for low emission was investigated using a Dhandapani
Foundary (DPF) diesel engine in Part-I1. In order to
examine whether the variation in key combustion
parameters have the same effect and influence on
every diesel engine of any make, the same research
methodology was adopted on TEXVEL diesel engine
with the same hardware configurations. Extensive
research into the mechanisms governing diesel
combustion and emissions has already been
reported2,3. The vast amount of investigation done in
the diesel combustion and emissions still not well
understood due to the complex interrelationships that
exist between combustion system parameters and fuel
injection system parameters. Taguchi developed
multivariate
experimental
techniques4,5
using
orthogonal design arrays that allow one to isolate the
effect of a single parameter on a particular response
characteristic. Taguchi methods have been most
extensively used in industrial and manufacturing
sectors; their application to investigate diesel
combustion and emissions has been very limited6. The
___________
*For correspondence (E-mail: m_natanuragct@yahoo.com)

objective of this research study was to examine the

effects of changes in several key combustion and fuel
injection system parameters on engine exhaust using
Taguchi methods to have a better understanding of
how these changes affect the diesel combustion and
emission formation processes.
Experimental Procedure
Test set-up and experimentation

A test rig has been installed for experimentation to

measure the NOX, CO, HC and smoke levels of
engine emissions. The rig comprises of fuel tank,
manometer, air tank, electronic temperature
measuring unit, fuel injection system, and exhaust gas
analyzer. A single cylinder, direct injection TEXVEL
engine having bore (114 mm) and stroke (140 mm)
was taken for investigation. Fig. 1 shows the
experimental test set-up put in the research laboratory
at Government College of Technology, Coimbatore.
Steady state tests were conducted on diesel engine
with 18 different hardware configurations at 40% and
60% of maximum load during the experiment. The
injector unit was removed often to change the
nozzle/nozzle protrusion. The trials associated with
the change of piston-to-head clearance (gasket
change) were tested in random order to save testing

INDIAN J. ENG. MATER. SCI., DECEMBER 2005

506

time as well as avoid introducing any noise otherwise

would be caused by hardware change. Extra
precautions were taken to ensure that each part was
re-installed according to specifications. A total of 288
data points were recorded in this experiment with the
help of exhaust gas analyzers (Kane-May 900
combustion analyzer for measuring NOX level, NPMSM11B meter for measuring smoke level and NPMCH1 exhaust gas analyzer for measuring CO and HC
levels). NOX, CO, HC and smoke emission responses
were obtained for the 18 engine configurations. The
response of the system is measured using Eq. (1)
i =n

Fig. 1Diesel engine test rig.

S/N ratio (dB)STB = -10 log [1/n

Y 2]
i =1

Table 1Parameter with Levels

Parameters

A. Number of holes 3 holes

B. Piston-to-head
1.2
clearance
C. Nozzle Potrusion 2.5
D. Start of Injection25.3
Timing
bTDC
F. Injection Control
160
Pressure
G. Swirl Level
open
(Throttle Position)

where, n is number of trials and Yi are the emission

data for each trial.

Levels
2

4 holes

1.4

1.8

mm

3.4
28.3
bTDC

4.35
31.3
bTDC

mm

170

180

atm

open

Full open

Unit
Parameter selection

deg.

The engine parameters that are most likely to

influence diesel exhaust emissions are nozzle spray
holes, piston-to-head clearance, nozzle protrusion,
injection control pressure, start of injection timing and
swirl level7.
Selection of factor levels and orthogonal array

Due to the non-linearly of the diesel exhaust

emissions over the normal speed and load operating

Table 2Mixed orthogonal arrays [L18 (2137)]

1
Column No.

No. of
holes

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Three
Three
Three
Three
Three
Three
Three
Three
Three
Four
Four
Four
Four
Four
Four
Four
Four
Four

... (1)

2
Piston-tohead clearance
(mm2)

3
Nozzle
protrusion
(mm)

4
Injection control pr.
(atm)

5
Start of inj. timing
(degree)

6
Swirl level

1.2
1.2
1.2
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.6
1.6
1.6

2.9
3.95
4.0
2.9
4.0
4.0
2.9
3.95
4.0
2.9
3.95
4.0
2.9
3.95
4.0
2.9
3.95
4.0

160
170
180
160
170
180
170
180
160
180
160
170
170
180
160
180
160
170

25.3bTDC
28.3bTDC
31.3bTDC
28.3bTDC
31.3bTDC
25.3bTDC
25.3bTDC
28.3bTDC
31.3bTDC
31.3bTDC
25.3bTDC
28.3bTDC
31.3bTDC
25.3bTDC
28.3bTDC
28.3bTDC
31.3bTDC
25.3bTDC

