SAE TECHNICAL

PAPER SERIES 1999-01-0908

Turbocharger Modeling for Automotive

Control Applications
Paul Moraal
Ford Forschungszentrum Aachen

Ilya Kolmanovsky
Ford Research Laboratories

Reprinted From: SI Engine Modeling

(SP-1451)

International Congress and Exposition

Detroit, Michigan
March 1-4, 1999

400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-5760
The appearance of this ISSN code at the bottom of this page indicates SAE’s consent that copies of the
paper may be made for personal or internal use of specific clients. This consent is given on the condition,
however, that the copier pay a $7.00 per article copy fee through the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc.
Operations Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 for copying beyond that permitted by Sec-
tions 107 or 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law. This consent does not extend to other kinds of copying such as
copying for general distribution, for advertising or promotional purposes, for creating new collective works,
or for resale.

SAE routinely stocks printed papers for a period of three years following date of publication. Direct your
orders to SAE Customer Sales and Satisfaction Department.

Quantity reprint rates can be obtained from the Customer Sales and Satisfaction Department.

To request permission to reprint a technical paper or permission to use copyrighted SAE publications in
other works, contact the SAE Publications Group.

All SAE papers, standards, and selected

books are abstracted and indexed in the
Global Mobility Database

No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without the prior written
permission of the publisher.

ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright 1999 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE. The author is solely
responsible for the content of the paper. A process is available by which discussions will be printed with the paper if it is published in
SAE Transactions. For permission to publish this paper in full or in part, contact the SAE Publications Group.

Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication through SAE should send the manuscript or a 300
word abstract of a proposed manuscript to: Secretary, Engineering Meetings Board, SAE.

Printed in USA
 1999-01-0908

Turbocharger Modeling for Automotive Control Applications

Paul Moraal
Ford Forschungszentrum Aachen

Ilya Kolmanovsky
Ford Research Laboratories

Copyright © 1999 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.

ABSTRACT engine models because the standard linear interpolation

Dynamic simulation models of turbocharged Diesel and
gasoline engines are increasingly being used for design
and initial testing of engine control strategies. The turbo-
charger submodel is a critical part of the overall model,
but its control-oriented modeling has received limited
attention thus far. Turbocharger performance maps are
typically supplied in table form, however, for inclusion into
engine simulation models this form is not well suited.
Standard table interpolation routines are not continuously
differentiable, extrapolation is unreliable and the table
representation is not compact. This paper presents an
overview of curve fitting methods for compressor and tur-
bine characteristics overcoming these problems. We
include some background on compressor and turbine
modeling, limitations to experimental mapping of turbo-
chargers, as well as the implications of the compressor
model choice on the overall engine model stiffness and
simulation times.
routine is not continuously differentiable, sometimes lead-
ing to apparent discontinuities in simulations. Further-
more, and more seriously, this type of model does not
adequately handle operating conditions outside of the
mapped data range, for example at very low turbocharger
rotational speeds.
While engine mapping usually covers the entire operating
range, the situation for the turbocharger unit is different.
Generally, it is possible to obtain the performance charac-
teristics from the supplier. However, the turbocharger
characteristics are typically only mapped for higher turbo
speeds (typically 90000 RPM and up) and pressure
ratios, whereas the operating range on the engine ex-
2.8
Compressor map
Measured engine data
2.6
2.4

The emphasis in this paper is on compressor flow rate 2.2

pressure ratio

modeling, since this is both a very challenging problem 2

as well as a crucial part of the overall engine model. For 180000
the compressor, four different methods, including neural 1.8
networks, are presented and tested on three different
1.6 160000
compressors in terms of curve fitting accuracy, model
complexity, genericity and extrapolation capabilities. 1.4 140000
Curve fitting methods for turbine characteristics are pre- 120000
1.2
sented for both a wastegated and a variable geometry
90000
turbine. 1
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
Scaled compressor flow parameter
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Figure 1. Typical compressor map. Usually, such a
compressor map shows constant speedlines
Dynamic simulation models of turbocharged Diesel and and constant isentropic efficiency lines. Here,
gasoline engines are increasingly being used for design we have omitted the efficiency lines and
and initial testing of engine control strategies. The turbo- instead superimposed the compressor flow
charger submodel is a critical part of the overall model, rate determined from engine mapping data. It
but its control-oriented modeling has received limited is readily apparent that the compressor
attention thus far. A standard approach still appears to be mapping data does not cover the operating
to include the turbocharger performance data in the form range of the compressor on the engine. In
of lookup tables directly into the model [6], [12]. However, particular, low speed and low pressure ratio
this form is not ideally suited for use in control-oriented data are lacking.

