Encontre seu próximo livro favorito

Torne'se membro hoje e leia gratuitamente por 30 dias.
10th International Conference on Turbochargers and Turbocharging

10th International Conference on Turbochargers and Turbocharging

Ler amostra

10th International Conference on Turbochargers and Turbocharging

avaliações:
5/5 (2 avaliações)
Comprimento:
926 página
Lançado em:
May 11, 2012
ISBN:
9780857096135
Formato:
Livro

Descrição

This book presents the papers from the latest international conference, following on from the highly successful previous conferences in this series held regularly since 1978. Papers cover all current and novel aspects of turbocharging systems design for boosting solutions for engine downsizing. The focus of the papers is on the application of turbocharger and other pressure charging devices to spark ignition (SI) and compression ignition (CI) engines in the passenger car and commercial vehicles. Novel boosting solutions for diesel engines operating in the industrial and marine market sectors are also included.

The current emission legislations and environmental trends for reducing CO2 and fuel consumption are the major market forces in the transport (land and marine) and industry sectors. In these market sectors the internal combustion engine is the key product where downsizing is the driver for development for both SI and CI engines in the passenger car and commercial vehicle applications. The more stringent future market forces and environmental considerations mean more stringent engine downsizing, thus, novel systems are required to provide boosting solutions including hybrid, electric-motor and exhaust waste energy recovery systems for high efficiency, response, reliability, durability and compactness etc. For large engines the big challenge is to enhance the high specific power and efficiency whilst reducing emission levels (Nox and Sox) with variable quality fuels. This will require turbocharging systems for very high boost pressure, efficiency and a high degree of system flexibility.
  • Presents papers from all the latest international conference
  • Papers cover all aspects of the turbocharging systems design for boosting solutions for engine downsizing
  • The focus of the papers is on the application of turbocharger and other pressure charging devices to spark ignition (SI) and compression ignition (CI) engines in the passenger car and commercial vehicles
Lançado em:
May 11, 2012
ISBN:
9780857096135
Formato:
Livro

Sobre o autor

The Institution of Mechanical Engineers is one of the leading professional engineering institutions in the world.

Relacionado a 10th International Conference on Turbochargers and Turbocharging

Livros relacionados
Artigos relacionados

Amostra do Livro

10th International Conference on Turbochargers and Turbocharging - Institution of Mechanical Engineers

Session 1

Novel Applications

HyBoost – An intelligently electrified optimised downsized gasoline engine concept

J. King, M. Heaney, E. Bower, N. Jackson and N. Owen,     Ricardo, UK

J. Saward and A. Fraser,     Ford Motor Company, UK

G. Morris and P. Bloore,     Controlled Power Technologies, UK

T. Cheng, J. Borges-Alejo and M. Criddle,     Valeo, France

ABSTRACT

The UK Technology Strategy Board (TSB) sponsored HyBoost project was a collaborative research programme to develop an ultra efficient optimised gasoline engine concept with Intelligent Electrification. The basis of the concept was use of a highly downsized 1.0 L boosted engine in conjunction with relatively low cost synergistic '12 + X' Volt electrical management system and electrical supercharger technologies to deliver better value CO2 reduction than a full hybrid vehicle. Project targets of 99 g/km CO2 as measured over the European Drive Cycle (EDC) in a standard 2011 Ford Focus whilst maintaining the same performance and driveability attributes as a 2009 production 2.0 L version of the car were achieved, and a potential route through to < 85 g/km CO2 identified. Ricardo was supported by a consortium consisting of Ford, Controlled Power Technologies, Valeo, the European Advanced Lead Acid Battery Consortium, Imperial College London and the UK TSB.

1 INTRODUCTION

Mandation of road vehicle fuel economy is becoming a global phenomenon, with legislation or binding agreements for substantial improvements coming into force in Europe, the US, Canada, Australia, Japan and China. Passenger cars are a primary focus of this legislation, with future targets calling typically for continuing improvement of 3% per year as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Future Passenger Car Fuel Economy Targets & Legislation (Source: Passenger Vehicle Greenhouse Gas and fuel Economy Standards: A Global Update – ICCT)

To put this change into context: in Europe, an average of 1.6% per year improvement has been achieved over the last decade, driven by the now superseded Voluntary Agreement. This is a world-leading pace of change, despite missing the VA targets. Future legislation in the major markets now requires that this pace of change must be doubled, for example in Europe a new car fleet average tailpipe CO2 emission of 130 g/km must be achieved, with phase-in from 2012-18, with even tougher targets currently set for 2020.

