Energy 57 (2013) 641e652

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Diesel engine combustion modeling for hardware in the loop

applications: Effects of ignition delay time model
Fadila Maroteaux*, Charbel Saad
Universit de Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines, LISV. 10-12 Avenue de lEurope, 78140 Vlizy, France

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper deals with the development of a phenomenological combustion single zone model of Diesel
Received 1 December 2012 engine. The aim of this work is to build a model suitable for HiL (Hardware in the Loop), and thus to be
Received in revised form able to run in Real-Time applications. The combustion sub-model estimates the heat release rate by the
18 February 2013
sum of two algebraic expressions related to premixed and diffusive burning process. The Wiebe corre-
Accepted 25 March 2013
lation has been used to model each algebraic expression of the combustion sub-model. The ignition delay
Available online 2 July 2013
time required by the combustion sub-model has been modeled through an Arrhenius correlation and an
algebraic simple correlation. An extensive identication analysis has been performed to express their
Keywords:
Diesel combustion
dependence with respect to engine operating conditions. The global model has been built with the
Hil application constraints of computational CPU load that characterize the real time simulations. The accuracy of the
Ignition delay model in predicting the in cylinder pressure has been tested over a large set of measurements at different
Wiebe correlations engine operating conditions. The comparison of in-cylinder pressure proles with experimental traces
Arrhenius expression has shown that the Arrhenius expression is less accurate than the simple correlation. However, these two
Algebraic expression approaches may be used in real time modeling.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
During the industrial development process, the ECU (engine
control unit) and its control functions need to be optimized and
tested for each specic engine project. To reduce the number of ECU
tests in a real vehicle, which are very expensive, HiL (Hardware in
the Loop) test systems are used to test and validate the engine
control unit. In this way expensive test bench hours can be partly
replaced by less expensive HiL hours during ECU calibration.
In an industrial context, the ECU software is rst designed by the
software development department, describing the specications of
engine project. A rst version of the software is then delivered to
the engine management system department including the new
functionalities. At this stage, this rst software is validated on
Hardware in the Loop (HiL) test bench to check its implementation
in the overall engine environment. HiL test bench offers a number
of powerful solutions to improve the development of engine stra-
tegies to reach more stringent environmental regulation. The
simulation of the engine behavior in HiL test bench requires models
that are able to simulate real systems (environment and physical
phenomena) in real time applications.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 33 139254996; fax: 33 139254985.
E-mail address: fadila.maroteaux@iut-velizy.uvsq.fr (F. Maroteaux).
The HiL simulation model used in this study is divided into four
major sections: Air System, Combustion system, Exhaust system
and Fuel system. The aim of this work is to provide a DI (direct
injection) Diesel engine model for the combustion system suitable
for real time applications. Indeed this model requires a very short
computational time, which is necessary for Hardware in the Loop
(HiL) implementation.
The combustion models published in the literature can be
classied into two main categories: multi-dimensional models and
zero dimensional models [1], including multi-zone and single zone
models. The multi-dimensional can provide a good in-cylinder
spatial description focusing on tools development for the engine
design: combustion chamber shaping [2,3], in cylinder charge
stratication [4,5] fuel jeteair interaction [6]. Unfortunately these
models require a high computational time, which makes them
unsuitable for this study. Indeed, the single zone models (or
empirical models) require generally a short CPU time and are more
appropriate for real time modeling.
Some single zone models published in the literature take into
account the spray modeling [7,8]. A detailed multi-zone spray
model has been published by Hiroyasu et al. [8], the authors divide
the fuel spray into several packets, which are independent from
each other. This kind of model is suitable to predict the combustion
process and the pollutant formation. However, to increase the ac-
curacy of the model, the number of spray packets must be

0360-5442/$ e see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.03.098
642 F. Maroteaux, C. Saad / Energy 57 (2013) 641e652
increased, leading to a signicant CPU time. Barba et al. [9] have
developed a two zones spray model, one zone describing the pre-
mixed combustion phase and the second zone describing the
diffused combustion phase, with a shorter CPU time compared to
the multi-zone spray approach. However, due to the high CPU time,
the multi-zone spray zero dimensional approaches remain un-
suitable to real time applications.
In the eld of single zone models, the combustion process is
described through the well known Wiebe correlation [10]. The
Wiebe function is widely used in internal combustion engine ap-
plications to describe the fraction of mass burned in the combus-
tion chamber during the combustion process. Watson et al. [11]
published an approach based on Wiebe model, but instead of us-
ing a single Wiebe correlation to predict the heat release rate, they
developed two mathematical equations: the rst equation to
describe the premixed combustion and the second equation to
describe the diffused combustion. In their approach, the combus-
tion duration for both combustion phases is assumed constant.
Many published studies have used the same approach called double
Wiebe function model to describe: the combustion behavior of
conventional Diesel engine [12], the HCCI (homogeneous charge
compression ignition) combustion process [13] and the spark
ignition engine combustion over variable operating conditions [14].
These approaches require short computational time, and give good
accuracy in term of in cylinder proles compared to experimental
data. Note that this accuracy is strongly linked to the ignition delay
time and Wiebe equations parameters identication.
This paper describes a single zone model for pressure cycle
simulation in common rail turbocharged Diesel engine, equipped
with an electronically controlled high pressure injection system.
The model simulates the intake and the exhaust strokes, the igni-
tion delay time and the combustion during a high engine speed
operating conditions. The combustion model is expressed as the
sum of two components, one relating to premixed and the other to
diffusion-controlled burning phase [11]. The mass fraction of
burned fuel has been modeled by the Wiebe function, applied for
each combustion phase. The ignition delay time required by the
combustion sub-model has been modeled through an Arrhenius
correlation and an algebraic simple correlation, in order to study
the inuence of both approaches on the accuracy of the model. The
identication of the model parameters has been done over by
comparing the simulated in cylinder pressure and the measured in
cylinder pressure, over a wide range of engine operations. The
model has been built with the constraints of computational step
size and CPU load that characterize the real time simulation on HiL
test bench. The main objective of this paper is to present a new
ignition delay time correlation that can be used in a single zone
model dedicated to real time application. The paper describes the
two approaches used for that purpose during this study.
This paper is arranged as follows. In the next section, the basis
software and hardware environments are summarized. The third
section is dedicated to the thermodynamic model, including closing
models: gas exchange model, combustion model, etc. The fourth
section describes the step of model parameters identication. The
results are presented in the fth section, followed by the conclusion
section.
2. Development environment and tools
2.1. Software environment
The model equations for each considered vehicle component
were implemented with MATLAB/Simulink. The package is an open
Simulink model for the real time simulation of turbocharged diesel
engine. The Simulink package has block library architecture, each
block being dedicated to different components: engine, vehicle and
driving environment. Since Simulink is an open model, additional
components can be added and existing models can be replaced
easily.
This study focused on the engine parts and more particularly on
the combustion component. Fig. 1 shows all the engine compo-
nents taken into account in this study. The experimental congu-
ration of the four cylinder turbocharged Diesel engine is similar to
Fig. 1. This engine includes an air lter, a turbo-compressor, an
intercooler, intake and exhaust manifold, and a 3 way EGR (exhaust
gas recirculation) valve allowing a by-pass of the EGR cooler
depending on the operating point. The exhaust pipe is equipped
with a DPF (diesel particulate lter) and a catalyst. Fig. 1 reproduces
the schematic Simulink block architecture of the air path developed
during this study.
Each Simulink block includes one or more S-Functions coded in
C language. The S-Functions are compiled inside the Simulink block
with Matlab. The LCO (LabCar Operator) is the user test bench
interface between the LabCar simulation boards and the simulated
engine. The simulation boards represent the simulated loads and
failures. With this interface, the user is able to manage the model
during drive cycles or manual engine operations. In real time pro-
cedure the user can check or vary any model parameters. This
application is then used as a driver control interface while the ECU
software parameters and diagnosis are checked using INCA.
2.2. Hardware environment
Fig. 2 shows the different components of the chain connecting
the PC to the ECU within the LabCar environment. The experiment
software is run by the host PC which is connected to the test bench.
The test bench includes a signal failure generator allowing the user
to generate failures such as open load, short circuits, etc. The rack
also includes the physical and simulated loads.
For this study, real engine actuators are used for some compo-
nents: inlet throttle valve, EGR valve, and fuel metering unit. Thus
the electrical responses (offset, learning, etc.) of these actuators are
not simulated in the model, but controlled by the ECU in order to
get a more accurate engine representation, particularly with these
project specic components. And thus for diagnosis purpose the
user is able to perform specic tests, such as system response to a
blocked actuator in closed or opened position driven by experi-
mental software.
For the simulated loads, the actuators are modeled by the
Simulink blocks and the signals (analogical, digital, PWM, fre-
quency, CAN) t to real ones within input/output boards (acquisi-
tion and simulation). Finally, the ECU with the embedded software
under test is connected to the test bench. For this component, the
overall system works as a real car so that the user can develop and
check the implemented project strategies.
Fig. 1. Engine schematic view.
 F. Maroteaux, C. Saad / Energy 57 (2013) 641e652 643

