CN114519902A - Control device for monitoring a machine - Google Patents

Control device for monitoring a machine Download PDF

Info

Publication number
CN114519902A
CN114519902A CN202111374855.7A CN202111374855A CN114519902A CN 114519902 A CN114519902 A CN 114519902A CN 202111374855 A CN202111374855 A CN 202111374855A CN 114519902 A CN114519902 A CN 114519902A
Authority
CN
China
Prior art keywords
defect
control device
value
machine
values
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Pending
Application number
CN202111374855.7A
Other languages
Chinese (zh)
Inventor
霍尔格·皮耶塔
鞠高正
帕特里克·雷克
福尔克尔·米勒
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
Fev Group Co ltd
Original Assignee
Fev Group Co ltd
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Priority claimed from DE102020007100.7A external-priority patent/DE102020007100A1/en
Priority claimed from DE102021003415.5A external-priority patent/DE102021003415A1/en
Application filed by Fev Group Co ltd filed Critical Fev Group Co ltd
Publication of CN114519902A publication Critical patent/CN114519902A/en
Pending legal-status Critical Current

Links

Images

Classifications

    • G—PHYSICS
    • G07—CHECKING-DEVICES
    • G07C—TIME OR ATTENDANCE REGISTERS; REGISTERING OR INDICATING THE WORKING OF MACHINES; GENERATING RANDOM NUMBERS; VOTING OR LOTTERY APPARATUS; ARRANGEMENTS, SYSTEMS OR APPARATUS FOR CHECKING NOT PROVIDED FOR ELSEWHERE
    • G07C3/00—Registering or indicating the condition or the working of machines or other apparatus, other than vehicles
    • Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
    • Y02—TECHNOLOGIES OR APPLICATIONS FOR MITIGATION OR ADAPTATION AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE
    • Y02T—CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION TECHNOLOGIES RELATED TO TRANSPORTATION
    • Y02T10/00—Road transport of goods or passengers
    • Y02T10/10—Internal combustion engine [ICE] based vehicles
    • Y02T10/40—Engine management systems

Landscapes

  • Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Combined Controls Of Internal Combustion Engines (AREA)

Abstract

The invention relates to a control device for monitoring a machine and for monitoring the emission performance of the machine, wherein the monitoring is based on a comparison of: the relative position of the machine-based measured and/or operational value criteria with respect to the nominal value of the machine is compared. The control device (1) for monitoring a machine (2) according to the invention is designed and set up to carry out the following steps: -detecting (S10) measured values and/or operational values of the machine (2), -deriving a criterion (S20) based on the detected measured values and/or operational values, -comparing (S30) the criterion with a nominal value, wherein the nominal value represents a state of normal functioning of the machine (2), and determining (S31) a relative position of the criterion with respect to the nominal value, and-deriving (S40) a state of the machine (2) based on a result of the comparison and the determined relative position.

