Effects of Different Turbocharging Systems on Performance 2016-01-2185

in a HD Diesel Engine with Different Emission Control Published 10/17/2016

Technical Routes
Jialin Liu, Hu Wang, Zunqing Zheng, Zeyu Zou, and Mingfa Yao
Tianjin University

CITATION: Liu, J., Wang, H., Zheng, Z., Zou, Z. et al., "Effects of Different Turbocharging Systems on Performance in a HD Diesel
Engine with Different Emission Control Technical Routes," SAE Technical Paper 2016-01-2185, 2016, doi:10.4271/2016-01-2185.

Copyright © 2016 SAE International

Abstract meet the Euro VI NOx emission limits when ‘EGR-only’ technical
route is adopted [3]. Therefore, complicated turbocharging system
In this work, both the ‘SCR-only’ and ‘EGR+SCR’ technical routes
and ultra-high injection pressure are necessary to minimize the soot
are compared and evaluated after the optimizations of both injection
emission or relieve the burden of aftertreatment while poor fuel
strategy and turbocharging system over the World Harmonized
economy performance is still unavoidable [3, 4, 5]. Until now,
Stationary Cycle (WHSC) in a heavy duty diesel engine. The exhaust
‘SCR-only’ and ‘SCR+EGR’ technical routes are widely adopted by
emissions and fuel economy performance of different turbocharging
vehicle manufactures to meet Euro VI emission regulations because
systems, including wastegate turbocharger (WGT), variable geometry
of superior fuel economy performance [2, 6]. ‘SCR-only’ strategy
turbocharger (VGT), two-stage fixed geometry turbocharger
requires high average SCR conversion efficiency above 95% and NH3
(WGT+FGT) and two-stage variable geometry turbocharger
slip less than 10 ppm to meet Euro VI emission regulations [7].
(VGT+FGT), are investigated over a wide EGR range. The NOx
Complicated SCR control strategies, high urea consumption and the
reduction methods and EGR introduction strategies for different
cost of SCR system are three critical factors restricting the ‘SCR-
turbocharger systems are proposed to improve the fuel economy. The
only’ technical route to be adopted for more stringent emission
requirement on turbocharging system and their potential to meet
regulation beyond Euro VI [8]. ‘SCR+EGR’ strategy has been
future stringent NOx and soot emission regulations are also discussed
investigated as a more promising and economical technical route for
in this paper. The experimental results show that retarding CA50
future emission regulations than ‘SCR-only’ because of simplified
shows more advantages in improving soot emission and fuel
SCR control strategy and lower urea consumption [4]. It is necessary
economy than further closing the intake throttle valve, because the
to investigate the trade-off between SCR and EGR to obtain optimum
excess air ratio is critical to the combustion efficiency and soot
total fluid consumption.
oxidation when the NOx is kept at low level. As to ‘SCR-only’
technical route, reducing the injection pressure appropriately and
EGR is an effective and widely employed method to reduce NOx
advancing CA50 as early as possible are beneficial to fuel economy.
emission in diesel engine [3, 9, 10]. High pressure EGR (HP-EGR)
The requirement on turbocharging system is varying at different NOx
has some advantages compared to the low pressure EGR (LP-EGR),
emission levels. The WGT, WGT+FGT, VGT and VGT+FGT are
such as rapid response to transient operation, compact structure and
recommended to be adopted in ‘SCR+EGR’ technical route when the
harmless to intake compressor [11, 12]. It has been widely adopted by
weighted NOx are controlled at 8.0 g/kWh, 5.0 g/kWh, 3.5 g/kWh
many vehicle manufactures. Single or two stage turbochargers should
and 2.8 g/kWh, respectively. Furthermore, according to the weighted
be utilized to maintain a suitable excess air ratio and minimize the
results, the ‘SCR+EGR’ technical route shows more potential to meet
soot emission according to the amount of EGR introduced into
the future more stringent NOx emission regulations compared to the
cylinder. The EGR introduction capability is mainly determined by
‘SCR-only’ technical route because of the superior fuel economy.
the pressure difference between the intake and exhaust manifolds.
However, the turbine flow area of conventional wastegate
Introduction turbocharger (WGT) or fixed geometry turbocharger (FGT) cannot be
adjusted. Consequently, the pressure difference in some low speed
With the increasingly stringent emission and CO2 regulations,
and high load conditions is usually too small, sometimes even
in-cylinder combustion and aftertreatment technologies have been
become negative, which is not sufficient to provide adequate amount
making remarkable progress [1]. ‘SCR-only’, ‘EGR-only’ and its
of EGR for expected NOx reduction. One typical method to further
combination ‘SCR+EGR’ are proposed as three kind of potential
increase the pressure difference is throttling the air intake [13].
technical routes to meet future emission regulations [2]. However,
Nonetheless, the fresh air and excess air ratio will be significantly
previous investigations show that large amount of EGR is required to
decreased, resulting in penalty in pumping loss, soot emission and and WGT+FGT), the design point is selected at the low engine speed
fuel economy. Variable geometry turbocharger (VGT) overcomes the to improve the low speed torque characteristics. When the engine
drawbacks of conventional wastegate and fixed geometry runs at high speed, the wastegate valve will open and by-pass some
turbochargers, which is a flexible device and is capable of providing waste gas to prevent over-speed and over-charge. For variable
sufficient pressure difference at all operation conditions [14]. Larger geometry turbochargers (VGT and VGT+FGT), the matching design
amount of EGR can be introduced by changing the angle of the point is selected at the rated power condition with the maximum
turbine inlet nozzles while keeping enough fresh air flow nozzle vane angle. Therefore, the variable geometry turbochargers
simultaneously. Therefore, a VGT has obvious advantages over a can achieve better fuel economy and emission performance at high
wastegate or fixed geometry turbocharger because it is possible to speed and better torque performance and faster transient response.
enhance the EGR introduction ability and deliver optimum boost The turbocharger configuration investigated in this experiment are
pressure to the engine over a wide operation range. listed in Table 2. An intercooler was installed between the low
pressure compressor and high pressure compressor to increase the
The NOx control strategies for fixed and variable geometry efficiency of the compressor. Another intercooler setup downstream
turbochargers are also critical to fuel economy and emission of the high pressure compressor was used to lower the intake
performance[15]. Injection pressure, injection timing, and EGR are temperature and increase the volumetric efficiency. An intake throttle
three important in-cylinder control parameters to reduce NOx valve was employed to regulate the pressure difference between the
emission [3, 16]. EGR can be introduced by regulating the HP-EGR intake and exhaust manifolds. A by-pass valve was parallelly
valve, controlling VGT vane position or adjusting the intake throttle connected to both ends of the intake throttle valve to keep a minimum
valve. Therefore, how to effectively reduce the NOx emission with fresh air flow for normal operation of the engine. Furthermore, the
minimum penalty on fuel economy and soot emission is still a HP-EGR rather than LP-EGR was adopted in this experiment and the
meaningful research topic to be investigated. HP-EGR circulation loop, including a HP-EGR valve, EGR cooler
and one-way valve, was setup between the upstream of high pressure
In this experiment, the effects of different turbocharging systems turbine and downstream of the intake throttle valve.
including WGT, VGT, WGT+FGT and VGT+FGT on fuel economy
and emission characteristics were investigated in a multi-cylinder Table 1. Specifications of the test engine.
heavy duty diesel engine with only HP-EGR. The optimal control
strategies for both fixed and variable geometry turbochargers were
explored to minimize the soot emission and to improve the fuel
economy performance. The potential of different turbocharging
systems with ‘SCR+EGR’ technical route to meet different weighted
raw NOx control targets, including 8.0 g/kWh, 5.0 g/kWh, 3.5 g/kWh
and 2.8 g/kWh, were evaluated over the WHSC test cycle. The raw
NOx control targets except 2.8 g/kWh are the NOx limits in Euro I,
Euro III and Euro IV. Based on these raw NOx control targets, SCR
conversion efficiency between 86%∼95% is required to meet the Euro
VI NOx limit. Moreover, ‘SCR-only’ and ‘SCR+EGR’ technical routes
were compared at weighted NOx emission of 8.0 g/kWh (SCR with
average conversion efficiency of about 95% is necessary to meet Euro
VI NOx emission limits). The requirement on turbocharging systems
and suitable technical routes for future stringent NOx and soot
emission regulations were also evaluated and discussed in this paper.

