Proceedings of the 38& Conference on Decision & Control Phoenix, Arizona USA December 1999

ThAOl

10:40

Hybrid Control of a Gasoline Direct Injection Engine

Maria Druzhinina Ilya Kolmanovsky Jing Sun Ford Research Laboratory, Dearborn, Michigan 48121-2053.
Abstract

This paper describes an automotive control problem where switching is an essential feature of the operation of a direct injection spark ignition engine. The engine operates in two distinct combustion modes with different emissions and torque characteristics: the homogeneous mode and the stratified mode. The control system must be capable of changing the combustion mode and the air-to-fuel ratio of the engine rapidly and without any noticeable torque disturbance to the driver. A hybrid control scheme is described in this paper t o control the mode transitions in this engine and its operation is illustrated with simulations on a mean-value model of the engine.
1 Introduction

Figure I: Direct injection stratified charge engine.

Hybrid and switching systems are common in powertrain control applications [2]. In this paper we describe a case study based on a gasoline direct injection stratified charge (DISC) spark ignition engine, see Figure 1. This engine can combust fuel in two distinct modes corresponding to either a stratified fuel-air mixture (stratified mode) or a well-mixed homogeneous fuel-air mixture (homogeneous mode). With stratified combustion? the DISC engine is able to operate at extremely lean overall air-to-fuel ratios (up to 50:l as compared to 14.64:l for stoichiometric operation of conventional PFI engines). The stratification is achieved by injecting fuel diwctly into the engine cylinder late in the compression stroke, and enhanced by an elaborate cylinder head and piston bowl design and charge motion control. As a result, zin ignitable mixture is formed near the spark plug, although the overall in-cylinder air-tefuel ratio is extremely lean. At higher air-to-fuel ratio the intake manifold pressure is higher and pumping losses are reduced, thereby leading to improved fuel economy 1 for and reduced carbon dioxide emissions. See [l, 4 more information on the operation of stratified charge engines. Typically, stratified operation is limited to low and part-load engine operating conditions. This is because the intake manifold pressure is limited by atmospheric pressure, hence the (overall) air-to-fuel ratio decreases
'On leave from the Institute for Problems of Mechanical Engineering, Russian Academy of Sciences.

as the load on the engine increases. The decreased airto-fuel ratio results in increased levels of smoke and hydrocarbons. That and the fact that at similar values of the intake manifold pressure the stratified combustion mode is actually less efficient than the homogeneous combustion mode prevents utilization of stratified combustion mode at higher loads. Also at higher engine speeds stratified combustion mode is not feasible due to insufficient time for mixing and breathing. Consequently, at higher speed and load conditions the engine is operated in the homogeneous combustion mode with the air-to-fuel ratio lower than that in the stratified mode or sometimes rich of stoichiometry. The fuel is still injected directly into the cylinder, but early in the intake stroke to ensure a well mixed homogeneous charge. The torque and emission characteristics in the homogeneous combustion mode are distinctly different from the stratified combustion mode, see e.g. [4], thereby resulting in a truly hybrid plant to be controlled.
Under lean operating conditions, the conventional three-way catalyst (TWC) oxidizes hydrocarbon (HC) and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions but has a very low conversion efficiency for oxides of nitrogen (NOx) emissions. One technique to treat NOx is to incorporate a lean NOx trap (LNT) in the exhaust system after the TWC. This device accumulates NOx during lean operation, but as it is being filled up its trapping efficiency gradually decreases to zero. Hence the LNT is periodically purged of stored NOx in order to regenerate its capacity in such a manner that the stored NOx (pollutant) is converted to nitrogen and carbon dioxide. The operation at a rich air-to-fuel ratio to purge the LNT is referred to as the purge operation while the nominal lean operation is referred t o as the normal

0-7803-5250-5/99/$10.000 1999 IEEE

2667

operation. Consequently, the transition between stratified combustion and homogeneous combustion modes may be initiated not only when the engine torque demand increases but also when there is a need to purge the LNT although the engine torque demand is small.

stratified and for homogeneous combustion:

= T, (Wf ,pl ,Wc,r,6, N ), if stratified mode, = Th (Wf , P I ,Wcyl,6, N ), if homogeneous mode. (2) The expressions (2) can be obtained by regressing
T

The mode transitions have to be accomplished in a manner that does not create a disturbance to the vehicle that is noticeable by the driver. At typical steadystate highway cruise conditions the purge operation may last 2-3 sec. for every 60 sec. of normal operation. The control system must ensure a constant engine torque torque value T = Td, while the engine is going through this rapid transition from normal operation to purge operation and back. Other performance objectives for this transition include the minimization of the transition time and avoidance of spikes in transient NOx and HC emissions. The objective of this paper is to develop a control scheme that accomplishes the transitions and supports the desired value of the engine torque throughout the transition. The controller has a hybrid structure, with a high level lhnsition Governor (used to determine the combustion mode and the set-points) and the low level Coordinated Feedback Controller. The Coordinated Feedback Controller is designed using the SpeedGradient (SG) approach [3] t o coordinate the spark timing and the throttle inputs. The third subsystem, the Fueling Controller, ensures the desired value of the engine torque throughout the transition.
2 Engine Model

steady-state engine mapping data. Specifically, the brake torque value in (2) is a sum of friction torque (quadratic in N , linear in P I ) , pumping torque (linear in p l , quadratic in N ) and indicated torque ( h e a r in Wf, quadratic in the deviation of the spark from the maximum brake torque (MBT) spark, where the MBT spark depends on the air-to-fuel ratio and N ) , see [ 4 ] . The engine air-to-fuel ratio is defined as
A=-.
Wc,l

Wf The feasible intervals of the air-tduel ratio are differ-. and for the ent for the stratified combustion (A E d8) homogeneous combustion (A E d h ) but these intervals do overlap, A, n d h # 0.

3 Control Design
The control architecture consists of a higher level Transition Governor and a lower level Coordinated Feedback Controller. The Coordinated Feedback Controller is used near the desired operating point to drive the throttle and the spark timing inputs in response to the set-points generated by the Transition Governor. The Transition Governor drives spark timing and throttle inputs during the rapid transient phases and also decides on when to initiate a switch from the stratified combustion mode to the homogeneous combustion mode. The Transition Governor also utilizes another degree of freedom often available but frequently neglected in hybrid designs - resetting the state of the dynamic controller. The Fueling Controller is used to support the desired value of the engine torque. In what follows, we first describe the Fueling Controller, then the Coordinated Feedback Controller and then the Transition Governor.
3 . 1 fieling Controller To deliver the desired value of the torque output, T d , we invert the torque functions (2) so that the fueling rate value is generated according to

A constant engine speed, zero EGR model is assumed for this study. The rationale for these assumptions is that the engine speed is varying slowly when the vehicle is in gear and that the EGR valve is typically closed during the mode transitions. The intake manifold filling dynamics are of the form:

where pl is the intake manifold pressue, Ldth is the electronic throttle position, N is the engine speed value, Wth is the mass flow rate through the throttle, Wc,l is the engine intake mass flow rate. The functions Wth and Wcyl are nonlinear functions of the intake manifold pressure. They are obtained by regressing the engine The function Wth depends static mapping data, see [4]. linearly on u t h , which is (modulo nonlinear transformations) is the electronic throttle position. The engine torque, T , depends on the engine fueling rate, Wf, engine spark timing, b, and intake manifold pressure, pl . The functional dependence is different for

wf = ~ , ( T d , p l , W c y l ,N b ,) , wf = Ah(Td,pl, wcyl, b,N),

for stratified mode, for homogeneous mode.

(3)

In either case, Wf achieves the torque d u e of Td for the given p l , 6 , Wcyl,N . Both pl and N are measured while Wcylis estimated according to the %peeddensity equation, Wcyl = ko(N)plNIT,. Here the intake manifold temperature TI is either measured or z!stimated.
2668

3.2 Coordinated Feedback Controller To render the system affine in control, we augment an integrator t o the spark timing input, i.e.