of the system is taken negative. The gas ow rates through the

intake and the exhaust valves are expressed by Eq. (8) and the
injected fuel mass ow rate is calculated by Eq. (14). The initial
condition for the mass (m(0)) is taken at the beginning of the cycle,
when the intake valve is opened. This initial mass corresponds to
the mass present in the clearance volume.

3.2. Energy balance

The general equation of internal energy for an open thermo-

dynamic system may be written as:

dU X
_ i hi  Q_ w  W
m _ Q_
comb (2)
dt i

with the rate of change of energy of the system being given by:

dU dmh dpV
 (3)
dt dt dt

where:
Fig. 2. Test Bench and its environment.
-PThe dots denote differentiation with respect to time.
- m_ i hi is the net rate of inux and outux enthalpy (intake
In a previous study, the modeling was targeted on the air path i
including all involved components (Turbocharger, Intake Manifold, phase, injection period and exhaust phase).
- Q_ w is the total heat transfer to the walls.
Exhaust manifold, etc.) using the OEM (original equipment manu- _ pV_ is the rate at which the system does work by
- W
facturer) engine physical specications (for more details see
boundary displacement.
Refs. [15,16]). As a reminder, in this previous study a simple way has
- Q_ comb is the energy source term due to the combustion process.
been used to calculate the enthalpy ow, in order to reproduce the
- p and V are respectively the pressure and the volume of the
temperature and pressure behavior of the OEM engine in terms of
system.
mean values [17,18]. This model has been tuned to include maps for
volumetric efciency and combustion efciency function of the in-
Note that the convention used in Eq. (2) is that heat loss by the
jection timing and phasing. These look-up-tables have been built
system is taken negative and work done by the system is taken
from experimental data taking into account normal injection mode
positive. Additionally, the sensible enthalpy of the injected fuel is
and late injection mode (DPF regeneration). The objective of this
negligible in comparison with the sensible enthalpy of the intake
study is to implement a physical combustion model in the HiL system
and the exhaust phases [19].
instead of look-up-tables. This step is necessary to improve accuracy
Differentiating the left side of Eq. (2) gives:
and allows the use of the model for different types of Diesel engine.
X
mh_ _ i hi  Q_ w Q_ comb pV
m _  mh
_ (4)
3. Thermodynamic model
i

A single zone model has been developed for engine cycle Eq. (4) is rewritten as:
simulation. This approach considers the cylinder charge as a ho-
mogeneous mixture of ideal gases in chemical equilibrium. Mass mh_ m _ out hout  h  Q_ w Q_ comb pV
_ in hin  h  m _ (5)
and energy balances are written for an open thermodynamic sys- Assuming ideal gas behavior and thermodynamic equilibrium,
tem in order to take into account the gas exchange process during the equation of the rate change of temperature obtained from Eq.
the intake and the exhaust strokes. (5) is expressed as:

3.1. Mass balance mcp T_ m _ out cp Tout  T  Q_ w Q_ comb pV

_ in cp Tin T  m _ (6)

The rate of change of the total mass (m) in any open thermo- where cp is the specic heat capacity at constant pressure calcu-
dynamic system is equal to the mass ow rates into and out of the lated as function of temperature and of gas composition [1,20]: air
system. In our case the equation of conservation of mass is given by: and fuel before the start of combustion, and combustion products
during the combustion and expansion phases.
dm
m _ out m
_ in  m _ inj (1) On another hand, the initial temperature condition for Eq. (6)
dt has been taken equal to inlet temperature at the beginning of the
where: intake stroke (at the IVO (intake valve opening)).
m_ in is the air mass ow rate trough the intake valve during the Note that the time rate of change of pressure is obtained from
intake stroke. the differential equation of state for ideal gases law as:
m_ out is the burned gas mass ow rate trough the exhaust valve p_ T_ m
_ V_
 (7)
during the exhaust stroke. p T m V
m_ inj is the injected fuel mass ow rate.
The convention used in Eq. (1) assumes that the mass ow rate the equation above is written with the assumption that the rate
into the open system is taken positive, while the mass ow rate out change of the specic gas constant is negligible.
644 F. Maroteaux, C. Saad / Energy 57 (2013) 641e652