The mass-market advancement of Hybrid vehicles still requires significant reduction in product cost. Recent analysis by Ricardo (updating the 2003 DfT/DTI Low Carbon Roadmap) indicates that current Hybrid cars only offer marginal Total Cost of Ownership savings unless these cost reductions are realised. This analysis also continues to indicate that deploying low cost technologies across a large number of vehicles remains more cost-effective than deploying costly technology to a few.

In the UK and Europe, the Diesel engine is currently established as the fuel-efficient solution for the majority of passenger cars sold. However, its significant incremental cost over a gasoline engine arising from the cost of precision fuel injection and exhaust after-treatment devices forms a higher proportion of the purchase price. Furthermore, rising demand for Diesel fuel rather than gasoline impairs the efficiency of the refinery (meaning that CO2 savings on a well to wheel basis are becoming less attractive) and pushes up the price of Diesel fuel. The aim of the HyBoost concept was to combine cost-effective hybridisation with synergistic gasoline engine downsizing technologies to offer a CO2/performance trade-off better than today's more costly full hybrids and high efficiency Diesels.

2 HYBOOST CONCEPT

HyBoost targets were to deliver a C-segment model year 2011 (MY2011) Ford Focus demonstrating a 30-40% reduction in CO2 emissions as measured over the EDC (to below 100 g/km) versus a baseline MY2009 2.0 L Naturally Aspirated (NA) gasoline engine version of the passenger car whilst maintaining the comparable vehicle performance and driveability attributes. Figure 2 shows a simple scheme of the concept with the 2.0 L NA engine replaced with a downsized DI gasoline engine equipped with a conventional fixed geometry turbocharger (FGT) delivering superior steady state power and torque levels. A Front End Accessory Drive (FEAD) mounted Belt Starter Generator (BSG) gave micro hybrid functionality of stop/start and more efficient motoring and generation enabled through the higher voltage 12 + X (typically between 18 – 27 V) energy storage of an ultra capacitor system. Energy recovered during deceleration events could be deployed in a sophisticated boosting system combining a 12 + X electric supercharger blowing through the conventional turbocharger and/or the BSG torque assist system, using the electrical energy optimally to achieve good transient response or improved fuel consumption. The component systems have previously been demonstrated individually at 12 volts, but not brought together in this synergistic combination as a 12 + X system.

Figure 2 Hyboost Concept Scheme

The project also included exploration of electric turbocompounding (shown in the scheme but not fitted to the HyBoost car) and a novel energy storage technology for further enhancements to efficiency and cost respectively, but these items are not covered in this paper.

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Hyboost Engine And Boost System

HyBoost uses a modified near production Ford 1.0 L 3 cylinder turbo GDI EcoBoost base engine. This gives 50% downsizing over the baseline engine. Figure 3 shows the steady state torque curves of the two engines, and the superior performance of the HyBoost engine can be clearly seen. The Ford 2.0 L Duratec engine produces peak power and torque levels of 107 kW at 6000 rpm and 185 Nm at 4000 rpm respectively. This compares to the HyBoost (with no electric supercharger assist) peak power and torque levels of 105 kW at 5500 rpm and 234 Nm at 2500 rpm respectively, which were achieved through re-optimisation of the boosting system, use of a new intake air path required to include the electric supercharger, and fitment of a new high efficiency Valeo Water Charge Air Cooler (WCAC) system. The WCAC system was specified with a very high (relative to engine size and performance) heat rejection capability of between 16 – 18 kW, and this was key to enabling excellent charge cooling to mitigate knocking and maintain lambda 1 operation through to full load, resulting in excellent Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (BSFC) across the entire operating map.

