1 / 26

INGAS Sub Project A3 „Boosted Lean Burn Gas Engine“ Review Meeting 07- 08 /04/2011 Brussels

INGAS Sub Project A3 „Boosted Lean Burn Gas Engine“ Review Meeting 07- 08 /04/2011 Brussels. FEV Motorentechnik, Bertold Hüchtebrock. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011. 2. Review meeting – Brussels, April 2011 Review aspects (SP A3). Content

iman
Download Presentation

INGAS Sub Project A3 „Boosted Lean Burn Gas Engine“ Review Meeting 07- 08 /04/2011 Brussels

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. INGAS Sub Project A3 „Boosted Lean Burn Gas Engine“ Review Meeting 07-08/04/2011 Brussels FEV Motorentechnik, Bertold Hüchtebrock

  2. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011 2

  3. Review meeting – Brussels, April 2011Review aspects (SP A3) • Content • Remarks / answers to general comments • Remarks / answers to reviewed deliverables

  4. Review meeting – Brussels, April 2011Review aspects (SP A3) Updated DA3.5 contains cost aspects Conclusion (A1-A2-A3) in 06/2010: Comparison will be performed. Linked to WP A3.4.3 [M33…] (potential evaluation) Future ownership to FEV does not provoke any problem @ Opel! Discussed during separate meeting (7th april). Updated 24MPR covers Task A3.3.5.

  5. Review meeting – Brussels, April 2011Cost aspects SCR Extract of revised DA3.5 from SAPT:

  6. Review meeting – Brussels, April 2011CO2/Fuel efficiency comparison within A(1..2..3)-Subprojects • Conclusions of CG Meeting, 06/2010 • A CO2-comparison within the A(1..2..3) approaches will be performed • Proposal for INGAS project: Extended NEDC cycle (CRF) • ARTEMIS (by simulation!) • Regarding SP A3: Linked to WP A3.4.3 (Potential evaluation) starting from M33

  7. CO2 emissions comparison

  8. CO2 emission comparison A possible comparison is expressed by the g CO2 / ton vehicle which is an index of the specific energy associated to the technology CONFIRMED BY FEV

  9. CO2 emission comparison SoA Target

  10. Additional test over NEDC for CO2 evaluation

  11. Additional test over NEDC • Needs to adopt an additional test cycle to complete NEDC evaluation • The new test cycle must be in measure • to represent real life operating conditions of typical CNG applications • to be easily shared among partners (both in terms of simulation and experiments) • put on evidence the benefit coming from the technologies developed within INGAS project Homologation Real life

  12. ARTEMIS NEDC Additional test over NEDC • Artemis appears to be not suitable: • because of the typical operating points are too much balanced on high speed/load • the actuation of the cycle at the chassis dyno is very complex with different strategies for the gear ratio management that depend on the vehicle weight

  13. Additional test over NEDC Proposal for INGAS project – Extended NEDC cycle URBAN EXTRAURBAN HIGHWAY Weight factor 60% 30% 10%

  14. Additional test over NEDC ARTEMIS Proposal NEDC • The proposal appears to be more suitable: • the engine operating field is wider compared to NEDC • the weight factors allow to better balance the real mission profile of the vehicles • the actuation of the cycle at the chassis dyno is very similar to NEDC (good repeatability/reproducibility)

  15. CO2 EVALUATION – DECISION from SP A1 – A2 – A3 • Results in terms of CO2 emissions will be compared as g/(km x kgvehicle) and positionned with regard to 443 EU regulation (for NEDC test cycle); • A tentative to scale up the 3 engines in order to have a homogeneous comparison on a same common vehicle will also be performed by simulation.

  16. Review meeting – Brussels, April 2011Ownership SP A3 vehicle Statement from OPEL towards INGAS engagement: Opel, one of Europe’s largest automakers, was founded 1862 in Rüsselsheim, Germany. The company with its headquarters in Rüsselsheim operates 13 plants in eight countries and employs around 47,000 people (as of December 2009). Opel and its sister brand in the U.K., Vauxhall, sell vehicles in more than 35 markets in Europe. Opel vehicles are characterized by their outstanding design, innovative technologies and environmental friendliness. The development and sale of Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) vehicles is one important pillar of this approach. Consequently Opel / GMPT-G continue their efforts to develop efficient and clean natural gas engines with a technical approach close to InGas workstream A3 and supports the project to the best possible extent. Conclusion:  Future ownership to FEV does not provoke any problem @ Opel!

  17. Review meeting – Brussels, April 2011Clarification of resources allocation by FEV and RWTH (P1 & P2)

  18. Review meeting – Brussels, April 2011Clarification of resources allocation by FEV and RWTH (P1 & P2)

  19. Review meeting – Brussels, April 2011Task A3.2.3: Modelling, design and rig testing of lean burn combustion • Task 3.2.3: Modelling, design and rig testing of lean burn combustion • Simulation work reasonably can support the understanding of engine test results / phenomenons and promote further improvement of the engine. • This way purposeful simulation work requires as input results of the previous test campaign. • In SP A3 due to different reasons effective MCE testing started retarded (main reason: difficulties in EMS startup). The limited availability of personal and hardware resources did not allow to regain the delay. • In conclusion the spent MM’s in simulation are behind the plan (4/15.5) and have to be continued in the last year. • Reviewer remark: Missing CFD meshes respective CFD calculation:With month 29 (Feb. 2011) initial CFD calculations on the homogenisation quality are finished. Intentionally the intermediate results have not been reported in the P2 periodic report (ongoing result analysis).

  20. Review meeting – Brussels, April 2011Task A3.3.5: Design of the power train control strategy • Task 3.3.5: Design of the power train control strategy • Deviating from the P1 periodic report the EMS related activities (Task A3.3.5) are not mentioned in the P2 periodic report (first version).[The EMS more or less is a means to an end and does not represent the development mainstream in SP A3] • OPEL contribution (A3.3.5): Informations on sensor-/actuator specifications • Description of activities and results within Task A3.3.5 are covered by the updated P2 periodic report:

  21. Review meeting – Brussels, April 2011Deliverable DA3.2

  22. Review meeting – Brussels, April 2011Deliverable DA3.2 • DA3.2: Report on components and power train ready to test • If this objection refers to possible investigations on the 1.6 l gasoline engine based A3 approach (side study), it can be clearly stated, that all activities described in the P2 periodic report refer to the 1.9 l diesel engine based approach!Adequate remarks within the revised DA3.2 report hopefully will avoid further misunderstanding. • Regarding the reported investigations I would like to comment, that due to pending MCE testing the final hardware configuration is not known yet!

  23. Review meeting – Brussels, April 2011Deliverable DA3.4  No objections (report accepted) !

  24. Review meeting – Brussels, April 2011Deliverable DA3.5 Especially on low engine out NOx-level there is a strong gradient FC vs. NOx. The demanding CO2 target most probably does not allow engine operation on NICE NOx level! See above

  25. Review meeting – Brussels, April 2011Deliverable DA3.5 NICE result (Ford TRANSIT [2040 kg] & 2 l lean CNG operation) Steady-State Replacement-Test Vehicle Test (w/o EGR)

  26. Review meeting – Brussels, April 2011Deliverable DA3.8  No objections !

More Related