Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

Appendix X: Full System Simulation Modeling of Fuel Consumption Reductions
Pages 438-441

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 438...
... For all configurations the vehicle test weight, ate transmission and rear axle ratio. With minimal parameter rolling resistance, and drag characteristics were held constant adjustments the results compared favorably to the EPA cerat the values noted in the table.
From page 439...
... of the drive cycle time required spark retard to avoid knock. A vehicle manufacturer is likely to establish a spark timing Applying this equation to the 2.5L naturally aspirated calibration that provides significant margin to avoid knock engine and the 1.68L and 1.25L turbocharged engines at a so that complete reliance on the knock control system is not typical FTP cycle engine speed of 1,500 rpm and a torque required.
From page 440...
... However, the 1.25L Timing to Avoid Knock turbocharged engine with nearly the same stroke as the 1.68L engine has a 7 percent increase in FMEP, due to the higher Engine FTP HWY peak cylinder pressure. Even with this small increase in Fixed Cams 0.00 0.00 FMEP, the actual friction torque of the 1.25L engine will be DCP 0.00 0.00 considerably lower than the 2.5L naturally aspirated engine EFR 0.00 0.00 due to the engine downsizing.
From page 441...
... (kPa) GDI 2.5L NA 6 50 2.5 16.5 5.00 4.7 28.4 5.8 38.8 1.68 L TC 7 50 3.7 21.2 4.08 6.0 23.2 8.6 37.7 1.25 L TC 8 50 5.0 24.4 4.04 6.9 23.0 11.5 41.4 Where: PCyl, max is the peak cylinder pressure in bar, Cmps is the mean piston speed in m/s.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.