Evaporative emission leak detection method with vapor generation compensation

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 6382017
  • Patent Number
    6,382,017
  • Date Filed
    Wednesday, November 10, 1999
    25 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, May 7, 2002
    22 years ago
Abstract
An improved method of detecting evaporative emission system leaks, wherein first and second changes in closed-system fuel tank pressure due to vapor generation are measured respectively prior to and after the leak testing, and wherein the larger of the first and second pressure changes is used to adjust the pressure measurements taken during leak testing, or to invalidate the diagnostic if the vapor generation exceeds a threshold. The first vapor generation test occurs at the beginning of the driving cycle when there has been no significant disturbance of the vapor equilibrium in the fuel tank, and thereby provides an indication vapor generation due to volatility of the fuel. The second vapor generation test occurs well into the driving cycle, and provides an indication of vapor generation due to fuel heating and sloshing.
Description




TECHNICAL FIELD




The present invention relates to leak detection in an automotive evaporative emission system, and more particularly to a detection method that takes into account the vapor generation characteristics of the system.




BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION




In automotive evaporative emission systems, fuel vapor generated in the vehicle fuel tank is captured in a charcoal-filled canister and subsequently supplied to the engine air intake through a solenoid purge valve. Since the effectiveness of the system can be significantly impaired by faulty operation of a component or by a leak in one or more of the hoses or components, the engine controller is generally programmed to carry out a number of diagnostic algorithms for detecting such failures. If faulty operation is detected, the result is stored and a “check engine” lamp is activated to alert the driver so that corrective action can be taken.




Experience has shown that evaporative system leaks can be particularly difficult to reliably detect and diagnose due to variability of fuel characteristics, driving schedules, and environmental conditions. While leaks can theoretically be detected by closing off the air vent, drawing the system below atmospheric pressure with engine vacuum, and then monitoring the change in system pressure, the results are subject to misinterpretation due to unmeasured effects such as vapor generation in the fuel tank. Accordingly, what is needed is a method of reliably detecting evaporative emission system leaks.




SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION




The present invention is directed to an improved method of detecting evaporative emission system leaks, wherein first and second changes in closed-system pressure due to vapor generation are measured respectively prior to and after the leak testing, and wherein the larger of the first and second pressure changes is used to adjust the pressure measurements taken during leak testing, or to invalidate the diagnostic if the vapor generation exceeds a threshold. The first vapor generation test occurs at the beginning of the driving cycle when there has been no significant disturbance of the vapor equilibrium in the fuel tank, and thereby provides an indication of vapor generation due to volatility of the fuel. The second vapor generation test occurs well into the driving cycle, and provides an indication of vapor generation due to fuel heating and sloshing.











BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS





FIG. 1

is a diagram of an automotive evaporative emission system according to this invention, including a microprocessor-based engine control module (ECM).





FIG. 2

, Graphs A-C, graphically depict the operation of the diagnostic method of this invention.





FIGS. 3 and 4

are flow diagrams representative of computer program instructions executed by the ECM of

FIG. 1

in carrying out the diagnostic method of this invention.











DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT




Referring to

FIG. 1

, the reference numeral


10


generally designates an evaporative emission system for an automotive engine


12


and fuel system


14


. The fuel system


14


includes a fuel tank


16


, a fuel pump (P)


18


, a pressure regulator (PR)


19


, an engine fuel rail


20


, and one or more fuel injectors


22


. The fuel tank


16


has an internal chamber


24


, and the pump


18


draws fuel into the chamber


24


through a filter


26


, as generally indicated by the arrows. The fuel line


28


couples the pump


18


to the fuel rail


20


, and the pressure regulator


19


returns excess fuel to chamber


24


via fuel line


30


. Fuel is supplied to the tank


16


via a conventional filler pipe


32


sealed by the removable fill cap


34


.




The evaporative emission system


10


includes a charcoal canister


40


, a solenoid purge valve


42


and a solenoid air vent valve


44


. The canister


40


is coupled to fuel tank


16


via line


46


, to air vent valve


44


via line


48


, and to purge valve


42


via line


50


. The air vent valve


44


is normally open so that the canister


40


collects hydrocarbon vapor generated by the fuel in tank


16


, and in subsequent engine operation, the normally closed purge valve


42


is modulated to draw the vapor out of canister


40


via lines


50


and


52


for ingestion in engine


12


. To this end, the line


52


couples the purge valve


42


to the engine intake manifold


54


on the vacuum or downstream side of throttle


56


.




