The present invention pertains to engines and particularly to engine controls. More particularly, the invention pertains to calibration of engine controls.
The invention is a tool for calibration of an engine control system.
The calibration of a control system for diesel engines is a very laborious and expensive process for automakers. Much time may be spent on experimenting with the engine to model or map the engine and then generating the best controller calibration (also referred to as tuning) parameters for the engine control system. A seemingly urgent need at the moment may be the speeding-up of the engine calibration process. Model-based approaches that help shorten dynometer times may also be greatly needed.
The present invention may be a tool that takes inputs which include actuator setpoints, sensor measurements and performance requirements. The requirements may include acceleration, emissions, robustness, fuel economy, and more. The tool may contain an algorithm which computes engine calibration parameters which result in an engine controller that satisfies or allows a tradeoff among the performance requirements.
The invention may include a computer having a tool designed for performing model identification and generating controller tuning parameters. The making of the tool may require one to design and code the software, and to design and make a connection with a test rig, and also to make the production control software.
A basic engine control set-up may include an ECU 11 connected to an engine 12, as shown in
A basic concern of engine control is to develop calibration data to be accessed from the module 13 by the control algorithm of module 14 such that the closing the loop around the engine 12 may result in acceptable performance with respect to the user requirements. User requirements may often be set by the engine manufacturer and at a high level reflect the requirements of the end user. These requirements may include, but not be limited to, emissions, fuel economy, drivability and noise, vibration and harshness (NVH). The emissions, which need to satisfy regulated levels, are usually specified by a regulating body such as the EPA. There may be minimum fuel economy expectations or requirements. The drivability may be indicated by torque and speed requirements. NVH may need to be kept within acceptable levels.
The electronic control unit (ECU) 11 may include a digital computer that controls engine (and sometimes transmission, brake or other car system) operations based on data received from various sensors 16. Examples of these operations used by some manufacturers may include an electronic brake control module (EBCM), an engine control module (ECM), a powertrain control module (PCM) or a vehicle control module (VCM).
A PID control algorithm may be provided by the following equation.
where e(t) is the error signal containing the difference between the desired boost pressure (target) and the measured boost pressure (MAP). Δe(t) may be regarded as “e(t)-e(t-1)”. A calibration challenge in this case is to design the values of parameters Kc, Ki, and Kd such that closed-loop performance of the system 20 matches expectations. For example, a requirement may be stated as “when subject to step disturbance of 0.2 bar, the control system shall achieve desired boost pressure to within 5 percent accuracy in less than 1 second”. Often the calibration parameters may be required to be developed as a function of engine and ambient conditions. For instance, the values of Kc, Ki, and Kd may depend upon or change as a function of on engine speed and load or fueling rate. Also, ambient air temperature and pressure may affect the values of Kc, Ki, and Kd.
The present calibration process may rely on generating or determining values for the controller calibration parameters using standard model based control designs that require a model of the dynamics of the engine 12.
An application module 46 may be connected to an output of model determination module. At the input of module 46, a question at a decision place 38 may be asked as to whether to do a closed-loop simulation 34 or not relative to the output of module 45. If the answer is “Yes”, then one may go to the closed-loop simulation 34 and then to an engine trial 39. If the answer is “No”, then one may skip the closed-loop simulation 34 and go directly to the engine trial 39. After the engine trial 39, a performance analysis 35 may be performed on the results of the engine trial 39. The analysis 35 may indicate what the performance numbers are for a given set of values for the calibration parameters output from module 45. A question at a decision place 36 as to whether the requirements are satisfied by the performance numbers may be asked. If the answer is “No”, then one may return back to the experiment 31, the model identification 32 or the model based control design stage 33 of model determination module 45, as needed in that order. If the answer is “yes” to a question of the decision place 36, then a downloading of determined values for the calibration parameters, such as PID calibration parameters Kc, Ki, and Kd, to an ECU 11 may be effected. The performance analyzer 35 and decision place 36 may compose an evaluation module 47.
This system 30 may work with multivariable interactions or multivarible control. The calibration parameters of a PID controller may automatically be determined. Various approaches besides PID control may be used. For instance, model predictive control (MPC) may be used.