Low
Medium
High
Medium
High
Low
High
Low
Medium
Medium
High
Low
Low
Medium
High
High
Low
Medium

NATARAJ et al.: DIESEL ENGINE PARAMETERS FOR EMISSION REDUCTION USING TAGUCHI METHOD

range of the engine, two levels for nozzle spray holes

(A) and three levels for the remaining parameters was
considered. Control parameters and their levels are
given in Table 1. L18 [21 37] mixed orthogonal array
shown in Table 2 was selected for the experimental
investigation. smaller-the-better is being taken as a
quality characteristic, since the objective function is
to minimize NOx, CO, HC and smoke emission.
Statistical analysis

A statistical analysis was done for the experimental

data obtained which are shown in Table A2 from the
L18 experiment. The average emission responses and
S/N ratios were calculated for each control factor.
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed to
identify the most significant control parameters and to
quantify their effects on NOX, CO, HC and smoke.
Table 3 shows variance (Fo) and percentage of
contribution ratio ().

507

Response curve analysis

Response curve analysis is aimed at determining

influential parameters and their optimum levels. Figs
2 and 3 show significant effects for each emission
response at each factor level for 40% Wmax and 60%
Wmax respectively. The S/N ratios for the different
emission responses were calculated at each factor
level and the average effects were determined by
taking the total of each factor level and dividing by
the number of data points in that total. The greater
difference between the levels, the parametric
influence will be much. The parameter level having
the highest S/N ratio corresponds to the parameters
setting indicates lowest emission.
Referring (Fig. 2) the response curve at 40% Wmax
for the CO emissions, the highest S/N ratio was
observed at nozzle spray holes (4 holes), piston-tohead clearance (1.8 mm), nozzle protrusion (4.35
mm), start of injection timing (25.3 bTDC), injection

Table 3ANOVA results for 40% and 60% of Wmax

CF
F0
A
B
C
D
F
G
(e)

CO (%)
%

102.5*
0.7
4.2
16.0 !
6.0
64.4
-

35.2
0.5
2.9
11.0
4.1
44.2
2.1

F0

40% of Wmax
HC (ppm)
Smoke (HSU)
NOX (ppm)
F0
F0
%
%
%

5.1*
3.5 !
1.9
1.6
4.5
0.5
-

14.6
19.9
11.1
9.1
25.5
2.7
17.1

25.3*
1.7
0.2
0.8
1.4
9.9
-

42.8
5.8
0.5
2.8
4.6
33.4
10.2

12.1
1.0
0.2
17.8*
0.04
3.5 !
-

19.2
3.1
0.5
56.5
0.1
11.1
9.5

F0

CO (%)
%

20.8
1.5
1.3
1.0
5.9 !
40.6*
-

F0

16.3
2.4
2.0
1.6
9.3
63.7
4.7

(e)-pooled error [e1+e2] * Most significant More significant ! Significant Less significant

60% of Wmax
HC (ppm)
Smoke (HSU)
NOx (ppm)
F0
F0
%
%
%

12
1.9
1.4
1.2
4.8 !
17 *

Fig. 2Response curves for 40% Wmax.

16.9
5.4
4.0
3.4
13.6
48.2
8.5

29.0*
4.1
0.1
0.4
4.2 !
28.6
-

Very less significant

26.5
7.4
0.1
0.7
7.7
52.2
5.5

11.3
0.3
0.4
20.0*
0.2
1.0
-

18.5
1.0
1.3
65.6
0.6
3.2
9.8

508

INDIAN J. ENG. MATER. SCI., DECEMBER 2005

Fig. 3Response curves for 60% Wmax.

