RF Corona Ignition vs.

Spark Ignition: A
Comparison for Varying Thermodynamic
Conditions and Combustion Strategies of
Modern Turbocharged Gasoline Engines
Thorsten Wolf, Martin Schenk, Markus Schrter, Franz
Zellinger, Benedikt Klaus, Daniel Pfeiffer, Hubert Fischer

Abstract
Combustion strategies of modern gasoline engines make high demands
on a robust ignition process to allow a precise initiation of the combustion
with only small cyclic variations. This provides the necessary degree of
freedom in the development process, to further optimize combustion strat-
egies towards lower emissions and reduced fuel consumptions on the one
hand; and higher specic power as well as a better dynamic performance
on the other. During the last decade RF corona ignition systems gained
increasingly attention for gasoline engine applications. By means of a vo-
luminous inammation area, as well as the radical-chemical inammation
rather than the radical-thermal process of conventional ignition systems,
the corona ignition allows a stable combustion process with very little cy-
cle-to-cycle uctuation of the initial ame kernel. Furthermore, the design
of the high-voltage electrodes, as well as the combustion chamber as cor-
responding ground electrode allows the specic geometrical optimization
of the inammation area.

This contribution compares the corona-initiated combustion with that of

a high-energy coil spark ignition system under various engine conditions
within the operation map of modern turbocharged gasoline engines. Main
aspects of the comparison are the inuence of charge motion, dilution
rate, engine load, as well as engine speed and compression ratio. Em-
phasis is put upon the comparison of the principal system characteristics,
their fundamental differences, as well as their operation strategy potential.

The analysis is based on classical pressure indication measurements and

modern optical measuring methods using a transparent engine. Various
statistical as well as image processing techniques are used to emphasize
the principle differences between the two types of ignition systems. The

503
measurements presented are based on single-cylinder research engines
and multi-cylinder engine prototypes based on current series engine ge-
ometries.

1. Test setup and procedure

1.1. Engines for thermodynamic testing

The experiments described below were carried out on a single-cylinder,
4-stroke research engine with basic geometries based on the new BMW
in-line engine generation, and two three-cylinder engines. In this respect,
the units serve the sole purpose of representing and recording various
ignition conditions.

Table 1: Engine data

Engine 1-Cyl. Research 3-Cylinder 3-Cylinder

Displacement 500 cm 1,500 cm 1,500 cm
Bore/stroke 82 mm/94.6 mm
Compression 12:1 12:1 9.5:1
ratio
Number of 4/variable on inlet
valves/valve lift
Camshaft Adjustment range of 80 CA on inlet and exhaust side
actuators
Exhaust gas Cooled external Cooled external Only internal
recirculation EGR EGR EGR
Injection system Direct petrol injection, multi-hole fuel injector, central
positioning, 200 bar system pressure
Ignition systems Inductive spark ignition and corona ignition system

The engines used were equipped with variable camshaft phasing mecha-
nisms (VANOS) on inlet and exhaust side and variable valve lift (VALVE-
TRONIC) on the inlet side. The compression ratio was adjusted to = 12,
except stated otherwise. Standard premium fuel with RON = 98 was used
for the testing. The most important engine parameters are listed in ta-
ble 1. Apart from conventional test rig measuring equipment, pressures

504
in the combustion chamber, intake, and exhaust system were recorded
by a high-speed, time-resolved pressure indicating system. For applying
different characteristics of charge motion, the single cylinder engine was
equipped with variabilities in the inlet ports, as illustrated in gure 1. The
two ports were separated and had round cross-sections for inserting air-
ow guides for increasing tumble charge motion. By means of a swirl ap,
one port could be deactivated to create swirl charge motion. The types of
charge motion examined and their generation is described in table 2.

Table 2: Examined charge motion characteristics

Type of charge motion Way of creation

Tumble Original surface shape of a tumble intake port
Swirl Additional port deactivation via swirl ap
Strong tumble Masking of of the lower cross section of
each intake port via inserted ow guides

Figure 1: Single-cylinder intake system with variability for charge

motion generation

505
1.2. Transparent engine
The transparent engine was based on the geometry of the thermodynamic
singlecylinder test engine. The principle setup of the optical engine is de-
scribed in [1, 2]. It has large quartz glass windows in the top of the piston
and in the upper part of the cylinder liner for maximum optical access.
Flame propagation was recorded through the window in the top of the pis-
ton quasi-integrated along the cylinder axis; and through the upper part
of the cylinder liner quasi-integrated along an axis vertical to the cylinder
axis using two high-speed cameras in parallel.

To realize different kinds of charge motion, the optical engine had been
equipped with the same variable inlet ports as the thermodynamic single
cylinder engine. Flame propagation was recorded by detecting the lumi-
nescence of the ame. The optical aperture of the transparent piston top
makes up approx. 50 % of the surface of the piston in the central area
about the cylinder axis. This provided good preconditions for the observa-
tion of the initial ring behavior of the ignition systems.

