Search Results

In earlier work it has been shown that a nearly ideal solution to the problem of accurate estimation of the air mass flow to a central fuel injection (CFI) (or throttle body (TBI)) or EFI (or multi-point (MPI)) equipped engine is provided by using a closed loop nonlinear observer for the engine. With proper design this observer was shown to be both accurate and robust with respect to modelling end measurement errors. It is based on a Constant Gain Extended Kalman Filter (CGEKF). Since the publication of this work, another type of observer has emerged in the literature for which claims of great robustness have been made. This observer is based on new developments in the area of nonlinear control theory and is called a Sliding Mode Observer (SMO). In this paper these two types of observers are compared theoretically and experimentally on an engine mounted on a dynamometer. A very aggressive driving scenario is assumed for these tests.

A very important component of an accurate steady state and transient air/fuel (A/F) ratio control strategy is the transient fuel compensation (TFC) substrategy. This is the part of an engine control algorithm which cancels the fuel film dynamics and makes it possible to place injected fuel into the intake manifold (or close to the intake ports or valves) of a spark ignition (SI) engine at the correct time and location. This paper presents the results of a very large series of experiments conducted with the same engine with either a throttle body (TBI) (or central fuel injection (CFI)) manifold or with a multi-point port injection (MPI) (or electronic fuel injection (EFI)) manifold. These experiments have shown that in some practical applications it may be necessary to model the intake manifold as a two time constant dynamic system rather than as a single differential equation system.

In an earlier paper one of the authors of this paper (E. Hendricks and co-authors) treated the question of obtaining correct steady state and transient control of the air/fuel (A/F) ratio of an SI engine. This study was based in part on simulations conducted with a dynamic engine model developed earlier and in part on experimental results. The main conclusions were that conventional control strategies (Speed-Throttle, Speed-Density and Mass Air Flow (MAF)) cannot give proper A/F control because of 1. sensor and anti-aliasing filter time constants and 2. improper or lacking compensation for manifold fuel film and (air) filling dynamics. In this paper, the results of a long series of experiments conducted with the control systems above are to be presented. Both central fuel injection (CFI) (or throttle body (TBI)) and electronic fuel injection (EFI) (or multipoint (MPI)) manifolds have been investigated.

An important element in nearly all engine control systems is the lambda control feedback system and its associated switching exhaust gas oxygen sensor (EGO). This feedback loop is necessary to keep the mean value of the normalized air/fuel ratio close to one. This is a necessary condition for proper operation of the three-way catalyst systems which are a part of nearly all production emissions control systems. Currently many systems are based on using classical proportional-integral (PI) controllers in lambda control feedback loops which are self-oscillating. Proper design of such systems is dependent on knowing the time delay between the injection time and the time when a corresponding signal appears at the engine exhaust EGO sensor. Recently a new method of designing the vital larnbda control loop has emerged which is claimed to be very robust with respect to the injection/exhaust time delay.