SEARCH · Search NASA
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Today, more than 21 million vehicles on U.S. roads are flexible-fuel vehicles (FFVs). These vehicles can operate on either gasoline or blends of gasoline and ethanol up to E85 (a gasoline-ethanol blend containing 51% to 83% ethanol). As a renewable fuel, ethanol offers significant advantages. It is produced predominantly in the United States, made from home-grown feedstocks, and burns cleaner than gasoline.
More than 21 million vehicles on U.S. roads are flexible-fuel vehicles (FFVs) as of August 2022. These vehicles can operate on either gasoline or blends of gasoline and ethanol up to E85 (a gasoline-ethanol blend containing 51% to 83% ethanol). As a renewable fuel, ethanol offers significant advantages. It is produced predominantly in the United States, made from home-grown feedstocks, and burns cleaner than gasoline.
The objective of this study is to understand the impact of ethanol-blended fuel at various blending levels (10%, 15%, and 20% vol.) on "in-operation" vehicles built to differing emissions and manufacturing standards around the world. The study focuses on vehicles used in Canada, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, and Mexico. Historical experience in the United States and Brazil informs the analysis. The primary study question is: Are vehicles in targeted countries physically and operationally compatible with ethanol blended fuel? For a fuel to be compatible with a vehicle, the fuel must perform its function as part of the integrated fuel-vehicle system, meaning: the car should start easily and drive normally, the fuel should not cause catastrophic fuel system leaks, the fuel should not cause corrosion or degradation of any engine or fuel system components (including emissions control components). The history of E10 use in the United States, beginning in 1978, was evaluated and shows no reliability or operability issues for cars dating back to pre-emissions-control times -- and likely included many cars manufactured in the 1960s. This strongly supports the contention that fuel chemistry and property differences between E0 and E10 are so small that any car made to international standards in the last 50 years will have a very high probability of being fully compatible with E10. This conclusion is supported by the experience in Brazil in the 1970s, where E10 was also introduced, and ethanol blending for conventional cars rapidly ramped up to even higher blend levels. A limited number of fuel system and component manufacturers supply the global market, including Bosch, Continental, Denso, Delphi, and Visteon. To reduce complexity, ethanol-compatible materials began to be integrated in fuel system designs globally. Fuel systems evolved over the following decades to incorporate ethanol-compatible materials with core subsystem families, such as in-tank fuel pumps used across several global vehicle original equipment manufacturers (OEMs). A similarly compelling case can be made that all cars at the Tier 1 (or equivalent) emissions-control technology level or higher are fully compatible with E15 blends, based on the data evaluated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Ricardo in 2010. For cars at this technology level, the minor differences in fuel chemistry and properties between E10 and E15 are not significant. For E20, studies are not as extensive but are still highly significant. A long-term durability study conducted on mileage accumulation dynamometers presents convincing evidence that Tier 2 technology level cars have materials of construction and engine control authority for compatibility with E20, although this conclusion is not as strong as those drawn for E10 and E15, which are also partly based on real-world experience.
Here, in the present work, computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations of a single-cylinder gasoline compression ignition (GCI) engine are performed to investigate the impact of gasoline-ethanol blending on autoignition, nitrogen oxide (NO x ), and soot emissions under low-load conditions. In order to represent the test gasoline (RD5-87), a four-component toluene primary reference fuel (TPRF)+ethanol (ETPRF) surrogate (with 10% ethanol by volume; E10) is employed. A three-dimensional (3D) engine CFD model employing finite-rate chemistry with a skeletal kinetic mechanism (including NO x sub-mechanism), adaptive mesh refinement (AMR), and hybrid method of moments (HMOM) is adopted to capture the in-cylinder combustion phenomena and soot/NO x emissions. The engine CFD model is validated against experimental data for three gasoline-ethanol blends: E10, E30 and E100, with varying ethanol content by volume. Model validation is carried out for a broad range of start-of-injection (SOI) timings (−21, −27, −36, and −45 crank angle degrees (°CA) after top-dead-center (aTDC)) with respect to in-cylinder pressure, heat release rate, combustion phasing, NO x and soot emissions. For relatively later injection timings (−21 and −27 °CA aTDC), E30 yields higher amount of soot than E10; while the trend reverses for early injection cases (−36 and −45 °CA aTDC ). On the other hand, E100 yields the lowest amount of soot among all fuels irrespective of SOI timing. Further, E10 shows a non-monotonic trend in soot emissions with SOI timing: SOI-36>SOI-45>SOI-21>SOI-27, while soot emissions from E30 exhibit monotonic decrease with advancing SOI timing. NO x emissions from various fuels follow a trend of E10>E30>E100. On the other hand, NO x emissions increase as SOI timing is advanced for all fuels, with an anomaly for E10 and E100 where NO x decreases when SOI is advanced beyond −36 °CA aTDC. Detailed analysis of the numerical results is performed to investigate the soot/NO x emission trends and elucidate the impact of chemical composition and physical properties on autoignition and emissions characteristics.