If we consider the evolution of Q over a discrete time interval [t,t At] we have

Q(t At)
We introduce a vector of engine states
z=lp1

Q(t) Q(t)At,

and, hence, t o minimize Q ( t At) we select u(t) in the direction of minus the "speed-gradient" ,i.e. -@(z, w). Note that because F depends linearly on U ,@ does not depend on U. We explicitly calculate the entries of the vector Q(z,w) as follows

&IT,
2 1 6 1
T

and engine controls

U=[Uth

The engine operating point is defined by the value of the engine speed N and the desired engine torque Td:

Then the engine dynamics as represented by (1) and (4) can be summarized by the equation

i: = F ( z ,U ,w).
The controller derivation assumes that the fueling rate is generated according t o (3). The controller is designed using the Speed-Gradient (SG) method [3] which is reviewed in the Appendix. This method achieves the convergence t o zero of the following objective function:

where A = A, for the stratified combustion mode and A = A h for the homogeneous combustion mode. We select U t o force Q t o decay along a descent direction, i.e. 21 = u d n*(z, w), (5) where I I > 0 is a 2 x 2 matrix of constant gains and Ud is the feedforward of desired values for the engine inputs, ud = [ u t h , d OIT. Here 'LLth,d is the feedforward of the throttle position. The controller (5) is referred to as a Proportional Speed-Gradient Controller (SGP). Another controller choice is a Proportional-plusIntegral Speed-Gradient (SG-PI) Controller of the form
U

Q(z,w) = &I

+ Q z + &3
Q3

+ 0,

QI = O*~'YI(WC,~ - AdWf)',
Qz = 0 . 5 ' Y z ( p i - Pi,d)',

=0.5%(6 - d d ) 2 ,

= Ud - n@(Z, W )- r

where A d , P l , d , 6 d are the commanded d u e s of the air-to-fuel ratio, intake manifold pressure and sparktiming that are functions of the demanded value of the engine torque Td, the value of the engine speed N and the desired combustion mode. The weights 7 1 ,7 2 , 7 3 are used t o shape the closed loop system transient response. Specifically, these weights can be adjusted to speed up the response of some of the variables relative to the other. In accordance with the SG method and assuming that ~ ( t 3)w is constant, we first calculate a time derivative of Q along the trajectories of the closed loop system:

I,'

* ( 2 ( S ) , W)dS,

(6)

where II > 0, I? > 0 are 2 x 2 matrices of constant gains. The additional freedom of the integral control can be exploited t o shape the closed loop transient response, e.g. t o facilitate the purge of the LNT where it is desirable that the air-to-fuel ratio falls slightly lower than the steady-state value during the transient; this ensures a faster TWC breakthrough. The implementation of the SG-PI controller is possible without knowing precisely the value of the feedforward term Ud, see the Appendix.

The derivative of w with respect to gradient") is

("speed-

3 1 imposes The closed loop stability requirement in 1 a restriction on the weights 71, "12, 7 3 . To verify local asymptotic stability, they must be selected so that w ( z , u d , w ) < 0 at least for all z # Xd close to z d , where Z d is the vector of equilibrium states of the engine corresponding to u d and w. The verification of these stability conditions has been done numerically.
The specification of the controller has been done in continuous time. The actual implementation of the SG-P

2669

and SG-PI controllers is accomplished in discretetime with appropriate low-pass filters applied t o the measured signals. The implementation of SG-PI controller, in general, requires a n additional antiwindup compensation that avoids performance deterioration due t o actuator saturation. These aspects are standard for digital implementation of controllers specified in continuous time.

while J h may reflect our objective of minimizing NOx emissions (that are high for homogeneous combustion around the air-to-fuel ratio value of 16). The Transition Governor has a discrete state, p , that takes values 0, 1,2,3. Each state value corresponds to a particular way of operating the engine:
e

