检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:黄德军[1] 王志伟[1] 李伟[1] 朱红国[1] 蒋习军[1]
机构地区:[1]中国汽车工程研究院
出 处:《汽车技术》2011年第9期55-59,共5页Automobile Technology
摘 要:简述了5种稀释系数(DF)的计算方法,基于定容稀释采样系统得到了某车用柴油机稳态测试循环的5组典型工况试验数据,计算分析了各工况的稀释系数,比较分析了4种基于污染物浓度的DF与基于流量的DFFlow差异及对CO2、HC校正结果与计算油耗的影响。结果表明,不同的DF计算方法得到不同的DF结果;CO2气体示踪法的DF与DFFlow相比,差异较小;与DFFlow相比,CO2校正结果及计算油耗的差异较小,HC校正结果的差异较大。Five methods of dilution factor (DF) calculation are outlined in this article. Five groups of typical cycle test data of an automotive diesel engine in steady test cycle is obtained based on constant volume dilution sampling system, and the dilution factors in each cycle are calculated and analyzed, then the difference of four DFs based on pollution concentration and DF Flow based on flow are compared and analyzed, and the effect thereof on CO2 and HC correction results as well as on fuel consumption calculation is also analyzed. The results show that different DF calculation methods lead to different DF; compared with DF Flow, DF calculated with CO2 gas tracer analysis has less variation; and compared with DFnow, CO2 correction method and fuel consumption calculation has less difference, whereas HC correction results have large difference.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.30