1
tends down to 10000 RPM shaft speed and pressure
ratios close to unity. This is illustrated in Figure 1. As a
result, standard interpolation methods (polynomial
regression, look-up tables) generally fail to produce rea-
sonable results outside of the region where experimental
data is available. In fact, because of the nonlinear nature
of the compressor and turbine characteristics even inter-
polation through lookup tables has been found to cause
unacceptable performance in simulations.
In this paper we will present a number of different curve
fitting methods for turbochargers which allow a more
compact implementation of the turbocharger submodel.
Special emphasis will be on the abilities of the different
methods to extrapolate the performance characteristics
into regions which are usually not mapped, but which are
encountered during normal operation of the engine. First
we'll provide some insight into the limitations of experi-
mental turbocharger mapping.
LIMITATIONS OF EXPERIMENTAL
TURBOCHARGER MAPPING
Whenever the choice is given, one should obviously aim
for extending the range of available experimental data,
rather than trying to predict/extrapolate the behavior out-
side of the given range (unless good models of the
underlying physics are available, in which case a few
experimentally measured data points may suffice to char-
acterize a large operating region and experimental devel-
opment time can thus be reduced). With regard to
extending the range of experimental mapping of turbo-
charger units on a flow bench (in particular, lower turbine
speeds and lower mass flow rates), two problems arise,
which would require significant effort to work around. The
following is an explanation provided by David Flaxington
[2], at the time working at Allied Signal - Garrett.
FLOW SENSOR ACCURACY
The flow through the compressor (the same arguments
hold for the turbine) is usually measured by determining
the differential pressure across a properly sized orifice
placed in the flow path, and using Bernoulli's law, assum-
ing incompressible flow (constant density), to determine
the flow rate [3]. This gives a smooth variation of com-
pressor characteristics as the flow rate is varied. One can
map at lower speeds if smaller orifice plates and nozzles
are used to measure the lower flows, but this produces a
problem. As the flow rate is reduced, the accuracy of the
readings with any one measuring device reduces.
Changing at some point to another measuring device
sized for lower flow rates then causes a step change in
the mass flow readings as the accuracy of the measure-
ment is again improved.
With a vast set of orifice plates and nozzles this problem
could be circumvented. However, this is not standard
practice and improvements are largely dependant upon
the goodwill of the supplier.
2
HEAT TRANSFER EFFECTS
A second problem associated with the low speed region
of the maps is caused by the heat conduction from the
hot lubricating oil to the cool compressor end. At higher
speeds, the conduction can reverse and go from the hot
air to the lubricating oil. This heat added to the air is mea-
sured by the temperature sensors measuring the temper-
ature rise of the air and used to calculate the work input
and hence the efficiency of the compressor and the effi-
ciency of the turbine. It makes the compressor look worse
because apparently more turbine work is required than is
really used. The same effect makes the turbine look bet-
ter. This problem is worst at low speeds because of the
higher temperature differences. With relatively large
areas, higher temperature drops and low flow rates, the
backplate and compressor housing are relatively efficient
heat exchangers. This effect can be seen on the com-
pressor maps which all show efficiency collapsing at low
pressure ratios. This is not true aero performance. On the
turbine maps, the opposite effect of the turbine looking
better than it really is is apparent. Again this is not true
aerodynamic performance. Lower speeds would show
the heat transfer effect as more extreme. This means that
the predicted transient performance would be in error if
the maps were used without correction because the tur-
bine work to drive the compressor is overestimated and
more work is actually available to accelerate the rotor.
The heat transfer problem is not easily overcome without
separate turbine, bearing and compressor dynamome-
ters. When these are in use, the compressor mapping
method could be adjusted to control the temperature dif-
ferences driving the heat transfer so that it could be
largely eliminated. However, different oil temperatures
may require different bearings to be used and either of
these two changes would affect the turbine maps. This is
a problem the turbocharger manufacturers are well aware
of, but simple solutions presently don't appear to be avail-
able.
COMPRESSOR
BACKGROUND – The rotating impeller of a centrifugal
compressor imparts a high velocity to the air. The air is
then decelerated in a diffuser with a consequent rise in
static pressure. Neglecting heat losses, the power, P,
required to drive the compressor can be related to the
mass flow rate through the compressor, W, and the total
enthalpy change across the compressor from the first law
of thermodynamics as
(1)
Assuming constant specific heat coefficients, the power
is given by
(2)
The subscripts 01 and 02 refer to the stagnation condi-
tions at the compressor inlet and outlet, respectively. If cp
is specified in kJ/kg/K, W in kg/sec and T01,T02 are in K
then units of P are kW. For an isentropic process the tem-
perature ratio can be related to the pressure ratio using
the relation,
(3)
To account for the fact that the compression process is
not isentropic, the compressor isentropic efficiency, 0 ≤
ηc,is ≤ 1, is introduced and defined as the ratio of theoret-
ical (isentropic) temperature rise and actual temperature
rise:
(4)
Combining equations (3) and (4),
(5)
hence,
(6)
An insight into various terms comprising equation (6) can
be obtained by considering the enthalpy change across
the compressor, ∆h. From equations (1) and (6), we
obtain the following relation between enthalpy change
and pressure risse across the compressor:
(7)
Assuming that there are no losses (i.e. in the ideal case),
∆h can be estimated from Euler's equation for turboma-
chinery. Consider a compressor with a radial vaned
impeller, no backsweep and no inlet pre-whirl. Then [13],
(8)
where U2 is the velocity of the impeller at the impeller tip,
Cθ2 is the tangential component of the air velocity leaving
the impeller, while U1, is the velocity of the impeller at the
impeller entry (where air enters the impeller), and Cθ1
the tangential component of the air velocity entering the
impeller (see Figure 2 for a velocity diagram). The no inlet
pre-whirl assumption implies that Cθ2 = 0 and
(9)
The ratio
(10)
is known as the slip factor and depends, for example, on
blade spacing, backsweep angle, and mass flow rate
3
through the compressor [13]. Thus, from equation (10)
we obtain
(11)
C2
Cθ2 U2
ω
Figure 2. Generic compressor flow velocity diagram at
impeller tip, indicating blade tip velocity U2, air
flow absolute velocity C2 , and the tangential
component of the air leaving the compressor,
Cθ2.
If the dependence of the slip factor on the mass flow rate
is neglected, equations (7) and (11) suggest that, ideally
(i.e. if ∆h = ∆hideal), the pressure increase across the
compressor should only be a function of the turbocharger
speed Ntc. However, this is not the case because of the
losses that do depend on the mass flow rate, W. The
actual enthalpy change across the compressor is larger
than ∆hideal and the ratio is precisely the compressor effi-
ciency:
(12)
There are several sources of losses that can be broadly
categorized as (1) incidence losses in the impeller and
diffuser caused by flow instantaneously changing direc-
tion to comply with geometry, (2) friction losses in impel-
ler, diffuser and collector (e.g. due to viscous drag on the
walls), (3) clearance losses in the impeller, (4) losses in
the impeller due to the backflow and several others, see
[13]. Accounting for these losses individually with phys-
ics-based sub-models may be very difficult. Further-
more, it is not clear how to validate the individual sub-
models from the experimental data. Consequently, one
can view their use as simply a way of introducing a partic-
ular parametrization with multiple parameters to be
regressed from compressor performance maps. Simpler
expressions can potentially be generated by only partially
restricting ourselves to the structure suggested by the
physics based models. This is, basically, the curve fitting
approach pursued in this paper.
The turbocharger manufacturer specifies the perfor-
mance characteristics in terms of the mass flow rate and
isentropic efficiency for varying compressor speeds and
pressure ratios on a flow stand and supplies the informa-
tion as performance maps in table form. It is conven-
tional to specify the performance maps in terms of scaled
mass flow rate parameter, φ, and compressor rotational
speed parameter, , that are defined as

