Assessment of supercharging boosting

component for heavily downsized gasoline

engines
A Romagnoli, W S-I Wan-Salim, B A Gurunathan, R F Martinez-Botas
Imperial College London, UK
J W G Turner, N Luard
Powertrain Research and Technology, Jaguar Land Rover Limited, UK
R Jackson, L Matteucci
Lotus Engineering, UK
C Copeland, S Akehurst, A G J Lewis, C J Brace
University of Bath, UK

ABSTRACT
Current trend on engine downsizing forces engine manufacturers to contemplate
powertrains with more than one boosting device. The presence of these devices
leads to complex 1-D engine models which rely on performance maps provided by
turbo/supercharger manufacturers. So far, no detailed analysis has been carried
out to understand how these maps affect engine performance simulation. As part of
the UltraBoost project (65% gasoline engine downsizing), Imperial College tested
the boosting components of a turbo-super configuration. The acquired data were
used to assess the effectiveness of 1-D engine performance prediction and to
contemplate the opportunity to exploit the boosting system and use it as engine
charge air cooler in the form of an expander.
NOMENCLATURE
Abbreviation
BSFC Brake Specific Fuel
Consumption
BMEP Brake Mean Effective
Pressure
C
Flow velocity
cp
Specific Heat
Constant Pressure
ER
Expansion Ratio
HP
High pressure
LP
Low pressure
m
Mass Flow Rate
N
Speed
PR
Pressure Ratio
P
Pressure
T
Temperature
UB
UltraBoost
W
Power

Unit

[m/s]

Subscripts
OUT
INL
T
S
SC
TT

Unit

Outlet
Inlet
Total
Static
Supercharger
Total-to-total

[J/kgK]

[kg/s]
[rpm]

Greek

Density
[kg/m3]

Efficiency

Specific Heat Ratio

[Pa, bar]
[K]
[W]

_______________________________________
The author(s) and/or their employer(s), 2014

13

1 INTRODUCTION
The need for more efficient, more performing and less polluting engines is forcing
OEMs to significantly downsize engine capacity. The technical challenges associated
with engine downsizing (typically of up to 40%) are well understood and OEMs are
acting to develop engine concepts capable of real world fuel economy
improvements whilst delivering sufficient vehicle driveability and performance, for
example through turbocharging [1].
The UltraBoost programme is an ambitious project aiming to deliver a 2.0 Litre four
cylinder gasoline downsized demonstrator engine capable of up to 35 bar Brake
Mean Effective Pressure (BMEP), air pressure charging of up to 3.5 bar absolute and
offering approximately up to 35% potential for the reduction of fuel consumption
and CO2 emissions while still matching a JLRs 5.0 litre V8 naturally aspirated (NA)
engine performance figures (65% engine downsizing).

ENGINE POWER [kW]

ENGINE TORQUE [Nm] llloll

600
300
The target power and torque curves
are given in Fig. 1; these have
been used as baseline curves to
500
250
build up all the analysis carried out
in this paper. In order to meet the
400
200
targets outlined above, a high level
of boosting for the engine is
300
150
required. After an assessment
phase, looking at many different
200
100
options (including electrification of
some components), a two-stage
100
50
series arrangement was selected.
Torque
Power
This includes a LP stage (GT30R
0
0
turbocharger by Garrett) and a HP
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
stage
mechanical
supercharger
ENGINE SPEED (rpm)
from
EATON
(Fig.
2).
More
Figure 1: UB target Power and Torque
specifically, the supercharger is a
Roots type Twin Vortices Series
(EATON TVS R410) with a clutched, single speed drive. This supercharger is capable
of running with high adiabatic efficiency over a wide range of operating conditions.
The selection and matching of the boosting
system was mainly supported by 1-D engine
simulation (using GT-Power). Data for the
baseline engine platform where made
available by Jaguar Land Rover whereas for
the selection of the boosting components
(turbocharger
and
supercharger),
the
analysis relied on the performance maps
provided by the manufacturers [3].

