Patent Grant
8186336
The present disclosure relates to internal combustion engines, and more particularly to a fuel control system and method for improved response to feedback from exhaust gas oxygen (EGO) sensors in an exhaust system.
The background description provided herein is for the purpose of generally presenting the context of the disclosure. Work of the presently named inventors, to the extent it is described in this background section, as well as aspects of the description that may not otherwise qualify as prior art at the time of filing, are neither expressly nor impliedly admitted as prior art against the present disclosure.
Internal combustion engines combust an air/fuel (A/F) mixture within cylinders to drive pistons and generate drive torque. A ratio of air to fuel in the A/F mixture may be referred to as an A/F ratio. The A/F ratio may be regulated by controlling at least one of a throttle and a fuel control system. The A/F ratio, however, may also be regulated by controlling other engine components (e.g., an exhaust gas recirculation, or EGR, system). For example, the A/F ratio may be regulated to control torque output of the engine and/or to control emissions produced by the engine.
The fuel control system may track a trajectory of a signal corresponding to a desired A/F ratio. The trajectory, however, may affect disturbance rejection performance and/or emissions reduction. For example, the trajectory may be a periodic sinusoidal signal. Therefore, the fuel control system may include an inner feedback loop and an outer feedback loop to improve tracking of the trajectory while maintaining disturbance rejection performance.
More specifically, the inner feedback loop may use data from an exhaust gas oxygen (EGO) sensor located upstream from a catalytic converter in an exhaust system of the engine system (i.e., a pre-catalyst EGO sensor). The inner feedback loop may use the data from the pre-catalyst EGO sensor to control a desired amount of fuel supplied to the engine (i.e., a fuel command).
For example, the inner feedback loop may decrease the fuel command when the pre-catalyst EGO sensor senses a rich A/F ratio in exhaust gas produced by the engine (i.e., non-burnt fuel vapor). Alternatively, for example, the inner feedback loop may increase the fuel command when the pre-catalyst EGO sensor senses a lean A/F ratio in the exhaust gas (i.e., excess oxygen). In other words, the inner feedback loop may maintain the A/F ratio at or near an ideal A/F ratio (e.g., stoichiometry, or 14.7:1), thus increasing the fuel economy of the engine and/or decreasing emissions produced by the engine.
Specifically, the inner feedback loop may perform proportional-integral (PI) control to correct the fuel command. Moreover, the fuel command may be further corrected based on a short term fuel trim or a long term fuel trim. For example, the short term fuel trim may correct the fuel command by changing gains of the PI control. Additionally, for example, the long term fuel trim may correct the fuel command when the short term fuel trim is unable to fully correct the fuel command within a desired time period.
The outer feedback loop, on the other hand, may use information from an EGO sensor arranged after the catalytic converter (i.e., a post-catalyst EGO sensor). The outer feedback loop may use data from the post-catalyst EGO sensor to correct (i.e., calibrate) an unexpected reading from the pre-catalyst EGO sensor, the post-catalyst EGO sensor, and/or the catalytic converter. For example, the outer feedback loop may use the data from the post-catalyst EGO sensor to maintain the post-catalyst EGO sensor at a desired voltage level. In other words, the outer feedback loop may maintain a desired amount of oxygen stored in the catalytic converter, thus improving the performance of the exhaust system. Additionally, the outer feedback loop may control the inner feedback loop by changing thresholds used by the inner feedback loop in determining whether the A/F ratio is rich or lean.
Exhaust gas composition (e.g., A/F ratio) may affect the behavior of the EGO sensors, thereby affecting accuracy of the EGO sensor values. As a result, fuel control systems have been designed to operate based on values that are different than expected. For example, fuel control systems have been designed to operate “asymmetrically.” In other words, for example, the error response to a lean A/F ratio may be different than the error response to a rich A/F ratio.