The air vent valve


44


and purge valve


42


are both controlled by a microprocessor-based engine control module (ECM)


60


, based on a number of input signals, including the fuel tank pressure (TP) on line


62


and the fuel level (FL) on line


64


. The fuel tank pressure is detected with a conventional pressure sensor


66


, and the fuel level is detected with a conventional fuel level sender


68


. Of course, the ECM


60


controls a host of engine related functions, such as fuel injector opening and closing, ignition timing, and so on.




In general, the ECM


60


diagnoses leaks in the evaporative emission system


10


by suitably activating the solenoid valves


42


and


44


, and monitoring the fuel tank pressure TP. According to the invention, the method involves a first vapor generation test conducted at the beginning of the driving cycle, a leak test of the evaporative emission system, and a second vapor generation test conducted after the leak test has been completed. The first and second vapor generation tests are carried out by setting the valves


42


and


44


to their closed states to establish a closed system, and monitoring the TP signal for pressure changes due to vapor generation in the fuel tank


16


. The leak test is carried out by setting the valve


44


to its closed state, modulating the valve


42


to establish a below atmospheric pressure in the fuel tank


16


, setting the valve


42


to its closed state to establish a closed system, and then monitoring the TP signal for pressure changes due to an atmospheric leak into the closed system, such as a leak in the fuel tank cap


34


or the pipes


46


,


48


or


50


.




The above method is graphically depicted in

FIG. 2

, where Graph A depicts the state of the vent valve


44


, Graph B depicts the state of the purge valve


42


, and Graph C depicts a tank vacuum signal developed from the TP signal, all as a common function of driving cycle time. By convention, the vacuum signal of Graph C depicts increasing vacuum as a positive quantity, and increasing pressure as a negative quantity.




The driving cycle is initiated at time t


0


, and the first vapor generation test is initiated shortly thereafter at time t


1


; this involves activating the normally open vent valve


44


, and deactivating the normally closed purge valve


42


, as seen in Graphs A and B, respectively. During the interval t


1


-t


2


, the duration of which may be determined in advance by calibration, the tank vacuum signal (Graph C) may fall slightly (pressure rise) due to vapor generation, depending on the fuel volatility. The change in pressure is recorded as a slope (i.e., change in pressure/time, also referred to herein as PRE-VG SLOPE), and the vent valve


44


is then re-opened at time t


2


, allowing the system pressure to return to its normal level.




The leak test is subsequently conducted in the interval t


3


-t


5


. In the illustrated embodiment, the vent valve


44


is activated to a closed state, and the purge valve


42


is modulated to draw the tank vacuum below atmospheric pressure to a reference pressure (REF), and to maintain the reference pressure until the enable conditions for the leak test are met at time t


4


. At such point, the purge valve


42


is deactivated to establish a closed system, and the change in pressure (which may be due to a leak or vapor generation) is monitored over a predefined interval t


4


-t


5


. The change in pressure is recorded as a slope (i.e., change in pressure/time, also referred to herein as LEAK TEST SLOPE), and the vent valve


44


is then re-opened at time t


5


, allowing the system pressure to return to its normal level.




The second vapor generation test is initiated at time t


6


, shortly after completion of the leak test. As with the first vapor generation test, the normally open vent valve


44


is activated, and the normally closed purge valve


42


is deactivated, as seen in Graphs A and B, respectively. During the interval t


6


-t


7


, the duration of which may be determined in advance by calibration, the tank vacuum signal may fall slightly (pressure rise) due to vapor generation, this time depending primarily on the degree of fuel sloshing and heating. The change in pressure is recorded as a slope (i.e., change in pressure/time, also referred to herein as POST-VG SLOPE), and the vent valve


44


is then re-opened at time t


7


, allowing the system pressure to return to its normal level, and completing the diagnostic measurements.