3 . 3 Transition Governor The desired combustion mode, P d , is a function of the TalT and at a given time engine operating point w = [N, instant t may be different from the present combustion mode, p ( t ) . The variables p , p d can take two discrete values: p = 0 corresponds t o the stratified combustion mode and p = 1 corresponds t o the homogeneous combustion mode. The desired air-to-fuel ratio, A d r spark timing 6 d , intake manifold pressure p 1 , d and the desired throttle position ?&h,d are functions of w and Pd and may change with time.
The Tkansition Governor utilizes either the SG-P or the S G P I Coordinated Feedback Controller locally, only at engine operating conditions close t o steady-state. Specifically, the Coordinated Feedback Controller is used whenever the current state z(t) = [p1(t),6(t)JT is inside a capture zone defined by
rco(w,P)

p = 0: The engine is operated in the stratified combustion mode with spark timing and throttle input governed by the SG-PI Coordinated Feedback Controller with the set-points &, 6d and p l , d and the desired throttle position U t h , d .

p = 1: The engine is operated in the stratified combustion mode with the throttle commanded t o the fully closed position if p l ( t ) > P l , d ( t ) or fully open position if p l ( t ) < p l , d ( t ) . The spark timing input 6 ( t )is selected (within feasible w(t)) subject t o range) t o minimize J , ( p l (t),6(t), E A,. the constraint X = X,(pl(t),6(t),w(t))
p = 2: The engine is operated in the homoge-

= tz = lpl,qT:&(s,w)

5 Q(W,P)I.
e

neous combustion mode with the throttle commanded t o the fully closed position if p l ( t ) > p l , d ( t ) or fully open position if p l ( t ) < p l , d ( t ) The spark timing input 6 ( t ) is selected (within , ( t ) )is minfeasible range) so that J h ( p 1 ( t ) , d ( t ) w imized while = X h ( p l ( t ) , 6 ( t ) , w ( t ) ) E d h .

The trajectories generated by SG-P controller or by SG-PI controller with zero initial integrator state have (w,p) then they rethe property that if they start in rc0 main in reo (w, p ) as long as w, p remain constant. This invariance property allows t o avoid chattering when switching into and out of the mode where the SG-P or the SG-PI controllers are active and that is the main reason while we use Q in the definition of the capture , , we zone. By selecting a sufficiently small value for c can always ensure that the capture zone is within the domain of attraction of the closed loop system. In addition, certain pointwisein-time state and control constraints can be enforced. In our case we have been able t o find a single value of Q that works for all w and p in the range of interest. We define two functions that are used t o calculate the air-to-fuel ratio in stratified combustion mode, X,(pl(t),6(t),w(t)), and the air-to-fuel ratio in the b(t),w(t)). homogeneous combustion mode, X h ( p 1 ( t ) , Note that these functions depend on 6 because we generate the fueling rate by the controller (3) that involves the spark timing input. The objectives of minimizing transient emissions and fuel consumption translate into the minimization of the performance func6, w) in stratified combustion mode and tion J, (PI, J h ( P 1 , 6 , w) in homogeneous combustion mode. For example, J, may reflect our objective of minimizing HC emissions (that are high for stratified combustion)

p = 3: The engine is operated in the homogeneous combustion mode with spark timing and throttle input governed by the Coordinated Feedback Controller with the set-points &, & andp1,d and the desired throttle position u t h , d .

Let the present sampling time instant be t , while the previous sampling time instant be denoted by t-1. The specification of the transition between various values of p can now be easily done by the following rules:
0

If p(t - 1) = 0:

If p ( t - 1)= 1:
- If p d ( t ) = 1, check if there exists a spark
dh.

value 6aw,lsuch that PI ( t ) d , S w , 1 ,w ( t ) )E If so, set p ( t ) =: 2, else p ( t ) = 1.