For the experiment step or stage 31, one may use a setup as shown in
The model identification stage 32 in
The following may reveal a model of the dynamics of an engine. Such a model may be applicable to engine 12. A development of a feedback controller may require a model of the engine dynamics as a function of an operating point and ambient conditions as well as a technique for constructing this model by combining physical insight and experimental results.
If one considers the case of MAP and MAF response to VNT and EGR, and writes a 2-by-2 transfer matrix,
where the symbols y1, y2, u1, u2 represent the physical parameters, then one gets
Based on various experiments with a model, each single-variable subplant may be well-defined by the sum of two first order responses,
Then each of the subplants gij(s) may be characterized by four parameters; 2 gains (kijs and kijf) and 2 time constants (pijs and pijf). The superscripts “f” and “s” are intended to denote “fast” and “slow”.
For computational convenience, one may collect the parameters of the differential equation into a 4-vector,
θij(σ)=└kijs(σ),pijs(σ),kijf(σ),pijf(σ)┘.
The functional dependence of θij(σ) on the symbol σ indicates that the value of the gains and time constants may depend on some other variables. A study into a representative model appears to show that the scheduling parameters σ must at least include the speed and load σ(t)=[Ne(t) Wf(t)]. There may be schedule made relative to the operating point on the intake and exhaust pressures so that
σ(t)=[pi(t)px(t)].
The model based control design step or stage 33 may refer to an automatic design of the control algorithm—including its calibration parameters—as a function of the identified model and also performance specifications. One could concentrate on a model predictive control. However, there may be many other multivariable control design techniques that could be used with the present system. Some of these techniques may include robust control (H-infinity or H-2 control), linear parameter varying (LPV) control, LPV H-infinity control, PID control with model based design of calibration parameters, and so forth.
The closed-loop simulation or engine trial step may refer to the testing of a designed control algorithm and calibration parameters. A developed controller may be put into closed-loop with either the real engine or a simulation of the engine. Then a prespecified test or tests (e.g., a running one of the legislated emissions certification cycles) of the closed-loop performance may be performed and the data collected.
The performance analysis step or stage 35 may refer to a using of the calibration software tool to analyze the closed-loop test data in order to make a decision as to whether the closed-loop performance is acceptable or not.
The download calibration parameters step or stage 37 to an ECU 11 may refer to an act of copying the designed calibration parameters into the appropriate memory locations in the ECU 11.
In the present specification, some of the matter may be of a hypothetical or prophetic nature although stated in another manner or tense.
Although the invention has been described with respect to at least one illustrative example, many variations and modifications will become apparent to those skilled in the art upon reading the present specification. It is therefore the intention that the appended claims be interpreted as broadly as possible in view of the prior art to include all such variations and modifications.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3744461 | Davis | Jul 1973 | A |
4005578 | McInerney | Feb 1977 | A |
4055158 | Marsee | Oct 1977 | A |
4252098 | Tomczak et al. | Feb 1981 | A |
4383441 | Willis et al. | May 1983 | A |
4426982 | Lehner et al. | Jan 1984 | A |
4438497 | Willis et al. | Mar 1984 | A |
4456883 | Bullis et al. | Jun 1984 | A |
4485794 | Kimberley et al. | Dec 1984 | A |
4545355 | Takao et al. | Oct 1985 | A |
4546747 | Kobayashi et al. | Oct 1985 | A |
4601270 | Kimberley et al. | Jul 1986 | A |
4653449 | Kamei et al. | Mar 1987 | A |
5044337 | Williams | Sep 1991 | A |
5076237 | Hartman et al. | Dec 1991 | A |
5089236 | Clerc | Feb 1992 | A |
5108716 | Nishizawa | Apr 1992 | A |
5123397 | Richeson | Jun 1992 | A |
5233829 | Komatsu | Aug 1993 | A |
5282449 | Takahashi et al. | Feb 1994 | A |
5349816 | Sanbayashi et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5351184 | Lu et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5365734 | Takeshima | Nov 1994 | A |
5398502 | Watanabe | Mar 1995 | A |
5452576 | Hamburg et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5477840 | Neumann | Dec 1995 | A |
5560208 | Halimi et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5561599 | Lu | Oct 1996 | A |
5570574 | Yamashita et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5598825 | Neumann | Feb 1997 | A |
5609139 | Ueda et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5611198 | Lane et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5682317 | Keeler et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5690086 | Kawano et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5692478 | Nogi et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5746183 | Parke et al. | May 1998 | A |
5765533 | Nakajima | Jun 1998 | A |
5771867 | Amstutz et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5785030 | Paas | Jul 1998 | A |
5788004 | Friedmann et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5846157 | Reinke et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5893092 | Driscoll | Apr 1999 | A |
5942195 | Lecea et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5964199 | Atago et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5974788 | Hepburn et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6029626 | Bruestle | Feb 2000 | A |
6035640 | Kolmanovsky et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6048620 | Zhong | Apr 2000 | A |
6055810 | Borland et al. | May 2000 | A |
6058700 | Yamashita et al. | May 2000 | A |
6067800 | Kolmanovsky et al. | May 2000 | A |