2. Ignition systems

2.1. Transistor coil ignition

A state-of-the-art transistor coil ignition system was used as reference.
The spark plug had a single-electrode air gap with 0.7 mm distance. The
energy of the plug top ignition coil on the secondary side amounts to
100 mJ.

2.2. Radio frequency corona ignition

The corona ignition systems used here generate high AC voltages in the
frequency range of 1 MHz to 5 MHz at the tip of the igniters. The front-end
electrodes of the igniters were formed to a regular star with four or ve
equally shared tips. The combustion chamber acts as a counter electrode.
Compared to a standard plug, the tips of the corona igniter have to be
sharp for building a so-called point-plane arrangement as illustrated at the
top of gure 2. This electrode conguration generates a highly inhomoge-
neous electric eld decreasing strongly from the tip towards ground. Plas-
ma channels are formed in the area, where the ionization eld strength is
exceeded. Since the areas with the eld strength below the ionization limit

506
remain almost unchanged, no complete plasma channel is build up as for
spark ignition (gure 2, bottom) and the energy input mainly accelerates
electrons and does not heat up the gas [5]. More details about the setup
of a corona ignition system can be found in [1, 3, 4].

Figure 2: Schematic diagram of a corona discharge (top) and

conventional spark discharge (bottom) [5]

2.3. Comparison of spark and corona ignition

Looking upon the combustion process of modern turbocharged engines,
most of the ame propagation is dominated by the so-called turbulent
ame front propagation, which in general rises almost but not complete-
ly linearly with increasing average piston velocity [6]. This correlation as-
sures, that even at high-speed operation of modern engines efciently fast
overall combustion is possible, even with the time available for combustion
decreasing linearly with engine speed. Comparing the initial increase of
the mass fraction burnt with the volume fraction burnt further, one realizes
that already at low-mass fractions at normal, non-diluted combustion pro-
cesses the volumetric expansion of the initial ame is signicantly higher

507
than the rise on the mass fraction scale. This results in the fact, that under
such conditions the point, where 5 % of the mass fraction of the cylinder
lling is burnt (5 % MFB point) is on a volumetric scale already far beyond
the spread of conventional ignition systems. This changes, however, if the
combustion is strongly diluted, which diminishes the thermal expansion
effect of the initial ame signicantly.

Thus, it can be easily understood that the inuence of the ignition sys-
tem becomes more signicant at higher MFB ratios, the more diluted a
combustion process actually is. Furthermore the very early initial ame
process of a point-shaped, thermally initiated inammation as by a spark
plug, is strongly dependent upon laminar ame velocities, until the nally
turbulent ame propagation regime is dominant [7]. This inuence can be
assumed lower the more charge motion and turbulence are present and
increase the initial inammation area and decrease the time period, until
turbulent effects start to dominate the inammation process.

Inside a spark discharge, the plasma is heated up, expands thermally, and
locally conditions of auto ignition are reached at its surface [8,9]. The small
initial ame kernel is located near the electrodes, and thus is exposed
to wall quenching. Furthermore, the rst ame propagation following the
initial thermal plasma expansion is laminarly dominated and propagates
comparatively slowly [7]. The corona, however, does not heat up the gas,
but creates radicals that initiate the inammation [8]. With its streamers
branching out into the combustion chamber a considerably large area is
reached and thus electrode quenching is negligible. Since the density of
radicals is not isentropic its gradients lead to locally different burn veloc-
ities. The resulting small-scale turbulence accelerates inammation from
the beginning [10].

These different characteristics of the two ignition systems and their effect
on the inammation process are examined in this article for various ther-
modynamic conditions of the engine map.

3. Results
The two parameters which span an engine map are engine load and
speed. Within this engine map the ignition and combustion takes place
under signicantly differing conditions. For these differing environments,
the behavior of both spark and corona ignition will be compared.

508
In the rst section, we report on the characteristic differences for three dif-
ferent load regions, ranging from lower part load to top load. The second
section discusses the inuence of engine speed; the third, the inuence
of the underlying compression ratio. The fourth section is devoted to the
inuence of charge motion, whereas the last chapter focuses on energy
dependencies when operating the ignition systems for varying parameter
sets of corona voltage and corona duration.

3.1. Inuence of engine load

At lower part load a higher residual gas fraction, achieved by higher valve
overlap, is favorable in two ways. Firstly, the gas exchange losses are re-
duced signicantly and secondly, an increase of the isentropic coefcient
g gives rise to a higher efciency in the high-pressure cycle [11]. The EGR-
rate however, up to which a stable ignition process can be achieved, is the
limiting factor. Figure 3 displays the coefcient of variation (CoV) of the
indicated mean effective pressure as a function of the in- and outlet cam
phasing for an operation point at lower part load with an indicated mean
effective pressure (IMEP) of 2 bar and a revolution rate of 2,000 min-1.

