The present specification generally relates to systems and methods to control a diesel engine airpath and, more specifically, to systems and methods for reducing NOx and hydrocarbon emissions during driving while limiting visible smoke production without significantly compromising fuel economy or torque response (e.g., drivability).
In internal combustion engines, an amount of air supplied to engine cylinders may be manipulated by engine components. For example, in modern diesel engines, variable geometry turbines (VGT) may be used to increase an amount of air supplied to engine cylinders by varying an angle of turbine stator inlet vanes such that the amount of supplied air is changed.
Such modern diesel engines typically balance providing optimum performance and fuel economy while meeting stringent federal regulations on emissions, such as constraints on particulate matter and nitrogen oxides. To meet these requirements, many diesel engines having a VGT also use an exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) valve having a variable controlled position. The EGR valve re-circulates varying amounts of engine exhaust gases back into the engine cylinders to reduce the peak temperature of combustion and reduce NOx formation, which may be exponential at peak combustion temperatures.
Such engines operate over a large range of operating conditions, which may include, for example, engine speed, fuel usage, and engine load, among other conditions. One or more controllers are embedded in an engine control unit (ECU) to control various engine actuators in response to sensors that detect engine performance. Turbodiesels incorporate a VGT to provide flexible boost, and often use the EGR system to control emissions. However, the addition of both the turbocharger and EGR systems into the engine design introduces strong nonlinearities, complicating control development.
Accordingly, a need exists for an emissions management system and method for turbodiesels with an EGR.
In one embodiment, a method for controlling an engine airpath includes receiving, at a supervisory controller, an engine speed corresponding to a present engine speed, a fuel target corresponding to a request for torque from a driver and one or more state estimates generated by an estimator. The method further includes predicting over a prediction horizon, with the supervisory controller, a constraint violation in response to the engine speed, the fuel target, and the one or more state estimates using a prediction model, adjusting an EGR rate target to a modified value, with the supervisory controller, when the constraint violation is predicted, and maintaining the EGR rate target at a nominal value when the constraint violation is not predicted. A nonlinear predictive controller receives the EGR rate target, generates one or more actuator commands based on the EGR rate target, where the one or more actuator commands control an EGR throttle, an EGR valve, and VGT such that an EGR rate of the engine airpath tracks the EGR rate target, and transmits the one or more actuator commands to an engine of the engine airpath.
In another embodiment, a system for controlling an engine airpath includes a processor communicatively coupled to a non-transitory computer-readable medium. The non-transitory computer-readable medium stores instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to receive an engine speed corresponding to a present engine speed, a fuel target corresponding to a request for torque from a driver and one or more state estimates generated by an estimator. The processor further predicts over a prediction horizon a constraint violation in response to the engine speed, the fuel target, and the one or more state estimates using a prediction model. The processor adjusts an EGR rate target to a modified value when the constraint violation is predicted and maintains the EGR rate target at a nominal value when the constraint violation is not predicted. The processor further generates one or more actuator commands based on the EGR rate target. The one or more actuator commands control an EGR throttle, an EGR valve, and VGT such that an EGR rate of the engine airpath tracks the EGR rate target and transmits the one or more actuator commands to a valve of an engine.
In another embodiment, a vehicle includes a diesel engine having a diesel engine airpath, a sensor coupled to the diesel engine airpath, an actuator coupled to the diesel engine airpath and an electronic control unit comprising a processor and a non-transitory computer-readable medium, the electronic control unit communicatively coupled to the sensor and the actuator. The non-transitory computer-readable medium stores instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to receive an engine speed corresponding to a present engine speed, a fuel target corresponding to a request for torque from a driver and one or more state estimates generated by an estimator. The processor further predicts, over a prediction horizon, a constraint violation in response to the engine speed, the fuel target, and the one or more state estimates, adjusts an EGR rate target to a modified value when the constraint violation is predicted, and maintains the EGR rate target at a nominal value when the constraint violation is not predicted. The processor further generates one or more actuator commands based on the EGR rate target. The one or more actuator commands control the actuator such that an EGR rate of the diesel engine airpath tracks the EGR rate target and transmits the one or more actuator commands to the actuator of the diesel engine.
These and additional features provided by the embodiments described herein will be more fully understood in view of the following detailed description, in conjunction with the drawings.