Experimental Setup
Test Engine
All experiments were conducted in a four-stroke, six-cylinder,
turbocharged heavy-duty diesel engine equipped with a common
rail injection system. The detailed specifications of the engine are
shown in Table 1 and the schematic of the experimental setup is
illustrated in Figure 1.

Four different turbocharging systems, including a single stage

wastegate turbocharger (WGT), a single stage variable geometry
turbocharger (VGT), a two stage fixed geometry turbocharger
(WGT+FGT) and a two stage variable geometry turbocharger Figure 1. Schematic of the experimental setup.
(VGT+FGT), were investigated in this study. The overall objective of
turbocharger matching is to fit a turbocharger with most suitable
characteristics to the engine in order to obtain the best overall
performance from that engine. As to the wastage turbocharger (WGT
Table 2. Turbocharger configurations investigated in the experiment.
An electronic control unit (ECU) made by Bosch was used to control
the fuel injection parameters. A piezoelectric pressure sensor (Kistler
6125C) coupled with a charge amplifier (Kistler 5011B10) was
employed to measure in-cylinder pressure. The pressure data
acquisition was triggered by an optical crank angle encoder (Kistler
2614A4) with a resolution of 0.5 °CA. The experimental pressure
trace was utilized to calculate the heat release rate according to the
thermodynamic modeling in the reference [17]. The gaseous exhaust
emissions including CO, CO2, HC, NOx and lambda were measured
by an emission analyzer (HORIBA MEXA 7100DEGR). Moreover,
uncertainties of all measurements are shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Uncertainties of the measurement instruments.
The EGR ratio was calculated according to the CO2 concentrations in
the intake and exhaust pipes via the following formula Eq. (1):
(1)
Furthermore, the filter smoke number (FSN) was measured by a filter
paper smoke meter (AVL 415S) and the indicated specific dry soot
emission (unit: g/kWh) was calculated according to the following
formula Eq. (2) shown in the reference [18].
(2)
In Eq. (2), mair and mfuel are the intake mass flow rate (kg/h) and fuel
mass flow rate (kg/h) respectively while Pb refers to break power (kW).
Test Methods
The effects of different turbocharging systems, including WGT, VGT,
WGT+FGT and VGT+FGT, on fuel economy and emission
characteristics were investigated over the WHSC test cycle, which is
a legislated test cycle adopted in Euro VI emission standard. The
operation conditions in WHSC are given in Figure 2. The numbers in
the red circle represent the test sequence in WHSC. Except the cold
and warm idle conditions, the other operation conditions consist of
five speeds (25%, 35%, 45%, 55% and 75%, which are abbreviated
as A, B, C, D and E respectively) and four loads (25%, 50%, 70%
and 100%). The injection strategy at idle condition was kept the same
as the original engine for stable combustion and cold-start. A pilot
injection was added before main injection at all 25% load conditions
to restrict the pressure rise rate to an acceptable level (<10 bar/ °CA).
With regard to the EGR introduction method of fixed geometry
turbochargers, the HP-EGR valve was firstly opened and then the
intake throttle valve was regulated. As to variable geometry
turbochargers, after the HP-EGR valve was fully opened, the EGR
was further introduced by increasing the pressure difference between
intake and exhaust manifolds via the control of VGT vane position.
With optimized EGR control and injection strategies, in the premise
of an acceptable soot emission and fuel economy, the potential of
different turbocharger systems to meet various weighted NOx
emissions were evaluated. The injection pressure and injection timing
were optimized over the WHSC test cycle for ‘SCR-only’ technical
route to obtain weighted NOx emission of 8.0 g/kWh with optimum
fuel economy. Moreover, the ‘SCR-only’ technical route was
compared with the ‘SCR+EGR’ technical route after the optimization
of combustion process.
Figure 2. WHSC operation conditions of the experimental engine.
Results and Discussion
Optimization of Control Strategies for Variable and
Fixed Geometry Turbochargers
Control Strategy for Variable Geometry Turbochargers
with ‘SCR+EGR’ Technical Route
With variable geometry turbochargers, the NOx reduction methods
can be generally summarized as opening HP-EGR valve, decreasing
the effective flow area of the turbine, throttling the intake flow and
injection strategy optimization. Therefore, the performance of the
control methods mentioned above on NOx reduction and their effects
on fuel economy and soot emission will be explored. After that, a
reasonable NOx reduction or EGR introduction strategy for variable
geometry turbochargers can be proposed. In this part, the operation of
n=1415 r/min and BMEP=14.1 bar is chosen as a typical operation
condition which corresponds to the D70 operation condition in
WHSC test cycle. A two stage variable geometry turbocharging
system (VGT+FGT) is chosen as a representative for both single and
two stage variable geometry turbochargers because of the similar
NOx reduction control strategies.