The asymmetry is typically designed as a function of engine operating parameters. Specifically, the asymmetry is a function of the exhaust gas composition, and the exhaust gas composition is a function of the engine operating parameters. The asymmetry is achieved indirectly by adjusting the gains and the thresholds of the inner feedback loop, requiring numerous tests at various engine operating conditions. Moreover, this extensive calibration is required for each powertrain and vehicle class and does not easily accommodate other technologies, including, but not limited to, variable valve timing and lift.
An engine control system includes a proportional correction module and a variable proportional gain determination module. The proportional correction module generates a proportional correction for a fuel command to an engine based on a variable proportional gain and a difference between expected and measured amounts of oxygen in exhaust gas produced by the engine. The variable proportional gain determination module determines the variable proportional gain based on a nominal gain and an amount of time since a polarity of the difference has changed, wherein the nominal gain is based on engine operating parameters.
A method includes generating a proportional correction for a fuel command to an engine based on a variable proportional gain and a difference between expected and measured amounts of oxygen in exhaust gas produced by the engine, and determining the variable proportional gain based on a nominal gain and an amount of time since a polarity of the difference has changed, wherein the nominal gain is based on engine operating parameters.
Further areas of applicability of the present disclosure will become apparent from the detailed description provided hereinafter. It should be understood that the detailed description and specific examples are intended for purposes of illustration only and are not intended to limit the scope of the disclosure.
The present disclosure will become more fully understood from the detailed description and the accompanying drawings, wherein:
The following description is merely exemplary in nature and is in no way intended to limit the disclosure, its application, or uses. For purposes of clarity, the same reference numbers will be used in the drawings to identify similar elements. As used herein, the phrase at least one of A, B, and C should be construed to mean a logical (A or B or C), using a non-exclusive logical or. It should be understood that steps within a method may be executed in different order without altering the principles of the present disclosure.
As used herein, the term module refers to an Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC), an electronic circuit, a processor (shared, dedicated, or group) and memory that execute one or more software or firmware programs, a combinational logic circuit, and/or other suitable components that provide the described functionality.
A desired amount of fuel to be supplied to an engine (i.e., a fuel command) may be adjusted based on feedback from an exhaust gas oxygen (EGO) sensor upstream from a catalytic converter (i.e., a pre-catalyst EGO sensor). For example, the fuel command may include control signals for a plurality of fuel injectors corresponding to the desired amount of fuel. The feedback may be a difference (i.e., error) between expected and actual amounts of oxygen in exhaust gas produced by the engine. More specifically, the feedback may be a voltage (Verr) indicating a difference between expected measurements from the pre-catalyst EGO sensor (based on the fuel command) and actual measurements from the pre-catalyst EGO sensor.
A control module may perform proportional-integral (PI) control of the fuel command based on the voltage Verr. Rather, the fuel command may be adjusted using a proportional correction and an integral correction, both of which are derived from the voltage Verr. For example, the PI control may adjust the fuel command based on a weighted sum of the proportional correction and the integral correction.
More specifically, the proportional correction may include a product of the voltage Verr and a proportional gain (P). The proportional correction may provide faster correction to the fuel command in response to changes in the voltage Verr. The integral correction, on the other hand, may include an integral of a product of the voltage Verr and an integral gain (I). The integral correction may improve accuracy of the fuel command by decreasing the average steady-state error.
Selecting the proportional gain P for the PI control scheme, however, has both advantages and disadvantages. More specifically, a large proportional gain P typically results in faster recovery from disturbances in the voltage Verr but poor steady-state tracking. Similarly, a small proportional gain P typically achieves better steady-state tracking, but a slower response. Therefore, typical engine control systems may perform PI control of the fuel command using moderate proportional gain P to balance the advantages and disadvantages. A moderate proportional gain P, however, may result in decreased fuel economy and/or increased emissions. Moreover, the integral correction may result in large oscillations during large disturbances (due to over-correction), thus increasing settling times further.