control pressure (170 mm) and swirl level (full

throttle open). Similarly the optimum parameter
setting for lowest HC emissions were found to be a
nozzle spray holes (4 holes), piston-to-head clearance
(1.8 mm), nozzle protrusion (4.35 mm), start of
injection timing (25.3 before TDC), injection control
pressure (170 atm) and swirl level (full throttle open).
Smoke emissions were lowest at nozzle spray holes (4
holes), piston-to-head clearance (1.4 mm), nozzle
protrusion (4.35 mm), start of injection timing (25.3
before TDC), injection control pressure (160 atm) and
swirl level (full throttle open). NOX emissions were
lower at nozzle spray holes (3 holes), piston-to-head
clearance (1.2 mm), nozzle protrusion (3.4 mm), start
of injection timing (25.3 before TDC), injection
control pressure (180 atm) and swirl level (full
throttle).
Referring (Fig. 3) the response curve, looking 60%
Wmax for the CO emissions, the highest S/N ratio was
observed at nozzle spray holes (4 holes), piston-tohead clearance (1.8 mm), nozzle protrusion (4.35
mm), start of injection timing (25.3 before TDC),
injection control pressure (170 atm) and swirl level
(full throttle open). Average HC emission was lowest
for nozzle spray holes (4 holes), piston-to-head
clearance (1.8 mm), nozzle protrusion (4.35 mm),
start of injection timing (25.3 bTDC), injection
control pressure (170 mm) and swirl level (full
throttle open). Smoke emission were lowest at nozzle
spray holes (4 holes), piston-to-head clearance (1.8
mm), nozzle protrusion (2.5 mm), start of injection

timing (25.3 before TDC), injection control pressure

(160 atm) and swirl level (full throttle open). NOX
emissions were lowest at nozzle spray holes (3 holes),
piston-to-head clearance (1.2 mm), nozzle protrusion
(3.4 mm), start of injection timing (25.3 before TDC),
injection control pressure (170 atm) and swirl level
(full throttle open).
Finding optimum parameter settings

Table 4 summarize the optimum parameter setting

determined for each response at 40% Wmax and 60%
Wmax. Note that the term optimum reflects only the
optimal combination of the parameters defined by this
experiment. Summary table needs to be constructed,
in which only the level sums of SN ratio of significant
factors appear. The optimum setting is determined by
choosing the level with the highest SN ratio. Control
factor A is most significant in CO, HC, and smoke
than NOX. However, since factor A is less meaningful
in HC, smoke emission than CO emission. So the
optimum condition is A2. In respect of control factor
B and C; factors B and C are significant only in HC
emission and CO emission respectively. Hence B3
and C3 are predicted as the optimal levels for the
parameters B and C. For factors D, F and G, more
than one response is significant. So it is confirmed
that D1, F2 and G3 are the optimal conditions for
parameter D, F and G respectively at 40% maximum
load. Same combination of parameters was obtained
in a similar way for the 60% maximum load.
Therefore, the optimal combinations of control factors

NATARAJ et al.: DIESEL ENGINE PARAMETERS FOR EMISSION REDUCTION USING TAGUCHI METHOD

509

Table 4Overall summary table for optimal conditions

Control Factor
Level

1
2
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3

Sum of signal-to-noise ratio for 40% Wmax

CO
HC
Smoke
NOX
A*GD!
D*A
!

B
A*
G
A*F
G!
FC

Parameter
level
for
optimal
emission

Sum of signal-to-noise ratio for 60% Wmax

HC
Smoke
NOX
A*G
G*A
G*AF !
D*A
F ! C
F ! B

Parameter
level
for
optimal
emission

115.52
167.06

A2

54.3
113.17

A2

55.53
93.62

19.01
50.54

61.54
38.86

31.05
50.78
67.32
87.73
95.41
99.71
104.1
97.27
81.21
98.01
98.68
85.89
67.89
101.26
113.46

CO

32.48
72.48
44.19
10.45
26.81
32.3

25.78
35.07
39.56

G3

Table 5 Baseline and optimum engine parameter combinations

Baseline

Nozzle spray hole

Piston-to-head clearance
Nozzle protrusion
Start of inj. timing
Inj. control pr.
Swirl level

Parameter settings
Optimized

3 holes
1.4 mm
3.4 mm
28.3 before TDC
170 atm
Full throttle open

4 holes
1.8 mm
4.35 mm
25.3 before TDC
170 atm
Full throttle open

Table 6Baseline versus optimized engine emission

Emissions

CO (%)