Figure 2: UB engine system

layout [2]

14

Engine models (1-D in nature) are being

extensively used by engine makers since
they provide simple, fast but still physically
based tools for preliminary engine design.
The theory behind engine software is not
new and the main advantage is that its
development relies on extensive database
which
come
from
many
years
of
experimental activity and model optimization.
At present, the output prediction from

current models compares quite well with engine test bench data. However the level
of simplification intrinsically embedded in this software requires simulation
engineers to calibrate these models in order to compensate for the lack of data and
inadequate calculation routines in critical areas such as combustion, knock, surge,
turbine maps extrapolation etc. In addition to this, the rapid electrification of
powertrain also requires development of mathematical models for electric machines,
motors and generators which are not always available in standard software
packages.
Amongst the many areas which would require specific analysis, the current paper
intends to assess the impact on engine simulation output due to the presence of
boosting devices. In 1-D models, turbochargers and superchargers represent two
boundary conditions for the engine block since they determine the inlet pressure
and temperature of the charge air feeding the engine. However turbocharger
turbines present a long standing issue which is related with the width of turbine
performance maps provided by turbocharger manufacturers. These maps (usually
obtained with hot gas test stands) are narrow in range and force engine simulation
software to rely on significant extrapolated map points. In addition to this, the
advent of sequential/series installation on the intake side, forces the HP
compressors to operate at different inlet pressures and temperatures to what they
have been designed and tested for. Again this poses a question on how well the
HP compressors output parameters are predicted by current 1-D engine software.
2 AIM AND OBJECTIVES
The aim of this paper is to provide an insight into supercharging boosting
technology in heavily downsized gasoline engines. More in particular, two main
aspects of supercharging will be investigated:
assessment of the impact of above-ambient inlet conditions on supercharger
performance prediction in current 1-D engine software. Justification: see
Section 1. Implementation: experimental analysis and comparison with
GT-Power prediction.
assessment of supercharger performance when run as an expander (i.e. HP
stage declutched and driven by the pressurized air inlet instead of the engine
crankshaft). Justification: when not in use, the HP compressor could be
contemplated as an additional cooler for the engine charge air.
Implementation: experimental analysis.
3 EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS
3.1 Experimental set up
All of the Ultraboost engine development work was undertaken in one of the
University of Bath transient engine facilities. The facility features a twin
dynamometer arrangement with a 220kW AVL AC dynamometer supplemented by a
Froude eddy current brake to allow additional absorption up to the expected torque
and power rating of the Ultraboost engine. Maintaining the AC dynamometer
allowed motoring work to be undertaken for controller debugging and friction tests
as well as improved transient response during time to torque testing. All control
and data acquisition was performed using a Sierra-CP CADET V-14 control system.
In addition to standard temperatures and pressures, specific experimental hardware
was used for measuring engine speed, torque, combustion parameters, fuel flow,
emissions, intake manifold and engine blowby. Interfaces to the combustion
analysis, EMS, emissions analysers, CAN instruments, conditioning of combustion
air, fuel and cooling circuits were all achieved through the CADET v-14 software [4,
5].

15

Figure 3: Supercharger test rig overview

As per the supercharger analysis, a bespoke test facility was set up at Imperial
College with a 100 kW electric motor (nominal speed of 1800 rpm) used as main
drive. The speed of the motor is well below the nominal speed of the EATON
supercharger which is rated with a max. speed of 24000 rpm. Hence, in order to
achieve the required speed, a system of step-up gears was included in the rig
design (Fig. 3). The power absorbed by the supercharger was measured with a
torque meter positioned after the crankshaft pulley (Figs. 3 and 4). The pulleys/belt
assembly on the supercharger side replicates the same layout as the UB engine
using the same groove type pulley and belt (green box in Fig. 4). At the inlet to the
supercharger, mass flow rate, pressure and temperature were measured using a
V-cone (DP meter from ABLE), static pressure tappings (using a Scanivalve system)
and K-type thermocouples respectively. At the exit to the supercharger, only
pressure and temperature were measured (Fig. 4).

Figure 4: Supercharger testing layout

16

The inlet to the supercharger was built in modular units allowing two types of tests.
Referring to the black box in Fig. 4, Option 1 consists of letting the supercharger
inlet exposed to ambient conditions (atmospheric pressure and temperature)
whereas Option 2 allows the inlet pressure and temperature to the supercharger to
be set by means of an inline heater and compressor. Option 1 set up was used to
generate standard supercharger performance maps (refer to Section 3.2) whereas
Option 2 was used to generate test data for 1-D engine simulation comparison
(Section 4, above ambient inlet conditions) and to assess the supercharger
performance when run as an expander (Section 5).
3.2 Experimental results
In this section the test results for the UB engine and the HP stage (supercharger)
are reported.

