通过柔性气门驱动的停缸和断缸对怠速燃油后处理热管理效率的影响

IF 2 Q2 ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL Frontiers in Mechanical Engineering Pub Date : 2019-08-21 DOI:10.3389/fmech.2019.00052
K. Vos, G. Shaver, A. Ramesh, J. McCarthy
{"title":"通过柔性气门驱动的停缸和断缸对怠速燃油后处理热管理效率的影响","authors":"K. Vos, G. Shaver, A. Ramesh, J. McCarthy","doi":"10.3389/fmech.2019.00052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cylinder deactivation (CDA) and cylinder cutout are different operating strategies for diesel engines. CDA includes the deactivation of both the valve motions and the fuel injection of select cylinders, while cylinder cutout incorporates only fuel injection deactivation in select cylinders. This study compares diesel engine aftertreatment thermal management improvements possible via CDA and cylinder cutout at curb idle operation (800 RPM and 1.3 bar BMEP). Experiments and analysis demonstrated that both CDA and cylinder cutout enable improved fuel efficient “stay warm” thermal management compared to a stock thermal calibration on a Clean Idle Certified engine. At curb idle, this stock calibration depends on elevated exhaust manifold pressure to increase the required fueling (for thermal management) and to drive EGR. The study described here demonstrates that CDA does not require an elevated exhaust manifold pressure for thermal management or EGR delivery control, whereas cylinder cutout does. In addition to achieving engine-out NOx levels no higher than the stock thermal calibration, both cylinder cutout and CDA enable up to 55% and 80% reductions in particulate matter (PM), respectively. Cylinder cutout demonstrates 17% fuel savings, while CDA demonstrates 40% fuel savings, over the stock six-cylinder thermal calibration. These fuel efficiency improvements primarily result from reductions in pumping work via reduced air flow through the engine. Cylinder cutout reduces the air flow rate via elevated amounts of recirculated gases which are also required to regulate engine-out NOx, resulting in a larger delta pressure across the engine and consequently more pumping work than CDA. CDA reduces the air flow rate by deactivating cylinders, which reduces the charge flow rate and enables a small delta pressure between the intake and exhaust manifolds, resulting in less pumping work by the cylinders. As a result, CDA is more efficient than cylinder cutout. Furthermore, the thermal merits of cylinder cutout require high exhaust manifold pressures, and are subject to the configuration of the exhaust manifold and the exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) path.","PeriodicalId":53220,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Mechanical Engineering","volume":"83 3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of Cylinder Deactivation and Cylinder Cutout via Flexible Valve Actuation on Fuel Efficient Aftertreatment Thermal Management at Curb Idle\",\"authors\":\"K. Vos, G. Shaver, A. Ramesh, J. McCarthy\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fmech.2019.00052\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Cylinder deactivation (CDA) and cylinder cutout are different operating strategies for diesel engines. CDA includes the deactivation of both the valve motions and the fuel injection of select cylinders, while cylinder cutout incorporates only fuel injection deactivation in select cylinders. This study compares diesel engine aftertreatment thermal management improvements possible via CDA and cylinder cutout at curb idle operation (800 RPM and 1.3 bar BMEP). Experiments and analysis demonstrated that both CDA and cylinder cutout enable improved fuel efficient “stay warm” thermal management compared to a stock thermal calibration on a Clean Idle Certified engine. At curb idle, this stock calibration depends on elevated exhaust manifold pressure to increase the required fueling (for thermal management) and to drive EGR. The study described here demonstrates that CDA does not require an elevated exhaust manifold pressure for thermal management or EGR delivery control, whereas cylinder cutout does. In addition to achieving engine-out NOx levels no higher than the stock thermal calibration, both cylinder cutout and CDA enable up to 55% and 80% reductions in particulate matter (PM), respectively. Cylinder cutout demonstrates 17% fuel savings, while CDA demonstrates 40% fuel savings, over the stock six-cylinder thermal calibration. These fuel efficiency improvements primarily result from reductions in pumping work via reduced air flow through the engine. Cylinder cutout reduces the air flow rate via elevated amounts of recirculated gases which are also required to regulate engine-out NOx, resulting in a larger delta pressure across the engine and consequently more pumping work than CDA. CDA reduces the air flow rate by deactivating cylinders, which reduces the charge flow rate and enables a small delta pressure between the intake and exhaust manifolds, resulting in less pumping work by the cylinders. As a result, CDA is more efficient than cylinder cutout. Furthermore, the thermal merits of cylinder cutout require high exhaust manifold pressures, and are subject to the configuration of the exhaust manifold and the exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) path.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53220,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Mechanical Engineering\",\"volume\":\"83 3 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-08-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Mechanical Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fmech.2019.00052\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Mechanical Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fmech.2019.00052","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

柴油机熄火与熄火是两种不同的运行策略。CDA包括阀门运动和选定气缸燃油喷射的停止,而气缸切断只包括选定气缸燃油喷射的停止。这项研究比较了在怠速运行(800转/分,1.3巴BMEP)时,通过CDA和气缸切断可能改善的柴油发动机后处理热管理。实验和分析表明,与清洁怠速认证发动机上的库存热校准相比,CDA和气缸切断都能提高燃油效率“保持温暖”的热管理。在怠速状态下,油液校准取决于排气歧管压力的升高,以增加所需的燃料(用于热管理)并驱动EGR。本文所述的研究表明,CDA不需要提高排气歧管压力来进行热管理或EGR输送控制,而气缸切断则需要。除了使发动机排出的氮氧化物水平不高于库存热校准外,气缸切断和CDA分别可将颗粒物(PM)减少55%和80%。气缸切割显示节省17%的燃油,而CDA显示节省40%的燃油,在库存六缸热校准。这些燃油效率的提高主要是由于通过减少发动机的空气流量而减少了泵送工作。气缸切断通过增加再循环气体的量来降低空气流速,这也需要调节发动机排出的氮氧化物,从而导致整个发动机的δ压力更大,因此比CDA需要更多的泵送工作量。CDA通过停用气缸来降低空气流量,从而降低了充注流量,使进气和排气歧管之间的压力差很小,从而减少了气缸的泵送工作量。因此,CDA比气缸切割更有效。此外,气缸切断的热性能需要较高的排气歧管压力,并取决于排气歧管和废气再循环(EGR)路径的配置。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Impact of Cylinder Deactivation and Cylinder Cutout via Flexible Valve Actuation on Fuel Efficient Aftertreatment Thermal Management at Curb Idle
Cylinder deactivation (CDA) and cylinder cutout are different operating strategies for diesel engines. CDA includes the deactivation of both the valve motions and the fuel injection of select cylinders, while cylinder cutout incorporates only fuel injection deactivation in select cylinders. This study compares diesel engine aftertreatment thermal management improvements possible via CDA and cylinder cutout at curb idle operation (800 RPM and 1.3 bar BMEP). Experiments and analysis demonstrated that both CDA and cylinder cutout enable improved fuel efficient “stay warm” thermal management compared to a stock thermal calibration on a Clean Idle Certified engine. At curb idle, this stock calibration depends on elevated exhaust manifold pressure to increase the required fueling (for thermal management) and to drive EGR. The study described here demonstrates that CDA does not require an elevated exhaust manifold pressure for thermal management or EGR delivery control, whereas cylinder cutout does. In addition to achieving engine-out NOx levels no higher than the stock thermal calibration, both cylinder cutout and CDA enable up to 55% and 80% reductions in particulate matter (PM), respectively. Cylinder cutout demonstrates 17% fuel savings, while CDA demonstrates 40% fuel savings, over the stock six-cylinder thermal calibration. These fuel efficiency improvements primarily result from reductions in pumping work via reduced air flow through the engine. Cylinder cutout reduces the air flow rate via elevated amounts of recirculated gases which are also required to regulate engine-out NOx, resulting in a larger delta pressure across the engine and consequently more pumping work than CDA. CDA reduces the air flow rate by deactivating cylinders, which reduces the charge flow rate and enables a small delta pressure between the intake and exhaust manifolds, resulting in less pumping work by the cylinders. As a result, CDA is more efficient than cylinder cutout. Furthermore, the thermal merits of cylinder cutout require high exhaust manifold pressures, and are subject to the configuration of the exhaust manifold and the exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) path.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Mechanical Engineering
Frontiers in Mechanical Engineering Engineering-Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
115
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Direct yaw moment control of eight-wheeled distributed drive electric vehicles based on super-twisting sliding mode control Uncertainty-aware explainable AI as a foundational paradigm for digital twins Optimization of virtual design and machining time of the mold master ceramic jewelry products with Indonesian batik motifs A temperature-based synthesis and characterization study of aluminum-incorporated diamond-like carbon thin films Parametric comparison of different lobe rotor geometry for positive displacement turbine in water distribution network
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1