Turbocharger Control-Oriented Modeling: Twin-Entry Turbine Issues and Possible Solutions

Author(s): Nicolo Cavina, Andrea Borelli, Lucio Calogero, Ruggero Cevolani and Luca Poggio
Source: SAE International Journal of Engines , Vol. 8, No. 5 (November 2015), pp. 2120-2132
Published by: SAE International
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26278107

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26278107?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

SAE International is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to SAE
International Journal of Engines

This content downloaded from

202.3.77.169 on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:25:05 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 2015-24-2427
Published 09/06/2015
Copyright © 2015 SAE International
doi:10.4271/2015-24-2427
saeeng.saejournals.org

Turbocharger Control-Oriented Modeling: Twin-Entry Turbine Issues

and Possible Solutions
Nicolo Cavina and Andrea Borelli
University of Bologna

Lucio Calogero, Ruggero Cevolani, and Luca Poggio

Ferrari Auto Spa

ABSTRACT
The paper presents possible solutions for developing fast and reliable turbocharger models, to be used mainly for control applications.
This issue is of particular interest today for SI engines since, due to the search for consistent CO2 reduction, extreme downsizing
concepts require highly boosted air charge solutions to compensate for power and torque de-rating. For engines presenting at least four
in-line cylinders, twin-entry turbines offer the ability of maximizing the overall energy conversion efficiency, and therefore such
solutions are actually widely adopted.

This work presents a critical review of the most promising (and recent) modeling approaches for automotive turbochargers,
highlighting the main open issues especially in the field of turbine models, and proposing possible improvements. The main original
contribution is then on solving specific issues related to the twin-entry turbine, to develop a control-oriented model able to predict the
machine behavior under all possible admission conditions.

The results of this study have been applied to a V8 high-performance GDI engine with twin-entry turbochargers. Experimental data are
shown throughout the paper, to demonstrate the benefits of the proposed approach.

CITATION: Cavina, N., Borelli, A., Calogero, L., Cevolani, R. et al., "Turbocharger Control-Oriented Modeling: Twin-Entry Turbine
Issues and Possible Solutions," SAE Int. J. Engines 8(5):2015, doi:10.4271/2015-24-2427.

INTRODUCTION consequence is that the instantaneous mass flow rate and efficiency
values (i.e., at the actual rotational speed and pressure ratio) are
The physics governing the turbocharger operation is particularly
obtained from steady-state experimental data [1].
complex, since the flow is viscous, unsteady and three-dimensional,
and a significant amount of heat is exchanged between turbine and
This work focuses on the analysis and control-oriented modeling of a
compressor and with the surrounding environment [1]. For these
turbocharging system for a high-performance V8 engine. For this
reasons, a detailed and “white” box model (typically 3-D) of the
reason, each turbocharger is equipped with a Waste-Gate (WG)
turbocharger fluid dynamics is needed during the components design,
by-pass system, and the turbines are of twin-entry type. During this
development and optimization phases. Some authors have recently
project, different turbocharger models, produced by the same
demonstrated that a 1-D model of the turbine still allows representing
supplier, have been modeled and tested. The paper initially presents
the turbine behavior under unsteady operating conditions quite
experimental data, control-oriented models, critical issues and
accurately [2, 3]. Due to the complexity of this kind of approach, and
possible solutions for single-entry, or “standard”, turbines. The
to the need for expensive and time consuming experimental tests
second part of the paper is instead entirely focused on twin-entry
([4]), a zero-dimensional, map-based (or “grey/black”) representation
turbine modeling. The main original contribution is the development
of the turbocharger performance is still preferred for studying the
of a map-based, zero-dimensional twin-entry turbine control-oriented
interactions between the internal combustion engine and the
model, able to predict its behavior under all admission conditions.
turbocharger itself (so called turbo-matching), or for developing and
testing engine control strategies [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11]. This modeling
approach considers the flow quasi-stationary, and the main

2120

This content downloaded from

202.3.77.169 on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:25:05 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Cavina et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 8, Issue 5 (November 2015) 2121

Turbine and compressor maps are obtained by performing

experiments on specifically designed test-benches. Such systems are
usually equipped with temperature and pressure sensors both in
intake and exhaust ports of the turbo-machines, and the compressor
and turbine mass flows are also measured, as well as their
instantaneous rotational speed. Such information allows calculating
the efficiency of both machines, the Corrected Mass Flow (CMF) rate
for the compressor, and the Reduced Mass Flow (RMF) rate for the
turbine, respectively as a function of compressor Pressure Ratio (PR)
and turbine Expansion Ratio (ER), for different external conditions
[12, 13]. Such parameters are defined in the following equations and
in the Acronyms/Abbreviations Section.

Figure 1. Hot gas test bench with compressor closed loop control. Source [13].

To further extend the turbine maps at the lowest ERs, run-away speed
(1) measurements are performed by replacing the compressor rotor with
a bladeless one of the same mass. By neglecting the aerodynamics
friction on the bladeless disc, it is possible to determine the minimum
ER at which the turbine is still able to provide mechanical work, and
(2)
therefore to identify the zero turbine efficiency condition for each
rotational speed level (Figure 2).