(13)
where Ntc denotes the compressor rotational speed
(rpm). The use of the scaled parameters eliminates the
dependence of the performance maps on inlet condi-
tions (Tin and pin). For the remainder of this section, we
will assume that the inlet and outlet velocities for the
compressor are small enough to ignore the difference
between static and stagnation pressure and temperature.
The dependencies are
(14)
(15)
Figure 1 shows several speedlines (lines of stable operat-
ing points of pressure ratio versus mass flow parameter
for constant speeds) for a typical compressor. For each
speedline, there are two limits to the flow range. The
upper limit is due to choking, when the flow reaches the
velocity of sound at some cross-section. In this regime no
further flow increase can be obtained by reducing the
compressor outlet pressure and the speedline slope
becomes infinite. The lower limit is due to a dangerous
instability known as surge [13]. During surging a noisy
and often violent flow process can occur causing cycle
periods of backflow through the whole compressor and
the installation downstream the compressor. The specific
value of φ at which surge occurs depends not only on the
compressor characteristics but also on the properties of
the installation downstream of the compressor. Typically,
this value is where the slope of the speedline is zero or
slightly positive. The left-hand extremities of the speed-
lines may be joined up to form what is known as the
surge line. When the turbocharger compressor is con-
nected to an engine intake manifold, the volume of the
manifold is often not sufficient to damp out the pressure
fluctuations arising from periodic suction strokes of the
pistons. As a result, even though the mean value of φ
may lie to the right of a surge line obtained in a steady-
state flow stand, the minimum mass flow rate (at the peak
of the pulse) may cause surge to develop. Other instabili-
ties that can develop during operation of a centrifugal
compressor include stalls. See [13] for a discussion of
inducer stalls, impeller stalls and rotating stalls.
CURVE FITTING OF COMPRESSOR MASS
FLOW
For the mathematical representation of the compressor
flow characteristics, there are two options. The flow
through the compressor can be expressed as a function
of pressure ratio pout/pin and turbine shaft speed Ntc
(16)
4
or the pressure ratio across the compressor can be mod-
eled as a function of compressor flow Wc and turbine
speed Ntc:
(17)
When viewing the compressor model in isolation, Model
II appears to be the better choice:
• In the areas where the speedlines are almost hori-
zontal,coinciding with a large part of the engine oper-
ating regime, as illustrated in Figure 1, this model is
less sensitive to input or modeling errors. In Model I,
lines of constant pressure ratio intersect the speed-
lines with a very small angle, resulting in high sensi-
tivity of Wc for small changes in pressure ratio pout/
pin.
• Unlike Model II, Model I cannot be easily incorpo-
rated into a dynamic model that exhibits surge
behavior (as will be made clear below).
However, when the compressor model is implemented as
part of an engine model, other aspects need to be taken
into account.
SENSITIVITY – When the compressor model is con-
nected to the engine model, the equilibrium compressor
flow and boost pressure levels are determined from an
equilibrium of the engine pumping rate and the compres-
sor flow map. The engine pumping is given by the follow-
ing equation:
(18)
where, for fixed fueling rate, the volumetric efficiency ηvol
and engine speed N are only weak functions of boost
pressure pi and compressor flow Wc. The subscript i
refers to intake manifold conditions. For fixed engine
speed, the term ηvol Vd N/(120 R Ti) is sometimes
referred to as engine pumping constant, and the pumping
map is a linear function of intake manifold pressure.
Superimposing the engine pumping map for various val-
ues of the engine pumping constant onto the compressor
map (Figure 3) illustrates that the sensitivity issue has
changed significantly: the engine operating points are
determined by the intersection of the two sets of lines.
The angle of intersection is never close to zero, but rather
around 60-90 degrees, indicating that the sensitivity to
compressor modeling error is almost the same for Mod-
els I and II. Of course, this analysis is only correct for
steady-state operating points. During transients the
engine operating trajectory behaves differently with
respect to the compressor speed lines due to the fact that
the pressure ratio changes much faster than the com-
pressor flow rate.