The embodiments set forth in the drawings are illustrative and exemplary in nature and not intended to limit the subject matter defined by the claims. The following detailed description of the illustrative embodiments can be understood when read in conjunction with the following drawings, where like structure is indicated with like reference numerals and in which:
Referring generally to the figures, embodiments of the present disclosure are directed to the use of a supervisory model predictive controller (SMPC) and a nonlinear model predictive controller (NMPC) in tandem to reduce cumulative NOx and hydrocarbon emissions during driving while limiting visible smoke production and without significantly compromising fuel economy or torque response (e.g., drivability) for an internal combustion engine plant (e.g., the plant being a diesel engine airpath) that has engine operating parameters as constraints. Generally, the SMPC controller modifies the exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) rate targets and fueling rate commands in real-time to enforce fuel-air ratio constraints and prevent visible smoke while the NMPC controller tracks the EGR rate and intake pressure commands by manipulating an EGR throttle, EGR valve, and variable geometry turbine (VGT). The NMPC controller may implement two variants of the MPC for feedforward and feedback to achieve high speed tracking performance, disturbance rejection, and robustness. As such, the diesel engine airpath (DAP) MPC controller may reduce cumulative emissions relative to a state of the art benchmark strategy when placed in closed-loop with an engine on a transient dyno.
Various embodiments of the diesel engine airpath plant and SMPC and NMPC operations and methods are described in detail herein. It should be understood that the algorithms described herein may be applied to plants other than diesel engine airpaths as will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art.
An intake manifold 30 is coupled to the plurality of cylinders 24 to supply intake air to each cylinder 24. Also coupled to the intake manifold 30 is an intake manifold pressure sensor 32 (also referred to as a MAP sensor) to measure intake manifold air pressure. Combustion gases are carried away from the plurality of cylinders 24 and the engine block 22 by an exhaust manifold 34.
A bypass path 29 between the intake manifold 30 and the exhaust manifold 34 has a coupled EGR valve 40 to re-circulate a portion of the exhaust gases from the exhaust manifold 34 back into the intake manifold 30 for supply to the plurality of cylinders 24. Along with the EGR valve 40, an EGR cooler 42 may be coupled in the bypass path 29. As described above, the EGR valve 40 re-circulates varying amounts of engine exhaust gases back into the plurality of cylinders 24 to allow for both a more complete combustion and reduced engine emissions. The amount the EGR valve 40 is opened controls an amount of engine exhaust gases that are able to re-circulate through the bypass path 29 from the exhaust manifold 34 back into the intake manifold 30. The EGR cooler 42 assists to help prevent the EGR valve 40 from overheating, which may otherwise lead to an increased wear and tear.
An EGR throttle 44 to further assist with controlling gas circulation is mounted in an airflow path from a compressor 46 of a VGT 48. A compressor inlet mass airflow (MAF) sensor 36 may be coupled in line with the compressor 46 to measure the amount of airflow through the compressor 46. An intercooler 50 to assist with preventing overheating of the EGR throttle 44 may be coupled in line between the compressor 46 and the EGR throttle 44 along the airflow path for intake air. The compressor 46 increases a pressure of the incoming air. Further, the VGT 48 includes turbine input vanes that may be opened, partially opened, or closed through an angling of the turbine input vanes to control a VGT lift and to allow for the passage of air in through the EGR throttle 44 to join with the exhaust gases being re-circulated into the intake manifold 30 through the bypass path 29. Thus, by controlling an angle of turbine input vanes, the VGT 48 controls an intake manifold pressure provided by the compressor 46 of the VGT 48. An amount the EGR throttle 44 is opened also restricts the amount of air provided through the VGT 48 that is able to join with air recirculated through the bypass path 29. Also coupled to walls defining the bypass path 29 is an EGR rate sensor 43 to measure EGR rate (such as a fraction of re-circulated air versus fresh air) as the EGR valve 40 and/or the EGR throttle 44 affect it. Another measurement, EGR flow rate or EGR flow, may refer to an amount of mass re-circulated airflow through the EGR valve 40.