The sooting propensity of a fuel is closely coupled with the fuel composition and chemistry. A detailed understanding of their effects is, therefore, needed to develop next-generation fuels which can minimize particulate emissions. With this overarching goal, the present work numerically investigates the effects of fuel composition and octane sensitivity (S) on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and soot emissions, for four-component gasoline-ethanol blend surrogates comprising isooctane, n-heptane, toluene, and ethanol. A partially-premixed counterflow flame is chosen as the canonical configuration for this study and simulations are performed using CHEMKIN-Pro-employing a kinetic mechanism developed by Park et al. (2017). In addition, a, detailed soot model based on the sectional method is used to capture the spatial characteristics of soot emissions. The kinetic mechanism and soot model are validated using available experimental data for various targets. A total of 86 TPRF-E mixtures, spanning a wide range of concentration of each component, and a wide range of S are analyzed. The effect of each non-paraffinic fuel component on the resultant PAH and soot emissions is investigated. PAH and soot emissions are found to vary significantly depending upon the blend composition. Additionally, based on the parametric sweeps, a regression analysis is carried out to identify global parameters that govern the formation of PAHs and soot. The analysis shows that both toluene content and S have a prominent effect on the formation of PAHs and soot, with toluene content having a stronger impact. Moreover, larger PAHs have higher dependency on toluene content and S. Furthermore, a detailed analysis is carried out to understand the physical and chemical phenomena associated with the observed trends of PAH and soot emissions.
Computational modeling of fuel-injection and fuel-impingement processes was carried out to provide insight into previous experimental results obtained from a direct-injection spark-ignition research engine operated with various ethanol and aromatic fuel blends. Seven model fuels were evaluated using both single- and split-injection strategies. Model results showed that droplet vaporization enriched the concentrations of aromatic species in the liquid phase, especially those with low vapor pressure, and ethanol-containing fuels altered droplet sizes and led to increased liquid-phase mass in the cylinder. For the spray-modeling conditions studied, most of the injected fuel remained in the liquid phase, which would be expected to result in more fuel impingement on cylinder or piston surfaces. Fuel impinging on lower cylinder-temperature surfaces was found to create wall films that could interact with the piston during the compression stroke. Fuel impinging on hotter piston-temperature surfaces vaporized more readily, but for fuels with high ethanol and aromatic content, wall films remained and were highly concentrated with lower vapor pressure and aromatic compounds. These films could lead to pool fires during combustion and therefore significant particulate matter emissions.
Monopropellant propulsion that provides high performance and low hazards compared to state-of-art hydrazine are being investigated under NASA, DOD and commercially sponsored green propellant research and development programs. This NASAeffort looks at phosphate stabilized 50% hydrogen peroxide/water –ethanol blends to evaluate their stability and combustion behavior in submillimeter diameter microtube combustion apparatus for cubesat propulsion applications. Exploratory 7-day stabilitytests find no pressure rise in a sealed test tube environment at room temperature indicating at least short term stability of the mixture. Temperature rise during combustion testing in resistively heated nickel microtube apparatus shows that micro-combustion is achieved in the tube. Propellant density is approximately 1.2 g/cm3compared to 1.0 g/cm3for hydrazine. Theoretical specific impulse of the stoichiometric blend is 219 s at a chamber pressure of 20 psia and an area ratio of 30:1. Density-specific impulseof this blendis263 swhile hydrazine is only about 215-220 sin small reaction control system thrusters. This provides about 20-22% more density-specific impulse for the cubesat compared to hydrazine. The theoreticalcombustion temperature is2168°F, whichis thermally compatible with stainless steel materials of constructionand the nickel catalystused in the tests. Combustion test results are given for stoichiometric, as well as fuel-leanand fuel-richpropellant formulations. Thesetests focus on thermally and catalytically supported combustionin the microtube, whichrequires a microtube preheat temperature of about 900°F and sufficient residence time to achieve combustion that is stable and anchored in the tubewithout blowing through the tube unreacted. Thrust class is expected to be in the 10 mN range based on flow rate and estimated specific impulse.Power requirements are generally below 25 Wto heat the tube. Steady state combustion testing is typically conducted for 3 minutes and shows littledegradation of the hardware over multiple test cyclesindicating thatthere is little catalyst degradation over time and littlecatalyst deactivation due tothe phosphate stabilizer inthe hydrogen peroxide.