Description

Control device for monitoring a machine
Technical Field
The invention relates to a control device for monitoring a machine and for monitoring the emission performance of the machine, wherein the monitoring is based on a comparison of: the relative position of the machine-based measured and/or operational value criteria with respect to the nominal value of the machine is compared.
Background
DE 102014115485B 4 discloses a method for evaluating the robustness of at least one diagnostic function, wherein at least one characteristic value is determined for at least one characteristic variable of the diagnostic function.
Disclosure of Invention
The control device according to the invention for monitoring a machine is designed and set up to carry out the following steps:
-detecting measured and/or operational values of the machine,
-deriving a criterion based on the detected measured values and/or operational values,
-comparing the criterion with a nominal value, wherein the nominal value represents a state in which the machine is functioning properly, and finding the relative position of the criterion with respect to the nominal value, and
-ascertaining the state of the machine based on the result of the comparison and the determined relative position.
The control device determines the state of the machine on the basis of the result of the comparison and the determined relative position of the criterion with respect to the nominal value, in such a way that the invention achieves: the robustness of the calculation can be improved, and the robustness of the monitoring can be further improved.
The effectiveness of the monitoring is understood as robustness. If the monitoring indicates that the machine is functioning properly despite the machine being defective, or indicates that the machine is defective despite the machine functioning properly, the monitoring is not robust. Since the measured and/or operating values detected are often subject to fluctuations, the criterion sought is also subject to fluctuations. If the monitoring indicates that the state of the machine is correct despite the fluctuations, the monitoring can be considered robust.
The machine is preferably a vehicle, in particular an internal combustion engine. In principle, however, the control device according to the invention can be used in a machine for which monitoring of measured values and/or operating values is considered for the vehicle.
Variables describing the state of the machine are understood as measured values and/or operating values. This can be, for example, efficiency, noise emission and/or pollutant emission, temperature or pressure. In this case, for example, measurements and calculations by a model or readings from a characteristic map are understood as detection.
The criterion, which is based on the detected measured and/or operational values of the machine, characterizes the current state of the machine. In this case, the criterion can correspond to a detected measured value and/or a running value. However, in particular if more than one measured and/or operating value of the machine is detected, it is advantageous to convert the detected measured and/or operating values into a standard suitable for characterizing the machine. If the machine is in a nominal state, i.e. functioning properly, the standard takes a nominal value.
The nominal value represents a state in which the machine is functioning properly. The nominal value can be related to the operating state of the machine. The further the machine deviates from the nominal state, the further the standard deviates from the nominal value.
Preferably, the control device is designed and set up to repeatedly carry out the steps of detecting, determining the criterion, comparing and determining the state.
The control device repeatedly executes the steps of detecting, evaluating the standard, comparing and evaluating the state, and in this way, the invention achieves: the machine can be monitored over a period of time and/or for a plurality of monitored processes.
Preferably, the steps of detecting, evaluating the criteria, comparing and evaluating the status are performed continuously. Particularly preferably, the control device is used for so-called on-board diagnostics of the machine.
In order to control the robustness of the monitoring, the control device can, for example, determine from the relative position of the criterion with respect to the nominal value: the frequency or duration of the repetition of the steps. If the relative position of the criteria is far from the nominal value, the steps are performed more frequently or longer in order to obtain an unambiguous result. Conversely, if the relative position of the criteria is close to the nominal value, it may be sufficient to repeat the steps less often or to perform the steps in a shorter period of time to obtain an unambiguous result.
The control device is preferably designed and set up to additionally take into account the defect values during the comparison and to determine the relative position of the criterion with respect to the nominal value and with respect to the defect values. The defect value represents a defective state of the machine.
The control device considers the determination of the machine state on the basis of the result of the comparison and the relative position of the criterion with respect to the nominal value and with respect to the defect value, in such a way that the invention achieves: the relative position of the criteria can be evaluated with respect to the defective state of the machine and with respect to the state of normal functioning of the machine. This increases the effectiveness of the relative position, which also increases the robustness of the monitoring.
The control device is preferably designed and set up to determine a defect measure on the basis of the relative position of the criteria and to take the determined defect measure into account when determining the machine state.
The invention achieves that the control device takes into account a specific defect measure when determining the machine state, in such a way that: the defect measure of the machine is taken into account in the monitoring.
Preferably, for determining the defect measure, the control device maps a range between the nominal value and the defect value onto a range between two defined values a and B, preferably 0 and 1. The mapping function is particularly preferably continuous and monotonous here. The nominal value maps to a value a and the defect value maps to a value B. An example of a mapping function is a linear mapping or an S-function. The mapping function can be related to an operating state of the machine. In contrast, the values a and B are independent of the operating state.
The values of the criterion on the side of the nominal value facing away from the defect value are mapped onto values smaller than or equal to a. The values of the criteria located on the side of the defect values deviating from the nominal value are mapped onto values greater than or equal to B. The same mapping function, extrapolation or another function can be used for the mapping. But it is also particularly preferred that the function is continuous and monotonic. Advantageously, the function is limited upwards and downwards and tends towards extreme values for values that deviate far from the nominal value and/or the defect value.
The value determined by the mapping of the criteria can be considered a defect measure for the machine. A defect measure below or near a indicates that the machine is functioning properly and a defect measure near or above B indicates that the machine is defective. The defect measure between a and B is ambiguous, wherein when determining the machine state, it can be indicated from the defect measure: whether the machine is defective or functioning properly. The duration or number of repetitions of detecting, evaluating, comparing and evaluating states can also be adjusted based on the defect metrics.
The control device is preferably designed and set up to determine the debounce speed on the basis of the relative position of the criteria and to take the determined debounce speed into account when determining the machine state.
The control device takes into account the determined debounce speed when determining the machine state, by which means the invention provides: when the state is obtained, the debounce speed can be used as a speed parameter, so that the determined robustness can be improved, and the monitoring robustness can be improved.
Preferably, the control device maps the defect measure onto another range of values defined by the values C, D and E. Advantageously, C is less than D and D is less than E. For example, C corresponds to the value-1, D corresponds to the value 0, and E corresponds to the value 1. Here, the defect metric at a point near A is mapped onto C, the defect metric at a point defined between A and B is mapped onto D, and the defect metric at a point near B is mapped onto E. The defined points particularly preferably correspond to the limit values. If the mapped defect metric lies between D and E, then it is known to be a defective machine, and if the mapped defect metric lies between C and D, then it is known to be a properly functioning machine.
Preferably, the mapping function is continuous and monotonic. Advantageously, the mapping function is constrained to very large and very small values of the defect measure and tends towards a lower limit value and/or an upper limit value.
The mapping of the defect measure, i.e. the debounce speed, can be used as a speed parameter for finding the machine state. This can for example mean: a few unambiguous results are sufficient when the debounce speed is high, but many results are required when the debounce speed is low, before the control device considers the results to be robust and finds the machine state. For example, a negative debounce speed can trigger a determination of a properly functioning state, while a positive debounce speed can trigger a determination of a defective state.
In the case where the defect measure between a and B is ambiguous, the debounce rate is 0 or close to 0. The seeking does not terminate or lasts for a very long time. This is consistent with ambiguous results and solves the problem of random results in this situation.
The control device is preferably designed and set up to determine the probability that the machine is functioning properly and/or defective on the basis of the relative position of the criteria and to take into account the determined probability when determining the machine state.