According to the invention, the pressure change measured during the leak test is compensated based on the larger of the two slopes determined during the first and second vapor generation tests. Since the first vapor generation test occurs when there has been no significant disturbance of the vapor equilibrium in the fuel tank, the PRE-VG SLOPE provides an indication of vapor generation primarily due to volatility of the fuel. Since the second vapor generation test occurs well into the driving cycle, the POST-VG SLOPE provides an indication of vapor generation primarily due to fuel heating and sloshing. The vapor generation slopes PRE-VG SLOPE and POST-VG SLOPE are each compared to upper and lower thresholds for the purpose of disabling small and/or very small leak detection, and the larger of the PRE-VG SLOPE and the POST-VG SLOPE is used to adjust the LEAK TEST SLOPE to compensate for vapor generation. For purposes of this description, a very small leak is defined as a leak equivalent to an opening having a diameter of 0.020″, and a small leak is defined as a leak equivalent to an opening having a diameter of 0.040″.





FIGS. 3 and 4

are flow diagrams representative of computer program instructions executed by the ECM


60


for carrying out the above-described diagnostic method.

FIG. 3

describes a diagnostic routine that is executed during a diagnostic interval, and

FIG. 4

details a portion of the flow diagram of

FIG. 3

concerning vapor generation testing.




Referring to

FIG. 3

, block


80


of the diagnostic routine is first executed to determine if the evaporative diagnostic enable conditions have been met. This may involve, for example, determining if the engine coolant temperature is within a predefined range, if the difference between the coolant temperature and the inlet air temperature is within a given range, if the measured fuel level is within a given range, and if the barometric pressure is within a given range. If one or more of the conditions is not met, the block


82


is executed to disable the evaporative leak diagnostic. If all of the conditions are met, the block


84


is executed to run the first vapor generation test. Once the first vapor generation test has been completed, the block


85


determines if the measured slope (PRE-VG SLOPE) is greater than an upper threshold rate PRE-VG_THR2. If so, the fuel is too volatile to reliably detect the existence of either small or very small leaks, and the block


82


is executed to disable the evaporative diagnostic. If PRE-VG SLOPE is lower than the upper threshold PRE-VG_THR2, but higher than a lower threshold rate PRE-VG_THR1, as determined at block


86


, the fuel is too volatile to reliably detect the existence of a very small leak, and the block


88


is executed to disable the very small leak test diagnostic. The block


90


is then executed to run the leak test. As described above in reference to

FIG. 2

, the result of the leak test is a detected change in pressure or slope that may be due to a leak in the otherwise closed system. Upon completion of the leak test, block


92


is executed to run the second vapor generation test. Once the second vapor generation test has been completed, the block


94


determines if the measured slope (POST-VG SLOPE) is greater than an upper threshold rate POST-VG_THR2. If so, there is too much vapor generation to detect the existence of either a small or very small leak, and the block


82


is executed to disable the evaporative system leak diagnostic. Block


96


determines if the measured slope (POST-VG SLOPE) is greater than a lower threshold rate POST-VG_THR1. If so, there is too much vapor generation to detect the existence of a very small leak, and the block


98


is executed to disable the very small leak test diagnostic. The block


100


is then executed to compensate the result of the leak test based on the greater of PRE-VG SLOPE and POST-VG SLOPE, thereby compensating the measured decrease in vacuum for vapor generation effects. If the very small leak test diagnostic has not been disabled, as determined at block


102


, the blocks


104


and


106


are executed to compare the compensated leak test slopes (S. SLOPE, V.S. SLOPE) to respective small and very small thresholds THRs, THRvs. The respective leak test is considered to have been failed if the compensated slope exceeds the respective threshold. If block


102


is answered in the affirmative, execution of the block


104


is skipped. And finally, the results of the tests are reported at block


108


.




The flow diagram of

FIG. 4

further details the method of carrying out the first and second vapor generation tests, and is intended to apply to either such test. Thus, both the first and second vapor generation tests (blocks


84


and


92


of

FIG. 3

) involve a similar series of steps. First, block


110


is executed to determine if the system vacuum is below a threshold. When the sensed vacuum falls below the threshold, the block


112


is executed to command the purge valve


42


and the vent valve


44


to their closed states, and block


114


stores the current tank vacuum as the initial value of the test. The block


116


then increments a slope timer, and when block


118


detects that the timer has reached a reference time REF-TIME, the block


120


calculates the respective slope PRE-VG SLOPE or POST-VG SLOPE. Finally, block


122


is executed to open the vent valve


44


, completing the respective vapor generation test.