Emission data for 40% Emission data for 60%

Wmax
Wmax
Baseline Optimized
Baseline Optimized
0.28

HC (ppm)
Smoke (HSU)

70
71

(No)x (ppm)

570

0.06, 0.06,
0.06
20,10, 10
32, 33, 32
510,
512,
510

110
86

0.09,
0.08,
0.08
20, 20, 10
51, 52, 51

690

633, 633, 635

0.52

are A2 B3 C3 D1 F2 G3 for minimized concentration

of NOX, CO, HC, and smoke in the diesel engine
emission both at 40% and 60% of Wmax.
Results and Discussion
The optimum parameter combinations are differing
from base line engine parameter settings. The baseline

B3

C3
45.53
37.96
16.93

D1

F2

59.84
40.58

65.51
72.65
85.67

C3
45.85
38.99
15.57

20.88
41.1
17.98
18.31
25.69

B3

54.06
74.79
38.61
1.01
82.51
83.95

(e)-pooled error [e1+e2] * Most significant More significant ! Significant Less significant

Parameters

86.17
137.66

63.41
96.42
64.00
34.07
89.36
100.4

24.21
22.1
15.67
7.29
26.9
27.8

D1

F2

G3

Very less significant

and optimum parameter combinations are shown with

levels in Table 5. The results point out that the parameter
combinations are not changed with load variation. Table
6 shows that the emission data for baseline engine and
optimized engine.
Fig. 4 shows visually the composition of CO, HC,
NOX and smoke in emissions for the baseline and
optimized engine at 40% Wmax and 60% Wmax. CO,
HC and smoke level in emission varies proportionally
with the load for both baseline and optimized engine.
NOX emission was not reduced that much whatever be
the load variation. Noticed that there was remarkable
reduction in emission with load variation for the
optimized engine when compared to baseline engine
for the CO, HC and smoke.
Performance analysis

Fig. 5 demonstrates the comparative study on

performance evaluation of base line engine versus
optimized engine. It was made clear that the
performance of the optimized engine is better than the
base line engine for the entire load range from minimum
to maximum. Also proves that Taguchi parameter design
concept is more powerful and efficient tool for reducing
the concentration of pollutants in the exhaust emission
of diesel engine.

510

INDIAN J. ENG. MATER. SCI., DECEMBER 2005

Fig. 4aCO Emission versus load conditions.

Fig. 5bBrake power versus indicated thermal efficiency.

Fig. 4bHC Emission versus load conditions.

Fig. 5cBrake power versus specific fuel consumption.

Fig. 4cSmoke emission versus load conditions.

Fig. 4dNox emission versus load conditions.

Fig. 5dBrake power versus CO emission.

Fig. 5aBrake power versus brake thermal efficiency.

Fig. 5eBrake power versus HC emission.

NATARAJ et al.: DIESEL ENGINE PARAMETERS FOR EMISSION REDUCTION USING TAGUCHI METHOD

511

parameter design concept is more powerful and

efficient tool for reducing the concentration of
pollutants in the exhaust emission of diesel engine.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Thiru M.
Rajasakar, Faculty of Thermal Engineering
Department, Government College of Technology,
Coimbatore, for the professional and technical support
rendered during this study.
Fig. 5f Brake power versus smoke emission

References
1

Nataraj M, Arunachalam V P & Dhandapani N, Indian J Eng

Mater Sci., 12 (2005) 169-181.
Gill A P, SAE Paper No. 880350, (1988) 461-473.
Hunter C E, Cikanek H A & Gardner T P, J Eng Gas
Turbines Power, 111 (1989) 916-929.
Antony J, Int J Adv Manufact Technol, 17 (2001) 134-138.
Sung H Park, Robust design and analysis for quality
engineering (Chapman & Hall India, London), 1996.
Hames R J, Merrion D F & Borman G L, SAE Paper No.
710671, (1971) 738-751.
Ganesan V, Internal combustion engines (Tata McGraw-Hill
Publising Company, New Delhi), 2002.
Ross P J, Taguchi technique for quality engineering
(McGraw-Hill, New York), 1988.
Logothetis N, Total quality management-from Deming to
Taguchi and SPC (Printice-Hall International, UK), 1992.

2
3
4
5
6
7
Fig. 5gBrake power versus NOX emission.