Referring now to
In some embodiments, a cascaded strategy may be implemented for the MPC controllers. That is, the architecture may combine a target-generating supervisory controller 110 (i.e., SMPC) and a nonlinear controller 120 (i.e., NMPC) having an airpath controller 130 and one or more estimators 140 communicatively coupled to an engine 150, which in some embodiments may be the internal combustion engine 10 of
In operation, the supervisory controller 110 generates targets, r(t), and a fuel command, q(t), that are input to the nonlinear controller 120, which uses them to compute actuator commands, w(t) among other things. The actuator commands, w(t), may be generated by the airpath controller 130 of the engine airpath controller 100 depicted in
In some embodiments, the supervisory controller 110 receives an engine speed, Ne(t), corresponding to a present engine speed, a fuel target, qtrg(t), corresponding to a request for torque from a driver and one or more supervisory state estimates, {circumflex over (x)}(t), generated by an estimator. For example, the fuel rate target, qtrg(t), may be determined by mapping a pedal angle to a fueling rate target, qtrg(t). As such, the engine speed, Ne(t), and the fuel rate target, qtrg(t), define the engine operating point ρ=[qtrg Ne]. Additionally, the compressor, cylinder, fuel, and EGR flows are denoted by wc, wcyl, wf, and wegr. The fueling rate, which is proportional to wf/Ne, is denoted q and the intake and exhaust manifold pressures are denoted by pim and pex, respectively. The burnt mass fractions in the intake and exhaust manifolds are denoted by F1 and F2 and the EGR rate, χegr=χ is defined as
The state estimate and control vectors for the supervisory controller 110 may be denoted as follows:
x=[pimpexwνcF1F2]T, and u=[pimtrgχtrgq]T (1)
The state estimate and control vectors for the airpath controller 130 may be denoted as follows:
z=[pimχ]T, and w=[uthruvaluvgt]T (2)
The supervisory states may further be partitioned in some embodiments into an airpath variable and an EGR loop variable, respectively, denoted by:
ξ=[pimpexwc]T, and Y=[F1F2]T (3)
Given the above reference notation, elements and functionality, the engine airpath controller 100 will now be described in more detail. The supervisory controller 110, based on a prediction model, may predict whether a constraint violation will occur in response to implementing a fuel target, qtrg(t), corresponding to a request for torque from a driver. That is, when a driver depresses an accelerator pedal, a signal may be generated which corresponds to a request for additional torque or power from the engine. Depending on the present engine speed and a variety of other engine variables, the engine airpath controller 100 may determine whether a constraint will be violated. In some embodiments, the constraints of concern to the supervisory controller 110 may include, for example, maximum temperatures, pressure values, fuel-air ratios, regulatory values, or the like. These constraints may correlate to one or more performance attributes of the engine, such as emissions, power, fuel economy, drivability, or the like.
In some embodiments, an objective of the engine airpath controller 100 is to supply the torque requested by the driver (i.e., drivability), while maintaining and/or maximizing fuel economy, respecting regulatory constraint on NOx and particulate matter(PM), and limiting visible smoke (e.g., quantified by exhaust opacity). By predicting whether a constraint violation will occur in response to implementing a fuel target, qtrg(t), corresponding to a request for torque from a driver, the supervisory controller 110 may generate an EGR rate target, χtrg, having a modified value from a nominal value and/or an adjusted fuel command, q(t). In some embodiments, the supervisory controller 110 may also generate an intake manifold pressure target, pimtrg, in response to the fuel target, qtrg(t), corresponding to a request for torque from a driver. For example, during a tip-in (i.e., a fuel step up) the fuel-air ratio rapidly increases since fuel may be added to the system more quickly than the airflow to compensate, accordingly, the supervisory controller 110 may predict this fuel-air ratio constraint violation. In response, the supervisory controller 110 may adjust the EGR rate target down, so that it undershoots its nominal value in order to reduce F1. In other words, the EGR rate target decrease reduces or eliminates the violation of the fuel-air ratio constraint.
To predict a constraint violation, the engine airpath controller 100 may rely on engine models. For example, the supervisory controller 110 may implement a closed-loop airpath prediction model to estimate the response of a nonlinear controller 120 to the fueling target and fueling command. In some embodiments, the closed-loop airpath prediction model may be defined by:
ξk+1=F(ρ)+A(ρ)ξk+B(ρ)uk, (4)
where A, B, and F are appropriately sized operating condition dependent matrices. In some embodiments, the supervisory controller 110 may utilize a burnt gas fraction model to predict the emissions response of the system by tracking the evolution of the burnt gas fractions (BGF) in the intake manifold, F1 and exhaust manifold, F2. For example, a burnt gas fraction model may be expressed in the form =G(ξ)+b(ξ)q, and the BGF equations may be written as:
where c is the constant such that wf=cNeq, Rair is the gas constant of air, Rex is the gas constant of the exhaust gas, and Vim, Vex, Tim, and Tex are the volumes and temperatures of the intake and exhaust manifolds. The effective air-fuel ratio, denoted by: (A/F)E, quantifies the mass of oxygen consumed per unit fuel and is calibrated as a function of operating condition based on analyzed exhaust data. The cylinder flow may be estimated as a linear, operating condition dependent function of intake pressure, i.e., wcyl=a(ρ)pim+b(ρ), the EGR flow is estimated as wegr=wcyl−wc, and the throttle flow wth may be assumed to be equal to the compressor flow. In a steady state situation, the BGF equations reduce to the following relationship between the gas fractions and EGR rate:
Furthermore, since the equations are linear in , the update equation can be computed, for example, as:
i+1=(I2x2−Δτ1G(ξi))−1(i+Δτ1b(ξi)qi), (8)
where Δτ1 is the integration step size. These two models may be combined to form the prediction dynamics of the supervisory controller 110. As such, the prediction model, written in the form xi+1=fs(xi, ui, ρ, Δτi), may be given by:
In some embodiments, the prediction, by the supervisory controller 110, may be determined over a prediction horizon. To do so in an efficient manner, the temperatures and engine speed may be considered constant over the prediction horizon. Additionally, as the length of the uniform prediction horizon increases, for example, to capture the dynamics of interest, a large number of discrete time steps are required. This may lead to additional decision variables, which increases the computational complexity. However, in some embodiments, a non-uniform integration of the prediction horizon may be used to. For example, the following function, Eq. 10, may be implemented to determine time step sizes over the prediction horizon, effectively reducing the total length of the horizon.