3.3. Closing models - S is the heat transfer surface area (cylinder, piston and liner)
function of time.
In order to solve the governing system, closing models for each - hg is the heat transfer coefcient
term introduced in Eq. (1) and in Eq. (6) need to be modeled.
The wall temperature has been xed equal to 515 K, This average
3.3.1. GAS exchange: ow rate Av through valves value has been estimated from the test bench engine during a
During the gas exchange, we have introduced in Eq. (1) the mass warmed-up operation.
ow rate through the intake valve and the mass ow rate through The heat transfer coefcient is calculated from the well known
the exhaust valve. A one dimensional quasi-steady compressible Woschni correlation [21] as:
ow model is used to calculate these mass ow rates during the
intake and exhaust periods [19]. The intake manifold and the hg 3:26B0:2 p0:8 T 0:55 w0:8 (12)
exhaust port are treated as plenums with known pressures. The gas
ow through the valves is always unidirectional moving from the where: B is the cylinder bore and w is the average cylinder gas
upstream side of the component, towards the downstream side of velocity. This gas velocity is expressed as:
the component. At each step of the gas exchange process, values for
the valve open areas, the discharge coefcient CDv are obtained VTr
w C1 Sp C2 p  pm (13)
from tabulated data for intake and exhaust valves. Note that the pr Vr
manufacturer of the cylinder head gives these tabulated data. The
mass ow rate across that valve is calculated from: where:

pup   - pr , Vr and Tr are the working uid pressure, volume and tem-
_ CDv Av p
m 4 pup ; pdown (8)
rTup perature at the inlet valve closing.
- Sp 2LN is the mean piston speed (L is the stroke and N is the
where: engine speed).
- C1 and C2 are model parameters given in Table 1.
- pup and Tup are respectively the upstream pressure and - pm is the motored cylinder pressure as the same time as p. The
temperature. motored cylinder pressure is calculated by the equation of state
- pdown is the pressure downstream. for ideal gases law, where the motored temperature is calcu-
- r is the gas constant for the gas. lated from Eq. (6), without the combustion term.

The term 4pup ; pdown is calculated as:

3.3.3. Injection rate
 g 1  1  g g
2 1 2g 2 p 2 1 The rate of injected fuel is an input of the combustion model
4 when down 
g1 g1 pup g1 from the injection map implemented in the HiL test bench. How-
ever, we have decided to introduce a simple model of the rate of
(9)
injected fuel to make the system autonomous. The injector used in
this study is a Bosch KBEL 58P147 with 7 holes; each hole has a
" !2 !g1 !#1
diameter equal to dnoz 0:132 mm. The density of fuel is taken
2g
g g 2
pdown pdown
4  equal to 850 kg/m3. The injection pressure pinj is assumed to be
g1 pup pup
(10) equal to the rail pressure; the pressure losses in the injector are
 g g
p 2 1 negligible compared to rail pressure level [19]. The injection mass
when down _ ow rate is then written as:
pup g1

where g is the ratio of specic heat capacities. _ inj rfuel q_ inj

m (14)
During the intake stroke, the upstream conditions are the
v

pressure and the temperature in the intake manifold and the u 
u2 p  p
downstream ones are the in-cylinder conditions. Similarly, during t inj
q_ inj CDinj Anoz (15)
the exhaust stroke these upstream parameters are taken from the rfuel
in-cylinder conditions and the downstream conditions are the
pressure and the temperature in the exhaust manifold. where:

3.3.2. Heat transfer model - rfuel is the density of the fuel.

The heat transfer to the walls introduced in Eq. (6) is calculated
with the assumption that this mechanism is due only to forced
convection. The model used in this study is a single zone
phenomenological model, where the radiative heat transfer is due
only to the in cylinder burned gases temperature. In this case, the
radiative heat transfer is small in comparison with the convective
heat transfer [19]. Consequently, this term is written as:
- q_ inj is the injector ow rate given by the manufacturer.
- CDinj is the discharge coefcient of the injector taken equal to
0.9, this value is given by the injector manufacturer.
- Anoz is the total nozzle surface area.
Table 1
Average in cylinder gas velocity coefcients (Woschni correlation).

Q_ w hg ST  Tw (11) C1 C2

For gas exchange period 6.18 0

where: For compression period 2.28 0
For the combustion 2.28 3.24  103
and expansion period
- Tw is the wall temperature.
 F. Maroteaux, C. Saad / Energy 57 (2013) 641e652 645

  
Note that from Eq. (14) the injected fuel mass (minj ) is easily dxbd 1 q  qcomb
calculated from the injection period Dtinj (or injector nozzle open ad md 1
dt Dqcombd Dqcombd
period) as:  md 1

q  qcomb
 exp  ad 22
_ inj Dtinj
minj m (16) Dqcombd
This method is called in the literature the double Wiebe equa-
tions model. This approach seems more appropriate for real time
3.3.4. Combustion process
modeling, as it requires a calibration phase for two algebraic ex-
Diesel combustion process is a complex, unsteady, heteroge-
pressions (i.e. Wiebe equations). It has been therefore chosen in the
neous, three-dimensional process. In this study, the objective is to
present study. On another hand, since the coefcients ap and ad
build a very reduced model able to be used in real time application.
represents the combustion efciency, in this study they have been
A useful approach to the problem of combustion simulation is to
xed to 6.9, so that 99.9% of fuel is burnt at the end of combustion.
model the combustion as a heat release process, as originally pro-
This combustion model induces ve unknown parameters: the
posed by Lyn [22]. For combustion simulations which predict en-
weight factor b, the Wiebe parameters mp and md for premixed and
gine performance, algebraic expressions can provide an adequate
diffusive burning, the combustion duration of each phase Dqcombp
description of this heat release rate, provided that the constants in
and Dqcombd respectively. Additionally, the start of combustion
these expressions are chosen suitably to reect the dependence of
crank angle (or time) introduced in Eqs. (21) and (22) has to be
the actual fuel burning rate on engine type and particular operating
modeled; the details of this step are given in the next sub-section.
conditions. Generally, these constants are calibrated from experi-
mental data.
3.3.5. Ignition delay
The global heat release rate equation may be written as:
The ignition delay is dened as the time between the SOI (start
of injection) and the SOC (start of combustion). In engine domain
dx
Q_ comb minj Q lhv b (17) this ignition delay time is calculated from an empirical integral
dt
correlation [19]:
Where Q lhv is the lower fuel heating value and xb is the mass
fraction burned.
Z
SOC
1
1 (23)
Diesel combustion process proceeds in two phases: premixed sID
combustion and diffusive combustion, Watson et al. [11] have SOI
developed a model where the apparent fuel burning rate is
The above equation allows to calculate the start of combustion
expressed as the sum of two components, one relating to premixed
crank angle required by Wiebe correlations (Eqs. (21) and (22)),
and the other to diffusion burning phase. The burned mass fraction
where the ignition delay time sID must be correlated.
is then given by the following relationships:
4. Model parameters identication
dxb dxbp dx
b 1  b bd (18)
dt dt dt The developed in cylinder model presented in the above section
is mainly oriented to real time application. The recourse to a
where b is the weight factor expressed as the ratio between the fuel simplied formulation with calibration factors allows to reach both
burned by premixed phase and the total injected fuel. goals of short computational time and model accuracy in terms of
In this study, the mass fraction of burned fuel has been modeled in-cylinder proles. The chosen combustion model based on dou-
by the Wiebe function, which may be written as: ble Wiebe equations is able to describe the two combustion pro-
cesses: a premixed combustion taking place in the early stage
 

