3. Configuring the Digital Twin
Thus, the application of digital twins for solving problems related to diagnostics of the technical condition of internal combustion engines may be implemented according to different schemes and principles. One possible approach is considered below using the example of the laboratory test bench of Odesa National Maritime University based on a Weichai WP4 marine diesel-generator [
25]. The core of the DT is based on the on-line service Blitz-PRO, which provides simulations of static and transient ICE operations with 0D-1D thermodynamic model [
26,
27].
According to the scheme presented in
Figure 2, the main stages include calibration of the digital twin mathematical model, identification of the current engine operating mode, and diagnostics of the engine technical condition.
Mathematical Model Calibration
At the first stage, calibration of the mathematical model is performed considering the operating mode space
. For the investigated engine, this space is limited to certain regions around fixed engine operating modes, as shown in
Table 1.
To determine the mathematical model calibration parameters, i.e., to obtain the array of vector values , both literature data and experimental engine test data were used. Such experiments should preferably be carried out according to classical experimental procedures, namely:
ensuring steady-state engine operation with stabilization of all controlled parameters, primarily temperatures of cooling media and exhaust gases;
applying averaging procedures over a sample of 50–100 consecutive engine cycles in order to reduce the influence of cycle-to-cycle variability of the engine working process.
Obviously, such experiments require specialized equipment and laboratory test bench conditions; however, they provide the most reliable information regarding engine working processes.
Table 2 and
Figure 3 present examples of experimental data obtained in accordance with the above-mentioned principles.
A separate important problem is the processing of experimental data, during which several tasks must be solved:
reliable determination of the top dead center (TDC) position;
accounting for the influence of crankshaft angular velocity irregularity;
averaging of sequential cycle data;
determination of fuel injection timing and injection duration;
determination of fuel ignition timing;
calculation of fuel injection characteristics and heat release characteristics.
Each of the above-mentioned tasks requires the development of efficient computational algorithms and their implementation in software form. For example, accurate determination of the TDC position is performed using both the crankshaft position sensor signal and analysis of the compression curve of the experimental indicator diagram using methods proposed in [
28,
29,
30]. Compensation for errors associated with crankshaft rotational speed irregularity is achieved using both direct signal acquisition from the flywheel toothed ring and analytical methods based on calculation of the resultant tangential force. FFT-based filtering algorithms are applied for determination of fuel ignition timing and calculation of heat release characteristics.
Figure 3.
Averaged and normalized experimental data for the test engine at (Pb = 18 kW at 1500 rpm) as a result of 72 consecutive cycles being processed.
Figure 3.
Averaged and normalized experimental data for the test engine at (Pb = 18 kW at 1500 rpm) as a result of 72 consecutive cycles being processed.
Figure 4.
Experimental cylinder pressure diagram superimposed with the calculated fuel injection rate diagrams and heat release rate diagrams for a test engine at mode (Pb = 18 kW at 1500 rpm).
Figure 4.
Experimental cylinder pressure diagram superimposed with the calculated fuel injection rate diagrams and heat release rate diagrams for a test engine at mode (Pb = 18 kW at 1500 rpm).
The following criteria were used for calibration of the mathematical model. For integral parameters averaged over the engine cycle, such as boost pressure, fuel consumption rate, and similar quantities, the objective function δ
int is proposed:
where
N is the number of experimental operating points,
is the experimentally measured value, and
is the corresponding simulated value.
For the in-cylinder pressure diagram (indicator diagram), it is reasonable to use the parameter Δ
pav, defined as the average deviation between the simulated and experimental pressure traces over the engine cycle:
where L is the number of measurement points in the experimental indicator diagram.
The results of mathematical model calibration for three reference engine operating modes are presented in
Figure 5 and
Table 3.
Operating mode identification
From the perspective of mathematical modeling, the problem of identifying the current engine operating mode using sensor data requires accurate synthesis of fuel injection characteristics, fuel combustion characteristics, and proper determination of turbocharger turbomachinery parameters.
An important requirement is the automatic adjustment of the corresponding model calibration parameters based on the calibration data obtained at the reference operating points. As an example of such model adaptation, consider the fuel injection characteristics.
Figure 6 presents the experimentally and computationally determined injection rate profiles for three reference operating modes of the investigated diesel-generator set:
,
, and
.
The obtained injection characteristics may be directly utilized within the digital twin; however, they remain valid only for the operating conditions under which they were determined. Therefore, the digital twin must be capable of modifying the fuel injection characteristics according to changes in the engine operating mode. In the case of a diesel-generator set, the parameter that primarily characterizes operating mode variations from the perspective of fuel injection is the injection duration, which can be experimentally determined through analysis of a vibroacoustic sensor signal.
In his work, Razleitsev [
31] proposed approximating fuel injection characteristics using the sum of two parabola-type functions:
where
is the normalized injection angle, Ф
inj1 is the relative duration of application of the first approximation function, and
a,
b,
c,
m1,
m2,
m3 and
m4 are calibration coefficients.
Figure 6 shows the experimentally and computationally derived injection characteristics plotted as a function of the normalized injection angle
. A common feature of all obtained curves can be observed during the initial injection phase, namely a gradual increase in the injection rate that closely follows an exponential trend.
Such behavior cannot be adequately represented by the original Razleitsev equations. However, satisfactory approximation can be achieved through a minor modification of the model:
where Ф
inj2 denotes the relative start point of application of the second approximation function.
When Фinj2 = 0, the original Razleitsev formulation is recovered. Appropriate selection of Фinj1 and Фinj2 enables satisfactory approximation of the initial stage of fuel injection.
