Towards a Powerful Hardware-in-the-Loop System for Virtual Calibration of an Off-Road Diesel Engine
<p>Virtualization process to reduce ICE development cost and timing and to go faster to Start of Production (SOP) stage.</p> "> Figure 2
<p>Hardware in the Loop Simulator.</p> "> Figure 3
<p>Kohler KDI 1903 engine: experimental setup layout and engine schematic.</p> "> Figure 4
<p>Engine Model sketch in AVL CRUISE™ M environment.</p> "> Figure 5
<p>Parametrization of the flow coefficient of the intake throttle valve.</p> "> Figure 6
<p>Coolant temperature: model description.</p> "> Figure 7
<p>External emission models for CO, THC and Soot.</p> "> Figure 8
<p>HC Model Structure graphic.</p> "> Figure 9
<p>Exhaust after-treatment system of KDI 1903 TCR engine.</p> "> Figure 10
<p>(<b>a</b>) Simulated (red) vs. experimental (black) NO<sub>x</sub> emission downstream DOC. (<b>b</b>) Simulated (red) vs. experimental (black) HC emission downstream DOC.</p> "> Figure 11
<p>(<b>a</b>) Top: Simulated (red) vs. experimental (black) NO<sub>x</sub> emission downstream DOC. Bottom: Simulated (red) vs. experimental (black) NO emission downstream DOC. (<b>b</b>) Top: Simulated (red) vs experimental (black) HC emission downstream DOC. Bottom: Simulated (red) vs experimental (black) CO emission downstream DOC.</p> "> Figure 12
<p>DPF model overview.</p> "> Figure 13
<p>DPF—NO<sub>2</sub> recycling.</p> "> Figure 14
<p>DPF Combustion rate simulated tests.</p> "> Figure 15
<p>Measured (<span class="html-italic">x</span>-axis) vs. Simulated (<span class="html-italic">y</span>-axis) NO<sub>x</sub> emissions at Engine Out (normalized).</p> "> Figure 16
<p>Measured (<span class="html-italic">x</span>-axis) vs. Simulated (<span class="html-italic">y</span>-axis) Soot emission at Engine Out (normalized).</p> "> Figure 17
<p>Top: Simulated (red) vs. experimental (black) NO<sub>x</sub> Engine Out (normalized). Bottom: Difference between simulated and measured NO<sub>x</sub> Engine out signals (normalized).</p> "> Figure 18
<p>(<b>a</b>) Statistical analysis of NOx Engine Out simulated at VTB to determine the model accuracy over the NRTC; (<b>b</b>) Simulated (red) vs experimental (black) of cumulated NOx engine Out emission normalized with respect reference value.</p> "> Figure 19
<p>Simulated (red) vs. Measured (black) cumulated soot over NRTC Cycle (normalized).</p> "> Figure 20
<p>(<b>a</b>) Turbo speed w/o Altitude Calibration normalized with respect to the maximum value reached in the test; (<b>b</b>) Turbo speed w/ Altitude Calibration normalized with respect to the maximum value reached in the test w/o altitude calibration.</p> "> Figure 21
<p>(<b>a</b>) Turbine inlet temperature w/o Altitude Calibration normalized with respect to the maximum value reached in the test; (<b>b</b>) Turbine inlet temperature w/ Altitude Calibration normalized with respect to the maximum value reached in the test w/o altitude calibration.</p> "> Figure 22
<p>(<b>a</b>) Simulated (red) vs measured (black) Intake throttle valve (top) and EGR valve (bottom) positions (normalized with respect to the maximum value reached in the test); (<b>b</b>) Simulated (red) vs measured (black) fuel injection (normalized with respect to the maximum value reached in the test).</p> "> Figure 23
<p>(<b>a</b>) Simulated (red) vs. measured (black) turbocharger speed (normalized with respect to the maximum value reached in the test); (<b>b</b>) Simulated (red) vs. measured (black) NOx engine out emission (normalized with respect to the maximum value reached in the test).</p> "> Figure 24
<p>(<b>a</b>) Simulated (red) vs. measured (black) intake manifold pressure (normalized with respect to maximum value reached in the test); (<b>b</b>) Simulated (red) vs. measured (black) intake manifold temperature (normalized with respect to maximum value reached in the test).</p> "> Figure 25
<p>(<b>a</b>) Simulated (red) vs measured (black) DOC inlet temperature (normalized with respect to the maximum value reached in the test); (<b>b</b>) Simulated (red) vs measured (black) DPF inlet temperature (normalized with respect to the maximum value reached in the test).</p> "> Figure 26
<p>Top: engine speed (normalized with respect to the maximum value reached in the test) of vehicle duty cycle; Bottom: injected quantity of vehicle duty cycle (normalized with respect to the maximum value reached in the test).</p> "> Figure 27
<p>Exhaust Temperature over the Vehicle Duty Cycle (normalized with respect to the maximum value reached in the test).</p> "> Figure 28
<p>Soot Loading comparison between HiL simulation and real engine test bed (normalized with respect to the maximum value reached in the test).</p> ">
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Virtual Test Bed
2.2. Reference Engine
2.3. Real-Time Engine Model
- Pressure at start of injection correction (PSOIC).