Figure 3 Ford 2.0 L Duratec Vs Hyboost Torque Curves Comparison

As the engine becomes more aggressively downsized several potential issues arise with regards to perceived performance. Firstly, the main issue is turbocharger lag, where the device itself takes time to build up boost pressure and the subsequent transient torque curve does not meet the steady state torque curve. Secondly, often there can be a big difference between the low engine speed NA torque (typically 8 – 11 bar BMEP), where the FGT is not able to deliver any significant boost pressure even during steady state conditions, and peak torque, which can be as high at 34.5 bar BMEP in the case of HyBoost with a larger turbocharger fitted. This also can give a perceived turbocharger lag feel during vehicle launch even if the boosting system response is more than adequate. To counter these effects,Hyboost uses a Valeo 12 + X 3.3 kW electric supercharger to mitigate turbocharger lag in addition to enabling some degree of torque augmentation to the base engine, and a CAD model of the device is shown on the engine in Figure 4.

Figure 4 CAD Model Of The Hyboost Powertrain Showing The Valeo 12 + X Electric Supercharger And Associated Intake Pipework

Figure 3 also shows the full load** torque curve of HyBoost with the electric supercharger running from 1000 to 2000 rpm engine speed. The following key benefits of the electric supercharger can be determined from the detailed analysis performed on the HyBoost project:

• The electric supercharger provides additional boosting capability beyond the FGT and thus enables significant steady state and transient torque augmentation in the lower engine speed range. The FGT also behaves as a pressure ratio multiplier of the electric supercharger boost so is effectively an in-series, 2-stage compressor system. This gives the potential to address the large step up seen between low and mid speed torque

• Figure 3 shows there is a thermodynamic multiplication of the electric supercharger power through the engine. At 1000 rpm the torque rises from 125 to 183 Nm with the electric supercharger assistance, which is equivalent to a 6.1 kW increase in power at this speed (13.1 to 19.2 kW respectively). At 1500 rpm the rise is from 185 to 239 Nm, which is an 8.48 kW increase, and both of these improvements were achieved with an input of only 1.8 kW to the electric supercharger. This equates to a 47 and 29% increase in engine torque at those speeds respectively, and transiently the proportional increase in engine torque could be even higher dependant on the boost response without the electric supercharger assistance

• As a function of the higher engine power achieved with the electric supercharger assistance more energy is naturally released to the FGT turbine, enhancing its run-up

• The air mass flow and pressure ratio provided by the electric supercharger is essentially free if provided from stored recovered energy (although the system can run in self-sustaining mode as long as the generator can provide the required energy and the electric supercharger remains within temperature limits). This results in a lower Indicated Mean Effective Pressure (IMEP) required to generate boost than it would be for a conventional turbo or supercharged engine for the same Brake Mean Effective Pressure (BMEP). With downsized gasoline engines IMEP levels can be very high and it can be extremely challenging to operate the engine at these levels without significantly compromised combustion (retarded spark timing and high levels of fuel cooling to control Exhaust Gas Temperature), that can then translates in to a degradation in real world fuel economy

** Note that full load performance availability is dependent on available stored energy

Application of the electric supercharger to mitigate turbocharger lag required only relatively shorts bursts of usage, typically in the order or 1 to 3 seconds, with the engine returning to conventional thermodynamic only (without electrical assist) operation as soon as possible. Figure 5 shows some early test bed data taken on prototype phase engine with a 12 V electric supercharger fitted. Here a load step is used at constant engine speed to evaluate the boost response with and without the electric supercharger running. Following a pedal stamp to Wide Open Throttle (WOT) from a minimum load condition the boost pressure rise is measured, and the graph shows that the time to peak boost is halved with the electric supercharger running for 2 seconds than without the electric supercharger running. This testing was far from optimum but shows the benefit of the electric supercharger, and the 12 + X electric supercharger proved to be capable of achieving maximum speed of greater than 60,000 rpm in less than 200 ms and a maximum pressure ratio of 1.6 bar with high motor efficiency. Subsequent vehicle performance and driveability attributes where maintained with the 50% engine downsizing as shown in table 1 later in the paper.

Table 1

Powertrain And Vehicle Attributes Comparisons

Figure 5 Hyboost Load Step Boost Response Using 12 V The Electric Supercharger On Test Bench

Finally from Figure 3 the torque curve from a revised larger turbocharger fitted to the HyBoost engine is shown with application of a Valeo-supplied Low Pressure cooled WOT Exhaust Gas Recirculation (LP WOT EGR) system. A peak power and torque of 112 kW at 5500 rpm and 260 Nm at 3000 rpm respectively was achieved despite the engine not being optimised for these high levels of specific output. The detriment of the larger turbo can be seen below 2250 rpm where the engine torque drops off considerably, however, in this case aggressive use of the electric supercharger can be utilised to fill in the curve if necessary, as shown by the large arrow. In HyBoost's case, with a primary project focus on low CO2, the main energy benefit of the larger turbocharger was considerably reduced pumping across the device at part load, resulting in a measured average 2% improvement in BSFC at the key drive cycle engine speeds and loads.