Monopropellant propulsion that provides high performance and low hazards compared to state-of-art hydrazine are being investigated under NASA, DOD and commercially sponsored green propellant research and development programs. This NASA effort looks at phosphate stabilized 50% hydrogen peroxide/water –ethanol blends to evaluate their stability and combustion behavior in submillimeter diameter microtube combustion apparatus for cubesat propulsion applications. Exploratory 7-day stability tests find no pressure rise in a sealed test tube environment at room temperature indicating at least short term stability of the mixture. Temperature rise during combustion testing in resistively heated nickel microtube apparatus shows that micro-combustion is achieved in the tube. Propellant density is approximately 1.2 g/cu.cm compared to 1.0 g/cu.cm for hydrazine. Theoretical specific impulse of the stoichiometric blend is 219 s at a chamber pressure of 20 psia and an area ratio of 30:1. Density-specific impulse of this blend is 263 s while hydrazine is only about 215-220 s in small reaction control system thrusters. This provides about 20-22% more density-specific impulse for the cube sat compared to hydrazine. The the oretical combustion temperature is 2168°F, which is thermally compatible with stainless steel materials of construction and the nickel catalyst used in the tests. Combustion test results are given for stoichiometric, as well as fuel-lean and fuel-rich propellant formulations. These tests focus on thermally and catalytically supported combustion in the microtube, which requires a microtube preheat temperature of about 900°F and sufficient residence time to achieve combustion that is stable and anchored in the tube without blowing through the tube unreacted. Thrust class is expected to be in the 10 m N range based on flow rate and estimated specific impulse. Power requirements are generally below 25 W to heat the tube. Steady state combustion testing is typically conducted for 3 minutes and shows little degradation of the hardware over multiple test cycles indicating that there is little catalyst degradation over time and little catalyst deactivation due to the phosphate stabilizer in the hydrogen peroxide.
Fuel blending effects on chemically-dominated fuel properties, such as gasoline anti-knock quality, are influenced by fundamental chemical kinetic interactions between the blending agent and the base fuel. Historically, quantification of such interactions has focused on changes to the radical pool, including $\dot{O}$H and HO 2 , while intermolecular interactions pertaining to carbonated, non-fuel-specific intermediates are typically overlooked. In this regard, this work aims to derive new insight into intermolecular chemical kinetic interactions that are intrinsic to fuel blending effects via a case study on blends of 0–30% ethanol (by volume) into FGF-LLNL (a multi-component gasoline surrogate for FACE-F research gasoline) using a rapid compression machine at a diluted/stoichiometric fuel loading, compressed pressure of 40 bar and low- to intermediate-temperature regimes that are representative of boosted SI engine operation. Ethanol blending effects on the intermediate temperature heat release (ITHR) of FGF-LLNL are characterized using experimental measurements, where ethanol is found to promote the extent of ITHR and suppress the transition from ITHR to main ignition. Chemical kinetic modeling is undertaken using a recently updated gasoline surrogate model. Sensitivity analyses on ITHR characteristics further corroborate the ethanol blending effects, and highlight the significant dependence of ITHR on both fuel-specific and non-fuel-specific reactions. An approach allowing comprehensive characterization of the complex intermolecular chemical kinetic interactions between constitutes in a fuel blend is then proposed. Application of the approach to FGF-LLNL/E0–E30 reveals that ethanol perturbs the heat release and autoignition characteristics of FGF-LLNL not only by directly changing the $\dot{O}$H and HO 2 radical pools via fuel-specific reactions, but also through intermolecular interactions where participating intermediates can be produced and consumed by various sub-chemistries. Disabling the intermolecular interactions in carbonated species between ethanol and FGF-LLNL sub-chemistries leads to somewhat slower ITHR evolution and lower ignition reactivity. The role of the individual intermolecular interaction is also characterized using the proposed approach. Lastly, implications of intermolecular interactions for future studies that aim to improve model performance are highlighted, where it is found that further investigations on the core C0-C4 chemistry are needed for developing highly accurate chemistry models for complex fuel blends.