Obviously, when the injection duration changes, the calibration parameters a, b, c, m1, m2, m3, m4, Фinj1 and Фinj2 must also change. However, for practical implementation within a digital twin, it is desirable to minimize the number of variable parameters. In the present case, satisfactory representation of the injection characteristics over the investigated operating range can be achieved by varying only three parameters: m4, Фinj1 and Фinj2.
Figure 7 presents the regression relationships obtained for these parameters as functions of the injection duration φ
inj. Application of the proposed fuel injection model to both the reference operating modes and an arbitrary intermediate operating mode is illustrated in
Figure 8. The results demonstrate that the modified equations provide sufficiently accurate approximation of the experimental injection characteristics, including the critical initial stage of fuel injection.
Malfunction detection
To employ a digital twin for engine condition diagnostics, an optimization problem must be solved. One potentially effective approach is the application of Design of Experiments (DoE) methodology and statistical response surface analysis.
In particular, the following approach may be proposed. The engine is considered as a collection of interconnected systems and mechanisms, including the fuel injection system, air supply system, valve timing mechanism, cylinder–piston assembly, and others. For each system or mechanism, a set of parameters can be identified that reflects specific fault conditions and can be incorporated into the engine process simulation.
For the fuel injection system, such parameters may include the fuel injection timing, injection duration, injector nozzle hole diameter, and fuel density and viscosity. For the valve timing mechanism, the relevant parameters include intake and exhaust valve opening and closing timings. For the air supply system, characteristic parameters include charge-air cooler resistance and effectiveness, compressor and turbine adiabatic efficiencies, turbine flow capacity, exhaust system resistance, and similar quantities. The selection of parameters depends on the specific engine under investigation.
The fault identification procedure may be formulated as a sequential analysis of each selected engine subsystem. For this purpose, a numerical experiment is performed using either a full-factorial experimental design matrix or an appropriate fractional-factorial replica. For each parameter representing a potential fault, a baseline level and variation interval are specified. The objective functions are selected to quantify deviations between simulation results and diagnostic or monitoring data obtained from the actual engine.
For integral engine performance parameters, the objective function δ
int defined by Equation (14) is employed. For indicator diagrams, which remain one of the most informative diagnostic tools in marine engine practice, the following objective function is proposed:
where Δp
av and Δpmax denote the average cycle deviation (defined according to Equation (15)) and the maximum deviation between experimental and simulated indicator diagrams, respectively.
For a more detailed analysis of indicator diagram discrepancies, logarithmic objective functions may also be introduced:
The logarithmic representation normalizes deviations across different phases of the engine cycle, particularly during combustion and gas-exchange processes. This feature is important when diagnosing faults originating from different engine subsystems.
Figure 9 illustrates simulation results obtained for a prototype engine, selected as the MAN B&W 8S50ME-B8 operating at 75% MCR along the propeller characteristic. A combined fault condition involving cylinder wear and exhaust valve malfunction was artificially introduced. It can be observed that the ln(
p)=f(φ) diagram provides substantially better visualization of deviations during both combustion and gas-exchange phases than the conventional p=f(φ) indicator diagram.
The proposed fault identification methodology was evaluated using a test case. A digital twin was developed within the Blitz-PRO simulation environment based on a virtual engine derived from the MAN B&W 6S80ME-C7 prototype. A fault associated with the fuel injection system was simulated for one of the six cylinders while operating at 75% MCR along the propeller characteristic.
The input dataset available for fault detection consisted of measurements obtainable using standard engine instrumentation, as summarized in
Table 4, together with the indicator diagram of the affected cylinder. Furthermore, it was assumed that the faulty subsystem was known in advance and that only two fault-related parameters deviated simultaneously from their healthy values.
All simulations were performed using a constant cycle fuel delivery of qf = 135.4 g/cycle. The following diagnostic factors were investigated:
Injection timing φstart.inj, characterizing fuel pump adjustment quality and high-pressure fuel pump valve condition;
Injection duration φinj, characterizing wear of fuel equipment and injector adjustment;
Injector nozzle hole diameter dinj.holes, characterizing nozzle wear;
Coefficient Ec in the fuel spray mean diameter correlation, characterizing deterioration of the injector needle valve.
Table 5 summarizes the baseline factor levels, variation intervals, and parameter values corresponding to both healthy (etalon) and faulty (malfunction) operating conditions.
Table 6 presents the fractional-factorial design matrix together with the corresponding values of the three objective functions δ
int, Δ
pID, and Δln(
p)
ID. The same table also contains the calculated response surfaces obtained using second-order polynomial regression models.
Figure 10 presents the synthesized indicator diagrams corresponding to different factor combinations.
The response functions were approximated using second-order polynomial regression equations of the form:
The coefficients
ai for the three objective functions are provided in
Table 7.
The obtained regression models were subsequently analyzed to locate their extrema and determine the factor combinations corresponding to the minimum objective function values. The results are presented in
Table 8.
As can be seen, the analysis successfully identified the nature of the simulated malfunction, namely prolonged fuel injection (a possible consequence of leakage within the high-pressure fuel pump) combined with deteriorated fuel atomization (a possible consequence of injector nozzle wear). However, the exact numerical values of the fault-related parameters were not estimated accurately.
Consequently, the results demonstrate the importance of selecting factors with sufficiently independent physical effects when constructing the diagnostic experiment.
It is also informative to compare the optimized parameter values with the actual values used to simulate the malfunction. Such a comparison is presented in
Figure 11. The results indicate that the parameter combinations identified through optimization reproduce the actual engine process with satisfactory accuracy, particularly for parameter set (3) shown in
Figure 11.