The settling time of the system may also depend on a magnitude of the integral gain I. In other words, as the integral gain I increases, the convergence rate of the system increases. Increasing the integral gain I, however, may also increase a magnitude of over-correction (i.e., over-shoot) due to the plant delay (dp). Thus, while the system may have an average steady-state error of zero, other statistics (e.g., standard deviation) may increase. A moderate integral gain I, however, may also result in decreased fuel economy and/or increased emissions (similar to a moderate proportional gain P, described above).
Therefore, a system and method is presented that performs PI control of the fuel command using a variable proportional gain (Pv) and a transfer operation for the PI control scheme. The variable proportional gain Pv includes a nominal gain component based on engine operating parameters and a proportional gain component based on a time (in number of engine cycles) since a polarity of the voltage Verr has changed. Specifically, the nominal gain component is relatively small to improve steady-state tracking performance. The proportional gain component, on the other hand, increases proportionally with the magnitude of the disturbance in the voltage Verr and/or the time since the polarity of the voltage Verr has changed. The proportional gain component, therefore, may reduce settling times. Furthermore, one or more components of the PI control scheme may be transferred (i.e., exchanged) when a polarity of the voltage Verr changes, which may further reduce settling times and prevent over-correction.
Referring now to
Fuel injectors 24 inject fuel into the cylinders 22 to create an air/fuel (A/F) mixture. For example, the fuel injectors 24 may be actuated based on the fuel command. While fuel injectors 24 are implemented in each of the cylinders 22 (i.e. direct fuel injection), it can be appreciated that one or more port injectors (not shown) may inject fuel into one or more ports of the cylinders 22, respectively (i.e. port fuel injection). The A/F mixture in the cylinders 22 is compressed by pistons (not shown) and ignited by spark plugs 26. The combustion of the A/F mixture drives the pistons (not shown), which rotatably turns a crankshaft 28 generating drive torque. An engine speed sensor 30 may measure a rotational speed of the crankshaft 28 (e.g., in revolutions per minute, or RPM).
Exhaust gas resulting from combustion is vented from the cylinders 22 through exhaust valves (not shown) and into an exhaust manifold 32. An exhaust system 34 includes a catalytic converter 37 that treats the exhaust gas to reduce emissions. The exhaust system 34 may then expel the treated exhaust gas from the engine 12. A pre-catalyst EGO sensor 36 generates a first EGO signal based on an amount of oxygen in the exhaust gas upstream from (i.e., before) the catalytic converter 37. A post-catalyst EGO sensor 38 generates a second EGO signal based on an amount of oxygen in the exhaust gas downstream from (i.e. after) the catalytic converter 37.
For example only, the EGO sensors 36, 38 may include, but are not limited to, switching EGO sensors or universal EGO (UEGO) sensors. The switching EGO sensors generate an EGO signal in units of voltage and switch the EGO signal to a low or a high voltage when the oxygen concentration level is lean or rich, respectively. The UEGO sensors may generate an EGO signal in units of A/F equivalence ratio (EQR) and eliminate the switching between lean and rich oxygen concentration levels of the switching EGO sensors.
A control module 40 receives the MAP signal, the engine speed (RPM) signal, and the first and second EGO signals from the pre-catalyst EGO sensor 36 and the post-catalyst EGO sensor 38, respectively. The control module 40 regulates operation of the engine system 10. More specifically, the control module 40 may control at least one of air, fuel, and spark supplied to the engine 12. For example, the control module 40 may regulate airflow into the engine 12 by controlling the throttle, fuel supplied to the engine 12 (the fuel command) by controlling the fuel injectors 24, and spark supplied to the engine 12 by controlling the spark plugs 26.
The control module 40 may also implement the system and method of the present disclosure. More specifically, the control module 40 may perform PI control of the fuel command using the variable proportional gain P, and the transfer operation for the PI control scheme according to the present disclosure.