Figure 3. Generic compressor speed lines and engine
pumping map (for fixed engine speeds). The
intersections of the two sets of lines
determine engine operating equilibria
MODEL STIFFNESS – Model I can easily be incorpo-
rated into a mean value engine model with ambient pres-
sure pamb as (constant) input and intake manifold
pressure pi as state variable. The intake manifold dynam-
ics are modeled by
(19)
where the implicit assumptions of constant temperature
and absence of EGR are without loss of generality. Using
Model I, the compressor flow Wc is simply given by
(20)
Using Model II, an additional state variable must be intro-
duced based on the momentum equation for the air mass
mc in the tube connecting the compressor outlet and the
intake manifold. With pc denoting the compressor outlet
pressure, and A and l representing the cross sectional
area and length respectively of the connecting tube, the
momentum equation is given by
(21)
hence
(22)
Depending on the geometry of the intake assembly, the
addition of this state variable can increase the model stiff-
ness considerably. Model stiffness refers to the ratio of
smallest to largest eigenvalue of the linearization around
a given operating point, or, equivalently, to the difference
of time scales in the system’s dynamics. Dynamic models
for the complete engine dynamics can be found in, e.g.,
[5]-[8]. Using typical values for A and l, say A=50cm2 and
l=20cm, at a nominal operating point (fuel=1.5 kg/hr,
load=40Nm, no EGR), the range of eigenvalues of the lin-
5
earized system was found to be between -0.5 and -280.
The additional state introduced an eigenvalue of -4100 to
the system. The resulting increase in simulation time by a
factor of 3 - 4 may be unacceptable. However, if the con-
necting tube between compressor and intake manifold is
longer (this may be required for packaging of the inter-
cooler, for example), say, l=100cm, the additional state
introduces an eigenvalue of -450 to the system. In this
latter case, the simulation time will not be significantly
affected.
In the remainder of the section we'll describe four differ-
ent curve fitting techniques for the flow characteristics of
a radial compressor. Alternative approaches have been
reported in [10].
Jensen & Kristensen Method (5) – In [5], Jensen & Kris-
tensen present a simplification of a model due to Winkler
[14]. The model uses the dimensionless head parameter
Ψ, equivalent to the slip factor defined in equation [10]:
(23)
where Uc is the compressor blade tip speed
(24)
The normalized compressor flow rate Φ is defined by
(25)
and the inlet Mach number M introduced by
(26)
The head parameter Ψ and compressor efficiency ηc are
then expressed as functions of Φ and M in the following
way:
(27)
(28)
The coefficients k and a are determined through a least
squares fit on experimental data. Since equation (27) is
invertible, this compressor model is also capable of
describing the compressor flow as a function of pressure
ratio (Model I) by
 (29)
Depending on the model chosen, the output is then given
by
(30)
or by
(31)
Due to the particular choice of basis functions, namely
rational polynomials, this method is effective in describing
both the flat speedlines at low flow rates, as well as the
almost vertical speedlines at high compressor speeds.
The functional form (27) has a singularity at Φ=k3. Only
the curve to the left of this asymptote is used. During sim-
ulations, care must be taken to avoid crossing this singu-
larity during the numerical integration.
Even though the model is not entirely physics-based,
equation (31) shows that extrapolation to low compressor
speeds and low mass flow rates causes the resulting
pressure ratio to decrease continuously to unity for zero
mass flow, which is exactly what one would expect to
happen physically. The only constraint on the curve fitting
parameters is that k3>0 for all compressor speeds.
Mueller method – In his Master's Thesis [8], Martin
Mueller from DTU derives a compressor model from first
principles, incorporating the underlying physical princi-
ples as well as the compressor assembly geometry. The
models thus derived can predict the compressor charac-
teristics surprisingly well. However, once experimental
data is available, still better accuracy can always be
achieved by appropriate curve fitting.
Based on physical considerations, Mueller proposes to
model Ψ as a quadratic function in Φ:
(32)
This model is claimed to be generic, however, the param-
eters A, B, and C are known to be speed dependent and
the way in which this speed dependence is modeled is
again a design choice. The obvious choice is to model A,
B, and C as linear or quadratic in Uc. However, Mueller
observes that this choice does not lead to a generic
model because it fails to give satisfactory results for
some of the compressor types under investigation. It
turns out that, rather than fitting A, B, and C indepen-
dently, it is advantageous to exploit one more observa-
tion, namely that the curve connecting the maximum
mass flows Wc,top on each speedline is typically a qua-
dratic function in Uc. This then leads to the following
parametrization:
6
(33)
This model is expressed in the form of Model II and can-
not easily be inverted to a Model I form. Whatever finite
period of time is needed for determining the sign of the
square root term in the inversion (during which the sign
may be incorrect, and if a globally stable sign detection
algorithm can be found at all) will more than likely be
unacceptable in dynamic simulations.
Zero Slope Line method (ZSLM) – Another model for the
compressor flow map was developed in an internal publi-
cation [7]. It describes the compressor flow parameter, φ,
as a function of pressure ratio, r, and speed parameter,
(Model I). First, the curve connecting the maximum
mass flows on each speedline (also referred to as the
zero-slope line) is characterized by a quadratic in :
(34)
where rp,top are the values of the pressure ratio corre-
sponding to φtop. Then, in order to capture the steep
slope of the speedlines near the choke limit, the speed-
lines to the right of the zero-slope line are modeled as
exponentials:
(35)
for rp,< rp,top and are linearly extended to the left of the
zero-slope line:
(36)
where the parameter α is modeled as a constant, or as a
function of :
(37)
Neural networks – Neural networks are becoming
increasingly popular for a wide range of applications,
including curve fitting, system identification, etc. The use
of neural networks for representing turbocharger charac-
teristics is reported in [4], among others. However, even
though neural networks are claimed to be universal func-
tion approximators, which they are in even a quite gen-
eral sense, finding the right structure and coefficients
requires some amount of trial and error.
In [4], a network with one hidden layer and five neurons is
used to represent a compressor flow map in the form of
model II, i.e., pressure ratio is fitted as a function of mass
flow and compressor rotational speed. A network with nu
inputs (nu=2 in this case), one hidden layer containing nn
neurons and ny outputs (ny=1 for now) would mathemat-
ically be represented by
(38)
where b and W are coefficient vectors and matrices
respectively, and the function f is the neuron transfer
function (basis function) typically of the form
(39)
In general, such a network requires a total of
(nu+ny+1)*nn+ ny coefficients to be fitted. A network with
2 inputs, 5 hidden neurons and 1 output would therefore
have 21 parameters to be fitted, the same network with
two outputs would have 27 coefficients. Considering the
fact that a typical compressor map is specified by 25-40
points, this is a large number of coefficients. Of course, if
one given network is used to fit a family of compressor
maps, the ratio of data points to coefficients improves
substantially.
Here we have used a smaller network to fit the compres-
sor maps; in fact, both mass flow map and efficiency are
represented in one single network with two inputs and
two outputs. For a compressor map in the form of model
II, i.e., pressure ratio is fitted as a function of mass flow
and compressor rotational speed, 3 and 4-node net-
works with 17 and 22 coefficients respectively gave
excellent results for the compressor pressure ratio (see
Figure 7). The problem of fitting a compressor model of
type I, i.e., compressor mass flow as a function of pres-
sure ratio and compressor speed, proved much more dif-
ficult - practically impossible actually. Any combination of
3-5 neurons and one or two hidden layers was tried up to
10 times, with initial coefficients generated in a partially
random way without success. The problem here is that
the fit through the mapped data points may have to be
less than optimal in order to get sensible extrapolation
results. This type of behavior is difficult to enforce in a
generic structure such as a neural network. Even the
addition of "artificial" mapping points in the surge region
and at low compressor speeds, or the deletion of the pos-
itive slope speedline segments was without success.
Of course, with an increasing number of neurons and lay-
ers, the optimization problem to determine the best coef-
ficients increases in dimensionality and number of local
extrema. This means that the optimization process will
take longer, and at the same time, it may become more
difficult to find a sufficiently good initialization because of
the larger number of local minima. Therefore, the optimi-
7
zation method (also referred to as network training)
needs to be computationally very efficient and have built-
in mechanisms for escaping from local minima. Over the
past couple of years, the issue of computational speed
has improved significantly compared to the initial back-
propagation algorithms, which are a type of gradient
descent method. Commercially available software, such
as The Mathworks' Neural Network Toolbox [1], imple-
ment a number of different second order methods, such
as Levenberg-Marquardt, which are orders of magnitude
faster than gradient descent based backpropagation
methods.
The issue of global convergence on the other hand, has
not been solved with the same level of success. The
crude method is simply to start the optimization many
times from different, semi-randomly generated initial con-
ditions (knowledge about the output range allows one to
restrict some coefficients to a sensible range). However,
this can be quite tedious. A large number of trials with 4
and 5-node networks for the model I compressor map
revealed that about one out of ten times the resulting net-
work starts to look acceptable, but a sufficiently accurate
fit was not obtained. A more systematic way of dealing
with local minima was developed by Puskorias and Feld-
kamp [9] and, undoubtedly, more exist; however, a
review of the neural network literature is beyond the
scope of this paper.
The conclusion is that for a generic compressor charac-
teristics curve fitting method, neural networks are very
well suited for models of type II, but appear not to be
suited for models of type I (or, at least, it is not straightfor-
ward to find the right structure and training procedure,
and significant manual modifications of the mapping data
are required).
CURVE FITTING RESULTS FOR THREE
DIFFERENT COMPRESSORS
In this section we present the curve fitting results on
three compressors from two different manufacturers for
the methods discussed sofar. The compressors are iden-
tified here only as compressors 1,2, and 3. In Figures 4-
7, the curve fitting methods are applied to the compres-
sor flow map for three compressors used for engine dis-
placements in the range from 1.1 to 2.4 liter. The data
supplied by the manufacturer is indicated by the solid
lines - the speedlines cover speeds in the range of 90 -
230 kRPM. Superimposed onto the manufacturer's data
are the results of the curve fits (dashed lines), extended
down to very low turbine speeds (10kRPM, 30kRPM, and
60kRPM) and pressure ratios or mass flows. The exten-
sion of the maps gives an indication as to whether the
curve fits produce sensible results in extrapolation. Espe-
cially for lower turbine speeds, this is important, because
they represent operating conditions which are frequently
encountered.
It can be noted that all methods yield quite similar results Compressor 1
for the lower speed lines of the supplied compressor 2.8 18
maps. Also, except for the neural network approach, each
2.6
method has difficulties describing the highest speed lines
for at least one of the given compressors. The extensions 2.4 16