The control device takes into account the determined probability when determining the machine state, by means of which the invention provides: the duration or number of repetitions of the steps of detecting, evaluating the criteria, comparing and evaluating the state is adjusted according to the determined probability.
Preferably, in order to determine the first probability, the control device maps the defect measure onto a range of values which is equal to or slightly below 1 for defect measures below a and equal to or slightly above 0 for values above B. A monotonic transition occurs between a and B. The result of this mapping can be seen as the probability that the criterion that occurred is less than the defect measure considered. Thus, the result of the mapping indicates a probability that the machine is functioning properly.
Furthermore, the control device preferably determines a second probability, which represents the probability that the machine is defective. For this purpose, the control device maps the defect measure onto a range of values which is equal to or slightly above 0 for defect measures below a and equal to or slightly below 1 for values above B. The result of this mapping indicates the probability of the machine being defective.
To solve the state, the control device repeats the steps of detecting, solving the criterion, comparing, and solving the state, and calculates the product of the first and second probabilities by separately multiplying the calculated first and second probabilities. If one of the two probability products is below the first limit value, but the other remains above the second limit value, the determination of the state is ended. These two limit values can be related to the number of probabilities calculated.
The result of the machine state is derived from the relationship of the two probability products to each other. If the first probability product is less than the second probability product, the control device determines a defect state of the machine. Otherwise, the control device determines a state of normal functioning of the machine.
Particularly preferably, the control device terminates the determination of the state without consequence if both probability products are below the second limit value and/or at least one probability product is below the third limit value.
Additionally or alternatively, a maximum number of the determined probabilities can be defined, upon reaching which the control device aborts the determination of the state without consequence.
The control device according to the invention for monitoring the emission performance of a machine is designed and set up to carry out the following steps:
-determining a first defect measure of a first component of the machine,
-determining a first emission impact based on the determined first defect measure, and-monitoring an emission performance of the machine based on the first emission impact.
The invention achieves that the control device monitors the emission behavior of the machine on the basis of the first emission influence, in such a way that: during monitoring of the function of the first component, in this case determining of the first defect measure, the emission performance is evaluated. Therefore, the invention has the following advantages: the emissions are evaluated by determining a first emission impact when performing on-board diagnostics (OBD) of the machine, and the evaluation is taken into account when monitoring the emission performance.
The control device for monitoring the emission behavior can in this case be in particular a control device according to the invention for monitoring a machine, which is designed and set up for monitoring the emission behavior. In addition or as an alternative to the step for monitoring the machine, a control device for monitoring the machine can carry out the step for monitoring the emission performance.
A defect measure is herein understood to be a measure representing the degree of machine defects. The control device for monitoring the emission performance is preferably designed and set up to determine the first defect measure, as is the case with the control device for monitoring the machine, on the basis of the relative position of the criteria determined as a function of the detected measured values and/or operating values of the machine. In particular, it is preferred that the control device for monitoring the machine and the control device for monitoring the emission behavior are formed as one control device.
Emission influence is understood here as the influence of the state of the first component on the emission behavior. If the first component is in a nominal state, the emission impact corresponds to a nominal emission. Conversely, if the state of the first component deviates from the nominal state, the defect measure no longer corresponds to the nominal value, and the emission impact of the first component generally deviates from the nominal emission.
Emission is understood herein to mean the output of emissions by a machine to the environment.
Monitoring is understood here as a comparison of the emission performance with an expected or desired emission performance. The expected or desired emission behavior can be generated in particular from the legal regulations of the emissions. Emissions are understood here to be harmful substances, carbon dioxide and noise emissions. In particular, if the machine has an emission performance deviating from the expected or desired emission performance due to a defect of the first component, the monitoring can also comprise informing an operator of the machine, making a functional limitation or even an automatic shutdown of the machine.
Preferably, the control device determines the first emission influence from a mapping of the first defect measure by means of a function. The mapping function can be a linear mapping or an S-function, for example. In particular, the mapping function can be related to the operating state of the machine.
Further preferably, the mapping function maps the smallest first defect measure onto the emission contribution corresponding to the nominal emission. The mapping function maps the largest first defect measure to a value which, for example, requires a machine shutdown or at least a machine repair due to legal regulations, because a specified limit value is reached or exceeded.
In particular, if the first defect measure and the emission contribution are not proportional to one another, that is to say the emission increases, for example, both when the defect measure becomes large and small, a more complex mapping function is required, which for example has a non-monotonic behavior, so that, for example, an increase in the emission contribution can be followed even if the defect measure becomes small. If the defect measure can deviate from the nominal value in two directions, but only one direction causes an increase in emission impact, the mapping function is defined such that the defect measure is mapped only in that direction to a value indicating that the machine that caused the increase in emission impact is shut down or at least repaired.
The control device is preferably designed and set up to use a statistical function if the first emission effect is determined.
The control device determines the first emission contribution using a statistical function, by which means the invention achieves: a plurality of first defect metrics can be considered in determining the first ranking effect. This makes it possible to reduce the strong fluctuations of the first emission influence, since the individual outliers of the first defect measure are reduced by the statistical function.
A statistical function is preferably understood here as an average or median value of the first defect measure. The control device can here apply a statistical function to the first defect measure and determine the first emission impact on the basis of the averaged first defect measure, for example, or directly determine the first emission impact on the basis of the first defect measure and apply the statistical function to the determined first emission impact.
Particularly preferably, the control device determines the first emission influence on the basis of an average of the first defect measure, wherein the control device averages the first defect measure over the debounce period. A debounce period is understood here as a measure of time within which the control device classifies a measurement as authentic or not. The debounce period can be defined here as a time preset or the number of data points. Here, the debounce period can be dynamically adjusted. The debounce period can be shortened if the measurement data is unambiguously trusted, but can be extended if the measurement data is not unambiguously.
Preferably, the control device is designed and set up to take into account the nominal emissions of the machine when determining the first emissions effect.
The invention achieves that the control device takes into account the nominal emissions of the machine when determining the first emissions effect, in such a way that: the emission effect can be taken into account not only in absolute terms, but also additively or multiplicatively.
Adding here means: the emission impact is added as a factor to the nominal emission. The minimum defect measure corresponds here, for example, to a coefficient of 0 for the emission effect.
Multiplication is here represented as: the emission impact is multiplied by the nominal emission as a factor. Here, the smallest defect measure would correspond, for example, to a factor of 1 for the emission impact.
Preferably, the control device is designed and set up to determine at least one further emission effect and to monitor the emission performance of the machine on the basis of the first and the at least one further emission effect.
The invention achieves that the control device determines the emission performance on the basis of the first and at least one further emission influence, in such a way that: if the machine includes more than one component and/or more than one emission, the emission performance of the machine can also be monitored.