Figure 3: Variation of cam phasing for spark ignition and corona ignition.
The grey values represent the corona, the black the TCI system. The
dashed lines symbolize the limit accessible by a CoV = 3 % limit.
(2,000 min-1; IMEP = 2 bar)

509
Overall, the corona ignition results in a signicantly smoother engine oper-
ation, displaying the signicantly lower CoV values in all operation points.
Furthermore, if one assumes a tolerated engine roughness of CoV = 3 %
(indicated by the dashed lines), the area of the cam phasing map, which
fullls this stability criteria, is signicantly larger for the corona ignition than
it is for the standard spark ignition system. Thus the corona can operate
with considerably higher rates of residual gas (lower-left corner of the cam
phase map) than the conventional spark ignition.

To determine the actual fraction of the residual gas, a gas exchange anal-
ysis was performed in a selected set of operating points. These points
had been chosen according to an increasing valve overlap. Beginning at
in- and outlet phasing equal 80 CA the outlet phasing was reduced to
60 CA gradually. Proceeding from this conguration, the inlet phasing
was reduced to 65 CA. Figure 4 illustrates the burn delay over the cal-
culated rate of residual gas. At lowest valve overlap with the residual gas
content being 25 %, the corona ignition displays a decrease in burn delay
by ~10 CA with respect to the conventional spark ignition. This difference
in burn delay increases with rising residual gas rate. At a residual gas rate
of 34 % the spark induced inammation needs already more than twice
the time of the corona to reach the MFB 5 % point. A further increase in di-
lution for the transistor coil ignition (TCI) was not possible without the risk
of misre. In the scatter diagram of Figure 5 the indicated mean effective
pressure is applied versus the MFB 5 % points for sets of 256 combustion
cycles. The graphs represent a residual gas fraction of 25 % (left side) and
30 % (right side) for both ignition systems, respectively. For rising dilution
by residual gas the number of delayed cycles, which lead to a lower IMEP,
increases strongly for TCI. This results in a higher CoV and an increase
in fuel consumption.

510
Figure 4: Burn delay over rate of residual gas. The black triangular markers
represent the spark ignition, the grey round markers the corona ignition.
(2,000 min-1; IMEP = 2 bar)

Figure 5: Scatter diagrams displaying the IMEP vs. 50 % MFB point for
256 individual cycles each. The diagrams display the results for TCI
and corona ignition, both at rates of 25 and 30 % EGR dilution. Top row
represents spark plug, bottom row Corona. The TCI clearly displays
a signicant number of delayed cycles with reduced fuel efciency.
(2,000 min-1; IMEP = 2 bar)

511
For the corona ignition the distribution of the MFB 50 % points is compar-
atively narrow. Its width rises only slightly with the increase from 25 % to
30 % dilution rate. Thus, for the corona ignition system the CoV stays low,
which results in an overall better fuel efciency. As a consequence the co-
rona ignition can help to improve fuel consumption in two ways. Firstly, the
strongly stabilized position of MFB 50 % reduces the quantity of inefcient
cycles. Secondly, corona enables higher rates of residual gas than spark
plug and thus helps to even further reduce gas exchange losses.

To illustrate the performance of the ignition systems in the medium part

load range we investigate the dilution limit by externally cooled low pres-
sure EGR for the loads of 4 and 8 bar IMEP and an engine speed of
1,500 min-1. Figure 6 plots the CoV for 4 and 8 bar IMEP and both ignition
systems as a function of the volumetric EGR-rate.

Figure 6: Inuence of load on maximum dilution limit for spark plug and
corona. An IMEP of 4 bar is represented by triangles, 8 bar by circles,
the black color represents the spark plug, the grey color the
corona ignition. The dashed lines connecting the last two
points of each series illustrate the dilution limit.
(1,500 min-1; IMEP = 4 bar and 8 bar)

Figure 6 clearly illustrates three principle dependencies. First, the over-

all dilution limit increases with load for both ignition systems. This is due
to the fact, that at higher load the elevated temperature level stabilizes

512
combustion by an increase in laminar burning velocity. Second, we see
that for both loads the corona ignition clearly outnumbers the TCI system
in the dilution rates achieved. Finally, the relative difference between the
corona system and the TCI system decreases with rising load, since the
improved combustion conditions primarily enhance the TCI rather than the
corona system, which can be explained by the higher dependency of the
spark ignition system on the laminar burn velocity, quenching effects and
charge motion [7, 12].

The improved thermodynamic conditions at ignition timing lead to a more

stable formation of the ame kernel with faster growth for the spark igni-
tion system, whereas the corona ignition in its initial inammation process
can be assumed to be less dependent on these factors, since it is domi-
nated by size and supported by the small-scale turbulence initiated by the
corona itself. Another aspect of the load dependence is the decreasing
size of the corona ignition system with rising density at ignition timing [1].
As a consequence, the relative increase of maximum possible EGR-rate
by the corona ignition decreases with load.