Conclusions
The feasibility of using the Taguchi method to
optimize selected diesel engine design parameters for
low emissions was investigated using a single
cylinder, research diesel engine. The conclusions
from this work are summarizes as follows: The
Taguchi method was found to be an efficient
technique for quantifying the effects of engine design
and operating parameters on exhaust emissions. CO
emission level was influenced by nozzle spray holes,
swirl level, start of injection timing, injection control
pressure and nozzle protrusion. HC emission level
was influenced by nozzle spray holes, injection
control pressure, piston-to-head clearance, nozzle
protrusion and swirl level. Smoke emission level was
influenced by nozzle spray holes, swirl level, injection
control pressure and piston-to-head clearance. NOX
emission level was influenced by start of injection
timing, nozzle spray holes and swirl level. NOX, CO,
HC and smoke emission results obtained from the
confirmation experiments fell in good agreement with
the predicted results. The parameter settings of
optimized engine were not found in any of 18 trial
runs of the L18 orthogonal array. 18 trials were
conducted to find the optimized parameter settings.
The performance of the optimized engine is better
than the base line engine and also proves that Taguchi

Appendix
Predicting emissions at optimum conditions for 40% Wmax
The parameter setting for the optimum conditions are shown in
following table:
Control
Factor
A
B
C
D
F
G

Parameters
No. of holes
Piston-to-head clearance
Nozzle Protrusion
Start of Injection Timing
Injection Control Pressure
Swirl Level

(Four holes)
(1.8 mm)
(4.35 mm)
(25.3bTDC)
(170 atm)
(Full throttle open)

Levels
A2
B3
C3
D1
F2
G3

To estimate the emission responses at the optimum conditions,

Eqs (A1) and (A2) is used;
Effective number of replications (neff)
neff = N / [1+(Total D.O.F associated with items used in
estimate)]
(A1)
where N is number of trial runs; and is Mean
Estimate of error variance (Ve)
Ve =

Pooled Variation of non-significant sources

Pooled degrees of non-significant sources

(A2)

Estimation of predicted confidence interval (CI)

The confidence interval8,9 of the above-predicted estimation is
calculated using the following equation.

INDIAN J. ENG. MATER. SCI., DECEMBER 2005

512
CI = t (, )

Ve
neff

(A3)

In calculating the estimates, only the parameters with a strong

effect on the emission response are used to allow for experimental
error (variance).
For CO emission at 40% Wmax
The S/N ratios for each emission response level are listed in Table
A4. For carbon monoxide (CO) emission, the parameters with the
strongest effects were;

3.347
= 23.42 3.055

=
20.19 to 26.65
The confirmation test is conducted to check whether the
obtained optimal condition (A2 B3 C3 D1 F2 G3) falls within the
Confidence Interval. The CO emission datas are 0.06, 0.06, 0.06
SN ratio for these observations (CO emission) is
i =n

SN ratio(dB)

= -10 log [1/n

Yi ].
2

i =1

Strong effects: A2 D1 G3
The average S/N ratio for CO, i.e., T was determined using the
values shown in Table A3 for nozzle spray holes as;

= -10 log

1
2
2
2
3{0.06 + 0.06 + 0.06 }

= 24.44 dB

115.52 +167.06 ( 282.58)

=
T =
= 31.40
18
18

= (A2D1G3) = A2+D1+G3 2 T

The SN ratio value is contained within the 99.995% confidence

interval obtained. So the optimum condition is confirmed by a
confirmation test.

167.06 104.1 113.46

+
+
2(31.40)= 23.42
9
6
6

neff

18
=3
1+ (1+ 2 + 2)

Ve

S S S S S
= B + C + F + e1 + e 2 12
18 18 18 18 18

Similar calculations were made for other emissions in 40% and

60% of maximum load using the following strong effects;
40% Maximum load
Strong effects for hydrocarbon (HC)
Strong effects for smoke
Strong effects for Oxides of Nitrogen(NOX)

: A2 B3 C3 D1 F2
: A2 B2 G3
: A1 D1 G3

60% Maximum load

37.28 219.31 310.93 108.12 47.34
=
+
+
+
+
12
18
18
18
18
18

Strong effects for carbon monoxide (CO)

Strong effects for hydrocarbon (HC)
Strong effects for smoke
Strong effects for oxides of nitrogen(NOX)