600

300

500

250

400

200

300

150

200

100

Target Torque
Exp. Torque
Target Power
Exp. Power

100
0
0

1000

2000

3000

ENGINE SPEED [rpm]

4000

5000

6000

50

ENGINE POWER [kW]

ENGINE TORQUE [Nm]

The UB engine was tested at full load conditions for a range of speeds going from
1000 rpm to 6000 rpm. The engine set up included the boosting components (HP
and LP stage), EGR (Exhaust Gas Recirculation) control strategy and water cooled
exhaust manifold. In Fig. 5 the measured power and torque curves for the UB
engine (experimental Torque and experimental Power) have been compared with
those obtained from the baseline 5.0L engine (Target Torque and Target Power).
The figure shows that the UB engine meets the requirements for power and torque.
The full load curves at high engine rpm have not been completed due to some
issues which arose at the time of testing (even though a full sweep for power and
torque is currently being done and it will be material for future publications). At low
engine rpm instead (from 1000 rpm to 1250 rpm), the experimental torque shows
significant deficit when compared to baseline engine (28% and 12% less torque
and power respectively). This is due to the boost system not being able to deliver
the target pressure as initially predicted by the simulation during the selection
phase of the boosting components (for more details please refer to [3]).

0
7000
)

Figure 5: UB Target and Experimental Power and Torque

The HP stage was tested and its results compared with those provided by the
manufacturer. The isentropic efficiency (total-to-total) was calculated using the
thermodynamic correlations in Eq. 7. Besides the efficiency, an additional
parameter (here defined as Power Ratio) was also calculated. This is defined as the
ratio between the consumed power of the supercharger (WSC, Eq. 6) and the input
power (WSHAFT, Eq. 5) provided by the electric motor (measured with the torque
meter). Since the pulleys/belt assembly after the torque meter replicates the same
layout as that of the UB engine, the Power Ratio is intended to represent a pseudo-

17

mechanical efficiency for the SP-EB-CB (green box in Fig. 3). The Power Ratio
values were then used to generate a look-up table for the UB engine model in order
to determine the transmission losses occurring between the crankshaft and the
supercharger.

(3)

=
=

)
/

(5)
1
1

+ 0.5

(4)

,
,
,

(6)

(7)

(8)

The measured mass flow rate and efficiency results have been plotted in Figs. 6 & 7
and compared with those provided by EATON. From Fig. 6 it can be seen that the
mass flow rate values agree well with those measured by EATON. The trend for the
mass flow rate curves is consistent with the original maps from EATON and a
difference in mass flow no larger than 4% could be found. Different considerations
have to be made for the 18krpm and 20krpm where a larger discrepancy between
the mass flow rates (black and red points) was found. This can probably be
attributed to the higher temperatures experienced within the supercharger at
higher rotational speeds; this could lead to larger clearances between the
supercharger lobes and the casing (due to thermal expansion). This explanation
was partly supported by the supercharger manufacturer (EATON) which pointed out
the fact that the unit tested at Imperial College was a one-off prototype with
potentially different coating material for the lobes and hence with different response
to thermal variations (no further indication has been provided in this direction).
2.6

8krpm

10krpm

12krpm

14krpm 16krpm 18krpm

20krpm

6krpm

2.4

PRESSURE RATIO [TT]

2.2
2
1.8

4krpm

1.6
1.4

2krpm

1.2
1
0.00
0.02
0.04
MASS FLOW RATE [kg/s]

0.06

0.08
EATON

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16

IMPERIAL

Figure 6: Validation for supercharger mass flow rate measurements

18

As per the supercharger efficiency, good agreement between the EATON and
Imperial supercharger test data was also found (Fig. 7), with thermal efficiencies
beyond 70%. In the secondary axis, the Power Ratio values have also been
reported (dashed lines). The curves show that for low rotational speeds (2krpm to
6krpm) the power ratio values fall below 75%. However for rotational speeds which
are more representative of the supercharger speeds in real engine operating
conditions the power ratio climbs up to 85%.The speed ratio between engine
crankshaft and supercharger speed is 5.88. This means that for supercharger
speeds lower than 6000 rpm, the engine would be running at speeds less than
1000 rpm, operational speeds at which the supercharger will not be operating.
100%