(3)

(4)

The experimental characterization of the compressor is quite

straightforward, since the flow is “cold” and quasi-stationary.
Compressor maps can be obtained with relatively simple test
flow-benches, or even directly during engine operation. Conversely,
the direct coupling of the turbine at the engine exhaust introduces
several elements that make the experimental characterization of its
performance particularly critical: fully unsteady (and three-
dimensional) flow, very significant heat exchange, waste gate variable
position and its effects on the turbine intake conditions. Such
phenomena make it impossible to map the turbine performance
directly during engine operation at the test bench, and require
specifically designed and very complex experimental flow benches,
which still do not allow to fully reproducing the turbine operation
when coupled to the internal combustion engine, especially for what
concerns unsteady phenomena. The most widely adopted solution is
the so-called hot-gas test-bench, where the turbine is fed with a
stationary hot gas flow produced by burning at a controlled
temperature a stoichiometric mixture of air and methane. Intake
turbine pressure may be controlled by varying the burner hot gas
mass flow. In such type of test stands, the compressor acts as a brake
with respect to the turbine, and therefore the operating conditions that
can be tested at a given rotational speed are limited between
compressor surge and choking lines, which respectively impose a
lower and upper limit to the mechanical work absorbable by the
compressor. To extend the range of measurable turbine expansion
ratios, the compressor power consumption can be controlled in closed
loop by varying the air density at the compressor inlet. A typical
compressor closed-loop hot gas test stand is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 2. Hot gas test bench with bladeless compressor rotor for run-away
speed measurements. Source [13].
The experimental determination of the compressor and turbine
efficiency is nonetheless particularly challenging, since it is achieved
by estimating the power delivered and absorbed respectively by the
turbine and the compressor, and by measuring the inlet flows
characteristics. The main issues that make such evaluation extremely
complex are related to mechanical losses and heat exchange
phenomena. The need to limit heat flows is reflected on a lower limit
of the rotational speeds that can be investigated on a hot-gas
test-bench, since the effects of heat being exchanged between turbine
and compressor are more and more significant as the rotational speed
is lowered. The main consequence of existing heat exchange is an
over-estimation of the turbine efficiency (and an under-estimation of
the compressor one), which masks the real aerodynamic effects
contributions [1, 14]. Therefore, even when advanced hot gas test rigs
are used for the experiments, the lower rotational speed range cannot
be fully investigated while providing accurate evaluations. This
implies the need to extrapolate both compressor and turbine maps
towards low rotational speed regions, which are particularly
interesting because they are frequently experienced during medium-
low load engine operation, such as under urban driving conditions. As
a possible alternative approach, recently some researchers have

This content downloaded from

202.3.77.169 on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:25:05 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
2122 Cavina et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 8, Issue 5 (November 2015)

proposed the use of a cold-gas test-bench [13, 14]. For what concerns The interpolation and extrapolation of experimental compressor data
friction losses determination, specific test benches may be developed has been carried out following the well-known approach proposed by
using electric machines for measuring the mechanical efficiency. A [15], and based on the non-dimensional parameters introduced by
simplified approach consists of including such losses in the turbine [16] (head parameter Ψ and non-dimensional flow rate ϕ):
efficiency map [1]. Finally, it should be observed that flow-bench
tests are typically performed with the waste-gate in closed position
(sometimes the waste gate is mechanically sealed to prevent leakage),
and this makes it very complex to model the turbine performance
under all other operating conditions. (5)

It is now worth recalling that a full experimental characterization of a

given turbocharger is not always available, due to cost and time
(6)
reasons. Typically, the selection of the turbocharger and the
development of its control-oriented model are based on experimental The blade tip speed Uc is defined by the following Equation (7):
data provided by the manufacturer, which are usually derived by
hot-gas standard flow-bench measurements, and are therefore limited
in terms of both expansion ratio and rotational speed ranges.
Interpolation and extrapolation methods become therefore key factors (7)
for achieving high accuracy even under operating conditions that
In [15] it is demonstrated that the mathematical relationship between
have not been directly measured. In fact, although the compressor
the two non-dimensional parameters may be expressed in the form of
maps may be directly used to simulate its behavior (essentially due to
a homographic function, such as the one reported in Equation (8).
the quasi-static flow inlet conditions), the high pressure and
temperature pulses at which the turbine is subjected determine an
expansion ratio cyclically variable in a much wider range than the
one covered by flow-bench data. To capture the real turbocharger (8)
behavior, extended maps can be built by following methodologies
proposed by various authors in the last decades. The idea is to use the Where the parameters Ki are defined by the following equation:
available experimental data to extend turbine and compressor
performance characteristics at low rotational speeds and over a wider
range of pressure ratios. The next sections of the paper deal (9)
separately with the compressor and turbine maps interpolation and
extrapolation problem, by taking into account the most promising
solutions that have been proposed in the literature, and introducing
new contributions in particular for the turbine model. The second part (10)
of the paper is dedicated to twin-entry turbine modeling issues, and
Figure 3 shows the results obtained by applying the methodology (5),
possible solutions.
(6), (7), (8), (9), (10) to interpolate and extrapolate experimental data
that were available for one of the compressors investigated during the
COMPRESSOR MAPS INTERPOLATION project.
AND EXTRAPOLATION
As already mentioned, the extrapolation of compressor experimental
maps is far less critical than the turbine one, since experimental
measurements are able to describe the compressor performance over
its entire operating range (i.e., between surge and choking
conditions), for a given rotational speed. However, it should be
observed that surge conditions also depend on the compressor
surroundings, so that different test benches will generate different
surge limits (and generally different to the ones experienced on the
engine). Moreover, surge initiation definition is not unique, but it is
based on different identification techniques (today mainly related to
the frequency content of instantaneous pressures and flows).

Figure 3. Interpolation and extrapolation over a wide PR range of a

compressor map (PR vs CMF) using Jensen and Kristensen [15] method.