From the powertrain downsizing alone a 27% reduction in fuel consumption was measured over the EDC versus the baseline primarily through reduced engine pumping losses and better BSFC for the same vehicle tractive load. Advanced Design of Experiments calibration techniques were used to gain a further 2% improvement. Also, due to the high engine torque output achieved a 6 speed manual transmission with significantly higher gear ratios was sourced from a Diesel engine application in the same base vehicle, realising a further 4 % reduction in drive cycle CO2 whilst still achieving the performance targets.

3.2 Hyboost Micro Hybrid System

The HyBoost Valeo StARS™ 12 + X BSG is capable of 4 kW in motoring and 6 kW in regeneration mode, with the energy being stored in a 200 Farad ultra capacitor pack (UCaps). A 2.2 kW DC/DC converter allowed energy to be moved between the standard vehicle 12v lead-acid battery and the UCaps. The benefits of the micro hybrid system can be split up into three key areas:

3.2.1 Smart Charging

Smart charging over the EDC is enabled though the capability of the BSG to regenerate aggressively during zero fuel tip out and braking events. More than sufficient energy is recovered to meet the vehicle's base electrical loads. Currently the legislative drive cycle requires that the battery and UCap state of charge must be the same at the beginning and end of the cycle, but all the regenerated energy is fed back into the UCaps, however, there is a bleed back of some stored energy from the UCaps through the DC/DC converter to maintain the 12 V battery State of Charge (SOC). The neutral charging strategy resulted in a typical 4% improvement in drive cycle CO2.

3.2.2 Stop-start

The majority of current stop-start systems operate in neutral gear only, which is to say that the engine does not stop until neutral has been selected and the clutch released. The engine then starts when the clutch is pressed again ready for the next pull away. Stop-start in neutral gives approximately a 4% benefit over the drive cycle. However, on the EDC the gear selection point before the pull away is approx 2 seconds before the car needs to drive, and so essentially it means the engine can be idling for between 2 – 4 seconds when the vehicle speed is 0 km/h. Due to the capability of the BSG to start the engine quickly and, if required, assist the drive of the engine during pull away, a more aggressive in-gear strategy can be used so before driving away on the cycle the gear can be selected but the engine does not actually start until the driver starts lifting his or her foot off the clutch. Similarly, coming off the hills on the ECE15 section of the cycle the engine is stopped when the clutch is depressed and the vehicle speed is 0 km/h, but still in gear. Figure 6 shows the instantaneous CO2 benefits (solid line) of stop-start and torque assist over the ECE15. Stop-start in-gear gives an extra 1% improvement in CO2 over stop-start in neutral only.

Figure 6 Stop-Start And Torque assist benefits over ECE15

3.2.3 Torque assist

Figure 7 shows the initial simulation of BSG behaviour (StARS Torque, + ve torque is motoring mode, -ve torque is regeneration mode), electric supercharger operation (e/s flag) and UCap SOC over the whole EDC. From this graph it can be seen that there is sufficient recovered energy in the UCaps from regeneration events to employ BSG torque assist, and this is primarily used during the ECE15 pull away transients. The effect of the BSG torque assist is reduced engine fuelling requirements and results lower cycle CO2. Optimisation on the vehicle actually realised benefits over the Extra Urban Drive Cycle (EUDC), as shown in Figure 8, as well as the ECE15, as shown above in Figure 6. Additionally, it was possible to drive the entire cycle with no electric supercharger operation, and the CO2 improvement from torque assist was 3.5%, giving a total combined micro hybrid benefit of 12.5%.

Figure 7 Stars 12 + X And Electric Supercharger Operational Simulation Over The EDC

Figure 8 Torque Assist Benefits Over EUDC

When operating the vehicle with a more aggressive driver demand than seen over the whole EDC, the stored energy was then distributed to the BSG (for direct launch assist) and/or the electric supercharger (for lag mitigation) dependant on the engine speed, load and rate of change of pedal demand. A complex control strategy was developed to supervise the operation of HyBoost's key systems.