Preferably, the control device is designed to monitor a plurality of emission configurations and to use different mapping functions for different emissions, since a defect of the first component can have different, possibly even opposite, effects on different emissions. By using a different mapping function, the control device can advantageously determine, for each emission, a corresponding emission impact based on the first defect measure.
Preferably, the control device is designed and set up to determine at least one further defect measure in the case of more than one component to be monitored. The control device can then use at least one further defect measure in order to determine a corresponding emission impact for one or more emissions to be monitored.
In particular, the control device is preferably designed and set up for monitoring a plurality of emissions for a plurality of components to use individual mapping functions for the respective emissions and to determine a defect measure for each component. The individual mapping function for each emission can in this case be different for each component, in order to take into account: the effect of the defect metric of the first component on the observed emission may be different from the defect metric of the second component.
In particular, the invention achieves: an overall assessment of emissions is possible even in the event of failure of a plurality of component parts. This is advantageous for example for the following cases: failure of parts of individual components does not lead to error messages, but in combination leads to exceeding the limit values.
Further advantageous embodiments of the invention are described below.
Drawings
Preferred embodiments are explained in detail in accordance with the following figures. Shown here are:
FIG. 1 illustrates one embodiment of a powertrain having a control apparatus;
FIG. 2 illustrates one embodiment of the steps performed by the control device for ascertaining machine state;
FIG. 3 illustrates one embodiment of determining a defect metric and a debounce rate;
FIG. 4 illustrates one embodiment of determining the first and second probabilities;
FIG. 5 illustrates one embodiment of steps performed by the control device for monitoring an emissions performance of a machine;
FIG. 6 illustrates one embodiment of determining first, second, and third emissions effects.
Detailed Description
Fig. 1 shows a drive train 2 for a vehicle. The drive train 2 comprises an intake line 9, an internal combustion engine 3, an exhaust line 10 and a first exhaust gas circuit 11 and a second exhaust gas circuit 12. Here, the intake line 9 is disposed upstream of the internal combustion engine 3. An exhaust line 10 is arranged downstream of the combustion engine 3 and comprises the exhaust gas purification system 4.
The internal combustion engine 3 is configured as a supercharged direct-injection diesel engine having four cylinders 13. For this purpose, the internal combustion engine 3 comprises an exhaust-gas turbocharger 14. The exhaust-gas turbocharger 14 comprises a compressor 15 arranged in the intake line 9 and a turbine 16 arranged in the exhaust line 10. The turbine 16 and the compressor 15 are coupled to one another in such a way that the energy absorbed by the turbine 16 from the exhaust gas can be used by the compressor 15 for compressing the fresh gas to an increased pressure level.
For introducing the diesel fuel into the cylinders 13, the internal combustion engine 3 comprises an injection device 30. The injection means 30 comprise an injector, an inlet line and a fuel supply for each cylinder 13.
The exhaust gas purification system 4 includes a Diesel Oxidation Catalyst (DOC)5, an SCR system, and an ammonia slip catalyst (ASK) 7. The DOC5 is configured to reduce emissions of carbon monoxide and unburned hydrocarbons.
The SCR system is disposed downstream of the DOC5 and includes an SCR13 catalyst 6, a dosing unit 19, and a mixer 20. The metering unit 19 is designed and set up to introduce ammonia (NH3) into the exhaust gas line 10 upstream of the SCR catalyst 6. The introduced ammonia and the exhaust gas are mixed in a mixer 20 arranged between the metering unit 19 and the SCR catalyst 6. The SCR catalytic converter 6 is designed and set up to reduce NOx emissions with ammonia.
For detecting NOx emissions, a NOx sensor 22 is arranged downstream of the exhaust gas aftertreatment system 4.
The first exhaust gas circuit 11 is arranged upstream of the exhaust gas purification system 4 and is designed to discharge exhaust gas upstream of the turbine 16 of the exhaust gas turbocharger 14 from the exhaust line 10 and to supply it to the intake line 9 downstream of the compressor 15 of the exhaust gas turbocharger 14. The second exhaust gas circuit 12 is designed to discharge exhaust gas downstream of the DOC5 from the exhaust line 10 and to supply it to the intake line 9 upstream of the compressor 15 of the exhaust gas turbocharger 14. By means of the first exhaust gas circuit 11 and the second exhaust gas circuit 12, a preferred exhaust gas recirculation rate can be provided for the operation of the internal combustion engine 3 and the most efficient possible operation of the internal combustion engine 3 can be achieved.
The powertrain 2 includes a control apparatus 1. The control apparatus 1 is constructed and arranged to execute a control program. The control program includes commands to perform the steps shown in fig. 2:
detecting S10 a plurality of measured and operational values of the machine 2,
-deriving an S20 criterion based on the detected measured and operational values,
comparing S30 the criteria with a nominal value and a defect value, wherein the nominal value represents a properly functioning state of the machine 2 and the defect value represents a defective state of the machine 2, and determining S31 the relative position of the criteria with respect to the nominal value and the defect value,
determining S32 a defect metric based on the determined relative position of S31 of the criterion,
-determining S33 a debounce rate based on the determined defect measure S32, and
-determining S40 a state of the machine 2 based on the result of comparing S30, the determined relative position of S31, the determined defect measure of S32 and the determined debounce speed of S33.
The control unit program is used here for on-board monitoring of the drive train. For this purpose, the control device program continuously executes the steps of detecting S10, finding the norm S20, comparing S30, finding the relative position of the norm S31, determining S32 the defect measure, determining S33 the debounce speed and finding the state S40.
The control program detects information about the SCR catalyst 6, NOx emissions downstream of the exhaust gas aftertreatment system 4 and the speed and load of the internal combustion engine 3 as measured values and operating values. The revolutions and the load are supplied to the control device by the motor control means, the NOx emissions are measured by the NOx sensor 22, and the control device program finds the state of the SCR catalyst 6 by executing a model for calculating the ageing, loading and temperature of the SCR catalyst 6.
The control device program finds the criterion based on the detected measured values and the operating values S20. For this purpose, the control program compares the ascertained NOx emissions and the ascertained state of the SCR catalyst 6 with the ascertained expected values of the load and the speed of rotation. The expected values are stored in a characteristic map that can be called for by the control unit program. Thus, the standard characterization measurement and operational values of S20 are evaluated to the extent that they correspond to the expected state of powertrain 2.
The control device program includes a command to compare the evaluated criteria of S20 with the nominal value and the defect value S30. The nominal value represents a properly functioning state of the powertrain 2 and the defect value represents a defective state of the powertrain 2. If powertrain 2 is in the nominal state, the criterion of S20 is found to substantially correspond to the nominal value. The farther the powertrain deviates from the nominal condition, i.e., becomes more and more defective, the closer the criterion of S20 is found to the nominal value and the closer to the defective value.
If the detected NOx emissions and the detected state of the SCR catalyst 6 correspond as closely as possible to the detected revolutions and the expected value of the detected load, the criterion of S20 is evaluated closer to the nominal value than to the defect value. If the detected NOx emissions and the detected state of the SCR catalyst 6 do not correspond to the expected values, the sought criterion S20 is closer to the defect value than to the nominal value. If the detected state of only the NOx emissions or only the SCR catalyst 6 corresponds to the expected value, the sought criterion S20 may lie relatively centrally between the nominal value and the defect value. Thus, it may not be clear explicitly whether the powertrain 2 is defective or functioning properly.
In order to robustly solve the state of the powertrain at S40, the control device program therefore includes commands that take into account the standard relative position, defect measure and debounce speed when solving state S40. For this purpose, the control unit program first determines the relative position of the criterion S31 by: the distance of the standard from the nominal value and the defect value is calculated.
To determine S32 the defect measure, the control device program comprises a command to map a value range between the nominal value and the defect value onto a value range between two defined values a and B. The values a and B are here 0 and 1 as shown in the upper diagram of fig. 3. The control device program uses a linear function as the mapping function for an exemplary operating point of the powertrain 2. The control device program uses other functions for some operating points. The nominal value NW is mapped onto the value a and the defect value DW is mapped onto the value B.
The values of the standard which lie on the side of the nominal value which faces away from the defect value are mapped onto values which are smaller than a. The values of the criteria located on the side of the defect values deviating from the nominal value are mapped to values larger than B. The control device program uses the same linear function for these mappings, and the control device uses another function or extrapolation method for some operating point programs to map the criteria. The linear function is limited in this case upward and downward, so that values which exceed the nominal value and the limiting value, i.e. values which are smaller than a or larger than B, tend toward the limiting value.