- Combustion delay correction (CDC).
- MFB (mass fraction burned) 50% correction (MFBC).
- One engine map using only main injection and without Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) to better estimate the injection delay and engine volumetric efficiency.
- One engine map with standard calibration for overall model parametrization.
2.4. Real-Time Exhaust After-Treatment Model
- DOC: Light off temperature test (Oxidation of CO, HC and NO)
- DPF: Light off temperature test (Oxidation of CO, HC and NO)
2.4.1. Diesel Oxidation Catalyst Model
- Non-uniformity of flow and temperature field in full-size component → affecting kinetics.
- The engine exhaust gas includes a mixture of different gas species, especially hydrocarbons.
- Presence of external heat transfer in the full-size component.
- Different aging status of the catalyst components.
2.4.2. Diesel Particulate Filter Model
- as channel reaction (as in the DOC model)
- in the wall
2.5. Engine Model Validation on HiL System
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Applications of HiL System for Calibration Activities
3.1.1. Altitude Conditions Calibration
- Turbocharger maximum speed
- Max exhaust port temperature
- Turbine inlet temperature
3.1.2. Soot Loading Model Calibration
4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
cDPF | Coated Diesel Particulate Filter |
CPU | Central Processing Unit |
DI | Direct Injection |
DOC | Diesel Oxidation Catalyst |
DPF | Diesel Particulate Filter |
EAS | Exhaust After-Treatment System |
ECU | Engine Control Unit |
EGR | Exhaust Gas Recirculation |
EO | Engine Out |
ETB | Engine Test Bed |
FMU | Functional Mockup Unit |
FTIR | Fourier Transform Infrared spectroscopy |
HiL | Hardware In the Loop |
HTC | Heat Transfer Coefficient |
HW | Hardware |
ICE | Internal Combustion Engine |
KDI | Kohler Direct Injection |
MFB | Mass Fraction Burned |
MiL | Model in the Loop |
NRTC | Non-Road Transient Cycle |
OEM | Original Equipment Manufacturer |
PGM | Platinum Group Metals |
PM | Particulate Matter |
PN | Particulate Number |
RMS | Root Mean Squared |
SiL | Software in the Loop |
SW | Software |
VTB | Virtual Test Bench |
0D | Zero-Dimensional |
1D | One-dimensional |
References
- Onorati, A.; Montenegro, G. 1D and Multi-D Modeling Techniques for IC Engine Simulation; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Khan, D.; Gül, M.Z. Zero-Dimensional Modelling of a Four-Cylinder Turbocharged Diesel Engine with Variable Compression Ratio and Its Effects on Emissions. SN Appl. Sci. 2019, 1, 1162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Deng, J.; Stobart, R. BSFC Investigation Using Variable Valve Timing in a Heavy Duty Diesel Engine. SAE Tech. Pap. 2009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galindo, J.; Lujan, J.M.; Climent, H.; Guardiola, C.; Varnier, O. A New Model for Matching Advanced Boosting Systems to Automotive Diesel Engines. SAE Int. J. Engines 2014, 7, 131–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leach, F.; Ismail, R.; Davy, M.; Weall, A.; Cooper, B. The effect of a stepped lip piston design on performance and emissions from a high-speed diesel engine. Appl. Energy 2018, 215, 679–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chase, A.; Miwa, J.; Abidin, Z.; Cung, K. Investigation of an Advanced Combustion System for Stoichiometric Diesel to Reduce Soot Emissions; SAE Technical Paper; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Millo, F.; Boccardo, G.; Piano, A.; Arnone, L.; Manelli, S.; Tutore, G.; Marinoni, A. Numerical