Search Results

GTL (Gas-To-Liquid) fuel is well known to improve tailpipe emissions when fuelling a conventional diesel vehicle, that is, one optimized to conventional fuel. This investigation assesses the additional potential for GTL fuel in a GTL-dedicated vehicle. This potential for GTL fuel was quantified in an EU 4 6-cylinder serial production engine. In the first stage, a comparison of engine performance was made of GTL fuel against conventional diesel, using identical engine calibrations. Next, adaptations enabled the full potential of GTL fuel within a dedicated calibration to be assessed. For this stage, two optimization goals were investigated: - Minimization of NOx emissions and - Minimization of fuel consumption. For each optimization the boundary condition was that emissions should be within the EU5 level. An additional constraint on the latter strategy required noise levels to remain within the baseline reference.

For on- and off-highway applications in 2012/2014 new legislative emissions requirements will be applied for both European (EURO 6/stage 4) and US (US 2010/Tier4 final) standards. Specifically the NOX-emission limit will be lowered down to 0.46 g/kWh (net power ≻ 56 kW (EU)/130 kW (US) - 560 kW). While for the previous emissions legislation various ways could be used to stay within the emissions limits (engine internal and aftertreatment measures), DeNOX-aftertreatment systems will be mandatory to reach future limits. In these kinds of applications fuel consumption of the engines is a very decisive selling argument for customers. Total cost of ownership needs to be as low as possible. The trade-off between fuel consumption and NOX emissions forces manufacturers to find an optimal solution, especially with regard to increasing fuel prices. In state-of-the-art calibration processes the aftertreatment system is considered separately from the calibration of the thermodynamics.

Modern powertrain development is targeting to meet challenging, to some degrees contradictory development goals in a short timeframe. Looking to a development time schedule of 36 months from concept to SOP, it becomes a prerequisite that unnecessary design loops have to be avoided by all means. Now, in addition, the experimental development work has to be conducted more efficiently than in the past. In recent years methods for an efficient design process have been successfully applied. Testing and vehicle application work can take advantage of methods empowered by model based approaches. Today, models with different levels of detail are able to significantly improve nearly every development phase. Supported by standardized and automated test bench and vehicle procedures an efficient and comprehensive development process can be established and utilized, which is also necessary to tackle growing complexity.