Improving Transient Torque Response for Boosted Engines with VCT and EGR

Modern gasoline engines have increased part-load fuel economy and specific power output through technologies such as downsizing, turbocharging, direct injection, and exhaust gas recirculation. These engines tend to have higher sensitivity to driving behavior because of the steady-state efficiency versus output characteristics (e.g., sweet spot at lower output) and the dynamic response characteristics (e.g., turbo lag). It has been observed that the technologies aimed at increased engine efficiency may improve fuel economy for less aggressive cycles and drivers while hurting fuel economy for more aggressive cycles and drivers. The higher degrees of freedom in these engines and the increased sensitivity make controls and calibration more complex and more important at the same time. With the interactions between the dynamic response characteristics of the powertrain and the driver in mind, a dynamic control strategy for variable cam timing (VCT) and exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) is developed. The strategy allows actuator positions at steady-state optimal values when possible yet a fast response proportional to the driver request in transients. The aim is to strike a balance, which is tunable, between steady state efficiency and transient response. Most of the calibration process is algorithmic and based on standard engine mapping data. Experimental results for fuel economy on drive cycles and performance testing from powertrain and chassis dynamometers for two powertrain configurations are reported. Analysis shows improvements in terms of fuel economy and driver demand tracking on drive cycles as well as improved performance metrics. In particular, it is demonstrated that it is possible to simultaneously improve transient performance and fuel economy.

[1]  Mrdjan J. Jankovic,et al.  Torque management of engines with variable cam timing , 1998 .

[2]  Julia H. Buckland,et al.  Model Predictive Control for Low Pressure Exhaust Gas Recirculation with scavenging , 2017, 2017 American Control Conference (ACC).

[3]  Jason B. Martz,et al.  The elusive consequences of slow engine response on drive cycle fuel efficiency , 2017, 2017 American Control Conference (ACC).

[4]  Terrance Wagner.  Advanced Gasoline Turbocharged Direction Injection (GTDI) Engine Development , 2015 .

[5]  Zoran Filipi,et al.  Nonlinear model predictive control of a dual-independent variable valve timing engine with electronic throttle control , 2011 .

[6]  Robert Albert Stein,et al.  Comparison of Variable Camshaft Timing Strategies at Part Load , 1996 .

[7]  Lars Eriksson,et al.  CONTROL AND OPTIMIZATION OF TURBOCHARGED SPARK IGNITED ENGINES , 2002 .

[8]  M. Jankovic,et al.  Optimization and scheduling for automotive powertrains , 2004, Proceedings of the 2004 American Control Conference.

[9]  Zheng Xu,et al.  Development and Optimization of the Ford 3.5L V6 EcoBoost Combustion System , 2009 .

[10]  Johan Lindberg,et al.  Air-Path Model Predictive Control of a Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine with Variable Valve Actuation , 2014 .

[11]  Jonas Mårtensson,et al.  Optimal Air Path Control During Load Transients on a Spark Ignited Engine With Variable Geometry Turbine and Variable Valve Timing , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology.

[12]  Amey Y. Karnik,et al.  Electronic throttle and wastegate control for turbocharged gasoline engines , 2005, Proceedings of the 2005, American Control Conference, 2005..