Simulation of the Combustion Process of a High EGR, High Injection Pressure, Heavy Duty Diesel Engine; SAE Technical Paper; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Piano, A.; Millo, F.; Sapio, F.; Pesce, F.C. Multi-Objective Optimization of Fuel Injection Pattern for a Light-Duty Diesel Engine through Numerical Simulation. SAE Int. J. Engines 2018, 11, 1093–1107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Millo, F.; Sapio, F.; Piano, A.; Pesce, F.C. Digital Shaping and Optimization of Fuel Injection Pattern for a Common Rail Automotive Diesel Engine through Numerical Simulation; SAE Technical Paper; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meda, L.; Shu, Y.; Romzek, M. Heavy Duty Diesel after-Treatment System Analysis Based Design: Fluid, Thermal and Structural Considerations; SAE Technical Paper; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Diewald, R.; Cartus, T.; Schüßler, M.; Bachler, H. Model Based Calibration Methodology; SAE Technical Paper; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.-Y.; Andert, J.; Quérel, C.; Schaub, J.; Kötter, M.; Politsch, D.; Hadj-amor, H. X-in-the-Loop-Basierte Kalibrierung: HiL Simulation Eines Virtuellen Dieselantriebsstrangs. In Simulation und Test 2017; Liebl, J., Beidl, C., Eds.; Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2018; pp. 53–79. [Google Scholar]
- Trampert, S.; Nijs, M.; Huth, T.; Guse, D. Simulation von Realen Fahrszenarien Am Prüfstand. MTZextra 2017, 22, 12–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wurzenberger, J.C.; Bardubitzki, S.; Kutschi, S.; Fairbrother, R.; Poetsch, C. Modeling of Catalyzed Particulate Filters—Concept Phase Simulation and Real-Time Plant Modeling on HiL. SAE Int. J. Engines 2016, 9, 1720–1734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patil, K.; Molla, S.K.; Schulze, T. Hybrid Vehicle Model Development Using ASM-AMESim-Simscape Co-Simulation for Real-Time HIL Applications; SAE Technical Paper; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tietze, N.; Konigorski, U.; Fleck, C.; Nguyen-Tuong, D. Model-Based Calibration of Engine Controller Using Automated Transient Design of Experiment. In 14. Internationales Stuttgarter Symposium; Bargende, M., Reuss, H.-C., Wiedemann, J., Eds.; Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2014; pp. 1587–1605. [Google Scholar]
- Mizuno, H.; Elbers, R.; Pfeilmaier, P.; Naono, T.; Oyobe, H.; Hanada, H.; Shirota, K.; De Smet, J. Development of Simulation Test Bench (HV-HIL) to Calibrate and Evaluate Hybrid Vehicle Components without Real Engine or Car. In 16. Internationales Stuttgarter Symposium; Bargende, M., Reuss, H.-C., Wiedemann, J., Eds.; Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2016; pp. 1117–1130. [Google Scholar]
- Blanco-Rodriguez, D.; Vagnoni, G.; Aktas, S.; Schaub, J. Model-Based Tool for the Efficient Calibration of Modern Diesel Powertrains. MTZ Worldw. 2016, 77, 54–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schäuffele, J.; Zurawka, T. Automotive Software Engineering—Grundlagen, Prozesse, Methoden Und Werkzeuge Effizient Einsetzen (3. Aufl.); Vieweg & Sohn: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Linssen, R.; Uphaus, F.; Mauss, J. Simulation Vernetzter Steuergeräte Für Die Fahrbarkeitsapplikation. ATZelektronik 2016, 11, 16–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caraceni, A.; De Cristofaro, F.; Ferrara, F.; Scala, S.; Philipp, O. Benefits of Using a Real-Time Engine Model During Engine ECU Development; SAE Technical