As such, the short steps may ensure consistency between the model and what is applied, the medium steps may capture emission peaks, and the long steps may capture the intake and exhaust pressure responses.
Still referring to
zk+1={tilde over (F)}(ρi)+Ã(ρi)zk+{tilde over (B)}(ρi)wk+θ(zk,wk,ωi), (11)
where {tilde over (F)}, Ã, and {tilde over (B)} are appropriately sized, parameter dependent, matrices, and θ is a nonlinear function. The linear properties of the model may be identified first using least squares. The nonlinear function θ(zk, wk, ωi) may then be identified using the error signal ek=Zk+1−{tilde over (F)}(ρi)−Ã(ρi)zk+{tilde over (B)}(ρi)wk. In some embodiments, a polynomial basis function may be used to parameterize the nonlinear portion of the model. As such, the nonlinear function is given by:
θ=ω(ρ)TΦ(y,2), y=[zTwT]T, (12)
where ω is a coefficient and Φ(y,d) is a basis for , the set of all polynomials in n variables of degree >1 and ≤d, e.g.,
=span{x12,x1,x2,x22} (13)
The coefficient, ω, is identified using linear least squares. Since the model is linear in its parameters, the coefficients are interpolated between grid points using linear interpolation, resulting in a nonlinear parameter-varying model. For example, the result of the nonlinear model may be compared with the same model using only the linear terms (ω=0) for a particular operating point.
It should now be generally understood that the supervisory controller 110 and the nonlinear controller 120 operate in a cascade architecture where the supervisory controller 110 predicts a constraint violation based on at least a fuel rate target and provides the nonlinear controller 120 with adjusted targets in response to predicting a constraint violation. The nonlinear controller 120, using engine models, such as those described above, may determine actuator commands to transmit to the engine for operating the engine with reduced or no constraint violations. However, due to the complicated tradeoff between fuel economy, NOx emissions, and total hydrocarbon concentration (THC) emissions, the engine airpath controller 100 should also shape the transient response of the system as it transitions between operating points. In other words, transient shaping has a significant impact on performance because a significant portion of emissions production occurs in transients. Additionally, the response speed of the system to fuel commands affects drivability.
Furthermore, the outputs of the system may be split into measurements, constraints, and performance variables, ym, yc, and yp, respectively, as shown in equation (14) below.
ym=[pimwcNe]T, yc=ϕ, yp=[ΨSMΨNO
The measurements, ym, are available for feedback and the fuel-air ratio may be estimated from the measurements. The performance outputs: torque, smoke (exhaust opacity), NOx concentration, and THC, denoted τq, ΨSM, ΨNO
Referring now to
As referenced above with respect to
where u=[χ0|ktrg . . . χN−1|ktrg]T, and x=[χ1|kT . . . χN|kT]T. In some embodiments, the intake pressure target is not modified, i.e., it is set at pim,ktrg=
l(ui,ui−1,ρ)=(χi|ktrg−χegr)2+α(qtrg−q)+βs+∥ui|k−ui−1|k∥R2 (17)
where α>0, β>0, γ>0, and R>0 are tuning parameters and include tracking objectives for the EGR rate target and fueling rate, a penalty to soften the fuel-air ratio constraint to guarantee feasibility, and a damping term. The cost function does not depend on system outputs. The fuel command and/or EGR rate target are only modified in response to a predicted constraint violation. The slack penalty, βs, defines an L1 softened constraint on the fuel-air ratio which is used to limit the visibility of smoke. The fuel-air ratio may be computed using
where (A/F) is the stoichiometric air-fuel ratio of the fuel. The fuel-air ratio limit, ϕ(ρ, wc), is a characteristic of the engine that is determined from engine mapping. Furthermore, it typically increases with compressor flow and decreases with engine speed. The fuel tracking term, α(qtrg−q), enforces drivability and since it is linear, 0≤qi|k≤qktrg,i=0, . . . , N−1, is needed to ensure that the fuel does not exceed the request. The remaining constraints, a lower bound on χtrg and a fueling rate nonnegativity constraint, make the control constraint set compact.
