The New Powertrain Virtual Analysis Process in Engine Design and Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">Due to new federal regulations and higher environmental awareness, the market demands for high fuel economy and low exhaust emission engines are increasing. At the same time customer demands for engine performance, NVH and reliability are also increasing. It is a challenge for engineers to design an engine to meet all requirements with less development time. Currently, the new engine development time has been trimmed in order to introduce more products to the market. Utilizing CAE technology and processes in an engine development cycle can enable engineers to satisfy all requirements in a timely and cost-effectively way.</div><div class="htmlview paragraph">This paper describes a new Powertrain Virtual Analysis Process which has been successfully implemented into Chrysler PTCP (Powertrain Creation Process) and effectively utilized to shorten and improve the product development process. This new virtual analysis process guides the product development from concept through the production validation phases. Based on the new process, CAE engineers collaborate with product development, quality, dyno/vehicle test and design CoE (Center of Excellence) teams to establish the concept study plans and quality documents (boundary diagram, functional model, DFMEA and DVP&amp;R) of components and systems; complete and execute the CAE plans according to DVP&amp;Rs; optimize the mechanical and reliability test plans depending on CAE contribution; assess the product design risk based on CAE results and existing test data at each design phase before physical tests start; utilize CAE tools to provide solutions when failures are found during tests; and close loop of virtual analysis process by summarizing lessons learned from product development.</div><div class="htmlview paragraph">This paper summarizes CAE technologies used in this new virtual analysis process during a new Chrysler I4 engine design and development. These technologies include NVH, 1D engine performance, CFD gas/coolant flow, conjugate heat transfer, crankcase breathing, lubrication, and structure durability. The new virtual analysis process helped meet challenging engine program targets that required 88% new engine parts (excluding carry over fasteners/sealants) in only 22 months from program approval to start of production.</div></div>
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".