= 3.347
A 99.995% confidence interval for CO was determined by;
t (,) = t (12, 0.005) = 3.055 (from t-Distribution Table)

t(,) = 23.42t(12,0.005)
Ve
= 23.42 3.055

neff

: A2 F2 G3
: A2 B3 F2G3
: A2 B3 F1 G3
: A1 D1

Table A1 illustrate a comparison of the actual S/N ratios

computed from the measured emission responses and the
predicted S/N ratios computed using Eqs (A1)-(A3). The ranges
of the predicted S/N values were computed for 99.995%
confidence interval about the mean. In the usual course of events,
all three-emission responses fell within their predicted ranges,
which indicated good reproducibility and confirmed that the
experiment results were valid.

Table A1Comparison of predicted and actual S/N ratios using optimum setting for 40% Wmax
Emissions

CO (%)
HC (ppm)
Smoke (HSU)
NOX(ppm)

For 40 % Wmax
Predicted range of S/N ratio
Actual S/N Ratio
( 99.995% confidence )
20.19 to
-21.12 to
-32.69 to
-54.35 to

26.65
-7.04
-27.77
-49.83

24.44
-23.01
-30.19
-54.16

For 60 % Wmax
Predicted range of S/N ratio
( 99.995 % confidence )
16.37 to 24.49
-25.5 to -9.78
-34.36 to -31.25
-56.18 to -54.5

Actual S/N ratio

21.57
-24.77
-34.21
-56.03

NATARAJ et al.: DIESEL ENGINE PARAMETERS FOR EMISSION REDUCTION USING TAGUCHI METHOD

513

Table A2Experimental data

AT 60% W max

AT 40% W max
CO data
(%)

Run
No.

HC data
(ppm)

Smoke data
(HSU)

NOX data
(ppm)

CO data
(%)

Trial
1
(X1)

Trial
2
(X2)

Trial
1
(X1)

Trial
2
(X2)

Trial
1
(X1)

Trial
2
(X2)

Trial
1
(X1)

Trial
2
(X2)

Trial
1
(X1)

0.41

0.41

50

60

63

72

480

478

0.26

0.26

50

50

78

78

411

388

0.25

0.26

40

30

71

72

757

0.11

0.12

10

10

42

45

0.12

0.12

20

20

41

42

0.34

0.36

50

50

67

0.17

0.17

40

50

0.4

0.41

30

30

0.19

0.18

20

10

0.15

0.16

11

0.06

0.04

12

0.12

13

HC data
(ppm)

Smoke data
(HSU)

NOX data
(ppm)

Trial
2
(X2)

Trial
1
(X1)

Trial
2
(X2)

Trial
1
(X1)

Trial
2
(X2)

Trial
1
(X1)

Trial
2
(X2)

2.71

2.7

130

150

95

95

571

580

0.52

0.53

50

50

79

81

620

625

750

0.53

0.52

60

60

85

88

976

973

531

540

0.12

0.14

20

20

62

63

676

672

467

466

0.35

0.36

20

10

67

70

658

660

71

968

960

1.38

1.36

130

140

91

93

1161

1155

61

58

534

536

0.31

0.3

40

40

64

65

717

715

78

77

961

960

0.5

0.49

60

60

82

83

922

920

20

64

66

372

373

0.27

0.27

20

30

63

68

543

542

40

50

41

43

1059

1056

0.19

0.18

30

30

54

57

1458

1452

40

40

37

36

455

452

0.08

0.08

20

20

43

45

603

590

0.12

10

10

53

58

809

800

0.38

0.39

20

20

81

76

930

935

0.34

0.32

50

70

66

74

760

764

1.46

1.42

120

130

94

91

739

744

14

0.15

0.16

30

30

39

46

1137

1141

0.22

0.24

30

40

58

63

1433

1428

15

0.08

0.08

10

10

29

31

625

620

0.09

0.09

10

10

57

53

782

780

16

0.1

0.1

10

10

31

32

785

793

0.15

0.16

10

10

45

43

1040

1046

17

0.17

0.18

10

10

54

53

753

752

0.87

0.88

60

50

83

82

856

854

18

0.06

0.07

10

10

28

30

732

731

0.09

0.1

10

10

40

42

984

989

Table A3 Average emission responses from L18 experiment

Parameters
A. No. of holes
1. Three
2. Four
B. Piston-to-head clearance (mm)
1. 1.2
2. 1.4
3. 1.8
C. Nozzle protrusion (mm)
1. 2.5
2. 3.4
3. 4.35
D. Start of injection timing (Deg)
1. 25.3 before TDC
2. 28.3 before TDC
3. 31.3 before TDC
F. Injection Control Pressure (atm)
1. 160
2. 170
3. 180
G. Swirl Level
1. throttle open
2. throttle open
3. Full throttle open