In some embodiments, the supervisory controller OCP may be compactly represented as:
min·z
s·t c(zk,{circumflex over (x)}k,ρk)≤0, (18)
where zk=[ukT SkT]∈ are collected primal decision variables, {circumflex over (x)}k∈5 is the SMPC state estimate, ρk∈2 is the operating condition, J: n×5×2→ is the cost function and c: n×5×2→m are the inequality constraints. All equality constraints, including the nonlinear dynamics, have been eliminated by substitution. Therefore, this nonlinear program may be approximated by the following quadratic program
where Hk=∇z2J(zk−1,{circumflex over (x)}k,ρk)≥0, fk=∇2f(zk−1,{circumflex over (x)}k,ρk), Ak=∇2c(zk−1,{circumflex over (x)}k,ρk), and b=−c(zk−1,{circumflex over (x)}k,ρk). In operation, one instance of Eq. (19) is solved per time step as in the real-time iteration scheme. The supervisory control update is then computed as:
uk=[
Referring now to
The ECU 302 may be communicatively coupled to the actuators (e.g., to actuate the EGR valve 40, the EGR throttle 44, and/or the VGT 48), internal combustion engine 10, and sensors (e.g., the intake manifold pressure sensor 32 (MAP), compressor inlet mass airflow sensor 36 (MAF), EGR rate sensor 43, or the like) through a communication path 330. The communication path 330 may be formed from any medium that is capable of transmitting a signal such as, for example, conductive wires, conductive traces, optical waveguides, or the like, or from a combination of mediums capable of transmitting signals. The communication path 330 communicatively couples the various components of the internal combustion engine 10 and the ECU 302. As used herein, the term “communicatively coupled” means that coupled components are capable of exchanging data signals with one another such as, for example, electrical signals via conductive medium, electromagnetic signals via air, optical signals via optical waveguides, and the like.
As noted above, the ECU 302 may include one or more processors 332 that can be any device capable of executing machine-readable instructions. Accordingly, a processor 332 may be a controller, an integrated circuit, a microchip, a computer, or any other computing device. The processor 332 is communicatively coupled to the other components of
The ECU 302 also includes a memory component 334, which is coupled to the communication path 330 and communicatively coupled to the processor 332. The memory component 334 may be a non-transitory computer-readable medium and may be configured as a nonvolatile computer-readable medium. The memory component 334 may comprise RAM, ROM, flash memories, hard drives, or any device capable of storing machine-readable instructions such that the machine-readable instructions can be accessed and executed by the processor 332. The machine readable instructions may comprise logic or algorithm(s) written in any programming language such as, for example, machine language that may be directly executed by the processor, or assembly language, object-oriented programming (OOP), scripting languages, microcode, etc., that may be compiled or assembled into machine readable instructions and stored on the memory component. Alternatively, the machine readable instructions may be written in a hardware description language (HDL), such as logic implemented via either a field-programmable gate array (FPGA) configuration or an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC), or their equivalents. Accordingly, the methods described herein may be implemented in any conventional computer programming language, as pre-programmed hardware elements, or as a combination of hardware and software components. The ECU 302 further includes additional storage or databases to store components such as off-line pre-computed matrices, as described in detail further below. The memory component 334 may include machine-readable instructions that, when executed by the processor 332, cause the processor 332 to perform the functions of the ECU 302, operating as an engine airpath controller 300.
In some embodiments, the ECU 302 is communicatively coupled to the engine airpath controller 300. In other embodiments, the engine airpath controller 300 including the estimators 340, supervisory controller 310 (SMPC), the nonlinear controller 320 (NMPC) and the estimators 340 may be implemented with the ECU 302 such that instructions for carrying out the steps of the engine airpath controller 300 are stored in the memory component 334 and the processor 332 executes the steps.
As depicted in
The burnt gas fractions may be obtained by propagating Eqs. 5 and 6. The normalized fuel-air ratio may also be estimated using
where (A/F) is the stoichiometric air-fuel ratio of the fuel.
Utilizing the measurements provided by the ECU from engine sensors and methods of estimating quantities not directly obtained from sensor measurements, the estimators 340 may calculate SMPC state estimates, {circumflex over (x)}k, and NMPC state estimates, {circumflex over (z)}k. The SMPC state estimates, {circumflex over (x)}k, may include the intake manifold pressure, pim, the exhaust manifold pressure, pex, the compressor inlet mass air flow, wc, the intake burnt gas fraction F1 and the exhaust burnt gas fraction, F2. The NMPC state estimates, {circumflex over (z)}k, may include intake manifold pressure, pim, and the EGR rate estimate, χ. The estimators 340 may also calculate a consistent linearization point using the modified intake pressure signal and provide the linearization point, xlin, to the supervisory controller 310.
