Date post: | 13-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | baldwin-mclaughlin |
View: | 213 times |
Download: | 0 times |
INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25thth/26/26thth, 2011, 2011
INGAS INtegrated GAS PowertrainINGAS INtegrated GAS Powertrain
1
SP B0 Status presentation, outline
E.ON Ruhrgas- Engine tests on oil influence on fuelling system components
JBRC: - Numerical simulations on the influence of gas quality on engine operation
- Engine tests on gas quality impacts
GDF Suez- Numerical simulations on the influence of gas quality on engine operation (extended matrix of gases)
MEMS:- Gas quality sensor tests
INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25thth/26/26thth, 2011, 2011
INGAS INtegrated GAS PowertrainINGAS INtegrated GAS Powertrain
2
WP 4: Engine tests at E.ON Ruhrgas
Influence of compressor oil in CNG– Oil residues from the fueling station may deposit in CNG car
components and affect the operation of the engine – Aim of test: determination of tolerable oil content in gas
pressure regulator source: Bosch
source: Daimler
• relevant amounts of oil can occur in the high pressure and in the low pressure parts ot the gas train
• fouling of valves and regulators by high viscous oil particles may cause malfunctions
c
INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25thth/26/26thth, 2011, 2011
INGAS INtegrated GAS PowertrainINGAS INtegrated GAS Powertrain
3Seite 3
Details of investigation
General test conditions: Test engine: Daimler M271 NGT (former car
MB 200 NGT) Pressure regulator heated (90 oC) Injecting of a constant amount of oil Changing engine operating parameters
(medium and high load range) At night no test operation for simulation of
conditions similar to the vehicle Test time per test series 200 operating hours Injection valves from Siemens
Planned measurement program: Variation of oil content (about 5 - 70 mg/m3) Test different type of oil (synthetic/mineral oil) Impact of temperature at the pressure
regulator/ gasrail Different injectors (standard / enhanced)
Metering system for oil with control unit
INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25thth/26/26thth, 2011, 2011
INGAS INtegrated GAS PowertrainINGAS INtegrated GAS Powertrain
4Seite 4
Test series with synthetic and mineral oil
Results after 200 hours test operation:
Only 10-15% of the injected synthetic oil and less than 10% of the mineral oil (70 mg/m3) is found in the gas line again.
• The remaining oil is burned in the engine Solid oil deposits were not formed on relevant components (pressure
regulator, piping and fuel injectors)
Gas railMarginal amount of oil after test period
INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25thth/26/26thth, 2011, 2011
INGAS INtegrated GAS PowertrainINGAS INtegrated GAS Powertrain
5
B0 WP performed / in progress JBRC
505
505
510
510
51551
5
505
505
510
510
51551
5
0 0.025 0.05 0.075 0.1 0.125 0.15
EGR [1]
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
C3
H8_
fuel
[1]
0.05
0.05
0.1
0.1
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.2
0.20.25
0.25
0.25
0.3
0.3
0.35
0.05
0.05
0.1
0.1
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.2
0.20.25
0.25
0.25
0.3
0.3
0.35 Tpist
Knock_fraction
Imep 21 bar, 1800 RPM, ignition timing 20°BTDC
Combination of influence of fuel composition and control interventions on engine behavior – Example
INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25thth/26/26thth, 2011, 2011
INGAS INtegrated GAS PowertrainINGAS INtegrated GAS Powertrain
6
B0 WP performed / in progress JBRC
Influence of combined control interventions on engine behavior – Example: Limit Gas L2
2.1
2.1
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.62.6
2.6
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.8
2.8
2.1
2.1
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.62.6
2.6
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.8
2.8
-24 -22 -20 -18 -16 -14 -12IgnTmg [deg]
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
EG
R [
1]
0.02 0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.040.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.060.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.120.12
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.2
2
0.24
0.240.24
0.26
0.26
0.26
0.26
0.28
0.28
0.280.
28
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.32
0.320.32
0.34
0.34
0.34
0.36
0.3
6
0.36
0.38
0.02 0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.040.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.060.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.120.12
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.2
2
0.24
0.240.24
0.26
0.26
0.26
0.26
0.28
0.28
0.280.