q  qcomb m1 which is followed by a diffusive combustion. The different param-

xb 1  exp  a (19)
Dqcomb eters introduced in this model vary signicantly for each injection
and each engine operation, and have been identied and calibrated
The derivative of the above equation should equal the rate of from measured pressure cycles. In the present study, focusing on
burned fuel introduced in Eq. (18): single injection cycle, the engine operating points include only high
    
engine speed (from 4000 rpm up to 4750 rpm) with single injection
dxb 1 q  qcomb q  qcomb m1 at varying BMEP (brake mean effective pressure) from 1 bar up to
am 1 exp  a
dt Dqcomb Dqcomb Dqcomb 15 bar. Note that on the engine test bench, all the cycles with single
(20)
Table 2
where q, qcomb and Dqcomb are the instantaneous crank angle, Engine geometry.

the crank angle of start of combustion and the combustion Bore 80 mm

duration respectively. In this expression, a and m are tuning Stroke 93 mm
parameters. Number of cylinders 4
Eq. (20) is applied for each combustion phase in order to solve Displaced volume 467 cm3
Eq. (18) as: Clearance volume 29 cm3
Compression ratio 16.8:1
! ! Ratio of connecting rod length to crank radius 2.98
dxbp   1 q  qcomb Intake valve diameter 35.2 mm
ap mp 1
dt Dqcombp Dqcombp Exhaust valve diameter 32.5 mm
Intake valve Opening: 3 CAD BTDC
" !mp 1 # (21)
Closing: 21 CAD aBDC
q  qcomb
 exp  ap Exhaust valve Opening: 46 CAD bBDC
Dqcombp Closing: 5 CAD BTDC
646 F. Maroteaux, C. Saad / Energy 57 (2013) 641e652

injection are operated at high engine speed and without Exhaust 4.1. Ignition delay time calibration
Gas Recirculation (EGR). The engine specications are presented in
Table 2 and the schematic engine general view is given on Fig. 1. In the literature, the ignition delay time is usually correlated by
Table 3 presents the main experimental engine operating condi- an Arrhenius equation [1,19] of the form:
tions used for the calibration phase.
 
The experimental engine test bench used in this study is E
sID Apn exp (24)
equipped with a commercial Renault four cylinder 1.9 L turbo- RT
charged Diesel engine. The engine is equipped with a high-pressure
common rail fuel injection system. The in cylinder pressure is where E is apparent activation energy for the fuel auto ignition
measured with a piezo-electric pressure transducer. The engine is process; R is the universal gas constant; p is gas pressure; T is gas
tted with a cooled EGR system, and the EGR rate is set by the temperature and A and n are constants dependent on the fuel, on
engine ECU and regulated by an electric EGR valve. the injection and on air ow characteristics.

Table 3
Main experimental engine operating conditions used for the calibration of the model parameters. Bold letters indicate engine operations used for validation.

Engine operation number Engine speed (rpm) BMEP (bar) EGR rate (%) SOI (CAD BTDC) Injected fuel mass (mg) Rail pressure (bar)

1 4000 0 0 3 8.93 588

2 4000 1 0 3 9.85 613
3 4000 2 0 4 11.71 671
4 4000 3 0 4 14.01 758
5 4000 4 0 5 16.29 834
6 4000 5 0 5 18.91 911
7 4000 6 0 5 21.38 999
8 4000 7 0 5 24.12 1114
9 4000 8 0 6 26.87 1238
10 4000 9 0 6 29.18 1345
11 4000 10 0 7 31.48 1407
12 4000 11 0 7 33.71 1460
13 4000 12 0 8 36.34 1515
14 4000 13 0 11 39.28 1576
15 4000 14 0 11 42.96 1587
16 4000 15 0 11 46.87 1586
17 4250 0 0 4 8.74 589
18 4250 1 0 4 9.88 626
19 4250 2 0 5 12.13 722
20 4250 3 0 5 14.61 813
21 4250 4 0 6 17.29 917
22 4250 5 0 6 19.53 1004
23 4250 6 0 7 21.72 1102
24 4250 7 0 8 24.69 1236
25 4250 8 0 9 27.22 1357
26 4250 9 0 10 29.55 1470
27 4250 10 0 10 32.1 1512
28 4250 11 0 10 34.65 1538
29 4250 12 0 11 37.5 1566
30 4250 13 0 12 40.88 1591
31 4250 14 0 12 44.17 1587
32 4500 0 0 5 9.16 611
33 4500 1 0 5 10.29 659
34 4500 2 0 6 12.45 775
35 4500 3 0 6 14.91 859
36 4500 4 0 7 17.35 976
37 4500 5 0 7 19.61 1088
38 4500 6 0 8 22.52 1229
39 4500 7 0 9 25.49 1340
40 4500 8 0 11 27.82 1489
41 4500 9 0 12 30.57 1596
42 4500 10 0 13 33.31 1594
43 4500 11 0 13 35.72 1591
44 4500 12 0 14 38.49 1592
45 4750 0 0 6 9.4 620
46 4750 1 0 6 10.87 690
47 4750 2 0 7 12.8 787
48 4750 3 0 7 15.15 872
49 4750 4 0 8 17.36 879
50 4750 5 0 8 19.6 1089
51 4750 6 0 10 22.88 1248
52 4750 7 0 12 26.29 1411
53 4750 8 0 14 28.64 1528
54 4750 9 0 15 31.5 1594
55 4750 10 0 15 34.18 1598
56 4750 11 0 15 36.89 1596
57 4750 11.5 0 15 37.91 1595
 F. Maroteaux, C. Saad / Energy 57 (2013) 641e652
Watson et al. [11] have developed a similar ignition delay time
correlation for Diesel fuel; the ignition delay time is written as:
 