Referring now to
The desired EQR determination module 45 determines a desired EQR EQRdes based on various engine operating parameters. For example, the various engine operating parameters may include, but are not limited to MAP (e.g., from the MAP sensor 20), engine speed (e.g., from the RPM sensor 30), and post-catalyst EGO concentration (e.g., from the post-catalyst EGO sensor 38). Additionally, for example, the desired EQR signal EQRdes may be a periodic signal with period Td.
The error determination module 50 receives the pre-catalyst EGO measurement from the pre-catalyst EGO sensor 36. The error determination module 50 also receives the desired EQR EQRdes from the desired EQR determination module 45. The error determination module 50 determines an expected EGO measurement based on the desired EQR EQRdes. For example, a look-up table may include a plurality of expected EGO measurements corresponding to different desired EQR values. The error determination module 50 may determine an error based on pre-catalyst EGO measurement (i.e. an actual EGO measurement) and the expected EGO measurement.
For example, the error may be the voltage Verr. More specifically, the voltage Verr may indicate a difference between the expected EGO measurement and the actual EGO measurement (e.g., expected−actual). The error determination module 50 may also determine an estimated plant delay dp based on a delay between the fuel command and a corresponding measurement from the pre-catalyst EGO sensor 36. For example only, the estimated plant delay may be determined using a lookup table relating estimated plant delay to MAP and/or mass air flow (MAF) rate.
The proportional correction module 60 receives the voltage Verr from the error determination module 50. The proportional correction module 60 also receives signals indicative of various engine operating parameters. For example, the proportional correction module 60 may receive signals from the MAP sensor 20 and the RPM sensor 30, indicative of intake manifold pressure and engine speed, respectively. However, signals indicative of other engine operating parameters may be received by the proportional correction module 60 (e.g., percentage of exhaust gas recirculation, or EGR, or a position of an EGR valve).
The proportional correction module 60 generates a proportional correction for the fuel command that is received by the fuel control module 90. In one embodiment, the proportional correction module 60 may include an additional module (not shown) that generates the variable proportional gain Pv (e.g., a variable proportional gain generation module). However, the proportional correction module 60 may also generate the variable proportional gain Pv.
The proportional correction module 60 may generate the proportional correction P based on the voltage Verr and the variable proportional gain (Pv). For example, the proportional correction P may be generated as follows:
P=Pv×Verr (1).
The variable proportional gain Pv, for example, may then be generated as follows:
Pv=Knom(MAP,RPM)+KV×D1(n) (2),
where Knom is a nominal gain component (a function of engine operating parameters) and the other quantity [Kv×D1(n)] is the variable proportional gain component. More specifically, D1 is a first deadzone function, n is the time (in number of engine events) since the polarity of the voltage Verr has changed, and Kv is the gain of the variable proportional gain component. Thus, the variable proportional gain Pv may be the nominal correction component Knom when the sign of the voltage Verr changes (i.e., the variable proportional gain component may be zero).
The first deadzone function D1 may be defined as follows:
where Td is a dither period and n is time (in number of engine events) since the polarity of the voltage Verr has changed.
As shown above, the first deadzone function D1 is zero until the number of engine events n exceeds one half of the dither period (Td/2). In other words, when n is greater than one half of the dither period Td/2, the first deadzone function D1 is equal to the difference between the number of engine events since the polarity of the voltage Verr has changed and half the dither period Td/2. Therefore, the variable proportional gain Pv does not increase greater than the nominal gain component Knom when the voltage Verr changes polarity more often than half the dither period Td/2.
However, when the voltage Verr does not change polarity after a number of engine events n equal to half the dither period Td/2, then the variable proportional gain Pv increases linearly with respect to the number of engine events n (via the first deadzone function D1). Thus, large disturbances may be removed quickly (i.e. via the variable proportional gain component), while maintaining steady-state tracking performance (i.e. via the nominal gain component).