28
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.32
0.320.32
0.34
0.34
0.34
0.36
0.3
6
0.36
0.38
Boost_press
Knock_fraction
RW, L2, RPM 1800, lambda 1, IMEP 21
INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25thth/26/26thth, 2011, 2011
INGAS INtegrated GAS PowertrainINGAS INtegrated GAS Powertrain
7
B0 WP performed / in progress JBRC
Sensitivity of -sensor voltage to fuel composition variationExample – Various content of carbon dioxide in fuel blend
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
0 600 1200 1800 2400 3000 3600time [s]
U
LS
[V]
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
vCO
2/(v
CO
2+vT
NG
) [1
]
LSVm LSVX vCO2
INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25thth/26/26thth, 2011, 2011
INGAS INtegrated GAS PowertrainINGAS INtegrated GAS Powertrain
8
B0 WP performed / in progress JBRC
Relationship between knock sensor outputand knock intensity from evaluation of indicator diagram
Example – Various content of propane in fuel blend
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1HR at Knock Onset
Cyc
le #
10.84% Propane AKR=0.1V12.5%Propane AKR=0.35V14.1% Propane AKR=2V
INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25thth/26/26thth, 2011, 2011
INGAS INtegrated GAS PowertrainINGAS INtegrated GAS Powertrain
9
GDF SUEZ Results and Study in progress:GDF SUEZ Results and Study in progress:Guidelines to compensate the impact of a fuel Guidelines to compensate the impact of a fuel gas composition variation on power output gas composition variation on power output and emissions and emissions
[D.B0.7] GDF SUEZ/CVUT JBRC [D.B0.7] GDF SUEZ/CVUT JBRC
INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25thth/26/26thth, 2011, 2011
INGAS INtegrated GAS PowertrainINGAS INtegrated GAS Powertrain
10
[D.B0.7] GDF SUEZ - Methodology description[D.B0.7] GDF SUEZ - Methodology description
INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25thth/26/26thth, 2011, 2011
INGAS INtegrated GAS PowertrainINGAS INtegrated GAS Powertrain
11
[D.B0.7] GDF SUEZ – Study range[D.B0.7] GDF SUEZ – Study range
GDF SUEZ Study Range Values
Engine control parameters
EGR rate (%) 0-15
Ignition timing (°) 10 – 40
Boost pressure (bar) 1.4 - 2.6
Relevant engine control parameters [D.B0.6]
JBRC functioning points [D.B0.7]
Engine maps [D.B0.5]
-3 functioning points at different engine speeds, using JBRC experimental points:
1200 rpm 1800 rpm 2400 rpm
-Engine maps issued from the GDF SUEZ calibration results
Error margin below 8% (more about 1 – 2% on average) from experimental to simulated values
INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25thth/26/26thth, 2011, 2011
INGAS INtegrated GAS PowertrainINGAS INtegrated GAS Powertrain
12
G20 L1 L2 L3 L4 L5
Description
Pure methaneLow CVHigh MN
High CVLow MN
Influence of H2
Influence of H2 and N2
Composition CH4 vol% 100 75,31 87,18 84,56 77,58 66,94
N2 vol% 0 19,21 0,55 0,53 0,69 8,18
CO2 vol% 0 1,50 1,69 1,64 0,14 1,34
C2H6 vol% 0 3,18 7,51 7,28 1,09 2,82
C3H8 vol% 0 0,54 2,40 5,33 0,35 0,48
n-C4H10 vol% 0 0,17 0,33 0,32 0,12 0,15
i-C4H10 vol% 0 0 0,22 0,21 0 0
n-C5H12 vol% 0 0,04 0,04 0,04 0,02 0,03
i-C5H12 vol% 0 0 0,05 0,05 0 0
C6H14 + vol% 0 0,05 0,03 0,03 0,01 0,05
H2 vol% 0 0 0 0 20,00 20,00
[D.B0.7] GDF SUEZ – Matrix of limit gases[D.B0.7] GDF SUEZ – Matrix of limit gases
INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25thth/26/26thth, 2011, 2011
INGAS INtegrated GAS PowertrainINGAS INtegrated GAS Powertrain
13
[D.B0.7] GDF SUEZ First results[D.B0.7] GDF SUEZ First resultsIgnition timing, crucial engine parameterIgnition timing, crucial engine parameter
Out of the three engine parameters, ignition timing is obviously one crucial engine parameter: Optimum value for power output exists; Also effects over exhaust gas emissions and knock occurrence.
Depending on the ignition timing, effects of EGR rate and boost pressure change and control strategies must be adapted.
INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25thth/26/26thth, 2011, 2011
INGAS INtegrated GAS PowertrainINGAS INtegrated GAS Powertrain
14
[D.B0.7] GDF SUEZ[D.B0.7] GDF SUEZStudy in progressStudy in progress
Optimum value- Does this optimum value change depending on gas quality?
- Does the adjustments performed in order to reach this optimum can be correlated to some gas property?
- Extension of the results to exhaust gas temperature and structure temperature in order to check study range with regard to engine constraints
INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25thth/26/26thth, 2011, 2011
INGAS INtegrated GAS PowertrainINGAS INtegrated GAS Powertrain
15
Gas sensor field test
• 1 year test within 2 vehicles(VW Caddy, Passat)
• concept works fine
• significant change of methane number between CH and D (Nurnberg)
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
05/10 06/10 07/10 08/10 09/10 10/10 11/10 12/10 01/11 02/11 03/11 04/11 05/11
met
han
e n
um
ber
[--]
date [MM/YY]
Field Test Gas Sensor
Baregg CH ESSO D
Orbassano I Windisch CH
Re-Fill Caddy½ tank
Passat
INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25thth/26/26thth, 2011, 2011
INGAS INtegrated GAS PowertrainINGAS INtegrated GAS Powertrain
16
CRF lab tests
• values AVL / test CRF / deviation G25 = 104 / 95 / -9 Gxy = 75 / 70 / -5 Torino = 85 / 83 / -2 G20 = 100 / 98 / -2 H2,20% = 80 / 70 / -10
H2,40% = 60 / 70 / +10
Barca1 = 76 / 78 / +2
Barca2 = 77 / 78 / +1
• measured values within
the tolerance of the sensor
• larger errors at some engine set points,
due to possible backpressure
values AVL
test CRF
deviation
G25 104 95 -9
Gxy 75 70 -5
Torino 85 83 -2
G20 100 98 -2
H2,20% 80 70 -10
H2,40% 60 70 +10
Barcelona 1 76 78 +2
Barcelona 2 77 78 +1
INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25INGAS meeting, Oulu, May 25thth/26/26thth, 2011, 2011
INGAS INtegrated GAS PowertrainINGAS INtegrated GAS Powertrain
17
Methane Number
Gas Density H/C ratio Calorific value
• Engine max performance;
• Engine efficiency;
• Exhaust temperature control
• A/F metering;
• Emission control;
• Instantaneous fuel consumption computation;
• Vehicle residual range (if tank cng temperature available)
• Boost pressure
Parameters of interest
Finality
Sensor family
less expensive,
simple design,
more robust
more complex design,
better accuracy for LHV
CRF application considerations