into the surge region, i.e., extending the speed lines to

pressure ratio
2.2
the left, yield very different results depending on the
2 14
curve fitting method chosen. This was to be expected
180000
since the methods of Jensen & Kristensen and ZSLM 1.8
12
require the speed lines to be strictly monotonic. However,
1.6
160000
for use in mean value control oriented engine models,
any of the proposed extensions will work since they all 1.4 9 140000

provide bounded and continuously differentiable exten- 1.2 6

120000

sions, and the surge region is expected to be entered 3

1 90000
1
only for very short periods during transients, if at all. 0 0.05 0.1 0.15
scaled mass flow parameter
0.2 0.25 0.3

Finally, Mueller's method applied to compressors 2 and 3 mean eror 0.021426%, std 0.059537

reveals some slight difficulties with the extension to very

low speed lines: the extrapolated speed lines for 30
kRPM in the second and third fit in Figure 5 are obviously Compressor 2
incorrect. 20

3
In order to validate the extrapolation results to the lower
speed lines, all the compressor fits were repeated and 18
supplied with the manufacturer's data excluding the low-
2.5
est speed line. All methods showed acceptable results for

pressure ratio
16
the extrapolated lowest speedline. In fact, the methods by 200000
Jensen & Kristensen and Mueller yielded almost identical 2 14
results compared to the fits where all the original data 180000
were used for curve fitting. 12
160000
1.5 10
140000
CURVE FITTING OF COMPRESSOR 120000
6
EFFICIENCY 3
1
100000
1
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
scaled mass flow parameter
One method for describing the compressor isentropic mean eror -0.217840%, std 0.094753
efficiency was already given in equation (28). It models
the efficiency as a quadratic function of the compressor
flow rate, with coefficients depending on the speed Compressor 3
parameter. For compressor 1, the corresponding effi- 23
3.5
ciency fit is shown in Figure (8)
21
Alternatively, if the compressor flow is represented using 3
a neural network, the network can be augmented with a
19
pressure ratio

second output (and additional nodes if necessary) and

2.5
be retrained to provide an approximation for the isen- 230000
17
tropic efficiency as well as for the mass flow rate. This 210000
was actually already done for the neural network curvefits 2 15
190000
shown in Figure (7). For compressor 1, the correspond- 13
170000
ing efficiency fit is shown in Figure (9) 1.5 11 150000
9 130000
6 110000
3 90000
1 1
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
scaled mass flow parameter
mean eror 1.664988%, std 0.097928

Figure 4. Curve fits for three different compressors

using method proposed by Jensen &
Kristensen [5].

8
 Compressor 1 Compressor 1

2.8 compressor data 2.8 compressor data

curve fit curve fit
2.6 2.6 zero slope line

2.4 2.4
pressure ratio

pressure ratio
2.2 2.2

2 2
180000 18 180000
1.8 1.8

1.6 1.6
12 160000 160000

1.4 9 140000 1.4 140000

16
6 120000 120000
1.2 1.2
3
1 90000 14 1 3 6 900009 12 14 16 18
1 1
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
scaled mass flow parameter scaled mass flow parameter
mean eror 0.053687%, std 0.058212 mean error = -4.73764 % , std = 0.0023737

Compressor 2
Compressor 2
compressor data
compressor data 3 curve fit
curve fit zero slope line
3