3.3 Hyboost CO2 Glide Path And Performance Status

Figure 9 shows a slightly simplified CO2 glide path for the project from the baseline vehicle to HyBoost demonstrator vehicle. The results in the chart are based on cold start (25 deg C) tests undertaken following the legislative procedure, and meet EU5 emissions standards.

Figure 9 Hyboost Vehicle CO2 Glide Path

Starting from left to right the breakdown of the chart is as follows:

1) Baseline vehicle MY2009 Ford Focus 2.0 L NA PFI gasoline vehicle with 5 speed gearbox 169 g/km CO2

2) MY2011 Ford Focus 1.6 L EcoBoost production vehicle, an 18% improvement to 139 g/km CO2

3) Installation of the Ford Fox 1.0 L engine replacing the 1.6 L engine, BSG fitted and utilising a standard charging strategy, slightly higher friction of a FEAD capable of working with the full BSG functionality, a 14% improvement to 120 g/km CO2

4) Installation of the 6 speed Diesel gearbox with higher ratios, a 4 % improvement to 115 g/km CO2

5) StARS™ 12 + X smart charging employed, a 4% improvement to 110 g/kmCO2

6) In-gear stop-start, a 5% improvement to 104.7 g/km CO2

7) BSG torque assist, a 3.5% improvement to 100.8 g/km CO2

8) Mileage stabilisation of car, a 2% improvement to 98.8 g/km CO2

9) 2% Conformity of Production (COP) allowance to 96.8 g/km CO2

10) Large turbo tested with 2% improvement to 94.9 g/km CO2

The engine supplied and used in the vehicle was brand new, as was the HyBoost car itself. Typically the vehicle may be aged anywhere between 4,000 to 20,000 km to ensure that it has been stabilised. This was not undertaken on HyBoost due to project time constraints and it is Fords experience that up to a 2% improvement in cycle fuel consumption could be gained, and this is shown in line 8 above. A manufacturer specified Conformity of Production (COP) allowance of 2% has been included in line 9 – 2% is generally the minimum figure used by most OEM's, and this could be increased to 4 or even 6%.

From detailed engine and vehicle simulation and testing undertaken on the project a series of five additional small improvements were identified that could result in a further significant reduction in fuel consumption beyond the 99 g/km CO2 target, bring the concept down to an equivalent level achieved by a similarly sized full hybrid vehicle. These are also shown on Figure 9, and can be summarised as follows:

11) Control strategy refinement from further development work to fully optimise the system would be expected to give at least a further 1.5% improvement in EDC CO2

12) Similar to 11, better utilisation of the current UCaps, or even a minimal increased storage on the vehicle has been shown through simulation to be beneficial as the re-generation opportunities over the EDC have not been fully optimised at the current stage of concept development

13) The 6 speed Diesel gearbox was an off-the-shelf un-modified production box. Vehicle drive cycle simulation showed that the final drive could be slightly lengthened to give an additional 1% improvement in EDC CO2. The performance attributes, primarily the 0–62 mph time, could be maintained as the vehicle could achieve 62 mph is 2nd gear with the longer final drive whereas it currently requires a shift to 3rd gear, which takes up approx 0.4 – 0.5 seconds of the current 0 – 62 mph time

14) From a combination of the large turbocharger and LP WOT EGR tested on the engine test bed it was determined that the engine compression ratio (CR) could be increased by an estimated 0.5 – 0.7 ratios, which could result in an approximate 1% improvement in EDC CO2

15) Minimal use of Eco-car specific parts such as Eco-tyres, aero tweaks, etc would be expect to give a further 10% improvement

Table 1 compares the key powertrain and vehicle attributes of the baseline vehicle versus the 2011 Ford Focus 1.6 L EcoBoost, the 2011 Ford Focus with the HyBoost powertain, and the 2010 Toyota Prius. It can be seen that HyBoost concept proved to be capable of achieving the C02 levels of a full hybrid (dependant on the hardware utilised, as shown in Figure 9) but with superior performance attributes. However, it should also be noted that the cost of the HyBoost concept powertrain system was estimated at one third of the full hybrid, and total weight increase of system was also less than 20 kg versus the base 2.0 NA engine, and several hundred kilograms less than for the full Hybrid when including the battery pack and supporting electrical architecture in the measurement. Off cycle fuel consumption, as assessed on the Artemis drive cycle, remained excellent due to the engines ability to maintain high efficiency even at full load through excellent combustion characteristics and lambda 1 operation everywhere. Figure 10 shows the completed HyBoost vehicle.

