Drivetrain Emission Uncertainty Calculation for Sensor Heating Phase
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing methods for determining emission values in motor vehicle drivetrains with internal-combustion engines face challenges in accurately measuring or modeling ambient and system conditions, leading to uncertainties in pollutant emissions, particularly at the start of a drive cycle when sensors may not be ready, resulting in inaccurate emission value determination.
Innovation Solution
A method to calculate an effective prevailing uncertainty value for emission values at a given time point by weighting prevailing uncertainty values with corresponding emission values prior to that time, using techniques like sliding or exponential smoothing, to establish more precise tolerance levels for emission regulation, allowing for adaptive control of the drivetrain to reduce emissions.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Measurement precision
If sensors are used to measure emission values, then measurement precision is improved, but at the beginning of the drive cycle sensors are not ready (heating phase) leading to unreliable measurements
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary heating of sensors before they are used for measurements. The control unit monitors sensor readiness status and only allows measurement operations after the sensors have been properly heated, ensuring reliable measurements from the start of the drive cycle.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent introduces an intermediary control unit that manages the transition between sensor heating phase and measurement phase. This control unit acts as a mediator, coordinating the sensor readiness status with the emission measurement operations to ensure measurements are only performed when sensors are ready.
2Productivity
If models are used to determine emission values during heating phase, then continuous emission determination is possible, but modeling inaccuracy increases uncertainty
Solution Approach 1:
The system dynamically switches between different determination methods based on sensor readiness status. During the heating phase, models are used for continuous emission determination; once sensors are ready, the system transitions to sensor-based measurements. This dynamic adaptation optimizes both continuity and accuracy.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent applies beforehand cushioning by using model-based estimates during the sensor heating phase to cushion the gap in measurement capability. This ensures continuous emission determination is maintained even when direct sensor measurements are not yet available, preventing data gaps while accepting temporary reduced accuracy.
3Ease of operation
If fixed tolerance levels are used for emission regulation, then regulation simplicity is maintained, but precision is reduced due to not accounting for time-dependent uncertainty
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements dynamic tolerance levels that automatically adjust based on the current determination method and sensor readiness status. Tolerance levels are higher during model-based estimation phases and lower during sensor measurement phases, providing precision-adapted regulation without requiring complex manual configuration.
Solution Approach 2:
The system uses feedback from sensor readiness status and determination method selection to automatically adjust tolerance levels. The control unit continuously monitors which determination method is active (model-based or sensor-based) and adjusts the applicable tolerance levels accordingly, enabling precision-adapted regulation through automated feedback mechanisms.
Data Source
AI summary
The invention relates to a method for determining an effective prevailing uncertainty value (304, 305) for an emission value (301, 302) for a given time point when operating a drivetrain (100) of a motor vehicle with an internal-combustion engine (110), wherein, at different times (n), one prevailing emission value (301) and one prevailing uncertainty value (303) are determined for the emission value, wherein the effective prevailing uncertainty value (304, 305) for the given time point is determined from prevailing uncertainty values (303) and prevailing emission values (301) prior to the given time point.