The effects of HP-EGR valve, VGT vane position and intake throttle
valve on NOx and BSFC are presented in Figure 3. At each fixed VGT
vane position, the NOx can be reduced by opening the HP-EGR vale
and then by regulating the intake throttle valve. The hollow symbol
means that the NOx is reduced by opening HP-EGR valve. The
symbol with ‘+ center’ means that the HP-EGR and the intake throttle
valve are fully open. The symbol with dot center means that the NOx
is reduced by closing the intake throttle valve. The orange dashed line
represents that the HP-EGR valve and the intake throttle valve are
fully open with different closures of VGT vane. A lowest BSFC (in the
blue circle) can be obtained from the orange dashed line at a certain
VGT vane position, which is defined as the initial VGT vane position
(IVP). The initial VGT vane position can be used to decide at which
Figure 3. Comparison of NOx reduction methods (HP-EGR valve, VGT and
VGT vane position that opening the HP-EGR valve can obtain the intake throttle) on fuel economy.
optimal fuel economy. As shown in Figure 3, compared to other VGT
vane positions, the lowest BSFC can be obtained during the HP-EGR
valve opening process when the HP-EGR valve is opened at the initial
VGT position of 50%. The initial VGT vane positions for two stage
variable geometry turbocharger over the WHSC test points except idle
condition are shown in Figure 4, which shows that the initial VGT
vane closure decreases with the increase of engine speed. As shown in
Figure 3, increasing the VGT vane closure (orange dashed line) and
closing the intake throttle valve (the line connected by the symbols
with dot center) are the two methods that can be adopted to further
reduce the NOx emission after the HP-EGR valve is fully open.
Obviously, better fuel economy performance can be obtained by
increasing the VGT vane closure compared the closing the intake
throttle valve. Thus, the NOx reduction or EGR introduction control
strategies for variable geometry turbochargers to obtain optimal fuel
economy can be summarized as follows: Firstly, the NOx can be
reduced by opening the HP-EGR valve while keeping the VGT vane
position at initial VGT vane position. Secondly, the NOx can be
further reduced by increasing the closure of VGT vane from the initial Figure 4. Initial VGT vane position of VGT+FGT turbocharging system over
VGT vane position to the VGT vane position near the operation limits. the WHSC test.
At last, if NOx needs to be further reduced, intake throttle valve
should be employed.