This content downloaded from

202.3.77.169 on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:25:05 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Cavina et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 8, Issue 5 (November 2015)
The coefficients Ki,j have been identified using Matlab-based custom
genetic algorithms, converging over minimum Root Mean Squared
Error (RMSE) between experimental and modeled data. A key issue
is the algorithm initialization, and the genes of the starting population
(the initial values of the coefficients Ki) have been selected by forcing
the corresponding homographic function to pass through three
specifically selected experimental values, for each speed line (max
PR, max CMF, and intermediate conditions).
In [15] it is also stated that the proposed methodology is not
particularly accurate for the highest compressor rotational speeds,
when M becomes greater than 1.1 and the flow characteristics change
significantly. The accuracy loss is clearly visible in Figure 3. To
overcome this limit, some authors have proposed solutions purely
based on mathematical fitting techniques (such as spline functions or
neural network algorithms [7, 10]), while others have attempted to
maintain the parametric description introduced by [15, 16], evolving
it according to what proposed by [11, 14]. In particular, in [11] it is
suggested that each constant-speed group of experimental data should
be treated separately, and that a set of Ki parameters should be
identified for each constant-speed dataset. Then quadratic functions
are used to fit the Ki coefficients with respect to turbocharger speed,
thus allowing to extrapolate data also at turbocharger speeds that
were not experimentally tested. By following this approach, a much
more robust description of the compressor behavior has been
achieved, as shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4. Interpolation and extrapolation over a wide PR range of a
compressor map (PR vs CMF), according to [15] as modified by [11]. 2-D and
3-D view.
This content downloaded from
202.3.77.169 on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:25:05 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
2123
Figure 4 shows that the interpolation and extrapolation of
experimental data is now much more robust. In particular,
extrapolation at low PRs is now consistent with the compressor
experimental choking behavior. Still, the extrapolation towards
smaller mass flow rates is strictly monotone, while experimental data
denote a PR reduction when approaching the surge line (mainly due
to incidence losses [1]), especially at high speeds. Two further
considerations are needed to completely clarify this issue: Since the
extrapolated maps will be used in a filling-emptying 0-D model,
providing mass flow rate in response to PR inputs, the curves need to
be monotone and a more mathematically fit function would introduce
uncertainty. Secondly, such operating conditions (highest speeds and
PRs) are typically not reached during engine-turbocharger interaction.
It should finally be noted how the extrapolation at even higher
rotational speeds (in this case higher than 175500 rpm) is not reliable,
and this is due to the type of function used for data interpolation/
extrapolation. A homographic function as the one defined by
Equation (8) presents a discontinuity as K3 → ϕ, and it provides
reliable information only if the left branch of the function is involved.
For describing the compressor efficiency characteristics, the
methodology proposed by [11, 14] has been adopted, which is based
on the following definition of isentropic efficiency:
(11)
Where
(12)
After analyzing the behavior of several different compressors, some
researchers isolated the existence of a linear relationship between the
enthalpy difference and the Corrected Mass Flow (CMF) rate across
the compressor, at constant speed [8, 11, 14]:
(13)
For each rotational speed available in the experimental dataset, the
two parameters a and b may be estimated theoretically or identified
mathematically [8, 11]. In our approach, they have been identified
using genetic algorithms. Finally, to interpolate/extrapolate the
efficiency model at different rotational speeds, the parameters a and b
may be modeled as a function of turbocharger speed through
parabolic fittings passing through the axes origin.
One advantage of this approach is that the compressor characteristic
maps (mass flow and efficiency) are now related one another through
Equation (13), thus increasing simulation stability. At the same time,
such relationship propagates the CMF interpolation/extrapolation
errors (such as the monotonic trend when reducing PR at constant
speed) onto the interpolated/extrapolated efficiency maps.
2124 Cavina et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 8, Issue 5 (November 2015)

Finally, if turbine characteristics are compared with the ones

corresponding to an adiabatic nozzle, it can be observed that choking
takes place at higher ERs for the turbine [1], thus demonstrating that
a possible schematization for the turbine performance is to consider it
equivalent to two consecutive nozzles.

Several researchers have analyzed the previously mentioned

phenomena, and most of them have proposed a turbine flow rate
model based on the equation for adiabatic nozzles [11, 14, 15], which
considers the effective area as a function of ER and rotational speed,
as expressed by Equation (15).

Figure 5. Compressor efficiency map: interpolation and extrapolation

according to the method proposed by [8, 11].
(15)

TURBINE MAPS INTERPOLATION AND Where

EXTRAPOLATION
As mentioned in the Introduction section, the turbine ER range that
can be experimentally investigated on a hot-gas test-bench is limited
by the compressor capacity to exert resistant torque on the shaft. On
the other hand, once installed on the engine, the turbine may
experience wide and fast inlet pressure variations, and such
(16)
oscillations are particularly large when the installation on the engine
is designed to convert at least part of the kinetic energy of the exhaust The dependency between effective crossflow area and the parameters
gas discharged by the various cylinder (pulse turbocharging [1]). ER and nTC may be expressed according to what suggested by
Even if the mechanical power applied by the turbine varies different authors. In [15] it is proposed in the following form:
significantly, the turbocharger inertia prevents the rotors from
instantaneously adapting to the corresponding steady-state rotational
speed levels. Therefore, during an engine cycle the rotational speed
will remain almost constant, even if the turbine ER will change (17)
significantly. These phenomena are responsible for a significant
Where
turbine efficiency decrease with respect to the maximum values that
may be measured on the test bench under stationary conditions, and
they impose the need for extrapolating experimental turbine maps
over a wide ER range. (18)

The above methodology has been applied to the experimental data

Physical considerations, supported by experimental observations,
available for one of the turbines investigated during this project. The
clearly show that the turbine characteristics are strongly related to the
unknown coefficients ki,j have been identified with a Matlab-based
turbocharger rotational speed [1]. The speed dependence arises from
genetic algorithm, converging over minim RMSE between
the effect of the centrifugal field created by the rotor's rotation, and
experimental and modeled data. Interpolation results are presented in
this is the main reason for observed turbine mass flow reduction when
Figure 6, while extrapolation over a wider ER range is shown in
increasing the rotational speed at constant ER. Further, the same
Figure 7. In such figures, as usually done when presenting turbine
phenomena necessarily imply that ERs greater than one are needed
performance data, Reduced Mass Flow is plotted versus Expansion
for positive mass flows through the turbine, and that the minimum
Ratio. Different colors are used for different constant-speed curves,
expansion ratio for positive flow increases with increasing
and the values reported in the legend refer to reduced rotational speed
turbocharger speed. A theoretical expression may be derived to define
as defined by equation (19).
the minimum ER needed for balancing the rotor centrifugal force
field, once rotor geometry, inlet conditions and rotational speed are
known [17, 18].