In some embodiments, the supervisory controller 310 receives engine operating conditions, ρ, which include a fuel request target, qtrg, indicative of a request for torque from a driver, an engine speed, Ne, and one or more state estimate signals, {circumflex over (x)}k, generated by an estimator 340. In some embodiments, the supervisory controller 310 may also receive the linearization point, xlin from the estimators 340. The supervisory controller 310 solves the OCP (i.e., Eqs. 15 and 16) at each sampling instance, tk, and generates one or more targets, r, which may include the EGR rate target, χtrg, a fuel command, q, and/or intake manifold pressure target, pim. In some embodiments, the supervisory controller 310 may predict, over a prediction horizon, whether a constraint violation will occur in response to the engine speed, Ne, the fuel target, qtrg, and the one or more state estimate signals. If the supervisory controller 310 predicts a constraint violation, the supervisory controller 310 may generate an EGR rate target, χtrg, having a modified value such that the constraint violation is either eliminated or reduced. In some embodiments, the supervisory controller 310 may generate a modified fuel command q and transmit it to the ECU 302 and the nonlinear controller 320. In some embodiments, the supervisory controller 310 may generate a modified intake manifold pressure target, pim, in response to predicting a constraint violation.
In some embodiments, the nonlinear controller 320 receives NMPC state estimates, {circumflex over (z)}k, engine operating conditions, ρ, which include a fuel request target, qtrg, indicative of a request for torque from a driver, an engine speed, Ne, and outputs from the supervisory controller 310. The outputs from the supervisory controller 310 may also include targets, r, (e.g., modified or unmodified from a previous instance) which may include the EGR rate target, χtrg, the fuel command, q and/or the intake manifold pressure target, pim. The nonlinear controller 320 estimates the system response to the received NMPC state estimates, {circumflex over (z)}k, engine operating conditions, ρ, and the one or more targets, r. In response, the nonlinear controller 320 generates one or more actuator commands, w, based on the EGR rate target, where the one or more actuator commands, w, control an EGR throttle, an EGR valve, and VGT such that an EGR rate of the engine airpath tracks the EGR rate target. For example, the nonlinear controller 320 may solve one or more OCPs in the process of determining the one or more actuator commands (e.g., Eqs. 21-24).
The actuator commands, w, and the fuel command, q, may be transmitted to the ECU 302. The ECU 302 may transmit the commands to the corresponding actuators and engine components. targets, r, including the EGR rate target, χtrg, a fuel command, and/or intake manifold pressure target, pim.
Referring now to
The supervisory controller 310 may receive the SMPC state estimates, {circumflex over (x)}k and the engine operating conditions, ρ, which includes a fuel request target, qtrg, and engine speed, Ne. The supervisory controller 310, in block 312, determines model coefficients, optionally, using linear interpolation to compute the coefficients between grid-points. Additionally, in block 314, the supervisory controller 310 determines, based on MAF, Ne, and q, a fuel-air ratio engine constraint using a set point map (e.g., as depicted in
In block 316, the supervisory controller 310 applies derivative calculations to the OCP to generate QP matrices. In block 318, a solver is implemented to calculate targets, r, including the EGR rate target, χtrg, a fuel command, and/or intake manifold pressure target, pim. The fuel command, q, may be transmitted to the engine 350 and the nonlinear controller 320. In block 322 of the nonlinear controller 320, the EGR rate target, χtrg, a fuel command, q, and/or intake manifold pressure target, pim are input into a nonlinear controller 320 having an architecture that utilizes a feedforward controller 324 and feedback controller 328. The feedforward controller 324 receives multiple inputs to generate control constraints, which are fed into the feedback controller 328. The feedforward controller 324 may receive nominal actuator positions, uk, fictitious measurements, denoted by {tilde over (z)}k from the nominal plant 322, and the EGR rate target, χtrg, a fuel command, q, and/or intake manifold pressure target, pim from the supervisory controller 310. The feedforward controller 324 may also receive model parameters from the model coefficients block 326, for example, generated from the open-loop airpath model, as described above, such that the feedforward controller 324 may estimate the engine's response to newly generated actuator commands. The feedback controller 328 receives multiple inputs including the generated feedforward controller 324 actuator commands and further refines the actuator commands utilizing real measurements, {circumflex over (z)}k, generated by one or more of the estimators 340. In some embodiments, estimator 340 utilizes sensor readings from sensors coupled with the engine to provide state estimates (i.e., real measurements), for example, NMPC state estimates, {circumflex over (z)}k. As a result, the nonlinear controller 320 calculates and generates actuator commands to track the EGR rate target, χtrg, a fuel command, q, and/or intake manifold pressure target, pim. The actuator commands are transmitted to one or more of the engine valves and throttles for adjusting the operation of the engine. The feedforward controller 324 and feedback controller 328 will be described in more detail with respect to