Figure 10 Hyboost system implementation in Ford Focus vehicle

SUMMARY and CONCLUSIONS

The HyBoost concept demonstrated that use of a highly downsized, boosted engine in conjunction with relatively low cost synergistic '12 + X' Volt management system and electrical supercharger technologies can deliver better value CO2 reduction than a full hybrid vehicle. System incremental cost has been estimated below that of Dieselisation, giving strong potential for market advancement. In summary:

• The project enabled improvements in the state-of-the-art in stop/start systems and boosting, both of which will become ubiquitous in advanced passenger cars.

• Full system functionality was achieved and a CO2 glide path identified that was better than first predicted to levels below a current benchmark full hybrid

• The HyBoost vehicle is technically a Hybrid (a micro/mild hybrid, with up to 6 kW of electrical power) and can be marketed as such, offering similar CO2 performance but without the purchase or lifetime cost concerns of larger battery systems

• It was shown that HyBoost technologies can be applied to existing base engines with a relatively low level of re-engineering, thus reducing the cost of implementation in a product range and extending the applicability of the base engine (which may be offered in three or four power trims, from naturally aspirated through boosted to HyBoost configurations)

• HyBoost technologies are modular, meaning that economies of scale can be realised at component level by suppliers

• As demonstrated on the project, HyBoost technologies offer the scope for good real world fuel economy because downsizing, full load stoichiometric operation and exhaust energy recovery are effective at higher loads

• Vehicles equipped with HyBoost technologies have potential to fall below some of the incentivised CO2 thresholds shown in Figure 1, therefore adding to their market appeal

• The HyBoost system has reduced dependence on commodity materials such as Copper or Lithium (compared to a Full Hybrid) and precious metals (Compared to a Diesel with advanced after-treatment, or even a Fuel Cell); hence its success (and linked environmental benefit) is less vulnerable to fluctuating commodity prices, and its life-cycle environmental impact is potentially superior

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors would like to thank the many people who have contributed to the TSB HyBoost project, especially the key partners not mentioned in the paper (EALABC, ICL) that undertook very successfully parallel research work packages into the more advanced technologies not discussed in this paper.

REFERENCE LIST

[1] Owen, N., King, J., HyBoost TSB submission documents, 2009.

[2] Bower, E.T.How do we maintain transient response whilst continuing to downsize. UK: Cranfield University, 2010. [MSc Thesis].

[3] Owen, N., Jackson, N., Ricardo UK Ltd:, A new look at the Low Carbon Roadmap IMechE Seminar on Low Carbon Vehicles, 2009.

Turbo-Discharging for improved engine torque and fuel economy

A.M. Williams, A.T. Baker and C.P. Garner,     Wolfson School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, Loughborough University, UK

ABSTRACT

This paper presents experimental data and supporting simulation for Turbo-Discharging applied to internal combustion engines. It shows that significant improvements to engine breathing (~ 7% torque increase) are possible with potential for significant fuel economy benefits across a large proportion of the engine operating range. Significantly reduced in-cylinder trapped residual mass can extend the knock limit of gasoline engines giving further fuel economy benefit from, for example, spark advance. The technology is applicable to a wide range of engine architectures, aspiration, fuels and combustion systems and is particularly well suited to engines with high load demand or passenger car gasoline engines.

1 INTRODUCTION

The power density, low cost, fuel flexibility and durability of internal combustion (IC) engines have led to their widespread use for on-highway, off-highway, power generation and marine applications. The current trend for vehicle electrification offers many opportunities; however, the current status of battery development (with respect to cost, energy density and power density, (1)) limits the widespread application of full electric vehicles (FEVs). As electrification of vehicles increases through hybridisation and range-extended EVs, the demand for efficient IC engine technology will continue (2).

Turbochargers have been applied to diesel engines for many years to achieve the required power density with additional fuel economy advantages. Gasoline engines also benefit significantly from the application of turbochargers and downsizing, which leads to reduced part load throttling losses (3). It is likely, therefore, that many future diesel and gasoline IC engines will use turbocharging technology.