Figure 6 displays that for an IMEP of 4 bar the corona can bear an EGR
rate of 25 % (for a CoV level below 3 %), which compares to an EGR-limit
of 15 % for the TCI system, thus amounting to an relative increase of
67 %. For the higher load of 8 bar IMEP the spark ignition system is capa-
ble of EGR rates up to 28 %. The corona however can increase this limit to
about 35 % volume fraction of EGR. This amounts to a relative difference
of 25 % among the two ignition principles at an IMEP of 8 bar which is
remarkable, but less than it is at an IMEP of 4 bar.

Increasing the load further, the challenges change, as do the require-

ments on ignition systems. With higher loads, temperature and pressure
inside the combustion chamber rise. To avoid knocking, ignition timing is
changed to later crank angles. As a consequence, the thermal efciency
decreases and fuel consumption rises [13].

On the one hand, an ignition system has to mechanically withstand both

high temperatures and pressure oscillations due to knocking, to meet the
requirements of an up-to-date turbo charged combustion engine. On the
other, it must be able to induce a stable combustion even at high counter
pressures. A comparison between spark plug and corona ignition at IMEP
levels up to 27 bar is shown in gure 7. The compression ratio of the en-
gine was 9.5.

513
 Figure 7: Scatter diagram comparing spark and corona ignition at
high load. Spark plug is colored black, Corona ignition grey.
(4,000 min-1; IMEP = 23 bar; 25 bar and 27 bar; compression ratio = 9.5)

The more stable ignition for corona can be seen in the diagram on the left
hand side where the IMEP is plotted over MFB 5 % for each individual
cycle of the measurement. The improved ignition leads to a signicant re-
duction in distribution of the MFB 50 % points, as can be seen on the right
hand side. This enables an overall earlier average position of MFB 50 %,
and thus an increase in fuel efciency.

There are two manners the distinct higher combustion stability can be
used. One is to adjust the same torque as for spark ignition. The benets
are reduced fuel consumption and slightly lower charge level. This case is
plotted in gure 7. The other is to increase the torque at same charge level
as for TCI. The absolute fuel consumption will stay same, but the specic
fuel consumption decreases due to the higher load. Figure 8 illustrates
that in both cases approximately the same maximum knock intensity is
reached as with TCI, but with improved overall efciency.

514
 Figure 8: Scatter diagram showing approximately the same
maximum knock intensity for TCI as well as corona. Black
triangles represent the TCI, grey circles the corona.
(4,000 min1; IMEP = 25 bar)

3.2. Inuence of engine speed

This section focuses on the effect of engine speed on the inammation
process.

5
15001500
rpm rpm
Spark
Spark
plug
15001500
rpm rpm
Corona
Coron
4 25002500
rpm rpm
Spark
Spark
plug
25002500
rpm rpm
Corona
Coron

3
CoV [%]

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
EGR-rate [%]

Figure 9: Inuence of engine speed on maximum dilution limit for spark

plug and corona. Triangular markers are used for 1,500 min-1, round
markers for 2,500 min-1. Black color shows the spark plug results, the
grey color the results of corona ignition. The dashed lines connecting
the last two points of each series illustrate the dilution limit.
(1,500 min-1 and 2,500 min-1; IMEP = 7 bar)

515
Keeping in mind, that generally with increasing engine speed the charge
motion rises, however the time available for an efcient combustion de-
creases, the various phases and processes of the combustion are affect-
ed in a different way, dependent upon their strength of correlation upon
the engine speed. We do illustrate these principle effects for the example
of the dilution limit with cooled EGR for two operation points at 7 bar IMEP
at the engine speeds of 1,500 and 2,500 min-1.

Figure 9 depicts the CoVs as a function of the EGR rate. The steep rise in
CoV for higher EGR rates representing the dilution limit is indicated by
a dashed line connecting the last two points of each series. At 1,500 min-1
the EGR-dilution limit is raised from 31 % for the spark system to 34 %
by use of a corona ignition system. The relative increase is about 10 %.
At higher speed of 2,500 min-1 generally only lower EGR-rates can be
achieved, however the corona system can increase the dilution limit of
spark ignition (16 vol. %) by about half up to 24 vol. %.

Thus in contrast to the inuence of load, generally the dilution limit strong-
ly decreases with rising engine speed, however the relative benet of a
spacious corona ignition system increases. This can be explained by two
arguments. First, for compensating for the reduction of available time for
inammation with increasing engine speed the ignition angle is changed
to earlier values. Therefore the difference in burn delay between the two
ignition systems becomes more important, the higher the engine speed
is, since the earlier times of ignition signicantly deteriorate the inamma-
tion due to lower gas temperature. Particularly the spark plug is affected
because of its earlier ignition timing. Second, the corona ignition process
can be assumed to depend less on the reduced laminar burning velocity.
Opposing is the effect of charge motion, as we will see later in this paper.
Charge motion is generally rising with engine speed however this effect
seems not to be able to compensate for the rst two aspects.