Ta
sID Apn exp (25)
T
where Ta n,and A are calibrated parameters [23] depending on fuel
type (diesel gasoline, kerosene, etc).
For diesel fuel the calibrated parameters suggested by Ramos
[23] are: Ta equal to 2100 K; n equal to 1.02 and A equal to 3.45.
However, theses parameters have to be calibrated for each specic
engine application. Tino et al. [24] and Arsie et al. [25] have used
the same approach to model the ignition delay time. Asie et al. [25]
have developed a correlation for A function of the engine speed and
of the in cylinder overall equivalence ratio. Their correlation has
been calibrated for low engine speed (lower or equal to 3000 rpm).
This published correlation has been tested in a rst step of our
study for high engine speed, however an insufcient accuracy be-
tween the model and the experimental in cylinder proles was
observed. Hence, we have adopted the same approach in order to
correlate the parameter A, keeping the parameter values Ta and n
equal to those suggested by Ramos [23]. This choice has been
guided by fact that the parameter A is directly proportional to the
ignition delay (Eq. (25)) and is easier to calibrate than the param-
eters n and Ta. Additionally Eq. (25) includes in its expression the
dependence of the ignition delay time with the in cylinder tem-
perature and pressure, which affect strongly the ignition delay. In
Direct Injection (DI) diesel engine this ignition delay is affected also
by the start of injection and the injection pressure. These inu-
encing parameters cannot be taken into account through the in
cylinder pressure and temperature. Therefore, the parameter A has
been chosen in order to include in Eq. (25) the effects of the in-
jection timing and pressure. In addition, the heat transfer to the
walls increases with the engine speed as expressed in Woschni
correlation (Eq. (13)). This phenomenon affects the working uid
temperature and pressure at the start of injection used to calculate
the ignition delay time (Eq. (23)).
In order to estimate the optimal value of the parameter A in this
study, a least square technique comparing simulated and experi-
mental ignition delay including varying engine operating condi-
tions has been done. The measured ignition delay time has been
estimated for each engine operation (Table 3) and dened as the
time lag between the injection starting time and the rise of the heat
release rate. Fig. 3 shows an example of heat release rate derived
from experimental in cylinder pressure versus CAD at 4000 rpm,
and the ignition delay detection (SOC). The identication step has
shown that the parameter A is inuenced by: the injection timing,
the injection pressure and the engine speed. From a correlation
analysis, the best compromise between the accuracy and general-
ization has been obtained considering the dependence with engine
speed (N), the start of injection crank angle (qinj), and rail pressure
(prail). The correlation for the parameter A is written as:
A 399:539  1:4179103 N 2:159107 N 2 2:211qinj
 0:003qinj  4:716103 prail 1:7468106 p2rail
2
(26)
where N (rpm), prail (bar) and qinj (CAD)
Fig. 4 shows the comparison of the calculated ignition delay
time with Arrhenius correlation and the measured ignition delay
time for all the engine operating conditions given in Table 3,
including the engine operating conditions used for the model
validation and for the calibration phase. Note that the numbers
reported on the CAD axis correspond to the number of each engine
647
Fig. 3. Experimental heat release rate when the engine speed is equal to 4000 rpm and
BMEP equal to 5 bar (see Table 3). TDC at 360 CAD.
point (see Table 3). When moving from the left to the right on this
gure, the engine speed increases from one curve to the next (from
4000 rpm up to 4750 rpm). At constant engine speed Fig. 4 re-
produces the expected decrease of the ignition delay time with the
increase of engine load (for example on the rst curve of Fig. 4 at
4000 rpm, the ignition delay decreases from 700 ms down to 110 ms
when BMEP evolves from 0 up to 15 bar). In addition, an increase in
engine speed has a small effect on ignition delay time. For each
engine speed, in comparison with experimental ignition delay, we
observe on this gure that the simulated ignition delay is over-
estimated at low loads (BMEP lower than 3 bar at 4000 rpm and at
4250 rpm and BMEP lower than 5 bar at 4500 rpm and 4750 rpm)
and underestimated at higher loads. The maximum relative error
observed is around 20% for some engine operating points at high
load.
The comparison between the calculated parameter A (Eq. (26))
and the estimated experimental parameter A is plotted on Fig. 5
versus engine speed and varying engine conditions (injection
timing, rail pressure, etc). The estimated experimental parameter A
has been obtained with the experimental ignition delay, the in
cylinder temperature and the in cylinder pressure, by using Eqs.
(23) and (25). Fig. 5 shows that an increase in injection timing, rail
pressure and engine speed results in a decrease in parameter A,
from 2.2 down to 0.4. Additionally, the decrease of A with engine
speed is shown in Table 4 for two BMEPs (low and high BMEP); this
table also points out that the value of A at constant BMEP decreases
when the engine speed increases. We observe in this table that A is
more affected by engine speed at high BMEP: the decrease of A is
around 6% when the BMEP is equal to 0 bar, and is around 36% for a
BMEP set to 11 bar, leading to a magnitude of 30%. Otherwise, at
xed engine speed the parameter A has the same behavior as the
ignition delay (Fig. 4). The decrease of A varies from 59% up to 70%
when the engine speed is increased from 4000 rpm up to 4750 rpm,
leading to a magnitude of approximately 10%; the same order of
magnitude as the ignition delay time. These results lead to the
conclusion that the parameter A is more affected by load than by
engine speed. Besides, the maximum relative error observed on
Fig. 5 is around 5% lower than the error level obtained above for the
ignition delay time (Fig. 4), which is mainly due to the effect of in
cylinder temperature and pressure variations taken into account in
Eq. (25). Finally, for all experimental data, we observe on Fig. 5 that
the parameter A evolves from 0.4 up to 2.3; as mentioned above,
Ramos [23] suggest a constant value equal to 3.45. Although it
seems from our results that this parameter cannot be kept constant
for varying engine conditions, its value is still in the same order of
magnitude as the value proposed by Ramos [23] (lower than 4).
In order to estimate the accuracy of Arrhenius approach in term
of ignition delay time for these engine operations, we have devel-
oped a simple algebraic correlation. This approach has been based
648 F. Maroteaux, C. Saad / Energy 57 (2013) 641e652

Fig. 4. Comparison between measured (Data) and simulated (simulation) ignition delay time (Arrhenius approach).