In addition to EGR, NOx emission is also significantly correlated to

combustion phasing. Therefore, the comparison of VGT vane
position and CA50 on fuel economy is explored and illustrated in
Figure 5. The VGT vane positions are swept from 50% to about 70%
(restricted by the operation limits of the VGT), while the HP-EGR
valve and the intake throttle valve are kept fully open. The maximum
EGR rate or the minimum NOx emission is limited by the maximum
closure of VGT vane. Three contour lines with NOx emission of 8.0
g/kWh, 5.0 g/kWh and 3.5 g/kWh are presented in Figure 5, which
shows that better fuel economy can be obtained by advancing CA50
while increasing the closure of VGT vane compared to retarding the
CA50 while decreasing the closure of VGT vane at the same NOx
emission level. This indicates that the combustion phasing has
stronger influence on BSFC compared to VGT vane position when
the NOx is higher than 3.5 g/kWh. Therefore, the CA50 should be
advanced as early as possible when the target NOx is higher than 3.5 Figure 5. Comparison of VGT vane position and CA50 on fuel economy.
g/kWh. In this case, a better fuel economy performance can be
obtained at the same NOx emission level.
If NOx emission is expected to be further reduced when the VGT
vane reaches its maximum closure position, the intake throttling will
be employed. Though the intake throttle valve can increase the
pressure difference between the intake and exhaust manifolds, which
in turn leads to the increase of HP-EGR and the reduction of NOx,
the intake fresh air is also dramatically reduced, results in reduction
of excess air ratio and deterioration of soot emission. Moreover,
throttling the intake flow also increases the pumping loss, which
causes penalty on fuel economy. Therefore, retarding CA50 is
proposed and considered as a competitive method to substitute intake
throttling. The comparisons of CA50 and intake throttling on fuel
economy and soot emission are illustrated in Figure 6. All the data in
Figure 6 are at a fixed NOx emission of about 2.5 g/kWh, which are
controlled by the coordination of both CA50 and intake throttle valve.
When EGR is reduced form 22.5% to 21.2% by regulating the intake
throttle valve, CA50 should be retarded from 9 °CA ATDC to 15 °CA
ATDC to keep a fixed NOx emission. BSFC slightly increases while
the soot emission can be reduced by about four times due to the
remarkable increased excess air ratio. Consequently, at a low NOx
emission condition, retarding CA50 can significantly improve soot
emission with only slight penalty on fuel economy, which shows
greater advantage in NOx reduction compared to intake throttling.
Figure 6. Comparison of CA50 and intake throttle on fuel economy and soot
emission.
Control Strategy for Fixed Geometry Turbochargers with
‘SCR+EGR’ Technical Route
With fixed geometry turbochargers, the HP-EGR valve, intake
throttle valve and injection strategies are three critical control
parameters for NOx reduction. A two stage fixed geometry
turbocharger is chosen as a representative to illustrate the NOx
control strategies for fixed geometry turbocharger because both single
and two stage fixed geometry turbochargers have similar NOx control
strategies. The NOx control strategies for fixed geometry
turbocharger are presented in Figure 7. The EGR can be firstly
increased by opening the HP-EGR valve and then further increased
by closing the intake throttle valve. When NOx is higher than 5.0 g/
kWh, both EGR and CA50 have no significant effects on soot
emission while remarkable effects on fuel economy is observed. Due
to the sufficient excess air ratio, the combustion phasing has greater
influence on fuel economy than EGR. Therefore, at higher NOx
emission levels, improved fuel economy and soot emission can be
obtained with advanced CA50. If NOx lower than 3.5 g/kWh is
required, the intake throttling should be further increased to enlarge
the pressure difference between the intake and exhaust manifolds.
The increased pumping loss and sharply reduced excess air ratio lead
to the penalty on fuel economy and soot emission. At this condition,
the soot emission is very sensitive to intake throttle valve position or
EGR rate. At the same NOx emission level, retarding CA50 with
lower EGR rate has more advantage in soot reduction compared to
advancing CA50 with higher EGR rate. Meanwhile, retarding CA50
has insignificant influence on fuel economy. Therefore, at lower NOx
emission, the CA50 had better be retarded to obtain better soot
emission while still maintain comparable fuel economy.
Figure 7. The NOx control strategies for fixed geometry turbochargers.
Comparison of EGR Introduction Ability among Different
Turbochargers
Figure 8 shows the effects of HP-EGR valve, intake throttle valve
and VGT vane position on EGR introduction ability. The EGR
introduction capability is mainly determined by the pressure
difference between the intake and exhaust manifolds. A certain
exhaust-intake pressure differential is required to obtain a desired
EGR flow rate, and this in turn will produce a given pumping mean
effective pressure (PMEP). As to wastage turbochargers (WGT and
WGT+FGT), the EGR is introduced firstly by opening the HP-EGR
valve and then regulating the intake throttle valve. As shown in
Figure 8 (a), higher EGR rate can be obtained by WGT+FGT because
of lower effective turbine nozzle area compared to single WGT.
Consequently, WGT+FGT will produce higher pumping loss
compared to single WGT. It is well know that intake throttling will
severely reduce the amount of intake fresh air flow, which will lead to
lower combustion efficiency and higher soot emission. It can be
probably foreseen that WGT+FGT will show better performance on
combustion efficiency and soot emission compared to single WGT
because less intake throttling is required for WGT+FGT to obtained
the same EGR rate. As shown in Figure 8 (b), the EGR for variable
geometry turbocharger (VGT and VGT+FGT) is introduced firstly by
opening the HP-EGR valve and then regulating the VGT vane
position from the initial VGT vane position (IVP). The initial VGT
vane positions for VGT+FGT and VGT are 50% and 60%
respectively. Higher EGR can be obtained by single VGT during the
HP-EGR valve control process because of higher initial VGT vane
position resulting in higher exhaust-intake pressure differential.
However, when the VGT vane positions are the same between
VGT+FGT and VGT, higher EGR can be obtained by VGT+FGT. It
is expected that VGT+FGT will produce higher pumping loss during
the HP-EGR valve control process and lower pumping loss during the
VGT vane position control process.
a.
b.
Figure 8. Effects of HP-EGR valve, intake throttle valve and VGT vane
position on EGR ratio
Control strategies for variable and fixed geometry
turbochargers with ‘SCR-only’ technical route
Injection strategy optimization is an important method to control
NOx emission for ‘SCR-only’ technical route. The injection pressure
and combustion phasing are directly related to the fuel economy and
soot emission. Therefore, it is necessary to optimize both the injection
pressure and injection timing for ‘SCR-only’ technical route to obtain
better fuel economy and lower exhaust emission. Because the
variable geometry turbochargers have similar NOx control strategies
compared to fixed geometry turbochargers after optimization, only
the NOx control strategies for a single stage variable geometry
turbocharger (VGT) is presented in Figure 9. The VGT vane positions
were swept at a fixed CA50 and injection pressure for each operation
condition in the WHSC test cycle and the VGT vane position
corresponding to the best fuel economy was chosen as the optimal
VGT vane position. As shown in Figure 9, at a fixed NOx emission,
retarded CA50 is required under higher injection pressure condition,
which leads to the increase of both accessory work and combustion
phasing loss. Notable increase in BSFC is observed while the
improvement of soot emission is determined by NOx emission level.