90%
14krpm 16krpm
18krpm
12krpm

90%

85%

8krpm

80%
2krpm

70%

80%

4krpm 6krpm

75%

60%
50%

70%

40%

65%
20krpm

30%
20%

2krpm

60%

18krpm

14krpm
12krpm

55%

8krpm

10%

4krpm

6krpm

POWER RATIO

EFFICIENCY [TT]

20krpm

10krpm

16krpm

0%

50%
0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

MASS FLOW RATE [kg/s]

0.08

0.10
EATON

0.12

0.14
IMPERIAL

0.16

0.18
Power Ratio

Figure 7: Validation for supercharger efficiency measurements

(primary axis) and plot of the Power ratio (secondary axis)

4 COMPUTATIONAL ANALYSIS
The following paragraphs analyse the output of the GT-Power simulations for the HP
stage performance. This aim is to assess how well GT-Power simulation calculates
the performance parameters when the input values are different than ambient. The
GT-Power analysis was done using a validated 1-D engine model for the UB engine
(refer to Section 1). For validation, the results for the 1-D engine model was
compared to engine test bed results as described in Sections 1 and 3.2.
4.1 Supercharger performance analysis
The supercharger was tested for rotational speeds, inlet mass flows, pressures and
temperatures equivalent to those obtained from the UB engine at full load
conditions. The control strategy for the UB engine, forces the supercharger to
operate up to 3500 engine rpm ( 20580 supercharger rpm). However for the
current testing programme, it was chosen to not exceed 2500 engine rpm on the
test bed in order to avoid damaging the supercharger as a consequence of the large

19

inlet pressure and temperature. The comparison for the supercharger inlet
conditions between the 1-D simulation and the tests is given in Table 1. From the
table it is apparent that the speed, pressure, temperature and mass flow rate have
been set accordingly, with a discrepancy no larger than 1%.
Table 1: Supercharger inlet conditions (1-D simulation/Imperial Tests)
NEngine
[rpm]
NSC
[rpm]
Mass flow [kg/s]
Inlet Pres. [Pa]
Inlet Temp. [K]

1250
7350/7359
0.060/0.057
1.429/1.434
303/302

1500
8820/8844
0.0939/0.09
1.734/1.73
320/320

4.0

385

3.5

380

2000
11760/11750
0.180/0.172
2.320/2.321
333/332

2500
14700/14742
0.265/0.254
2.832/2.78
347/353

SC OUTLET TEMPERATURE [K]

SC OUTLET PRESSURE [bar]

1-D Simulation

3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5

1-D Simulation
Tests Imperial

2500

365
360
355
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
ENGINE SPEED [rpm]
0.9
0.8

10

0.7
0.6

8
EFFICIENCY

SC POWER [kW]

370

3000

12

6
4
2

375

350

1.0
500 1000 1500 2000
ENGINE SPEED [rpm]

Tests Imperial

0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2

1-D Simulation
Tests Imperial

0.1

1-D Simulation
Tests Imperial

0.0
500 1000 1500 2000
ENGINE SPEED [rpm]

2500

3000

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

ENGINE SPEED [rpm]

Figure 8: Comparison between measured and predicted SC data

In Fig. 8 the measured outlet conditions to the supercharger have been compared
with those obtained with the simulation (SC outlet pressure, SC outlet temperature,
SC power, SC efficiency). Even though the trend of all the measurements is well
captured by the simulation, the test results show that there are some discrepancies
between the measured and predicted data. At higher engine rpm, the measured
and predicted outlet pressures diverge significantly with a variation of about 6%
(P=0.21 bar). As per the temperature, there is no clear pattern between the
measured and predicted values. The same occurs for the SC power which shows
larger variations as the engine speed increases (at 2500 rpm, difference of about