2.5

pressure ratio
2.5
pressure ratio

200000
200000
20 2
2
180000
180000
160000
12 160000 1.5
18 140000
1.5 10
140000 120000
120000 100000
6
3 100000 1 3 6 10 12 14 16 18 20
16 1
14 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
1 scaled mass flow parameter
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
scaled mass flow parameter mean error = -5.47799 % , std = 0.0031010
mean eror 0.041969%, std 0.060226

Compressor 3
Compressor 3
3.5 compressor data
3.5 compressor data curve fit
curve fit zero slope line

3
3
pressure ratio
pressure ratio

2.5 230000
2.5 230000

210000
210000 23 2
2 190000
190000
21 170000
170000
1.5 150000
1.5 11 150000 19
9 130000
130000 110000
6 110000 17 90000
3 90000
15
13 1 1 3 6 9 11 13 15
23 17
21
19
1 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.2 scaled mass flow parameter
scaled mass flow parameter mean error = 0.114804 % , std = 0.00070898
mean eror 0.189370%, std 0.055547

Figure 5. Curve fits for three different compressors Figure 6. Curve fits for three different comprressors
using curve fitting method proposed by compressors using curve fitting method
Mueller [8] proposed in [7].

9
 Compressor 1 Compressor 1
0.8
2.8 compressor data
curve fit
0.75
2.6 18

2.4 0.7

Compressor efficiency
16
pressure ratio

2.2 0.65

2
0.6 180000
14
180000 120000
1.8 140000160000
0.55
12
1.6 90000
160000
0.5
1.4 9 140000
6 120000 0.45
1.2
3
1 90000
1 0.4
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
scaled mass flow parameter Scaled mass flow parameter
mean eror 0.002116%, std 0.016118
Figure 8. Compressor efficienc curve fit for compressor
1 using curve fitting method proposed by
Jensen & Kristensen [5].
Compressor 2

compressor data
curve fit Compressor 1
3 0.8
20

0.7
2.5 18
pressure ratio

Compressor efficiency
0.6 180000
120000 140000
160000
16 200000
90000
2 0.5
14 180000
0.4
12
160000
1.5 10
140000
0.3
6 120000
3
1 100000
0.2
1
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03
scaled mass flow parameter
mean eror -0.004643%, std 0.014558 0.1
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
Scaled mass flow parameter

Figure 9. Compressor efficiency curve fit for compressor

1 using the same 3 node neural network as
was used for the compressor flow rate in the
Compressor 3
top graph of Figure (7).
3.5 compressor data
curve fit
23 TURBINE
3 21

19 BACKGROUND – The turbine is powered by the energy

pressure ratio

of the exhaust gas. The power input to the turbine, P,

2.5 17 230000
can be obtained from the first law of thermodynamics,
210000 neglecting heat transfer, as
15
2
190000
13
170000 (40)
1.5 11
150000
9
130000 where W is the mass flow rate of the exhaust gas
6
3 90000
110000 through the turbine. As previously, the subscripts 01 and
1
1 02 refer to stagnation conditions at the turbine inlet and
0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16
scaled mass flow parameter
mean eror 0.312992%, std 0.02571 the turbine outlet, respectively. Treating the exhaust gas
Figure 7. Curve fits for three different compressors as an ideal gas, we obtain
using a neural network with 3 neurons in one
hidden layer. (41)