on the same calibration technique. The idea here is to build a simple
correlation in order to reduce the relative error observed with the
Arrhenius approach and to exclude then the variation of in cylinder
charge with time (temperature and pressure). As observed exper-
imentally and from the results shown on Fig. 4, the engine speed
variable has not been taken into account. Besides, in order to
introduce the effect of intake temperature and intake pressure on
charge conditions during the delay period, these two variables have
been introduced in this calibration step. Note that with the
Arrhenius approach, the charge conditions are included through
the in cylinder temperature and the in cylinder pressure (Eq. (25)).
The best compromise in this case leads to the following equation for
the ignition delay time:
4.2. Wiebe parameters calibration
The double Wiebe equations model described by Eqs. (21) and
(22) requires a calibration step of the ve parameters. A correla-
tion analysis has been carried out to derive ve multiple re-
gressions which express the parameter as function of the engine
speed (rpm), the rail pressure (bar), the inlet pressure (bar), the
inlet temperature (K), the start of injection crank angle (CAD) and
the overall equivalence ratio (f). The developed correlations are as
follows:
b 218  3:54104 N 6:57108 N2  0:04f  4:83103 f2
1:24qinj  1:72103 qinj  3:58103 prail 1:37106 p2rail
2

(28)
sID 4:66  4102 qinj 1:16104 q2inj  1:12106 prail
 8:95105 pinlet  9:25106 Tinlet (27) mp 75:7  1:33f 4:79102 f2  3103 prail  3:49107 p2rail
 14pinlet 4:36p2inlet  0:3Tinlet 4:15104 Tinlet
2
where pinlet and Tinlet are inlet pressure (bar) and inlet temperature
(K) respectively. (29)
In this case the ignition delay time depends on the same pa-
rameters as the parameter A (Eq. (26)), plus the inlet engine con- md 6:1  0:16f  2:78102 f2  7103 prail 2:59106 p2rail
ditions (temperature and pressure), which characterize the air ow
(30)
(i.e. initial engine cycle conditions). The comparison of the calcu-
lated and the measured ignition delay is presented on Fig. 6, for the
same engine operations as Fig. 4. This gure shows that in term of Dqcombp 13:2  1:64102 prail 3:82pinlet 7:3102 Tinlet
ignition delay the simple correlation gives very reliable results 0:22f 3103 N
compared to experimental results, the maximum relative error is
(31)
around 1%. The accuracy obtained in this case is higher compared to
the Arrhenius approach. This improvement is mostly due to the fact
that the simple correlation models the ignition delay as a function Dqcombd 2:18102 5:64102 prail  1:99pinlet 0:56Tinlet
of engine operating parameters xed for each operating point, 25:4f  8:8103 N (32)
while the Arrhenius correlation depends on the in cylinder pres-
sure and temperature evolutions.
5. Model results

The proposed combustion model has been rst coded using

Matlab/Simulink software before its implementation on a HiL test

Table 4
Evolution of parameter A versus engine speed and BMEP.

Engine speed Parameter A value Parameter A value

(rpm) (BMEP 0 bar) (BMEP 11 bar)