20

30.7%, Power=3.53 kW). As per the efficiency, the results are believed to be
strongly biased by heat transfer effects. Heat transfer effects on compression
process for centrifugal machines were explained by the lead authors in [6].
Calculating the supercharger isentropic efficiency (using Eq. 7) when inlet
temperature is higher than ambient is no longer appropriated, since heat transfer
through the casing affects the SC exit temperature (which could partly explain the
disagreement observed between the predicted and measured outlet temperatures).
A variation in outlet temperature of 5C can lead to an efficiency variation of
several percentage points.
5 SUPERCHARGER AS AN EXPANDER
5.1 Turbo-expansion: initial simulation study
In pressure-charged engines, intake air pressure is raised by a compressor in order
to increase air density and therefore, specific power output. However, the charge
air temperature is also raised by the compression process, thus making intercooling
necessary to reject this heat to the environment. However, since heat exchangers
have effectiveness below unity, the temperature of the intake air will always be
above ambient temperature in a pressure charged engine. This increased air
temperature can lower the knock limit of the engine - making it necessary for lower
compression ratios or greater spark retard. Both of these mechanisms for knock
control can lead to compromises on fuel economy for a given BMEP target. While
there are other ways to improve knock tolerance in a pressure charged SI engine
(increasing EGR rates and improved port and combustion chamber design),
lowering charge temperature at start of compression could provide a direct route to
improved fuel economy.
The concept of turbo-expansion is not new indeed it has been used widely to
provide air conditioning to commercial aircraft for many years. The idea is a simple
one. If there is energy available to over-boost an air charge, this additional
pressure can be expanded over a turbine (expander) to remove heat. Therefore, if
the heat of compression is removed via a standard intercooler prior to expansion, it
is possible to cool the air charge below ambient temperature. Due to the potential
advantages of this approach, there have been recent attempts to apply this concept
to the air path of a SI engine. Perhaps most notably, the NOMAD engine
development project by Lotus Engineering [7, 8] sought to demonstrate the
advantages of turbo-expansion using an Opcon mechanical twin-screw expander.
The concept and the T-S diagram from this work are shown in Fig. 9.

Figure 9: Turbo expansion process [7]

21

Whelan et. al. [9, 10] proposed a slightly different turbo-expansion concept where
a compressor and turbine are both placed in the intake flow path to raise and lower
the intake pressure respectively. By removing heat between the compressor and
turbine stages with a second charge air cooler, the expansion stage will lead to
sub-ambient temperatures. This approach was investigated using the UltraBoost,
GT-Power model as part of an initial study into the possible benefits of turboexpansion to a highly downsized SI engine. In the model arrangement the
additional components were placed within the two stage supercharger/turbocharger
air path.
This brief study considered a single engine speed at 2000rpm where the
supercharger supplied an over-boost (pressure ratio +0.25) compared to standard
operation. The turbo-expander compressor provided final pressure ratio of 1.25
before rejecting heat through a heat exchanger (=0.85) and expanding through
the fresh-air turbine (expansion ratio ~1.5). The turbo-expander performance was
provided from scaled turbocharger maps which generated total to static efficiencies
of ~75%. Despite the additional parasitic loss of the supercharger (MEP= +0.8bar),
this was more than offset by the benefit of being able to advance ignition timing
due to the lower charge temperature at the end of the compression stroke. In fact,
the full-load BSFC was predicted to improve by 4-5% due the sub-ambient air
charge from the turbo-expander. Although it was not explored in this study,
diminishing returns could be expected for reduced expansion efficiencies as noted
by the work by Turner et.al. [8].
5.2 Eaton Supercharger as expander
The GT-Power simulation suggested that there could be significant benefits from
turbo-expansion air charge cooling. In addition, since the UltraBoost arrangement
places the supercharger downstream of the turbocharger, this posed an interesting
question, namely, could the Eaton supercharger be used as an effective expander?
While this would require additional boost from the turbocharger, there are
operating points where there is excess turbine energy that could be used to
generate additional boost by modulating the wastegate. In this situation, a
mechanical connected expander could present an indirect means to recover exhaust
gas energy.
Since, to the authors knowledge, there is no available performance test data of an
Eaton supercharger acting as an expander, the experimental facility at Imperial
College was used to test this capability. As shown in Fig. 4, the inlet to the
supercharger was pressurized with a compressor and allowed to expand from inlet
to exit. The temperatures and pressures were recorded as before and the resultant
torque and speed was measured. Figure 10 shows the expansion ratio versus mass
flow for the Eaton device operating as an expander at constant speeds of 2000rpm,
4000rpm and 8000rpm. For reference, the supercharging characteristics are also
presented as delivering a pressure ratio for speeds up to 10,000rpm. It can be
immediately noted that to deliver a similar mass flow range to the engine, the
supercharger must spin at a slower rotational speed if it is to operate as an
expander. As an example, if an expansion ratio of 1.4 is desired, in order to deliver
a similar engine mass flow, the supercharger would have to spin at approximately
half the speed compared to the operation as a compressor. While this dual purpose
is not possible with a fixed ratio drive, model-based research into the use of a
continuously variable transmission (CVT) supercharger has been carried out by the
University of Bath in reference [11]. Thus, the possible switching between
compressor and expander operations could be envisaged using such a variable ratio
drive system.