The application of turbines in the exhaust flow allows recovery of energy from both the exhaust gas as it leaves the cylinder and, under some conditions, from the crankshaft itself (via the exhaust gas). Conventional technologies such as turbocharging and turbocompounding allow engine developers to navigate a two dimensional energy flow space for optimisation of charge gas systems for engine fuel economy. The more recent introduction of the novel Turbo-Discharging concept (4) offers a third dimension allowing potentially further fuel economy benefits at key engine operating points. It achieves this by using some of the extracted energy in the exhaust gas path rather than the intake air path or compounding into the crankshaft and is discussed in more detail in Section 2. This paper presents, for the first time, experimental results from an on-engine Turbo-Discharging system and uses these together with further simulation to predict the potential performance benefits.

2 TURBO-DISCHARGING

Turbo-Discharging systems consist of four key parts:

1. A 'high pressure' manifold connected to a single port from each cylinder;

2. A turbine connected to the high pressure manifold;

3. A 'low pressure' manifold that is connected to the turbine outlet and a single port from each cylinder;

4. A compressor or pump downstream in the exhaust system which depressurises the low pressure manifold.

Figure 1 shows a schematic of a Turbo-Discharging exhaust system applied to a turbo-charged gasoline engine. The valve to the high pressure manifold is opened before that to the low pressure manifold to allow the blowdown pulse to be recovered by the Turbo-Discharging turbine. The valve to the low pressure manifold is then opened to allow the displacement stroke of the piston to occur at a lower cylinder pressure. Such valving arrangements have been successfully demonstrated to reduce engine pumping work when applied to a turbocharging system (5). The full exhaust flow then passes through the turbocharging turbine. Either turbine can be by-passed to achieve, for example, low speed torque targets and aftertreatment thermal management. The compressor/pump acts to reduce the pressure at point C in Figure 1 allowing more energy to be recovered from the turbocharging turbine and, for a given boost pressure, reducing the pressure in the low pressure manifold, also increasing the energy that can be recovered from the Turbo-Discharging turbine. It can be beneficial, but not essential, to remove heat from the exhaust upstream of the compressor (Qoptional) which increases further its pressure ratio leading to up to double the potential benefit (4).

Figure 1 Schematic of an illustrative Turbo-Discharging system spplied to a turbo-charged gasoline engine

Turbo-Discharging has several impacts on the indicated thermal efficiency of the engine. These are summarised in Figure 2. The lower exhaust pressure contributes to significant reductions in pumping work as the turbine energy is recovered around bottom dead centre when the piston speed is low and, therefore, impact on pumping work is small. The bulk of the displacement stroke (which contributes more significantly to pumping work) occurs at a pressure close to that in the low pressure manifold. This has been predicted to contribute up to 4% fuel economy improvements in previous simulations (4).

Figure 2 Idealised part load in-cylinder pressure-volume diagram showing the primary and secondary gains ((1) and (2) respectively) of a Turbo-Discharging system

Additionally, in-cylinder pressures when the exhaust valve closes can be significantly lower than in a conventional engine resulting in significantly lower trapped hot residual mass. This has the potential to allow additional spark advance in SI engines, reduced cooled EGR mass requirement and increased compression ratio, all contributing to improved powertrain efficiency. The improvement of engine efficiency is counteracted partially by increased engine throttling to maintain a given engine load; however, this has been shown to be a small effect in comparison to the pumping work benefit gained by the lower exhaust pressure.

Previous 1-D gas dynamic engine simulations (4) have indicated that lower exhaust pressure, reduced residual mass and increased turbocharging turbine expansion ratio allow higher peak engine torque than a conventional engine despite operating with reduced exhaust valve lift to achieve the alternating exhaust valve timings.

3 EXPERIMENTAL HARDWARE

The aim of this series of tests was to explore experimentally the behaviour of the Turbo-Discharging system and provide a basis for 1-D gas dynamics model validation. A Ford Sigma 1.4 litre naturally aspirated gasoline engine was used for this study. This is representative of low/no-boost conditions on future downsized gasoline engines. The engine details are described in

Você chegou ao final desta amostra. Inscreva-se para ler mais!
Página 1 de 1

Análises

O que as pessoas pensam sobre 10th International Conference on Turbochargers and Turbocharging

5.0
2 avaliações / 0 Análises
O que você acha?
Classificação: 0 de 5 estrelas

Avaliações de leitores