4000 2.23 0.929

4250 2.2 0.755
4500 2.13 0.636
Fig. 5. Comparison between simulated and measured parameter A versus engine 4750 2.1 0.596
speed (Arrhenius approach).
 F. Maroteaux, C. Saad / Energy 57 (2013) 641e652
Fig. 6. Comparison between measured (Data) and simulated ignition delay time
(simple correlation).
bench. A Simulink block has been added for each part of the model:
intake valve, combustion chamber and exhaust valve. The outlet
conditions of each new block represent the inlet conditions of the
next block (see Fig. 1). From each new block, mean value of the
mass and enthalpy ow rates are calculated. These rates are
required by the other components of the full engine model
(turbocharger, exhaust manifold, etc.) described through mean
values approach as in our previous study [15,16]. The imple-
mentation of the different blocks on the HiL test bench has required
an adaptation of the solver time step. The previous mean value
Diesel engine model has been executed on HiL system with a
sample and constant time step of 1 ms with a Dual Core RTPC (real
time processor computer). This time step of 1 ms provides the
cylinder pressure with a resolution of 24 CAD or 28.5 CAD at
4000 rpm and 4750 rpm respectively; this resolution level is not
suitable for the crank angle approach chosen in the present study.
In order to reduce this step time size, a Quad Core RTPC of 3 GHz has
been used, allowing an execution time of 37 ms of the solver. We
have then obtained a step size of one-degree crank angle from
4000 rpm up to 4750 rpm.
In order to check the accuracy of the model, the calculated in
cylinder proles have been compared rst with a test set of
experimental data (see Table 3) used for the calibration phase at
varying engine conditions. The model has been then used to
simulate others engine operations. For example Fig. 7 reproduces
the comparison of the rate of burned fuel simulated by the model
(Eqs. (20) and (27)) and estimated from experimental measure-
ments when the engine speed is equal to 4000 rpm, the BMEP set at
4 bar and injected fuel mass xed equal to 16.29 mg. On the same
Fig. 7. Comparison between simulated and measured rate of burned fuel at 4000 rpm,
BMEP 4 bar. TDC at 0 CAD.
649
Fig. 8. Comparison between simulated and measured in cylinder pressure at 4000 rpm
and BMEP 4 bar.
gure the rates of burned fuel by premixed combustion (Eq. (21))
and diffusive combustion (Eq. (22)) are plotted for more details. We
observe a good accuracy between the simulated and the measured
proles in terms of amplitude and ignition delay time. Fig. 8 re-
produces the comparison of the in cylinder curves for the same
engine conditions: experimental curve, simulated curves with
simple correlation and Arrhenius correlation. For all the proles the
start of combustion (SOC) occurs after the TDC (top dead center at
360 CAD) and the start of injection begins at 5 CAD BTDC (before
top dead center). The accuracy between the experimental prole
and the simulated prole with the simple correlation is very good,
while the simulated prole obtained with Arrhenius correlation
presents a very slight increase of the maximum peak pressure
(lower than 1 bar). This difference is due to the advanced SOC
(smaller ignition delay time) around 0.5 CAD, the SOC is observed at
6 CAD ATDC. For the same engine speed and for higher BMEP equal
to 7 bar, similar trends are observed on Fig. 9. In this case the in-
jection starts at the same time 5 CAD BTDC, while the rail pressure
is increased from 834 bar up to 1114 bar and the injected fuel mass
is set equal to 24.12 mg, in comparison with the operation at 4 bar
BMEP. Fig. 9 shows that the ignition delay is smaller compared to
the previous case, leading to an advanced SOC at 2 CAD ATDC, for
experimental and simple correlation curves. Additionally, the
maximum pressure peak is well predicted both in amplitude and in
position when the simple correlation of the ignition delay time (Eq.
(27)) is used. Here again, the Arrhenius correlation presents
advanced start of combustion at 1 CAD ATDC, main cause of the
higher peak pressure.
The in cylinder pressure proles results obtained when the
engine speed is increased up to 4250 rpm are presented on Fig. 10,
on Fig. 11 and on Fig. 12, at varying engine conditions as follows:
Fig. 9. Comparison between simulated and measured in cylinder pressure at 4000 rpm
and BMEP 7 bar.
650 F. Maroteaux, C. Saad / Energy 57 (2013) 641e652
Fig. 10. Comparison between simulated and measured in cylinder pressure at
4250 rpm and BMEP 7 bar.
- Fig. 10: SOI 8 CAD BTDC; rail pressure equal to 1236 bar,
injected fuel mass equal to 24.69 mg; experimental SOC 1 CAD
BTDC; BMEP equal to 7 bar.
- Fig. 11: SOI 11 CAD BTDC; rail pressure equal to 1512 bar,
injected fuel mass equal to 32.1 mg; experimental SOC 5 CAD
BTDC; BMEP equal to 10 bar.
- Fig. 12: SOI 12 CAD BTDC; rail pressure equal to 1587 bar,
injected fuel mass equal to 44.17 mg; experimental SOC 7 CAD
BTDC; BMEP equal to 14 bar.
For these engine operating conditions, we observe the same
trends as above, the results obtained with the simple correlation of
ignition delay time present a very good agreement with the
experimental data, in terms of amplitude and of position. The start
of combustion at 4250 rpm occurs BTDC for all the cases, as shown
on these gures. Fig. 4 has shown that at xed engine speed the
Arrhenius error level increases when the BMEP increases, and at
4250 rpm the Arrhenius correlation underestimates the ignition
delay time from 5 bar BMEP. This phenomenon leads to a smaller
ignition delay time and advanced SOC as observed on Figs. 10e12,
leading to a higher maximum in cylinder pressure.
For all the cases presented in this paper, the simple correlation
gives good results for real time application. All the gures show
that the position and peak pressure are well reproduced. Besides,
for the entire tested engine operations with single injection the
same trends have been obtained. The behavior of the simulated in
cylinder pressure obtained in the present study conrms the ac-
curacy of developed sub-models for ignition delay and combustion
process describes with double Wiebe approach. Despite a lower
accuracy given by the Arrhenius correlation compared to the simple
correlation, has been shown. For both correlations, we have found
Fig. 11. Comparison between simulated and measured in cylinder pressure at
4250 rpm and BMEP 10 bar.
Fig. 12. Comparison between simulated and measured in cylinder pressure at
4250 rpm and BMEP 14 bar.
that the start of injection and the rail pressure affect signicantly
the ignition delay time, while the engine speed has a slight effect.
6. Conclusion
Real time engine simulation including gas dynamics and com-
bustion is a crucial step for testing pre-industrial engine control
device functions. Most combustion models used in HiL simulations
are based on the mean value approach. Since the injection pattern
has a direct effect on Diesel combustion and therefore also on the
cylinder pressure, Mean Value Engine Models (MVEM) are no
longer sufcient for closed-loop testing of the new ECU generation.
Precise real time calculation of the cylinder pressure according to
the actual injection is needed. The present work deals with this
global objective.
In this work, a thermodynamic model has been used for the
simulation of engine performance in a common rail turbocharged
Diesel engine. The double Wiebe function has been used for the
combustion sub-model. This approach estimates the fuel burned
rate by the sum of two algebraic expressions related to premixed
and diffusive burning process. The ignition delay time required by
the combustion sub-model has been modeled through an Arrhe-
nius correlation and a simple algebraic correlation. The global
model has been built with the constraints of computational step
size and CPU load that characterize the real time simulation on HiL
test bench. The computational step size is xed by the Dual Core
RTPC (Real Time Processor Computer), used for each project. When
the in-cylinder pressure crank angle evolution is used, the Dual
Core RTPC with a time step of 1 ms is not sufcient. Therefore, a
Quad Core RTPC of 3 GHz with a lower time step has been used,
allowing a resolution with one crank angle time step.
An extensive identication analysis has been performed on the
sub-models parameters and multiple regressions have been
derived to express their dependence with respect to engine oper-
ating conditions. The correlations for Wiebe parameters allow
reproducing the amplitude and the duration of fuel burned rate
with a good accuracy, for both premixed and diffusive phases. In
this paper, two ignition delay correlations have been proposed, one
calibrated with engine operating conditions and the other linked to
in cylinder temperature and pressure (Arrhenius correlation). For
the latter, we have shown that when the pre-exponential param-
eter has been chosen as a calibrated parameter, the ignition delay
time is affected signicantly by the start of combustion and the rail
pressure, while the engine speed effect seems less noticeable.
Furthermore, we have found that the same independent variables
affect the ignition delay when an algebraic correlation is adopted.
In this case the effects of in cylinder charge conditions are linked to
in cylinder inlet conditions (temperature and pressure), thus
 F. Maroteaux, C. Saad / Energy 57 (2013) 641e652 651

introducing explicitly two more variables in the simple correlation Q_ w heat transfer to the walls (J/s)
in comparison with the pre-exponential parameter expression. Qlhv lower fuel heating value (J/kg)
The accuracy of the model in predicting the in cylinder pressure q_ inj injector fuel ow rate (m3/s)
has been tested over several engine speed measurements at r gas constant for the gas (J/(kg K))
different engine operating conditions (inlet pressure, inlet tem- R universal gas constant
perature, rail pressure, injected fuel mass, etc). The results have S surface (m2)
shown that the simulated in cylinder proles with the simple Sp mean piston speed (m/s)
correlation of the ignition delay are in very good agreements with t time (s)
the experimental curves. The accuracy in this case has been T temperature (K)
observed on the maximum pressure and on the time of the U internal energy (J)
maximum pressure, modeled by the calibrated expressions of V volume (m3)
double Wiebe function parameters. In addition, the simulated start w gas velocity (m/s)
of combustion is as good as the measured ignition delay. For all the W work (J)
tested engine operations, the mean relative error for the ignition xb mass fraction burned
delay time is lower than 0.25 CAD for the developed simple ignition
delay correlation. With the Arrhenius correlation the accuracy of
the model is lower, mainly due to the differences observed between Greek symbols
the simulated and the measured ignition delay times. For low load b weight factor
the ignition delay time is overestimated while for high load it is g ratio of specic heat
underestimated, leading to a maximum difference of around 3 CAD. q crank angle (degree)
Consequently, the comparison of in cylinder proles with experi- Dq duration (degree)
mental traces has shown that the Arrhenius expression is less ac- rfuel fuel density (kg/m3)
curate than the simple correlation in term of maximum in cylinder f equivalence ratio
pressure. sID ignition delay time (s)
Comparing the two developed correlations in this study, alge-
braic simple correlation shows greater potential in simulating the
ignition delay time and the in cylinder proles with a single in-
Subscripts
jection mode compared to Arrhenius expression. The benet of this
b burned
simple correlation is mostly due to the fact that the ignition delay
comb combustion
time is directly estimated from engine operating conditions
d diffusive
(external command parameters), excluding then the simulated in
in inlet
cylinder temperature errors. The drawback of this approach is
inj injection
related to the multi-injection modes. In that case, the pre-injection
out outlet
can be easily correlated by a similar expression, while main injec-
down downstream
tion is more affected by pre-injection than by engine operating
up upstream
conditions. The possible application of this approach to multi-
m motored
injection cases is under investigation.
p premixed
This study represents a small part of a major work including the
r reference
engine and the vehicle model development in real time computa-
rail rail
tional environment. This work still under progress in order to
v valve
extend the proposed model to the overall engine operating points,
including the multi-injection cases (pre and post).