= 0, determine a spark value that minimizes ldsw,2 - Sdl while I P 1 ( t ) , S , , , 2 I T E r,,(w(t),O). If no such

- If p d ( t )
aSw,2

2670

Ssw,a exists set p(t) = 1, otherwise set p ( t ) = 0, S ( t ) = dSw,a and reset the inte-

range, we switch t o t o p = 2. Finally, we switch t o p = 0 when the intake manifold pressure rises sufficiently high and with an appropriately selected value of the spark timing, is within an appropriately defined capturing zone. Note that in the above scenario it can happen that the controller switches from p = 0 to I.1 = 1 even though the value of P d remains equal t o zero, if large changes in w(t) render the present state outside of the capturing zone. In this case, we basically engage the bang-bang controller in intake manifold pressure corresponding t o L1 = 1. The simulated closed loop responses for the transition from the normal operation t o the purge operation are shown in figures 2-3. The transition from the normal operation t o the purge operation is requested and starts at t = 0.2 sec. The engine torque and engine speed (40 Nm, 2000 rpm) are constant throughout this transition. The air-to-fuel ratio changes from 35 t o 14 within 0.5 sec.
2000 rpm, 40 N-m

gral state of the SG-PI controller t o zero.

0

If p(t - 1) = 2:
- If p d ( t ) = 0, check if there exists a spark

such that ' * ( p l (t), 'Sw939 w(t)) E A,. If so, set p ( t ) = 1, else p ( t ) = 2. - If P d ( t ) = 1, determine a spark value 6 s w 0 , 4 that minimizes I ~ s w, ~sdl while bi(t), ~ s w , s ]E ~ rcO(w(t),1). If no such Ssw,4 exists, set p ( t ) = 2; otherwise set p(t) = 3, b(t) = bsw]4 and the integral state of the SG-PI controller t o zero.
'Sw,3
0

If p(t - 1) = 3:

Note that in practical implementation of the switching out of the capture zone condition we use a threshold A > 0. We do this as an !additional precaution t o avoid chattering and t o account for discrete-time implementation errors. In the transitional states ( p = 1 or p = 2) the spark timing is selected based on the one-dimensional optimization of J, and Jh. This optimization can be (approximately) accomplished on-line or off-line by a search over a few grid points in the feasible range of the spark timing input. 4 Simulation Results

a
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

08

0.7

0.8

0.9

$30

. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... ... ... ... ..

ro 20
10

01
02

To illustrate the workings of this controller suppose, for example, that initially p = 0, p = 0 (stratified combustion) while the target operation has just changed

03

04

Time [SI

05

08

07

08

09

to purge as defined by the appropriate values of the

set-points and pa = 1. Then the Transition Governor swithes t o p = 1 and the throttle is closed. At each sampling time instant it then attempts t o find a value of the spark timing, 6 = 6,w,1, such that the estimated air-to-fuel ratio in the homogeneous combustion regime falls within the feasible range for the homogeneous regime. If such a value of spark timing can be found, we switch from p = 1to p = 2. The switch from p = 2 toL !, = 3 is prompted if at the present time instant t , the intake manifold pressure pl ( t )is such that there exists a spark timing value 6 = 6ew,4 such that the pair (p1(t), 6,w,4) is inside the capture zone. Similarly, if initially p = 3,p = 1, while pd = 0 we switch to p = 2 and then, when a spark value daw,4 can be found such that the estimated air-to-fuel ratio if we switch to the stratified combustion regime is within the feasible

Figure 2: Time histories of Mode 'lkansition Governor

State p, throttle position Uth and spark timing,

6. Setpoints corresponding to pd = 1 are shown

by the dashed lines.

5 Appendix: Speed-Gradient Feedback Laws

Here we demonstrate that the SG-PI controller rejects unmeasured additive constant input disturbances. Although this is an easy observation (and is a basic property of linear systems with integral control) for SG-PI controllers we have not found it in the book [3]or other literature with which we are familiar. For the specific case here we consider a version of the Speed-Gradient algorithm [3]that deals with the sys-

267 1

tm

value of the feedforward term ue since the integrator states of SG-PI controller provide the means of adaptation t o the values of the set-points that are used for feedback. Indeed, we introduce a constant vector disturbance w E Rm into (9) so that
U

= Ue

- n(LgQ)T + 8 + W ,

e = -I(LgQ)T,
+

(10)

. .... ............... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ........x--.-.

1 4 0.S 011

0 1 2

013

0:4

015

016

017

*;

019

1
I

and choose the following Lyapunov function: 1 V = Q ( z- 2,) z(f3 w)TI-l (0 W ) 2 0.