In summary, the diagnostic method of the present invention provides a reliable method of detecting the existence of a leak in an evaporative emission system, primarily by compensating the leak measurements for the influences of vapor generation due to fuel volatility, fuel heating and sloshing. While the present invention has been described in reference to the illustrated embodiment, it is expected that various modifications will occur to those skilled in the art. For example, there may be more than two vapor generation tests, and various factors may be applied to the vapor generation slopes prior to compensation of the leak test slope to account for differences in the system pressure. Accordingly, it will be understood that methods incorporating these and other modifications may fall within the scope of this invention, which is defined by the appended claims.



Claims
  • 1. A method of detecting a leak in an automotive evaporative emission system including the steps of:repeatedly measuring a pressure in the system; conducting a first vapor generation test substantially at the beginning of a driving cycle by closing all venting of the system and monitoring a first change in the measured pressure; conducting a leak test to detect an apparent leak in the system by bringing the measured pressure to a reference value below atmospheric pressure, and then determining a rate of change of the measured pressure; conducting a second vapor generation test after completion of the leak test by closing all venting of the system and monitoring a second change in the measured pressure; compensating the determined rate of change based upon the greater of the first and second pressure changes; and determining the existence of a system leak when the compensated rate of change exceeds a threshold.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the first pressure change monitored during the first vapor generation test is due primarily to a volatility of fuel residing in the system, and the second pressure change monitored during the second vapor generation test is due primarily to heating and sloshing of fuel residing in the system.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, including the steps of:comparing the first pressure change to an upper threshold; and disabling the detecting of a leak if the first pressure change exceeds the upper threshold.
  • 4. A method of detecting leaks in an automotive evaporative emission system, including leak tests to detect a first-sized leak and a second-sized leak, with the second-sized leak being smaller than the first-sized leak, the method including the steps of:repeatedly measuring a pressure in the system; conducting a first vapor generation test substantially at the beginning of a driving cycle by closing all venting of the system and monitoring a first change in the measured pressure; comparing the first pressure change to upper and lower thresholds; disabling the leak tests for both first-sized and second-sized leaks if the first pressure change exceeds the upper threshold; bringing the measured pressure to a reference value below atmospheric pressure, and then determining a rate of change of the measured pressure; conducting a second vapor generation test after completion of the leak test by closing all venting of the system and monitoring a second change in the measured pressure; compensating the determined rate of change based upon the greater of the first and second pressure changes; and detecting the existence of both first-sized leaks and second-sized leaks based on the compensated rate of change if the first pressure change is less than the lower threshold; and detecting the existence of a first-sized leak but not a second-sized leak based on the compensated rate of change if the first pressure change exceeds the lower threshold but not the upper threshold.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, including the steps of:comparing the second pressure change to an upper threshold; and disabling the detecting of a leak if the second pressure change exceeds the upper threshold.
  • 6. A method of detecting leaks in an automotive evaporative emission system, including leak tests to detect a first-sized leak and a second-sized leak, with the second-sized leak being smaller than the first-sized leak, the method including the steps of:repeatedly measuring a pressure in the system; conducting a first vapor generation test substantially at the beginning of a driving cycle by closing all venting of the system and monitoring a first change in the measured pressure; bringing the measured pressure to a reference value below atmospheric pressure, and then determining a rate of change of the measured pressure; conducting a second vapor generation test after completion of the leak test by closing all venting of the system and monitoring a second change in the measured pressure; compensating the determined rate of change based upon the greater of the first and second pressure changes; comparing the second pressure change to upper and lower thresholds; disabling the leak tests for both first-sized and second-sized leaks if the second pressure change exceeds the upper threshold; detecting the existence of both first-sized leaks and second-sized leaks based on the compensated rate of change if the second pressure change is less than the lower threshold; and detecting the existence of a first-sized leak but not a second-sized leak based on the compensated rate of change if the second pressure change exceeds the lower threshold but not the upper threshold.