The mapped value of the criteria corresponds to a defect measure of the powertrain 2. A map value below or near a indicates a properly functioning powertrain 2 and a result near or above B indicates a defective powertrain 2. The results between a and B are ambiguous.
To determine the S33 debounce rate, the control device program includes a command to map the determined defect metric of S32 onto another range of values, as shown in the lower diagram of fig. 3. The other range of values is defined by the three values C, D and E. Here, C is smaller than D, and D is smaller than E, i.e., C ═ 1, D ═ 0, and E ═ 1. Here, the defect metric at a point close to a is mapped on C, the defect metric close to the defect metric preset between a and B is mapped on D, and the defect metric at a point close to B is mapped on E. The predetermined defect measure corresponds to a limit value which defines a limit between a functional and a defective drive train 2.
The mapping function is continuous but the slope is zero in the region of the value D. For very large and very small values of the defect measure, the function is limited and tends towards a lower and an upper limit.
The control device program uses the determined debounce speed of S33 as a parameter for determining the state of S40 powertrain 2. Some unambiguous results are sufficient in case the debounce speed is high, i.e. near 1 or-1, and in case the debounce speed is low, i.e. near 0, many results are needed before the evaluation state S40 is considered robust. Here, a negative debounce speed corresponds to a properly functioning powertrain 2, and a positive debounce speed corresponds to a defective powertrain 2.
In the case of an ambiguous defect measure between a and B, the debounce rate is 0 or close to 0, and the state of powertrain 2 is found S40 never ends or lasts for a very long time. This is consistent with ambiguous results and solves the problem of random results in this situation.
In an alternative embodiment, instead of debounce speed, the control device program includes commands for finding the first and second probability products, comparing the first and second probability products with the first and second limit values, and finding S40 the state of powertrain 2 based on the result of comparing the probability products with the limit values.
For this purpose, the control device program performs a first mapping as shown in the upper diagram of fig. 4, which maps the determined defect measure S32 onto a value range from zero to one. Here, defect metrics less than or equal to a are mapped to a value of 1, and defect metrics greater than or equal to B are mapped to a value of 0. The defect measure between a and B is mapped to a value between zero and one via the S-function. The result of this mapping yields the probability that the powertrain 2 is functioning properly.
The control device program performs a second mapping as shown in the lower diagram of fig. 4, which maps the defect measures onto a value range from zero to one, so that defect measures smaller than or equal to a are mapped onto a value 0, defect measures larger than or equal to B are mapped onto a value 1, and defect measures between a and B are mapped onto values between 0 and 1 by means of the S-function shown. The result of the second mapping yields a probability that powertrain 2 is defective.
To determine S40 the state of drive train 2, the control program includes a command to determine the product of the first and second probabilities by: the calculated first and second probabilities are multiplied separately from each other. The determination of the state of the drive train 2 is ended when one of the two probability products is below a first limit value and the other probability product is simultaneously above a second limit value. The first and second limit values are defined based on the calculated quantities of the first and second probabilities.
The control device program determines the result of the state S40 from the relationship of the products of these two probabilities. If the second probability product is greater than the first probability product, the control unit program determines a defective drive train 2. If the first probability product is greater than the second probability product, the control program determines a properly functioning drive train 2.
If the two probability products are below the second limit value and/or at least one probability product is below the third limit value, the evaluation state S40 is aborted and restarted without a result. Additionally, a maximum number of calculated probabilities is defined, at which point the control device program aborts the determination state S40 and restarts after the waiting period has elapsed.
In an alternative exemplary embodiment, the control device 1 of the drive train 2 is designed and set up for monitoring the emission performance. For this purpose, the control device 1 is constructed and set up to execute a control program. The control program includes commands to perform the steps shown in fig. 5:
detecting S100 a plurality of measured values and operating values of the powertrain 2,
-determining S210 a first criterion of SDPF6 based on the detected measurement values and operational values,
determining S220 a second criterion of the DOC5 based on the detected measured value and the operational value,
comparing S310 the first criterion with a first nominal value and a first defect value, wherein the first nominal value represents a properly functioning state of the SDPF6 and the first defect value represents a defective state of the SDPF6, and determining S410 a relative position of the first criterion with the first nominal value and the first defect value,
comparing S320 the second criteria with a second nominal value representing a properly functioning state of the DOC5 and a second defect value representing a defective state of the DOC5, and determining S420 a relative position of the second criteria with the second nominal value and the second defect value,
determining S510 a first defect measure of the SDPF6 based on the determined relative position of the first criterion S410,
determining S520 a second defect measure of the DOC5 based on the determined relative position S420 of the second criterion,
determining S610 a first emission impact based on the determined first defect measure S510,
determining S620 a second emission impact based on the determined first defect measure S510,
-determining S630 a third emission impact based on the determined second defect metric S520,
-determining S700 a total emission impact based on the determined first S610, second S620 and third S630 emission impact, and
monitoring S800 an emission performance of the powertrain 2 based on the total emission impact S700.
The control device program is used here for on-board diagnostics together with the evaluation of the emissions of the drive train 2. To this end, the control device program continuously executes the following steps: detecting S100, finding S210, S220 first and second criteria, comparing S310, S320, determining S410, S420 relative positions of the first and second criteria, determining S510, S520 first and second defect metrics, determining S610, S620, S630 first, second and third emissions effects, determining S700 total emissions effects, and monitoring S800 the emissions performance of powertrain 2, as indicated by the dashed line in FIG. 5 from step S800 to step S100.
The control device program detects information about the DOC5, the SDPF6, the NOx emissions downstream of the exhaust gas aftertreatment system 4 and the number of revolutions and the load of the internal combustion engine 3 as measured and operational values. The revolutions and load are supplied to the control device by the motor control means, NOx emissions are measured by the NOx sensor 22, and the control device program finds the states of the DOC5 and SDPF6 by executing a model for calculating the aging, loading and temperature of the DOC5 and SDPF 6.
The control device program determines S210 a first criterion based on the detected measured values and the operating values. To this end, the control device program compares the sought NOx emissions and the sought state of SDPF6 with the sought revolutions and expected values of the load. The expected values are stored in a characteristic map that can be called for by the control unit program. Similarly, the control device program finds S220 a second criterion based on the information about the DOC 2. Thus, the first and second evaluated criteria S210, S220 characterize the extent to which the measured and operational values correspond to the expected state of the SDPF6 or DOC 5.
The control device program comprises a command to compare the sought first criterion S210 with a first nominal value and a first defect value S310. The first nominal value represents a properly functioning state of SDPF6 and the first defect value represents a defective state of SDPF 6. If SDPF6 is in the nominal state, the first criterion S210 that is evaluated substantially corresponds to the first nominal value. The further SDPF6 deviates from the nominal state, i.e. it becomes more and more defective, the further away from the first nominal value and the closer to the first defect value the first criterion S210 is sought.
If the detected NOx emissions and the detected state of SDPF6 correspond as closely as possible to the expected values of detected revolutions and detected load, the first criterion S210 is derived closer to the first nominal value than to the first defect value.
If the detected NOx emissions and the detected state of SDPF6 do not correspond to expected values, then the first criterion S210 is derived to be closer to a first defect value than to a first nominal value. If the detected condition of only NOx emissions or only SDPF6 corresponds to an expected value, the first criterion S200 that is evaluated may be relatively centered between the first nominal value and the first defect value. It is not clear explicitly whether SDPF6 is defective or functioning properly.