3.3. Inuence of compression ratio

A higher compression ratio inuences the combustion process in several
aspects that can affect the relative differences of the two ignition systems
under comparison.

516
 Figure 10: In cylinder pressure for compression ratios of
9.5 and 12 for TCI at = 1.0
(1500 min-1; IMEP = 9 bar)

Generally, with rising compression ratio, the efciency of the idealized en-
gine process increases, however limiting aspects, such as the knock limit
become more severe. Thus, with an increasing need to delay the center
of combustion to later, non- ideal crank angle positions, the advantage of
a precise ignition system such as the corona ignition is expected to be-
come more important (see 3.1). The increase of the compression ratio fur-
thermore results in a general increase of the temperature level at ignition
timing, due to a higher adiabatic temperature rise during the compression
stroke. Figure 10 illustrates these effects for a stoichiometric operation
point of IMEP = 9 bar and 1500 min-1.

517
Figure 11: Variation of cam phasing for = 9.5 (top) and = 12 (bottom)
with spark ignition in black and corona ignition in grey color.
(2000 min-1; IMEP = 2 bar)

Assuming an adiabatic compression, the thermodynamic conditions at the

time of ignition, symbolized by the vertical bar, are signicantly different.
With an identical temperature level of 25 C at the inlet port, the compres-
sion ratio of = 12 gives rise to a temperature increase of about 34 K at
time of ignition compared to = 9.5, the pressure difference amounts to
about 3.8 bar. The higher temperature raises the laminar burning velocity.
This becomes important for dilution aspects in the not knock limited area
of the engine map, especially for low load conditions.

The expectation is, that an overall increase in laminar burning velocity

leads to a higher overall dilution tolerance and to a reduced difference
between the two ignition systems under comparison. The prospect of the
reduced differences is based upon their different kind of inammation. The
TCI leads to ignition by heating up the gas until locally reaching condition
of auto ignition inside a small volume near the spark gap. The corona

518
provides a large area of ignition and its early inammation mechanism is
strongly based on radical activation at the corona branches [8].

Figure 11 illustrates these effects for the variation in cam timing both on
inlet as well as outlet side at an operating point of 2,000 min-1 and an IMEP
of 2 bar, which has been depicted in gure 3, but this time in the direct
comparison with the results gained when lowering the compression from
12 to 9.5. Plotted is the coefcient of variation of the IMEP as a function of
in- and outlet cam phasing. For the lower compression ratio the maximum
possible valve overlap is considerably restricted for both ignition systems.

The relative differences among the two ignition systems as well as the
relative benets are increasing towards the lower compression ratio. The
maximum possible valve overlap for spark ignition, and thus the maximum
dilution limit by residual gas, decreases stronger with lowered compres-
sion ratio than it does for the corona ignition system. Accordingly, TCI is
here more affected by a change of compression ratio than the voluminous
corona ignition.

3.4. Inuence of charge motion

In this section the behavior of the ignition systems towards different kinds
of charge motion is investigated.

519
 Figure 12: Comparison of three kinds of charge motion for spark plug
and corona ignition. Left column represents spark plug, right column
corona ignition. Tumble conguration is illustrated in triangles, swirl
conguration in circles, strong tumble conguration in squares.
(2,000 min-1; IMEP = 2.7 bar)

The three charge motion congurations under consideration are a tum-

ble-dominated charge motion, created by the standard tumble ports of the
test engine, a swirl-dominated charge motion, generated by deactivating
one inlet port, and a strongly tumble-dominated charge motion, achieved
by additional ow guides which decrease the cross-section of the intake
ports to speed up the inlet air ow (cf. table 2 and gure 1). To examine the
inuence on the ignition system, we exemplarily chose a lean limit varia-
tion in a lower part load point of 2.7 bar IMEP at 2,000 min-1. The standard
deviation of MFB 5 % (SD MFB 5 %) and the CoV can be seen in gure 12.

The strong tumble conguration can increase the lean limit for spark plug
from an air-fuel ratio of 1.4 to 1.6 a relative increase in diluting air vol-
ume fraction of 50 %. The corona system can benet from charge motion
as well and the lean limit can be raised from 1.6 to 1.8 (i.e., a relative
increase in diluting air vol. fraction by 33 %) by changing from standard
tumble to strong tumble conguration. The cycle-to-cycle stability of the in-

520
ammation process, measured by the standard deviation of MFB 5 %, can
be increased explicitly for TCI. For the corona system, this inammation
stability can be increased by higher charge motion as well.

