This is the first part of a study investigating a model-based transient calibration process for diesel engines. The motivation is to populate hundreds of parameters (which can be calibrated) in a methodical and optimum manner by using model-based optimization in conjunction with the manual process so that, relative to the manual process used by itself, a significant improvement in transient emissions and fuel consumption and a sizable reduction in calibration time and test cell requirements is achieved. Empirical transient modelling and optimization has been addressed in the second part of this work, while the required data for model training and generalization are the focus of the current work. Transient and steady-state data from a turbocharged multicylinder diesel engine have been examined from a model training perspective. A single-cylinder engine with external air-handling has been used to expand the steady-state data to encompass transient parameter space. Based on comparative model performance and differences in the non-parametric space, primarily driven by a high engine difference between exhaust and intake manifold pressures (Δ P) during transients, it has been recommended that transient emission models should be trained with transient training data. It has been shown that electronic control module (ECM) estimates of transient charge flow and the exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) fraction cannot be accurate at the high engine Δ P frequently encountered during transient operation, and that such estimates do not account for cylinder-to-cylinder variation. The effects of high engine Δ P must therefore be incorporated empirically by using transient data generated from a spectrum of transient calibrations. Specific recommendations on how to choose such calibrations, how many data to acquire, and how to specify transient segments for data acquisition have been made. Methods to process transient data to account for transport delays and sensor lags have been developed. The processed data have then been visualized using statistical means to understand transient emission formation. Two modes of transient opacity formation have been observed and described. The first mode is driven by high engine Δ P and low fresh air flowrates, while the second mode is driven by high engine Δ P and high EGR flowrates. The EGR fraction is inaccurately estimated at both modes, while EGR distribution has been shown to be present but unaccounted for by the ECM. The two modes and associated phenomena are essential to understanding why transient emission models are calibration dependent and furthermore how to choose training data that will result in good model generalization.
Accelerating Kinetic Parameter Identification by Extracting Information from Transient Data: A Hydroprocessing Study Case