(19)

(14)

This content downloaded from

202.3.77.169 on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:25:05 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Cavina et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 8, Issue 5 (November 2015)
Figure 6. Interpolation of turbine map according to [15].
Figure 7. Extrapolation of turbine map over a wide ER range, according to
[15].
From Figures 6 and 7 it can be clearly observed how the constant-
speed curves are acceptable within the interpolation range, while
extrapolation both towards larger and smaller ERs does not provide
plausible results. In particular, the model does not take into account
the centrifugal force field that opposes fluid motion through the
turbine at lower ERs. At constant ER, the model erroneously predicts
larger mass flows at greater rotational speeds. Also, constant-speed
lines do not seem to collapse at a certain RMF value at larger ERs, as
if choking limits were not present.
To overcome such limitation, in [11] a different interpolation/
extrapolation method is proposed, based on an exponential function
for representing effective area variations:
(20)
The parameters K1 and K2 are to be identified for each constant-speed
set of tests, and one further assumption is proposed, to consider that
RMF tends to one unique asymptotic value, regardless of rotational
speed. The authors of [11] therefore suggest to consider only one
“equivalent” K1 parameter (calculated as the main value of all the
ones previously identified at different speeds), and to re-identify K2
for each speed level. To extrapolate the model also at low speed
levels, a polynomial regression is finally performed for K2
This content downloaded from
202.3.77.169 on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:25:05 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
2125
parameters. The method has been successfully applied, as shown in
Figure 8, and one minor refinement that has been verified and
introduced is that the asymptotic mass flow value (at infinite ERs) is
better represented by the K1 parameter identified for the highest
available rotational speed dataset, rather than by the average one. In
addition, care should be taken to ensure that K2 polynomial function
is monotonic, to avoid constant-speed lines superposition.
Figure 8. Turbine map: extrapolation over a wide ER range according to [11].
Figure 8 shows the results obtained by applying the methodology
based on Equation (20), on the same data set presented in Figures 6
and 7. The extrapolation both at large and small ERs appears to be
much more robust: choking limits are respected at large ERs, while
centrifugal effects are now correctly modeled at small ERs (RMF
decreases with increasing rotational speed, at a given ER).
It should be noted that even if the effective area model represented by
Equation (20), and modified according to the previous considerations,
is definitely a significant improvement with respect to (17), still
centrifugal field effects are not correctly modeled at the lowest ERs.
This can be proven by observing that, as in model (17), all RMF
curves still converge to ER = 1 when extrapolated to zero mass flow
conditions. One possible solution is to correct the ER values used for
interpolation/extrapolation with apparent ER values, defined as the
difference between actual ER and ER at zero mass flow rate, for that
given rotational speed condition, as shown in Equation (21).
(21)
Interpolation/extrapolation is then carried out as described above,
simply by substituting ER with ERapp, as shown in Equation (22).
(22)
With this approach, it is possible to achieve a satisfactory
mathematical description of the RMF-ER relationship, while
preserving physical constraints, especially at very low ERs, as shown
in Figure 9.
2126 Cavina et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 8, Issue 5 (November 2015)
Figure 9. Turbine map: extrapolation over a wide PR range according to (22).
2-D and 3-D view.
For what concerns turbine efficiency maps, interpolation and
extrapolation of experimental data can be carried out with the
well-known Blade Speed Ratio (or BSR) approach. The method is
based on the experimental observation of the existence of one curve
for efficiency versus BSR, for all turbine operating conditions [12,
19, 20, 21, 22]. Equation (23) defines the BSR parameter.
(23)
Various possible solutions have been presented to better identify a
robust relationship for interpolating/extrapolating the turbine
efficiency. As also reported in [18], the data available for this study
confirmed that the relationship between efficiency and BSR is much
better verified (and it provides unique outputs) if both efficiency and
BSR are previously normalized. The normalization should take place
with respect to maximum efficiency values, observed while varying
ER, and with respect to the corresponding BSR. Both BSR at
maximum efficiency and maximum efficiency values may be linearly
This content downloaded from
202.3.77.169 on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:25:05 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
correlated to ER. Once BSR normalization has taken place,
normalized efficiency may be evaluated by using the following
relationship [18]:
(24)
The model (24) is available in the commercial code GT-Suite® [18],
and it allows defining one single (b, c) couple of parameters for all
turbine operating conditions, since the main hypothesis is that one
single relationship between efficiency and BSR does exist, once both
parameters have been normalized. This hypothesis may actually be
accepted only at lower BSRs, while it provides inconsistent results at
higher ones, and it should possibly be replaced with a speed-
dependent c model. Under such conditions, rotational speed effects
are in fact consistent, and the coefficient c represents the intercept
between the efficiency function and the x-axis:
(25)
The parameter c therefore represents the maximum BSR at which the
turbine can provide positive mechanical power, and it can be
measured (and modeled), for each iso-speed line, through the
so-called run-away speed measurements (Figure 2). If such
experimental data are not available, the same theoretical approach
already introduced for RMF maps extrapolation may be adopted,
even if it would in this case introduce over-estimation effects. The
interpolation/extrapolation of turbine efficiency experimental values
shown in Figure 10 has been achieved by implementing the
previously described methodology. Results are encouraging, and it
should be noticed that the relatively large interpolation/extrapolation
errors at highest ERs should not be considered critical, for two
reasons. Efficiency sensitivity to ER variations is quite weak in such
areas, and ERs lower than the maximum efficiency ones are mostly
covered during engine-turbine interaction, especially for pulse
discharge configurations, as the one considered in this project.
Figure 10. Turbine efficiency map: interpolation and extrapolation. Model
with extended speed dependency at high BSRs.
 Cavina et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 8, Issue 5 (November 2015) 2127