To illustrate these differences more explicitly, gure 13 shows the scat-

ter diagrams IMEP vs. MFB 5 %, comparing spark and corona ignition
for the different charge motion congurations at stoichiometric and lean
conditions ( = 1.5), respectively. The TCI shows narrowed cycle-to-cy-
cle spread with increased charge motion intensity at stoichiometric con-
ditions. For lean conditions ( = 1.5) the advantage regarding the stabi-
lization by higher charge motion increases even further. For the corona
ignition system almost no reduction in MFB 5 % scatter can be seen for
= 1.0. However, for lean burn conditions the corona system also displays
signicant stabilization by raised charge motion. The differences of the co-
rona between stoichiometric and lean burn with respect to its charge mo-
tion dependence can be attributed to the decreased laminar ame speed
due to the increase in air-fuel-ratio.

Figure 13: Scatter diagrams IMEP over MFB 5 % comparing spark and
corona ignition for different charge motion congurations
at = 1.0 (left column) and = 1.5 (right column). Each row
represents one conguration of charge motion. Spark plug is
colored in black, corona ignition in grey.
(2,000 min-1; IMEP = 2.7 bar)

521
To examine the effect of charge motion on the initial ame kernel develop-
ment for the two ignition systems optical measurements were performed.
The conditions for the experiments were = 1.4 and the MFB 50 % kept
constant at 15 CA after TDC. The late MFB 50 % position is due to safety
measures taken for the optical engine. The ignition timing was adjusted
accordingly. The engine speed was 2,000 min-1 at an IMEP of 2.7 bar. Fig-
ure 14 depicts the rst 10 degrees of ame kernel formation, for the tum-
ble conguration in the top row, for the strong tumble conguration in the
bottom row. The left side depicts the inammation process for the spark
ignition, the right side for the corona ignition. Each conguration is repre-
sented by a sequence of three images, displaying the side view parallel to
the crankshaft (top) and the piston crown window view along the cylinder
axis (bottom). The time delay between the images of one set was 5 CA,
i.e., ~ 400 s. In all of the images the plasma luminescence and ame
luminescence have been detected, integrated along the particular line of
view. Each image sequence represents a characteristic single combustion
cycle. Each image had an exposure time of 56 s (i.e., 0.67 CA). For the
standard tumble charge motion, the spark plug does not display a strong
ame front development for the rst 10 CA after time of ignition. For the
increased charge motion of the strong tumble conguration, the ame
front at 10 CA after spark onset has already reached a remarkable size.

522
Figure 14: Flame kernel development and initial inammation for tumble
conguration (top row) and strong tumble conguration (bottom row)
and both ignition systems (spark ignition: left, corona ignition: right) for
constant MFB 50 % of 15 CA a. TDC. View: inlet valves on the left,
outlet valves on the right hand side of each photograph.
(2,000 min-1; IMEP = 2.7 bar; = 1.4)

The very early ame front of the corona ignition is inuenced only to a
minor extent by the charge motion. At 5 CA the ame luminescence is
visible in the direct vicinity of the luminescence of the corona. The effect
of charge motion is visible as an overall deection of the streamers, and
the uprising ame-kernel as a total. The relative ame propagation with
respect to the streamers, however, is comparatively independent of the
type of charge motion. At 10 CA after the time of ignition the effect of
increased turbulence on ame front propagation is visible even for the
corona ignition. The projected size of the ame kernels through the piston
crown window displays a slightly larger area for the strong tumble congu-
ration. The view through the side window however reveals a considerable
size gain by the strong tumble conguration.

Since the corona generates a high density of radicals along its branches,
and quenching is restricted to the very prong-tip and hence very low, the
ame front propagates fast immediately after ignition. In this very early
phase of combustion, an increased charge motion can only slightly affect
the corona inammation. For the transistor coil ignition, generating an ex-

523
tended combustion zone takes more time due to higher losses through
quenching, and the propagation of ame front starting laminarly. The ex-
tended charge motion, on the one hand, does deect the spark and thus
increases its surface on the other, its turbulence helps to generate a fast
transition into a turbulent ame front.

Thus, TCI is more dependent on charge motion than corona ignition. Fig-
ure 15 illustrates the effect mentioned above: The very early ame front
development of a spark ignition is remarkably slower than that of a corona
ignition. Only a slow increase in ame size can be recognized during the
rst 9 crank angle of the spark ignition. The pictured ame contours have
equal temporal distance of 1 CA. Ignition angle is 18 CA b. TDC for both
ignition systems. The coloring of the contours represents the temporal
progress. For TCI the rst real contours outside the central knot start at
about 9 CA after ignition. For the corona, the ame contours appear al-
most equidistant right after the time of ignition.