  • 7. A method of detecting a leak in an automotive evaporative emission system by repeatedly measuring a pressure in the system, and conducting a leak test by bringing the measured pressure to a reference value below atmospheric pressure, and then determining a rate of change of the measured pressure, the improvement comprising the steps of:conducting a first vapor generation test substantially at the beginning of a driving cycle, and prior to conducting the leak test, by closing all venting of the system and monitoring a first change in the measured pressure; and conducting a second vapor generation test after completion of the leak test by closing all venting of the system and monitoring a second change in the measured pressure; compensating the determined rate of change based upon the greater of the first and second pressure changes; and detecting the existence of a system leak when the compensated rate of change exceeds a threshold.
  • 8. The improvement of claim 7, wherein the first pressure change monitored during the first vapor generation test is due primarily to a volatility of fuel residing in the system, and the second pressure change monitored during the second vapor generation test is due primarily to heating and sloshing of fuel residing in the system.
  • 9. The improvement of claim 7, including the step of:comparing the first change in the measured pressure to a threshold; and disabling the detecting of a system leak if the first change exceeds the threshold.
  • 10. A method of leak testing an automotive evaporative emission system by repeatedly measuring a pressure in the system, and conducting a leak test by bringing the measured pressure to a reference value below atmospheric pressure, and then determining a rate of change of the measured pressure, wherein the leak test includes tests to detect a first-sized leak and a second-sized leak, with the second-sized leak being smaller than the first-sized leak, the improvement comprising the steps of:conducting a first vapor generation test substantially at the beginning of a driving cycle, and prior to conducting the leak test, by closing all venting of the system and monitoring a first change in the measured pressure; and conducting a second vapor generation test after completion of the leak test by closing all venting of the system and monitoring a second change in the measured pressure; compensating the determined rate of change based upon the greater of the first and second pressure changes; comparing the first pressure change to upper and lower thresholds; disabling the detecting of both first-sized and second-sized leaks if the first pressure change exceeds the upper threshold; detecting the existence of both first-sized leaks and second-sized leaks based on the compensated rate of change if the first pressure change is less than the lower threshold; and detecting the existence of a first-sized leak but not a second-sized leak based on the compensated rate of change if the first pressure change exceeds the lower threshold but not the upper threshold.
  • 11. The improvement of claim 7, including the step of:comparing the second change in the measured pressure to a threshold; and disabling the detecting of a system leak if the second change exceeds the threshold.
  • 12. A method of leak testing an automotive evaporative emission system by repeatedly measuring a pressure in the system, and conducting a leak test by bringing the measured pressure to a reference value below atmospheric pressure, and then determining a rate of change of the measured pressure, wherein the leak test includes tests to detect a first-sized leak and a second-sized leak, with the second-sized leak being smaller than the first-sized leak, the improvement comprising the steps of:conducting a first vapor generation test substantially at the beginning of a driving cycle, and prior to conducting the leak test, by closing all venting of the system and monitoring a first change in the measured pressure; and conducting a second vapor generation test after completion of the leak test by closing all venting of the system and monitoring a second change in the measured pressure; compensating the determined rate of change based upon the greater of the first and second pressure changes; comparing the second pressure change to upper and lower thresholds; disabling the detecting of both first-sized and second-sized leaks if the second pressure change exceeds the upper threshold; detecting the existence of both first-sized leaks and second-sized leaks based on the compensated rate of change if the second pressure change is less than the lower threshold; and detecting the existence of a first-sized leak but not a second-sized leak based on the compensated rate of change if the second pressure change exceeds the lower threshold but not the upper threshold.
US Referenced Citations (13)
Number Name Date Kind
5261379 Lipinski et al. Nov 1993 A
5327873 Ohuchi et al. Jul 1994 A
5396873 Yamanaka et al. Mar 1995 A
5411004 Busato et al. May 1995 A
5427075 Yamanaka et al. Jun 1995 A
5467641 Williams et al. Nov 1995 A
5490414 Durschmidt et al. Feb 1996 A
5572981 Pfleger et al. Nov 1996 A
5637788 Remboski Jun 1997 A
5679890 Shinohara et al. Oct 1997 A
5699775 Azuma Dec 1997 A
5750888 Matsumoto et al. May 1998 A
6041648 Angermaier et al. Mar 2000 A