Acknowledgments Abbreviations
ATDC after top dead center
This research was funded by BOSCH FRANCE; the authors wish BTDC before top dead center
to thank this company. BMEP brake mean effective pressure
CAD crank angle degree
Nomenclature ECU engine control unit
EGR exhaust gas recirculation
a, m shape factors of Wiebe function Hil Hardware in the Loop
A ignition delay parameter MVEM mean value engine model
Anoz injector nozzle area (m2) SOI start of injection
Av valve area (m2) SOC start of combustion
B cylinder bore (m) TDC top dead center
CD discharge coefcient
cp specic heat capacity (J/(kg k)) References
h specic enthalpy (J/kg)
hg heat transfer coefcient (J/(m2.K)) [1] Shi Yu, Ge Hai Wen, Reitz Rolf D. Computational optimization of internal
combustion engines. London, UK: Springer Verlag; 2011.
L stroke (m)
[2] Ge HW, Shi Y, Reitz RD, Willems W. Engine development using multi-
m mass (kg) dimensional CFD and computer optimization. SAE Paper 2010. no 2010-01-
m_ mass ow rate (kg/s) 0360.
N engine speed (rpm) [3] Whang H, Reitz R, Yao M. Comparison of diesel combustion CFD models and
evaluation of effects of model constants. SAE Paper 2012. no 2012-01-0134.
p pressure (Pa) [4] Maroteaux F, Noel L, Ahmed A. Numerical investigations on methods to
Q_ comb heat rate due to combustion (J/s) control the rate of heat release of HCCI combustion using reduced mechanism
652 F. Maroteaux, C. Saad / Energy 57 (2013) 641e652
of n-heptane with multidimensional CFD code. Combustion Theory and
Modelling 2007;11(4):501e25.
[5] Choi Seungmok, Park Wonah, Lee Sangyul, Min Kyoungdoug, Choi Hoimyung.
Methods for in-cylinder EGR stratication and its effects on combustion
characteristics in a diesel engine. Energy 2011;36:6948e59.
[6] Han Park Su, Cha Junepyo, Jun Kim Hyung, Lee Chang Sik. Effect of early in-
jection strategy on spray atomization and emission reduction characteristics
in bioethanol blended diesel fueled engine. Energy 2012;39:375e87.
[7] Jung Dohoy, Assanis Dennis N. Multi-zone DI diesel spray combustion model
for cycle simulation studies of engine performances and emissions. SAE Paper
2001. no 2001-01-1246.
[8] Hiroyasu H, Kadota T, Arai M. Development and use of a spray combustion
modeling to predict diesel engine efciency and pollutant emissions.
Bulletin of JSME The Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers 1983:26. no
214.
[9] Barba C, Burkhardt C, Boulouchos K, Bargende M. A phenomenological com-
bustion model for heat release rate prediction in high speed DI diesel engines
with common rail injection. SAE Paper 2000. no 2000-01-2933.
[10] Wiebe II. Brennverlauf und Kreisprozeb von Verbrennungsmotoren. Berlin,
Germany: VEB Verlag Technik; 1970.
[11] Watson N, Pilley AD, Marzouk M. A combustion correlation for diesel engine
simulation. SAE Paper 1980. no 800029.
[12] Miyamoto Noboru, Chikahisa Takemi, Murayama Tadashi, Sawyer Robert.
Description and analysis of diesel engine rate of combustion and performance
using Wiebes functions. SAE Paper 1985. no 850107.
[13] Yasar H, S Soyhan H, Walmsley H, Head B, Sorusbay C. Double-Wiebe func-
tion: an approach for single zone HCCI engine modelling. Applied Thermal
Engineering 2008;11-12:1272e83.
[14] Yeliana Yeliana, Cooney C, Worm J, Michalek DJ, Naber JB. Estimation of
double-Wiebe function parameters using least square method for burn du-
rations of ethanol-gasoline blends in spark ignition engine over variable
compression ratios and EGR levels. Applied Thermal Engineering 2011;30:
2213e20.
[15] Millet Jean-Baptiste, Maroteaux Fadila, Saad Charbel, Aubertin Fabrice,
Lehr Mathias. Air system and diesel combustion model for a 4 cylinder engine
in real time computing conditions: application on a EU5 personal car with
diesel particulate lter. SAE Paper 2009. no 2009-24-0136.
[16] Millet Jean-Baptiste, Maroteaux Fadila, Aubertin Fabrice. Air system and diesel
combustion modeling for hardware in the loop applications. Journal of En-
gineering for Gas and Turbines and Power 2012;134(4):12. 042802.
[17] Hendricks E. Mean value modeling of large turbocharged two-stroke diesel
engines. SAE Paper 1989. no 890564.
[18] Schulten Paul JM, Stapersma Douwe. Mean value modeling of the gas ex-
change of a 4-Stroke diesel engine for use in powertrain applications. SAE
Paper 2003. no 2003-01-0219.
[19] Heywood John B. Internal combustion engine fundamentals. New York, USA:
McGraw-Hill; 1988.
[20] Shehata MS. Cylinder pressure, performance parameters, heat release, specic
heats ratio and duration of combustion for spark ignition engine. Energy
2010;35:4710e25.
[21] Woschni GA. Universally applicable equation for the instantaneous heat
transfer coefcient in internal combustion engine. SAE Paper 1967. no 670931.
[22] Lyn WT. Study of burning rate and nature combustion in diesel engine. Proc IX
Symp on Combustion The Combustion Institute 1962. p. 1069e82.
[23] Ramos JI. Internal combustion engine modeling. New York, USA: Hemisphere
Publishing Co; 1989.
[24] Schulze Tino, Wiedemeier Markus, Schuette Herbert. Crank angle based diesel
en gine modelling for harware-in-the-loop applications with in-cylinder
pressure sensors. SAE Paper 2007. no 2007-01-1303.
[25] Arsie I, Di Genova F, Pianese C, Rizzo G, Sorrentino M. A single-zone model for
combustion and NOx simulation in common-rail multi-jet diesel engines. SAE
Paper 2003. no 2003-01-79.