10
If W is specified in kg/sec, cp in kJ/kg/K, and T in K then
P is in kW. For a given pressure ratio across the turbine,
the outlet temperature can be computed assuming isen-
tropic expansion,
(42)
In order to account for the fact that the expansion through
the turbine is not isentropic, the turbine (total-to-static)
isentropic efficiency is introduced and defined as
(43)
where T2,is is the temperature of the exhaust gas leaving
the turbine if the expansion were isentropic. Note that the
turbine outlet temperature is evaluated as static, because
no use can be made of the kinetic energy left in the
exhaust gas at the turbine outlet.
Using equation (42) and the above defined isentropic effi-
ciency, we obtain the following expression for the turbine
power:
(44)
The turbine outlet temperature T02 is given by
(45)
Similar to the analysis done for the compressor, it is pos-
sible to obtain more insight into various terms that com-
prise the above equation. From Euler's equation for the
turbine rotor we obtain
(46)
where ∆hideal is the ideal (or isentropic) enthalpy drop
across the turbine, Cθ1 is the tangential velocity compo-
nent of the flow at the entry to the rotor and U1 is the
velocity of the turbine rotor at the point where the flow
enters. Assuming that there is no swirl at the turbine out-
let we obtain Cθ2 = 0, and ∆hideal = U1Cθ1. Similar to
the compressor slip factor, the ratio Cθ1/U1 is a function
of several variables, e.g. the number of rotor blades. Con-
sequently, in the ideal case
(47)
is proportional to the square of the turbo speed. Of
course, various sources of energy losses (accounted for
by the turbine efficiency) do introduce the dependence on
the turbine mass flow rate. See [13] for more details.
11
Typically, the turbine model is used during simulations to
calculate turbine power and mass flow rate given inlet
and outlet pressure values and turbocharger speed. The
turbocharger speed and inlet pressure are usually state
variables whose behavior is determined by differential
equations based on compressor-turbine power balance
and ideal gas law respectively. The turbine outlet pres-
sure is a function of the flow restriction of the exhaust
system assembly downstream of the turbine. Ideally, it is
equal to atmospheric. As a consequence of this use of
the model, it is convenient to express the turbine charac-
teristics in the same form as the compressor Model I, i.e.,
the turbine mass flow is expressed as a function of tur-
bine pressure ratio and rotational speed.
The turbocharger manufacturer characterizes the mass
flow rate and isentropic efficiency over a certain operat-
ing range (typically for turbine speeds between 100
kRPM and 180 kRPM and pressure ratio between 0.3
and 0.8) on a flow stand and supplies the information in
table form. For turbines with variable inlet geometry
(generically abbreviated as VGT - variable geometry tur-
bochargers), an additional input for these maps is the
inlet geometry setting ϑvgt
Again, we'll use the scaled mass flow parameter, φ, and
turbine speed parameter, , and neglect differences
between static and stagnation pressures and tempera-
tures:
(48)
The use of these parameters eliminates the dependence
of the performance maps on inlet conditions (Tin and pin).
These maps are now only a function of speed parameter,
pressure ratio across the turbine, and, if applicable, VGT
setting ϑvgt:
(49)
and
(50)
where U/C is the blade-speed ratio [13], defined as
(51)
and D denotes the turbine blade diameter. Note that the
blade speed ratio is a function of pressure ratio and
speed parameter, and hence no new independent vari-
ables are introduced.
It should be noted that the manufacturer supplied data on
turbine characteristics is not as representative of actual
turbine behavior on the engine as is the case for com-
pressor data. The turbine is characterized on a flow
bench with steady flow, whereas the turbine on the
engine experiences strong pressure pulsations, which
will influence its performance. For that reason, it may be
preferable to model the turbine using data measured
directly on the engine. However, this does require the tur-
bine speed measurement, which may not always be
available. Figure (10) illustrates this to some extent: the
flow measured on the engine is slightly higher than the
mapped flow for a given mean value of the pressure ratio
across the turbine. The figure also clearly illustrates the
effect of the wastegate: for expansion ratios close to 2
and higher, an increasing portion of the exhaust flow
bypasses the turbine through the wastegate. As a result,
the total flow through the exhaust increases without build-
ing up additional boost pressure or exhaust manifold
pressure. A final observation on Figure (10) is that here,
again, we see that the turbine map does not cover the
entire region of turbine operation on the engine. Just as
with the compressor, lower flows and lower expansion
ratios were not mapped. In contrast to the compressor,
however, the turbine characteristics can be extrapolated
into those regions without real difficulty.
Turbine flow data
0.18
Turbine map
Measured engine data
0.16
Turbine mass flow parameter φ
0.14
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0 the fact that, in the limit, the turbine can actually act as a
1 1.5 2 2.5
Turbine expansion ratio
Figure 10. Comparison of turbine flow characteristics
provided by the turbine manufacturer and
measured on the engine. At higher boost
pressures, the wastegate opens and part of
the exhaust flow bypasses the turbine. Since
the wastegate flow was not measured
separately, the turbine flow parameter
includes the wastegate flow.
CURVE FITTING OF TURBINE MASS FLOW
FIXED GEOMETRY TURBINE – The mass flow rate
through the turbine can be modeled as an adiabatic noz-
zle flow, where the effective flow area is a function of the
turbine speed parameter, and pressure ratio. In [11] it is
pointed out that the standard orifice flow equations are
derived assuming isentropic expansion. In the case of the
turbine flow, not only do we know that the expansion is
not isentropic, but we also know the isentropic efficiency.
Hence, we could use a more general form of the equa-
tions presented here, taking into account the isentropic
efficiency. However, at least for the turbines considered
here, this modification did not result in noticeably better
fits, hence we'll stick with the standard equations. There-
fore, turbine flow equations are given by
(52)
where the effective turbine area At . is modeled as a
function of turbine pressure ratio and speed parameter.
For a fixed geometry turbocharger, a simple fit for the
effective turbine flow area At was proposed by Jensen &
Kristensen:
(53)
where the parameters kti are functions of the speed
parameter:
This representation is only approximate because the
pressure ratio across the turbine at which choked flow
occurs is actually lower than the expected value of
approximately 0.55 (depending on exhaust gas composi-
tion and temperature). The reason is that the turbine
effectively behaves as a series of two nozzles (inlet noz-
zle vanes and rotor passages), which each individually
experience higher pressure ratios than the total across
the turbine. However, by including the pressure ratio as a
parameter in the effective area fit (53), the model can still
represent an increasing mass flow parameter at pressure
ratios beyond the critical pressure ratio. A second restric-
tion on the validity of the adiabatic nozzle flow model is
3 3.5
compressor with flow against a positive pressure gradi-
ent, whereas in an adiabatic nozzle flow reversal would
occur under those conditions.
Figure (11) illustrates the results of the turbine flow curve
fit. The accuracy is more than adequate.
VARIABLE GEOMETRY TURBINE – For variable geom-
etry turbochargers, the turbine area is modified by chang-
ing the inlet geometry. For example, in the case of
variable nozzle geometry, the throat area of the nozzles
is modified, resulting in a change in expansion ratio for
the same mass flow rate. One way to model the turbine
flow in the presence of a variable inlet geometry is to use
equation (51) where the effective area is also a function
of the (normalized) geometry setting. For turbine 2 a rea-
sonably good fit could be obtained this way without a tur-
bine speed dependence, i.e., the mass flow parameter is
12
expressed as a function only of the pressure ratio and the
inlet geometry setting. A slight variation of equation (51)
is given by
sion ratios. However, in light of the comments on turbo-
charger mapping limitations described earlier, the
observed decreased efficiency at lower expansion ratios
may be an artifact of heat transfer effects occurring dur-
ing the experimental procedure.
Turbine 2
0.4

φ
0.667

Scaled turbine mass flow parameter

0.5

where 1-g is the theoretical zero flow pressure ratio (the 0.2
intersection of the curves with the abscissa in Figure 12), 0.333

and g is fitted as a quadratic function in vane position.

0.167
The result of this fit is shown in Figure 12. 0

Turbine data for turbine 1

0.24

0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

φ

1
Turbine expansion ratio
6092
Scaled mass flow parameter

0.16
5415 Figure 12. Curve fit of turbine flow for turbine 2, using
4738
modified version of adiabatic nozzle flow.
4061 VGT setting, normalized between 0 and 1 is
indicated in the graph.
3045