TWIN-ENTRY TURBINE CONTROL-

ORIENTED MODEL
The need for fast and consistent CO2 reduction of mobile sources has
forced vehicle manufacturers to downsize internal combustion
engines and, especially for gasoline-powered ones, to introduce
turbocharging technologies. In this context, pulse turbocharging has
demonstrated to be beneficial for engines with four or more cylinders
per bank, and twin-entry turbines are now considered as the best
solution for avoiding negative interaction effects between discharging
cylinders. As described in [23], a twin-entry turbine presents a volute
with two flow passages, separated by a dividing wall that avoids
direct flow interactions up to a circumferential section very close to
the rotor inlet. Since twin-entry turbines are designed to partially Figure 12. Twin-scroll asymmetric turbine. RMF performance of the two
collect (and convert) engine exhaust charge pulse effects, it is clear scrolls under single admission conditions.
that pressure levels (and mass flow pulsations) may vary significantly,
within each of the two scrolls, during the engine cycle. To better The twin-entry turbine model is inherently much more complex than
define the instantaneous flow conditions, in [24] it is proposed the use the traditional one: due to engine interaction, during a single engine
of the Mass Flow Ratio (MFR) parameter: cycle a twin entry turbine may operate under “equal” admission
(equal ERs for the two scrolls but MFR different from 0.5 due to
asymmetry), single admission or intermediate conditions [3].
Therefore, the overall performance will necessarily depend on mass
(26) flow distribution among the scrolls, and several intermediate
conditions should be experimentally investigated to support
Twin-entry turbines do therefore require specific and more complex interpolation/extrapolation algorithms. Figures 13 and 14 show
experimental tests, and the relative data have to be interpolated, experimental data relative to one single scroll (scroll # 1), both under
extrapolated and subsequently interpreted by using new tools. single (i.e., no flow through scroll # 2) and equal (same pressure ratio
Further, often twin-entry turbines present asymmetric entering flow across each scroll) conditions. The x-axis represents the single scroll
conditions, and the two scrolls have different fluid-dynamics Expansion Ratio. For an asymmetric turbine, if only “extreme”
characteristics. The schematic shown in Figure 11 presents one of the conditions are considered (no flow or equal ER for the two scrolls), 8
turbines tested and modeled during this project, highlighting some different maps would result (4 for RMF and 4 for efficiency).
possible in-flow conditions (respectively corresponding to MFR=0,
MFR=1, MFR=0.47). Asymmetry is clearly visible between the two
scrolls (and it is responsible for MFR being equal to 0.47 under equal
ER for each scroll, the so-called “equal” admission condition).

Figure 11. Twin-scroll asymmetric turbine. Possible inlet flow conditions (and
testing configurations). Figure 13. RMF vs ER, twin-entry turbine under equal and single admission
- SCROLL 1.
Due to asymmetry effects, different RMFs are to be expected for the
Figures 13 and 14 show the very different behavior of the same scroll
two scrolls when testing single admission conditions (i.e., conditions
under different admission conditions, demonstrating a high sensitivity
corresponding to center and left pictures of Figure 11), as
to the adjacent scroll instantaneous mass flow, and therefore the need
demonstrated by Figure 12. This poses additional challenges onto
to experimentally characterize the turbine at least under two
interpolation/extrapolation algorithms, but even more critical is the
“extreme” conditions for each scroll: single and equal admission. The
question of how to deal with such wide variety of experimental (or,
same type of experimental facilities as the ones presented in the
better, interpolated/extrapolated) data during engine simulation runs.
Introduction section may be used for such purposes, if minor
In the next figures, ER represents each scroll pressure ratio, while
modifications are made to the test bench to alternatively stop each
ERavg is used for average pressure ratio across the turbine.
scroll’s flow.