This work utilizes a rapid compression machine (RCM) to experimentally quantify autoignition and preliminary heat release characteristics for blends of 0 to 30% ethanol by volume into two surrogates (FGF-LLNL and FGF-KAUST) that represent a full boiling range gasoline (FACE-F). Experimental conditions cover pressures from 15 to 100 bar, temperatures from 700 to 1000 K, and diluted/stoichiometric and undiluted/lean fuel loading conditions representative of boosted spark-ignition and advanced compression ignition engines, respectively. Direct comparison is made with previously reported results for FACE-F/E0–E30 blends. Here, a detailed gasoline surrogate chemistry model is also proposed, and chemical kinetic modeling is undertaken using the proposed model to generate chemical insights into the compositional effects and ethanol blending effects.
Learn how ethanol is used in transportation fuels and about the different ethanol blends you may find at fueling stations. This fact sheet from Energy Saver includes information on the history of ethanol in the United States, what fuel ethanol is, the three categories of ethanol blends, and flex-fuel vehicles.
Ignition delay times of a gasoline surrogate (iso-octane/toluene/n-heptane/1-hexene at 55/25/15/5% by liquid volume, developed in McCormick et al. 2017) with high-level bioblendstock-gasoline surrogate blends (50% and 85% biofuel by liquid volume of each ethanol and methyl acetate) were collected behind reflected shock waves. Post-reflected-shock temperatures ranged from 968 to 1361 K at pressures of about 4, 10, 25, and 50 atm. Data were collected for real fuel–air mixtures at fuel lean and stoichiometric conditions (φ = 0.5, 1.0) with focus on the more-practical, fuel-lean conditions. Ignition delay times were measured from OH* chemiluminescence around 307 nm using an endwall diagnostic. The RON and MON of the surrogate were 90.3 and 84.7, respectively. Ethanol was chosen due to its wide use in flex-fuel vehicles and availability, while also providing an increased octane rating. Methyl acetate was chosen for its especially high octane rating to investigate the effect of an extreme case. To validate the gasoline surrogate, the data are compared to real gasoline (RD387) and several gasoline surrogate experiments from the literature. Using the wide range of pressures studied, the gasoline surrogate’s pressure dependence was quantified to account for test-to-test variations using regression analysis. Similarly, a global correlation for gasoline and its surrogates was developed using all available data from the literature. Two modern chemical kinetics models targeting gasoline and its surrogates are compared to the ignition delay time measurements. These new high-pressure, high-bioblendstock concentration tests provide required chemical kinetic data for optimizing fuel and engine design.
Scenarios for deep decarbonization rely on biomass for biofuels, biopower, and bioproducts, often including negative emissions via carbon capture and storage or utilization. Despite the prominence of biomass in many deep decarbonization pathways, critical questions remain about biomass allocation, effects of transportation electrification, the pace of growth, and implications for agriculture and land use. We address these questions through a unique comparison of carbon pricing effects on the growth of biomass utilization and its effects on land use in the United States by comparing results from a multisectoral integrated assessment model, the Global Change Analysis Model [GCAM], with results from a biomass-to-biofuels system dynamics model, the Biomass Scenario Model [BSM]. We contribute to model comparison efforts by analyzing the biomass deployment needed for a scenario consistent with a "Middle of the Road" Shared Socioeconomic Pathway [SSP2] and a representative concentration pathway of 2.6 W/m2. The GCAM scenarios solve for global equilibrium conditions that are consistent with this pathway, including demands for biomass across all economic sectors and representing bioenergy with carbon capture and storage as a technology option. The BSM scenarios assess those biomass and biofuel results for the United States and identify challenges associated with that pace and amount of expansion. In the scenario analysis, we harmonize key factors such as carbon price trajectory, domestic ethanol fuel demand, ethanol blending, and arable land availability, and vary them in both models. In GCAM, we vary the carbon price, transportation electrification, ethanol blending constraints, and arable land availability inputs and the value of the carbon in land; in BSM, in addition to directly inputting certain GCAM results, we vary the maximum rate of biorefinery construction, flexibility of feedstock types across conversion processes, and policy incentives such as tax credits and renewable identification number payments. The selected carbon price trajectory results in a rapid increase in biofuel production in the United States, reaching about 9.4 EJ/year in 2060 in the highest scenario analyzed in GCAM. Results differ between the two models in timing and ultimate quantity of biomass and biofuel production. GCAM biofuel quantities