However, if the injection pressure is further reduced to certain extent,
poor air-fuel mixture leads to lower combustion efficiency and fuel
economy. Consequently, there exists an optimal injection pressure
which presents the best compromise between the combustion loss and
accessory work. As shown in Figure 9, the optimal injection pressure
varies depending on the target NOx emission. However, both fuel
economy and soot emission should be taken into account when
determining the optimal injection pressure. Due to the relatively
higher excess air ratio of ‘SCR-only’ technical route compared to
‘SCR+EGR’ technical route, the injection pressure can be reduced
without remarkable deterioration of soot emission. Meanwhile, CA50
can be advanced to obtain optimal fuel economy performance.
Therefore, it is beneficial to adopt lower injection pressure and
advanced CA50 for ‘SCR-only’ technical route to achieve better fuel
economy performance.
a.
b.
Figure 9. NOx control strategies for ‘SCR-only’ technical route.
Comparison of ‘SCR-only’ and ‘SCR+EGR’ Technical
Routes on Fuel Economy and Soot Emission
Both ‘SCR-only’ and ‘SCR+EGR’ technical routes are adopted to
meet the Euro VI emission regulations. A more retarded CA50 is
required for ‘SCR-only’ technical route while a more advanced CA50
coupled with moderate EGR is also adequate for ‘SCR+EGR’
technical route to reach the same NOx emission level. The effects of
two technical routes on fuel economy and soot emission are
illustrated in Figure 10 (a) and Figure 10 (b) under the same injection
pressure, injector geometry and piston bowl. Assuming the SCR
conversion efficiency is 95% for both technical routes , the raw NOx
emission should be kept at 8.0 g/kWh to meet the Euro VI NOx
emission limits (NOx<0.4 g/kWh). In terms of ‘SCR-only’ technical
route, the CA50 is required to be retarded to about 21 °CA ATDC
with BSFC of about 214 g/kWh. However, with ‘SCR+EGR’
technical route, CA50 at 8 °CA ATDC coupled with about 13% EGR
rate can also achieve the same NOx emission level compared to the
‘SCR-only’ technical route. In addition, a 9.3% improvement in
BSFC can also be obtained with ‘SCR+EGR’. Both technical routes
have ultra-low soot emission when the raw NOx emission is kept at
8.0 g/kWh. As a result, with the assumption of same SCR conversion
efficiency, ‘SCR+EGR’ technical route is more competitive in fuel
economy to reach Euro VI emission regulations than ‘SCR-only’
technical route. As for future emission regulations more stringent
than Euro VI, the CA50 cannot be further retarded, improving the
SCR conversion efficiency seems to be a possible approach for
‘SCR-only’ technical route. However, the control of aftertreatment
will be complicated, urea consumption and cost will also be another
issues. In contrast, with ‘SCR+EGR’ technical route, even though the
SCR conversion efficiency cannot be improved, further increasing the
amount of EGR can also reduce the raw NOx emission and has the
potential to meet future stringent emission regulations with lower
customer using cost. However, the soot emission caused by large
amount of EGR is another possible challenge for ‘SCR+EGR’
technical route. Overall, it is seen that ‘SCR+EGR’ has more
potential than ‘SCR-only’ technical route to meet future stringent
NOx emission regulations.
a.
b.
Figure 10. Comparison of ‘SCR-only’ and ‘SCR+EGR’ technical routes at the
condition of n = 1415r/min and T = 945Nm
It should be noted that the same combustion system is used between
the ‘SCR-only’ and ‘SCR+EGR’ technical routes. If the piston
bowl, the injector geometry and the injection strategy can be
optimized for ‘SCR-only’ technical route to achieve lower engine-
out NOx emission and better NOx-BSFC trade-off at a given
injection timing, the difference in fuel economy between ‘SCR-
only’ and ‘SCR+EGR’ technical routes will become smaller than
the results shown in this study.
Effects of Different Turbochargers on Combustion and
Emission Characteristics
The Comparison of Different Turbochargers with
‘SCR+EGR’ Technical Route
With ‘SCR+EGR’ technical route, the amount of EGR introduced
into the cylinder is determined by the target NOx emission. A
sufficient excess air ratio is essential to achieve high efficiency and
clean combustion. However, different turbocharger systems have
different boost capability. Therefore, the potential of different
turbochargers to meet varying NOx and soot emissions are also
distinct from each other. Consequently, the effects of different
turbocharger systems including WGT, VGT, WGT+FGT and
VGT+FGT on excess air ratio (lambda), soot emission, CO emission
and exhaust temperature are compared at different NOx emission
levels. The experimental results at the operation condition of n=
1415r/min, T=945Nm are presented in Figure 11. The NOx control
strategy for variable geometry turbochargers is opening the HP-EGR
valve firstly and then adjusting the closure of VGT vane. If intake
throttle valve is adopted, though lower NOx can be further reduced,
soot will dramatically increase. Therefore, the intake throttle valve is
not adopted for VGT and VGT+FGT. The NOx control strategy for
fixed geometry turbochargers is opening the HP-EGR valve firstly
and then regulating the intake throttle valve.
As shown in Figure 11 (a), the lambda is decreased for all
turbochargers with the reduction of NOx emission and it is mainly
determined by the boost capability. The VGT+FGT shows higher
lambda than VGT, whereas VGT shows higher lambda than WGT at
all NOx emissions. However, the lambda of WGT+FGT varies rapidly The fuel economy is determined by multiple factors, such as
with the reduction of NOx emission. When NOx is higher than 7.0 g/ combustion efficiency, combustion duration and pumping loss and so
kWh, the lambda of WGT+FGT is higher than that of VGT+FGT. As on. Higher lambda can improve combustion efficiency, decrease the
NOx is further reduced, the lambda of WGT+FGT is lower than that combustion duration and lower the combustion temperature which is
of VGT+FGT because of intake throttle valve is used to increase EGR. helpful for reducing heat transfer loss. As shown in Figure 12, the
As shown in Figure 11 (b) and Figure 11 (c), the soot and CO difference of pumping loss among these turbochargers are small.
emissions are mainly dominated by lambda. The inflection points of BSFC of all turbochargers increases with the reduction of NOx
soot and CO emissions for all turbochargers correspond to lambda of emission. The VGT+FGT shows better NOx-BSFC trade-off than
about 1.4. The difference of soot and CO emissions among different VGT while VGT shows better NOx-BSFC trade-off than WGT.
turbochargers become larger when lambda is below 1.4. The variable WGT+FGT shows the best BSFC performance at higher NOx
geometry turbochargers shows better performance in soot and CO emission region. However, as NOx emission is further reduced, the
emissions compared to the fixed geometry turbocharges due to the BSFC of WGT+FGT is gradually higher than VGT+FGT and VGT.
higher boosting capability of VGT by closing the VGT vane position
compared to intake throttling. Therefore, better NOx-soot trade-off
and higher combustion efficiency can be obtained by VGT+FGT
compared to other turbochargers. Moreover, the exhaust temperature
has significant effect on SCR conversion efficiency. Therefore, the
comparisons of exhaust temperature among different turbochargers are
exhibited in Figure 11 (d). The exhaust temperature is closely related
to the amount of charge in the cylinder. Higher intake mass flow or
higher lambda will decrease the exhaust temperature. Therefore, the
exhaust temperature of VGT+FGT is lower than VGT and WGT. In
addition, significant variations in exhaust temperature with fixed
geometry turbochargers can be observed with different NOx emission
levels compared to that of variable geometry turbochargers. This
indicates that the SCR conversion efficiency will not be greatly
changed with variable geometry turbocharges over a wide NOx
emission range compared to fixed geometry turbochargers.