Figure 15: Comparison of ignition phase between spark plug and corona
(2,000 min-1; IMEP = 4 bar; = 1.0) [3]

524
3.5. Energy dependencies
Despite the thermodynamic potential, the energy consumption of alterna-
tive ignition systems and its impact on inammation potential is an import-
ant aspect that needs to be considered. For a conventional single spark
ignition, one can primarily vary the ignition energy, besides the ignition
timing itself. For a given thermodynamic condition, this energy variation
only very slightly can affect the burn delay, primarily by statistical effects.

Thus, for optimal MFB 50 % positioning, the spark timing is to be consid-

ered as rather determined. For the corona ignition, there are more adjust-
able parameters, since size of the initial inammation area is signicantly
affected by the primary corona voltage as is the burn delay. Another
parameter is the corona duration, which can be chosen independently. It
had been mentioned previously [1, 3], that it also can affect the burn delay
to a certain extent.

These two free parameters allow an optimal adaptation of the energy and
the burn delay to each individual combustion situation. This provides sig-
nicantly more freedom of application than conventional spark systems,
and offers the option to meet the individual combustion needs at minimum
energy consumption. The amplitude of the high voltage and the time how
long it is applied, control the corona size and the duration of the plasma
discharge, respectively. In a rst approximation from the side of the pri-
mary circuit assuming the voltage being proportional to the current, the
energy can be estimated as follows:

(1)

U and t are representing the ignition parameters voltage and duration,

respectively. In addition, the energy input is dependent on the conditions
inside the burning chamber, such as pressure and mixture composition.
The options of adjusting energy input for the transistor coil ignition system
are more limited. The energy inside the coil can be calculated to:

(2)

L represents the inductance of the coil I primary current. At constant sup-

ply voltage, the energy inside the ignition coil can be controlled by its

525
charging time. But there are more restrictions. With decreasing energy
inside the coil the maximum available ignition voltage decreases as well
as the duration of the spark. Thus, the potential of reducing ignition energy
for TCI is strongly limited. At high loads the limit is set by the necessary
breakdown voltage; at low loads the desired spark duration for stable igni-
tion restricts the energy optimization.

Figure 16: Inuence of varying corona ignition voltage and

duration on burn delay. Voltage variation is illustrated
in black, duration variation in grey color.
(2,000 min-1; IMEP = 2.7 bar)

We now want to have a closer look on the dependencies of the corona ig-
nition on its primary parameters, primary voltage, and corona duration. To
demonstrate their inuence, we varied the duration and the primary volt-
age for an operation point of 2.7 bar IMEP and 2,000 min-1 independently.
We examined the dependency both for stoichiometric and for lean com-
bustion ( = 1.6). The MFB 50 % point was kept constant at 8 CA after
TDC. Figure 16 depicts the dependence of the resulting burn delay, for an
independent variation in duration and primary voltage.

The results for = 1 are depicted on the left; the results for = 1.6 on the
right side. In all cases, the measurement series started from the same
voltage/duration set, represented as 100 % voltage/100 % duration set-
point. It is striking, that the burn delay is signicantly stronger dependent
on ignition voltage rather than it is on ignition duration. This is expected,
since the voltage directly affects the size of the inammation area. The dif-
ferences are even more pronounced for diluted combustion (here = 1.6).

526
Looking upon this variation from the perspective of applied energy, the de-
pendencies differ somehow, since the energy approximately depends on
the primary voltage squared, but only linearly on its duration. This energy
approximation serves for an illustration of principle correlations only. For
a detailed analysis, the energy has to be measured explicitly. The energy
consideration weakens the dependency on voltage related to energy and
leaves the duration variation untouched. Figure 17 depicts the resulting
functionalities of the voltage and the duration variation in dependence of
the ignition energy applied.

Figure 17: Inuence of varying corona ignition voltage and duration on

burn delay for same ignition energy. Voltage variation is illustrated in
black, duration variation in grey color.
(2,000 min-1; IMEP = 2.7 bar)

For = 1.0 reducing energy from 100 % down to about 40 % does not
show a signicant difference between the two variations. An even further
reduction in voltage however displays a stronger inuence of the voltage
variation than the variation of the corona duration. For = 1.6 both curves
separate already from the early beginning. Thus, from an energy savings
perspective, it is better to adjust ignition performance with a higher ignition
voltage rather than by long corona duration.

As an example of how short a duration is actually sufcient for high volt-

age and good burning conditions, a duration variation in the medium load
range (around natural aspirated full load) is displayed in gure 18. The
dependency of combustion stability on ignition duration is very low, until
it reaches a certain limit. Very short corona pulses down to 20-50 s are
already sufcient to ignite the mixture without deteriorating the CoV. Since

527
this is much lower than the typical spark durations of a conventional TCI,
there is potential for a signicant reduction in primary energy consumption
for the corona ignition.