Referring now to
Referring now to
Algorithm 1: Input: ym,k,ρk,zk−1,wk−1
1: Read Pex,k,Tex,k,Tim,k from the ECU
2: Compute χk,F1,k,F2,k
3: Compute rk, qk by solving Eq. 15 and 16, the SMPC OCP
4: Compute Δ
5: Compute=
6: Compute
7: Return wk, qk
In some embodiments, the feedforward controller 524 and the feedback controller 528 each include an OCP for solving online. For example, the feedforward controller 524 may include an OCP defined by:
Additionally, the feedback controller 528 may include an OCP defined by:
Referring back to
Turning to
The engine airpath controller was placed in closed-loop with a Toyota GD engine on a transient dyno and run over the Worldwide Harmonized Light Vehicles Test Cycle (WLTC) and New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) drivecycles. The results are shown in
Smoke was evaluated by counting the number of spikes, which exceeded the visible limit. Over the WLTC the engine airpath controller was able to significantly reduce cumulative NOx and THC, by mass, compared to a Toyota benchmark controller. The aggressive tuning had similar drivability as the benchmark and yielded significant NOx and THC reductions at the cost of two additional visible smoke events. A more conservative tuning brought the number of visible smoke spikes in line with the benchmark but reduced the NOx and THC benefit, and drivability was adversely affected as well.
Over the NEDC the engine airpath controller slightly increased NOx and slightly decreased THC. The NEDC cycle is not aggressive enough to trigger fuel limiting or cause visible smoke events. The increase in fuel consumption is not large enough to be considered significant as the results are estimated by integrating the commanded fuel signal rather than measured using a fuel meter.
A summary of the results obtains using the engine airpath controller are shown in Table 1 below.
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
It should now be understood that the supervisory controller and the nonlinear controller operate in a cascade architecture where the supervisory controller predicts a constraint violation based on at least a fuel rate target and provides the nonlinear controller with adjusted targets in response to predicting a constraint violation. The nonlinear controller, using engine models, may determine actuator commands to transmit to the engine for operating the engine with reduced or no constraint violations.
It is noted that the terms “substantially” and “about” may be utilized herein to represent the inherent degree of uncertainty that may be attributed to any quantitative comparison, value, measurement, or other representation. These terms are also utilized herein to represent the degree by which a quantitative representation may vary from a stated reference without resulting in a change in the basic function of the subject matter at issue.
While particular embodiments have been illustrated and described herein, it should be understood that various other changes and modifications may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the claimed subject matter. Moreover, although various aspects of the claimed subject matter have been described herein, such aspects need not be utilized in combination. It is therefore intended that the appended claims cover all such changes and modifications that are within the scope of the claimed subject matter.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
7389773 | Stewart et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
8265854 | Stewart et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8620461 | Kihas | Dec 2013 | B2 |
9451019 | Herz et al. | Sep 2016 | B2 |
9677493 | Stewart et al. | Jun 2017 | B2 |
9771883 | Haskara et al. | Sep 2017 | B1 |
9835094 | Lahti et al. | Dec 2017 | B2 |
20130111905 | Pekar et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130317722 | Midlam-Mohler | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20150066337 | Langley et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20160108732 | Huang | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20160160787 | Allain et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20170218860 | Pachner et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2007132102 | Nov 2007 | WO |
Entry |
---|
“An explicit model predictive control framework for turbocharged diesel engines”, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/documents/6584790; Published/Accessed: Jul. 2014. |
“Multi-variable air-path management for a clean diesel engine using model predictive control”, https://arx.appi.keio.ac.p/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/SAE09WC_2009-01-0733_final.pdf; Published/Accessed: 2009. |