22

2.2

2.0

2.0

1.8

1.8

1.6

1.6

1.4

1.4

1.2

1.2

EXPANSION RATIO

PRESSURE RATIO

2.2

1.0

1.0
0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.10

0.11

0.12

0.13

MASS FLOW RATE [kg/s]

Imperial_4000rpm

Imperial_6000rpm

Imperial_8000rpm

Imperial_10000rpm

Imperial_12000rpm

SC_Expander_6000rpm

SC_Expander_4000rpm

SC_Expander_8000rpm

Figure 10: Pressure and Expansion Ratio of Eaton Supercharger versus

Mass Flow
Figure 11 demonstrates the total-to-total efficiency of the supercharger as an
expander compared to the compressor operation. The definition of expansion
efficiency is simply taken from a turbine definition as shown in Eq. 9. It is
immediately clear from this data that a substantial drop in isentropic efficiency is to
be expected from an attempt to use the EATON as an expander. This is not
surprising considering the design intent of the device was not to operate in this way.
The values are also reasonably consistent with those reported in reference [8].

1
,
1 (1(

/
)

,
,

(9)

Finally, Fig. 12 demonstrates the power that can be generated, and thus returned
to the engine, if it is operated as an expander. Picking up the example earlier, if an
expansion ratio of 1.4 is desired, approximately 1kW of power can be generated
while simultaneously reducing the air charge temperature.
These results represent an intriguing new use of an Eaton supercharger and show
that the device could be used as an expander in the series, turbo-super
arrangement if it were possible to change the drive ratio. However, it is also clear
that, operating as an expander, the supercharger can only deliver isentropic
efficiencies between 40-50%. It is this rather poor expansion efficiency that may
lead to diminishing returns from a sub-ambient intake air charge. To understand
the trade-off between additional turbocharger boost (turbine backpressure) and the
benefits from turbo-expansion across a supercharger, further modelling work must
be carried out using the data presented here.

23

1.800

1.700

1.700

1.600

1.600

1.500

1.500

1.400

1.400

1.300

1.300

1.200

1.200

1.100

1.100

1.000

PRESSURE RATIO

EXPANSION RATIO

1.800

1.000
0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

EFFICIENCY [TT]
SC_Expander_4000rpm

SC_Expander_6000rpm

SC_Expander_8000rpm

Imperial_4000rpm

Imperial_6000rpm

Imperial_8000rpm

Figure 11: Total to total isentropic efficiency of the supercharger operating

as a compressor and expander
1.800
1.700

EXPANSION RATIO

1.600
1.500
1.400
1.300
1.200
1.100
1.000
-2000
-1500
POWER SHAFT[W]

-1000

-500

SC_Expander_2000rpm

SC_Expander_4000rpm

SC_Expander_6000rpm

SC_Expander_8000rpm

Figure 12: Power harvested from the supercharger operating as an

expander
6 CONCLUSIONS
The current article describes the outcomes of a research conducted on a heavily
downsized gasoline engine (UltraBoost project, 65% engine downsizing). The
engine boosting system layout is a two-stage series layout, with a LP stage
(turbocharger) and a HP stage (EATON TVS supercharger). The analysis focussed
on the HP stage and is aimed at understanding the effectiveness of commercial 1-D
engine software when predicting the performance of boosting elements (a
supercharger in this case) with inlet conditions other than ambient (pressure and
temperature beyond atmospheric).