The control device program further comprises a command to compare the sought second criterion S220 with a second nominal value and a second defect value S320. The second nominal value represents a properly functioning state of the DOC5, and the second defect value represents a defective state of the DOC 5. If DOC5 is in the nominal state, then the second criterion S220 that is evaluated substantially corresponds to the second nominal value. The further the DOC5 deviates from the nominal state, i.e. it is more and more defective, the further away the sought second criterion S220 is from the second nominal value and closer to the second defect value.
The second criterion S220 is found to be closer to the second defect value or closer to the second nominal value, depending on how much the detected state of the DOC5 corresponds to the detected number of revolutions and the expected value of the load.
To robustly solve the state of the SDPF6 and the state of the DOC5, the control device program includes commands that take into account the relative position of the first or second criteria, the first and second defect metrics, and the first and second debounce rates when solving the states. For this purpose, the control device program first determines the relative position of the first and second criteria S410, S420 by: the control device program calculates the distance of the first standard from the first nominal value and the first defect value and calculates the distance of the second standard from the second nominal value and the second defect value.
To determine S510 the first and second defect metrics, the control device program comprises a command to map a range of values between the first nominal value and the first defect value and between the second nominal value and the second defect value onto a range of values between values a and B between the two defined values. The values a and B are here 0 and 1 as shown in the upper diagram of fig. 3. The control device program uses a linear function as the mapping function for an exemplary operating point of the powertrain 2. The control device program uses other functions, sometimes also different functions, for some operating points to determine the first and second defect values. The first and second nominal values NW are mapped onto the value a and the first and second defect values DW are mapped onto the value B.
The values of the first and second criterion on the side of the first or second nominal value NW facing away from the first or second defect value DW are mapped to values smaller than a. The values of the first and second criterion on the side of the first or second defect value DW facing away from the first or second nominal value NW are mapped onto values larger than B. For these mappings, the control device program uses the same linear function here; the control device program maps the first and/or second criteria using different functions or extrapolation methods for some operating points. The linear function is limited in this case upward and downward such that values which exceed the first or second nominal values and the first and second limit values, i.e. values which are smaller than a or greater than B, tend toward the limit values.
The mapped value of the first criterion corresponds to the defect metric of SDPF6, i.e., the first defect metric, and the mapped value of the second criterion corresponds to the defect metric of DOC5, i.e., the second defect metric. The mapping values below or near A indicate that SDPF6 or DOC5 are functioning properly, and the results near or above B indicate that SDPF6 or DOC5 are defective. The results between a and B are ambiguous.
To determine the first and second debounce rates, the control device program includes a command to map the determined first defect measure and the determined second defect measure onto another value range as shown in the lower diagram of fig. 3. The other range of values is defined by three values C, D and E. Here, C is smaller than D, and D is smaller than E, i.e., C ═ 1, D ═ 0, and E ═ 1. Here, the first or second defect degree at a point close to a is mapped on C, the first or second defect degree close to the defect degree preset between a and B is mapped on D, and the first or second defect degree at a point close to B is mapped on E. The preset defect measure corresponds to a limit value which defines a boundary between a functional and a defective SDPF6 or DOC 5.
The mapping function is continuous but the slope is zero in the region of the value D. For very large and very small values of the first or second defect measure, the function is limited and tends towards a lower and an upper limit.
The control device program utilizes the determined first debounce rate and the determined second debounce rate as parameters for determining the state of the SDPF6 and the state of the DOC 5. Before the evaluation state is considered to be robust, some unambiguous results are sufficient in case the first or second debounce speed is high, i.e. close to 1 or-1, and many results are required in case the first or second debounce speed is low, i.e. close to 0. Here, the negative first or second debounce rate corresponds to a properly functioning SDPF6 or DOC5, while the positive first or second debounce rate corresponds to a defective SDPF6 or DOC 5.
In the case of an ambiguous first or second defect measure between a and B, the first or second debounce rate is 0 or close to 0 and the state determination of SDPF6 or DOC5 is not terminated or lasts for a very long time at all times. This is consistent with ambiguous results and solves the problem of random results in this situation.
In order to determine S610, S620, S630 the first, second and third emission impact on the basis of the determined first defect measure and the determined second defect measure S510, S520, the control device program comprises a mapping of the determined first defect measure S510 onto two further value ranges defined by the values F and G, as shown in the upper and lower diagram of fig. 6, and of the determined second defect measure S520 onto the further value range defined by the values F and G, as shown in the upper diagram of fig. 6.
In this case, the upper diagram of fig. 6 corresponds to the first and third emission influences, and the lower diagram of fig. 6 corresponds to the second emission influence. Here, the first emission influence describes the influence of the first defect measure S510 on the NOx emissions, the second emission influence describes the influence of the first defect measure S510 on the NH3 emissions, and the third emission influence describes the influence of the second defect measure S520 on the HC emissions.
The control device program here performs the determination of the first, second and third emission impact S610, S620, S630 such that first an average of the first and second defect measures is formed over the debounce period. The debounce period corresponds to a period up to which the determination of the state of the SDPF6 or DOC5 based on the first or second debounce rate can be considered robust. Based on the averaged first defect metric and the averaged second defect metric, the control device program then determines first, second, and third emission impacts S610, S620, S630. The control unit program here selects the selected function shown in fig. 3 and 6 as a function of the operating point of the drive train 2, and also uses different functions at least in part for the first and third emission influences.
The control device program further includes commands to consider the first, second, and third nominal emissions of the SDPF6 and the DOC5 in determining the first, second, and third emissions impacts S610, S620, S630. This is additionally performed by the control device program, so that the first, second and third emission influences are derived as follows:
E1＝E1，nominal+K1(D1)，E2＝E2，nominal+K2(D1)und E3＝E3，nominal+K3(D2)
wherein E is1Is the first emission impact, E2Is a second emission influence, E3Is the third emission impact, E1，nominalIs the first nominal emission, E, of SDPF62，nominalIs the second nominal emission of SDPF6, E3，nominalIs the nominal emission of DOC5, and K1(D1) And K2(D1) Is a first and second emission contribution and a first defect measure D1Coefficient of correlation, and K3(D2) Is the third emission contribution and the second defect measure D2The coefficient of correlation.
The control device program includes commands to determine a total emissions contribution for the powertrain 2 based on the first, second, and third emissions contributions and to monitor an emissions performance of the powertrain based on the total emissions contribution.
To this end, the control unit program first determines a linear and independent addition of the first, second and third emission influences:
EGes＝EGes，nominal+∑Ki，
wherein i is 1, 2, 3.
Based on the total emissions impact, the control device program monitors S700 the emissions performance of the powertrain 2 in the manner: the control device program compares the total emission effect with the limit values stored in the control device. If the emission performance of the powertrain 2 is within the nominal range based on the comparison, no intervention of the control device is required. Conversely, if the emissions of the powertrain are manifested outside the nominal range, i.e. against one or more limit values, the control device controls the powertrain by: the control device changes the operation of the drive train or informs the operator of the vehicle of maintenance, repair and/or at least inspection of the defective component, here the SDPF6 or the DOC 5. If the emissions performance deviates significantly from the limit values, the control device shuts down the power train 2, for example, in order to prevent permanent damage to the SDPF6, the DOC5, or other components.
In an alternative embodiment, not shown, the control device program comprises the following commands:
by the formula E ═ Enominal·∏FiLinear, uncorrelated multiplication of (1), wherein FiIs a factor related to the defect measure of the emission contribution,
by basing on E (D) according to E ═ E1…，Dn) Or a common mapping by a combination of all defect metrics, or
By basing on E (D) according to E ═ E1，…，Dn) Or E ═ Enominal·ΠFij(Di，Dj) By the pairwise interaction of the two defect metrics,
to determine the total emissions impact.
In particular, the determination based on the common mapping and the pair-wise interaction based mapping has the advantage that the total emission contribution can be determined directly based on the defect measure. Thus, it is not necessary to determine individual emissions effects.

