Control Tutorials for MATLAB and Simulink - Introduction_ Simulink Control
GT modeling tool for interface simulations · GT simulation –Native GT and GT-Simulink...
Transcript of GT modeling tool for interface simulations · GT simulation –Native GT and GT-Simulink...
GT Aftertreatment Modeling Tool for Interface Simulations11/09/2015
Bhargav Ranganath
Outline
Objective
Target customer
Key players and uncertainties
Tool requirements
Project outline
Results
Summary
Objective
Investigate GT aftertreatment tool for carrying out whole AT
configuration level interface simulation using custom kinetics
– Aftertreatment configuration: Pipe-DOC-DPF-Pipe-Doser-Pipe-SCR-
AMOX
– Simulink as integration tool: Run Aftertreatment plant model in GT
interfaced with Simulink.
Target Customers
System Pure Simulation
Controls Development and Calibration
Simulink
AT Simulation tool
AT Simulation
tool
Real-time Application
Aftertreatment Pure Simulation
Temperature Prediction
Emission Prediction
AT Simulation
tool
Key Players and Uncertainties
Key players
– CMI: Model development and controls teams
– Gamma Technology Aftertreatment and interface teams
– JMI model development team
Key uncertainties
– Tool transparency to custom models
– Tool features available to model given technology
– Modular kinetics
– Resource availability to model at supplier end
Tool Requirements
Requirements
Ability to model basic aftertreatment
components – Pipe, DOC, SCR, DPF and
AMOX
Real time or faster in both native and
interface modes
Implement custom chemistry and transport Stability under high transient conditions
Include features to model multiple sites and
zones
Ability to actuate robustly all BC from
interface tools
Encrypted kinetics models Ability to model flow bypass
Handle transitions to and from zero flow Smooth integration with interface tools
Correct representation of heat transfer in all
components
Clearer help documents and discernable
error messages
Ability to model complex aftertreatment
components – TWC, SCRF, LNT
Include features to model multiple layers
Project Outline
CMI developed SCR and AMOX kinetics
JMI provided DOC model
GT default DPF models
Interface Application: AT configuration in GT interfaced with Simulink
Engine data: Configuration model accuracy – qualitative and quantitative validation
Speed and stability in native application
Native Application: AT Configuration in GT (catalysts and pipes)
Reactor data – Component model accuracy qualitative/quantitative validation
Ease of custom kinetic model implementation within GT
Same accuracy as GT native simulation
Speed and stability same as native application
Project Outline
CMI developed SCR and AMOX kinetics
JMI provided DOC model
GT default DPF models
Interface Application: AT configuration in GT interfaced with Simulink
Engine data: Configuration model accuracy – qualitative and quantitative validation
Speed and stability in native application
Native Application: AT Configuration in GT (catalysts and pipes)
Reactor data – Component model accuracy qualitative/quantitative validation
Ease of custom kinetic model implementation within GT
Same accuracy as GT native simulation
Speed and stability same as native application
CMI SCR Model
Model kinetics transferred from current simulation tool
Multiple site model with multiple surface site species
Developed kinetics modular and does not include transport terms
No washcoat pore diffusion included
NO
xO
nly NOx + NH3
NH3 Only
NOx Only
Reactor Data Validation: Boundary Conditions and Parameters
4 step protocol
SV: 120 [k/hour]
Zero initial NH3 storage
ANR~1 under step 2
– Standard SCR
– Fast SCR
Four Step Protocol
Reactor data validation – NOx conversion from step 2
Model predictions off at extreme end temperatures
– NH3 oxidation at high temperature and NH4NO3 formation at lower
temperature in presence of NO2
Nox split: 0 Nox split: 0.5
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 200 400 600 800
NO
x C
on
v [%
]
Temperature [DegC]
Step 2 NOx Conversion
Test GT
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 200 400 600 800
NO
x C
on
v [%
]
Temperature [DegC]
Step 2 NOx Conversion
Test GT
NH4NO3
formation and
decomposition
NH3
oxidation
NH3
oxidation
Summary – CMI SCR model
In house developed SCR kinetics implemented in GT
Multiple site model with multiple surface site species implemented
Model captures the correct functionality of the technology