Figure 12. Effects of different turbochargers on combustion duration, pumping

work and fuel economy.

Figure 13. Potential of different turbochargers to meet varying NOx emission.

The potential of different turbochargers to meet various NOx emission is

illustrated in Figure 13, in which the blue line indicates the required SCR
conversion efficiency to meet Euro VI NOx emission limits at each raw
NOx emission. Soot, BSFC and the system complexity are all taken into
consideration when evaluating the optimal turbocharging configuration at
Figure 11. Effects of different turbochargers on soot emission, fuel economy
a fixed NOx emission. A single WGT should be used when the NOx is
and exhaust temperature under EGR condition.
controlled at about 8.0 g/kWh. A SCR with an average conversion
efficiency of 95% is required to meet the Euro VI NOx emission limits.
If the raw NOx emission reduces to 5 g/kWh, a single WGT is not
adequate due to higher soot emission and BSFC. At this condition,
WGT+FGT should be employed to improve soot emission and BSFC.
As the NOx emission is further reduced, single VGT and VGT+FGT are
required when the NOx is controlled at 3.5 g/kWh and 2.8 g/kWh,
respectively. Therefore, the upper black curve is not a recommended
turbocharger configuration and the lower red curve is a recommended
turbocharger configuration for each NOx level. However, no matter
which turbocharger configuration is employed, BSFC and soot emission
have the tendency to increase with the reduction of NOx emission.
The Comparison of Different Turbochargers with ‘SCR-
Only’ Technical Route
Figure 14. Effects of different turbochargers on fuel economy and exhaust
temperature under no EGR condition.
With ‘SCR-only’ technical route, injection timing can be used to
control NOx emission. The effects of different turbochargers on
lambda, BSFC and exhaust temperature are illustrated in Figure 14.
The soot emission of these turbochargers are all lower than 0.01 g/
kWh and are very close to each other. Therefore, soot emissions are
not presented here. As shown in Figure 14 (a), WGT+FGT has the
highest lambda or intake mass flow rate, followed by VGT+FGT,
WGT and VGT. Higher lambda or intake mass flow can reduce the
maximum combustion temperature, resulting in lower heat transfer
loss. Moreover, higher lambda can also increase the fuel oxidation
rate, leading to shorter combustion duration. Therefore, the sequence
of BSFC for different turbochargers is opposite to the sequence of
lambda, which is shown in Figure 14 (b). The exhaust temperature is
presented in Figure 14 (c), WGT+FGT has the lowest exhaust
temperature due to its highest intake mass flow. Exhaust temperature
does not change significantly while the BSFC varies notably with the
changing of NOx emission or CA50. Therefore, retarding CA50
seems not to be an effective approach to elevate exhaust temperature.
As shown in Figure 11 (d), intake throttling has great effect on
exhaust temperature compared to CA50 retarding.
Comparison of Fuel Economy and Emission
Characteristics among Different Turbochargers over
WHSC test cycle
Weighted Results for ‘SCR+EGR’ Technical Route
To fully evaluate the potential of different turbocharging systems to
meet various NOx emission legislations for ‘SCR+EGR’ technical
route, the fuel economy and emission characteristics of these
turbocharging systems are compared over the WHSC test cycle with
weighted raw NOx emissions of about 8.0 g/kWh, 5.0 g/kWh, 3.5 g/
kWh and 2.8 g/kWh. The raw NOx emission control targets except
2.8 g/kWh are the NOx limits in Euro I, Euro III and Euro IV. Based
on these NOx emission targets, SCR conversion efficiency between
86%∼95% is required to meet the Euro VI NOx limit.
Figure 15 (a1) depicts the comparison of fuel economy among these
turbochargers at various weighted NOx emissions over the WHSC
test cycle. The BSFC of all turbochargers increases with the reduction
of weighted NOx emission. However, the extents of BSFC
improvement for these turbochargers vary at different weighted NOx
emissions. When the weighted NOx is controlled at about 8.0 g/kWh,
two stage turbochargers, including VGT+FGT and WGT+FGT, have
better fuel economy performance than single stage turbochargers
(VGT and WGT). As the weighted NOx further reduces to 3.5 g/kWh
or even lower, BSFC of single VGT is lower than that of WGT+FGT
due to the intake throttling is employed for WGT+FGT system at
most operation conditions. The BSFC of fixed geometry
turbochargers (WGT and WGT+FGT) are more sensitive to weighted
NOx emission compared to that of variable geometry turbochargers
(VGT and VGT+FGT). The BSFC reduction percent of VGT+FGT,
WGT+FGT and VGT relative to WGT is illustrated in Figure 15 (a2).
The relative weighted BSFC reduction percent for variable geometry
turbochargers increases with the reduction of NOx emission. This
means that the extent of weighted BSFC improvement for variable
geometry turbochargers are more obvious at low weighted NOx
emission region. In addition, VGT+FGT shows more advantages for
BSFC reduction than single VGT at all weighted NOx emissions.
The comparison of weighted soot emission among different
turbochargers at various weighted NOx emissions is exhibited in
Figure 15 (b1) and the relative weighted soot emission reduction of
VGT+FGT, WGT+FGT and VGT is illustrated in Figure 15 (b2). The
weighted soot emission of all turbochargers increases with the
reduction of weighted NOx emission. VGT+FGT shows better soot
reduction performance than single VGT and WGT has the highest
soot emission over all the weighted NOx emission range. When the
NOx is controlled at about 8.0 g/kWh, only 10% soot reduction can
be achieved by utilizing single VGT. However, two stage
turbochargers show stronger soot reduction capability with relative
weighted soot reduction of about 30%. The relative weighted soot
reduction percent of variable geometry turbochargers increases with
the reduction of weighted NOx emission. As the weighted NOx
reduces to about 2.8 g/kWh, the soot emission of VGT and
WGT+FGT are all about 0.01 g/kWh with the relative weighted soot
reduction of about 52%. In this case, the VGT+FGT is required to
further reduce soot emission. As shown in Figure 15 (b), a soot
emission of about 0.007 g/kWh and relative weighted soot reduction
of about 67% can be obtained by employing a VGT+FGT system.

