Cycle-based LQG knock control using identified exhaust temperature model

Abstract

Spark ignition engines are often desired to be operated close to their knock borderline when MBT (maximum brake torque) cannot be achieved for optimizing combustion efficiency. Under this circumstance, a calibrated baseline spark timing, along with other control parameters such as intake and exhaust valve timings, is found for the engine control system to maximize fuel economy, and a stochastic scheme can be used for the control based on a large number of history data. However, cycle-to-cycle combustion variations still exist, resulting in a relatively conservative baseline control. To reduce cycle-to-cycle combustion variations, a real-time cycle-wised knock compensation is required. The correlation between exhaust temperature at the current cycle and knock intensity at the next cycle was found in our earlier research. In this paper, a cycle-to-cycle spark timing compensation scheme is developed based on the measured exhaust temperature when the engine is operated close to its knock borderline. To make model-based control possible, $q$ -Markov COVER (COVariance Equivalent Realization) system identification was used to obtain a linearized engine exhaust system model from incremental spark timing to associated exhaust temperature and knock intensity. Accordingly, a Linear–Quadratic–Gaussian (LQG) controller is designed, based on the identified model, to minimize the knock intensity fluctuations based on incremental exhaust temperature variation. The LQG control strategy was integrated with the existing entire knock control architecture, where the baseline spark timing is generated based on the offline machine training with an online updating scheme developed earlier, and demonstrated experimentally. Note that the cycle-based compensation only adds incremental spark timing to the baseline control so that knock combustion variations can be reduced. Three test scenarios are used to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed cycle-to-cycle compensation scheme when the engine is knock-limited. With the help of cycle-to-cycle based compensation, it was demonstrated that engine spark timing can be further advanced about one crank degree while maintaining the same knock intensity up-limit due to reduced knock combustion variations. Note that this is corresponding to 0.5%–1.0% fuel economy for this engine when it is operated under knock condition.

Keywords

Knock borderline control LQG control exhaust temperature feedback cycle-to-cycle compensation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Heywood

. Internal combustion engine fundamentals. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 1988.

Wang

Liu

Reitz

. Knocking combustion in spark-ignition engines. Prog Energy Combust Sci 2017; 61: 78–112.

Zhu

Haskara

Winkelman

. Closed-loop ignition timing control for si engines using ionization current feedback. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 2007; 15(3): 416–427.

Eriksson

. Spark advance modeling and control. PhD Thesis, Linköping University, Sweden, 1999.

Jones

JCP

Frey

Muske

, et al. A cumulative-summation-based stochastic knock controller. Proc IMechE, Part D: J Automobile Engineering 2010; 224(7): 969–983.

Thomasson

Shi

Lindell

, et al. Experimental validation of a likelihood-based stochastic knock controller. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 2015; 24(4): 1407–1418.

Jones

JCP

Frey

Muske

. A statistical likelihood based knock controller. IFAC Proc Vol 2010; 43(7): 809–814.

Zhang

Shen

, et al. On-board knock probability map learning–based spark advance control for combustion engines. Int J Eng Res 2019; 20(10): 1073–1088.

Siano

Panza

D’Agostino

. Knock detection based on mapo analysis, ar model and discrete wavelet transform applied to the in-cylinder pressure data: results and comparison. SAE Int J Eng 2015; 8(1): 1–13.

10.

Zhu

Haskara

Winkelman

. Stochastic limit control and its application to spark limit control using ionization feedback. In: Proceedings of the 2005, American control conference, 2005, Portland, OR, 8–10 June 2005, pp. 5027–5034. New York, NY: IEEE.

11.

Tang

Pal

Dai

, et al. Stochastic Bayesian optimization for predicting borderline knock. Int J Engine Res. Epub ahead of print 16 December 2021. DOI: 10.1177/14680874211065237.

12.

Tang

Pal

Dai

, et al. Borderline knock prediction using machine learned kriging model. In: 2022 American control conference (ACC), Atlanta, GA, 8–10 June 2022, pp. 3038–3043. New York, NY: IEEE.

13.

Naber

Blough

Frankowski

, et al. Analysis of combustion knock metrics in spark-ignition engines. SAE Trans 2006; 115: 223–243.

14.

Tang

Zhu

Men

. Review of engine control-oriented combustion models. Int J Eng Res 2022; 23(3): 347–368.

15.

Zhu

. A real-time pressure wave model for knock prediction and control. Int J Eng Res 2021; 22(3): 986–1000.

16.

Zhou

Shao

Hua

, et al. Effect of retarded injection timing on knock resistance and cycle to cycle variation in gasoline direct injection engine. J Energy Resour Technol 2018; 140(7): 072202.

17.

Kawahara

Tomita

. Visualization of auto-ignition and pressure wave during knocking in a hydrogen spark-ignition engine. Int J Hydrog Energy 2009; 34(7): 3156–3163.

18.

Abu-Qudais

. Exhaust gas temperature for knock detection and control in spark ignition engine. Energy Convers Manag 1996; 37(9): 1383–1392.

19.

Ainouz

Vedholm

. Mean value model of the gas temperature at the exhaust valve. Thesis, Linköping University, Sweden, 2009.

20.

Eriksson

. Mean value models for exhaust system temperatures. SAE Trans 2002; 111: 753–767.

21.

Wallson

. Estimation of engine gas temperatures during pressure transients. Thesis, Linköping University, Sweden, 2018.

22.

Brunton

Kutz

. Data-driven science and engineering: Machine learning, dynamical systems, and control. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022.

23.

Zhu

. Weighted multirate q-Markov cover identification using PRBS: an application to engine systems. Math Probl Eng 2000; 6(2–3): 201–224.

24.

Malm

. Control oriented modeling of engine out temperatures. Thesis, Linköping University, Sweden, 2018.

25.

Kerai

Verem

. Physically based models for predicting exhaust temperatures in si engines. Thesis, Linköping University, Sweden, 2016.

26.

Pal

Wei

Zhu

, et al. Dynamic system identification for a nonlinear vehicle model using q-Markov cover under different operational conditions. In: 2021 American control conference (ACC), New Orleans, LA, 25–28 May 2021, pp. 2830–2835. New York, NY: IEEE.

27.

Liu

Skelton

Sharkey

. Modeling Hubble space telescope flight data by q-Markov cover identification. J Guid Control Dyn 1994; 17(2): 250–256.

28.

Zhu

Skelton

. Q-Markov cover identification using pseudo-random binary signals. Int J Control 1995; 62(6): 1273–1290.

29.

Lindquist

. On feedback control of linear stochastic systems. SIAM J Control 1973; 11(2): 323–343.

30.

Georgiou

Lindquist

. The separation principle in stochastic control, redux. IEEE Trans Automat Control 2013; 58(10): 2481–2494.

31.

Kalman

. A New approach to linear filtering and prediction problems. J Basic Eng 1960; 82(1): 35–45.

32.

Tang

Dai

Archer

, et al. Borderline knock adaptation based on online updated surrogate models. Int J Engine Res. Epub ahead of print December 2022. DOI: 10.1177/14680874221137485.

33.

Deb

. Multi-objective optimisation using evolutionary algorithms: an introduction. In: Wang

Deb

(eds) Multi-objective evolutionary optimisation for product design and manufacturing. London: Springer, 2011, pp.3–34.