Paper; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.; Andert, J.; Neumann, D.; Querel, C.; Scheel, T.; Aktas, S.; Miccio, M.; Schaub, J.; Koetter, M.; Ehrly, M. Hardware-in-the-Loop-Based Virtual Calibration Approach to Meet Real Driving Emissions Requirements. SAE Int. J. Engines 2018, 11, 1479–1504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pfau, R.U.; Schaden, T. Real-Time Simulation of Extended Vehicle Drivetrain Dynamics. In Multibody Dynamics: Computational Methods and Applications; Arczewski, K., Blajer, W., Fraczek, J., Wojtyra, M., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2011; pp. 195–214. ISBN 978-90-481-9971-6. [Google Scholar]
- Schernus, C.; Lütkemeyer, G.; Winsel, T.; Ayeb, M.; Theuerkauf, H.J.; Pischinger, S. HiL-Calibration of SI Engine Cold Start and Warm-Up Using Neural Real-Time Model; SAE Technical Paper; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, Y.; Lin, C.-C. Development and Validation of a Mean Value Engine Model for Integrated Engine and Control System Simulation; SAE Technical Paper; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Canova, M.; Fiorani, P.; Gambarotta, A. A Real-Time Model of a Small Turbocharged Multijet Diesel Engine: Application and Validation; SAE Technical Paper; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Katrašnik, T.; Heinzle, R.; Wurzenberger, J.C. Detailed Engine and Vehicle Plant Model to Support ECU Calibration. In Proceedings of the Powertrain Modeling Conference, Bradford, UK, 4–6 September 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Guzzella, L.; Onder, C. Introduction to Modeling and Control of Internal Combustion Engine Systems; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2009; ISBN 3-642-10775-3. [Google Scholar]
- Fuchs, G.; Steindl, A.; Jakubek, S. Local Jacobian Based Galerkin Order Reduction for the Approximation of Large-Scale Nonlinear 664 Dynamical Systems. Int. J. Math. Model. Methods Appl. Sci. 2011, 5, 567–576. [Google Scholar]
- Müller, M.; Hendricks, E.; Chevalier, A. On the Validity of Mean Value Engine Models During Transient Operation; SAE Technical Paper; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pischinger, S.; Schernus, C.; Winsel, T.; Ayeb, M.; Wilhelm, C.; Theuerkauf, H.J.; Woermann, R. HiL-Based ECU-Calibration of SI Engine with Advanced Camshaft Variability; SAE Technical Paper; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Katrašnik, T. Transient Momentum Balance—A Method for Improving the Performance of Mean-Value Engine Plant Models. Energies 2013, 6, 2892–2926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Isermann, R. Engine Modeling and Control: Modeling and Electronic Management of Internal Combustion Engines; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; ISBN 978-3-642-39933-6. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, S.; Andert, J.; Pischinger, S.; Ehrly, M.; Schaub, J.; Koetter, M.; Ayhan, A.S. Scalable Mean Value Modeling for Real-Time Engine Simulations with Improved Consistency and Adaptability; SAE Technical Paper; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stage V Regulation (EU) 2016/1628. Available online: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/1628/oj (accessed on 7 September 2021).
- KOHLER KDI 1903 TCR. Available online: https://kohlerpower.com/en/engines/product/kdi1903tcr (accessed on 7 September 2021).
- AVL CRUISETM M v2019 User Manual—Chapter 6.1.7; Hans-List-Platz 1, 8020 Graz, AVL List GmbH, MOBEOTM Cylinder; Mobicom Technologies Pvt Ltd.: Bengaluru, India, 2019.