This content downloaded from

202.3.77.169 on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:25:05 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
2128 Cavina et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 8, Issue 5 (November 2015)
Figure 14. Efficiency vs ER, twin-entry turbine under equal and single
admission - SCROLL 1.
Twin-entry turbine performance maps may then be modeled
(interpolated/extrapolated) with the same methods presented and
discussed in the first part of the paper. Figures 15, 16, 17, 18 show the
RMF and efficiency maps that have been obtained for scroll number
1 of the turbine under analysis, under single and equal admission
conditions.
Figure 15. Twin-entry turbine RMF characteristic under equal admission
conditions - SCROLL 1.
Figure 16. Twin-entry turbine RMF characteristic under single admission
conditions - SCROLL 1.
This content downloaded from
202.3.77.169 on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:25:05 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Figure 17. Twin-entry turbine efficiency characteristic under equal admission
conditions - SCROLL 1.
Figure 18. Twin-entry turbine efficiency characteristic under single admission
conditions - SCROLL 1.
As it can be seen, the quality of interpolation/extrapolation is
generally more than acceptable. Figure 17 shows how the proposed
methodology introduces relevant errors in particular when the
negative efficiency trend with large and increasing ER is not captured
by the model, as it happens at the highest rotational speed.
Fortunately, this type of behavior is typical of a twin-entry turbine
operating at large ERs under equal admission conditions, which
usually are not encountered during engine-turbine interaction (the
turbine will be subjected to the largest ERs during cylinder pulse
discharge phases, which will correspond to mainly single admission
conditions). At large ERs, the single admission map will therefore be
mostly used, where such negative trend is not present in the
experimental data.
Once such experimental data are available, the behavior of a
twin-entry turbine may be correctly modeled by using the so-called
interaction map, as proposed by [24]. The idea is to identify the
specific turbine operating condition (and the corresponding maps that
represent its behavior) by considering the instantaneous turbine mean
Expansion Ratio (average between the two scrolls pressure ratios),
and the instantaneous pressure ratio between the two scrolls (ratio
between inlet pressure of the two scrolls). The combination of such
two values uniquely identifies the fluid-dynamics characteristics of
the actual operating condition, and it therefore allows to correctly
evaluate overall turbine mass flow rate and efficiency (by correctly
selecting and interpolating previously identified performance maps).
 Cavina et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 8, Issue 5 (November 2015)
The interaction map presented in Figure 19 shows experimental
turbine operating conditions corresponding to “extreme” situations
for each scroll: single admission (MFR=1.00 and MFR=0.00) and
equal pressure ratios for the two scrolls (MFR=0.47, due to turbine
asymmetry).
Figure 19. Twin-entry turbine experimental interaction map. Single admission
conditions are reported for both entries (MFR=1 and MFR=0), together with
the curve corresponding to “equal” admission (or, better, equal expansion ratio
for the two scrolls) and MFR=0.47.
To allow its use during engine simulation, the single/equal admission
data of the interaction map should first of all be interpolated and
extrapolated on a wide range of average turbine ERs and scroll PRs.
This activity has been carried out by initially neglecting rotational
speed effects, and all data points relative to a specific admission
condition have been interpolated/extrapolated using the same
exponential function proposed by [11] for extrapolating RMF as a
function of ER (see Equation 20). The PR model is represented by
Equation (27), and coefficients x1, x2, y1, and y2 have been identified
via genetic algorithms converging over minimum RMSE, for each of
the three investigated admission conditions.
(27)
Figure 20 presents the results of such interpolation/extrapolation
algorithm. It should be recalled that equal admission conditions
correspond to PRscroll=1, and in that case the operating condition is
uniquely identified by the average turbine ER (and the interpolating/
extrapolating function on the interaction map is simply given by
PRscroll=1). Relatively large errors are noticeable at high ERs,
showing that this simplified approach is not able to completely model
the turbine behavior. If a finer interpolation/extrapolation should be
needed, speed effects may be directly taken into account by
identifying different x and y parameters for each iso-speed curve, but
it should also be observed that such error won't have significant
effects during the simulation, since large average ERs are normally
not reached during engine-turbine interaction.
This content downloaded from
202.3.77.169 on Thu, 26 Novon Thu, 01 Jan 1976 12:34:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
2129
Figure 20. Interpolation and extrapolation of twin-entry turbine interaction
map via (27).
The remaining problem to be solved is how to make use of the
extended interaction map during engine-turbocharger simulations, in
order to correctly take into account interaction effects between the
two scrolls. The schematic of Figure 21 describes the algorithm that
has been developed for such purpose: the pressure ratio between the
two scrolls and the turbine average ER are assumed to be known
from the previous simulation time step, and they are used to identify
the instantaneous MFR at which the turbine is operating, from the
extended interaction map. With this information, efficiency and RMF
maps corresponding to “extreme” admission conditions (equal and
single) may be interpolated, assuming as weighting coefficient the
previously determined MFR.
Figure 21. Schematic of the interpolation algorithm for estimating twin-entry
turbine performance.
To better support this interpolation phase, experimental tests with
intermediate admission conditions may result particularly useful, but
they require a much more complex hot-gas test-bench, as explained
in [24]. As an example, Figure 22 shows the extended interaction
map of the same twin-entry turbine of Figure 20, with additional
experimental and interpolated/extrapolated admission conditions,
corresponding to intermediate MFRs. In particular, purple color is
used for a MFR condition equal to 0.30 (greater than 0.00 and smaller
than 0.47), while dark red color represents an MFR condition equal to
0.70 (greater than 0.47 and smaller than 1.00).
2130 Cavina et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 8, Issue 5 (November 2015)

case). It can be seen how under such conditions the interaction

between the two scrolls consists in a reverse flow: part of the mass
flow going through the highest pressure scroll does not enter the
turbine rotor, but is reflected back into the other scroll. It should be
recalled that in this case the x-axis shows the instantaneous single
scroll pressure ratio.

Figure 22. Interpolation and extrapolation of twin-entry turbine interaction

map extended with intermediate unequal admission conditions.

If instantaneous pressure values are measured for each scroll during

engine-turbine interaction, while measuring at the same time the
average turbine ER, such operating points may be added on the
interaction map, thus providing a clear understanding of how the
turbine operates when connected to the engine (via a pulse discharge Figure 24. RMF data versus turbine ER, showing how backflow occurs for
system), as shown in the next figure. To avoid cyclic variability MFRs greater than 1.
influences, 500 consecutive engine cycles have been measured under
The interaction map may then be further extended, including cross or
steady-state conditions, and cycle-average pressure cycles have been
reverse flow conditions during the experimental tests, as shown in
computed and considered in the analysis.
Figure 25.