generally exceed BSM amounts because CCS is applied to biofuel pathways in GCAM, and because of differences in capacity expansion and related dynamics of land allocation, biomass production, and price dynamics. These dynamics include rapid biorefinery capacity expansion in high demand cases. To satisfy this biomass demand, GCAM rapidly equilibrates land allocation, but the BSM limits the rate at which this re-allocation can occur. A further contrast with the equilibrium approach in GCAM is that the BSM represents a delay between planting and harvesting woody biomass resources. As a result of these model contrasts, feedstock costs in BSM increase more than in GCAM, and the absence of CCS in the BSM also reduces the relative economic attractiveness of biofuels production. The bottlenecks, lags, and price increases also lead to potential for volatility in feedstock price and land allocation to biomass in the BSM. GCAM has more biomass production than BSM in all scenarios, partly because of the broader, economy-wide coverage of GCAM, in contrast to BSM's exclusive focus on biofuels. In both models, trends like those of biofuels production were observed for biomass production: minimal growth without a carbon price and policy incentives, and increases with a carbon price, particularly with carbon capture and storage, because the inputs assume that biopower and biofuels decrease greenhouse gas emissions. In high policy scenarios, biomass demand is high, and the consequent high biomass prices due to the land re-allocation bottleneck in the BSM limit biofuel production even if the biorefinery capacity is expanded. However, because biomass prices do not increase as much in the low policy scenario, growth is slower and the land-reallocation bottleneck no longer dominates, such that the effect of increased capacity can be seen. Across both the models, a change in assumptions from less to more land availability increases biofuel production in both GCAM and BSM, as the upward pressure on feedstock price and volatility are both reduced.
Metal supported solid oxide fuel cells (MS-SOFC) are integrated with internal reforming catalyst for direct utilization of ethanol to generate electricity. MS-SOFCs are operated up to 500 h at 700°C, with water-ethanol blend fuel using high-purity ethanol and denatured ethanol. Performance and durability with denatured ethanol varies dramatically with the composition of the denaturant. Cells operated with three denatured ethanol fuels containing small amount of methanol, isopropanol, and denatonium benzoate demonstrate similar and relative stable performance after stabilization, suggesting that these fuels are fit for MS-SOFC operation. No or minimum carbon deposits are observed on the high entropy alloy-based reforming catalyst layer. Denatured ethanol containing gasoline and toluene leads to fast degradation. Here, MS-SOFCs are promising for direct utilization of denatured ethanol, offering a path to rapid-start, carbon-neutral operation with widely-available fuels.
The Gasoline Engine and Fuels Offering Reduced Fuel Consumption and Emissions (GEFORCE) project was proposed in response to the U.S. Department of Energy’s Funding Opportunity Announcement 0991 by a team made up of the members of the Coordinating Research Council (CRC) and the research staff at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL.) The project focused on investigating the potential benefits that might be attained through synergistic use of specific engine technology together with fuels formulated to represent potential directions that high-octane fuels of the future might progress. A stated objective in the DOE FOA was to demonstrate a 25% reduction in petroleum consumption through optimization of the engine technologies together with a suitable fuel. An advanced engine was constructed and used with a matrix of research fuels to investigate potential avenues for efficiency improvement. The engine incorporated technologies expected to become mainstream for boosted engines in the next 10 to 20 years. These included increased compression ratio, a two-stage turbocharger, and cooled external exhaust gas recirculation (EGR). The fuel matrix was designed to investigate impacts from research octane number (RON), volumetric ethanol content, and the final boiling point of the fuel. The engine calibration was optimized for each fuel individually and data collected to enable vehicle system modelling that projected energy consumption, fuel economy, tailpipe CO₂ emissions, and impact on petroleum consumption for an industry-average mid-size sedan. The engine calibration and data collection were carried out at IAV in Michigan and is the subject of a separate report. IAV provided the engine data to Oak Ridge National Laboratory to support the vehicle modelling portion of the project. The vehicle modelling results show the following trends: Ethanol content does have a consistently strong influence on the fuel economy results for all cycles and all fuels. Among the fuels of a nominal RON level, increasing ethanol content consistently lowers fuel economy, with the 30% ethanol fuels always providing the lowest fuel economy for a given RON level. However, in