The integral correction module 70 also receives the voltage Verr. The integral correction module 70 may also receive a transfer signal (T) from the transfer module 80 and the estimated plant delay dp from the error determination module 50. The integral correction module 70 generates an integral correction I for the fuel command that is received by the fuel control module 90. The integral correction I may be combined with the proportional correction P to cancel disturbances. More specifically, the integral correction I may decrease the convergence time and improve steady-state tracking.
The integral correction module 70 may generate the integral correction I based on the voltage Verr and an integral gain (Ki). For example, the integral correction I may be generated as follows:
l(k)=l(k−1)+Ki(MAP,RPM)×Verr+Kv×T×D2(n) (4),
where k is a current time (in number of engine events), K1 is the integral gain component (a function of engine operating parameters), Kv is the gain of the variable component of the proportional correction P (previously described with respect to Equation 2), D2 is a second deadzone function, and T is the transfer signal (from the transfer module 80).
The second deadzone function D2 may be defined as follows:
where dp is the estimated plant delay (i.e., the delay between the fuel command and a corresponding measurement from the pre-catalyst EGO sensor 36), and n is time (in number of engine events) since the polarity of the voltage Verr has changed.
As shown above, the second deadzone function D2 is zero until the number of engine events n exceeds one half of the dither period Td/2 plus the estimated plant delay dp. In other words, when n is greater than one half of the dither period Td/2 plus the estimated plant delay dp, the second deadzone function D2 is equal to the difference between n and one half of the dither period Td/2 plus the estimated plant delay dp.
The transfer module 80 also receives the voltage Verr. The transfer module 80 generates the transfer signal T based on the voltage Verr. More specifically, for example, the transfer signal T may be generated as follows:
In other words, the transfer signal T may set the third component of the integral correction I equal zero unless the transfer signal T is sent (see Equation 4). The transfer operation of the third component of the integral correction I may remove a ringing effect that may occur (see
Referring now to
Referring again to
Referring now to
In step 104, the control module 40 may determine the voltage Verr. In step 106, the control module 40 may determine whether the polarity of the voltage Verr has changed. If true, control may proceed to step 108. If false, control may proceed to step 110.
In step 108, the control module 40 may generate the transfer signal T, which may set the third component of the integral correction I to zero (i.e., unless the transfer operation is performed). Additionally, in one embodiment the control module 40 may reset the time n (in number of engine events) to zero because the polarity of the voltage Verr has changed.
In step 110, the control module 40 may determine the proportional gain Pv and generate the proportional correction P using the proportional gain Pv. In step 112, the control module 40 may determine the integral correction I.
In step 114, the control module 40 may correct the fuel command based on the proportional correction P and the integral correction I. For example only, the control module 40 may correct the fuel command based on a weighted sum of the proportional correction P and the integral correction I. Control may then return to step 104.
The broad teachings of the disclosure can be implemented in a variety of forms. Therefore, while this disclosure includes particular examples, the true scope of the disclosure should not be so limited since other modifications will become apparent to the skilled practitioner upon a study of the drawings, the specification, and the following claims.
This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/246,697, filed on Sep. 29, 2009. The disclosure of the above application is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4099491 | Reddy | Jul 1978 | A |
| 4214558 | Nishioka et al. | Jul 1980 | A |
| 4241710 | Peterson et al. | Dec 1980 | A |
| 4481908 | Iida | Nov 1984 | A |
| 4502443 | Hasegawa et al. | Mar 1985 | A |
| 4889099 | Tomishawa | Dec 1989 | A |
| 5761901 | Staufenberg et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5787867 | Schnaibel et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5836153 | Staufenberg et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5941223 | Kato | Aug 1999 | A |
| 6026795 | Poggio et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6286494 | Ishii et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6520168 | Ishii et al. | Feb 2003 | B2 |
| 6711892 | Tamura et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
| 7500354 | Pohmerer et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
| 20060277896 | Gehret, Jr. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20110077845 A1 | Mar 2011 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 61246697 | Sep 2009 | US |