Figure 23. Engine-turbine instantaneous operating conditions superimposed

on the interaction map, for a test at 7500 rpm and full load.
As also reported in [24], the data of Figure 23 demonstrate that the
interaction map previously defined does not comprise all possible
operating conditions. More specifically, it can be concluded that the
gas stand turbine flow with one inlet blocked does not represent the
limit of flow behavior. If the scroll pressure ratio exceeds the
boundaries of the single admission at a given turbine pressure ratio
(MFR < 0 or MFR > 1), interaction occurs between the two scrolls.
This means that a fraction of the mass flow going through the scroll
with higher pressure level does not reach the turbine wheel, but
recirculates into the second scroll in front of the wheel. This
phenomenon is commonly described as back-flow [24]. To
experimentally characterize such extreme but realistic conditions, a
specifically designed hot-gas test stand is needed. As an example,
Figure 24 shows RMF data measured while controlling the MFR
between scroll 1 and scroll 2 at a value greater than 1 (1.4 in this
Figure 25. Extended interaction map, including MFR conditions greater than
one and smaller than zero (corresponding to reverse flow).
Model Evaluation
To indirectly evaluate the twin-entry turbine model performance,
Figure 26 shows the extended interaction map, with superimposed
both experimental and modeled instantaneous conditions, for an
engine working point of 2000 rpm and maximum load (fully open
throttle and completely closed waste-gate). Two different turbine
models are compared, the so-called standard one (which considers
two “parallel” turbine wheels), and the one described in the previous
paragraph. It should be noted that both turbine sub-models have been
integrated in a full, 0-dimensional Simulink engine-turbocharger
control-oriented model, mainly used for control and diagnostic
functions development and calibration.

This content downloaded from

202.3.77.169 on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:25:05 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Cavina et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 8, Issue 5 (November 2015)
Figure 26. Extended interaction map, with superimposed experimental and
simulated instantaneous flow conditions. Test at 2000 rpm and max load.
As it can be clearly seen, the new model provides much more realistic
results, while the “standard” model estimates a lower average ER,
and an excessive pressure ratio between the scrolls. Turbine test stand
experiments demonstrate that under specific operating conditions
(low average ER and relatively large scroll PR), the turbine cannot be
anymore schematized using only one characteristic map (typically
equal admission), and engine-turbine interaction requires the turbine
model to be accurate also under such “extreme” conditions. The
consequences of lower average turbine ER estimation may for
example lead to excessive scavenging flow, or to under-estimation of
pumping losses.
Another possible way of evaluating the twin-entry turbine model
performance is to verify the ability of correctly capturing the
turbocharger dynamics. Figure 27 shows a comparison between
measured and simulated turbocharger speed, during a positive load
step on-board the vehicle. The two above-mentioned turbine models
are compared, showing how the “standard” one significantly
under-estimates the turbocharger “time-to-boost” characteristic (2 s
vs 3 s).
Figure 27. Comparison between experimental and simulated turbocharger load
step response, during vehicle on-board operation.
This content downloaded from
202.3.77.169 on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:25:05 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
2131
CONCLUSIONS
The paper presents possible solutions for developing fast and reliable
turbocharger models, to be used mainly for control applications. A
critical review of the most promising (and recent) modeling
approaches for automotive turbochargers is presented in the first part
of the paper, highlighting the main open issues especially in the field
of turbine models, and proposing possible improvements.
The main contribution is the development of a map-based, zero-
dimensional twin-entry turbine control-oriented model, able to
predict the machine behavior under all admission conditions. The
proposed approach makes optimal use of experimental data measured
on specifically designed hot-gas test stands, by defining interpolation
and extrapolation algorithms that allow an accurate representation of
the instantaneous operating conditions for both turbine entries.
The twin-entry turbocharger sub-model has been developed in
Simulink environment, and integrated into a full V8 high-
performance engine 0-D model, to support control strategies
development and calibration. Experimental data are shown
throughout the paper, to demonstrate the benefits of the proposed
approach, and the impact of the turbocharger sub-model accuracy on
key performance parameters (such as turbocharger time-to-boost).
REFERENCES
1. Watson, N., Janota, M.S., “Turbocharging the internal combustion
engine”, John Wiley & Sons, 1982.
2. Serrano, J., Arnau, F., Novella, R., and Reyes-Belmonte, M., “A
Procedure to Achieve 1D Predictive Modeling of Turbochargers under
Hot and Pulsating Flow Conditions at the Turbine Inlet,” SAE Technical
Paper 2014-01-1080, 2014, doi:10.4271/2014-01-1080.
3. Chiong, M.S., Rajoo, S., Martinez-Botas, R.F., Costall, A.W., “Engine
turbocharger performance prediction: One-dimensional modeling of a
twin entry turbine”, Energy Conversion and Management, Volume 57,
May 2012, Pages 68-78, ISSN 0196-8904, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
enconman.2011.12.001.
4. Rajoo, S., Romagnoli, A, Martinez-Botas, R.F., “Unsteady performance
analysis of a twin-entry variable geometry turbocharger turbine”,
Energy, Volume 38, Issue 1, February 2012, Pages 176-189, ISSN 0360-
5442, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2011.12.017.
5. Watson, N., “Dynamic turbocharged diesel engine simulator for
electronic control system development”, ASME Journal of Dynamic
Systems, Measurement, and Control Vol 106, pp.27-45, 1984.
6. Kao, M., Moskwa, J.J., “Turbocharged diesel engine modeling for
nonlinear engine control and estimation”, ASME Journal of Dynamic
Systems, Measurement and Control, Vol 117, 1995.
7. Moraal, P. and Kolmanovsky, I., “Turbocharger Modeling for
Automotive Control Applications,” SAE Technical Paper 1999-01-0908,
1999, doi:10.4271/1999-01-0908.
8. Martin, G., Talon, V., Higelin, P., Charlet, A. et al., “Implementing
Turbomachinery Physics into Data Map-Based Turbocharger Models”,
SAE Int. J. Engines 2(1):211-229, 2009, doi:10.4271/2009-01-0310.
9. MARTIN, G., TALON, V., PEUCHANT, T., HIGELIN, P. et al.,
“Physics based diesel turbocharger model for control purposes,” SAE
Technical Paper 2009-24-0123, 2009, doi:10.4271/2009-24-0123.
10. Dowell, P. and Akehurst, S., “Advanced Mapping Techniques for Radial
Compressor for Use in Real-Time Engine Models,” SAE Technical
Paper 2010-01-1227, 2010, doi:10.4271/2010-01-1227.
11. El Hadef, J., Colin, G., Chamaillard, Y., and Talon, V., “Physical-Based
Algorithms for Interpolation and Extrapolation of Turbocharger Data
Maps”, SAE Int. J. Engines 5(2):363-378, 2012, doi:10.4271/2012-01-
0434.
2132 Cavina et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 8, Issue 5 (November 2015)