some cases the energy consumption improvement allows the 30% ethanol fuels to match the fuel economy of the ethanol-free fuel P. These observations underscore the importance of both engine efficiency and fuel volumetric energy content on vehicle fuel economy.; There was no consistent trend in the projected energy consumption results for differences in fuel T90 for all fuels and cycles. Fuel economy projections did show a consistent trend, with the higher T90 fuel providing slightly greater fuel economy when compared to the low T90 fuel of the same ethanol content. The observed trends were consistent with differences in the heating value of the fuels.; The 102-RON fuels provided reduced energy consumption and greater fuel economy for the advanced engine on all drive cycles. The engine compression ratio of 11.5 was higher than would typically be used in a turbocharged engine when 92-RON fuel use is expected. Hence, the engine experiences more efficiency degradation from knock avoidance when using the 92-RON fuels. This degradation causes the fuel economy results for the 92-RON fuels to be lower than those for the 102-RON fuels.; Fuels E and F (92-RON, 30% ethanol) are projected to achieve 10% or greater reduction in petroleum consumption, with fuels K (102-RON, 30% ethanol) and O (97 RON, 30% ethanol) achieving greater than a 20% reduction. Fuel L (102-RON, 30% ethanol) achieves greater than 25% reduction, meeting the petroleum reduction target of the project. All of the fuels that achieve 10% or greater reduction in petroleum consumption are 30% ethanol blends.; Increasing final boiling point increased fuel economy at fixed ethanol content when the 102-RON fuels were used. This trend is a result of differences in the volumetric energy content of the fuels and the projected energy consumption values for the fuels. In the case of the 102-RON fuels, increasing final boiling point also resulted in an increase in the energy content of the fuel. There was not a consistent trend between the energy content and final boiling point for the 92-RON fuels at fixed ethanol content.
Three factors, i) the ethanol “blend wall”, which limits its market as a transportation fuel, ii) advances in production efficiency, and iii) feedstock diversification, could lead to excess ethanol at competitive prices. Those factors have already motivated a search for value-added derivatives (e.g., distillate fuels, olefins, and asymmetric amines). Siting small, low cost, flexible conversion facilities to process ethanol at or near the fermentation plant could encourage the growth of an enterprise. Decreasing the barriers to entry, matching supply and demand, and enhancing access to production incentives are enabling success factors. This review discusses the process chemistries that might be employed by such ethanol conversion facilities based on market prices. Finally, how these technologies might benefit from process intensification, and without the requirement of complex processing or large pressures or temperature gradients typically employed in conventional, large scale facilities.
The direct injection spark ignition (DISI) engine has received considerable attention due to its potential to increase the power density of traditional spark ignition engines while significantly improving fuel economy through lean, unthrottled combustion. However, the market introduction of DISI engines operated in a lean combustion mode is inhibited by their unsatisfactory emissions, especially during cold start conditions that make proper mixture formation more challenging. Ethanol-blended gasoline, now a widely used fuel, makes the cold start of a DISI engine more difficult, leading to higher HC and soot emissions because of the high latent heat of vaporization of ethanol relative to gasoline. This work investigated the impact of coolant temperature on the characteristics of combustion and emissions in a stratified-charge DISI engine fueled with an E30 fuel (i.e. 30% ethanol in gasoline), while the coolant temperature was alternated between four levels (45, 60, 75, and 90 °C) to simulate different conditions throughout the warm-up process. The experiments showed that the coolant temperature affected the post-spark inflammation time, as well as the speed, intensity, and stability of the combustion process in the engine. When the coolant temperature rose, the engine produced more NOX and less CO, PM and HC. In addition, high-speed direct photography was used to obtain crank-angle resolved images of fuel sprays and flames in the cylinder. As the coolant temperature rose, the liquid spray lengths became shorter, reducing the possibility of wall wetting, and reduced irradiance from soot particles also indicated less nonpremixed combustion. The in-cylinder imaging results are consistent with the observed combustion and emission characteristics and shed light on the underlying processes. Finally, some potential solutions to the emissions challenges faced here could be either raising in-cylinder temperatures by using trapped residuals or modifying the injection schedule, for example by increasing the number of injections or to inject later in the cycle into a higher-density environment.