a).
b).
Figure 15. Weighted BSFC, soot emissions and its relative weighted reduction
percent at various weighted NOx emissions.
CO and HC are not the major issues in conventional diesel engine
because they can be easily removed by a diesel oxidation catalyst
(DOC). Figure 16 presents the weighted CO and HC emissions with
different turbochargers at various weighted NOx emissions. As
shown in Figure 16 (a), the weighted CO emission of all
turbochargers increases with the reduction of weighted NOx
emission. The VGT+FGT shows better performance in CO emission
at all weighted NOx emission region because of higher intake mass
flow at most operation conditions. The weighted HC emission of
WGT increases obviously when the weighted NOx is reduced from
3.5 g/kWh to 2.8 g/kWh, because the intake mass flow is greatly
reduced by intake throttling. The weighted HC emissions with
different turbochargers are exhibited in Figure 16 (b). The weighted
HC emissions for all turbochargers slightly decrease as the weighted
NOx reduces, while, there is no significant difference in HC emission
among these turbochargers.
According to the weighted results over the WHSC test cycle, the
requirements on turbocharging systems at different weighted NOx
emissions can be obtained. A WGT is adequate for the weighted NOx
emission of 8.0 g/kWh, with extra benefits of low cost, space-saving
with an acceptable fuel economy and soot emission. When the
weighted NOx emission needs to be controlled at 5.0 g/kWh, a
WGT+FGT is recommended because of the improvement in fuel
economy and soot emission compared to VGT and WGT. As the
weighted NOx emission is further reduced to 3.5 g/kWh, VGT shows
superior fuel economy performance than WGT+FGT with almost the
same soot emission. If the raw weighted NOx emission is controlled
at 2.8 g/kWh, a VGT+FGT is essential due to its ability in soot
emission and fuel economy improvements. It should be noted that the
requirement on turbochargers at various weighted NOx emissions
based on the weighted results are the same to that based on a single
operation condition (n=1415 r/min T=945 Nm) described in Figure
13. This is also an important reason that the D70 (n=1415r/min, T=
945Nm, BMEP=14.1bar) operation condition has been chosen as a
representative condition to illustrate the control strategy for
turbochargers and the effects of these turbochargers on fuel economy
and emission characteristics.
Figure 16. Weighted CO and HC emissions at various weighted NOx emissions.
It should be noted that the specific manifold arrangement could change
some of the conclusions of the paper. Using a divided manifold and
turbine housing, which is typically only available in WGT (or a WGT
high pressure stage in the series configurations), the effective turbo
efficiency can be considerably improved leading to improvements in
fuel economy and EGR driving capability[19, 20]. A WGT with an
asymmetric housing can also significantly increase EGR driving
capability, which would eliminate the penalty of using the intake
throttle observed in this study. Thus, an alternative WGT system with a
divided housing and asymmetric turbine would have significantly
different performance from the WGT system shown in this study.
Weighted Results for ‘SCR-Only’ Technical Route
With ‘SCR-only’ technical route, NOx can be mainly controlled by
injection strategies, including injection pressure and injection timing,
rather than EGR. The major advantage of variable geometry
turbochargers compared to the fixed geometry turbochargers is that
the turbochargers can be well matched over a wide operation
conditions by regulating the VGT vane position. To evaluate the
performance of different turbochargers for ‘SCR-only’ technical
route, the fuel economy and emission characteristics of different
turbochargers are compared over the WHSC test cycle with weighted
NOx emission of about 8.0 g/kWh (95% SCR conversion efficiency
is required to reach Euro VI NOx limits), which is shown in Figure
17. The results shown in Figure 17 are already optimized, including
the optimization of injection pressure and injection timing. The
VGT+FGT has the lowest weighted BSFC and soot emission because
of better matching at most operation conditions compared to
WGT+FGT. The weighted BSFC and soot emission of WGT+FGT
are very close to that of VGT. The single WGT has relatively higher
weighted BSFC and soot emission due to lower intake mass flow,
which in turn results in higher combustion loss and heat transfer loss.
There is no notable difference in weighted HC emission among these
turbochargers, while the weighted CO emission of VGT+FGT is
slightly lower than the others. If fuel economy, soot and system
complexity are all taken into consideration, a single VGT is more
competitive in cost and space-saving compared to VGT+FGT, though
slightly higher weighted BSFC and soot emission are observed. The
WGT has poorer fuel economy and soot emission performance than
VGT. Therefore, a single VGT is recommended to meet the weighted
NOx emission of 8.0 g/kWh for ‘SCR-only’ technical route. In this
case, a SCR with an average conversion efficiency of 95% is
adequate to meet the Euro VI NOx limit.
Figure 17. Weighted BSFC, soot, HC and CO emissions of different
turbochargers at weighted NOx emission of 8.0g/kWh.
Comparing the weighted results of ‘SCR+EGR’ and ‘SCR-only’
technical route at weighted NOx emission of 8.0 g/kWh, with the
same turbocharger system, significantly lower weighted BSFC can be
obtained by employing ‘SCR+EGR’ technical route due to early
combustion phasing (CA50). It should be noted that there will be
different heat rejection characteristics from the technical routes and
the turbo arrangements, which would potentially lead to increase in
fan and pump parasitic losses. Moreover, there is no notable
difference in weighted soot emission when the weighted NOx is
controlled at about 8.0 g/kWh for both ‘SCR+EGR’ and ‘SCR-only’
technical routes. The advantages of ‘SCR-only’ technical route are
that there is no EGR valve and no calibration of EGR system, which
could be helpful for system reliability improvement and calibration
cost reduction. Furthermore, compared to ‘SCR+EGR’ technical
route, the ‘SCR-only’ technical route seems to be unfavorable to meet
future more stringent NOx emission regulations because of the poor
fuel economy. Overall, the piston bowl and injector geometry are not
changed among these turbocharger systems and different technical
routes. If the piston bowl and injector geometry are further optimized
for these turbochargers and technical routes, a better emission and
fuel economy performance could be obtained.
Conclusions
In this study, the effects of different turbocharging systems, including
VGT+FGT, WGT+FGT VGT and WGT, on fuel economy and
emission characteristics with both ‘SCR+EGR’ and ‘SCR-only’
technical routes have been experimentally investigated in a heavy
duty diesel engine over the WHSC test cycle. Only HP-EGR is
adopted in this experiment. The optimal control strategies for these
turbochargers have been explored under both with and without EGR
circumstances. The potential of different turbocharging systems to
meet future stringent NOx and soot emission regulations with both
‘SCR+EGR’ and ‘SCR-only’ technical routes are also evaluated and