“Diesel engines”, http://www.idsc.ethz.ch/research-guzzella-onder/research-projects/diesel-engines.html; Published/Accessed: Jan. 5, 2009. |
M. Huang, K. Zaseck, K. Butts, and I. Kolmanovsky, “Rate-based model predictive controller for diesel engine path: Design and experimental evaluation,” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 1922-1935, 2016. |
P.Ortner and L. del Re, “Predictive control of a diesel engine air path,” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 449-456, 2007. |
G. Stewart and F. Borrelli, “A model predictive control framework for industrial turbodiesel engine control” in Decision and Control, 2008, CDC 2008. 47th IEEE Conference on pp. 5704-5711, IEEE, 2008. |
M. Huang, H. Nakada, K. Butts, and I. Kolmanovsky, Nonlinear model predictive control of a diesel engine air path: A comparison of constraint handling and computations strategies, IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 23, pp. 372-379, 2015. |
D. Liao-McPherson, S. Kim, K. Butts, and I. Kolmanovsky, “A cascaded economic model predictive control strategy for a diesel engine using a non-uniform prediction horizon discretization,” in 2017 IEEE Conference on Control Technology and Applications (CCTA), pp. 979-986, Aug. 2017. |
M. Karlsson, K. Ekhoim, P. Strandh, R. Johansson, and P. Tunesta 1, “Multiple- input multiple-output model predictive control of a diesel engine,” IFAC Proceedings Volumes, vol. 43, No. 7, pp. 131-136, 2010. |
K. Harder, M. Buchholz, J. Niemeyer, J. Remele, and K. Graichen, “A real-time nonlinear mpc scheme with emission constraints for heavy-duty diesel engines,” in American Control Conference (ACC), 2017, pp. 240-245, IEEE, 2017. |
T. Broomhead, C. Manzie, P. Hield, R. Shekhar, and M. Brear, “Economic model predictive control and applications for diesel generators,” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 2016. |
I. Kolmanovsky, P. Morel, M. Van Nieuwstadt, and A. Stefanopoulou, “Issues in modeling and control off intake flow in variable geometry turbocharged engines”, Chapman and Hail CRC research notes in mathematics, pp. 436-445, 1999. |
E. Garone, S. DiCairano and I. Kolmanovsky, “Reference and command governors for systems with constraints; A survey of theory and applications,” Automatica, vol. 75, pp. 306-328, 2017. |
R. Cagienard, P. Grieder, E. C. Kerrigan and M. Morari, “Move blocking strategies in receding horizon control,” Journal of Process Control, vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 563-570, 2007. |
M.J. Tippett, C.K. Tan, and J. Bao, “Non-constant prediction step mpc for processes with multi scale dynamics,” IFAC Proceedings Volumes, vol. 47 No. 3, pp. 3068-3073, 2014. |
J. B. Rawlings and D. Q. Mayne, “Model predictive control: Theory and design,” Nob Hill Pub., 2009. |
K. Harder, M. Bucholz, J. Niemeyer, J. Remele and K. Graichen, “Nonlinear mpc with emission control for a real-world off-highway diesel engine,” in Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics (AIM), 2017 IEEE International Conference on, pp. 1768-1773, IEEE, 2017. |
Q. Zhu, S. Onori and R. Prucka, “Nonlinear economic model predictive control for si engines based on sequential quadratic programming,” in American Control Conference (ACC), 2016, pp. 1802-1807, IEEE, 2016. |
G. C. Goodwin, M. M. Seron and J. A. De Dona, “Constrained control and estimation: an optimisation approach,” Springer Science & Business Media, 2006. |
T. Maruyama, T. Shimura, A. Ejiri, Y. Ikai and K. Shimotani, “Model predictive control applied to a diesel engine air-path system with dead time,” in SICE Annual Conference (SICE), 2011 Proceedings of, pp. 2628-2633, 2011. |
A. Murilo, M. Alamir and D.Alberer, “A general nmpc framework for a diesel engine air path,” International Journal of Control, vol. 87, No. 10, pp. 2194-2207, 2014. |
R. Toth, “Modeling and identification of linear parameter-varying systems,” 2010. |
H. Li, K. Butts, K. Zaseck, D. Liao-McPherson and I. Kolmanovsky “Emissions modeling of a light-duty diesel engine for model-based control design using multi-layer perception neural networks,” tech. rep., SAE Technical Paper, 2017. |
M. Diehl, H. G. Bock and J. P. Schloder, “A real-time iteration scheme for nonlinear optimization in optimal feedback control,” SIAM Journal on control and optimization, vol. 43, No. 5, pp. 1714-1736, 2005. |
M. Diehl, R. Findeisen, F. Allgower, H. G. Bock and J. P. Schloder, “Nominal stability of real-time iteration scheme for non-linear model predictive control,” IEE Proceedings-Control Theory and Applications, vol. 152, No. 3, pp. 296-308, 2005. |
K. Walker, B. Samadi, M. Huang, J. Gerhard, K. Butts and I. Kolmanovsky, “Design environment for nonlinear model predictive control,” tech. rep., SAE Technical Paper, 2016. |
L. Del Re, F. Allgower, L. Glielmo, C. Guardiola, and I. Kolmanovsky, Automotive model predictive control: models, methods and applications, vol. 402. Springer, 2010. |
L. Grune and J. Pannek, Nonlinear Model Predictive Control, pp. 43-66 Springer, 2011. |
Honeywell International Inc., “Powertrain Control” https://turbo.honeywell.com/our-technologies/onramp/ Date Accessed Jun. 7, 2018. |