0.08
Turbine data for turbine 2
0.4

1
φ

0.667
Scaled turbine mass flow parameter

0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

1
Turbine expansion ratio
0.5

Figure 11. Curve fit of turbine flow for turbine 1 for

0.2
different values of the speed parameter. 0.333

An alternative is to use a neural network with all inputs 0.167

0
(speed parameter, pressure ratio, and vane setting) and
one hidden layer with three neurons. The result of that fit
is shown in Figure 13. An interesting note on extrapola-
tion: the asterisks in Figure 13 mark the extrapolated tur- 0
2.5
1.5 2.0 3.0
bine flows at 10kRPM. It is apparent that these Turbine expansion ratio

extrapolation results do not make physical sense. Hence, Figure 13. Curve fit of turbine flow for turbine 2, using 3-
in order to get sensible extrapolation results for low tur- node neural network. VGT setting, normalized
bine speeds, the neural network needs to be supplied between 0 and 1 is indicated in the graph.
with additional, artificial mapping points forcing the net- The asterisks near the y-axis are the result of
work to provide much lower turbine flows at these low extrapolation of the turbine flow parameter to
speeds. For the previous fit based on the orifice flow 10kRPM turbine speed for the given VGT
equations the extrapolation did give sensible results. settings. This network would have to be
retrained and supplied with artificial mapping
CURVE FITTING OF TURBINE EFFICIENCY points at low turbine speeds to force it to give
more sensible low speed turbine flows.
For fixed turbine speed, the turbine efficiency typically
has the shape of an inverted parabola, and can usually The curve fit illustrated in Figure 14 is a quadratic polyno-
be modelled by a quadratic or cubic polynomial in blade mial in blade speed ratio with coefficients linearly depen-
speed ratio, with coefficients depending on the speed dant on the speed parameter:
parameter [5], [7], [8]. In [10], a correction factor at low
expansion ratios is used to account for the observed
accelerated decrease in efficiency at those lower expan- (54)

13
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
In this paper we have presented an overview of curve fit-
ting techniques for automotive turbochargers, motivated
by two facts: Turbocharger mapping data usually do not
span the operating range experienced on the engine,
hence a need for reliable extrapolation, and, even though
it still appears to be commonly used, the representation
in lookup tables is not well-suited for implementation in
dynamic engine simulation models. .
Turbine data for turbine 1
0.75
0.74
0.73
3046
Turbine efficiency
0.72
0.71
0.7
4061
0.69 4738
0.68
5415
0.67
6092
0.66
0.55 0.6 0.65
Blade speed ratio U/C
Figure 14. Curve fit of turbine efficiency turbine 1 for
different values of the speed parameter
The emphasis was on compressor flow rate curve fitting
for two reasons: engine models are generally more sensi-
tive to errors in mass flow than to errors in temperatures
(within reason, of course), and the compressor character-
istics are more difficult to capture based on first principles
models than the turbine characteristics. In other words,
the compressor flow rate representation is both the more
critical and the more challenging task. Four different
techniques were described and illustrated on three differ-
ent compressors. Based on the choice of input and out-
put, the methods can be classified into two categories:
Model I uses pressure ratio and speed to compute mass
flow, Model II uses mass flow and speed to compute
pressure ratio. The particular choice has interesting impli-
cations on the overall engine model. For a compressor
characterisation in the form of Model II, a neural network
appeared to be the most accurate technique for all three
compressors. It is also the most flexible in that its com-
plexity is easily changed by changing the number of neu-
rons or hidden layers. Furthermore, by combining
compressor pressure ratio and isentropic efficiency in
one network, the total number of coefficients compares
not unfavorably to the other techniques described. For a
compressor characterisation in the form of Model I how-
ever (typically used in control oriented mean value
engine models), a neural network was not found to give
an acceptable representation. Sensible extrapolation of
the model to lower turbocharger speeds and compressor
flow rates could not be obtained, even after manual mod-
ifications in the compressor mapping data. Instead, an
empirical model proposed by Jensen & Kristensen
appeared to be best suited.
For the representation of the turbine characteristics we
made a similar experience as for the compressor Model I
representation: a neural network can give an accurate fit
of the mapping points, but a sensible extrapolation to
lower expansion ratios and turbine speeds can only be
obtained by augmenting the experimental mapping data
with a suitable number of articial mapping points in those
areas. On the other hand, a more physically based model
using adiabatic nozzle flow equations extrapolated very
well without manual intervention in the mapping data.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Thanks to Michiel van Nieuwstadt from Ford Research
Laboratories and an anonymous reviewer for careful
reading of the draft paper. Thanks also to David Flaxing-
ton from Allied Signal/Garrett for a number of fruitful dis-
cussions.
REFERENCES
0.7 0.75 0.8
1. Demuth, H., Beale, M., "Neural Network Toolbox, version
3.0", The Mathworks, Inc., 1988.
2. Flaxington, D., Allied Signal/Garrett. Personal communica-
tion. July1996.
3. Fraden, J., "AIP Handbook of modern sensors", AIP Press,
1993.
4. Nelson, S.A., Filipi, Z.S., Assanis, D.N., "The use of neural
networks for matching compressors with diesel engines,"
Spring Technical Conference, volum ICE-26-3, pages 35-
42, 1996.
5. Jensen, J.P, Kristensen, A.F., Sorenson, S.C., Houbak, N. ,
Hendricks, E., "Mean value modeling of a small turbo-
charged diesel engine," SAE 910070.
6. Kao, M., Moskwa, J.J., "Turbocharged diesel engine model-
ing for nonlinear engine control and estimation", ASME
Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control,
Vol 117, 1995.
7. Kolmanovsky, I.V., Moraal, P.E., van Nieuwstadt, M.J., Crid-
dle, M., Wood, P., "Modeling and identification of a 2.0 l tur-
bocharged DI diesel engine". Ford internal technical report
SR-97-039, 1997.
8. Mueller, M., "Mean value modeling of turbocharged spark
ignition engines", Master’s thesis, DTU, Denmark, 1997.
9. Puskorius, G.V., Feldkamp, L.A., "Decoupled extended Kal-
man filter training of feedforward layered networks", Pro-
ceedings IJCNN, 1991.
10. Sher, E., Rakib, S., Luria, D., "A practical model for the per-
formance simulation of an automotive turbocharger", SAE
870295.
11. Sokolov, A.A., Glad, S.T., "Identifiability of turbocharged IC
engine models", SAE 1999.
14
12. Watson, N., "Dynamic turbocharged diesel engine simula-
tor for electronic control system development", Journal of
Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control 106, pp.27-
45, 1984.
13. Watson, N., Janota, M.S., "Turbocharging the internal com-
bustion engine", John Wiley & Sons, 1982.
14. Winkler, G., "Steady state and dynamic modeling of engine
turbomachinery systems", PhD Thesis, University of Bath,
1977.

15