compared. The main conclusions can be summarized as follows:
1. Regulating VGT vane position is more competitive in fuel
economy and soot emission improvement compared to intake
throttling. Better matching under most operation conditions
can be achieved with VGT compared to fixed geometry
turbochargers. Therefore, improved fuel economy and soot
emission compared to fixed geometry turbochargers can be
obtained by variable geometry turbochargers over the WHSC
test cycle, especially at low weighted NOx emission condition.
2. Retarded combustion phasing (CA50) can be beneficial to
obtain a relatively lower NOx emission with ‘SCR+EGR’
technical route, while still maintaining comparable BSFC and
remarkable soot reduction performance compared to intake
throttling , since the excess air ratio is critical to combustion
efficiency and soot oxidation.
3. With ‘SCR-only’ technical route, lower injection pressure and
early CA50 are beneficial for fuel economy improvement at the
same NOx emission with an acceptable soot emission.
4. The requirements on turbocharging system vary at different
NOx emission levels. The WGT, WGT+FGT, VGT and
VGT+FGT are recommended with ‘SCR+EGR’ technical route
when the weighted NOx are controlled at 8.0 g/kWh, 5.0 g/
kWh, 3.5 g/kWh and 2.8 g/kWh, respectively.
5. The ‘SCR+EGR’ technical route shows more potential to meet
the future more stringent NOx and soot emission regulations
compared to ‘SCR-only’ technical route, because EGR shows
more advantage in BSFC compared to retarding CA50 when the
NOx and soot emission are controlled at the same level.
References
1. Johnson, T., "Review of Vehicular Emissions Trends," SAE Int.
J. Engines 8(3):1152-1167, 2015, doi:10.4271/2015-01-0993.
2. Cloudt, I.R., Baert, I.R., Willems, I.F., and Vergouwe, M.,
"SCR-only Concept for Heavy-duty Euro VI Applications,"
MTZ worldwide 70(9):58-63, 2009, doi:10.1007/BF03226980.
3. Yao, M., Zhang, Q., Liu, H., Zheng, Z. et al., "Diesel Engine
Combustion Control: Medium or Heavy EGR?," SAE Technical
Paper 2010-01-1125, 2010, doi:10.4271/2010-01-1125.
4. Morgan, R., Banks, A., Auld, A., Heikal, M. et al., "The Benefits
of High Injection Pressure on Future Heavy Duty Engine
Performance," SAE Technical Paper 2015-24-2441, 2015,
doi:10.4271/2015-24-2441.
5. Wakisaka, Y., Hotta, Y., Inayoshi, M., Nakakita, K. et al.,
"Emissions Reduction Potential of Extremely High Boost and
High EGR Rate for an HSDI Diesel Engine and the Reduction
Mechanisms of Exhaust Emissions," SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr.
1(1):611-623, 2009, doi:10.4271/2008-01-1189.
6. Cloudt, R., Willems, F., and van der Heijden, P., "Cost and 19. Müller, M., Streule, T., Sumser, S., Hertweck, G., et al., "The
Fuel Efficient SCR-only Solution for Post-2010 HD Emission Asymmetric Twin Scroll Turbine for DAIMLER Heavy
Standards," SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. 2(1):399-406, 2009, Duty Engines," presented at Aufladetechnischen Konferenz,
doi:10.4271/2009-01-0915. Germany, 2008.
7. Vressner, A., Gabrielsson, P., Gekas, I., and Senar-Serra, E., 20. Müller, M., Streule, T., Sumser, S., Hertweck, G., et al., "The
"Meeting the EURO VI NOx Emission Legislation using a EURO Asymmetric twin scroll turbine for exhaust gas turbochargers,"
IV Base Engine and a SCR/ASC/DOC/DPF Configuration in the presented at ASME Turbo Expo 2008: Power for Land, Sea, and
World Harmonized Transient Cycle," SAE Technical Paper 2010- Air, Germany, Jun 9-13, 2008.
01-1216, 2010, doi:10.4271/2010-01-1216.
8. Chi, J., "Control Challenges for Optimal NOx Conversion Contact Information
Efficiency from SCR Aftertreatment Systems," SAE Technical Associate Professor, Dr. Hu Wang
Paper 2009-01-0905, 2009, doi:10.4271/2009-01-0905. State Key Laboratory of Engines, Tianjin University
9. Zheng, M., Reader, G.T., and Hawley, J.G., "Diesel engine Tianjin 300072, P.R.China
exhaust gas recirculation--a review on advanced and novel wang_hu@tju.edu.cn
concepts," Energy Convers. Manage. 45(6):883-900, 2004,
doi:10.1016/s0196-8904(03)00194-8. Acknowledgements
10. Maiboom, A., Tauzia, X., and Hétet, J.-F., "Experimental The authors would like to acknowledge the financial supports
study of various effects of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) on provided by the National Basic Research Program of China (973
combustion and emissions of an automotive direct injection Program) (2013CB228402) and the Natural Science Foundation of
diesel engine," Energy 33(1):22-34, 2008, doi:10.1016/j. China through the project of Outstanding Young Scholarship Award
energy.2007.08.010. (Grant No. 51125026).
11. Millo, F., Giacominetto, P.F., and Bernardi, M.G., "Analysis
of different exhaust gas recirculation architectures for
passenger car Diesel engines," Appl. Energy 98:79-91, 2012, Definitions/Abbreviations
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.02.081. ATDC - after top dead center
12. Lim, G., Choi, Y., Park, C., and Park, J., "Effects of HPL and BMEP - brake mean effective pressure
LPL EGR Gas Mixed Supply on Combustion and Emissions BSFC - brake specific fuel consumption
in Automotive Diesel Engine," SAE Technical Paper 2011-01-
CA - crank angle
1831, 2011, doi:10.4271/2011-01-1831.
CA50 - crank angle at 50% heat release
13. van Nieuwstadt, M., "Coordinated Control of EGR Valve and
Intake Throttle for Better Fuel Economy in Diesel Engines," DOC - diesel oxidation catalyst
SAE Technical Paper 2003-01-0362, 2003, doi:10.4271/2003- ECU - electronic control unit
01-0362. EGR - exhaust gas recirculation
14. Chi, Y., Cheong, J., Kim, C., and Choi, K., "Effects of VGT and FGT - fixed geometry turbocharger
Injection Parameters on Performance of HSDI Diesel Engine
HD - heavy duty
with Common Rail FIE System," SAE Technical Paper 2002-
01-0504, 2002, doi:10.4271/2002-01-0504. HP-EGR - high pressure exhaust gas recirculation

15. Johnson, T., "Vehicular Emissions in Review," SAE Int. J. IVP - initial VGT vane position
Engines 5(2):216-234, 2012, doi:10.4271/2012-01-0368. LP-EGR - low pressure exhaust gas recirculation
16. Qi, D., Leick, M., Liu, Y., and Lee, C.-f.F., "Effect of EGR and PMEP - Pumping mean effective pressure
injection timing on combustion and emission characteristics of SCR - selective catalyst reduction
split injection strategy DI-diesel engine fueled with biodiesel,"
VGT - variable geometry turbocharger
90(5):1884-91, 2011, doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2011.01.016.
WGT - wastegate turbocharger
17. Heywood, J.B., "Internal combustion engine fundamentals",
Mcgraw-hill New York, 1988, ISBN:0-07-028637-X. WHSC - world harmonized stationary cycle

18. AVL, "The specification of AVL 415S filter smoke number

meter," AVL List GMBH, Graz, Austria, 2007,

The Engineering Meetings Board has approved this paper for publication. It has successfully completed SAE’s peer review process under the supervision of the session organizer. The process
requires a minimum of three (3) reviews by industry experts.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or
otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE International.

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE International. The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper.

ISSN 0148-7191

http://papers.sae.org/2016-01-2185