- Oppenauer, K.; Alberer, D.; del Re, L. Simplified Calculation of Chemical Equilibrium and Thermodynamic Properties for Diesel Combustion. SAE Int. J. Engines 2011, 4, 2257–2277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Riccio, A.; Di Iorio, F.; Siccardi, F.; Severi, D.; Lucchetti, G.; Karlon, A.; Valchev, P. Heavy Duty Diesel Engine and EAS Modelling and Validation for a Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulation System; SAE Technical Paper; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Incropera, F.P. Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer, 7th ed.; John Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Missen, R.W.; Mims, C.A.; Saville, B.A. Introduction to Chemical Reaction Engineering and Kinetics; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
Intake throttle valve |
Diesel Common Rail Injectors |
EGR valve |
Fuel Pump |
Engine type | DI turbocharged 1.9L diesel engine |
Emission compliance | China 4, US Tier 4 Final, EU Stage V |
Engine displacement | 1861 cm3 |
Bore × Stroke | 88 mm × 102 mm |
Turbocharger | Single stage turbo and mechanical wastegate |
Fuel injection system | Common Rail |
EGR path | High Pressure |
Aftertreatment system | DOC + cDPF |
Rated power | 42 kW @ 2600 rpm |
Rated torque | 225 Nm @ 1500 rpm |
Measurement Equipment | Specification |
---|---|
Exhaust gas analyser | AVL AMA i60 SII |
Smoke meter | AVL 483 micro soot sensor |
DPF weighing scale | Mettler-Toledo KA32s |
Air flow rate | AVL FLOWSONIX™ Air |
Fuel flow rate | AVL FUEL MASS FLOW METER |
Exhaust gas temperature | Sheathed thermocouples |
Tuning Parameter | Value |
---|---|
PSOIC | 0.11 |
CDC | 0.05 |
MFBC | 0.46 |
Tuning Parameter | Value |
---|---|
NEM | 0.21 |
NHC | 0.33 |
Characteristic | DOC Sample | DOC Full Size |
---|---|---|
Diameter [in] × length [in] | 1 × 3 | 2 × 3 |
Wall thickness [mil] | 4 | 4 |
Cell density [cpsi] | 400 | 400 |
PGM loading [-] | Pt and Pd | Pt and Pd |
Substrate material [-] | Cordierite | Cordierite |
SGB Test ID | CO [ppm] | NO [ppm] | C3H6 [ppm] | SV [1/h] |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | - | 200 | - | 200,000 |
2 | - | 20 | - | 200,000 |
3 | - | 200 | - | 100,000 |
4 | - | 520 | - | 200,000 |
5 | 80 | - | - | 200,000 |
6 | 80 | - | 24 | 200,000 |
7 | - | - | 24 | 200,000 |
8 | 80 | 200 | - | 200,000 |
# | Site | Reaction | Reaction Rate |
---|---|---|---|
1 | PGM | CO + 0.5O2 → CO2 | A1 ·exp(−E1/RT) · CCO·CO2/I |
2 | PGM | C3H6 + 4.5O2 → 3CO2 + 3H2O | A2 ·exp(−E2/RT) · CC3H6·CO2/I |
3 | PGM | NO + 0.5O2 ↔ NO2 | A3·exp(−E3/RT) · (CNO·(CO2^0.5)−CNO2/keq)/I |
Reaction | Activation Energy Ei | Pre-Exponent Multiplier Ai |
---|---|---|
1 | E1 = 72,383 [J/mol] | A1 = 1.18 × 1011 [-] |
2 | E2 = 143,460 [J/mol] | A2 = 1.56 × 1019 [-] |
3 | E3 = 6864 [J/mol] | A3 = 1.12 × 104 [-] |
# | Reaction | Reaction Rate |
---|---|---|
1 | Csoot + 0.5O2 → CO | R1 = fCO·k1·exp(−E1/RT)·CO2 |
2 | Csoot + O2 → CO2 | R2 = (1 − fCO)·k1·exp(−E1/RT)·CO2 |
3 | Csoot + NO2 → CO + NO | R3 = gCO·k3·exp(−E3/RT)·CNO2 |
4 | Csoot + 2NO2 → CO2 + NO | R4 = (1 − gCO)·k3·exp(−E3/RT)·CNO2 |
Tuning Parameter | Value |
---|---|
E1 | 16,264 [J/mol] |
k1 | 1.4 × 106 [-] |
E3 | 12,503 [J/mol] |
k3 | 1.1 × 1011 [-] |
fCO | 0.1 [-] |
gCO | 0.9 [-] |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Riccio, A.; Monzani, F.; Landi, M. Towards a Powerful Hardware-in-the-Loop System for Virtual Calibration of an Off-Road Diesel Engine. Energies 2022, 15, 646. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15020646
Riccio A, Monzani F, Landi M. Towards a Powerful Hardware-in-the-Loop System for Virtual Calibration of an Off-Road Diesel Engine. Energies. 2022; 15(2):646. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15020646
Chicago/Turabian StyleRiccio, Antonio, Filippo Monzani, and Maurizio Landi. 2022. "Towards a Powerful Hardware-in-the-Loop System for Virtual Calibration of an Off-Road Diesel Engine" Energies 15, no. 2: 646. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15020646