CO (%)

For 40% Wmax

Smoke
HC (ppm)
(HSU)

NOX
(ppm)

CO (%)

For 60% Wmax

Smoke
HC (ppm)
(HSU)

NOX
(ppm)

12.84
18.56

6.17
10.40

2.11
5.62

6.84
4.32

6.03
12.57

9.57
15.30

2.32
4.57

6.65
4.51

15.29
15.68
16.12

5.17
8.46
11.22

2.98
4.50
4.11

6.18
4.95
5.60

7.91
9.08
10.93

10.65
12.08
14.57

3.00
3.05
4.28

5.83
5.23
5.67

14.62
15.86
16.62

6.54
7.48
10.84

3.96
3.60
4.03

5.53
5.86
5.35

7.84
9.43
10.65

10.92
12.11
14.28

3.54
3.34
3.45

5.68
5.87
5.19

17.35
16.21
13.54

10.52
7.87
6.47

4.50
3.54
3.55

7.64
6.50
2.59

10.74
8.41
8.76

13.34
13.34
10.62

3.70
3.26
3.38

7.59
6.33
2.82

16.33
16.45
14.31

5.41
12.08
7.37

4.34
4.20
3.06

5.43
5.63
5.67

9.01
12.47
6.43

10.57
16.07
10.67

4.03
3.68
2.61

5.32
5.77
5.64

11.31
16.87
18.91

6.99
8.89
8.98

1.74
4.47
5.38

4.30
5.84
6.59

0.17
13.75
13.99

5.68
14.89
16.73

1.21
4.48
4.63

5.47
5.10
6.17

INDIAN J. ENG. MATER. SCI., DECEMBER 2005

514

Table A4SN ratios for NOX, CO, HC and Smoke data at 40% Wmax

Run
No.

CO
(%)
SN ratio
(dB)

AT 40% Wmax
HC
SMOKE
(ppm)
(HSU)
SN ratio+36
SN ratio+38
(dB)
(dB)

NOX
(ppm)
SN ratio+62
(dB)

CO
(%)
SN ratio
(dB)

AT 60% Wmax
HC
SMOKE
(ppm)
(HSU)
SN ratio+43
SN ratio+40
(dB)
(dB)

NOX
(ppm)
SN ratio+64
(dB)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

7.74
11.70
11.87
18.78
18.42
9.12
15.39
7.85
14.65
16.19
25.85
18.42
9.63
16.19
21.94
20.00
15.14
23.72

1.16
2.02
5.03
16.00
9.98
2.02
2.88
6.46
9.98
2.88
3.96
16.00
0.32
6.46
16.00
16.00
16.00
16.00

8.39
9.97
4.46
7.42
8.62
2.32
7.43
2.35
10.58
1.51
8.87
3.89
4.36
0.87
6.12
4.06
4.47
4.72

-8.643
5.596
5.596
17.696
8.995
-2.735
10.313
6.107
11.373
14.653
21.938
8.290
-3.168
12.757
20.915
16.189
1.160
20.434

0.06
9.02
7.44
16.98
19.02
0.39
10.96
7.44
14.87
13.46
16.98
16.98
1.05
12.03
23.00
23.00
8.16
23.00

8.80
8.12
4.22
7.43
7.62
2.73
6.90
4.71
9.31
0.74
8.49
4.61
6.60
0.89
6.15
3.63
5.36
4.12

1.39
0.16
0.91
5.23
5.64
1.22
2.51
0.21
1.74
5.53
6.75
3.11
1.08
5.40
8.45
8.03
3.43
8.75

0.45
1.94
1.26
4.08
3.28
0.72
3.81
1.67
3.67
5.11
7.13
2.10
0.68
4.36
5.19
7.13
1.67
7.74