Claims (18)

1. A control device (1) for monitoring a machine (2), wherein the control device is designed and set up to carry out the following steps:
-detecting (S10) measured and/or operational values of the machine (2),
-deriving a criterion based on the detected measured and/or operational values (S20),
-comparing (S30) the criterion with a nominal value, wherein the nominal value represents a state of normal functioning of the machine (2), and determining (S31) the relative position of the criterion with respect to the nominal value, and
-ascertaining a state of the machine (2) based on a result of the comparison and the determined relative position (S40).
2. The control device (1) according to claim 1, wherein the control device (1) is configured and set up to repeatedly perform the steps of detecting (S10), evaluating the criterion (S20), comparing (S30), determining (S31) and evaluating the state (S40).
3. The control device (1) as claimed in claim 1 or 2, wherein the control device (1) is constructed and arranged for additionally taking into account a defect value in the comparison (S30), wherein the defect value represents a defective state of the machine (2), and determining (S31) a relative position of the criterion with respect to the nominal value and with respect to the defect value.
4. The control device (1) as claimed in one of the preceding claims, wherein the control device (1) is designed and set up for determining (S32) a defect measure on the basis of the relative position of the criteria and taking into account the determined defect measure (S32) in the determination of the state (S40) of the machine (2).
5. The control device (1) as claimed in one of the preceding claims, wherein the control device (1) is constructed and arranged for determining (S33) a debounce speed on the basis of the relative position of the criterion and taking into account the determined debounce speed (S33) when ascertaining the state (S40) of the machine (2).
6. The control device (1) as claimed in one of the preceding claims, wherein the control device (1) is designed and set up for determining a probability that the machine (2) is functioning properly and/or defective on the basis of the relative position of the criterion, and for taking into account the determined probability when ascertaining the state (S40) of the machine (2).
7. The control device (1) as claimed in claim 3, wherein the control device (1) is constructed and set up for determining (S32) a defect measure by:
-mapping a range of values between said nominal value and said defect value onto a range of values defined by A and B,
-mapping said nominal value onto a defined value a and said defect value onto a defined value B, and
-mapping the criterion on a value smaller than or equal to A, larger than or equal to B, or on a range of values between A and B, based on its relative position, wherein the mapping of the criterion corresponds to a defect measure of the machine (2),
and determining a state (S40) of the machine (2) based on the determined defect measure (S32).
8. The control device (1) according to claim 7, wherein the control device (1) is designed and set up to determine (S33) the debounce rate by mapping the determined defect measure (S32) onto a value range defined by three values C, D and E by:
-mapping the defect measure corresponding to the value a onto the value C, mapping the defect measure corresponding to the value B onto the value E and mapping the preset defect measure between the values a and B onto the value D, and
mapping defect metrics that do not correspond to the values A and B or to a preset defect metric to values smaller than C, larger than E, or to values between C and E, wherein the mapping of defect metrics corresponds to a debounce rate,
and determining a state (S40) of the machine (2) based on the determined debounce speed (S33) and/or the determined defect measure (S32).
9. The control device (1) as claimed in claim 7, wherein the control device (1) is constructed and set up for the comparison (S30)
-performing a first mapping of the defect metrics onto a range of values from zero to one, wherein defect metrics smaller than or equal to A are mapped onto a value of 1, defect metrics larger than or equal to B are mapped onto a value of 0, and defect metrics between A and B are mapped onto values between zero and one, such that the first mapping corresponds to a first probability that the machine (2) is functioning properly,
-performing a second mapping of the defect metrics onto a range of values from zero to one, wherein defect metrics smaller than or equal to A are mapped onto a value 0, defect metrics larger than or equal to B are mapped onto a value 1, and defect metrics between A and B are mapped onto values between zero and one, such that the second mapping corresponds to a second probability that the machine (2) is defective,
-finding the first and second probability products by repeatedly finding the first and second probabilities and multiplying them separately from each other, and
-comparing said first and said second probability products with first and second limit values,
and ascertaining a state of the machine (2) based on a result of the comparison (S40).
10. A control device for monitoring the emission performance of a machine, wherein the control device is designed and set up to carry out the following steps:
-determining a first defect measure for a first component of the machine,
-determining a first emission impact based on the determined first defect measure, and
-monitoring the emission performance based on the first emission impact.
11. The control device according to claim 10, wherein the control device is configured and set up for using a statistical function in determining the first emission impact.
12. The control device according to claim 10 or 11, wherein the control device is constructed and arranged for taking into account a nominal emission of the machine when determining the first emission impact.
13. The control device according to one of claims 10 to 12, wherein the control device is designed and set up for determining at least one further emission influence and for monitoring an emission behavior of the machine on the basis of the first emission influence and the at least one further emission influence.
14. The control device according to claim 13, wherein the control device is constructed and arranged for determining a total emission impact of the machine based on the first emission impact and the at least one further emission impact, and for monitoring an emission performance of the machine based on the total emission impact.
15. The control device according to claim 14, wherein the control device is constructed and arranged to,
-performing the total emission contribution based on a linear and uncorrelated addition or multiplication of the first emission contribution and the at least one further emission contribution,
-determining the total emission impact based on the first and at least one further defect measure, and/or
-determining the total emission impact based on a pair-wise interaction of the first and the at least one further defect measure.
16. The control device according to any one of claims 10 to 15, wherein the first emission impact and the at least one further emission impact are determined on the basis of a function, and the function is formulated in relation to an operating point.
17. The control device (1) as claimed in one of the preceding claims in combination with one of claims 10 to 16, wherein the control device is designed and set up to determine the first defect measure and/or the at least one further defect measure of the first and/or the at least one further component by means of:
-detecting measured and/or operational values of the machine,
-deriving a criterion based on the detected measured values and/or operational values,
-comparing the criterion with a nominal value, wherein the nominal value represents a condition of normal functioning of the machine,
-determining the relative position of the criterion with respect to the nominal value,
-mapping a range of values between a nominal value and a defect value of the first and/or at least one further component onto a range of values defined by two values A and B, wherein the defect value represents a defective state of the machine,
-mapping the nominal value onto a defined value a and the defect value onto a defined value B, and
-mapping the criterion onto a value smaller than or equal to a, larger than or equal to B, or onto a value lying between a and B, based on the relative position of the criterion, wherein the mapping of the criterion corresponds to a measure of the defect of the first and/or at least one further component.
18. The control device according to any one of claims 10 to 17, wherein the control device is constructed and arranged for controlling the machine based on the monitored emission performance.
CN202111374855.7A 2020-11-20 2021-11-19 Control device for monitoring a machine Pending CN114519902A (en)