Caution to prevent compensating for deficiencies in kinetics through
mass transport
CMI AMOX Model
Two layer AMOX kinetics implemented – SCR kinetics and PGM
kinetics
Includes pore diffusion
– Effective diffusive resistance at 200 [DegC] specified for species
SV: 160 [k/hour]
Step 2: ANR=1.0; Step 3: NH3 only
AMOX: ANR=1; NO only NOx
Overall the model captures the correct
trends compared to data
– NH3 conversion, NOx conversion/make and
N2O make
NOx conversion and NOx slip at higher
temperatures
– GT predictions good under step 3 and off
under step 2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
NH
3 C
on
vers
ion
[%
], N
Ox
and
N2
O m
ake
[pp
m]
Temperature [ Deg C]
Step -3
Test - NH3 Conversion
Sim - NH3 Conversion
Test - NOx make
Sim - NOx make
Test - N2O make
Sim - N2O make
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
NO
x an
d N
H3
Co
nve
rsio
n [
%]
and
N2
O m
ake
[pp
m]
Temperature [DegC]
Step - 2
Test - NOx Conversion
Sim - Nox Conversion
Test - NH3 Conversion
Sim - NH3 Conversion
Test - N2O make
Sim - N2O make
Summary – CMI AMOX model
In-house two layer AMOX model implemented in GT
– Pore diffusion introduced for transport of species within the two layers
– Constant diffusive resistances at 200 [DegC] temperature
Model predictions good under low temperatures and reasonable under
high temperature
Model captures the correct trends and functionalities of the technology
Caution to prevent compensating for deficiencies in kinetics through
mass transport
JM DOC
DOC kinetics model developed with in-house tool and implemented in
GT
Both internal and external mass transfer implemented
Model from JMI shared with CMI as a compound object with access to
variables and parameters through compound interface
Supplier provided validation – Engine data: NO an HC Oxidation
Courtesy JMI
NO Oxidation
SV: 45-140 [k/hour]
Inlet Feed: THC, NOx
and CO
HC Oxidation
SV: 50-180 [k/hour]
Inlet Feed: THC, NOx
and CO
Project Outline
CMI developed SCR and AMOX kinetics
JMI provided DOC model
GT default DPF models
Interface Application: AT configuration in GT interfaced with Simulink
Engine data: Configuration model accuracy – qualitative and quantitative validation
Speed and stability in native application
Native Application: AT Configuration in GT (catalysts and pipes)
Reactor data – Component model accuracy qualitative/quantitative validation
Ease of custom kinetic model implementation within GT
Same accuracy as GT native simulation
Speed and stability same as native application
AT Configuration Model Setup
DOC DPF SCRPipe2 Pipe3 SCR AMOXEnd PipeExhaust
Comp
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
IT [
K]
IMf
[kg
/s]
Time [s]
Boundary Conditions
Inlet Mass Flow Rate
Inlet Temperature
0.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
6.00E-04
8.00E-04
1.00E-03
1.20E-03
1.40E-03
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
NO
, NO
2 [
mo
le f
ract
ion
]
Time [s]
Inlet NO and NO2
Inlet NO
Inlet NO2
Cold Soak Warm
Inle
t M
ass F
low
[kg/s
]
Inle
t Tem
pera
ture
[K
]
Configuration Model Development and Results
Simulation carried out in GT version 7.5 build 2
Configuration built with JMI DOC, CMI SCR and AMOX and GT DPF
models
Both variable diameter and bends implemented in pipe geometry
Non-adiabatic boundary conditions implemented for all components
No additional calibration work for GT – all parameters from test
Model time step set to input data frequency
No soot in boundary condition
Cold FTP – GT/Test comparison
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Tem
per
atu
re [
Deg
C]
Time [s]
DOC Inlet Gas Temperature
DOC IT - Test
DOC_IT - GT
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 500 1000 1500
Tem
per
atu
re [
Deg
C]
Time [s]
DOC Outlet Gas Temperature
DOC_OT - Test
DOC_OT - GT
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 500 1000 1500
Tem
per
atu
re [
Deg
C]
Time [s]
DPF Outlet Gas Temperature
DPF_OT - Test
DPF_OT - GT
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 500 1000 1500
Tem
per
atu
re [
Deg
C]
Time [s]
SCR1 Outlet Gas Temperature
SCR1_OT - Test
SCR1_OT - GT
No heat addition/removal due to
water condensation and
evaporation modeled [1]
Tem
pera
ture
[K
]
Tem
pera
ture
[K
]Tem
pera
ture
[K
]
Tem
pera
ture
[K
]
Cold FTP – GT/Test comparison
Temperature from Simulation
higher compared to test
Higher temperature results in better
NOx conversion from simulation