6076353 | Freudenberg et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6105365 | Deeba et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6153159 | Engeler et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6161528 | Akao et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6170259 | Boegner et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6171556 | Burk et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6178743 | Hirota et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6178749 | Kolmanovsky et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6216083 | Ulyanov et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6237330 | Takahashi et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6242873 | Drozdz et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6263672 | Roby et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6273060 | Cullen | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6279551 | Iwano et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6312538 | Latypov et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6321538 | Hasler | Nov 2001 | B2 |
6338245 | Shimoda et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6347619 | Whiting et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6360159 | Miller et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6360541 | Waszkiewicz et al. | Mar 2002 | B2 |
6360732 | Bailey et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6379281 | Collins et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6425371 | Majima | Jul 2002 | B2 |
6427436 | Allansson et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6431160 | Sugiyama et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6463733 | Asik et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6463734 | Tamura et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6470682 | Gray, Jr. | Oct 2002 | B2 |
6470866 | Cook | Oct 2002 | B2 |
6502391 | Hirota et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6512974 | Houston et al. | Jan 2003 | B2 |
6546329 | Bellinger | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6560528 | Gitlin et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6571191 | York et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6579206 | Liu et al. | Jun 2003 | B2 |
6612293 | Schweinzer et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6625978 | Eriksson et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6629408 | Murakami et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6647710 | Nishiyama et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6647971 | Vaughan et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6671603 | Cari et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6672060 | Buckland et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6679050 | Takahashi et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6687597 | Sulatisky et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6705084 | Allen et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6742330 | Genderen | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6758037 | Terada et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6789533 | Hashimoto et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6823667 | Braun et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6823675 | Brunell et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6826903 | Yahata et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6827061 | Nytomt et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6915776 | Zur Loye et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
20010002591 | Majima | Jun 2001 | A1 |
20020029564 | Roth et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020056434 | Flamig-Vetter et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020073696 | Kuenstler et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020098975 | Kimura et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020170550 | Mitsutani | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020173919 | Moteki et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020184879 | Lewis | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020194835 | Bromberg et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030022752 | Liu et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030041590 | Kitajima et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030089101 | Tanaka et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030101713 | Dalla Betta et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030120410 | Cari et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030143957 | Lyon | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030145837 | Esteghlal et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030150422 | Huh | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030172907 | Nytomt et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030200016 | Spillane et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030213465 | Fehl et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030221679 | Surnilla | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030225507 | Tamura | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040006973 | Makki et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040007211 | Kobayashi | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040007217 | Poola et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040025837 | Hunt et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040034460 | Folkerts et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040040283 | Yasui et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040040287 | Beutel et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040050037 | Betta et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040055278 | Miyoshi et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040055575 | McCarthy, Jr. et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040060284 | Roberts, Jr. et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040074226 | Tanaka | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040089279 | McLaughlin et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040112335 | Makino et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040118117 | Hartman et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040128058 | Andres et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040129259 | Mitsutani | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040134464 | Mogi | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040135584 | Nagy et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040139735 | Zhu | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040139951 | Fisher et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040249558 | Meaney | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050088653 | Coates et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
10010978 | Sep 2001 | DE |
10219382 | Nov 2002 | DE |
1221544 | Jul 2002 | EP |
59190443 | Oct 1984 | JP |
WO 02101208 | Dec 2002 | WO |
03065135 | Aug 2003 | WO |
WO 2004027230 | Apr 2004 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20070156363 A1 | Jul 2007 | US |