Calculating its time derivative along the trajectories of the system (7), (9) we obtain:

0.6

0.1

02

0 . 3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Time [SI

V = (VzQ)T(f(z) + g ( z ) U e .- g ( z ) n ( L g Q ) T+ + g ( z ) ( e w ) ) (e w)r-le =

+ +

= L f Q ( z )+ L g Q ( z b e
and

- (LgQ)Tn(LgQ),

Figure 3: Time histories of intake manifold pressure p l (kPa), air-to-fuel ratio A, and fueling rate W j (gps). Set-points corresponding to Pd = 1 are shown by the dashed lines.
tem &ne in control

i: = f(z) g ( s ) u .

(7)

The objective is t o ensure the convergence of the state trajectories of the system (7) t o the desired equi, E R corresponding t o a constant inlibrium z put 21, E R which satisfies f(ze) g ( Z e ) U e = 0, g ( z e ) # 0 . With U = U , the equilibrium x, is assumed t o be asymptotically stable. The SG control design proceeds using a designer specified objective function which is smooth scalar radially unbounded and such , ) > 0 if z # 2 6 , Q ( 0 ) = 0 . The that Q ( x ) = Q ( z - 2 parameters of the function Q must be selected so that the stability condition in [3] is satisfied. Here we assume a more restrictive form of the stability condition, that is

Consequently, the closed loop system trajectories z ( t ) , e ( t ) are bounded and, according t o LaSalles invariance theorem, converge t o the largest invariant set M of (7), (9) contained in E = { (q8)E Rn+ml Q ( x 2,) = 0 , LgQ = 0 } , that is, the set where V = 0. It is clear that for any trajectory in M we have z = 2, and x = 0. Setting x = x, and x = 0 in (7) we get f ( x e ) + g ( x e ) ( U e - I I ( L g Q ) T + 8 + w ) = 0, V(z,8) E M . Recalling that ue is the feedforward of the values of the set-points x, E R, i.e. satisfies the equality f(ze) g(ze)ue E 0 , we get g(z,)(8 W ) = 0 on M. Since g(ze) # 0, the largest invariant set M in E has , , 8 = - w } . This form M = {@,e) E Rn+ml2 = z expression for M and the convergence of the system trajectories z ( t ) , e ( t )t o M proves that the SG-PI controller ensures z + x e even when the feedforward value of U , that is consistent with the value of the desired equilibrium ze is not known precisely.

L I Q ( ~+ ) LgQ(z)ue I - P ( Q ( z ) )
where p ( q ) > 0, p ( 0 ) = 0, is a continuous function. The Speed Gradient Proportional-plus-Integral (SGPI) Controller has an additional feedforward term U,:
U

= U, - II(LgQ(x(t))T -

L g Q ( z ( s ) ) T d s , (8)

where r = rT> 0, II = IIT > 0 are gain matrices. The control law (8) can be rewritten in a more convenient equivalent form:
U =U,

-II(LgQ(z(t))T +8,

e = r ( L g Q ( z ( t ) ) T (9) ,

where 8 E Rm are the integrator states. It will be shown that the implementation of the SG-PI controller (9) is possible without knowing precisely the

References [l] Anderson, R.W., Yang, J., Brehob, D., Vallance, and Whiteaker, R.M., Understanding the thermodynamics of direct injection spark ignition (DISI) combustion systems: An analytical and experimental investigation, SAE paper 962018. [2] Butts, K., Kolmanovsky, I., Sivashankar, N., Sun, J., Hybrid systems in automotive control applications, in Control Using Logic-Based Switching, edited by Morse, S., Springer, 1997. [3] Fradkov, A.L., Adaptive Control an Large-scale Systems, Nauka, Moscow, 1990, (in Russian). [4] Sun, J., Kolmanovsky, I., Brehob, D., Cook, J., Buckland, J., and Haghgooie, M., Modelling and control problems for gasoline direct injection engines, Proceedings of 1999 IEEE Conference on Control Applications, Hawaii.

2672