Figure 18: Inuence of ignition duration on ignition quality (left diagram)

and engine smoothness (right diagram). 8 bar IMEP is represented by
black, 12 bar by grey and 14 bar by light grey color.
(2,000 min-1; IMEP = 8, 12 and 14 bar)

4. Conclusion
The comparison between corona ignition and a state-of-the-art transistor
coil ignition shows distinctly better performance for the corona system all
over the engine map. Higher ignition stability can be transformed into low-
er fuel consumption particularly for low speed and load, diluted mixtures,
and knock limited combustion.

The maximum possible dilution rate of both ignition systems rises with
increasing load or decreasing engine speed, however the relative gain
in possible dilution through corona ignition increases especially towards
low loads, towards inammation conditions with low charge motion and
towards increasing engine speed. Nonetheless, even at high engine loads
or low engine speeds corona can increase ignition stability compared to
spark plug considerably.

By contrast, with the transistor coil ignition the inammation stability of the
corona system is only slightly diminished with decreasing compression
ratio. Its higher robustness also can be seen in the inuence of charge
motion, since the initial corona inammation is affected only slightly. Due

528
to the faster main combustion through increased turbulence, even for co-
rona ignition dilution limits can be shifted by increased charge motion.

From an energy savings perspective the favored settings to adjust corona

ignition performance is using high primary voltage rather than high ignition
duration. With minimum durations as low as 20 s the corona offers poten-
tial for a signicant reduction in primary energy consumption.

529
References
[1] Schenk, M., Fessler, M., Rottengruber, H. & Fischer, H. (2012). Ver-
gleich der thermodynamischen Potenziale alternativer Zndsysteme
fr ottomotorische Brennverfahren. Presented at the 10th Internation-
al Symposium on Combustion Diagnostics, Baden-Baden.
[2] Fessler, M. (2012). Untersuchung der Auswirkungen eines alternativen
Zndverfahrens auf den Verbrennungsprozess bei einem geschichtet-
en Brennverfahren. Forschungsberichte aus dem Institut fr Kolben-
maschinen Karlsruher Institut fr Technologie (KIT). Berlin: Logos.
[3] Schenk, M., Fessler, M., Wolf, T., Klaus, B. & Fischer H. (2012). Com-
parison of the Thermodynamic Potential of Alternative Ignition Sys-
tems for SI-Engines. Presented at the 1st Symposium on Advanced
Ignition Systems for Gasoline Engines, Berlin.
[4] Freen, P. (2005). Radio Frequency Electrostatic Ignition System Fea-
sibility Demonstration. Energy Innovations Small Grant Program, Fi-
nal Report. Sacramento: California Energy Commission.
[5] ETH Zrich (2009). Elektrische Energiesysteme. Lecture on High-Volt-
age Technology, Zurich.
[6] Wachtmeister, G. (2014). Skriptum zur Vorlesung Verbrennungsmo-
toren. Lehrstuhl fr Verbrennungskraftmaschinen. Technische Uni-
versitt, Mnchen..
[7] Heywood, J.B. (1988). Internal Combustion Engine Fundamentals.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
[8] Starikovskaia, S.M. (2006). Plasma Assisted Ignition and Combus-
tion. Journal of Physics, D: Applied Physics, 39, pp. 265-299.
[9] Maly, R. & Herweg, R. (2008). Spark Ignition and Combustion in
Four-Stroke Gasoline Engines. Flow and Combustion in Reciprocat-
ing Engines. Heidelberg: Springer.
[10] Kadono, T., Yushida, K. & Shiji, H. (2002). The Combustion Phenom-
ena under Corona Discharge Application. SAE International Journal
(SAE Paper 2002-32-1823).
[11] Kuberczyk, R. (2009). Wirkungsgradunterschiede zwischen Otto- und
Dieselmotoren. Schriftenreihe des Instituts fr Verbrennungsmotoren
und Kraftfahrwesen der Universitt Stuttgart, no. 44. Renningen: Expert.
[12] Warnatz, J. & Maas, U. (2006). Combustion. Heidelberg: Springer.
[13] Golloch, R. (2005). Downsizing bei Verbrennungsmotoren. Heidel-
berg: Springer.

530
Acknowledgements:
We would like to take this opportunity to express our gratitude to our
colleagues responsible for special optical and electrical measuring tech-
niques. The authors also would like to thank our partners for providing the
prototypes of the corona ignition systems.

531
The Authors:
Dipl.-Phys. Thorsten Wolf, BMW AG, Mnchen

Dr.-Ing. Martin Schenk, BMW AG, Mnchen

Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Markus Schrter, BMW AG, Mnchen

Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Franz Zellinger, BMW AG, Mnchen

Dr.-Ing. Benedikt Klaus, BMW AG, Mnchen

Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Daniel Pfeiffer, BMW AG, Mnchen

Dipl.-Ing. Hubert Fischer, BMW AG, Mnchen

532