Applications Claiming Priority (4)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
DE102020007100.7 2020-11-20
DE102020007100.7A DE102020007100A1 (en) 2020-11-20 2020-11-20 Control unit for monitoring a machine
DE102021003415.5 2021-07-02
DE102021003415.5A DE102021003415A1 (en) 2021-07-02 2021-07-02 Control unit for monitoring the emissions behavior of a machine

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
CN114519902A true CN114519902A (en) 2022-05-20

Family

ID=81597098

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
CN202111374855.7A Pending CN114519902A (en) 2020-11-20 2021-11-19 Control device for monitoring a machine

Country Status (1)

Country Link
CN (1) CN114519902A (en)

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US10815860B2 (en) Method for monitoring a nitrogen oxide storage catalyst
RU2598968C2 (en) Method of automatic diagnostic of selective catalytic reduction system
EP3255257B1 (en) Internal combustion engine and exhaust-gas-component estimating method
US9988963B2 (en) Method for monitoring an oxidation catalysis device
JP6422343B2 (en) Method and apparatus for monitoring the dynamic characteristics of a gas sensor in an internal combustion engine
US20060218895A1 (en) Method for operating an internal combustion engine and device for executing the method
CN110645076B (en) NH based on model3Leak diagnosis method
US8346424B2 (en) Method of monitoring in-use performance ratios of onboard diagnostic systems for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles
US20140373510A1 (en) Method for determining hc-conversion efficiency of a catalyst, a diagnostic device configured to carry out the method as well as a motor vehicle having such a catalyst
US20080034742A1 (en) Failure diagnosis method for reducing agent addition valve
US9181840B2 (en) Method to operate a diesel particulate filter
US9181841B2 (en) Method and apparatus for monitoring the light-off temperature of a diesel oxidation catalyst
JP5395318B2 (en) Method and apparatus for operating an internal combustion engine
GB2475318A (en) Method for diagnosing catalytic device by estimating an aging index
JP5432422B2 (en) Method and apparatus for monitoring the function of an exhaust sensor
JPH09236569A (en) Function diagnosing device of exhaust gas purifying apparatus of internal combustion engine
KR20160110102A (en) Systems and methods for monitoring the health of a three-way catalyst
EP1734242A1 (en) Diagnostic method for a post-cat lambda sensor and a catalyst of an exhaust system
CN108374712B (en) Method for fault detection in an SCR system by means of ammonia slip
US6871136B1 (en) Method for on-board diagnosis of cold start emissions reduction control strategy
CN115559804A (en) Control device for monitoring the emission characteristics of a machine
CN114519902A (en) Control device for monitoring a machine
US9677451B2 (en) Electronic control module for an internal combustion engine
CN115288832B (en) Diagnostic method and diagnostic system for identifying DOC sulfur poisoning and aging
US8281652B2 (en) Method for testing the functionality of an oxidation catalyst of an internal combustion engine

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
PB01 Publication
PB01 Publication
SE01 Entry into force of request for substantive examination
SE01 Entry into force of request for substantive examination