24

The EATON TVS supercharger was tested with similar speed, inlet pressure and
temperature as those predicted by the engine model at the inlet to the
supercharger. The operating conditions considered for the supercharger analysis
were equivalent to the engine running at full load conditions with speeds varying
from 1000 rpm to 2500 rpm. An agreement within 1% could be achieved for the
inlet conditions between simulation and experiments. As per the supercharger
output values, the test results showed that the 1-D engine software provides a
good prediction for the supercharger outlet pressure (max. discrepancy of 6%
encountered at 2500 rpm only). As per the outlet temperature and supercharger
power, the simulation and experiments show similar trend even though, the
difference between measured and predicted values can be significant for some
engine rpm. For instance the measured supercharger power was found to be 30.7%
higher than that predicted at 2500 rpm. As per the supercharger efficiency, no valid
comparison could be brought forward since the measured efficiency was found to
be significantly biased by heat transfer due to the heated air inlet temperature.
In addition to the supercharger simulation prediction analysis, an experimental
study on the supercharger performance was also carried out in order to assess the
opportunity to use the supercharger as an additional charger air cooler (i.e.
supercharger was run as an expander). The experiments showed that there is a
substantial drop in the supercharger isentropic efficiency when used in this way. A
penalty of more than 20 percentage points could be found (efficiencies less than
50%) for the speeds under exam (supercharger speeds 4000 rpm to 8000 rpm). On
the other hand, the test results also showed that a non-negligible amount of power
(more than 1kW) can be generated from the supercharger when run as an
expander. This suggests that, besides serving as a charge air cooler, the
supercharger could also be contemplated as a power generation system. These
results are quite interesting and could potentially open the way to consider a
supercharger as an enabler for enhanced engine fuel economy.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank the UK Technology Strategy Board (TSB) for
funding the UltraBoost project and all the consortium partners (Jaguar Land Rover,
Lotus Engineering, Shell Global Solutions, GE Precision Engineering, CD-Adapco,
University of Bath and University of Leeds) for the support provided.
REFERENCE LIST
[1]

[2]
[3]

[4]

[5]

Improving Fuel Economy by 35% through combined Turbo and Supercharging

on a Spark Ignition Engine, C. Salamon, M. Mc Allister, R. Robinson, S.
Richardson, R. Martinez-Botas, A. Romagnoli, C. Copeland, J. Turner, 21st
Aachen Colloquium Automobile and Engine Technology, 2012.
UB200 Boosting Layout, C. Carey, JLR Technical Presentation, Jaguar Land
Rover, Coventry, UK, June 2011.
Copeland, C., Martinez-Botas, R., Turner, J., Pearson, R., Luard, N., Carey, C.,
Richardson, S., Di Martino, P., Chobola, P., 2012. Boost System Selection for
Heavily Downsized Spark Ignition Prototype Engine, 10th IMechE International
Conference on turbochargers and turbocharging, London.
Karl. G., Andrew, L., Sam, A., Chris, B., nick, L., 2012. The effect of advanced
combustion control features on the performance of a highly downsized
gasoline engine, FISITA 2012 World Automotive Congress, Beijing, China,
F2012-A01-021.
Online source, University of Bath website: http://www.bath.ac.uk Powertrain
Vehicle & Research Centre (PVRC).

25

[6]

Romagnoli A, Martinez-Botas RF, 2012, Heat transfer analysis in a

turbocharger turbine: An experimental and computational evaluation, Applied
Thermal Engineering, Vol:38, 1359-4311, Pages:58-77.
[7] Turner, J., Pearson, R., Bassett, M., and Oscarsson, J., Performance and Fuel
Economy Enhancement of Pressure Charged SI Engines through
Turboexpansion An Initial Study. SAE paper no. 2003-01-0401.
[8] Turner, J., Pearson, R., Bassett, M., and Blundell, D. W., The Turboexpansion
Concept - Initial Dynamometer Results. SAE paper no. 2005-01-1853.
[9] Whelans, C., Richards, R., Turbo-cooling applied to light duty vehicle
engines, Congress, 2005.
[10] Whelans, C., Richards, R., Spence, S., Young, A., Design and Development of
a Turbo-expander for Charge Air Cooling IMECHE Turbochargers and
Turbocharging, 2010.
[11] Rose, A., Akehurst S., and Brace, C., Investigation into the trade-off between
the part-load fuel efficiency and the transient response for a highly boosted
downsized gasoline engine with a supercharger driven through a continuously
variable transmission Proc. of IMECHE, Part D: Journal of Auto. Eng., Sept.
2013, DOI: 10.1177/0954407013492932.

26