2D effects not captured in model
can render better conversion from
simulation
Overall trend matches with data0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
0 500 1000 1500
NO
x [g
]
Time [s]
Cold Cycle Cumulative Out NOx
GT Inlet NOx
GT Outlet NOx
Test Outlet NOx
GT Native Simulation Speed Summary
GT simulation speed fast compared to Real time
Configuration Boundary condition Real
Time [s]
Simulation time to real
time for GT native
DOC-DPF-SCR-SCR-AMOX Cold FTP 1200 0.188
DPF-SCR-SCR-AMOX Cold FTP-soak-Warm FTP 3613 0.22
DOC-DPF-SCR-SCR-AMOX Cold FTP-Soak-Warm FTP 36130.24
SCR 3xRMCSet 7290 0.049
DOC-DPF-SCR Idle-C100 18000 0.28
DOC-DPF-SCR-SCR-AMOX Highly transient BC with
soak
34071.029
Project Outline
CMI developed SCR and AMOX kinetics
JMI provided DOC model
GT default DPF models
Interface Application: AT configuration in GT interfaced with Simulink
Engine data: Configuration model accuracy – qualitative and quantitative validation
Speed and stability in native application
Native Application: AT Configuration in GT (catalysts and pipes)
Reactor data – Component model accuracy qualitative/quantitative validation
Ease of custom kinetic model implementation within GT
Same accuracy as GT native simulation
Speed and stability same as native application
GT/Simulink Setup
Mode
– Run GT as .gtm
– Run GT as .dat
– Compile and run GT as .dat from Simulink
Actuate BC from Simulink using scripts
Update model parameters from Simulink using scripts
Same license used between GT native and GT/Simulink application
Post processing GT results possible from Simulink or GT-Post Actuate parameters
from Simulink
Actuate BC
from Simulink
GT Simulink
Object
GT AT config model
GT simulation – Native GT and GT-Simulink
Configuration: DeCompPipe-CMI_SCR
Boundary conditions: 3 back to back RMCSet
cycle
SV: 6-60 [k/hour]
CMI SCR kinetics
100
200
300
400
500
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
Tem
pe
ratu
re [
Deg
C]
Exh
Mas
s Fl
ow
Rat
e [k
g/s
]
Time [s]
RMCSet BC
Exh Mf
Exh Temp
GT simulation – Native GT and GT-Simulink
0.00
50.00
100.00
150.00
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
NO
[p
pm
]
Time [s]
Outlet NO
GT_GT
Simulink_GT
0.00
50.00
100.00
150.00
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
NO
2 [
pp
m]
Time [s]
Outlet NO2
GT_GT
Simulink_GT
0.00
100.00
200.00
300.00
400.00
500.00
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
NH
3 [
pp
m]
Time [s]
Outlet NH3
GT_GT
Simulink_GT
No difference between GT native
and GT/Simulink results
GT in Simulink Simulation Speed Summary
GT robust handling actuation of all BC from Simulink while running multi-component configuration with challenging boundary conditions
GT takes similar times both in native and from Simulink mode
Configuration Boundary
condition
Real
Time
[s]
Simulation
time to real
time for GT
native
Simulation
time to Real
time for
GT/Simulink
DOC-DPF-SCR-SCR-
AMOX
Cold FTP-Soak-
Warm FTP
3613 0.24 0.26
SCR 3xRMCSet 7290 0.049 0.054
DOC-DPF-SCR Idle-C100 18000 0.28 0.267
DOC-DPF-SCR-SCR-
AMOX
Highly transient
BC with soak
3407 1.02 0.85
Tool Requirements
Requirements
Ability to model basic aftertreatment
components – Pipe, DOC, SCR, DPF and
AMOX
Real time or faster in both native and
interface modes
Implement custom chemistry and transport Stability under high transient conditions
Include features to model multiple sites Ability to actuate robustly all BC from
interface tools
Encrypted kinetics models Ability to model flow bypass
Handle transitions to and from zero flow Smooth integration with interface tools
Correct representation of heat transfer in all
components
Clearer help documents and discernable
error messages
Ability to model complex aftertreatment
components – TWC, SCRF, LNT
Include features to model multiple layers
and zones
Summary
Custom component models implemented and validated from GT
Configuration model built in GT and validated in native application
GT simulation fast and robust in handling highly transient BC in both
native and Simulink application
GT Simulation results same from both native and Simulink application
Follow up with further evaluation of the tool
Acknowledgements
GT support team
Rohan Gumaste for GT support within CMI
SPA AT team from Cummins
CTI team from Cummins
Reference
1. SAE Int. J. Commer. Veh. 2013-01-1064, Cold Start Effect
Phenomena over Zeolite SCR Catalysts for Exhaust Gas
Aftertreatment