12. Serrano, J., Pla, B., Gozalbo, R., and Ospina, D., “Estimation of the RMSE - Root Mean Square Error.
Extended Turbine Maps for a Radial Inflow Turbine,” SAE Technical
Paper 2010-01-1234, 2010, doi:10.4271/2010-01-1234. T - Temperature.
13. De Bellis, V., Bozza, F., Schernus, C., and Uhlmann, T., “Advanced U - Blade tip speed.
Numerical and Experimental Techniques for the Extension of a Turbine
Mapping”, SAE Int. J. Engines 6(3):1771-1785, 2013, doi:10.4271/2013-
24-0119. GREEK SYMBOLS
14. Martin, G., “Modèlisation 0D - 1D de la chaîne d'air des moteurs á
combustion interne dédiée au contrôle”, P.h.D. Thesis, Universite γ - Specific heats ratio.
d'Orleans, 2010. Δ - Variation.
15. Jensen, J., Kristensen, A., Sorenson, S., Houbak, N. et al., “Mean Value
Modeling of a Small Turbocharged Diesel Engine,” SAE Technical η - Efficiency.
Paper 910070, 1991, doi:10.4271/910070.
16. Winkler, G., “Steady state and dynamic modeling of engine
ρ - Density.
turbomachinery systems”, PhD Thesis, 1977 Φ - Non-dimensional flow rate.
17. CANOVA, M., FIORANI, P., GAMBAROTTA, A., and TONETTI,
M., “A real-time model of a small turbocharged Multijet Diesel engine: Ψ - Head parameter.
application and validation.,” SAE Technical Paper 2005-24-065, 2005,
doi:10.4271/2005-24-065.
SUBSCRIPTS
18. Canova, M., Chiara, F., Rizzoni, G., and Wang, Y., “Design and
Validation of a Control-Oriented Model of a Diesel Engine with 0 - Stagnation conditions.
Two-Stage Turbocharger”, SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr. 2(2):387-397, 2010,
doi:10.4271/2009-24-0122. 1 - Condition at compressor inlet.
19. Hiett, G. f. Johnston, I. H., “Experiments Concerning the Aerodynamic 2 - Condition at compressor outlet.
Performance of Inward Flow Radial Turbines”, Proc. Inst. Mech. Engrs,
178, Pt 31 (II), 1963-64. 3 - Condition at turbine inlet.
20. GT-SUITE Flow Theory Manual, version 7.1, 2010.
4 - Condition at turbine outlet.
21. Eriksson, L., “Modeling and Control of Turbocharged SI and DI
Engines”, Oil & Gas Science and Technology - Rev. IFP, Vol.62 (2007), app - Apparent.
No. 4, pp. 523-538, Copyright c 2007, Institut français du pétrole,
doi:10.2516/ogst:2007042. avg - Average.
22. Watson, N., “Transient Performance Simulation and Analysis of
Turbocharged Diesel Engines,” SAE Technical Paper 810338, 1981,
C - Compressor.
doi:10.4271/810338. corr - Corrected.
23. Fredriksson, C. F., Qiu, X., Baines, N. C., Müller, M. et al., “Meanline
Modeling of Radial Inflow Turbine With Twin-Entry Scroll”, Paper No. ext - External
GT2012-69018, ASME Turbo Expo 2012: Turbine Technical Conference
and Exposition, 2012, doi:10.1115/GT2012-69018. Fl1 - Flow (scroll) 1.
24. Schorn, N., “The Radial Turbine for Small Turbocharger Fl2 - Flow (scroll) 2.
Applications: Evolution and Analytical Methods for Twin-Entry
Turbine Turbochargers”, SAE Int. J. Engines 7(3):1422-1442, 2014, int - Internal.
doi:10.4271/2014-01-1647.
is - Isentropic.
DEFINITIONS/ABBREVIATIONS MAX - Maximum.
Aeff - Effective nozzle flow area. norm - Normalized.
BSR - Blade Speed Ratio. red - Reduced.
CMF - Corrected Mass Flow rate. ref - Reference.
cp - Specific heat at constant pressure. scroll - Scroll (entry).
cs - Velocity achieved by a gas expanding in an adiabatic nozzle. TC - Turbo Charger.
D - Diameter. TT - Total-to-Total.
ER - Expansion Ratio.
h - Enthalpy.
- Mass flow rate.
n - Revolutions per minute.
p - Pressure.
PR - Pressure Ratio.
r - Rotor radius.
R - Gas constant.
RMF - Reduced Mass Flow rate.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or
otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE International.

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE International. The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper.

This content downloaded from

202.3.77.169 on Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:25:05 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms