0
Research Papers

Modeling and Analysis of Fuel Injection Split for Diesel Engine Active Fueling Control

[+] Author and Article Information
Fengjun Yan

e-mail: yanfeng@mcmaster.ca

Song Chen

e-mail: chens78@mcmaster.ca

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
McMaster University,
Hamilton, ON L8S 4L7, Canada

Xiangrui Zeng

e-mail: zeng.195@osu.edu

Junfeng Zhao

e-mail: zhao.557@osu.edu

Junmin Wang

e-mail: wang.1381@osu.edu
Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
The Ohio State University,
Columbus, OH 43210

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Dynamic Systems Division of ASME for publication in the Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control. Manuscript received January 1, 2013; final manuscript received June 12, 2013; published online August 23, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Gregory Shaver.

J. Dyn. Sys., Meas., Control 135(6), 061016 (Aug 23, 2013) (8 pages) Paper No: DS-13-1001; doi: 10.1115/1.4024806 History: Received January 01, 2013; Revised June 12, 2013

With the improvements in Diesel engine injection systems, the fueling-path, which is more accurate, flexible, and faster than the air-path, can be actively utilized in conventional and advanced combustion mode controls, especially for enhancing the combustion transient performance. In this paper, fuel injection split models are proposed to describe the relationship between fuel split ratio and two combustion outputs, i.e., the crank angle at 50% heat released (CA50) and the indicated mean effective pressure (IMEP). The model parameters are related to the engine in-cylinder thermal boundary conditions, referred to as the in-cylinder conditions (ICCs). The models were verified by engine experimental data with identical and different ICCs under different engine operating conditions. Such models can be potentially utilized in active fueling control for Diesel engine combustion control, and therefore benefit engine fuel efficiency and reduce engine-out emissions.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

The MFB calculated based on Eq. (5)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Modeled pilot, main and total fuel MFB

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

The relationships between R and IMEP and heat release rate under identical ICCs (a) R versus heat release rate and (b) R versus IMEP

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

The experimental Diesel engine platform

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

The pilot and main injection timings

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

The amount of pilot and main injection in the experiment: (a) Pilot injection mass and (b) main injection mass

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

CA50 and IMEP model validations under identical ICCs: (a) CA50 model validation and (b) IMEP model validation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

MFB validation with R = 4/21 from group 1 and R = 3/21 from group 2: (a) R = 4/21, group 1 and (b) R = 3/21, group 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

CA50 and IMEP model validations under different ICCs: (a) CA50 model validation and (b) IMEP model validation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

θ1θ2 diagram

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

CA50 model validation by averaging the parameters: (a) Averaging the parameters of the two parameters and (b) averaging all the groups separately

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

CA50 model validation by averaging the parameters under different operating conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

IMEP model validations under different operating conditions

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In